Gods arrovve against atheists. By Henrie Smith

CHAP. V. VVherein is shewed that the Church of Rome is not the true Church of God, nor obser∣ueth the right Religion. (Book 5)

I Am nowe entring into that great con∣trouersie betwéene the Protestantes & the Papistes, whether of them should bée the true Church, and true worship∣pers of God in Christ: for they both

acknowledge God and Christ his son, and all the sa∣cred and canonicall books of the scriptures they confes▪ to come from God, & from his diuine spirit, as indéede they could come from no other. But whiles they both confesse this booke, it is good reason that they shoulde both stand to the arbitrement and iudgement of these bookes, for the trial of the true Church: which if they doo (as indéed they must) this controuersie is at an end and not worthy to be made a question, or to be doub∣ted of: for by the sacred & canonicall writinges it shal by and by be manifest, that the Church of Rome can∣not bee the true Church possibly. But first let vs hear what it saith for it selfe, & what good groundes it hath for the fortification thereof. For if it bee not builded vpon a good foundation, and vpon such sure groundes as will holde, the whole building is like to lie in the dust, and to come to ruine.

1 They hold very stiffely (but not so strongly) that the Church of God militant here vpon earth, is euer visible to the outward eye, and may bee pointed out by the finger at al times, in such sort as that any one may know thither to resort, as to the congregation of Gods people, there to ioine himselfe vnto them, & to praise and pray vnto God with them, and to do those things which he requireth at their hands. But al this gain of profit them,* 1.1 nor hurt vs: for as in the Primi∣tiue Churches persecuted by those tyrannicall & hea∣then Emperors, there was a Church of God (though not seem of them) who had their meetings & assem∣blies amongst themselues (though secretly because of their enemies:) so likewise in the dayes of Quéene Marie, as also in all other times of the persecution of our Church by the Romish Bishops and their par∣takers, our Church no doubt was and might be, and

they likewise haue their méetinges, and assemblies, though both they and the place of their resort were vnknowne to those their persecutors.

In the time of Dioclesian the Emperour (especial∣ly) Christians were so wasted, as to the iudgement of men none were remaining, theyr bookes were bur∣ned, the Churches destroyed, and themselues put to death: in the end when this great hauock was made, and crueltie had wasted and destroyed all that could be found, where was then the visible church? It must néedes then bée enforced to hide it selfe, and so it was, and the glorie thereof so eclipsed, that for a w••yl•• it shined no where. And therefore the Church is not al∣waies visible and seene to the outward eye, nor splen∣dent in the faces and sight of men, & yet a true church notwithstanding, as then it was: for it is the Sum••e though it bee sometimes ouerwhelmed with a cloud, and it is fire still, though it bée sometime raked vp in Embers: and so the true Church is and may bee, al∣though not séene or known to the worlde, yea though it séeme ouerwhelmed with tyrannicall malice, and hide it selfe as though it were cleane extinct.

2 Let them tell mée where the Church was visi∣ble, when béeing assembled at Ierusalem,* 1.2 there arose a great persecution against it, insomuch as they were all dispersed and scattered as the Text sheweth? Or let them tell mee where or how the Church was vi∣sible, when Christ was smitten, and all the rest were scattered and hid, and concealed themselues:* 1.3 the face of the visible Church was then not in Christ & his Apo∣stles, but in the Iewes among the Scribes & Phari∣sées: and therefore it visibility bee such a marke of the true Church, then these (who crucified Christ) were the true church, and not Iesus Christ & his Apostles.

Which who dare affirme? yea, who will not denie yea, when the shepheard was smitten, and the shéep scattered, and yet a true Church, who can denie b•••• that a true Church may bée, though it bée not appa∣rantly visible and séene to the world? What should I say more? Doth not S. Iohn in his Reuelation testifie expressely,* 1.4 That the Church of Christ (signified there by a woman) fugit in solitudinem, fled into a desert or wildernes, where shee had a place prepared for her of God, and where she could not for a certaine season bée found of her persecutors? Let them further shew mée how the Church was visibly in the time of Elias the Prophet, when he complained that himselfe was left alone?* 1.5 O Lord (saith he) they haue forsaken thy couenant, they haue destroyed thine Altar, & slaine thy Prophets with the sword: and I am left alone. Elias did not thinke himselfe to be solus Propheta re∣lictus (as Campion answered in the Tower) I say hee spake not of himselfe onely in that respect: but in this respect, that hée tooke him to bee the onely true wor∣shipper that was left in Israell, which is manifest by the answere which God gaue him: namely, that be∣side him he had seuen thousand true worshippers yet remaining, which had not bowed their knée to Baall. I demand of the Papists, when Elias knew no other true worshippers of God but himself, how the church was visible, for whither hee should go to finde a true worshipper he knew not. Againe it is written in 2. King. 16.* 1.6 that vnder the raigne of Achas there was taken a patterne of the Altar of the Idolaters of Da∣mas••us, and that Ʋrias the high Priest remooued the Altar of the Lorde, whereby it appeareth, that the Priesthood was corrupted, the Altar remoued, & con∣sequently the sacrifices ceased, &c. What visibilitie of

the true Church could there be in those daies, either of Achas, Manasses, and other kings being Idolaters, when the Temple it selfe (where onely by the law of God, the Iewes were to offer the sacrifices) was polluted and defiled with heathenish Idolatry? What Church or Congregation could any man (in this case) haue resorted vnto to haue performed a true and acceptable sacrifice vnto God in those times, when the Temple of Ierusalem (which was the place to worship at) would admit no true worship∣pers, but onely Idolaters? It is therefore manifest, that a true Church may be, though they know not a congregation of God to resort to, yea though it bée close and not séene or knowne one to the other, nor yet to the world. And consequently visibility (which the Papists make a marke of the Church) is no perpetuall marke thereof. Yea, if such visibility should be a marke of the true Church, then were the Idolatrous people in the time of Elias, in the time of Achas, Manasses, and many other kings of Israell that were Idolaters, the true Church, who indéede were the false Church: And then were Elias and all other the true worshippers of God, who had in those times no places left to sacrifice in, the false Church, which is absurde. Chrysostom saith,* 1.7 that in the times of the abhomination of desolation (spoken of by Christ Iesus in Math. 24.) that is, in the time of wicked heresie which is the armie of Anti∣christ (as he expoundeth it) Nulla probatio potest esse Christianitatis, neque effugium potest esse Christiano∣rum aliud volentium cognoscere fidei veritatem nis•• scripturae diuinae: No proofe can be made of Chri∣stianitie, neither can there bee any other refuge for Christians which are desirous to knowe the tru••

faith, but onely the diuine Scriptures. And there∣fore I conclude (which is apparant) that the true Church sometime is in such a state, as that visiblenes cannot discerne or proue it, but only the diuine scrip∣tures must demonstrate & declare it: And consequent∣ly, it is demonstratiuely manifest, that it is no true position of the Papists, that the Church of God is alwaies and euermore visible, seene, and splendent, to the outward eye and view of the world. Where∣fore the Papists do vs great iniury, and bewray their owne ignorance, when they would haue vs to shewe our Church in all times & ages (which notwithstan∣ding perhaps may bée done) for our Church was al∣waies, though it were not seene or knowne to them, but lay bid and kept it selfe close from their fury and tyranny, as the first and primitiue Churches did from their bloody persecutors. Our Church was then perse∣cuted in those times when it could not be séene, & ma∣ny then like constant Martyrs, endured the tyranny of that Romish religion, so that some were banished, others fled into other Nations, some indured Mar∣tyrdome at home, some other hid themselues, but the whole Church generally was vexed, and oppressed. And therefore when our Church was thus persecu∣ted, it is a good argument (I thinke) to say, Wée had our Church then and alwaies, though a persecuted Church, though a Church chased and pursued, though a Church scattered, though a Church not séene or visi∣ble to them, yea, though in it selfe it were inlightened from God many ages together. Namely, till the tyr∣ranny e•• Antichrist were ouerpast.

Secondly, Another erronious position, whereby they are miserably deceaued is this: They hold the Church cannot erre:* 1.8 And therefore suppose because

the Church of Rome was once the true Church of God, therefore it is so now and euermore. As though there might not be an Apostacie in the Church, which Saint Paul affirmeth there should. Or as though a perticular Church (for the Church of Rome is but a perticular Church) could not erre? Yea, as though general Counsels (which represent the whole Church) could not erre? for so they affirme, but how truely let the world iudge. And if it may be shewed that generall Counsels haue erred, or may erre, then they yéeld their cause in this behalfe. I wish they would for their owne sakes: for false Iesuits & Semi∣naries doo but deceaue themselues & others to their owne confusion in this world, and except they repent in the world to come. That generall Counsels may erre, is manifest by Augustine, who plainly teacheth that only the Scriptures cannot erre, al other writers may erre, Prouinciall Counsels may erre, lastly, hée saith, Concilia quae fiunt ex vniuerso orbe Christiano,* 1.9 priora posterioribus sape emendari; cum aliquo experi∣mento rerum aperitur quod clausum erat, & cognosci∣tur quod latebat: That generall Councels which are gathered of all the Christian worlde, are often cor∣rected, the former by the latter, when by any triall of things, that is opened which was shut, and that is knowen which was hidden. A generall Councell may be corrected (saith Augustine) Ergo, it may erre. And therfore Augustine speaketh plainly to Maximi∣nian the Bishop of the Arrians,* 1.10 Neither ought I to alledge the Councel of Nice, nor thou the Councel of Arrimine, to take aduantage thereby; for nei∣ther am I bound, nor held by the authoritie of this, nor thou of that; Set matter with matter, cause with cause, or reason with reason, trie the matter by

the authoritie of Scriptures, not proper witnesses to any of vs, but indifferent witnesses to vs both.

In the time of Constantine that Christian Empe∣rour,* 1.11 was the first and last Counsell of Nice, wherin according to our Créede was decréed, that Christ was God as well as man. In the time of Constantius (Constantinus sonne) fauouring the errour of the Ar∣rians; it was decréed in the Counsell of Arimine, that Christ was not God but onely man. This Counsell of Arimine did erre, (and that grosely in a matter of faith) Ergo, it is palpable that a generall Counsel may erre, euen in matters of faith.

Againe, generall Counsels haue béene contrary one to the other, and that in matters of faith: as the Counsell of Constantinople condemned the setting vp of Images in the Church: and the Counsell of Nice afterward allowed Images. One of their (be∣ing contrary) must néeds be errours: Ergo, A generall Counsell may erre.* 1.12

The generall Counsell confesseth of it selfe that it may erre: For the whole Counsell prayeth in the end of a generall Counsell (in a set forme of praier that i•• appointed to bée saide after euery Counsell) namely, that God would Ignorantiae ipsorum parcere, & errori indulgere. Spare their ignorance, and par∣don their errour. Ergo, a generall Counsell may erre.

