The examination and confutation of a certaine scurrilous treatise entituled, The suruey of the newe religion, published by Matthew Kellison, in disgrace of true religion professed in the Church of England

THE EXAMINATION and Confutation of Kellisons scurrilous Suruey of the newe Religion , as he tearmeth it .

Chap , 1. Kellisons fond conceit and error , concerning the foundations of our Religion .

IF it be the part of a wise builder to lay a firme foundation , as our Sauiour Christ Math. 7. teacheth , and common experience prooueth most euidently vnto vs ; then we may wel collect , that Kellison our aduersary , in his Suruey , hath shewed himselfe neither wise builder , nor wise man , who in his first booke going about to build the Toure of his Romish Babel doth wholy mistake his foundations , laying the frame of his worke eyther vpon the Pope , whome he supposeth to be a visible Iudge of all controuersies , or vpon the mission and preaching of Romish Masse priestes . Furthermore , talking of our Religion , he doth grossely erre in the foundations of it , supposing that it relyeth , first vpon the authoritie of our Preachers , then vpon their allegations out of Scriptures , thirdly vpon mens priuate spirits , fourthly vpon credible or probable testimonies , and lastly vpon some visible Iudge : matters ( certes ) rather deuised by him selfe , then taught by vs . The visible Iudge , and authoritie of Priestes , is layd as a foundation of fayth by Stapleton in his booke of doctrinal principles . That which he talketh of priuat spirits , and the allegation of Scriptures out of mens own humors , is an imputation of Papists layd vpon vs and that most vniustly . For we build the Church vpon the Prophets and Apostles . Iesus Christ him selfe being the cheefe corner stone , as the Apostle teacheth vs Ephes. 2. And the Scriptures we receiue , not as they are interpreted by the Massepriests , or any mans humorous fancy , but as they procéed from the spirit of God by the ministery of his Prophets and Apostles .

Wherefore mistaking the foundation of the worke , we may well imagine , that his discourse , that is a worke raysed either without foundation , or beside the foundation , is most vaine , idle , and absurd . The first Chapter of his first booke , he beginneth with a long declamatory narration , proouing , that no man is to intrude him selfe into the function of the ministery of the Church without mission . But what is that to the foundation of religion , which is the subiect which he promised to handle ? Doth he suppose , that the principal foundation of his Massing religion is layd vpon the preaching , or rather not preaching & mission of pol-shorne priests sent out by the Pope to say Masse for quicke and dead ? if he doe , then like as his gunpowder consortes went about of late to blow vp the King and Sate , so doth he goe about to blow vp the Popes Chayre together with all his Cardinals , Friars , Monkes , and Masse-priestes .

For , first the Pope shall neuer be able to proue his mission . Ephes. 4. wee read , that Christ gaue some Apostles , some Prophets , some Euangelists , some Pastors , and Teachers . But the Pope is none of all these . His state is too great to be conteyned within this small and weake number . Further he is no successor of Peter . For he rather killeth , than féedeth Christs shéep . Thirdly he rather medleth with Swordes , then Keyes ; and if he handleth the Keyes of the Church , yet can he shewe no Commission for it . Fourthly he is absurd , if he clayme the right of a Bishop . For he doth not the worke of a Bishop . Lastly the Apostles Successors , and Preachers sent from God procéed according to their Commission and Instructions receiued from God . But the Pope procéedeth according to his owne Decretales and the rules of his owne Chancery . Out then must he goe , and all that pretend to come from him as méere intruders , if we folowe the Apostles rules .

The Cardinals are but of a late standing . S. Peter had no Cardinals about him . Nor were the parish Priests of Rome that assisted the auncient Bishops of that Cittie so gallant fellowes , as these new Cardinals are . They neither preach nor Baptise as Cardinals . And therefore cannot pretend right of succession , eyther from the Apostles , or from auncient Bishops or Priestes . In the holy Scriptures , albeit some alleadge the wordes Cardines terrae , there is no mention of them . Finallye the Fathers knew them not . If then the Popes decretales warrant them not ; these Cardines terrae , or rather terren and carnall Cardinalls , may goe in vltimos fines terrae , that is into the vtmoste endes of the earth to seeke for their mission .

The Monkes and Fryars are no where mentioned in Scripture , vnlesse it be Apocalyps . 9. Where wée finde , that Locustes did issue out of the smoke of the bothomlesse pit , whereby is signified , that by their smoky traditions they should obscure the light of the Gospell . They succeede not Pastors and Teachers . For their profession is pouertie , chastitie and obedience to monkish rules , and not to teach or administer Sacraments . Hierome and all antiquitie put monkes after Priests , and range them in another order . Fryars entred but lately into the Church vnder the conduct of Dominicke and Francis . Their authoritie is wholy from the Pope : and other commission can they shew none . Masse-priestes are not sent to preach and administer the Sacraments , but to sacrifice Christs bodie and blood vnder the accidents of bread and wine , for quick and dead , as appeareth in the formall wordes of their ordination . But such a mission is no where found in Scripture . For our Sauiour instituting the Sacrament of the Eucharist said , accipite , edite , bibite . That is , take , eate , drinke , and not , sacrificate pro viuis et defunctis , that is , Sacrifice for quicke & dead . True it is , that he saith , hoc facite that is , doe this . But hoc facere doth no where eyther in Scripture or prophane Authors signifie sacrifice this . Virgil is alleadged , where one saith cum faciam vitula . But if they bring no better proofes , the Masse-priests will prooue themselues as wise as Calues . For it is one thing to say , facere vitula , and facere hoc . Beside that , Virgil yet was neuer esteemed a good interpreter of Christes wordes . To omitte Scriptures , this sacrificing Preest-hood of the Romanistes , hath no proofe out of Fathers . For no where in any authenticall writing of theirs is any mention made of such an ordination . Nay it is apparant , that the same was first talked of by idle Schoolemen , and authorized after a sort by the conuenticle of Florence vnder Eugenius the fourth . Finally , neither doe Scriptures , nor Fathers mention any such real , carnal , and corporall sacrifice of Christes body and blood made in the Eucharist vnder the accidentes of breade and wine for the sinnes of the quicke and dead , as I haue fully demonstrated in my Bookes de m●ssa against Bellarmine . Nay , the Canon it selfe dooth signifie , that the sacrifice of the Church is offered as well by the people as the Priest , as these words declare , qui tibi offerunt . But the Papists wil not say , that the people offereth vp Christs body . Further the Masse-priest prayeth that God would be pleased to accept the sacrifice : but it is absurd to make a Masse-priest mediator for Christs body and blood . If then they bee false Prophets , Theeues , & Robbers , that come without mission or sufficient warrant ; then are the Popes of Rome , Cardinals , Monkes , Fryars and Masse-priests false Prophets , Theeues , and Robbers . And that may in part also bee prooued , by the confession of our aduersarie . For if , ( as hee saith ) all are to bée reputed such , that can neither shew ordinarie calling from the Apostles , nor extraordinarie from the spirit of God ; then are they to bee shunned as false Prophets and false teachers , and punished seuerely , not onely as men lately besmired with Gunne-powder , but also as false Theeues & Robbers . For extraordinarie calling they pretend none , & ordinarie calling authorized by Gods word , they haue none , as hath in part beene prooued . Further we say , that whereas two thinges are to be respected in ordination of Bishops & Ministers of Gods word , viz. the rite of ordination , & the substance of the function , whereto they are ordeyned ; in the popish Church , our aduersaries haue neither of these two lawfull . First they haue no imposition of hands by Bishops . For they haue no lawful Bishops , & allow the imposition of hands of Abbots . Further their Bishops are no successors of the Apostles , but the popes creatures , that is rather a temporal prince , then a Bishop . The Monks and Fryars are rather called to doe pennance then to preach , when they are shorne . Secondly their Priests are not called to preach and baptise , which was the forme and substance of the mission of the Apostles and their successors , but to sacrifice Christes body and blood vnder the accidents of breade and wine for quicke and dead : which forme and function , neither Kellison , nor all the rabble of Romish Priests and Fryars , shall euer prooue to bee auncient , lawful , or authenticall .

Against our Bishops , Priests and Deacons , no such matter can be excepted . For first it cannot be denyed but that our Bishops were lawfully ordeined by imposition of handes of other lawfull Bishops . The Ordination of Bishop Cranmer & other Bishops then liuing , the Papistes themselues cannot deny to be lawfull . But from them other Bishops folowing receiued the rite of consecration . Bishop Parker was consecrated by the imposition of handes of Bishop Barloe , Bishop Couerdale , Bishop Scory , and two Suffragans , mentioned in the Acte of consecration yet to be seene : which not onely had succession from such Bishops as our aduersaries account lawfull , but in deede were lawfull Bishops . Our bretherne in Germany and Zuizzerland had imposition of handes from Luther , Zuinglius , Oecolampadius , Bucer and others : in France from Farel , in Scotland from Knox and others , whome the Papistes cannot deny to haue bene lawfully ordeined Priests , at the least if their owne formes were lawfull . And from these men & their successors , al other Pastors & Ministers of the Church , haue receiued the rite of imposition of handes , or ordination to the Ministery . Neither is it materiall , that the first preachers of the Gpspel in these Countries were not Bishops , and so called , as it was in England . For suppose no Bishop would haue renounced the heresyes of Popery , nor haue taught sincerely : should not inferiour ministers teach truth , and ordeine other teachers after them ? Furthermore , they wanted nothing of true Bishops , but the name and tytle . Finally the rite and imposition of handes by such as are called Bishops is not so necessary , but that in a defection of Bishops of a nation , and in case of other extreme necessitye , Ministers may lawfully be ordained by other Ministers : which is prooued first , for that generally the Presbytery or Ministery of the Church hath right to impose handes , and next for that the Keyes are called Claues Ecclesiae , and not Claues Episcoporum : and lastly for that necessitie admitteth not the obseruance of all ceremonyes . As for example , admit a multitude of Christians should goe into the Indiaes without ministers , it is not to be supposed , but they haue power to appoint Ministers among them selues in this case of necessitye .

Secondly it is certaine , that the Bishops and Ministers of reformed Churches haue bene sent to preach and so administer the Sacraments , by such as had authoritye in the Church , and that they haue executed their function accordingly . Why then should any deny them to be truly the Apostles successors ?

Finally , the defection of ordinary Priestes in the Romish Church being extraordinary , we may not imagine , that all ordinary rites and formes were to be obserued in the vocation of such , as by the instinct of Gods holy spirit were stirred vp extraordinarily to restore the decayed partes and ruines of Gods Temple .

But sayth Kellison pag. 9. If their Preachers be sent by an ordinary mission , let them shewe their succession . And heere hee alleageth Tertullians wordes lib. de praescript . aduers . haeret . concerning the orders of Bishops , and succession from the Apostles . And two places out of S. Augustine , in Psal. contr. part . Donati . And contr. epist. fund . where he speaketh of the succession of Bishops . Againe , he vrgeth vs , if any thing were extraordinary in those , which first reformed the Church , to prooue their mission by miracles ; and runneth into a long discourse of the visibilitie of the Church , of miracles and prophesies . To which wee answere first , that if the succession of Bishops were the onelye proofe of an ordinarie mission , the Papists themselues were in bad tearmes hauing no proofes of their succession of popes so much bragged of , but the testimony of Anastasius , Platina , Naucler , Sabellicus , Onuphrius , Genebrard , Baronius & such like hungrie parasites of the Pope iarring and contending one against another like mastye Curres about a bone . Secondly the Greekes , Antiochians and Aegiptians , pretend to this day succession of Bishops , and yet are grossely fallen from the faith , & want true Bishops . Thirdly , Tertullian & S. Augustine speak of succession of Bishops , but neither of them denyeth them to bee Bishops or pastors , that are not ordeined by a Bishop , who was not ordered with al solemnities . Fourthly , we shew such a succession of Bishops , as the Papists themselues cannot controle , deriuing them concerning order & externall formes from Bishops allowed by our aduersaries , and concerning succession of Doctrine from the Apostles , Fathers and auncient Bishops of the primitiue Church . Fiftly the question concerning the visibilitie of the Church is diuers from that , which concerneth succession . For I hope K. will not say , that hee euer saw the succession of Romish Bishops , or that any Apostle saw his successors . Lastly wee alleage that the old Prophets were sent extraordinarily , and yet wrought no miracles . Diuers apostolicall men likewise haue beene raysed vp by God at diuers times , and yet wee reade not , that eyther all of them prophecied , or wrought miracles .

This being our answere , of which Kellison could not be ignorant , but that hee is eyther ignorant of matters in question , or else voide of honesty and good dealing ; what is it , I pray you , that hee is able to alleadge against the vocation and mission of Gods ministers in our Churches ? First saith he , Page . 11. They say , that the Apostles which were the first Bishops and Pastors had for a time their lawfull successors , but that at the length the church fayled , and the Pastors with it . But while he talketh of mission he lyeth shamefully and without all commission . For first wee distinguish both Bishops and ordinarie pastors from Apostles . So doth the Apostle also , Ephe. 4. Secondly we deny , that Christs Church euer hath fayled . Thirdly wee teach , that the Apostles haue alwaies had some successors , albeit neither in one place , nor without all interruption . If then he haue not fayled in true dealing , let him set downe the authors names , that haue affirmed this which hee reporteth , and relate their words sincerely .

age . 13. he addeth , that Luther disobeyed the Pope and the Church , and deuised a new Religion to cloake his villany . But first the Pope and the Church are euill yoaked together . For Christs sheepe heare not the voice of strangers . Secondly these words of villany come out of his shop of mallice . Lastly neuer shall this K. prooue that Luther deuised any new Religion . For he onely impugned late errors , and sought to bring Christians backe to the auncient Catholike faith .

Thirdly he shapeth an other answere for vs Page . 14. & maketh vs to say , that wee had predecessors , but they were inuisible . But this abuse with he offereth vs , is too grosse & palpable for neither doe we make our predecessors inuisible . Nor doe we denie , that the ancient fathers & holy Bishops of old time , as they taught the Catholicke and apostolike faith , and no more , were out predecessors .

Fourthly hee telleth vs , that such as pretend extraordinarie sending runne vnsent . But he taketh vppon him too too arrogantlye to limit Gods power , and seemeth plainely to contradict Gods word . S. Paul Ephes. 4 , mencioneth Euangelists without limitation either of times or places , and Saint Iohn Apocaly . 11 foresheweth , that God will giue power to his two witnesses preaching against the Kingdome of Antichrist , and the abuses of their times . Neither doth either Optatus or Cyprian , or the Apostle speake any word against vs herein . Optatus L●b . 2. contra parmen . speaketh of some intruding donatists : & Cyprian , of certaine presumptuous Nouatians , which as the Arch-priests & Iesuites and Masse-priests doe in England , thrust themselues into the ministerie in Africk without warrant . The Apostle Eph. 4. leaueth out the Pope & therefore ouerthroweth our aduersaries cause . But hee saith not one word , why Pastors and teachers may not sometime either hee sent extraordinarily , or furnished with extraordinarie power . Finally albeit the Church be built vpon a Rocke , yet particular Churches & Citties may fall into errors , and hardly can bee reformed without some extraordinarie helpes .

Fiftly he affirmeth Page . 19. that extraordinarie mission is alwaies to be prooued by extraordinarie signes and tokens of Prophecies or miracles . And to this purpose hee feyneth that both Luther and Caluin endeuoured to prophecy and to worke miracles . But the first is disprooued by the examples of the prophets and Apostles . For neither doe we reade , that all the prophets wrought miracles , nor that all the Apostles prophesied . Furthermore the Godly Martyrs of old time , and the auncient Bishops were often indued with extraordinarie graces : yet did they not all worke wonders and prophecy . The second is disprooued both by our Doctrine and practise . For neither doe wee now practise miracles , or stand vpon prophecies , nor doe wée teach , that the Doctrine of truth is to be confirmed with miracles or prophecies . To conuince vs , this K. produceth the testimonye of Cochleus , Surius , Staphylus , Genebrard , Fontanus , Bolsec , and such like fellowes . But their testimonies are not worth a Nut-shell , being hired to speake shame of the popes aduersaries . Hee is verie light of beleefe , that giueth credit to the wordes eyther of enemies , or hired parasites .

Finally he concludeth Page . 28. that we haue no assurance of our Religion by the authoritie of our Preachers , being able to say no more then false Apostles for proofe of their authoritie . Hee doubteth not also to affirme , that both Brownists , and those of the family of Loue , may as well alleadge Scriptures , and pretend to bee sent of God , as Caluin and Luther . But first he sheweth himselfe a simple Doctor of Diuinitie , that teacheth , that the authoritie of preachers is a sufficient assurance for Christians to builde their Religion and faith vpon . As for vs wee beleeue them no further , then they treade in the steps , and continue in the Doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets of God . Secondly it is not sufficient to alleadge or pretend Scriptures , but they must bee truelye alleadged . Neither is the priuate fancie of euerie capriecious head to be equalled with the determinations of graue men , and well experimented in Scriptures . Lastlye , there is no comparison betweene learned men called and allowed by the Church , & phantasticall fellowes , that rashly presume to leape into the ministeriall function without eyther calling , allowance , or qualities fitting for such a calling .

In his second chapter he shameth not to say , that those which ground their Religion on Scriptures , ( which hee like a bad and bare fellow calleth bare ) set the gate open to all Heretickes and Heresies . Thus our aduersaries aduauncing the Popes decretales , and the vncertaine tradisions of the Romish Church , detest the holy Scriptures , and open their mouthes against God . But wee are rather to beleeue Christ and his Apostles , then such blasphemous gapers and speakers against holy Scriptures . The Apostle Ephes. 2. saith the faithfull are built vppon the Apostles and prophets . Ephes. 6. the word of God is called the sword of the Spirit . And 2. Tim. 3. The scripture is commended as profitable to instruct and reproue , and able to make the man of God perfit . But neither may the ground of faith be tearmed a gate set open to Heresies , nor is the sword of the spirit a meanes to breede errors . Further how can the same be a gate set open to heretikes being able to make the man of God perfit ? certes if the allegation of Scriptures were a way to error , our Sauiour Christ would neuer haue sent his hearers to search scriptures . Neither would the auncient Fathers haue termed Scriptures a canon of faith , if they had beene any gate set open to Heresies . Irenaeus in his third booke against Heresies , saith the Apostles first preached the Gospell , and afterwards deliuered the same to vs in Scriptures , that it might be a foundation & pillar of our faith . He sheweth also , that it is the propertie of Heretikes , when they are conuinced by Scriptures , to accuse the Scriptures , and to speake euill of them . Origen in Math. tract. 25. sheweth , that Scriptures are to be brought for proofe of all Doctrines . Neither neede we to doubt , but that of themselues , they are verie sufficient . Our Sauiour Math. 4. by Scriptures onely ouercame the Diuell . Neither did the auncient Fathers by other weapons preuaile against Hereticks . In generall councels of olde time not the Popes decretales , but the holy Scriptures were laide before the fathers . Lastly if the word of God cannot be receiued , it is farre more vnlike , that Heretickes will respect the traditions or wrightings of men . Neither is it material , that Hereticks cauil against Scriptures , and detort them to contrarie sences . For such cauils and deprauations may easily be refuted by scriptures , and to such abuses the wrightings of men are much more subiect , then holy scriptures .

But saith Kellison , The Deuill hath alwayes affected to be as like as may be , to Christ and his Apostles in allegation of Scripture . He maketh also a long and lewd narration of heretikes alleadging Scriptures . But first most false it is , that the deuil alwayes affecteth to alleadge Scriptures . Nay he alleadgeth traditions , customes and humane deuises more often then Scriptures . False it is also , that heretikes more often alleadge Scriptures , then the testimony of traditions , Fathers & other reasons . But suppose that heretikes should often alleadge Scriptures ; yet we are not to refuse that , which by others is abused . Neither doe wise men refuse meat , because gluttons doe thereby surfet , or forbeare to drinke , for that drunkards abuse wine to excesse . If then Kellison wil néeds folowe heretikes in calumniating scriptures , and not forbeare ( as the deuil did ) to abuse Scriptures to contrary sence , then must he giue Christians leaue to folowe Christ and his Apostles in alleadging Scriptures , and not presume to condemne those , which prefer Scriptures before traditions , & Gods worde before the Popes decretales .

Pag. 33. and 34. He runneth out into a large field concerning the possession of Scriptures , which ( as he sayth ) belongeth to Catholikes , & not to heretikes . But what may this make for Papists ? whom by many reasons we haue in our Challenge conuinced to be heretikes , and not Catholikes ? Furthermore , the question , which he proposeth here , concerneth the sufficiency and authority , and not the possession of Scriptures . But this is this Surueyors pleasure to abandon matters in Controuersie , and to trifle about needlesse questions .

Afterward he sheweth , why heretikes aledge Scriptures , and mentioneth the decrees & writings of the Pope & the Church . He endeuoreth also to prooue , that Scripture is not easily to be vnderstood . Matters much stood vpon by him , but yet very impetinent in this place , where the question is about allegation of Scriptures , as an Argument of it selfe only sufficient . Furthermore , what if heretikes depraue and wrest Scriptures , shal not true Catholikes rely vpon them ? Thirdly the Popes bulles and blundering decretales are not of such qualitye , that they ought to be compared to Scriptures : or mentioned , where they are in place . Lastly , Scriptures in matters necessary to saluation , are playne and easy . But what if some places were difficult ? should we therfore absteine to alleadge Scriptures ? nay rather we ought diligently to study them , that by vnderstanding of them we may resolue our difficultyes . Tertullian alleadged by him pag. 37. doth not refuse flatlye to dispute with heretikes by Scripture , or count such disputation lippe labour , as this impudent compagnion falsely affirmeth . For his common course was to conuince heretikes by Scriptures . But if he thought it frutelesse , at any time to alleadge Scriptures , it was against such onely as denied the Scriptures .

Of holy Scriptures the prophane fellowe speaketh , if not blasphemously , yet basely and contemptibly . pag. 35. he compareth them to colours vsed by foule women , and to sweete odours vsed by sluttes . pag. 39. he calleth them bare , and compareth them to a nose of waxe , and alloweth the saying of one , that compared them to Aesops Fables , especially vnderstanding the bare letter of Scriptures . Finally , he shameth not pag. 41. to say , that the worde of God with a false meaning is the worde of the deuill . Matters deseruing rather corporal punishment , then verbal censures . We may not therfore maruel , if he rayle at Luther & Caluin belying them without all shame or conscience . First he sayth Luther dissaloweth S. Iames his Epistle . He onely maketh it inferiour to other Canonical Scriptures , as not esteemed to be his . Secondly he chargeth Caluin and Luther with Misconstruing S. Pauls Epistles . He should rather prooue it then falsely affirme it . Thirdly he saith Luther doth discanon Iob , jest at Ecclesiastes , and contemne all the Gospels , but S. Iohns , the Epistle to the Hebrewes , and that of Iude. But his writings doe refute these slaunders , and nothing doth K. bring to iustifie them . Lastly he sayth Caluin and Luther will haue the bare letter , or joyned with their voluntary exposition to be Iudge of controuersies : matters vtterly vntrue and improbable . For neither doe we admitte the letter without the sence , nor doe we allow voluntary or priuate expositions .

Pag. 46. he falsifyeth the testimony of Scriptures , where he sayth Her selfe confesseth her owne obscurity . For S. Peter 2. Epist. 3. doth not say that the Scriptures are obscure , as this K. pretendeth : but only that certaine thinges in S. Pauls Epistles are difficult . And psal. 119. the Prophet compareth Gods word to a Lanterne , and to light . Lucerna pedibus meis verbum tuum sayth he , & lumen semitis meis . If any obscuritie and difficultie be attributed to Scriptures by Fathers , it is only in such poyntes , as are not necessary to saluation .

Finally , he reciteth the words of Luther concerning the plainnesse of Scriptures partially , and obiecteth vnto vs the testimony of Osiander about the differences concerning mans iustification by Christ . But neither is Luther to be blamed , if he reprooue those , that call Scriptures obscure : nor is any credite to be giuen to Bellarmine citing Osiander , nor to Osiander , where he writeth against those that differ from him in the Article of mans iustification . Long may he declayme against Luther and Osiander and others . But nothing doth his reasoning or rather rayling against reading of Scriptures effect . For who will not rather folowe the exhortation of Chrysostome exhorting lay-men to get them Bibles , and to read Scriptures , then regarde the babling of this Popish parasite , that calleth readers of scriptures Biblists , and sayth we holde , that to be the true meaning of Scriptures , which euery ones priuate spirit imagineth ?

In the third chapter of his first book , he disputeth against those which make their owne priuate Spirit supreme iudge in earth of the interpretation of Scripture . The which as it lanceth the Pope deepely , whose priuate and satanical spirit is the supreame iudge , whome all Papists are bound to follow ; so it toucheth not vs at all . For albeit wee refuse the Pope and his adherents for iudges ; yet we relye not vpon our owne priuate spirit in expounding scriptures but vpon the spirit of God , that eyther speaketh plainely , or expoundeth himselfe in some other place , and for atteining the right vnderstanding of Scriptures , vse the hope of tonges , the exposition of fathers and all learned men , the discourse of histories , and all other good meanes . Neither did Luther thinke , or proceede otherwise . Why then doth noth this superlunaticall Surueyor declare , who they bee , that doe attribute the publike and iudiciall interpretation of Scriptures to euery mans priuate spirit , and in what place ? why doth he forge to himselfe an absurde opinion held by none , that I knowe , saue the Papists , who in matters controuersed hold the Popes priuate definition , for a supreme resolution ? would hee therein shew his triumphant eloquence ? if this were his purpose ; let vs see , I beseech you , what he performeth .

First he saith selfe loue is a good , as guilding , and then talketh of the goodmans Cowe , Pans pipe , Appolloes harpe , painting of womens faces , Hens and Chickens , and such like fooleries . But his horrible eloquence declareth him to bee the Chicken of a Buzzard , and a blinde Harper , that cannot discerne betweene selfe loue , & priuate spirits . His reader also may see , that hee hath as much skill in painting of faces , as in expounding of scriptures . And yet all his Cow eloquence wil not serue to couer the deformities of the painted whore of Babilon , of whome hee is a deuoute seruant , and vppon whome he bestoweth much complextion to no purpose .

Luther regardeth it not , albeit some of the Fathers should speake against a point of faith : neither would hee submitte his Doctrine to be iudged by the Romish antichristian prelates . But that sheweth not , that he preferred himselfe before any , but rather that hee preferred the Scriptures and articles of Christian faith before all . And to them he exhorteth all to submitte themselues , ascribing nothing to his owne opinion . But what if Luther shold haue spoken out of square ? what is that to the new Religion , he speaketh off ? doth our religion depend vpon euery word of Luther ? certes no more , then the faith of the Church of Rome vpon the idle discourses of Kellisons Suruey . As for Caluin hee referreth nothing to his owne spirrit , but to the rule of Gods word , to which he submitteth his interpretations , as well of these wordes , hoc est corpus meum , as of other places of Scriptures else where interpreted by him .

Finally , we neither reiect Fathers , nor Councels , nor godlye pastors . The skip-iacke surueyor therefore , that calleth Luther and Caluin Skip-iacks , and like a skip-iack running from matter to matter , makes so long a declamation against selfe loue , and ouer-weening a mans selfe , did herein seeme to loue himselfe , but too much , and much to offend in ouer-weening and surcuydrie , that pleased himselfe in this Chapter , that is so farre from the purpose , so false in respect of vs , and so contrarie to himselfe , and his owne cause .

His fourth Chapter he beginneth , as his manner is , with a pedanticall declamation against Parricides , shewing how strangely they were punished , being sowed into a sacke with a Cocke , a Viper , an Ape , and a Dogge . But to what purpose is all this ? doth he thinke , that it is no lesse , then the crime of Parricide , to reiect some Fathers ? why then , the Pope and his agents by the confession of this K. are all parricides , and for their dogged and viperous , apish , and cockish natures , deserue to be sewed in sackes , as Vrbane the sixt did deale with certaine Cardinals , & with the beastes of like nature to be throwne into the sea . As for vs wee reiect no Fathers , that consent one with another , and with holy scriptures in matters of faith , but rather the bastardlye writinges of falsaries , and of such as take vppon them the names of Fathers , or else such , as hold singular opinions , or varie from the Doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles of Christ .

Luther had no reason in matter of the Sacrifice of the Masse to disclaime the fathers , which all with one voice , as I haue iustified against Bellarmine , make against the carnall sacrifice of the Popish Masse for quicke and dead . But if hee or Caluin , or any other speake against Fathers , it is not against all , nor against the Bookes , which are certainely knowne to bee theirs , but against counterfet fellowes , and some particuler opinions .

