Their Errours about the Scripture are,

1. Vid. Turnb. Tetrag. c. 2. That the Church doth regulate the Scripture, and is not regulated by it, so making the Church the Rule of Faith. That the holy Scrip­tures are not the only and whole Rule of our Faith, and Life, in all matters necessary to Salvation.

2. That the Church hath Autho­rity to alter as well the things con­tained in holy Scripture, as those that are delivered in the Church by Apostolical Tradition: yea the Pa­pists affirm, that it is in the power of the Church, to alter that which God commandeth in Scripture, that is, to make Commandements con­trary to Gods Commandements. And they are divided in the main, viz. what this Church is, which is the infallible Judg, B [...]xters Sate Re­ligion. whether it be the present Church or the for­mer Church; whether it be the Pope only (at least, in case of diffe­rence between him and his Council) or whether it be a general Council, although the Pope agree not, as the [Page 3] French and Venetians say; yea whe­ther it be the Clergy only, or the Laity also that are this Church.

3. Bellarm. l. 3. c. 3. They also assert, that it is lawful to allegorize Scripture, both in the Old and New Testament.

4. Ecchii Enchirid. loc de au­thorit. Ec­cles. Pigg. l 1. de Hierarch. [...]ccl s. That the Pope is the supreme Judg of all Controversies, and that the Scripture hath no authority in re­spect of us, but what is granted to it by the Church. For adding some Books to the Scripture which were not from the beginning: The Papists being bold upon the Decree of the Council of Trent, will, that among these the Books of Tobit, Judeth, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, the first and second of Macchabees should be Ca­nonical: likewise the Additions to Esther, Baruch, with the Epistle of Jeremiah, and the Additions to Da­niel, these they call δευτεροκανονικοὶ, Canonical in a second degree.

5. Stapl. t [...]n l. 3 c. 36 That the Canon of Scripture is imperfect, wanting many Divine Revelations: therefore some Books have been received as Canonical at one time, and not at another: some some have been received as Canoni­cal [Page 4]in some Churches not in other. Vid. Downham

6. They prefer the Faith and Judg­ment of the Church of Rome, which they say is the internal Scripture written by the hand of God in the heart of the Church, before the holy Scripture.

7. Bellarm. de verb. Dei. l. 1. c. 2. That unwritten Traditions are to be equally believed, and to have as great authority as the Scripture: that Traditions (which they call the unwritten Word) are the Rule of Faith.

8. They contend, that the Cu­stomes and unwritten Opinions of the Church of Rome, are most cer­tain Apostolical Traditions.

9. Blondel Dalaeus. They number the Popes De­cretal Epistles with the holy Scrip­tures: when yet it is most cleerly proved by Blondel in a just Volume, that abundance of them are forge­ries: and Dalaeus proves it particu­larly of the Clementines.

10. Wide Downham Catal. They say it is Heresie for any to say, that it is not altogether in the power of the Church or Pope to appoint Articles of Faith.

11. That the Scripture is not [Page 5]sufficient for the refuting of all He­resies (as if there were any Heresie­but what is against Scripture.)

12. Id ibid. That the Church is ancienter than the Scripture (that is, than the Word of God which is now writ­ten;) because it is ancienter than the writing of it: as if it were not the same Word of God, which was first delivered by voice, that is now in writing.

13. That it is not necessary nor convenient for the common People to read the Scriptures, but rather dangerous and hurtful.

14. That the translating of the Scriptures into vulgar Languages is the fountain of Heresies: and they that do it deserve ill of Christian Re­ligion.

15. That the Hebrew Copy of the Old Testament, the Greek of the New Testament is not authentical.

16. B [...]lla [...]me de verbo Dei. l. 3. That the Scriptures are very obscure, and hard to be understood, even in things necessary.

17. That it belongeth not to all the faithful to search into the mea­ning of the Scripture.

18. That the certain Interpretati­on of the Scripture is not to be ga­thered out of the Scripture.

19. They make seven Principles of the Christian Doctrine, which are all grounded in the Authority of the See and Pope of Rome.

Their Errours concerning God and Christ.