The Pope of Rome (whom the Papists holde for head of their Church) may erre: Ergo, their whole Church may erre.* 1.13 Augustine proueth it erres, Beatae memoria Innocentius Papa, sine baptismo Christi, & sine participatione corporis & sanguinis Christi vitam non babere paruulos docet. Behold Pope Innocenti∣us of blessed memory doth teach that yong childrē cannot be saued, except they receiue the baptisme

of Christ, and also the communion of the body and blood of Christ.

But this is taxed for an errour, Ergo the Pope of Rome can erre, and consequently the whole Church vnder him, except perchaunce members haue a priui∣ledge aboue the head.* 1.14 But what shall I néed to stand hereupon, their owne Cannon law (as is euident in the decrées) doth say expressely, that if the Pope bee found negligent of his owne and his brethrens salua∣tion, yea thogh he lead innumerable people by heaps to the deuill of hell, no mortall man may presume to reproue him: because he himselfe béeing to iudge all, is to bée iudged of none, nisi deprehendatur a fide deui∣us, except he be found erring from the faith: wher∣by it appeareth, that they thought hee might erre in matters of faith, or else that exception was put in in vaine. But the Pope is no other than a man, as also all the members of his Church bée, and humanum est errare, all men are subiect to errour. Let euery man take héed how he trusteth the Pope or any man mor∣tall, for it is written Iere. 17. Maledictus homo qui in homine confidit, Cursed is that man that putteth his trust in man. And why? because (as the kingly Pro∣phet Dauid saith Psa. 116.) All men are liers in their wordes, and sinners in their works. But when the doctrine of that man of Rome and of his Church is in diuers things cl••ane contrary to the expresse word of God, who can denie but it is an apparant erring Church?

As when it stablished ignorance to bée the mother of deuotion, which Christ calleth the mother of er∣rour, saying, Yee erre not knowing the Scriptures, Math. 22.••9. Who can chuse but think that it hath no good meaning in it, but purposed onely to build vy

the pride of the Pope, of his Cardinals, Bishoppes, Priests, Monkes, and other their ecclesiasticall men. Christ biddeth the people, to search the Scriptures: Iohn. 5.39. ••••is Antichrist forbiddeth them, saying, it is per••lous, it causeth schismes, sectes, and heresies, as though they were wiser than Christ. Againe, the Apostle Paule commandeth, That the word of God should dwell plenteously in the people, whereby they might teach themselues. Collos. 3.16. But the Pope of Rome and his Church, alloweth not plenti∣f••l knowledge of the word in them, yea ignorance is the knowledge that hee would desire them to haue. Who would not iustly suspect such a Church, & such a Religion, yea condemne it, when to maintaine and continue their Church in errours, they would haue none of the people to search any scriptures, whereby they might bée discouered. Thus the sillie Papistes (whom I pittie) are lead like blind men they knowe not whither, and with their implicita fides (which is to beléeue (for their part) they know not what) are la∣mentably seduced. It is good themselues should sée & know what they beléeue, and that their faith and be∣léefe be right, least at last they be (through euer much trust of their teachers) extremely deceiued. The peo∣ple of Berca were highly commended, and it is noted to their praise, that they searched the scriptures, to sée whether those thinges were true or no which Paule himselfe teached. Acts 17. For whosoeuer he bee, yea though it were an Angell from heauen, if hée teach matters contrary to the doctrine of the holy & cano∣nical scriptures, we are to held him accursed, yea and accursed againe, as the Apostle of Christ Iesus S. Paule commandeth. Gal. 1.8.9.

Againe, the Church of Rome when it taught and

holdeth, that the Scriptures were to bee made vnto the people or congregation in an vnknowne tongue, what were the people the wiser? Saint Paule would haue all thinges owne to ediffyng in the Church. For sayth Saint Paeule, Is qui supplet locum indoctiquo∣modo dicturus est Amen ad tuam gratiarum actio∣nem, qua•• do quidem quid dicas nescit? How shall hee that supplyeth the place of an vnlearned man saye Amen to thy thankes giuing, when hee vnderstan∣deth not what thou sayest? 1. Corinth. 14. And in that whole Chapter bee vtterly disliketh seruice in an vnknowne tongue. And therefore if the Church of Rome will not confesse their errour heerein, she is past all shame, and hath the impudent and shamelesse face of an harlot.

They haue all deuised and defende a place of Pur∣gatorie, wherein all that depart this life bée put, and there punished (béeing a punishing fire) vntill they helpe to fetch them out with theyr Masses, and other their inuentions and deuises: which they wil not do, nor thinke they haue reason to doe, except they haue good currant coyne for the same.

And therefore it may bee well and iustly called Purgatorie pickepurse: and it is manifestly apparant héereby, that wealth and great riches of the Clergie was the onely marke they ayu••ed at. For it hath no warrant in the Canonicall bookes of the scriptures: yea the Canonicall bookes of the scriptures shew the contrary, and so do the ancient Fathers. Christ in the Gospel, Luk. 16. sheweth only but two places, name∣ly, heauen and hell, saying, that the rich mans soule (which was vnmercifull to Lazarus) went after his death to hell, & there was tormented, & that Lazarus soule (béeing dead) was caried into Abrahams bosom,

a place of ioy and comfort. To the Théefe which was executed at the passion and suffering of Christ; and beléeued in him, Christ answered, Hodi•• eris mocum in paradiso, This day shalt thou bee with mee in pa∣radise. Luk. 23.43. Which sheweth that the soules of the faithfull neuer come in Purgatorie fire to be boy∣led and punished, for all their sinne is forgiuen, and consequently the punishment incident to the same is forgiuen also, and their soules passe from death to life and into paradise, a place of comfort, delectablenes, & all swéetnes: namely heauen where Christ is. Ve∣rely verely I say vnto you (saith Christ) he that hea∣reth my word, & beleeueth him that sent me, hath eternall life, and commeth not into condemnation, but passeth from death to life. Iohn. 5.25. What is become then of this Purgatorie▪ Saint Paule sayth, I couet to be dissolued and to be with Christ, Phil. 1.23. shewing thereby, that presently after his disso∣lution he was to bée with Christ in glorie. For wee know (saith hée) that when this earthly tabernacle of ours is dissolued, wee shall bee a building not made with hands, but eternall in the heauens. 2. Cor. 5.1. Saint Iohn in his Reuelation saith, Blessed are the dead which die in the Lorde, from henceforth they rest from their labours, and their workes followe them. Reu. 14.13. If from the time of their death they haue blessednes and rest (as he sheweth) then are they not in any Purgatorie fire to bée scortched and mole∣sted. Saint Peter telleth the Saints and children of God, and assureth them of it, That the ende of their faith is the saluation of their soules. 1. Pet. 1.9. If saluation of their soules begin at the end of their faith which lasteth vnto the end of their life (and no longer for then they haue the fruition and possession of that

which they beleeue and hope for,* 1.15 then is it manifest there is no Purgatorie. Ambrose saith, Qui hic non receperit remissionem peccatorum, illic non erit is in coe∣lo: quia remissio peccatorum vita aeterna est: He that heere in this life receiueth not remission of sinnes, shall neuer come in the kingdome of heauen, for life eternall is remission of sinnes. Cyprian saith,* 1.16 Quando ••stine excessum fuerit, nullus iam locus poenitentiae, nul∣lus satisfactionis effectus: hic vita aut amittitur aut tenetur: hic saluti aeternae cultu Dei & fructu proui∣detur. And againe by and by he saith: Tu sub ipso licet exitu & vitae temporalis occasu pro delictis Deum ro∣ges, quiverus & vnus est, venia datur confitenti, & credenti indulgentia salutaris, & ad immortalitatem sub ipsa morte transitur. That is: when men are once departed hence, there is then no more place of re∣pentance, no effect of satisfaction: heere life is ey∣ther lost or kept: heere prouision is made for eter∣nall saluation by the worship of God & fruits. And th••refore saith he: Doe thou call vpon God, though it be at thy last gaspe, and departure of this thy tem∣porall life, but call vpon that God which is one and true, pardon is giuen thee if thou confesse thy sins, and sauing forgiuenes if thou beleeue: and from death presently thou shalt passe to immortalitie. Ierome saith,* 1.17 that the time of sowing their sáede for Christians is this present life, & that as soone as this life is ended, they reape euerlasting life.* 1.18 Augustine saith, Primum fides catholicorum diuina authoritate regnum esse crescit calorum: secundum gehennam, vbi omnis Apostata, vel a Christi fide alienus, supplicia ex∣peritur: Tertium peni••us ignoramus, nec esse in scrip∣turis sanctis reperimus. The first place (saith hee) the faith of Catholickes doth (by diuine authoritie) be∣leeue

to bee the kingdome of heauen: the second, hell: a third place we are vtterly ignorant of, ney∣ther can we find any such in the holy scripturs. And the same Augustine writeth in another place,* 1.19 That they which beleeue a purgatory fi••e are much de∣ceiued, and that through an humane conceit. How then can the Papistes be the true Catholicks, which beléeue not the faith of the Catholicks, which Augu∣stine doth affirme?

They also hold that a man since the fall of Adam, batl, frée will of himselfe & of his own power to c••me vnto God, and to do things acceptable & wel pleasing in his sight. Whereas God saith after that time, that the imaginations of mens harts are onely euil euery day. Gen. 6. If they be onely euill, then haue they of themselues no affection to goodnes acceptable to him. And Christ saith, no man can come vnto me, except my Father draw him. Iohn. 6.44.65. If her must bee drawne before he can come, hee hath no procliuitie or willingnes of himself to come. And therfore is it that the Prophet saith, Conuert thou me, and I shall bee conuerted. Ier. 7. shewing that hee hath no power in himselfe to be conuerted. And S. Paule sheweth, that till God giue grace, there is none that doth good, no not one. Rom. 3.10. &c. For all the philosophicall vertues & good deeds which men doe before they haue faith (which is the gift of God) are sinne, & not accep∣table to God. Iohn. 6.29. For the Apostle witnesseth that without faith it is impossible to please God. Heb. 11.6. and that whatsoeuer is not of ••aith is sin. Rom. 14.23. Christ himself again saith, that except men be ingraf•• into him, they can bring foorth no fruit. Iohn. 15.1.2. &c. Paule often teacheth that wee must be new men, & cast off the olde man. Rom. 1.2.••.