If Caluin should call the men of Trent , Hogges and Asses , he did them a speciall fauour . For they shewed themselues to bée worse , being open enemies of the Christian faith , and moste obstinate oppugners of the truth . But they are none of our Fathers , nor of the Fathers of the Church . Nor is the synagogue of Rome maintaining the abuses , which we refuse , our Mother , but the Mother of fornications , or as Petrarch calleth her , the Mother of errors , and the greate Whore described Apocalyps . 17. Gregory the first wanteth much of the learning of former Fathers ; yet is neither he , nor his messenger Austen so bad , but that his successors were farre worse . Furthermore , we doe not beleeue , that so wise a man as Gregory the first is reputed , would write so foolish Bookes , as the dialogues , that goe vnder his name , and are so full of olde wiues tales , and fabulous toyes .

But should Luther , Caluin , or others ouerlash in speaking of Fathers ; yet to doe this K. fauour , I am content to ioyne with him vpon this issue , that the Fathers of the Church in their authentical writinges in the greatest controuersies betwixt vs and the Papistes are for vs and against them . And of this hee could not be ignorant , but that he is onely a Schoole pedant , and an ignorant broacher of new opinions , and not versed in the writings of the Fathers . Against vs he alleageth the most reuerend & learned Father Toby Matthew most worthy Bishop of Durham : but he doth offer him singuler wrong , as that reuerend Bishop will alwaies testifie . Afterward he bringeth in Genebrard a professed enemy , whose deposition is no more worth , then if this ketler should out of his malice speake it . Luthers scruples grew not vpon doubt of the Fathers doctrine , but of the long approbation of the Masse , and other abuses . In fréewill for substance of doctrine we doubt not of the Fathers fauour against the Papistes .

Finally he sayth , The Fathers haue the infallible assistance of Gods holy spirit in exposition of Scriptures , and that those which reiect them , reiect also the councels of the Church , and the authority of Pastors , by which the Church is directed : And finallye open a gate to all Heresies . But heere are manye absurdities hoodled together without truth or order . For First he supposeth most falsely , that all the Fathers are reiected by vs . Secondly he confirmeth the exposition of Fathers to be equal to the determination of the Pope , which neither his holy Father , nor his owne consortes will graunt . Thirdly not euerie one that reiecteth Fathers in some things , dooth therefore reiect councels or all the pastors of the Church . Finally albeit diuers late Councels were reiected , and the testimonies of fathers not admitted without choise ; yet the definitions of Councels , which are apparently deduced out of Scriptures , and the Fathers authentical expositions , consonant to the rule of faith might bee approued by those , which haue authoritie in the Church , which euerie priuate man is to followe , vnlesse by some equall , or greater authoritie that resolution be reuersed . But if Kellisons Doctrine were confessed ; then might the Pope goe shake his eares . For what shold we need to goe to him , if the Fathers haue Gods holy spirit infallibly assisting them in the exposition of Scriptures ? againe if denying of the authoritie of Fathers were the opening of a gap to all Heresies , them did the Popes open gaps to al Heresies , who in their decretaline expositions of hoc est corpus meum , & feede my Sheep , and drinke ye all of this , and infinit such like textes of scriptures decline quite from the common interpretation of Fathers , and nothing regard their authoritie .

The fift Chapter is partly a Scholastical exercise concerning the motiues , that may enduce men to beleeue the Christian fayth , and partly an inuectiue against vs , for that we admit not the rinegued Masse-priestes sent vs hither by the Pope , & their counterfet miracles . And thereupon he would conclude , that we want those probable meanes to enduce reasonable men to be of our religion , which the Papists haue . But first his dispute concerning probable motiues to the fayth , is nothing else , but a vaine discourse of his owne foolish motions , disioynted opinions , and improbable fancyes . For not onely the Pagans of olde time , but also the Turkes now may better alleage antiquity , consent , authority of mission , the subduing of the worlde to their religion , miracles and such like motiues , then the Papistes , séeing Popery is nothing else , but a corruption of Christian religion , that is neither so auncient , as Arianisme , nor so largely spread abroad as Paganisme and Turcisme . Neither are the Papistes for learning comparable to the auncient Philosophers . Secondly whatsoeuer this K. speaketh of mission , it maketh against the Masse-priestes , that come both without authority , and without any message deliuered by Christ , or his Apostles vnto them . For neuer shal he prooue the Popes vsurped authority , though he should liue to the worldes end , nor that Masse-priests are to sacifice for quick and dead , and to cut the throat of Princes , which be the principal poyntes of their mission . Thirdly we offer to prooue , that we haue not onely those probable motiues , which he speaketh of , as miracles , consent , antiquity , and such like , to enduce men to like of our religion ; but also the worde of God , the testimony of the auncient apostolike Church , and many sure groundes , which our aduersaryes want . Neither néeded this K. to brag much of Bellarmine or Suarez , seeing their positions stand refuted without answer , but that he which can say little him selfe , must néeds relye on others . Fourthly nothing hath this babler to obiect either against the authoritye of our teachers , or their doctrine ; which is not more vnsauery , then Colewortes twice or thrice sodden . Where he calleth Boy Masse-priestes olde teachers , and their doctrine also olde , and our teachers and doctrine newe ; he like a poore disputer beggeth that , which he cannot by argument effecte or conuince , and like a foolish pleader , talketh of matters preiudiciall to him selfe . Nay , when he shall come to tryall , he shall find , that the Fathers in all poyntes of fayth are for vs , and not for the Pope , whose triple-Crowneship , and decretaline doctrine they neuer knewe . Fiftly where he ( like a curre ) barketh at the memory of the renowned Father Bishop Iewel , and snarleth at the most famous learned man the Lord of Plessis Marlj , as if they had corrupted and mis-alledged Scriptures and Fathers , and by vntruthes and weake proofes abused they readers ; the first is iustified by maister Whitakers against al the barkings of his malicious enimies : the second hath verified his allegations against al his accusers , by the original words of the authors by him alledged , in a late edition of his booke , & both these verifications stand without reply . But if we should goe about to collect all the lyes , slaunders , impostures , corruptions , falsifications , errors , fooleries , fond conclusions , absurd assertions without ground , and imperfections of Bellarmine , Baronius , Suarez , Harding , Saunders , Alan , Stapleton and their mates ; they would fill Cart-loades of volumes . Finally all this long discourse is as farre from the purpose , as Kellison is farre from learning and honesty . For heere hee should reason against the grounds of our Religion . But groundes are one thing , and motiues another : those being certaine , these probable , and oftentimes not concludent . But were hee not a beetle-headed Surueyor , as he is a polshorne sacrificer of Baal ; he would haue forborne to touch this poynt of motiues . For what motiue can any man haue to beleeue , that an vnlearned , bougerly , blinde and wicked Pope is supreme iudge of Religion , that an obscure and infamous Italian hath power to depose the King of England ; that Christians are not to beleeue the articles of our christian faith , nor Scriptures , vnlesse they receiue them from the Popes chayre ; that Ecclesiasticall traditions , of which the authours and defenders are not yet resolued , are equall to holy Scriptures , that the olde lattin vulgar translation of the Bible is authenticall , and the originall text not , or that Dogges do somtime eate Christes body , or that Christes body and blood is sacrificed in the Masse , although the same at the same instant be in heauen , and is not consumed , as is the manner of sacrifices ; and infinite such absurdities ?

In the end of the first Chapter hee citeth diuers slaundrous reports of Luther and Caluin , and talketh Idely of the good life of Papists , or rather excuseth their lewd life notorious to the world . He doth also alleage the number , antiquity , miracles , and other qualityes of such as taught his religion . Afterward he runneth backe to talke of the succession of Popes . Finally by a tale out of Iosephus of the Iewes and Samaritans Temple he douteth not , but he should winne the victory , if he were to plead against vs . But if he plead no more wisely , then he doth in this place ; his auditorye should haue good reason to hisse him from the barre . For first his slanderous reportes against Luther and Caluin are matters deuised by Cochleus , Staphilus , Bolsecus , and other popish parasites hired of purpose to deuise slanders against them : of which Bolsecus in publike synode reuoked his malicious libell . But the matters we obiect to the Popes , and their adherents , are matters recorded in publik actes & authentical histories , the authors wherof were men fauouring popery . Secondly this Lobster-faced fellow would blush to talk of the liues of the Italians and other the popes adherents , but that he knoweth their lewde actes are concealed from the people of England by the remotenesse and distance of their Country . And yet all that know Italy , and the nations subiect to the Pope , will say , he hath no reason to stand much vpon their pietye or honestye . Thirdly neuer shall he shewe , eyther that the moderne Popes are the successors of the first Bishops of Rome , or that the Popish Bishops , that are now the marked slaues of Antichrist , are the true successors of Austen the Monke and his fellowes . Nay the Doctrine that wee professe , being taught by them , and the decretaline doctrine that we refuse , being vnknowne to them , it must needes followe , that not the popish Wolues , but our Bishops are their successors , Finally the tale out of Iosephus doth little fit this K. purpose . For neither hath the moderne Church of Rome any affinitie with the temple of the Iewes , nor can this K. doe any such feates as he imagineth .

Was not then this surueyor both idle , and vnaduised , that runneth through so many impertinent matters to his particular purpose , and so aduerse to his generall cause ?

The last Chapter of his first book is yet more extrauagant , then al the rest . For therin he speaketh not one word of the grounds of our Religion , which are the things which he propounded for the subiect of his discourse ; but of the Pope , whome wee take to bee the head of Antichristes Kingdome , and to bee so rightlye called , although hee would gladlye prooue him to bee the supreme iudge in matters of Religion . And his reason is , for that euery Kingdome hath his King , euerie Dukedome a Duke , euerie Cittie a Major or Bayliffe , euery Army a general , euerie village almost hath a Constable , &c. hee prooueth the same also by Gods order both before the Law and after , and by the example of Saint Peter and of the Bishops of Rome , who , as he saith , were euer called the Vicars of Christ , and successors of S. Peter . And in the end hauing runne himselfe out of breath , he concludeth , that we haue no iudge in matters of Religion , and so open a gap to all Heresies . But if he come into his Countrie and reason no better , the Constable of the parrish where he landeth , if hee bee a man of any vnderstanding , may doe well to set him by the heeles . For First hee reasoneth absurdly from politick bodies to Christes mystical body . Secondly if any argument might bee drawne from thence ; yet would this similitude ouerthrowe the Popes monarchy . For albeit , euerie Kingdome , Armie , Cittie and Village hath his gouernour ; yet it were absurd to make one King ouer all the world , one commander ouer all armies , one grand Maior or Constable ouer all the Maiors and Constables of the world . Thirdly , neyther was there one supreme iudge of matters of Religion before the lawe , vnder the lawe , or in the time of the Gospell , as I haue at large prooued against Bellarmine in my Bookes De pontifice . Rom. ( which are to hot for such a tender fingred Surueyor to handle ) nor are we now to conforme our selues to the law , but to Christes institution . Fourthly , for one thousand yeares after Christ , shall not this ranging fellow prooue , that the Bishops of Rome were called Christs Vicars . The title of Peters successors is common to all true teachers succeeding Peter , and importeth no generall commaund ouer the whole Church . Fiftlye , Theophilus Bishop of Antioche Lib. 2. Autolicum is grossely belyed . So like wise is Chrysostome homil. 34. in epist. 1. ad Corinth . Finally , he wrongeth vs , where he saith we haue no judge of matters of Religion . For the onely supreme iudge that determineth infallibly is God speaking in Scriptures . If any varietie bee about his determination , the supreme iudge of all the church vpon earth is a lawfull generall councell proceeding according to Gods word . In the meane while euerie nation is to stand to the definition of a nationall councel . And to this iudge doe we submit our selues . As for the Papists they submitte themselues to a blinde Pope , that sometime beleeueth not , and seldome vnderstandeth the Articles of the Christian faith . Kellison therefore , that dreameth of such a fellowes infallible iudgement , hath little reason to talke against the proceeding vsed in the Church of England , for deciding of matters of Religion . Further hee hath neede to beware , that the Constable of one parrish or other , take him not within the sphere of his actiuitie , least he place him in the supreme hole of the Stocks , for his supreme idiotisme in matters of iudgement concerning religion .

Chap. 2. The foundations of Popish religion discouered to be most weake and foolish .

THus we haue séene how much this K. hath mistaken the grounds of our religion , and how litle he hath to say against them . Let vs therefore nowe consider his supposed groundes , and the common foundations of the popish religion , and what Christians are to thinke of them .

Kellison where he talketh of the grounds of our religion , discourseth first of the mission of our Preachers , and Lib. 1. cap. 1. concludeth that no man is to hang his saluation on these newe Ministers . Which argueth first , that hee supposeth the mission of the Pope and his sha●●● Masse-priestes to be a principall ground of religion , and next , 〈◊〉 ●he papists are to hang their saluation vpon them . But this 〈…〉 nely a meere foolery , and most grosse impietye , but also an open way to all superstition and Heresie . The same ground is also ouerthrowne by Kellisons owne positions . Meere foolery it is to build our faith vpon a blind ignorant and wicked Pope . Neither can wee esteeme it other then impietie to adde a foundation to that , which is already laide , which is Christ Iesus , and to beleeue the Popes determinations , as the word of God .

Furthermore , this being graunted , then will it followe , the Pope teaching Heresie , that all Papists are to followe him , and that when he goeth to hell for teaching errors , according to the Chapter si papa . dist. 40. that Kellison and his consorts are to goe after him . Kellison supposeth , that he cannot erre . But this sheweth , that his faith is built vppon supposals , yea such supposals as by euident demonstrations are declared to be false .

Finally this ground of the mission of the Popes , and their adherent Masse-priestes is ouerthrowne by Kellison his owne discourse . For if the Popes bee not S. Peters or the first Bishops of Romes successors ; then are they , as Kellison saith , intruders and false Prophets , nay theeues and Robbers .

But Saint Peters successors they cannot be , hauing First no vocation to be Apostles . Secondly , taking on them an Office that S. Peter neuer had , to wit , to mannage both the swords , to dispose of kingdomes , to cut christian mens throates , that will not receiue their marke , and leauing S. Peters office in feeding Christes shéepe .

Neither are they the lawful successors of the first Bishops . For first they are no Bishops , as neither hauing lawfull election by the people and Clergie , but onely by certaine new vpstart electors called Cardinals , nor preaching or dooing the worke of a Bishop . Secondly , they haue deuised a new Doctrine and faith , diuers from that , which the first bishops of Rome taught , as their decretales shew . Thirdly , they haue taken vppon them an vniuersall power both in temporall and ecclesiasticall matters , which the Christian Bishops of Rome in times past neuer had nor challenged .

The Masse-priests consequently being authorized by the Pope cannot pretend any lawfull calling or mission . But were they cleare of this exception , yet can they not iustifie their mission . For first they are called ad sacrificandum pro viuis et defunctis , that is to sacrifice for quicke and dead . But of such a calling there is neyther ground nor memoriall in the holy scriptures , or auncient fathers . Secondly , they teach not the Doctrine of the Apostles and their successors , but of the Popes decretales , and of the Schools Sophisters . Lastly , they are the market slaues of Antichrist hauing their crownes shauen , and their handes annointed with his oyle , and with him they fight against the Saints of God . Of their abhominable villanies , I will say nothing at this time , although I haue iust occasion being prouoked thereto by the vniust slaunders of this greasie Masse-priest against maister Luther and Maister Iohn Caluin of reuerend memorie . That part of my defence shall be reserued to a greater volume .

Secondly , this K. excludeth scriptures from being a foundation of religion . Wherin he hath great reason if we respect the doctrine of Papists . For how can they admit scriptures for a foundation , that rayle against them , flye from them , and cannot stand , if their authoritie were most eminent , and to bee preferred before all humaine deuises ? but this sheweth , the Kellison is a better Mason to build Babell , and the synagogue of satan , which is vpholden with humane traditions and the Popes sword , then the Church of God , which is built vppon the Prophets and Apostles , Iesus Christ being the cheefe corner stone .

His third foundation , as it seemeth , is laid vpon Councels and Fathers . For of them hee talketh much Lib. 1. C. 4. but neither doth he name what Councels , nor what Fathers , nor what writings of Fathers he meaneth : matters of verie important consideration . For foundations must be certaine . But among the councels actes , and writings of Fathers , there are many thinges neuer established by councels , nor taught by Fathers . Furthermore the Fathers themselues will not haue their writings taken for canonicall , or authenticall scriptures , as may bee prooued by infinite testimonies . But I will heere onelye alleadge one or two . Quamuis sanctus sit aliquis post apostolos saith Hierome in Psal. 86. quamuis disertus sit , non habet authoritatem . He saith plainely , that no Father after the Apostles time hath authoritie . The same Father sheweth , that onely Scriptures are the foundation of the Church : and Augustine lib. 2. Contr. Crescon . c. 31. hath these words : literas Cypriani , non vt canonicat habeo . The like he saith epist. 19. ad . Hieronymum , and epist. 48. shewing that there is great difference betwixt scriptures , and the writings of Fathers . Finally diuers Heretikes haue pretended councels and Fathers .

His last and moste authenticall foundation is the supreme iudgement of the Pope . But that sheweth , that popish religion is rather from man , then God , and that the Papists are rather the synagogue of Antichrist , relying vppon his decretales , then the church of God , that is built vpon also plainelye declare , that there is no certainty in popish Religion , standing vppon the humor of a man , whose opinions are repugnant to other popes , and whose minde may change , and cause him to vtter contrarie Doctrines . Thirdly , it sheweth , that Popish Religion is absurd , being grounded vpon the opinions and sentences of ignorant & impious men . Finally , grant this , & then the Papists , if the Pope deny Christ , must all goe to hell with him .

Likewise Stapleton handling of purpose this argument in the preface of his booke of Doctrinall principles , deliuereth vnto vs these seauen principles and foundations of faith , First the Catholike and Apostolike Church , Secondly , the power of the same church in teaching and iudging matters of faith infallibly , Thirdlye , the persons , in whome this power doth reside . Fourthly , the meanes by which they proceede in teaching & judging . Fiftly , the chiefe heads , about which that power is conuersant . Sixtly , authoritie to interpret Scriptures infallibly : and lastly , power to deliuer Doctrines not conteined in Scriptures . But if he had beene bound in statute staple , I doe not thinke he could haue spoken more absurdly , or impiously , & falslye . For First if hee talke of principles demonstratiue of the christian faith , then should he not haue talked of single words , and termes , as he doth , but of propositions or Scriptures conteining the primarye propositions of the Christian faith . Secondly if the rude fellow had but had one graine of pietie , he would not haue left out the holy Scriptures out of the number of christian principles . Thirdly , the Church , to speake properlye , is built vpon a foundation , and is not the foundation of the Church , vnlesse he will haue both a building without a foundation , and a foundation beside the building . Fourthly , it is an absurd course to separate the power of the Church , and the persons in whome the same consisteth , from the Church . Fiftly , what more ridiculous , then to call a forme of proceeding , a principle of Christian Doctrine ? Sixtly , all Articles of the faith may be called heads , but it is meere foppery to thinke that Christian Religion hath as many foundations , as seuerall Articles . Finally it is moste absurde to beleeue , that eyther the Pope , or the Church of Rome doth interpret scriptures infallibly , or hath the power to adde Articles not contained in Scriptures to the Christian faith . If then Stapletons meaning be , that all traditions not written , and all interpretations of the Pope and his adherents , and all the Popes determinations and decretales , and the sayings of the fathers and Councels allowed by the Pope are the foundations of faith , then doth he endeuor to build Babylon , & not Hierusalem , fantasticall deuises , and monstrous chimeraes , and not the true faith ; the kingdome of Antichrist , and not Christes church . Nay if these were foundations of faith ; then would it follow First , that the foundation of the Romish faith is not yet fully laide . For as yet all their decretales , and determinations are not fully published . Secondly we should not know where to finde this faith , these traditions , and interpretations and opinions of Fathers , all of them being not yet resolued . Thirdly , the Romish faith should be a meere humane deuise standing vpon humane fancies . Finally it should be contrary to it selfe , and to scriptures : for such are the Romish traditions and interpretations and allegations of fathers .

Canus in his Booke de Locis Theologicis , layeth downe ten groundes , from whence all arguments in controuersies of Diuinitie in his opinion are deriued . The first is holy Scripture , The 2. tradition , The 3. is the authoritie of the Catholik church The 4. is the authority of general councels . The 5. is the authoritie of the Church of Rome . The 6. is the authoritie of the holy Fathers . The 7. is the authoritie of Schoolemen & Canonists . The 8. is naturall reason . The 9. is the authoritie of Philosophers , and ciuill lawyers . The last is the authoritie of humane histories . But first it is no smal wrong to ioyne with holy scriptures , not onely the writing of Fathers , but also the writings of Schoolemen , canonists , and profane writers . Secondly , it is the ouerthrowe of faith , to found the same vppon vncertaine and vnknowne traditions . Thirdly , it appeareth heereby , that the faith of Papists for the moste part is an humane opinion being grounded vpon men , nay vpon humane reason . Finally , his groundes are not onely changeable for the moste part , but also contrarie one to another . That is prooued , not onely by the mutability of the decrees of councels , & Doctrine of councels , Schoole-diuines , Canonists , and prophane authors , but also by traditions themselues , of which diuers are abrogated and ceased . This may be demonstrated by traditions , by testimonies of Fathers , actes of Councels , the doctrine of Thomistes and Scotistes , Canonists , ciuill Lawyers , and profane writers . For not onely profane writers haue shewed themselues ignorant of matters of faith , but both Schoolemen and fathers haue held contrarie opinions , as shall be prooued when neede is by diuers particulars .

Bellarmine in his Preface in lib. de pont. Rom. is not ashamed to apply these words of the Prophet Isay , Behold I will put a Stone in the foundation of Sion : vnto the pope . There also hee auoucheth the Sea of Rome to bee the foundation of the Faith . Likewise in the end of his preface de verbo dei , he seemeth to holde that the sence of Scriptures is to be fetched from the Popes See , and sencelesse decretales . Lastly the same man doth as confidently alleadge the Pope decretales , as Saint Paules Epistles .

Gelasius in the Chapter Sancta . dist. 15. ordeineth , that the Histories of Martyrs and their sufferings are to bee receiued . And commonly the Romish Church doth prooue her traditions partly out of such legends , and partly out of their missals , porteses , and other rituall Bookes .

Kellison therefore , when he looketh vpon the ruinous foundations of the Romish faith , hath little reason to talke against the foundations of our Christian faith . For First we all agree , that the writings of the Prophets and Apostles are the principles and foundations of our faith : and thus both Scriptures , and Fathers doe teach vs . But the Papists , as may appeare by that , which I haue alleadged , doe one differ from another .

Canus doth not once mention the Pope among his theologicall places : which to Stapleton and Bellarmine is the principall foundation of the worke . Contrarywise Stapleton leaueth Scriptures out of his reckoning of principles of faith , which Canus confesseth to be a moste solide foundation of faith . Canus againe numbreth diuers foundations , and places theologicall , which others doe not once mention .

Secondly albeit we doe not build our faith principallye , eyther vpon the actes of councels , or testimonies of Fathers , further then they build their Doctrine vpon holy Scriptures , yet in the interpretation of Scriptures wee doe not neglect the authoritie of councels and Fathers . But the Papists , albeit they seeme to found their faith vpon the authoritie of councels , and Fathers , yet regard them not one straw , if it be the popes pleasure to determine contrarie vnto them .

Thirdly , our faith is built vpon the rocke Christ Iesus , but the faith of the Romanists is built vppon the straw and stubble of popish traditions & determinations , and as they say ; vpon the Pope , who to them is the supreme iudge , and pole-starre of faith shining out of his papall Chaire .

Fourthly our faith is the Christian faith , being built onely vpon the word of God . Theirs is a decretaline , & an humane faith , being built vpon the Popes decretales , and humane inuentions .

Fiftly , our groundes are immoouable , and agree well one with an other . But their groundes are mutable , and contrary one to another .

Sixtly , they cannot deny our groundes , vnlesse they will blaspheme against holy Scriptures . But vpon their owne groundes they are not yet well agreed . We doe generally refuse them , and antiquity was ignorant of them .

Seuenthly , our groundes are safe and sure . But he that foloweth the Pope , or beleeueth all that is written in the Breuiaryes and Missals , cannot assure him felfe , that he is in the right .

Finally , it is a thing most ridiculous to beleeue , that whatsoeuer an vnlearned Pope , or a man voyd of religion determineth in matters of fayth , is to be holden as a matter and firme Article of fayth . For as well may a blind man iudge of colours , as a blind and irreligious Pope of matters of religion . But we are assured , that the Prophets and Apostles haue truly declared vnto vs the whole counsaile of God .

Open your eyes therfore deere Christians , and suffer not your selues to be abused by the impostures of Masse-priestes . You see they are not resolued in the foundations of fayth . And doe you think that these men entend the edification of Gods Church , who ●rre in the maine principles and foundations of fayth , and cannot stand , vnlesse the Pope , who hath manifestly declared himselfe an enemy of religion , may sit iudge in his owne cause ?

Chap. 3. Kellisons Motiues to Popish religion compared with the Motiues , that may enduce men to embrace true Christian religion . Therein also the true motiues to Popery are touched .

KEllison in his first Booke and fift Chapter , talketh of Motiues to Christian religion : but so coldely and barely , as if his cause wanted life and motion . First , he telleth vs pag. 106. that our Sauiour Christ proued his Mission by prophecyes and miracles . Among other miracles hee talketh of the strange conquest , which the Apostles made of Idolatry . Secondly , he sayth we want reason and authoritye to perswade men to our religion , being not comparable eyther to auncient Fathers , or to Bellarmine , Suarez , and such fellowes , in wit , or learning , or good life , or antiquity , or number , or dignity . Thirdly , he talketh of consent & succession . But First the example of our Sauiour Christ , & the conquest made by Christs Apostles ouer Idolatrye maketh against the idolatrous papists . For neither can the Pope prooue his vniuersall Monarchy by Prophets , or by miracles ; nor hath any Christian man reason to adhere to papistes , that want confirmation of their Popes , and Masse-priestes Mission , and yet bring into their Churches heathenish idolatry , and much false and erronious doctrine , and namely concerning the 7. Sacramentes , the sacrifice of Christs body and blood in the Masse for quicke & dead , Popish purgatory , and teaching that man by power of free will is able to worke his owne saluation , that we are to make vowes and confessions to Saints , & to offer sacrifice in honor of them , that we are to satisfie for sinnes ( whose guilt is remitted ) in Purgatory , that the Pope hath power to deliuer soules out of Purgatory by his Indulgences , that his Chaire is the foundation of the church and such like doctrines of deuils .

Secondly , the ancient Fathers are wholy against the papistes in these poynts . As for the Popes of Rome and their parasites Bellarmine , Suarez , and the rest , they are not such , as are to be bragged vpon , eyther for learning , wit , good life , or any vertue .

Thirdly , neither are the papistes comparable in number to the Turkes & Pa●ans , nor haue they eyther true succession , or consent , or antiquity , that maketh for them . Nay if the papistes would stand to these motiues ; they were cleerly gone . For neither haue they prophesies or miracles for them , Nor can the Pope , or the Masse-priests prooue their mission by miracles , nor doth antiquity make for them . As for good life , this K. may be much ashamed to speake of it , the filthynes of Popes , Cardinals , Masse-priestes , Monkes , Nonnes and Friars , being so notorious to the worlde , and recorded in so many storyes and actes of Councels .

What then is the reason , that so many adhere to papistes , and what are the motiues , that enduce so many to like their religion ? Forsooth first Fire and Sword . For they kill all , that will not receiue the Popes marke , or that once mutter against their idolatrous religion .

Secondly , secret and trecherous practises against all that shall once dare to professe the truth . Masse-priestes brewe treason and rebellion , Iesuites set on assassinors . The Pope hath his Agents with all Princes . Neither doth he , or his Agents omit any occasion to stirre vp Princes to make warre against them that professe the truth , and to persecute them to death .

Thirdly , excommunicating , and killing , and poysoning of Kings opposite to the Popes tyranny . By the Popes practice K. Henry the 8. and Quéene Elizabeth were often in danger here in England . By the trechery of the Leaguers King Henry the 3. was slayne , and Henry the 4. wounded and brought to great extremity in France . Henry of Lucemburgh was poysoned by a Dominican Fryar . Frederic the 2. was empoysoned , and in the end murdered , as Matthew Paris doth signifie : and this no dout by the Popes practise .

The 5. of Nouember anno 1605. a trayne of gunpowder was layd by certaine Papistes vnder the vpper house of Parliament , purposing to destroy the King , the Quéene , the Prince , the nobles and commons there assembled ; and by their destruction to replant popery in England The treason discouered , they broke forth into open rebellion .

Fourthly , slaundrous Libels ; as the inuectiues of Alan and Parsons against Quéene Elizabeth and the State : of Saunders against Her , and her Parents and Counsaile : of the Leaguers and Iesuites against King Henry the 3. and 4. of France , and the rayling discourses written against Luther , Zuinglius , Caluin , Beza , Knox , and all godly men declare .

