This book made available by the Internet Archive.

THIS VOLUME,

WHICH DISCLOSES THE

JUGGLING OF JESUITS,

BY RICHARD BAXTER;

'*AND BY IT, HE BEING DEAD YET SPEAKETU*." IS AFFECTIONATELY INSCRIBED TO

ALL JUNIOR THEOLOGIANS;

WHO ALREADY ARE CONSECRATED TO THE

« JVf/JV/STijy OF RECO^rCILMTIOJ^,"

OR WHO ARE PREPARING " EARNESTLY TO CONTEND FOR

THE FAITH

WHICH WAS ONCE DELIVERED TO THE SAINTS."

WITH DEVOUT SOLICITUDE,

THAT THEY MAY NOT "FIGHT

THE DRAGON;

AND THE BEAST;

AND THE FALSE PROPHET;

AS ONE WHO BEATETH THE AIR,"

BUT THAT THEY MAY BE

" MORE THAN

CONQUERORS

THROUGH HIM WHO LOVED US ! "

NeiO'York, Qclober 12, IS35.

Introductoiiy Address, Epistle Dedicatory, Preface,

Adoration of Anj^cls, AU)i(^onsos, Allcifiance tlenied, Ambiguity of Romanists, ArijuiniMits against. Popery, Baptism, lloiicncration. Belief of the Church, Belief of the Truth, Beza,

Bohemians, Boy of Bilson, Brothels licensed at Rome, Calumnies on Protestant

Ministeis, Calumny of Papists, Calvin,

Canonized Saints, Catholic Church and the Popedom contrasted, Celibacy of Priests, Character of Popes, Character of Rome, Christian Profession, Church of Rome ceased, Concubines of Priests, Continuance of Popery, Corporeal presence of Christ

in the mass, Corrui)tions of Authors, Council of Lyons, Controversies of Roman

Priests, Crimes of Popes, Decision of Controversies, Denial of Faith, Denial of Marriage, Despotism of Popery, Divisions in the Popedom, i^^etection of Jesuits, Dispensation for oaths. Dispensations for concealment.

Pa^c, Pafre

7|End of controversy, 83

25 Equivocation of Papists, 298

33 l'>rors in faith overthrow 164| Popery,

310 Rncrnnins IV. Pope,

56 Evan<j;elical Ministry, 109 Evidence of Scripture,

49 Evidence of the senses, 272 Extirpation of heretics,-161 FaitlV, love and obedience, 263 False allegations of Jesuits, 269 196 False doctrines of Ronian-310 ism,

184 False interpretations, 218 False miracles,

JFasting among Papists, 200 Forgiveness of Sin by Rom 182 'ish Priests, 191 Fraudulent divisions, 213 Fri irs and Monks,

|General councils, 129 Godly men not Papists, 22-2 Head of the church,

63 Henry IV, of France, 221 Hugo's account of Lyons, 263 Hojuenots,

68Hucnan depravity encour-225I aged by Roman Priests, 261

75

62

203

288

69

56^ 265

267 171 184 267

273 295 221 228 49 129 312 220 310

236:Ignorance invincible,

[Image worship, 271|lmpeifecfion of works, 178 Implicit faith, 220|Inti(lel Popes,

jinterprclation of Scripture, 200,Invocation of Saints, 219,lrisli Massacre, 107!Jansenists and Jesuits, 275 Jesuit doctrines, 273JJesuit principles, 284|Jesuit proselytism,

66:Jesuit reproaches, 3001 John XII. Pope, 267 John XXIII. Pope,

Judge of controversies, 297'julius III. Pope,

Diversity of opinion, 152, 280: Justification by faithj Divisions in the Popedom, 66 Law of Chiist, Doctrines contrary to Scrip Legends,

lure, 76 Lusher,

1*

255

162

263

259

69

250

163

310

95

268

95

302

198

62

61

81

220

265

289

180

168

INDEX.

Page Pogi

Lyons, 220| Praying for the dead, 164

Massacre of Huguenots, 310 Pretended Miracles, 184

Mental reservation, 298|Priestly celibacy, 222

Meritorius good works, 278 Principles of faith, 100

Miracles, 180, 184 Principles of Papists, 78

Monks and Friars,

Murder of Governors,

Mystery of Jesuitism,

Novel opinions.

Novelty of Popish corruptions,

Novelty of Protestantism,

Nuns,

Oaths derided.

Oaths nullified,

Opinions ot councils,

Opus operatum.

Original sin,

Papal artifices,

Papal decretals.

Papal innovations,

Papal sovereignty,

Papal unity,

Pardon of sin.

Pastoral authority,

Paul II. Pope,

Perjury,

Persecution,

Personal holiness,

Peter not Vicar of Christ,

Pius I[. Pope,

Popery contrary to the

senses, Popery contrary to unity. Popery is antichrislian. Popery past amendment, Popes are antichrist. Popish ceremonies. Popish concealment. Popish confusion. Popish deceitfulness. Popish forgeries. Popish perjury. Popish sanctity. Popish slaughters. Popish succession a novelty. Popish treason. Popish unity. Prayers to the dead,

22llP:ohibilion of the Scriptures, 264 3041 Proofs of Papists, 78

95lProtestant divisions, 89 i^

230'Purgatory, 266

Renunciation of Christian 226; love, 55

142 Richlieu's catalogue of errors, 270 220 Roman Hierarchy no part 306' of the true church, 299; Roman Saints, 157 Romish ancestors, 263 Romish legends, 263 Scandalous sins,

135 267 282 180 264 132 67 216 255 131 305 265 249 203 142 180 120 198 251 135

295 Schism, 57 Schisms among Papists,

234 Simony of Popes,

131 Sins ot ignorance, 89 Sovereignty of the Pope,

266 Spanish armada,

266,Spiritual worship,

219,Succession of doctrines,

299iSuccession of ministers,

308 Succession of Popes,

266JThccla's miracles,

291iTradiiion,

219 Translations of the Bible, Transubstantiation,

69 Uncertainty of Romanism,

45 Uncharitableness of Popery, 252 248 Uncleanness sanctioned by 312 Popery, 225

288 Unfair disputants, 293

225|T'm godly Popes, 215

297|T iiiiolincss of Rome, 60

116j r 11 married Priests, 221 \/

187 Veneration of relics, 166

178j Venial sins, 264

303 Vices of Romish Priests, 220 210 Vi'/ors of Jesuits, 297

308 Wuldenses, 310

153 Woaltti of convents, 202

303 Wicked men not Christian

64 believers, 275

163 William Perry, 184

ADDRESS

TO THE MINISTERS, OFFICERS, AND MEMBERS

OF ALL THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES

IN THE UNITED STATES.

The rapid increase of the Papal Apostacy, and of the principk'S of Jesuitism, in our Republic, is the most astonishing modern development of "the Mystery of Iniquity." Viewed in reference only to civil society, nothing can be more contradictory to all reasonable anticipation, than that Popery should have been able to force an admission into our community; much less that it should have been acceptable to American Citizens. Our whole national polity is so widely severed from the entire system of Romanism, under every possible modification, that the correct motives, and the true causes, should be ascertained and specified, for that astounding aberration from rectitude, self-interest and decorum, the existence of which, the present appalling predominance of Popery, and the evident extending sway of the Roman Pontiff' throughout our land, so unequivocally shows.

The inquiry is often propounded—how can the ex-traordinar}'- spread of Popery, and the manifest multiplication of the Papists be rationally accounted for in the present state of our country ? It is often said in reply, that the increase of Papal vassals in the United States, results entirely from foreign immigration, and the expenditure of European money. Admit that the former of those causes augments the number of Roman devotees; and that the latter enables the Jesuits to erect male and female convents, and seminaries—nevertheless both do not exhibit the whole existing relative

position of the Pontifical authority in our confederated republics.

Two anomalous facts undeniably declare, that other causes are in operation which give life and encouragement to the efforts that Roman Priests and disguised Jesuits make to subjugate these States to the Italian Pontiff. Neither the crowds of Papists who are constantly arriving, nor the sums of money which are regularly transmitted from Europe, at all account for the peculiar favor with which Romanism is regarded, and the special solicitude which so many citizens exemplify to propitiate its priests. Nor do those principles afford any plausible solution of another mysterious circumstance ; that the whole body of American citizens are manifestly imbued with an overpowering dread of the malign influence, and appalling machinations of the Papists.

There has been a general neglect of that department of ecclesiastical literature which comprises the history of the Christian church, and especially of that portion of it which appertains to the Papal hierarchy. Except in a few more prominent stations. Popery was almost unknown in the United States, until subsequent to our last contest with Britain ; nor had its progress attracted any marked interest, until about six years ago, it was first proposed, that an attempt should be made to direct the attention of the Protestant churches to the character, wiles and pernicious acts of the grand apostate enemy of the kingdom of God. From that cause, the recent polemical discussions concerning the "lying wonders and strong delusion" o( Pontifical Rome have either been disregarded or opposed; and there is an almost universal dearth of information respecting the Scriptural prophecies and delineations of that enemy of ** our Lord, and of his Christ," who is generically de-

nominated "the Man of sin;" the "scarlet colored Beast full of names of hlasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns"—and "Mystery, Babylon the great; Mother of Harlots and the abominations of the earth."

It is also not a little perplexing, that the Apocalypse, to the reading and hearing of the words of which book alone of the sacred canon, a unique blessing is attached by the " Faithful Witness, and prince of the kings of the earth"—the Apocalypse, or the revelation of John is far less studied in its connection with the past annals of the Christian church, than any other portion of " the oracles of God." Hence, there is an almost universal ignorance or misconception of the genuine attributes and ungodly proceedings of the Romish " seducing spirits, and false teachers, who speak lies in hypocrisy."

The predominating sensibility throughout the American Protestant churches is an undefinable dread of the Pope's vassals who are domiciliated among us. From which cause, public controverted discussions of the dogmas, superstitions, frauds, and corruptions of Popery and Jesuitism are sternly counteracted. Publications both in the form of volumes and periodicals are slighted and decried. Houses of prayer are premptorily refused for the purpose of preaching the Gospel of Christ in illustration of Scriptural predictions—and not only is every effort to arouse the slumbering disciples repelled; but those Watchmen, who " see the sword coming upon the land, and blow the trumpet to warn the people," are censured and denounced, as if they were disturbers of the public peace.

This is not the work of our Romish inveterate adversaries. Having latterly discovered that their scornful superstition of Protestants excited both disgust and alarm, the Jesuits now have become comparatively lamb-like, and " beguile with enticing words." They

perceive that the cause of their foreign despot, the Roman Pontiff, is more efficiently promoted in this republic, by their deceptions than by their menaces ; and through their covert artifices, than with open assault. The combined apathy and opposition of Protestant Ministers and other influential professed adherents of the Reformation are consolidating the Papal system, and facilitate its enlargement and sway throughout the United vStates, far more than all the priest-ridden multitudes, who are transported from Europe: and all the treasures which pontifical ambition and ignorant bigotry can squander, upon the marvellous design to subjugate the minds and hearts, the bodies and souls of American citizens to the accursed iron yoke of Pope Gregory. Whence does this slavish fear of the Papists emanate? There is a deep-rooted impression that the vassals of Rome are a turbulent, lawless, and ferocious confederacy, who are impelled by an unpricipled priesthood. What are the Jesuits and Dominicans ? Men who know no authority but the supreme pontifical mandate ; who are united to mankind by none of the natural bonds of relationship; who have no motive of action but personal indulgence, and the aggrandizement of their craft; and who being exempt from all government, except that of their ecclesiastical superiors, and having no permanent residence, because they are always subject to the order of removal from their prelat-ical master; constantly, and in every place, are ihe enemies of all that portion of the human family who will not submit to their infernal despotism. Therefore, timid Protestants conclude, that it is preferable not to irritate the Beast, lest they should feel the compound anguish arising from the Bear's gripe, and the Lion's mouth, inflicted with leopard-like suddenness and ferocity. Baxter has luminously depicted that absurdity.

" Some think that it is the safest way to please tlie Pope and Jesuits; and so will be Papists," or support their cause, "on the same terms that some of the Indiana worship the devil, because he is so naught, that he may not hurt them." If we reflect upon the pi'esent situation of Jesuitism in this republic, it is scarcely credible, that the revered author of the "Juggling of Jesuits," one hundred and eighty years ago could have so precisely described existing realities. Vast numbers of Protestants, act upon the same principle, as the man who bowed to the images of Jupiter and Satan. When he was reproved for his infatuation ; he retorted; " It is impossible to know what may happen, or where we may go ; so it is best to have friends in every place."

But who can estimate the mischiefs that follow from the large donations which are made not only by merely nominal Protestants, but also by actual members of the Reformed churches, towards the erection of those idolatrous temples where the Romish superstitious ceremonial is performed ? In many places throughout our land, the sites of the edifices or materials for the erection of them, or money to pay the mechanics, have been profusely lavished by the avowed followers of Christ, to complete Mass houses and Jesuit male and female convents. To admit that those donors thus bestowed their gifts from a profound non-acquaintance with Popery is an impeachment of their rationality; and yet to suppose that they have thrown away their superflu.ous wealth from a predilection for. Romanism, or from a supposition that it is Christianity, altogether makes void their sincerity. ^Whatever may be the cause, the efiects are most pernicious. The energies of the Protestant champions are enfeebled, and the power of the Roman Priests is invigorated and becomes more extensive and unshaken.

Since the commencement of the more direct " war upon the Beast," in America, nearly six years have passed away ; and two facts have been elicited from the occurrences which have transpired. The vast majority of American citizens, and even of American christians are nearly altogether ignorant of Popery—and a spurious liberalism prevails throughout our country; which unfolds itself nearly in our Lord's graphical description of the ancient Jewish blind guides—" who strained at a gnat and swallowed a camel."

It is demonstrable, that each of those principles, and especially both them conjoined, must have a decisively injurious tendency upon the churches of Christ. Popery, through their joint operation, is considered to be either harmless and so may be tolerated without opposition ; or it is viewed as a species of modified Christianity, which demands our occasional conformity with its principles and ritual. Such a contradictory interpretation of Scripture can arise only from entire ignorance of the tenth, and the subsequent chapters of the Apocalypse. However incompetent through our finite judgments, we may be to determine the times and seasons, and also some of the prophetical figures, with the application of them ; yet one thing is certain as derived from the whole tenor of the sacred volume; that idolatry is a crime most abhorent to Jehovah; that the system of Popery is doomed by God to utter destruction ; and that all Papists being idolaters, unless they come out of Babylon the Great, will be " partakers of her sins, and will receive of her plagues."

The erroneous judgment that is formed of the genuine attributes of Romanism is both the cause and the effect of that false charity which urges so many of our citizens to look with complacency upon that antichristiati system, and to consider it on account of its fraudulent

INTRODrCTORY ADDRESS, Xlll

appellative, as an emanation from " the glorious GovSpel of the ever blessed God."

The same combined delusion and fondness for its pageantry, its music, its ornaments, and its shows, actuate that resistance which is so general, and so continuously displayed, to the use of evangelical means for the overthrow of Popery. Indeed it seems to be entirely forgotten, by almost all orders of people both within the church, and in the world; that "the working of Satan" is a most alarming curse to every nation who tolerate and succumb to it; and that "the testimony ol Jesus which is the spirit of prophecy" has distinctly foretold that the admission and progress of "the mystery of iniquity" among any community is a decisive expression of the displeasure of Jehovah, designed by him as a punishment for their transgressions and their sins. Thus the Apostle Paul, 2 Thessalonians, 2: 10—12; emphatically declares—" They received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. For this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie; that they all may be damned, who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness."

This reflection is peculiarly impressive, if considered in connection with the retributive dispensations of the Omnipotent Governor. We have always boasted of the unequalled illumination and freedom which overspread our country; and the questions instantly arise; has that light been duly improved ? has that liberty been used for evangelical objects, and according to divine prescriptions ?

Reflect upon the contrast. Popery is a system of darkness and slavery, mental, bodily and spiritual. Nothing more directly at the antipodes to all our republi-

can civic theories in legislation and political economy can possibly be imagined, than the dogmas, injunctions and appointments of the Court of Rome, exclusive of their total contradiction to Christianity; and yet that ''So7i of Perdition,^' who has withered the comforts, blasted the prosperity, promoted the contentions, extinguished the improvements, polluted with blood, and because it is a ceaseless God-robber, Malachi 3: 8, 9; has "cursed with a curse," during the last twelve hundred years, every one of the ten kingdoms of the Beast, is now nourished in this country as if he were " the Friend of sinners, and the Prince of Peace."

Those irreconcilable contradictions between all that Americans exult in, of the rights of conscience, and civil liberty, when contrasted with the gloom and vassalage of the Papacy, combine the most intensely exciting inquiries in reference to the prospective advances of the pontifical predominance throughout our land. Here we have a fact, v;hich in its primary aspect appears to be utterl}^ inexplicable—that men who are sensitive beyond description to the least apparent infringement of their privileges by their own elected official personages; at the same time deliberately choose and obstinately encourage the grasping usurpations of a foreign despotic potentate; whose boundless arrogance claims the illimitable control of all the affairs of every individual not only during his earthly pilgrimage, but throughout eternal ages ; and also assumes to determine and regulate not merely his own forced and voluntary minions, but the concerns of all the tribes of mankind, without a murmur of resistance, and forever.

Whether the supreme and all righteous arbiter of human transactions would alarm us by tlie fearful intimation that he can permit men voluntarily so to blind themselves, that they will aid the tyrant to forge the

INTRODUCTORY ADDRESS. \V

•chains which shall fetter themselves, and build the prison for their own incarceration, and manufacture the scourges with which themselves shall be lacerated ; is a topic which demands serious investig-ation, and may properly excite penitent humility. The signs of the times are full of melancholy portents for the American churches; and that light of which in one aspect we have boasted, and in another, endeavored to extinguish, is rapidly becoming obscured by the smoke of the bottomless pit: and that liberty which has been so perverted into licentiousness on one side, and been so grievously despoiled on the other, seems to be gradually transforming into the feudal bondage of the dark ages, when a Monk's cowl was the highest object of reverence, and a Friar's approbation was the most richly valued possession.

If we were asked for an example of human depravity which should be too palpable to admit either of denial or proof, we would adduce the present condition of Popery in the United States. No other reason can be assigned for the progress which it, has made, and the cordiality with which it has been received; than the sanction which indirectly by example, and immediately by its accomrnodating doctrines and license, that " all deceivableness of unrighteousness" imparts to every unhallowed indulgence. Popery is silently but gradually undermining all the moral principles of our people. " The leaven, the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducecs" almost imperceptibly, except unto a very perspicacious observer, is embittering and corrupting our whole code of ethics, both theoretical and in practice.

Examine three facts in connexion with the fourth, seventh, and ninth commandments. What has been the prime cause of that vast addition to the sabbath break-

XVl INTRODUCTORY ADDRESS.

ing which in our h\rge cities especially has transform^ ed the latter half of the Lord's day into one unrestricted scene of sensual revelry. What are the Sunday evening " Sacred Concerts," as they are called, but an excuse for the continued perpetration of the regular dissoluteness of the other six days, with the scene and place only shifted from the seductive theatre to the fascinating garden. This is a master-piece of satan ; to gild over sabbath breaking with a pretended sacred concert; as if any thing could be sacred, where theatrical profligates perform, and notorious " lovers of pleasure" resort. But it is the genuine effect of Popery. The Papist's sabbath ends as soon as mass is closed; and then every species of inordinate gratification may be indulged with impunity. The desecration of the Lord's day is one of the indelible and most obvious features of the Popedom ; and as the natural and inevitable consequence, infidelity, and all diversified ungodliness with their ineffable evils speedily overflow the land. It being also proper to be remembered, that this dishonor of the Lord's day, so far from being condemned by the Papal creed, is an essential ingredient in their system, and from their superstitions inseparable.

The transgression of the seventh commandment is indissolubly conjoined with Popery. That characteristic of the Romish apostacy is declared by both the Apostles Paul and John, to be an infallible mark of the mystical Babylon ; and according to the testimony of the Papal historians, the Scriptural delineations are most minutely accurate. That the various crimes and the scandalous disorders, which are implied in the Lord's mandate, are increasing not only in frequency, but also in openness, and likewise in aggravated enormity, is a fact which is so obvious, that alas! it requires DO evidence to verify its melancholy truth, Can it be

believed, that Jesuitism is not principally chargeable with this awfully wide spreading desolation? Do not the Jesuit Priests teach, that many of the sins of unchastity are merely venial ? are they not pardoned for a slight penance ? are not dispensations for all past delinquencies sold for a trifle? Cannot indulgence for one or more years, be obtained for a given price, which permits the purchaser to violate the law of God as often as he ploases, and promises him exemption from the divine displeasure ? "When we remember the proportion of Papists in our large cities and towns, is it possible that such an irreligious and contaminating system should exist, and be in full operation among them, and that all other persons should escape the infectious contagion ? Is it conceivable that the large.multitudes of sinners who are anxious to live unrestrained by the jurisdiction of Jehovah will not be gratified, without examining its genuineness, Vv'ith a pretended Christianity, which tolerates them in every licentious practice, and which guarantees their eventual security, through the power of a Priesthood so condescending to human propensities, and Avhose beneficence is so cheaply purchased ?

But probably survej^'ed in all their operations in civil society throughout our Federal Republic, the doctrines and practices of the Jesuits and other Roman Priests, and their devotees, respecting the ninth commandment, are more pernicious than even the desecration of the Sabbath, and the deluge of impurity with which they are desolating public morals and decorum. The equivocations, mental reservations, nullifying of oaths, infringement of covenants, and in short, all the innumerable modes which those deceivers have invented to invalidate apparently the most solemn obligations, and

2*

XVlll INTRODUCTORY ADDRESS,

yet to remove any dread of guilt from the Falsifiers ; are the most awful proofs of outrageous impiety, and daring perfidy which are found among human annals. Yet all those perjuries of the most flagrant character are constantly perpetrated in the United States, and by all classes of Papists, not only with impunity; but with the approbation and according to the instruction of their Priests. Can those barefaced violations of truth and sincerity be openly displayed without injury to others who witness them? Can the doctrine that the Roman Pontiff and his subordinate priests can nullify an oath or a contract; and dispense with the most solemn obligations, and authorize deliberate perjury, be openly taught as a part of the Romish Religion, without deteriorating the minds and consciences of men not possessed of that fear of the Lord which is the beginning of wisdom? Lying and false swearing are essential to the very existence of Popery.

It must also be remembered, that this Sabbath-breaking, uncleanness, and deception are taught in all the Seminaries and Convents whether of boys or girls in this Union. It is of no importance, by what name those institutions are known ; Jesuit Priests and Ursuline Nuns substantially impart the knowledge, and entice to the doing of all that loathsome iniquity. This is one of the great prospective dangers to our country. Multitudes of youth and of the moat influential rank in the American community recently have been and now are in the course of tuition under those consummate adepts in every diabolical art. From their course of tuition, all evangelical instruction is most cautiously excluded. The juvenile mind is enchanted with pomp and mummery; and beguiled with blandishments, or menaced with alarm, or operated upon by both alternately, until the creature has become a mere machine

whicli tlie priestly artificer adapts to any purpose that may promote his desig-ns or gratify his vicious desires. All tiiat youth truly learn in any Jesuit institution, whether it be a college or nunnery, is the most efficient manner to impose upon the world around them. That is beyond all dispute' the most dangerous of all the results which flow from those monastic establishments, in which Protestant boys and girls are immured. There they learn every possible abomination ; and also are taught every ingenious device by which they can elude discovery in the midst of their crimes: and deceive all persons who are not minutely conversant with their chicanery and turpitude.

Jesuitism cannot proceed onward in its progress throughout our country, as it has done for the last ten years without speedily illustrating its baneful effects, in the increasing indifference of the public to sterling knowledge; in growing immorality; in prevailing scepticism; in a silent but systematic and deadly change in the spirit of our statute laws : and in an accelerating corruption and debasement of the national character.

Jesuitism cannot exercise its present wicked influence many years longer before the Christian churches will find themselves cowering to the audacity, and writhing under the usurpations of those vile emissaries of the Roman Pontiff

It is therefore " high time to awake out of sleep, to cast off the works of darkness, and to put on the armor of lightV The welfare of the community and the vital interests of the Christian churches are deeply concerned in a prompt renovation of the character and actions of Protestants in reference to Popery. Two measures are indispensable. An accurate and a general acquaintance with the qualities and mischievous effects of the grand apostacy; and the adoption of

efficient and evangelical means to counteract and di* minish that unholy predominance which the Romish accursed despotism has already attained.

The former course necessarily implies the dissemination of knowledge hy periodicals, standard volumes, and popular discussions, especially by lectures on the prophecies which advert to Romanism. The latter comprises a correct understanding of the evils which flow from the existence of Popery in its connection with civil society, and of the proper methods to extirpate that insidious poison which it infuses into the whole mass of the community, and by which their energies are paralyzed, and the system corrupted with a loathsonje and direful mortification. With this point however the Christian churches, in their associated relations cannot interfere. No man wishes to infringe upon the rights of conscience; and no citizen would be willing to rebuild the dungeous, forge the fetters, sharpen the sword, and kindle the fires of Dominican Inquisitors, and Papal Butchers. It may confidently be anticipated that the coflag rations of the Auto da Fe, and the indiscriminate massacre of Protestants by the blood-hounds of the Mother of Harlots, who furnished the blood of the Saints with which she became drunken, have passed away not to be reiterated. But the events which have occurred since the commencement of that shaking of the nations, the French Revolution in 1789, not only in France; but also in Spain, Portugal, Italy and Austria, assure us; that the Romish priestly assassins will not surrender their stilettos, their poison, their frauds, and their long enjoyed supremacy without a struggle ; which although it will terminate in their overthrow, will previously have convulsed the nations who had submitted to them to their centre; and will spread desolation, anguish, penury

and slaughter, through all tliuir boundaries, to tlic utmost extremity. Tlic United States of America will not escape the experience of the storm and the wo, in exact proportion to the number of the Papal Ecclesiastics, and the extent to which their power and abominations have controlled throughout our country.

It is therefore desirable to promulge among our churches a work that exhibits in the most compendious form the various artifices by which the emissaries of the Roman PontilT endeavor to delude the unwary to their ruin ; thereby to enlighten those who are not acquainted witfl the fallacies and the Popish corruptions; and also to excite becoming watchfulness on the part of the Protestant churches against the snares of their insidious foes. For that purpose, the best probably of all the controversial disquisitions by the immortal Richard Baxter was selected. During the civil commotions in Britain which followed the lawless and destructive exhibitions of '* King craft," by James I. and Charles I. the Jesuits attempted to increase the ferment, and the divisions among the Protestants, that the unthinking multitades, weary of their unceasing-commotions, might for quietude as they supposed, take refuge in a Jesuit's absolution, and within the turrets of Babylon. The authentic history of that period certifies that to accomplish their schemes, every subterfuge and trick were adopted by those ingenious and fox-like masters of fraud and deception. They had received dispensations from the Pope and the General of their order to wear every kind of vizor, to appear in all sorts of disguise, to assume any name or profession, and to perpetrate every possible crime so as to promote the grand scheme, the restoration of the Pontifical authority throughout those kingdoms.

In consequence of those Papal indulgences, Jesuits

XXll INTRODUCTORY ADDRESS.

were found in all characters ; and always exceeding in extravagance even the wildest efiervescence of those who felt more than ordinary excitement during that agitated period. It was then partially known, and has since been amply ascertained and proved; that Nuns ohtruded themselves amoni? the female followers of George Fox, and that many of the scandalous public exhibitions of women in a state of nudity were by those well trained prostitutes of the Romish Priests. The leaders also of those minor sects who promulged as their cardinal tenet, a community of property and sexual intercourse, were chiefly Jesuits and Nuns, or others whom they had artfully selected as suitable tools to carry on their pernicious schemes. Many of those who pretended to be preachers of different sects, and who were distinguished for the infuriated extravagance of their opinions, and the apparent madness of their behaviour, were Roman Priests and Monks; who had but one design, to augment the national discord, to disgrace Protestantism, to deceive the ignorant, and thus to proselyte the people to the Roman superstitions. Baxter wrote the ensuing work expressly to unfold their wickedness : and it is a lasting memento, that Popery is immutable in its treachery and ungodliness.

The attentive American Reader of the ''Juggling of Jesuits,^^ and the specifications of the ''Forty Popish Frauds,^'' which Richard Baxter has detected and disclosed ; will be deeply impressed with the exact similitude which there is between the period of Oliver Cromwell's supremacy in Britain, and the principles and acts of the Jesuits in this republic. Admitting even that a modern polemic could have composed a volume exactly identical in fervor and in materials, it would not have been in any way so impressive as this development of the spirit, and practices of Jesuitism, which

INTRODUCTORV ADDRESS. XXlll

was first published one hundred and eighty years since ; and which is as exactly adapted to the present situation of Romanism in the United States, as if it had been composed under the superintendence of the spirit of prophecy, or as if it had been a philosophical and historical delineation of a preexistent controversy.

Among the multifarious polemical works in reference to Romanism, and the means which its treacherous partizans use to disseminate it in this country, it is believed that no treatise could be selected which presents stronger claims upon the attention of the ministers, officers, and members of the American churches, than this display ot "■ Jesuitical Juggling,^'' by Richard Baxter. Not only does he confute the system of Popery as incurably corrupt and totally anti-christian, by a few concise arguments, which all can comprehend; but he also describes the dexterous artifices of the Jesuits so lucidly and in such diversified forms, that none can deny the accuracy of the narrative; and no one can plead an excuse for being ensnared by their " sleight and cunning craftiness, whereby they lay in wait to deceive."

It is deliberate treason to the Lord of all, or it is judicial infatuation in all those ministers and members of the Christian churches, who assert that the alarm respecting Popery is fictitious, and that the battle with Jesuitism has not yet to be fought in this Union. Are there not at the present hour, probably twelve hundred thousand Papists in the United States, with half a million more in Canada at the North, and several millions adjoining on the South West in Mexico ? Are not France and Spain, and Portugal, and Ireland, and Austria, constantly disgorging the very dregs of Romish ecclesiastical corruption in the shape of Monks and

Nuns upon our land and in a continuously augment* ing stream ? Monks and Nuns also of such abandoned profligacy, that even those pitiable priest-ridden slaves could no longer tolerate their turpitude, or their existence among them ? The time will speedily arrive when their morbid influence will be felt by the body politic, and their iron grasp will convince our citizens that if they would preserve their rights and enjoy the gospel, they must "put on the whole armour of God, and wrestle against the rulers of the darkness of this world, and against spiritual wickednesss in high places."

Therefore Ministers and Churches! hear the words of " the son of Go(f, the Amen, who hath his eyes like unto a flame of fire."—" I have a few things against you, because you sufler that woman Jezabel, who calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed to idols. Be watchful and strengthen the things which remain, that are ready to die. Be zealous therefore and repent! He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches!"

EPISTLE DEDICATORY

TO

RICHARD CROMWELL

These papers tender you their service, because the subject of thvm so nearly concerneth both us and you, that you should be well acquainted with them. The Roman Canons that batter the unity, Catholicism, and purity of the Church of Christ, are mounted on the frame which I have here demolished. The swords and pens, and tongues that you are now engaged against, and which you must expect henceforth to assault you, are whetted and managed by the senseless, tyrannous, ungodly principles which I have here detected. Un-. reasonable as they appear to the unprejudiced, they have animated the studies and diligent endeavors of thousands to captivate tlie princes and nations of the earth to the Roman yoke. Vain as they appear to us that see them naked, they have divided and distracted the churches of Christ, and troubled and dethroned princes, and laid them at the feet of the Roman Pope, They have absolved subjects from their oaths and other obligations to fidelity; and have involved many nations in blood. O the streams of the blood of saints that have been shed by Roman principles, in Savoy, France, Bohemia, Poland, Germany, Ireland, England, and many other lands! The war 1 here manage, is against those adverse principles that have armed thousands and millions against the innocent, or against their lawful sovereigns, whom God had bound them to obey. They have fastened knives in the breasts of the greatest kino-s, as the lamentable cases of Henry the Third and Fourth of France do testify. They have, in a few days time, in Paris, and the adjoining parts of France, perfidiously butchered nobles, and other persons of eminence, and people of all sorts, to the number of forty thousand. The doctrines which I here confound, have invaded England by a Spanish armada, by the Pope's consent, and upon the account of religion. They have prepared

knives and poison for our princes, which God did frustrate. They have laid gunpowder to blow up king and parliament, and hellishly execute the fury of the deluded zealots in a moment, and then charged the Puritans with the fact. In a time of peace, by a sudden insurrection, they murdered so many tliousands in Ireland in a few days or weeks as posterity will scarcely believe. They are dreadful practicals, and not mere speculations, that we dispute against. I beseech you, therefore, that you receive not this as you would do a scholastic or philosophical disputation about such things as seem not to concern you ; but as you would interest yourself in a disputation upon the question, whether you should be murdered as a heretic, and whether we should be tormented and burnt as heretics, and whether the lives of all the princes and people upon earth, whom the Pope judgeth heretics, should be at his mercy. I speak not this to provoke you to deal bloodily with them, as they do with the servants of the Lord ! I abhor the thought of imitating their cruelty I It is only the necessary defence of your life and dignity, and the lives of all the Protestants that are under your protection and government, and the souls of men, that I desire. On what terms we stand with those men whose religion teacheth them to kill us if they can, and to venture their lives for it, is easy to understand. When we have no security from them for our lives, but their inability to destroy us, we must disable them or die. I ulter not melancholy dreams nor slanders. I have here showed it in the plain and copious decrees of ihe approved General Council at Lateran, that the deposing of princes, and absolving their subjects from their fidelity, and giving their dominions to others, not only for supposed heresy, but for not exterminating such as denytransub-stantiation, &c., is an article of their faith; and no man can disown it without disowning Popery in the essentials. If once they will renounce the decrees of general councils approved by the Pope, we shall be soon agreed. Costerus, Enchirid. cap. 1, p. 46, saith; Qucn. sane de-creta si i^eriiatem, si obsignationem Spiriius Sa7icii, si pra^senliam Christi species, idem liabeni pondus et momentum quod Sancta Dei Evangclia; " which decrees.

if you advert to the truth, or the seal of the Holy Spirit, or the presence of Christ, have the same authority as the holy gospel of God." They believe those decrees to be as true as the gospel. Bozius Hostiensis, and many more of them make the Pope to be the Lord of all the world. Bellarmin and the stronger side do carry it as the common jutlgment of all Catholic divines ; see what a rabble he heaps up. De Pontif Rom. li. 5, c. 1, that the Pope ratlune spiriliialis, habct saltern iiulircclc 'polestatem quandam, camque aummavi in tcm-jwralibus; "by reason of his spiritual office, has the chief power in temporal affairs!" Which, cap, 6, he saith, is just such over princes as the soul hath over the body or sensitive appetite; and that thus he may change kingdoms, and take them from one and give them to another, as the chief spiritual prince, if it be but necessary to the safety of souls. Cap. 7. Whether the Pope do take your government to be for the good of souls, I need not tell you. It is the stupendous judgment of God on Christina princes for their sins, that they have been so far blinded as to endure such a usurper so long, and have not before this blotted out his name from among the sons of men. It is not lawful ,saith Bellarmin, ib. c. 7, for Christians to tolerate an infidel, or heretical king, if he endeavor to draw his subjects to his heresy or unbelief: but to judge whether a king do draw to heresy or not, belongeth to the Pope, to whom the care of religion is committed: therefore it belongs to the Pope to judge a king to be deposed, or not deposed. You see here it is not lawful for such Christians as the Papists to tolerate you; which may help your judgment in the point of their toleration. Si Christiani, saith Bellar. ib. olim nondeposueruntNero-■,icm — Valentem Arianuin ct similes, id fuit quia dee-rant vires temporales Christianis; "if Christians formerly did not depose Nero, Valens the Arian, and others, it was because they were deficient in temporal power!" You have your government, and we our lives, because the Papists are not strong enough. They tell you what to trust to. Toilet, one of the best Jesuits, li. 1. de Instruct. Sacerd. c. 13, saith; They that were bound by the bond of fidelity or oath, shall be freed

from such a bond, if he fall into excommunication : and during that, debtors are absolved from the obligation of paying to the creditor that debt that is contracted by words. These are no private, ineflectual opinion*. Pope Pius V. himself, in his bull against Queen Elizabeth, saiih ; We will and command that the subjects take arms against that heretical and excommunicated queen. But their cruelty to mens' souk and the Church of Christ, doth yet much more declare their uncharitable-ness. It is a point of their religion to believe that no man can be saved but the subjects of their Pope. Knotty and a late pamphlet called " Questions for Resolution of unlearned Protestants, &c.," and Bishop Morton hath recited the words of Lindanus, Valentia, and Vasquez. Apol. lib. 2, c. 1, defining it to be of necessity to salvation, to be subject to the Roman Bishop. Would not a man think, that for such horrid doctrines, as damn the far greatest part of Christians in the world, they should produce at least some probable arguments? But what they have to say, I have here faithfully detected. If we will dispute Avith them, or turn to them, the scripture must be no further judge than as their church expound-eth it. The judgment of the ancient, yea, or present church, they utterly renounce ; for the far greatest part is known to be against the headship of their Pope ; and therefore they must stand by for heretics. Tradition itself they dare not stand to, except themselves be judges of it; for the greatest part of Christians profess that tradition is against the Roman Vice-Christ. The internal sense and experience of Christians they gainsay;-concluding- all besides themselves to be void of charity or saving grace; which many thousands of holy souls do find within them, that never believed in the Pope. Yea, when we are content to lay our lives on it, that we will show them the deceit of Popery, as certainly and plainly as bread is known to be bread when we see it, feel, and taste it, and as wine is known to be wine when we see and drink ; yet do they refuse even the judgment of sense, of all mens' senses, even their own and others. So that we must renounce our honesty, our knowledge of ourselves, our senses, our reason, the common experience and senses of all men, and the judgment of the

far greatest part of the present church, or else by the judgment of the Papists we must all be damned.

VVhethei such opinions as those should by us be un contradicted, or by you be sullered to be taught your subjects, is easy to (.liscern. If they had strength, they would little trouble us with disputing. Nothing is more common in their writers than that the sword or fire is fitter for heretics than disputes. This is but their aftergame. Though their church must rule princes, as the soul rukth the body, yet it must be by secular power. Excommunication doth but give fire; lead and iron do the execution. When they arc themselves disabled, it is their way to strike us by the hands and swords of one another. He that saw England, Scotland, and Ireland awhile ago in blood, and now sees the lamentable case of so many Protestant princes and nations destroying one another, and thinks that Papists have no hand in contriving, counselling, andinstigating,or executing, is a stranger to their principles and practices.

Observing, therefore, that of all the sects that we are troubled with, there is none but the Papist that disputeth with us with flames and gunpowder, with armies and navies at their backs, having so many princes, and so great revenues for their provision ; I have judged it my duty to detect the vanity of their cause.

We earnestly request, that you will, resolvedly, adhere to the cause of truth and holiness, and afford the reformed churches abroad the utmost of your help for their concord and defence, and never be tempted to own an interest that crosseth the interest of Christ. How many thousands are studiously contriving the extirpation of the Protestant churches from the earth .'' How many princes are confederate against them 1 The more will be required of you for their aid. The serious endeavors of your renowned father, Oliver Cromwell, for the Protestants of Savoy, hath won him more esteem than all his victories.

*We humbly request, that you will faithfully adhere to those that fear the Lord in your dominions. In your eyes let a vile person be contemned; but honor them that fear the Lord. Psal. xv. 4. Know not the wicked; but let your eyes be upon the faithful of the

3*

land. Psal. ci. 4. 6. Compassionate ihe weak and curable. Punish the incurable j restiain the froward, but love and cherish the servants of the Lord. They are, under Christ, the honor and the strength of the commonwealth It was a wise and a happy king that professed that his good should extend to the saints on earth, and the excellent, in whom was his delight. Psal. xvi. 2, 3. This strengthening of the vitals is one of the chief means to keep out Popery and all other dangerous diseases. We see few understanding godly people receive the Roman infection, but the profane, licentious, ignorant, or malignant that are prepared for it.

We earnestly request your utmost care, that we may be ruled by godly, faithful magistrates, under you ; and that your wisdom and vigilance may frustrate the subtilty of masked Papists or Infidels, that would creep into places of council, command, or justice, or any public office. If ever such as those should be our rulers, we know what Ave must expect. The reasons of our jealousies of such men are, because we know that the design is agreeable to their principles and -interests. We know it is their usual course : and we find that such men swarm among us. We hear their words; we read their writings, we see their practices for Popery and Infidelit3\ The jealousies of many wise men in England are very great, concerning the present designs of this generation of men ; and not without cause. We fear the masked Papists and Infidels more than the barefaced enemy. The men that we are jealous of, and over whom we desire you to be vigilant, are those hiders, that purposely obscure and cover their religion. He that wilfully concealeth his faith, alloweth me to suspect it to be naught. Those men we are jealous of; and if ever you advance them into places of command or power, it will increase our jealousies. I have no personal grudge to any of them. But the gospel, and the souls of men, and the hopes of our posterity, are noMo contemptible as to be given away as a bribe to purchase those men*s good will, or to stop their mouths, lest they should reproach us. As it i-s the common, but a poor redress, that after the massacres of thousands, the surviving Protestants have still had from the Papists, to

disclaim tlje fact, or cast it upon some rash.disconteiitcJ iiieii, which will not make dead men alive again. So will it be a poor relief to us, when those men are our masters, and have deprived us of all that was dear to us in the world, that we escaped their ill hmguage while the work was doing.

Papists disown abundance of the abominations which they propagate ; but as plain dealing in religion is better than juggling, so, we had rather that open Papists were tolerated, than those juggling deceivers. They that know the Jesuits and Friars, profess that they arc moro common in princes, councils, and families, and in the houses, if not the closets of noblemen, commanders, and persons of public trust or service, than we that live and mean simply, do imagine. And who would have thought that had not known it, that they had so insinuated into the several sects among us, and that they were so industrious in their work, as the Newcastle Scottish Jew was, to be circumcised or become Jew, and then re-baptized. Sec, and all to deceive?

Judge how fiir their seductions are to be tolerated. They preach treason against princes and states as a principal part of their religion.

Their doctrine corrupteth all morality, what need we fuller, clearer proof, than the Jansenian hath given us in his •* Mystery of Jesuitism?" Morton hath long ago produced enough to tell us what to expect from such men. Apolog. part I. 1. 2. c, 13. Toilet, himself, 1. 4. de Instruct. Sacerd., c. 9, saith ; Quantum ad intentio-ncm dilectionis, non teacmur sub preceplo Dcum plus omnibus diligere. " As to the intention of delight, we are not bound by the command to love God, more than others." Stapleton, 1. 6. de justif, c. 10., and Valent. 1. de Votis, c. 3, saith ; Hoc preceytum diligendi Deum e.c tola mente, doctrinalc est, non obllgatorium. "The precept t:) love God with all the mind, is merely doctrinal, and not obligatory." See here, a precept, and the greatest precept, even to love God above all, is not obligatory ? And p. 322, he reciteth the words of Toilet-ibid. 1. 4. c. 21, and 22;-teaching equivocation upon oath before a magistrate, and so maintaining perjury. And p. 327, he citeth the same author, maintaining that

murder and blasphemy, in a passion, and not deliberate, is no mortal sin, unless in one that is used to blaspheme. And p. 329, Bellarm. Costerus, and Valentia maintain, that fornication in a priest, is better, or a smaller sin than to marry. The like he shows of their doctrine of theft, false witness, &c , p. 332, 333. &c.

Above all their other mischiefs, the propagating of infidelity is the greatest. Under the vizor of inhdels, they plead against scripture and Christianity, to loosen men from all religion, and persuade them that they must be infidels or papists. Veron and his followers have given them full directions to manage that design. And while with debauched consciences they thus persuade men to be infidels in jest, they have made abundance such in true sadness; so that there are many such swarm among us, that sometimes seemed pious persons, that plead against Christianity itself. The leading papisis seem to be Christians in jest, and infidels in good earnest themselves.

If you ask who it is that presumeth thus to be your monitor .'' It is one that serveth so great a master, that he thinks it no unwarrantable presumption in such a case to be faithfully plain with the greatest prince. It is one that stands so near eternity, where Lazarus shall wear the crown, that unfaithful man-pleasing would be to him a double crime. It is one that rejoiceth in the present happiness of England, and earnestly wisheth that it were but as well with the rest of the world; and that honoreth all the providences of God, by which we have been brought to what we are. He is one that concurring in the common hopes of greater blessings yet to these nations underyour government, and observing your acceptance of the frequent addresses that from all parts of the land are made unto you, was encouraged to concur with the rest, in the tender of his service. That the Lord will make you a healer and preserver of his churches here at home, and a successful helper to his churches abroad, is the earnest prayer of

RICFIARD BAXTER.

PREFACE.

The controversies here handled are those that still are making the iT:reatest combustions in the Christian world ; and yet they seem exceeding- easy. I seldom meet with a learned Protestantbuttaketh Popery for such transparent fallacies, that he is little or no whit troubled with any doublings in the business.

We are confident of our own religion, because we believe the gospel: and we have no other rule and test of our religion : and we are confident that Popery is a deceit, because we both believe the gospel and the judgment of the ancient and present churches, and because we believe our sense itself As sure as we know bread from flesh, and wine from blood, by seeing, tasting, &c., so sure know we that Popery is false. And if a controversy is not at an end, when it is brought to the judgment of all the senses of all the sound men in the world, it being about the object of sense, then we are past liope of ending controversies; and therefore, as we will not waste our time to dispute that snow is black, or the fire cold, no more will we trouble ourselves with those men that tell us that bread is not bread, and wine is not wine.

Two things the Papists are still liarping on. The first is, that in our way, we liave no assurance that the Christian religion is true, or that scripture is the word of God. Their second is, that thread-bare question. Where was your church before Luther? Where hath it been successively in each age .^ And here mere sophistry carrieth it through the papal world, to the deluding of the simple, that are not able to see things for names.

The men that ask us where our chuixh and religion was, either know not, or will not let others know what our religion is. Show us, say they, a church in all ages that held all that the Protestants hold, or else they

were not Protestants. Forsooth, we must receive from them a definition of a Protestant, and then we must prove the succession of such. Know therefore, what is the thing whose succession is questioned. A Protestant is a Christian that holdeth to the holy scriptures, as the sufficient rule of faith and holy living, and pro-testeth against Popery. The Protestant churches are societies professing the Protestant's religion. The Protestant religion is an improper speech; but the Protestant's religion is a phrase that we shall own. For Pro-testancy is not our religion itself, but the rejection of Popish corruptions of religion or defiling additions. The l^rotestant's religion is the holy scriptures alone. The Papist's religion is all that is decreed by the Pope and councils. Our religion, contained in the scripture, hath its essentials and integrals. All the essentials and as much of the integrals as in the use of means we are enabled to understand, we believe particularly and explicitly: the rest we believe generally and implicitly to be all true. The essentials of our religion are only the baptismal covenant expounded in the creed, Lord's Prayer, and Decalogue, as opened by Christ, the summaries of things to be believed, willed, and done; baptism being appointed by Christ himself, for the true and sufficient symbol of our faith, to put men into the right and possession of church communion ; and the departing from this test or symbol, made by Christ himself, for this use, is the lacerating of the churches. But the whole scriptures contain more, even the integrals and accidentals of our religion.

So that, as the Papists will not permit us to take the writings of Gretser, Bellarmin, or any of their doctors, or the articles of their divines at Thoren, Ratisbon, &c., to be articles of their faith, but only those that are contained in general councils approved by the Pope; so we require that they call nothing the articles of our faith, but what is contained in the said summaries and in the holy scriptures, which are the only rule of our entire religion. Do they know our religion better than we do.-'

The Christian religion hath been in all ages since Christ in visible societies. The religion of Protestants

is the Christian religion. Therefore, the religion of Protestants hath been in all ages since Christ, in visible societies.

That religion which is contained in the holy scripture, as its rule or sullicient revelation, hath been professed in all ages in visible churches; but the religion of Protestants is contained in the holy scriptures as its rule or sulficient revelation : therefore, the religion of Protestants haih been professed in all ages in visible churches.

We name the societies from the places of their residence. Our church began at Jerusalem, and thence was dispersed into Asia, Africa, and Europe. It hath continued in Syria, Ethiopia, Egypt, India, Greece, &c. If I could name but one nation that had been of my religion, I should suspect it were not the true religion. It is the Christian world that is instead of a catalogue to us.

O but, say the jugglers, this is a general answer, to say vou are Christians : there are more sorts of Christians than one. I reply, it is the general or Catholic religion and church that we are speaking of; and, therefore, if it were not such a general answer, it were not pertinent to the question. There are no sorts of true Christians but one; that is, there is no essential difference among them. But may not Christians of several degrees of knowledge be in the same Catholic church .'' Our question is not, where any sect, or any particular church liath had its succession; but where that Catholic church hath been, of which we are members. And surely Christ hath but one Catholic church. 0 but, say they, would you make men believe that Ethiopians, Armenians, Greeks, &c., are Protestants i* Is it the name of Protestants, or their Religion, that you would have us prove a succession of? Those deceivers cheat abundance of poor souls by this one device, even supposing that the word Protestant doth denominate our church from its essential parts, and so call for a catalogue of Protestants. But I would ask, whether we or they do better know our religion; and consequently what a Protestant is ? If they know it at all, it is from our writings or expressions .'* For they will not pretend without signs to

know our hearts, and that better than ourselves. A Protestant is a Christian that protesteth against Popery. Christianity is our religion. Protestinnr against Popery is our rejection of your corruptions of religion. Men that never lieard of the name of Papist or Protestant, may be of the same religion with us. If many nations of the world never received Popery, and we reject it- if they never knew it, and we know it and disown it: are we not both of one religion, even in the integrals ? One man never heard of the leprosy: another catcheth it and is cured of it: and'a third flieth from it and pre-venteth it; all those are tr.uly sound men. When you call to us for a proof of our succession, either you mean it of the essentials of our religion and church, or of the negation of your corruptions. Either you mean it of the points that we are agreed in, or of those we differ in. Christianity we are agreed in ; and that is our religion, and nothing but that, Protestancy is but our wiping off' the dirt, that you have brought upon our religion. Is he not a man as well as you that will not tumble with you in the dirt, or go into your Pesthouse ? If we know not our own religion, then we cannot tell it you: and then you cannot know it: but if we do know it, believe us when we profess our own belief. We owti no religion but the Christian religion, nor any church biit the Christian church, nor dream of any catholic church but one, containing all the true christians in the world, united in Jesus Christ the Head. W^e protest before men and Angels that it is the Holy Scriptures that are the law and rule and test of our religion ; and why are we not to be believed in this our own profession, as well as you are in yours, when you make the decrees of Popes and councils to be your law and rule and tests?

We perform therefore more than you demand. You ask us where was our church before Luther? and we answer where ever the Christian religion was, and the Holy Scriptures were received. But we tell you not only where our church and religion was, but where there were men that owned not your grand corruptions, more than we. What can you demand more of us, when you call for a succession of Protestants, than that

we tell you of a succession of christians of our religion who were not Papists, and against Popery, who therefore were of our integrity. Who knoweth not that the Abas-sines, Armenians, Egyptians, Greeks, &c., are against your Papal sovereignty, infallibility, and all that is by us renounced as essential to Popery, though not against every one of your anti-christian errors ?

O, but, say the jugglers, those are not Protestants; they differ from you in many particulars. Call them by what name you please, they are anti-papists, or free from Popery, and then they are of our religion. But must the \Vorld be made to believe that all that we believe is essential to our religion, and that no man that differeth from us can be of our religion, be the difference ever so small.-^

But, say they, tell us of a church that professes your articles. Silly deceivers! Do not those very articles profess that the " holy scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation, so that whatever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an article of the faith, or bethought requisite or necessary to salvation."' We never took those articles instead of the Scripture, but the articles and all Protestants profess the Scripture to be the only entire rule and test of their faith and religion. The substance of our articles may easily be proved to have been successively held by the church from the beijinninG:: but it is not incumbent on us to prove that every word in the writings of every divine or church hath been so continued ; no more than you will own the writings of any divines or provincial synods of your own, as being the rule of your fauh. As you profess that the decrees of Popes and general councils approved by him, besides the Scriptures, are the rule and test of your religion : so do we profess that the Scripture alone, with the law of nature, is the rule of ours.

But, what! say they, will you be ot the same church with Nestorians, Eutychians, and oth r heretics.'' I answer: we will not take all for Nestorians, or Eutychians, that a railer can call such, that never knew them, nor can prove it. Heretics, indeed, that deny anv

4

essential part of Christianity, are no Christians, an^, therefore, not of the churcli that we are of: but if you will call those heretics that have all the essentials of Christianity, because they err in less points, \re know that there are such in the Catholic church. We will be none of them ourselves, if we can escape it: yet, indeed, we have no hope of escaping all error till we are perfect in knowledge; but we will not run out of the iamily of God, because there are children and sick persons in it; nor will we forsake the Catholic church because there are erring persons in it.

O but, saith the Papist, we acknowledge not your distinction of points essential and not essential; all points of faith are essential with us, and of necessity to salvation. That is such impudent and faithless juggling as may make one blush to think that Christianity hath such professors. The outside of that assertion damneth all the world who live to the use of reason. The inside of their deceitful meaning is almost clean contrary, and leaveth heathens and infidels in a state of salvation as well as Christians. It makes no one article of faith essential to a Christian, or to one that shall be saved; and turns the church into an invisible thing, clean contrary to their own assertions of its visibility. Thus they wrangle themselves into a wood of contradictions and unchristian absurdities.

The outside of their assertion is this; that every point that we are bound to believe by a divine faith, is fundamental or essential to Christian faitli, or of necessity to salvation : and if then no man breathing can be saved, for no man knoweth all that he is bound to know, no man believeth that which he understandeth not. It is impossible to believe that a proposition is a truth distinctly and actually, when 1 understand not what the proposition is. That we all know but in part, even what we are obliged to know, no man will deny. All that God hath revealed in his word, is tlie matter of our faith. No man can say, I have no culpable ignorance of any one truth of God that I should believe. Had we been more perfect in our diligent studies and prayers, and use of all means; and had we never sinfully grieved the spirit that should illuminate us, to say nothing

of our original sinful darkness, tlicre is not one of us but mi^ht iiave known more than we do. If sin of the will and life be consistent with true faith, then some sin in the understanding" is consistent with faith. But, according to the outside of their doctrine, no man that hath any sinful ignorance, and consequently, unbelief in his understanding, can be saved; that is, no man in the world. If he that thinks he knoweth any thing, knoweth nothing as he ought to know, I Cor. viii. 2., what shall be said of those men that think they and all the church do know all things that they ought to know, and that their understandings havp no sin ? 'And must we be of that faith that damneth all men, and of thai church where none are saved?

As the outside of their assertions is made for a bug-hear lo frighten fools, so the inside is this that heathens and infidels may be of their church, or saved, and that nothing of the Christian foith at all is necessary to salvation. For they tell us that they mean, that all points are of necessity, where they are sufficiently proposed, and men's ignorance is not invincible ; but where there is no sufficient proposal, but men's ignorance is invincible, or such as comes not from a wilful neglect of means, there no ignorance of the articles of faith is damnable, and so no article absolutely necessary. Hence, the question indeed is not whether men believe or not, but whether they are unbelievers or heathens, or ignorant persons, by a wilful neglect of sufficiently proposed truth, or not. So that all that part of the heathen or infidel world that have no proposal of the Gospel, may not only be saved, but be better and safer than Christians, who certainly are ignorant of some truth which they ought to know^

But, say they, it will not stand with faith to deny belief to God in any thing sufficiently revealed ; for he that believeth him in one thing, believeth him in all.

Very true, if they know it to be the word of God. And if this be all, Protestants believe every thing without exception which they know to be a divine revelation : and no wonder, for so doth every man that believes that there is a God, and that he is no liar. But may it not stand with faith to be ignorant, and that through

sinful negleet, of some revealed truth of God, or of the meaning of his word ? If you are so proud as to think that all the justified are perfect and have no sin, yet at least consider wlielher a man that livethin Heathenism till fourscore years of age,and then turns Christian, is not afterward ignorant through his former sinful negligence 1 But dare you say that you have no sinful ignorance to bewail / Will you confess none, nor beg pardon, nor be bolden to Christ to pardon it ? Thus they make no point of faith necessary, while they seem to make all necessary.

By this Protean juggling, they make the church invisible. For what man breathing knoweth the secrets of the souls of others, whether they have resisted or not resisted the light i'-^and whether they are ignorant of the articles of faith upon sinful contempt, or for want of some due means of faith, or internal capacity, or opportunity? We are as sure that all men are ignorant of something that C4od hath revealed to be known in nature and Scripture, as that they are men. But now whether any one of those men be free from aggravations of his ignorance, and that in every point, upon which the Papists make him an unbeliever, is unknown to others. When the faith or infidelity of men, and so their being in the church or out of it, must not be known by the matter of faith which they profess, but by the secret passages of their hearts, their willingness or unwillingness, resistance or non-resistance, and such like, the church then is invisible. No man can say which is it, nor who is of it. He that professeth not the faith, may be a Catholic ; and he that professeth it, for ought they know, may be an infidel, as being sinfully ignorant of some one truth that is not in his express confession. Thus by confusion the builders of Babel mar their own work.

Bellarni, de Verbo Dei, lib. 4. cap. 11, saith : "In the Christian doctrine both of faith and manners, some things are necessary to salvation to all; as the knowledge of the articles of the Apostles' creed, of the Ten Commandments, and of some sacraments. The rest are not so necessary, that a man cannot be saved without the explicit knowledge, belief, and profession of

ihcm —Tliose things tliat are simply necessary and are prufitable to all, the Apostles preached to all.— All things are written by the Apostles which are necessary to all, and whicii they openly preached to all."

Costeru:3 Enchirid. c. 1. p. 49. " We deny not that those chief heads of the faith which are to all Christians necessary to be known to salvation, are perspicuously enough comprehended in the writings of the Apostles."

Thus they are forced after all their cavils, to say as we, in distinguishing of articles of faith. They cannot be ignorant, that the church hath still had forms of profession,'which were called her symbols, as being the badge of her members; and did not suspend all upon ancertain conjectures about the frame and temper of the professor's minds.

But if indeed it be not the want of necessary articles cf faith thatlhey accuse us of, but the want of willingness or diligence to know the truth, let them prove their accusaiions. Do they think we would not as willingly know the truth as they / and that we do not pray as earnestly for Divine illumination .-' Do we not read their books? and are we not willing to confer with the wisest of them that can inform us .'' When Ave prove a succession of our religion, by proving a succession of such as adhered to the Scriptures, which are the doctrines of our religion, an argument that no Papist under heaven -can confute, they vainly tell us, that all heretics pretend t) Scripture, and therefore that will not prove the point.

Doth it follow that Scripture is not a sufficient rule of our religion, because heretics may pretend to it ? You take our articles for our religion, and yet may heretics that are far from our minds, pretend to them ; and would borrow credit from it to their heresies. The law of the land is the rule of our justice ; and yet lawyers and th'?ir clients that are contrary to each other, do plead it for their contrary causes. Must we have no rule or test or discovery of our religion which a heretic can pretend for his impiety.'' What words of God or man are not capable of being misinterpreted .'' If we should give you every day a confession of faith, some heretics

4*

might pretend to hold the same. No wonder then if they do so by the Scriptures,

Can any learned Papists be so ignorant, as not to know that the authority of Popes and Councils is frequently pretended for contrary opinions among them, and by many heretics. Will they therefore grant that the decrees of Popes and Councils are no sufficient discovery of their faith ? If heretics pretending to your test of faith, disprove not that to be your faith, then heretics pretending to our rule and test of faith, v/hich is the Holy Scripture, U no proof that it is not our rule of faith.

Therefore, the proof of a succession of such churches as have received the Holy Scriptures, is a valid proof of a succession of churches of our religion, seeing we have no religion, doctrinally, but the Holy Scriptures: yet adding that we prove a succession also of churches that never owned Popery: even the greatest part of the Christian world. But let those men themselves but prove to us a succession of their church, even such as they require of us, let them prove that from the Apostles' days, the Catholic church, or any one congregation of twenty men, did hold all that now their Councils and Popes have decreed, and are esteemed articles of their faith, and I am contented to be their bond slave forever, or to be used by them as cruelly as their malice can invent.

In the very principal point of their Papal Sove-reignt}', ihei/ have nothing but this gross deceit to cheat the ivorld ivilh. The Roman emperors divers ag^es after Christ did give the Bishop of Rome a primacy in their empire, and hence those men would persuade us, that even from Christ they have had a sovereignty over all the Christian world. Wink but at these four mistakes ; that Christ's Institution stands in stead of the emperor's ; that ;divers hundred years after Christ, it had been m the Apostles' days ! that primacy is sovereignty or universal government: and especially grant them, that the Roman Empire was all the Christian world ; and then they have made good that part of their cause.

That many nations without the reach of the Roman

Empire liad received the Cliristian fiiiih, is a Ijistorical luct which is past doubt. Those countries were not under the Roman power: and none of them were gov* erned by the l*ope.

If all that pan of the Christian world that was out of the reach of the lUiman Empire, did never submit to the sovereignty of the Pope, then hath he not been successively, or at any time the actual head of the universal church. The Emperor's mother of Abassia, ballled the Jesuits, by asking them, how it came to pass, if obedience to the Pope be necessary to salvation, that they never had heard from him till now?

The Indians, Abassines, Persians, and many more in the East; and the Scots, and Irish, and Danes, and Swedes, and Poles, and Muscovites, and most of Germany in the West and North, were not subjects of the Pope.

If the rule and test of the faith of Papists never had a real being, or no succession from the Apostles, then their faith and church hath either no real being, or no such succession.

It is either general councils, or Popes, or the church essential, as they call it, that is, the whole body, that is the rule of their faith. If it be general councils ; they had no being from the Apostles till the council of Nice ; therefore the rule of the Papists' faith was then unborn. They never had a being in the world: for there was never any thing like a general council since the days of the Apostles to this day. The first at Nice had none, and the following councils, as Constantinop. 1. &c. were only out of one piece of the empire.

If it be not general councils, but the Pope that is the rule of their faith ; then, theiv faith hath been interrupted, and turned to heresy and to infidelity when the Pope hath so turned. Why then do they tell our people, that they take not the Pope for the rule of their faith ?

If it be the major part of the universal church, it is known that two to one are against them : therefore by that rule, their faith in the Papal sovereignty is false and it would be hard, if a man must be of no belief, till he have brought the world to the polls for it

If all the stir that the Papists make in the world for the Papal government he but to rob Christian magistrates of their power, then are they but a seditious sect. There are but two sorts of government in the church: the one is by the word applied unto the conscience, which worketh only on the willing; either by preaching, or by personal application, as in sacraments, excommunication and absolution : and this is the work of the present pastors, and cannot be performed by the Pope. The other is by command, that shall be seconded with force ; which is proper to the magistrate.

i

INTRODUCTORY

PoPEaT contrary to Unity. — Dirsctions for Prolesiunls iclio argue with P.:pisls. — Seven argnmenls ae;(iinst Pop ry. — Popery is falss. — Opposes Ckrislian love. — Teadics ri bellian to civil ^ovcrnm^its. — Is (ni itnlioJy suslem. — Tke Papists are two coniinunilies, and h tve iico sovereign heaJs. — The ancient Romajicliarch has ceassd. — Popery is contrary to our senses.

The thoughts of the divided state of Christians have Inonght grord and constant sadness to my soul : espe-ciallv' ^Yhen 1 remember, that while we are quarrelling', and plotting, and v/riting, and fighting against each other, so many parts of the world remain in the infidelity of Heathenism, Judaism or Mohammedism, where millions of poor souls do need our help; and if all our strength were joined together for their illumination and salvation, it would be too little. Oh horrible shame to the face of Christendom, that the nations are quietly serving the devil, and yet that instead of combining to resist him, and vindicate the cause and people of the Lord, we are greedily sucking the blood of one another, and tearing in pieces the body of Christ with furious hands, and destroying ourselves to save the enemy a labor; and spending that wit, that treasure, that labor and that blood, to dash ourselves in pieces on one another, which might be nobly, and honestly, and happily spent in the cause of God.