1. SOme hold, that the Son and Spirit are not God of them selves.

2. Ex Cha­mie [...]. They deny the infallible cer­tainty of Divine Providence.

3. Of this see the Writings between Doctor Hammond and Mr. Jeanes. They deny that the Soul of Christ did increase in Wisdom.

4. They deny that the Soul of Christ did suffer torments for man­kind, any otherwise than by way of sympathy with his Body.

5. They deny him to be the only Head of the Church.

6. They say, that he is Media­tor only according to his humane Nature.

7. Tho. part. 3. quaest. 83. That the Blood of Christ is not necessary to wash away Sins, but that they may be done away by holy Water, knocking the Breast, and o­ther ridiculous means.

8. They seem to give unto Christ a santastical Body, that nei­ther consisteth of dimensions nor occupieth a place, which when he was born, did not open the Womb of his Mother; and when he arose did penetrate the Stone of the Se­pulchre; and when he instituted his Supper, lay hid under the species of Bread and Wine.

9 They deny Christ to be the only Mediator of Intercession, but joyn with him Angels and Saints.

10. They deny Christ to be the only Prophet, whose voice only must be heard; spiritual King and Priest of the New Testament. But they make the Pope the chief Pro­phet and Pastor, King and Monarch, and Priest: whence it followeth, that the Pope is not only opposed to Christ, as his Adversary, but as his Rival.

11. That the (unchangeable) [Page 8]Priesthood of Christ, the Eternal Priest, is made Eternal by the Suc­cession of other sacrificing Priests, which they make.

12. That Christ, who is God over all, blessed for ever, did merit for himself; though he was both Viator & Comprehensor, in Termino & extra Terminum, and in the days of his flesh did possess all desired happiness, and saw God face to face while he lived here.

13, The Jesuits say, that Jesus Christ might have sinned, might have been subject to vices, might have fal­len into errour and folly.

14. That Christs Merits are not the only meritorious cause of Sal­vation.

15. Fevard. p. 430. That the Fear and Agony of Christ proceeded not from any fee­ling of Gods wrath or indignation, but he only shewed the affection of humane sense fearing Death!

16. They are so bold, as to ap­point the place where Christ shall ap­pear in the day of Judgment, name­ly in the East.

17. That the Son of Man shall ap­pear [Page 9]with the sign of the Cross born before him. Then shall the sign of the Son of Man appear in Heaven. Matth. 24.30. that is (say they) the Sign of the Cross.

18. They deny that God alone is to be worshipped, and do commu­nicate Divine Worship to certain Creatures.

19, That God necessarily gives Grace to him that doth his best.

20. Some Jesuits assert, that we satisfie the Love we owe to God, by loving him three or four times in our life. And others, that we may pass over our whole life without any thought of loving him, and yet be saved after all this.

21. That God might give Grace and Glory to men, because of the honest actions of natural Vertues, though they had not of themselves any relation to Grace or Glory, which are of a supernatural order. That is to say, that God could save men by actions purely natural: and so that man could deliver himself from sin and misery, without having need of. Jesus Christ, and that by [Page 10]consequence his active and passive obedience were superfluous, and ex­acted from him without any neces­sity.

Their Errours concerning Man.

1. Ecc. Cha­mier. THat every thing against the Law is not sin.

2. That Concupiscence, and the first motions thereof be no sins, nor have the nature of sin.

3. That all Sins are not in their own nature mortal; Menric, S [...]m. M [...] ­ [...] lib. 4. cap. 20. that Sin is cal­led mortal, because it brings Death upon the Soul, that is, say they, it depriveth it of Gods Grace: That some Sins are in their own na­ture venial, and do not deserve eter­nal punishment.

4. That by every mortal sin Grace is lost.

5. The Divinity of the Jesuits maintains Aversions against our Neighbour, it allows us to wish and do him hurt, and even to kill him, though it be for temporal concerns, [Page 11]and also when we are assured, that by killing him we damn him.

6. They cherish Pride and Vain­glory in all sorts of persons, even in the most holy actions: and accor­ding to their Divinity it is almost impossible to sin mortally by Pride or Vain-glory.

7. Their Doctrine gives all sorts of liberty to the Senses, and justifies in a manner all sorts of Pleasure which it can taste.