Fiftly their impudent lies and fables in setting foorth their owne Religion , and discommending the truth , and such as eyther now , or in time past professed it , as the fabulous tales of Iacobus de voragine , Surius , Baronius , and diuers writers of popish Histories will testifie .

Sixtly , their publishing of counterfet bookes , vnder the names of Fathers , and the corrupting of Fathers by their expurgatorie indexes .

7. Their impudent falsification of ancient Fathers , and other writers , as may bee prooued out of the allegations of Bellarmine , Stapleton , and other popish Proctors .

8. Their false imputations laide vpon others , and their impudent denials of thinges done by themselues .

9. The diligent suppressing of the Books of holy Scripture , and all Bookes written in vulgar tongues , concerning matters of religion .

10. The prohibiting of Christians to dispute reason , or question of matters of faith .

11. The ignorance & blindnes of christians , that know nothing , but onely such matters , as the false Fryars and Masse-priestes tel them .

12 The impudent clamors & raylings of this generation in Pulpits , lying and slaundring all , that professe the Gospell sincerely .

13. The rigor of auriculer confession , by meanes whereof the Popish faction vnderstandeth all mens secrets .

14. The bloody crueltie of the popes agentes , executioners and inquisitors .

Finally , the rewardes and prayses that are giuen to those that trauaile eyther by writing , or practise to maintaine the Popes cause . Without these motiues all the motiues mentioned by Kellison were to no purpose .

As for vs wee haue two principall motiues to hold vs in the truth , which would also mooue others to draw vnto vs , if they knew them . The first is the truth and iustice of our cause . The next is the impieties , blasphemies , abhominations , fooleries , absurdities , iniustice of Popery . For the truth of our Religion we● offer to bring Scriptures , councels , Fathers , antiquitie consent , true succession , law , reason and all other proofes required in the iustification of Religion .

The reasons to deterre men from Popery , we shal God willing deduce at large in a particular discourse . Thus much may serue to requite Kellisons discourse of motiues to Religion for the present .

Chap. 4. Of the markes and properties of Heretickes .

THe name and nature of Heresie beeing so odious , it is not to be maruelled , if the Patrons thereof disguise themselues in their tearmes , names , and titles . The Valentinians , as Tertullian in his Book against them testifieth , did colour their most vaine and filthie deuises , with holy names , titles and arguments of true religion . Sanctis nominibus & titulis & argumentis verae religionis vanissimà atque turpissima figmenta configurantes . So likewise doe Papistes vnder colour of Catholike religion present to their followers their hereticall D●●trine concerning the being of Christes bodie in many places , transubstantiation , the carnall eating of Christes flesh with the mouth , the deuouring of Christes body by brute beastes , and the merits of congruitie . Vnder the title of Gods true worship they commend the seruice of the blessed Virgin , the adoration of Angels , of Saints , and of their images ; vnder the name of the sacrifice of praise and thankes-giuing they shadow the abhominable idol● of the Masse : and vnder the name of succession , the greeuous yoake of the Popes Tyrannye . But as Wolues muffled in sheepes cloathing are discerned by their Woluish qualities ; so Hereticks are discouered by certaine markes and hereticall properties . The which if Kellison would or durst haue set downe truely ; then would it haue appeared , that Papists , and not we , are Heretikes For first Heretikes are they , that teach new Doctrine in the Church . Haerest deputatur saith Tertullian Lib. de praescript . quod postea inducitur . But such is the decretaline and Trent doctrine of traditions , iustification , Sacraments , purgatorie , indulgences , worship of images , Angels and Saints .

Secondly , they flye the light of Scriptures and speake euill of them . Therefore Tertullian calleth them lucifugas scripturarum , and Ierenaeus Lib. 3. aduers . haeres . c. 2. saith , when they are conuinced by Scriptures , they fall to accuse Scriptures , as if they stood not well or wanted authoritie , or were to bee wrested to diuers sences , or else as if truth could not bee sound by those , that are ignorant of tradition . Cum ex scripturis arguuntur , in accusationem conuertuntur ipsarum scripturarum , quasi non recte habeant neque sint ex authoritate , & quia variè sint dictae , & quia non possit ex his inueniri veritas ab h●● , qui nesciant traditionem . And doe not the Papists flye the light of Scriptures , forbidding them to bee read publikelie in vulgar tongues , and punishing such as haue Scriptures translated into their mother tongue without licence ? doe they not also say , that Scriptures are like a nose of waxe , or as Kellison saith waxy , and that they depend vpon the Church , and that the truth cannot sufficiently be knowne without tradition ?

Thirdly , Heretickes teach otherwise then the Apostles did . Therefore the Apostle . 1. Tim. 1. gaue order to Timothy , that hee should charge some , that they should not teach otherwise . Vnde extranei & inimici apostolis haeretici saith Tertullian de praescript . adu . haeret . nisi ex diuersitate doctrinae , quam vnusquisque de suo arbitrio aduersus Apostolos , aut protulit , aut recepit ? Whence are Heretickes strangers and enemies to the Apostles , but by reason of the diuersitie of Doctrine , which euerie one of his owne head either deuised , or receiued contrarie to the Apostles ? This qualitie is also incident to the Papistes , that not onely teach otherwise , then did the Apostles , but haue also added to the Apostles doctrine all that trash , which wee desire to be scoured away , as being contrarie to the apostolike forme of doctrine .

Fourthly Heretickes stand much vpon false miracles and prophesies , as the examples both of Montanistes , and Seuerians doe shew . There were also certaine Heretickes called mirabiliarij , confirming all their Doctrines with miracles . Tertullian de praescrip. aduers . haeret . Sheweth that Heretickes shall commend the authoritie of their teachers , in raysing the dead , curing the weake , and fore-prophecying things to come . adijcient multa de authoritate cuiusque doctoris haeretici , illos maxima doctrinae suae confirmasse , mortuos suscitasse , debiles reformasse , futura significasse . In which pointes the Papists doe followe them at the heeles , bragging of the miracles of Dominic , Francis , Ignatius , Xauerius and other their Romish Saints , and making miracles & prophecies , markes of their Church , and motiues to enduce men to like of their Religion .

Fiftly , Hereticks commonly stand vpon traditions , as wee may reade in Irenaeus . Lib. 3. c. 2. And because Christ said , he had many things to say to the Apostles , which they could not then beare ; imagine , that their deuises were conteined in these concealed Doctrines . Omnes etiam insipientissimi haeretici qui se Christianos vocari volunt , audacias figmentorum suorum , quas maxime exhorret sensus humanus , saith Augustin tract . 97. in Ioan. bac occasione euangelicae sententiae colorare conantur , vbi dominus ait , adhuc multa habeo vobis dicere , sed non potestis portare modò . The same humor is likewise in the Papists , and diuers of them vse these words of our Sauiour , to that purpose , albeit S. Augustine calleth them therefore most foolish Heretickes .

Sixtly , our Sauiour Christ sheweth , that false Prophets shall come vnto vs in the habit and cloathes of Sheepe , but are inwardly rauening Wolues . The same we finde partly verified in the Arians , and Donatistes , but moste expressely in the Papistes . For albeit they will bee called Catholikes and Christes sheepe ; yet they deuoure true Catholikes , like Wolues , and massacre all , that once dare open their mouthes against their idolatries , and hereticall imaginations . Their inquisitors tribunals are full of blood of innocents , and their garments are red with blood , and carrie euident markes of their crueltie . In France they haue massacred old and young , men and women , and spared none , that came in their way , farre passing in crueltie , both the Donatistes and Arians .

7. To defend their peruerse & erroneous Doctrine , Hereticks are wont to detruncate , and by false expositions , to peruert holy scriptures , Tertullian de praescript . saith of marcion , that to fit his purpose , he cut the Scriptures at his pleasure : ad materiam suam caedem scripturarum confecit . Hierome in epist. ad Galat. c. 5. saith , hee may bee called an Heretike , that vnderstandeth the Scriptures otherwise , then the sence of the holy Ghost requireth , albeit he be not yet departed out of the Church . So likewise the Papists abuse the holy Scriptures moste shamefully in their allegations , cutting them , and forcing them contrarie to the meaning of the holy Ghost . The old Latin translation of the Bible cutteth off and addeth to the originall text and yet will they needes haue it authenticall . These words of Isay ecce ponam in fundamentis Sion lapidem , &c. in praefat. in lib. de pontif . Rom. Bellarmine most impudently detorteth to the Pope . Likewise doe the Papists abuse these wordes Hierem. 1. ecce constitui te hodie super gentes , to prooue , that the Pope is made head of nations . These words bibite ex hoc omnes : they conster , as if none of the communicants , but the preest , were to drinke of the chalice .

8. Hereticks conceale diuers of their false & lewd Doctrines Iraeneus lib. 1. c. 23. saith that they holde , that they are not to deliuer publikely their mysteries , but in silence to conteine them in secret . Non oportere saith he , omnia ipsorum mysteria effari , sed in abscondito continere per silentium . Tertullian also saith , they hide their mysteries in secret , ne margaritam porcis , & sanctum canibus iactarent : that is , least they should cast Pearles to swine , and holy things to Dogges . So likewise the Papists pronounce their Canon in secret , and will not , that lay men shal dispute of matters of faith , and thinke it is not fit , that holy Scriptures in vulgar tongues should be read eyther publikely or of all Christians , without restreint . Some also adde the same reasons which Heretickes abusing Christes wordes , doe bring , viz. least pearles should bee giuen to Swine , and holy thinges to Dogges .

9. Clement of Alexandria Lib. 7. Strom. telleth vs , that Heretickes being conuinced doe oftentimes deny their Doctrine . So likewise Papists openly refuse to professe that the pope hath power to commaund the Subiects , to cut their Kinges throates , and will not graunt that images are to bee worshiped with diuine worship . Yet to their followers in secret they doubt not to propound these pointes without scruple of conscience .

10. Heretickes denying their faith to God , seldome keepe faith to men , as the example of the Pricillianists doth plainely declare . Herein therfore the papists doe plainely shew , whome they follow , teaching that faith is not to be kept with Heretickes , and dispensing with oathes moste easily . The Rhemists in their annotations vpon the 23. of the Actes , doe expressely teach their followers , to breake their oathes , and to runne into wilfull periurie .

11. The liues of Hereticks are verie leud & loose , libera sunt illis omnia et soluta , saith Tertullian de praescr . Theodoret lib. 1. haeret . fab. in praefat . saith their obscenity is such , that the Stage Players would be ashamed to speake or heare it . And what he saith not , we may imagine by the popes of Rome , whose abhominable beastlinesse modest eares refuse to heare . Publikelye they maintaine Stewes , and nothing among Masse-priestes and Fryars is more common , than vnnatural lust The Pope and his lawes they feare ; of Scriptures they speake vnreuerently ; God they feare not .

12 , They farre excell all men in pride , and will not haue their dooings or doctrine● examined . Heerein they resemble Mahomet who would not haue any question made of his law . But the pope excelleth both Mahometans , and all other Hereticks . He will bee honored as God . If he should drawe innumerable soules with him to hell , yet will hee not be taxed for it , as appeareth by the Chapt. Si papa . dist. 40. His determinations , as his folowers hold , are in fallible .

Finally , by our aduersaryes discourse and by their owne confession , they may also plainely be conuinced to be Hereticks . For first it is the propertie of Heretickes saith he , Lib. 2. cap. 1. To go out of the Church , & to depart from the faith . He might also haue added , teaching Doctrines of Deuils , and forbidding to marry , and commaunding to abstaine from certaine meates , and then the matter would haue beene very cleare . For moste wickedlye they disgrace marriage in the Chap. proposuisti . dist. 82. As if married folkes liued after the flesh , & could not please God , and forbid their priestes , Fryers and irreligious orders to marrie . They doe also restreine their Monkes from eating flesh , & forbid lay-men to eate it vpon certaine daies . But albeit , he hath concealed these wordes from vs , yet hath he said sufficient . For teaching a new faith neuer knowne to the Apostles , nor taught by them , the Papists are clearely gon from the faith : and hauing receiued a newe head of their Church , and new foundations of their Doctrine , and strange formes of sacraments , they are closelye departed out of the Catholike church , & imbrace the particuler faith of the Pope . Neither can this their departing be denyed or concealed , for as Arius by denying of Christes diuinitie and equalitie with the Father , and Nestorius for making two persons of Christ , and other Heretickes for teaching singular pointes of Doctrine contrarie to the doctrine of the Apostles were said to depart out of the Church , and so to abandon the societie of the faithfull , although they might pretend succession , and still claymed the title of the Church , and of Catholikes ; so the papists , if they teach any new Article of faith , not taught by the Apostles and auncient Church , they are departed out of the Apostolike and Catholike church .

Secondly he saith , that later standing and noueltie is a marke of Hereticks . And this hee goeth about to proue by Scriptures , and Fathers . But he might well haue spared his labour , for wee doe not deny it . Nay vpon this ground we professe , that wee are able manifestly to demonstrate the Papists to be Heretickes . For such a societie as the Pope and his adherents are , was neuer séene for a long time after the Apostles . If Kellison say contrarie ; let him leaue his pedantery , & shew his triple-crowned Pope with two swords treading vpon Princes neckes and cutting their throates and ruling the world , his purple Cardinals , his shauen Masse-priestes , his Monckes , Nonnes and Fryars , and their retinue to haue continued since the Apostles times . Furthermore the doctrine of the carnal eating of Christes flesh , of transubstantiation , of the subsistence of accidents in the eucharist without their substances , of the communion vnder one kind , of the popes vniuersal headship , of purgatorie , of indulgences , and other pointes decreed in late conuenticles , would be shewed and prooued .

If Kellison can deriue these Doctrines from the Apostles , his holy Father will giue him his blessing : if not , by his owne confession his owne consortes are to be anathematized as Heretikes , and the Pope for the head of them .

In his third Chapt. of his second booke , he saith , that particular names taken from Sect-maisters are notes of Heretickes , which is also a third argument to prooue him , & his consorts Hereticks , being al called of their grand sect maister the Pope papists , & some of Benedict being termed Benedictines , others of Francis and Dominicke , Franciscans , and Dominicans , and of Ignatius Ignatians , and some of Thomas and Scotus , Thomistes and Scotistes . Nay leauing the common name of Christians and catholikes , they will be called Catholike Romans . Against them therfore the word● of Hierome contr. Lucifer . may aptly be turned , out of which wee may conclude , that they are not the Church of Christ , but the Synagogue of Antichrist . Neither doth Iustine speake any thing against the Valentinians and Marcionistes , or Cyprian against the Nouatians , concerning the imposition of their names , but the same may be applyed against the Papists .

In his fourth chapter he maketh it a propertie of Heretickes to renew old Heresies . Which although it be not incident to all Heretickes ; yet it is a verie eminent qualitie in the papists . For from the Simonians they haue borowed their practise of buying and selling ecclesiasticall matters , and the vse of Concubines ; from the Carpocratians they haue taken the worship of images ; from the Collyridians the saying of Masse , or offering their wafer Cakes in honour of our Lady ; from the Marcionistes the baptisme of Christians by women , and their limbus patrum ; from the Valentinians & Manicheies their opinion of the being of Christs body in the Sacrament without soliditie ; from the Pelagians the denyall of originall sinne in the blessed virgin , the perfection of iustice , and impeccabilitie of Christians . Finally they haue deriued diuers other branches of old condemned Heresies from other Heretickes , as at large I haue shewed in my late challenge .

His fift marke of an Hereticke is want of succession . A simple marke , if wee doe well consider it . For neither in the beginning of the world , nor in the time of Aaron , was there anye succession of knowne priestes in the world . Likewise neither our Sauiour Christ , nor Peter did succeede the priestes of the Lawe . For Christ was a priest after the order of Melchisedech , and Peter was by Christ designed an Apostle , hauing none to goe before him . But to confesse succession to bee a marke of the Church , and want of succession a marke of an Hereticke ; yet would this one property of Heretickes much blemish the Romish See . For neither are the Popes Bishops , or Peters successors , nor can the Papists deriue their Doctrine of the popes vniuersall power , of his two swords , of his espousals with the church , of his indulgences , of the carnal eating & champing Christs flesh with the téeth , of Transubstantiation , of the Communion vnder one kinde , of adoring the Sacrament and the Crosse with diuine worship , of making vowes , confessions and prayers , to Saintes , and such like pointes of decretaline Doctrine from the Apostles , or any Apostolike men , which , as Tertullian sheweth , is a necessarie point in succession . Ego saith he , sum Heres Apostolorum , sicut cauerunt testamento suo , sicut fidei commiserunt , sicut adiurauerunt , ita teneo . As if he shold say , none can be the Apostles heires , but such as kéepe the doctrine contained in their testament . The same father in the same place excludeth heretikes , as strangers & enemies holding a contrary doctrine to the Apostles . Furthermore the pole-shorne Masse-priests sacrificing Christes body and blood really in the Masse for quicke and dead , and diuers purposes cannot deriue their pedegree eyther from the Apostles , or from the Priestes and ancient Doctors of the church . Finally this forme of gouernment and Doctrine , which is now in the Church of Rome , cannot bee confirmed by any succession of Bishops and Priests . Nay that rotten succession of Popes , whervpon the cause of Papists , doth hang as vpon a thrid of a Spider-web , hath no other ground and certainty , then the testimonie of Anastasius the Popes blinde bibliothecary , Martin Polonus , Platina , Sanders , Genebrard , Illesca and such like base fellows which no Christian , I trow , wil admit for the Basis , and foundation of his faith .

His sixt marke of heretikes is dissension in Doctrine . and this he prooueth in a long and tedious discourse . But with this mark he brandeth his owne consortes for Heretikes . For they dissent , not onely from the auncient Fathers . But one from another most manifestly . That is aparent , by diuers treatises written of controuersies . This is prooued by the differences of Thomistes and Scotistes , and of all Schoolemen one from an other . Neither doe they differ in small matters , but in the highest pointes of Religion , as namely whether the holy Ghost proceede more principally from the Father , then the Son , about the diuine notions , about the atributes of God , about Meritum Congrui , about the cause of predestination , about the thing designed by the word hoc in these wordes , hoc est corpus meum , about the conception of the blessed Virgin , and all matters of diuinitie : as the treatises of Schoolemen doe plainely shew .

Bellarmine also doth in moste controuersies no lesse earnestly dispute against his owne consortes , then against vs . Neither is it materiall that all of them professe themselues willing to abide the Popes determination . For vntill he determine somewhat , their contentions are endlesse . And albeit they then cease to contend , yet their differences in opinions appeare neuerthelesse .

The seauenth chapter of his second Booke , discou●seth of a seauenth marke of Heretikes , and therein he endeuoreth to prooue al to be Heretikes , that follow a particular sect . Nowe who seeth not , that this toucheth the Papists in generall , that restreining themselues within the Romish Church followe the Popes sect . And are bound by their Doctrine to follow him , although he leade them with him to the pit of hell . The Monkes also and Fryars , follow the heades and rules of their seueral sectes , without looking whither they leade them .

The eight marke of an Heretike saith he , is to be condemned by the church , or else as he saith afterward , by generall Councels . which doth no lesse touch his holy Father , then the rest . For contrary to the forme of the Nicene councel . c. 4 , He giueth libertie to Abbots to consecrate Bishops , and contrarie to the 5. Cannon absolueth those , that are excommunicated by other Bishops Contrary to the 6. Canon hee inuadeth the dioceses of other Patriarkes contrarye to another order hee separateth Priestes from their wiues . With Eutyches condemned in the councell of Chalcedon hee beleeueth , the Christ hath a bodie , neither solide nor palpable , nor like to ours . For such is that body which he supposeth to be in the Sacrament . Likewise all the old Heresies , which hee holdeth , are condemned by the whole Church . Lastly all true Christians , doe inwardly abhorre Popish impieties , idolatries , and Heresies .

Finally the Papists generally in the Chapt. ad abolendam . de haeret . condemne them for Heretikes , that teach contrarie to the Doctrine of Christes Church , concerning the Sacraments . But this doth notoriouslye touch themselues . For where the Scriptures mention onely baptisme , and the Lordes supper , as seales of Gods grace , they increase the number of Sacraments , and make seauen Where Christ said , take and eate , they say , offer , heaue , hang vp , and carry about . Where Christ ordeined , that all communicating one kinde should also receiue the other , they sacrilegiously depriue the people of the cuppe . Finallye they teach , that Christians are iustified by confirmation and extreame vnction , and that all their Sacraments haue like effectes .

Thus we see , hee hath marked his owne consortes with the markes of Heretikes . But hee shall neuer bee able to fasten his markes vppon vs . In the beginning of his second Booke , hee talketh after his declamatorie manner of the diuels disguising himselfe in the habit of a young gallant ( like percase to the young Iebusites and Masse-priestes , that going about to seduce simple soules attire themselues like gallants ) or of a Fryar . Hee assureth also his disciples , that he is discryed eyther by his staring eyes , or stinking sauor , or horned head , or forked feete , or base voice . But first we would gladly knowe of him , why the deuill should rather speake in a base , then in a meane voice , and next how hee commeth so well acquainted with him , that hee knoweth his whole description from his hornes to his clouen feete . And lastly how it hapned that speaking of the Deuill in the first part of the period , he forgot himselfe in the second , & speaketh of some member of the Deuill , and of an Hereticke ? what ? are Heretikes discerned by their staring eyes , and forked feete , and such like partes ? he telleth vs also of the pecking of Birdes , and the counterfeting of alchymistes , grauers and Heretickes , putting grauers of idolatrous images nere to Heretikes , as they doe well deserue . But what is that to vs ? if heretikes be such , as counterfet religion , and yet are gone out of the Church , then concerneth it vs nothing . For with our mouth we professe , and with our hart we beleeue all the Christian and Apostolike faith , and dissent not from the Apostolike church in any one article of faith professed publikelye for a thousand yeares after Christ . Nay wee doe onely relinquish the Papists , as Christians in old time left the Arians and Donatists and as some now leaue the Mahometans , wherein they haue forsaken Christ and his truth . Either then must this K. shew , that as former heretikes haue done , we broach some doctrine contrarye to the ancient faith , or else hee talketh idelye of going out of the Church . Maister Luther he left the Papists hauing once folowed their opinions , but not in any point of faith , but rather where they taught contrary to the faith .

Secondly neuer shall he prooue , either that the professors of our Religion are of a later standing , then the moderne Papistes , or that our religion embraceth nouelties . For Luther is not our founder , nor any of late time , but the Apostles of Christ Iesus , whose doctrine left in deposte to the church we embrace , detesting all prophane nouelties of Papistes . Neither doe we bring in any new faith , but reiect the popish later Heresies , and corruptions , though to some they seeme olde . But saith Kellison , the faith hath neuer increased in substance , but onely in explication , as if their Doctrine of traditions , of Romish interpretations , of the latin vulgar translation , of the 7. sacraments , of iustification by orders and extreme vnction , of transubstantiation , of the carnall eating & champing with the teeth of Christes flesh , of the sacrifice of Christes body & blood in the Masse , vnder the accidentes of breade & wine , for quicke and dead , and the Popes vniuersall Monarchie were matters of no substance ; or else , as if the substance of these Articles had beene euer beleeued in the Church . This he would insinuate , but the noueltie of them is so apparent , that his consorts are much puzled , when they come to search them in auncient writers .

Thirdly we neither call our selues Lutherians , Caluinistes , Zuinglians , nor any such particular names . Neither is it materiall , that the Papistes doe call vs in scorne by these names . For who doth credite the malicious tearmes of enemies ? nay in this point we are more cléere then the papistes , that call themselues , some Franciscans , some Dominicans , some by other names ; which we doe not .

Fourthly wee renounce all old Heresies condemned by auncient Councels , and pronounce Florinus , that held God to bee the author of sinne , Anathema . The like we say of Eunomius , Pelagius , and their consortes . Neither was Caluin of other opinion , but that his malicious enemies doe falsely impute vnto him , that he should teach , that God is the author of sinne . Wee doe not say with Iouinian , that all sins are equall , nor denie to the bodies of Christians decent buriall . Nor did Hierome writing against Vigilantius allowe prayers to Saints departed , or the merits of Monkery , or teach as the Papistes doe , of vigils or lightes set vp in churches at noone time . But suppose he shold holde opinions contrary to the truth ; yet are not his wordes a rule of Heresie . The second synod at Nice allowed a certaine reuerence doone to images , but nothing so much as the Papistes now giue to them . But whatsoeuer that synode decreed in that point , the same was reprooued in a synod at Frank-ford , and neuer generallye receiued eyther in the East or West Churches . Aerius was reputed an Hereticke for Arianisme , and not for finding fault with superstitious oblations for the dead . Whatsoeuer his opinion was it toucheth vs nothing , that doe allow the orders of the Church established among vs . Finally we anathematize the Heresies of the Simonians Menandrians , and others ( whome he ridiculously surmiseth to haue bene condemned for denying the real presence ) of the Messalians and Caians , ( whome he imagineth to haue beene accounted Heretikes for denying the sacramentes to conteine grace , as the Papistes hold it ) of the Nouatians , that denyed repentance to publike sinners , of the Gnostikes , Manichees , and Encratites ( whome hee ignorantlye surmiseth to haue beene condemned for denying marryage to bee a Sacrament ) of Heluidius , Rhetorius and all other auncient condemned Heretikes . If then this Hereticke will obiect Heresies to vs , hee must both set downe the wordes of the Heresie condemned by the Catholike Church , and prooue , that wee holde such an Heresie .

Fiftly , wee want no proofe of our Religion , which may be drawne from true succession . For we do not only communicate in matters of faith with the Apostles , but also with the auncient Bishops of Hierusalem , Antioche , Alexandria , and Rome almost for a thousand yeares . Wee succeede also to the Bishops of England before Bishop Cranmer in al things , which they taught well , and according to the Catholike fayth . But could we shew no line of succession ; yet if we agree in doctrine with the Apostles and first Bishops of the Christian Church , it is sufficient . Ad hanc formam prouocabuntur ab illis ecclesiis saith Tertullian de praescript . aduers . haeret . quae licet nullum ex apostolis , vel apostolicis authorem suum proferant , vt multo posteriores , quae denique quotidie instituuntur , tamen in eadem fide conspirantes non minus apostolicae deputantur pro consanguinitate doctrinae . He telleth vs playnly , that they are Apostolike Churches that teach the same Doctrine , albeit they were not founded by the Apostles or Apostolike men , nor had any succession of Bishops . Likewise hee sheweth , that they are the Apostles heires , that hold that fayth , which is conteined in their Testament . Seeing then we do only publish Apostolicall Doctrine , and purge away Popish errors ; our Churches are most truly Apostolicall . But sayth K. pag. 196. This is to make bare Scripture judge of our Doctrine , and as much , as if we should say , that the Church of God fayled , and that the Synagogue of the Diuell possessed the world many yeares . Hee telleth also how Luther in his preface before the disputation of Lipsia , vanted , that he had first published Christ . But first this is a common abuse of Heretikes , to call Scriptures bare . Secondly false do clearely disperse this cloud of slaunder . But his foolish attempt may giue cause to vs , to touch both him and his consortes , for their manifold and blasphemous impietyes . In the beginning of his third Booke he sayth , that as the Stoickes commend Zeno , the Platonickes Plato , the Peripatetickes Aristotle , the Epicureans Epicure , the Atheistes Diagoras , so Christians should speake honorably of Christ . But if he had not beene of the sect of Diagoras , and a prophane Atheist ; he would haue blushed to haue compared Christ to Diagoras , and Epicurus , two prophane and impious men ; and Christians to Atheistes , and Epicureans and prophane followers of Philosophers . He would also haue forborne to haue concluded , that christians are to honor Christ , as Atheistes honor Diagoras . But to referre the examination of the impious Doctrine of this Atheist and his consorts to his proper place , what hath he to obiect against vs and our Doctrine of Christes person , or nature ?

First he telleth vs , how Michael Seruetus was a brother of our Religion , and denyed that God the Sonne was true God , or coaequall to his Father . But whatsoeuer his blasphemyes were , he learned them among the Papistes , where he was brought vp , and not among vs , where he was punished for his blasphemyes . Secondly he seemeth to be rather a brother of the Papistes , among whome hee learned his impieties , and with whome hee defended the adoration of Angels , then of kinred to vs . Thirdly this ignorant Surueyor attributeth the heresie of the Arians vnto Seruetus , where he did wholy deny the Trinity , calling all that beleeue the holy Trinity , atheistes ; as may appeare in the proceedings against him .

Next he saith , that Luther in his book against Latomus affirmed , that he could not abide this word , homoousion . A matter most false and slaunderous . His words are conditional . Quod si odit anima mea vocem homoousion , saith he , et nolim ea vti , non ero haereticus , quis enim me coget vti , modo rem teneam , quae in concilio per scripturas definita est ? so it appeareth hee held the thing , and that not wordes , but matters , in his conceite , made Heretickes .