And againe hee biddeth to be renewed in the spirit of our minds. 1. Cor. 2.14. And moreouer hee saith, that the naturall man perceiueth not the thinges that are of God, neither can he: for they are spiritually discer∣ned. And againe, that it is God that worketh the wil & the deed. Phil. 2.13. And he plainly confesseth of him¦selfe, & of all others, that we are not able of our selues so much as to thinke a good thought: and that all our sufficiencie is of God. 2. Cor. 3.5. Which premisses do shew that our vnderstanding is blind, & our will per∣uerse in any diuine matter, or acceptable seruice vnto God, till God do enlighten the one, & draw and moue the other vnto himself. Thus hath God ordered mat∣ters, to the end himselfe might haue all the glorie as∣cribed to him, as good reason he should. For what is a man since his fall in Adam, but an abiect and runna∣way from God, of himself séeking by-paths & crooked out-waies, leading from God, and from his worship: except he bee assisted from aboue? (which is signified by Adams hiding himselfe from the presence of God after his fall.) And therefore Augustine saith well & truly, Hominem libero arbitrio male vsum,* 1.20 & se & il∣lud per didisse, That man hauing ill vsed his free will that hee had, hath now both lost himselfe and that. And againe, Liberum arbitrium captiuatum ne quid possit ad iustitiam, that free wl•• is taken captiue, that it can do nothing towards righteousnes. And again▪ Hominis non libera, sed a Deo liberata volunt as obse∣quitur. Not the free will, but the freed will of man, (which is set free by God) doth obey & yeeld obei∣sance: & again, Liberum non fore quod Des••ratia non liberauerit, that the wil is bound & not free, til God deliuer it and set it at liberty. Cyprian (which S. Au∣gust. so oft citeth) saith, De nullo gloriandū, &c, many

must glory of nothing,* 1.21 bicause nothing is curs, ther∣fore euerie man annihilating his owne power, must learne wholy to depend vpon God. And Chrisostom saith, that Omnis homo non modo naturaliter peccator sed totus peccatum est. Euery man is not onely sinful naturally, but is altogether sinne. And therefore S. Paule sheweth, that till a man be regenerate or born anew, & vntil he be renewed in the spirit of his mind, he hath in him nothing else but concupiscentias erro∣ris, lustes and affections after errour, Eph. 4.23.24. saying likewise, that by nature wee are the sonnes of wrath, Ephe. 2.••. Which also Christ himselfe testifi∣eth to Nicodemus▪ saying: that that which is borne of the flesh is flesh, and that which is borne of the spirite is spirit, and that except a man be born anew by that spirite, hee can neuer so much as sée the kingdome of God, Iohn. 3.3. &c. And therefore S. Paule telleth, that there must bée a new creature, whosoeuer wil be in Christ Iesus, and a renewing and Metamorpho∣sis of the minde (he vseth the verie worde) before men can finde out the good and acceptable will of God, and what pleaseth him. Rom. 12.2. I therefore conclude, that the Papistes are farre wide, and knowe not the miserie and thraldome of men whereinto they are fallen by that great sinne an•• disobedience of Adam, whilest they stande to defende frée will in naturall men: indéede it appeareth to bée frée and too free vnto euill, but it is so bound and fast tyed from desire of a∣nie diuine duties, that God must first drawe it out of that seruitude wherein it is, and set it at libertie, and mooue it to come before it will shewe any readines that way. I trust therefore they sée that their Church not onely may erre, but erreth most grossely in many points.

They holde that in the Sacrament of the Lordes Supper, it is lawfull to debar the people of the Cup: And so they vse, which is contrarie to the institution of Christ, Bibite ex hoc omnes, Drinke ye all of this, Math. 26.27. And as well, and by as good authori∣tie may they take the bread from the people likewise: And it is contrarie to the expresse doctrine of Saint Paul, 1. Cor. 11.23.28. (who as himselfe testifieth, deliuered the Institution of Christ) for he saith, Let a man examine himselfe, Et sic edat, & bibat, And so let him eate of this Bread, and drinke of this Cup. So that he must drinke as well as he must eate. And that the people should bée pertakers, and receiue in both kindes, was obserued many hundred yeares in the Church after Christ. Insomuch, as Pope Gelasius decréed, that all they should be excommunicate,* 1.22 which would receaue but in one kinde. But Rome that now is, is not Rome that then was, but with her Councell of Constance, is not ashamed to go against all Antiquitie, and all Diuinitie.

But they holde (which is a maruellous grosse er∣rour also) Transubstantion in the Sacrament, name∣ly, that after the words of Consecration, the Breade and Wine are changed into the very substance of the Body and Blood of Christ: And this they woulde séeme to ground vppon these wordes, Hoc est Corpus m••um, This is my Bodie, Math. 26.26. which they will haue to bée expounded literally. But why then doo they not expound the other wordes of Christ lite∣rally also, concerning the Cup: For the Text saith, in the 27. & 28. verses, That he tooke the Cup, &c. and said, This is my blood. I am sure they will not say, that the cup was the blood of Christ (as the words bée) but they will graunt a figure in those wordes:

namely, Contineus pro continent••, that by the cup is meant the wine in it. If then they wil admit a figure in this, why may there not bee a figure in the other? namely fignatum pro figno, that these wordes, This is my body, should bee vnderstood thus: This bread is a signe of my body (which was broken for you.) If wée looke into the olde Sacramantes of the Iewes, namely, Circumcision, and the Paschall lambe, we•• shall find the phrase of spéech obserued. For Circum∣cision was called the Lords couenant, when indéed it was not the couenant (as all men doo knowe) but a signe and seale of the couenant: for the couenant was this to Abraham, Ero Deus tuus, & seminis tui, &c. I will bee thy God, and the God of thy seede, &c. Gen. 17. Rom. 4.11. So likewise the Paschall Lambe is called the Passeouer, when indéed it was but a sign of their passe-ouer, or passing ouer or through the red Sea (which was a mightie and most wonderfull de∣liuerance, Pharao and all his host béeing in the Sea, when they passed through as on dry land.) Insomuch therefore as it is vsuall in Sacraments so to speake, it is not against reason, but standeth with verie good reason to thinke, that Christ Iesus in instituting this Sacrament, which to the Christians is the same that the Paschall Lambe was to the Iewes, did likewise call the bread his bodie, in such sort as the Paschall Lambe was the Passeouer: that is to say figuratiue∣ly, that as the Paschall Lambe was called the Passe∣ouer, and yet was but a signe and remembraunce of their Passeouer, so the bread was called his bodie, and yet it was but a signe and remembraunce of his bodie.

And that this is the right exposition, may appéere by the wordes of Christ, where hee sayth, Doe this

in remembrance of mee.* 1.23 Luke. 22.19. Tertullian like∣wise doth so expound them: for hee saith, Christ said, Hoc est corpus meum, id est, figura corporis me••, This is my body, that is, a figure of my bodie.* 1.24 Augustine likewise saith, Christi miranda patientia adhibuit Iu∣dam ad conuinium in quo corporis & sanguinis sui fi∣guram discipulis tradidit••, The admirable patience of Christ admitted Iudas to the banquet, wherein he deliuered to his Disciples a figure of his body & bloud. And againe hee saith,* 1.25 Non dubitauit Dominus dicere hoc est corpus meum, eum daret fignum corporis sui, The Lord doubted not to say this is my bodie, when he gaue but the signe of his bodie. And this exposition must néedes bée true, for Saint Paule saith plainely and expressely, 1. Cor. 11.26.28. That the Communicant doth eate breade, Ergo it remaineth bread after the wordes of consecration. For if it were transubstantiance into the body of Christ, then were there no bread to eate, but the bodie of Christ is the thing that should bée eaten. But none doo eate the ve∣rie bodie of Christ: for if euerie Communicant did eate the verie bodie of Christ naturally, carnally, and really (as they grossely suppose) Christ should haue a number of bodies, which inpalpably absurd and mon∣strous: and beside then euerie Communicant should bée saued; yet, euen Iudas himselfe (which is knowne to bée the ch•••••• of p••rdition:) for Christ saith, He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my bloud, hath eter∣nall life: Iohn. 6.54. Indéede the elect and godly do eat Christ, and drinke Christ, but how? not carnally, but spiritually, and by a true faith, apprehending Christ, and applying Christ with all his benefites as firmly vnto their soules, as the bread and wine is applyed to their bodies.

B••••••des, if Christ gaue his body to bée eaten real∣ly by his Disciples, at the time of the Institution of this Sacrament, what was it that did hang on the crosse on the morrow? Moreouer Saint Peter saith, Act. 3.21. that as touching the bodie of Christ, the Heauens must conteine him vnto the ende of the world: If his bodie bée in heauen, and that hée hath a true bodie (as all men know he hath) how can it be that hée should be both in heauen and in earth, as tou∣ching his bodie at one time. For though hée haue a glorified bodie, yet hée reteineth the nature and pro∣pertie of a true bodie still, which can bée but in one place at once: * 1.26 And so saith Augustine, saying, Cor∣pus Domini in quo resurrexit vno tantum loce esse po∣test: The bodie of the Lorde wherein hee rose a∣gaine, can bee but in one place onely. But the Pa∣pists to helpe themselues, are driuen to this, to say that there is a miracle in the Sacrament, and that Christ is there miraculouslie: Whereto I answere, that if the breade bée turned into the verie bodie of Christ by a miracle, then should it appeare visibly so, for the nature of euerie miracle is to be visible to the outward eie and senses: as when Christ turned wa∣ter into wine, it was visibly wine: When Moses rod was turned into a Serpent, it was visibly a Ser∣pent: And so if the breade bée turned into the verie bodie of Christ, it is visibly his bodie, if you will hold a miracle to be wrought therein. But Augustine answereth there is no miracle in the Sacrament,* 1.27 say∣ing thus: Honorem tanquam Religiosa poscunt ha∣bere stuporem tanquam mira non poscunt: The Sacra∣ments may haue honour as thinges religious, but they are not to be admired at as miracles. Theodo∣ret also is most expressed against Transubstantiati∣on,* 1.28

for thus he saith: Neque enim signa ••istica post sanctificationem recedunt à natura sua manent enim in priore substantia, figura & forma, & videri, & tangi possunt sicut prius. That is, The mysticall signes after consecration, doe not depart from their nature, for they abide stil in their former substance, figure and forme, and may be both seene and felt as before.

Gelasius a Pope himselfe, doth say most plaine∣ly, that there is no transubstantiation in the Sacra∣ment: his words be these, Non desinit substantia vel natura panis & viui, & certe Imago,* 1.29 & similitude cor∣poris & sanguinis, Christiin actione miseriorum cor∣poris Christi celebratur. The substance or nature of bread and wine doth not cease, and verily there is the image and similitude of the bodie and blood of Christ celebrated in the action of the misteries of the bodie of Christ. And therefore I conclude, that the Church of Rome which now is, is not the same which it was in former times, but it is become degenerate and reuolted from that former puri•••••• which once was in it: And conseq••••ntly it is ex∣pressely manifest, that that Church both may and doth erre.