These thoughts provoked me to consider, how the wounds of the church might yet be healed : and I have made it long a principal part of my daily prayers, that God would give healing principles and dispositions unto men. But the more I studied how it might be done, the more difficult, if not impossible it appeared,

because of the Roman tyranny] the Vice-Christ or pretended Head of the church, being with them become an essential part of it, and the subjection to him essential to our Christianity itself So that saith Bellarmin de Eccles. 1. 3. c. 5. No man, though he would, can be a subject of Christ, that is not subject to the Pope; and this with abundance of intolerable corruptions they have fixed by the foncy of their own infallibility, and built upon this foundation a worldly kingdom, and the temporal riches and dignity of a numerous clergy, twisting some princes also into their interest, so that they cannot possibly yield to us in the very principal points of difference, unless they will deny the very essence of their new society, pluck up the foundations which they have so industriously laid, and leave men to a suspicion that they are fallible hereafter, if they shall confess themselves mistaken in any thing now ; and unless they will be so admirably self denying, as to let go the temporal advantages in which so many thousands of them are interested. Whether so much light may be hoped for, or so much love to God, and self denial in millions of men so void of self denial, it is easy to conjecture : and we cannot in these greatest matters come over to them, unless we will flatly betray our souls, and depart from the unity of the Catholic church. If we should thus cast away the truth and favor of God, and sin against our knowledge and conscience, and so prove men of no faith or religion, under pretence of desiring a unity in faith and religion, yet all would not do the thing intended, but we should certainly miss of those very ends which we seek, when we had sold the truth and our souls to obtain them. For there is nothing more certain, than that the Christian world will never unite with the Roman Vice-Christ, nor agree with them in their corruptions, against plain Scripture, tradition, consent of the ancient church, and the reason and common sense of mankind. Never did the universal church, or one half of it center in the Roman sovereignty : and why should they hope for that which never yet was done.'' When they had their primacy of place, it made the Pope no more a sovereign and a Vice-Christ, than the King of France is sovereign to

the Duke of Saxony or Bavaria; or tlian the senior justice on the bench is the soverei<^ii of the rest: and yet even this much he never had but from the Roman Kmpire. What chiim did he ever lay in his first usurpations to any ciiurch without those bounds/ It was the empire that raised him, and the empire limited his own usurpations. Reinerius, Cont Waldens. Catal. in Ciblioth. l\iir. to 4. p. 773; saith : " the churches of the Armenians, and Ethiopians, and Indians, and the rest which the Apostles converted, are not under the church of Rome," In Gregory's days, they found the churches of Britain and Ireland both strangers and adversaries to their sovereignty : insomuch that they could not procure them to receive their government, nor change the time of Easter for them, nor to have communion with them. In the year G14, Laurentius wrote a letter, Avith Mellitus and Justus, to the Bishops and Abbots in Scotland. ' We happened to enter this island, called Britain, before we knew them; and believing that they walked after the manner of the universal church, we reverenced both the Britains and the Scots in great reverence of their sanctity. When we knew the Britains, we thought the Scots were better. But we have learnt by Daganus and by Columbanus the Abbot, that the Scots do nothing differ from the Britains in their conversation. For Daganus coming to us, refused not only to eat with u?, but even to eat in the same house where we did eat." Usher. Epist. llibern.

The work that here I have undertaken, is this—to give you a few invincible arguments, which the weakest may be able to use, to overthrow the principal grounds of the Papists; and to .letect their frauds, with sufficient directions for the confutation of all the Papists in the world.

Before I mention the grouiids or cause that you must maintain, I must premise this advice.

Understand what the religion is that you must hold and maintain. It is the ancient Christian religion. Do not put every truth among the essentials of your religion. Our religion doth not stand or fall with every controversy that is raised about it. That which was the true religion in tne Apostles' days is ours now:

that which all were baptized into the profession of, and the churches openly held forth as their belief Reformation brings us not a new religion, but cleanseth the old from the dross of Popery, which by innovation they had brought in. A man that cannot confute a Papist, may yet be a Christian, and so hold fast the true religion. It followeth not that our religion is unsafe, if some point in controversy between them and us be questionable or hard The Papists would fain bring you to believe that our religion must lie upon some of those controversies. |-*erhaps you will say, that then it is not about religion that we differ from them. I answer, yes : it is about the essentials of their religion, and for the preserving of the integrity of ours against the consequences and additions of theirs. They have made them a new religion, which we call Popery, and joined this to the old religion, which we call Christianity. Now we stick lo the old religion alone ; and therefore there is more essential to their religion, than there is to ours ; so that our own religion, even the ancient Christianity,is out of controversy between us. The Papists do confess that the creed, the Lord's prayer, the Ten Commandments arc true, and that all the Scripture being the word of God, is certainly true: so that our religion is granted us as past dispute. Therefore it is only the Papists' religion that is in question between us, and not ours. If you will make those lower truths to be of the essence of your religion which are not, you will give the Papists the advantage which they desire.

If the Papists call for a rule, or test of your religion, and ask you where thay may find it, assign them the Holy Scriptures, and not any confessions of churches, further tiian as they agreee with that. We know of no divine rules and laws of faith and life, but the Holy Scripture. The confessions of churches are but part of the Holy Scripture, or collections out of them, containing the points of greatest weight. And if in phrase or order, much more in matter, there be any thing human, we make it not our rule, nor are we bound to make it good, no more than tlie writings of godly men. A point is not therefore with us an article of faith, because

our churches or a synod put it into a confession, but because it is the word of God. For a council's determinations do with us difler but gradually from the judgment of a single man, in this respect. And therefore we give them the Scriptures only as the full doctrine of our faith, and the perfect law of God. Those points in it, which life or death is laid upon, and God hath told us, we cannot be saved without, we take them as the essentials of our religion, and the rest as the integrals only. The essentials are the Baptismal Covenant, explained in the Creed, Lord's Prayer and Decalogue.

Understand well what is the catholic church, that when tiie Papists ask you what church you are of, or call to you to prove its antiquity or truth, you may give them a sound and catholic answer. The catholic church is the whole number of true Christians upon earth ; for we meddle not with that part which is in Heaven. It is not tied to Protestants only, nor to th« Greeks only, much less to the Romanists only, or to any other party whatsoever; but it comprehendeth all the members of Christ: and as visible, it containeth all that profess the Christian Religion by a credible profession. If the Christian Religion may be known, then a man may know that he is a Christian, and consequently a member of the catholic church. But if the Christian Religion cannot be known, then no man can know which is the church or which is a Christian. All Christians united to Christ the head are this catholic church.

I shall now give you some easy arguments, by which even the weakest may prove that Popery is but " all deceivahleness of unrighteousness.'''' —2 Thess .2 .9, 10.

I. If there be any godly honest men on earth be-sides Papists, then Popery is false and not of God. But there be godly honest men on earth besides Papists — therefore Popery is false, and not of God.

It is an article of Popish faith, that there are no godly honest men on earth besides Papists : therefore if there be any such. Popery is false. By godly honest men, I mean such as have true love to God, and so are in a state of salvation. Their very definition of the

5

church doth make the Pope the head, and confine the membership only to his subjects, making the Roman Catholic Church, as they call it the whole. But lest ^ny ignorant Papist say, / may he a Roman Catholic uithout believing that all others are ungodly, and shall be damned, I give it you in the determination of a Pope and general council. Leo, X. Abro^: Pragm. sanct. Bull, in the seventeenth general council at the Lateran, saitb, seeing it is of necessity to salvation, that all the faithful of Christ be subject to the Pope of Rome, as we are taught by the testimony of Divine Scripture, and of the Holy Fathers, and it is declared in the constitution of Pope Boniface VIII. Pope Pius II. was converted from being j^noias Sylvius by this doctrine of a cardinal, approved by him at large, Bull. Retract. inBinius, vol. 4., p. 514. I came to the fountain of truth, u-hich the holy doctors both Greek and Latin shew; icho iciih one voice say, that he cannot be saved that holdeth not the unity of the holy church of Rome; and that all those virtues are maimed to him that refuseth to obey the Pope of Rome: though he lie in sackcloth and ashes, and fast and pray both day and night, and seem in all other things to fulfil the law of God. So that if a Pope and general council be false, then Popery is false. For their infallibility is the ground of their faith, and they take it on their unerring authority. But if the Pope and a general council be believed, then no man but a subject of the Pope can be saved: though he fast and pray in sackcloth and ashes day and night, and fulfil the law of God. Itis certain therefore that if any Roman Catholic do not believe that all the world shall be damned save themselves, they are indeed no Roman Catholics, but are heretics; for they deny a principal article of their faith ; the infallibility of the Pope with a general council, which is your very foundation.

Therefore even in the great and charitable work of reducing the Ahassines, the Jesuit Gonzalus Roderi-cus in his speech to the emperor's mother laid so great a stress on this point, that when she professed her subjection to Christ, lie told her, that None are subject to Christ, that are not subject to his Vicar. Godignus de reb. Abassin. Lib. 2. c. 18. Roderic. liter, j). 323.

Bcllnrnihisahh, dc Eccl. I. 3. c. 5. No man ihov<rh lie uould can he subject to Christ that is not subject to (be Pope , that is he cannot be a (.'hrislian. Therefore Cardinal Richlicu told the Protestants tliat they were not to be called Christians. Abundance more of them ^assert that Protestants cannot be saved I now prove that your Pope, and council, and faith are false, and that others beside you may be in a state of charity and salvation. For you confess yourselves, that he that is in a state of charity, is in a state of salvation.

If a man may know his own heart, then there are others besides Papists that are in charity, and arc god-hi men : and so in a state of salvation.

The consequence is plain by inward experience to every godly honest man that knoweth himself If I can know my own heart, I must needs say, I love God, and am not void of sincere godliness and honesty. And that I may know my own heart I can tell also by experience: for to know my own knowledge and will is an ordinary certain thing, if not by intuition itself And if a man cannot know whether he believe and love God or not, then no man can give thanks for it, nor make profession of it: for men cannot converse together, if they cannot know their own minds. Bellarmin confesseth that we may have a moral conjectural certainty that we have true love and are justified. Then I have a moral conjectural certainty at least, that Popery is false ; because I have at least such a certainty that I am not ungodly or unjustified. So that what measure of knowledge or persuasion any Protestant hath that he is truly honest and justified, that measure of knowledge must he needs have, if he understand.* himself, that Popery is a deceit.

So that hence you may gather these four conclusions : That all that have any knowledge or 'persuasion that they are not ungodly, unjustified persons themselves, and void of the true love of God ; are quite out of danger from turning Papists, if they understand but what Popery is ; and if they do not, they cannot turn to it, but in part.

That never any honest godly man did turn Papist] and this the Papists themselves will justify. For they

say, by a Pope and general council, that no man can be saved but a Papist: and they generally hold, that all that have charity and are justified, shall be saved if they so die. So that if Popery be true, then no man had charity or true godliness before he was a Papist; and therefore never did one godly man or woman turn Papist. And therefore let them take the honor of their wicked seduced ones. What glory is it to them that none ever turned to them but ungodly people?

It foliowelh that the Papists do yiot so much as desire or ifiviie any godly man to turn to them. If you understand their meaning, they call you not to turn to them, if you are not ungodly persons.

Hence, every one that turneth Papist, doth thereby confess that he was a wicked man before, and that he had not the least true love to God; that he was not justified, but a graceless wretch.

All you that do but know or hope that you have any saving grace, have an argument here against Popery, which all the Jesuits in the world cannot confute. For you know your own hearts belter than they: and they have no way to turn you to them, but by persuading you that you are not what you are, and that you know not what you know. So that plainly this is your argument; / know, or I have good persuasioji that I am not utterly void of charity or saving grace] therefore I know, or have the same persuasion that Popery is false, which determineth thai none have charity or saving grace hut Papists.

A man may have a very strong conjecture that many others that are no Papists have saving grace; though he had no persuasion that he hath such grace himself; consequently he must have as strong a conjecture that Popery is false. What abundance of holy, heavenly persons have we known of all ranks among us! Such as have lived in daily breathings after God, spending no small part of their lives upon their knees, and in the serious and reverent attendance upon God in holy vvorsliij), meditating day and night upon his law; hating all known sin, and delighting in lioli-ness, and longing for perfection ; and living in constant temperance and chastity, abhorring the very ap-

pearance of evil, and making conscience of an idle word or thought, devoting their lives and labors, and all they have to God, giving all their estates to pious and charitable uses, except what is necessary for their daily bread, even mean clothing and food ; taming their bodies, and bringing them into subjection, and denying themselves, and mortifying the flesh, and contemning all the honors or riches of the world, resolving to suffer death itself, as many of their brethren have done from the Papists, rather than sin willfully against God and their consciences : in a word living to God and longing to be with him, and manifesting those longings to the very death; grieving more at any time, if they have but lost the sense and persuasion of the love of God, than if they had lost all the world; and would give a thousand worlds, if they had them, for more of the love of God in their souls, and fuller assurance of his love and communion with him. As far as words, and groans, and tears, and the very drift of a man's life, and the expending of all that he hath, can help us to know another man's heart, so far do we know all this by others, that have lived among us. And may we not conjecture, and be strongly persuaded that these, or some of these, or some one of these, was a holy, justified person?

If ever you are tempted to be a Papist, look on one side on the lives of holy men, such as Bradford, Glover, Sanders, Hooper, and the rest that laid down their lives in the flames in testimony against Popery: besides all the thousands that in other nations have died by the Papists' hands, because they durst not sin against God: and besides all the learned holy divines of other nations, and the millions of godly Protestants there; as also look upon all the godly that are now living, men or women, that live in most earnest seeking after God and serving him ; look on those about you, inquire of others; read the writings of holy divines: and then remember, you cannot turn Papist till you have concluded that all those are daimied, and are utterly void of saving grace and love of God. If there be but one Protestant that you know, or any one of all that have been, that you take to be in a saving state, you cannot

5*

possibly turn Papist, if you know what you do. For it is essential to Popery to contradict all this.

Is this an easy task to one that hath the heart of a rnan in his breast? If you are not true Christians yourselves, dare you conclude that not one of those are true Christians? If j^ou confess that you love not God yourselves, dare you say that among the far greater part of the Christians of the world, there is not one man or Avoman that loves God ? This you must say, if you will be a Papist.

Many who are not Papists are good Christians, and consequently Popery is a deceit, and that is the testimony of many of their onm writers. I will not call for their testimony concerning ourselves, but concerning other churches whom they condemn as heretics, that are jiot subjects of the Pope of Rome. I will content myself with one of many that might be cited. Burchardus, that lived in the Holy Land, saith of them as followelh, ;;. 325, 326— And for those that we judge to be damned heretics, as the Ncstorians, Jacobites, Maronites, Georgians, and the like, I fou7id them to be, for the most part good and simple men, aiid livirig sincerely toward God and men

Of the Roman Catholics he saith, p. o2o.—^Thcre are in the Land of Promise men of eve'/y nation under Heaven, and every nation live after their oicn rites: ayid, to speak the very truth, to our oion great confusion, there are none found in it, that are worse, and more- corrupt in manners than Papists.

He also tells us, p. 324, that the Syrians, Greeks, Armenians, Georgians, Nestorians, Nubians, Jubeans. Clmlda:ans, Maronites, Ethiopians, Egyptians, and many other nations, theie inhabit; and that some arc not subject to the Pope ; and others called Heretics, as the Nestorians, Jacobites, &c. but there are many in those sects that are very sincere, know nothing of heresies: devoted to Christ: so that they far excel the religious of Rome. So you hear an adversary's testimony.

Well then, when a Papist can prove to me, that 1 love not God, contrary to my own experience of myself: and when he can make me believe that no one of all the holy heavenly Christians of my acquaintance, min

isters, or people, are in a slate of charily or justification : and tliat no one Christian on e: rth shall be saved but a Papist, then I will turn Papist But I must solenanlv profess that this belief is so difficult to inc, and abhorred by niy reason, and wy whole heart, and so contrary to niy own knowledge, and to abundant evidence, and to all Christian charity, that 1 think 1 shall as soon be persuaded to believe that I am not a man, and that 1 have not the use of sense or reason, or that snow is black, and the crow white, as to believe this essential point of Popery. I should a hundred times easier be brought to doubt whether I have the love of God myself than to conclude all the Christians in the world to be the heirs of damnation.

II. Tkat docirhie is not true nor of God, which Icachcth men to renounce all christian love and works of Christia?i love, towards most of the Christians tipon earth : but so doth the doctrine of Popery; therefore it is not of God.

If their error were merely speculative, it were the less: but here we see the fruits of it, and whither it tends. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye love one another. —John 13: 35.

This special love is the commandment of Christ, the new commandment; without this, no man can be a lover ot God, nor be loved of him as a member of Christ. 1 John 3: 11, 12, 14,23; 4: 7, 8, 11, 12, 20,

21. 2 John 5. John 13: 34; 15: 12, 17. 1 Pet. 1.

22. lie that loveth not a Christian as a Christian, with a special love, is none of the sons of God. Papists teach men to deny this special Christian love to most Christians in the world. They that teach men to take most true Christians in the world for no true Christians, but for heretics or ungodly persons that shall be damned, do teach them to deny the special love and works of love to most true Christians : but thus do the I^apists. How can a man love him as a Christian or a godly man, whom he must take to be no Christian, or an ungodly man? It is true they may yet love them as creatures, and so they must the devils; and they may love them as men, and so they must the Turks and Heathens: but no man can love him as a member of

Christ, whom he believes to be no member of Christ, but of the devil. All Papists are bound to this unchax-itableness by their religion, even by the Pope and general councils. Christ bindeth his servants to love one another with a special love ; so the Pope and council bind the Papists not to love the most true Christians with a special Christian love. They cannot do it without being heretics themselves, or overthrowing the foundation of Popery,

Here you have a taste of the Popish charity, when they boast above all things of their charity. It is their horrible inhuman uncharitableness that seems to me their most enormous crime. Also you may see here the extent of their good works, which they so much glory in. He that is bound not to love me as a Christian, is bound to do nothing for me as a Christian. So that they will not give a cup of cold water to a disciple in the name of a disciple, unless he be also a disciple of the Pope: nor can they love or relieve Christ in his servants, when they are bound to take them as none of his servants: and so the special love and charity of a Papist extendeth to none but those of their own sect, Let them take heed lest they hear, inasmuch as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me.

HI. That dcctrine ichich tKachcth men to destroy or undo them whom Christ hath bound them to love as Christians, and absolveth subjects from their allegiance to their princes, and requireth the deposing of them, and committing the government of their dominions to others, because they arc judged to be heretics by the Pope; or if they will 7iot destroy and extripatc such as he calleth Heretics; that doctrine is not God. But such is the doctrine of Popery.

A paper entitled An explanation of the Roman Catholic's belief and others like it seem to renounce the opinion of breaking faith with heretics, and of promise breaking with magistrates. It seems they think they owe no more obedience to their magistrates than they promise. But I refer the reader to what King-James and his defenders have said on this point, and now give you the words of fheir own approved general council the fourth at the Lateran under Innocent III.,

as Binius and others record it. In the first chapter they set down their Catholic Faith, two articles of which arc; That no man can bo saved out of their universal clinrch; That the bread and wine in the sacrament of the altar are transubstantiated into the body and blood of Christ, the appearances remaining. In the third chapter they say, "We excommunicate and anathematize every heresy extollino- itself against this holy orthodox Catholic faith, which we have before cxponed, condcmnins^^ all heretics by what names soever they may be called—And being condemned, let them be left to the present secular powers, or their bailifts to be punished, the clergy being first degraded of their orders; and let the goods of such condemned ones be confiscate, if they be laymen, but if they be clergymen let them be given to the churches whence they had their stipends. And those that are found notable only by suspicion, if they do not by congruous purgation demonstrate their innocency, according to the considerations of the suspicion and the quality of the person, let them be smitten with this word o^ Anathema, and avoided by all men, till they have given sufficient satisfaction ; and if they remain a year excommunicate, let them then be condemned as heretics. And let the secular powers, in what office soever, be admonished and persuaded, and if it be necessary, commpelled by ecclesiastical censure, that as they would be reputed and accounted believers, so for the defence of the faith, they lake an oath publicly, that they will study in good earnest according to their power, to exterminate all that are by the church denoted heretics, from the countries subject to their jurisdiction. So that when any one shall be taken into Spiritural or temporal power, ho shall by his oath make good this chapter. But if the temporal lord, being required and admonished of the church, shall neglect to purge his country of heretical defilement, let him by the metropolitan and other comprovincial bishops be tied by the bond of excommunication. And if he refuse to satisfy within a year, let it be signified to the Pope, that he may from thenceforth denounce his vassals absolved from their fidelity, and may expose his country to be seized by Catholics, who

rooting out the heretics, may possess it without contradiction, and may iveep it in the purity of faith ; saving the right of the principal lord, so be it that he himself do make no hindrance hereabout, and oppose any impediment: and the same law is to be observed with them that are not principal lords. And the Catholics that taking the sign of the Cross shall set themselves to the rooting out the heretics, shall enjoy the same indulgences and holy privileges which were granted to those that go to the relief of the holy land. Moreover we decree, that the believers, receivers and defenders, and favorers of heretics, shall be excommunicate: firmly decreeing, that after any such is noted by excommunication, if he refuse to satisfy within a year: he shall from thenceforth be ipso jure infamous, and may not be admitted to public offices or councils, or to the choice of such, nor to bear witness. And he shall be intestate and not have power to make a will, nor may come to a succession of inheritance. And no man shall be forced to answer him in any cause; but he shall be forced to answer others. And if he be a judge, his sentence shall be invalid, and no causes shall be brought lo his hearing. If he be an advocate, his plea shall not be admitted. If a notary or register, the instruments made by him shall be utterly void, and damned with the damned author. And so in other the like cases, we command that it be observed." Thus they go on further commanding bishops by themselves, or their arch-deacons, or other fit persons, once or twice a year to search every parish where any heretic is found to dwell, and put all the neighborhood to their oaths, whether they know of any heretics there, or any private meetings, or any that in life and manners do difler from the common conversation of the faithful, &c. And the bishops that neglect those things are to be cast out, and others put in their places that will do them.

Pope Gregory 7. I. 4. Episi. 7., expressly stirs up the people to cast of their princes, saying ; '"For the conspiracy of heretics and the king, we believe it is not unknown to you that are near them, how it may be impugned by the Catholic bishops and dukes, and

many others in the German parts: for the failliful of the Church of Rome are come to such a numher, tliat unless the king shall come to satisfaction, they may openly profess to choose another king, and observing justice we have promised to favor them, and will keep our promise firm, &c."

The sum of all is, that all that the Pope calls heretics, must he condemned and destroyed, and all kings, princes or lords, that will not execute his sentence and root them out, must be dispossessed of their dominions, and the subjects absolved from their fidelity, whatever oaths they had taken, and all others that do but favor or receive them be utterly undone.

I fetch these things out of the very words of a general council confirmed by the I^ope, and unquestionably approved by them. Many ages saw this doctrine put in execution, when the emperors of Germany were deposed by the Pope, and the subjects absolved from their allegiance.

Perhaps some will say, that this decree was not de fide, but a temporary precept. When a precept requi-reth duty, it may be a point of faith to believe it. Precepts are the objects of faith, at least as they are assertions that the thing commanded is our duty. It is an article of faith, that God is to be loved and obeyed, and our superiors to be honored, and our neighbor to be loved, and charity to be exercised, &c. The creation, the incarnation of'Christ, his death, resurrection, ascension, glorification, intercession, his future judgment, the resurrection of the body, &c., are all matters of fact, and yet matters of faith too. If practicals be not articles of faith, then we have no articles of faith at all: for all our theology and religion is practical. Do Papists murder po^r Christians by thousands, and yet noi fide diviaa believe that it is their duty so to do ? Either it is a duty, or a sin, or indiflerent. If a sin, woe to their Popes and councils; and if this be no sin with them, I know not why the world should be troubled by them with the name of sin. If it be in-different, what then shall be called sin ? If they can swallow such camels as the blood of many thousand Christians, what need they strain at gnats, and stick

at private murders, or fornication, or lying", or slandering, any more than the Jesuit casuists do? But if those murders and deposing kings be indeed a duty, bow can they know it to be so, but by believing ? Indeed if a general council and the Pope are to be believed, who give it us with a Decernimus et fir miter stat-uimus, then it is doubtless a point of faith: and if they are not to be believed, then Popery is but a mere deceit.

But may we not be Roman Catholics though we join not with them in this point? Have not many such renounced it ? and so may we. If you renounce the decrees of a Pope and general council, you renounce your religion in the very foundation of it. and cannot be J^apists; but are in the Roman account as errant heretics as those that they have tortured and burn to ashes: though here, where they cannot handle you as they would do, they dare not tell you so. If you may renounce the decrees of a Pope and general council, when they say; it is a duty, or lawful to exterminate all heretics, that believe not tran-substantiation, and to seize upon the lands of princes that will not do it, and to deliver them to others that will, and absolve their vassals from their fidelity; if you may renounce them in this, why may not we renounce them in other things as groundless?

IV. The true catholic church is holy: the Church of Rome hath for many generations been unholy : therefore the Church of Rome icas not in any oj those generations the true catholic church.

The major proposition is an article of the creed professed by themselves, as much as by us; I believe the holy catholic church.

The unholiness of the Church of Rome, I prove undeniably, thus: if an essential part of the Church of Rome, even its head, hath been unholy through many generations, then the Church of Rome hath been unholy, for many generations : but an essential part, even the head, hath been unholy.

Though it will not follow that the Church is holy, because one essential part is holy, yet it clearly follovv-eth that the Church is unholy, because an essential

part is unholy. As it followeth not that the body is Sound, because the head is sound ; yet it followeth, that the man, or the body is unsound or sick, because the head is unsound or sick. As it is not a church without al! its essential parts, so it is not a holy church without the holiness of all its essential parts.

They make the Pope the head of the Catholic Church, and an essential part; which is the principal controversy between them and the true catholics.

Abundance of their Popes have been unholy, and they dare not deny it. Their own historians describe their impieties, ami their own writers, even those that are bitterest against us, do freely confess it: and general councils have judged them and cast them out The number of those monsters is so great, that it would make a volume but to name them, and recite their crimes.

Pope John XXIII. was accused and deposed by the general council at 'Constance, upon seventy articles, The first article was, that he was from his youth, a man of a bad disposition, immodest, impudent, a liar, a rebel, and disobedient to his parents, and given to most vices; and then was, and yet is, commonly taken for such a one by all that knew him. The second article was, how by fiimoniacal and unjust means he grew rich. The third Article, that by simony he was promoted to be a cardinal. The fourth article, that being legate at Bonnonia he governed tyranically, impiously, unjustly, being wholly alien from all Christian justice, divine and human, &c. The fifth article, that thus he got to b« Pope, and yet coniinued as bad, and as a Pagan despised the worship of God ; if he performed any, it was more lest he should be totally blamed of heresy and cast out of the Papacy, than for any devotion. The sixth article was, that he was the oppressor of the poor, the persecutor of righteousness, the pillar of the unjust and the simoniacal, a server of the flesh, the dregs of vices, a stranger to virtue, flying from public consistories, wholly given to sleep and carnal desires, altogether contrary to the life and manners of Christ, the mirror of infamy, and the profound inventor of all mischiefs: so far scandalizing the Church of Christ, that among:

6

Christian believers that knew his life and manners'^ he was commonly called the devil incarnate. The seventh article was, that being a vessel of all sins, repelling the worthy, he simoniacally sold benefices, bishoprics and church-dignities openly, to the unworthy that would give most for them.

Threescore more of those articles were all proved to be notorious, by cardinals, arch-bishops, prelates, and many more. I add a few of the last. That he came to be Pope by causing Pope Alexander and his physician Daniel de Sophia to be poisoned. That he committed incest with his brother's wife, and with iiuns, and whoredom with virgins, adultery with men's wives, and other crimes of incontinency, for which the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience. That he was notoriously guilty of murder, and other grievous crimes, a dissipator of the Church goods, a notorious simonist, and a pertinacious heretic. That often, he obstinately asserted, dogmatized, and maintained, that thereisno life everlasting, nor any other after this; more-over,he said and obstinately believed that the soul of man doth die and is extinct with the body like the brute beasts, and that the dead shall not rise again at the last day, contrary to the article of the resurrection. Thereupon the council deposed him.

Now judge, whether the Roman Church had a holy head, when it had a heathen and a devil incarnate?

The general council at Basil deposed Pope Eugeiiius IV. as being a rebel against the holy canons, a notorious disturber and scandalizer of the peace and unity of the Church, a simonist and a perjured wretch, incorrigible, a schismatic, and an obstinate heretic.

Pope John XIII. alias XII. was in council convicted of ravishing maids, wives, and widows at the Apostolic doors: and committing many murders. He drunk a health to the devil, and at dice called to Jupiter and Venus for help, and at last was slain in the act of adultery. Platina saith, he was from his youth a man contaminated with all dishonesty and filthiness, and if he had any time to spare from his lusts, he spent it in hunting, and not in praying; a most wicked man or rather a monster. The life of that most wicked man

being" judged in a council oi Itaiian bishops; for fear of them he iled and lived like a wild beast in the woods. At last he got the better ai^ain by the help of his friends at Rome, till an angry man found him with his wife, and sent him to answer it in another world. Their own writers note that this was the first Pope that changed his name, whom his followers imitated. Do you think' the head of the Roman Church was then holy?

Many others of them have been most wicked wretches, common adulterers, fornicators, and sodomites, who poisoned their predecessors to get the Popedom. Bar-onius their flntlering champion saith, Annal. ad an. 912. "What then was the face of the holy Roman Church i* How exceedingly filthy, when the most potent, and yet the most sordid whores did rule at Rome/ by whose pleasure sees were changed, prelates were given, and which is a thing- horrid to be heard, and not to be spoken, their lovers or mates, were thrust into Peter's chair, being false Popes, who are not to be written in the catalogue of the Roman Popes, but only for the marking out of such times. And what kind of cardinals, priests, and deacons think you we must imagine that those monsters did choose, when nothing is so rooted in nature as for everyone to beget his like.'"'

Genebrard, that spleenish Papist, Lib. iv. Sec. x. saith, "in this one thing that age was unhappy, that for near one hundred and fifty years about fifty Popes did wholly fall away from the virtue of their ancestors, being rather irregular and apostatical, than apostolical." So that the Church of Rome had not then either a holy or apostolical head.

Pope Adrian Vf. writeth, De Sacram. Confir. Art. 4, that there have many Popes of Rome been heretics. Two or three several general councils condemned Pope Honoriiis for a heretic.

If I should tell you what their own writers say of the wickedness of the Roman clergy, in many ages ; and of the wickedness of the Roman people; of the large sums of money that the Pope hath yearly for the licensed or tolerated brothels in Rome, you would think that the body of the particular Roman

church was near kin to the head, and therefore not the holy mistress of all churches.

But perhaps some will say, that the Pope was holy because his office was holy, though his person was vicious. If this be the holiness of the Catholic church mentioned in the creed, then the institution of offices is it that makes it holy, and while the office continueth, the holiness cannot be lost. Then let them prove their holiness by saints no more. Let them not then delude the people, but speak out, and tell them that they mean such holiness as is consistent with heathenism, or infidelity murders, sodomy, and may be in an incarnate devil! Is that the holiness of the Catholic church?

By this means you leave no room for the Church of Rome, or any Papifc^t in the Catholic church which is truly holy.

Not as Papists: they can be no members of it. But if with any of thern Christianity be predominant, and prevail against the infection of J-'opery, so that it practically extinguish not Christianity, then as Christians they may be members of the church, and be saved too but not as Papists.

V. The true catholic church of Christ is but one : the pretended Roman Catholic church is more than one : therefore the freiended Roman Catholic church is not the true catholic church of Christ.

1. Where there are two heads or sovereign powers, specially distinct, there are two societies, or churches. But those called Papists, or the Roman Catholic church, have two heads or sovereign powers specially distinct. Therefore they are two churches.

There are many volumes written by both sides for their several forms. Bellarmin, Gretser, and the rest of the Italian fncticn assert that the Pope \i the chief power, and above a general council, and the seat of infalMbilit}-, and not to be judged by any, being himself the judge of the whole world. The other party aver that a general council is above th« Pope, and that he is to be judged by them, and may b© deposed by them. If any say, that they are but few and not true Papists of this opinion, I answer, then a general council are but few, and not true Catholic*,

which yet is said by them to represent the whole Catholic church: for the g"cneral council of Constance and of Basil have preinptorily asserted it, and repeat it over and over. Tlie council of Basil say, Ses ultim. that "not one of the skilful did ever doubt but that the Pope was subject to the judgment of a general council, in things that concern faith. And that he cannot without their consent dissolve or remove a general council; and that this is an article of faith, which without destruction of salvation cannot be denied, and that the council is above the Pope, de ride, and it cannot be removed without their consent, and that he is a heretic that is against these things." Bbiius p. 43. 79, 96. Pope Eugenius owned that council, p. A2. For the council of Constance, Martin V, was chosen by it, and present in it, and personally confirmed what they did as a council, and not'what private members did. You see that even general councils representing the Papal church do not only say that a council is above the Pope, but make it an article of faith, and damn those that deny it. What then is become of Bellannin and the rest of their champions.^

But perhaps you will say, they are but few on the other side. Not only most Popes, and the Italian clergy, and the predominant party of Papists, but another general council, the Lateran, under Julius II. and Leo X. expressly determine that the Pope is above a general council. So that here is not only an undeniable proof that general councils are fallible by their contradicting each other, and that there is a necessity of rejecting some of them, and consequently that the foundation of Popery is rotten : but also here is one representative catholic church against another representative catholic church, and one council for one species of sovereignty, and another for another species of sovereignty. So that undoubtedly it is not the same church.

The nations that are on both sides to this day, are a proof beyond denial of their division. The French on one side, and the Itilians on the other; and other nations divided between both. So thai the thing which

they call by one name, is two indeed. But So it not the true catholic church.

2. Where there are two, three or four heads or sov' eieigns at once numerically distinct, there are two three or four churches. But the Roman Church pretending to be catholic, hath had two or three or four heads at once numerically distinct; therefore it wa« two or three or four churches.

It is not only two species of sovereignty, but two in^ dividual sovereigns that are inconsistent with the nu' merical unity of a political body. Two, or ten, or two hundred may join in one sovereignty, as one political person, but if there be two sovereigns, there are certainly two societies: for if both be suprt me, neither is subordinat \ The I'apists lay their very foundation on a supposed division. Peter and Paul were both at once their Bishops. There are not many of them who venture to tell us, that Peter only was the supreme, and that Paul was under him : but they make them as equals, or co-ordinate ; and some of them say, that Paul was the bishop of the uncircumcision, and Peter of the circumcision, and then Pettr''s church is confined to the Jews. And they do not tell us, that one headship was divided between them: for then that example would direct them still to have two Popes, or two bishops to a Church: so that Peter being a head, and Paul a head, they had distinct bodies.

They cannot deny their many following divisions. The twenty third schism, as Werner a zealous Papist, in flisciculo tempor. reckons them was between Felix V^ and Eugenius: of which Werner saith, that "hence arose great contention among the writers of this matter, ^ro and contra, and they cannot agree to this day : for one part saith, that the council is above the Pope, the other part on the contrary saith, no, but the J^ope is above the council. God grant his church peace, &c."

Of the twenty-second schism, Werner saith thus, ad an. 1373, "The twenty-second was the worst and most *ubtle of all. For it was so perplexed, that the most learned and conscientious men were not able to find out to whom they should adhere. And it was continued for forty years to the great scandal of the whole

(tlcTgy, and the great loss of souls, because of heresies ftnd other evils that then sprung up, and because there was no discipline in the church against them. And therefore from Urban VI. to Martin V. I know not who was Pope."

After Nicholas IV. there was no Pope for two years nnd a half; and CeUsline V. that succeeded him resigning it, Boniface VIII. entered, that styled himself lord of the whole world in spirituals and temporals, of whom it was said, he entered as a fox, lived as a lion, and died like a dog.

The twentieth schism was great between Alexander III. and four schismatics, and lasted seventeen years.

The nineteenth scliism, was between Innocent II. and Peter Leonis. Innocent got the better because he had more on his side.

The thirteenth schism was between another and Benedict VIII.

The fourteenth schism was scandalous and full of confusion between Benedict IX. and five others, which Benedict was wholly vicious; and therefore being damned, appeared in a monstrous and horrid shape ; his head and tail were like an ass, and the rest of his body like a bear, saying, I thus appear, because I lived like a beast. In that schism there was no less than six Popes at once. 1. Benedict was expelled. 2. Silvester III. got in, but was cast out again, and Benedict restored. 3. But being again cast out, Gregory VI. was put into hii place; who because he was ignorant of letters, and yet infallible no doubt, caused another Pope to be consecrated with him to perform Church offtces; which was the fourth; which displeased many, and therefore a third was chosen, wliich was the fifth instead of the two that were fighting with one another; but Henry tho emperor coming in, deposed them all, and chose Clement II. who was the si.xth of all them that were aliva at once.

But above all schisms, that between Formosus and Sergius, and their followers, was the foulest; such saying and unsaying, doing and undoing there was, besides the dismembering of the dead Pope, and casting him into the water. And of eight successors, saith Werner, I can say nothing observable of them; be-

cause I find nothing of them but scandal, because of the unheard of contention, in the holy apostolic see one against another, and together mutually against each other.

One Pope in those contentious times, I find lived in some peace, and that was Silvester II. of whom saith Werner, Silvester was made Pope by the help of the devil, to whom he did homage: that all might go as he would have it:—but he quickly met with the usual end, as one that had placed his hope in deceitful devils.

I now appeal to reason itself, whether this were one church, that for fifty years together had several heads, some of the people following one, and some another, and the most learned and the most conscientious not able to know the right Pope, nor know him not to this day. But the true catholic church of Christ is but one.

VI. The true catholic church hath never ceased or discontinued, si?ice the founding of it to this day. The Church of Rome hath ceased or discojitinued : therefore the Church of Rome is not the true catholic church.

If the head which is an essential part hath discontinued, then the Church of Rome hath discontinued. But the head hath discontinued.

1. There have been many years interregnum or vacancy, when there was no Pope at all. And where then was the church when it had no head ?

2. There have been long successions of such as were not apostolical, but apostatical.

3. Your own Popes and councils command us to take such for no Popes. Pope Nicholas in his decretals, Caranza p, 393. saitii; He that by money or the favor of men, or popular or military tumults is intruded into the apostolical seat without the concordant and canonical election of the. cardinals and the following religious clergy, let him not be taken for a Pope, nor apostolical, but for apostatical. And even the priests, he commandeth ; Let no 7nan hear inass of a priest whom he certainly knoweth to have a concubine or wO' man introduced, Caranza, p. 395. and priests that commit fornication, cannot have the honor of priesthood.

But our greater argument is from the authority of God, and the very nature of the office. A?i infidel, or notorious uiiiiodly man, is not capable of being the pastor of a Church, while he is such. Bui the Popes ef Rome have been infidels, and notoriouslij ungodly men : therefore they were incapable of being pastors of the Church, and consequently that Church was headless, and so no church. Where there is not the necessary matter and disposition of the matter, there can be no reception of ihe form. But infidels and notoriously ungodly men, are not matter sufficiently disposed to receive the form of pastoral power: therefore they cannot receive it. As every true church is a Christian Church, it being only a congregation of Christians that we so call, so every pastor is a Christian pastor: but an infidel or not:)riously ungodly man is not a Christian pastor: therefore not a true pastor. Otherwise a Mohamedan, .Tew, or Heathen may be a true Pope. If any disposition or qualification at all be necessary to the being of the pastoral office, then is it necessary, that he own God the Father, and the Redeemer, that IS, be not notoriously an infidtd, or ungodly.

Popes have been such as 1 mention. Marcellinus sacrificed to an idol ; Liberius subscribed to the Arian profession. I believe there is a hundred times more hone of their salvation by repentance, than of a hundred of their successors, John XXII. held that the soul dies with the body, of which the Parisians and others condemned him. John XXIII. denied the life to come, and so was an infidel. The witchcraft, poisonings, simony, sodomy, adulteries, incest, &c. of others, are recorded by their own historians.

VII. If a man may be sure, that he knows bread to be bread, and wine to he wine, lohtn he seeth, feelelh and f.astcth them., then he may be sure that Popery is a deceit. But a man may be sure that he knoweth bread to be bread, and loine to be icine, when he seeth, feeleth, and iasteth them.

I speak of such a knowledge as belongs to men of sound sense, and a convenient object and medium. It is the senses of the wliole world that I appeal to ; it is bread and wine that are near us, in the hand or

mouth that I speak of, and not at a mile's distance : in the day lig"ht, and not in the dark. So that take the bread and wine into your hand and judge it, and let that decide our controversy. If you can tell whether that be bread or no bread, you may tell whether the Papists or we are in the right. Those therefore that be not learned enough to judge by disputations and writings of learned men, may yet judge by their sight and feeling. Either you know bread and wine when you see it, taste it, feel it, or you do not. If you do, then the controversy is at an end ; for the senses of all sound men in the world, will be against the Papists, that say the bread after consecration is no bread, and the wine is no wine. But if you cannot know bread when you see, feel, and eat it; 1. Then we are sure that the Pope and all his council is not at all to be trusted : for if sense be not to be trusted, then the Pope and his council know not when they read the Scripture, and canons, and fathers, and hear traditions, but that they are deceived. 2. Then we are uncertain of any judgment that Pope or council can give: for when they spoke or wrote it, we are uncertain whether our eyes and ears, or reason judging by them, are not deceived in the hearing or reading of their words. 3. How ridiculously then do they call for a judge of controversies ? and what a foolish quarrel is it that they make, who shall be the interpreter of Scriptures, or judge of controversies? For what can a judge do but speak or write his mind .'' and when he hath done, you know not what it is you hear or read, because your senses may deceive you. It is a far harder matter to understand a sentence or book of the Pope or council when you read or hear it, than to know bread when you see, and feel it. Many thousands know bread, that know not the Pope's sentence, nor a word of a book. 4. By this rule, it is uncertain whether Scripture be true, or Christianity the true religion. For we cannot know it but by our senses: and if they are so uncertain, all our religion must needs be uncertain, 5. We cannot tell what revelation to desire that should end our controversies and make us certain. For if God shall send an angel or other messenger from

Iieaven to decide the controversies between us and Papists, what could he do more but speak it to us as from God ? and we shoukl still Ite uncertain of what we see or hear: so that we are left incurably in our ignorance and controversies, if Popery be true.

Elcre you may see upon what terms we dispute with Papists, and what hope there is of its satisfying them. We dispute with men that will not believe their own senses, or senses of the world. The damned man, Lul(c 16. thought if one might have been sent to his bri'thren from the dead, they would have believed. And if Abraham sa}'' to them, if they will not hear Mosc.^ and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead ; wc may say of Papists, if they will not believe their own eyes, and ears, and taste, and know not bread when they see, and feel and eat it, how should they be persuaded, though one were sent to them from heaven to resolve them? Can we think by all our arguments to make any matter plainer to a man than that bread is bread, when he seeth and eateth it? If this be uncertain to them, what can you prove to them, or what way can you devise to deal with them? For indeed, if sense be uncertain, we have no certainty of any thing in the world.

But to this, Tiibervillc, in his Manual of Controversies saith, substance is not the proper and immediate object of sense, but color, quantity, &c. Nor can sense judge at all of substance though it be under sensible accidents, unless it be the subject of those accidents, and have a sensible and corporeal manner of being, which the body of Christ neither is, nor hath in that sacrament. It hath a spiritual manner of being, and is not the subject of the accidents of bread. They are without a subject by miracle ; therefore no wonder, if sense be deceived in this matter. Here sense and reason must vail bonnet to faith, and submit to the authority of God revealing, and the church propounding: they are not competent judges what God can do by liis omnipotence.

Is this all that those Rabbles have to satisfy the world that it is not bread and wine which is seen, and felt, and tasted I Is this not like the rest of their

H

JESUIT

contradictory imag-inations? That Christ hath not jt corporeal manner of being in the sacrament: and yet h is not bread, but is the body that is there: he saith, we maintain not his corporeal, but real and spiritual presence in the sacrament. So that either they affinu that his body is present, and yet deny his bodily presence, but not his corporeal presence. Most learnedly ! We shall at last be taught to distinguish between bodily and corporeal! But is not the juggle in the word manner? Perhaps the corporeal presence is not denied, but the corporeal manner. In term it is said, We maintain not his corporeal presence. And can a bodybe present and not in a bodily manner ? And why-is spiritually, put as contradistinct.'' When Paul said our bodies shall be raised spiritual bodies, he thought that they were nevertheless bodies for being spiritual; and therefore it is nevertheless a bodily manner of presence, for being a spiritual manner. But if by the corporeal presence or manner denied, be meant nothing but the qualities and quantity by which it is fit to be the object of our senses, why had we not this plainly without juggling? To say Christ is present in body but not sensibly, is plainer English, than to say that he is present in body but not bodily present.

He calls them the accidents of bread, and ye^. saith, they are without a subject. And so doth the cx-planations of the Roman Catholic belief, and their ordinary writers say that the body of Christ is under the forms of bread and wine, and yet say that bread and wine are none of the subject of those forms.

He professeth transubstantiation is a miracle, and so every ignorant, drunken, adulterous priest of theirs hath the gift of miracles, which he worketh as oft as he consecrateth. Such miracles are the glory of their church, and the proof of their infallibility.

He tells you that substance is not the proper and immediate object of sense, but color, quantity, &c. But is not the mediate object proper, as well as the immediate ? Be it a proper or improper object, we may yet believe that reason by the help of sense doth judge as infallibly of substances as accidents. If you think otherwise, then all the forementioned consequences

are undeniable. You know not whether tlic world saw Christ on earth : or wliethor he were crucified, dead, buried, rose, or ascended. It might be but color and quantity which men saw; and when Christ told them a spirit hath not flesh and blood as ye see me have, they might have answered, we see no flesh and blood, but color and quantity. Thomas had then small reason to be convinced by seeing and feeling, when he saw but color and quantity, and felt but quantity and quality. By this reasoning the world is not sure that ever there was a Pope of Rome, but the color of a Pope, or other accidents. You know not that there is any earth under your feet, or that you are a man, or have a body, because your senses perceive but the accidents of it.

What manner of men did Tuberville imagine he had to deal with, when he puts off' his readers with such an answer as this ? Mark the unfaithful dealing of those men, and how grossly they abuse poor people that follow them with mere deceits. The question or objection which he undertook to answer was, whether sense telling us that it is bread after the consecration be deceived? To this he tikes on him to give an answer, and cunningly speaks to another question, and passeth this by. It is one question whether sense can infiiUibly discern Christ in the sacrament, if he were there, or discern that he is not there? and another question whether sense can infallibly discern bread and wine, and know whether they be there? The last was the question in hand : but he slyly answers to the first instead of it; and. tells us, that sense cannot judge of substance, though under sensible accidents, unless it be the subject of those accidents, and have a sensible and corporeal manner of being, which the body of Christ neither is nor hath in the sacrament. Therefore Christ may be in the sacrament and you not discern him by sense. What is that to the question ? is it not the holy truth of God that you are about ? and should you thus abuse it, and the souls of men ? The question is, whether sense and the intellect thereby be infallible in judging bread to be bread when we see, feel and eat it ? Had you never a word to say to this ? to

7

persuade men thai they have eyes and see not, feel not, or that the world knoweth not certainly what they seem to know by seeing and feeling? Ilereafrer deal by US as fairly as Bellarmin did, who quite gave away the Roman cause by granting and pleading that sense is infallible in positives: and therefore we may thence say, this is a body because I see it; and so this is bread or wine because I see, feel and taste it, but not in negatives: and therefore we cannot say, this is not a body because I see it not. Give over talking of the Pope, or church, or religion, or men, if you are uncertain of substances which are the objects of your sense.

But you say, sense and reason must here vail bonnet to faith. In the negative case let it be granted, and any case where faith can be faith. But if sense and the intellect therewith be fallible in positives, so that we cannot know bread when we see and eat it, faith cannot be faith then. What talk you of faith, if you credit not the soundest senses of all the men in the world, when sense and reason are presupposed to faith ? How know you that faith here contradicteth sense? You will say, because the church or Scripture saith : this is my body : and there is no bread ? But how know you that there is any such thing in Scripture? or that the church so holdeth ? You think you have read or heard it: but how know you that your sense deceived you not i' He that cannot know bread when he seeth and eateth it, is unlikely to know letters and their meaning when he seeth them.

• The simplest reader that hath honesty and charity, is secured against Popery by the first argument, which he may make good to his own soul against all the Jesuits on earth. And he that is unable to proceed on that account, may by the evidence of this last argument confute any Papist living, if he be a man of sense and reason : and having brought all our controversies so low, that sense itself may be the judge, it is in vain to use any reason with that man who will not believe his own eyesight, nor the sight, and feeling, and taste of all the world.

CHAPTER [.

Error in fuitk in ow point is a per/ ct confnlalion of all Poprry.

I now proceed to the principal part of my task which is to open the deceits of the Jesuits; and to give directions for the discovering- and confutation of them, that you may see the truth.

If you prove them guilty hnt of any one error in points of belief determined by their church, you thereby disprove the ichole body of Popery. For you pull up the foundation which they build on, and the aiUhor-ity into which they resolve their faith. They will grant you, that if they are deceived by the church in one thing-, they have no certainty of any thing upon the church's credit. So that if you read PauVs discourse against praying in an unknown tongue, or the many precepts for our reading and meditating in the law of God, or the like, and can but perceive that the Popish Latin service, or their forbidding men to read the Scriptures, &c. is contrary hereto, or if you find out but any one of their errors, you cannot be a Papist, if you understand their profession.

Thougii we know that the Scripture and all that is in it is of infallible truth, and that every true Christian, while such, is infallible in the essentials of Christianity ; for else he were no Christian : yet we profess that we know but in part, and that our own writings and confessions may possibly in somethings be beside the sense of Scripture; and there being much more propounded in Scripture to our faith, than what is of absolute necessity to salvation, we may possibly, after our studying and praying, mistake in some things that are not of the essence, but the integrity of Christianity, and are necessary to the strength or comfort, though not to the being of a Christian. So that every error in their faith, destroys their grounds, and their new religion ; but so doth not every error of ours.

Or to speak more distinctly; let us distinguish between their objective faith, and our subjective faith. Their objective faith hath errors in it, but ours hath

none by their own confession : for theirs is all the decrees of their Popes and councils: and ours is only the Holy Scripture : which they confess to be infallible. Our own writings do but show how we understand the Scriptures, and so whether our subjective faithhe right or not. We confess that it is not only possible but probable, that we are mistaken in some lower points, about the meaning of the Scriptures, and yet our foundation is still sure. But they have confounded their subjective and objective faith: and one believes it on that account, because others do believe it, and so one age or part do but seek for the object of their faith in the actual faith of the other. They conclude that every point which is of faith, that is determined by the church to be so, is of such necessity to salvation that no man can be saved that denieth it, or that doth not believe it, if sufficiently proposed. But we are assured, that though all that is in Scripture be most true, yet through misunderstanding, some points there proposed to oar faith may possibly be denied and disputed against by a true believer; and yet his salvation not be overthrown by it. The Papists cry out against us for distinguishing between the fundamentals or essentials of religion and the integrals : but we know it to be necessary.

CHAPTER II.

That doctrine ichich is conlranj lo Scripture is erroneous.

When you have brought the matter thus fur, and see that if they have one error in faith, their whole cause is lost, then consider, whether it be possible for that doctrine vhich is so contrary to Scripture, and to itself to be free from all error 1 1. How contrary it is to Scripture: to forbid the reading of Scripture in a known tongue : their public praying in an unknown language: their administering to the people by the halves, denying them the wine, and giving tliem the bread only: their affirming men to be perfect without

«in in this life: their calling some sins venial which deserve a pardon, and yet are truly no sins: their absolute forbidding their priests to marry, and saying that there is no bread and wine left after the consecration. Dent. vi. 7, 8, 9. Deut. xi. 18, 19, 20. Isa. xxxiv. 16. Psal. i. 2. Nehem. viii. Josh. viii. 34, 35. Matt.xu, 35. xix. 4 xxi. 16. xxii. 31. Mark xW. \0/ZQ>. Ads\\\\. 28. xiii. 27. xv. 21. 1 Thess.x 27. Co/, iv. 16. Deut. xxxi. 11. Epk. iii. 4. Matt. xxiv. 15. Rev. i. 3. 2 Tim. iii. 16. John \, 39. Jlcis xvii. 2, 11. xviii. 28. Rom. XV. 4. 2 Ti?7i. iii. 15. /s^. viii. 16, 20. xl. 4. Rom. vii. I. James i. 25. Hos. viii. 12.

1 Cor. xiv. 31^//. xxvi. 27, 28. I Cor. xi. 25, 26, 27, 28. 1 Cor. x. 16. Eccl. vii. 20. Ja7}ies iii. 2. 1 JoAw i. 8. PA«7. iii. 12. LwA-e xi. 4. Dez^^. xii. 32. Gal iii. 10. 1 JoA/i iii. 4. I .Tm. iii. 2, 4, 5, 11, 12. Ti^ i. 6. 1 Ti?n. iv. 3. 1 Cor. ix. 5. I Cor. x. 16. 1 Cor. xi. 23, 26, 27, 28. Ads ii. 42. Ads xx. 7, 11.

2. They are contrary to themselves. Not only several persons, but several countries go several ways; the Trench are of one way, and the Italians of another, even in the fundamentals of their faith, into which all the rest is resolved. Their Popes have ordinarily been contrary to one another in their decrees; which made PLatina say, following Popes do still either infringe or wholhj abrogate the decrees of the former Popes. Erasmus saith, that Pope John XXII. and Pope Nicholas are contrary one to another in their ichcle decrees., and in things that belong to matters of faith Had we no instances but of Sergiiis and For-mosus and their following partakers, it were enough. And Celestinc's case puts Bellarmin to silly shifts. Their councils contradict each other. They confess that the Arians have had as many councils as general as ever the orthodox had: and if it be only the want of the Pope's approbation that nulliheth their authority, then let them tell us no more of councils and of all the church, but say plainly that it is but one man that they mean.

But even their approved councils have been contrary : The sixth council at Constantinople approved by Pope Adrian, is now confessed to have many er-

7*

rors. The council of Neocaesarea, confirmed by Pope Leo IV. and by the Nicene council, as saith the council of Florence ses. 7. condemned second marriages, contrary to Scripture. The council at Lateran under Leo. X. determines that the Pope is above a general council; and the councils of Constance and Basil determine that the general council is above the Pope, and that it is heresy to deny it.

CHAPTER III.

Principles and Proof.

If you enter into dispute tvith any Papist, inquire first what he will take for sufficient proof, aiid what common principles you aie agreed on by which the rest must be decided. Men that agree in nothing Q.i all, are not capable of a dispute. For the principles in which they are agreed, are those that the rest must be reduced to. And when you have made this inquiry, you shall find that the Popish way of disputing is to forbid you to dispute, unless you will first yield the cause to them as beyond dispute; and that they are not agreed with ihe rest of the world in any common principles to which the differences may be reduced for trial; and so there is no sort of proof that they will admit of as sufficient. If there be any ground of proof at all, it must be ; from the senses': or from reason: or from Scripture: or from the church; but they will stand to none of those.

Begin at the bottom of all, and know of them whether they will take that for a valid proof, which is fetched from sense, even from the sound senses of all men in the world, supposing a convenient object and medium ? If they will not take this for proof, how can you dispute with them ? Or what proof can be admitted, if this be not admitted? We havo this advantage in dealing, even with those heathen that have blotted out much of the law of nature itself, that yet they will yield to an argument from sense.

But if they would yield to the validity of this proof: then they give away their cause, seeing sense telleth ua that it is bread which we see, feel, and eat after the consecration. They know this; and therefore they disown and deny that proof,

But will they then admit of proofs from reason 1 No, that cannot be, if proof from sense be not admitted. For reason receiveth its object by means or occasion of the senses, and must needs be deceived if they are deceived. Reason hath not a principle that it holds faster, than that sense is to bo credited; that this is white or black which my own eyes and the eyes of all other men do see to be so: and so that this is bread which we all see, and feel, and taste to be so. Therefore Papists tell us that reason must stoop to f:iith ; that is, they will not stand to reason when it contradicteth the doctrine of their sect. It seems they are in some parts of their religion unreasonable. But I would know, wliether tliey have any reason to be unreasonable. If they have, then why might not our reason be valid as well as their reason which they bring against reason? by which they contradict themselves. For if reason be vain, why reason they to prove its vanity or invalidity.'' But if they have no reason against reason, let them confess it, and offer us none, and then their disputes will do no harm. AV^e easily yield, that we have reason to believe God's revelation, about those things whi<'h we had no reason to believe if they were not revealed: and that many of those revelations are above reason, so far as that reason cannot discern the truth of the thing without them : yea, it would rather judge the tilings improbable. But yet revelations are received by reason, and inform reason, and not destroy it; nor do they so contradict sense or reason, as to make that credible which sense and reason have sufficient ground to judge false.

So that here we must break with a Papist, even where we might join in dispute with a heathen. And how will Papists deal with heathens if they will deny the proofs from sense and reason .''

But will they stand to the validity of proofs from

so JEBtJlT

Scripture ? No : for they take it to be but part of God's word, so that \vc may not argue negatively, it is not in the Holy Scripture : therefore it is not an article of faith or a law of God. For they will presently appeal to tradition, &•:, And even so much as is in Scripture, though they confess it to be true, yet they confess it not to be by us intelligible, and will not admit of any proof from it but with this limitation, that you take it in that sense as the church take it. For they are sworn by the Trent oath, to take it in that sense as the holy mother church doth hold and hath held it in, and never to take or interpret it, but according to the unanimous sense of the fathers. So that they must know what sense all the fathers are unanimous in before they can admit a proof from Scripture. And before that can be done, a load of books must be read over or searched: and when that is done, they will find that most texts were never meddled with by most of those fathers in their writings: and in those that they did meddle with they disagreed in multitudes, and where they agree they are not unanimous: and thus the Papists are sworn to believe no sense at all. If they would have come down to a major vote, it is no short or easy matter to gather the votes. If they know the fathers' unanimous consent, yet must they have the sense of the present church too: but is it not all one to make your adversary the judge of your cause, as the judge of your evidences and all your proofs .''

Will they stand to the judgment of the catholic church? No; for when they deny proof from sense and reason, they must needs deny all that is brought from the church: for the church cannot judge itself but on supposition of the infallibility of sense. When you argue from the judgment and practice of the greater part of the church, they presently disclaim them all as heretics or schismatics, and will have no man to be a valid witness but themselves. The Greeks, the Ethiopians, the Armenians, the Protestants, all are heretics or schismatics save they; and therefore may not be witnesses in the case. So that you see that Papists will admit of no proofs from sense or reason, or the sufficiency of Scripture, or the testimony of the catholic church, but only from themselves.

JUGaLIIIC. gl

CHAPTER IV.

Judge of Controversies.

Understand what the Papists mean ivhcn they call ripon you for a judge oj controversies.

If you dispute with them, they ask you, icho shall be the judge? and \ ersuado you tirit it is in vain to dispute witliout a living judge : for every man will be the judge himself; and every man's cause be right in his own eyes, and all the world will be still at odds till we are agreed who shall be the judge.

1. You may easily observe that this is the plain drift of all, to persuade you to make them your judges, and yield the cause instead of disputing it. For it is no other judge but themselves that they will admit. Yield first that the Pope or his council is the judge of all controversies, then it is folly to dispute against them : so that if you will yield them the cause first, they will then dispute with you after.

The necessity of a judge is a pretence: for it is against all reason and experience to think that all inquiries or disputes are vain, unless there be a judge to decide the case. A judge is a ruling decider ; not to satisfy men's minds, so much as to preserve order, and peace, and justice in society. But there are thousands of cases to be privately discussed, that we never need to bring to a judge. Every husbandman, or tradesman, or navigator, or other artificer meets with doubts and difficulties in his way which he laboreth to discern, and satisfieth himself with a judgment of discretion without a ruling judge. We eat and drink, and clotlie ourselves, and follow our daily labors without a judge, though we meet with controversies in almost all. Men marry, and build, and buy, and sell, and take physic, and dispatch their greatest worldly business without a judge. Judges are only for such controverted cases as cannot well be decided without them, to the attaining of the ends of government.

2. Is it not against the daily practice of the Papists to think or say that all disputes and controversies must

have a judge ? Who is the judge between the nominals, reals, and formalists, the Dominicans, Franciscans and Jesuits, in all those controversies which have cartloads of books written on them ? Their Popes or councils dare not judge between them. Do they not daily dispute in their schools among themselves without a judge? and still write books against one another without a judge? 3. Understand well the use and differences of judgment. The sentence is but a means to the execution : and judges cannot determine the mind and will of man : but preserve outward order, if men will not see the truth themselves. The Jesuits that are so eager for free will, should easily grant that the Pope by his definition cannot determine the will of man. They see that heretics remain heretics, when the Pope hath said all that he can : and if he can cure them all by his determinations, he is much to blame that lie doeth not. If a man's mind can be settled, an infallible teacher is fitter than a judge. Judgment then being for execution, w^hen you ask, who shall be the judge ? I answer, judgment is either total, absolute and final: or it is only to a certain particular end, limited and subordinate, from which there is an appeal. In the former case, there is no judge but Christ, and the Father by him. No absolute decision can be made till the great judgment come ; and then all will be fully and finally decided. And for the limited present judgments of men, they are of several sorts according to their several ends. When the question is, who shall be corporally punished as a heretic ? the magistrate is judge : for coercive punishment being his work, the judgment must be his also. But when the question is, who shall be excommunicated as a heretic ? as God's law hath told us who, so is the rule of decision about individuals. To try individual persons, and cases according to this law, belongs to the governors of the church : but not to the governors of other churches a thousand miles off, that never received such an authority, and are not capable of the work : but to the governors of the church in which the party hath communion, and into which he shall at any time intrude and seek communion. All men have a judgment of discerning that are concerned in the execution.

So thai if ti disputing Papist will sfiy tliat iiis business is not to dispute with you, but to cxconiniunicato, or hang, or burn you for a heretic, then 1 confess there is all the reason in the world that you should first agree upon the judge. But why the Po])c should be the judge, 1 know not.

CHAPTER V.

End of contrctversy.

Papists tell you, that in their icay there is an end of co}itroversics, but in yours there is none : for if you ivill not stand to One^s judgment as infallible^ you may dispute as long as you live before you come to an end.

In discussing this part of the deceit:—1. We confess that on earth there will be no end of all controversies among the best: nor of the great controversies which salvation lieth on, between the believers and unbelievers: that is, there will be still infidelity and heresy in the world, and error in the godly themselves. IJath it not been so in every age till now \ And wh}'^ should we expect that it should now be otherwise ? Doth not Paul tell us that here we know but in part, and prophesy in part 1 and that which is imperfect will not be done away, until that which is perfect is come"? While we know but in part, we shall ditVer in part.

2. Hath your way put an end to controversies anymore than ours 1 Are you not yet at controversy with infidels, whether Christ be the Redeemer, and with heretics whether he be true eternal (Jod ] Are you not yet as full of controversies among yourselves, as any Christians on the face of the earth 1 In the many volumes of your schoolmen, casuists, and commentators, I can shew more controversies yet depending, than you can find among all Christians in the world together.

3. Is there any thing in your way that better tondeth to the deciding of controversies than in ours ? Con-trarily, you have made more controversies than you have ended. We have a certain infallible rule to decide

our controversies by, such as you confess yourselves to be infallible; even the Holy Scriptures. But you have an uncertain rule, even the decrees of your Popes and councils, and the many volumes of the fathers, which are at odds among thcniseh es ; your very rule is self-contradictino-, and your judges are together by the ears. Our Faith consistcth in those points which are granted by yourselves, and so are beyond controversy between us and you. But yours lieth in a mixture of men's corruptions, which will ever be controverted and condemned. Our Faith consistcth in the few ancient articles by which the church was always known as to its essentials. But you confound the essentials with the integrals: and the number of your necessary articles is so great, as must need be matter of more controvers}' than ours.