8. That Discourses even of filthy things, though they proceed from curiosity and levity, do not go be­yond a venial sin: and that to speak of filthy things for the pleasure that is taken in those Discourses without having a design to pass on to disho­nest actions, is but a venial sin.

9. Escohar, Filliut [...] Lessius, Layman, Zanch [...]. The Jesuits authorize all sorts of ways to get Wealth, and dispense with restitution of what is procured by the most unjust and infamous ways. They teach that Christians may take Usury of the Turk. Cor­nel. a laipde. in Deut. 23.19.

10. They teach, that if a man be drunk, or doing any thing with a [Page 12]formal design to provide for his health, all the the evils that happen in consequence thereof are to be e­steemed as coming by accident: that it is no sin to eat and drink ones fill without necessity for pleasure, on­ly, provided that it do not prejudice ones health.

11. The Jesuits allow of Magick and Witchcraft; and say, that they are not superstitious who heal the sick by Charms, composed of Psalms and other Prayers, and who by stro­king and Prayers heal them of incu­rable Diseases.

12. The Jesuits teach-several ways of mocking God & men without pu­nishment, Jesuits Morals. and without sin, in promi­sing that which they never intend to do, and not doing that which they have promised, although they are obliged thereunto by Vow and by Oath. They have found out an ex­pedient to deceive the world, to take a salfe Oath even before a Judg without perjury.

13. Equivocation and mental re­servation, Mason of [...]. that mystery of iniquity, and Quintessence of impudence is [Page 13]maintained at this day both in Press and Pulpit by the Popish Doctors; though it be far from Christian sim­plicity, and the Doctrine of God, which requireth that men speak the truth from the heart.

14. According to these Jesuits, there is scarcely any habitual sin; and that custom of sinning may make a man uncapable of sinning.

15. That Ignorance excuseth sins committed without knowing them, and even those which are committed afterwards; and that there are pro­perly no sins of ignorance, according to the Jesuits.

16. The Papists teach, that the whole Law of God may in this life be fulfilled by the Regenerate, and and that some do keep it perfectly.

17. That we may fulfil the Com­mandements of God, and of the Church, not only without intention, but with an intent contrary, and al­together criminal.

18. The Jesuits enhaunse and debase (as they please) the Goods of this world which are the usual ob­ject or matter of sin, and so nourish [Page 14]vice, and dispense with the Law of God.

19. They have found out a kind of necessity, which dispenseth with the Law of God, that necessity makes that lawful which is not lawful by the Law.

20. That though God as a Sove­reign and absolute Lord might make him suffer an eternal pain, who did disobey him in a slight matter, yet he could not do it as a Judg, be­cause in this quality he is obliged to proportion the punishment to the fault, which is not greater than the matter of the disobedience.

21. Bellar. de Justif. l. 4. c. 10. Greg. Va­len. Tom. 1. They teach, that it is not only possible for men to keep the Law of God in this life, but to do more than is prescribed or comman­ded; and that these works do make men perfect; and that men of their abundance may allot unto others such works of supererogation.

22. That good works are not only necessary to Salvation, necessitate prae­sentiae, because they must necessarily be present, and we cannot be with­out thems: but necessitate efficientiae, [Page 15]they are necessary as efficient causes together with Faith of our Salvati­on.

23. Vid. Ce­pa [...]in vit. Gonzagae [...] l. 3. c. 2. That a just man in his good works doth not sin; but that their works are truly just, without any spot or blemish of sin.

24. Andrad. Orth. Expl. l. 6. They hold that eternal life is bestowed for the merit of Works; that Christ did merit for His, not only Pardon of all faults and Grace to do all good Works, but also that their Works should be meritorious of life everlasting. Bayus me­rit. ope­rum. l: 3. c. 9. They make two kinds of merit; meritum de congruo, merit of congruity; such are the preparative Works before Justifica­tion, as were the Prayers and Alms­deeds of Cornelius, Act. 10. which (though they be not simply merito­rious ex debito Justitiae, by the due debt of Justice) yet, say they, of Congruity they deserve at Gods hands, because he doth gratiously ac­cept them. The other kind they call meritum de condigno, merit of Con­dignity, when the reward is justly due by debt.