Thirdly hee telleth , how Luther in commentar. in C. 1. Genes. called the Sonne of God , the instrument of God , by which hee created the world . But like an honest Surueyor , hee confesseth that he hath not seene those commentaries . and perhaps he wold not see them . For if he had , he might haue seene himselfe conuinced to be a lying companion . Now he sheweth himselfe onely to be a light fellow , that beleeueth fables vppon heare say . In his comentaries vpon that booke now no such matter is to be found .

Fourthly he chargeth Luther with leauing out these words in the Litany sancta trinitas , vnus deus , miserere nobis : & the word deus out of this sentence , deus fortis , and out of the first of Iohn , the fift Chapter , this sentence , there are three which giue witnesse in heauen , the father , the word , & the holy Ghost , & these three are one . But first the reason , why he left out the wordes mentioned in the Litany was not for mislik of the word Trinitie , but for that the dutch word dreifaltigheit did signifie rather triplicitie , then Trinitie . Secondlye it is not like , that Luther did omit eyther the word Deus , or the sentence in S. Iohns epistle , concerning the Trinitie , because we finde not that obiected vnto him by his moste curious aduersaries . But what if by negligence , or fault of the Coppie these wordes had beene omitted , what is that to vs , that doe not omitte them ? hath the surueyor forgot , that hee promiseth a suruey of our Religion ?

Fiftly , he chargeth Luther with saying , that as Eutyches said , so it may well be said , that the diuinitie of Christ suffred . But this slaunder is refuted not onely by Luthers booke de concilijs , but also by Bellarmines preface in his dispute de Christo . He onely saith , that he disputed with Nestorians which contended that the diuinitie of Christ could not suffer . But hee doth not say that Christes diuine nature could suffer , as Eutyches did , and as this K. would haue vs to surmise .

Page 247. He imputeth vnto Melancthon , that hee should say both in his booke of common places , and in his book against Stankarus , that the Sonne of God according to his diuinitie prayed to his Father for his kingdome , glory , and inheritance , and that the diuine nature of the Sonne was obedient to his Father in his passion . And the like saying saith K. hath Beza , yea , and Caluin also . But if eyther of them had said any thing , wherupon this accuser might ground his slaunder ; he would not haue spared to haue set downe their words at full . Melancthon hath not these words according to his diuinitie . But what if he should speake improperly , shold he not haue leaue to interpret himselfe ? Againe suppose there were an error in his words , must we satisfie for his fault ? Lastly who knoweth not , that the Fathers sometime by the diuinitie and humanitie of Christ singlye vnderstand his person ?

Afterward Page . 248. he inueigheth against the Vbiquetaries who affirme as hee saith , that the diuine attributes are reallye communicated vnto Christes humane nature . But heerein hee sheweth great simplicitie . For this toucheth the Papists that wil haue Christes body to bee both in heauen and earth , and vppon euerie alter at one time : which being graunted the Vbiquetaries omnipresence doth followe necessarily , seeing a body cannot bee in two remote places , but it must be in the midst . Secondly , they wil haue this communication to be per communicationem idiomatum , so that it appeareth , their meaning is , that after a manner of speech these diuine attributes are communicated to Christes humane nature . Finallye of the opinion of the reall presence of Christes bodye in the Sacrament taught by Papists , this error of the Vbiquetaries , whether in speech or Doctrine proceeded : and therefore it toucheth our aduersaries verie neere , and vs nothing at all .

In the same place hee chargeth Caluin for teaching , that the name of God is attributed to the Father 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , and that hee denyeth Christ to be God of God . Hee saith also that Whitaker heerein subscribeth vnto him , and lastlye that Caluin and Iewell and diuers other affirme , that Christ according to his Diuinitie was Preest and mediator . But first both Bellarmine and this brabler doth calumniouslye reporte Caluins wordes . For writing against Valentinus Gentilis hee saith not , that the father as God hath any preheminence , but as hee is the first person in the Trinitie , and as the Sonne is begotten of the Father . Secondly hee denyeth not , that Christ is God of God , but onely saith , that the phrase is hard , and meaneth , that wee are to vnderstand the wordes personally thus , Christ which is God is of the Father , which is God , & not as if there were two Gods the one proceeding from the other . Thirdly Maister Whitakers wordes being set downe would cleare him . For his meaning is , that the diuine essence doth neither engender , nor is ingendered , those being properties of the persons . Finally both Maister Caluin , and the reuerend Father Bishop Iewell , and other our Diuines doe teach aright , that the office of Christes mediation and Préest-hood belongeth not to eyther nature , singly considered in it selfe , but to the person , that is God and man . But the aduersaries that wil haue Christ as God to act nothing , but ascribe the whole office of Christes Preest-hood to the humane nature , doe deuide the person , and not onelye the two natures , approching neerer to Nestorius , then our teachers to error .

Finally hee alleadgeth the testimony of Egidius Hunnius against Caluin , as if in exposition of scriptures he did Iudaizare , or fauour the Iewes . But neither is the testimony of a sworne enemie to be much regarded , nor hath any man that felicitie in expounding Scriptures , that he fayleth in nothing .

In the second chap. he chargeth vs , that we make Christ an absurd redeemer , these are the words of this absurd surueyor . And why so , I pray you ? forsooth because we hope onelye to be iustified by Christes iustice . But this doth not touch vs onely , but the holy prophets , & apostles also . God by his prpophet Isay . c. 53. saith that his iust seruant shall iustifie many by his knowledge , & shal beare their sins . The Apostle . 1. Cor. 1. teacheth vs , that he is made vnto vs wisdome , righteousnesse , sanctification & redemption . To make his matter good page . 257. hee maketh vs to say , that there is no justice but Christes justice , nor good workes but Christes workes , nor merit but his merit , nor satisfaction but his satisfaction . But these are his owne sottish ideotismes , and not our wordes . For wee doe not denye that there is a certaine imperfect iustice in man sanctified by Gods holy spirit , and that such doe good workes pleasing vnto God . We confesse also , that man by sinne doth merit death , albeit his workes be not so perfect , that they can deserue eternall life . Finally we know , that the Fathers sometime accompt the obedience of the law to bee a satisfaction , and so cal the performance of penalties enioyned by the Church . But did we attribute all the honor of our iustification and saluation vnto Christ our Sauiour ; yet this is neither absurditie , nor dishonour to him . But this absurd and kettle Diuine dooth dishonour and blaspheme Christ ioyning the wordes , absurd and redeemer together . He doth also contradict the Scriptures , where hee saith , that Christ with one word , or teare , or drop of blood might haue redeemed vs . And therein he passeth the impudency of his holy Father Clement the sixt in the chap. vnigenit . extr. de poenit . & remiss . for he saith , one drop of blood would haue sufficed . But this dropping & dreary dunse addeth a teare or a word . How contrarie they are to scriptures , these testimonies declare Isay . 53. therfore shal he deuide the spoiles of the strong , because he hath giuen his soule to death . Mat. 20. We reade , that he came to giue his life a ransome for many , and Luc. 24. that so Christ must suffer . and 1. cor. 15. that Christ dyed for vs according to the Scriptures . Gal. 3 , We learne , that to deliuer vs from the curse of the law he was made accursed , and Hebr. 2. that it was fitting , that the author of our saluation should by suffering be consummated . & Heb. 9. that his testament could not bee fulfilled without the death of the testator . Absurdly also he talketh of a storme raysed in heauen for the Sonne of God , when Lucifer wold be like the highest . For it is ridiculous to thinke of any stirre or storme raysed in Heauen , where there is , and alwaies was such quiet and content ; or to suppose that Lucifer contended with the Sonne of God . Hee might doe well to tell vs what Deuill tolde him this . For in holy Scriptures no such thing is found . Finally describing the blessed state of man in Paradice , and of his miserie being throwne out of Paradice , vnawares he ouerthroweth with his boysterous eloquence two bulwarks of Popery , to wit Freewill and Purgatory . For if euery sinner bee a slaue to his flesh , and a captiue to the Diuell , and a slaue to sinne , and the Diuell , as hee saith ; then hath hee not freewill . For to bee free , and bound at one time implyeth contradiction . Againe , if the deuill hold sinners in hell perpetuallye , as page . 254. hee confesseth , then there is no redemption out of Purgatory , which as Papists teach , is in hell .

Pag. 258. he chargeth vs farther , that we teach , that good workes are not necessary , and thence inferre , that no Lawes eyther humane or diuine can bind vs in conscience . And lastly he sayth that we hold that no sinnes , nor euill workes can hurt vs , because Christes justice being ours , no sinne can make vs sinners . And so he runneth on in a course of wild eloquence , like a Colte that hath broken his halter . But as Hierome sayth in his Booke against Vigilantius , stultum est fingere materiam , cui rhetorica declamatione respondeatur . It is a foolish and dizardly thing , to feine matters , & then in a rhetorical surueying declamation to answer . In his fictions certes this man seemeth neither to haue reason , nor conscience . For first albeit we say , that we are not iustified by workes ; yet we teach , that as many as are iustified by faith in Christ , are also sanctified by his grace , and that workes are necessary effects of our iustification . Secondly we directly affirme , that Gods Lawes doe bind in conscience , and mans Lawes as farre as they commaund for Gods Lawe , albeit through Christ Iesus we are deliuered from the curse of the law , being iustified by fayth , and walking no more after the flesh , but after the spirit . Thirdly we beleeue , that all sinnes and euill workes do hurt those , that doe them . Although we also beleeue , that he who is borne of God , and iustified by fayth , sinneth not vnto death . Finally most falsely he maketh vs to teach first , that Christ hath redeemed vs , because no sinne can hurt vs ; and next , that we are deliuered from the Law , because no Law can binde vs ; and thirdly , that we are deliuered from the Diuel and Hel , because howsoeuer we liue , they cannot hurt vs . Nay we pronounce him anathema , that shall hold , that eyther sinne cannot hurt , or that the Law bindeth not , or that howsoeuer Christians liue , they cannot be damned to Hell . And thus much may serue to cleare vs from this barking curres slaunders .

But Popish Doctrine concerning our redemption is not so easily defended . For Papistes beleeue , that the Pope by his indulgences can redeeme soules from Hell . They teach also , that euery man is to satisfie for his sinnes committed after Baptisme . But then Christ is but halfe a redeemer . Neither do they sticke to say , that the sonne of God assuming the nature of Thomas Aquinas , or some other might haue redeemed the world : which is contrary to all the promises made to the Fathers concerning the Messias to come of the seede of Abraham . Kellison pag. 261. sayth , that Christes Passion was not our formall justification , nor satisfaction ( he should haue said Christes Passion , obedience , and iustice , if he would formally haue crossed our Doctrine ) but only the meritorious cause , of our redemption and saluation , which deserueth for vs at Gods hands grace , by which together with our cooperation we may be saued & redeemed . But if Christ be not our formal justice , them his iustice was not made our iustice : which contradicteth the Apostle 1. Cor. 1. If he did not formally satisfie for vs , then he dyed almost in vaine , and we are to satisfie for our selues . If he be only the meritorious cause of our redemption and saluation , then hath not Christ saued or redeemed vs , but we are to saue and redeeme our selues , as well as we can . If by grace together with our cooperation we are saued and redeemed , as this K. saith ; then we are formally saued and redeemed without Christ , which only commeth in as a meritorious cause . Beside that , if grace here be nothing but charity , or a habit not distinct from Charity , as Schoole-men teach ; then our owne workes properly saue vs , and not Christes Passion . Finally if Christes redemption of vs from sinne , be nothing else , but a deseruing of grace , by which we dispose our selues to justification , & if he hath freed vs from the tyranny of the Diuill and captiuity of Hell , because he hath procured vs grace , by which we may resist maugre all the force of Hell , and hath satisfied for our sinnes , to obtaine vs grace , that we may satisfie for all our sinnes , as this wicked blasphemer teacheth pag. 262. Then is man the principall cause of his owne iustification , and good workes should goe before iustification , and Christ should not deserue to be called our redeemer , or sauiour , but a grace giuer , that men might free and redeeme them selues . And lastly not Christ should satisfie for vs , but wee should satisfie for our selues : All which poyntes are not only contrarie to Scriptures and absurd , but vtterly ouerthrow the worke of Christes satisfaction and ransome payd for vs .

In the third Chapter of his third Booke hee goeth on rayling against vs , & cryeth out with open mouth , that we make Christ no redeemer at all , and his reason is , for that we teach , that euen righteous men are sinners , and that our sinnes are couered by the imputation of Christ his satisfaction and righteousnesse . But his Collection is so foolish , that if there were a whole couent of Fooles in place , he might well prooue Abbot . For Saint Iohn sayth , that if we say we haue no sinne , we deceiue our selues , and the truth is not in vs . And the Apostle Rom. 4. out of the Prophet sayth , blessed are they , whose iniquities are forgiuen , and whose sinnes are couered . And yet Kellison will not say , but that these holy Apostles acknowledged Christ to bee their redeemer . Our Sauiour also taught the Apostles to pray for the forgiuenesse of their trespasses . Finally to say , that a Christian can liue without sin , is playne Pelagianisme . Hierome dialog . 1. aduers. Pelagianos setteth downe these two propositions , for the ground of Pelagianisme , that a man may be without sinne , if he will , and that Gods commaundements are easie . Saint Augustine likewise Lib. de haeres . c. 88. reckoneth this assertion among the heades of Pelagius his heresie , that the life of just-men in this world hath no sinne at all . Neither is Kellisons exception of any moment For it followeth not , if Christ make not men cleare without sinne , that Adam is more potent then Christ , because all his posteritie were made sinners . For by the same reason it may be sayd , that as all men were made sinners by Adam ; so all should be made righteous by Christ . Furthermore the power of Christs grace exceedeth Adams transgression in this , that Christ deliuered man of his meere grace . But Adams posteritie by his transgression incurred the penalty therof deseruedly . The Apostle sheweth , that Christes grace exceeded Adams transgression . For Christ pardoned many offences , but death came by one mans offence .

He doth also charge vs , that we affirme , that notwith-standing Christes grace , we cannot resist any temptation of the flesh , or the Deuill , that we cannot fulfill the Law ( in any sort ) that we cannot doe any good worke , but must needs sinne in all our actions . But if hee cannot prooue , that we doe so teach ; then I thinke he cannot deny , but that he hath sinned in this action . Let him therfore name them , that so teach , and prooue it out of their wordes if he canne . Or else it will appeare , that we teach nothing but that which standeth with truth , and with the honor of Christ in atcheuing our redemption .

But our aduersaries will not so easily acquit themselues of teaching lewdly , concerning the article of our redemption through Christ . For first Kellison teacheth , pag. 261. as before is noted , that Christ is only the meritorious cause of our redemption . which is as much as if hee should ascribe the principall and formall cause to our selues . Secondly he sayth , that Christ gaue vs grace , by which together with our cooperation we may bee saued and redeemed . Which being graunted , it followeth , that Christ redeemed vs not , but only procured vs grace , wherby wee might redeeme our selues . Thirdly both hee and his consortes teach , that euerye man ought to satisfye for his sinnes committed after Baptisme . But if a man do satisfye for his sinnes , then is hee his owne redeemer . Fourthly the Papistes hope by the merits of Saintes , to be saued and redeemed . But as he , that serueth many Gods , serueth no God truelye ; so hee that hath many redeemers hath no true redeemer . Fiftlye they beleeue , that the Pope by his indulgences can redeeme soules out of purgatorie . Which sheweth , that Christes redemption is vnsufficient . Finallye in the canon of the Masse they professe , that they offer pro redemptione animarum suarum : as if the Priest with the sacrifice of the Masse , could redeeme soules .

By the verie same argument also , Lib. 3. c. 4. he endeuoureth to prooue , that wee make Christ no spirituall Phisition . As if Christ did not cure our diseases , when he couereth them , and imputeth his iustice vnto vs , and sanctifieth vs by the holy Ghost . But if his argument were concludent , then must hee himselfe also affirme , that Christ is no spirituall Phisition . For he will not denie , I trow , that Christ dooth couer our sinnes , and that no man in this life is so perfectly cured , but that hee committeth diuers sinnes . To say otherwise is flat pelagianisme . Furthermore he is a good Phisition that taketh away the paine of the disease , albeit hée cannot for the weakenesse of the patient cure the reliques thereof altogether . And Isay , c. 53. saith we are healed by the woundes of Christ . Yet no man will say , that in this frailty wee are so cured , that we sinne not . Finally , there is a great disproportion and dissimilitude betwixt the diseases of the bodye and the soule . The paines of the soule diseases follow after this life , the paines of bodilye sicknesses come together with the disease . For the soule diseases God punisheth ; for bodilye diseases the Phisition pitieth the patient . The soule diseases consist in disobedience , and actions , which being once done , cannot bée vndoone . But diseases of the bodie consist in distemper , or other euill qualitie , which may be remooued . Although then the diseases of the body may be remooued ; yet the diseases of the soule cannot bee perfectly cured , so long as we liue in this world . Nay albeit this K. take Christ for his Phisition ; yet he will not say , that hee is cured of all ignorance , malice , defectes and infirmities . Most ridiculous therefore is his discourse of the diseases of the soule , and of his resine and emplasters of 7. Sacraments , and of his burning in purgatorye , and other his Schoole-trickes and foolerye , and more like to make his reader sicke with the surfet of his suruey , then otherwise .

The fift Chapter of his third Booke , containeth a fragment of some Schoole-lecture concerning the honor due to Law-giuers . But while he would seeme to honour Christ , with the title of a Lawgiuer , he doth much dishonour him comparing him to Moyses , nay , to Lycurgus , Solon , Romulus , Plato , Trismegistus , and I know not who . Against vs all his bablement maketh nothing . For albeit we doe not confound the law , and the gospell , nor make Christ a lawgiuer like to Moyses , or an exactor of the penalties of lawes , as doe the Papists ; yet we doe not denye , that hee may be tearmed , and is after a sort a Lawgiuer . Neither doth eyther Luther or Caluin , deny this absolutelye , as this K. affirmeth . Hardly therefore will hee bee able to charge vs with any fault in this behalfe , vnlesse he will falsifye our wordes , as hee doth Caluins . lib. 3. Instit. c. 19. 10. making him to conclude , that Christians are exempted from all lawes : where he hath no such words and onely speaketh of ceremonies , that may bee obserued and omitted . But the Papists , albeit they make Christ a Law-giuer , and make that a part of his honour ; yet they giue the same power to the Pope , c. translato . de constitutionibus : shewing themselues to be subiects of an other Kingdome , then that of Christ Iesus .

In the sixt Chapter he rayleth not onely at man , but at God , calling him absolutely an angry God , and supposing , that his wrath is no way to be appeased , but by the masse-priests sacrifices . Further he saith , that Christ offered two sacrifices , the one at his last supper , the other vpon the Crosse , and that he hath many vicegerentes . But that is contrary to the wordes of the Apostle . Heb. 9. who saith , that Christ was once offered to take away the sinnes of many . This is derogatorie to the honor of Christ , that is a Priest for euer after the order of Melchisedech , and cannot well stand with the Popes generall vicarship , or the office of Masse-priestes his supposed vicegerents . Against vs his vaine brablementes effecte nothing , seeing Christ is a Priest according to the order of Melchisedech , in regard , that he succeedeth none , nor hath any successors or vicegerents in this sacrifice , that he offered once vpon the Crosse . Furthermore this preesthood of Christ after the order of Melchisedech we maintaine , the Papistes ouerthrowe , as at full I haue declared in my third booke de missa against Bellarmine , where also the absurdities and contradictions of the Masse-priestes are particularly disciphred .

In the seauenth Chapter of his third booke moste wickedly hée would make the world beleeue , that we deny Christ to be iudge of quicke and dead . And his reason is , for that Caluin saith , that Christ shall not condemne a faithfull man . As if it were not the part of a iudge , as wel to acquite , as to condemne . Further if this argument were concludent ; then should Kellison denye Christ to be iudge of quicke and dead . For I hope he will not say , that Christ will at the last day condemne faithfull men . He addeth also , that we deny to Christ , two offices of a judge , to wit , remuneration , and discussion , because we teach , that man in this corruption of his nature cannot merit heauen by his workes , and that no sinne is in his owne proper nature veniall . But neither is this argument better then the former . For although mens works deserue not the fauour and reward , that shall be shewed them ; yet no man will deny , that God almightie that iudgeth of their actions , may reward them . And albeit no sinne is veniall in his proper nature , if wee respect the rigour of the lawe ; yet there is great difference betwixt sinne and sinne , and the iudge is not onely to iudge of the qualitie of sinnes , but also to examine and discusse , whether the partie haue sinned or not . Much idle talke also dooth hee spend about Christes two aduents , as hee calleth them , and about Iewish fancies concerning the Sonne of Ioseph , that , as they dreamed , was to be slaine in the battell of Gog and Magog , and of the dispatch of the iudgement in a trise , and of the pronouncing of the sentence in an audible voice . But because these Schoole-boyes fancies belong not to this argument , I wil referre them to bee censured by his owne fantasticall disciples . In the meane while I would pray this surueyor either to prooue them more demonstratiuely , or to affirme them more modestly .

The 8. chapter containeth a packe of calumniations against vs for teaching , that Christians are iustified by faith apprehending Christes iustice , that is imputed vnto vs . And heereof hee concludeth , that all men are not onely equally iust , and perfect , as the Beguardes said , but also as iust as Christ himselfe . But his inference is foolish & absurde . For although by Christes satisfaction and merits wee are all iustifyed , and acquited ; yet there is an imperfect iustice in all the faithful , in some more , in some lesse , and no way comparable to Christes iustice . As for the perfection of Beguardes and Beguines , it proceeded from the opinion of Monkish perfection , and therefore much rather deserueth to bee imputed to Papists , then to vs . Papists also say , that a man may performe the law perfectly , and that no man is saued , but hee that obserueth the law . But of the first we may conclude , that their iustice is equall to the iustice of Christ , who performed the lawe perfectlye , and that all they , that are saued by the lawe are equall in iustice : matters somewhat strange and absurd , yet following necessarily of our aduersaries Doctrine .

In the ninth chapter hee goeth about to prooue , that we bring the new Testament , and Christian religion into question . But of all this greate slaunder , hee hath no other ground , then this small and simple collection , that therefore we doe so , because wee teach , that Christ as man , knew not the day of judgement , and that hee increased in wisdome . But therein wee teach nothing but that which both the Scriptures affirme , and ancient Fathers beleeued . Christ speaking of the last day Marc. 13. no man knoweth saith he , no not the Sonne , Nazianzen also Lib. 2. de filio : nouit vt deus saith he , vt homo se dicit ignorare . The same is prooued by the testimonie of Cyril . Luke . chap. 2. saith , that Iesus increased in wisdome , & stature , & in fauour with God & men . And heereupon Ambrose writeth , that Christ according to the flesh was filled with wisdome and grace . Maxentius also in profess . fid. cath . affirmeth , that Christ according to his humanitie did grow and profit in age and wisedome . Quamobrem fatendum est saith he , deum natum ex foemina non secundum diuinitatem , sed secundum humanitatem , deum in cunis iacentem , pannosum , sordibus inuolutum creuisse et profecisse , aetate , et sapientia secundum humanitatem , non secundum diuinitatem .

Finally , if Christ as man by the Vnion be omniscient , why is he not omnipotent , and praesent in all places ? and why should not al the rest of the diuine attributes be really transfused into his humanitie , as well as this one ?

In the the tenth Chapter he saith , we make Christ a desperate man , and for proofe he alleadgeth certaine places , as taken out of Caluin . But what if Caluin haue not these wordes ? doth not this K. desperately abuse his readers patience ? I would also complaine , that Maister Caluin is wronged , but that the enemies of truth take pleasure in slaundring him . Whosoeuer list to compare Caluins wordes with Kellisons reporte , shall easilye perceiue the wrong offered him . For neither dooth hee say , that the horrible confusion of damnation did fiercelye torment Christ with feare , nor that hee had to doe with the iudgement of God , albeit Kellison impute both vnto him Falselye also hee translateth Caluins wordes in Math. c. 27. v. 46. turning reum , culpable , and exitio deuotus , already condemned , & making him to affirme , that which hee obiecteth to himselfe , and answereth . But suppose Caluin in tearmes had passed to farre ; yet if this surueyor had doon his office , hee would not haue reported other mens wordes , for groundes of our religion .

The eleuenth chapter conteineth nothing but an inuectiue against Caluin , who supposed , that the article of the creede concerning Christes discending into hell , ought to be expounded of his greeuous suffringes in his soule , which in bitternesse might be parangoned , as he thought , to hellish paines . But all this concerneth vs and our religion nothing , which mislike his particular opinion heerein . All this while therefore , that he bauled against Maister Caluin , the Surueyor seemeth to bée out of his way . Furthermore moste shamefully hee belyeth Caluin diuers waies . First he saith , that Caluin acknowledged no locall hell . Secondly that hee affirmed , that these wordes , my God my God why hast thou forsaken mee , were the wordes of a damned man . And lastly , that Caluin at the houre of death dispayred and called vpon the Deuill . The two first are confuted by his writings vppon the Creede , and the passion . The last by the testimonie of all that were present at his death Neither must Kellison thinke to escape hell for reporting these hellish vntruthes deuised by Bolsec , Genebrard , and such like hel-houndes , vnlesse hee repent . Finally hee saith first , that all hellish paines are without end . Next hee counteth it strange , that Caluin brought Christ into hell . And lastly affirmeth , that Christes blood was sufficient to redeeme the Deuill , and the damned . But his followers teach first , that the paines of purgatorie are hellish , and caused by the flames of hell . Next they say , the limbus patrum , whither Christ discended is in hell , and lastly that Christ came not to redeeme Deuils , nor tooke the nature of Deuils , but of men .

In the 12. Chapter he goeth about to traduce vs , as not louing Christ . And why ? Forsooth because sayth hee , you loue not the Mother of Christ , nor the Saintes , nor the Crosse , nor the Images of Christ or the Saintes , nor his Nayles , and other things belonging to him . He might if it had pleased him , haue added also the Asse , wheron Christ rode to Hierusalem , and the Bones of the Paschall Lambe , and the Baskets wherin the Fragmentes were gathered , after hee had fed fiue thousand with fiue Barly loues and two Fishes . But how prooueth hee , that we doe not loue the blessed Mother of God nor the Saintes ? Forsooth because we do not worship them , as the Papistes doe . But if this bee an argument of want of loue , them neither the Apostles , nor first Chrstians loued Christ , or his Saintes . He telleth also how Quintin an Heretike vsed the Apostles with lewd termes . But we do detest Quintin , as we doe Kellison . Thirdly he sayth , that Caluin called Sayntes long eared creatures , and Wicleph called them scurras principis , and that Luther wrote , that euery Ministers yoake-fellowe may bee as holy , as the Mother of God . But these are calumniations deuised by them , that neither loue Christ , nor the professors of the Christian faith . It may be , that Caluin said the Papistes made them to haue long eares , and that Wicliph said they were vsed , as Princes vshers . But against Gods true Saints they neuer opened their mouth , or thought basely . Further he talketh idely of the Crosse , of the nayles and Images of Christ , and the Saintes . For it is no great signe of loue to keepe the instruments , which were cause of our friends death , and well may Christians detest the worship of Images , and yet loue the memoriall of holy men , that either trauailed in setting forth the Christian faith , or suffered for the same . This scuruy Surueyor in seeking to set forth the honor of the Mother of God , and the Saintes ; doth most shamfully abuse them , endeuoring to prooue , that we loue not Christ , because that we loue not his Mother , nor his Saintes , euen as those loue not a man , that loue not his Dogge . and so most blasphemosly he compareth Gods Saintes to Dogges . Much hee talketh of the worship of Saintes , and their reliques , after the Popish manner . But if he were the man he would be taken for ; he should leaue his vagrant scurueying discourses , and prooue the same with arguments . That hee will be able to doe it , wee haue cause to suspect , seeing & feeling his weaknesse in this kinde .

Pag. 355. hee saith the Saintes see and knowe euen our cogitations and prayers . But that is as much , as if he should make them Gods . For to God alone it belongeth to search the hearts . He telleth vs also , how they see all in the face of God . But then they must comprehend Gods infinite essence , which implyeth a contradiction .

Thus we see our Doctrine concerning Christes person , and nature cleared . But the wicked Doctrine of Papistes concerning not only the same articles , but also his office , and the partes therof , neither shall Kellison , nor all his consortes be able to cleare or defend .

Chap. 6. A collection of certaine absurd and blasphemous assertions of the Papistes , concerning Christ his incarnation , person , natures and offices .

THIS argument , if I should prosecute it fully , would require a very ample and large Treatise . The absurd and impious assertions of the aduersaries are so many . But I will content my selfe with few , that out of them we may collect , what the qualitie is of the rest .