4. We know our religion, and where to find it. It was perfect at the first, and receiveth no additions or diminutions. One generation cometh, and another goeth, but the word of the Lord endureth forever. But you never know when you have all, because you know not when your Pope will have done defining. That is an article of faith to you one year that was none the year before, nor ever before.

5. We need no judge to decide any controversies among us in the points of absolute necessity to salvation: both because the Scripture is so plain in those points, as to serve for decision without a judge ; and because we abhor to make a controversy of an}' of them ; and where there is no controversy there needs no judge. We are all agreed, through the plainness of the Scripture, that there is but one, eternal, most wise, and good, and omnipotent God: and that there is one Mediator between God and man, wbo is himself both God and man, that was crucified, dead, buried, went to liadcs, rose again, ascended, intercedeth for us, and is king and head of the church : and will raise tlic dead, and judge the world, some to heaven, and some to hell. These and all the rest of the essentials of our fahh, and many more points that are not essentials, are so plain in Scripture, that we are past making them a matter of controversy. If any man deny an essential point of faith, he is none

of US. But you are so deep iii infidelity, tlint you must have a judj^e to decide your controversies in the necessary articles of faitli. For wliatever is of faitli you make to he of sucli equal necessity, that you deride our distinguishing^ the fundamentals from the rest. Do you think Ciuistians need a judge, or must put it to a judge to decide, ivhethcr Christ be the 3Icssias or not? whether he died and rose again or not 1 whether he will judge the world or not ? W he he a judge, he must have power to oblige you to stand to his determination on which side soever he determine. And if John

XXII. determine that the soul is not immortal, or John

XXIII. that there is no resurrection or life to come, but a man dicth like a beast: would you stand to that decision?

G. If you say that your judge hath power to oblige you only on one side, that is, when he judgeth right, and so make no judge of him, but a teacher, we have such judges as well as you, even teachers to show us the evidence of truth.

7. If you say that you have a judge to determine of iieresy in order to excommunication, so have we; even the pastors of the churches, who are bound to unite and assist each other in such works. What is to be accounted heresy, the law of God sufficiently determineth : and what particular persons are to be judged heretics and excommunicated according to that law, the particular pastors that are on the place can better decide, than a

, Pope that is a thousand, or five thousand miles off, and cannot hear the witnesses. And do you not yourselves decide almost all such cases of your subjection, by the present priests and prelates, and not by the Pope ? And why may not we do so then as well as you ?

8. But you lay all upon your Pope's and council's infallibility. Believe that infalibility if you can. I should think myself a miserable man, if I were not myself more infallible than your Popes have been. Every Christian, while such, is infallible in his belief of the Christian faith; and the Scripture is an infallible ground of our belief.

9. Is it not a plain judgment of God upon you, that while you make the Scripture so dark and not intelligi-

ble, and cry up the necessity of a living judge; you should not only swarm with difl'erences among yourselves, but should be utterly disagreed, and at a loss to know who is that judge of controversies; one saying it is the Pope, and another that it is the council: and what the better are you for saying, there must be a judge, as long as you cannot tell who it must be 1 It is not only uncertain among you, whether Pope or council be the infallible judge, but also which is a true Pope, and which is a lawful general council? For forty years at least together the church could not know the true Pope, but the more learned and upright men were divided : nor is it known to this day. Frequently the strongest carried it, and success was his best title. General councils themselves knew not the right Pope. The council at Constance and Basil knew not tlie right Pope. They at Basil thought Felix Y. the true Pope, and Eugenius no Pope: but friends and strength confuted a general council, and proved that Eugenius was the Pope. Who knows which council to take for authority? What catalogues have you of reprobated councils, and of doubtful councils, and partly approved, partly reprobate, and who knows wliich and how far; but only that is approved, that plcaseth the Pope, and tlmt reprobate that dis-])leascth him, and yet perhaps approved by a former Pope. So that you are all confusion and uncertainty about your true Popes and general councils.

What a loss are you at to know their decrees and canons? What a fardel of false decretal epistles have you thrust upon the world ; decretals that use a translation of the Scripture that was formed a long time after the death of tlie supposed authors of those epistles. Decretals which make mention of persons and things that were many score hundred years after the death of the feigned authors. Those are your new Scriptures, and by those our faith must be regulated, and our controversies decided.

Your canons are uncertain. Some have but twenty canons of the first general council at Nice : and others have the new found rabble of additions. Much more uncertainty or certain forgery there is in the canons called the apostles.

JUGOLIiNC. S7

1 appeal to all tlic impartial reason in the world, whether your voluniinousi, apocryphal uncertain faitii that needs a living judjie, and cannot find one, or agree upon him, tliat leaves your controversies still undecided, be u liker way to peace and unity, than our short and plain articles and infallible Scripture faith, that hath less matter of contention, and better means to prevent it, even faithful teachers and judges in every church and commonwealth, which shall so far determine as may preserve tiie peace of those societies, leaving the final full decision of all to the eternal judge that is even at the door.

10. Is not God's hand of judgment yet more observable against you, that when your Popes and councils have passed their ju Igment, the several sects are unable to understand them] Witness the sentence against the Jansenisls, of which the persons that seem to be condemned, say, that there is no such thing or words in all Jan-senius' writings, as the Pope saith are in him, and con-■demneth as his : and the controversy is as far from a decision, as if the Pope had held his peace. Your great disputer White, is the same, for all the Pope's determination.

Take another instance, whether the Pope or council be supreme ] The councils of Constance and Basil determined it one way as of faith, and yet that made no end of the controversy. The council of Lateran and Pope Leo X. determined it the other way ; and yet it is a controversy after two contrary decisions : and som« say one way, some the other: and others say, it is yet undecided, for fear of angering the French by casting them ofi' as heretics. The council at Basil, scss. 36., fully determined the controversy between the Franciscans and Dominicans about the Virgin Mary's immaculate conception: and yet it is undetermined still ; and White afiirms, that certainly there is no tradition for it, nor any probability that ever the negative will be defined. Apolog, for tradit. p. 64, 65, G(^. He carricth it as boldly out, as if no council had made or meddled with it. The words of the council are these: "A hard question hath been in divers parts, and before this holy synod, about the conception of the glorious Virgin Mary, and the beginning of her sanctification ; some saying that the Virgin

and her soul were for some time or instant of time actually under original sin : others on the contrary, saying, that from tlie heginning of her creation, God loving her, gave her grace by which preserving and freeing that blessed person from the original spot, ifcc. We, having diligently looked into the authorities and reasons, which for many years past have in public relation on both sides been alleged before this holy synod, and having seen many other things about it, and weighed ■them by mature consideration, do define and declare, that the doctrine affirming that the glorious Virgin Mary, the mother of God, by the singular preventing and operating grace of God, was never actually under original sin, but was ev^er free from all original and actual sin, and was holy and immaculate, is to be approved, held and embraced of all catholics as godly and consonant to church worship, catholic faith, right reason, and sacred Scripture: and that henceforth it shall be lawful for no man to preach and teach the contrary." Is not this plain defining'?

But it is said, that was not an approved council. It was owned by Pope Eugcnius himself. The council of Basil was approved by the Pope : for Pope Felix V. ane of the best Popes that ever Rome had for a thousand years past, approved it in this point: not only bv accepting their election, but in express terms "professing firmly to hold the faith of the councils of Constance and Basil, and to keep it inviolate to a tittle, and confirm it with his soul and blood : promising faithfully to labor to defend the catholic faith, and for the execution and observation of the decrees of the councils of Constance and Basil, swearing to prosecute the celebration of gen-» eral councils, und confirmation of elections, according to the decrees of the holy council of Basil," sess. 40. " If they say that Felix was not a true Pope : then Martin y, chosen by the council at Constance was no true Pope; and then where is your succession ? These things are plain and cannot be denied, though unconscionable shifters, that argue according to their wills, may find words to beguile the simple.

Hence your catholic church representative is nothing if one man like it not.

How largely hath the council of Trent dealt about original sin: and yet the foresaid White saith, that "If the people were taught that original sin is nothing but a disposition to evil, or a natural weakness, which unlcs?; prevented brings infallibly sin and damnation : and that in itself it deserves neither reproach nor punishment, aa long as it proceeds not to actual sin, the heat of vulgar devotion would bo cooled, <fcc." which is a mere Pelagian issue of all the determinations about original sin, which thev swear to believe.

CHAPTER VI.

Papal Unity.

You may thus see what to think of theii' glorying in their uniti/, and accusing our divisions. One of the principal arguments that they prevail by, is by telling the people into how^ many sects we are divided. That the catholic church is but one ; but we are many. And they will tell you of all the names they can reckon up ; and that all the division comes by departing from the Roman Church; every man being left to be of what religion his fancy leadeth him to, for want of an universal judge of controversies. They ask you what reason you have among all those sects to believe one of them rather than another l So they would persuade you that there is no way for unity but by turning Papists, that we may be united in the Pope of Rome.

1. To all that dvoceit, wc give them a full answer. It is not every kind of unity that is desirable : but unit}' with truth, and honesty, and safety. It is easier to agree in evil than in good : for evil findeth more friendship with corrupted nature, and hath more servants in the world. The wicked are more airreed, and f\ir more in number, of one mind, than the godly are. The Mohammedans are far more agreed ; and in a far greater number, than the Papists are. Tiie devils have some agreement in their way. They are all agreed to hate Christ and his members, and to s^ek night and day whom they may

8*

devour. It is easier to agree in a Papist's work than in ours. To center carnally in a sinful, and a most wicked man. To agree in certain forms and ceremonies, which flesh and hlood are glad to delude themselves with, instead of the life of f^iith and love. It is easy to agree in such a carnal religion. To spare the lahor and time of study and searching after truth, and to cast their souls upon the faith of others, even the Pope or a council ; that is an easy thing for lazy ungodly men to agree in. But to make the truth our own, and get the law of Christ written in our own hearts, and to live upon it, and walk in the light, and emhrace all those truths that are most against our fleshy inclination and interest, is not so easy for corrupted nature to ageee upon.

2. Christ has told us that it is a little flock to whom he gives the kingdom, Luke 12. 32., and that the gate i& strait, and way narrow that leads to life, and few there be that find it; and the gate is wide and the way broad that leads to destruction, and many there be that enter at it. And therefore it is no great wonder if en or and sin have tiie greater number.

3. There is a far more excellent unity and concord among the true reformed catholics, than among the Papists, who do but cheat poor souls with the false pretence of unity.

They are utterly divided and disagreed about thai very power in which they should unite, and which they pretend must harmonize them in all other things. One half of them are for the sovereignty of a Pope, and the other of a general council: and that as a point of faith. So that tliere is no possibility of union with them, who arc divided in the very point in which they invite us to unite with them. If the eye be dark how shall the body see ? If they cannot agree about that power that they say must unite them in all things else, what hope is there of an agreement witli tiiem ?

But for our parts we are all agreed that Christ onl\ is the head of the church, and in him wc all unite.

With us, they are but some few half-witted self-conceited novices that fall ofl' and disagree from us in any thing that destroyeth salvation. But with the Papists, princes arc against princes, and nations against nations,

anJ much more, general councils against general coun" cils, even in tiie foundation of their faitii. 80 tliat let the general councils he never so full and learned, and justly called, yet if they be against the Pope's sover-eiijuty over them, the other party call them hut false councils and conventicles. Of how greilt moment this diflerence is, let Cajetan he a witness, who in his oration in the council at the Lateran, under Leo. X< inveighing against the councils at Pisa, Constance and Basil, makes one to be Babel, and the other Jerusalem.

Papists are divided into two several pretended churches, hy nuikiug themselves two sovereigns : but so are not we: for we have but one head Jesus Christ. That they are two churches, hear the words of Cajetan, Bin. p. 552. " This novelty of Pisa sprung up at Constance, and vanished. At Basil it sprung up again and exploded. If you he men, it will also be repressed as it was under Eugenius IV'. For it cometh not from heaven and therefore will not be lasting. Nor doth it embrace the principality of that one, who is in the church trumphant, and j)reserveth the church militant; and which the Synod of Pisa ought to embrace if it came from heaven, and not as it doth, to rely on the government of a multitude. The church of the Pisans therefore doth far differ from this church of Christ. For one is the church of believers ; the otlier of cavillers. One of the household of God ; the other of the erroneous. One is the church of Christian men : the otlier of such as fear not to tear the coat of Christ, and divide the mystical members of Christ from his mystical bod^^ " This was spoken in that council with applause. Can there bo greater divisions than those 1

4. They have been utterly divided about the very power of choosing their Pope, in whom they must unite. In one age the people chose him. In another the clergy chose him. Sometimes both together. For a long time the emperors chose him. At last, only the cardinals chose him. Sometimes a general council hath chosen him. Our catholic church hath no such uncertain head, but one who is the same yesterday, to day, and forever.

5. They have often had two or three Popes at once,

and one part of the church followed one, and another the other. For forty years together, none knew the true Pope. Cajetan saith ; "Of the schism of that time there were three so accounted Popes, tliat none of them miglit bo esteemed the successor of Peter, either certain, or without ambiguity." For many ages one part ran after one, and the other after the other, or strove about them. But we are all agreed in our head without controversy.

6. They killed multitudes of persons in their divisions about the choice of their Pope, as in the choice of Da-masus. They had many bloody wars to tlie dividing of the church about their Popes, and between Pope and Popo. That was their unity. It would make a Christian ashamed and grieved to read of the lamentable wars and divisions of Christendom ; between and about their Popes.

7. Popes and christian emperors, kings and princes, have been in lonfr and sfrievous wars.

8. They have set princes against princes, and nations against nations, in wars about the causes of the Popes for many ages together.

9. They have set kings and tlieir own subjects together in wars, as all Christendom have known by sad experience.

10. They have excommunicated princes, and encouraged their subjects to expel them, and to murder them: hence were the inhuman murders of Henry III. and Henry IV. kings of France ; and the powder plot, and many treasons in England. That is their unity.

11. They center and unite the Church in an impotent, insufficient head, that is not able to do the office of a head, and therefore cannot possibly preserve unity. But our head is all sufficient.

12. They set up not only a controverted head, which all the churches never agreed to, nor ever will do, but also a false usurping head, in whom the churches dare not and ought not to unite. Whereas Jesus Christ is beyond controversy the just and lawful head of the church.

13. Your agreement and unity are with none but your own sect: and is this so great a matter to boast of? You divide yourselves from the catholic church, and cast

tlicMu oft'as heretics, or scliisniritics ; and llioii boast of a unity anioni; yourselves. If you nia<^nity your unity from tiie <2^reatness of your number tiiat aLn'CM,', tlic (jJreek church also is lunnerous : and yet in this we far exceed you. For tiie true catiiolic is in union witii all tlic members of Christ on eartli. We lay our unity on the essentials of ciu-istianity, and so are united witii all true Cinistians in the world ; even with many of them that reproach us : when you laying your unity on many doubtful points, wliich you know not what yourselves, can extend it no farther than to your sect. Which is the more notable and glorious unity 1 to be united to the truly catholic body, containinff all true Christians in the world, or to be at unity with a sect, which is the lesser and more corrupted part of the church?

14. With what face can Papists dory in their unity, that are the greatest dividers of the church on earth? Who is it that condemneth the greatest part of the church, and prosecuteth that condemnation with fire and sword, or so much vehemence, as the Papists do ? when they have most audacious!}^ divided themselves from all others, and arrogated the title of catholics to themselves, they call this abominable schism by the name of unity. If you say that the reformers have divided themselves from others : I answer, not as from heretics, or no members of the same body with us, as you do : but only from unsound brethren : and therefore properly we are not divided from th'^m, but only from th'ir mistakes. We think it not lawful to join with the dearest brethren in sinning, or in that worship, by personal local communion, where we cannot keep our innocency. But we hold the the unity of the spirit with them in the bond of peace: and are one with them in all the substance of Christianity, and holy worship. Even where distance of place, or circumstantial dilferences keep us from communion in the same asseml)lies ; yet our several assemblies have communion in faith, and love, and the substance of worship as to the kind : so that our division from other Christians is nothing to the Papists.

15. But when any difier from us in any point essential to Christianity, they are none of us, nor owned by us ; ^nd therefore you cannot say that we are at difterenc^

among ourselves, because some apostates have fallen off from us. You will not allow us to say, you have many sects, because some of you have turned socinians, or because thousands of yours have turned to the reformers, in the days of Luther, Calvin, 6cc. And why then should those sects be numbered with those that are not of us, but went out from us ? If men turn infidels, ifcc, they are not of us no more than of you. If you say that we bred them : I answer no more than you breed them, when they turn to the same sects from you : and no more than you bred the Lutherans. The}^ went out from you and yet you bred them not : but on the other side, you cherish those as part of your church, who differ from you in your fundamentals ; so that the Pope dare not unchurch or disown them.

16. Our unity is in positives, and theirs is in negatives. Ours is a unity in faitii, and theirs is in not believing the contrary. Dead men have a fuller unity in the grave than Papists have. White's "Way to the true chuixh." Sect. 53.

17. Our union is divine, having a divine head and centre, and divine doctrine and law in which we agree. But the Papists' is human, having a carnal head and centre, and human decrees and canons for its matter and rule.

18. They have not so sure a means of retaining men in their unity as wo have: for where one hath forsaken our unity and communion, hundreds if not thousands, have forsaken theirs ; as France, Belgium, Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Poland, Hungary, Transylvania, England, Scotland, Ireland, «Slc. can witness: and if themselves might be believed, the Greek church, and all, or almost all the Christians else in the world have gone from their unity. Yet will thjsy glory in the effectual-ness of their means of unity ? VVhy then did they not retain all those nations in their unity ?

19. They have very little religious unity at all among them ; for force and terror keep men in their church. Who can tell under such violence how many stick to them in conscience and willingly ? He that will forsake their religion in Spain is tormented and burnt at a stake, and in other countries where they have full power, he niust be at least undone. So that theirs is a unity of

bodies more than of minds: and tiieir union is jiot procured by the Pope as Pope; but by tlio temporal sword, which the Pope iiatli usurped over some countries, and wiiich dehided princes use by his persuasion in other countries. Wiiat a jugiillng deceit tlien is this, to [)er-suade poor souls, that the only way to unity is to centre in the Pope of Rome, as the most eflectual means of ending difl'eronces ! when in the mean time they make so little use of it, and place so little confidence in it themselves, but uphold their unity by tiie magistrate''s sword? Besides that force, it is tiie riches and j)refer-ment of their clergy, with their imnuinity from secular ])Ower, and the like, that is the means of their unity. But it is the light of Holy Scripture opened by a faithful ministry, and countenanced by Christian magistracy without tyranny, tiiat is our means of unit}'.

If the Papal headship be so effectual a means of unity as they pretend, and if they are so much of a mind as they say, let them give us leave to preach tux-lve months in Spain and Italy if they dare : or let them give men leave without fire or sword to choose their religion.

20. After all their tyranny, they have more difference among themselves than we have, or than all the Christians in the world. To hide the infamy of ilieir differences, they tolerate them, and extenuate them. For differences in discij)line, and order of worship, they allow abundance of sects called orders, that men and women may chose which they please. The voluminous differences of their schoolmen, casuists and commentators, they say are not in matters of faith. But call them what you will, they are greater differences than are with us. Read "The Mystery of Jesuitism," and take notice of the differences between the Jesuits and the Janscnians.

Filiutius the Jesuit holds, that "if a man have purposely wearied himself with satisfying a prostitute, he may be dispensed with from fasting on a fasting day, and he is not obliged to fast." The Jansenians think otherwise.

The Jesuits Basilius, Pontius, and Bauny teach, that "a man may seek an opportunity of wilfully sinning, when the spiritual or temporal concernment of ourselves or our neighbors inclineth him thereto." The Jansenists think the contrary.

Kman. Sa the Jesuit liolds, that "a man may do what lie conceives lawful according to a probable opinion, though the contrary be the more certain : and for this the opinion of one doctor is sufficient." Filiutius the Jesuit held, "that it is lawful to follow the least probable opinion, though it be less certain; and that this is the common opinion of modern authors." The Jansenists are against it.

Layman the Jesuit holds, that "if it be more favorable to them that ask advice of him, and more desired, it is prudence to give them such advice as is held probable by 8ome knowing person, though he himself be convinced that it is absolutely false," The Jansenists are against this.

Bauny the Jesuit holds, "that when the penitent follows a probable opinion, the confessor is bound to absolve him, though his judgment be contrary to that of the penitent: and that he sins mortally if he deny him absolution." The Jansenists deny this.

Reginald and Cellot hold, that "the modern casuists in questions of morality are to be preferred hefore the ancient fathers, though they were nearer the apostles' times," The Jansenists think otherwise.

Pope Gregory XIV. declared that murderers are unworthy to have sanctuary in churches. But the Jesuits and Jansenists agree not wlio are the murderers. The 29 Jesuits in their Praxis p. GOO. by murderers understand, "those who have taken money to kill one treacherously: and that those who kill without receiving any reward, but do it only to oblige their friends, are not called murderers." The Jansenists think otherwise. No marvel if you cannot understand the Scripture without a judge, when you cannot understand your judge, what he means by a murderer. Crashaw's "Religion of Rome as bad as ever."

Vasquez the Jesuit saith, "that in this question, rich men are obliged to give alms out of their superfluity ; though the atTumative he true, yet it will seldom or never happen, that it is obligatory in point of practice." The Jansenists think otherwise.

Valentia the Jesuit, and Tanner hold, that "if a man give money not as the price of a benefice, but as a motive

to resign it, it is not simony, thougli he that resigns do look at the money as his principal end." Tlio Jan-scnists think otherwise.

Caspar Ilurtado saith, "that an incumbent may without mortal sin wish the death of him that hath a jK^nsion out ot'his living, and a son his father's death ; and may rejoice when it happens, so it proceeded only from a consideration of the advantage accruing to him thereby, and not out of any personal haired." The Jansenists believe it not.

Layman the Jesuit, and Peter Ilurtado think, that a man may lawfully fight a duel, accepting the challenge to defend his honor or estate. The Jansenists think otherwise.

Sanchez and Navarrus allow a man "to murder his adversary secretly, or despatch him at unawares to avoid the danger of a duel." Molina thinks "you may kill one that wrongfully informs against us in any court." Regi-naldus ; "that you may kill the false witness which the prosecutor brings." Tannerus and Emanuel Sa, that "you may kill both witness and judg^ which conspire the death of an innocent person." So think not the Jansenists.

Henriquez saith, "one man may kill another who hath given him a box on the ear, though he run away tor it, provided he do it not out of hatred or revenge, and that by that means a gap be open for excessive murder, destructive to the state. And the reason is, a man may as well do it in pursuance of his reputation, as his goods ; and he that hath had a box on the ear is accounted dishonorable tUl he hath killed his enemy." Azorius saith, "is it lawful for a person of quality to kill one that would give him a box on the ear, or a bang with a stick ? Some say not. But others affirm it lawful, and for my part I think it probable, when it cannot be avoided otherwise: for if it were not, the reputation of innocent persons were still exposed to the insolency of the malicious." Many others are of the same mind, insomuch that Lessius saith, "it is lawful, by the consent of all casuists, to kill him that would give a box on the ear, or a blow with a stick, when a man cannot otherwise avoid it." Baldellus saith, "it is lawful to kill him that saith

9

to you, thou liest, if a man cannot right himself other--Hvise/' Lessius saith, 'Mf you endeavor to ruin my reputation by opprobrious speeches before persons of honor, and I cannot avoid them otherwise than by killing you, may I do it i* I may; though the crime you lay to my charge be such as I am really guilty of, it being supposed to have been so secretly committed, that you cannot discover it by ways of justice. It is proved, if when you would take away my reputation by giving me a box on the ear, it is in my power to prevent it by force of arms, the same defence is certainly lawful, when you would do me the same injury with your tongue. Besides, a man may avoid the affront of those whose ill language he cannot hinder. In a word, honor is more precious than life, but a man may kill in defence of his life, e?'go, he may kill in defence of his honor." The Jansenists are against all this.

Escobar saith, that "regularly it is lawful to kill a man for the value of a crown." according to Molina. Amicus saith, "it is lawful for a churchman or a religious man to kill a detractor that threatens to divulge the scandalous crimes of his community or himself, when there is no other means left to hinder him from doing it, as if he be ready to scatter his calumnies, if not suddenly despatched out of the way." Caramavel in his fundamental theology takes it for certain, that "a priest not only may kill a detractor on certain occasions, but sometimes ought to do it." The Jansenists believe none of this.

You may read in "the Mystery of Jesuitism," a volume of such passages of the Jesuits, allowing men to give and receive the sacrament when they come that day from adultery, and allowing a man to eat and drink as much as he can with his health: and discharging men from a necessity of loving God, unles it be once in their lives, or as others say upon holy-days, or as Hurtado de Men-doza, once a year, or as Conink, once in three or four years, or a sHenriquez, once in five years, or as Anthony Sirmond, not at all, so we do not hate him, and do obey his other commands.

Are all those differences among the Papists so small as to be no matters of faith ? Judge then whether Pa-

pi.sts or tho reform.;;! arc more at unity among tliem-selves.

Altliough the loving of God, the avoiding of murder, brihcry, and the like, are no matter of faith at Rome, 3'ct I desire to know whothi^r tlic Holy Scripture be matter of faith or not? I'lify dare not deny but it is. What is the Scripture, but tho words and the sense or matter'? Are the Papists agreed among th.emselves about either of those? No: for some of the best learned of them have stood for the preeminence of the Hebrew and Greek texts: and others, and the most for the vulgar Latin. But that vulgar Latin translation hath been often altered by them. After many others. Pope Sixtus V. made it so complete, that the church was required to use his edition ; yet after him came Pope Clement VIII. and mended it in many thousand places, and imposed that upon the church ; which of those Popes were infallible ] They much differ in their translations.

For tho sense of Scripture although men swear to take the Scriptures in the sense of the church, yet will not any Pope or council to this day, teli us the sense of them, either by giving us an infallible commentary, or by deciding the many thousand differences that are among their commentators. Do not all these commentators forswear themselves, those who lived since the council of Trent, having sworn to expound Scripture in the sense of the church, and only according to the unanimous consent of the fathers 1 Why doth not the Pope decide these controversies? seeing he is a judge of controversies to keep them all of a mind 1

But perhaps they will say ; "all those Scriptures are not matters of faith." WMicre are we then 1 what is matter of faith if Scripture be not? If all be not, how shall we know which is ? Is no one of all those many hundred or thousand texts which your commentators differ about any matter of faith 1 If not, then you have no faith. If it be, then the Papists differ amon^ themselves in matters of faith. James Bellum Papale, vel Con-cordia Discors.

CHAPTER VII.

Principles of Faith.

Thus you may discern how to deal with them, tohen thei/ industrioiisli/ confound the essentials and the integral parts of our jaith : for this is another of their jug-lings.

They cannot endure to hear us distinguish tlie fundamentals, that is the essentials of our religion from the rest: and therefore they call for a catalogue of our fundamentals : and would persuade us that whatsoever is matter of faith, is of no necessity to salvation to be believed, and those are damnable heretics that deny them, and therefore we must not make any such difference. Their design in this is to persuade people that the world must be wholly of their mind in matters of faith, or else they cannot be saved. And by this trick they would prove that the Protestants and many other churches are all heretics, and therefore have no place in general councils, and are no parts of the catholic church.

We desire the Papists to tell us whether Christianity be any thing or nothing ? If any thing, it hath its essence. Whether this essence of Christianity be know-able or not ? If not, then they cannot know a Christian from another : and they cannot know the church from other societies. If it be knowable, then its essence must needs be knowable. Whether all true Christians in the world are of the same stature or degree of knowledge and explicit belief? If they be, then there is no difl'erence between fathers and babes, strong and weak, priest and people ; and then the Jesuits have no more knowledge or faith than tlic simplest woman of their church. But if there be a diiference, whether the essence of Christianity be varied according to those degrees. If so, then there are as many sorts of Christianity in the world, as there be degrees of faith. If not, then the essence of Christianity is distinguishable from the integrity or superadded degrees, whicli is the thing that we contend for. Whether the apostles did not go on to teach their people more, after they had made them

Cliristians, in a state of salvation? And whetlier the priests, friars, and Jesuits will give men uj), and teach them nothiiii^ more wiien they have made them Christians. I know they will say, there is more to he taught. If so, then the essentials of Christianity are distinguish-ahle from the integrals or degrees. We would know how they will understand, Ileb. v. 10, 11, 12, 14. and vi. 1, 2. " For when for the time ye ought to he teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which he the first principles of the oracles of God, and ar^ become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness, for he is a babe. But strong meat belongeth to them that are full of age, who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern good and evil: therefore leaving the pri!ici})les of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on to perfection, not laying again the foundation, &.c." Tell us whether the apostle do not here distinguish between babes and strong men; milk and strong meat; the principles or foundation or perfection 1 Whether all that is revealed by God be of absolute necessity to every man's salvation that do or may hear it ? If so, then no man can be saved that knoweth not all that God hath revealed ; and then no one in the world can be saved : for here we know but in part. Their own commentators diller about the word of God, wiiicli sheweth that they are imperfect in the knowledge of its senses. The Pope knows it not, or else he is shamefully to blame, that he will not toll it the world, and reconcile his commentators and disputers. But if all revealed be not of absolute necessity, then we may have leave to distinguish between points absolutely necessary, and the rest. Whether all shall be damned, that know not as much as the most learned and wise \ If not, then still we may have leave to distinguish;—Whether any ignorance or error that is culpable, will stand with charity and salvation 1 If not, then who shall be saved % If so, then we may still distinguish the points of absolute necessity from the rest. Whetlier the whole Holy Scripture be the word of God \ If so, then whether we ought not to believe it all as far as we can understand it 1 And whether it be not all matter of fai^h ? If not they must tell us, what part of

9*

God's word is to be believed, and what not. If so; tfieli dertainly men may err in points of faith, and yet have charity, and be saved : as their disas^reeinsf commenta-tors, casuists, and schoohiien do. Whether the matters that their divines aie disagreed in, be revealed by God, or things unrevcalcd ? If not revealed, do they not deserve to be kicked out of the world, for troubling the world so v/ith unrcvealcd tilings 1 If they be revealed, arc they not revealed to be believed, and so are of faith? Whether there be not some things essential to true ohe^ (Hence, and some things not esscntian If not, then no sinner hath sincere obedience, and can be saved : if so ; then why may not the same be said of faith ? Whether they require any profession of the faith or not ? If the}' do, then what is that profession 7 Is it a profession of every particular truth that God hath revealed to be believed? Or is it a profession of some particular truths only ? If of some only, why of those more than the rest, if they be not the essentials distinguishable from the rest 1 What is the use of the church'^s creed, and why tliey have used frequently to make confession of their faith ? Was it not the whole fahh essential to Christianity which they confessed ? If not then it was not fit to be the badge of the church; or of the orthodox: if so, then it seems those creeds had in them the essentials distinguished from the rest. Whether every thing delivered or defined by any general council, be of such necessity to salvation, that all must explicitly believe them all, that will be saved ? It so, then whether any Papist can be saved, seeincp they understand them not all ? . If not, then a distiTiction must be made. How can the}' countenance ignorance so much as they do, if all things revealed be of equal necessity to salvation. What mean they to distino-uish of implicit and explicit faith ? Is it enough to believe as the church believes, and not know what in any particular ? then it is not necess^ary to salvation to believe the resurrection of Christ, or of man, or the life to come. For a man may believe that the church is in the rio-ht, and yet not know that it holdeth any of these. Is it enough to believe the formal object of faith, which with us is God's veracity, without the material ? Or is it enough to remain infidels, and only believe that the

church arc true believers ? If you hold to this, you make no act of faith, but one, the believing that the church, that is, the Pope or council are true believers, to be of necessity to salvation. Hut if there be someiiiini^ that is necessary to be actually, that is ex|)licitly, believed, then nuist not that be distmguished from the rest and made known? Whence is it that you denominate men believers with you .'' Is it from a positive faith, or for not holding the contrary ? If the latter, then stones, and beasts, and pagans, and their infants may be believers. If the former, then the positive faith whence all believers are denominated must be known. Is not that truth faitli and all that is essential to Christianity, which doth consist with saving grace, or to nse your phrase, with true charily? If not, then either infidels and no Christians may have true charity, or else true charity may be in the unjustified, or both. If then men of lower knowledge and faith than doctors, may have true charity; and therefore true faith. Bellarmin often distinguislieth between the points that all must of necessity explicitly believe, and the rest, Suarez in 3. part. Thorn. Disp. 43. Sect. 4. saith of the article of Christ's descending into hell—" If by an article of faith we understand a truth which all the faithful are bound explicitly to know and believe, so I do not think it necessary to reckon this among the articles of faith, because it is not altogether necessary for all men." Here Suazer. distinguislieth between articles of necessity to all, and tliosethat are not: and excepts even the descent into hell from this number of articles necessary to all.

But perhaps you will say, that though all that is of faith is not necessary to be believed explicitly by all, yet implicitly it must. That which you call implicit believing is no believing that point, but another point: yea a point that doth not so much as infer that, for it tollow-eth not, the church is infallible; therefore Christ descend-eth into hell.

We believe all that is of faith, with an implicit faith as well as you: but it is an implicit divine faith and not human : for we are sure all that God saith is true ; and his divine veracity is the formal object of our faith. We believe that all that is in Scripture is true, and all that was ever delivered by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost is true.

But all that is of faith is so necessary, that it will not stand with salvation to helieve the contrary, or deny or disbelieve any point of faith. That cannot be true ; for no man can prove that a point may not be denied and disputed against by a true believer as long as he is ignorant tliat it is true, and from God : the same ignorance that keeps him from knowing it, may cause him to deny it, and gainsay it. Do not your own differing commentators, sciioolmen and casuists dispute voluminously against some truths of divine revelation? If you change a man's mind from the smallest error by dispute, do you take that to be a change of his state from death to life ? ^Ena?as Sylvius thought a general council was above the Pope : but when he was Pope Pius II. he thought the l*ope above a general council; was that a change from death to life. It seems by his bull of retractation, he thought so, but so did not several general councils. Was the Council of Basil, or Constance, or Pisa in a state of death and damnation for believing the Pope to be subject to a general council ? or was the council at Lateran in a state of death for holding the contrary 1 Must citJicr Pope John or Pope Nicholas be damned because of the contrariety of their decrees 1 If the council of Tolet ordain that he thai hath a concubine instead of a wife, shall not be kept from the sacrament, doth it prove them all in a state of death ] If Bellarmin confess that the sixth general council of Constantinople have many errors, doth it follow that they were in a damnable state? If the second council at -Sice maintain the corporeity of Angels, and the lirst council at Lateran maintain the contrary, doth ii follow that one of them was in a state of death 1 I think !iot: though it proves a general council fallible, when approved by the Pope, and therefore Popery a deceit. Bellarmin tells us the change of his own mind.

Th.e retractations of Austin tell us of the cliange of his mind in many things: and yet it lolloweth not that he was in a state of death and unjustified before.

But all that is of faith is of necessity to the salvation of some, though not all. If that be granted, yet you must distinguish between points necessary to be believed by all. But in what case is it that you n^.ean, that other points are of necessity to some ? Is it to those some

that know thorn to be ot* divine revelation ? But lliat is not because the thinLi^s tlieuisclvcs an.' simply necessary to salvation ; hnt because a belief of Ciod's veracity, and the trutli of all that lie revealetli in i^cneral, is of necessity: and lie that believeth tliat God is true, cannot chose but believe ail to i)e true which he knows God revealetli. He that thiuketh God to be a liar, in one word, <loth not believe his veracity, and so hath no divine faith at all. Tlioreforc you need not fear lest any one should be guilty of not believing that which they know is the word of God, but those that take God to be a liar ; and that is those that take him not to be God, and so are atheists. But still the thing of absolute necessity is to believe in general that God is true in all his word ; and to believe the truth of the essential points of Christianity in particular embracing the good propounded in them. Now it is true that secondarily all known truths are of necessity, to be believed, because else our general belief of God's veracity is not sincere. But yet we must say that antecedently even to that person, those superadded truths were not of necessity to his salvation to be believed, because they were not of such necessity to bo known ; and it' they had not been known, there had not been such necessity of believing them.

But if you say, thai all were obliged to know them, or that had opportunity, or the revelation of the trutli, and yet did not, and thereupon deny them culpably, are in a state of death: I deny that, and shall prove it false. A wilful refusing the light, because men love darkness rather than light, is a certain sign of a graceless wretch. But every culpable ignorance and unbelief is not damning ignorance or unbelief. Otherwise no man should be saved : for no man is void of culpable ignorance, and consequently of culpable unbelief. Had we never been wanting in the use of means, there is no man but might have known more than he doth. Is there any one that dare refuse to ask God forgiveness of ignorance, unbelief, or the negligence that is the culpable cause of them, or that dare say, you need no pardon of them ? If you plead for venial sin, how can you deny a venial unbelief, upon venial ignorance ? But then learn more piety, than to say that your venial unbelief or sin is no sin, save as

analogically so called ; or that it deserves a pardon, or deserves not everlasting punishment. But if you call it venial, because being consistent with the true love of God and habitual holiness, and saving faith, the law of grace doth pardon it, and not condemn men for it; thus we would agree with you that lliere is venial sin ; but then there is venial unbelief.

We easily prove this from the law of God. It is the nature of the preceptive part to constitute duty only, and the violation of that is sin : but it is the sanction, the promise and threatening that determines the reward and penalty. -»Now it is only the old law of works that makes the threatening as large as the prohibition, condemning man for every sin: but so doth not the law of grace. The precept still commandeth per feet obedience, and so makes it a duty ; but the promise maketh not perfect obedience the condition of salvation; but faith, repentance, and sincere obedience, though imperfect. The law of nature still makes everlasting death due to every sin: but it is such a due as hath a remedy at hand provided and offered in the gospel; and is actually remedied to all true believers. So that as it is not every sin that will damn us, though damnation be due to it, because we have a present remedy; so it is not very culpable ignorance or unbelief that will damn us, though it deserve damnation ; because the gospel doth not only not damn us for it, but pardons it, by acquitting us from the condemnation of the law. All this may teach you, not only to mend your abominable doctrine about mortal and venial sin; but also to discern the reason why a man may deny some points of faith that are not of the essence of Christianit}-, and yet not be damned for it; because the law of grace doth not condemn him for it, thouirh he be cul[)able, for the law of grace may command further tlian it premptorily condemneth in case of disobedience. It is the promise that makes faith the condition of life, though it bo the prece it that makes it a duty. Now it saveth not as a performed duty directlv, because the precept gives not the reward, but as a performed condition. Therefore unbelief condemneth not effectually as a mere sin directly, but as such a sin as is the violation of nonperformance of that condition.

CHAP ti:r vttt.

Decision of Conlrcversits.

Anotlior of their juffirlings is, to extol the jiulgmcni of the catholic church (ts that irhich must be the ground of faith, and the decider of all controversies. To tliis end they plead against the sufficiency of Scripture, and l)end all the force of tiieir arguings and designs, as if all their hope lay in this point, and as if it were granted that we arc lost, if the catholic church he admitted to be the judge. Hence it is that they cry out against private faith and opinions, and calll men to the faith of the church, and persuade the poor people, that the church is for them, and we are but branches broken off.

We are content to deal with them at their own weap-01^, and at that one in which they put their trust. We know that the true catholic churcli or any member of it, cannot err in any of the essentials of Christianity, for then it would cease to be the church: but we have too much reason to judge that it is not free from error in lesser things. Yet in the main cause between the Papists and us, we refuse not their judgment. Nay we turn this canon against the canoneers, and easily prove that the Papists cause is uttterly lost, if the catholic church be judge.

But it is the ancient church, or the present church that must decide the cause ? It shall be which you will. For the most ancient church in the apostles' days, we are altogether of its belief, and stand to its decision in all things ; and if you prove we mistake them in any thing, we shall gladly receive instruction and be reclaimed. To them we appeal for our essentials and integrals. For some following ages, we will be tried by them in the articles of our faith, and in the principal controversies we have with the Papists.

But this will not serve their turn : it is the present church that must judge or none : for, they say, if the ancient church had power, so hath the present: and il the ancient church had possession of the truth, how shall

we know it by the present ? We may know it by the records of those times lar surer than by the reports of men without writing. Controversies on numerous mysterious points are sorrily carried in the memories, especially of the most, even of the teachers; especially when men's memories die with them, and they cannot make their children the heirs of their knowledge or memories. Do you now remember what was done in the days of Ignatius, Justin, Cyprian, ifcc. that never saw them ? And can you, that hardly teach your children a long catechism, teach them to carry in memory all your voluminous councils better than written records can preserve them. For the records, one diligent skilful man willl know more than ten thousand others. Bar-onius, Albaspinasus, Petavius, among the Papists, and Usher, Blondell, Salmasius, Gataker, &c. among the protestants, knew more of the mind of antiquity, than a whole country besides, or than general councils have known.

If you appeal to the greater number, to them shall you go. You must be tried by the present church ; then you are condemned. Is it the less number, or the greater, or the better that must be judge? You will not say the less ; if you do, you know where you are. If you say the better part shall be judge : who shall be judge which is the better part ? We are ready to prove the reformed churches the better part: and if we do not, we will give you the cause. But will you appeal to the greater part ? Then you are lost. The Greeks, Mos-covites, Armenians, Abbasines, and all other churches in Asia, Africa and Europe are far more than the Papists ; and your own pens and mouths tell us that those are against you. Many of them curse you as heretics or schismatics ; the rest of them know you not, or refuse your government. They all agree against your Pope's universal headship or sovereignty, and so against the very form of your new church. So that the world knows the judgment of the far g eatest part of Christians on earth to be against you in the main. This you get by appealing to the catholic church.

But you say, that all those are schismatics or heretics, and none of the Catholic Church : but they say as much

by you; and how do you prove it.^ Who shall be judg-e whether they, or you be the catholic church? You tell us of your succession, and twenty tales that are good, if you may be judges yourselves; but so do they say as much which is good if they be judges. When we offer to dispute our case with you, you ask us who shall be judge, and tell us the Catholic Church must be judge. But who shall be judge between you and them which is the catholic church? You will not let us be judges in our own cause, and why then should you? Are we Protestants the less number as to you? so are you to all the rest that are against you. And what reason have we to let the less number judge over the greater ? If still you say, because you are the better, let that be first tried ; but not you be the judges.

So that the case is plainly this: either the Papists must stand to the greater number, and then the controversy is at an end: or they must shamefully say, v:e will not dispute with you, unless ive may be the judges ourselves. Or else they must dispute it equally with us, by producing iheir evidence.

CHAPTER IX.

^9inhiguity of Romunlsts in controversy.

The most common and prevalent deceit of Papists is by ambiguous terms to deceive those that cannot force them to distinguish, and to make you believe they mean one thing, when they mean another, and to mock you icith cloudy loords. Look to them therefore especially in three terms, on which much of their controversies lies; the words church, pope, and council. Few understand what they mean by any one of these words.

When you dispute of the church with them, agree first upon the definition of church. When you call them to define it, you will find hov^ many things they call the church. Sometimes they mean the whole bod}', pastors and people: but more commonly they mean only the pastors. Sometimes they mean the church

10

real: and sometimes the church representative, as they call it, in a general council. But whether they mean the pastors or people, they exclude all saving the pope and his subjects, and so by the church, mean but a part or a sect. Sometimes in the question about tradition, some of the French take the church for the community, as fathers deliver the doctrine of Christ to their children, &c. Sometimes they take it in its political sense, for a society, consisting of a visible head and members : but then they agree not of that head, some setting the pope highest, and some the council. Frequently they take the word church for the supposed head alone, as in most questions about infallibility, judging of controversies, expounding Scripture, keeping of traditions, defining points of faith, &c. The}' say, the church must do these: but commonly they mean the supposed head. One part mean a general council: and the Jesuits and Italians, and predominant part mean only the pope. So that when they talk of the whole catholic church, and call you to its judgment, and boast of its infallibility, they mean all this while but one poor sinful man : and such a man as sometimes hath been more unlearned than many school-boys of twelve years of age ; a murderer, adulterer, heretic, infidel, or an incarnate devil. This man is their church, as Gretser, Bellarmin, De concU. author. Lib. 2, Cap. 19., and others profess.

So that if you force them to define and explain what they mean by the church, you will either cause them to open their nakedness, or find them all to pieces about the very subject of dispute.

When they use the name pope in disputation, make them explain themselves; and tell you in a definition what they mean by a pope. For, though you would think this term sufficiently understood, yet you find them utterly at a loss about it. Consider distinctly the efficient, matter, and form. As to the efficient cause of their pope, there must concur a divine institution, which they can no where show, and a call from man. What man or men have power to make a head to the catholic church.!' But whether they will call it an ef ficient cause, or only an essential cause, election and ordination must go to make a pope. Now either they

will put these into their definition, or not. If not, know of them wliether a man witlioiit election and ordination may be pope : if so, wiiat makes him one .'' If possession, then he that can conquer Rome and sit down in the chair is pope. If not possession, what then ? why-may not any man say I am pope .'' But doubtless they will tell you that an election, or ordination, or both are necessary. If so, then is it necessary to the being of a pope, that some certain persons elect who have the power, or will any electors serve whosoever? If any will serve, then every monastery or every parish may choose a pope ? If there must be certain authorized electors, see that those be named in the definition. Then first know whether those electors are empowered to that work by divine law, or by human. If by divine, let them show it if they can. In Scripture they can never find who must choose the pope. And their tradition hath no such precept, as appeareth by the alterations and divers ways. If it be but by a human ecclesiastical canon, then the Papacy is so too : for the power received can have no higher a cause than the power giving or authorizing.

When you know who those electors must be, you open their nakedness. For if they say, it must be the cardinals, ask them, where then was the pope when there were no cardinals in the world ? and whether that were a pope or not that was chosen by the whole Roman clergy ? or whether those were popes oi* not that were chosen by the people.'' or those that were chosen by the emperor ? or those that were chosen by councils? If they tell you that it must be the Roman clergy : know whether the cardinals be the whole Roman clergy ? Whether the people, the council or the emperors were the Roman clergy? If they would persuade you, that cither the people, or the emperor, or the council did not elect the pope, but only show whom the Roman clergy should elect, interposing exorbitantly some unjust force with the due election; then all history crieth shame against them. Nothing is more evident in the Papal history than that there have been at least five ways of election among them.

Jf they allow of any of those as valid, which it ever

be, as they must, or give up their succession, then by what law of God did the emperor of Germany choose a head for the church, any more than the emperor of Habassia, or the king of France or Spain? When the emperor hath chosen one and the clergy another, and some others a third, were all true popes, if each party was authorized electors ? If yet the people choose one, and the Roman clergy another, and the cardinals alone a third, and the emperor a fourth, and a council a fifth, must all those stand, or which of them, aad why ? Or if they tell you that it must be the particular Roman church; then if the people of that church choose one, and the clergy another, and the cardinals a third, which is the true pope ? The succession is gone : for they were no popes that emperors or councils chose.

If they tell you that it is not election but consecration that makes a pope or that consecration is of necessity with election: then demand of them whether it be any one whosoever that may consecrate, or whether that high power be confined to certain hands'? If any may serve, or any bishops, then he that can get three drunken bishops to consecrate him may be pope. And then there may be an hundred popes at once. But if it be confined to certain hands, let it be declared who those are that must ordain or consecrate him. If they say, that it must be only the Italian bishops that must consecrate, then know of them by what law of God they have power to consecrate a head to the universal church: by what law they can form a creature of a more noble species than themselves; or whether this prove not, that as a bishop at first was but like the foreman of a jury, thence sprung an archbishop, and thence a patriarch, so in process of time, when pride grew riper, the pope grew to be the head or governor of the universal church.

But if they can show us no law of God empowering those special consecrators, any more than others, then where is the Papacy that dependeth on if? There is nothing in Scripture to empower the Italian bishops any more than the Gallican, German, or Asian, to consecrate a head for the catholic church.

But suppose there were, yet we must be resolved

whether it be some or all the Italian Bishops that must do it? U but some which be they? and how is their power proved ? If all or any, then what shall we do when some of them consecrate one pope, and some another, and some a third ? Which of those is the pope? If consecration give the power, all are popes. And still the Papal succession is overthrown, while many popes had no consecration by Italian bishops.

Thus you may sec what a case the Jesuits will be in, if you put them to insert the necessary electors and consecrators in their definition of a pope.

You must also require them to put his necessary <lualification in the description. For if no disposition of the matter be necessary, then a Jew or other infidel maybe pope: which they will deny. If any disposition of the subject be of necessity to the reception of the form, cause them to put it down. It is either true godliness, or it is common honesty and sobriety: and then farewell Papacy ; or it is learning and knowledge : and then Alphonsus Castro, and other Papists, will bear witness that some popes understood not their grammar, and one good man, saith Wernerus, being ignorant of letters, was fain to get another com-pope to say his offices, though it happened that they could not agree, and so a third was chosen, and his choice disliked, and a fourth chosen, till there was six chosen popes alive at once. If age be necessary, then children popes iiave interrupted the succession. If the masculine gender be necessary. Pope Joan interrupted the succession, unless fifty of their own historians deceive us. But the question is whether faith in Christ be of necessity to a pope ? If so then what will you say to John XXII I. that denied the life to come, and to those that have been guilty of heresy ? So that by that time they have put the necessary qualification of a pope into their definition, you shall find them silenced.

But they are not agreed about the very form of the papacy. Some say he is the head of all the church: others, with the general councils of Constance and Basil say, that he is the head only of the singular members, but subject to a council. So that you may see what

10*

a case they will be in, if they tell you what they mean by a pope, and define him.

If they use the name of a general council, call them to define what they mean by a general council. Some of them will say, it must be a true representative of the whole catholic church: so that morally they are all consenting to what is there done. But then the doubt remaineth, whether there be a necessity of any eertam number of bishops? If not; it seems the whole church may agree that twenty, or ten, or two, or one shall represent them, and be a general council. But if this must not hold, then must all the bishops of the world be there, or only some, and how many? Binius saith, vol. 1, p. 313. that a general council is that where all the bishops of the world may and ought to be present, unless they be lawfully hindred, and in which none but the Pope of Rome by himself or his legates, is wont to preside. It is when all the church is morally represented, the pope presiding.

How prove they that only bishops should be members of a council, and not presbyters ?

By their definition they nullify many general councils, because the pope presided not there: even the first general council at Nice.

By this rule we never had a general council. At the first session of the council of Trent, there were but four archbishops aud twenty-two bishops, taking in the titular bishops of Upsal, Armagh, and Worcester. At divers other sessions after but eight or nine, or every few more. In the fourth session which decreed to receive tradition with equal pious affection and reverence as the Holy Scriptures, and which gave a false catalogue of the canonical books, there were but the pope's legates, two cardinals, nine archbishops, and forty one prelates. Now was that the whole church morally rcn-resented ? were those twenty-two, or forty-one all the bishops of the world, or the hundredth part of them? and ought all the bishops of the African, Asian, and other churches to have been there?

It is plain by this definition, that a general council is but a name, and that no such thing is to be expected in the world. For, if all bishops, or half come thither,

what shall their flocks do the while f How many years must they be traveling from America, Ethiopia, and all the remote parts of the Christian world ? So much shipping-, and provision, arc necessary for the convoy of so many, that the bisliops are not able to defray the hundredth part of the charge. Abundance of them are so aged and weak, that they are unfit for the journey. Their princes are some of them infidels, and some at wars, and will never give them leave to come. They must pass through many kingdoms of the enemies, or that are in wars, that will never suffer them to pass. The lediousiiess, and hazards of the journey would be death to most of them, and so it is but a plot to put an end to the church. The length of general councils is such, some of them being ten years, that at Trent eighteen, that so many bishops to be long absent from home, is but to give up the church to infidelity or impiety: unless the bishops be such things as the church can spare. When they come together, they could not understand one another, because of the diversity of their languages. The number would be so great, that they could not converse in one assembly: so that a true general council now, is but a name to amuse those that think the world is no bigger than a man may ride over in a week's short journey.

This definition is ridiculous for it is enough that all the bishops of the world may and ought to be there, whether they be there or not. But then what if laziness or danger deter them or detain them ? Is that a council where bishops ought to be and are not? How many must be present, any or none? Prove that forty bishops are a general council, because the rest ought to be there. Who shall be judge of each man's case, whether he could or ought to have been there? Will you judge men before they are heard, or their cause known ? Your saying that they ought to have been there, is no proof.

Binius hath one exception, unless lawfully hindered. If all the bishops in the world be Ijfwfully hin-dred, it seems it is a general council when no body is there: you see now what you put the Papists too, if you put them to define a general council, or tell you what they mean by that word.

CHAPTER X.

Pupal Coyifusion. '^

When the}?- go about from councils or other history to prove the sovereignty of the pope, let them not cheat you by confounding ; a human ordinance with a divine : an alteiahle point of order loith an unalterable essential part of the church: or a mere primacy in the same order or office, tcith a governing sovereignty or a different order or office.

Therefore we would learn of them, whether the preeminence and order of the five patriarchal sees, began not about the first council but was settled some while after: for till there were general councils, so called, there was no occasion of determining which should have the first, second or third seat.

Whenever the time was, we inquire; whether the sees of Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, were not patriarchal as soon as Rome ? and whether councils that speak of priority, or posteriority, do not in the same manner, and on the same grounds, and to the same ends give Alexandria, and Antioch, their places, as they do to Rome? We find them speaking of them as matters of the same order and nature. Whether all those have not the same kind of right to their preeminence, whether it be divine or human ? The very foundation of the patriarchal order, and of Rome's patriarchal primacy, which was the preparative to its universal sovereignty, was a mere human invention, given on occasion of the imperial seat at Rome, and not any institution of Christ to Peter and his successors. All that will not be befooled out of all historical verity by Popish audacity, may take it from the express words of the council of Calcedon, Act. 16,—"We following always the definitions of the holy fathers, and canon, and knowing those that ngw have been read of the 150 bishops, that were congregated under the emperor Theodosius at Constantinople, things, concerning the privileges of the same church of Constantinople. For to the seat of old Rome, because the empire of that city, the fathers

consequently gave the privileges. And the 150 bishops being moved with tlie same intention, have given equal privileges to new Rome: reasonably judging, that the city adorned with the empire and senate, shall enjoy equal privileges with old regal Rome." Binius p. 134.

It may confound all the Papal jugglers on earth to find an approved general council affirming that Rome's primacy was given by the fathers ; because it wa«> the imperial city. On the same reason they do the like by Constantinople ; for the council of Constantinople which had gone before them on those grounds: so that you have the vote of two councils, that it was not so from the beginning, nor an apostolical tradition, but the act of the fathers, because of the imperial city. If a general council can err. Popery is a deceit. If it cannot err, then the very primacy in the pope was then but new, and done by man, that might do the like by others, and therefore undo this again.

But say they. Pope Leo confirmed not this. Then the church representative may err, and the pope only is infallible. Leo and his delegates never expected one word against the saying, that it was because of the ern-pire, that Rome by the fathers had the primacy given it. The reason given by themselves Concil. Constant, can. 5. is this, because Constantinople is new Rome. Binius saith that Rome receiveth not the canons of^ this council neither, but only their cuiideuuiation oi Macedonius : and that every council hath just so much strength and authority as the apostolic seat bestoweth on it. For unless this be admitted, no reason can be given why some councils of greater numbers of bishops were reprobated ; and others of a smaller number confirmed." Vol. 2. p. 515.

What would you have more ? Do you not see what the Popish church is ; and what they mean when they ask you, whether your private judgment be safer or wiser than that of the whole church, or of all the Christian world ? You see they mean all this while but one man, whom Gretser and others plainly confess they call the church. So that indeed it is general councils, and all the Christian world or church that are the ig-

norant, fallible, and oft erring part: and it is one man, who has been reputed an incarnate devil by a general council, that is the unerring pillar of the church, and wiser than all. They make a mere nothing or mockery of general councils, any further than they please the pope? And can you expect that any thing should please them that is agaiiist his greatness, or as Julius II. calls it, his holding the place of the great God, the maker of all things, and laws ? What a vile abuse is it then of the pope to trouble the world by the meetings and consultations of general councils, when he can sit at Rome and contradict them infallibly, and save the catholic church from the errors that general councils would else lead them into : and therefore could he not with less ado infallibly make us laws, canons and Scriptures without them? For that which the pope can do against a general council, he can do without them. If he can infallibly contradict a general council, and infallibly rule us without them. Therefore 3"0U may look long enough before you see another general council. The council of Constance were neither prognosticators nor effectual lawgivers, when they prognosticated and ordained decennial coun-ciis.

Here also you may see what account the Papists make even of the first general councils. It is all one with them to judge others heretics for contradicting especially the four first general councils, compared to the four evangelists as the Scripture itself: and yet they profess themselves to reject the canons or decrees of both those, the first of Constantinople, and that of Cal-cedon.

Thus the pope is privileged from all possibility of being an heretic personilly: and not only the Romish universal monarchy and vice-godhead, but even its patriarchal primacy was no apostolical tradition, but a human institution, founded on this consideration, that Rome was the imperial seat and city.

Human it must needs be: for councils did not declare any part of the law of God, but ordain it as an act of their own. They and the patriarchate of Constantinople, which was a new seat, neither patriarch

nor bishop residing- tlicrc in tlio apostles' clays, or Ion"-after. Tlicy give this new patriarcii the second place and once made him equal with old Rome, which they would never have presumed to do, if they had thought that the jiatriarchship of Alexandria, Anlioch, or Rome had been of divine institution: for what horrible arrogance would that have been, when the Holy Ghost by the apostles had made Alexandria second, and Anlioch third, and Rome first, for a council to set Constantinople befove two of them, and equal with the first.

Therefore if patriarchs be desirable creatures, there may more new ones now be made, as lawfully as that of Constantinople.

Therefore we judge, that to disobey the pope, or withdraw from his subjection, if he had never forfeited his patriarchship by the claim of an universal headship, were no greater a sin, than to disobey or withdraw from the patriarch of Alexandria, Antioch, or Constantinople. Either the government by patriarchs and archbishops is of God's ordaining and approving, or not: if not then it is no sin to reject any of them. If it be of God, then to reject any of them, though in simple error, is a sin of disobedience through ignorance, but is far from proving a man to be no member of the catholic church : for patriarchs are far from being essential parts of the catholic church.

As in the Papists' own judgment, the catholic church may be without the patriarch of Constantinople, Alexandria, or Antioch; so may it therefore without the Pope of Rome. All the Greek church which hath set up the patriarch of Constantinople in competition with the pope, must needs hold that the universal primacy is of human institution: for Constantinople never pretended to a divine institution : and they could never have had the impudence to prefer a human before a divine : and therefore never thought the primacy of Rome to be of divine right.

CHAPTER XI.

Tradition.

The great endeavor of the Papists is to advance tradition : the council of Trent ses. 4. hath equalled it with the Scriptures as to the pious affection and reverence wherewith they receive it. On pretence of this tradition they have added abundance of new articles to the faith, and accuse us as heretics for not receiving their traditions. This is a principal difference betwixt us, that we take the Scriptures to be sufficient, to acquaint us with the will of God, as the rule of faith and holy living: and they take it to be but part of the word, knd that the other part is in unwritten tradition, which they equal with this. For the maintaining of tradition it is that they write so much to the dishonor of the Holy Scripture.

For the discovery of their desperate fraud in this point, and the right confuting of them , you must distinguish them out of their confusion : you must grant them all that is true and just, which we shall as stifly defend as they: you must reject their errors and confute them : and you may turn their own principal weapon against them, to the certain destruction of their cause.

We must distinguish the tradition of the Scriptures, or the Scripture doctrine, from the tradition of other doctrines, pretended to be the rest of the word of God: between a certain proved tradition, and that which is unproved and uncertain, if not grossly feigned: between the tradition of the whole catholic church, or the greater part, and the tradition of the lesser more corrupted and selfish the Roman part! between a tradition of necessary doctrine or practice, and the tradition of mutable orders : between tradition of testimony, or history, or of teaching ministry, and tradition of decisive judgment, as to the universal church. Suffer them not to jumble all those together, if you would not be cheated in the dark.

Concerning tradition, we grant the following propositions.

That the Holy Scriptures come down to us by the certain tradition of our fathers and teachers ; and that what the seeing and hearing of the apostles was to tiiem that lived with them, that tradition and belief of certain tradition is to us, by reason of our distance from the time and place. So that thougii the Scripture bears its own evidence of a divine author, in the image or superscription of God upon it, yet we are beholden to tradition for the books themselves, and for much of our knovvlt-dge that those are the true writings of the apostles and prophets, and all, and not depraved, &c.

The essentials of the faith have been delivered even from the apostles in other ways and forms, besides the Scriptures: as in the professions of the faith of the churches. In the baptismal covenant and signs, and whole administration. In the Lord's Supper. In Catechisms. In the prayers and praises of the church. In the hearts of all true believers, where God hath written all the essentials of the Christian faith and law. So that we will not do as the Papists perversly do : when God delivereth us the Christian religion with two hands. Scripture completely and verbal tradition, in the essentials; they quarrel with Scripture on pretence of defending the other: so will not we quarrel with tradition, but thankfully confess a tradition of the same Christianity by unwritten means, which is delivered more fully in the Scripture: and this tradition is in st)me respect subordmale to Scripture, and in some respect co-ordinate, to hold us out the truth.

The apostles delivered the Gospel by voice as well as by writing, before they wrote it to the churches.

By that preaching we confess there were Christians made, who had the doctrine of Christ in their hearts, and churches gathered that had his ordinances among them, before the Gospel was written.

We confess that the converted were bound to teach what they had received to their children, servants and others: that there was a settled ministry in many churches ordained to preach the gospel as they had received it from the apostles before it was written: that baptism, catechising, profession, the eucharist, prayer, praise, &c, were instituted and in use, before the Gos-

11

]22 JESUIT

pel was written for the churches: that when the Gospel was written as tradition bringeth it to us, so ministers are commissioned to deliver both the books and the doctrine of that book, as the teachers of the church, and to preach it to those without, for their conversion ; that parents and masters are bound to teach that doctrine to their children and servants: if a minister or other person were cast into the Indies or America without a Bible, he must teach the doctrine, though he remembered not the words; and by so doing might save souls : that to the great benefit of the church, writers of all ages in subserviency to Scripture have delivered down the sacred verities, and historians the matters of fact: that the unanimous consent of all tiie churches manifested in their constant professions, and practices, is a great confirmation to us : so are the sufferings of the martyrs for the same truth : the declaration of each consent by councils is also a confirming tradition : and the confessions of heretics, Jews and other infidels, are providential and historical traditions, for confirmation : and we also profess thai if we had any certain proof of a tradition from the apostles of any thing more than is written in Scripture, we would receive it.

But we take the Holy Scriptures as the complete universal rule or law of faith and holy living. We know of no tradition that containeth another word of God; and we know there is none such because the Scripture is true, which asseiteth its own sufficiency. Scripture, and unwritten tradition are but two ways of acquainting the world with the same christian doctrine; and not with divers parts of that doctrine, that tradition adds to Scripture. It is but the substance of greatest virtues that are conveyed by unwritten tradition: but that and much more is contained in the Scripture, where the christian doctrine is complete, and containeth the integrals as well as the essentials.

The manner of delivery in a form of words, which no man may alter, and in so much fulness and perspicuity, is mucli to be preferred before the mere verbal delivery of the same doctrine. The memory of man cannot retain as much as the Bible doth contain, and preserve it safe from alterations or corruptions; or if

one man were of so strong a memor3% no man can imagine that all should be so; or if one orcneration had such wonderful memories, we cannot imagine that all their posterity should have the liUe.

If all the world had such Tniraculous memories, yet men arc apt to be negligent either in learning or keeping of lioly doctrine. All have not that zeal that excites them to such wonderful diligence without which such a treasure could not be preserved.

When so much matter is committed to bare memory without a form of unalterable words, new words may make an alteration before men are aware. The change of one word sometimes makes a whole discourse have another sense.

There are so many carnal men in the world that love not the strictness of that doctrine which they do possess, and so many heretics that would pervert the holy doctrine, that it would purposely be altered by them if it could be done ; and it might much more easily be done, if it lay all upon mens' memories : for one party would set their memory against the others, and tradition would be set against tradition : especially when the far greater part of the church turn heretics, as in the Arians' days; then tradition would be most at their keeping and interpretation ; and if we had not then had the unalterable Scriptures, what might they not have done ?