The Church of Rome doth further holde, that their Pope hath authoritie to depose kinges and Princes: But by what Title? It is cleare that in his either so dooing, or attempting to doo hée is both a notable Traitour vnto God whose authoritie hée doth claime and arrogate••, and vnto Princes to whome hée should bée subiect. For the raising and pulling downe, of Princes God hath reserued to himselfe alone and in his power: For it is hee (not the Pope) that deposeth the mightie from their

seates, and exalteth them that are of lowe degree, Luke, 1. It is hee (not the Pope) that putteth downe Kings, and giueth Kingdomes to whomsoeuer hee will. And it is hee that testifieth of himselfe, saying: Per me Reges regnant, & principes dominantur, By mee Kinges raigne, and Princes beare dominion, Dan. 2.20. & cap. 4.14. & 22. Séeing therefore, It is God that hath this high authoritie proper to himselfe which way can the Pope claime it, without iniurie and treason vnto God? Will hée claime it by reason of his keyes, and in his Apostolicall right? That hée cannot doo: For hée must remember that the keies giuen, were the keies of the kingdome of heauen, Math. 16.19. And therefore by authoritie of the keies h•••• cannot meddle with terrestriall kingdomes to open an entrance for any into them, or to shut out or exclude any that bée in them. And beside Saint Paul the Apostle doth say expressely both of himselfe, and of the rest of the Apostles, that how great au∣thoritie soeuer they haue for the ouerthrowing of ••••••ang holds (that is, of rebellious thoughts, and proude cence••••••••, and stiffenecked opinions seated in mens harts against God, as himselfe expoundeth in the same place) that all their power and meanes to conuert men is onely by the sword of the spirit which is the word of God, and by the power of the keyes committed to them. In all which their authority, giuen vnto them from Christ, hée confesseth plaine∣ly, 2. Cor. 10.4. That the weapons of their warfare, are not carnall, but mighty through God, that is, spirituall: Which words doo demonstrate, that by their ecclesiasticall ministerie, they haue cléerely no ciuill authoritie committed to them.

And moreouer it is manifest, by the practise of the

Apostles and all their precepts (commaunding all Christians to obay their Rulers, their Kinges and Princes, yea, though they were persecutors) that the Apostles neuer had any such authoritie committed to them, Rom. 13.1.2.3.4. 1. Pet. 2.13. Tit. 3.1. And therefore it is vndoubtedly true, that the Pope of Rome cannot claime it by any such authoritie. A∣gaine, the Bishop of Rome can claime no more au∣thoritie by the power of the keies, or of binding and loosing, than any other Bishop elsewhere may doo, for the keyes, that is to say, the power of opening and shutting, and of binding and loosing, Iohn, 20.22.23. were giuen to all the rest of the Apostles as well as to Peter: And consequently for any Minister of the Gospell thereby to claim•• authoritie aboue another is absurd: For they bée all indifferently ioined in one commission, and therefore haue al equall authoritie, & therefore the Bishop of Rome by vertue of the keies hath no more authority than any other Bishop hath: That is to say, none at all to depose Princes, their duetie is rather to practise obedience themselues to them, and to teach the same obedience to others as the Apostles of Christ did. Yea, Christ himselfe said, his kingdome was not of this world, Ioh. 18.36. Himself likewise refused to bée made a king, Ioh. 6.15. Himselfe paid tribute vnto Caesar, and commaunded others to giue the same, and all other dueties of sub∣iection and obedience vnto Caesar, Math. 22.21. If hée were subiect to Caesar, it is a shame for the Bishop of Rome to exalt himselfe aboue Caesar.

But perchaunce the Bishop of Rome, will challenge this his Soueraigne Authoritie ouer Princes by donation from Constantine, or some o∣ther Christian Emperour: Indéede such Fables

sometimes hée is not ashamed to vtter, but let it bée the strongest way for him if you will, that some Christian Emperour was so foolish as to giue him his Empyre (which is neither likely nor credible) yet s••y I, it was neither lawfull nor tollerable for him to take it, if hee will bée a Minister of the Gos∣pell, or a Successour of the Apostles. For Christ hath expressely forbidden his Apostles, and in them all the Ministers of his Gospell, all such dominion, and ciuill iurisdiction, saying thus vnto them, The Kings of Nations raigne ouer them, and they that be great amongst them, beare rule or dominion: But it shall not bee so with you. Matthew, 20, 25.26. Marke, 10.42.45. Luke, 22.25. and 26. verses.

Which wordes bée most prohibitorie, and shewe that they may not raigne like kings of Nations, nor beare rule as great men in those Nations doo: But they must serue in the Church, and bée diligent to dis∣charge that great charge in the Church which their Master Christ Iesus hath laide vppon them: And therefore euery way the Pope of Rome hath no title, but is herein an vsurper, and an intruder, and a noto∣rious and odious Traitor both to God and Princes. And besides, all the auntient Churches haue affirmed and acknowledged the supreame authoritie of Prin∣ces, aboue and ouer all both Priests and people: And therefore saith Tertullian, Colimus Imperatorem vt hominem à Deo secundum,* 1.30 & solo Deo minorem: VVe honour the Emperour as the next man to God, and inferiour to God onelie. And againe hée saith, that Princes are A Deo secundi,* 1.31 post cum primi, ante om∣nes, & super omnes. The second to God, the first next after God, and before and ouer all men.

Optatus in like sort saith,* 1.32 Super Imperatorem non est, nisi solus Deus qui fecit Imperatorem, There is none aboue the Emperour, but God onelie which made the Emperour. And Chrysostome saith, Parem vllum super terram non habet•• He hath no equall on earth. And Gregory Bishop of Rome himselfelf affir∣meth, That power is giuen to Princes from heauen, not onely ouer souldiers, but priests. And therefore I conclude, that the Church of Rome which now is, is not the Church which once it was, but is wonder∣fully fallen into corruption, and growne into pride, both against God and his annointed Prince, and con∣sequently not onely may erre, but dooth erre, and that most detestably and abhominably in the highest degrée.

The Bishop of Rome dooth further holde, that hee hath authoritie from God to forgiue sinnes: & there∣vpon hee sendeth foorth his Charters of pardon, his Buls and Indulgences, to such as hée meaneth to as∣soyle. The Scribes in the Gospell could say, None can forgiue sinnes but God. Mar. 2.7. Iob, 14.4. E∣say. 43.25. If therefore the Pope of Rome will take vpon him to forgiue sinnes (in that sort hée dooth) hée must proue himselfe to bée God, otherwise his acti∣ons will not bée warranted: how often in the Scrip∣tures is it said of God that hée forgiueth iniquity and transgressions? ascribing that authority only to God and to no other.

I néed not recite any particular places, the whole booke of God is plentifull héerein. I doo not denie, but Ministers of the Gospell haue power to binde and to loose sinners (as Christ himselfe sheweth, Math. 16.) but how, and whome? They can neither iustifie the vnrighteous whom God abhorreth, nor yet condemn

the godly and faithfull, whome God dearely loueth: In as much therefore as they cannot pardon such as God condemneth, nor yet condemn such whom God acquiteth, Rom. 8.33.34. it is manifest that al their power of binding and loosing sinners, is limited and bounded within the compasse of Gods word, which they may not passe: for if they doo, they goe beyond their warrant, and so all that they doo will bée of no force. The incredulous and obstinately wicked per∣sons, they may by warrant of Gods word pronounce condemnation against, except they doo repent, and to the assuredly faithfull repentant and godly persons, whose centinuall care is to please God and walke in his waies, they may pronounce the sentence of vn∣doubted and certaine saluation, because the worde of God doth affirme as much: and this all the binding and loosing of sinners which they haue. For in all their pronunciations of pardons, and forgiuenesse of sinnes, they must bée sure they speak not in their own names, nor their owne wils and pleasures, but they must doo it in the name of God, béeing first assured that it is his word, will, & pleasure which they vtter. But the Bishop of Rome obserueth not the rule of Gods word to sqare & measure his pardō by: but par∣doneth whom he lift, & as hee list, as if he were a God himselfe, hauing absolute power in himselfe (without respect of Gods word or will) to doo what he list. In∣somuch as Traitors & rebels against God and their lawfull Princes, he will not only pardon without ex∣ception, but he will abette them in their deuilish deui∣sed, and perswade them forward in their damnable courses, till at last (when it is too late for them to re∣pent) they will (if they take not good héed in time) féele the ••••art of it in hell tormentes together for euer.

What the religon of Rome is, may appéere by this, that any man for monie may get a pardō for his sins: & then what sin néed rich men feare to commit, when a Popes pardon will saiue all▪ or how can it be other∣wise than a religion of licentiousnes, when for mony a man may haue a licence of dispensation against any sin whatsoeuer. These things be such open blottes to the Romish religion, as that worthily euery good and godly minde hath it in detestation, & doth iustly con∣demne it. Yet further will I prooue, that the Church of Rome cannot be the true Church possibly.

1 The Church of Rome doth hold, that the diuine and sacred Scriptures doo not containe all things ne∣cessarie to saluation: but their vnwritten traditions must (forsooth) all bée receiued with equall and lyke authoritie, for so hath theyr Councell of Trent deter∣mined.* 1.33 And Pope Le•• the fourth feareth not to pro∣nounce with a loud voice, That hee that receyueth not without difference the Popish Cannons as well as the foure Gospels, beleeueth not aright, nor hol∣deth the Catholike faith effectually. The decretall Epistles also they number with the Canonical scrip∣tures. And Pope Agathe saith, that all the sanctions and decrées of their Romish Sea are to bee taken as stablished by the diuine voice. Which blasphemies who can abyde▪ For heereby they make both the Scriptures imperfect, and not so content, doe further adde vnto those Scriptures.

Wherein they commit two notable sinnes, first accusing the sacred and canonical scriptures that they containe not al matters necessary to saluation: which is directly contrary to the testimonie of S. Iohn, who saith, that these things are written that ye may be∣leeue, & that in beleuing ye may haue life eternal:

and cleane contrary to the testimonie of Saint Paul, who saith, That the Scriptures (giuen by diuine in∣spiration) are profitable to reproue, to teach, to cor∣rect, to instruct, and perfect the man of God. 2. Tim 3.15. Ergo the Scriptures or word of God written, is a true, sound, and perfect whole doctrine, contai∣ning in it selfe fully all things néedfull for our salua∣tion. Yea Saint Paule saith expressely to Timothie, That the Scriptures are able to make him wise vn∣to saluation. 2. Tim. 3.13. And therefore the Church of Rome béeing cleane contradictorie, dooth maruei∣lously erre: and therefore also we néed none of theyr vnwritten traditions.