First then Alexander Hales p. 3. qu. 2. membr. 13. sayth , that although man had not fallen , yet Christ should haue bene in carnated . With him also consenteth Vdalricus Lib. 5. sum . and other Doctors . Thomas Aquinas in scripto holdeth the opinion to be probable . But this opinion crosseth Gods councell , maketh man wiser then God , and contradicteth both Scriptures and Fathers . Iesus Christ came into the world to saue sinners , sayth the Apostle 1. Tim. 1. where-vpon the glosse addeth , tolle vulnera , tolle morbos , et nulla est causa medicinae . And Augustine ser. 9. super verb. apostoli , si homo non peccasset filius dei non venisset . If man had not sinned , the sonne of God had not come into the world . And Leo in serm. de natiu . si homo in suo honore mansisset , creator mundi creatura non fieret .

Secondly the same Alexander and Vdalricus do affirme , that the three persons in the Trinity may assume one mans nature , tres personae saith Alexander possunt assumere & communicare vnum & eundem hominem indiuiduum . But this is contrarie to the worke of the incarnation of Christ , and confoundeth the persons , and is a thing not imaginable .

Thirdly Thomas inscripto , and Durande in 3. dist. 2. q. 1. and others say , that God was able to assume an vnreasonable creature . But what is more blasphemous , then to call God a horse or an vnreasonable creature , as the Sonne of God by taking our nature , became man , and was truly called man ?

4. Bonauenture in 3. dist. 4. sayth , that the Virgin Mary hath destroyed all Heresies , and did merit the reconciliation of all mankinde . Reconciliationem quoque toti humano promeruit generi . But if she did merit mans reconciliation , what needed Christes merits ? If she killed all Heresies ; then was she a more excellent teacher , then the Apostles .

5. Vdalricus Lib. 5. sum . denyeth , that Christ hath two relations of a sonne , the one to his eternall Father , the other to his Mother . Veneramur saith he , in Christo duas natiuitates non duas filiationes . Other Schoolemen also are of his side . But the Scriptures call him both the Sonne of God , and Sonne of man ; and if he were not truely the Sonne of man , as he is the Sonne of God ; then could he not haue redeemed man .

6. Alexander Hales granteth that this proposition , Christ as he is man , is the adopted Sonne of God , is true : which destroyeth by a consequence Christes right , as being the Sonne of God by nature .

7. Durand in 3. sent. dist. 11. admitteth this proposition , Christ is a creature , which commeth nere to Arianisme .

8. Bonauenture in 3. dist. 12. confesseth that in Christ there was a power to sinne . primo modo saith he , fuit in Christo peccandi potentia . And he collecteth this , because hee had freewill . Neither dooth Thomas writing vpon the sentences differ much from him . But Durand goeth beyond both , for hee saith , that if the humane nature of Christ had beene assumed in pure naturalls , that Christ might haue sinned and beene damned : his wordes are these in 3. sent. dist. 12. q. 2. Constat quod humaena natura sibi derelicta potest peccare . Ergo sic assumpta peccare potuit . And againe , quod add●tur , si peccare potuit , dānari potuit , concedatur , quia cum damnari sonet , in poenam , non est maius inconueniens dicere Christum damnatum , quam mortuum vel passum . So heere they may see that the blasphemous wordes , which they seeke for in Caluin , are expressely to be found in their owne Schoolemen .

9. Bonauenture in 3. sent. d st. 12. saith , that Christ might haue taken flesh of a man , as hee did of a woman . Which destroyeth the Article of Christes birth . He seemeth also to graunt , that the Son of God in the shape of a woman might haue redeemed mankinde , albeit it was more decent , that hee should bee a man .

10. The grace of vnion of the two natures in Christ both Alexander , and Thomas and others hold to be vncreated . Which being graunted it must needes follow , that the vnion of the two natures was from euerlasting , which is the totall ouerthrowe of our Christian fayth .

11. In Christ they deny commonly that there was fayth or hope . But he that wanteth fayth , is an infidell , and he that wanteth hope is a desperate man : which to affirme of Christ , is most blasphemous . Nay in this point the Scoole-men are contrary to themselues . For if fayth be an assent to the word of God ; & hope be an expectation of thinges future : then eyther had Christ fayth , and hope , or else he beleeued not the word of God , nor expected or hoped for the resurrection of his body : both which cannot be spoken of Christ without blasphemy .

12. The Schoole-men commonly hold , that the paynes of Christes Passion were exceeding great , and yet as touching the superior part of his reason , they say that at the same time he was in exceeding pleasure and joy . But this implieth contradiction , that the same man , at the same instant , should suffer in his soule extreme paines , and yet bee in exceeding ioy and pleasure . It is also contrarie to Scriptures : attendite saith he , si est dolor , sicut dolor meus . Beholde if there be any dolour comparable to mine ? But if hee were in exceeding pleasure , many mens passions should exceede his .

13. By the vnion of the natures they teach , that Christ was made omniscient . But no reason can bee alleadged , why the atribute of knowledge , should bee more really transfused into Christes humane nature , then the attribute of omnipotence or omnipresence , and the rest . And therefore Durand graunted , that he had omnipotence per assistentiam .

14. Henricus de Gandauo taught , that there was an other forme in Christes humane nature besides the reasonable soule , and that his death was not naturall . Richard de media villa saith , his death was miraculous , and that if the influence of the diuinitie had not been withdrawne , hee could not haue dyed . But this is nothing else , but labour and contention to ouerthrowe Christes true humanitie , by shewing him not to be like to vs , and a plaine way to dissolue the vnion of his two natures .

15. The maister of the sentences lib. 3. dist. 16. holdeth the Christ by necessarie course of nature neither suffered , nor dyed . dici potest saith hee , Christum voluntate , non necessitate suae naturae hos defectus , sicut alios suscepisse , silicet necessitatem patiendi in anima , et moriendi in carne . But this taketh away the similitude betwixt Christes humane nature & ours , who in this frailty cannot auoid paine , nor death .

16. Generallye they say , it was not necessarie , that Christ should suffer death for mankinde . Kellison moste impiouslye saith , that one drop of Christes blood , and one teare was a sufficient ransome for the sinnes of the world . But this is a plaine ouerthwart course to Gods eternall councell , to Scriptures , and to reason . For how could man by these meanes bee ransomed from death , Gods iustice being not to bee satisfyed , but by death ?

17. Antisiodorensis . lib. 3. summae saith , that Christ merited nothing , as he loued God . But that maketh God a lyar , that promiseth eternall life to those that performe the lawe , and extolleth mans obedience aboue the obedience of Christ . For Papistes graunt heauen to be deserued by such as loue God .

18. They doe holde for the moste parte , that Christ from the first instant of his conception was vir perfectus , and had the perfect vse of reason , and did merit . But this being graunted , there is no difference betwixt a man and an Embryo , or Childe newly conceiued , and Christ must needes haue a soule and body of an other nature then other men .

19. Although Christ bee the vniuersall mediator of all mankinde , yet Petrus de Tarentasia , and Richard de media villa teach that praelates and Saintes are called particular mediators , praelati & viri sancti say they , dicuntur particulares mediatores personarum quarundam .

20. They deny , that Christ was a man during the time , that he lay in the graue . In that time also Antisiodorensis dooth denie him to be our redeemer , as this word redeemer signifyeth the worker of the mysterie of our redemption . But if he were then no man , then was our Sauiour sometimes no man , & so the mystery of the vnion of the two natures is dissolued ; if then he was no redeemer , then he lost the honor of the redemption of mankinde ; neither of which can be affirmed without grosse inconueniences .

21. Albertus and others say , that Diuels carrie their hell about with them . Which if it bee granted , then the hell of Papistes is no determinate place , neither is it in the bowels of the earth , but also aboue the earth , and in the ayre , and in the Popes chamber , when the deuill is there .

22. Bellarmine lib. 1. de missa . C. 2. saith , that in a true sacrifice , that is offered to God , it is required , that it bee destroyed . His wordes are , ad verum sacrificium , requiritur , vt id , quod offertur deo in sacrificium , planè destruatur . If then the Papists offer vp the verie bodie and blood of Christ in the Masse , as they teach ; then they destroy Christes bodie and blood , and depriue vs of Christes body . But this is a most blasphemous assertion , to say that Christes bodie and blood may be destroyed , and such fellowes deserue of all Christians to bee abhorred , as blasphemers , and abolishers of Religion .

23. They holde , that not onely wicked and reprobrate men , but also that Dogges and hogges may eate vp Christs true bodye . But that is contrarie to all Religion , not onely to cast holy thinges , but also the redeemer of the world , to Hogges and Dogs .

24. They beleeue and teach , that Christes body is in the Sacrament really , although it bee neither seene nor felt there . They beleeue also that the same body is both in heauen visible , and in the earth inuisible at one time . But this dooth quite ouerthrowe Christes humane nature . For neuer was there man in the world , that had such a bodie .

25. Bellarmine lib. de incarnatione Cap. 11. saith , that God is able to turne all the world into bread , and that all this bread may bee turned into Christes body . But it is moste absurd to thinke , that Christ hath a bodie so great as all the world , or that al the world is no bigger , then a mans body , or that one mans body may bee in all places .

26. They pray vnto Saints to helpe them , and to intercede for them . But what is more absurd , then to leaue Christ , and to pray to those , of whome they haue no certaintie , whether they be saued or not ? if they say , they are assured they are saued , they speake absurdly . For if they teach aright , that no man , can assure himselfe of his owne saluation , then they teach men absurdly , to assure themselues of the saluation of all those , that are canonized by the Pope .

27. They ouerthrowe the groundes of artes and rules of reason and sence , where they teach , that Christes bodye and blood is really in the sacrament , and offered vp continually for quicke and dead . For reason and Arithmeticke teach vs , that many vnityes make a number , & that one & one make two . But this ground the Papists destroy . For albeit vpon this Altar is one bodie , and at the same time another vpon an other , yet doe they denye , that in this case one & one make two . They say also , that albeit Christes body bee entyre vppon three hundred seuerall altars , yet there are not diuers bodies vppon the Altar . Sense also teacheth vs , that wee receiue breade and wine . But they will haue vs rather to beleeue the Pope , then our owne sences . Philosophye teacheth vs , that no bodye can come to a place , or goe away without locall motion . But these teach that Christes bodie beginneth to bée in the Sacrament , and departeth from thence againe , the formes being corrupted , without locall motion .

28. All Christians beleeue , that Christ is the redeemer of the world and the sole and absolute mediator betwixt God and man . But Papists in their Masse make their Priestes mediators betwixt God and Christes body , that lyeth on the altar , as they say , and that in pitifull sort , included in a small roome . Supra quae saith the Preest , speaking of consecrated hoastes , propitio ac sereno vultu respicere digneris , & accepta habere , as if God wold not looke vpon his Sonne , nor accept him without their mediation . And againe iube haec perferri per manus sancti angeli tui in sublime altare tuum , that is , commaund this sacrifice viz. of Christes bodie and blood , to bee carryed vp vnto thy high altar by the handes of thy holy Angell . So they make Christ a weake and impotent mediator , that cannot ascend into heauen without the Preests Prayers , and helpe of Angels .

29. They beleeue , that their soules are redeemed by Masses ( for that they boldely , affirme in the Canon ) by indulgences , and merits of Saintes and by our owne satisfactions , as it appeareth by their common positions in their Doctrines of indulgences , merits , and satisfactions .

30. They destroy Christes Preest-hood , and that two waies . First , as if he had offered no perfect Sacrifice for mans sinne , they continually offer vp sacrifices for quicke and dead . Secondly as if his prayer were not heard , they runne to our Lady , to Angels and Saints , and make them their mediators . Our Lady they call the gate , and S. Peter the Porter of heauen .

31. They denie Christ to remaine a Preest for euer after the order of Melchisedech , when they teach , that their Masse-priests are after the order of Melchisedech , and that Christ offereth not now but by these Vicar-priestes .

32. They deny Christ to be the onely head , foundation , and teacher of his Church , giuing equall authoritie to vnwritten traditions , and popish decretales , and to Christes doctrine .

Finally , no man can talke more wickedly and dishonorablye of Christs person ond offices then Kellison . Page . 256. he saith the word was mute . But what could the Arians speake more dishonorably of the eternall word , then to say , he was mute ?

He saith also , that Christ with one word or teare might haue redeemed vs . But this abaseth the greatnesse of his power , and diminisheth the merit of his passion . Page 261. He affirmeth that Christes passion was not our formal iustification , nor satisfaction , but onely the meritorious cause of our redemption & saluation , which deserued for vs at Gods hands grace , by which together with our cooperation wee may bee saued and redeemed . He might in more cleere wordes haue said , that Christ did not satisfye for vs , nor saue vs , or redeeme vs , but onely merited for vs , that we might satisfye for our selues , & saue & redeeme our selues . Which doctrine is most blasphemous , moste desperate and derogatorie to the glorious worke of that great redemption , which Christ wrought for vs vpon the crosse .

P. 265. Hee defendeth the mediation and intercession of our Lady , & of the Saintes , for such as worship them & call vpon them . But as they that worship more Gods then one , are indeed without God , so this defender of many mediators hath not , nor indeede acknowledgeth any true mediator .

P. 271. Hee saith , that the seauen Sacraments doe all giue grace , to heale our spirituall woundes : which being added to that , which hee said before of Christes meriting grace , by which together with our owne cooperation wee may bee saued : It appeareth , that hee neither maketh Christ our redeemer , nor the Physicion by whose wounds wee are healed . For you see he ascribeth it to secondary causes , nay to extreme vnction and ceremonies neuer instituted by Christ . Nay hee supposeth , that our diseases may bee cured by the Priestes of Baal , by the flames of purgatorie , and the oyle of indulgences . But let him not deceiue himselfe . The scalding fire of purgatorie wil not agree with his greasie shauen crowne .

P. 283. Hee speaketh eagrely against those , that deny Christ to bee a law maker . But his secret purpose hee dare not vtter , for hée knoweth , that the Romish Church maketh the Popes lawes to binde in conscience , and from Christ to him translateth the power to make lawes . But this would haue appeared verye grosse , and would haue shewed , that for Christes tribunall seate , he ment to erect the Popes consistorie .

P. 285. Hee telleth vs , that Christ hath many vicegerents in his Preest-hood . But this doth quite ouerthrow Christes préest-hood , that is without succession and vicegerency being according to the order of Melchisedech , that had neither successor , nor vicegerent . This K. himselfe will not deny , I thinke , albeit hee be a dull fellowe , that Princes that are present neede no vicegerents . How then commeth it to passe , Christ beeing present with his church , as the Papists say really on the alter , as we say , by his holy spirit , and grace , that this fellow will needes appoint him vicegerents , bring in a race of Baals Preestes , and bald Sacrificers without lawful institution or commission ?

Lib. 3. cap. 7. he talketh of Christes iudgment . And in the 8. Chapter of the same Booke of wrong offerd to Christ by making others equall to Christ . And in the 9. Chapter of those , that make Christ ignorant of his office . But hee had little reason to talke of these matters , seeing the Papistes will haue Christ and the Pope to haue but one consistory , & hold that the Popes iudgment is infallible , when he determineth matters of faith . They do also make the Pope head of the Church , and vse other mediators as well as Christ . The glosse also vpon the extrauagant vnam sanctam . de maiorit . et obed. doth blasphemously in a certaine case charge Christ with indiscretion . Non videtur dominus discretus fuisse saith he , vt cum reuerentia eius loquar , nisi vnicum post se talem vicarium reliquisset .

Pag. 338. he commeth in with this prouerbe , loue me loue my Dogge . And there-vpon gathereth , that we loue not Christ , because wee worship not our Lady and the Saynts , comparing them to Dogges . What then remaineth but that the Pope cause this madde Dogges teeth to be knocked out , that biteth he careth not whome , blasphemeth Christ and dishonoreth his Saintes , whom he would seeme to honor ?

Chap. 7. An answer to Kellisons calumniations , charging vs eyther to haue no Religion at all , or a gracelesse Religion .

IF Our aduersarie were a man of grauitie , and did dispute like a Diuine , or a man of learning , it were not amisse to bestow some more labour vpon him . But now seeing he doth nothing , but lye like a Sycophant , and rayle like a scurrilous and gracelesse companion deuoyd of reason and honesty , in that which followeth , I will trusse vp his great fardle of foolery within the compasse of a few leaues . If any thing leaue , it shall not fayle to haue answer God-willing in my next , if he can and will note the dedefault .

His first bolt against our Religion is this : you haue no true Priestes , ergo no true Religion , as we may reade , Lib. 4. c. 1. But his antecedent is false . For if by Priestes hee meane true Bishops and Pastors , that truely preach the word , and sincerelie administer the holy Sacraments according to Christ his institution ; then haue wee such . Neyther is it materiall , that they haue no ordination from the Pope , nor offer sacrifice for quicke and dead . For neither are the Popish sacrificing shauelinges true Priestes , nor haue they any good ordination being authorized eyther by the Pope , that is a lay man , or by Abbots , that haue no right to ordeine Ministers , or by such as haue their ordination from the Pope , who is a mere vsurper of Episcopall authoritye . That they are not true Priests , it appeareth both by their defect of ordination , and also by the false title of their office , being appointed to sacrifice for quick and dead . The scriptures speake often of Priestes or Elders . So likewise do the Fathers . But they vnderstand such , as preach the word , and administer the sacraments , and not sacrificing shauelinges offring for quicke and dead . Further we may answer , that for sometime , and in some places Religion may consist without ordinary pastors , & verie well without Popish-priestes . This discourse therefore is all for vs , and against Kellisons shauen crowne , and idolatrous Priest-hood .

His second bolt is leuelled at our religion very lewdly . For it toucheth not vs , that haue not only the sacrifices of praise & thanks-giuing , & all other spirituall sacrifices vsed among Christians , but also the commemoration of Christes onely sacrifice once offered vpon the Crosse dayly celebrated in the holy Eucharist . But it striketh the Massing Religion deadly . For if there be no Religion , where there is no reall and externall sacrifice ; then haue the Papistes no Religion . And that is prooued first by Bellarmines wordes Lib. 1. de missa cap. 2. Where he sayth , that in a true sacrifice offered to God , it is required , that the thing offered be destroyed . If then they offer vp Christes body and blood in their Masse ; then do they consume and destroy the same , and afterward leaue themselues nothing to offer . Secondly that sacrifice of Christes body and blood within the accidents of bread & wine , which the Masse-priestes offer for quicke and dead , as they surmise , is a mere fancy and imagination of theirs contradicting Christ his institution of the Eucharist , and diuers other places of Scriptures . They alledge , I confesse , some words of the instituon of the Eucharist , and that which Daniel speaketh of the dayly sacrifice , and Malachy of the cleane oblation . But they fit not the impure Masse , nor the Idolatrous sacrifice of Baals priests destroying Christes institution , and offring that , which hee commaunded not to be offered , but to bee receiued in remembrance of his death and Passion . The Fathers also were ignorant of the histrionicall sacrifice of the Masse-priestes . Neither was there any certaine Law or Doctrine established for it before the wicked conuenticle of Trent had enacted their sacrificing Lawes . All which is prooued in my Bookes de missa against Bellarmine , which this K. doth not make any hast to answer . Nay he is more absurd then Bellarmine where he sayth , that Christ powred out his blood at his last Supper . For then hee should haue offered a bloody sacrifice at his last Supper , and powred out his blood twise . To conclude , where he thinketh to commend vnto vs his massing sacrifice , he sheweth that Popish religion is nothing , but mere nouelties and fooleries surpassing the reach of common vnderstanding .

His third bolt is thus formed Lib. 4. c. 3. they haue noe certentie of Sacraments at all : ergo no Religion . And to prooue his antecedent he sayth , that if any will forsake the Catholique Church and her beleife of seuen Sacraments , that hee hath no morrall nor probable assurance of any Sacraments . But first we deny , that the particuler Church of Rome is the Catholique Church . Secondly we affirme , that the Catholike Church for a thousand yeares did neuer heare of 7. Sacraments , onely and properly so called . Thirdly it is absurd to thinke , that the institution of confirmation , and extreme vnction did aswell proceed from Christ , as Baptisme and the Lordes Supper , or that they worke like effectes . Matrimony , orders and repentance we confesse haue their originall from God : but neuer as Sacraments of the new Testament . For they were in vse before Christes time , and want both formes of wordes , and certaine signes , and promises annexed to signes : all which are necessarily required in true Sacramentes .

Kellison braggeth of proofes of Scriptures and Fathers for all matters . But where are they ? we can see none brought by him . Nay his Maister Bellarmine hath bewrayed the pouerty of his cause in this behalfe , to no little discredit of himselfe , and discomfort of his consortes . If then they haue eyther no Religion , or a gracelesse Religion , that haue no assurance of seuen Sacraments , as this K. confesseth ; then is Kellison and his company left either without Religion , or with a gracelesse Religion .

Onely this is his comfort , that if we haue no graceful religion , yet he hath a greasie Religion , and hopeth to be iustified partly by the greasing of his handes & shauen crowne , and partly by extreme vnction beeing well greased departing out of the world , that hee may burne like a candle in purgatorie , and slippe like an Eele out the gripes of Lucifer .

The fourth bolt is thus framed by this foolish surueying fletcher . They detract from the dignitie of Sacraments , and attribute litle vnto them . Ergo they haue no Religion , or a gracelesse religion . But how doth hee prooue , that we diminish the dignitie of Sacraments , or attribute lesse vnto them , then is due ? hee alleadgeth , how some call them badges or signes , and saith , that we deny that they giue grace , or effectuate any iote of sanctification in our soules more then the Sacraments of the olde law did . But first no man among vs , will say , or euer did say , that they serue onely for signes or badges of Christianitie , and haue no other vse . Secondly , we all confesse , that God worketh sanctification by the sacraments of the new testament , albeit Gods power is not so tyed to sacraments , as the Papistes teach , who affirme , that they conteine grace , and giue that to the signe , that is properly wrought and effected by Gods grace . Thirdly , wee teach , that the Sacraments of the new Testament are Sacraments of things passed and exhibited , as the sacraments of Moyses lawe were of things future ; yet we deny not , that God wrought grace by them , as hee dooth by these . And this is consonant both to holy Scriptures and fathers . Finally wee doe not derogate any thing from true Sacraments , that by the word of God is due vnto them , albeit wee preferre baptisme and the Lordes Supper before the pretended Sacramentes deuised by the aduersaries . But if those haue no Religion , that detract from the Sacraments , then haue Papistes but a poore religion , which rebaptise oftentimes those which are by vs baptised , and in liewe of the holy Eucharist haue thrust into the Church the idole of the masse . They haue also corrupted the Doctrine both of repentance , & of orders , making their auriculer confession and humane absolutions and satisfactions parts of penance contrarie to all antiquitie , and reordaining those that are duelye ordered by vs . Finallye they make their Preestes , and Monks , and Fryars , to forsweare marriage . and separate married folkes for Religion , violating the rites of their owne pretended Sacraments .

The fift bird-bolt of this dog-bolt is shot against Luther , Caluin , Brentius , Melancthon and diuers other learned Diuines , whome hee chargeth , to haue taken away in effect those Sacraments , which they seeme to allow of . But first , hee should haue vnderstood , if both his wits and brayne had not fayled him , that there is great difference betwixt priuate opinions , and Religion . Secondly lewdely doth he prooue , that which maliciously hee obiecteth vnto particulers . Luther neuer said nor thought , that eyther the wordes of baptisme as they are instituted by Christ may bee omitted ; or that the element of water may bee changed into beare , or milke , or other liquor . Nay , therein we reprehend the Papistes , for that they are to bolde , not onely in changing and adding wordes , but also in taking away the Elements in the administration of Sacraments . The which appeareth in that they haue thrust in these wordes & aeterni , and mysterium fidei , into Christes wordes , in the institution of the Cuppe , and haue added to baptisme , salte , spittle , and other elements , and taken away the Cup from the communicates .

Caluin also with all his might defendeth the integritie of Christs institution both concerning the wordes and elements of the sacraments , & neuer called Christes words magical charmes , albeit the Papists with wordes , and a puffe of winde , as with a charme thinke to transubstantiate bread & wine into the Lordes bodie and blood .

Buccer in c. 26. Math. dooth not deny , that wordes are necessarie in the Eucharist . His wordes set downe will cleare him from Kellisons slaunder .

Luther , where he saith , that Children beleeue , saith nothing , but that which S. Augustine and others haue said before him . Of actuall faith in Children he saith nothing , albeit this K. doth actually and falsely report it .

Caluin lib. 4. Instit. c. 16. 18. saith not , that S. Iohn baptistes baptisme was as good , as Christes baptisme , but that his baptisme was one with Christes baptisme : which is also prooued , for that Christ was baptized by Iohn , and for that the Apostles were baptized with no other baptisme . Neither dooth the example Act. 19. prooue it to bee different . For eyther they were not well baptized , that were baptized into Iohns baptisme , or they were not rebaptized , but onely had imposition of handes and the baptisme of Gods spirit .

True it is , that caluin denyeth women power to baptize : & so wold that aduersaries also , if they did not corrupt al good orders . But that addeth to the dignitie of the sacrament . He saith further , that some that are not baptized may be saued . And so the aduersaries graunt also , especiallye when eyther Martyrdome supplyeth baptisme , or a man seeketh baptisme , and cannot haue it in time . That the Children of the reprobate are not to be baptised , or that the Children of the faithfull neede not to bee baptized Caluin neuer sayd , nor thought . Neither dooth hee say , that wee receiue bare signes in the Lords supper , but the communion of the body and blood of Christ . If then this surueyor would haue set downe these learned mens wordes truelye , then should hee haue had no reason to charge them with taking away the Sacraments , or derogating from them .

But the Papistes , while they depend wholy vpon the préests intention , and chop and change wordes in the holy institution , and take away , not onely the substance of bread and wine , but also the Cup from the communicantes , doe indeede depriue Christians of the Sacraments . Thomas Aquinas p. 3. q. 66. saith that baptisme may bee administred , in lixinio , that is in lye , and Albertus , in Brodio , that is , in pottage . Dionysius Carth. in 4. sent. dist. 3. q. 2. saith , that our Ladies name may be added to the name of the Trinity , and yet all remaine good . Potest in inuocatione beatae mariae fieri baptismus cum inuocatione Trinitatis . Finally , they teach , that Dogs & Hogs may eate the Sacrament of the Eucharist , & vse to baptise belles . These are the men therefore , that abuse the Sacraments , and depriue Christians of them : & not Luther or Caluin .

His sixt and last bolt is directed against the Liturgie and prayers of the Church . But as in other places so heere also the man shooteth at rouers , ranging vp and downe in an idle and tedious discourse concerning the excellency of prayer , which no man calleth in question . But that which in the title of his Chapter hee proposeth to himselfe , hee forgetteth , and cannot prooue viz. that eyther wee haue no prayer , or else disorders in prayer . Hee is not ashamed to affirme , that wee haue no prayers at al on working daies . But that is confuted both by common experience and the publike orders of the Church . On Holy daies , hee saith , we spend our time in yelling out Geneua Psalmes . So the Deuill teacheth him to yell out blasphemyes against the prayses of God in Psalmes , translated out of holy Scriptures . And why thinke you ? forsooth because wee admit not the filthie idolatrous prayers of the Masse , and breuiaries , and for that also wee pray in tongues vnderstood , and with our spirit , and vnderstanding , and for that we vse not their Baals songs . But when Christians consider how Papistes pray like Parrats , not vnderstanding what they say , and sing their monkish Hymmes , & call vpon they knowe not whome , and send vp their prayers before stockes and stones ; they haue no occasion , eyther to mislike our Prayers or Psalmes , or to allow their owne . Neither is it materiall , that wee beleeue not , that Prayers merit heauen , or satisfye for our sinnes , or that man naturally hath liberum arbitrium both in knowing and dooing thinges pleasing to God . For albeit they merit not , yet they both obtaine thinges necessarie , and remooue thinges hurtfull . Againe , albeit wee cannot satisfye for our sinnes by prayers , yet by them we obtaine remission of sinnes , for which our Sauiour hath sufficiently satisfyed . Finally albeit the natural man by freewil and nature dooth neither vnderstand the thinges of God , nor pursue after thinges pleasing to God ; yet directed by Gods holy spirit , by prayers wee obtaine Gods grace , that both enlightneth our vnderstanding , and helpeth our weakenes . So in all these cases prayer is profitable .

Furthermore albeit wee teach , that man is iustified by faith , and that euerie true Christian led by Gods spirit , is to assure him selfe of Gods fauour ; yet are wee not to neglect the meanes , nor to contemne Prayers which are exercises of our faith , and helpe to confirme vs , and are meanes to obtaine thinges necessarie for vs . The Surueyor therefore that concludeth against the meanes , because wee assure our selues of the end promised vnto vs through Christ Iesus , is but an ideot disputer . For albeit wee hope to attaine to the end ; yet wee doe not deny ordinarie meanes .