A whole body of doctrine kept only in memory, will soon be disjointed; and if the matter were kept safe, yet the methud and manner would be lost.

There could not be such satisfactory evidence given to another of the integrity or certainty of it, as when it is preserved in writing. We should all be diflident that the laws were corrupted, or that lawyers might combine to do it at their pleasure, if there were no law books or records, but all lay in their memories. If they were faithful, yet they could not give us evidence of it.

The holy truths of God, historical, doctrinal, practical, prophetical, &c., without a course of miracles, or extraordinary means, could not have been kept through all ages, as well without writing, as with it.

If writing be not necessary, why have we so many fathers, histories, and canons? Why do they fetch their tradition from those and ridiculously call them unwritten verities ^ Are they unwritten, when they turn us to so many volumes for them? If man's writing be necessary for their preserv^ation, men should thankfully acknowledge that God hath taken the best way in giving it us in his own unalterable phrase.

If they prove that some matters of fact are made known to us by tradition that are not in the Scripture, or that any church orders or circumstances of worship then used are so made known to us, which yet we wait for the proof of, it will not follow that any of those are therefore divine institutions, or universal laws for the unchangeable obligation of the whole church. If there be some things historically related in the Scripture, that were obligatory but for a season, and ceased when the occasion ceased, as the washing of feet, the abstaining from things strangled and blood, the anointing of the sick, the prophesyings one by one, 1 Cor. xiv. 31. miraculous gifts and their exercise, &c. it will not follow, that they are universal laws to the church.

We will never take the pope's decision for a proof of tradition: nor will we receive it from pretended authority, but from rational evidence. Their saying, ice. are the authorised keepers of tradition, shall not go with us for proof.

It is not the testimony of the Papists alone, who are not only a lesser part of the church, but a part that hath espoused a corrupt interest against the rest, that we shall take for certain proof of a tradition, but we will prefer the testimony of the whole church before the Romish church alone.

They that can produce the best records of anliquitv, or rational proof of the antiquity of the thing they plead for, are of more regard in the matter of tradition than millions of unlearned men. Universal tradition is preferred before the tradition of the Romish sect, and rational 7;roo/of antiquity is preferred before ignorant surmises. But where both those concur w/iircrsa/co«-$ent, and records or other credible evidence of antiquity, it is most valid.

As for the Romish traditions which they take for part of God's word ; they must produce sufficient proof that they came from the apostles, before we can receive them as apostolic tradition : and also that it was delivered by the apostles as a perpetual universal doctrine or law for the whole church.

Either those traditions have evidence to prove them apostolical, or no evidence. If none, how can the pope know them ? If they have evidence, why may not we know it as well as the pope?

If there be any proof of these traditions, it is either some ancient records or monuments : or it is the practice of the church; but then how shall we know how long- that practice hath continued, without recourse to the writings of the ancients:'' Reports are very uneer-tain. If it may be known without the search of ancient records, then we may know it as well as they.

If the pope and his priests have been the keepers of it, have they in all ages kept it to themselves or declared it to the church ? If they have concealed it, then it belonged not to others : or else they were unfaithful and unfit for the office. Then how do succeeding popes and priests know it ? If they divulged it, then others know it as well as they. We have had abundance of preachers from among the Papists, who were once Papists themselves, as Luther, MelanrAhon, Zuingluie, Calvin, Beza, Peter Martyr, Bucer, S^*c., and yet they knew not apostolical traditions.

It mars your credit with us, because we are nble to prove the beginning of some of your traditions, or a time when they had no being : also the death and burial^ of many things that have long gone under the name of traditions.

You are so confounded between your ecclesiastical decrees and traditions, and your apostolical traditions, that we despair of learning to know one from the other and of seeing under the hand of the pope and a general council a catalogue of the true apostolical traditions. It seems to us scarce fair dealing that in one thousand years time, the church could never have an enumeration "and description of those traditions, with the proofs of them.

11*

It is abominable impiety for you to equal your traditions with the Holy Scripture, till you have enumerated and proved them. It makes us suspect your traditions, when we perceive that they or their patrons have such an enmity to the Holy Scriptures, that they cannot be rio^htly defended without casting some reproach upon tlie Scriptures, But this is no new thing with the ap-plauders of tradition. The eighth general council at Constantinople, Can. 3, decreed that the image of Christ should be adored with equal honor iciih (he holy Scripture.

If your own councils themselves, are for the sufficiency of Scripture, what then has become of &il your traditions ? Binius, p. 299, Council of Basil, Ragusii Orat. —" Faith and all things necessary to salvation, both matters of belief and matters of practice, are founded in the literal sense of Scripture, and only from that may argumentation be taken for the proving of those things that are matters of faith, or necessary to salvation ; and not from those passages that are spoken by allegory, or other spiritual sense. The Holy Scripture in the literal sense soundly and well understood, is the infallible and most sufficient rule of faith.''^ This is the Protestant doctrine. There is nothing any way necessary to faith or salvation, but what is contained in the Scriptures, either expressly, or as the conclasion in the premises. We grant tradition or church practices are very useful for our better understanding of some Scriptures : but, what is this to another traditional word ot God? Prove your traditions by inference from Scripture and we receive them.

This is the doctrine for Scripture. Sufficiency and perfection are the rule of faith and life, admitting no addition as necessary, but explication. When this doctrine past so lately in a Popish council, you may sec that the very doctrine of tradition equalled with Scripture, or being another word of God, necessary to faith and salvation, containing what is wanting in Scripture, is but lately sprung up in the world.

Tiie Papists get liitle by their argument from tradition : they lose by it all their cause.

For two things they much plead tradition ; their private doctrines and practices, in which they disagree

from all Christians ; and there they lose their lahor with the judicious : because tliey ^ive us no sufficient proof tjjat their tradition is apostolical, and because tlir> dissent of other churches showeth that it is not universal.

Tlie other cause for which they plead tradition is the doctrine of Christianity itself; with a desic^n to lead jnen to the church of Rome : as if we must be no (christians, unless we are Christians upon the credit of the pope, and his subjects.

We do not strive against tradition or testimony of antiquity for the Scripture, or for Scripture doctrine : we make much advantage of such just tradition. We accept our religion from both the hands of Providence that bring it us ; Scripture and tradition ; and we abhor the contempt which those partial disputers cast upon Scripture ; but we are not tlierefore so partial ourselves as to refuse any collateral or subordinate help for our faith. Tlij more testimonies the better. The best of us have need of all the advantages for our faith that we can get. When they have extolled the certainty of tradition to the highest, we gladly join with them, and accept of any certain tradition of the mind of God. I advise all who would prove themselves wise defenders of the faith, to take heed of rejecting arguments from providences, or any necessary testimony of man, especially concerning matter of fact, or of rejecting true church history, because the Papists overvalue it under the name of tradition, lest such prove guilty of the like partiality and injuriousness to the truth as the Papists are. Whereas the Papists imagine, that this must lead us to their church for tradition, I answer we go beyond the Papists in arguing for just tradition of the Christian faith, and make far greater advantage of it than they can do. They argue but from authoritative decision by the pope, under the name of church tradition, whereas we argue from true history and certain antiquity, and prove what we say.

Their tradition is no tradition : for it must be taken upon the credit of a man, supposed infallible iby supernatural, if not miraculous endowment; which is not tradition but prophesy. If they prove the man to be such a man, it is all one to the church whether he say that

this was the apostles' doctrine, or this I deliver myself to you from God. For he is so qualified, he has the power and credit of a prophet or apostle himself : therefore they must prove tlie pope to he a prophet, before their tradition can get credit: and when they have done that there is no need of it.

When Papists speak of tradition confusedly, they give us just reason to call them to define their tradition, and tell us what they mean by it, before we dispute with them upon an ambiguous word ; seeing they are so divided among themselves, that one party understands one thing by it, and another another thing; which we must not sufler tliose jugglers to jumble together and confound.

Another advantage in which we go beyond the Papists for tradition, is, that as we argue not from the mere pretended supernatural infallibility or authority of any ; as they do, but from rational evidence of true antiquity ; so we argue not from a sect or party as they do, but from the universal church. As far as the whole church of Christ is of larger extent and greater credit than the Popish party, so far is our tradition more credible than theirs.

The Papists are fewer by far than the rest of the nominal christians in the world. And the testimony of many is more than of a part. The Papists above other parties have espoused an interest that leads them to preten 1 and corrupt tradition, and bend all things to that interest of their own, that they may lord it it over all the world: but the whole church can have no such interest and partiality. The Papists are but one side ; and he that will judge rightly, must hear the other sides speak too. But the tradition that we make use of, is from all sides concurring ; even Papists themselves agree with us in many points.

Our tradition reacheth farther than the universal church, for we take in all rational evidence of Jews, heathens, heretics, and persecutors ; that bear witness to the matters of fact, and what was the doctrine and practice of the cluistians in their times, and what books they made tlie ground of their faith. So that as impartial history or testimony differeth from private assertion, or from the testimony of one party only ; so doth our tradition excel

both the sorts of Popish tradition, both that of the Papal, and that of the council pariy.

But \vc have not done with tiiom, till tradition has given them their mortal stroke. You appeal to tradition, to tradition you shall go. l>ut what tradition? The tradition of the catholic church'? and where is that to he found and known ? hut in the profession and practice of tlie church, and in the records of the church?

The great questions between you and us, arc these : Whether the pope be the head and sovereign ruler of the whole catholic church ? and ichether the catholic church and the Roman are of equal extent?

Inquire of the present church : and there we have the profession and practice of all the Greeks; the Syrians; the Moscovites ,* the Georgians; and all others dispersed throughout the Turk's dominions, with the Jacobites, Armenians, Egyptians, Abassines, and all other churches in Europe, &-c. which disclaim the headship of the Roman pope. All those with one mouth proclaim that the church of Rome is not, and ought not to be the mistress of the world, or of all other churches, but that the l)0})e for la^'ing such claim is a usurper, and the anti-Christ. This is the tradition of the Greeks; of the Abassines, and the greatest part of the church on earth agree in this. What then is become of the Roman sovereignty, by the verdict of tradition ; even from the vote of the greatest part of the church ? Rome hath no right to its pretended sovereignty, Babylon is fallen by the judgment of tradition.

If you say that all those are heretics or schismatics, and therefore have no vote, we answer : a minor party, ]>artial and corrupt, seeking dominion over the rest, may not step into the tribunal, and pass sentence against the catholic church, or the greatest part of it.

But your common saying is, that the Greeks, Protestants, and all the rest were once of your church, and departing from it, they can have no tradition but yours. Go to former ages, seeing it is not the present church whose voice you will regard. But iiow shall we know the way and mind of the ages past! If by the present age, then the greater part giveth us their sense against you. If by the records of

those times, we arc content to hear the testimony of these. When we look into the ancients we find them against you; and no footsteps of your usurped sovereignty, but a contrary frame of government, and a consent of antiquity ajrainst it. When we look into later history we find, how by the advantages of Rome's temporal greatness and the emperor's residence there your greatness begun, and preparation was made to yout usurpation, and how the translation of the imperial seat to Constantinople made them your competitors, in the claim of an universal headship ; and how it being once made a question, you got it by a murdering emperor who took your side for his own advantage. It was not till Hildcbrand's days that you could get any possession. Instead of apostolical tradition for your sovereignt\^; eight hundred years after the days of Christ, you had not so much of the catholic church in your subjection, as you have now. At six hundred years after Christ no known part of the world acknowledged your universal sovereignty; but only the Latin western church submitted to the pope as their patriach, and the first in order among the patriarchs. In the days of Constantino and the Nicene council, he was but a bishop of the richest and most numerous church of Christians : and for a hundred years after Christ, he was no more than the presbyter of a particular church.

The Ethiopian churches of Habassia, the Indians, Persians, <fec. were never your subjects. England, Scotland and Ireland were not only long from under you, but resisted 3'ou, maintaining the council of Chalcedon against you, and joining with the eastern churches against you, about Easter day. The eastern churches also were never your subjects.

Canus Loc. 'Ilicol. lib. 6. cap. 7. saith; not only the Greeks, but almost all the rest of the bishops of the whole world,have vehemently sought to destroy the privileges of the church of Rome : and indeed they had on their side, both the arms of emperors, and the greater number of churches: and yet they could never prevail to abrogate the power of the pope of Rome. The catholic church was not then your subjects, when the greater number of churches, and most of the bishops of the whole world, as

u ell as Greeks, were against you, and vehemently foutlii against your protended privilege's.

JOiincrius contra ^Vuhhmscs Caial. in IjibHotluca Patrum, Tom. 4. p. 773. saitli, tlie cliurdies of the Armenians, and Ethiopians, and Indians, and tlic rest uliicli ti;e apostles converted, aie not under the churcli of Konic. What would you have plainer ? You may conjecture at tiie nundjers of those churches by what a legate of the pope that lived among them, saith of one corner of them, Jacob, a Vitriaco llistor. Orient, cap. 77: the churches in the easterly j>arts of Asia alone exceeded in multitude the Christians both of the Greek and Latin Churches. Alas, how little a thing then was the Roman church !

If all this were not enough, the tradition of your own church destroys the papacy utterly. "A general council is above the pope, and may judge him and depose him; that is of faith, it is heresy to deny it ; and this is so sure that no wise man ever doubted it." Tiiis is the judgment of the general council of Basil, with whom that of Constance doth agree. Whether those councils were confirmed or not, they confess them lawfully called and owned, and extraordinarily full. So they were their church representative ; and so the pope's sovereignty • over the council is gone by tradition. If a free general council should be called, all the churches in the world nmst be equally there represented : and if they were so, then down goes the usurped headship of the pope: for most of the churches in the world are against it : and therefore in council they would have the major vote. And thus by the concession of the Roman representative church the pope is gone by tradition.

CHAPTER XII.

Papal Soveriignly.

Another of the Roman frauds is this: The^ persuade men that the Greeks, the Protestants, and all other churches, icere once under the Pajjal sovereignty, and

have separated themselves without any just cause: and therefore we arc all schismatics; and have no vote in general councils, <fec.

This is a vain accusation. Abundance of churclies bad not any notable communion witb you. The Greek churches withdrew from your communion, but not from your subjection. If any of the patriarchs or emperors of Constantmople did for carnal ends submit to you, it was not the act of the churches, nor owned, nor of long continuance. So that it w,is from your communion and not from your subjection that they withdrew.

We that are now living, our fathers or our grandfathers, were not of your church: and therefore we never did withdraw.

There were churches in England before the Roman power was owned : therefore it was a sin to change, the first change was the sin, when they subjected themselves to you ; and not the later, in which they returned to their ancient state.

The Germans or English or whoever did relinquish you, have as good reason for it, as for the relinquishing of any other sin. If they did by the unhappiness of ill education or delusion, submit to the usurped sovereignty of the pope they had no reason to continue in such an error. Repentance is not vice, w hen the thing repented of is a vice. Justify therefore your usurpation, or else it is in vain to be angry with us for not adhering to the usurper, and the many corruptions that he brought into the church.

CHAPTER XIII.

Schisin.

Another deceit that they manage with great confidence is this: Jf the church of Rome be the true church : then yours is not the true churchy arid then you arc schismatics in sepcrating from it: but the church of Rome is the true church; for you will confess it was a true church, when Paul wrote the epistle

to the Romans : and if it ceased to be a true churchy tell us when it ceased^ if t/oii can : if it ceased to be a true church, it was either by heresy, or schism, or apostacy,

A mail would think that cliildron can sec the palpable fallacy ef this argument; and yet of few do the learned Papists make more use. The deceit lieth in the ambiguity of the word church. It is taken often in Scripture for one particular church, associated for personal communioH in God''s worship. And thus there were many churches in a country, as Judca, and Galatia. It is taken by ecclesiastical writers often for an association of many of those churches for communion by their pastors; such as were diocesan, provincial, national churches ; whereof most were then ruled by assemblies, where a bishop, archbishop, metropolitan or partriarch, as they called them did preside. It is taken in Scripture for the body of Christ ; the holy catholic or universal church containing all true believers as mystical, or all professors of true faith as visible. It is taken by the Papists for one particular church lohich is the mistress or ruler of cdl other churches^

If the question be of a true particular church, we grant that the church of Rome was a true and noble church, in the days of Paul and long after ; and thus Paul ownetli it in his epistle as a true church. To die question when it ceased to be a true church: I answer, what matter is it to us whether it ceased or not, any more than whether Corinth, Ephesus, Coloses, Thes-salonica, or Jerusalem be true churches or be ceased ? In charity we regard them all: but otherwise what is it to the faith or salvation of the world, whether Rome or any one of those be yet a true church, or ceased ? I know not that there is any church at Coloses or Philippi, or some other places that had then true churches : and doth it therefore follow that I am not a true believer? What would you say to one who should argue thus concerning other churches, as those men do of Rome ? and say, if Philippi, be a true church, then England has no true churches, if it be not, when did it cease to be a true church ? Would you not answer him : what is it to me whether Philippi be a true church or not? may not w**

12

and they be both true churches ? how j)rovc you that ? and wlietlier it be ceased or not ceased, doth no whit concern my faitii or salvation, fartlier than as my charity is to be exercised towards them. So say we of Rome, it was a true particular church in the apostle's days. And if it be still a true church what hinders but we may be so too? But whether it be so or not, is little to me. It concerneth not my faith or salvation to know whether* there be any such place as Rome on earth, or whether it were consumed long ago. If a man were so simple as to believe a report that Rome was destroyed by Charles of Bourbon, and never inhabited, or had a pope since, he were but such a heretic as Pope Zachary and Bishop Boniface made of Virgilius, for holding there be antipodes.

If you take the word church for a diocesan or patriarchal church, or association of churches; supposing such forms proved warrantable, the same answer serveth as to the first.

But if by a true church you mean either the whole universal church: or a mistress church that must rule all ihe rest, there never was such a church in Paul's days.

Therefore we turn this argument of the Papists against themselves. If the church of Rome itcre neither the ivhole catholic church, nor the inistress of all other churches lohen Paul wrote his epistle to them, then it is not so now, nor ought to be so accounted. That the church of Rome was not the whole catholic church then, no man can doubt, that reads what a church there was at Jerusalem, what a church at Ephcsus, and Philadelphia, Smyrna, Thyatira, Laodicea, Corinth, and abundance more. Where doth Paul once name them either the catholic church, or the mistress or ruler of all churches'? or give the least hint of any such thing? or mention any pope among them whom the wliole world was to take to be their sovereign head ? Is it not an incredible thing that Paul, and all the apostles would forget to make any mention of this privilege, or teach them how to use it, or teach other churches ther duty in obeying the churcli of Rome, if indeed they had been made the mistress church ? Men that can believe what they list, may say what they list. But for my part I will never accuse

l*aul anil all the apostles, of so great oblivion or negligence. And therefore I conclude, Rome was neither the universal churcli, nor the mistress church then, and therefore it is not so to he accoinited now.

But tiie matter of the? Roman church must he distinguished from its iww political form. For the matter, so many of its members as are true christians, are part of the catholic church of Christ tiiough not the whole. But as to the |)olitical form of the Roman church, as it is a body kcaded by one claiming an universal monarchy, so the form is false and anticin-istian, and therefore the church as Papal can bo no better.

This is our answer to the question, wliethcr the church of Rome, be a true church 1 There arc I doubt not among them many true members of the catholic church, though I am confident that salvation is much more rare and dilTicult with them, than it is with the reformed catholics ; but tlie pope as a pretended universal monarch is a false head, and consequently their Papal church, as such, is a false antichristian church, and no true church of Jesus Christ.

CHAPTER XIV.

Another great endeavor of the Papists is, to make, men believe that they only have a fixedness ^unity^ consistency and scttlcdness in religion : but we arc still ai uncertainty, incoherent, not tied together by any certain bond, but still upon divisons, and upon change.

Is this difieronco so great a business ? Do not those cheaters know, that if for this they would reproach us, they must do so by themselves 1 Know they not that among their own schoolmen there is the same difference ? and know they not that if differences in ceremonies or modes should unchurch us, or disgrace us, it would fall as foul on the whole catholic church, in the very primitive times ? Did they never read of the difference between the Asian and the Roman churches, about the

t36 JESUIT

celebration of Easter day, and how Polycrates and the rest did plead tradition against the church of Rome's tradition; how IrencX'Us did reprehend the Bishop of Rome for his uncharitable censure of the churches for so small a difference ? and how Polycarp and Anicetus Bishop of Rome could not agree, as building upon contrary traditions : but yet maintained Christian peace ; Euschius Lib. 5. Hist. Eccl. cap. 26. The English and Scottish churches long after that adhered to the Asian way; even after the council of Nice had ended the controversy on the Roman side. Who knows not how many more controversies greater than those of ours have been among the churches of Christ, without their unchurching or disparagement to religion ?

For the doctrinal controversies, most of them lie more in words than in sense, and all of them are far from the foundation, though they be about Christ, who is the foundation. Those of us that say Christ died for all, and those that say he died not for all, do agree as your schoolmen do, that he died for all, as to the sufficiency of his death and price : but he died not for all as to the actual efficiency of pardon and salvation : is not this •your doctrine ? and is not this ours 1 and are you not as much disagreed about it as we ? what else meant the late decision against the Jansenists 1 and the persecution of them in France 1 And yet have you the face to make this a reproach of us .'* For the righteousness of Christ, we are commonly agreed that it is both his obedience and passion that we are justified and saved by : though we are not all of a mind about the reason of their several interests.

For different forms of worship those men do wilfully forget what a number of offices and Mass books have been among themselves and other churches: and the number of Litanies or Lituriiies of several a<res and churches they have given us.

As for the changes and unfixedness which they charge us with, we are contented that our principles and our practices be compared with the Papists, and then let modest and judicious enemies be judges which of us are more fixed, or more mutable.

For our principles, we take only Christ to be the chief

foundation of our faith, and liis inspired pro|)hets and apostles to be tiio secondary foundation : wliercas tiic Papists build upon many a most ungodly man, because he is the Pope of Rome. Which of those is the firmer foundation ?

We take nothing; for our rule but tlie sure word of God contained in the Holy Scriptures: but the Papists take the decrees of all popes and councils for their rule. Our rule they confess to be divine and infallible: their rule we affirm to be human and fallible. Which then is like to be more firm ? Our rule the Sacred Scriptures in the original languages, as to the words, and the matter of them, as to the sense, the Papists themselves confess is unchangeable ; but they will not say as much of their own ; that alteration which Pope Sixtu>, and Pope Clement made in the vulgar Latin Bible, which is one part of their rule, and the other part is their decrees, of which Pope Leo. X. Bulla contr. Luth. saith, the popes our predecessors never erred in their canons and constitutions. And yet Pope Julius IL said is his general council at the Lateran with their approbation, Cont. pragmaf. sand, monitor. —Though the institutions of sacred canons, holy fathers, and popes of Rome—and their decrees be judged immutable, as made by divine inspiration ; yet the pope of Rome, who, thouch of unequal merits, holdcth the place of the eternal king, and the maker of all things, and all laws on earth, may abrogate these decrees when they are abused.

You see here from the mouth of infallibility itself, if the Roman faith have any, of what continuance we may judire their immutable decrees to be, which are made as by divine inspiration: they are immutable till the pope abrogate them, who being in God's place, is of power to do it.

We have a rule tliat was perfected by Christ and his apostles, to which nothing can be added, and therefore we are at a certainty for our religion: for we have a sure and perfect rule from heaven. Nothing may be added to it, or taken from it. But the Papists do profess that the determinations of the pope or council may make a point, and so five thousand points, for there is no certain number, to be articles of faith, and necessary to

12*

salvation. So that the Papists never know when their faith is perfect and grown to its full stature. For ought they know a thousand more articles may be added. And yet these men of uncertain growing faith, have the face to persuade men that we are mutable, and they are fixed.

We never changed our head, our Lord, our faith, or one article of our faith : if malice itself be able to charge us with changing the smallest article of our faith, let them say their worst: we change not our rule, the Holy Scriptures, nor one clause or sentence of it, but endeavor the preservation of the same, which at the first we received. In our contests with the Papists, our great offence is at their mutation from the ancient rule and way ; we contend but for the faith once delivered to the saints: the old way with us is the good way: we abhor a new religion. If we change in any thing, it is but by repenting of our former changeableness wliile our nation was Popish ; having then changed from the apostolic simplicii}^, we change from that sinful change, and return to the ancient way again. And if we have made any further changes since our first cliange at the reformation, it is but perfecting the change to antiquity and apostolic simplicity, which we tiien begun. Rome was not built in one day, and is not pulled down in a day. The work of reformation is but one change, though it be not done all at one time. If we find some spots of Romish dirt upon us, that escaped us at our first washing, it is no dangerous mutability yet to wash it ofl. If a man converted by saving grace be not perfectly rid of all his former sin the first day of his conversion, should he be reproached as mutable for striving against it all his life after, and casting it ofl' by degrees as he is able ? If a man did but recover by degrees from the relics of his disease, they will not therefore rej)roach him as mutable. If he sweep the dust or dirt out of his house every day, they will not say, he is mutable, and knows not where to rest. Those men might as well reproach us as mutable, because we rise in the morning and do not still lie in bed ; or because we go to bed at nicrht, and do not stay up entirely.

But what is it that we are changeable in 1 We have

changed none of the substance of worship: did we ha|)-tiso befoiv, and do we not so still 1 did we pray or administer tiie Lord's Supper before, and do we not still ] what is the change 1 Do these men think us so sottish as to place our relitrion in circumstances 1 God hath bid us pray contiiuially: but he hath not told us whether we shall use a prayer-book or not, but left that to men's necessities or conveniences to determine. Doth a man change his religion or worshij) of Ciod, if he either begin or cease to use a book] but whether we use them, or not use them, is no part of our religion at all, but a mere accident, or common helj) and a|)purtenance. God hath not told jireachers whether they shall use notes for their memory in |)reaching : to one it is a hindrance, to another a help. Doth a man change his religion when he changeth a custom of using notes'? God hath not told us what chapter we shall read, or what psalm we shall sing, or what text we shall jireach on this day or that day. What if one age think it best that pastors shall read no chapter preach on no text, and sing no psalm but by direction : and the next age think it meeter to leave that to each minister, as thinking it unfit to ordain such ministers as have not wit enough to choose their text, chapter, or psalm according to occasions. Will you say that here is a change of religion 1 These outside hypocrites tell the world what a thing they take religion to be, and in what they place it. What if one read a chapter with spectacles, and another without, or if one preach in a pulpit, and another below : or if one preach in a white garment, and another in a black : are we therefore of several religions 1 or is this any part of the worship itselfl do we not all stand or sit at the hearing of a sermon, as we please? do we not kneel or stand at prayer as we please 1 Yea, do not men commonly in singing psalms or prayer or praise to God, sit or stand as they please ? Doth standing, kneeling, or sitting make another religion, or any part of it? And for marrying, burying, baptising, and the rest, we have altered no part at all of the worship of God ; what ignorant souls are these, that think that the using a book, or a gesture, or certain words to the same sense, make difl'erent religion, or ordinances of worship? Those are tricks

that none but the ignorant will be deluded with, that know not what religion or worship is. They may as well say if I cliange my lecture day from Thursday to Friday, that I change my religion or the worship of God.

But they have changed the very essence of their church ; the officers, the doctrine, the discipline, the worship, as though they had been born for change, to turn all upside down.

In the primitive times the church had no universal monarch but Christ: but they have set up a new universal monarch at Rome.

In tlic primitive times the catholic church was the universality of Christians: they have changed it to be only the subjects of the pope.

in. the primitive times Rome was but a particular church as Jerusalem and other churches were : but they have changed it, to be the mistress of all churches.

For many hundred years after Christ, the Scripture was taken to be a sufficient rule of faith : but the}' have changed it to be hni part of the rule.

In the ancient church all sorts were earnestly exhorted to read, or hear, and study the Scripture in a known tonsfue : but they have changed that into a desperate restraint, proclaiming it the cause of all heresies.

In the ancient church the bread and wine was the body and blood of Christ representative and relitive: but they have changed it into the real body and blood.

Heretofore there was bread and wine remaining after the words of consecration : but they have changed so, that there remaineth neither bread nor wine, but the ({ualities and quantity, without the substance, and this must be believed, because they say it, against Scripture and antiquity, and sense itself.

In the ancient church the Lord^s Suppc? ?vas administered in both kinds, bread and wine to all: but they have lately changed this into one kind only to the peo-))le, denying them one half of the sacrament.

Of old the Lord^s Supper was but the commemoration of the sacificc of Christ upon the cross, and a sacrament of our communion icith him and his members: but now they have changed it into a propitiatory sa-critice for the sins of the quick and dead : and in it

they adore a piece of bread as very God, wiili divine uorsliip.

Of old, men were tauglit to make daili/ ronfrssfon of shi, and bcf^ pardun ; and when they had done all, to confess themselves unprofitable servants : but now they are so chanircd, that they pretend not only to be perfect without sin, and to merit by the condignity of their works with God, but to supererogate and be more perfect than innocence could make them, by doing more than their duty.

Of old those things wore accounted sins deserving hell, and needing the blood of Christ for pardon, which now are changed into venial sins, which properly are no sins, and deserve no more than temporal punishment.

Of old the saints had no proper merits to plead for themselves; and now men have some to spare for the buying of souls out of purgatory.

Of old the pastors of churches were subject to the rulers of the commonwealth; even every soul, not only for wrath, but for conscience' sake was obliged to be subject : but now all the clergy are exempted from secular judgment, and the secular power is subject to them : for the pope hath power to depose princes, and dispossess them of their dominions, and put others in their room, and dissolve the bonds of oaths and covenants, in which the subjects were obliged to them, and to allow men to murder them.

I might fill a volume with all the changes they have made in doctrines, and church orders, and discipline, and religious orders and their discipline, and in worship and ceremonies. Their Liturgy or Mass-book hath been changed, and abundance of additions it iiath had since the beginning of it.

Now I am content that any impartial man shall judge whether Papists or the reformed churches are the more mutable and unsettled in their religion ? and which of them is at the greater certaintv, firmness, and immuta> bility ]

CHAPTER XV.

J^oveUy and Succession.

xVnotlier fraud of the Papists, vvliich they place not the least of their confidence in, is this : the^ persuade the i^cople that our church and religion are but neto^ of the other day''s invention: and that theirs is the only old religion. And therefore they call upon us to give them a catalogue of the professors of our religion in all ages ; which they pretend we cannot do : and ask us where our church was before Luther.

To this we sliall give them a hrief but satisfactory answer. We are so fully assured that the oldest religion is the best since the date of the Gospel, that we are contented our whole cause shall stand or fall by this trial. Let him be esteemed of the true religion, that is of the oldest religion. This is the main difference between us and the Papists. We are for no religion that is not as old as the days of the apostles : but the\^ are for the novelties and additions of popes and councils. Poly-dore Virgil Inven. Rcrum, lib. 8. c. 4. calling us a sect, gives 3'ou a just description of us, ''''having once got leave to speak that sect did marvelously increase in a short time; ivhich is called evangelical, because they affirm that no law is to be received which belongeth to salvation, but what is give?! by Christ or the apostles.'''' Yet these very men hav^e the face to charge us with novelty ; as if Christ and his apostles were not of sufficient antiquity for them. Our main quarrel with them is, for adding new inventions in religion, and their principal business against us is to defend it, and yet they call theirs the oM religion, and ours the new.

That which is most conformed to the doctrine and practice of Christ and his apostles, is the truly ancient religion and church. But our religion and church is most conformed to the doctrine and practice of the apostles : therefore it is the truly ancient religion and church.

That religion which is most conformed to the Holy Scripture is most conformed to the doctrine and practice of Christ and his apostles. But our religion and churches

arc most coiilbrined to the Holy Scrii)tiiics. Tiiey c;iu say nothing against tiiis but that the Scri[)turc is insufficient without tradition : hut wo have no rule of faith which is not hy themselves confessed to he true: they acknowledge Scripture to he tlu; true word of God ; so that the truth of our ride is justified hy themselves. Let tiiem sliow us as good evidence that their additional articles of faith or laws of life came from the apostles, as we do that the Scriptures came from them, and then we shall confess that we come short of them. Let tlicm take the controversies between us point by point, and hriuir their proof, and we will bring ours, and let tliat religion carry it that is apostolical. Tlieir traditions in matter of faith superadded to the Scripture, are mere heretical or erroneous forgeries, and they can give us no proof that ever they were apostolical. The Scripture alTu'meth its own sufficiency ; and therefore excludeth tlieir traditions. In their own general council at Basil, the Scripture sufficiency was defended. The ancient fathers were for the sufficency of Scripture. Their traditions are the opinions of a dividing sect, contrary to the traditions or doctrine of the present catholic church: the far greater jmrt of Christians being against them. For some hundred years after Christ, most of their pretended traditions were unknown or abhorred by the Christian church, and no such things were in being among them. The chief points of controversy maintained against us, are not only without Scripture, but against it, and thence we have full particular evidence to disprove them. If the Scri[)tures be true, as they confess them to be, then no tradition can be apostolical or true, that is contrary to them. The Papist's tradition is, that the clergy is exempt from the magistrate's judgment: but the Holy Scriptures saitii, Jet tvcri/ soul he subject to the higher powers, Rom. xiii. The Papists' tradition is for serving God lyublichj in an unhioum tongue : but the Holy Scripture is fully against it. Their tradition is against laymen's reading the Scripture in a known tongue, without special license from their ordinary : but Scripture and all antiquity are against them.

These seven ways we know tiieir traditions to be deceitful ; because they are unproved; against the sufficien-

cy of Scripture, their own former confessions, and the consent of the fathers ; contrary to the judgment of the catholic church ; once the church was without them ; and many of them are contrary to express Scripture.

If Scripture will show which of us is nearest the doctrine and practice of the apostles, then the controversy is ended. For we provoke them to try the cause by Scripture, and they deny it. We profess it is the rule and test of our religion; but they appeal to another rule and test. Thus you may see which is the old religion.

Our church and religion have continued from the days of Christ till now. The promise of Christ cannot be broken. Christ promised in his word, that that church and religion which are most conformed to the Scriptures, shall continue to the end : but our church and religion are most conformed to the Scripture : therefore Christ hath promised that it shall continue to the end.

The Christian religion and catholic church have continued from the days of Christ till now. But ours is the Christian religion, and catholic church : therefore ours hath continued from the days of Christ until now. That religion which hath all the essentials of Christianity, and doth not deny or destroy any essential part of it, is the Christian Religion. That religion which the apostles were of is the Christian religion. They who believe all that is in the Holy Scripture are of the Christian religion ; but thus do the reformed churches believe.

They who are of that one holy catholic church, where Christ is the head and all true Christians are members, are of the true church; for there is but one catholic church.

They who are sanctified, and justified, have the love of God in them, are members of the true catholic church : but such are all that are sincere professors of our religion.

But all this will not serve them without telling them where our church was before Luther: to this we answer we have no peculiar catholic church of our own ; for there is but one, and that is our church: where-ever the christian church was, there was our church. Wherever any Christians were congregated for God's worship, there were churches of Uie same sort, as our

particular churches. Wherever Christianity was, there our religion was ; for we know no religion but Christianity. Would you have us give a catalogue of all the Christians in the world since Christ ? Or would you liave us as vain as Tuherville who names some popes, about twenty professors of their faith in each age, as if twenty or thirty men were the catholic church : or as if those men were proved to be Papists by his naming them ?

Our religion is Christianity. Christianity hath certain essentials, without which no man can be a Christian ; and it hath moreover many precious truths, and duties necessary to the better being of a Christian. Our being as Christians is in the former ; and our strength and increase and better being are much in the latter. From the former, religion and the church are denominated. Our implicit and actual explicit belief, as the papists call them, must be distinguished ; or our general and our particular belief. And also the positives of our belief must be distinguished from the implied negatives ; and the express articles themselves, from their implied con-sectaries.

Now I shall tell 3'ou where our church hath been in all ages since the birth of Christ.

In the days of Christ and his apostles our church was where they and all Christians were : and our religion was with them in all its parts, both essential and perfective. That is, we now believe all to be true that was delivered by the apostles as from God, with a general faith ; and ail the essentials and as much more as we can understand, with a particular faith. But we cannot say that with such a particular faith we believe all that the apostles belieN-TDd or delivered ; for then we must say that we h.ave the same degree of understanding as they ; and that we understand every word of the Scriptures,

In the days of the apostles themselves, the consecta-ries, and implied verities, and rejection of all heresies were not particularly and expressly delivered either in Scripture or tradition.

In the next ages after the apostles, our church was the one catholic church, containing all true Christians, headed by Jesus Christ: and every such Christian was a mem-

13

ber of it. The essential parts of our religion were con* tained both in the Holy Scriptures, and in the public professions, ordinances, and practices of the church in those ages, which you call traditions; and the rest of it, even all the doctrines of faith and universal laws of God, which are its perfective parts, were fully contained in the Holy Scripture. And some of our rejections and consectaries, were then gathered and owned by the church, as heresies occasioned the expressing of them: and the rest were all implied in the apostolical Scripture doctrine which they preserved.

By degrees many errors crept into the church : so, that neither the catholic church, nor one true Christian did reject any essential part of Christianity. All parts of the church were not alike corrupted with error, but some more, and some less. The whole church held the Holy Scripture itself, and so had a perfect general or implicit belief, even while by evil consequences they oppugned many parts of their own profession.

When in process of time by claiming the universal sovereignty, Rome had introduced a new pretended catholic church, by superadding a new head and form, there was then a two-fold church in the West; the Christian as Christian headed by Christ; and the Papal as Papal headed by the pope ; and by that usurped monarchy they endeavored to make but one of them, by making both the heads essential, when before one only was tolerable. If the matter in any part may be the same ; and the same man may be a Christian and a Papist, and so the same assemblies : yet still the forms are various: and as Christians and part of the catholic church, they arc one thing: but as Papists and members of the separating sect, they are another thing.

In the time of the Romish usurpation, our church was visible in the Imvest degree among the Papists themselves, not as Papists, but as Christians. For they never did deny the Scriptures, nor the ancient creeds, nor baptism, the Lord's Supper, nor any of the substance of our positive articles of religion. They added a new religion and church of their own, but still professed to hold all the old in consistency with it.

Wherever the truth of the Hohj Scriptures and the

ancient creeds of the church was professed, tliere was our relijOfion before Liitlier : but even among tbe Papists, the Holy Scriptures and tlie said creeds were visibly professed, theiefore among ibem was our religion.

Popery itself was not ripe for a corruption of the Christian faith professed, till Luther's opposition heightened them. For the Scripture was frequently before, by Papists held to be a most sufficient rule of faiih, as I have sliowed from the council of Basil; and consequently, tradition was only pleaded as conservatory and exposi-to) y of the Scripture, but now the council of Trent hath equalled them, when they found that out of Scripture ihey were unable to confute or suppress the truth.

At the time of the Church's oppression by the Papacy, our Religion was visible, and so our Church: in a more illustrious sort, among the Christians of the most of the world, Greeks, Ethiopians, and the rest^ who never were subject to the usurpation of Rome, but only many of them took him for the first patriarch, but not the governor of the universal church. So that here was a visibility of our church doubly more eminent than among the Romanists ; in that it was the far greatest pari of the catholic church that thus held our religion, to whom the Papists were then but few ; and in that they did not only hold the same positive articles of faith with us, but also among their rejections did reject the chief of the Popish errors as we do.

They rejected with us, the pope's Catholic Monarchy^ the pretended infallibility of the pope or his councils : the new form of the Papal church, as headed by him, with other points; which are the very fundamental controversies between us and the Papists. So that the major part of the catholic church did profess it, with the rejection of the Papacy and Papal church, and so you may as easily see where our religion was before Luther, as where the catholic church, or most of Christians were before Luther.

Our religion was professed with a yet greater rejection of Romish corruptions, by many thousands that lived in the western ehurcli itself, and under the pope's nose, and opposed him in many of his ill endeavors against the church and truth, together with them that gave him th«

hearing, and were glad to be quiet, and gave way to his-tyranny, but never consented to it.

Concerning those we have abundant evidence, though abundance more we might have had, if the power and subtilty of the Papal faction had not had the handling of them. Histories tell us of the bloody wars and contentions that the emperors of both East and West have had with the pope to hinder his tyranny; and that they were forced by his power to submit to him, contrary to their former free professions. Treatises were written against him, both for the emperors and princes, and against his doctrine and tyranny. Histories and professions of the Albigenses, Waldenses, Bohemians and others were very numerous, and they affirmed about the year one thousand one hundred, that they had continued since the apostles, and no other original of them is proved. General Popish councils have contended and borne witness against the pope's superiority over a council. In that and other points, whole countries of their own are not yet brought over to the pope. They have still among themselves Dominicans, Jansenists, &c., who are reproached by the Jesuits. Most points of ours which we oppose to Popery, are maintained by some or other of them. But the fullest evidence is the certain history or knowledge of the case of the common people and clergy among them, who are partly ignorant of the main matters in controversies between us, and are generally kept under the fear of fire, and sword, and torments; so that the truth of the case is this : the Roman bishops were aspiring by degrees to be archbishops, and so to be patriarchs, and so to have the first seat and vote, and to be called the chief bishoj)s or patriarchs^ and at last they made another thing of their office, and claimed, about six hundred years after Christ, to be universal monarchs or governors of all the church. But though that claim was soon laid, it was comparatively but icvf^ even in the West, that made it any article of their faith ; but multitudes sided with the princes that would have kept the pope lower, and the most of the people meddled not with tlie matter, but yielded to necessity, and gave place to violence, except the Albigenses, Bohemians, Wickliffites and the rest that more openly opposed. So that no man

could judge of the multitude clearly, which side they were on, being forced by fire and sword, and having not the freedom to profess their minds.

Our religion was at first with the apostles, and the apostolic church : and for divers hundred years after, it was with the universal Clirislian church. Since Rome's usurpation, it was even with the Romanists though abused, and with the greater part of tlie catholic church that renounced Popery then, and so do now ; and also with the opposers of the pope in the West. This is the succession we plead, and where our church and religion still was.

If any deny that we are of the same church and religion with all that is truly christian, I easily prove it. They tliat <ire Ciiristians joined to Christ the head, are all of the same church and religion, for none else are Christians or united to Christ, but the church which is his body : but all sincere Christians and we are united to Christ the head : therefore we are all of the same church and religion.

They who believe the Holy Scripture, and differ in no essential part of the Christian faith, are of the same church and religion: but so do both we and all true Christians: therefore we are all of one church and religion.

They who are truly regenerate, and justified, hating all known sin, longing to be perfect, loving God above all, and seeking first his kingdom and righteousness, and accounting all tilings but loss in comparison of Christ, are all of the true catholic church, and the true Christian religion': but such are all that are sincere, of the reformed churches ; as we to prove others by our profession and practice, by which only tlicy are capable of judging of us; and to ourselves infallibly against all the enemies of our salvation in hell or eartli, by the knowledge and acquaintance with our own hearts, and the experience of the work of God upon them. All the Jesuits in the world cannot persuade me that I love not God, and hate sin, and prefer not the love of Christ before all the world, when I feel and know that I do; till they can prove that they know my heart better than I do.

If Christ consent to it, and we consent to it, then ve

13*

all who are sincere in our profession are of the true catholic church and religion; for ifhe consent and we consent^ who is there that is able to break the match 1 But Cbrist consenteth, and we consent. His consent is expressed in his Gospel, that whoever helieveth in him shall not perish, but have everlasting life ; and whoever will may drink of the water of life freely. Our consent we openly j rofessed at baptism, and have frequently renewed; and our own souls are acquainted with the sincerity of it, whatever any that know not our hearts may say against it.

All that are truly baptized, and own their baptismal covenant, are visible members of the true catholic church; for it is the very nature and use of baptism to enter us into that church. Protestants, are all truly baptized, and own their baptismal covenant: therefore we are all of the true catholic church.

Tuberville says; The true church of God hath had a continued succession from Christ J3ut the Protestant church, and so of all other sectaries, hath not a continued succession from Christ to this time. Judge what this man or any Papist ever said with sense and reason, to prove that the Eastern and Southern churches have no true succession. Are they not now of the same church and religion as ever they have been? All the change that many of them have made, hath been but in the entertaining of some fopperies, common to Rome and them : and if any of those, which you call sectaries can prove their succession, it destroys your argument and cause.

We will begin with him at the first century, and so to the second ; and if he can prove that Jesus Christ, or the Virgin Mary, or John I3aptist, or the apostles, or any one of the rest that he hath named, were Papists, much more all of them, I am resolved to turn Papist. But unless he intended to provoke his reader to an irreverent laughter about this abuse of holy things, one would think he should not have named John Baptist, who was dead not only before Rome had a church, but also before the time that Bellarmin and his brethren pretended that Peter received his commission, to be the universal head. Did not that writer know that Protes-

taiits can give him the same names, as for them ] And if printing them be proof, their proof is as good : if it be not, wliat proof shall we have / Our proof is the Holy Scriptures, written by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost in those times. Thence we prove that the fust church held the same belief as we have; and we will thence jirove that the catholic church was not then Papists. Why else do we still appeal to Scriptures, and they refuse to stand the trial of it any otherwise than as expounded by the pope, but that we are confident, and they diftident of them ? We know the apostles' faith from the apostles ; but the Papists will not know it but from the present church of Rome. They tell you the apostles were for them : but how know we that? by the testimony of the next age : and where is that testimony ? because the fourth age was of dieir mind ; and how prove vou that 1 because the present age is of their mind : but most Christians of the present age are against them : vet they are not of the church : it is only the present church of Rome ! but the present church of Rome represented in a general council may err, but the pope cannot err in appoving a council. So that the sum is this : if the pope himself may be judge, the apostles were Papists.

I make no doubt, though Bellarmin deny it, but that other churches can prove as good a succession as the Roman, as to bishops; and Bellarmin after all gives up this mark as insufficient to prove a true church. Lib. 3. de Hcclts. cap. 8. By his own confession then, succession will not prove the Romanists a true church.

As to a succession of religion, and a continuation of the catholic church, I am so lar from declining it, in argumentation, that I here solemnly profess to all Papists, who shall read these words, that, as soon as I shall

SEE ANY CERTAIN PROOF, BY CATALOGUE OR ANY OTHER WAY, THAT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH HATH SUCCES-SIVKLY FROM AGE TO AGE BEEN PaPISTS, I WILL

TURN Papist without delay: and I challenge

THEM TO GIVE US SUCH PROOF IF THEY CAN : Or it

they will prove that in the fust age, or the second, or third, the catholic church were Papists, I am resolved to turn Papist: but I am most confident that they can-

not prove that in any one age to this day, the catholic church were Papists.

CHAPTER XVI.

Diversity of opinion.

Another notable fraud of the Papists, is this : to con* found all their own errors and corruptions together, and then to instance in some of those errors that are common to them with some others, and to omit the essential parts of Popery. Thus they would make the world believe, that if they prove the antiquity of any points in difference between them and us, they do thereby prove the antiquity of Popery, and so of the succession : so they would make our religion essentially to consist in every inferior difference between us.

Suffer them not thus therefore to juggle in the dark, but distinguish between the essentials of popery, or the main difference between them and us, and the other errors, which are not proper to them alone.

Bellarmin opens his juggling, lib. 4. dc Eccles. cap. 9, where he pleadeth antiquity of doctrine as a note of the true church. Two ways we may by this mark prove our church. By showing the sentences of the ancients, by which we confirn) all our tenets, and refute our adversaries. But this way is most prolix, and obnoxious to many calumnies and objections : the other way is shorter and surer, by showing first from the confession of the adversaries, that our tenets are the doctrine of all the ancients. If the weakness or rashness of any Protestants be the Papists' strength, it is time for us to be more prudent : but if it be the Papists' unhappiness that cannot understand the ancients, but only from the pope or the Protestants, the fathers are fallen into the hands of babies as well as the Scrij)tures ; and the Protestants have too little wit if they will join with the pope in an abusive interpreting the fathers for tli*; Pa})ists. Bellarmin proceeds to cite Calvin, and the ccnturists, as giving them the fathers, in the point of freewill, Limbus, Con-

ciipiscence, Lent, lay baptism in necessity, &-c., therefore by our confessions antiquity is for the Papists. Tliis is their shortest and surest way. Is not here great diffidence in tlie fatliers, when they have more confidence in our sayings tlian their writings 1

But this jugghng will not serve the turn. Take up the essentials of Popery, and prove a catholic succession of them, and you shall win the day. I here again solemnly promise and protest, that when ever I see a valid PROOF OF A Popish succession of these following

POINTS, I will presently TURN PaPIST : OR OF ANY ONE OF THEM, I WILL TAKE UP THAT ONE. And

I provoke the Papists tliat boast of tradition, succession and antiquity, to do this if they are able.

1. Let them prove that the pope of Rome is appointed by Christ to be tlie universal monarch, sovereign, governor, head of the catholic church, and the vicar of Christ on earth, and holding the place of God himself, whom all must obey:—2, That the true and only catholic church is a society thus headed and governed bythe pope, and that no man is a true member of the catholic church, that is not the subject of the pope as universal monarch : nor can any other be saved, as being without the church:—3, That the church of Rome is by God's appointment the mistress of all other churches :—4, That the pope of Rome is infallible :—5, That we cannot believe the Scriptures to be the word of God or the Scripture doctrine to be true, but upon the authoritative tradition of the Roman church, and upon the knowledge or belief of their infallibility : that is, we must believe in the pope as infallible, before we can believe in Christ, who it is pretended gave him that infallibility :—6, That no Scripture is by any man to be interpreted but according to the sense of the pope or Roman church, and the unanimous consent of the fathers: —7, That a general council approved by the Pope cannot err; but a general council not approved by the pope may err :—8, That nothing is to us an article of faith till it be declared by the pope or a general council; though it was long before declared by Christ or his apostles as plain as they can speak:—9, That a general council hath no more validity than the pope giveth it:— XO, That no pastor hath a valid ordination, unless it be

derived from the pope :—11, That there are articles of faith of necessity to our salvation, which are not contained in the Holy Scriptures, nor can be proved by them :—12, That such traditions are to be received wiUi equally pious affection and reverence as the Holy Scrip-teres :—13, That images have equal honor with the Holy Gospel:—14, That the priests of the catholic church ought to swear obedience to the pope as Christ's vicar:—15, That the pope shall be a temporal prince : —16, That the pope and his clergy ought to be exempted from the government of princes, and princes ought not to judge and punish the clergy, till the pope deliver them 10 their power, having degraded them':—17, That the pope may disposess princes of their dominions, and give them to others, if those princes be such as he judg-cth heretics, or as will not exterminate heretics :—18, That in such cases the pope ma}^ discharge all the subjects from their allegiance and fidelity :—19, That the pope in his own territories, and princes in theirs, must burn or otherwise put to death, all that deny transub-staotiation, the pope's sovereignty, or other doctrines, when the pope hath sentenced them :—20, That the people should ordinarily be forbidden to read the Scripture in a known tongue:—21, That public prayers, praises, and other public worship of God, should be perfomed constantly in a language not understood by the people : —22, That the bread and wine in the eucharist, is transubstantiated into the very body and blood of Christ; so that it is no more true bread or wine, though our eyes, taste, and feeling tell us that it is :—23, That the consecrated host is to be worshipped with divine worship, and called our Lord God :—24, That the pope may oblige the people to receivt^ the eucharist only in one kind, and forbid them the cup :—25, That the sins called venial by the Papists, arc properly no sins, and deserve only temporal punishment:— 26, That we may be perfect in this life by this double pt^rfection ; to have no sin, but to keep all God's law perfectly : to superero-gate, by doing more than is our duty :—27, That our works properly merit salvation of God, by way of commutative justice, or by the condignity of the works as proportioned to the reward :—28, That priests should be

forbidden marriage :—29, Tliat there is a fire called purgatory, where souls are tormented, and where sin is pardoned, in another world:—'50, That in haptisin there is an implicit vow of obedience to the pope of Rome :— '31, That God is to be worshipj)ed ordinarily by the oblation of a true proper propitiatory sacrifice for the living and the d<uid, where the priest only shall cat and drink the body and blood o( Christ, while the congregation look on and partake not:—32, That the canon of Scripture is the same that is declared by the council of Trent.

lam resolved to receive as many of them, as they can prove that they were in all ages the doctrine of the universal church.

Till they perform that task, let them never more for shame call to us for catalogues or proof of succession. But if they are so unkind that they will not give us any j)roof of such a succession of Popery, we shall be ready to supererogate, and give them full proof of the negative, that there hath been no such succession of those thirty two points.

Certainly it bclongeth to them that sujDrrinduce more articles of faith, to prove the continuation of their own articles through all ages.

One of those articles, the pope's sovereignty, Tuber-ville proves in the first age from Peter's words. Act. xv. 7, 8, 9, 10. God chose Peter to convert Cornelius and his company : therefore the popo is the universal monarch. Are you not convinced by that admirable argument ? but he forgot that Bellarmin, Ragusius in Concil, Basil: and others say, "no article can be proved from Scripture, but fi'om the proper literal sense."

In the second age he hath nothing but the names of a few that never dreamt of Popery, and a canon which you must believe was by the apostles, that priests must communicate.

In the third age he nameth fifteen bishops of Rome, of whom the last was deposed for olVering incense to Saturn, Jupiter, &.C. but not a syllable to prove that one of those bishops was universal monarch ; much less that the catholic church was for such monarchy. But he tells you that the second and third age produced no councils; the greater deceivers are the Papists that have found us

councils then ; an^ so you have no succession proved. Yea, but, lie saith, they have successions of popes, martyrs and confessors, which is sufficient for their purposes.

See the strength of Popery! Rome had bishops, therefore they were the universal rulers of the church : Rome had martyrs and confc^ssors : therefore it was the mistress of all churches. Who can resist those arguments 1 but why did you not prove that your confessors and martyrs suffered for attesting the pope's sovereignty ? if they suffered but for Christianity, that will prove them but Christians, and not Papists. Thus to the confusion of the Papists, they have nothing to show for the succession or antiquity of Popery for the three first ages. Worse than nothing : for he comes in with decretals of some of their bishops: decretals unknown, till lately in the world: brought out by Isidore Mercator : but with so little cunning as left them naked to the shame of the world ; the falsehood of them being fully proved, and confessed by some of themselves. Here you see the first foundation of Papal succession, even a bundle of fictions, lately fetched whence they please to cheat the ignorant part of the world.

In the fourth and fifth ages Tuberville makes us amends for his want of proof from the three first. But what is that to a succession, while the three first ages are strangers to Popery 1 His first proof is from the council of Nice ; and what saith that'? it defined that the Son of God is consubstantial to his father and true God. And what is that to Popery ? It defined the pope's sovereignty : but how prove you that? In the thirty-ninth Arab, canon. O what consciences have those men that dare thus abuse and cheat the ignorant ! As if the canons of the first general council had never been known to the world, till Alphonsus Pisanus a Jesuit published them out of Pope Julius, and some Arabic book. Men that can make both councils and canons at their plejis-ure above a thousand years after the supposed time of their existence, never want authority. This is a cheaper way of canon—making in a corner, than to trouble all the bishops in the world with a great deal of cost and travel to make them. But if this be the foundation, the building is answerable. Zosiraus had not been acquaint-

led with those new articles of an old council, when he put his trick upon the sixth council of Carthage, where ibr the advancement of his power, though not to an universal monarchy, yet to a preparative degree, he laid his claim from the council of Nice, as saying, " if an ejected hishop appeal to Rome, tlie hishop of Rome shall appoint some ol tiic next province to judge; or ifyet he desire his cause to be heard, the bishop of Rome shall appoint a presbyter his legate, iSiDC." In that council were 217 bishops, Aurclius being President, and Augustin being one. They told the pope that they would not yield to him till the true copies of the council of Nice were searched : for those that they had seen had not those words, which Zosimus alleged. Hereupon they sent to the churches of the East; to Constantinople, Ale.fandria, Antioch, &c. for the ancient canons. Thence they received several copies which all agreed; but none of them had either Zosimus' forgery, nor the forged clause which Bellarmin has, much less the eighty canons of Pisan the Jesuit, but only twenty canons, which have not a word for the pope's sovereignty.

Zosimus knew not then of Pisan's canons, or else he would have alleged them; nor yet of Bellarmin's new part of a canon for the primacy of the bishop of Rome. Zosimus himself had not the faith, the wit or the memory, to plead either Scripture, apostolical institution, or tradition, for his privilege: but only a false canon of the council of Nice; as looking no higher it seems for his authority The Roman bishops early began both to aspire, and make use of forgeries to accomplish it. There was no such apostolic or church tradition for the Roman power, as masters of tradition now plead for; which all the catholic church must know. The whole council, with all the churches of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, &c., that is all save Rome were ignorant of that which Zosimus would have had them believe. Little did the church then believe the pope's infallibility. Upon the reception of the several copies of the Nicene canons, they modestly convicted Zosimus of falsehood: and the council resolved against his usurpation. In the African councils, the epistle of Cyril of Alexandria, and Atticus of Con-

14

stantinople: and the epistles of the council to Boniface and Celestine, before they had received their answers from other churches about the Nicene canons, they declare that would not suffer that arrogancy.

That council looked no higher for the power of the pope and other metropolitans, than to the council of Nice, and thought it a good argument, that the pope had no such power, because no council had so subjected the African church: therefore they never dreamed that Christ or the apostles had given it to him. They evince the nullity of his pretended power out of the Nicene council. They took him not to be above a council, having power to dispense with its canons. By the Nicene council, not some, but all business must be ended where they begin ; and therefore there is no appeal to the pope. He that saith otherwise unjustly chargeth the Holy Ghost to be wanting to the church. They took it for a sufficient reason against appeals to Rome, because all might appeal to a provincial or general council. They thought it a thing not to be imagined, that God should give his spirit to any one man, even to the pope to try and judge, and deny it to a council, general or provincial: so that they little dreamed of the Roman infallibility or power of judging all the world. They thought the pope to be incapable of this universal judgment, were it but by distance, and the natural impediments of age, sex, and many the like, that must needs hinder the necessary witnesses from such a voyage or journey: so that they give an argument from natural necessity against the pope's pretended sovereignty and judgment. They plainly make such judgments to be invalid for want of necessary witness and means of prosecution. Whereas the pope might object that h ' could prevent all this by his legates, they flatly rejected that too, and say they find no such thing constituted by any synod: so that they both rejected the pope's trying and judging by legates in other metropolitans' jurisdiction ; and they took it for a sufficient ground to do so, that there v,-as no council had so constituted ; much less a Scripture constitution, or apostolical tradition. If the pope may neither judge them by himself nor his legates, he may sit still. They convict

the Roman blsliop of stMidin<jf thcni a false canon of the Nicene council. Tln-'y show us wljat way tlie po|>e then took to get and Weep his power: by sending to the secuhir commanders of the provinces, in whom they had special iulcrciit by their residence at Rome, to execute their wills by force. The council plainly accuse them of introducing secular arrogance into Christ's church, that better loveth simplicity and humility and light. They plainly require the bishop of Rome to do so no more. They tell him that Faustinus remaining any longer in Africa will not stand with that honesty and moderation of the bisliop of Rome which is necessary to brotherly charity.

I give you the plain passages of the council, and screw no forced consequences from them. Now let Binius and liis brethren make childicn believe that it was not appeals to Rome, but a troublesome manner of trial that the council was aofainst: and tell men that take him for infallible, of a Nicene canon for the pope's su-premacyand monarchy: and persuadeidiotsanddoiards that the catholic church in the fourth and fifth ages was for the universal government of the pope.

The first Constantinople council, saith Tuberville, decreed the bishop of Constantinople to be chief next the bishop of Rome.

Then that primacy was but the institution of councils. It was grounded on a secular reason ; for so sailh the canon, because it is new Rome. The pope's primacy was but honorary, and gave him no universal government; for the primacy here granted to Constantinople, gave them no government over Alexandria, Antioch, &c. And the second canon expressly limits all bishops without exception to their own diocess. The third canon affirmed, that according to the Nicene council^ in every j)i'oi'iiice the provi?icial cou?icil ought to administer and govern all things. See how clearly the succession of the Roman monarchy is disproved to that time.

The next proof is from the third act of the first council of Ephesus, that Peter yet lives and exercises judgment in his successors. The words, that Peter was the head of the apostles, though nothing to their pur-

pose, are neither spoken nor approved by the council, but only by Celestine's legate. The council, though specially moved by his concurrence to extol Celestine to the highest, yet never spake a word of his governing pov^rer or sovereignty, but only his consent: and when they mention the Roman church, it is only their consent which they predicate. They extol Cyril equally with Celestine. Binivs, Tom. 2. Cap. 15.

The next witness brought is the council of Chalce-don, as calling Leo, universal archbishop and patriarch of old Rome, and sentence is pronounced against Dio-scorus in the names of Leo and St. Peter. 'I'his is one of your common frauds. It was not the council that called him universal archbishop, but two deacons in the superscription of their libels, Theodorusand Ischirion. Were they the catholic church?

By universal archbishop is plain that they meant no more than the chief in dignity and order of all archbishops, and not the governor of all. That universality was only in the empire, and not over the world.

That very council in its canons not only gives the bishop of Constantinople equal privileges with the bishop of Rome, but expressly saith that Rome received this primacy of order from a council, because it was the seat of the emperor. When Bellarmin comes to that canon, he plainly charges that farnous fourth general council with falsehood, and says that the pope approved not this canon. But approved or not approved, if that was the catholic church representative, their testimony is valid to prove that there was then no reception of the Roman monarchy as of God, but con-trarily a mere primacy of dignity and honor given it newly by men.

In the sixth and in the seventh age though then the sovereignty was claimed by Boniface, he citeth no council for it neither.

In the eighth age he cites the second council of Nice, as approving an epistle of Pope Adrian, wherein he saith that the Roman church is the head of all churches. Whether Adrian himself by the head meant the chief in dignity, or the governor of all, is a great doubt. Tharasius seems to imply the contrary, as if his see

had llie privilege only of being the primate of Rome, and not tlie ruler of the world. That council did not openly own the Papal sovereignty.

I am content that any impartial sober person may judge, whether here be a satisfactory proof of a catholic succession of the Papal sovereignty, when through so many ages, they bring not a word for any succession at all; much less that it was owned by the catholic church : and least of all, that all the rest of Popery was so owned.

Having showed you that Papists cannot prove any succession, or continuation, or tradition of their religion, let us consider their silly shift, in other points.

I have already proved that ignorance or difference about many points not essential to Christianity, may consist with our being of one religion and catholic church, and therefore such differences are nothing to the point of succession of the catholic church or religion : and Papists tolerate or plead for the toleration of greater differences among themselves, which yet they affirm to consist with the unity of faith.

The Jesuits maintain, that if a man do but believe in their pope and church as infallible, he may not only as some say, be ignorant of some article of the creed itself, and yet be a true catholic, and be saved, but also believe a f^ilse article as from 3od and the church. The former is commonly taught not only by such as Suarez, that say the article of Christ's Descent into Hell is not to all of necessity to salvation, but by many others in the doctrine of implicit faith. The latter clause you may see among others in AlbertiJius the Jesuit, Corol-lar. p. 250, where his objectors put this case : " Suppose twenty bishops preach to a countryman a false article, as if it were spoken by God and the church: that proposal of the twenty bishops is so sufficient, that the countryman prudently formeth an evident practical judgment, and morally certain, to believe with a speculative assent the article proposed by the twenty bishops, for the authority of God as the formal reason. Three absurdities seem hence to follow. That the countryman should be obliged under mortal sin, to believe the twenty bishops, and so the precept of faith should bind

14*

to believe a falsehood. The countryman should be in God's grace without faith. In grace, because he commits no mortal sin, yea he obeys the command of believing: yet without faith, because he believes a false-.hood opposite to faith, and so loseth faith. God should concur to deceive. To the first Albertinus an-swereth that its no absurdity that the command of faith do oblige to believe a falsehood. To the second he saith, that the countryman doth not lose his grace or faith; because the falsehood believed is not formally opposite to the true faith, but materially." A man therefore may hold an article opposite to the faith materially, and yet not only be a true Christian in grace and faith, but also in so doing obey by accident the command of believing, so be it he believe in their church, If that be so, with what face can these men say that our church or religion is new, or not the same with the Greeks, &c., when we have the same formal object of faith, and differ in no essential material point ? See here their lubricity and partiality.