And againe, how should we bée assured that those traditions which they call Apostolicall, be Apostoli∣call, considering them not written by the Apostles? Augustine speaking hereof, saith thus: Si qua reti∣nuit Iesus Christus,* 1.34 quis nostrum dicet hoc vel illud esse? Et si quis hoc dicat, quomodo probabit? That is, If Iesus Christ haue kept any thing close, which of vs shall say that it is this or that? And if anie say it is this, how wil•• hee proue it? For all the errors of the Church of Rome, shrowd themselues vnder the har∣bour of traditions. And Chrysostom saith flatly, what∣soeuer is requisite for our saluation,* 1.35 is conteined in the Scriptures. And againe hee saith, All thinges bee cleare and plaine in the Scriptures, and whatsoeuer thinges be needfull be manifest there. And Ierome in the prologue of the Bible to Paulyne, after hée had recited the bookes of the new Testament and the old, saith thus:* 1.36 I pray thee (deare brother) among these liue, muse vpon these, know nothing else, seeke for none other thing. And againe vpon the bookes of the olde and new Testament: These writings be holie,

these bookes bee sound, there is none other to bee compared to these, whatsoeuer is beside these, may in no wise bee receaued amongst these holy things.* 1.37 And againe hée saith, All other thinges which they seeke out or inuent at their pleasure, without the authority & testimony of the Scriptures (as though they were the traditions of the Apostles) the word of God cutteth off. Let vs therefore stand fast to the written word of God, and as for their traditions, which they cannot prooue but obtrude vnto vs with∣out testimonie of Scriptures, let vs contemne them.* 1.38 For as Athanasius saith, the holy Scriptures inspi∣red from God, are sufficient to all instruction of the truth. And as for the other point of the Papists in equalling and adding of their traditions, their decre∣tall Epistles and Canons, to the pure and diuine word of God, it is a blasphemy intollerable, and who can indure it? For doth not God say thus,* 1.39 Yee shall put nothing to the word which I commaunde you, neither take ought there from.* 1.40 Deut. 4. And againe he saith, whatsoeuer I commaund you, that take heede yee doe onely to the Lord, put nothing thereto not take ought therefrom. And doth not S. Iohn in his Reuelation,* 1.41 say that if any man adde to this thinge God shall adde vnto him the plagues which are written in this booke and shall take away his part out of the booke of life. I conclude there∣fore that the Church of Rome which doth not con∣tent hir selfe with the sacred and Holie Scripture (which the chast spouse of Christ euermore doth) is not the true Church of God: for there she sheweth hir selfe to beare the marke of a strumpet. But when shée procéedeth and addeth hir owne traditions, De∣cretall Epistles, and Cannons to the word written:

and maketh them to be of as good and equall authori∣tie as the Canonicall and sacred Scriptures them∣selues, What greater pride could haue bin shewed, or what higher blasphemie? But these are the right notes of an adulteresse, to equall hirself with her hus∣band. Yea, What should I say more? They holde that the authoritie of the Church is aboue the Scrip∣tures, which sheweth fullie the notable pride and spi∣rituall whoredome of their Church.

2 The Church of Rome is Idolatrous, and ther∣fore it is not the true Church. They fall downe be∣fore Idolls and Images as the heathen did, and ther∣fore commit Idollatrie as the heathen did: I speake for the manner of their worship, for the heathen how soeuer they worshipped not the true God, yet they thought they worshiped the true God, and their mea∣ning was to worship the the true God in the Image or Idoll, as the Papists likewise doo meane: for they say, they be not such fooles as to thinke or beléeue that an Image or Idoll (made of wood or stone) could bée God: neither were the heathen so foolish as to thinke or beléeue that their Idolles or Images were God, (for they knew they were made of wood or stone or such like) but (as they tooke it) they worshipped God in the Image, as the Papists say they doo: and there∣fore the case for the manner of worship is all one: A∣gaine if the Papistes doo not worshippe the Idoll or Image, why doe they bowe downe vnto it? God commaundeth saying: Thou shalt not make to thy selfe any grauen Image,* 1.42 so that the verie making of Images to represent God withall (who is a spi∣rit eternall and invisible) is Idollatry. Againe hée saith: Thou shalt not bowe downe to them, nor worship them, &c. So that to bowe downe vnto

them (though they bée supposed to represent God) 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Idollatrie, for God must be worshipped in such sort as himselfe hath prescribed, and not otherwise: and that it is flat Idollatrie to worshippe God in any I∣mage, is expresse and manifest by the Children of Is∣raell, when they made the golden Calfe to bee a re∣presentation of God,* 1.43 for the Tert sheweth that it was Idollatrie, for which many of them were pla∣gued & punished, and yet their meaning was to wor∣ship the true God in the Calfe: for they were not so simple as to thinke or beléeue that that dead Idoll or Image was God, and therefore the Idollatrie of the church of Rome is as grosse and wicked as theirs was. Neyther can the Papists helpe themselues in their wonted distinction of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 affirming that they giue to Images but Duliam that is seruice and to God Latriam that is worship,* 1.44 shewing there∣by that both they worship God and serue Images: But how agreeth the temple of God with Images, saith Paull: or what warrant haue they to serue I∣mages beside God? When Christ him selfe saith (it is written:) Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God,* 1.45 and him onely shalt thou serue.

And Paull the Apostle doth likewise perswade ex∣pressly: that men shuld turne from Idolls or Images to serue the liuing God, (where the word Dulia is v∣sed) whereby the Apostle doth shew that there is such an opposition betwéene Images and the seruice of God, that he that serueth the one, cannot serue the o∣ther. God himselfe disliketh Idolles and Images vt∣terly,* 1.46 saying by his Prophet that they are so farre from being Lay-mens Bookes (as the Papistes tearme them) that they are no better than teachers of lies. And Saint Iohn himselfe commaundeth all

Christians to kéepe themselues from Idols:* 1.47 Besides it is Idollatry to praye vnto any but God: For Christ hiddeth when men pray, not to call vppon the Uirgin Mary, nor any other Saint departed this life but vpon God onely: When yée pray (saith hée) say thus.* 1.48 Our Father whinh art in heauen &c. Againe Saint Paull saith, howe shall they call vppon him on whom they haue not beleeued?* 1.49 declaring ther∣by that faith and prayer goe together. Wee can call vpon none but we must consequently also beleeue on him: But we are to beléeue none but God, therefore wee may pray to none but God; and therefore the Church of Rome calling vpon Saints departed, com∣mitteth grosse Idollatry, for the Scripture sheweth that God onely is to be prayed vnto. Besides, They that in their Idolatrous Masse or Sacrament of the altar (as they tearme them) after a certaine mumb∣ling of wordes by the Priest, there is no bread nor wine remaining but the very bodie & blood of Christ, and that péece of bread which is showed (for bread it still appeareth to be, for al their magicall mourning) they commanded to bée adored and worshipped. To adore or worship any creature (such as bread is) is I∣dolatrie: the Papisticall Church doth the same: Ergo it is Idolatrous. I haue proued it before, that it remai∣neth bread after consecration, and that Christ cannot possiblie bee there as touching the bodilie substance because in that respecte he is ascended vp into heauen and there sitteth on the right hand of God his Fa∣ther, vntill he come to iudge the quicke and the dead, & if they will not beléeue Diuine testimonies there∣in: Yet the authority of Cicero a heathen man might somewhat moue them, for in one place he saith: Quē tam Amentemesse putas qui illum quo vescator De∣um credat esse? That is,* 1.50 Whome doe you thinke so

mad as to beleeue that which he eateth to be God. Insomuch therefore as the Church of Rome doth worship bread, as if it were God, It is manifest they be grosse Idollaters. And consequently their Church cannot be the true Church of God on earth.

3 The Papistes doe not denie Christ in wordes, but if we examine them by perticulars we shall finde that in déede they doe: as for example, we know that the right faith beléeueth Christ Iesus to be both God and man, which the Church of Rome in wordes will so affirme: But vrge them in this point of the Sa∣crament, and then they bewray themselues, that they beléeue not Christ to haue a true bodie: for when they are preassed with this, that the bodie of Christ cannot be both in heauen and in earth at once, and the selfe same time, because it is against the nature of a true bodie so to bée: then they become vbiquitaries and say, that because the Godhead of Christ is euerie where, therefore his humanitie is euerie where. But this is no good consequent, for the Godhead and hu∣manitie are of seuerall nature. And if his bodie and flesh were euerie where as his Godhead is: howe is that true which the Angell spake saying surrexit non est hic. He is risen he is not here. For these wordes sheweth that his bodie and flesh is not euery where.* 1.51 Againe if he were euery where in respecte of his hu∣manitie, how is it true that he ascended into heauen? For that word ascention doth shew that his bodilie presence did remoue from one place to another, and then was it not in that place from whence it did re∣moue.

Lastly it is the propertie of a Diuine nature to be euerie where, and therefore whilest they defend this vbiquitie of the flesh of Christ: It is as much as if

they should say that the flesh of Christ is turned into God (which is a groosse Herisie. And thus it appea∣reth, that the Papists doe with the Eutichians, deny that Christ hath a true bodie when they holde that (contrarie to the nature of a true bodie) it may be in diuers places at once: yea, euerie where: and therefore denying Christ to haue a true bodie, they are not the true Church: and somuch for their error concerning the person of Christ.

4 Now for the office of Christ, (for his person & his office bee two chiefe thinges which we are all to regard.) The Papists will yéeld with vs that it con∣sisteth in these thrée points, namely: that he is both a Prophet, a Priest, and a king. This I say in words they will acknowledge, but in déedes and veritie they doe not, for in respect that Christ is our Prophet which should and did reueale his Fathers will vnto the world, wee ought to bee content with his voice, and search no further then hée hath reuealed in his Scriptures. But the Papists are not so contented, but they holde that their vnwritten traditions and Popish Cannons, must also bee receaued vpon like perill of damnation, as before it shewed concerning the Priesthood of Christ. It consisteth in two things, namely the offering vp of himselfe once for a full perfect and sufficient Sacrifice: And his intercession with his Father, which yet remaineth also and shall doe to the worlds end. Both these the Papists anni∣hilates as I will proue. First concerning the Sacri∣fice and Oblation of Christ, there is noe doubt but béeing once done vpon the Crosse, it was a most full, perfect and satisf••ctorie Sacrifice to deliuer both a cul∣pa & pana: from the guiltines and the punishment incident to that guiltines: for otherwise how should

Christ bée Iesus, that is a Sauiour,* 1.52 if he did not deli∣uer vs from the punishment, as well as from the sin. But the Papists hold that Christ hath obtained by his passion, remission for our sins going before Bap∣tisme: but sinnes committed after Baptisme, that his passion hath taken away only the guiltines, but that the punishment remaineth notwithstanding, which is to be paide in purgatorie (as they say) and to be redéemed by our owne satisfactions, and so they make the punishment due to sinne (which is indéed e∣ternall in hell) to bee but temporarie in purgatorie vpon satisfactions (as they haue deuised). But what can a man giue for the ransome of his soule? And it appeareth before, euen by the reporte of Augustine that the Catholicke faith beléeueth in Purgatorie, such as they haue inuented.* 1.53 For as Saint Iohn saith the blood of Christ is that which purgeth vs from all sinne, and that his most pretious blood is the one∣lie Purgatorie wée holde, and doth deliuer his peo∣ple from the punishement due to sinnes, aswell as from sinnes: for our punishment was laide vp∣pon him and with his stripes are wee healed,* 1.54 as the Prophet Esay speaketh: Againe the Papists doe saye they offer vp Christ in their Masse, which Masse they saye is propitiatorie, both for the liuing and the dead: First for the dead it cannot bee pro∣pitiatorie nor doe good vnto, for as the tree falleth,* 1.55 so it lieth: and as a man is found to die, so bee goeth ei∣ther to heauen or to hell. A third place which the Papists call purgatorie there is not. And if any bee in heauen their Masses can doo them no good: for they inioy all good alreadie: And if any bee in Hell,* 1.56 wee know that Ex inferno nulla redemptio, from hell there is no redemption. And therefore for the dead

it canot be propitiatory, nor any thing els availeable: And for the liuing it cannot be propitiatorie. Yea it is blasphemo us & derogatorie to the passion of Christ once for all, for in asmuch as he is a Priest for euer, after the order of Melchisedeck, he is to die but once which he did vpon the Crosse: whose obligation bée∣ing perfect (as the Author to the Hebrews speaketh:* 1.57) néedeth not any other helpe (as of maske or whatso∣euer els) to make it perfect: yea it is wicked, grosse, blasphemous, and damnable to suppose any imper∣fection in the sacrifice and ablation of Iesus Christ, for God twice cried with a voice from heauen saying, This is my beloued Sonne in whom I am well plea∣sed.* 1.58

5 As touching the other part of his Priesthood: namely,* 1.59 his intercession with his father, whereby he maketh request vnto God for vs, although the Pa∣pists ascribe them chiefly vnto Christ, yet what doo they else but cleane robbe him of it, when they asso∣ciate others with him. As namely the virgin Mary, They call her the Queene of heauen; the gate of Paradise; their life and sweetenes; the Treasurer of Grace; the refuge of sinners; and the Media∣trix of men. I pray what doo they nowe leaue to Christ: Yea when they say thus to her,

O felix puerpera nostra pians scelera, iure matris impera Redemptori, that is, O happy mother satisfieng for our sinnes, by thy motherly authority commaund the Redeemer.