Chap. 8. The Surueyors calumniations against our Doctrine concerning God , refuted .

AS it is a heynous Heresie to make God the author of sinne , and condemned in Florinus and Blastus ; so it is a heynous calumniation to charge innocent christians with so heynous a crime , as to hold God to bee the author of sinne . All this notwithstanding , Kellison a Surueyor , as hee calleth himselfe , but not for Christ , but for Antichrist , will needes affirme , that wee make God the author of sinne and wickednes . But what if we teach contrarie ? will it not appeare , that the author of sinne was author also of this shamelesse and sinfull slaunder ? well then let vs see what is publikelye professed by the reformed churches . In the confession of the French Church , we reade that God is not the author of euill , and that he is cleare of all blame for thinges done euill . The Heluetian Churches condemne Florinus and Blastus for maintaining the contrarie Doctrine . Damnanus say they , Florinum & Blastum , & omnes , qui deum faciunt authorem peccati . The same also wee doe both in our writinges and Sermons publikely teach , and professe . Neither can this K. alleadge either sentence or word to the contrarie . But saith he , lib. 5. c. 1. Caluin and his followers auouch , that God immediatelye and directlye is the author of wickednes : and Melancthon in Rom. c. 8. auoucheth , that Dauids adultery , & Iudas treachery were as much the work of God , as S. Paules vocation . He saith also , that Beza , & diuers others haue like sayings . But first wee are vniustly charged with euery priuate mans opinions : neither will our aduersaries thinke it reason , in their owne case to bee so vsed . Secondlye Caluin is much wronged by this foule mouthed curre . For he is so farre from saying , that God is the author of all wickednesse , that expressely lib. 1. instit . c. 18. he teacheth , that God is author of no wickednesse . Falsely also dooth he charge Caluin to say , that God not onely foreseeth mans sinnes , but hath created him of determinate purpose to that end . Hee saith onely , that God dooth not onely permit men to doe what they will , but dooth gouerne their actions , and direct them to such endes , as he appointeth , not that he willeth or acteth their sinne , or the obliquity of the action , but that he directeth their wicked actions to good endes , which is the Doctrine of Saint Augustine in enchiridio ad Laurentium , and diuers other places . Melancthon also is moste wickedly slaundered by this false and wicked fellow , for he hath no such wordes , as those , wherewith hee standeth charged . Neither may we doubt , but this fellowe , that hath such leysure to prye into all mens faults , wold haue set down Bezaes wordes , and any thing written or taught by vs , if the same had made for his purpose . Wherefore seeing this K. setteth downe his owne malicious slaunders , and not our words , he may , if he finde anye inconuenience or absurditie redounding thereof , take the same wholy to himselfe , and not impute it to vs . He may also forbeare to prooue , that God is not the author of sinne . For vnlesse himselfe haue any such wicked conceite , we know no man , that will maintaine any such blasphemy .

In his second Chapter of his fift Booke hee chargeth Caluin further with teaching , that Gods will and power doth so domineere ouer the wil of a sinner , that he cannot resist Gods motion , which eggeth & vrgeth him to sin . Matters vtterly false & forged . For proofe hee citeth Lib. 3. instit . c. 21. 6. et 8. But there is no such matter to be found in those places . There also he is charged to say , that Gods will is a necessity of things . But neither doth he say any such thing in that place ; nor if hee should say , that Gods absolute wil doth impose a necessitie of thinges , doth it followe , that God doth egge and vrge men to sinne . It appeareth therfore that this lying companion sought not to finde out truth , but to oppresse truth , and the fauorers therof , with lyes and slaunders deuised by himselfe .

Thirdly he supposeth , that we teach , that Gods commaundements are impossible , and that a man can as soone touch the heauens with his finger , as fullfill the least commaundement . But this is so grosse a lye , as a man may almost touch it with his finger . For although we beleeue , that noe man in this frailty of our nature , after the fall of Adam , is able perfectly to fulfill the whole Law of God ; yet absolutely and simply no man teacheth them to be impossible . Nay we know they were possible to Adam in the state of innocencie , and that now by grace many commaundemets may be performed . But suppose we should say , that the Law cannot perfectly bee performed , yet should wee say no more , then Ambrose and Hierome do teach in Galat. 3. and Chrysostome in Gal. 2. and Bernard serm. 50. in cant . and Thomas Aquinas in Gal. 3. lect. 4. He wold prooue , that the commaundements of God are easie and light . But therin he sheweth his owne lightnesse , that condemneth himselfe for not performing that , which he taketh to be light . The rest of his illations are meere fooleryes grounded vpon his owne fancyes .

In his fourth Chapter he would inferre that wee make God a most cruell Tyrant , because we teach , that no man is able to performe the whole Law of God perfectly . But his inference is most wicked and blasphemous , and could not proceede , but out of the blasphemous thoughts of a wicked Masse-priest . Out of our Doctrine no such matter is to bee inferred . For as in matter of debts , the Creditor may iustly exact his owne , the Debtor hauing bound himselfe to pay , and after proouing vnsufficient & vnable ; so man is iustly punnished for not paying his debt , whereto he is bound , & which by his owne fault he is made vnable to pay . Luther de seruo arb . confesseth , that in this obscure light of nature , and debility of vnderstanding man cannot see , why God should not bee vniust condemning him , that cannot chuse but sinne . But yet he accuseth not God eyther of injustice or cruelty , as this man would haue it , but rather accuseth man of blindenesse and ignorance . And yet others do plainly see , that God doth most iustly exact that at the hande of man , which by his owne default hee is become vnable to performe .

Finally he chargeth the reformers , that they pul down the true God out of his throne , and place an Idole in the same of their owne imagination . And his reason is first , for that all Heretiks are Idolaters ; and next for that we hold , that God is the author of sinne , and of a bad nature , vnreasonable , and cruell . But if all Heretikes be Idolaters ; then as the Papistes are grosse Heretiks , so are they grosse Idolaters , holding diuers branches of the Simonian , Carpocratian , forsan , Angelican , Manichean , Pelagian Heresie , and of diuers other damned Heresies . Againe if all Idolaters pull God out of his Throne ; then the Papistes that giue Gods honor to creatures , & worship the Sacrament , stockes and stones Idolatrosly , do pull God , as much as in them lyeth , out of his Throne . Finally if we haue cleared our selues from all the iniust imputations of this Sycophant , and shewed , that neither Caluin , nor any of our teachers do hold , that God is author of sinne , or guilty of any iniustice ; then I hope the very Papistes them-selues wil be ashamed to heare such blasphemous termes proceed from their teachers , & bee more wary hereafter , how they giue eare to our aduersaryes clamours . It is one thinge to crye loud , and another thing to bring sound proofe . Sycophants obiect great crimes : but wise Iudges proceed according to proofes .

Chap. 9. That our Doctrine giueth due obedience and respect both to Princes and to their Lawes .

HOW wickedly the Popes of Rome haue abused the clemency of Christian Princes , it would require a long discourse to relate . This breefly may be verified , that they haue trod downe the maiestie of Kinges , contemned their Lawes , and set variance betwixt the Prince and his subiectes from time to time . And yet , as if the Doctrine of Popery , were cleare in this poynt , this K. blusheth not to obiect the faultes of his consortes to vs . Like vnto Parmenian the Donatist , who when hee might bee ashamed of his owne faultes , yet blushed not to accuse innocent Catholiques . Cum pro tuis erubescere debueras , saith Optatus to Parmenian , Lib. 2. contr. Parmen. catholicos innocentes accusas . The difference betwixt our Doctrine and Popery in this point is very great . We say , it is not lawfull for any subiect to lay violent handes vpon their annoynted Kinges . The Papistes are taught to rebell against Kinges excommunicat by the Pope . Nay Pius the fift in bulla contr. Elizahethā denounceth them excommunicate , that would not stirre against Queene Elizabeth , and take armes against her .

Secondly we say , that the King is not subiect to any forraine Potentate . They hold , that it is necessary to saluation for the King of England to be subiect to the Pope , and thinke men bound to beleeue it . Nay they say the Pope is as farre aboue the Emperour , as the Sunne aboue the Moone .

Thirdly we say , that the Kinges Lawes concerning Ecclesisticall matters are to be obeyed . The Papistes giue all power in Ecclesiasticall affaires to the Pope , and say that the King therin is but an vsurper .

Fourthly we say , that not only lay-men , but also all Masse-priestes , Monkes , and Fryers , ought to be subiect to the Prince . These fellowes exempt their Clergie and their goods from Princes gouernement , as appeareth by Bellarmines treatise de exemptione Clericorum , and diuers decrees of Popes .

Finally we make Princes and Kinges , soueraigne commaunders ouer their subiects , and immediate exequutors of Gods lawes . Contrariwise the papistes make them most base exequutioners of the Popes Lawes , and therein preuaile so farre , that they not only set Princes together by the eares one with another , but make them the Popes hangmen , and force them to persecute their owne innocent subiects , if they wil not admit the Popes Idolatrous , and Hereticall Religion .

But saith Kellison Lib. 6 c. 1. they teach , that no Prince can binde a man in conscience to obey his Lawes and commaundements , and giue subjectes good leaue to rebell and reuolte . This he sayth , and how prooueth he that , which hee saith ? forsooth saith he , Luther exhorted the Germaines not to take Armes against the Turke . And in his Booke against the King of England called him all to naught . Secondly he telleth vs of the Rebellion of the Boores in Germanie . Thirdly he citeth certaine places out of Luther , shewing , that the Popes lawes , or Princes positiue lawes binde not to mortall sin , nor rule the conscience .

Lastly he spendeth much idle talke about the tumults in France , Flaunders , and Germany . But first what maketh all this to lawes binding in conscience ? Secondly the Articles of his accusation containe manifest vntruthes . For neither doe wee giue subiectes leaue to reuolt , neither doe wee deny that Princes lawes doe binde in conscience , as oft as they commaund any thing commaunded in Gods word , or prohibite thinges by God prohibited . If Luther respected not the Pope , nor his decretale lawes ; it is no maruell , seeing hee is no lawfull Prince , but an Vsurper , and the head and maintayner of Antichristes Kingdome . Furthermore where hee and Caluin defend Christian mens libertye , as touching their conscience , they say no other thing , then that which they haue learned , and which euerie man may gather out of Saint Iames Chap. 4. where hee sayth , there is owne Law-giuer , that can saue and destroy . As for Kellisons proofes they are eyther grounded vpon false reports ; or else containe matters impertinent . First false it is , that Luther exhorted the Germains not to take armes against the Turke . Nay hee rather encouraged them to defend their countrie against the Turke , onely shewing them , that if they meant to preuaile against him , they must first correct their liues , and reforme their errors in Religion . But whatsoeuer he said in this argument , it concerneth this matter in question , nothing . Secondly , hee was not King Henries subiect , but dealt against him more freely , as being by subtiltie of Papists set foorth to countenance the Popes leud cause . Thirdly , wee defend not the Rebellion of the rustical Boores in Germany , neyther did Luther spare to reprooue them , and to write against them . Beside that , the cause of their insurrection was not Religion , but temporall oppression . Fourthly wee haue before declared what is Luthers & Caluins meaning concerning the binding of mens consciences . Fiftly , the Germains and States of the low Countries are well able to cleare themselues from all blot of rebellion , or imputation laid vpon them by this sycophant , as may appeare to any that will reade their defences . Finally the Christians in France neuer rebelled , but onely tooke armes in defence of their liues , against such as broke the Kings edictes , and therefore haue beene iustifyed in their actions by the Kings themselues , and by their edictes at diuers times . Wherfore seeing their owne Kings did cleare them ; this swad hath no reason to accuse them .

In his second Chapter of his sixt booke he chargeth vs , that our Doctrine dooth bring iudges and tribunall seates into contempt . And his reason is partlye , for that Luther and Caluin teach , that the positiue lawes of Princes bind not in conscience , and partlye for that they doe condemne the Popish Doctrine of freewill . But his reason is so simple and soppish , that it falleth of it selfe without our helpe . For albeit the positiue lawes of Princes , that haue no strength of Gods lawe , doe not reach so farre , as to binde the conscience ; yet all the lawes of Princes , that haue their ground in Gods law doe binde the conscience also . Likewise the authoritie of Princes is of God , and therefore no man may resist them without offence of conscience . Furthermore albeit positiue lawes of Princes binde not in conscience ; yet they doe bind men to susteine the punishment inflicted by Princes lawes not direct contrarie to Gods lawes . Finally albeit man haue not freewil after the opinion of the Papists in discerning spirituall matters , and dooing works pleasing to God , & tending to the ateining of eternal life ; yet he hath freewill to doe lewdly , and therefore iustly deserueth to be punished . This fellow therefore rather deserueth to bee punished , that vnderstandeth our cause no better , then admired for his profound sophistrie . He addeth , that it followeth by the Doctrine of these nouuellants , that Princes haue no authoritie to commaund . But then these olde hacsters must bring in new & strange conclusions . For as wee haue before declared , wee maintaine the Princes authoritie against the vsurpation of the Pope , and obey his lawes better then Papistes , who for a long time haue stood for the Pope against their Princes , both in France and other places . Kellison like an old sycophant may therefore doe well , seeing the Popes tyrannie is so newe , to abstaine from charging others with noueltie , and forbearing to rayle and lye , to produce some better arguments .

In the third chapter of his sixt booke hee concludeth , that wee bring Princes lawes into contempt , and in the fourth and last Chapter , that by our Doctrine , neither the Prince is to rely vppon his Subjects , nor Subiects vpon the Prince , nor one vpon another : And all this because Luther and Caluin teach , that Princes meere positiue lawes doe not binde in conscience . But as leapers , that mistake their rising fall oft in the midst , so disputers fayling in their groundes come short of their conclusion . This position of Luther and Caluin I haue heeretofore shewed to haue beene quite mistaken by Kellison . But had they taught so as he imagineth ; yet doe they neither bring lawes into contempt , nor breed any distrust or euil correspondence betwixt Princes & subiects . For al Gods lawes binde in conscience , & mans lawes as farre as they haue vigor from Gods law . The authority of Princes is grounded vpon the Law of God . From the same also not onely our duty towards our parents , but also of husbands to their wiues , & wiues to their husbands , of children to their parents , & contrarywise for the moste part receiueth strength . Finally the same authoriseth diuers contracts willing vs so to doe to others , as wee would haue others to doe to vs . Furthermore beside matter of conscience , ciuill lawes doe sufficiently keepe themselues from contempt by diuers sortes of ciuill punishments . His frappling out-courses therefore touch vs nothing . But admitte once the wicked and damnable doctrine of Poperye , and giue the Pope leaue to excommunicate Princes ; then subiects are assoyled from their fealtie and obedience , oathes are broken , lawes are trodden vnder feet , Kings are murthered and impoysoned , rebellions are raysed , lawfull contracts are broken , the Father betrayeth his Children , and setteth fire to them , as hath been seene by practise where Popery beareth sway , and the like doe the Children to their Parents . Finally all lawfull contracts are dissolued , and al iustice is banished . And this we can prooue by diuers practises of the Pope and his adherents in England , Franc● , Flanders , Germany and other countries . But that wee reserue the full declaration hereof to another place .

Chap. 10. That our Doctrine leadeth men to vertue , & deterreth them from all vices .

AS the Pagans cryed out in old times against Christians , as if they were Atheistes , & the lewdest men that euer liued ; so do Papists crye out against Christians of our time . Kellison dooth redouble his cries of Atheisme and blasphemy , and in the seauenth booke of his Suruey accuseth vs of loose caryage , and vicious liuing . And thus it is come to passe , as saith Nazianzen epist. 31. ijdem iniuria afficiuntur , & accusantur , Honest men are both wronged & accused . But our Doctrine wil alwaies stand firme against their accusations , and we doubt not but the professors of our Religion will alwaies passe for right honest men , whensoeuer they shall bee paralleled eyther with popes , cardinals , Monkes , Fryars , Nonnes , or the Canaillery & rablement of Masse-priests & their followers .

Many reasons wee haue to perswade vs to obedience of gods Lawes and holinesse of life , whereof these are principall . First Gods commaundement , which wee are to obey ; Secondly his honor , which wee are to seeke ; Thirdly Christes example , which we are to follow ; Fourthly the election and vocation of Christians , which requireth a life answerable to our profession ; Fiftly the reward promised to those , that keepe Gods lawes ; Sixtly the scandale , that insueth of lewd actions ; and lastly the curse and eternall miserye and punishment , that is denounced against the transgressors of the lawes of God .

Heerein wee haue also great aduantage of the Papistes . Wee follow Gods eternall word , that is a lanterne to our feete , and a light to our pathes ; they followe obscure and vnwritten traditions , Wee ground our doctrine vpon the Apostles and Prophets , that were moste holy men : they follow the decretales of moste wicked and impure Popes . Wee propose to our selues the example of Christ and his holy Apostles : they followe Antichrist , and the founders of diuers orders of Monkes and Fryars , and Nonnes , who were rather superstitious , than zealous , ceremonious , then holy and Religious . Wee punish adulterie in moste places with death , and fornication with shame & reproach ; neither doe we admitte publike bordels : they count fornication and adulterie small faultes , and maintaine in all great cities of Italy , and moste Countries subiect to the Pope common bordel houses , whereby greate occasion of corruption of manners is offered to youth , and great offence to Infidels and weake Christians . Wee force none to forsweare marriage : the Papists suffer neither Monkes , Fryars , Nonnes , nor Masse-priestes to marrie ; whereof many horrible sinnes and abhominations follow . We dispense neither with oathes nor promises , nor dissolue contracts : the Pope taketh on him to doe all this , whereby great occasions are offered of periurie , and peruerse dealing . Wée set vp no bankes of vsurie : they commonly set vp bankes of vsurie , and call them sometime banks of pittie , because men borrow vpon lesse interest , then of common-bankers . Wee suffer neither Iewes nor Marans among vs : they admitte both , and take tribute of them , to the great scandale of Religion . We count it a thing abhominable , for men professing Christianitie to empoyson and murder those , that are opposite to them in Religion : the Pope and his adherents count such murders and empoysonments meritorious , and honor the assassiners , as Saints , as appeareth by the example of Iames Clement , William Parry , Ghineard , Castel and such like . Such as rebell or conspire against Princes wee detest as Traytors ; they honor as Martyrs , as appeareth by the example of Plomptree , the two Nortons , Campian , Ballard , Watson and Clerke and such like . And shortly we doubt not to heare but that Pearcy and Catesbie and the gun-powder Traytors shall be put into the Popes callender . Wee giue no power to Preestes to absolue impenitent sinners : the popish Masse-preestes absolue all that confesse , and bid them doe pennance afterward . Nay they absolue , murderers , assassinors and Traytors . We allow no indulgences of Popes , that remit , as they say . temporall punishments ; they beeing confident vpon the Popes indulgences commit grosse offences . Wee doe not beleeue , that sinnes are doone away by masses : they hope to be iustified by gazing vpon a Masse-preest . Finally , we leaue no hope for sinners after this life : they promise sinners that they shall passe to eternall life through Purgatorie .

Kellisons discourse therefore concerning vertues , which are so rare among the Papistes ; and of vices , that so swarme amongst them , was vnreasonably inserted in his Suruey . Against our Doctrine , certes , iustly he can take no exception . In the title of the first Chapter of his 7. Booke , he chargeth vs with taking away the hope of Heauen and feare of Hell . But when hee should bring his proofes , hee alledgeth only a broken sentence or two out of Luther and Caluin , which notwithstanding being truly set downe , do make nothing for him . For neither doth Caluin deny , that men ought to doe well for hope of reward , but only condemneth the humor of those , that respect only reward , as if nothing els were to moue men to doe good : nor doth Luther mislike , that man should feare Hell , but that Christians should not bee mooued for other causes to refraine from euill , then for feare of Hell . But what is this to vs , if aduantage might be taken of some wordes of Luther or Caluin ? Further he runneth backe to talke of Lawes positiue not binding in conscience , most falsly and without all colour , charging vs with taking away all feare of Lawes . The rest of his first Chapter of his 7. Book is nothing but a ranging discourse of diuers sortes of feare , and of the effects of the hope of reward and feare of punishment , which in Doway might passe for a peece of a Schoole-boyes declamation , but here comming out of place , and being not gaynsaid shall passe , as do the rest of his idle declamations , for a peece of pedanticall foolery .

In the second Chapter of the same Booke hee maketh a great matter of faith only justifying , and sayth that therby a gappe is opened to all vice . But his discourse is such , as rather may beseeme a stage vice , then a Diuine speaking against vice . First hee telleth vs , that Sathan beateth his doctrine into mens heads , and that the same was maintained first by those , against whom S. Iohn S. Iames , S. Peter and S. Iude writeth , as Augustine testifieth ; and then by Simon Magus , and Eunomius ; and lastly by Luther and Caluin . But heerein hee resembleth the Iewes Luke 11. that attribute the miracles of Christ to the power of Belzebub . For this Doctrine of iustification by faith without workes is the Doctrine not of Satan , as this Satanicall Masse-priest affirmeth , but of the holy Ghost . We conclude saith the Apostle Rom. 3. that a man is justified by fayth without the works of the Law . Neither doth he vnderstand the works of the ceremoniall Law , or works done by force of free-will . For then he would not haue excluded all the workes of the Law , nor denyed that Abraham was iustified by workes . Furthermore he would only haue concluded , that man is not iustified by the ceremoniall Law or by workes done by the force of free-will without grace . S. Augustine also lib. de fid. et oper. c. 14. teacheth vs , that man is first iustified , and then doth good workes . His wordes speaking of good works are these : sequuntur iustificatum , non praecedunt iustificandum . They follow him that is justified , and goe not before in him , that is to be iustified . As for those Christians , that turned the grace of God into wantonnesse , as Saint Iude sayth , and the rest , against whome the Apostles wrote , they did altogether contemne good workes : a matter much condemne and farre from vs . Simon Magus likewise & Eunomius gaue themselues ouer to a dissolute life , and Eunomius promising saluation to his followers beleeuing only , speaketh not of the true fayth of Christ , but of his owne wicked and Hereticall fayth . But Luther and Caluin neither speake against good workes , nor contemne them , nor allow of their opinions , that contemne good workes , but only exclude them from being the cause of iustification , or concurring in the act of iustification before Gods tribunall seate . Otherwise they exhorte all Christians to good works , and highly prayse them , as the fruites of our iustification , and very acceptable in Gods sight . And this Doctrine they deuised not of their owne brayne , but receiued it from the Apostles and the ancient Fathers of the Church . Cum dicit apostolus saith Saint Augustine de fid. et operib. C. 14. arbitrari se iustificari hominem per ●●dem sine operibus legis , non hoc agit , vt praecepta contemnantur , sed vt sciat se quisque per fidem iustificari , etiam si legis opera non praecesserint . When the Apostle sayth , that hee beleeueth man to be justified by fayth without the works of the Law , he entendeth not , that the commaundements should be despised , but would that euery man should knowe , that hee is justified by fayth , albeit the workes of the Lawe goe not before . Against vs therefore neither the words of Iude nor of other apostles make any thing . But against our aduersaries , if S. Augustine bee Iudge , they ayme directly . arbitrantur saith he Lib. de fid. et operib. c. 15. per quasdam poenas ignis eos posse purgari ad salutem percipiendam merito fundamenti . Hee saith , the certaine in his time errooniously beleeued , that such as liue lewdly may be saued through fire holding the foundation . And against such hee disputeth and applyeth the Apostles wordes .

Secondly our aduersarie telleth vs , that Luther and Caluin teach , that good-works are mortall sinnes , and that faith according to Caluins opinion is sinne . But that is rather a lewd & sinfull tricke to impute that to any , which hee neuer wrote nor thought . Nay it appeareth manifestlie , that they teach contrarie .

Thirdly hee asketh a question , where we reade in Scriptures , that only faith justifieth . But this question we haue alredy answeared . And now we say further , that this is found in all places , where either the Law and works are excluded from causing iustification , or else we are said to be iustified freely and by grace , or else are taught that the iust doth liue by fayth . The Apostle Gal. 2. sayth if justice be by the Law , that Chirst dyed in vaine . And Gal. 5. volentes iustificari per legem à gratia exciderunt . While they sought for justice by the Law , they fell from Christ . Neither is our aduersaries exception of any moment , where hee sayth that the workes of the ceremoniall Law , and of the Gentiles are only excluded by the words of the Apostle . For he doth not onely speake of the Gentiles , but of Abraham , that was the Father of the faithfull , & denyeth that he was iustified by works . The prophet Dauid also Psal. 32. pronounceth him blessed , to whome God imputeth no sin . Which sheweth , that it is not the ceremoniall Law , but the whole Lawe , whose transgressions are imputed to vs . And the Apostle generally excludeth all workes for which a reward is due from iustification . Ei qui operatur merces non imputatur secundum gratiam . He addeth also how fayth may be sayd to justifie . But he might haue remembred , that here he is no teacher , but an aduersary . We do therfore rather expect arguments , then documents from him . His exposition of faith iustifying as a disposition , or as a worke is farre from truth , and from the meaning of the Apostle , who excluding our workes placeth our true iustification before God in Gods mercy , and Christs iustice made ours by fayth . To conclude this point , seeing none are saued but such as are iustifyed , and none are iustifyed by workes of the law , but such as performe the whole law ; it is manifest that before God , which is so iust and holy , and leaueth no sin vnpunished , no sinner is iustified by the workes of the law . If it were otherwise , then would it folow , that Mary Magdalen , and other great sinners transgressing the law were iustified by the law .

Fourthly he saith It is an absurd heresie to say , that faith cannot be without workes . But if he speake of a true , liuely and iustifiing faith , he is rather an absurd heretike , if he say , that the same may be without good works . The apostle saith that faith worketh by charity , and that the iust doth liue by faith . But liuely faith is actiue . S. Augustine also lib. de fid. et oper. c. 16. dooth testifie , that true faith cannot bee voide of workes , fides Christi saith he , fides gratiae Christianae , id est ea fides , quae per dilectionem operatur , posita in fundamento n●minem perire permittit . So it appereth , it deserueth not the name of Christian faith , that worketh not by charitie . In this place also this K. accuseth the Lutherans & Caluinistes , as he calleth them , for their euill life . But this is onely an ordinarie phrase of his rayling stile . For not those , that exclude workes from causing our iustification before God , but such as albeit they pretend faith and works , yet neither haue true faith nor good workes , are guiltie of this accusation . If we please to parralell those , whome hee calleth Lutherans and Caluinistes , with the Popes , Cardinals , Masse-priestes and their adherentes , I doubt not , but they will appeare Saintes in the eyes of indifferent iudges in comparison of them . If any man else doubt , let him reade the actes of the Conuenticle of Constance against Iohn the 23. the reportes of Iohn the 12. Sergius the 3. Landus , Gregory the 6 and 7. Alexander the 6. Paul the 3. Leo the 10. & other Popes set downe in Histories . To speake generally there is great difference betwixt the men of Geneua and Rome , of England and Italy .

Finally he concludeth , if faith onely doe iustifie , that if a man retaine faith , all the vilanyes in the world cannot hurt him : & that hee may assure himselfe , he is iust , howsoeuer he liueth . And this hee goeth about to confirme by Luthers wordes which he reporteth thus , Sola fides Christi necessaria est ad salutem : cetera omnia liberrimaneque praeceptaneque prohibita . Onely faith is necessary to saluation , all other thinges are free , and neither commaunded nor forbidden . But as his dealings are dishonest , so his conclusion concerning vilanies is most vilanous . For albeit we hold , that a Christian man is to be iustified by faith alone in Christ Iesus : yet wee teach also , that he abuseth Gods grace , and deceiueth himselfe , which walking after the flesh and not after the Spirit , and liuing loosely and vngodly supposeth notwithstanding , that he retayneth true faith . Furthermore none of vs euer taught , that euerie one is presently iustified , that beleeueth himselfe to bee iust as this K. boldly auoucheth , but hee that indeede truely beleeueth in Christ Iesus . Lastly this sycophant dooth most vniustly wrest and misreport Luthers words . For in his commentaries in Gal. 2. hee hath not the words alleadged by Kellison , albeit hee boldelye affirme it . Nay hee seemeth to write plaine contrarie . Iustificato sic corde per fidem , saith hee , quae est in nomine eius dat eïs deus potestatem filios dei fieri diffuso mox spiritu sancto in cordibus eorum , qui charitate dilatei eos ac pacatos hilaresque faciat omnium bonorum operatores , omnium malorum victores , etiam mortis contemptores & inferni . Hic mox cessant omnes leges , omnium legum opera . Omnia sunt iam libera licita , & lex per fidem & Charitatem est impleta . His meaning therefore is that those that are iustifyed by faith , haue charitie and doe all good workes , and auoide sinne , not by constraint of lawes , but mooued by Gods spirit working by faith and charitie , and beeing stirred to doe well of their free choice . And after the former wordes he addeth , that a sinner looking for righteousnesse at Gods handes is not to looke vpon his owne workes , but vpon God through Christ . Are not these fellowes then strange collectors that conclude contrarie to a mans words and meaning , and would make Luther a fauorer of licentiousnesse of life , and an enemie of good workes , who expressely condemneth al wickednes and commendeth good works , detracting nothing from them , but that they doe not iustifye before God , but are rather fruites of iustification ?