The second Council of Nice that decreed for image worship, expressly decrees, that Latria, divine worship is to be given only to God : Thomas Aquinas Sum. 3. q. 25. art. 3 & 4, maintaineth that Latria, " divine worship is to be given to the image of Christ, and to the Cross that he died on; and to the sign of that CrossJ^ Here is an article of their faith expressly contradicted: yet Aquinas is a member of their church. If any say ne is no member, it is proved past doubt, for the pope hath canonized him for a saint : so that now it is a part of their religion to take him for a true believer. Albertinus, as he thinks, proved, that though in many other matters of fact the pope be fallible, yet in the canonizing of saints he is infallible, because of some promise of God's special assistance. Abundance of such instances might be brought to prove, that the Papists oicn men as true believers, who deny or contradict articles of their faith. But what need we more, than that France and thousands elsewhere are yet members of their church, that deny the Latcran and Florentin definition for the pope's supremacy above a general council ? and when most Papists hold that angels are incorporeal, contrary

to the definition of the said second Council of Nice. Therefore by their own law, we may say, that those were of our religion that differed from us in nothing that is essential to the faith.

Papists tell us tiiat Jerom. Austin, Ambrose, &c., held the invocation of saints. If any desire the departed saints to pray for them, as they do the living, we have reason enough to take it for their error.

The primitive church was unacquainted with the Romish prayer to saints. Till the end of the fourth century, they are not able to prove that ever three men were for prayer to the dead at all, except such a conditional speech in an oration as Gregory Nazianz hath; if holy souls have any f.are or feeling of such things as these, receive this oration, Orat. 11. Usher in his answer to the Jesuit, page 418, saith, that fo/ niju parts of the first four hundred years, the Jesuit is not able to 'produce one true testimony out of any father ivhcrehy it may appear that any account at all v:as made of it. He citeth the full express words of the fathers of those first ages against praying to saints, as Origen in Jos. Horn. 16 In Rom. lib. 2. cap. 2: and Contr. Celsum. lib. 8, lib. 5. Tertullian Apol. cap. 30. Tertullian and Cypiian on Prayer. Athanasius Orat. 4. Cont. Arium. Eccles. Smyrn. apud Euseb. Hist. lib. 4.

When prayer to the dead came in, it exceedingly differed trom the Romish prayers to the dead. Those adorations and devotions offered by the Papists to the Virgin Mary, are enough to make a Christian tremble, and are horrid blasphemy or idolatry.

The reason why in the Old Testament men were not wont to pray to saints, Bcllarmin saith, was because then they did not enter into Heaven nor see God. Bellar. dc sand. Beat. li. 2. cap. 19. Saurez Tom. 2. disp. 42. Sect. 1. But as the chief doctors of the church for divers ages were of opinion that the saints are not admitted into Heaven to the clear sight of God before the day of judgment, as most of the Eastern churches do to this day, therefore they could not be for the Popish prayer to saints.

Men may be of the same faith and church \vith us, who differ and err in as great a matter as this. The

council of Florence defined it, that " departed souls are admitted into heaven to the clear sight of God. Yet Stapletonand Francis. Pegna.a Castro, Medina and So' tus, ajffirm that Irenceus, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Cle-mens Ronianus, Origen, Ariibrose, Chrysostome, Austin, Lacta?itius, Victorinus, Prudentius, Theodoret, Aretas, Oecumenius, Theophylact, Euthymius, and even Ber-nard, have delivered the contrary sentence. Staplet. Defens. Eccles. author, cojit Whitak. lib. 1. cap. 2. Pegna. Part 2. Director. Inquisitor, com. 21. ■

All those are against the Popish invocation of saints, so they were against that which now is determined to be of faith, whence I gather that the Romish faith in-creaseth, and is not the same as heretofore. That they had not this article by tradition from any ol those fathers, or from the apostles by them, unless from the Scriptures. That men that err in such points as are now defined by conncils to be of faith, are yet accounted by Papists to be of their church and faith: and therefore they may be of ours, notwithstanding such errors as this in baud. Whence the Papists are a perjured generation, that swear not to e.xpound Scripture but according to the unanimous consent of the fathers.

The council of Laodicea condemned them as idolaters who prayed to angels, Can. 35. The full testimonies of Greg. Nyssen, Athanasius, Epiphaniiis, <^v. are against praying to saints and angels, and the detection of Bellarmin's fraud, that pretendeth the fathers to speak of the Gentile idolatry, when they mention the Virgin Mary and the saints, and say expressly they were not to be adored; may be found in Usher's Answer; 470—472.

But for all ttat Tahervillc hath fathers for his adoration of angels and saints. And who are they? The first is Dionysius: to which I answer, there is not such a word in the place cited in Dionysius. We are for praying the saints to pray for us too, that is, those on earth: and the words cited by him, mention not the saints in heaven. Dionysius is a spurious apocryphal book : not once known and mentioned in the world till six hundred years after Christ, as Bellarmin himself saith; Lib. de Scriptor, Eccles. de Dionysi. et lib. 2. de Monach. cap. 5.

The second is Clevi. Apostol. Conslit. 5. The words spealv only of honoring- the martyrs, which is our unquestioned duty; but not of praying to them. It is an apocryphal forgery, and neither the apostle's nor Clement's work which he citeth. Let him believe Bcllar-mill de scriplor. Eccles. p. 38, 39, who saiih that in the Latin church, those constitutions are of almost no account ; and the Greeks themselves, canon 2. Trul. reject them as depraved by heretics, and the receiving of them misleadeth the Ethiopians.

The third testimony is from Justin's second Apol. It is not praying to angels that Justin intends, but giving them due honor. His intent is to stop the mouths of heathens that called the Christians impious for renouncing their gods ; to them he replieth, that we yet honor the true God, and his angels, &c.

His testimony for the third age is only Origen in his Lamentations. Origen there mentioneth the saints, but not the dead saints. It is the saints in the church on earth whose prayers he desireth. You cite a forgery that is none of Origen's works. Not only Erasmus saith that this lamentation was neither written by Origen, nor translated by Jerom, but is the fiction of some unlearned man, that by this trick devised to defame Origen. Baronius Annal. Tit. 2. ad an. 253. witnesseth that pope Gelasius numbers it with the apo-cryphals.

The next exception to be considered is, praying for the dead : which they say the ancient church was for.

We are for the commemoration of holy lives and sufferings of the saints. And the first sort of the ancients' prayers for them began here, as the occasion. We are for thankful acknowledgment of God's mercies to the departed saints, and to the church by them. And the first prayers for them were such as those. Usher hath proved that they were saints, supposed to be in heaven or paradise, and not in purgatory, that were then prayed for : and therefore that it was not the Popish praying for tormented souls that was then practised: and therefore their prayers then besides commemorations and thanksgivings were the petitioning of all those following mercies for them which are not to bo

received till the resurrection. Bellarmin himself proving that though we were certain that the blessed souls shall have a raised glorified body, and be justified in the last judgment, yet may it be prayed for, because it is yet future. Now' we are far from being of another church or religion than those thai hold such an opinion as this. Usher when he had cited many testimonies saith ; " in those and other prayers of the like kind, we may descry evident (ootsteps of the primary intention of the church in her suppl ications for the dead: which was that the whole man, not the soul separated only, might receive public remission of sins, and a solemn acquittal in the judgment of that great day; and so obtain both a full escape from all the consequences of sin, the last enemy being now destroyed, and death swallowed up in victory, and a peifect consummation of bliss and happiness: all which are comprised in that short prayer of Paul for Onesiphoras, though made for him while he was alive, the Lord grant unto him that he may find mercy of the Lord in that day. Yea, divers prayers for the dead of that kind are still retained in the Roman offices; of which Medina thus writes : "Although I have read many prayers for the faithful deceased, which are contained in the Roman Missal, yet have I read in none of them that the church doth petition, that they may more quickly be freed from pains: but I have read that in some of them, petition is made, that they may be freed from everlasting pains. Again there be other prayers wherein petition is made, that God would raise the souls of the dead in their bodies unto bliss at the day of judgment."

Here you may see the differences between the prayers for the dead which are used by the I^apists and by the Eastern churches to this day.

Another point that they much ch illenge us about is; the veneration or adoration of images, relics, and the cross, to which I may join peregrinations to places esteemed by them to be otjeminent holiness. Concerning peregrinations, Gregory ISyssen wrote purposely against going on pilgrimage to Jerusalem. He adviseth even the retired monastics, in those countries that were near to Judtea, to forbear such pilgrimages as dangerous

and unnecessary, and not at all commanded in the Scripture. Tlie l^apists did as lon"^ as they could persuade the world that this epistle was not by Gregory; and when they were made ashamed of that, they would expound it as prohibiting- pilgrimages to none but the monastics : and sure if it should be forbidden them, then much more should others be forbidden, that have not the leisure, and pretend not to their devotions.

But it is one thing to use images, and another to use them Popishly, which is to make them mediate objects of divine worship, yea to worship the very image itself, and the cross and sign of the cross, with the same worship as we do him that is signified by them : so that we confidently affirm, that the primitive church did make no use of images at all in the worship of God ; nor en-dui'e them in the place of worship. When they were first brought in, the Popish use of them was renounced and detested. Clemens Alexandrinns Protrcpt. ad Gent, saith that, we are plainly forbidden to use that deceitful art of painting or image making :—we have no sensible image made of any sensible matter, but such an image as is to be conceived with the understanding. Origen against Celsus lib. 7. is large and plain against the use of images, as the Protestants are. The Eliber. concil. C. 36. saith it seemeth good to us, that pictures ought not to be in the church, lest that which is worshipped or adored should be painted on walls. Some Papists would fain find a sense for this canon contrary to the words: but Melch. Canus plainly saith, that the council did not only imprudently but impiously make this law to take away images. Loc. Theol. lib. 5. cap. 4. cone. 4.

They have no better shift to save their credit, than to set their own school-men and general council together by the ears. The second council of Nice, that did most for images, did openly renounce the adoring them with divine honor, and Tharasius solemnly professed, they did refer and repose faith and divine worship in the true God alone. Aquinas Sii7n. 3. 9. 25., maintaineth that the images of Christ, and the cross, and the sign of the cross, are to be worshipped with divine worship. What saith Tuberville to this? This is a mere school

opinion and not of faith with us: urge not therefore, whai some particular divines say, but hearken to the doctrine of God's church.

Is not this a gross kind of juggling, that would never down if devout ignorance and implicit faith had not prepared the people? You see here that to contradict the determination of a general council, is not of faith with them. But is it not against your faith ? Do you give leave to mere school opinions to contradict general councils ? See here what's become of the Popish faith? If the determinations of councils be not articles of faith with you, then you have no faith, but give up your cause : and if they be, then Aquinas and his followers are heretics. Then what's become of the Pope's infallibility in canonizing saints, that have sainted Thomas Aquinas, who is proved a heretic by your law: so that your cause is gone which way ever you turn. What it is to pray to saints, when some of them are made heretics by your own laws ? Then also see, at what unity the church of Rome is among themselves, when it is the very common doctrine of their learned schoolmen, which contradictelh a general council. What a holy church you have, when your most learned divines are thus made heretics. Usher's allegations of Arundel's provincial council at Oxford, 1408. Naclantus in Rom. cap. 1. saith : " We must not only confess, that the faithful in the church do worship before the image, as some cautiously speak, but that they adore the image, without any scruple: yea and that they worship it with the same worship as the prototype; so that if it be worshiped with divine w^orship, the image must have divine worship." Cabrera, part 3. Thorn., qu. 25. art. 3. aisp. 2. num. 15, saith : " it is of faith that images are to be worshipped, in churches and without: and we must give them signs of servitude and submission, by embracing, lights, offering incense, uncovering the head, &c. Images are truly and properly to be adored, with an intention to adore tliemselves, and not only the samplars represented in tliem. This conclusion is against Duiandus and his followers, whose opinion by the moderns is judged dangerous, rash, and savoring of heresy. Medina reporteth that Victoria reputed it

heretical: but our conclusion is the common one of divines. If images be improperly only adored, then they arc not to be adored simply and absolutely; which is manifest heresy. And if images are to be worshipped only by way of remembrance, because they make us remember the samplars, which we thus adore as if they were present, it would follow that all creatures are to be adored with the same adoration as God—which is absurd. The opinion of Thomas, that the image must be worshipped with the same act of adoration, as the samplar which it representeth, is most true, most pious, and very consonant to the decrees of faith. Cabrera adds, that this is the doctrine of Thomas and all his disciples, and almost all the old schoolmen, and particularly of Cajetan, Capreolus, Paludanus, Fer-rariensis, Antoninus, Soto, Alexander, Alesius, Albertus, Magnus, Bonaventura, Richardus de media villa, Dio-nysius Carthusianus, Major, Marsilius, Thomas, Wal-densis, Turrecremata, Clichtovaeus, Turrian, Vasquez; &c. Azorius saith, it is the constant opinion of divines. Institui. Moral, torn. 1. lib. 9. cap. 6. In the Roman pontifical published by the authority of Clement, it is exprsssed, that the legate's cross shall have the right hand, because divine worship is due to it. Here the pope himself is a heretic; and the pontifical contains heresy: and all the schoolmen are heretics, by contra-dictingthe determination of the second general council at Nice, and the doctrine which they say, is the doctrine of God's church. Such is the faith and unity of th« Papists,

But they also maintain "that though all those worship the very cross and Images themselves, and that with divine worship, yet there be some that do but worship God by the image. Do you think that rational pagans did not know as well as you that their images were not gods themselves, and so worshipped them not as gods, but as the representers and instruments of some deity ? Lactantius Instit. lib. 2. cap 2. brings them in saying thus ; we fear not them, but those whom they represent, and to whose names they are consecrated. Arnobius thus ; It is the gods that we worship by images. Au-gustin thus reporteth the pagans saying, I do not wor-

15

ship that stone, nor that image, which is without sefls^/ Psal. 113. cojic. 2. I worship neither the image nor a spirit in it; but by the bodily Hkeness I behold the sign of that which I ought to worship. That many of them renounced the worshipping of devils, appearelh by Auguslin's report of their words, in FsaL 96. " We worship not evil spirits : it is those that you call angels, that we worship, who are the powers of the great God, and the ministers of the great God." To whon\ Austin answers; would you would worship them, that is honor them aright, then you would easily learn of them not ti3 worship them. Few could be so silly as to think there were as many Jupiters or ApoUos as there were images of them in the world. So that you see here that some of the pagans as to image-worship disclaimed that which the Papists ascribe to them, divine worship.

Oh but, saith Tuberville, tell us not of particular doctors, but of the doctrine of God's church. What! not of Thomas 1 not of the army of school divines before mentioned.? not of the common judgment of divines'? for so they call it; not of that wliich is of faith, or consonant to it, and whose contrary is heresy, or savors of heresy 1 not of Pope Clement VIII. and the Roman pontifical? Wonderful! are all those no body in your church ? O admirable harmony that is in your united church !

But you agree to leave out the second commandment lest the very words should deter the people from image worship ; and to make an irrational division of the tenth to blind their eyes. Yet you cry up the testimony of the fathers, when you are fain to hide one of the ten commandments, so that thousands of your poor seduced followers, know not that there is such a thing. No wonder if you cast away Gregory Nyssen's epistle against pilgrimages; and Epiphanius in the end of his epistle to Joban. Hierosol. against images, and if \'asquez 3. Thom. disp. 105. c. 3. contrary to the plain words feigns that it was the image of a profane or common man that Epiphanins pulled down ; and Al. Cope Dial 5. c. 2L says, that the epistle is counterfeit and not by Epiphanius; and if Bellarmin de imag. c. 9. and Baronius an. 392 say that this part of the epistle is forged : and if Alphons.

Ti Castro, cont. IlcPros. do imag. reproach Epiplianius for it as an Iconoclast. So well are yon agreed in tlie confutation of tlic lathers' testimonies, that any way will ■serve yonr turn, though each man liavc his several way. Vasquez plainly confesseth, *' indeed the Scripture doth forbid not only the worship of an image for God, but also the worshipping the true God in an image : but this commandment is now repealed, and therefore under the Gospel we mav do otherwise." Vasq. lib. 2. de Adorat. Disp. 4.' f. 3. 'Sect. 74. 75. et c. 4. Sect. 84.

Many Christian churches do reject images from their churches as well as Protestants. More reject statutes that reject not pictures. Many that keep them, worship them not, nor God in them, or by them, as by a mediate object. General councils have been against images, that want nothing bnt the pleasure of the pope, to make them of as good authority as the council that was for them. That second council that was for them, of Nice, condemn oth the schoolmen and Pope Clement himself f^s heretics, for worshipping them, or the •cross with divine worship. Of the judgment of the ancient catholic church against the Popish use of images, peruse what Cassander, an honest Papist hath written to that end, Consultat. de imag. et simulac. "In reference to the images of saints, it is certain that at the beginning of the preaching of the Gospel, neither among Christians nor in the churches, images were not used, so Clement and Arnobius testify. At length, pictures were introduced into the churches, under the pretext of explaining the sacred iiistorical facts." He also alleges antiquity against the Popish use of images.

CHAPTER XVII.

Popish false interpretations.

Another of the Papists' deceits, and one of the principal juggleries with which they support their cause is this' False interpretations and applications of all the sayings of the fathers, which they force to countenanct their usurped supremacy.

1. Any claim that ambitious prelates have made to power, they use as an argument for their universal sover-eio-nty. There was too much pride and ambition in prelates, even in some that otherwise might be good men. Zosimus would have extorted a confession of his usurped power, and a submission to it from vVurelius, Augus-tin, and the rest of the African council: but he could not do it. Leo I. and Gregory I. and others, were very busy for the extending of their power: the Roman prelates long endeavored to put tlie halter on the Africans* heads, and about the French before they got them under. Shall those ambitions men be witnesses ? and because they would have had more power, doth it follow that it was their due ?

2. If they find that any distressed churches or bishops sent to Rome for help, it is gathered thence that they took the pope to be Christ's vicar general. As when Chrys-tom sent to Innocent, and Basil and the rest in the East did send often for help into the West; because Rome during the emperor's residence there, was the place where life or death was last pronounced on every man's cause by secular power; and therefore the Bishop of Rome had the greater opportunity to befriend other churches :—afterwards Rome had a great secular influence on the empire :—because in the diyisions of the Easterns about Arianism, they thought that the countenance of the orthodox in the West might have done somewhat to turn the scales :—and because the Bishop of Rome being taken for the patriarch of the first place, his voice might do much against an adversary.

Eusebius, Mclctiiis, Basil, and the rest of the orthodox, being both pestered with the Arians, and all to pieces also among themselves, sent for help to the West. Basil. Ep. 69. But whom? and for what ? not to the bishop of Rome only, nor by name, but equally to the bishops of Italy and France, without any mention of the Roman power. Not that the pope might cecide all by his sovereign power, which certainly was so near a way to their relief, that no wise man can imagine them so mad as to forget it, if it had been a thing then known and afjproved of : but only they desire that some may be sent to help them to be the stronger party in a synod, or

^t least some one to comfort them, and put sonic countenance on tlicir cause* Epist* 70, Basil writetli liiinself in the name of tiie rest: but to whom 1 to the hisho{)S ©f France and Italy ; and France before Italy ; without taking notice of a universal head of the church at Rome. What doth he importune them fori not that the pope would decide the controversy: but that they would acquaint the emperor with their state, because the West had an orthodox emperor, and the East an Arian, or send some to see how it stood with them. So that it was but either help from the emperor, or countenance from the number of bishops because they were over-voted, tliat they desired. Epis. 74, Basil again writes to the bishops of the West, no more to the Roman bishop than the rest: and he giveth those reasons; " for what we here speak is suspected, as if we spoke through private contention.—But for you, the fartlier you are remote from them by habitation, so much credit you have with the people, whereto is added that the grace of God helpeth you to relieve the oppressed : and if many of you unanimously decree the same things, it is manifest that the multitudo will produce a certain reception of your opinion." Wonderful! if there were a vicar general of Christ at Rome, that it never came into their mind to crave his decision or help, as such.?

O but say the Papists, that was because they had to do only with the Arians, that cared for no authority that was against them. But would the Arians have so much regarded the votes of the French and Italian bishops, or a few men sent from them, and yet not regard the head of the church 1 The Arians had heard of this headship, if any had. And would not the orthodox desire so much as a word from Rome for this advantage ? But it is false that against the Arians only they called for help. They expressly say; that it was also because they were divided among themselves, by personal quarrels. How importunately doth Gregory Nyssen afterward call for help from others, and telfFlavianus, in his epistle to him, of their misery as if all were lost 1 And the only sad instance was, that Helladius had proudly neglected him, and made him stand at his door, when he went to visit him, a great while before he was let in ; and then did not

15*

bid him sit down ; and then did not speak to him first but two or three strange angry words: That was the great business. Basil. Epist. 77. chided the Western bisliops, lor not sending to them, nor regarding them and their communion : and to touch their pride, he adds, *• We have one Lord, one faith, one hope. Whether you think yourselves the head of the universal church, the head cannot say to the feet, I have no need of you, or if you place yourselves in the order of other church members, you cannot say to us, we need you not." Would you believe that the Papists cite this passage of Basil, for their headship, because here is the word head! When it is plain, tliat Basil by the head means but llie c/iiefesi part, and not the sovereign power. It is also most evident, that he speaks to all the bishops of the West, and not to the Roman bishop ; and that he doth it as a smart reproof of their arrogancy, and not in any ap[)robation at all of their usurped power.

3. When the Papists find any heresy condemned by tlie Bishop of Rome, they cite tliis as a testimony of their sovereignty. As if other patriarchs and bishops condemned them not as well as they ; or as if we knew not that the church desired the most general vote against heretics, and therefore would be loth to leave so great a bishop out.

4. When they find the pope excommunicating foreign bishops, they cry up this as a testimony of the headship : as if to refuse communion witli another church or bishop is an act of jurisdiction over them. Other bishops have also excommunicated the pope: Niccphorus lib. 17. cap. 26., sailh Vigilius, proceeded to that insolence, that ho excommunicated Mennas for four months. Mennas did the same by him ; but Justinian being moved to anger with such things, sent some to lay hold on him. Vigilius being afraid of himself, fled to the altar of Ser-gius the Martyr, and laid hold on the sacred pipes, and would not be drawn away till he had pulled them down. But by the mediation of tlie Empress Theodora, tho pope was pardoned, and Mennas and he absolved one another. A fair proof of llie vicarship ! Pope flonorius was condemned tor an heretic by two or three general councils.

5. When they meet with any big words of tiieii own popes, they take it for a proof of the vicarshi[): as if big words did j>rove authority. Or as if we knew not iiow lowly they sj)oke to those tiiat were above them. Gregory was high enough towards tliose that he tlioiight he could master: but what low submissive language doth he use to secular governors above him ? VV hat llattering language did his successors use to the most base murderers and usurpers of the empire 1

6. Another Roman deceit is tliis : When thej find any mention of the exercise of the thriving Roman power, over their own diocess or patriarchal circuit, they would hence prove that universal power over all. By that rule the patriarcii of Alexandria or Constantinople may prove as much.

7. When they meet with passages that speak of the elevation of their pope to be the first patriarch in the Roman empire, or any power that by the emperors was given him, they cunningly confound the empire with the world, and especially if they find it called by the name of the world, and they would persuade you that all other Christians and churches on earth, did ascribe as much to the Bishop of Rome, as the Roman empire did. It is true that he was in the empire, acknowledged to be first in order or dignity, because of Rome the seat of his episcopacy, especially when general councils begfan to trouble themselves and the world about such matters of precedency. They usually called the empire all the world : and from such passages would the Papists prove tlie primacy at least of the pope over all the world. But put these Jugglers to it, to prove if they can, that beyond the river Euphrates, and beyond the bounds of the Roman empire, the pope did cither exercise dominion, or was once so niuch as regarded by them, any more than any other bishop, except there were atiy adjacent island or country that had their dependence upon the empire. They will not deny that the church extended much beyond the empire. Let them prove if they can, that ever any of those churches had any regard to the Roman bishop any more than to another man. Let them tell you where any empire out of tho line of the imperial power, was any whit subject to tho pope.

8. But their chief fraud is about names and words* When they meet with any high complimcntal title given to the Bishop of Rome, they presently conclude that it signifieth his sovereignty.

".Sometimes the Roman bishops are called Summi Pon-tifices, the chief popes : and hence some gather their supremacy. But Baronius their chief flatterer tells in Martyrolog. Roman, April, 9, that it was the ancient custom of the church to call bishops not only pontifices popes, but chief popes. And then citing a passage of Jerom. Epst. 99, he adds, " Those that understand not this ancient custom of speech, refer those words to the po])cdom of the church of Rome."

The names Papa, Pope, Dorainus, Pater sanctissimus, beatissimus, dci amantissimus, ifcc, were commonly given to other prelates.

What if Rome were called the mother of all churches? Basil saith, that the church of Ccesarea is the mother of all churches in a manner. Jerusalem has oft that title.

Sometimes they find Rome called Caput Ecclesiaruni, and then they think they have won the cause. But it is no more than that priority of dignity which not Christ, but the emperors and councils gave them, that is intended in the word. It is called the head, that is the chief seat in dignity, witliout any meaning that the pope is the universal monarch of the world.

The pope is called the archbishop of tlie catholic church, or the universal bishop ? Three flattering monks at the council of Chalcedon, do so supersciibc their libels : but they plainly mean no more than the bishop that in order of dignity is above the rest, and many particular churches are oft called catholic churches. Tliere is a diflercnce between a catholic church and the catholic church. Tiie prelate of Constantinople had that title, even by a council at Constant, an. 518, before the 15isliop of Rome had it publicly, or owned it. It was settled on the patriarch of Constantino[)le to be called the oecumenical or universal patriarch. Who knoweth not that emperors gave such titles at their pleasure ] Justinian at one time would give the primacy to Rome, and at another time to Constantinople, saying, " the church of Constantinople is the head of all other churches."

An. Dom. 530. C de Episcopis. I. 1. lege 24. Justinian who sonictinies calls Rome the head, when the sixth ircneral council iiad condemned Vigilius Pope of Rome, permitted Theodora his empress to cause him to he fetched to Constantinople, and dragged about the street in a halter, and then banished, till they had forced him to subscribe and submit to tlie council: even as they had deposed Pope Silverius his predecessor. Baronius himself mentioned a Vatican monument which calls Agapetus cliief bishop so doth it call Mennas, the apostolic universal bishop : which Baronius sailh, doth mean no more tlian that he was universal over his own provinces: and if that be so, any bishop may be called universal. One council of Carthage decreed that the bishop should be called, " not the chief priest, or the chief of priests, but tlie bishop of the first seat." And how long will they shut their eyes against the testimony of two of their own popes, Pelagius and Gregory who condemned the namo of universal bishop 1

They find the church of Rome called apostolic, and »o were others as well as that.

The pope is called the pillar of the church ; and what of that ? so are many others as well as he ; as all the apostles were as well as Peter? the church is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets. The pastors of the church were ordinarily called the pillars and props of it.

When the Papists read their popes called the successors of Peter, they take this as a proof of their sovereignty. Whereas Peter himself had no such sovereignty. They succeeded him not in his apostleship. They are called Paul's successors as well as Peter's. Others are called Peter's successors too as well as they, by the fathers. And other bishops ordinarily are called the apostles' successors, and other churches called apostolie churches.

Hcsych. Hierosol. apud Plwtium Cod. 2G9. says of Andrew the apostle; "the first begotten of the apostolic choir, the first fixed pillar of the church ; the Peter of Peter, or the Rock of Peter, the foundation of the foundation ; the principal of the principal, who called before he was called, and brought others to Christ before ho was brought to him by any others."

Hesychius also saith of James apud Photium Cod, 275. "with wliat praises may I set forth the servant and brother of Christ, the chief emperor or commander or captain of the new Jerusalem ; the prince or chief of priests, the president or principal of the apostles, the crown or leader among the heads, the principal lamp among the lights; the principal planet among the stars ? Peter speaketh to the people; but James giveth the law, or sets down the law." Where is more than this said of Peter himself] much less of the pope?

CHAPTER XVIII.

Popish For:^eries; and Corruptions of authors.

Another of the principal deceits of the Papists is this; they forge and corrupt councils and fathers, aiid then cite those forgeries. Be careful therefore how you receive their allegations, till you have searched and know the books to be genuine, and the particular words to be there, and uncorrupted.

1. Tiiey obtained the opportunity of possessing so many libraries, that they might the easilier play this abominable game. But God in mercy hath kept so many monuments of antiquity out of their hands, partly in the Eastern, and partly in the reformed churches, as suffice to discover abundance of their wicked forgeries and falsifications.

2. Of their forging canons and feigning councils which never were as Concil. Sinucssan. Concil. Rom. sub Silvester; Ushfr^s Ansiccr to the Jes. p. 12, 13. Of their forging Constantineh Donation and Isidore Mcrcator''s forging a fardel of decretals; and of their falsifying and corrupting in the doctrine of the sacrament, read the works of Ambrose, Chrysostom, Fulbert, Raban, Bertram, Ratrannus, &c., who detect their horribly impious cheats. But their Indices expurgatorii will acquaint you with mu.^h more. Yet their secret expurgations are worst of all. James^ corruption of councils.

3. Andreas Schottus the Jesuit publishing Basil's

JUGGLING.

179

works at Antwerp A. I). 1616. with Jesuitical fidelity, left out the epistle, in whicii is the followinij^ passage. Speaking of the Western bishops lie saith, "verily the manners of proud men grow more insolent, if they bo honored. If God he niercifid to us, what other addition have we need of t hut if (Jod's anger on us remain, what help can the pride of the West bring us? when they neither know the truth, nor can endure to speak it; but being prepossessed with false suspicions, they do the same things now, which they did in the case of Marcellus, contentiously disputing against those that taught the truth, but for heresy, confirming it by their authority. Indeed I was willing, not as representing the public person of the East, to write their leader Damasus, but nothing about church matters ; that 1 might intimate that they neither knew^ the truth of the things that are done with us, nor did admit the way by which they might learn them. And in general, that they siiould not insult over the calamitous and alllicted, nor think that pride did make for their dignity, when that one sin alone is enough to make us hateful to God." In which you may see the Roman power in those days, in the consciences of Basil and other fathers in the East.

4. How Tertullian reverenced them, you may see lib. ticpudicit. where he condemns Zepherinus. The Asian bishops condemned A'ictor, and IreucKus reproved him. Cyprian and Firniilian condemned Stephen : Marcellin-us was condemned by all. Liberius was oft cftiathema-tized by Hilary. Tiie resistance of Zosimus and Boniface by the Africans, «fcc. shows plainly in what esteem the now infallible universal head was then among the fathers and in all the churches. Wlien the Papists mention such passages, what juggling do they use? sometimes they silence them: sometimes they pass them over in a few words that are buried in a heap of other matters : and sometimes they bring in forgeries to obscure them. But commonly they make a nose of wax of councils and fathers, as well as of Scripture, and put any ridiculous sense upon them that shall serve their turn, though perhaps six among them may have six expositions. An epistle of Cyril of Jerusalem to Austin is forged by one that Molanus calleth a barbarous impostor ; His-

tor. Imag. I. 3. c. 36. about the miracles of Jeroni^ where purgatory and other errors are befriended. When Cyril died thirty years before Jerom. Yet Suarez and other most learned Papists make use of that forgery. Mendham'*s Policy of Home.

Of their abominable legends the wiser sort of ihem-selve« are ashamed. If any ancients have abused the church by shameless forgeries, the Papists make use of such as confidently as if they were the word of God. Let any man but read the life and miracles of Thecla, and try his faith upon it, whether he be able to believe that "Thecla stood so long at the window to hear Paul while all those daily applications and orations were made to her 1 that Demas and llermogenes were there to stir up the people against Paul as a deceiver, under the cloke of being his companions; that any of those orations recited are true, that her mother Theoclaea, and her lover Thamiris were on the sudden so cru<^l as to burn her, while they are said so much to burn in love to her; that when Tliecla had lormed her body like a cross, and cast herself into the flaming pile, the flames in reverence of the cross, became as a chamber to her, covering her like a vault from the people's sight, and not approaching her ; and that the earth making a grevious noise, the showers and hail destroyed the people, and Thecla went her way without observance, finding Paul and Onesiphorus hid in a sepulchre at prayer for her: that Paul permitted lier to cut her hair, and change her habit, and become his fellow traveller ; that Alexander the governor was so inflamed with her beauty at Autioch, even before she came in full sight of the people in the city gate, that he could not forbear, but presently must leap upon her like a mad dog: that she tore his cloak and threw ofl' his crown, and so saved her virginity ; that for this she was cast and tied to wild beasts, and the lions couched to her, and one lioness fought for her, and killed the rest that assaulted her ; that yet they turned more upon her : that she leaped into the fish pond among the devouring gea calves ; and that (ire from heaven came down into the water, and there made her a chamber and saved her from those sea beasts ; that Falconilla's soul appeared to her mother Tryphaeua to beg Thecla's prayers that

she might be admitted into heaven, telling her how much Tiiecla was admired in heaven. That at Thccla's prayers she was admitted into heaven ; Thelca was again tied to the wild hulls, and fire set to them to enrage them, the fire killed them, and burnt the bonds, and she was unhurt. That Thecla again put on man's clothes, and sought Paul: that Paul hereupon pronounced her an apostle and ordained her to go and preach the Gospel, and appointed her to one Pagan city; that she fixed at Seleucia, and there converted and baptised many ; and at last after many miracles did not die, but entered alive into the earth, which opened itself for her in the place where the lioly table stood ; that after her death she wi'ought one and thirty miracles; appearing to Basil, and encouraging him when he was weary, to go on in the writing of her praises, and plucking him by the ear, and so curing his headache, which else would have prevented his oration in her praise the next day."

I have instanced but this one case of Thecla, because it would be endless to tell you of their fictions. Nor do I mention this as one of their legends, nor as a piece of Metaphrastes, but as the works of an ancient father. Now either this is Basil's work, or it is not. If it be not, then what trust is to be given to the Papist antiquities, and supposed fathers: for this is one of them, and this story is vindicated by Petrus Pantinus, and Baronius, An. 47, who bringcth a whole army of fathers to attest the acts of Thecla, and approveth of this of Basil's, and the like of Metaphrastes. Two testimonies trouble him shrewdly. One is Tertullian, Baptis. cap. 18. who saith thus, "but if any women read the pretended writings of Paul, and the example of Thecla, for women's liberty to teach and baptise, let them know that a presbyter in Asia, that framed that writing, putting Paul's name instead of his own, was cast out of his place, being convicted of it, and confessing that he did it in love to Paul."

The other is Jerom's testimony Script. Eccles. who quoting the fore-cited words, saith, "the travels therefore of Paul and Thecla, and the whole fable of the baptised lion, we reckon among Apocryphal writings: for how can it be, that Luke the inseparable companion of the apostle was ignorant of this only among all his matters ?"

16

But Baronlus thinks that tliose arc not the same books that TertuUian and Jerom speak against: and why so '? because here is no mention of Thecki's preaching and baptising, nor of the lion baptised; and because so many fathers attest the story. But this is a visible falsehood, contrary to the express words of the story, which feign Paul to have sent her to preach as a true apostle, and mention her baptising the people of Seleucia. This shows how unfit the fathers are to be the authors of our faith, or to be esteemed infallible, who so easily believe and recite the forged stories of an Asiatic presbyter, even when TertuUian had before revealed the deceit.

But if this book was written by Basil of Seleucia, and was not spurious, then they who rest ujion the Holy Scriptures alone for the matters of their faith, do take a surer and wiser way, than they who build on the credit of eredulous impudent fabulous fathers.

By this you may see that the records and testimonies from antiquity are not to be trusted : even as Zosimus' report of the Nicene canon to the African council was not, who proved it a forgery, and so rejected it. When the writings are only in their keeping, and their interest call-eth them to deprave them, they are not to be trusted ; who venture to corrupt those which are in the hands of the Christian world.

CHAPTER XIX.

Popish Calwmuj.

Another of the Popish devices is, when they have laid their oion cause upon so many forgeries^ and uphold it by so many false reports, to make the people believe that it is we that are the liars, and that ice are not to be believed in any thing that ice say of them, and that we misreport the fathers, belie the Roman catholies: and therefore no man should read our books, or discourse with us so as to afford us any credence. We cannot quote what is in their own writers, but the ignorant people are taught to say we slander them. Though

u'C cilc the book, aiul puijjc and line, and tell them tliat they were jirinted at Konie, or Antwerp, or Paris, by men of their own profession, yet they believe us not, for they are instructed to hold us for liars, that we may be incaj)able of doing them good. If we cite any of the fathers, they tell us wo misallege them, (tr have corruj)t-ed them or they say no such thing. If we show them the books published by their own doctors, and licensed by their superiors, and printed by Papists, yet they will not believe us. And so they are taught the easiest way in the world to repel the truth, and confute those that would do them good. It is no more but to say, "you lie," and all is done.

In such a case as this, what is there to be done 1 ignorance and incredulity thus purposely conjoined, are the wall of brass that is opposed to our endeavors. To what purpose should we speak to them that will not hear? In such a case 1 know but two ways. 1. Endeavor to revive the stupified humanity and reason of those men : and ask them, is religion the work of a man or of a beast'^ of a wise man or of a mad man ? Is it a reasonable or an unreasonable course ? if it be reasonable, why then will you go without reason upon other men's bare words 1 but if you are so liulc men as to venture your souls without reason, you should not venture against it? would you rest on the bare word of one of those men, if it went against reason? if so then you renounce your man-^ hood. But suppose you will be so unreasonable, yet you have your five senses still ? If a priest shall tell you that the crow is white, and the snow is black, or that you see not when you know^ you sec, will you believe him ? If you will believe them before your eyes, and taste, and feeling, then I have done ^vith you. Who can dispute with stocks and stones, or men so far forsaken of God, as to renounce all their senses ? but if you will not believe a Papist against your eyes, and other senses, \vhy then do you believe that bread is not bread, and wine is not wine, when the eyes, and smell, and taste of all men say it is ? and if your senses tell you that your priests deceive you in one thing, you should not be so confident of them in olher things, as to believe aod hearken to none but them.

2. Try whether you can procure the priests to discuss those points hefore the incredulous people, that so they may hear both sides speak together. Get a conference between them, and some experienced judicious divine. But this will hardly be obtained. For if it be to dispute with one that is able, they pretend a danger of persecution ; and no promise of security will satisfy them. But if it be a weak inexperienced man that challengeth them, then they will venture, and take the advantage.

If nothing else can be done, the best way is to offer them some small book against Popery to read. If they are so captivated that they will neither hear nor read, and their leaders will not be drawn to a dispute, I know not what to do but leave them, and let them take what they get by their unreasonable obstinacy. They are unworthy of truth that set no more value upon it.

CHAPTER XX.

Popish Miracles.

Another of their deceits is hi/pretended miracles. If they hear of a girl who hath hysterical })assions in any violent degree, they presently go to cast the devil out of her, that so they may make deluded people think that they have wrought a miracle. And weak people, and perhaps the diseased woman herself, may be so much unacquainted with the disease, as verily to believe the priests, tlf^t they have a devil indeed : and so turn Papists when the cure is wrought, as thinking it was done by the fineer of God.

The same course they take also in distractions of othe^" diseases ; and sometimes persons are trained up by them to dissemble and counterfeit a lunatic or possessed state. Because Tuberville pleads their miracles, I shall revive the memory of one of the great miracles that was done among their proselytes in the parish of Wolverhampton.

At Bilson, in the parish of Wolverhampton in Staffordshire there was a boy named William Perry, who througli Popish devices seemed to be possessed with a

devil, about thirteen years old, but of special wit above Jiis age. In his fits he seemed to be deaf, and blind, writhini^ his mouth aside, continually groaninc^ and panting, and when he was pricked, pinched, whipped, he professed not to feel. Ho seemed to take no food that would digest, but with it cast up rags, thread, straw, pins, &c., his belly almost as Hat as his back, his throat swelled and hard, his tongue stiff and rolled up towards the roof of his mouth, so that he appeared always dumb, save that once in a fortnight or three weeks he would speak a few words. It was thought he was bewitched by Joan Cocks, because he would discern when that woman was brought into the room, though it were secretly done, as was tried before the grand jury at Staflord. lie would not endure the repeating of tlie tirst verse of Jolm. In the beginning was the loonl., c^'c, but other texts he would endure. When the parents had been wearied with him, and the country flocked in to see him, a priest of the Romish religion was invited to cure him. The priest exorcised him, praying in Latin over him, hanging a stone about his neck, washing him with holy water, witch water, and anointing him with holy oil, &c., which seemed to ease him, and make him speak, and sometimes cure him for the time. They hallowed all his meat and drink. He would not so much as eat raisins, or smell to flowers, unless they were blessed by the priest. He told them that while the puritans stood by him he saw the devil assault him in the shape of a black bird. The priest required the chief fiend to show himself: then the boy put out his tongue swelled. Tiie priest commanded him to show the people by the sheet before him, how he would use those that died out of the Roman church : whereupon he pulled and bit and tossed the sheet, till the people cried out and wept. Then he commanded the devil to tell him, how he did use Luther, Calvin and John Fox : and he played the same part more fiercely than before. Then the priest commanded him to show what power he had of a good catholic that died out of mortal sin : and then he thrust down his arms, and hanged down his head and trembled. The boy promised when his fit was over, that he would live and die a catholic, persuading his parents and friends, <fec. In this manner three priests one after

16*

the other followed the cure, still succeeding, but yet ilot curing him ; that they might draw the country to a longer observance of them, and preached to them in the house, that the miracle might be the more famous. For there were many devils in him,they saidyto be cast out; and it stopped the cure because the mother would not promise them to turn Papist if they cured him. But in the mean time the supposed witch was brought to trial at Stafford assizes, 1620, before Judges AVarburton and Davies. But the judges desired Bishop Morton then present to take care of the boy^ who took him home to his castle at Eccleshall, and after certain weeks time, having determined to try him, the bishop came to the boy, and told him that he understood that he could not endure the first verse of John. And, saith he, " the devil understandeth Greek as well as English, being a scholar of almost six thousand years standing, and therefore he knows when I recite that verse in Greek :" and so calling for a Greek testament, he read the 12th verse, and the boy thinking it had been the first, fell into his fit: and when that fit was over, the bishop read the first verse, and then the boy liad no fit, thinking it had been some other verse. And thus they proved him a deceiver, and the boy was much confounded ; but pretended more distraction : and then that he might get away, he complained of extreme sickness, and water wa? in the urinal, as black as ink, groaning when he made it: but the third day after, they spied him mixing ink, and nimbly conveying away the inkhorn. When they came in upon him, and found him in the conveyance, he broke out into tears, and was suddenly cured ; and confessed all, how he had been taught his art, and how he did all, and confessed that his intent was to be cured by a priest, and to turn Papist.

But before the bishop had discovered the knavery, one of the conjuring priests wrote the narrative of the' business, entitled A faithful relation oj the proceedings of the catholic gentlemen with the hoy of Bilson, shoiving, <fec. And they begin with. Not to us, O Lord, but to thy name give the glory ! And so they proceed to make their report o{ it, for deluding the people, as a miracle. At last the bishop brought the boy at the assizes, 1621,

to ask pardon openly of God, and the woman accused by hini, and of ilie conntiy cheated by liini, and tliere was an end of tliat Popisli miracle. Abundance more such 1 could give you out of certain records; but I recite this for the sake of the Papists of Wolverhampton, where Tuberville lived.

For miracles, if you regard not us, yet open your ears to a Jesuit that speaks the truth. Joseph Acosta de tcmporib, novis. lib, 3. c. 3. " To all the miracles of Antichrist, though he do great ones, the church shall boldly oppose the belief of the Scriptures : and by the inexpugnable testimony of tliis truth, shall by most clear light dispel all his jugglings afe.clouds. Signs are given to infidels^ Scriptures to believers; and therefore the primitive church abounded with miracles, when infi ^els Were to be called: but the last, when the faithful are already called, shall rest more on the Scripture, than on miracles. I will boldly say, that all miracles are vain and emj)ty, unless they be approved by the Scripture; that is, have a doctrine conformed to the Scripture. The Scri})ture is of itself a most tirm argument of truth.'*

If miracles be so much to be looked at, why not give us leave to observe them ? The same miracles that vou boast of, do testify against you, if they be true. Prosper makes mention of a miracle, which TlnjrcBus de DcBtnoniac. p. 76, recites was done by the sacramental wine. " A person possessed by the devil was cured, after many other means used in vain, by the drinking of the wine in the Eucharist." Doth not this miracle justify us that give the people the wine, and condemn you, that refuse to give it them 1 Many other miracles the fathers say were done by the sacrament in both kinds received, which condemn vou that forbid it.

CHAPTER XXI.

Popish DeceitfIllness.

Another of the Papist ways of deceiving is, by int' pudent lies and slanders against their adversaries; which they vent with such confidence^ that the seduced

people easily believe them. They who are taught to believe their priests against their own seeing, hearing, feeling, tasting and smelling, will believe the vilest lies that they are i)leaseci to utter, in cases wh.^re the miserable people are unable to disprove them.

1. In a manuscript of the Papists which I lately re* ceived there are those words ; "Luther having richly supped, and made his friends merry with his facetious conceits, died the same night. This is testified by Coch-leus in vita Luthtri. John Calvin, a branded sodomite, consumed with lice and worms, died blaspheming and call-ingf upon the devil. This is registered by Sclilusselburge and Bolsec. These were the ends of the parents of the Protestant and prcsbyterian pretended reformed religions."

As if their own tongue must sentence them to hell, in the very words before they say, " all liars, their part shall be in the pool burninaf with fire and brimstone, which is the second death;" and so make application of it to the Protestants, as being liars; and when they have done, conclude with the two fore-cited impudent lies of Luther and Calvin. The like words of Calvin, Daily hath in his papers to Charles I. the whole writing being stuffed with such impudent falsehoods, thnt one would wonder that human nature should be capable of such wickedness, and that the silly people should swallow dov»'n such heaps of deceits. Not those two alone, but multitudes of Papists have written those lies of Luther and Calvin. Thyrteus the Jesuit in his book dc Dccmoniacis^ part. 1. cap. 8. p. 21, tells us; "the same day that Luther died, tliere was at Gheola a town in Brabant, many persons posessed of devils, that waited on tiieir Saint Dymna for deliverance, and were all that day delivered: but the next day they were all possessed again; whereupon the exorcist or some body asked the devils where they had been the day before; and they answered, that they were commanded by their prince to be at the funeral of their fellow laborer Luther. And for proof of this, Luther's own servant that was with him at his death, looking out at the window, did more than once, to his great terror, see a company of ugly spirits leaping and dancing about without: and also that the

crows lollowcd the corpse all the way with a jj^reat noise." O wonderful |)atienco and mercy of God, that sufler such most ahominahle liars to live, and doth not cause some sudden vengeance to hefall them! I will tell the case of those two servants of Christ that are thus reviled, even as their master was hefore them, who was said to do miracles hy the power of the devil.

Luther was taken with a great pain in his breast, about the mouih of the stomach, and thought his death when it came would be sudden ; which made him say : "strike Lord, strike mercifully, for I am ready." Having preached his last sermon at Wittemberg, Jan. 17, he took his journey the 23d, to Isleben, whither he was called. When he came thither, he was grown so weak, that they almost despaired of his life ; yet by the use of fomentations he had so much ease, as that he preached sometime, and did other work from Jan. 29, to Feb. 17. The last day of his life, though he was weak, yet he sat at the table with them, and at supper his discourse was upon the question, whether we shall know one another in heaven.'' Which he affirmed and proved, in that Adam knew Eve as soon as he saw her, that she was flesh of his flesh: and therefore much more shall we know one another in heaven, &c. After supper, he withdrew himself as he used, for private prayer ; but the pain of his breast increased on him. When he had taken a medicine, he lay down on a couch and slept sweetly two hours, and then went to his chamber, saying to those about him ; "Pray God to preserve the doctrine of the Gospel to us; for the pope and council of Trent have stange contrivances." When he was laid down and had slept a while he awakened, and found by the increase of his pain, that h^ was near his end, and spoke to God as followeth, in their hearing: "O my heavenly father, the God and father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the God of all consolation, I thank thee that thou hast revealed to me thy son Jesus Christ, in whom I have believed, whom I have professed, whom 1 have loved, whom I have honored, whom the Pope of Rome and the rest of the rabble of the ungodly do persecute and reproach : I beseech thee, O my Lord Jesus Christ, receive my soul. O my heavenly father, though I am takeii from this life, and

though my body must now be laid down, yet I know certainly that I shall abide with thee forever, and that none can take me out of thy hands." Then he said ; "so loved God the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believeth in him, should not perish, but have everlasting life." Then he repeated part of Psalm 68 : and when he had drank a medicine that was given him, he said; "I go hence : I now return my spirit unto God," presently adding, "Father into thy hands I commend my spirit, thou hast redeemed me O God of truth." And so he died as if he were setting himself to sleep, without any sign of farther pain. But when they saw him dying, Jonas and Cselius asked him, "do you die constant through Christ in his doctrine which you have hitherto preached ?" and he answered. Yes ; and never spoke more. When he was dead at Isleben ; Count Mansfield would have kept his body, but the duke of Saxony would not suffer him, but caused it to be carried back to Wittemberg, and tliere with great solemnity interred.

This is the true report in brief of Luther's death, delivered to the world by those who stood by him, and were eye-witnesses. Yet impudent lying Papists have persuaded their followers that the devils were seen dancing about him, that when he was buried, there was a horrible thunder, and the body was taken away out of the coflEin by the devil, and a stink of brimstone left behind; with more such stuff as this, which they have printed, and of which one would think even the father of lies would be ashamed.

Of Calvin, not only those before mentioned, but also Bolsec, Surius, Prateolus, Demochares, Lindanus, Sanc-tesius, Cahierus, and others publish to the world, not only that he was an epicure, but a sodomite. Lessius the Jesuit impudently calls Christ to witness, that shall judge all men according to their works, that he doth not devise these things out of his own brain, but from good authors, and forty years current fame. His authors are those Papists, Bolsec, Brigerus, Stapleton, Campian, Duraeus, Surius, and Reginald. Hath hell any greater calunmies than those to fill the mouths or writings of men with all I

As (or the time when they say lie was stigmatized for sodomy, it was when he was a Papist, and therefore if it liad been true, it had been a greater dishonor to them than to us. But it is a mere forgery of the devil and a friar. Bolsec a friar seemed to turn Protestant, and coming to Geneva, began to preach the Pelagian doctrine there, and openly contend against the pastors in tho congregation ; and being confounded ])y Calvin, llie magistrates imprisoned liiu), and banished him for sedition. Then he went to the neighboring towns, to play the same game there : but the magistrates of Berne also ban-islied him out of their country. Whereupon he turned Papist again, and when Calvin was dead, he wrote alt those abominable lies of him. And all the rest took up the report from that one lying lieretical Papist: and so it became current fame with them, as if it were as true as the Gospel. Whereupon our writers challenged them to search the records at Noviodunum, where they say the thing was done, and prove that ever there was such a thing ; or else bear the open shame of liars. They can bring no proof, but call on us to disprove it; though the city are Papists, and haters of Calvin. But the Papist dean of that city. Jacobus le Vasscur, published at Paris, 1633, the annals of their cathedral church, v.nd therein pouring out his hatred against Calvin, doth yet out of their records clear him of all those accusations, and lets the world know that there was never any such thing, and that they had no crime at all against him, bui thathe turned from the Papists; and that the mayor of the city went away with Calvin, when he was forced to fly from his native country. He recites all the passages of Calvin's life there, but professeth that they had no more against him. Thus God confounded the lying Papists by one of themselves, and the records of that city, where they said the thing was done. And yet they believe one another, and carry on the lie to this day.

Arastrowther the chaplain to the King of England's ambassador with the emperor, being at Vienna, heard the Jesuits and others repeating confidently that slander of Calvin : whereupon he opened to them that evidence against it, and satisfied them of the falsehood.

Riret Sum. Conlr. against Baily. Jesuita Vaputans cap. 2.

As for the life of Calvin after he forsook the Papists, if you will believe the city of Geneva, and all the ministers and others that were about him, in his life and at his death, who knew better than Bolsec a fugitive apostate Papist that was his enemy, and then far off, you may see at larse in Melchior Adamus, and Beza, the description of a shining burning light of which Rome hath not to boast. He was a man of admirable judgment, industry, and piety. When he had forsaken his own country for the Gospel's sake, and taken up in Geneva, and planted the Gospel there, with Farel and Viret, at last the ungodly part getting the head, the ministers were banished ; and so he settled in another city. The four bailiffs of Geneva that banished the ministers, within two years were ruined by the judgments of God. One of them accused of sedition, seeking to escape througli a window, fell and was broken to death. Another was put to death for murder. The other two being accused of mal-adminis-tration, fled and were condemned. Calvin was sent for, and intreated to return to Geneva, which by importunity, and Bucer's persuasion, he yielded. There was he continually molested by the ungodly, and loved by the good. The malignants whom he would restrain by discipline from drunkenness, and other wickedness, were still plotting or raging against him, and called their dogs by his name. But shame was slill the end of their attempts. His revenge was to tell them, " I see I should have but sorry wages if I served man : but it is well for me that I serve him that always performeth his promises to his servants." He preached every day in the week each second week, and read three days a week a divinity lecture. Every Thursday he guided the presbytery; and every Friday at a meeting he held an expository conference and lecture; so that tiie whole came to almost twelve sermons a week. Besides this, he wrote epistles to most countries of Christendom, to princes, divines and others ; and all those great volumes of the most learned judicious controversies, commentaries, and other treatises, which one would liave tiiought might have been work enough for a man that had lived an hundred years,

if ht3 had done no other. Many heretics ho confuted, and some convinced and reduced. lie set up among ministers a course of teaching every family from house to house, of which he found incredible fruit. For all this his labor he endured the affronts, contradictions, and reproaches of the rabble, and sometimes was beaten by them. Because he would not administer the sacrament to ungodly men, that were lulers in the place, he was at first banished, and after threatened, and continually molested by them, and railing fellows set to preach and write against him. He always used a very spare diet: and for ten years before his death did never taste one bit, but at supper, as his constant course: so that every day was with him a better fast than the Papists make on their fasting days. By this extreme labor, speaking, and fasting, and watching-, for he dictated his writings as he lay in bed much, he overthrew his body ; falling first into a tertian fever, and then into a quartan ; and after that he fell into a consumption, with the gout and stone, and spitting of blood, and the disease in the hemorrhoid veins, which at last ulcerated by over-much fasting, speaking, and use of aloes; besides the head-ach which was the companion of his life. In those sicknesses he would never forbear his labor, but when he was persuaded to it, he told them, that he could not bear an idle life. And when he was near to death was still at work, asking those that in-treated him to forbear, whether they would have God find him idle ? Under all those pains of gout, stone, cholic, headache, hemorrhoids, consumption, &c. those that were about him testified to the world, that they never heard him speak a word unbeseeming a patient Christian. The worst was that oft repeated word, "how long, Lord! how long!" as being weary of a miserable world. Witnesses he had enough ; for he could scarce have rest for people crowding to him to visit him. On March 23, he went among the ministers to their meeting, and took his farewell of them there. The next day he was wearied by it: but the twenty seventh day he was carried to the court, to the senate of the city; where he made a speech to them, and took his farewell of them, with many tears on both

17

sides. April 2, he was carried to church, and staid the sermon, and received the sacrament. Afterwards the senate of the city came to him, and he made a heavenly exhortation to them. On April 25, he dictated his will. His library itself, and ail his goods, amounted scarcely to three hundred crowns. May H, he wrote his farewell to FarelL May 19, all the ministers came to him, with whom he sat and did eat, and cheerfully took his leave of them. On the twenty-seventh of May his voice seemed to be stronger, and so continued till his last breath that day, which was with such quietness as men compose themselves to sleep. The next night and day tlie city magistrates, ministers, scholars, people and strangers, were taken up in weeping and lamentation. He was buried according to his desire in the common church yard, without any monument or pomp ; and hath left behind him such a name, as in spite of all the devils in hell, and all the Papists on earth, shall be precious till the coming of Christ: and such waitings hath he left as are the comfort of the disciples of truth, and the shame of the reproaching adversaries.

This is that Calvin who is so hated by the bad, and loved and honored by the good: whom those Papists have called an epicure and sodomite, and said that he died blaspheming, and calling upon th€ devil, and was eaten with lice and worms. Is not God exceedingly patient, that will suffer such wretches to live on the earth? what man could they have named since Augus-tin, yea since the apostles' days, that was more unfit for such a slander than Calrin ? yet because Bolsec, who was banished and turned Papist, hath written those things against him, the rest take them up as confidently, as if the infallible chair had uttered them.

But yet if you think Bolsec is more to be believed than those who lived with Calvin, and the city of Geneva, who had continual access to him, I will give a testimony which shall shame the Papists that have a spark of modesty. Hear then what other Papists say, that knew better, or made more conscience of their words.

Florimund Raimund a Papist of Bourdeaux, or the Jesuit Richeome that wrote in his name, wr iting for

the pope and ai^aiiist Calvin, hath tliese words of liim: "Under a dry and lean body he had a sharp and lively wit; ready in answering; bold in attempting; a great faster ; even from his youth, whether for his health to overcome the lieadache, or for his studies. There is scarce a man found that ever matched Calvin in labors : for the space of twenty-three years, in which he remained in Geneva^ he preached every day once, and twice on the Lord's day often times. And every week he read public lectures of divinity besides ; and every Friday he was at the conference of the pastors: the rest of his time he spent cither in writing books, or answering letters."

Papirius Massonius a learned Papist, who wrote Calvin's life ; saith of him, "no day almost passed in which he did not preach to the citizens. Thrice every eight days, as long as ho lived, he professed or publicly taught divinity in the schools; being laborious, and always w^riting or doing something. Of a weak body, but worn by watchings, reading, writing, meditations, diseases, business, preachings. He took very little sleep, and therefore much of his works he dictated in bed to his servant that wrote them from his mouth. He did eat but once a day; and confessed that he found not a more present or surer remedy for his weakness of stomach and headache. His clothing was of small price, to cover him rather than adorn him. At Worms and Ratisbon he exercised the strength of an excellent wit with so great applause of the German divines, that by the judgment of Melartchton and his associates, by a peculiar privilege, he was called the divine. He wrote as much and as well as any man of the contrary parties, whether you respect number, acuteness, language, sharpness, emphasis or subtilty. Not a man of all his adversaries, whether catholics, anabaptists, Lutherans, Arians, or the forsakers of his party, that wrote against him, did seem to match him, in gravity of writing, and weight of words, and sharpness in answering his principles. He almost terrified Pighius himself discoursing of free will, and Sadaletus."

Papists tell us a story how Calvin hired one in Geneva to take on hinj to be dead, that he might have the

honor of raising him from the dead. This the Jesuit Thy-rseus de D^emoniacis writes, and it goes among them for a truth ; from the report of Bolsec. But Massonius confuteth this also, and saith that Baldwin knew nothing of it, who lived at Geneva, andaftei turned Papist, and was Calvin's enemy: and other reasons he giveth to disprove this and the other slanders that were raised of Calvin; saying, that they were but vulgar writers, that study or love to reproach or speak evil, that vend those things.

As they have done by those, so by others also. When Beza was eighty years of age, a false report came to the Papists that he was dead : whereupon Claudius Puteanus with his Jesuitical companions wrote a book, that at his death he turned Papist and renounced his religion. So that the old man who lived seven years longer, wrote against them, to prove that he was not dead, nor turned Papist. Those be the means by which men are recDuciled to the church of Rome.

They have printed also a story that Calvin's own son being bitten by a mad dog, was sent by his father to one of their saint's images for cure, when no other means would serve; and being cured, he turned Papist: but the world know that Calvin never had a son. Also they tell us of a saying of Luther's, that "this cause was not begun in the name of God, nor will it be ended in the name of a God ;" which Luther spoke of Eckius and the other Papists, yet those shameless liars confidently publish that he spoke this of himself

They annex that Luther would have men not contain, but he vehemently detcsteth it, and urgeth the contrary, telling th m that God no doubt will enable them to be continent, if they will use his means. Serm. de-Matrimon. They forgot that the fifth supposititious epistle of their Clement pleading for the community of all things, adds, "among those all, no doubt wives and husbands are contained."

Of the horrid lies of Genebrard, Possevin, and other Papists against Peter Martyr, Beza, Calvin and others, see Raynolds. de Idololatria Rom^ Eccl. 5.

When the fall of their house at Blackfriars had killed their priest^ and such abundance oi the people

who were hearing- him in the midst of the sermon ; they printed a book to persuade the people beyond sea, that it was a company of the heretics or puritans, that were killed at the hearing of one their preachers.

When the Gunpowder Plot was in hand, they contrived presently to give it all abroad that the puritans did it. Clark^s Mirror of God^s Judgments.

When Fisher the Jesuit had held his conference with Featly and White, there being present two earls; one of them, the Earl of Warwick, having business shortly after beyond sea, fell unknown into Weston's company, at Saint Omers, who presently told him for news, how Fisher had confounded the Protestant doctors, and that two earls and so many people were turned by it to the Church of Rome; not knowing that he who heard him was one of the two earls, and that there were not so many people there, and how they were confirmed against Popery by that dispute. When the Earl of Warwick brought home that jest, Weston hearing what sport was made with it in England, wrote an excuse for his lying.

Their very worship of God is composed of lies, and is that acceptable worship? Their offices and legends are stuffed with fictions. Cassander saitK : " so few of the relics in all Germany vvojild be found true ones if examined, that it is better quite to take off people from the veneration of them ;" instancing in one that was worshipped as a saint, and upon inquiry was found to be the bones of a thief.

Agobard of Lyons, complained about eight hundred years ago, that the " Antiphonary used in his church had many ridiculous and phantastical things in it: and that therefore he corrected much of it: cutting off what seemed superfluous, or light, or lying, or blasphemous " Agobard. ad Cant. Lugd. de Correctione Antiphon. Lindan made the like complaint; " Not only apocryphal matters out of the gospel of Nicodemus and other toys are thrust in, but even the secret prayers, and alas for shame and grief, the very canon varying and redundant, are defiled with the most filthy faults."

Therefore, as thou lovest thy soul, trust it not on the bare reports of such liars, but try before thou trust; and

give not up thy sense and reason to men that make sa little or so ill a use of their own.

CHAPTER XXII.

Translations of the Bible.

Another of their Deceits is to quarrel with our Translations of the Bible ; and make the people believe that we have so corrupted it, that it is none of the word of God and so they openly scorn it, and deride it.

Though learned men can soon confute them by vindicating the text as in the original languages, and then vindicating our translation, yet the common disputant need not put them and himself to so much trouble If they will but let the law of God contained in the Holy Scripture be the rule by which our difference shall be tried and decided, we will cut short the rest of the controversy, and take it wholly together ; and we will stand to the vulgar Latin, which themselves applaud: and that shall be the rule between us. Rather than they shall shift off' the unlearned by these tricks, we will admit of their own translation, which the Rhemists have composed. Only their commentaries and conceits shall not be taken into the text as part of the word of God. That quarrel is quickly at an end. The Scripture is so full against them, that no translation that makes it not another thing, can be on their side. Kidder's "Reflections on the French Testament, printed at Bourdeaux."

CHAPTER XXIII,

Popish Reproaches of Protestant Ministers.

Another of the designs of the Papists is io bring' all the faithful pastors of the churches into contempt, or suspicion at least, icith the people, so that they may

draw them to refuse our helps, and the Papists may deal with them alojie, ivhoni they know they are easily able to overreach. Though our people have not that absolute dependence upon their teachers as theirs have, yet an ordinate dependence is necessary to them, or else God would never have appointed teachers and pastors for his church, The Papists dare not trust their followers so much as to read a Bible in their vultrar tono-ue : much less to read our writinofs acrainst their errors and impieties. Their priests and friars ordinarily do not read them; nor commonly the writings of their own party: nor the strongest of those that are written against us : for fear lest the objections should prove too hard for the answer, or lest they should understand in some measure, the truth of our doctrine. Sandys, in his Europa Specul, tells how hard he found it, to meet with the works of Bellarmin himself in any book-seller's shop in Venice or other parts of Italy; but our people have all leave to keep and read the Papist writings. We dare venture them upon the light upon equal terms: but yet we know them to be insufficient, for the most part, to defend even plain and necessary truths, against the cavils of adversaries that overmatch them in learning and other abilities. Now lest we should but afford them our assistance, the Papists' principal design is to bring them into false conceits of the ministers, and make us odious to them ; that they may neglect our help, and the easier hearken to other teachers. If they can but prevail in that design, the souls of our people are like to be undone.