What greater blasphemy to Christ coulde they haue vttered? It is cleare that saint Paul saith there is but one God, and one Mediatour betwéene; God

and men, the Man Christ Jesus, 1. Tim. 2.5. But the Papists bée not content with him, but will haue many Mediatours. Saint Paul saith moreouer, that by him wée haue b••ldnes and accesse vnto God, Eph. 3.12. And therefore what foolish feare is it of the Papists to appoint to themselues other Mediatours? Sith therefore the Church of Rome doth not repute the once Oblation of Jesus Christ, and his Interces∣sion to bee perfect, but accuse them of imperfection (as appeareth by their doctrines) it cannot possibly be the true Church. Christ himselfe biddeth to aske in no other name than in his, and promiseth that whatsoe∣uer shall bée asked in his name, it shall bée done, Ioh. 14.13.14. Chrysostome,* 1.60 speaking of the woman of Canaan, who though shée were a sinner was hold to come vnto Christ, saith thus, En prudentiam huius mulieris non precatur Iacobum non supplicat Iohanem, non adit ad Petrum, nec Apostolorum caesum respicit, aut vllum eorum requirit, sed pro his omnibus peniten∣tiam sibi comitem adiungit & ad ipsum fontem pro∣greditur. Behold the wisedome of this woman. She doth not pray Iames, shee doth not beseech Iohn, shee goeth not to Peter, shee looketh not to the companie of the Apostles, neither doth request a∣ny of them, but for all this shee taketh repentance for hir companion,* 1.61 and goeth to the verie fountaine it selfe. And againe he saith, that to haue accesse vnto God, Nihil opus est atriensi seruo vel interces∣sore, sed dic miserere mei Deus, is enim te audit quo∣cun{que} sis loco & vndecunque innocetur. VV haue no need of any Courtly attendant or intercessor, but say, haue mercie vpon me O God, for hee heareth thee in what place so euer thou art, and from what place soeuer thou callest vpon him. Ambrose like∣wise

answeareth the carnall reason of the Papists,* 1.62 solent (saith he) misera vti excusatione dicentes, per istos posse ire ad Deum sicut per comites itur ad reges, ideo ad regum per tribunos & comites itur quia homo vtique est rex: ad deum autem, quem vtique nihil la∣tet, suffragatore non est opus sed mente deuota. Ʋbi∣cunque enim lelis locutus fuerit & respondebit illi. That is, They are wont to vse a pityfull excuse say∣ing, by these (Saints.) They may haue accesse vn∣to God, as by Earles there is accesse to Kings, Ther∣fore is it that by Officers and Earles accesse is made to the King, because the King himselfe is a man. But to come to God (from whom nothing is hid) there is no neede of a spokesman, but of a deuout minde: for wheresoeuer such a one speaketh to him, he wil answeare him. The Church of Rome therefore which accounteth not of the sufficiencie & perfection of that one Oblation of Christ, nor of his continuall intercession: cannot possiblie be the true Church.

6 The Papists in words will not denie but Christ is a King, which hath all power in heauen and in earth: But indéed it appeareth they doe exile and ba∣nish him out of his kingdome, or at least leaue him but a small portion or rather none at all: for in re∣spect that hee is a spirituall King and the King of his Church,* 1.63 he is also (as Saint Iames speaketh) the on∣ly law giuer thereunto, and therefore-by his lawes only, the Church is to be gouerned, which they can∣not abide, for they adde their Popish cannons, consti∣tutions, and customes, whereby they will haue the Church gouerned: yea they wil haue these take place though they vtterly displace the word of God, for the maintenance of them. Secondly Christ onely is to raigne in the consciences of men, and yet the Pope

claimeth power to binde mens consciences by his lawes, statutes, and decrees. Thirdly hee claimeth most traiterously to be the head of the whole vniuer∣sall Church, which title by way of prerogatiue is gi∣uen and attributed onely to Iesus Christ (to whome it onely appertaineth.* 1.64) But before I procéed anye further herein, I demaund of the Pope and Papists: when & by what right he their proud Pope taketh vp on him this title to be head of the Church or vniuer∣sall Bishop ouer all the Christian world (by vertue of which title he taketh vpon him to rule as he list, & to doe what he list.) First to claime it as successor to Peter, is impossible for that Peter the Apostle, ne∣uer had any such title, prehemince, or authoritie ouer the rest of the Apostles.* 1.65

It is true that Christ sayd to Peter (after hée had confessed Christ to be that Christ the sonn of the liuing God.) Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke will I build my Church. These wordes hitherto giue no superioritie to Peter aboue the rest: only they shew that the Church is builded non super Petrum sed super Petram: not vpon the person of Peter but vpon the rocke: and vpon what rocke? namely vp∣pon that Christ Jesus whom Peter confesseth to bée the sonne of the liuing God. For that confession of Peter concerning Iesus to bée that Christ the sonne of the liuing God, is the rocke whereupon the Church is builded: for (as Saint Paull expoundeth and affirmeth.) Other foundations can no man lay,* 1.66 but that which is laid already, namely Iesus Christ: And in another place hée saith expressely:* 1.67 that that rocke was Christ: And Christ himselfe affirmeth likewise,* 1.68 that he that heareth his wordes and doth them is likened to one that buildeth his house vpon

a rocke, shewing thereby that he, and his words, & Doctrine be the rocke, against which the gates of hell shall neuer preuaile. Agreeably whereunto speaketh Saint Paull againe,* 1.69 when hee saieth that the Church is builded vppon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles, Christ Iesus himselfe beeing the head stone in the corner. Where then shall wee finde that Peter was made Prince of the Apostles to rule ouer all the rest,* 1.70 as the Pope now doth: The Papists answeare that in the next wordes, when Christ gaue vnto Peter by speaciall name, the keyes of binding & loosing, he thereby made Peter the P••ince & vniuersall Bishop of the whole Church. But here∣unto I say, that Christ therein gaue no authoritye more to Peter than to the rest, that is at this time: The keyes were not giuen to him nor to the rest, on∣ly there was a promise that they should be giuen: for the wordes be not in the present tense, Do tibi I giue vnto thee: But in the future tense, Dabo tibi I will giue vnto thee, which promise of Christ was after∣ward truely performed, and when it was performed, the keyes,* 1.71 that is the power of binding and loosing sinners, was giuen not onely to Peter, but to Peter and all the rest together, as Saint Iohn in his Gos∣pell cléerely declareth and avoucheth. Now because Peter was the man that gaue answeare for himselfe and the rest, and so both Cyprian and Augustine doe expound and declare it: And therefore neither in the promise of the keyes, nor yet in the receit of the keyes, by Peter did he receaue any more authoritie or supe∣rioritye than the rest of the Apostles did. I grant he was called Primus because he was of the first that was called to the Apostleship, or because hee was the first of all the Apostles that confessed Christ to be the

Messias and Sonne of the liuing God, or because hée was readiest alwaies to speake and answere. But all this, doth not proue that hee had authoritie ouer the rest, or a larger Commission than the rest: Yea the words of their Commission doe shew the contra∣rie, namely that they had all equall authoritie, for it was thus made vnto them all indifferently, & with∣out putting a difference, namely, Goe ye and teach all Nations, baptizing them in the name of the Fa∣ther, and of the Sonne, and of the holy Ghost, tea∣ching them to obserue all things whatsoeuer I haue commaunded you, Math. 28.19.20. Runne ouer all that remaineth written and you shall finde that Peter was one of the twelue equall with the rest, and their fellow but not their Lord: Where was Peters superiority, when Paul reprooued him to his fate? Gallathians, the second Chapter, and the elea∣uenth verse, when béeing accused, hée pleadeth no priuiledge, but for the clearing of himselfe, and satis∣faction of others, hée aunswereth to that accusati∣on?

Where was Peters authority ouer the rest, when the rest sent him and Iohn into Samaria? Acts, the eleauenth Chapter, the third and fourth verses: and also in Acts, the eighth Chapter, and the fourtéenth verse. In that hée went at their sending, hée plainely sheweth that hée had no principalitie ouer them.

Where was his preheminence or authority, when in a Councell held at Ierusalem, where the Apostles were, yet not Peter, but Iames, ruled the action, and according to his sentence was the Decrée made, Luke, 22.25.26. &c.

Yea, I say moreouer, that when there was con∣tention

amongst the Apostles, who should bée chiefe amongst the, Christ told them plainely, that kings of Nations might beare rule ouer their people, and that great men vnder those kinges might likewise exercise authoritie ouer other, but so might not they doe one ouer another, Luke 25.26. &c. But the greatest amongst them should be as the least, & as a seruant: yea, should bee the least, and should be a seruant, as it is declared in Matthew, 20.25, 26 and in Marke, 10.42, 43.

If the greatest must be as the least, what authori∣tie hath hée aboue the least? For then hath the least as great authoritie as the greatest: That is, they bene all equall authoritie. I meruaile therefore what the Pope and Papists meane, contrary to the tenour of the Commission of Christ, contrary to the practise of Peter himselfe, and contrary to this decrée made by Christ of their equallity, to say notwithstanding that Peter was Prince of the Apostles, and had au∣thoritie ouer them all, when as indéede, it is manifest by all the Scriptures and course of his life, he neither claimed nor had any authoritie ouer the rest, more than the rest had ouer him, and consequentlye the Pope of Rome can neuer claime that as successour to Peter, which was neuer in Peter his supposed pre∣decessour.