In the third Chapter hee affirmeth , that Luther and Caluin in assuring men by an assured faith of election , remission of sinnes , justice , and perseuerance in the same loose the bridle to all iniquitie . But had not hee loosed the reines of his malicious tongue , and suffered the same to range without restraint against such as defend the truth ; he would neuer haue vttered so much falsehood and villany against Luther and Caluin . For they say not , that whatsoeuer mens liues be , they may boldly rely on Christ : or else , that men beeing clogged with al the sins of the world are to beleeue , that they are iust , as this surueying sycophant giueth out , but rather , that no man is to presume of his faith or of Gods mercie , or iustice without repentance and good life , which are the fruites & markes of a good faith . And Luther albeit he say that life cannot be lost by any sinnes , vnlesse a man will not beleeue : yet hee doth not speake of sinnes to come , but of sinnes past and doone away by the grace of Christ through baptisme and repentance .

Further out of Luthers wordes lib. de capt . Babyl . concerning the effect of faith he collecteth , that howsoeuer a man liue , & though he bee neuer so incredulous in the Articles of his beleefe ; yet if he beleeue that hee shall be saued , that it shall bee so . But no such conclusion can bee drawne from his wordes or Doctrine . Nay hée sheweth that good life cannot bee separated from true faith , and neuer ment to disioyne the faith of the articles of the Creede , from iustifying faith , this beeing deriued from that faith . Lastly albeit Christians being iustifyed by faith , hope they shall bee saued ; yet no man euer beleeued , that iustification is nothing else but an assurance that he shall bee saued , as the Surueyor surmiseth .

Page . 540. he calleth the faith of a mans owne saluation phantasticall , as if the Apostle Saint Paul beleeuing that nothing should separate him from the loue of God were phantastical . Furthermore how can a man professe himselfe a Christian , if he beleeue not remission of sinnes and eternall life ? and if he beleeue this , how can hee chuse but beleeue his owne saluation ? againe how can we pray without doubting , if we doubt of remission of sinnes , which wee craue in the Lordes Prayer ? finally the Sacraments are seales of this assurance of saluation when they are applyed to euerie particular Christian .

His last reason or rather reasonlesse argument to prooue , that assurance of faith bringeth foorth loosenesse of life , is this : because a man , as hee thinketh , may apprehend Christes justice to bee his , eyther being mooued to sinne , or being in the act of sinne . But this is his owne weake surmise . For hee that truelye apprehendeth Christ is clad with his iustice , and guided by his grace , and preserued from sinning . And he that walloweth in sin , and yet presumeth of Christes grace , is not partaker eyther of his grace or iustice .

In his 7. Booke and 4. Chapter hee inueigheth against vs for teaching that sinne is not imputed to a faithfull man . But all Christians are rather to exclaime against him , that beleeueth that sinnes are neither doone away by repentance , nor purged by faith in Christes blood , but alwaies imputed vnto true beleeuers . To helpe foorth with a bad matter , hee saith that Caluin lib. 3. instit . c. 14.17 . and chap. 18.8 . saith plainely that all iust and faithfull mens workes are sinnes . But this is a plaine lye , and sheweth that this surueyor dooth vse but little iust and plaine dealing . For in those places no such thing is to be found . Nay , it implyeth contradiction to bee a good worke , and a sinne both together . After this hee concludeth , because sinne is not imputed vnto them that beleeue , that Christians are not to feare theftes , or adulteryes , or other sinne . But his conclusion doth but lewdly follow vpon his premisses . For albeit former sinnes are doone away by true faith and repentance ; yet all true Christians beeing once cured are to take heede they sinne no more . Further repentance bringeth with it newnesse of life and a care to auoide sinne afterward , and not as K. surmiseth , a boldnesse in sinning .

The fift Chapter conteineth nothing almost but vaine repetitions and odious calumniations against Maister Luther and Caluin and other Godly men . First he saith , that they condemne the iust mans good deedes as mortal sinnes . But this hath bin declared to bee a mortall or rather capitall slaunder . For althogh they hold , that euen in the workes of good men there are imperfections , and that many actes to vs seeming good are euill ; yet they no where say , that the iust mans good deedes are mortall sinnes . in the wordes by K. alleadged partially , there is no such matter . Secondly hee chargeth them to teach , that the faithfull mans euil deedes are good and honest . But therein hee dealeth vnfathfully and dishonestly . For they doe not diminish mens sinnes , but commend Gods great mercy , that imputeth them not , albeit they be very great and heynous . Thirdly hée affirmeth , that Caluin teacheth , that originall sinne hath blotted out the image of God in man . But if all the vntruthes of this slauderous Suruey , were blotted out , the rest would scarce serue to stoppe one Vinegar bottle . Caluin saith , that the image of God in man is not lost by his fall , but onely blemished and defaced . The same man , where he speaketh of the workes of Infidels saith not that all of them are sinnes , but that they sinned all in their morrall actions . And this he prooueth out of Augustine lib. 4. contr. Iulianum . Finally , none of vs teaching , that our will is vnable to performe any good worke tending to the attaining of eternall life , dooth eyther teach contrarie to scriptures , or ouerthrowe Artes , or extinguish reason , or make all sinnes equal , albeit this K. in his brablement dooth charge vs therewith .

In the sixt Chapter he runneth beside himselfe , and entreth into a tedious declaration concerning free-will , and diuers odious repetitions of the same matters . But what will you say , is this to the purpose ? Forsooth no more then if hee should tell you what commaund he had in time past ouer the Hogsheades in my Lord Vauxes Sellar . For we do not deny free-will in all thinges , as did the Manachees , who held that sinne proceeded not from our will , but from the substance of the euill soule , and therfore are iustly refuted by Saint Augustine in his Booke de duab . anim . c. 11. neither did Luther deny free-will simply , but only in thinges that concerne the attaining of the Kingdome of heauen . Furthermore neither doth Luther teach , that free-wil goeth necessarily that way , which either the spirit spurreth it , or the Diuell vrgeth it , as this lewd Sycophant ridden and spurred on by no good spirit shamefully lyeth : nor doth Caluin affirme , that Gods prouidence and predestination taketh away free-will , as hee desperatly and imprudently chargeth him : neither do we either teach . that man sinneth vnwillingly , or deny , that he hath his will free in naturall & ciuill matters . What then is it that pincheth this thick-skind fellow ? Forsooth because we say that the naturall man neither discerneth the thinges , that are of God , nor by his free-will is able to performe them . This is it , which the semipelagian Papistes mislike , and against which Doctrine Kellison marshalleth all his forces , if such weake stuffe at the least , may bee termed forces . And first he endeuoreth to prooue free-will . But if by this word he vnderstand only an abilitie & wil to doe wickedly , then we deny not , but man hath free-will . If by free-wil he vnderstand that will and power in spiritual matters and concerning eternal life , which the conuenticle of Trent and other Romish teachers doe meane ; then he may do well to take a larger terme to prooue his Doctrine . That conuenticle sess. 6. c. 1. et . 5. speaking of free-will in matters concerning eternall life , saith , it is only attenuated , and weakned and not extinguished or lost by the fall of Adam . Gabriel Biel Lib. 2. d. 27. 4. teacheth . that a man by force of free-will may remoue the barre ( of Gods grace ) that is mortall sinne ; because hee may cease from the consent and act of sinning , yea hate sinne , and frame his will not to commit sinne . Homo existens in peccato mortali saith he , potest remouere obicem , hoe est peccatum mortale : quia potest cessare à consensu et actu peccandi , imò odisse peccatum , et velle non peccare . Commonly they hold , that man in his naturall faculties , was left sound after the fall ; that the will by the force of nature is able to dispose it selfe to receiue grace : that the same is able by the force of nature to auoyde euery mortall sinne , and to fulfill the Law of God , as touching the substance of the act . But the Scriptures teach vs , that the vnregenerate man is dead , and sould vnder sinne . 1. Cor. 2. Wee read that the naturall man vnderstandeth not the thinges that are of God , and that they are foolishnesse vnto him . And 2. Cor. 3. that all our sufficiencie is of God . Si ad aliquid idonei sumus , id ex deo est , saith the Apostle .

Secondly he saith if man haue no free-will , that then all vice may goe for currant . But if hee meane free-will and the power therof according to the Doctrine of the Papistes ; then his conclusion wil not passe for currant , nor will his vize-ship prooue more vicious holding with vs according to the Doctrine of the Scriptures and Fathers , then he now is esteemed defending the decretales of Popes , and Copper Doctrine of Schoole-men .

The seauenth Chapter of his 7. Booke containeth an inuectiue against vs , as if we taught , that all Gods commaundements are simply impossible . But heerein it seemeth , that wilfully he● mistaketh our Doctrine , that hee might the better vent his swelling eloquence to his gaping and witlesse Diciples . For we neither hold , that the Law is simply in it selfe impossible , nor teach that it is impossible simply for the regenerat man , to performe the Law of God in part . But we say , that the vnregenerate cannot performe any Law of God in such sort as hee should , and that the regenerate cannot so perfectly performe the whole law , as he ought . And this we know is the doctrine of the holye Apostles & Fathers of the Church . Saint Peter Act. 15. saith the Law was a yoake which neither the Disciples of Christ , nor their Fathers were able to beare . Quid tentatis deum saith he , vt imponatur iugum super ceruices discipulorum , quod neque patres nostri , neque nos portare potuimus ? Saint Paul Rom. 7. speaking of himselfe saith the Law was spirituall , and he carnall sold vnder sinne . And Rom. 8. the affection of flesh is death and enmitie against God , and is neither subject to the Law of God , nor can bee . Saint Ambrose in Galat. 3. saith that the commaundementes of God are so great , that it is impossible to keepe them . Tanta sunt mandata , vt impossibile sit seruari ea . Likewise lib. 9. epist. 71. He saith , no man can auoide sinne . Peccatum nemo euitare potest . And with him consenteth S. Hierome in c. 3. ad Galat. affirming , that no man can performe the Law . Augustine lib. de perfect . iustit . sheweth reason , why no man is able to fulfil that which is commaunded . S. Chrysostome in his Homilyes vpon the epistle to the Romans speaking of the Law , affirmeth plainely , that it is a matter impossible to fulfill it . Id verò saith he , nemini possibile est . And Bernard serm. 50. in cantic . saith that God commaunding thinges impossible made not men transgressors , but humble . And this is so plaine a matter , that Thomas Aquinas wrighting vpon the third to the Galat. confesseth freely , that it is impossible to fulfill the whole Law . Implere totam legem saith hee , est impossibile . But what should we neede to produce so many testimonies , when the Pelagians are condemned for Heretickes for saying , that a man may liue without sinne ( which must needes follow if a man be able to fulfill the whole Law ) and when experience teacheth vs , that euen the iust man falleth and all of vs offend in many things ? if then all those that affirme the Law to be impossible giue occasion of all impietie , as this sottish Surueyor , affirmeth ; hee had néede to distinguish subtilly , if he meane to cleare the ancient Fathers and Christes Apostles from impietie . If he teach contrary to them ; then is his Doctrine more like to sauor of impietie , then that of the holy Apostles and auncient Fathers .

The rest of his seauenth Booke is nothing else , but a rest of rayling termes , degorged out of his cankerd and malicious stomacke , and voyd of truth and proofe . We answer therefore breefly , and plainlye to the entent that heerafter hee may bee better enformed concerning our Religion first that Christ hath not freed vs from the obedience of Lawes , and that this is no part of our fayth to hold so . Nay we say , that faithfull men , as they are freed from the curse of the Law for their sinnes , so by diuers arguments they are exhorted and stirred vp to hearken to the wordes of the Law , and to yeeld their obedience vnto it . Secondly we pronounce them anathema , that shall say , that God is the author of sinne : and haue , I trust , fully discharged Maister Caluin from this most vniust imputation . Thirdly we take them to bee brutish Heretikes in the forme of men , that doe not diligently distinguish betweene vertue and vice . In our Doctrine there is not the least suspicion of any such matter . Fourthly of conscience wee speake according to the holy Apostle , that groundeth it not vpon the Popes decretales , but vpon the Law of God . Fiftly we hate all pride , knowing that humility is the cognizance of Christians , and ground-worke of all vertues . Sixtly wee exhort men to labour diligently in their vocation thinking them vnworthy to eate , that will not worke . Wee exhort all men also to doe good workes and that while it is day , because the night commeth when no man can worke ; so farre are we from allowing idlenesse . Seuenthly we hold that Mariage is honorable among all degrees of men , and say that God will iudge adulterers and fornicators . We teach chastity , wee punish vnchast and lecherous persons . Finally our Doctrine doth shew the way for sinners to arise , and to be loosed from the bondes of sinne . What a shamlesse fellow then is this to make these Doctrines falsely imputed to vs rules of our Religion , when we not only renounce them , but also detest them , and the reporter of them ?

The Papists iustly charged with that which is fals●ly i●●●●ed 〈◊〉 But if we looke backe and reflect our eyes vpon the Doctrine and practice of Papists , we shal then perceiue them to be guilty of that , which they most wickedly and slaundrously impute vnto vs . First as if Christ had freed them from al lawes , so they contemne all Lawes . The Pope taketh vppon him not only to dispence against the Doctrine of the Apostle , and the Law morall , but also to loose the subiectes from the obedience of lawes , & to arme them against their Princes . The Masse-priests and marked slaues of Antichrist are exempted from al burthens of Law . And Emanuel sa in his Aphorismes saith , that the rebellion of a Clerke against . his Soueraigne Lord is no treason , because he is not his Subject

Secondly , albeit they say , that God is not the Author of sinne , yet they hold , that their idolatrous doctrine of worship of Angels , Saintes , and Images , that the rebellious and treacherous practises of Subiects against Princes vpon warrant of the Pope , that the hereticall opinions and traditions of the Synagogue of Rome , which are moste wicked and sinfull , are of God . They blush not also to say that the pope & papacy is of God . But he is the man of sinne , and his state is the Kingdome of Antichrist .

Thirdly , as if they put no difference betwixt vertue and vice , so they chuse Prelates , Cardinals , Popes indifferentlye , without respect to the●r pietie , learning , and other good qualities . The Pope he dispenseth with all vices , the people liueth moste beastly . Petrarch in his Sonnets calleth Rome Babylon , in regard of the confusion there . In his Epistles without title speaking of the Popes Court , all goodnesse , saith he , is there lost . Omne ibi bonum perditur . Bernard lib. 4. de consid . speaking of the Romans saith , they were impious towards God , profane in handling holy thinges , seditious one toward another . Breidenbach in the historie of his trauailes , sheweth a maruellous corruption to haue growne among the people of his time . Recessit lex à sacerdotibus , saith hee , à principibus iusticia , consilium à senioribus , à populo sides . That is , the Lawe is departed from Preestes , justice from rulers , counsell from the Elders , and good dealing from the people . And least any man might doubt of the indifferent opinion that Papists haue both of good & bad , the Pope granteth indulgences to all , and Preestes absolue all that come to them , and promise heauen to all .

Fourthly , hee that seeketh for conscience , must neuer hope to finde it among Papistes , who making conscience to worke on a holy day , and to eate flesh on Frydaies , were nothing scrupulous to murder olde and young , men and women , and all sortes of people , and without forme of law to kill many thousands of innocent Christians , as may appeare by the bloody massacre of France Anno 1572. and by diuers exequutions doone vpon men of our religion both there and in other places . Of late in England Pearcy and his mates being resolued to blow vp the vpper house of Parliament , and to make a generall massacre of such as feared God , were absolued by Iesuites and Masse-priestes , and promised heauen for their good seruice . To make a somme of all , they make no conscience to make idoles , and to worship them , to violate the Saboth , to rebell against Magistrates or parents , or to breake any law of God . But to breake the Popes orders , or their owne traditions , they accompt it a matter very heynous .

Fiftly , next to Lucifer the Pope excelleth in pride He treadeth on Princes neckes , he giueth his feete to bee kissed , hee rideth on mens shoulders , he is called a God on the earth and vsurpeth his honor . Such also are the Prelates and the rest of the popish Clergie . Auentinus lib. 6. annal. in praef . sheweth they excell in pride , and with goods giuen to the poore keepe Dogges , Horses , Harlots . Pauperum alimentis canes , equos , scorta alunt .

Sixtly , neuer was idlenesse more in price , then since Monkes and Fryars came into the world . They deuoure the fruites of the painefull labour of others , and intend nothing but to eate , drinke , sleepe and to inioy carnall pleasures . Of such we may say with the Apostle . 2. Thess. 3. Hee that laboureth not , let him not eate .

Seauenthly , albeit the Masse-priestes , Monkes , Nonnes and Fryars forsweare marriage ; yet not sect of Religion , or state of men or women is more impure . Honorius Augustodunensis speaking of Nunnes , saith they are more common then Harlots . Omnibus fornicarijs peius prosternuntur . In England most horrible abhominations were found in the visitation of Abbyes . Petrus de Alliaco lib. de reformat . Eccles . and Theodoric à Niem in nemore vnion . & diuers others shew , that albeit Priestes were not marryed ; yet commonly they kept Harlots , and that now is euident , in our times , by common experience . Sacerdotes moderni saith Holcot in lib. sap. lect. 182. sunt similes sacerdotibus Baal , sunt angeli apostatici , sunt similes sacerdotibus Dagon , sunt sacerdotes priapi , sunt angeli abyssi . The Priestes of his time he resembleth to heathen Priestes , and sheweth how much they were subiect to lechery , and heathenish impieties .

Finally , the Doctrine of Popery is a doctrine full of licenciousnesse , the Popes of Rome take vpon them to dispense with all sins and wickednes . Their indulgences as the Germans Grauam . 3. complaine , are causes of many mischiefes , hinc stupra say they , incestus , adulteria , periuria , homicidia , furta , rapinae , foenora , ac tota malorum lerna . They take vppon them to absolue moste wicked sinners , à poena & culpa . Nay euerie Masse-priest challengeth to himselfe power to giue absolution to such as come to confession . The Iesuites of late absolued them before hand , which by gun-powder went about to blow vp the Parliament house . Hammond the Iesuite absolued Pearcy , Catesby and their fellowes taking armes against their King and Countrie . While men hope to satisfie for their sinnes in purgatorie , they deferre repentance to the last breath . Their enemies they tye with yron bondes . Alexander the 3. would not release the Emperor , vntill he had trod on his necke with his feete , and vsed him with greate indignities . Contrarywise they promise heauen to their friends , though laden with greeuous si●s . They hold euerie transgression of the Popes decretales to bee sinne . This is therefore a Religion , that both promiseth reward to cutthroates & greeuous sinners , and by their indulgences , absolutions , and fancies of purgatory hold a sinner so fast bound in sinne , that there can bee no hope for him , to bee loosed as long as he followeth their wicked Doctrines . As for Luther and Caluin they are farre from such wicked courses . They teach christian liberty . But they extend it not so , that they exempt Christians eyther from the obedience of Gods lawes , or mans lawes , but onely from the cursse of the law , and from humane traditions , that they binde not mens consciences . They distinguish Christ & Moyses . And so would Kellison too , but that hee talketh hee knoweth not what . Of Moyses his law they make diuers vses , and onelye detract from it the effect of iustification , and saluation by reason it accuseth man of sinne and is not fulfilled . The Apostle also teacheth , if iustice were of the law , that Christ had dyed in vaine . Of the author and original of sinne , and of conscience , they teach most Christianlye , following therein the Doctrine of the Apostles and holy Fathers of the church . The pride of the Pope & his adherents they detested and refused both by wordes and examples ; and so farre were they from idlenesse , and allowing of idlenesse , that they thought him vnworthy to liue or eate , that laboured not in some honest , and lawfull vocation . Concerning chastitie they taught as truely , as the Papists wickedly . They shewed , that it consisted not in forswearing marriage , but in abstinence from all filthie thoughtes , actes and speeches . That which some impute to Luther , of taking the Mayde , when the wife refuseth , is a meere calumniation . He sheweth onely what some doe , or at the least threaten to doe , and not what they ought to doe . Of the degrees of consanguinitie they teach better then the Pope . They neuer taught , that a man might marrie his brothers wife , or his Neece , or his Sister , as the Popes haue doone . Finally they hold no sinners fast bound in sinnes , but shew the right way , how to rise from sinne , by faith in Christ and true repentance , clearing those doubts , which before had entangled many Christian soules , and brought them to vtter destruction . If then this K. had not had his conscience seared , & his eyes seeled , and his vnderstanding darkned in these points , he would haue seene and acknowledged the deformities of his owne fellowes Doctrine , and abstained from accusing others .

Chap. 11. A reiection of Kellisons slaunderous accusations , imputing in his 8. Booke , Atheisme , and contempt of Religion to the professors of true and Christian Religion in the Church of England .

COnsorte not thy selfe with detractors saith Salomon Prouerb . 24. For their destruction shall come vppon them suddenly . But Kellison was not so wise , as to borrowe light from so wise and prudent a King . He hath chosen rather , to imitate fooles , who as if all their treasure were in their tongues , count it gaine , to speake lewdely of their betters . Istic est thesaurus stultis in lingua situs saith plautus in paenulo , vt quaestui habeant malè loqui melioribus . Forgetting his friendes in Italy , Spaine , and other countries groaning vnder the captiuity of Antichrist : in his preface he chargeth his natiue country of England , as vnfortunate for ingendring a certaine Monster called Atheistes . But if our Countrie men had lesse frequented Italy , there had béene farre lesse Atheisme , then in England now there is . It is well knowne , that Machiauelisme came from Italy , and rose not in England , and how Englishmen Italienated are said to be like Diuels incarnated . Furthermore if the Masse-priestes , as they haue brought with them the dregges of Popish heresies , had not also brought with them the sinnes of Sodome , and mixed diuine Religion with temporall policies , and state practises , seeking with fire and Gun-powder to reestablish in this kingdome the Popes tyranny ; then had he had no colour of this imputation . Neither dooth this any way concerne vs , that professe Religion heere in England , beeing the proper crime of the Italianated and Hispaniolized Masse-priestes and their consortes , that beeing inspired with the malicious spirit of Antichrist , liue like Atheistes and Sodomites , & teach rebellion , murder of Princes , periurie , equiuocations , and diuers other pointes of Doctrine repugnant both to Religion and ciuill pollicy .

In the first Chapter of his 8. Booke , hee affirmeth , Kellisons calumniatitions , as if our doctrine sauored of Atheisme refuted . that certaine poyntes of our Doctrine open a gappe to a deniall of the diuine Majesty . But when hee commeth to particulars , hee powreth out of his wide mouth a streame of impudent slaunders . First hee saith , wee are not afrayd to auouch , that God is the author of all sinne and wickednesse : and that he hath ordained vs to sinne from all eternitie , that wee sinne by Gods will and commaundement , and that he vrgeth vs to sinne . And concludeth , that wee make God cruell and tyrannicall , as commaunding vs that , which wee cannot performe , wanting free-will , and punishing vs for faultes , which wee cannot auoyde . But first hee doth not so much as offer to prooue his charge eyther out of the Doctrine of the Chuch of England , or out of any mans wrightinges , whose name is of any note in our Church . Nay hee knoweth , wee teach contrarie to that , which he imputeth vnto vs . May he not then be ashamed to charge his aduersaries with matters so false and improbable ? Secondly , hee is neither able to conuince Maister Caluin of any such impious Doctrine , nor hath he reason to make so greate clamours , if anye one priuate man of our teachers should hold any point of erroneous Doctrine . Lastly , before hee come at his conclusion , hee must make better proofe of his premisses , if he meane to haue the particulars of his suruey to passe without censure . He must also vnderstand , that albeit we haue not freewil , or liberium arbitrium in discerning the thinges of God , and dooing thinges pleasing to his diuine Maiestie ; it followeth not , that God is therefore cruell or tyrannicall , because by our owne default we became vnable to performe the Lawe , and blinde in discerning matters tending to eternall life .

The rest of the first Chapter containeth a long inuectiue against Atheistes , and certaine weake arguments brought to prooue , that there is a God . But as in the first hée toucheth his owne fellowes , so in the second hee confirmeth them in their Atheisme , being able to bring no better arguments to confute them , and in the whole behaueth himselfe fondly and vnlearnedly . First hee saith , that neither reason , nor faith , nor both together are able to discouer , what God is . But therein hee discouereth by his owne confession , that hee is a poore Surueyor of Religion , not knowing what God is , and a silly Doctor of Diuinitie , if hee deny that Scriptures teach vs what God is , as farre as is necessarie for vs to know .

Pag. 642. he saith , that creatures in God are increate , infinite , perfect , and that all of them in God are God . Which assertion first taketh away the distinction betwixt God and creatures . Next aduanceth creatures to a diuine being . And thirdly commeth neere to Seruetus his impiety . For if a creature in God is God , why may not Kellison also say , that God in a stone is a stone , and in Iron Iron , as Seruetus did , if Bellarmine in praefat. ante tom 1. disput . say truly . Neither can it excuse him , that God foresawe and foreknew all thinges , and as Philosophers say , had ideaes in him . For this deuise of ideaes is a Philosophical fancy , and yet cannot make Kellisons assertion good , seeing the platonicall philosophers distinguish ideaes from the thinges them-selues and make them separate from them .

Pag. 645. he talketh of conuincing a God-head , and sayth , that the world by Philosophers is called Alle. But the first speech is impious seeming to import , that he meaneth to ouercome God , and to confute him , as hee hath alredy endeuored to confute his truth . The second proceedeth of ignorance . For hardly will hee bee able to shew , in what tongue Philosophers call the world , Alle.

Pag. 648. he belyeth Caesar , where hee maketh him say , that the first inhabitants of England sprang out of the earth , as herbes or Toad-stooles . Caesar in his commentaryes talketh neyther of hearbes nor Toad-stooles , and vtterly reiecteth this falshood .

Pag. 649. he would gladly prooue , that there is a God by the conuulsions of men possessed . And pag. 650. by Witches . Hee sayth also , that such as are possessed by Deuils somtimes howle like Dogges , somtime yell like Wolfes . But his argumentes from Witches and possessed with Deuils prooue the Deuill , rather then God . Secondly his proofes are weake being drawne rather from illusions and counterfet trickes , then from matters euidently true . Lastly it is hard to be beleeued , that he hath heard any , that eyther howled like Dogges , or yelled like Wolfes . These proofes therfore are liker to draw men to infidelitye , then otherwise .

Afterward he talketh idlely of the heauy and lumpish nature of the earth ; an element , as it seemeth predominant in him , of the Common-wealth of Bees so well ordered , that a Statist may learne policy from it , as he beleeueth , of the leapes of Hares , of Foxes and Fearne bushes , of Spiders and spider-webs , and such like vaine and idle similitudes . But what should I follow or runne after him , that runneth so farre not onely from his argument , but from himselfe also ?

In the second chapters rubrike he affirmeth that our Doctrine , ruineth al Religion . But in the Chapter it selfe there is no ground brought for proofe of his assertion . Only in the latter end he doth afresh charge vs with holding , that God is the author of all sinne . And thereof concludeth , that those which beleeue this must needes haue cold hearts in Religion . But we haue declared his antecedent to be false and fantasticall . What then shall we need to beat downe his ruinous consequent ? The rest of this Chapter containeth diuers poyntes of popish Doctrine concerning Gods true worshippe , Heretikes and their markes , Christes honor , Priestes an sacrifices , succession , vnity , vniuersality , here idelye repeated , and formerly refuted . Pag. 671. he beareth vs in hand , that the moderne Romish Religion is most conformable to the Doctrine planted by the Apostles . But he shall not be able to prooue all his life , halfe of that which he hath affirmed in one line . He saith , he hath prooued it in his commentaries in secunda secunda . But his proofes are weake , and therefore dare not abide the light . If he come forth with his proofes of his Religion heerafter , we will pray him also to shew , that the Romish Doctrine of blowing vp Princes and Parliament-houses with Gun-powder , of breaking of oathes , of lying and equiuocating , of the Popes vniuersall Monarchye , of kissing the Popes Pantoufle , of iustification by confirmation , extreme vnction , Mariage , and orders ex opere operato , of taking Christ with the teeth , of transubstantiation , halfe communions , priuate Masses , prayer in a tongue not vnderstoode , worship of Saintes and Angels , and the rest of those Popish Heresies which we refuse , are conformable to that Religion , which was first planted by the Apostles .