The more is it to be feared, lest at last they should this way prevail, both because of the sin that lieth on ourselves in too reserved and negligent a doing of our work; and because of the great obstinacy and unprofitableness of the people, that hate the light, and unthank-fully despise it, or will not obey it, and work by it while they may.

The designs of the Papists against the ministry are these. They principally endeavor to delude the rulers of the land, and set them aginst them.

They labor by scoffs and nicknames to make them odious. As they were the authors or chief fomenters

of the old scorn under the name of Puritans, so are they of many more of late. If you hear men set themselves of purpose to scorn or vilify the ministry, they are either secret Papists, or their deluded servitors. If they speak of men that regard the ministry, and be not hardened as they to a despising of Christ in his servants, they call such priest-ridden ; and the pastors they scornfully call jack-presbyters, drpvines] and many-other scoffs are at hand, to serve the ends of the devil and the pope, by alienating the affections of the people from their teachers, that so they may devour them at pleasure.

Another of their ways of reproach is this: they tell the people what odious divisions are among us, and how many minds we are of and how oft we change; and such like reproaches. While they never tell them how much more changeable they have been, and what divisions are among themselves, incomparably beyond all ours.

Another reproach that the Papists cast on the ministry, is greediness, covetousness, and being hirelings.

I will give a brief comparison between the Papist priests and the ministers of Christ, that thou mayest see whether those men be fit to rail at us as mercenaries, and such as are the servants of mammon.

It is well known that the ministers of this land, and of all the reformed churches commonly, do many of them want necessaries, and some want food and raiment, and the rest of them, for the most part have little more, and no superfluities. Some that have not wives and children give all they can gather to the poor. Some give more to charitable uses, than they receive for the work of their ministry; living on their own means. This is the height of their covetousness and ambition.

Take a view of the Popish clergy, for greatness, riches, and numerousness. The pope who is their chief priest, pretendeth to the government of all the Christian world. Emperors and kings have kissed his feet, and held liim the stirrup. One emperor was forced to wait bare foot at his gates a long time in patience, till he pleased to open them, Another being forced to

prostrate himself to liim, the pope set his foot upon his neck, profanely abusing ihe words of Psalm 91. 13. He shall tread on the lion and adder, &c. Divers princes hath he deposed. He hath claimed a supremacy in temporals and spirituals, and his most moderate flatterers subject princes to him. General councils approved by him, decreed that he shall excommunicate and depose princes, who will not extirpate those that he calleth heretics, and shall commit the government to others, or give their countries to the first that can seize on them, and absolve all their vassels for their allegiance, in despite of oaths and God's commands. He is a temporal prince himself, having large dominions. He hath so numerous a clergy in the countries of all Popish princes, as makes him great and formidable to them. His cardinal priests are equal to princes, and greater than many princes are.

For their riches and numbers, to say no more of their pope and cardinals, they have such multitudes of arch-bishops, priests, abbots, priors, friars, and Jesuits, as to take up a great part of the land where they live. Take one instance of the Popish clergy in France

Bodin, a French judge in France, saith: Hcylin's Geography, page 148. "That the revenues of the clergy there are five millions seven hundred and sixty thousand dollars per annum; and that they possess seven parts of twelve of the whole revenue of the kingdom." Comment de stat. saith, " The clergy have near a fourth part of the lands of all the kingdom, besides the ofllerings, churchings, burials, dirges, and such like casualties, which amount to as much as their rents, which comes to half the kingdom: upon which Ed-

' '11'

win Sandys computes their revenue at six millions sterling yearly." One kingdom hath thirteen archbishops, a hundred and four prelates, a thousand four hundred and fifty abbies, five hundred and forty arch-priories, twelve thousand three hundred and twenty priories, five hundred sixty seven Nunneries, seven hundred Convents of friars, and two hundred fifty nine Commanderies of Malta ; besides all the colleges of the Jesuits. The parish priests are one hundred and thir-

ty thousand of all sorts. The kingdom is supposed to have about fifteen millions of people; but the clergy and their ministers are judged to be three millions of them. This account is only for France.

Are the tongues of those men fit to call us mercenaries, or hirelings, or such as preach for filthy lucre? Was ever greater impudence manifested by the vilest son of Adam, than for such men that lord it over emperors, kings and princes, and devour the wealth of the Christian world, to call poor ministers of Christ, covetous, or hirelings, that are content with food and raiment, and a common education of their children? If you had rather have the Popish priesthood, with the numberless swarm of friars, you may take them, and say, you had your choice ! White's " Orthodox faith, and way to the church explained and justified."

ICP' The great Abbey of St. Alban's, if all the old lands were united together, is now worth, in all its rents, profits, and revenues yearly about 200,000 pounds, one million of dollars. The Abbey of Glastonbury, 300,000 pounds : the Abbey of Augusiin, at Canterbury, 200,000 pounds ; Edmondsbury, the same ; Romsey, 300,000 pounds ; Crowland, 100,000 ; Leicester, 100,000 ; Evesham, 100,000, Tewksbury, 100,000; Abingdon and Readmg, 300,000. If the revenues of all the Abbey lands should be accounted according to the true \alualion of these times, it would be found to be so many millions as is incredil)le. Treasury of England, or account of all taxes; London, 1725. The above is an account of only ten rnonasteiics; and one hundred and ten years ago ; their annual rent was computed at nine millions one hundred and twelve thousand dollars—and at the present valuation it may be reckoned tuenty mi lions of dollars. The present interest of the national debt in Great Britain is far less than the actual robberies of the Popish priests and friars, and nuns, during the reign of Popery.

1 ne English Episcopal dioceses before the Reformation were valued by Stevens, a Papi-t writer, at the yearly income of five hundred thousand dollars each, which alone made about fifteen millions of dollars. From the above facts, may be ascestained the enormous pillage of the Pvoman hierarchy when they ruled; and also the undeniable cause of the ignorance, poverty, immorality and debasement of Papists: in every generation, and in all parts of tlie world.

CHAPTER XXIV.

Evangelical Laivfid Ministi'y.

Another of tlieir designs is this: to persnade the icorld that they only have a true ministry or priesthood, and an apostolical episcopacy and true ordination : and that ice and all other Protestant churches have no true ministers, but are mere laymen under the name of ministers, because u-e have no just ordination. How prove the}^ all that? They say, that they have a pope, that is a true successor of Peter: but we have no succession from the apostles, and therefore no just ordination, because no man can give that power which he hath not: and that we are schismatics separated from the church, and therefore our ordinations are invalid: and that some of our churches have no bishops, and therefore §ay they, we have no true ministry, nor are they true churches.

1. Though we need not fetch our ordination from Rome, 3'et we may truly say, that if they have any true ordination and ministry, then so have we; for our iirst reformers were ordained by their prelates, which is enough to stop their mouths. If they say that our schism hath cut off our power of ordination, 1 answer, that though they are notorious schismatics, yet if we were what they falsely say we are, it would not annul our ordination. This is the judgment of their own writers. Thomas a Jesu Conversione gentium, lib. 6. cap. 9. affirms it to be one of the certainties agreed on ; " schismatics lose not, nor can lose any spiritual power consisting in the spi^-itual character of baptism, or orders For this is indelible, as Thomas teacheth, Art. 3. and Turrecremata confirmeth, lib. 4. sum. part. 1. c. 7: and Silvester verb, schismatici: and it appeareth by Pope Urban's can. ordinationes, 9. q. 1 ; who judgeth those to be truly ordained, that were ordained by schismatical bishops : and from Austin lib. 6. de Bapt. Cont. Donatist. cap. 5, where hesaith "a separatist may deliver the sacrament as well as have it. He next addeth, that yet such are deprived of the faculty

of lawfully using the power which they have, so that it will be their sin to use it: and that thus those are to be understood that speak against the ordination, &c. of schismatics. It is unlawful, because their power is suspended by the church, but not a nullity, because they have the power. He puts the question whether schis-matical presbyters and bishops do want the power of order, or only want jurisdiction ? and he answereth out of Thorn. 22.*q. 39. art. 3, "they want jurisdiction, and cannot absolve, excommunicate, or grant indulgences, and so they cannot elect and give benefices, and make laws. But yet they have the power of orders ; and therefore a schismatical bishop doth truly make and consecrate the Eucharist and truly ordain; and when he electeth and promoteth any to ecclesiastical orders, they truly receive the character of order, but not the use, because they are suspended, if knowingly they are ordained by a schismatical bishop. He next asketh, whether this punishment depriving them of jurisdiction take place with all schismatics? and answers, that some say before the council of Constance this punishment belonged to all notorious schismatics, but not to the unknown ones: but since that council, it takes place only on those that are expressly and by name denounced, or manifest strikers of the clergy. But he himself answers ; if a schismatic be tolerated, and by the common error of the people be taken for lawful, there is no doubt but all his acts of jurisdiction are valid ; which we shall affirm also of heretics. But if a presbyter or bishop be a manifest schismatic, then some say, that those acts that require jurisdiction are invalid, but others say, that they are all valid in case the schismatic be not by name excommunicated, or a manifest striker of the clergy." It is their own canons, that the Papists here plead when the council of Constance hath so altered the business.

2. Though this that is said is enough as to the Papists, yet I add, that their sucoession is interrupted, and therefore they are the most unfit to be our judges. They have had long schisms, in which no man knew who was the right pope, nor knoweth to this day; and such long removes and vacancies, and such interpositions

of various ways of choosing their pope, and interruptions by heretical popes, condemned by general councils ; besides murderers, adulterers, simonists, and such as their own writers, Genebrard, and others expressly say, were not apostolical, but apostatical; and popes who by general councils have been judged or charged with heresy and infidelity, that there is nothing more certain than that their succession hath been interrupted.

3. They cannot be certain but it is in every age interrupted, and that there is no true pope or bishops among them, because the intention of the ordainer or conse-crator i« with them of necessity to the thing: and no man can be certain of the intention of the ordainers. Yet Bellarmin says, that though we cannot be sure that he is a true pope, bishop or prebyter that is ordained, yet we are bound to obey him. Where then is the certainty of succession ? Bellarmin Justificat. Cap. 8. sec. 5.

4. What succession of episcopal consecration was there in the church of Alexandria, when Jerom Epist. ad Evagrium, tells us : "At Alexandria, from Mark the evangelist even till Heraclius and Dionysius their bishops, the presbyters did always name one man that bishop, whom they chose from among themselves, and placed in a higher degree : even as if an army make an emperor, or the deacons choose one of themselves, whom they know to be industrious and eall him the chief deacon." Thus Jerome shews that bishops were then made by presbyters. In the same epistle he proves from Scripture, that presbyters and bishops were one. Medina accusing Jerom of error, saith that Ambrose, Austin, Sedulius, Primasius, Chrysostom, Theo-doret, Oecumenius, and Theophylact were in the same heresy, as Bellarmin himself reporteth him. So that presbyters now may make bishops as those of Alexandria did. Jerom there saith, "all are the successors of the apostles," yet apostles as apostles have no successors at all, as Bellarmin teacheth, lib. 4. de Ponlif. cap. 25. "Bishops do not properly succeed the apostles; because the apostles were not ordinary, but extraordinary, and as it vv«re delegated pastors, who have no successors. Bishops h ive no part of the true apostolic authority.

18

Apostles could preach in the whole world, and found churches, but so cannot bishops. The apostles could write canonical books, but so cannot bishops. Apostles had the gifts of the tongue and miracles, but so have not bishops. The apostles had jurisdiction over the whole church, but so have not bishops. And there is no succession but to a predecessor : but apostles and bishops were in the church both at once, as appeareth by Timothy, Titus, Evodius, and many more. If therefore bishops succeed apostles, to what apostle did Titus succeed/* and whom did Timothy succeed"? Bishops succeed apostles in the same manner as presbyters succeed the seventy-two disciples: but it is manifest that presbyters do not properly succeed the seventy-two disciples, but only by similitude, i^hilip, Stephen and others that were of the seventy-two, had never been after ordained deacons, if they had been presbyters before."

Now what is become of the Popish apostolical successors among their bishops? The scope of all this is to prove, that all prelates receive their power from the pope; and so their succession is confined to him alone: and therefore as oft ViS there have been interruptions in the Papal succession, so often the succession of all their church was interrupted.

But if bishops succeed not apostlts, and have not any of the apostolic power, who then doth the bishop of Rome succeed? Bcllarmin, cap. 25, saith; "The pope of Rome properly succeedeth Peter, not as an apostle, but as an ordinary pastor of the whole church." Let us then have no more talk of the apostolic seat, or at least no more arguing from that name : for Peter was not the universal vicar as an apostle, nor doth the people so succeed him. Doth not that give away the vicarship .-' which way will they prove it ?

But an objection falls in Bellarmin's way; "if this be so, then none of the bishops of Afric, Asia, &c. were true bishops, that were not made by the pope." To which he answers, that " it is enough that the pope do consecrate them mediately, by making patriarchs and archbishops to do it; and so Peter did constitute the patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch: who thus re-

ceiving authority from the pope, did rule, almost all Asia and Afric." Hut that almost marreth the whole cause: for where is the universal headship i' did Bel-larmiii think that Alexandria and Antioch were made at first the seats of patriarclis, having- a large jurisdiction as afterward they attained i* How will he prove that Peter made those two patriarchates, not as an apostle, but as an ordinary vicar general 1 Who made the patriarchate of Constantinople, and gave it that vast jurisdiction i* did Peter many hundred years after his death ? or did the Pope of Rome, that resisted and sought to diminish his power? or rather did not the general councils do it by the emperor's commands, the pope excepting and repining at it i' who made the patriarch of Jerusalem i* who made James bishop of Jerusalem ? Did Petsri* who made Timothy and Titus bishops ? did Peter or Paul ? Who gave Paul that powev? not Peter certainly. Do not those men jest with holy things? or do they believe themselves ? Bel-larmin confesseth, that the potestas Ordinis, et interi* oris jurisdictionis, power of order and interior jurisdiction, is immediately from God to ewQxy bishop as to the pope, cap. 22. Why then should it be denied of the exterior jurisdiction ? Is one part of the essence of the office given by the pope, and the rest without him/ What if it be proved, that the exterior and the interior jurisdiction of a pastor are one ? though the obedience be exterior, yet the jurisdiction is exercised on the soul in one case as well as another ; it being the mind on which the obligation lieth, and the pastoral rule is powerful and efl^ectual, aud further than you procure consent you are despised. For it is the magistrate's work to use violence. Bishops as bishops, can but persuade and deal by words with the inner man. What then is become of the Papist succession ?

5. He that is ordained according to the apostles' directions, or prescript in Scripture, hath the true apostolical ordination ; but so are we ordained. The apostles never confined ordination to those prelates that depend on the pope of Rome. The bishops to whom the apostles committed that power, are the same who are called presbyters by them, and they were the overseers

or pastors each but of one single church and not of many churches, in Scripture times, so Hammond asserts'. Such are those who ordain among us now. Grcgor. Nazianzen. oral. 18, saith, "I would there was no presidency, nor prerogative of place and tyrannical privileges ; that so we might be known only by virtue. But now this right side, and left side, and middle and lower degree, and presidency, and concomitancy, have begot us many contritions to no purpose, and have driven many into the ditch, and have led them away to the region of the goats."

Isidore Pelusiat. lib. 3. Epist. 223. ad Hierace??i, saith: "When I have shewed, what difference there is between the ancient ministry and the present tyranny, why do you not crown and praise the lovers of equality.''"'

Refer to Sedulius on Titus 1. Ansclm Enarrat. in Phil.i. 1. Beda on Ads 20. Alcuin Divinis Officiis ; Cap. 35, 36. ayid John Lib. 5. ; and Epist. 108. Anselm on I Timothy \\. 14. histitut.in Concil Colo?i. de Sacr. Ordin. Bucer Script. Anglic. Peter Martyr, Loc. Com. Clas. 4. Loc. 1. sect. 23; a7id Wiclifs arguments on the Waldenses. Cassander Consult, artic. 14, saith; It is agreed among all, that of old in the apostle's days, there was no difference between bishops and presbyters, but afterwards for order's sake and the avoiding of schism, the bishop was set before the presbyters." Occam determineth, that "by Christ's institution all the priests of what degree soever are of equal authority, power and jurisdiction." Reynold Peacock, wrote a book de ministrorum ciqualitate, which your party caused to be burnt. Richard Armachan, lib. 9. cap 5, ad Quceest. Armen. saith, "there is not found in the evangelical or apostolical Scriptures any difference between bishops and simple priests, called presbyters; whence it tollows, that there is one power in all, and equal from their order." Cap. 7, answering the question, whether any priest may consecrate churches, &c. he saith, "priests may do it as well as bishops, seeing a bishop hath no more in such matters than any simple priest. It seems therefore that the restriction of the priest's power was not in the primitive church according to the Scripture."

G. The chief error of the Papists in this cause is expressed in their reason, "no man can give the power that he hath not:" wherein they intimate, that it is man that giveth the ministerial power. Whereas it is the gift of Christ alone. Man doth but design the person that shall receive it, and then Christ giveth it, by his law, to the person so designed : and then man dotli invest him, and solemnize his introduction. Asa woman may choose her husband, but it is not she that giveth him the power over her, but God who deter-mineth of that power by his law : affixing it to the person chosen by her, and her action is but a condition, or cause of that capacity of the matter to receive the form. xMcn do but obey God in a right choice and designation of the person : his law doth presently give him the power, with which for order's sake he must be in solemn manner invested. But matters of order may ^possibly vary; and though they are to be observed as far as may be, yet they always give place to the ends and substance of the work for ordering whereof they are appointed.

7. Temporal power is truly and necessarily of God, as ecclesiastical, and it was at first given immediately by him, and he chose the person : and yet there is no necessity that kings must prove an uninterrupted succession. God useth means now in designing the persons that shall be governors of the nations of the earth. But not always the same means. Nor hath he tied himself to a succesive anointing or election: else few kings on earth would hold their sceptres. And no man from any diversity in the cases is able to prove, that a man may not as truly be a lawful church-governor, as a lawful governor of the commonwealth, without an uninterrupted succession of ministerial collation.

Bellarmin is forced to maintain, that with them it is enough that a pastor have the place, and seem lawful to the people, and that they are bound to obey him, though it should prove otherwise.

Our ordination therefore being according to the law of Christ, and the pope's so contrary to it: we are ready at any time, more fully to compare them, and demonstrate to any impartial man, that Christ doth

IS*

much more disown their ordination than ours; and that we enter in God's appointed way. Mr. Elliot in New England may better ordain a pastor over the Indians converted by him, than leave them without or send to Roiae, for a bishop or for orders. Voetius de desperata causa papatus. JVlason upon English ordination.

CHAPTER XXV.

Popish Sa..ctUy.

Another of their deceits is this : ihcy pretend the holiness of their churches and ministry, and the unho-liness of ours. This being matter of fact, a willing and impartial mind may the easier be satisfied. They assert their holiness, by the canonized saints among them: by the devotion of their religious orders, and their strictness of living: by their unmarried clergy : and by their sanctifying sacraments and ceremonies. In all which they say that we are so far wanting, that being out of the church, there is no true holiness among us.

I had never the happiness to be acquainted with any Papist of a serious spiritual temper, and holy life, but only some of a ceremonious formal kind of religion, and but with very few that lived not in gross sin. Papists make it an article of their faith, and an essential point of Popery, that no one Protestant hath charity, or can be saved; and that no Christian in the world is sanctified really, and can be saved but a Papist. They necessitate us to mention their ungodliness by so calling us to it, and laying the stress of all our cause upon the point: and laying the very christian faith iiself upon the holiness of their church. For we must not know that Scripture is God's word, or that Christianity is the true religion, till we first know that the church of Rome is the true church, that we may receive it on their credit: and we must know that they are the true church by being the only holy people in the world. If

my faltli lay on tliis foundation, 1 know so much of tiiu falsehood of it, that I must tnrn infidel : and 1 can no more believe this than 1 can believe that snow is not white.

They confess tliat tiieir common people are bad; hut yet they say, "there arc same good ones among us, but among the heretics not one is good." Thomas a Jcsu dc convcrs. omu. Gent. iJ. 531. Tuhcrville Manual p. 84. saith, but "I never yet heard of any Protestant saints in the world." O wonderful perversness of the hearts of sectaries! O wonderful patience of God ! Did not that man's heart tremble or smite him to write so iiorrid, so impudent a reproach against so many precious saints of God ? Durst he thus attempt to rob the Lord of tlie fruit of his blood? and to villify his jewels? and as Rabshakeh, to reproach the Israel of God .'' to attempt to pluck them out of Christ's hand that arc given him by his Father ; and to shut them out of heaven, tliat are redeemed and made heirs by so dear a price ; and to spit in their faces whom Christ hath washed with liis blood ? did he not fear that dreadful threatening of Christ, Mat. 18. 6, "But -who shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hansed about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." Though I see so much impiety among tlie Papists, I dare not say, I dare not think, that God hath not some holy one among tiiem. It is dangerous to condemn those that Chsist will justify, and make his members to be the members of the devil, and abusing so grossly the apple of his eye. If I see a man live wickedly, I dare say he is of a wicked life; but 1 dare not say that all are so, unless it be among men, whose principles I am sure are inconsistent with godliness, and I know that they hold those principles practically or prevalently. I have been acquainted with some Papists, learned and nnlearned. Few of the unlearned know what Christianity is, nor whether Christ were God or man, male or female, nor whether ever he was the king, prophet or priest of the church, nor for what end he died, nor what faith or repentance is ; but were infidels under the name of Papists or catholics. Nearly all the learned at4 unJearned live in gross

sin, the better sort would ordinarily swear by their lady, and by the mass, and some greater oaths. The rest were fornicators or adulterers, drunkards or revellers and gamesters. Never had I the happiness to be acquainted with one that could speak experimentally of tlic work of grace upon his soul, of the life of faith, of communion with God, and of the life to come. Their religion lay in being the Pope's subjects, and in fasting on Fridays and in Lent from some sorts of meat,and in saying over so many Ave Maries, Pater Nosters, or the like; and in observing days, and hours, and ceremonies.

But if those men that never heard of a Protestant saint, and conclude there is no one saved but a Papist; and build their salvation on this as an article of their faith, had known but those that I have known, and yet know; they would either have been of another mind, or have been left inexcusable in a malicious reproaching of the saints of the most high. I bless the Lord that I can truly say, that I know many, as far as the heart of another can be known, by words and a holy life, who live in much communion with God: whose souls are daily longing after him, and some of them spending much of their lives upon their knees, having had many a special extraordinary return to their importunate requests : whose delight is in the law of the Lord, in which they meditate day and night, which is locked up among the Papists : whose hearts smite them for vain words or thouglits, or the loss of time : that live in examplary humility, meekness and selfdenial, bearing wrongs patiently, and doing good to as many as they can, as the servants of all, contemning the riches and honors of the world, mortifying the flesh, and some of them longing to be dissolved and to be with Ciuist : in whom the world never knew either once drunkenness, fornication, or one rash oath, or any other gross sin. And is it certain that all those shall be damned, because they believe not in the pope? or is it not certain by promise that all such shall be saved?

When Papists lay their faith and cause on this, that their church is holy, and ours and all others are every man unholy, it is almost to me as if they said that no men but Papists have souls in their bodies, and laid their faitli on this; and as soon should I believe them, if this

W(!re their belief. It is a jrood preservative against po-perv, when a man c-innot turn Papist without puttint^ out his eves, and renouncing his wit, and reason, and common experience, as well as his charity ; and without denying what he knoweth by his own soul!

1. But let us come to their evidences. They say, we have no canonized saints. I answer all the apostles and saints of the first ages were of our religion ; and many of them have been beholden to the pope for canonizing them.

We have no usurper among us that pretendeth infallibly to know the hearts of others, nor to number God's saints. But with us the Holy Ghost maketh saints, and their lives declare it; and those that converse with them discern it, so far as to be highly confident ; and men discern it themselves, so far as to be infallibly, though not perfectly, certain.

The pope takes saints to be rare with them, that they musi be named and written with red letters in an almanack. TuherviUe Manual p. 85, sends us for proof to their chronicles and martyrologies, and he nameth four saints that they have had, Austin the Monk, Benedict, Dominick, and Francis, Now we all know that none but saints are saved, and without holiness none can see God; Heb. 12. 14. So that it seems if sanctity be so rare among the Papists, salvation must be rare.

But as for us, we make it our care to admit none but saints to our church communion, though we preach to others to prepare them for it: for we believe that the church is a holy society, and find Paul calling the whole churches that he writes to by the title of saints, and we believe it is the communion of saints that is there to be held. And if we had no more saints in one county at once, yea in one parish at once, than would fill up the pope's calander, so as to have one for every day in the year, we should betake ourselves to bitter lamentation. Whereas the church of Rome takes in all sorts of the unclean, and is so impure and polluted a society, that it is a wonder how they should have the face to boast of their holiness, to men who live among them and know them. Thousands of their members are stark infidels, not knowing the essentials of the Christian faith. In

Ireland many of them know not who Christ was, but that he was a better man than Patrick. Usher saw and lamented, that they perished as heathens for want of knowing Christianity itself, while they went under the name of catholics : and therefore he would have persuaded the popish priests to have consented that they should be all tau:dit a catechism of the common princi-pies that we are agreed in ; but he could not procure it. White asked one of them in Lancashire, who Jesus Christ was 1 she answered, that it was some good thing, or else it would not have been put into the creed. While's Key to the Church.

How much swearing, whoredom, drunkenness, and other wickedness are in their church is known not only by the complaints of their own writers, but by the common experience of travelers. We have known Papists who have turned from them by the experience of one journey to Rome, and seeing what is there. As for church censures by which any of those evils should be purged out, they are laid by, and reserved for other uses ; even as thunder-bolts for the pope's adversaries, and the servants of Clirist whom they take for heretics, and for princes whom the pope would have deposed and m.urdered. The lives of many kings and princes have been the sacrifice of the Roman ungodliness.

What need you any further proof, that their church is a common wilderness, and not the garden of Christ, and is a cage of all unclean birds, than that they actually keep them all in their communion. It made my heart rise at their hypocrisy and filthiness, to read one sentence in one of the most learned, and sober, and honest of all their prelates that have written. Albaspinccus Observat. " If ever any one man in this age was put from the comnmnion, which I know not whether such a thing hath come to pass, it was only from the receiving the Eucharist; in the other parts of his life, he retained the same familiarity and converse with other believers, which he had before his excommunication." Thus a prelate of France knew not any one person in the age that he lived in, who was ever excommunicated for ungodliness. Let the Christian world then observe by their practice, what an abominable hypocritical contest the^

ni.'ikc, to jn-ovc the power of clmrch-f^overnmcnt to he only in their pope, and the prelates to whom he givcth it; and when tlu^y have done, do make so little use of the power which they so pretend to, as not to exercisci the censures of the church upon any one offender. How were that man worthy to he thought of, or used, that would set all the world on fn-e hy contending, that no schoolmaster or physician should he suffered in the whole world, hut liimself and such as he giveth power to : and when he hath done, will not hy himself or his subjects and dependents teach or heal one person in an age ? Were such an one meet to live on the earth ? Or should we judge that man in his wits that would believe him 1 O what a sty is the Roman society ! What corruption in their assemblies ! And yet thc*^hovel or the besom must not be used once in an age ? no weed pulled up ? no superlluous branch cut off? Is this the use of all the canons of their church concerning excommunication. Must the Christian world be at such vast expense, to maintain so rich and numerous a clergy for this 1 JMust we cast out our pastors to receive such as these? When we should be ashamed, if we had not exercised more of the cleansing power in one church, than AlhaspincBus knew among the Papists in a whole age.— Alhaspiu. Vet. Eccl&s. Ritib. Observed.

But perhaps you think there is little of this fdth among them to be cast out. He that readeth their writers, or llveth among them, and seeth their lives, will not so think. He that had seen the murders of their popes for the obtaining of the popedom, or how Pope Stephen raged against the carcass of Pope Formosus, drawing it out of the grave, and changing its j)ontifical habit to a secular, and cutting off his fingers; or he that had seen Pope Christopher casting the corpse of Pope Leo V. into the river Tiber; or Pope Sergius keeping the said Christopher bound in prison; or Pope Boniface VII. putting out his cardinals' eyes, would scarce believe that the seat of Peter were holy: all which Platina and others of their own writers notice. Baronius himself tells us an. 897. " Pope Stephen VII. defiled Peter's seat with unheard of sacrilege, not to be named ; and the princes of Tuscany were brought into Peter's chair and Christ's throne.

being monstrous men, of most filthy lives and desperate manners, and every way most filthy. An. 900. Ugly monsters were thrust into the Papacy ; so that it was defiled with filthiness, and followed by those with a perpetual infamy. An. 912. At Rome, the most powerful and the most sordid whores did rule; at whose will the seats were changed, prelates were made, and, which is horrid to be heard, and not to be spoken, their sweet-hearts, false popes were thrust into Peter's seat." " For one hundred and fifty years the Popes were wholly fallen from the virtue of their predecessors, being disorderly, and apostatical, rather than aj)Ostolical, not entering i3y the door,but by the backdoor:" saith Genebrard Chron. Lib. 4. a?i. 901. He that shall read those writers impartially, will scarce tkink the head of their church hath been holy, which is an essential part of it; nor that their succession is interrupted.

Read Nic. Clemangis. Alvarus Pelagius de planctu EcdesicB, lib. 2. art. 2., and many such like ; and their poets Mantuan, Dante, &c., or Petrarch, Mirandula, &:c., and you will think the holiness of Rome the poorest proof in the world of their being the only church. Jirowne^s Fasciculus Rerum Kxpetend. et. Fvgiend.

Espencceus and others recite that distich : " Vivere qui cupitis sancte, discedite Roma: Omnia cum liceant, non licet esse bonum.^^

" If you desire to live holy, fly from Rome. All things there are lawful, except to be good." Baptist Mantuan. Voetii Causa desperata Papatus.

Platina saith. Vita Marcellini; " Our vices are so increased, that they have scarce left us any place for mercy with God. How great is the covetousnessof the priests? especially of those that rule all! how great lust! how great ambition and pomp ! how great ignorance of themselves, and of the Christian doctrine ! how little religion, and that rather counterfeit, than true ! how corrupt manners ! even such as in the profanest secular men are to be detested ! it is not worth the speaking; when they sin so openly and so publicly, as if they sought praise by it."

Claude 1, Espencapus on Titus, saith ; " Where is there under the sun a greater liberty, clamor, impunity

of all evil, infamy and impudence, than at Rome : verily it is such as no man can believe but he that hath seen it, and no man can deny it that hath seen it." Tiiis was written since the council of Trent. In the council of Trent, a Popish Prelate Cornelius Muss, and the wonder of his age among the Papists, saith " there is no monstrous fdthiness, or sink or plague of uncleanness, with which both people and priest are not defiled. In the very sanctuary of God, there is no shame, no modesty, no ho}>e or regard of good living: but unbridled and untamed lust, singular audaciousness, incredible wickedness. Would they had not fallen from religion to superstition, from faith to infidelity, from Christ to antichrist, yea as men that had no souls from God to Epicurus, or Pythagoras, saying in an impious heart, and an impudent mouth,there is no God. And yet now of a long time,there hath been no pastor that would require, or seek them again; because they all sought their own things, but not one the things of Jesus Christ." Muss after the council wrote thus ; Scrm. 2. " The Roman name is hateful with all nations ; and see, how little esteem the church itself is of, because of the scandals that are heard, seen and felt. I speak not now of enemies, that call it the whore of Babylon, hell, and the sink of all errors: but I speak of friends, that groan and daily sigh within themselves, saying, O holy city, how art thou thus profaned ! O glorious city ! that are thus become vile, thus condemned and neglected." Rivet. White's Wat/ to the true Church,

Guicciardin their historian saith; "Those are called good popes, whose goodness is not worse than other men's wickedness."

Claud. EspenccEus on Titus 1. complains, that the promises made by the pope, of reformation at the council of Trent, were all broken, and nothing done but deceit and shows. Of Pope Sixtus V. Bellarmin gave his judgment, that he thought, when he died he went to the devil, saying, "he that lives without repentance, and dieth without repentance, undoubtedly goeth to hell." Bellarmin also said, "as far as I can reach, as lar as I have any wisdom, as far as I understand, in plain terms, our Lord the pope is gone to hell." Barthol. JIarisof. life of Henry the great of France, caj). 17. saith;

19

" When the Spaniards perceived his contrivances to forsake their party, lest he should join witli the enemy, they caused liim to be stranirled in the night by a Franciscan, or one in a monk's habit, and the next day gave out that a domestic devil had strangled him ; and to make good the report a book was written of his life and printed, where all the wickedness of Pope Alexander ^ I. is charged on him." How the popes are still chosen by impious jugglings and combinations, cardinal Perron, tells in his Legationes et Negotiat. Cardinal Ossatus Epist. 87. said concerning pope Clement VIII. esteemed one of the very best of them : who persuaded the King of France to join with the Spaniards in the invasion of England; and when the cardinal answered that the King of France was under an oath of peace with the Queen of England ; their best pope replied, " the oath was made to a heretic, but he is bound by another oath to God and the pope. Kings and oiher sovereign princes tolerate themselves in all things that make for their commodity, and it is now come to pass that it is not imputed to them, nor taken to be their fault." He alleged the saying of Francisc. Marice Duke of Urbin, " a noble man or great man that is not the sovereign, is blamed and counted infamous of all men. if he keep not his faith ; but supreme princes may make covenants, and break them again without any danger to their credit, and may Ife, betray, and commit such like practices.'* Those are the best popes, that can forgive other men's sins and pardon them the pains of purgatory, and cannot save their own souls from hell! Can they not govern the universal church well, that can no better govern themselves, or that one city where they dwell 1 are not those men worthy to be consulted as infallible oracles, by those that dwell at tlie antipodes, though it cost them their lives to sail or travel to them ? can he be a Christian or be saved that bclievoth in one of those men? or can any man receive the Christian faith or Scriptures, till he first know those wicked men to be Christ's infallible vicars 1

How many thousands of prostitutes are licensed in Rome ; how sumptuously they live, and what revenues the popes derive from their fornication many Papist

authors mention. Some of them defend it; and even the present pope niaintains it. However the Jesuit Mariana, akiioii<:;h lie justified tiie murder of kin^^s ; Regis ct Regis instutiunc, lib. 1. cap. (i ; disallows that uncleanness, Spectaculis, cap. 16. Claude EspciiC(cus, Confine nfia^ lib. 3. cap. 4. laments that "all Rome is turned into one vast hrothel." "The Jews, says that Roman priest, so far shame you, that none of their daughters may hecome a harlot, unless they first turn Papists, and tiien they can obtain the license to live in lewdness," for the stipulated price.

Of the gain that comes to the pope and prelates by the simoniacal market of benefices, read Clcmangis Tract, dc annatibus non solvendis. Alvar. Pclag. jjlanC' ill Eccles. lib. 2. art. 15; and I. 1. art. 67. Claude JEs-penc. Tit. 1. Cardinal Cusanus Concord, cathnl. lib. 2. cap. 40. JIarc. Ant. Rcpub. Eccles. lib. 9. c. 9. Bu-doeus lib. 5. dc Asse ; Duarenus Sacris Eccles. 3Iinist, lib. 5. c. 8.

The odious sin of sodomy was common with many of the clergy and popes themselves; gluttony, drunkenness and whoredom being the common smaller sins.

Papirius INIassonius who wrote the deeds of the popes for their honor and sought his reward from Sixtus V. saith ; Episcop. urb. lib. 6. " No man doth now look for holiness in popes: those are judged the best, that are a little good or less wicked than other mortals used to be."

Pius II. was one of the best that the Papal seat a long time had ; and yet in liis ej)istle to his father ; Epist. 15. who was angry with him for fornication, he saith; " you say you are sorry for my crime. I know not what opinion you have of me. You know what you were yourself. Nor am I an hypocrite, that I should desire rather to seem good, than to be good. It is an ancient and usual sin* I know not who is without it. This plague is spread far and near; though I see it not, seeing nature, which doth nothing amiss, hath bred this appetite in all living creatures, that mankind should be continued." He who was the glory of the Papacy, knew none of all the Hierarchy without beasily sin.

Orichovius informs Pope Julius III. that Pope Paul

II. his predecessor had a daughter in the eyes of all men.

Of Pope Julius III. Onuphrius saith, "being a cardinal ho followed voluptuousness as by stealth, but being made popOj and having what he would have, he cast away all care, and gave up himself to his mirth and disposition." Thuanus also declares; Hist. lib. 6, *' he was very infamous as a cardinal, but afterwards past his life in greater infamy."

Alvarus Pelagius, lib. 2. art. 73. lamenting whoredom as a common sin, but specially of the clergy, tells us that the cause is, "because the religious of that age were gluttons or bell^'^-gods, arrogant, proud, incomparably beyond secular men, conversing with women, &c. And drink more wine in their religious state than before, and are commonly carnal. That the monks had their female devotees, with whom, by the prelate's license, they conversed. Being sent to preach they go to lewdness. That there was scarcely any of the nuns without her carnal male votary, by which they broke their faith with Christ." That was the holy Papacy.

In book 2. art. 28, he says, " Most of the clergy mix themselves with gluttony, drunkenness and whoredom, which is their common vice, and most of them give themselves to tlie unnatural vice. Thus continually, yea and jjublicly, do they offend against that chastity which they promised to the Lord: besides those evils not to be named which in secret they commit, which papers will not receive, nor pen can write." Abundance more he hath of the same subject, and their putting their choicest youth into houses of sodomy. That book of Alvarus Pelagius, Bellarmin calls Liber insignis ; de Scriptor. JEcclesiast.

Matth. Paris, p. 819, tells us of cardinal Hugo*s farewell speech to the people of Lyons when he departed with the pope's court; "Friends, said he, since we came to this city we have brought you great commodity and alms. When we came hither we found three or four brothels, but now at our departure we leave but one, but that one reacheth from the east gate to the west g«te." O holy pope ! and holy church !

Costerus the Jesuit easily answers all that is said, £»*

chirid. cap. 2. dc JBccles. "The cliurch losotli not the name Holy, as long as there is but one wlio is truly iioly.'* Is tliis your sanctity? If the head be unlioly, an essential part is unholy; and therefore the church cannot be lioly. One person is not the matter of the church, as one drop of wine cast into the sea doth not make it a sea of wine ; one Italian in England makes not England Italian ; nor docs one learned man make England learned. Let the Pai)ists observe, that it is from the very words of their own authors, that I have spoken of them what is here recited, and not from their adversaries. And therefore I am so far from believing- the Gospel upon the account that their church is holy that recom-mendcth it, or from believing them to be the only church of Christ because of their holiness, that I must bless God that I live in a sweeter air and cleaner society, and should be loth to come out of the garden to go into their sink to be made clean or sweet. The traveller learned more wit, who left us his resolution;—

"Rom. a vale; vidi; sati^ est vidisse ; revarta? Cum Icno aut ?nc/'etriz, sciirra, cinoidus ero.'*'^

*'Rome! Farewell; enough! Ihave seen thee. 1 will return to thee when I am a villain and a beast ! "

2. The second proof which they bring of the holiness of their church, is, the strict life of their friars, as Carthusians, Franciscans, and others. Travellers tell lamentable stories of friars ; and Guil. de Amore, and his companions have said much more, and many other Popish writers paint them in an odious garb.

This also shows the pollution of your church in comparison to our churches, that holiness and religion are such rarities and next to miracles among you, that it must be cloistered up, or confined to certain orders that are properly called religious, as if the people had no religion or holiness. When our care and hope is to make all our parishes far more religious and holy than your monasteries or convents.

3. Their third proof of the holiness of the Papists is derived from tiieir unmarried priests. Because the essential parts of your church nearest concern your cause, I ask—Was it not Pope John XI. who had Theodora for

19*

his mistress? Was it not Pope Sergius III. who was the father of Pope John XII. by Marosia? Did not John XII. or XIII., according to Luhprand and other Popish writers defile virgins ; and married women even at the doors of liis palace, and was finally killed by a husband who caught him in adultery? Did not a Papist write the following distich of Pope Innocent?

^^ Octo Nocens pueros genuit totidemque puellas, Hunc merito poi'uit dicere Rome patrem ! "

" That sinner had eight sons and eight daughters. Rightly did Rome call him their Father!''''

Whose son was Aloisus, made Prince of Parma by Pope Paul III. ? For your archbishops, prelates, priests &c. I shall add but the words of Dominicus Soto de Instit. et Jure qu. 6. art. 1. "We do not deny that the clergy keep concubines, and are adulterers.''

Paul directed Timothy and Titus to ordain a bishop that was the husband of one wife, and ruled well his house, having his children in subjection. The church long held to that doctrine. Greg. Nyssen was a married bishop. But if you are wiser than the S))irit of God, or can change his laws, or can prove the Holy Ghost so immutable as to give one law by Paul and other apostles, and another by the pope, we will believe you and forsake the Scripture, when you can bewitch and charm us to it.

We believe that a single life may be of convenience to a pastor, when it can be held; but that Christ's rule must be observed, " every man cannot receive this saying, but he that can, let him receive it;" but we do not teach, as the Jesuits do, that a man may lawfully go into a brothel, though he hath found by experience he is overcome.

Lest the vices of your priests should be laid open and punished, you exempt them from the secular power, and will not have a magistrate question them for any crimes. It is one of Pope Nicholas' decrees, Caranza, p. 395 ; " No layman must judge a priest, nor examine any thing of his life. And no secular prince ought to judge the facts of any prelates or priests whatsoever." That is the way to be wicked quietly, and sin without noise and infamy.

JUGGLING. U^Z

Those among us who are known to he unj^odly and scandalous, are not owned hy us, nor arc niemhers of our church, or admitted to the Lord's Supper in tiiosc congregations that exercise churcli discipline ; hut thev arc only as catechumens, whom we preach to and instruct, if not cast out.

Your eighth general council at Constantino[)le, Can. 14. decreed, " ministers must not fall down to princes, nor eat at their tables, nor debase themselves to them ; but emperors must take them as equals." But we are so far from establishing pride and arrogancy by a law, that tliough we hate servile flattery and man pleasing, yet we think it our duty to be the servants of all, and to condescend to men of low estate, and much more to honor our superiors and God in them.

The same council decreed, Canon. 21, *-'■ None must compose any accusations against the pope." No marvel then if all popes go for innocents.

Because you charge our churches with unholiness, and that with such an height of impudence, as I am certain the devil himself doth not believe you, even that there is not one good among us, nor one that hath charity, nor can be saved, unless by turning Papist; I tell you, that I doubt not but the churches in England, are purer far than those were in the days of Augustin, Jerom, &.c., and that the pastors of our churches are less scandalous than they were then. What if I should compare many of them to Augustin, Jerom, and such others, both in doctrine and holiness of life? Should I do so, I know you would account it arrogance. But yet I will presume to make some comparison.

As for the heavenliness of their writings, let some of ours be compared with them, and you will see at least that they spake by the same spirit. For their commentaries on Scripture, did we miss it as oft as Ambrose, Jerom, and many more, we should bring ourselves very low in the esteem of the church. Even cardinal Cajetan doth boldly censure the fathers' commentaries.

As to our lives, I have no pleasure in opening any of the faults of his saints, nor shall I mention any, but what are confessed by themselves, and to boast of our own purity I take to be a detestable thing, and contrary to

that sense of sin that is in every Saint of God : but yet if the Lord's churches and servants are slandered and reproached, as they were by the heathens of old, the vindicating them is a duty which we owe to Christ, and you are the cause of the inconveniences.

Those ministers that I converse with, are partly married and partly unmarried. The married live soberly, in conjugal chastity, as burning and shining lights before the people, in exemplary holiness of life. The unmarried also give up themselves to the Lord and to his service. And for the people of our communion, through the mercy of God, open sins are so rare, that if one in a church be guilty once, we all lament it, and bring them to penitence, or disown them, and they are the pity of all the congregation.

Were the churches better in the third, fourth, fifth, sixth, or following ages ] No. That is proved by the sad histories of the crimes of those times, and by the lamentable complaints of Basil, Gregory Nazianzen, and Gregory Nyssen, and Chrysostom, Austin, &c. What complaints are made by Gildas of the British Church ? What a doleful description have we of the Christian pastors and people in his days from Salvian de Guber-nat. 1

I judge also by the canons, and by the fathers' directions concerning offenders. Thus Gregory saith of drunkards ; Quod cum venia siis ingcnio sunt relin-quendi, ne deteriores jiant^ si a tali cotisuetudine evel-lantur. Was this the Roman sanctity even then ? Was that Saint Gregory's sanctity, that drunkards must be let alone with j)ardon, lest if they be forced from their custom they be made worse 1 If such advice were but giv'On by one of us, it would cast us out of our ministry. We dare not lot one drunkard alone in our church communion, where church discipline is set up.

Augustin saith ; " Drunkenness is a mortal sin, if it be daily or usual. And that they must be dealt with gently and by fair words, and not roughly and sharply." If one of us should make so light of drunkenness, what should we be thought 1 Aquinas 22. q. 150. art. 1. 4 ; art. 2. 1.

Many canons determine, " Priests that will not part

witli tlioir roiirnbincs, shall be suspended from ofTiria-tiiii^, till they let them go." Whereas with us, a man is ejected who should have a concubine but once.

Gratian Distinct. 34, citeth c. 17, of the Tolotan council, saying, " He that bath not a wife, but a concubine in her stead, shall not be put from the communion." The whole canon is thus ; *' If any believer have a wife and a concubine, let him not communicate. But he that hath no wife, and hath a concubine instead of a wife, may not be put from the communion. Only let him be content with one woman, either wife or concubine, which he will. He that liveth otherwise, let him be cast off, till he give over, and return to penitence."

In an English council at Berghamsted an. 697, the seventh canon is this; "If a priest leave bis adultery, and do not naughtily defer baptism, nor is given to drunkenness, let him keep his ministry, and the privilege of his habit." Spelman. King Alured in the preface to his laws tells us ; " except treason and desertion of their Lords, the councils of the clergy did lay but some pecuniary mulct on other sins." Spelman. Johnson's Laws and canons.

All this shows that the church then was much more corrupt than ours now in England.

The best of the fathers had such blots, that I may well make their confessions another discovery that our churches are as pure and holy as theirs. Augustin, whilst he leaned to the JManichces. confesseth himself guilty of fornication. Jerom that was so vehement for virginity and lived a monastic life, doth yet confess that he was not a virgin. Bernard, who lived so contemplative a life, in his Serm.de beata virgine de Assumpt. confesseth se car ere virgmitate.

When we tell the Papists of their licensing brothels at Rome, Bononia, 4fec., they fly to the words of Austin lib. de ordine ; " Take away harlots from among men, and you will disturb all things with lusts." Though this was written when Austin was but a young convert, and he afterwards changed his mind ; yet it shows that our times are far from the abominations of those, and our pastors are far more strict than Austin was.

As for the holiness of their church by ceremonies, as

holy water, holy oil, relics, altars and a hundred such things, it is not worthy of notice. All things are sanc-titied to us by the word and prayer. We devote ourselves and all that we have to God, and then to the pure all things are pure. We neglect no ordinance of God that we can know of and enjoy. He is a spirit, and seekefh such as will worship him in spirit and truth. This is the holiness that we look after. Bur for numbering beads, and ylyeJ/arigs, and going on pilgrimages, and such inventions of arrogant men, we place no holiness in them ; as knowing tiiat God desireth not a mimical or histrionical worship ; and that none knows what will please him so well as himself.

CHAPTER XXVI.

J^oveUy of Popish Corruptions. '

Another of their deceits is, hi/ calling us to tell them ichcn every one of their errors did first begin., and what pope did bring them in ; or else they tvill not believe but they are from the Apostles.

1. It belongs to you to prove the continuance of your opinions or practices, more than to us to prove the beginning. It sufficcth that we prove that there was a time when your errors were not in the church, and that we can do from the Scriptures and the Fathers. You know yourselves of abundance of changes which you know not who did first introduce. Who first administered the Lord's Supper in one kind only 1 that was not from the beginning"? Who first laid by the standing on the Lord's day, and used kneeling ? Can. 20. Council Niccn. 1. Alvarus Pelagius de planet. Ilccles. li. 2. art, 2. saith ; "The church bewaileth the sins of the people, but specially the clergy, as greater than the sin of Sodom. For we see that faith aud justice have forsaken the earth. The Holy Scri[)ture and sacred canons are accounted as fables. He is now a man of no knowledge that inventeth not novelties." You see that then novelties were brought in^ Vincentius Lirinensis complaineth of, and not only

roniplaiiiotli of,hut irivoili diioction what to do; " If any novel coiitaii^ioii shall fiidcavor to stain not only a part of the church, hut the whole church alike." J lis advice is to appeal from novelty to antl<|uity, and not to the pope or present church. " This direction is hut for new heresies at their first rising; hefore they falsify the rules of ancient faith, hefore they corrupt ancient writers, or can pretend to antic[uity, and hefore hy the larjre spreading of the venom, they endeavor to corrupt the volumes of our ancestors." But dilated and inveterate heresies are not to he set upon this w'ay, hecause they have had a long occasion of stealing truth ; and therefore we must convince such ancient heresies and schisms by the only authority of the Scripture if there be need or avoid them. Lirincns. cap, 4. «fcc.

Augustin ad Januariuni said ; " they load our religion w^ith servile burdens, which God in mercy would have to be free, with a very few and most manifest sacraments of celebration ; so that the condition of the Jews was more tolerable, that were subject to legal sacraments, and not to the presumptions of men." Gersoii. Vita Spirit, anima, led. 2. par 3, addeth, " If in thy days thou didst mourn, O wise Augustin, what wouldst thou have said in our time 1 where according to the variety and motion of heads, there is incredible variety and dissonant multiplicity of such servile burdens, and as thou callest them, of human presumptions. Among which as so many snares of souls, and entangling nets, there is scarce any man that walks secure, and is not taken, or caught."

In the judgment of Augustin and Gerson, have any novelties been brought into the church? did all your presumptions and burdens, and as Gerson calls them, halters for souls, come from the apostles, or are they your own 1 When all is thus overcome with novelty, do you make any question whether any thing be new 1

Bernard thought that human traditions were too mucii befriended, when he thus describeth the assemblies that he approveth, Epist. 91; " Such a council do I delight in, in which the traditions of men are not obstinately defended, or superstitiously observed : but they do diligently and humbly inquire, what is the good and well pleasing, and perfect will of God"

General councils by error introduced novelties, when later councils were fain to undo what the former had done: for so doth Augustin profess they did, saying, Z^c Bapiis. cont. Donat. lib. 2. cap. 6, " Councils themselves that are gathered through several regions and provinces, do without any scruple yield to the authority of more plenary councils that are gathered out of the whole Christian world ; and those same plenary councils do often yield or give place, the former to the later, when by some experiment of matters, that which was shut is opened, and that which lay hid is known."

What should hinder the introduction of novelty when general councils do so often err ? If such councils be morally and interpretatively the whole church, as the Papists say, then the whole church doth err in the reception of some novelty, before they declare it by their decrees. If you say that general councils cannot err, nor introduce such novelties, Bellarmin and many give you the lie : for De concil. lib. 2. cap. 11, he saith, " it cannot be answered that those councils erred because they were not lawful; for to most of them there was nothing wanting but the pope's assent. The second at Ephesus was altogether like that at Basil: for both were called by the pope; in both of them the pope's legate shortly after went away ; in both of them the pope was excommunicated; and yet, that the council of Ephesus erred; the adversaries will not den3^ Hence he con-cludeth that " the chief power ecclesiastical is not in the church, nor in the council, the pope being removed."

What should hinder, when there is but one man's vote against it, even the pope's, but that novelty and error may enter at any time, and when that one man is so wicked and heretical as he is ? General councils are but mere name and mockery. The packing of them ; the paucity and non-universality of them ; and the management of their affairs show it. They do nothing since the papal reign, but what the pope will, excepting the condemned councils. They have no being till he will, nor make any decrees but what he will, nor arc their decrees of any further power than ho is pleased to give them. So that his will is the sense of the general council or universal church. Sleidan and \ ergerius of Trent

tell US; "The Holy Ghost went to that council in a cloakbag from Rome." Espencccus Titus I. Bellar-min de coiicU. lib. 2. cap. 11, says; "We must know that the pope is vvout to send legates, instructed concerning- the judgment of the apostolic seat, with this condition, that if the council do consent to the judgment of the apostolic seat, it shall be formed into a decree; if not the forming of the decree shall be deferred till the Pope of Rome, being advised with, shall return his answer. In the council of Basil, Ses. 2, it was decreed by common consent, together with the pope's legate, that a council is above the pope; which certainly is now judged erroneous." The councils of Lateran and Florence decreed the contrary. Pighius saith, Hierarch. Eccles. 1. 6. " The councils of Constance and Basil went about, by a new trick and pernicious example, to destroy the ecclesiastical hierarchy, and instead of it to bring in the domination of a promiscuous confused popular multitude; that is, to raise again Babylon itself, subjecting to themselvs, or to the community of the church, which they falsly pretend that they represent, the very head and prince of the whole church, and him that is the vicar of Christ himself in this his kingdom; and this against order and nature, against the clearest light of Gospel verity, against the undoubted faith and judgment of the orthodox church itself"

Thus general councils with the pope's nuncio may bring in novelties in faith, against the^clearest light of the Gospel, and the full consent of antiquity; and yet those councils affirmed their opinions to be matters of faith, and the opposite to be heretical and damnable, and contrary to all antiquity. Hence novelties are matters of faith. The French to this day are guilty of those novelties, and charge their adversaries with innovation.

General councils themselves are but novelties, though they are the foundation of the faith of one half of the Papists, as the pope is of the other ? Pighius Hierarch. Eccles. lib. 6. cap 1. saith; "General councils have not a divine or supernatural original, but merely human original and are the invention of Constantino; profitable indeed sometimes to find out in controversy

20

which is the orthodox catholic truth: though to this they are not necessary, seeing it is a readier way to advise with the apostolic seat.*' Is your representative church the foundation of your faith, a novelty of Con-stantine's invention; and yet are you in the old way, and must we be put to prove you to be novelists'?

Do you think those popes did go the old way, of whom Alvarus Pelagius speaks, Planctu Eccles. art. 15. lib. 2; "They succeeded in authority, but not in sanctity, intruding themselves, procuring, bargaining, &c. building towers and palaces in Babylon, that is in Rome according to Jerom." Some foul innovation sure they were guilty of that so re-edified Babylon.

This is my first proof that you are novelists; from the general accusations of others, and confessions of your own.

2. Another proof that changes may be, and yet the time and authors be kn wn ; is, from the instance of other churches, which have b*en corrupted or subverted by innovations, and yet the time and authors are unknown. You accuse the churches in Habassia of many errors yourselves; and you are not able to tell us when they came in, or who introduced them. The same may be said of the Georgians, Armenians, Egyptians, and of the Greeks and Russians. Can you tell us when, and by whom, each error was introduced, that corrupted the churches mentioned in the Scripture .'* Corinth, Philippi, Colosse, Thessalonica, Ephesus, Lao-dicea, and the rest. You can give us no better account of that than we can of the authors of your own corruptions.

Among the primitive fathers, whose writings are come to our hands, many errors had the major vote; as that corporeity of angels, which your second general council at Nice owned, the millenary conceit, and many more which you confess to be errors. Tell us when any of those came in, if you can, unless you believe that Papias received the last from John, and then it is no error. Who did first induce the Asian churches to celebrate Easter at a season differing from yours? who first brought the Britons to it ? We know not certainly who first converted many nations on earth, nor when

they first received tlioir Cliristianity: and how then should we know wlien they first received each error .'

Good men did bring in novelties: and what was by them introduced as indifferent, by custom grew to seem necessary: and what they received as a doubtful opinion was esteemed a point of faith. The presbyters and whole clergy of Neocesarea were oflfended with Basil for his innovations ; for bringing in a new psalmody, or way of singing to God, and for his new order ■of monastics : and they told him that none of that was so in Gregory's days. What answered Basil ? He denieth not the novelty of this psalmody, but retorts again on them, that their litany also was new, and not knoNvn in the time of Gregory Thaumaturgus ; " How know you, says he, that those things were not in the days of Gregory? for you have kept nothing unchanged to this day of all that he was used to." You see what changing was then in the church among all sorts, when such an alteration was made in less than forty years. Yet Basil would not have any unity to be laid on any of those things, but addeth; "We pardon all those things, though God will examine all things : only let the principal things be safe." Basil Epist. 63. Isidore Pelusiota lib. 1. Epist. 90, saith ; "The apostles .of the Lord studying to restrain and suppress unmeet loquacity, and shewing themselves masters of modesty and gravity to us, did by wise councils permit women to sing in the churches. But as all God's documents are turned into the contrary, so this is turned to dissoluteness, and the occasion for sin. For they are not affected with deep compunction in singing divine hymns; but abusing the sweetness of the singing, to the irritating and provoking of lust, they take it for no better than stage-play songs." Therefore he adviseth that they be suffered to sing no more.

Here you see; that changes had happened about many divine things: that he adviseth himself the introducing of this novelty, that wom^n be forbidden singing in the church, because of the abuse, though he confess it a wise apostolic order. So that for novelty by good men to creep into God's worship, is not strange.

3. Moreover the nature of the thing may tell all the

world, that neither you nor we can account for the beginning of every error that crcepeth into the church; for the distance of time is great. Historians are not so exact: and what they tell us not, neither you, nor we can know—Much history is perished—Much is corrupted by your wicked forgeries—Mixtures of fables have hindered the credit of much of it—Nations are not individual persons, but consist of millions of individuals: and as it is not a whole nation that is converted to the faith at once, so neither is it whole nations that are perverted to heresy at once, but one receiveth it first, and then more and more, till it overspread the whole. Paul saitli that such doctrine eateth like gangrene'; and that is by degrees, beginning on one part, and proceeding to the rest. That which is at first received but as an opinion and an indifl^erent thing, must have time to grow into a custom, and that custom maketh it a law, and makes opinions grow up to be articles of faith, and ceremonies grow to be necessary things. This is the common way of propagating opinions in the world. Usher dc successu, et statu Ecchs. Mornaifs Mysteiy of Iniquity, and Rivet in the defence of him against Costcrellus. Pet. Molinaus hath purposely written a book de Novitate Pa'pismi, et Antiqvitate veri Christianismi, showing the newness of Popery in the several parts of it.

4. Can you tell us yourselves, when many of your doctrines or practices sprung up ? When took you up your Sabbath''s fast, for such you have been condemned by a council ? When the twentieth canon of the Nicene council, and when the canons at Trull were made. It was the practice of the church through the known world, to pray and perform other worship standing, and to avoid kneeling on the Lord's day: Tell us when this canon and tradition was first violated by you, and by whom 1 It was once the custom of your church to give infi\nts the Eucharist: Who first broke it of!'? It was once your practice to communicate in both kinds : Who first denied the cup to the Laity? At first it was only a doubtful opinion, that saints are to be prayed to, and the dead prayed for, which came into men's minds about the third or fourth century: But

who first made them articles of faith ? Augustin began to doubt, whether there were not some kind of Purgatory: But who first made this also a point of faith? Who was it that first added the books of the Maccabees, and many others to the canon of Scripture, contrary to the council of Laodicea, and all the rest of the consent of antiquity. Who was it that first taught and practised the putting an oath to all the clergy of the Christian church to be true to the Pope, and to obey him as the Vicar of Christ ? Wlio first taught men to swear that they would not interpret Scripture, but according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers ? Who was the first that brought in the doctrine or name of Transub-stantiation 1 and who first made it an article of faith ? Who first made it a point of faith to believe that there are just seven sacraments, neither fewer nor more? Did any before the council of Trent swear men to receive and profess without doubting, all things delivered by the canons and Oecumenical councils, when at the same time they cast off themselves the canons of many general councils, and so are generally and knowingly perjured? These and abundance more you know to be novelties with you, if wilfulness or gross ignorance bear not rule with you; and without great impudence you cannot deny it. Tell us when these first came up, and satisfy yourselves.

Apneas Sylvius, Epist 288, saith, " before the council of Nice, there was little respect had to the church of Rome." You see here the time is mentioned, when your foundation was not laid.

Cardinal iVico/a5 Cusanus, de Concord. Cathol. c. 13, &c., as plainly tells you; "that the Papacy is but of positive right ] and that the priests are equal: and that it is subjectional consent that gives the pope and bishops their majority; and that the distinction of dio-cess, and thai a bishop be over presbyters, are of positive right; and that Christ gave no more to Peter than the rest; and that if the Congregate Church should choose the bishop of Trent for their president or head, he should be more properly Peter's successor than the bishop of Rome." Tell us now when did the contrary doctrine first arise?

20»

Gregory de Valcntia, de leg. usu Euchar. ca'p. 10. states, '• that the receiving the sacrament in one kind, began not by the decree of any bishop, but by the very use of the churches, and the consent of believers : and that it is unknown when that custom first begun, or got head, but that it was general in the Latin Church, not long before the late council of Constance." And may you not see in this, how other points came in ?

If Pope Zosimus had but had his will, and the fathers of the Carthage council had not diligently dis covered, shamed, and resisted his forgery, the world had received a new Nicene canon, and we should never have known the original of it.

The Latin tongue was the vulgar tongue, when the Liturgy and Scripture was first written in it; at Rome, and far and near, it was understood by all. The service was not changed, as to the language: butthe language itself changed: and so Scripture and Liturgy came to be in an unknown tongue. When did the Latin tongue cease to be understood by all? Tell us what year, or by whom the change was made? Erasmus Decl. ad ceiisur. Paris, tit. 12. sect. 41, saith; "The vulgar tongue was not taken from the people, but the people departed from it"

5. Your errors were not in the times of the apostles, nor long after, and therefore they are innovations. If I find a man in a dropsy, or a consumption, I would not tell him, that he is well, and ought not to seek remedy, unless he can tell when he began to be ill, and what caused it.

You take us to be heretical: and yet 3'ou cannot tell us when our errors did first arise. Will you tell us of Luther? You know the Albigenses whom you murdered by hundreds and thousands, were long before him. JDo you know when they begun ? Your Reine-rius saith, that some said, they were from Silvester's days; and some said since the apostles: but no other beginning do you know.

6. What need we any more than to find you owning the very doctrine and practice of innovation? When you maintain that you can make us new articles of faith, and new worship, and new discipline, and that

the Pope can dispense with the Scriptures, and such like: what reason have we to believe that your church abhorreth novelty ?

Pope Leo X., among other of Luther's opinions, reckoned and opposed this as licretical; " It is certain that it is not in the hand of the church or pope, to make articles." Bulla co?tt. Luther.

The council of Constance that took the supremacy justly from the pope, did unjustly take the cup from the laity in the Euciiarist; " Though in the primitive church this sacrament was received by believers under both kinds.-'

The council of Trent say, Sess. 21. cap. 1,2; " This power was always in the church : that in dispensing the sacraments, saving the substance of them, it might ordain or change things, as it should judge most expedient to the profit of the receiver."

Vasquez To. 2. Disp. 216. N. 60, saith : "Though we should grant that this was a precept of the apostles, nevertheless the church and pope might on just causes abrogate it: for the power of the apostles was no greater than the power of the church and pope, in bringing in precepts."

Pope Innocent says ; by the fulness of our power, we candispense with the law above law. The Gloss therein saith; '-The pope dispenseth against the apostle; against the Old Testament. The pope dispenseth with the Gospel, interpreting it." Gregory de Valent. Tom. 4. disp, b. 8; saith; " Certainly some things in later times are more rightly constituted in the church than they were in the beginning." Cardinal Perron said, lib''2: Obs. 3. cap. 3. against King .Tames; on the authority of the church to alter matters contained in the Scripture: and he instanced of the form of sacraments being alterable; and the Lord's command, drink ye all of it, mutable and dispensable. Tolet; " It is certain, that all things instituted by the apostles were not of divine right. Andradius Defens. Concil. Trid. lib. 2. p. 236 ; hence it is plain that they do not err that say the popes of Rome may sometime dispense with laws made by Paul and the four first councils. Bzovius saith : " The Roman church using apostolical power,

doth according to the condition of times, change all things for the better," And yet will you submit to be taken for changers and novelists ? Chemniiius Exam-in. concil. Trident.

