The 26. Motiue is the 18. 13. and 14. demaund.
In this motiue is much babling, but no matter at all. * The summe of that he would proue is this. That Popery is not idolatrie, as we charge it because by Popery Ido∣latrie hath bene destroyed. Although this argument is naught, because one kinde of Idolatrie may destroy an Page 79 other, yet it is falsely affirmed, that Poperie hath de∣stroyed all idolatry. That Popery hath destroyed idola∣try: Bristow wil proue by three examples, the one of the reliques of Sainctes, and the honor of them, the other of the signe of the crosse and the honorthereof, and the last by the reall presence in the Sacrament, which he calleth his Lord and his God. But our Lord and God is in heauen according to the Psalm. 115. The destruction of idolatrie by Christ in deede was prophecied there∣fore the Pope setting vp and mainteyning as grosse ido∣latrie almost as euer was any of the Paganes, sheweth him selfe to be a verie Antichrist. But to the purpose Hierom lib. 28. in Isa. cap. 65. sayth that the heretikes in Fraunce were possessed with the deuill which could not abide the might and whips of the holy ashes. If he spake this against Vigilātius, & other godly men, which repro∣ued the immoderate honoring of reliques and other su∣perstitions, he spake of his owne iudgement, and not of the iudgement of the church. For he only of all writers of his time, counted Vigilantius an heretike as he did Ruffinus also, which yet is takē for as good a Catholike as he. It is knowne how he taunteth and scoffeth at Au∣gustine. Wherefore his censure is not sufficient to make Vigilantius opinion heresie, nor them heretikes which were of his iudgemēt. But admit this iudgement of Hie∣rom to be sounde, yet was not the honor and estimation of reliques which he defendeth, against Vigilantius the same, which is in Poperie, but much differing there frō. For thus he writeth ad R•panum contr. Vigilant.
By this you may see that the honor they gaue to re∣liques was but a reuerent estimatiō of them, for Christs sake, whose seruaunts the Martyrs were, and a lesse ho∣nor then they gaue to the Sunne and the Moone, as is manifest by his gradation, and consequently no religi∣ous worship. As the Papistes vse and mayntayne of the reliques, not of Saynctes, but oftentymes of deuills in∣carnate, of beasts and all manner of fayned bables. Ne∣ther is there any thing more monstrous in popery, then their shameles fayning of infinite reliques. That Augu∣stine writeth that deuils were tormented and expelled, at the memories or burialls of the martyrs, where som∣times idolls were worshipped, it proueth that idols were destroyed by Poperie. For if God wrought miracles at such places, where the bodies of his Martyrs slept to cō∣firme the faith, for which they died, doth this make any thing for Popery? But the same Augustine to the Maudaurenses that were Pagans, and other heathen men vseth the argument of the greater honor and re∣uerence doone by Kings and Emperours at the tombes and memories of the Saintes and Martyrs, and of mi∣racles wrought at the same places, to shew the power of Christe to the confusion of idolatrie. This wee graunt, but how doth Popery ouerthrowe Idolatrie? There reuerence although in sōe respects superstitious, was far from popish Idolatrie, of worshipping of Saints, Images, bones, &c, as wee haue shewed euen now out of Hierom the most eger defender of those vses and ab∣uses in his time: The miracles approued none other doctrine, then the ma•tyrs died for, who died for none other doctrine, but such as is contayned in the holy Scriptures, in which Poperie hath no ground. The like I say of the storie of the bodie of Babycas the martyr, in presence wherof, the oracle of Apollo could not speake. But Chrysostom to draw m•n from all kind of idolatrie, sent them from reliques. In Gen. Hom. 15, Nay he sent them to Page 81 the churches and houses of prayer, & to the graues of the martyrs not to worship them, as Papistes doe, but by such things to receaue blessing and to kepe them selues from being entāgled with the snares of the deuill, while they be put in mind of the vertue of the martyrs, to fol∣low their godly cōuersation. And albeit there were some superstitiō in that regard of martyrs troubles & memo∣ries, as in that age there was, yet doth it not follow, there was all Popery, nor such grosse idolatry as Papistes doe commit with their counterfait rehques. Finally the mi∣racles wroght by God at the dead bodies of the Saincts, might wel be vsed by Augustin, Chrysostom, & Theodo∣ret against the Gētills, asan argument to ouerthrow their idolatrie, euen as the example of the miracles wrought by God at the dead body of Elizeus against the idola∣trous Israelits Reg. but it followeth not therof, that idols should be made of their lawes, by worshipping them as the Papists do. For ye bones of Elizeus were not for that miracle takē out of his graue & shined in gold, deuided into many churches worshiped, licked, and kissed, as the Popish guise is. The same aunswere I make concerning miracles wrought by God with the signe of the crosse, which was the motiue of Lactantius. I say they proue not that the signe of the crosse should be worshipped, no more then the miracles wrought by God, with the bra∣sen serpēt, were any cause why the Israelits should wor∣ship the brasen serpent. Reg.
And as touching the blessed Sacrament, which Bri∣stow blasphemously calleth his Lord and God, although the reall presence and transsubstantiation were graun∣ted, forasmuch as the Papists thē selues affirme the Sa∣crament to consist of accidents as the signe, but no ac∣cidēts are God or in God: If any miracles were wrought by God at the celebration therof, as Augustine and Cy∣prian seeme to auouch, yet neither is the reall presence proued by those miracles, nor they tryed to be Papists, for writing of such miracles, of which if any man will see more, let him resorte to mine aunswere vnto Hes∣kins Page 82lib. 1. cap. 24. & lib. 3. cap. 42.
Vnto the storie of S. Bernards life we geue no credit, as to a counterfait fable, and as litle to the reporte of M. Poynts, i• his booke of the reall presence testifying the casting out of many deuils, by vertue of the same sacra∣ment. Finally it is alltogeather false, that he sayeth, the Iewes religion was chaynged by Christ into Popery. For the sacrifice of Christes death, against which the sacri∣fice of the Popish masse is blasphemous, hath taken a∣way all sacrifices & ceremonies of the law. Heb. 9. Con∣cerning the Altar which Christians haue, whereof they haue no power to ca•e which serue the Tabernacle, Heb. 13. mine aunswere is against Heskins. lib. 3. cap. 60. where that text & argument is handeled of purpose.