The Papists perceauing that the scriptures make nothing for them, but against them, (because they would haue the matter coloured with some Antiqui∣tie, or shew of Antiquitie at the least:) haue deuised some counterfet and forged Authors, (as Amacle∣tus, and Amissetus and such like) to speake some∣thinge for them. But the falsehood of all those, is dis∣couered by other writers (if they bee well marked.)

In Cyprians time it was déemed a matter odious for any to take vpon him to be a Bishop of Bishops, as appeareth by that voice which he cryed in the Coun∣saile of Carthage. It was likewise decréed in the Af∣fricans Counsell that none should be called Prieste of Priests, or Archpriest, or any such like. The Coun∣sel of Nice did decrée that the Bishop of Rome should kéepe himselfe within the compasse of his prouince and not excéed his bounds, as likewise the Bishop of Antioch, Ierusalem, and Constantinople were •••• doo the like. Other Councells did affirme as much, (which because they are sufficiently knowne I néede not to recite. But they all shewe that at those times the Bishop of Rome had no greater Jurisdiction than within his owne Prouince, and that hée coulde not meddle within the Prouinces of other Bishops. And Ierome of his time sayth,* 1.72 that the Bishoppe of Engubium, or any other the least Sea, is equall to the Bishop of Rome. The Title of Uniuersall Bi∣shop, was much desired of John Bishop of Constan∣tinople, and much contention there was about it. But it was neuer obtained of the Bishop of Rome vntill the time of Boniface the third, who procured that Title of Phocas that wicked Emperour of Rome: after which, the Bishops of Rome neuer cea∣sed still to augment their dignitie, and increase the pride of their Romish Sea: And euen at that very first time when John Bishop of Constantinople, sought to get that Title of Uniuersall Bishop to his Sea, Gregorie then Bishoppe of Rome,* 1.73 did himselfe stand against it mightily, and affirmed that hée could bée no lesse than Antichrist whosoeuer did take vnto him that Title. First therefore it is manifest, that vntill the time of Gregorie Bishop of Rome, an vni∣uersall

Bishop was not heard of in the Church, and Boniface the thirde was the first Bishop of Rome that got this title which was aboue 600. yeares after Christ. And besides how will the Bishop of Rome that now is, avoid himselfe to be Antichrist, Sith by the expresse determination of Gregorie Bishoppe of Rome his predecessour, hée is condemned for Anti∣christ, in as much as hée hath this Title, and is not ashamed thereof. For what is this else, but to come in the place of Christ, and consequently to bee Anti∣christ, vsurping the prerogatiue Title of Christ Je∣sus? But the Pope saith, that though hée claime thus to bee the heade of the Church, yet hee doth not name hims••lfe to bee otherwise than a Ministeriall head, & to bée Christs Vicar on earth. But why will he be so arrogant as to challenge this Title without ••••••full ••onueyance made vnto him from Christ, which hee cannot show. For who dare take vppon him to bée a ••i••uetenant to an earthly Prince with∣out S••st••rs Pattents first had from the Prince. A∣gaine, the Church of Christ on earth, being as a chast Spowse to her Husband and head Christ Iesus: nei∣ther can or ought to acknowledge any other for her head, than that her husband to whom shée hath pligh∣ted her troth. Lastly, there can bee no successour but when the Predecessour is gone and absent, but Christ is alwaies presente with his Church accor∣ding to his owne words, Beholde I am with you to the ende of the world, Matthew, 28.20. And there∣for hée can haue neither Successour nor Vicar to re∣present his person, or to guide his Church: For his spirit (since his bodily ascention) is the guide and go∣uernesse of the Church in his roome, Iohn, 14. & 15. & 16. For no man mortall is appointed thereunto.

I conclude therefore that for all these causes the Church of Rome can not possibly be the true Church.

7 The Church of Rome doth not ascribe Justifi∣cation to faith in Christ Iesus onely, but saith that mens works be meritorious, and to them partly is Iustification to bée ascribed, and so they make mens imperfect works to be causes of saluation, which is a grosse errour euen in the foundation or fundamental point. Saint Paul saith, That all are iustified freely by his grace, Rom. 3.24. If they be Iustified gratis, freely, (as hée affirmeth) then are they Iustified withoot any desert of theirs. And Saint Paul setteth downe the Axiome in the Conclusion, VVee holde that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the Law, Rom. 3.28. And the Apostle in very many places (whereof mention shall hée made here∣after) doth expressely exclude Weekes from being a∣ny causes of our Iustification: 〈◊〉〈◊〉 indéede they are the effects thereof: And therefore it appeareth to bée a true position, that Faith onely doth Iustifie, in as much as Iustification is (in the sight of God) impu∣ted to our Faith, not to our Workes: For Abra∣ham beléeued God, and that was imputed to him for righteousnes, as Paul speaketh Rom. 4.8. And hée sheweth that Abraham was not iustified by Works before God, for if Abraham were iustified by works, then should hée haue wherein to glory, but not before God, and because hée had not wherein to glory be∣fore God, therefore hée was not iustified in the sight of God. I graunt that saint Iames in his seconde Chapter doth say that Abraham was iustified by his Works, when hée offered vp his Son Isaac at Gods commaundement: And likewise that hée saith, that a

man is iustified by Works, and not by Faith onely: But before whom is hée iustified by Works? Not before God, but before men, that is to say, his works doo declare vnto men that saith whereby hée is iusti∣fied before God: And that this is the meaning of saint Iames may appeare by that his saying, where he saith, Shew vnto me thy Faith by thy VVorks, thou saiest thou hast faith, that is not inough, thy words doth not proue it, thy works will, therefore (saith hee shew me thy faith by thy workes. This word (Shew mee) doth manifest what manner of iu∣stification hée speaketh off, namely, that he speaketh of a iustification before men. For it is God that re∣specteth the faith of a man, whereby onely hée is iu∣stified in his sight: And it is men which respect the workes, whereby indéede they testifie vnto the world their faith to be good before God. For (as saint Iames saith truely) faith without works is but a dead faith, and not good, nor found, nor auaileable. But faith and works must goe together, and indéede where a true faith is, there good works will shew themselues as the fruits thereof. And thus Paul and Iames are to bee reconciled, which thing Thomas Aquinas a schooleman of the Papists doth himselfe plainely testi∣fie saying, that Christ Iesus doth iustifie effectiuè ef∣fectually: Faith doth iustifie apprehensiuè, by taking hold of Christ: and good works doo iustifie declara∣tiuè, that is, doo declare vnto men their iustification before God: And so it is cleare, that howsoeuer, a true faith cannot bee without workes, as fire cannot bee without light and heate, yet our iustification be∣fore God is to bee imputed to our faith, not to our works: as warmth is to bee imputed to the heate of the fire, not to the light of the fire. For so saith saint

Paul expressely, That God imputeth righteousnes without works, Rom. 4.6. And againe, That it is by grace not of workes, Rom. 11.6. And againe, Not of workes, Rom. 9.11. Againe, saint Paul telleth the Saints at Ephesus, that God hath ordained men to walke in good workes, yet he saith that they may not trust to be saued by them, for he affirmeth, and assu∣reth them, That they are saued by grace, and not by their works, Eph. 28.9.10. Againe, he speaketh in the person of himselfe, & of all the children of God, and saith, that wee are saued not by workes, but by his predestination and grace,* 1.74 2. Tim: 1.9. And againe, God is our Sauiour, not for any-workes which wee haue done, but according to his owne mercie hee hath saued vs, Tit. 3.5. And diuers other like places bée: Wherefore saint Hillary hath these very words (which we hold) Sola fides iustificat, Faith only doth iustifie.* 1.75 And Ambrose among other sentences hath this, Non iustificàri hominem apud Deum nisi per fi∣dem, That a man is not iustified before God but by Faith. Which is as much, as Faith onely doth iustifie before God. Saint Basil doth say, that this is perfect and sound reioycing in God, when a man doth not boast of his owne righteousnes, but knoweth that he wanteth in himselfe true righteousnes, and that he is iustified by faith onely. And Gregory Nazianzen saith, that to beléeue onely, is righteousnes. And ther∣fore it is euident both by the expresse testimony of the Scriptures, and of the Fathers, that wee holde the truth in this behalfe, and that the Church of Rome is in a maruellous errour. It is true which is written, that euery man shall bee rewarded according to his works: because the faith of men is estéemed and esti∣mated by their workes, as the frée is knowne by the

trust: But there is no Text of scripture to shewe, that any man is saued propter merita, for his works or merits, but many Texts of scripture to the contra∣ry, as before appeareth. For when we haue done all that we can, yet we must say (as Christ commaun∣deth) Wee are vnprofitable seruaunts, Luke, 17.10. And therefore the Papists which teach workes meri∣torious, yea workes of supererogation availeable to saluation, as well for others as for themselues, holde not the right faith, and consequently are not the true Church.

8 But if I should shew all the corruptions of the Ró∣mish Church, I should be infinite, neither am I able to number them. I will therefore conclude all this discourse onely with this argument following. The Pope of Rome being the head of that Church, is that famous Antichrist that was foretold by Paull the A∣postle, and that is presignified in the reuelation of Saint Iohn, Ergo it is impossible that the Church of Rome, should be the true Church, for the Church of Antichrist (though it boast neuer so much) cannot bée the true Church though it would faine bee so accoun∣ted, as many an harlot desireth to bee reputed an ho∣nest woman, one marke of that Antichrist, Paull sheweth to be this: 2. Thes. 2.8. that he should exalt him selfe aboue euerie one that is called God: hee doth not say aboue God, but aboue euery one that is called God: Iohn. 10.34. Nowe those whome the Scriptures calleth God we know to be such as be the Iudges & Magistrates of the earth, Psa. 81.6. who for that they bee in the place of God and his Lieu∣tenants, are vouchsafed (in Scripture) this high and Honourable title is to bee called Gods. That the Pope of Rome is such a one as doth exalt himselfe a∣boue

any such God of the Earth, namely aboue all Princes and Magistrates is a thinge so well knowne as I néede not to prooue it: himselfe by his wicked practises, and his Iesuits Seminaries, and Patrons doe in their bookes manifest the same vnto the world.

2 An other marke of Antichrist Paul setteth downe to be this, namely: 2. Thes. 2.4. that hee should sit in the Temple of God as God, shewing himselfe to be God. And I pray what doth the Pope els but sit in the Temple of God as God: When claiming the Apostolike Sea, he taketh vpon him to bee the head of the Church and to rule it as he list: to erect Prin∣ces, and to depose them againe from their thrones: that hee cannot erre: that hee can forgiue sinnes: matters that belong peculiarly to God and to no o∣ther? What doth hee els but by these demonstrati∣ons shew himselfe to be God, insomuch as hee arro∣gateth to himselfe most proudly the authority of God himselfe: which things the Sixt booke of the Decre∣tals, the Clemantines, and the Extrauagants doe a∣bundantly testifie. For these men were not content with that which Angelicus wrote in his Poetry (the beginning whereof is, Papa stupor mundi, the Pope is the wonder of the world. Nec Deus es, nec homo, sed neuter, & inter vtrumque. Thou art not God, ne art thou man: But neuter mixt of both. But these Popes were bold to take vnto themselues the verie name of God, and to accept it giuen of others, accor∣ding as Pope Sixtus the fourth, when he should first enter into Rome in his dignitie papall, had made for him a Pageant of Triumph, cunningly fixed vpon that gate of the Citie he should enter at, hauing writ∣ten vpon it this Blaspemous verse, dedicated vnto him.