Augustin Triumph, cle Ancon. q. 5. art. l,saith; "To make a new creed, belongs only to the pope: because he is the head of the Christian faith, by whose authority all things belonging to faith are confirmed and strengthened." Art. 2] "As he may make a new creed, so he may multiply new articles upon new articles." I?}i Prafat. sum. ad Johan 22; " The pope's power is infinite ; because the Lord is great, and his strength great, and of his greatness there is no end:" and Q 36 ; " The pope giveth the motion of direction, and the sense of knowledge, to all the members of the church ; for in him we live and move and have our being. The Vv'ill of God, and consequently the pope's will, who is his vicar, is the first and chief cause of all motions corporal and spiritual " Then no doubt he may change without blame.

Abbas Panormitan. cap. C. Christus de hacret. n. 2. saith: " The pope can bring in a new article of faith," Peter de Anchoran. asserts: " The pope can make new articles of faith; such as now ought to be believed, when before they ought not to be believed."

Tiirrecrcmat. sum. de Eccl. lib, 2. cap. 20d, said; "The pope is the m asiire and rule, and science of thing's to be believed." August, de Ancona shews us that "the judgment of God is not higher than the pope s, but the same; therefore no man may appeal from the pope to God :" Qu. 6. Art, 1.

The following is a great Popish argniiunt for the Papacy.

" It will not be denied that the church of Rome was once a most pure, excellent, flourishing and mother church ; and her faith renowned, in the world, Ro?n. 1. 8. ct 6. et 16. Whitens Def. Wkiiaker^s Answer to Sanders. Fulke cap. 21. Thes. 7. Reynolds Conclusion^.

That church could not cease to be such, but she must fall either by apostacy. heresy, or schism.

Apostacy is not only a renouncing of the faith of Christ; but of the name and title of Christianity. No man will say that the church of Rome had such a fall, or so fell.

Heresy is an adhesion or fast cleaving" to some private or singular opinion, or error in faith, contrary to the generally approved doctrine of the church.

If the church of Rome did ever adhere to any singular or new opinion, disagreeable to the common received doctrine of the Christan world, I pray you satisfy me in those particulars; by what general council was she ever condemned i* which of the fathers ever writ against her? by what authority was she otherwise reproved /

For it seems to be a thing very incongruous, that so great a church should be condemned by every private person, who hath a mind to condemn her.

Schism is a departure or division from the unity of tlie church, whereby the bond and communion held with some former church ir^ broken and dissolved.

If ever the church of Rome divided herself from any body of faithful Christians, or broke communion, or went forth from the society of any elder church, I pray you satisfy me in those particulars: whose company did she leave ? from what body went she forth? where was the true church she forsook /

It appears not a little strange, that a church should be accounted schismatical, when there cannot be assigned any other church different from her, which from asfe to ag-e since Christ's time hath continued visible, from which she departed."

^inswer to the foregoing ^Irgument.

If the author of this argument thinks as he speaks, it is a case to be lamented with tears of blood, that the church of Christ should be abused, and the souls of men deluded by men of so great ignorance. But if he knew that he doth but juggle and deceive, it is lamentable that any matter of salvation should fall into such hands.

The word church here is ambiguous, and either sig-nifieth, a particular church which is an association of Christians for personal communion in God's worship, or divers such associations, or churches associated for communion by their officers or delegates, for unity sake. Or else it may signify one mistress church that is the ruler of all the rest in the world. Or else it

may signify the universal church itself, which contain-eth all the particular churches in the world.

The Papist should not have played either the blind man or the juggler by confounding those, and never telling us which he means. For the first we grant him that Rome vvas once an excellent flourishing church; and so was Ephesus, Jerusalem, Philippi, Colosse and many more.

As to the :^econd sense, it is human or from church custom, so to take the word church ; for Scripture doth not so use it: but for the thing we are indifferent: though it cannot be proved that in Scripture times Rome had any more than one particular church.

As to the third and fourth senses, we deny, as confidently as we do that the sun is darkness, that ever in Scripture times Rome was either a mother to all churches, or the raler and mistress of all, or yet the universal church itself. Prove that and I will turn Papist I

But there is not a word for it in the texts cited, but an intimation of much against it. Paul calleth Rome a church and commendeth its faith : but doth he not so by the Thessalonians, Colossians, Ephesians, Philip-pians, &c. and John by the Philadelphians, Pergamos, Thyatira, and others, as well.'' And will not this prove that Rome was but such a particular church as one of them ?

Rome was once a true and famous particular church, but never the unitersal church, nor the ruler of the world, or of all other churches, in Paul's days. Would you durst lay your cause on this, and put it to the trial.? Why else did never Paul make one word of mention of this power and honor, nor send other churches to her to be governed ?

What is it to me, whether Rome be turned either apostate, heretical, or schismatical, any more than whether Jerusalem, Ephesus, Philippi, or any other church be so fallen? if you are not fallen I am glad of it; if you are I am sorry for it; and so I have done with you, unless I knew how to recover you. Would you not laugh at the church of Jerusalem that was truly the mother church of the world, if they should thus reason; " We are not fallen away: therefore we must

rule over all the world, and no man is a Christian that dotli not obey us? "

We accuse you not of renouncing the name of Christ; but according to your own definition of heresy, you are guilty of many heresies.

To your questions, I answer. What general councils did ever condemn onehalf of the heresies mentioned by Epiphanius, August in or Philastrius ? Was there ever a greater rubble of heresies than before ever a general council was known? and were they dead and buried before the first general council was born? Did you not smile when you wrote those delusory questions ; How can a general council condemn you, or any great part of the church ? for instance, the Greeks, &c. If you be not there, it is not a general council ? And will you be there to condemn yourselves ? You have more wit, and less grace. General councils did ever condemn the Greeks, for those many errors charged on them ? If the Greeks themselves were not there, it was not a general council: so considerable a part are they of the professing church. And what general council hath condemned the Abassines, Egyptians, &c.

Do you think general councils are so stark mad or horridly impious, as to condemn so many kingdoms with one condemnation for heresy? They know that men must be heard, before they be condemned, and a kingdom consisteth of many millions ot souls. It is not enough to know every man's faith, if we know the faith of the king, or pope, or arch-bishop, or prelates. How long shall they be examining each person in many kingdoms.?

Yet I can say more of your church than of others. He that kills the head, kills the man. Your usurping head is an essential part of your new-formed church : but your head hath been condemned by councils; therefore your church in its essential part hath been condemned by councils. Do you not know that all the world condemned your Pope Marcellinus for offering to idols ? Know you not that two or three general councils condemned Pope Honorius as a monothelite ? that the second general council of Ephesus condemned and excommunicated your pope? And that the council

of Basil, called by him, did the like 1 If you do not, see Bellarmin's parallel of them, de. ConcUiis lib. 2. cap. 11. Do I need to tell you what the council of Constance did ? Or for what Jo/m XXII, alias XXIII, and Johii XIII, and other Popes were deposed by councils? Do I need to tell you how many Fathers condemned Marcellinus, Liberius, Honorius and others/ How oft Hilary Pictavius fragmentis in Epist. Liberii, doth cry out. Anathema iibi, Liberi, prcevaricator: presuming to curse and excommunicate your pope. Need I tell you what Tertullian saith against Zephe-rinus.'' what Alphonsus a Castro, and divers of your own, say against Liberius, Honorius, Anastasius, Ce-lestin; and tell us that many popes have been heretics .-' At least permit us to believe Pope Adrian VI., himself. Bannes in T. 2. q. 1. art. 10, proves at large against Pighius, that a pope may be a heretic; and laughs at Pighius that now, after two hundred years, would prove them false witnesses, who write that Pope Honorius was condemned for a heretic by three popes, Agatho, Leo II. and Adrian II.

But though the popes have been condemned by councils, yet so have not your maintained doctrines. Did not the councils at Constantinoplecondemn the doctrine of the second Nicene council for image-worship, and the council at Frankford do the like 7 and those two at Constantinople were much more general than your council of Trent was.

That same council at Nice condemned the doctrine of Thomas Aquinas, and your doctors commonly, of worshipping the image of Christ, and the cross, and sign of the cross, with Latria, divine worship.

Did not your general councils at Lateran and Florence declare that the pope i above a council, and that they cannot depose him ? Yet your general councils at Constance and Basil determine the contrary as an article of faith, and expressly affirm the former to be heresy. Then your own doctrine, even in a fundamental point, is condemned by general councils of your own, which side soever you take, the pope's, or the council's.

Did not the sixth eouncil of Carthage, of which

Augustia was a priiicipal member, not only detect Pope Zosimus' forged canon of Nice, but also openly and prevalently resist and reject his usurpation, and refuse his Legates and Appeals? Pope Boniface, Epist. ad Eidalium, says, " Aurelius, sometime bishop of Carthage, with his colleagues, did begin, by the deviTs instigation to wax proud against the church of Rome, in the times of our predecessors, Boniface and Celestin."

Harding against Jewel's challenge, art. 4. sect. 19: says, " After the whole African church had persevered in schism the space of twenty years, and had removed themselves from the obedience of the apostolic seat, being deduced by Aurelius Bishop of Carthage." Austin was one of them.

But you say, that this was not a general council. True; for when part riseth against part, it cannot be the whole that is on either side.

Do you not know that the Greeks have often condemned you? Truly their councils have been much more general than yours at Trent was ; where about forty bishops altered the canon of Scripture, and made tradition equal with it. This one county would have afforded a far better council of a greater number.

One general council hath condemned your very foundation; and that is the fourth general council at Calcedon, Act. 15. Can. 28, and Act. 16; where you may find, that the ancient privileges of the Roman throne were given them by the fathers in council. That the reason was, because Rome was the Imperial city. That they give equal privileges to the seat of Constantinople, because it was now become new Rome: and that the Roman Legates would not be present at that act. But the next day when they did appear, and pretended that this act was forced, the bishops all cried: " No man was compelled. It i.s a just decree. We all say thus. We approve it. AVe all approve it. Let that stand that is decreed. It is all right."

That general council thought they needed not the pope's approbation for the validity of their decrees : when they pass them and take them for valid, even contrary to the will of the pope. Did that council think that their decrees were invalid, if the pope ap-

21

prove them not? They did not. And who is now to be believed ? Bellarmin and his party, and the present prevalent party oi the Papists, that say, councils not approved by the pope are invalid or without authority: or the council of Calcedon that thought otherwise?

The pope's legates called that proceeding; " A humbling, and depressing, and wronging of the Papacy; and therefore entered their dissent." Bellarmin Con^ fession lib. 2. de Pontif. cap. 17. Binius Notes on that council. Baronius cm. 451.

The shifts of Bellarmin, Binius, Baronius, Becanus,-Gretser, &c., are false which say that canon was surreptitiously brought into the council, j^tiiis, Act. 16, openly professed the contrary, and all the bishops gave their consent to the last.

This is one of the four great councils which the Papists themselves compare to the four Gospels; and in it were six hundred and thirty fathers.

That great council is against them, and on the Protestant side, in the very foundation of all our differences, whether the Roman privileges be of divine or human right? And though it be but the privileges, and not the now claimed vicarship that was in question, yet the conclusion is the stronger against them, because the lesser was denied.

But their last shift is, that this clause or canon was not approved, and so is null. Mark then ; we have general councils against you ; but we want the pope's approbation. Was that the meaning of your question, what council ? that is what pope condemned our church? Can it be expected that a man should condemn himself? or, can you be no heretic till then?

Did not your pope aprove of that council, when Gregory L likened it with the other three to the four Gospels? and said " I embrace it with my whole devotion : I keep it with most entire approbation," Greg. 1. Regist. I. 1. Epist. 24. Decrees, Dist. 15. c. 2. This is expressly a full approbation, not without excepting any part only, but excluding all such exceptions. The like approbation of Gelasius in the Roman council, is cited there also in the decrees.

It is no hard matter to prove you condemned by your

own popes. If you could but undorstand llio plaincsl words, there needed no talk to persuade you that Pope Gregory I. condemned the title of universal bishop or patriarch ; proressing earnestly that he was the forerunner of antichrist that would usurp it. But the plain truth is, as sad experience tcachcth us, no words of fathers, popes or councils, much less of Scripture, arc intelliafible to you. But we may truly say of you, thai lay all on the will of the pope, as Lodovicus Vives freely speaketh, Schol. in August, lib. 20. de Civit. Del, cap. 20 ; " Those are taken by them for edicts and councils, which make for them, or are on their side : the rest they no more regard than a meeting of women in a workhouse or a \vashing place." Do you understand this lano-uaire o[ one too honest to have much company?

You have a third question; "By what authority was she otherwise reproved?" By the authority of that precept, Levit 19. 17. By the same authority that Paul reproved Peter, Galatians 2, and withstood him to the face. By such authority as any man may quench a fire in his neighbor's house: or pull a man out of the water that is drowning : or as any one psistor may reprove another when he sinneth. By the same authority as Irenasus rebuked Victor, and the Asian bishops withstood him ; and as Cyprian and the council of Carthage repro^ved Stephen ; and the rest aforecited did what they di'd. By as good authority as the church of Kome condemneth the Greek church, doth the Greek church and many others condemn the priests of Rome.

The next case is about the Roman schism. To question whether Papists be schismatics, is to question whether Ethiopians be black. Do you not at this day divide from all the Christian world, save yourselves? do you not unchurch all the Christians on earth. O dreadful presumption ! when Christ is so tender of his interest and his servants, and is bound, as it were, by so many promises to save them and not forsake them. " You ask, what church you left.? and when was it.? and whose company .?" Senseless questions ! By a church, if you mean the universal church there is but one in

all: and therefore one universal church cannot forsake another: but when part of it forsaketh the other part, and arrogateth the title of the whole to themselves, do you doubt whether that be schism 1 If you mean a particular church: how can Spain, Italy, France, and many more kingdoms, go out of a particular church, that contain so many hundred particular churches in them? No more than London can go out of Paul's church. The catholic is but one, containing all true Christians on earth: and you have been guilty of a most horrid schism. You have set up a church in the church; universal church in the universal church; a new form destructive to the old. Your pope as Christ's representative, is now an essential part of it, and no man is a member of it, that is not a member of the pope's body, and subject to him. So that even the antipodes, and the poor Abassines, that know not whether the pope be fish or flesh, or never heard of such a name or thing, must all be unchristened, unchurched and damned, if you be judges. Bellarmin tells us, which indeed your church constitution doth infer, that all that are duly baptized, are interpretatively or implicitly baptized into the pope.

As you have devised a new catholic church, so you hereby cast off and disown all the Christians of the world that be not of your party, determining that none of them can be saved : who yet had rather venture on your curse and censure than into your heresy and schism.

You fix yourselves in this schism, and put us who unfeignedly long for peace, out of all hope of ever having peace with you ; because you will hearken to it on no terms, but that all men become subjects to your usurping representative-Christ: which we dare as soon leap into the flre as do. Do you know now where the church or body was that you forsook ? It was all over the world where ever there was any Christians.

Were it not a great schism, think you, if a few Jesuits should say, we are the whole church, and all others arc heretics or schismatics? Or was it not a great schism of the Donatisls to arrogate that title to themselves, and unchurch so many others ? and what church

did they forsake ? Augustin tells them over and over, what tlie catholic church was that they willidrcw from ; even all true Christians dispersed over the earth: or that churcli which began at Jerusalem, and thence diffused itself tjjrough the world. But he never blames them for separating from the universal Roman head or vicar. But from the conspicuous combination of particular churches, Optatus and he do blame them for withdrawing.

What if John of Constantinople, in piosecution of his title of universal patriarch, had concluded as you, that none in the world are Christ's members but his members, nor of the church but his subjects, had not this been a notorious schism ? Tell us then what church he had forsaken.

But your last caution doth condemn yourselves. Must that church that is true be visible from Christ's timei* then Constantinople, nor most other, were never true churches, and Rome itself was never a true church. Did you think that there was a church at Rome in ChrisVs time? you are not so ignorant. By this rule there should be'no true church, but that at Jerusalem, and those in Judea.

But suppose you had said, since the apostles' time; that also had excluded most churches on earth. ^ But if you mean the universal church; it hath been visible ever since Christ's time : but not always in one place or country. Is not the greater part of Christians in the world, whom you schismatically unchurch, a visible company ? The Abassines and many churches out of the Roman empire did never so much as submit to your primacy of order, nor had you ever any thing to do with them, more than to own them as Christians; yet now are condemned by your arrogancy, because they will not begin, in the end of the world, to enter into a new church on which they nor their forefathers had ever any dependence. It was a shrewd answer of an old woman, that the emperor of Habassia's mother gave to Rodericus the Jesuit, pressing her to fee subject to the Pope as Vicar of Christ, or else shQ could not be subject to Christ. " We are in tht^ same belief as we were from the beginning: If it ^vere not right why did

no man in so many ages warn us of our error till now'?''' Mark here a double argument against the pope : one from apostolical tradition ; for Godignus himself saitli, that no man doubts but Ethiopia received the faith from tlie beginning even from the Eunuch. The other is, that pope, who cannot in so many ages look after his flock, to send one man to tell them that they erred till about one thousand five hundred years after Christ, was never intended by Christ to be the universal governor of the world. Will Christ set any on an impossible work 1 or make it so necessary to people to olje}' one that they never so much as hear from ? But what said the Jesuit to the old woman ! he told her ; " The Pope of Rome who is ihe pastor of the whole church of Christ, was not able in the years past to send doctors into Hab-assia, because the Mohammedans compassed all, and left not any passage to them. But now the seas are open, he can do that which he could not do before." Liter. Gonzal. Roder. in Godign. de llch. Abass. lib. 2. cap. 18. As if Christ had set either the pope or the Abas-sines an impossible task; and appointed a governor that for so many hundred years could not govern : or the people must be so man}- hundred years no Christians, though they believed in Christ, till the pope could send to them ? and how should those and all such countries send prelates to a general council 1

Canus Loc. Tlieol. saith of the Jesuits'; so say I of your new church ; " You are called to the society of Jesus Christ, which society being undoubtedly the church of Christ, let them see to it, that arrogate this title to themselves, whether they do not imitate heretics by a lying affirmation that the church is only witli them." Lib. 4. c. 2.

But we do not hence conclude that all that have lived and died in your profession, have been no members of the church, because your church is guilty of heresy, and notoriously of schism. Millions that live among you consent not to your usurpations ; and do not so much as understand your errors. Some hold them but no-tionally as inelTectual opinions. Every one is not a heretic that holdeth a point that is judged heretical, and which is heresy in another, that holdeth it in another

JUGGLING. '247

sort. And then; arc errors callcil heresies \)y most, wliich are not destructive to the essentials of Christianity, hut only to some integral j)art. There is a schism tliat doth not unchurch men, as well as a schism that doth. But your own writers put you hard to it, who conclude, as IJellarmin and many more do, that heretics and schismatics are no memhers of the churcii. Melch. Canus hoc. TlicoL lib. 4. cap. 2. saith ; " That heretics are no |)art of the church, is the common conclusion of all divines; not only of those that have written of late, hut of them also that hy their antiquity are esteemed the most nohle : this is attested hy Cyprian Augustin, Gregory, the two councils of Lateraii and Florence. Rightly therefore did Pope Nicholas define that the church is a collection of catholics. " If this be true, it is an article of faith: and then Alphonsus a Castro, and all of his mind are heretics and lost men. Two approved general councils have determined that a heretic is no member of the church: but multitudes of your own writers, and Pope Adrian, and many more of your popes have judged that a pope may be a heretic : and consequently no member of the church. What is become of your church, when an essential part of it is no part of the church 1

Your common shift, which Canus and others fl}' to, is, that "he must be a judged heretic before he is dismembered." But that is for manifestation to men; before God he is the same, if men never judge him. Where the case is notorious, the offender is cut off. Then it is in the pope's power, to let whole millions of heretics to be still parts of the church : and so the world shall be Christians or no Christians as he please. And why may he not let Turks and infidels on the same grounds be part of the church] for he may forbear to judge them, if that will serve. Then all the Christians in tlie world that the pope hath not yet judged and cast out, are members of the church. Millions thus are of the church that never were subjects of the pope. If you say it is enough that there is a general condemnation, of all that are guilty as they are : then it is enough to cut ofi' a pope, that there was a general condemnation against such as he is.

Two or three councils and three popes did all judge Pope Houorius guilty of heresy, and consequently both popes and general councils have judged that a pope may be an heretic: therefore you have been judged heretical in your head, which is an essential part of your church.

' Thus I have shewed what is the Romish schism, which being but a part, hath attempted to cut off all the rest, and so hath made a new pretended catholic church. As a part of the old church which con-sisteth of all Christians united in Christ, we confess, all those still to be a part, that destroy not this Christianity, but as you are new gathered to a Christ-representative, or vicar general, we deny you to be any church of Christ. If you be church members^ or saved,it must be as Christians ; but never as Papists : for a Papist may be a Christian, but not as a Pap>ist.

If you cannot see the church that you separate from, open your eyes and look into much of Europe, and all over Asia, where are any Christians: look into Armenia, Palestine, Egypt, Ethiopia, and many other countries, and you shall find that you are but a smaller part of the church. Antony Marinarius in the council of Trent complained ; " That the church is shut up in the corners of Europe, and yet domestic enemies arise, that waste this portion shut up in a corner. "

Sonnius of Antwerp, l>cwo?i.9^ra^. Relig. Christian, lib. 2. Tract. 5. c. 8, saith ; " I pray you what room hath the catholic church now in the habitable world ? scarce three ells long in comparison of that vastncss which the Satanical church doth possess."

If 3'et you boast tliat 3^ou have the same seat that formerly you had: I answer ; so have the bishops of Constantinople, Alexandria, and others whom you condemn. Gregory Nazianz. Orat. dc laud. Athanasii, says ; " It is a succession of godliness that is properly to be esteemed a succession. For he that professeth the same doctrine of faith, is also partaker of the same throne: but he that embraceth the contrary belief, ought to be judged an adversary though he be in the throne. This indeed hath the name of succession ; but the other hath tiie thintr itself, and the truth. For

JUGGLING.

249

he that brcakcth in hy force, as ahiindanco of poj)f'.s difl, is not to be cstcenied a successor; hut rather lie ihat sullereth force : nor he that breakctii tlic hiws ; but lie that is chosen in maimer agreeahli; to the laws : nor he tiiat iiokleth conlraiy tenets; but lie that is endued with tiie same faith. Unless any man call him a successor, as we say a sickness succeedeth health, or darkness succeedeth lii,dit, and a storm succeds a calm, or madness or distraction succeedeth prudence. "

To which may be added another Papist decision; " Because many princes and chief priests or popes and other inferiors, have been found to apostatize, the church consisteth in those persons in whom is the true knowledge and confession of faith and verity." Lijra Gloss. MaUhcio 16.

CHAPTER XXVII.

Succession of ('octfines.

Another of their deceits is this : I'o charge lis with introducing new articles of faith or points of religion, hi cause ice contradict the neto articles ichich ihcj/ introduce, and then they recjiiire us to ijrove our doctrines inhirh are but the negatives of theirs.

We receive no doctrine of faith or worship but what was delivered by the apostles to the church. Those men bring in abundance of new ones, and say without proof, that they received them from t.he apostles. And because we refuse to receive their novelties, they call our rejections of them, the doctrines of our religion; and feign us to be the innovators. By this device, it is in the power of any heretic to force the church to take up new points of faith. If a Papist shall say, that besides the Lord's prayer, Christ gave his disciples anotlier form, or two, or three, or many ; or that he gave them ten new commandments not mentioned in the Bible ; or that he oft descended after his ascension, and conversed with them ; or that Christ instituted twenty sacraments, how should we deal with those men, but by denying their

fictions as sinful novelty, and rejecting them as corrupt additions to the faith? and were tliis any novelty in us? and should they hid us prove in the express words of Scripture or antiquity, our negative propositions, that Christ gave but one form of prayer, that he did not oft descend, that he gave no more decalogues, s?icraments, ^c. ? Is it not a sufficient proof of any of these, that they are not written ; and that no tradition of them from the apostles is proved ; and that they who hold the affirmative, and introduce the novelty, must prove, and not we ? Our articles of faith are the same, and not increased, nor any new ones added : but the Papists come in with a new faith, as large as all the novelties in the decretals and the councils : and those innovations of theirs we reject. Now our rejections do not increase the articles of our faith, no more than my beating a dog out of my house, or keeping out an enemy, or sweeping out the filth, doth enlarge my house or increase my family. They do not take all the anathemas and rejections in their own councils, to be canons or articles of faith. The pope hath made it an ariicle of faith, " no Scripture is to be interpreted but according to the unanimous consent of the fatliers. " This we reject and make it no article of our faiih, bu^t an erroneous novelt}'. Do w^e hereby make a new article, because we reject a new one of theirs l part of the oath made bj/ Pope Pius after the council of Trent. If this be an article, j)rove it. If it be a truth and no novelty, which be fathers, and which not? help us to know certainly, when we have all or the unanimous consent. Then tell us, whether every man is not forsworn with you,.that interprets any text of Scripture before he have read all the fathers; or any text which they do not unanimously agree on? We can easily prove to you, that this is a new article of your devising. Because else no man must expound any Scripture at all before those fathers were born. For how could the church before them have their unanimous consent l otherwise those fathers themselves wanted an article of faith ; unless it was an article to them, that they must expound no Scripture but by their own consent. Few of those fathers ex[)ound the twentieth part of the Scripture. They took liberty to disagree among themselves,

and thcrofoi'C do not unanimously consent in abundance of particular texts. Tliey tell us that tliey an; fallihle, and bid us not take it on their trust. The apostles have left us no such rule or |>recept, hut nuich to the contrary. Your own doctors, for all their oath, char<;<! the fathers with error and niiscxpoundint]^ Scripture, ('aims and many others charge Cajetan, a cardinal and |)illar in your church, with making it his practice to difl'er from the fathers, and choosing exjiositions purposely for the novelty ; as his custom. And when he hath highly extolled Cajetan, Loc. Thcol. lib.7. he adds; *'yet his doctrine was defiled with a lej)rosy of errors, by an affection and lust of curiosity, or confidence in his wit, expounding Scripture as he list; more acutely than happily : because he regarded not ancient tradition, and was not versed in the reading of the fathers, and would not learn from them the mysteries of the scaled book." He also blames him, that he always followed the Hebrew and Greek text. Many Papists arc blamed for the same faults. Andradius, and others plead for it. Yet those men are counted members of your church, that iro against an article of your new faith and oath.

Transubstantiation is one of your new articles in that oath. Do we make a new one now if we reject it ? Or need we be put to prove the negative ? Albertinus hath done it unanswerably.

Another of your articles is, that "it belongeth to your holy mother the church to judge of the true sense of Scripture. " You mean the Roman church ; and that they must judge of it for all the Christian world. Prove this to be the ancient doctrine if you can. If we reject this novelty, are we innovators'? or need we prove the negative? yet we can do it. Did Athanasius, Basil, Nazianzen, Nyssen, Augustin, Jerom, Chrysostom, Ep-iphanius, and the rest of the fathers, send to Rome for the sense of the Scriptures which they expound; or did they procure the pope's approbation before any of them published their commentaries ?

The like may be said of all the rest of yonr new articles, and practices. Some of your novelties we reject as trit!es, some as smaller errors, and some as greater: but still we keep to our ancient faith, of which

the Scripture is a full and sufficient rule, as Vineentius Lirinensis saith, though we are glad of all helps to understand it. We say with Tertullian de came Christie cap. G. " Nothing depends upon it, because Scripture does not exhibit it.—They prove it not, because it is not written.—Those who thus argue we resist."

CHAPTER XXVIII.

Popish xcant of Chanty.

Another of their deceits is this: They take advantage of our chariiahle judgment of the7n, and of their uncharitahle judgment of ns and all other Christians., to affright and inticc people to their sect. They say, that we cannot be saved, nor any that are not of the Roman church : but we say, that a Papist may be saved. They say, that we want abundance of the articles of faith that are of necessity to salvation. We say, that the Papists hold all that is necessary to salvation. Luther saith, that the kernel of true faith is yet in the church of Rome ; therefore say they, let Protestants take the shell. Hence they make the simple people believe, that even according to our own confiessions, their church and way is safer than ours.

Vergerins Opera, page 230, says ; " That great good the truth doth not flow from the Papac}', but from the true church of Christ persecuted by Rome."

1. The Papists' denying the faith and salvation of all other Christians doth not invalidate our faith, nor shake our salvation. Our religion doth not cease to be true, whenever a peevish adversary will deny or accuse it. Men are in never the more danger of damnation, because a Papist tells them that they shall be damned. W^e believe not that the pope hath the power of the keys of heaven, that he can keep out whom he please. We have a promise of salvation from Christ, and we can bear the threatening of a pope. When Bellarmin judged Pope Sixtus damned himself, it is strange that he should have a power before to dispose of heaven to others, and

JUGGLING. '^53

shut out whom lie pleased, that must be shut out lilm-self. The Novatiaus, Donatists, or any sect, that held the substance of the Christian faith, might have pleaded this argument as well as the Papists. For they also have the courage to pass the sentence of damnation upon others, if that will serve turn: and we have the charity to say, that some of them may be saved.

2. If by the Papists' own confession, charity be the life of all the graces or holy qualities of the soul, and that which above all others proveth a man to be justified, and in a state of salvation, then judge by this argument of their own, whether our charitableness or their unchar-itableness be the better sign, and whether it be safer to join with the charitable or the uncharitable? yea with them that are so notoriously uncharitable, as to condemn the far greatest part of the church of Christ merely because they are not Papists 1

3. When we say, that a Papist may be saved, it is with all these limitations : that a Papist as a Christian may be saved, but not as a Papist. As a man that hath the plague may live ; but not by the plague ; that Popery is a great enemy and hindrance to men's salvation ; and therefore that those among them that are saved, must be saved from Popery and not h)/ it ; that therefore salvation is a rarer thing among the Papists, than among the reformed catholics. Where it is most difficult, it is like to be most rare. Many more of the orthodox are likely to be saved than of the Papists; because where Popery prevaileth against Christianity, and so much mastereth the heart and life, that the Christian doctrine is not practically received, there is no salvation to be had for such, without conversion. Thus is it that we say a Papist may be saved. Hunnius wrote a book to prove them no Christians, and Perkins hath written another to prove, that a Papist cannot go beyond a reprobate. I must needs say so too, of all those in whom Popery is predominant practically, and overcometh Christianity, But yet I doubt not, but God hath thousands among them that shall be saved : of the common people that are forced to forbear contradicting the priests, and that understand not, or receive not all the mysteries of their deceit: and practically give themselves to a

holy life. Though I have known none such, yet when I read ihc writings of Gerson, Kenipis, Thauler, Ferus, Barbanson, Benedictus, Anglus, Renty, and such others; though I see much of error, and mere affectation; yet I am easily persuaded to believe, that they had the Spirit of God, and that there are many more such among them. But I should be sorry if holiness were not much more common among us, and freer from the mixtures of error and affectation.

4. For our saying, that they have the kernel, and so much as is necessary to salvation, it is true, but ii is the same kernel that we hold, and we have it undefilcd and unpoisoned ; and the Papists mix it with the venom of their errors. He that hath all things in his meat and drink that I have in mine, may yet make it worse than mine, if he will put poison in it. When you have all things necessary in a precious antidote or other medicine, you may soon mar all, by putting in more as the Papists do.

Christianity is enough to save them that mar it not, but keep it practically and predominantly. Even as a man that takes poison, and he that taketh none, are both of them men; and he that takes the poison may be said to have all the same parts and members as the other, and yet not be so likely to live, as he that lets it alone : and I cannot say but many that take it may recover : and if you ask me ; which be they ? I say, all tliose that timely cast it up again, or else whose strength of nature prevaileth against it and keepeth it from mastering the heart or vital powers, shall be recovered and live ; but those in whom the poison prevaileth and is predominant, shall die. So all those Papists that receive the errors of Popery, as either to cast them up again ; or that they are not predominant to the subduing of the power of Christian faith and holiness, by keeping them from being sincere, and practical, and predominant, those shall be saved but not the rest.

Now if upon those grounds, an}- man shall think thai Popery is the safer way, because we say, that they have all that is necessary to salvation, objectively in their creed, and that a Papist may be saved ; upon the same terms that man may be persuaded that it is safer taking

poison, becauso tliat lio liatlj all tlio parts of a man that takes it, and possihly nature may prevail, and he may live, lint yet 1 shall let the poison alone.

5. Papists that say, that a Protestant cannot he saved, do yet maintain that an inlidel may be saved, or one that hclicveth not the articles of the Christian faith* Vou will think this strange. But I insist on the i)roof of it, to the uses, that 3'oii may see, that their censures proceed from mere design or partiality; that they make believing in the pope to be more necessary than believing in Christ, or in the Holy Ghost', how holy their church is that admitteth of infidels ;—on what grounds they deny, that we may be one catholic church with the fathers, Greeks, Egyptians, Abassines, Armenians, Wal-denscs, <fec. because of son)e diftcrences; when yet they themselves can be one church with inlidels, or such as deny the articles of the creed, or at least believe them not; and how well their religion hangs together, and also how well they are agreed among themselves, even abont the essentials of Christianity itself, whether they be of necessity to salvation or not.

Franc, a Scuicta Clara in his Deus, Natura, Gra-iia, Problem. 15, et 16, tells us ; " The doctors commonly teach, that a just and probable ignorance ought to excuse : and that, it is probable, when one hath a probable foundation or ground. As a countryman, when he believes that a thing is lawful, drawn by the testimony of his parish priest or parents: or when a man seeing reasons that are probable on both sides, doth choose those which seem to him the more probable; which yet indeed are against the truth, to which he is otherwise well affected. In this case he erreth without fault, though he err against the truth, and so labor of the contrary ignorance. Hither is it to be reduced, when the articles of iaith are not propounded in a due manner; as by frivolous reasons, or by impious men : for then to believe, were an act of imprudence, saith Aquinas L. 2. q. 1.

415

So that if the truth of Scripture be so propounded as to seem most improbable, it is no sin to disbelieve it: and if such are excused, as by a parent or parish priest are seduced, and that have not a due proposal of the

truth ; then it must follow, that the heathens and infidels are innocent, that never had Christ proposed any way to them, and by iheir parents have been taught Mohammedanism, or Paganism. But I can prove, that even the want of a due proposal is a punishment for their sin? and that they ought themselves to seek after the truth ? and that it is of "their own sins that necessary truths do seem improbable to them? will sin excuse sin?

He alsotelleth us; "As to the ignorance of things necessary as means to salvation, the doctors diflcr: for Soto 4. d. 5. q. 5; and lib. do natur. ct grat, c. 12; and Vega 1. 6, c. 20. will have no more explicit faith required now in the law of erace, than in the law of nature. Vega and Gabriel (1.21. qu. 2, art. 3. and 3. d. 21. qu. 2. think ; that in the law of nature, and in many cases, in the law of grace, a man may be saved witii only natural knowledge, and that the habit of faith is not required. Hor-antius, being of the contrary opinion, saith, that they are men of great name that are against him, whose gravity and great and painful studies moved him, not to condemn tiiem of heresy, in a doubtful matter not yet judged." O happy Rome that hath a judge that can put an end to all tlieiv controversies 1 And yet cannot determine whether it be necessary to salvation to be a Christian ! Alvarez de Auxil. disp. 56, with others, seems to hold, that to justification is not required the knowledge of a supernatural object at all. Others say that both to grace and to glory an explicit faith in Christ is necessary, Bonavent. 3. d. 25. Others say that to salvation at least an explicit faith in the Gospel, or Christ is required, though not to grace or justification. And this is the commoner in the schools, as Herera declared and followeth it.

Clara saith; I take Scotus to be of that opinion, that it is not necessary as a means to grace or glory to have an explicit belief of Christ or the Gospel; as he seems at large to prove. Lib. 4. Dist. 3. Quest. 4.

What is clearer, than that at this day, the Gospel bindeth not, where it is not authentically preached ; that is, tliat at this day men may be saved without an explicit belief of Christ: for in that sense speaks the doctor concerning the Jews. And verily, whatever Scotus

hold witli liis wicked master ITerera, I tliink tliat tliis was the opinion of Scotus, and tlie coniujon one; which also Vega a faithful iScoiist Iblloweth ; and Faher 4. d. 3, Petigianis 3. d, 25. q. 1, and of the Thoniists, Bannes, 22. q. 2, a 8. Canus and others.

He also gathers it to be the mind of the council of Trent, Ses. 6. caj). 4. It is eflectually proved by the doctor, from John xv. If 1 had not come and spoke to them, they had not had sin. I know the doctors of the contrary opinion answer, that such are not condemned for tlie sin of infidelity jirecisely, but lor other sins that hinder the illumination and special hel[) of God. But verily the doctor there argueth, that the Jews might by circumcision be cleansed from original sin, and saved without the Gospel: and accordingly he may argue, as to all otliers to vv'hom the Gospel is not authentically promulgated : else his reason would not hold. Corduba I. 2. qu. Thcol. q. 5, subscribes to this opinion, saying —since the promulgation of the Gospel, an explicit belief of Christ is ncessary : except with the invincibly ignorant, to whom an implicit sufficethto the life of grace : but wOiether it suffice to the life of glory, is a problem ; but it is more probable that here also an implicit sufticeth. To which opinion consent both Medina clt recta in Deum Jidc, lib. 4. cap. idt. and Bradwardin fol. 62, that an implicit belief of Christ is sufficient to salvation.

Clara also saitli; " this is the way to end the debates of them that think ihe articles of the trinity, of Christ, of the incarnation, «fcc. are neccessary to salvation, though not to justification: and answering them, he saith that such are not formally without the church. You see then formally, infidels are in their church, and maybe saved, in his opinion.

After a blow at Vellosillus, he citeth also Victoria Relict. 4. dc Indis. et Richard, de Med. Villa, 3. 25 ait. 3. qu. 1 ; and others for this opinion: and tells you what his implicit fahh is; "to believe as the church be-lieveth."

From Scotus he answers the question, whether such persons may hold the contrary error to the truth that they are itrnorant of? and saith, No; while it is preach-

2-2*

ed but in some one place: till he know it to be believed as a truth by the church, and then he must firmly adhere to it. Which the charitable friar applieth to England, as excusable for not beleiving some of their articles. And he citcth Petigianis saying ; " If a simple old woman shall hear a false opinion from a false prophet, as that the substance of the bread remains with Christ's body in the Eucharist, and believe it: doth she sin because of this ? No ; this were to'o hard and cruel to affirm."

He citeth Anglus, and agreeth with him, that, "such as have no knowledge of those things to stir them up, are not bound so much as to seek information."

Vega lib. 6. cap. 18, says ; that as ignorance of pure denial about many articles of faith may be without fault: so there is the same reason of ignorance from depraved dispositions. Which he maintains against Gerson and Hugo. Clara adds ; " To speak my sense freely, I think that the common people committing themselvs to the instruction of the pastois, trusting their knowledge and goodness, if they be deceived, it shall be accounted invincible ignorance, or probable at least: so Herera : which excuseih from fault. Yea some doctors give so much to the instruction of doctors on whom the care of the flock lieth, that if they teach that God should be hated, a rude parishioner is bound to believe them. Whence he concludeth, that he hopeth many of us are saved; to which he citeth the consent of Azorius, To, 1. I. 8. fust. c. 6, and Corduba. He also says; " It seemcth to be the common opinion of the schools and doctors at this day, that the laity, erring with their teachers or pastors, are altogether excused from fault: yea by erring thus many ways materially, they merit, for the act of Christian obedience, which they owe their teachers, as Valentia saith ; To?)i 3. disp. 1. q. 2. Anglus, Vasquez^ S^^c.

Cajetan cites Zanchez, teaching; that those that are brought up among heretics are not to be accounted heretics, till they refuse belief sufficiently propounded to them. Alph. a Castro, Simancha, Arragon, Tanner, and Faber say the same.

Eman. Sa, affirms ; *' even among catholics many are

excused from the explicit knowledge of the trinity and incarnation, specially if there want a teacher. For what ! shall we say that an infinite nuinher of Christians, otherwise good people, perish, that scarce know any thing aright of the mystery of the trinity and incarnation ; yea judge j)erversly or falsely of them, if you ask them? Rozella and Medina are of the same mind ; and N'alcn-tia Anal if s. fid. lib. 2. cap. 3. lit. D.

In the sixteenth problem he puts another question, whether the law of nature and the decalogue may be unknown without fault? to which he answers; that though "Alex. Ales says, no : yet it is the common and received o[)inion, citing Adrian, Corduba, llerera, and others, that there may be such invincible ignorance in respect of the law of nature and the decalogue."

That which they call an implicit faith in Christ is no actual faith in Christ at all. lie that onl^^ believes as the church believes, and knows not that the church believes in Christ, in the resurrection of Christ, &c., hath no actual belief in Christ or the resurrection at all. If I believe, that one of you is true in his word ; it doth not follow, that I actually believe the particular propositions which I never heard. That which they call an implicit belief, is nothing but the explicit actual belief of the formal object of faith, divine or human ; as that God is true, or the church true and infallible ; but it is no belief at all of the particular material object.

Every one in the world that believeth that there is a God, must needs believe that he is no liar; and so hath in God an implicit belief. Now if this will save men, without a particular belief in Christ, then Christianity is not necessary. Every Turk, and Jew, and infidel that beHeveth in God, may then be said to have an implicit faith in Christ, in the Popish language ; because he believeth all that God revealeth to be true : but if an implicit faith in God will not serve, how should an implicit faith in the church serve ; unless the church, that is the pope, be better than God.

By a general council and the pope it is determined that no man can be saved out of their church, as headed bv the pope. To believe in the pope is of necessity to salvation ; bnt to believe in Christ, in his incarnation,

death, resurrection, is not so. An implicit faith in the pope or church, yea or erring doctors may save, and men may merit by following them in error: but an implicit faith in God himself will not save, if we believe not in the pope. So that if we were infidels we might be saved, if we were of the church of Rome, and believed in the pope : but the holiest Christian that be-lieveth explicitly in God and all the articles of faith, cannot be saved, if he believe not in the pope. Do you tliink they believe those doctrines themselves ? or rather frame them to the building of their kingdom?

What a wonder is it that learned doctors see not their own contradiction? They suppose a man to believe in the pope, or as the church believeth, and yet not to believe in Christ! and is not the church essentially a company of Christians ; the spouse, and body, and school, and kingdom of Christ? and is not the pope essentially the pretended vicar of Christ. How then can they believe in Christ's vicar, or Christ's school, or kingdom, or followers, before, they believe in Christ himself (

By all this you may perceive the holiness of the Roman cimrch, and the nature of that discipline or church government that all the world must needs submit to, or be damned. Even such as takes in infidels and all, and layeth the church as common to the world, for as many as will but believe in the pope and his priests.

You see here also another mystery opened: that a man may have enough to justify him, that yet will not save him. For most of them are here said to hold that a man may be justified without an explicit faith in Christ, or that the knowledge of Christ is not necessary to his justification, but to his salvation it is: though tlie other half say that it is necessary to neither. If a man die in a justified state, must he be condemned? When Paul saith, Rom. 8. 30. Whom he justified them he also glorified ?

You see also here what their baptism doth, that can ex nperc opcrato infallibly put away the sins of all those infidels, and so the Eucharist, &.c. And yet they must not be saved although their sins are all done away. O what a maze is the Romisli divinity ! you see how well they are agreed about those fundamentals, when half of

them tliinlt, that " actual heliof in Christ is nccessnry to salvation, and not to jiistilication : and others that it is noccssarv to hoth : and a greater part that it is necessary to neither." You also see here the henclU of having an infallihle living judge of controversies, and expounder of Scriptures : and how adniirahly he hath ended all their dift'erences.

If formally those unhelievers arc in their catholic church ; then the Cireeks and other Eastern and Southern Christians arc in the same catholic church as we arc, when we difler not so much.

When they have made the non-belief of articles of the faith consistent with salvation; they will never while they breathe be able to confute him that on the same grounds afHrmeth the contrary belief consistent with salvation, in the case of the same want of teaching and sufficient means.

You see therefore of how small moment the Popish censures are, when tliey judge that a Protestant cannot be saved.

Clara judgeth otherwise. But his book was burnt or condemned at RciK' for it; and thereby proveth himself a heretic, seeing a geneial council and pope have determined the contrary, even that it is necessary to salvation to be a subject of the Pope of Rome.

CHAPTER XXIX.

Popery encourages human depravihj.

Another of their deceits, and the most successful of all the rest is this ; They suit their doctrines and government and worship to the fleshly hiimors of the ungodly : by which means the greatest and the most arc always on their side. Our doctrine, discipline and worship are all so contrary to carnal interest and conceits, that w^e are still likely to lose the most and the greatest and consequently to be a persecuted people in the world. This is their unanswerable argument. By this means they captivate the nations to their tyranny. The most

f

are every where sensual, worldly and unsanctified. Wise men and godly men are few in comparison of the rest of the world. It is the multitude commonly who have the strength, and the great ones who have the wealtji. So that I take it for a wonder of mercy, that they are not lords in every country, that the reformed catholics be not used every where as they be in Spain in Italy. For where they have but opportunity to shew themselves, the principles and practices of the Papists are such, as will be most likely to win the rabble rout to them, and make them masters of the multitude, and of all except a few believing heavenly persons: for the flock is little that must have the kingdom. Then, when they have got the multitude thus to follow them, and clubbed the rest into prisons, or burned them in the flames, they reckon that as one of the surest evidences that they are the catholic church; because forsooth they are the greater number in the countries where they have advantage, and it is but a few whom they were able to persecute or burn as heretics that were against them. The very argument of the Jews against Christ and his disciples.

The reasons why they have not by this policy won the Christian world to thcii- side, under God the great defender of the innocent, are these : Because in the Eastern and Southern churches they have not had opportunity to lay their snares, as the}' have had here in the West: and also those churciies have too many corruptions and neglects at home for the gratifying of the worse sort. Because God hath been pleased in some places to bless the endeavors of the smaller part, as to enable them against the multitude to preserve some liberty. Because God hath sometimes given wise and godl}' princes to the people, that will not be cheated with the popular decehs. And because the papal tyramn- is directly contrary to the rights of princes, so that it is only those that are hlinded by ignorance, or strengthened by an extraordinary league with Rome, or forced by the multitude of popish subjects and neighbors, that put their necks into the Romish yoke. For by the popes pretended power in temporals, and by his excommunicating princes, and his pretended power to depose them.

JUGGLING. JiCS

and give their kiiigdoins to otliors, so as to alisolvc their subjects from tlier ojiths and fidelity, whirli is an article of their faith agreed on by the pope and general council, Later, sub. Innuc. S. cap. 3: and by ids exempting the clergy from their princes' j)o\ver; aiid by the pillaging their countries for money ; and by their doctrine and practices of murdering princes who are not of their mind: and by other evidences, they have awakened many of the princes of the earth to look about them, and consequently to befriend the truth against those tyrannous usur^ ers. Had it not been for those helps under God, wc should not have had liberty to breath in the common air.

That all the doctrines, government, and worship of the papists are suited to the humor and sensual multitude, and fitted to take with ungodly men, I shall prove in twenty particulars.

1. The reformed catholics hold, that none should be taken into the church, unless they make profession of the Christian faith, and of an holy life, for the time to come, and seem to understand what they say and do, and be serious in it; which exasporateth the grossly ignorant and ungodly, when we deny them this privi-ledge of believers. But the Papists admit of the ignorant ungodly, and such as believe not in Christ, and fill their antichristian community.

2. The orthodox hold, that Baptism seals remission of sin to none but true believers and their seed. The Papists persuade sinners that all their sins are not only pardoned, but actually abolished, ex opere operato in baptism ; which is comfortable news to such ungodly souls.

3. Protestants say, that original sin liveth after baptism in some degree ; though it reign not, or condemn not those that arc true believers ; and that concupiscence, that is, all inordinacy of the sensual appetite, or inordinate inclination to sensual objects, is a sin. The Papists tell them that when once they are baptised, there is no such thing in them as original sin, and that concupiscence is no sin at all.

4. The orthodox hold, that none are to be admitted to the eucharist, and communion of the church therein, but

those that believe actually, or profess so to do, the articles of faith, and understand the nature of the sc\crament, and live according to the law of Chtist. But the Papists give it to all, and drive men to the sacrament; so that Albaspinfcus saith, he knows not whether ever any one was kept away in his age.

5. Protestants hold, that men are not to be let alone in scandalous sin ; but admonished privately, and then openly before the church, and if yet they repent not, to be cast out; and not to be absolved or re-admitted, without a public confession and penitence answerable to the sin: and this wicked people hate at their very heart, and will not endure. But the Papists have got a device to please them, by auricular secret confession to a priest, where if he will but confess and sin, and sin and confess again, he may have pardon of course without any open shame or true reformation. If we durst but imitate the Papists in this one particular, we should do much to please the people that are now exasperated : for almost any of them will confess in secret that they have sinned, that will not endure the open shame.

6. Protestants hold, that every sin deserveth death, and that every breach of the law is such a sin; though God will not inllict the punishment on them that liave a pardon. But the Papists tell us of a multitude of sins that are but venial, that is, sins that deserve pardon, and not hell, and are indeed no sins, but analogically so called. And they make those to be venial sins, which are properly no sins : all sins that are not deliberated on, are with them but venial sins. So that if they will but sufficiently brutify themselves by suspending the exercise of reason, and will swear, curse, murder, without deliberation, they are then free from sin and danger. How easy and pleasing is this to the ungodly ? Those are but evangelical counsels with the Papists, that are the precepts or laws of Christ to the Protestants.

7. Protestants teach men that it is their duty to seek the understanding of the Holy Scripture, and to meditate in it day and night. But Papists forbid the common people to read it in a language which they understand, and save them all that labor that Protestants put them on. Nothing can win the people more than cherishing them thus in sloth and ignorance.

8. Protestants say, that a man cannot be justified or saved without actual fuith in Clirist, and that tiiis laith must extend to all things that are essential to Christianity. But Papists atVuni the justification and salvation of infidels, if they believe in the pope. A comfortable doctrine to the unbelieving world, to whom God hath spoken no such comfort.

We confess that those that never had the Gospel, are under the law of nature or works, and under such a law of grace as was made to Adam and Noah in the substance, as to the obligation and the ofl'ers of it, and that by such a law they shall be judged, but of the justification of Christians we have clear and certain promises.

9. Protestants say, tbat all our best works are imperfect, and the sin that adhereth to them deserves God's wrath, according to the law of works, though he pardon it by the law of grace, and that when we have done all we are unprofitable servants, and properly merit nothing of God, for the worth of our works or in commutative justice- But the Papists take those very works to merit heaven ex Condigno ; and some of them, say by tht proportion of the work and in commutative justice; which the Protestants declare, deserve damnation for their sinful imperfections, and therefore need a pardon through the blood of Christ. Yet they take those works to be perfect, and the man to be perfect, and say, that by such works as those, they may merit for others as well as for themselves. How easy and pleasing is this to proud corrupted nature 1

10. Protectants think, that no faith justifieth : but that which is accompanied with unfeigned love and resolution for obedience. But the Papists make a faith that is separated from charity, and joined with attrition, to be sufficient for admission t) the sacrament, which shall be instead of love or contrition, and so shall put away all sin.

11. Protestants knowing that God is a spirit, and will be worshipped in spirit and in truth, teach people a spiritual way of worship, to which carnal men are indisposed. But Papists accommodate them with a multitude of ceremonies, images, and a pompous his-

23'

trionical kind of worship, which is easy and pleasant to flesh and blood. To have an image before them, and copes, and ornaments, and abundance of formalities, and to drop so many beads, and be saved for saying over so many Ave Maries, or such like words; what an easy kind of religion is that, and how agreeable to flesh and blood? how much easier is it to say over their offices than to love God above all, and desire communion with him in the spirit, and to delight in him, and to pray in faith, and heavenly fervor ?

12. Protestants tell men of hell-fire, as the remediless punishment of those sins, which Papists say deserve but a purgatory : and they have hope of coming out of purgatory, but there is none of coming out of hell.

13. Protestants tell them of no hope of ease or pardon of sin after this life, if it be not pardoned here. But Papists tell them, that when they are in purgatory the pope hath power to pardon them, and the saying of so many masses for their souls may ease them or rid them out, and the merits of other folks may deliver them.

14. Protestants tell them, that they must be holy for themselves. But Papists tell them, that they may hire another man to say their prayers for them, which may serve their turn.

15. Protestants ingenuously confess, that they have no way to end all controversies in this life: but that we have a sufficient way so far to decide them, as is necessary to the peace of the soul, of the church, and of the commonwealth; but no way for a final absolute decision, till the day of judgment. Pastors of the church are to be judges, so far as they are to execute : and Magistrates are to be judges, so far as they must execute; and every christian hath a judgment of discerning, so far as he is to execute: but the absolute final judgment is reserved to the last day, when God ■will fully end all our controversies. That satisfieth not men who would have all in hand, and the sentence past before the assizes. Therefore Papists tell them of an end of all their controversies at hand; of an easy cheap remedy by believing the infallible pope anS council, and so putting an end to all divisions and doubts.

Ih. Prolffttants would havo none but professing saints in their churches. But Papists canonize a sainl as a wonder, and shut them up in monasteries, and call a few, rcli^iouif, who are separated from other Christians, as Christians formerly were from the world. Which brings the peojde to think that holiness and religion arc not necessary to all, but to a few devotees that will be better than they are commanded to be.

17. Protestants bind men to keep their vows, and fidelity to their governors. But Papists tell them that the pope hath power to free them from their fidelity, and dispense with their oaths.

18. Papists teach men to fast: by eating the pleas-antest meats. But Protestants use a total abstinence while they fast.

19. The main business and administration of Protestant pastors, is against that flesh that is unregenerate, and therefore must needs be distasteful to the multitude of the ungodly. Our preaching is to open men's sin and misery, and cause them to perceive their lost condition, and so to reveal to them a crucified Christ and then to set them on the holy self-denying heavenly life that Christ hath prescribed them: to speak terror to the rebellious, and to cist the obstinate out of our communion, and to comfort none as the heirs of heaven, either in life or death, but only the truly sanctified and renewed souls. The preaching of Papists is but seldom ; but they have a mass in Latin, and the old saying is ; "The mass doth not bite:" it galleth not a guilty conscience to see a mass and hear prayers which he understandeth not. When they do preach, they flatter and deceive men by their false doctrine. They cannot humble them in the sense of their original sin and misery; for that they tell them was quite extinct and done away in baptism: and for their following sins, absolution upon their customary confessions, hath done away all the guilt at least. So that here is no misery for the miserable souls to see; unless perhaps some gross actual sin be apparent among them, and then they shall have an oration against it, to drive them to auricular confession and to receive the body of Christ and be absolved. Thus do they by ceremonies quiet the con-

sciences of unsanctified men, and humor them in all their rites and customs, and at last turn them to heaven or purgatory with an absolution and extreme unction. How pleasing a religion that is to the ungodly people, those ministers can tell, that see the rage of such against those that deny them evenlDetter forms and ceremonies when they desire them to pacify their consciences instead of real holiness and obedience.

20. The Jesuits have fitted their whole frame of moral doctrine and case-divinity to humor the unconscionable. Those that would escape any worldly trouble or danger, the Jesuits have a help at hand for, even their doctrine of equivocation, and mental reservation, which makes the pope's dispensation with oaths and promises needless. What accommodations they have for him that hath a mind to murder his adversary, to calumniate another, to forbear restoring ill-gotten goods, to commit fornication, to rob another, and many the like, you may see in their own books; and what comfort they have for a man that loveth not God, so hi?, will not hate him. Mystery of Jesuitism.

So we see the advantage that Papists have to sweep away the vicious ignorant multitude, and then to boast that they are the catholics, and we but schismatics, because they are the greater part: and then they are armed also by the multitude, to oppress us by their violence.

Now the only remedy to use against this fraud, is to deal plainly and faithfulh^, though it displease, and to administer God's ordinances as he prescribeth, though never so distasteful to flesh and blood: and so to commit ourselves to God, and trust him with his church and cause, who is able to preserve it, and is most engaged to appear for us when we lay all upon him, and have none to trust but himself alone. Let us not hearken in this case to flesh and blood that would advise us to remit the reins of discipline, and to bend our administrations to some pleasing compliance with carnal minds. We disengage God when thus we begin to shift for ourselves out of his way. HalVs " Quo vadis?^^ Censure of Travel.

JUOOLINC, *26^

CHAPTER XXX.

Popish falsi (Ulcgdtiuns.

Another of their frauds is this: They cull out all the harsh u/ihandsomc passages, or mistakes that they meet with in any Protestant icriters, and charge all those upon the Protestant religion; as if they were so many articles of our faith, or at least v^ere the common doctrines of our churches.

They will not give us leave to do so by them, when we have much more reason for it. They teach the people, that they are bound to believe as their teachers bid them : and they reproach us for confessing-, that we are not in all points of doctrine infallible. Yet we still confess this fallibility, and say in plain terms, thai we know but in part. Divers of their particular doctors that we cite, are such as the pope hath canonized for saints : and they tell us that in canonizing he is infallible. And therefore an infallibly canonized saint must not be supposed to err in a point of faith. They boast so much of unity and consent among themselves, that we may the better cite particular doctors, And yet we think ourselves bound to stand to their own law in this, and to charge nothing on them as their faith, but what their churcJi doth own. Therefore while they refuse to stand to particular doctors, we will not urge them to It: for all men should be the professors of their own belief.

But what reason is there then that we may not have the same measure from them which they expect.!* We protess to take no man, nor council of men, for the lords of our faith, but for the helpers of our faith. They tell us, that they know not where to find our religion. We assure them that it is entirely in the written word of God, and that we know no other infallible rule; because we know no other divine revelation. They tell us; "all heretics do pretend to Scripture, and therefore that cannot be the test of our religion.^ I answer that so all cavillers, and defrauders may pretend to the law of the land to undo poor men by quirks of wit. or

a'J'O JESUIT

tire them with vexatious suits: and yet it follows not that we must seek another rule of right, and take the law for insufficient. What if heretics pretend to tradition, to general councils, and the decretals of the popes, as frequently they do, will you yield therefore that those are an insufficient rule, or test of your own religion ?- Open your eyes and judge as ye would be judged.

But I come to some of the particular opinions with which they charge us. And because I know not a more weio-hty renowned champion of their cause than Cardinal Richlieu I shall take notice of his twelve great errors, which he so vehemently chargeth on the reformed churches, as contrary to the Scripture. I shall do much to make clean our churches, if I fully wipe off all the pretended blots of error, that so crafty a man could charge upon them- In his Defens. contra script. 4. Ministr, Charenton. cap, 2., he thus begins his enumeration.

1. " The Scripture saith, Jam. 2, that a man is not justified by faith only : But you say, that he is justified by faith alone, and by faith only, which is found in no place of Scripture: and do vou not then resist the Scripture r'

We believe both the words of Paul and James, that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law, and saved through faith not of works, lest any man should boast, Rom. iii. 28. Ephes. ii. 8, 9; and also that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only, Jam.2. We believe all the Bible? Why then should he charge us with denying that, which we retain and publicly read in our churches as the word of God ? If he can prove that we understand not those words aright, he should have evinced it better than by the use of the words faith alone ; for our churches by faith alone, do profess openly to mean no more than Paul doth by faith without works: and can they find fault with Paul 1 We are not all agreed upon the fittest notion of the interest of faith and works in our justification : but our diflerence is more in words and notions than matter. Why do you not quarrel with your own Cardinal Contarenus and others who join with us in the doctrine of justification?

2. His second accusation is this, "Tlic Scripture saith, that we can love (iotl witii all the heart. You say, that man can love God with all the heart, which is no where read in Scripture ; and yet do you not resist the Scriptures ?"

We distinguish hetwcen loving God with all the hearty as it signifieth the sincerity and predominant degree of love, and so every true Christian hath it : and as it signifieth some citraordinanj degrccc above thi.'^ mere sincerity, and so some eminent stronger christians have it: and as it signifieth the highest degree, which is our duty, and which excludeth all sinful imperfection, and thus we say, tiiat no man actually doth love God perfectly in this Ife; nor do we think he speaks like a Christian, that dare say, " Lord, I love thee so much, that I will not be beholden to thee to forgive the imperfection of my love, or help me against any sinful imperfection of it." Your own followers whom you admire as the highest lovers of God, do oft lament the imperfections of their love. But now, if the question be only of the posse and not the act; we say, that the natural power is in all, and the nominal power which is the habit is in the sanctified ; but this moral power is not perfect itself, that is, of the highest degree, and witho.ut any sinful imperfection ; though yet it hath the perfection of sincerity, and in some, the perfection of an eminent degree.

3. His third accusation is this ; "The Scripture saith, that the eucharist is the body and blood of Christ, with the junction of those words that signify a true body and blood : you say that it is not Christ's body aixl blood, but only a figure, sign and testimony, which the Scripture no where saith."

The Scripture saith not, that it is his body and blood substantially, or by transubstantiation : and we say not, as you feign, that it is not his body and blood, but a figure, &c. For we say, that it is his bod}- and blood sacramentally and representatively ; as he that person-ateth a king on some just account, is called a king: and as in actions of investiture and delivery, the delivering of a key is the delivering of the house, and the delivery of a twig and turf is the delivery of the land,

and the deliverer may say, take, this is my house, this is my land, which I deliver th«e. If you be among many images in a room, you will not blame him that saith, that is Peter, and that is Paul, and that is the Virgin Mary, The Scripture often calls it bread after the consecration ; which you condemn us for : therefore we are taught to call it so. The Scripture saith ; 1. Cor, X. 5, that Rock was Christ: and he saith, I am the door, John x. I am the true vine, John xv. 1. David saith I am a worm and no man, Psalm xv. 6. We believe all this. But must we be therefore reproached, if we say that Dayid was a man; that the rock was Christ typically; that he was a vine and door metaphorically only ; and yet those are as plain as, " this is my body and this is my blood." •

4. His fourth accusation is this; "The Scripture saith, that baptism saveth us, and that we are cleansed and regenerated by the washing of water: on the contrary you say, that baptism doth neither save us, nor regenerate us, but is only to us a symbol of salvation, and regeneration, which is no where said in Scripture."

A childish contest about words ! We say that two thing's go to our full possession of our state of regeneration, justification, and cleansing: one is our fundamental right, w^hich the promise of the Gospel gives us upon our heart-consent or covenant with God : the other is our solemn investiture. In regfard to the for-mer, we are Christians, and regenerated and justified, before baptism. In regard to the latter, we are made Christians, regenerated, justified, saved, by baptism. This we commonly hold, and so never denied what you falsely sa}^ we deny. As a man is made a king by his coronation, that yet in a sort was one before : or as marriage makes them husband and wife by public solemnization; that were fundamentally so before by private covenant: or as possession is given by a key, or a twig and a turf, of that which a man had a right to before; so are we solemnly invested with those benefits by baptism, which we had a fundamental title to before. Do not your own writers confess this of a man that is baptised many years after he had faith and charity ? Do you think that Cornelius and the rest that

had the Holy Ghost before baptism, Act. x. had not justification before i' Do you think tliat Constantint'the great was unpardoned, U!iro<j^enerale and no Christian till he was haptiseri? Or would you quarrel against your own confessions?

5. His fifth accusation is this. "Scriptuie saiih, that priests do forgive sin : on the contrary you say that they do not remit them, but only testify that they arc remitted, which the Scriptures no where say."

We say, that whose sins the pastors of the church remit, they are remitted. Pastors as God's embassadors, do proclaim his general conditional pardon unto all. They are God's ministers to make a particular application, and delivery of pardon in baptism ; on supposition that the baptised be qualified for pardon. They are, as his ministers, to make the same application by declaration and delivery in the absolution of the penitent; on suposition that their penitence be sincere. As church governors, they may sometimes remit some humbling disgraceful acts, that were imposed on the penitent for the testification of his repentance, and the satisfaction of the church. And are not those four concessions enough? or are you minded to pick fuel for the rancor and uncharitablencss of your minds ?