In the third Chapter hee affirmeth , that in contempt of the Churches authority we bring all Religion into contempt . But how prooueth hee , that wee contemne the Churches authoritie ? First he sayth , it is a maxime , and almoste an article of fayth among vs , that the true Church , which once was , hath erred grossely , and in no lesse matters , then fayth , justification , merit , free-will , workes , satisfaction , Purgatory , prayer to Sayntes , worship of Images , number & vertue of Sacraments , sacrifice and such like . But if hee meane the whole Catholique Church ; this is neither article , nor maxime , nor opinion of ours , that the whole Church hath erred grossely . If he meane the Pope , and his adherents , and parasites , why should not they erre as well , as the Churches of Antioch , Alexandria , Hierusalem , and Constantinople ? That they haue indeed erred , we haue already prooued , and offer our selues alwayes ready to prooue : and it is most apparant , for that their Doctrine is not only diuers , but also contrary to the Doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles , and namely in the points aboue specified .

Next hee sayth Luther cared not for a thousand Churches , and Caluin , Beza and others despised all the Councels , and ancient Fathers . But neyther the contempt of the Synagogue of Rome , nor the reiection of diuers Conuenticles assembled by Popes , nor the refusall of diuers counterfet Bookes alledged vnder the name of Fathers , or of some Fathers singuler opinions doth argue anye contempt of the true Church , or of lawfull councelles , or of the authenticall writinges and common Doctrines of Fathers . Further , I would haue thought , that reason might haue taught him , talking so long of Religion , that priuate mens sayinges and opinions should not so often haue beene imputed generally to vs or to the whole Church .

To prooue , that contempt of the Churches authoritie bringeth Religion into contempt , hee alleadgeth , that wee cannot knowe , which is Scripture , which not , but by the voice of the Church . But first this is nothing to vs , which doe much esteeme the authoritie of the Apostolike and Catholike Church . We say also , that euerie priuate man is to reuerence the iudgement of the true Church . But what is this to the Romish synagogue that is not the true church ? againe what is this to the Pope , that is an oppressor of the church , and an enemie of Christian Religion ? if Kellison wil contend , that the sentence of the Pope , which neither vnderstandeth , nor percase can reade Scriptures in the originall tongues , must needes be followed in deciding the controuersies about Canonical scriptures ; his owne schollers wil laugh at him , that maketh a betilheaded fellow iudge in matters of religion , & a blinde man iudge of colours . If he refer men to the particular church of Rome , that now is , it will bee said , that she cannot bee iudge and partye , and that the auncient Church is much to bée preferred before her . Saint Augustine , wee confesse among manye other reasons was enduced also to beleeue by the churches authoritie . So likewise are many more then he . But K. remooueth all other reasons and motiues in matter of discerning scriptures , and maketh his moderne Church a necessarie cause and almost sole motife of faith , as if none were to beleeue eyther scriptures , or any other Article of faith vnlesse hee bee resolued by the Pope , and the moderne Church of Rome . Blasphemously also hee affirmeth , that the Romaine Church being contemned , wee can no more assure a man of Scripture , then of a Robin-hoodes tale . But to vse these comparisons is blasphemye . To make so much of nothing , and to stand so much vpon a blinde Pope , and to preferre the Romaine moderne Church before the auncient , and all other moderne churches , is foolery .

In the fourth Chapter he beareth his Reader in hand , that wee reject some bookes of Canonicall Scripture , and for proofe saith that Luther reiected the Booke of Iob , Ecclesiastes , and all the Gospels saue that of Iohn , and that we reiect the Bookes of Iudith , Tobia , Ecclesiasticus , Wisdome , and the Machabees . But these latter Bookes hee shall neuer prooue to be canonicall , vnlesse wée take the Canon largelye , as Saint Augustine sometimes seemeth to doe . S. Hierome in prol. galeato , Athanasius in Synops. Gregorius Nazianzenus in carminibus , Epiphanius in lib. de pond . & mensur . and the moste and best Fathers esteeme of them no otherwise , then we doe . The calumniation concerning Luther wee haue answered already . But saith K. they will needes receiue Scripture at the Roman Churches hand . And of this hee would inferre , that as well we ought to follow that Church in the number of bookes , as in receiuing canonicall Scripture vpon that Churches warrant . This s●ith hee , but hee taketh that for graunted , that no man yeeldeth him . For wee take the Scriptures as the Church of Rome her selfe did , from the Prophets and Apostles . We doe also assure our selues , that the iudgement of the Apostolike Church is farre to be preferred before the iudgement of the Apostaticall moderne Romish Church . Lastlye wee answere to his argument , that wee haue diuers arguments to assure vs of the authoritie & truth and number of canonicall bookes of Scriptures , beside the testimony of any one particular Church , as for example the testimony of Scripture it selfe , the likenesse , Maiestie antiquitie , truth , stile of Scripture and such like .

In the fift chapter he endeuoreth to prooue , that our dissensions in Religion doe open a gappe to contempt of Religion . And thereupon talketh his pleasure of Caluinistes and Lutherans , Puritanes , Protestants , soft and rigid Lutherians , Zuinglians , Bezites , Anabaptistes , Libertines , Brownistes , Martinistes , family of loue , and damned crew . But first the damned crew is by vs damned . In this late conspiracie of Papists , Edward Baynham , that is knowne to bee of the damned crewe was choson for a fit man to goe as nuntio from this damned crew to the Pope . Anabaptistes , Libertines , & the family of loue , are more among the Papists , then among vs . We say to them anathema maranatha . The Brownistes and Martinistes , wee generally condemne . The rest are the names of slaunder deuised by Papistes . To answere his obiection therefore , wee say , that the Churches of Germanye , France , and other countries doe well agree : and priuate men doe submitte themselues to the determination of a free generall councell , and in the meane while to their nationall Churches .

The groundes of his sixt chapter are laide vpon the Popes head-ship . For because wee want a visible head , hee supposeth wee giue great aduantage to Atheistes . But as the Popes headship is a matter rather fancied , then prooued out of Scriptures or Fathers ; so what so euer is thereupon built , the same is founded vpon fancie , and not worth a head of Garlike . That Saint Peter did rule both the Apostles and all the church , as Christes vicar generall , and head of the Church , it cannot bee prooued . All the Apostles were called alike , and sent to teach and administer the Sacraments alike . They had also the keyes of the Church giuen to them by one ioynt commission , and Paul professeth , that the principall of the Apostles gaue vnto him nothing . But had Peter had any such monarchy , as is pretended ; yet that is nothing for the aduantage of our triple crowned Popes , that are so vnlike to Peter , and kil Christes sheep , as he fed them . Nay the auncient Bishops of Rome neither gaue lawes to the whole church , nor ordained bishops in all quarters , nor receiued appeales out of al the world , nor reserued certaine cases to themselues , nor practised the rest of the moderne Popes authoritie . But saith K. where a head wanteth , there euerie man may preach , and embrace what Religion he will . As if generall and prouinciall councels , and Bishops in their Diocesses , & Godly Princes in their Kingdomes , were not able to remedy this disorder . Other meanes certes there was not in the primitiue Church , and he that looketh , that Popes should redresse Atheisme , and other abuses , is himselfe much abused .

In the last Chapter hee saith , that denying the reall presence ( taught by the Popish Synagogue ) we ruine Christian Religion , and call all other mysteries of faith in question . But his proposition is moste false , and absurd . For not those which deny the Cyclopicall eating of Christes flesh , and the carnall presence thereof vnder the accidents of bread and wine , but such rather , as hold that Christes flesh and blood is receiued of reprobats persons , nay Hogges and Dogges , and is swallowed downe into the belly , and deny thinges felt and seene , doe bring a slaunder vpon Religion , and call all holy mysteries , not onely into question , but into contempt also . Auerroes for this grosse opinion onely affirmed , that the Religion of Christians was of all other most ridiculous . For what can bee deuised more ridiculous , then to make a God , and to eate him vp presently ? this doctrine of Papists hath beene a great stumbling blocke both to Gentiles ●nd Christians , and is so improbable and contrarie to Christes institution , the expositions of Fathers , and common reason , as nothing more . Kellison , I confesse , braggeth that he will bring as plaine proofes for the reall presence , as are brought in scriptures , either for the holy Trinitie , or Christes incarnation . Or else he promiseth he will yeelde the bucklers . Which if hée would haue performed , then had he long ere this lost and forsaken the field . For he bringeth onely two places , and neither of them to his purpose , as I haue at large declared in my Book de missa against Bellarmine , where all the cauillations of our aduersaries are particularlye discussed , and so stand , for any thing either this doughty Doctor of Doway , or Bellarmine can say against vs . Furthermore the comparison of the popish reall presence , and the Doctrine thereof compared with the great mysteries of the holy Trinitie , and Christes incarnation , declareth him to bee an Atheist , that beleeueth such fundamentall pointes of Religion no more , then the popish absurd Doctrine of the carnal and canibal like eating of Christes flesh , and drinking of his blood and receiuing them with our mouth into our bellyes .

Diuers other absurdities hee committeth also in this Chapter . page . 698. speaking of popish sacrifices : by sacrifice saith he , wee consecrate to his seruice the liues , and substance of brute beastes . So it appeareth , if they sacrifice Christ in the Masse , that they kill him , and compare him to brute Beastes . page . 710. hee falsifyeth Saint Augustines wordes in his tract . vpon S. Iohns Gospell . page 713. hee confoundeth real , & sacramentall eating . There also hee saith , that Christ would not say , he meant a figuratiue and spirituall eating : but moste falsely . For Christ saith that the flesh profiteth nothing . And both Origen and Austen do expound these wordes of eating Christes flesh spirituallye and figuratiuelie . Lastly to prooue the real presence , hee alleadgeth page . 728. a testimonie out of S. Andrewes legend .

But neither can he prooue his carnall reall presence , nor iustifie his assertion , where hee maketh them Atheistes and ruiners of Christian religion , that deny this absurd , scandalous and blasphemous Doctrine .

Wherfore as by lawful tryall we haue acquited our selues & our doctrine of all suspition of Atheisme ; so wee doubt not , but to lay the same most iustly vpon the Pope , & his adherents , & vpon their impious & wicked doctrine . Outward * * professors of Popery inward Atheistes . Bernard in serm. 1. in Conuers . Pauli . beganne to complaine long since , both of the iniquitye of Popes , and of the dissolutenesse of Preest and People . Egressa est iniquitas à senioribus iudicibus vicarijs tuis saith he , qui videntur regere populum tuum . Non est iam dicere , vt populus , sic sacerdos , quod nec sit populus , vt sacerdos .

Petrarch in his Sonnets calleth Rome false and trayterous Babylon and the mother of errors , and chargeth her with seruing Venus and Bacchus rather then the God of heauen . In his Epistles without name speaking of the Popes Court , hee saith , it is voide of all goodnesse , and that there is neither libertie , nor rest , nor joy , nor hope , nor faith , nor charitye , but contrariwise greate losse and casting away of mens soules . Omne ibi bonum perditur , sed primum omnium libertas , mox ex ordine , quies , gaudium , spes , fides , Charitas , animae iacturae ingentes .

Wernerus in fascic . temporum in Martino . 2. Adriano . 3. & Stephano . exclaimeth , as if holy men were perished from the earth , and truth diminished among the Sonnes of men , and as if that were a moste wicked time . ô tempus pessimum saith he , in quo defecit sanctus , & deminutae sunt veritates à filijs hominum !

Breidenbachus in historia peregrinat . sua , reporteth , that in his time , the law was departed from priestes , justice from Princes , counsaile from the Elders , faith from the people , loue from parents , reuerence from Subjects , charitie from Praelates , Religion from Monkes , honesty from young men , discipline from the Clergie . His wordes are these : Recessit lex à sacerdotibus , à principibus iustitia , consilium à senioribus , à populo fides , amor à parentibus , à subditis reuerentia , charitas à praelatis , religio à monachis , à iunenibus honestas , à clericis disciplina .

In veritate comperi saith Walterus Mapes quod sceleri cleri studet vniuersitas , liuor regnat , veritas , datur funeri , haeredes luciferi sunt praelati . That is , of a truth I finde , that the whole ( Romish ) Clergie dooth study vilany . Enuie reigneth , and truth is buryed . Such Clergiemen are the heyres of Lucifer . And againe non est qui faciat bona istorum , quorum conscientia speluncae est latronum . There is none of these , that dooth good , their conscience is like a denne of theeues .

Mathew Paris in Henr. 3. saith , that in those times the sparks of faith began to grow cold . Temporibus illis ingruentibus igniculus fidei coepit nimis refrigescere .

Petrus de Alliaco in lib. de reformat . eccles . noteth the luxuriousnes , auarice , idlenesse , blasphemies , magicke artes , and superstitions , and that both of Princes and people of his time .

Adrian the 6. in his instructions to his legat Cheregatus confesseth ingeniously the corruptions of the church of Rome and Romanistes . Omnes nos saith he , declinauimus , vnusquisque in vias suas , nec fuit iam diu qui faceret bonum , non fuit vsque ad vnum .

The Bishop of Bitonto preaching in the first session of the conuenticle of Trent & speaking of the manners of the people then , confesseth , that they said in their heart , that there was no God , dicunt in corde suo saith he , quod non est Deus .

This may also bee specified by infinite examples both of Popes and Cardinals , and their followers . Theodoricke à Niem . de schism . lib. 2. c. 42. calleth Gregory the 12 and Petrus de Luna Elders of Babylon , and saith , that such iniquitie was gone from them , that the Catholike faith was therby ouershadowed , and that Religion suffered Shipwracke , and that vertue was departed from all men . Vt Catholica fides obnubiletur , & omnis religio naufragium patiatur . Virtutes ab omnibus recesserunt .

Iohn the 12. or as some number , the 13. dranke to the Deuill in his meriment , and called vpon him , when he playd at Dice , and as the Histories set out by Papistes themselues declare , was a wicked fellow .

Gregory the seuenth , as Beno the Cardinall writeth had commerce with the Deuill , and was in the Councell of Brixina condemned for a Magician . Hee saith also , that hee cast the Sacrament into the fire , which is not so much in him to bee maruelled . For hee that worshipeth the Deuill , cannot esteeme much of the body of Christ , which as Papists hold , is contained vnder the formes of bread and wine in the Sacrament . This man , when he dyed , as Sigebertus witnesseth , confesseth , that by the perswasion of the Diuell , hee had raysed many stirres in the world .

Siluester the second , as storyes report , made a compact with the Deuill . It is sayd also , that Gregory the 6. Bonet the 9. Paul the third , and diuers other Popes were Magicians , and Negromancers . But such men , as giue themselues to art Magick , renounce God and serue the Deuill .

Of Sixtus the fourth we read , that hee laughed at Religion , and beleeued not , that their was a God .

Riserat vt viuens caelestia numina Sixtus , Sic moriens nullos credidit essé Deos. saith one .

Vpon Alexander the sixt Sanazar wrote these verses , as a memoriall of his impieties : Humana iura , nec minus caelestia , Ipsosque sustulit deos &c. That is he disolued both Gods Lawes , and mans Lawes , and beleeued not that there was a God .

Clement the 7. as is said , when hee drewe neere to his end , told those which stoode about him , the shortly he hoped to bee resolued of that , of which he had euer much doubted , viz. whether there were eyther Heauen or Hell , or no. And the rather wee beleeue this report , because these verses were written of him .

Contemptor diuum , scelerum vir , publicus hostis ,

that is , a contemner he was of God , a flagitious fellow , and à publique enimie of his Country .

Iohn the 23. was condemned by the councell of Constance for denying the resurrection of the dead , and for other poyntes of Atheisme . Leo the 10. esteemed the Gospell no otherwise then as a fable . And of Iulius the third , the Papistes them-selues reporte diuers speaches sauoring of Atheisme .

If then Atheisme do so raigne in the Popes of Rome , whome the Papistes call most holy , and honor as the heades and foundations of their Church , & supreme Iudges of all controuersies , and are bound to follow , albeit they may lead infinite soules to Hell , as it is said in Chap. si Papa . dist . 40. it is no maruell , although the Masse priests and their followers be tainted with Atheisme , and contempt of Religion . Machiauell , whome many Atheists follow , was no English-man but an Italian , and a great friend of Clement the 7. to whome also he dedicated his Florentine historie . Neither was he an English-man , that held it a peccadillo or little sinne , no creer en dios , that is , not to beleeue in God . That Italian , that beleeued no other Trinity , then Messer domine dio , il papa et nostra donna , et preti et frati , that is , God Almightie , the Pope and our Lady , and Priestes and Friars , learned not his impiety , I trow , from vs .

The * * That the Doctrine of Popery tendeth to Atheisme . very doctrine of Popery tendeth to Atheisme and ignorance of God . Generally the lay-people think themselues safe , if they beleeue , as the Church beleeueth , and so Hosius and others teach their Disciples . But what , I pray you , is this , but Atheisme for men to be ignorant of Christ his grace , and of the meanes of their saluation , and of Gods true worship ?

Ephes. 2. the Gentiles worshipping many Gods are sayd to be without God in the world . May not then the same be verified of Papistes , that worship so many Angels and Saintes , and giue the honor of God to the Sacrament , to the Crucifixe , and the Images of the Trinity ?

Thirdly how can we esteeme them to haue any feeling of true piety , that speake so lewdly of Scriptures ? Some call them a Nose of Waxe , some a Ship-mans Hose , some a bare Letter , some Inky Diuinity , some a matter of strife , some the ground of Heresies . Kellison pag. 687. saith , if a man contemne the authority of the Romane Church , that hee shall no more bee able to assure himselfe of Scripture then of a Robin Hoodes tale . Pag. 41. hee saith the Scripture with a false meaning is the word of the Deuill . As if the Scripture being endited by the holy Ghost could in any respect be called the word of the Deuill . Pag. 39. he compareth Scriptures to Aesopes Fables , and saith they are of a Waxie nature . But he that is of God heareth Gods worde , and speaketh reuerently of Scriptures .

Fourthly none but Atheistes , and such as sauour of Atheisme directly violate and impugne Gods commaundements , and make Lawes repugnant vnto them . But the Papistes offend heerein both greeuously and notoriously . God sayth thou shalt haue no other Gods but me : the Popish faction sayth contrary , thou shalt haue other Gods , commaunding their followers to call vppon Saints and Angels , to worship the Sacrament and Crucifixes , to confesse their sinnes , & to offer Christes body and blood in the honor of Saintes and Angels . Tursellinus a Iebusite in his Epistle to Peter Aldobrandini before his storie of Loreto . saith Christ hath made his Mother partaker of his diuine Majestie & power as farre as it was lawfull . Matrem suam saith he praepoteus ille deus diuinae maiestatis , potestatisque sociam , quatenus licuit , asciuit .

In the second Commaundement we are directly prohibited to make grauen Images , to the intent to bow to them , and to worshippe them . But the Papistes haue impiously blotted out this commaundement in their short Catechismes , & commaund men vpon paine of death and damnation to fall downe before Crucifixes , and other Images , and to worship them somtime with doulia , sometimes with latria , according to the subiect .

The third Commaundement forbiddeth vs to take Gods name in vaine . But Papistes in their rascall Rhemish annotations in Act. 23. teach their followers to periure them-selues , & in their resolutions of cases of consciene teach them how to equiuocate , & to frustrate othes . And the Pope commaundeth his followers to break their othes giuen to Princes by him excommunicate vppon paine of damnation .

God commaundeth subiects to obey Kinges , and Children to honor Parents . The Pope commaundeth them to Rebell and take armes against such as he excommunicateth , and willeth Children to be exequutioners of their Fathers , by his inquisitors being falsely iudged Heretikes .

God forbiddeth murder , adultery , fornication , theft , false witnessing and concupiscence . The Pope promiseth heauen to murderers of Princes , and to Gun-powder Traytors , permitteth common stewes , & receiueth the hyre of Whores , commaundeth all his followers to spoyle such as by him are most vniustly excommunicated , by lyes and forgeryes maintayneth his vsurped Monarchy , and determineth in the conuenticle of Trent , that concupiscence is no sinne in the regenerate . Can we then doubt , whether Papistes be Atheistes ?

Fiftly , none but Atheistes eyther take to themselues diuine honor , or giue the same to creatures . But the Pope c. satis . dist. 96. taketh to himselfe the name of God . In the first Booke of Ceremonies . c. 7. hee applyeth to himselfe the honor , that is proper to Christ saying , All power is giuen to me in heauen and earth . In c. quoniam . de immunitate in 6. he claymeth to be the spouse of the Church . His flattering parasites call him a God on the earth , and our Lord God the Pope , and such like tearmes , as may bee prooued by the testimonie , of Felin in c. ego N. de iureiurando . and by the glosse in c. cum inter non nullos . extr. de verb. signif. Thomas Waldensis a man much esteemed by Stapleton , in prolog. Tom. 1. doct. fid. . thus cryeth out to Pope Martin , Lord saue vs , wee perish . Simon Begnius in concil . later . sess. 6. calleth Leo the x. the Lion of the tribe of Iuda , and a Sauiour . Ecce venit Leo de tribu Iuda saith he . And againe te Leo beatissime , saluatorem expectauimus . The same may also be prooued by infinite other testimonies .

Sixtly Atheistes they are , that make a mocke of Christian Religion . But this is a common crime of Popes and Papistes . for commonly they vse wordes of Scripture to make sport withall . As did Bon●face the 8. casting ashes into Prochetus his eyes and turning these wordes memento homo quod cinis es , into a iest . They also say , that Christ may be eaten of Hogges and Dogges , and hang him vpon euerie Altar . Gregory the 7. cast him into the fire . When the Pope rideth abroade he sendeth his God of past among the baggage and scullery . When their Saints doe not answere their desires , they cast them into the water , and rayle on them .

Seauenthly not contenting themselues with Christian Religion , they haue forged diuers new Relgions , and place more perfection in them , then in Christian Religion . Vnto S. Francis they giue the title of figuratiue Iesus , and say , that the order of S. Dominicke is protected vnder our Ladyes gowne in heauen : all which be trickes of Atheisme .

Eightly the worship of Angels and Saintes is confirmed with infinite lies , and most ridiculous fables redde publikely in popish Churches . And yet no man alloweth them , but such , as make mockes at Religion .

Ninthly it is playne Atheisme to deuise , new worships of God . For Christians haue but one God and one worship of God prescribed in his word . It is also atheisme to violate Christes institution in his Sacraments . But Papists haue deuised diuers new formes in worshipping of God by Masses prayers to saints , incensing of images , leading about Asses , carying of palmes , and infinite such like ceremonies . They haue also deuised new Sacraments , and made them equal to baptisme and the Lords Supper . Vnto bapisme they haue added chrisme , salt , spittle , light . From Christes supper they haue taken the Cuppe . They haue abolished bread and wine . Of a Sacrament to bee receiued they haue made a sacrifice to be heaued and offered . That which should bée common to all , they haue made priuate , & where Christians shold celebrate the memorie of Christes death in the Lordes Supper , these commaund the Sacrament to bee administred in a tongue not vnderstood , where the People vnderstandeth neither what is doone nor said .

Finally by the confession of Kellison the Papists may be conuinced to be execrable Atheistes . Papists proued Atheists by Kellisons confession . For if Atheistes bee monsters begotten by Heresies , as he saith , then are Papists monsters . For they maintaine many old and new Heresies , as hath often beene prooued , and are easily conuinced to bee Atheistes . The heresies of Simon Magus , Carpocrates , the Scribes and Pharises , the Capernaites , of Marcus , the Encratites , Collyridians , Eutychians , Pelagians , Staurolatrians , & diuers others are common among them .

Page . 261. he saith , that Christes passion was not our formall justification , or satisfaction . He meaneth likewise , that his iustice is not our formall iustice , and saith that he is onely the meritorious cause of our redemption and saluation , which deserueth for vs at Gods hands grace , by which together with our cooperation we may be saued & redeemed . But this is most horrible impietie , and taketh from Christ the honor of our redemption , saluation , and iustification , making man to be his owne redeemer and sauiour .

Pag. 667. hee reckoneth them among Atheistes , that make God cruell and tyrannical . But so doe the Papistes making our Lady more mercifull then Christ , and setting out him with Dartes and Thunder-boltes , and her with mercy and pittie . They do also say , that God punisheth sinnes forgiuen with cruell torments in Purgatory , and make the Pope to graunt indulgences , which God doth not .

Pag. 668. hee insinuateth them to bee Atheistes , that erre in Gods worship , and offer not lawfull sacrifices vnto him . But of this crime the Papistes are most guilty pretending to offer Chistes body and bloud really which was neuer commaunded them , nor can be done more then once , and erring wholy in the worship of Saints and images .

Pag 674. He giueth out boldly , that those which contemne the Churches authoritie bring all Religion into contempt . But audaciously hee therein condemneth the Pope and Synagogue of Rome . For none euer did more proudly condemne the authoritie of the church then they . The Pope claymeth to be aboue the generall councell , and aboue the Church . If the whole world shold giue sentence against the Pope , they say his sentence is to be preferred before all . Him they honor as supreme iudge . The authoritie of the Fathers they regard not , if he say contrary . They giue him power to dispense against the Law , and against the Apostle .

Page . 689. he saith , that such as admit some bookes of Scripture & reiect others , open a gappe to contempt of all Scripture and religion . But if such , as reiect Scriptures , and contemne them , be Atheistes ; then are Papistes superlatiue Atheistes They also reiect the third and fourth bookes of Ezras , and the third and fourth of the Machabees . Lastly they esteeme not , in allowing , or disalowing of canonicall Scriptures , eyther the sayings of Fathers , or the iudgement of the auncient Church , but wholy rely vpon the opinion of the Doctors of Trent , and the Pope . They preferre the olde Latin translation before the original text of the Bible , and allow no sence of Scripture , but that which the Romish church approoueth .

Page 693. he maketh dissension in Religion to be a note of Atheisme , but if that be so ; then hath he branded his owne consorts with a marke of atheisme . For hardly shal you finde one article of Religion , wherein the wrangling Schoolemen doe not differ one from another . Bellarmine quarrelleth as often with his owne fellowes almoste , as with vs . About the diuine attributes , and notions they are not yet resolued . If they durst , many would dispute against the Popes Monarchye , dispensations , indulgences and such like . The Masse , as yet , is not perfectly setled .

Page 696. he signifyeth , the erroneous opinions about the head-ship of the Church , are enducements to atheisme : which being graunted , then are the Papistes in a fayre way to atheisme . For vnder the title of Christ the sole and true head of the church they admit Antichrist , and bring vs foorth a monster , not onely with two heades , but with as many heades as Popes . There wanteth therfore nothing , but some Hercules , to cut of these Hydraes heades , and to restore to Christ his right of headship . Further in euerye vacation they want their visible head , which as Kellison saith , giueth adauantage to Atheistes , and maketh them to make a mocke at Religion . They haue also some times Popes without brayne , or witte : which is as great an inconuenience , as the rest .

Finally if such as teach erroneously of the presence of Christes body & blood in the sacrament , & vnderstand not the words of Christes institution , ruine Christian Religion , and call all other mysteries of the faith into question , as Kellison Page . 698. resolutelye and peremptorily auoucheth ; then will it plainely fall out , that the Papistes are ruiners of Religion , and haue no assurance of any point of faith by them defended . For as I haue before touched , and shall else-where more plentifully declare , they erre moste grossely in their Doctrine concerning the real presence , and haue shamefully mistaken and corrupted Christes institution of that holy mysterie .

Wee may therefore conclude first , that as the true professors of the christian faith in the church of England are moste innocent and cleare of this shamelesse imputation of atheisme moste wrongfully charged vpon them by this surueying , or rather surfeting Sycophant ; so the Papists our aduersaries and the principall actors among them are much to be suspected , that vnder colour of Popery , they couer a secret poyson of atheisme . Secondly if eyther our aduersaries , or any other would with indifferent eyes and vnpartial iudgement consider eyther the articles of our faith , which we professe , or the deformities and abuses of poperie which we refuse and detest , discerning truth from the slaundrous imputations of such wicked sycophants as this ; that then they would neither mislike vs for our forsaking the Synagogue of Satan , nor allowe the impious courses of our rayling aduersaries , nor long sticke in the myrie and filthie puddle of popish errors , and indure his tyrannicall gouernement .

ALmighty God , which hast told vs , that Antichrist shal be reuealed , and slayne by the breath of the mouth of the Lord Iesus , and destroyed with the brightnesse of his comming , vouchsafe dayly more and more to reueale him to all the christian world , and to discouer his trecherous and murdrous practises to all true Catholikes , and to dispell the mistes of calumniations , lyes and forgeryes , which his agentes doe dayly endeuour to spread abroad against the professors of truth , that so the truth appearing , both such as are in error may be reformed , and the weake confirmed in the sincere profession of the Gospell , & the Kingdome of Antichrist destroyed through our Lord and Sauiour Christ Iesus . And let all those , that wish the prosperity of Sion , and the conuersion or confusion of Babel , say alwaies Amen . Amen .