Oraclo vocis mundi moderaris habenis, Et merito in terris, crederis esse Deus.

By Oracle of thine owne voice the worlde thou gouernest all. And worthy lie a God on Earth men thinke and doe thee call.

Yea shall I say more? The Pope (if any man in the world) doth take vpon him such more than Lucife∣rian pride (howsoeuer to deceaue the worlde with wordes, he calleth himselfe seruus seruorum Dei, a ser∣uant of the seruants of God) that he exalteth himselfe aboue God himselfe and his worship: for hee taketh vpon him to bée aboue the Scriptures and to dispense with them at his pleasure, and to allow matters con∣trarie vnto them: which God himselfe (whose will is immutable and reuealed therein) will not doe: for he and his worde will not be contrarie. Againe héere∣by it is manifest that he exalteth himself aboue God, inasmuch as there is lesse danger and punishment, for any that breaketh any of Gods lawes, than for one that breaketh any the least constitution of the Pope. Moreouer, He claimeth authoritie in three places: Heauen, Earth, and Purgatorie, and that is the reason he weareth a triple Crowne: so that by this account and claime, he hath more and larger ex∣tended authoritie than God himselfe: for such a third place as purgatorie is, hee knoweth not of. And what do these things but manifest him to exalt him∣selfe euen aboue God and all that is worshipped?

3 Antichrist is described to bee such done as should come in lying signes and false miracls, and wonders 2. Thes. 2.9. (whereby, if it were possible, he would

deceaue the verie elect.) And that this is verified in the Pope and Popish Church, as all men knowe that haue béene acquainted with their knaueries, de∣ceits, and fraudes, so let their Aurea Legenda and booke of Trophes testifie to the whole world.

4 S. Paul 2. Thes. 2.8. Sheweth by his name that he that he speaketh of should be O'anomos, that is, a lawles person, or one subiect to no law which is also manifestly verified in the Pope, for no lawes will hold him, neither diuine nor humane, for he claimeth to bée aboue them all, and to change and alter what he list, and when he list, and to whome he list: which the glose vpon the decretalls doth testifie, saying thus of the Papists, Legi non subiacet vlli, that is, He is not subiect to any law. What is this els but to bée O'anomos, a lawles person euen the very same whom Saint Paull speaketh of.

5 Saint Iohn in his Reuelations doth portraye Antichrist & his seat by the name of the great whore, with whome haue committed fornication the kings of the Earth, & the Inhabitants of the Earth haue bin drunke with the wine of hir fornication. This woman is that great Citie which hath dominion o∣uer the kinges of the earth at the time of this Re∣uelation as Saint Iohn expressely affirmeth. Reuela. 17.18. It is well knowne that there was then no other Cittie which raigned ouer the kings of the earth but only Rome: And therefore Rome onely is and must néeds bée the Sea of Antichrist, for no other can bée by this euident & plaine description of Saint Iohn, for Rome was the onely Citie of the worlde, that raigned ouer the kings of earth, the head where∣of was then the Emperour, but now the Pope: for the condition of the first beast (namely of the Ro∣maine

Empire ciuill) is altred and changed into an Ecclesiasticall and Romaine Empire.

6 Saint Iohn in his Reue. 13.1••. saw a beast ri∣sing out of the Earth which had two Houres like the Lambe: but he spake like the Dragon, & then all that is spoken of this beast doth fitly and onely agrée to that man of Rome the Pope, who though in shew he were the Lambe, for what is more milde or hum∣ble than to call himselfe, the seruant of the seruants of God? Yet indéed he plaieth the part of the Dra∣gon or Deuill, hauing learned this cunning of Sa∣than, who though he bée neuer so bad a spirit: yet will transforme himselfe into an Angell of light to deceaue soules, 2. Cor. 11.14. as the Apostle shew∣eth. But héere is wisdome saith Saint Iohn in that Reuelation: Let him that hath any wit count the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, & his number is 666. Now because the number of this wicked beast containeth sixe hundreth sixty & sixe Ire∣neus thinketh that this Antichristian beast should be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that is a man of Italie, for the number of the beast is set downe in great letters, and this Gréeke word (Lateines) doth make it vp the iust number of 666. which is the number of the beasts name. If any doe thinke, that though this Reuelation were written in Gréeke, as being the more knowne and common language, yet that it was vttered to Saint Iohn in Hebrew, because the Hebrew tongue is the Holy tongue: & that Iohn himselfe was an Hebrew or Iew by nation, and that likewise diuers Hebrew words are found in the Reuelation: Whose opinion is not vnlikely but very probable, then let him séeke out an Hebrew worde which containeth that iust number, and herein be néedeth not to search far or to

studie much vpon the matter, for the Hebrew worde 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (that is Romanus a man of Rome, in Eng∣lish) doth in those Hebrew letters containe the iust number of 666. which is the number of the name of that Antichristian beast. And so by the number of the name to be accounted, either by Gréeke letters, or by Hebrew letters, it is perfectly agreeing to that man of Rome the Pope: all the markes agréeing to Antichrist (whatsoeuer they be) are found fully and onely accomplished in the Pope, and therefore there is no doubt but he is that notable Antichrist, of whō Paull and Saint Iohn in his Reuelation do testifie, & consequently the Church of Rome, being not the true Church of Christ, but contrarywise, the visible Church of Antichrist is iustly forsaken, and for euer to be forsaken of all Christians as they tender their saluation in Iesus Christ, to whom onely they haue betrathed themselues, and to whome they must re∣maine constant for euermore, which God graunt vs all to doe. Amen.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Visibilitie ••••sol. n••len 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the ••••urch in ••••tward 〈◊〉〈◊〉, is no 〈◊〉〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ma••••e of the tru•• Church.
• * 1.2

  Acts. 8.1.
• * 1.3

  Mar. 12.27
• * 1.4

  Reu. 12.6, 7
• * 1.5

  1. King. 19.11. &c.
• * 1.6

  2. King, 16.
• * 1.7

  Chrysost. in Mat. 24.
• * 1.8

  2. Thess. 2, 3, 4.
• * 1.9

  August. Tom. 6. li. 2 contra Do∣natist.
• * 1.10

  August. contra Maximin. lib. 3. cap. 4
• * 1.11

  Theodor. lib. 2. ca. 18.
• * 1.12

  Consil. Tom. 1. de ord. celeb. cons••l.
• * 1.13

  Lib. 2. ad Bonif. con∣tra epist. Pelag. ca. 4
• * 1.14

  Part. 1. di∣stin. 40▪ ca.
• * 1.15

  Amb. lib. 2▪ de bono mortis.
• * 1.16

  Cyprian contra De∣met. tract▪ ••
• * 1.17

  Ierom. in Gal. cap. 6.
• * 1.18

  August. li. hypog. 5.
• * 1.19

  Aug. En∣chir. ad L••••rent. cap, 67.
• * 1.20

  August. ad Arasf. epi•• 44. & En∣ch••r. ad •• aur. cap•• 30. & lib. •• cap. 7. & a•• Boni•• cap. 8. & 3. & a lib. pas••••
• * 1.21

  Lib. de praede••••. sanct. i••••m ad Bonifa. lib. 4. in Gen. Ho∣mil. 1.
• * 1.22

  C. compe∣rimus de confera di∣stinct.
• * 1.23

  Tertul. contr. Mar. ••iod. lib. 4.
• * 1.24

  August. in Psal. 8.
• * 1.25

  August. i•• Tom. 6. contra A∣damant. ••
• * 1.26

  August. 2. Iohan. tract. 3.
• * 1.27

  Augustine Tom. 3. de •• Trinit. lib. 3. cap. 10.
• * 1.28

  Theodor. Dialog. 2.
• * 1.29

  Gelas. contra Eurich.
• * 1.30

  Tertullian ad Scapu∣lam.
• * 1.31

  Tertul. in Apologet. ••
• * 1.32

  Optatus contr. Par∣men. lib. 1•• Chrysost. ad populū Antioch. homil. 2. Gregor. e∣pist. lib. 3. cap. 100. & cap. 103.
• * 1.33

  Councel, Trent. 1. decree. 4. Session. Distin. 20. cap. in li∣bellis. Distin in cap. in ca∣nonicis. Distin. 19. cap. sic om∣nes.
• * 1.34

  August. in epist ad Ianuar.
• * 1.35

  Chrysost. in Math. 24. hom. 4: Chrys. in 2. Thes. 2.
• * 1.36

  Ierom in his prolog of the Bi∣ble.
• * 1.37

  Iero. vpon Agge, 2.
• * 1.38

  Athana••, contra gentiles▪
• * 1.39

  Deu. 4.
• * 1.40

  Deu. 12.
• * 1.41

  Reue. 22.
• * 1.42

  Exod. 20.
• * 1.43

  Exod. 32.
• * 1.44

  2. Cor. 6.15.16.
• * 1.45

  Math 4.10 Deu. 9.13. & 10.20.
• * 1.46

  Abac. 1.
• * 1.47

  1. Ioh, 5.21.
• * 1.48

  Math. 6.
• * 1.49

  Rom. 10.14
• * 1.50

  Cicero. lib de natura.
• * 1.51

  Mat 28.6.
• * 1.52

  Mat. 1.••1••
• * 1.53

  1. Ioh. 1, 6••▪
• * 1.54

  Esay. 53.
• * 1.55

  Eccle. 1••.
• * 1.56

  Luk▪ 1••.
• * 1.57

  Heb. 5. & 6.7. & 8, & 9,
• * 1.58

  Math. 3.17 Math, 17.8
• * 1.59

  Rom. 8.34. Heb, 7.25.
• * 1.60

  Chrisose. homil. 12. de Cana••∣neae.
• * 1.61

  Iadem ••∣mil.
• * 1.62

  Ambro. in Rom, 1.
• * 1.63

  Iam. 4.12.
• * 1.64

  Ephe. 1.22.
• * 1.65

  Mat. 16.18.
• * 1.66

  1. Cor. 3.11
• * 1.67

  1. Cor. 10.4
• * 1.68

  Mat. 7.24.
• * 1.69

  Eph. 2.20
• * 1.70

  Mat. 16.19
• * 1.71

  Ioh. 20.22.23.
• * 1.72

  Hierome ad Euagri∣um.
• * 1.73

  vide Greg. lib. 4. epist. 32.34, 36, 38.39. & lib. 6. epist. 24.28.29, 30.
• * 1.74

  Hilláry in Mat. cap. 8
• * 1.75

  Amb. in Rom. 3.