We do not think that any man can primarily ds the chief agent forgive sins: but God must be the first pardoner. Nor that any man can pardon the sins of the dead, and abate or shorten the pains of the soul, in a fire called purgatory.

Verily, if the pope have power to remit but the very temporal punishment, he is a cruel wretch that will not forgive men, even good men, the torments of the gout, and the stone, and an hundred diseases; nay that will not remit them to himself; nor the pains ot death, when he is so loath to die. He that cannot remit the punishments which we see and feel, how shall we believe him, that he can remit a penalty that he never saw nor felt, nor can be proved to exist.

6. His sixth accusation is this; "Scripture saith, if a virgin marry she sinneth not: but you say that the just sin in all works: which Scripture mentions not."

Do you believe in your conscience that the Scrip-

ture meaneth that a virgin sinneth not at all in any circumstance or defect in the manner or concomitants of her marriage ? Then tell your nuns so, that if they marry they sin not. Tell priests so, that if they marry they sin not. Your own reason can expect no other sense in the words, but that marriage, as such, is no sin to the virgin. But if you think that in this or in any other work, you see God as apprehensively, and believe as strongly, and restrain every wandering thought as exactly, and love God as much as }'t)u are bound to do by tl)e very law of nature itself: so that you are perfectly blameless, and need not to be beholden to the blood of Christ, to the mercy of God, to the spirit of grace either for the forgiveness of those failings, or the cure of them : you show a proud pharisa-tcal spirit, unacquainted with itself and with the Gospel. Do you go on and say. Lord I thank thee that I am not as other men: and I will rather say, Lord be merciful to me a sinner: and which shall be rather justified, Christ hath told iis. The streams cannot be perfectly sinless till the fountain be so; and who can say, I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin? Prov. xx. 9. For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good and sinneth not, Eccl. vii. 20. Christ telleth us that the fruit will be like the tree, the actions like the heart: and therefore an imperfect heart will have imperfect duties. If you dare say there is no remnant of sin in your hearts, you have so much of it that it hindereth you from seeing it. Humility and self-know'ledge would soon end this controversy. We say not that all our works are sins, that is either materially forbidden, or done in wickedness and from vicious predominant habits. But that the same works, which materially are good, are tainted with our sinful imperfections, having not in them that ineasure of knowledge, faith, love, &e. that we ought to have; and therefore that we must beg pardon for our imperfections, and fly to the blood and merits of Christ, through whom God will accept both our works and us, for all the imperfection, which he pardoneth to us of his grace.

7. His seventh accusation is thisj "Scripture saith,

that there are wicked men and reprobates, who believe in Christ: but you contend that they believe not, but have only a shadow of faith: which no Scripture saith."

We say that reprobates do believe, and we say that they believe not, taking belief in dilferent senses. We believe whatever the Scripture saith, even that the devils believe and tremble : and yet as believers and Christians are all one, we do not call the (devils believers and Christians; but you may do it if ycu please. As belief signifieth a bare ineflectual conviction or superficial assent which you call informed faith, so we still confess that the wicked may believe. But as belief signifieth our receiving of Christ, and coming to him, and being planted into him as his members, and taking him heartily as Christ, our Lord and Saviour, and so becoming Christians and disciples; as it signifieth such a faith that hath the promise of pardon, of sin of adoption, and of glory: So we say that the wicked have but a show or shadow ot it.

8, His eighth accusation is this; "Scripture saith, that there are some that believe for a time, and after at another time believe not: you deny that there are any that believe for a time, and then fall from faith, and that he that once believeth doth never lose that faith; which is not in any Scripture to be found."

We maintain, that there are some that believe but for a time, and afterward fall away ; but we say it is but with an ineffectual or common assent that they believe, such as you call unformed faith ; your accusation therefore is false. The living seed are meant of saving. If any of you think that faith is called justifying or saving faith, only by an extrinsecal denomination, from a concomitant, and that there is no difference in the faith itself between that of the unjustified and of the justified, you are mistaken against all reason. Your own philosophers frequently maintain that the will, which is the seat of charity, followeth the practical dictates of the intellect, which is the seat of assent: and therefore according to those philosophers, a practical belief must need be accompanied with charity. Those that deny this, do yet maintain that

a powerful clear assent of the intellect will infallibly procure the determination of the will, though every assent will not, and though it do it not necessarily. So ihat on that account, and in common reason, there must needs be an intrinsic difference between that assent which prevailed with the will to determine itself, and that which cannot so prevail: and therefore your unformed and your formed faith, have some intrinsic difference.

Are you not at odds among yourselves about perseverance.^ Some laying it first on man's free will; and some, with Austin ascertaining perseverance to the elect, and laying it on God's free gift; and some Jesuits and school men affirming, that the confirmed in grace are not only certain to persevere, but that they necessarily believe and are saved, and cannot moitally sin. Strange doctrine for a Jesuit!

9. His ninth accusation is this; " Scripture saith, if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments : you say there is no need of keeping the commandments, and that he who saith it, doth deny Christ and abolish faith, of which the Scripture speaketh not a word."

We distinguish between the keeping of that law of works, or nature, which made perfect obedience the only condition of life : and the keeping of the law of Moses as such : and the keeping of the law of Christ. For the two first, we say that no man can be justified by the works of the law. Is this a doubt among Papists who believe Paul's Epistles? But as for the law of Christ, as such, we must endeavor to keep it perfectly; and must needs keep it sincerely, if we will be saved. In this all Protestants are agreed; and dare any Papist deny it ? If we be not all agreed on the sense of that text of Scripture, yet are we agreed on the doctrine.

10. His tenth accusation is this; "Scripture saith, that some that were illuminated and made partakers of the Holy Ghost, did fall, and crucif}'- again to themselves the Son of God : but you defend, that whoever is once a partaker of the Holy Ghost, you cannot fall from his grace: which Scripture speaketh not."

We maintain that those words of Scripture are of

certain truth. But we distinguish between the common and the special gifts of the spirit. The common gifts may be lost. The special gifts which accompany salvation, some judge are never lost. Otliers think they are lost only by those that are not predestinated as Austin and your Dominicans think.

II. £lis eleventh accusation is this; "Scripture saith, that God taketh away, and blotteth out our iniquity as a cloud, and puts our iniquities far from us, as the east is from the west, and maketh us as white as snow: you say, that he takes not away nor blotteth out our sin, but only doth not impute it, and doth not make us white as snow, but leaveth in us the fault and unclean-ness of sin: which Scripture no more speaks."

That is half falsehood, and half confusion. It is false that we say, he doth not take away, nor blot out our sin, nor make us white as snow. Do not all Protestants in the world affirm this ? There are these things to be considered. The act of sin: the habit, the guilt or obligation to punishment: and the culpability. As for the act, how can you for shame say, that God takes it away, when it is a transient act that is gone of itself as soon as acted, and hath no existence, as Scotus and all your own take notice ? As to the culpability, you will not surely for shame say, that God so put away David's adultery, as to make it reputable as a virtue, or not a vice. As to the full guilt, we maintain that it is done quite away: and it is in regard of that guilt and punishment that the Scriptures mentioned by you speak. For what else can they mean, when they speak of actual sins that are past long ago, and have no existence .'' Would you make us believe, that grace is given to David to put away the act of his murder and adultery, so that it may be a thing past and gone; which it is without grace ? So that when you feign us to say, that God takes not away sin, but only imputeth it, you feign us to make synonymal terms to be of different senses. He takes them away, by not imputing them.

But if you speak not of the sense of a particnlar text, but of the matter in difference, it can be nothing but the habit of sin that you mean, that we say, that

24

God takes not away. And here you are partly calttm-niators, and partly erroneous Pharisees. You calumniate, in feigning us to deny, that habitual sin is done away. Because our divines say, that it is not the work of mere pardon, which we call justification, to put it away; therefore you falsely say, that we hold, it is not put away at all. Whereas we hold, that all that are justified, are sanctified, converted, regenerated, renewed, and must live an holy life: and that all their sins are so far destroyed, that they shall not have dominion over them : that gross and wilful sin they for-3ake: and the least infirmities, they groan, and pray, and strive against to the last: and then obtain a perfect conquest. But if you mean, that no degree of habitual sin, or absence of holy qualities remaineth in the justified soul, it is a Pharisaical error. Dare you say that you have no sin to resist or purge or pardon .'' are you in heaven already? The whole have no need of a physician, but the sick, and have you no need of Christ to heal your soul 1 would you be no better than you are? O proud souls ! and strange to themselves and the purity of the law 1 hath not the Holy Ghost pronounced him a liar and self deceiver, that saith he hath no sin, 1 John, i, 8, 10/ In many things we offend all, James iii. 2. I shall recite two canons-of a council, which if you use the Lord's Prayer, are fit for you to consider. Concil. Mllevit. coat. Pelagianos Can. 7.

That council curseih all those as intolerable liars, that say the Lord's Prayer, desiring him daily to forgive or remit sins, and yet think that they have no sins to forgive, or that every saint hath not such sins. What can a Papist say to this, but by making councils as void of sense, as they feign the Holy Scriptures to be?

12. His twelfth and last accusation is this; "The Scripture saith, that blessedness is the reward, the prize, the penny, the wages of laborers, and the crown of righteousness: you contend that its merely the free gift of God, and not reward, which no Scripture doth affirm."

We constantly say that eternal life is given as a reward and crown of righteousness. But we distin-

JUOOLINC, Si79

guish between the act of God in his Gospel promise, which is a conditional deed of f^ift of Christ and life to all that will accept them, and the execution of this by judj^nient and glorilication. We also say that it was merely of God's free grace that he made such a deed of ijift, the blood of Christ being the purchasing cause, and nothing of our works had a hand in the procurement. Our justification in judgment, and our glorification, which are the execution of the law of grace, do make our works the reason ; not as having merited it in commutative justice, but as having performed the condition of the free gift, and so being the persons to whom it doth belong.. This is the sense of Scotus and of one half of the Papists, who say that merit of con-dignity is but by virtue of God's promise.

I leave it to the conscience of any sober Papist, whether we be guilty in any one point that this great cardinal chargeth us with ? And whether Papists and Protestants were not in a fair way for reconciliation, if we differed not more in other thin.crs than in these?

Scripture only is the rule and test of our faith and religion. Polydore Virgil speaks truly of us, saying; " They are called evangelical, because they maintain that no law is to be received in matters of salvation, but what is delivered by Christ or his Apostles." If therefore any man speak in any word amiss, blame the man that spoke it for that word; but blame not all, or any others for it. Austin retracted his own errors; and which of us dare justify every word that hath fallen from our mouths or pen before God i* How many hundred points do schoolmen and commentators charge on one another as erroneous, among yourselves / Shall all the errors of the fathers be charged on the catholic church, or all your writers' errors upon yours .''

That we do well to stick to the Holy Scriptures as the sufficient rule, we are the more encouraged to think, by the concessions of our adversaries of greatest note, as well by the testimony of the Scripture itself, and the consent of the ancient doctors of the church, and the unprovedness of their pretended additional. Even Cardinal Richlieu saith ; " As for us, we put, or assert, no other rule but Scripture, neither of another sort, nor

total: and we say that it is the whole rule of our salvation, and that on a double account; both because it containeth immediately and formally the sum of our salvation, that is, all the articles that are necessary to man's salvation, by necessity of means; and because it mediately containeth whatsoever we are bound to believe, as it sends us to the church to be instructed by her, of whose infallibility it certainly confirmeth us." Thus he grants us that all articles necessary to our salvation, as means, are immediately and formally in the Scripture : then surely they may be saved that believe no more than is in the Scripture: that we are to believe no church but that which the Scripture sends us to, and to believe its infallibility no further than the Scripture doth confirm it: and that the Scripture is our whole and only rule. Othat all Papists would adhere to this! But let them not blame us now for standing to it.

CHAPTER XXXI.

Diversity of opinion.

Another of their frauds is this; by ranking the Protestants among the rabble of sects and heresies that are in the world, and then asking ignorant souls, if you will needs be of any sect how many are before you? and what reason have you rather to be of the Protestants, than of any oiher /

This question is worth the considering by a Papist, or any sectary; but the true catholic is quite out of the reach of it. The church of Christ is one, and but one, This one catholic church containeth ail the true Christians in the world. This is the church that I am a member of; which is far wider than the Popedom. The church that I profess myself a member of containeth three parts; The most sound and healthful part; and that is the reformed churches. The most unsound in doctrine, though possess d of many learned men ; not as Papists but as Christians, though infected

with Popery. Tlic middle part, which is sounder than the Papists ip. doctrine, hut less learned, and below the Protestants in both; and that is all the Greeks and other Eastern and Southern churches that are no subjects of the pope. All those, even all true Christians, are members of the church that I belong to; thoug'h some of them be more sound, and to these I may add many particular lesser sects, that subvert not the foundation. Will you ask me now why I will not be of another sect, as well as of the Protestants/ My answer is ready, a sect divided from the body, 1 abhor. I am of no sect. It is the unity, universality and antiquity of the church that are its honorable attributes in my eyes. I^rotestants that unchurch all the rest of the world, and count themselves the whole church of Christ, do in some sort make themselves a sect. But where is there any such ? Therefore Protestants are no more a sect, than the patients in a hospital who are almost healed, or than the higher form of sc holars in school, or than merchants or richer sort of tradesmen in a city Such vl sect God grant that I may be of, even one in the church that shall be of soundest understanding, and of purest worship, and of the most careful, holy, honest life. But still I shall acknowledge them of the lowest form, even them that learn the A. B. C. to be in the same school Vv'ith me. And if they. Papists or any others, will disclaim me, that shall not unchurch me, as long as Christ disclaims me not. Nor shall it provoke me to disclaim them any further than Christ leads the way. So that the Papists may see that if they will deny the church that I am of, they must deny their own, and all the Christian world.

But how will they answer this themselves? It is one of the greatest reasons why I dare not be a Papist, because then I know I must be a sectary. What is a Papist but as mere a sectary as any that retaineth a name in the church i* They are a company of men that have set up a human usurping head or vice-Chritt over the catholic church, owning him themselves; and unchurching and condemning all the church that will not own him. The church that I am of is near thrice

24*

as big as the Papist church is. Theirs is but a polluted piece, that would divide itself from all the rest by condemning them.

I would seriously desire any Papist living to resolve the question ; If he will needs be of a sect, and forsake the universal church, why of the Popish sect rather than another? If because it is the greatest, I answer it is less than the whole. If because it is the purest, it is the most impure. If for antiquity, it is founded upon novelty. If because it is the richest? their money perish with them that measure the church and truth of Christ by the riches and splendor of this world!

CHAPTER XXXII.

Romish Ancestors.

Another of their jugglings is this; By working upon the people^s natural affections, and asking them, where they think all their Jorefathers are that died in the communion of the Roman church? Dare they think that they are all damnedl intimating that it is cruelty to say their ancestors are in hell; and if they say they be in heaven, then there is but one way thither, and therefore you must go the way that they went.

1. A weak understanding may easily deal with that sophistry. What if we grant that many of our forefathers that died Papists are in heaven ? doth it follow that we must therefore be Papists? It was not by Popery that they went to heaven, but by Christianity. What if many recover and live that eat not only earth and dirt, but hemlock or other poisons .'* Must 1 therefore eat them ? Or doth it follow that there is no other way to health ?

2. Our forefathers were all saved that were holy, justified persons, and no others. But among so many and great impediments as Popery cast in their way, we have great reason to fear that far fewer of them were saved, than are now among the reformed churches. Must I needs go that difficult way to heaven, because

some of them get thither? Must I travel a way that is commonly beset with thieves, because some that go that way do escape them?

3. It tliis were good reasoning, then may all the heathens, inHdels, Mohjimmedans use it, that have been educated in darkness. It is the argument which the barbarous heathens use, when the Gospel is preached to them ; what think you, say they, is become of our fathers ? If they were saved without the Gospel, so may we. The story of that infidel prince is common that being ready to go to the water to be baptized, stepped back, and asked where are all my ancestors now? And when he was told that they were in hell, and that the Christians go to heaven, he told them, then he would be no Christian, for he would go where his ancestors are.

4. Where be all our forefathers that are dead since the reformation? and where be all those that died between the resurrection of Christ and the appearing of Popery, or the prevailing of it in the world ? and where be all that die in the eastern and southern churches, that are no subjects of the Pope of Rome? Have we not as little reason to think that all these millions of men are damned, as to think so of our Popish ancestors?

5. Why should we be more foolish for our souls than for our bodies? I would not be poor because my ancestors were so. Nor would I have the stone or gout because my ancestors had them. Nor will I say 3iat they are no diseases, tor fear of dishonoring my ancestors that had them. And why then should I wilfully lick up any Popish errors, because my ancestors by the disadvantage of the times and of their education were cast upon them?

6. It is not oar forefathers but God that we must follow. It is he, and not they, who is the Lord of our faith and of our souls. It will not excuse us in judgment for disobeying God, to say that our forefathers led us the way: nor will it ease us in hell to suffer with our forefathers. Christ tells us, Z/wAe xvi. of a rich man that in hell would have his brethren warned, lest they should follow him: but these men would have us follow our forefathers, even in their sin against

God. Whereas the Scriptures constantly make it an aggravation of a people's sin, when they follow their fathers in it, and take not warning by their falls. The son that foUowelh his father in his sins, shall die, and he that takes warning and avoideth his father's sins, shall live. EzehieJ xviii.

7. Our forefathers might be saved that sinned in the dark, and yet we be damned if we follow them in the light; or at least we shall be beaten with more stripes than they, if both must perish. They had not our means, or liberty. If they had seen and heard Avhat we have done, many of them would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. Shall we sin wilfully after the knowledge of truth, because our fathers sinned ignorantly for want of information?

CHAPTER XXXIII.

Popish Despotism.

Another of their frauds is this; Pretend'uig to a divine institution, and natural excellency of a visible monarchical govarnment of the church. And so they would derive it from Peter, from Christ or from nature, and God the author of nature.

All their writings take this as their strength. I shall refer chiefly to a cheating consultation, by Boverius, Ratione vera fidei, (S^c. ad Carolum Principem, intended for the perverting of Charles I. then in Spain.

Part I.Reg. 6. he asserteth, that " besides Christ the invisible head of the church, there is a necessity that we acknowledge another certain visible head subrogate to Christ, and instituted of him, without which none can be a member of Christ, or any way subsist alive."

He begins his proof with a cheat, as gross as common, an abuse of Cyprian's words, /. 1. Ep. 3. where Cyprian speaks for the necessity of obeying one in the church, meaning a particular church, as the whole scope of his epistle testifieth: and this man would

make the simple believe that he speaks of the universal church.

K His reasons proceed thus: He tells us, that " the invisible God thinks meet to govern the world by visible men." Who denies that Christ also governeth his church by men ?

But he concludeth hence; "Still we believe that Christ doth govern his church in another way than God governeth the whole world ?" Doth not this man give up the cause of the pope, and say as much against it fundamentally as Protestant ? " We must not believe that Christ doth govern the church in any other way than God doth govern the world." But saith common sense and experience; God doth not govern the whole world by any one, two, or ten, universal vice-monarchs: therefore Christ doth not govern the church by any one universal vice-monarch.

His next reason is, '• Because Christ was a visible monarch once on earth himself: and if the church had need of a visible monarch then, it hath need of it still." 1. Here the reader may see, that it is to no less than to be Christ's successor, or a vice-Christ, that the pope prelendeth. And then the reason, if it were of any worth, would as well prove, that there must be one on earth still that may give the Holy Ghost immediately, and make articles of faith de novo, and laws for the church with promise of salvation, and may appoint new offices and orders in the whole church, &c. And why not one also to live without sin, and die for our sins, and rise again, and be our Saviour? And why not one to give us his own body and blood in the sacrament ?

2. Christ himself doth oppose himself to all terres-tial inhabitants, saying; One is your master even Christ. Be not ye called masters ? but he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. Be not ye called Rabbi, for one is your master even Christ, and all ye are brethren. J»f^^ xxiii. 8, 9, 10, 11,12. Where most evidently he shows that neither Peter, or any of his own disciples were to be called masters, as Christ was, nor was any such to be on earth, and so no vice-Christ ; yea that all his apostles being brethren, were

€

not to be masters one to another, but servants : so that here is a plain bar put in against any of Peter's mastership or headship of the universal church. Hence, it follows not that we must still have a Christ on earth, because we once had.

3. Christ hath chosen another vicar, though invisible, as Tertullian calls him; and that is,the Holy Ghost, whom he sent to make such supply as was necessary, by vari()us gifts proportioned to the several states and members of the church.

4. If Christ would have left a vice-Christ upon earth, w^hich should have been an essential part, even the head oi his church: he would doubtless have plainly expressed it in Scripture, and described his office and power, and given him directions to exercise it, and us directions how to know which is he, and to obey him; but there is not a word of any such matter in the Scripture, nor antiquity ; when yet is a point of such unspeakable importance?

5. You might as well feign, that if it were then necessary to have twelve or thirteen apostles, it is so still: and, if then it was necessary to have the gift of tongues and miracles, it is so still: of which the pope himself is void.

6. It is not enough for your silly wit, to say it is fit that Christ have a successor, therefore he hath one: but let him that claimeth so high an honor as to be the vice Christ, produce his commission, and prove his claim it he will be believed.

7. Christ is still the visible head of his church, seen in heaven, and as much seen in heaven, and as much Been over all the world, except Judea and Egypt, as ever he was. When he was on earth, he was not visible at Rome, Spain, Asia, &c. He that is emperor of the Turkish Monarchy, perhaps was never personally a hundred miles from Constantinople. The King of Spain is no visible monarch in the West Indies. If all the world except Judea might be without a present Christ, then why that may not as well as the rest you may give him nn account, if you will tie him to be here resident.

8. If the pope would usurp no more power than

Christ exercised visibly on eartli, he wouhi not then divide inheritances, nor beatipmporal princo, nor wear a triple crown nor keep a court and retinue, nor depose princes, nor deny thein tribute, nor exempt his prelates from it, nor from their judgment seats, nor absolve their subjects from their fidelity, &c. nor trouble the world as now he doth. He would not exercise the power of putting any to death; much less would he set up in([uisitions, to burn poor people for reading the Scriptures, or not being of liis mind.

He makes Christ tlie " visible pope while he was on earth, and tells us that promulgating the Gospel, sending apostles, instituting sacraments, &c. weie Pontificalia iiumcra, Papal ofiices.'' AVas Christ a pope: and is the pope a Christ ? Jesus I know: and Peter and Paul I know : but this vice-Christ I know not. If indeed the vice-Christ have power to do those Papal works, to promulgate a new Gospel, to send out Apostles, to institute sacraments, &c. as Christ did, let us but know which be the pope's sacraments, and which be Christ's; which be the pope's Apostles, and which be Christ's; and which be the pope's Grospel, and which is Christ's, and we shall use them accordingly. The law and testimony will help us to distinguish them.

He tells us as Card. RicliUcu and the rest commonly do, that "it is no dishonor to Christ to have a deputy, no more than ior the king of England to have a deputy or vice-king in Ireland." But our first question is, whether de facto such a thing be .'* Prove that Christ hath commissioned a vice-Christ, and we will not presume to say that he hath dishonored himself.

Though it should not dishonor Christ, it is such a transcendent honor to man, as we will not believe that any man hath, that proveth not his claim. It was no dishonor to the Godhead to be united to the manhood of Christ in personal union ; but if the pope say that the Godhead is thus united to his manhood I will not believe him.

Though we should not have presumed to question Christ if he had done it, yet we must presume to tell the pope that he is guilty of dishonoring Christ by his

usurpation. Because he sets up himself as vice-Christ, without his commission ; and takes that to himself, Christ's prerogative. God saith, " This is my beloved son in whom lam well pleased, hear him: And the Papists.say of the Pope, " This is the vice-Christ, hear him." • Because the power of the king is more communicable, than the power of Christ, it being such as is fit for one mere man as well as for another. But the power of Christ is such as no mere man is fit for. The capacity of the subject is considerable as necessary to the reception of the form of power. He that is God as well as man is fit for a universal monarchy, when he that is mere man is not. Whence we argue thus:—If there was never such a thing by God's institution as a mere man to be the Christ or universal head of the church, then there is no such thing to be imagined now: but there never was such a thing.

Christ that was the visible head was God and man: when the pope is so, we will believe in him, as his successor.

The reading of their immodest arguings, to prore the pope to be the vice-Christ on earth, doth exceedingly increase my suspicion that he is the Antichrist. For to be Peter's successor, as a first Apostle, is a contemptible thing in those men's eyes. This is not it that they plead for. Bellarmin expressly tells us, that the pope succeeds not Peter as an Apostle: it is as a vice-Christ to the whole church, as Boverius maintaineth: and this they-make the foundation of their catholic church, and the acknowledgment of it essential to every member of it.

CHAPTER XXXIV.

Scripture Evidence.

Another of their devices is, to take noUdng as evidence from Scripture ; but ike letters or express words.

They will not endure to hear of consequences, no nor synonymous expressions. Bellarmin himself saith,

Verb. Dei, Lib. 3. Cap. 3. " It is agreed between us and our adversaries, that efficient arguments should be sought from the literal sense alone : for that sense which is immediately collected from the wortls, is the certain reasoning of the Holy Spirit." Cardinal Perron in his reply against King James devised this deceit: but Gonter and Veronius the Jesuits have perfected it. Vedelius shows; Rationale Theologicum Cap. 6. that it was hatched in Germany by the Lutherans for the defending of consubstantiation, and from them borrowed by the revolter Perron ; whose father was a Protestant; but the sons of profligacy being intolerable to the Huguenot Christians he became a Papist. Voctiits Cans. Disp. Pap.

Our judgment in this point, I shall lay down distinctly. 1. The Holy Scripture is the doctrine, testament and law of Christ. And we shall add nothing to it, nor take aught from it. The use of it as a doctrine, is to inform us of the will of God in points there written. The use of it as a testament, is to signify to us the last will of our Lord concerning our duty and salvation. The use of it as a law, is to appoint us our duty and reward or punishment; and to be the rule of our obedience^ by which we shall be judged.

2. All laws are made to reasonable creatures, and suppose the use of reason for the understandingof them. To use reason about the law, is not to add to the law.

3. The subject must have this use of reason to discern the sense of the law that he may obey it: and the judge must rationally pass the sentence by it.

4. This is the application of the law to the fact and person : and though the fact in person be not in the law, yet the application of the law to the fact and person is no addition to it. Otherwise to use any such thing would be to add to it.

5. As the fact is distinct from the law, so must the sentence of the judge be, which results from both.

6. To speak the sense or thing in equipollent terms, is not to the law in matter or sense: else we must not translate.

7. Yet we maintain the Scripture sufficiency in terms and sense, so that we shall confess that equipol-

25

•^90 JESUET

lent words are only Holy Scripture as to sense, but no^' as to the terms ; even translations themselves.

8. But there is no law but may many ways be broken, and no doctrine but may be divers ways opposed. And therefore though we yield, that nothing but the express words of God are the Scripture, for terms and sense, yet many thousand words may be against Scripture, that be not there expressly forbidden in terms.^

The law of nature is God's law, and the light of nature is his levelation. And therefore that which the light of nature seeth immediately in nature, or that which it seeth from Scripture and nature compared together, and soundly concludeth from these premises, is truly a revelation from God.

10. The conclusion followeth the more from the premises, in point of evidence or certainty to us Where the Scripture is the more dark, there the conclusion is of the Scripture faith : but where the fact or proposition fi'om the light of nature is more weak, there the conclusion is of natural evidence: but in both, of divine discovery. For there is no truth and light but from God the father of lights.

Now for the Papists, you may see their folly thus; if nothing but the bare word of law may be heard in trials, then all laws in the world are void and vain. For the subjects be not all named in them ; nor the fact named: and what then have witnesses, and jurors, and judges to do ? The promise saith, he that beiieveth shall be saved: but it doth not say that Bellarmin or Veronius beiieveth : doth it follow, that therefore they may make no use of it for the comforting of their souls in the hopes of salvation .'' The threatening saith, that he that beiieveth not is condemned : but it saith not that such or such a man beiieveth not: should they not therefore fear the threatening ?

By this trick they would condemn Christ himself also, as adding to the law in judgment. He will say to them, I was hungry and ye fed me not, &c. But where said the Scripture so, that such or such a man fed not Christ? Christ knows the fact without the Scripture. The Scripture is sufficient to its own use, to be the rule of obedience and judgment; but it is not sufficient to every other use which it was never made

kor. The law said to Cain, thou shak not murdiT. Bui it is not said to him, thou hast killed thy brother, tliere-forethoii shall die. It was the judge's part to deliver this.

By this trick they would give a raan leave to vent any blasphemy, or do any villainy, changing but the name. But they shall find that the law intended not bare words, but by words to signify things : and if they do the things prohibited, or hold the opinions condemned, whatever names or words they clothe them with, they shall feel the punishment.

By this they would leave almost nothing provable by the Scripture, seeing a Papist or heretic may put the same into other terms, and then call for the proof of that. For example, they may ask where God com-mandeth or institateth any of the sacraments in Scripture? And when we tell them where Baptism and the Lord's Supper was instituted, they may reply, that there is no mention of Sacraments; and so turn real "ontroversies into verbal.

By this they would make all translations to be of "little use. A man might lawfully sin in English, because God forbad it only in Hebrew and Greek.

Let them tell us what Scripture saith, that Peter was the vicar of Christ, or the head of the catholic church: or the bishop of Rome, or that the pope is his successor, or that the pope is the vice-Christ, or universal bish:)p. Where is there express Scripture for any of this? or so much as Bellarmin's literal sense?

Why do not those blind and partial men see, that the same course also must be taken with their own laws? And all their decretals and canons are insufficient, according to these rules. It is easy for any heretic to form u^ his error into other words than those condemned by pope or council: and if you go again to the pope, and get him to condemn those new expressions, the men in Mexico may use them long to the detriment of the souls of men, before the damnatory sentence be brought to them. And when it comes they can again word their heresy anew. The Jansenists in France show how well the pope's decision of wordy controversies is understood, and doth not avail. But if they will hold that no part of the pope's laws oblige hut in the literal sense, or that none offend that violate

not the letter, they will make a great alteration in their affairs. Any of their subjects may blaspheme the pope himself in French, Dutch, Irish, English, Slavonian, «&c. because he forbids it only in Latin ; for if translation be not God's word then they are not the pope's word neither. A pretty crotchet for a Jesuit! It is said that a traitor or murderer may be hanged : but it is not said that such or such a man shall be hanged ; or that he was a traitor or murderer. Whitaker Disput. Script. Sac. Quest. 2. Cap. 10.

Their common instance is; "The Scripture no where calls itself the whole word of God; nor no where tells us which be the canonical books, &c. and yet those are articles of faith." The Scripture doth call itself the word of God, and signifies its own sufficiency, and several books have particular testimonies to be canonical. Though secondarily so far as Scripture affirmeth its own divinity, it should be believed : yet pri-maril}', that this is God's word, and that these are the books, and that they are not corrupted, nnd that they are all, &c. are points of knowledge antecedent in order of nature to divine belief of them. There are two great foundations antecedent to the matter of divine faith. The one is God's veracity; that God cannot lie: the other is, his revelation; that this is God's word: the first is the formal object of faith. The second is a necessary medium between the formal object and the subject, without which there is no possibility of believing. The material object called the articles of faith, presupposes both these, as points of knowledge, proved to us by their proper evidence. And that this is all the word of God, is a mere consequence, from the actual tradition of this much and no more.

To give you an undeniable illustration. Let us inquire which be the administering laws of this commonwealth. We shall find that the law-giver is none of them ; for that is in the constitution, before the administration : and it is the formal object of every law, which is more noble than the materi^il object. The promulgation of these laws is not itself a law; but a necessary medium to the actual obligation of the law. That there is no other laws but these, is not a law; but a point known by the non-promulgation of more.

JUODLING. '^\)o

That all these laws are the same that they pretend to be, and that they are not changed or depraved since, this is not a law neither, but a truth to be proved by vommon reason, from the evidences that may be brought from records, practise, and abundance more.

So is it in our case. Tliat God is true, and the sov-'^reign rector, is a point first to be known by evidence, 'he one being the I'ormal object of faith, and the other the formal object of obedience: and easily proved by natural light before we come to Scripture. That this is God's revelation, or promulgation of his law, is a point also first to be proved by reason; not before we see the book or hear the word, but out of the book or doctrine itself, with the full historical evidence, and many other reasons, whirh in order of nature lie before our obligation to believe. So that this is not primarily an article of faith, but somewhat hio-her as beino- the necessary medium of our believing. That there is no other law, or faith, is not primarily a law or article of faith, but a truth proved by the non-revelation or promulgation of any other to the world. He that will prove us obliged to believe more, must prove the valid promulgation or revelation of more. That these books are the same, and not corrupted, is not directly and primarily a law or article of faith, but a historical verity to be proved, and yet Scripture is witnesss to all or most of these, and so they are of faith.

Thus it is manifest, that it is an unreasonable demand of the Papists to call for express Scripture, for those things that are not articles of faith in a proper sense.

CHAPTER XXXV.

Unfair DisptUants.

One of their practical deceits consisteth in the choosing of such persons to dispute with, against whom they find that ihey have some notable advantage.

Commonly they deal with women and ignorant peo-

pie in secret, who they know are not able to gainsay their falsest silliest reasonings. Naked Popery ; error of unvritten Iradition.

If they deal with a iVIinister, it is usually with one that hath some at least of these disadvantages. Either with some young or weak unstudied man, that is not versed in their way of controversy. Or one that is not of so voluble and plausible a tongue as others. For they know how much the tonguing and toning of the matter doth take with the common people. Or with one that hath a discontented people, that bear him some ill will, and are ready to hearken to any one that contradicteth him. Or else with one who hath fixed upon some unwarrantable notions, and is like to deal with them upon terms that will not hold. If they see one hole in a man's way of arguing, they will turn all the brunt of the contention upon that, as if the discovery of his peculiar error or weakness were the confutation of his cause. None give them greater advantage there, than those that run into some contrary extreme. They think to be Orthodox by going as far from Popery as the furthest. About many notions in the matter of justification, certainty of salvation, the nature of Jaith,.the use of works, &c. they will be sure to go with the furthest. A .Jesuit desires no better sport, than to have the baiting of one that holds any such opinion, as he knows himself easily able to disgrace. One unsound opoinion or argument is a great disadvantage to the most learned disputant. Most of all the-insultings andsuccess ofthe Papists, are from some such unsound passages that they pick up from some writers. They set all those together, and tell the world that this is the Protestant religion. Just as if I should 2;ive the descrintion of a nobleman from all the blem-ishes that ever I saw in one nobleman. As if I have seen one crook-backed, another blind, another lame, another dumb, another deaf, another a drunkard, &c. I should say, that a nobleman is a drunkard, that hath neither eyes, nor ears, nor limbs to bear him, &c. So deal they by protestants. What a character could we give of Papists on those terms?

I would intreat all the ministers of Christ to take heed of giving them any such advantage. By over-

doing, and running to far into contrary extremes, you will sooner advantage them, and give them the day, than the weakest disputants that stand on safer grounds. Inconsiderate heat and self conceitedness, and making a faction of religion, carry many into extremes: when judgment, and charity and experience, are all for standing on the safe ground.

CHAPTER XXXVI.

Fraudulent Divisions.

Another of their practical frauds is this; seeking to divide the Protestants among themselves, or to break them into sects, or poiso7i the ductile sort loiih heresies, and then to draw them to some odious ]jrac-iices, to cast a disgrace on the Protestant cause.

In this and similar hellish practices, they have been more successful than in all their disputations; and thus the cause of hell must be upheld.

If their own priests are to be believed, Watson^s important considerations, Jesuits have set many nations in those, flames, whose cause the world hath not observed. John Brown, in his voluntary confession to a committee of parliament, said ; " The whole Christian world dotii acknowledge the prediction which the university of Paris did foresee in two several decrees they made Anno 1565, when the society of Jesuits did labor to be members of that university : That race of men is born for the destruction of Christianity and the subversion of literature." They were the only cause of the troubles which fell out in Muscovy, when under pretence of reducing the Latin church, and plant themselves, and destroy the Greek church, King Demetrius and his dueen, and those that followed him from Poland, were all in one night murdered by the monstrous usurper of the crown, and the true progeny rooted out. They were the only cause that moved the Swedes to take arms against their lawful King Sigismund, and chased him to Poland: and neither he nor his successors were ever able to take possession of Sweden. For the Jes-

'^96 JESUIT

uits' intention was to bring in the Romish religion, and root out Protestants. They were the only cause that moved the Polonians to take arms against the said Sig-ismund, because they had persuaded him to marry two sisters, one after the other; both of the house of Austria. They have been the sole cause of the war entered in Germany, since the year 1619, as Pope Paul V. told the General of their order, Vicelescus: for their avarice, pretending to take all the church lands from the Flussites in Bohemia to themselves, which hath caused the death of many thousands by sword, famine and pestilence in Germany. They have been the cause of civil wars in France, during all which time moving the French King to take arms against his own Protestant subjects, where innumerable people have lost their lives, as the seige of Rochelle and other places give sufficient proof. For the Jesuits' intentions were to set their society in all cities and towns conquered by the king, and quite to abolish the Protestants. They w^ere the cause of the murder of the last king of France. They were the only projectors of the gunpowder treason, and their penitents the actors thereof They were the only cause that incensed the pope to send so many fulminate Bulls to these kingdoms, to hinder the oath of allegiance and lawful obedience to their temporal prince. Their damnable doctrine to destroy and depose kings, hath been the cause of the civil wars, likely to befal these kingdoms, if God in mercy do not stop it. Prynne's Introduction.

If their own pens are to be credited, those very actions of the Swedes, Germans, French, which they cast, as a reproach in the face of the Protestant, as you may see in a book called The Images of the two Churches, were indeed their own and to be laid at their own doors.

How far they were the causes of the old broils in Scotland, Knox and Spotswood and all their latter histories will tell you.

How busy they were in England in Queen Elizabeth's days, the pope's Bulls, and the many treacheries committed signify. Moulin''s answer to Philanax.

C U A V T I-: R X X X V 11.

Popish ConceAment.

Another practical fraud of the Paj)ist3 is, In hiding themselves and their rcUgiun^ that they may do their work ivith the more advantage.

I. The principal means by which they conceal themselves is, by thrusting themselves into all sects and parties, and putting on the vizor of any side, as their cause rcquircth. It is well known that formerly we had abundance of them that went under the name of Protestants, and were commonly called by the name of Church Papists: but there is great reason to think that there are more such now. Some of them are prelatists, and some of them call themselves independents, some creep in among the Baptists, some "o under the cloak of Arminians, some of Socinians, and some of Millenians. They animate all the Jugglers and hiders of the times. Thev keep life in libertinism, and infidelity itselfl Among every one of tliose parties you may find them, if you have the skill of unmasking them.

Another way of hiding themselves is, by having a dispensation to come to any of our assemblies, or join in worship with any party good or bad. Or else they will prove it lawful without a dispensation, where the j>ope interdicteth it not. Their way is this : all the old known Papists, especially of the poorer sort, shall bo forbidden to come to our assemblies, lest they bring the blot of levity and temporizing on their religion, and lest there should not be a visible party among them to countenance their cause. But the new j)roselylcs, especially such as are of any power and interest in the world, and may do them more service in a masked way, and can fairly avoid the imputation of Popery, those shall have leave to come to our assemblies, when their cause may make advantage of it. That you may see I feign not all this of them, besides the proof from certain experience which we daily see ; I lay before you the decisions of one of their principal directors, in this work of propagating their faith ; Thom a Jesu de Convcrs, Gentium. How far they are for favoring of heathens

and infidels, and liberty of conscience for them, for all tlieir cruelty to Protestants, you may see; Lib. 5. Dub. 4. where he tells you that the sentence commonly received, in the schools is, that it is not lawful for Christian princes to use any force against infidels, for sins against the law of nature itself: and citeth Cajet. Victoria, Covarruv. Greg de valent. He decides it in the . middle way of Azorius, " that pagans may not be punished for despising the honor and worship of God, though they may for not giving every man his own, and for theft, murder, false witness, and other sins that are against men's right."

Lib. 5. part. 1. Dub. 6. he teacheth, that " a catholic living among heretics ma}', when the scandalizing of others forbid it not, for fear of death, go to the temples of heretics, and be among them in their meetings, and assemblies^, because of itself it is a thing indifferent; for a man may for many causes go to the temples of heretics, and be among thorn in their assemblies; that he may the easier and more effectually and com-modiously confute their errors, or on other just occasions, unless accidentally it scandalize others. As Azorius saith, he may do it to obey a prince, though he be an heretic, when he feareth the loss of his honor, maintenance or life : for in this he only obeyeth his prince : especially if among the Papists he openly affirm, that he doth it only to obey his prince, and not to profess the heretical sect: for by that open attestation he avoid-eth the offence and danger of catholics, and well de-clineth the unjust vexation of the prince."

Papists may eat ilesh on days when their church forbids it, to hide themselves among heretics." Dub. 5. So that the Papists are abundantly provided for their security, against such as would discover them when it gtands not with their ends to disclose themselves.

Another most effectual way of hiding themselves is, by equivocation or mental reservations, which we call lying, when they are examined about their religion, their orders or their actions. Lying that hurtetli not another, they maintain to be but a venial sin, which say they is properly no sin at all. To equivocate or reserve one half of your answer to yourselves, say the Jesuits is-not lying, nor unlawful, in case a man's interest

icqiiiretli him to do it^ Thnjiias a Jcsu the Cannclite, Dub. 4. seciirclh them sufl'»cienlly : his question is; " Whether one tiiat tlenyeth it when he is asked of a heretic wiietlicr he he a priest, or a rclipfio\is man or whether lie heard divine service, do sin against the confession of faith 1" lie answereth ; No: for liiat is no denying himself to he a Christian, or catholic : for it is lawful to dissemble or hide the person of a clergy-nian or a religious man, without a lie in words, lest a man be betrayed and in danger of his life; and for the same cause he may lay by his liabit, omit prayers, &,c.—because human laws for the most part bind noi the subject's conscience, when there is great hazard of life as in this case Azorius hath well taught." Just. Mor. Tom. 1. lib. 8. c. 27. So that by the consent of most, there is no danger to a Papist in any such case from his own confession.

Another way of hiding their religion and themselves, is by false oaths, which we call wilful perjury, but the Jesuits take for a lawful thing, when a mental reservation or equivocation supplieth the want of verbal truth. Who will ever want so easy, so obvious, so cheap a remedy against all danger of perjury, as a mental reservation is'?

The pope can sufficiently dispense with any of their oaths of fidelity or allegiance,. Hear the words of one of their owji priests— Brown's Voluntary Confess, in Pri/nnc's Introducf. He saith ; "It is strange to see the stratagems which they use with their penitents concerning the oath of allegiance ! If they be poor, they tell them flatly when they are demanded to take the oath, that it is damnable and no ways to be allowed by the church: If they be of the richer sort, they say they may do as their conscience will inspire them. And there be some of them that make no conscience at all, to have it taken so oft as they are demanded. What would you have more, than such discoveries by themselves 1

II. What get they by this hiding? WHiy screen themselves from danger, and more easily prevail to muln-ply their sect: for worldly persons would not so easily flock into them without some such security from suffering. They preserve those that are come

over to them from revolting, by the discouragement of suffering, especially the rich and honorable. They angle for souls with the less suspicion, when they stand behind the bush. Papists are become so distasted with the people by the powder plot, and many other of their pranks, that they may take more with them, if they come masked under another name. By tliis means they may openly revile and oppose the ministry, and ordinances, churches, and Protestant doctrine, without disturbance by the magistrate. A Papist in a Protestant's coat may rail at us and our doctrine in the open streets, and market place, and call us all to naught, and teach abundance of their own opinions without control. And many a poor soul will take a Papist into their bosom, and familiarly hear him, and easily swallow down what they say, that would be afraid of them if he knew them to be Papists. By this means they have easier access to a greater number than openly they could have : and they insinuate into our c<3unsels, and know all our ways, and how to resist us. But above all, by this means they are capable of any office and trust among us. It is easy therefore to discern that their principal artifice lyeth in hiding themselves, so there be a visible body of their open professors; those deceivers who have such stretching consciences.

III. But how shall these hiders be detected"? Suspect all tliat use a mask, and purposely hide their minds. A man that intendeth deceit, what ever his end be, should not take it ill to be suspected for a deceiver. God is so good a master that no body should be ashamed of him. Truth is so amiable, that the genuine sons of truth are not ashamed of it. True religion assureth men of that which will save them harmless, and bear out against all the malice of earth and hell, and repair all the losses that they can sustain in the defending of it. But saith one ; "Would you not hide your mind or religion in Spain ? " I would not whenever I found myself capable of serving God most by the discovery, not make use of positive juggling and dissembling to hide my religion. If Christians among infidels, or Protestants among Papists, had thought this dissimulation lawful, there had not been so many thousands of them martyred or murdered as were. What opinion is it that

brings men in England into any great danger at this (\a.Y? I will never be of a religion that is not worthy my open confession ; even to death, when there j.s .so much danger.

The juggling Papists may be known thus, that they are always loosening people from their religion, and leading them into a dislike of what they have been taught; that they may be receptive of their new impressions.

The juggling Papists may be much detected by this, that they are all upon the destructive part in their disputes, and very little on the assertive part. They pull down with both hands, but tell you not what they build up, till they have prepared you for the discovery. They tell you what they are against: but what they are for, you cannot draw out of them. As if any wise man will leave his house or grounds till he knows where to be better: or will forsake his staff that he leaneth on, or the food that he feedeth on, till he know where to have a better provision or support. Do they think wise men will be made irreligious? They deal by the poor people, as one that should say to passengers on shipboard; "What fools are you to venture your lives in such a ship that hath so much incumbrance- and danger, and so many flaws, and but a few inches between you and death, and is guided by such a pilot as may betray you, or cast away your lives for aught you know ?'^ They know now that none but mad men v/ill be persuaded by such words as those to leap into the sea to escape those dangers; and therefore they do this but to make men willing to pass into their ship, and take them for their pilots. If you are wise therefore hold them to it, till they have shewed you a safer vessel and pilot.

You may conjecture the quality of those jugglers, by their constant opposition against the ministry. It is ministers that are their eye-sore; the hinderers of their kingdom. Could they but get down those, the day were their own. Therefore their main business, whatever vizor they put on, is to bring the people mto a dislike or contempt of the ministry. They will rail at them.

26

The juggling Papists, what vizor soever they wear, are commonly putting in the necessity of a judge of controversies, an infallible church, a state of perfection here, and the magnifying of our own inherent righteousness, without justification by the forgiveness of sin: and oppose the authority and sufficiency of Scripture ; which they impugn, and lead men aside to another rule, the Papal traditions.

CHAPTER XXXVIII,

Jesuit Proselytism of men of Wealth and Influence.

Another of their practical frauds is; their exceeding industry for the jperverting of men of power and interest, that are likely to do much in helping or hindering them.

\ Be not too confident of your own understandings to deal with such jugglers in your own strength, without assistance. They have made it their study all their days, and are purposely trained up to deceive. whereas you are much wanting in their way of study, and much unfurnished to resist, how highly soever you may think of yourselves.

2. Read learned solid writings against the Papists.

3. Hearken not to Papists secretly, nor masked, nor coming to you by indirect and juggling ways: but open their persuasions, and call to some able studied divines to deal with them in your hearing, if needs you will hear them, that so you may hear one side as well as the other.

4. Take heed_,! what retainers, servants, or familiars are about you. We fear not any thing that they can do in an open way, in comparison of their secret whispers and deceits, when there is no body to gainsay them. Had they the truth, we should be glad to entertain it with them. Let not all our peace and safety be hazarded by the self conceitedness, or imprudence of our rulers. Seeing it is you that must govern us or set the vulgar the pattern which they are so much

addicted to imitate; wc adjure you in the name of the most High God, that you hearken not to seducers, and •corrupt tliosc intellects in which the whole nation hath so great an interest, We are willing to be as chan table to that proud throne of Rome, and usurping Vice-Christ, as will stand with the safety of our souls and of the church. But God forbid that v/e should be so blind, as to run into their pest-house, and drink the poison by which they are intoxicated.

CHAPTER XXXIX

Popish Pet-jury and Treason.

The most desperate of their practical frauds is this, Their treasons against the lives of 'princes, and the peace of nations, and their dissolving the bonds of oaths and covenants, and making perjury and rebellion duties and meritorious ivorks.

Horrid treason and tyrannical usurpation over all ihe Christian Princes caused England, Denmark, Sweden, and many other princes to shake off the Roman yoke. Kings are not fully kings where the Pope is fully Pope.

I need not tell the many treacheries since the refor-motion against our princes : or who it was that would have deposed as well as excommunicated Queen Elizabeth, and exposed her kingdoms to the will of others or who were the actors of the hellish powder plot. Do I need to mention their approving of the murdering of princes and the pretence of power to dispense with oaths of allegiance and fidelity, and who hath actually so oft pretended to expose princes and their dominions to the first occupant? Many in England disowned that doctrine : but the pope having owned and practised it; by disowning it they disown popery itself. It is an article of their faith; and essential to their religion, and is determined by a pope and the approved general council at Lateran under Pope Innocent III.

Albineus the Jesuit heard the murderer of Henry

IV. confess before he did the fact, and put off the examiners with this answer, that God had given him that special gift to forget when once he had absolved a sin ner whatsoever was confessed by him. Why was it that France expelled the Jesuits and set up a pillar of remembrance of their villanies, till Henry IV. gratified the Pope by calling them in again, and told the Parliament the peril of it should be upon him and so it was; for it cost him his life. Why did the same Parliament of Paris, Novemb. 1610, condemn Bellar-min's book against Barclay, as an engine of treason and rebellion? And the Theological faculty of Paris, April 4. 1626, condemned Santarell's book as guilty of the same villany, stirring up people to rebellion and kinor-killinir: which the university confirmed : while the Parliament condemned the book to be burnt.

Rivet recites of the answers of the Jesuits in Paris, when the Parliament asked them their judgment of that book: seeing: their general had approved the book, and judged the things that are there written to be certain, whether the}'- were of the same mind ? They answered, that, " living at Rome he could not but approve what was there approved of." But say the Parliament: What think you ? say the Jesuits, " the contrary.'' Say the examiners, but what would you do if you were at Rome ? Say the Jesuits, "that which they do who are at Rome.'' At which said some of the Parliament, have thev one conscience at Rome, and another at -Paris .'' God deliver us from such confessors as those.

But some of the Papists say that private men may not kill a king till he be deposed. Very true ! But it iS their doctrine, that.if once he be excommunicated, he is then no king, or if he be an heretic; and so bem^ no king, they may kill the man, and not kill the king. Suarez advers. Sect. Anglic, lib. 6. ca'p. 4. Sect. 14. Co.p. 6. Sect. 22, 24. Azorius Jcsuita Instil. Moral, 'part. 1. Z. 8. c. 13. Mysterium Patrum Jesui-farvm. Janseaian^s mystery of Jesuitism. Abbot's Antilogia ad Apolog. Eudccmojohan. But what need we more than the decrees of a pope and general council, and the practice of the church of Rome for ?o many

JUGGLING "305

For the pope's power to absolve from all oaths of allegiance and ficlelity, Pope Innocent III. and his approved general council have told the world enough

The Papists have lately had the confidence to atfirm that the powder plot and the Spanish invasion in 1588, were not a quarrel of religion, nor owned by the pope.

Cardinal Ossatus in his 87. Epist. to Villeroy, tells us that Pope Clement VIII, pressed the King of France to join with Spain in the invasion of Eng-land, and the cardinal answered that the king was tied by an oath to the Queen of England : to which the pope replied, that " The oath was made to a heretic, but he was bound in another oath to God and the pope; that kings and other princes do permit themselves all things which make for their commodity; and that the matter is gone so far that, that it is not imputed to them, or taken for their fault: and he alleged the saying of Francis Duke of Urbin, that indeed every one doth blame a nobleman, or great man that is no sovereign, if he keep not his covenants, or fidelity, and they account him infamous; but supreme princes may without any danger of their reputation, make covenants and break them, lie, betray, and perpetrate other such like things " That was Pope Clement VIIL Can we look for better from the rest?

Thuanus a moderate Papist and impartial historian, tells, lib. 89. p. 248, 249, an. 15S8. that, "the Spaniards pretended to undertake the expedition only for religion's sake, and therefore took with them Alarco vicar general of the Holy Inquisition, with Capuchins and Jesuits : and that they had with them the Pope's Bull, which they were to publish as soon as they landed; and that cardinal Allan was appointed as the pope's legate, to land at the same time, and with full power to see to the restorinf? of relio-ion. That the said bull had these expressions. ' The pope, by the power given from God by lawful succession of the catholic church, for the defection of Henry VIII. who forcibly separated himself and his people from the communion of Christians, which was promoted by Edward VI. and Elizabeth, who being pertinacious and impenitent in the same rebellion and usurpation—therefore the poT[}e

;-)ti6 JESUIT

jnciicd by the continual persuasions of n^any, and by the suppliant prayers of the Englishmen themselves, hath dealt with divers princes, and specirally the most potent King of Spain—to depose that v/oman, and punish her pernicious adherents in their kingdom.' That Pope Sixtus before proscribed the Q,ueen, and took from her all her dignities, titles, and rights to the Kingdom of England and Ireland, absolving her subjects from the oath of fidelity and obedience: he charg-eth all men on pain of the wrath of God, that they afford her no favor, help, or aid, but use all their strength to bring her to punishment; and then that all the English join with the Spaniards as soon as he is landed : offering revrards and pardon for sin, to them that will lay hands on the Queen ; and so shewing on what conditions he gave the Kingdom to Philip of Spain.'*

Yet some of the jugglers that say they are no Papists, persuade the world that Papists hold not the deposing of princes, nor absolving their subjects from the oaths of fidelity and that the Spanish invasion was merely on civil accounts, and that they expected not any English Papists to assist them.

Dominicus Ba'/ines in Thorn. 22. qu. 12. art. 2. saith, •' Quando adest Evide?is notitio., &c. when there is evident knowledge of the crime, subjects may lawfully exempt themselves from the power of their princes, before any declaratory sentence of a judge, so they have but strength to do it. Hence it follows that the faithful Papists of England and Saxony are to be excused, that do not free themselves from the power of their superiors, nor make war against them : because commonly they are not strong enough to manage those wars, and great dangers hang over them." You may see now how far the Papists are to be trusted : even as far a? they are sufficiently disabled.

August. Triumphus saith, de potest. Eccles. qu. 46. art. 2. " Duhium no^i c^t quhipapapossit omnes reges. cvm .^ubest causa ratio7f.abiIis, deponere: there is no doubt but the pope may depose all kings, when there iS reasoriable cause for it" Is not this a Vice-Christ and a Vice-God ?

Add to this, that th^ pope^is judge when the cause

is reasonable, far no doubt he must judjc, if he must e.xecute ; and then you have a pope in his universal sovereignty, spiritual and temporal.

Suarez and others say; when the pope hath deposed a king, any man may kill him. Mariana directs to poison him or secretly despatch him : dc reg instit^ Lib. 1. caj). 7. Suarez says; Defens. fid. Cat hoi. li. 6. c. 4. sect. 14. ''Post se/itentiarn, &c. After sentence past he is altogether deprived of his kingdom, so that he cannot by just title possess it: therefore from thence forward he may be handled as a mere tyrant; and consequently any private man may kill him "

I conclude with one testimony of a Roman Rabbi, cited by Usher, Epistol. J. R. 1609, who hath excused the powder-plot from the imputation of cruelty, "because both seeds and root of an evil herb must be destroyed," and adds a derision of the simplicity of the king in imposing on them the oath of allegiance, in the most memorable expressions, worthy to be engraven on a marble pillar. " Sed vide in tanta astutia, quanta sit simplicitas! &c. But see what simplicity here is in so great a craft! When he had placed all his security in that oath ; he thought he had framed such a manner of oath, with so many circumstances, which no man could any way dissolve with a safe conscience. But he could not see, that if the pope dissolved the oath, all its knots, whether of being faithful to the king or admitting no dispensation, are accordingly dissolved. I will say a thing even more admirable. You know I believe, that an unjust oath, if it be evidently known to be such, or openly declared such, obligeth no man. That the king's oath is unjust, is sufficiently declared by the pastor of the church himself. You see now that the obligation of it is vanished into smoke, and that the bond which so many wise men thought was made of iron, is less than straw." These are the words of Papists themselves Renounce your treacherous principles, and we will cease to charge you with them. Let a general council and pope but decree the contrary to what the fore-cited pope and general council have decreed; or else do you all declare that you think that pope and coun-

cil erred, and then you will either cease to be true Pa pists, or at least become tolerable members of human societies. Why doth not the pope himself condemn those doctrines, if really he disowns them ?

CHAPTER XL.

Popish Persecution and Slaughter.

Their last course when all others fail, is, to turn from fro.ud to force, and o'pen violence, stirring up princes to wars and bloodshed; that they may destroy the professors of the reformed religon, as far as they are able, and do that by flames and sword, by halters and hatchets, which they cannot do by argument. Hence have proceeded the bloody butcheries of the Waldenses and Albigenses, the wars in Bohemia, the league and wars and Massacres in France, the desolating wars of Germany, the plots, invasions and wars m England. Most of the flames in Christendom have been kindled for the pope by his agents, that he might warm him by that fire by which others are consumed. Hence his own pretences to the temporal sword, and so many volumes written to justify it, and so many tragedies acted in the execution. Yet these men cry up antiquity and tradition. What bishop in all the world for above three hundred years after Christ, did ever claim or exercise the temporal sword, as much as to be a justice of peace? It was their judgment that It did not belong to them. Neither the pope nor any bishop on earth, as such, hath anything to do with the coercive power of the sword; nor may not inflict the smallest penalty on body or purse, but only guide men by the word of God; and the utmost penalty they can inflict is, to excommunicate them. They have nothing to do to destroy men, when they have excommunicated them, nor to cause the magistrate to do it: but rather should still endeavor their conversion. Synesius Epis-tol. 57. Why doth not the pope when he hath past his excouimunications, content himself that he hath

done his part: but he must excite princes, and force them to execute his rage, and fall upon the lives and dominions of such princes as he will call heretical? He knows how small account would be made of his thunder-bolts, if he had not a secular arm to follow them. If it were not for arms and violence, lie would soon be cast out by the Christian world.

The same doctrine also Bernard taught the pope himself, Ad Eiigeu. P. R. dc Considerat. I 2. ''Quid tibi dimisit Apostolus? &c. What did the holy apostle leave thee? Such as I have, saith he, that give I to thee ; and what was that ? One thing J am sure of; it was not gold, nor silver, when he said himself, silver and gold have I none. It thou canst claim this by any other title, so let it be; but not by apostolical right: for he could not give thee that which he had not: such as he had, he gave, a care of the churches, but did he give thee a domination ? Hear himself. Nci as lords or ruling lords, saith he, in the heritage, but as examples of the flock. And lest thou think that he spoke it only in humility, and not in verity, it is the voice of the Lord himself in the Gospel: the kings of the Gentiles rule over them, and they that have power over them, are called benefactors, but you shall nor be so. It is plain that domination is forbidden the Apostles. Go thou therefore, and usurp ifthoudar-est, either apostleship whilst thou rulest as a Lord ; or a Lordly domination, while thou ar t Apostolic. Plainly thou art forbidden one of the two: U thou wilt have both alike, thou losest both." Thus the pope and his bishops are deprived of both, by grasping at both lone-ago

The pope makes himself a temporal prince in every prince's dominion on earth, where he is able to do it. and takes all the clergy out of their government into his own. So that actually he hath dispossessed them of part of their dominion already, by taking so considerable a part of their subjects from under their power. If any believe not that th-.' pope doth not thus exempt his clergy from the secular power, it is because he knows not their most notorious principles and practi-se.'=^ Even in England, in King-Charles'articles for

the Spanish match, the pope had the confidence to demand that prerogative ; and therefore himself added to the sixteenth article, which freed them from laws about religion, " ecclesiastic persons shall be under no law, but of their superior ecclesiastics^ So that no church-man must be under any law of the land, or government of secular princes. When they have such a strength in our own garrison, a foreign enemy is easily lei in. To the exciting of whom they will never be wanting, having their agents, in one garb or other, at the ears of all the princes and states in Christendom, and of most of the persons that are deeply interested in the government. With infidel princes sometimes, as Cyril the Patrick of Constantinople proved to the loss of his life, for being so much against the Papists. The more cause have all Christian princes and states to be vigilant against those incendiaries ; because they trust to war and violence, and build their kingdom on it, and therefore study it day and night. Because they have Jesuits all abroad continually upon the design; whose contrivances and endeavors are day and night to bring nations to their will, and to kindle divisions and wars among them to attain their ends. If the Papists can but deceive the-rulers, they will give us leave to dispute, and write, and preach against them, and laugh at us that will stand talking only, while they are working: and when the sword is in their hand, they will soon answer all our arguments, with a fagot, a hatchet, or halter. Smithfield confuted the Protestants, that both the universities could not confute. Their inquisition is a school where they dispute more advantageously than in academies. Though all the learned men in the world could not confute the poor Albigenses, Waldenses and Bohemians, jret by those iron arguments they had men that presently stopped the mouths of hundred thousands of them: even as Mohammedans confute the Christians. A strappado is a knotty argument. In how few days, did they confute thirty thousand Huguenots in and about Paris, till they left them not a word to say? In how few weeks space did the ignorant Irish thus stop the mouths of two hundred thousand Protestants ? Even

in Ulster alone, about one hundred and fifty thousand men were mortally silenced. Alas i many of the poor Irish know little more of Christ, but that he is abetter man than Saint Patrick. How long might they have been before they could have silenced so many Protestants any other way ? There is nothing like stone-dead with a Papist. They love not to tire themselves with disputes, when the business may be more successful dispatched.

Seeing this is the way that they are resolved on, and no peaceable motions will serve for the preventing it, all men that have any care of the church and cause of Jesus Christ, and the happiness of their posterity, have cause to stand on their watch guard : Not to be cruel to them, but to be secured from their cruelty. Let them have the rule, and then make the best you can of your arguments. If they can once get Protestant countries, into the case of Spain and Italy, their treachery shall not be cast in their teeth; for they will leave none alive and at liberty to do it.

Therefore in the name of God be vigilant, and watch for the security of the chureh as those that must give account. Let all that love the Gospel, and the prosperity of the Christian world, and of their posterity, have their eyes in their heads, and take heed of that bloody hand, that hath already spilled so many streams of Christian blood.

Some think that it is their safest way to please the pope and Jesuits, and so will be Papists on the same terms that some of the Indians worship the devil, because he is so naught, that he may not hurt them. But those men were wiser, if they understood, that the malice of infernal spirits is not to be avoided by pleasing them, but by resisting them. They are too bad to be ever pleased by any means, but what will be utter ruin. ■They are not stronger than the devil himself, who will fly if we resist him. If the best were not the most powerful, what would become of the world ? If God be stronger than the devil, he should rather be pleased than the devil; for he is'able to defend you from the devil's displeasure : and he is mqst .able', to hurt you if you be despisers of iiis pQw^r.vwH>a>;jueitice will

' '• •>> ••'>•*. 46>

effect more certainly on the bad, than satan's malice :an do upon the good. Men think themselves wise, that shift for their safety by carnal and unlawful means: but they shall all find at last, that honesty is the best policy, and the favor of God the best security, a life of faith the most prudent life; and that shifting for yourselves in unbelieving ways is the greatest folly. It is the design of the Papists to terrify, that none may dare to resist them, but may see that they have no hold of their lives while they are under their displeasure. But such as have most displeased thern have escaped best. Henry IV. of France, being persuaded to stand out against the Jesuits, answered, " Give me then security for my life." The security he found in his unbelief ■was assassination.

The Papists are fixed in their errors, and there is a necessity lieth on them never to change. The pope and a general council have already decreed that the pope may depose Protestant princes, and absolve their subjects. To give up which abominable error is to cease to be Papists; so that all people must necessarily despair of their amendment.

END

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

003551891

936

■5^^0V

333^4

•■2^