25. That there is a first and second Justification.

26. That the Virgin Mary was without sin, that she was conceived and born without original sin, and lived and died without actual sin.

27. Bernar­dini de Busti Ma­riale Par. 3 Serm. 3 That the Virgin Mary, du­ring the time of Christs Passion, and from his Ascension into Heaven, was the sole Queen, Mistress, and Instructer of his Church on Earth. That he assumed her into Heaven, Soul and Body, Baronius, Sponda­nus. Fa­brit. De­struct. Vitior. fourteen years after his own Ascension, as Baronius, Spondanus and others testifie; though they contradict each other therein, both in the manner, time, circum­stances, and reality of her assumpti­on: of which there is little or no mention in any old Ecclesiastical Hi­storians or Fathers of the Church.

28. Bernard, Serm. de Assumpt. beatae Ma­riae. Mich. Lochi. main. Serm. 6. Suraez. Tom. 2. Disp. 54. Sect. 6. They assert, that Christ hath assumed her Soul and Body into Heaven, and placed her therein, far above all Orders of Saints or An­gels, even at his own right hand, in the very Throne of the Trinity; and they vow obedience to her.

29. They assert, that Mary vow­ed Virginity before the Angel Ga­briel came to her with his Message: [Page 17]They also say, that the Church was in her alone, when Christ died.

30. That there is a place, Rhem Annot. in Matt. 12. Sect. 6. com­monly called Purgatory, into which some of the Redeemed go after this Life, as in a Prison-house, where the Souls which were not ful­ly purged in this life, are there pur­ged and cleansed by fire, before they can be received into Heaven. Vid John Verons Hunting of Purga­tory.

31. They have devised and imagi­ned, in their wandring conceit, four infernal and subterrestrial places, Hell, Purgatory, Limbus Infantium, where Children remain dying with­out Baptism; and Limbus Patrum, where, they say, the Fathers were before Christs coming. These places they distinguish three ways. 1. By the situation, Hell is lowest, Purgatory is next, Limbus Infantium in the third place, Limbus Patrum upper­most. 2. They differ (say they) in measure of punishment: some of them have poenam damni & poenam sensus, a double punishment, both of loss, in that they are excluded Hea­ven; and of pain also, as Hell and [Page 18]Purgatory. The other two Limbi are but dungeons of darkness only, where they suffer no other smart or pain, but are only absent from God. 3. They differ in time and continu­ance, say they, Hell and the Dun­geon of Children shall remain for ever; but Purgatory and the Dun­geon of the Fathers are temporal. The one, that is, Limbus Patrum, is many years ago dissolved; and Pur­gatory also shall cease, say they, at the coming of Christ. This then is their opinion, that the Patriarchs and Prophets before Christs coming were not in Heaven, but were kept in an infernal place of darkness, yet without pain, and were delivered by Christs descending into Hell.

32. Bellarm. l 4. de Pontif. c. 13. That the Pope is Christs De­puty, Vice-gerent, and Vicar-Ge­neral upon earth, to whom, and to whose Successors we should all give place, and yield obedience.

33. That the Pope cannot err.] Here see their shifting distinctions. The Pope may err in Manners (say they) not in Faith: alone by him­self, not in a Council: in his Cham­ber, [Page 19]not in his Consistory: by way of Conference, not of Conclusion: in a private Letter, not in a Decretal Epistle: in his Palace, not in the Pulpit: which last is truest; for he never cometh there. But he that erreth in Judgment, must of neces­sity err in his Determinations. Ma­ny of the Popes have erred greatly: Pope Marcellinus was an Idolater, and offered Sacrifice to Jupiter, and was forced by the Council of Sessa to recant it, where there were three hundred Bishops assembled. Libe­rius fell into Arrianism, as Athanasi­us testifieth. The like did Pope Foe­lix, as Saint Hierom writeth. Vide Willet. Controv. 4. Pope Honorius was a Monothelite, holding Christ had but one Will, and so but one Nature, for the which he was condemned in three General Coun­cils. Innocent the first made both Baptism and the Eucharist necessary for the Salvation of Infants: the lat­ter of these was condemned by the Council of Trent. Pope Stephen the sixth abolished all the Acts of For­onosus, his Predecessor. John the ninth disannulled all the Acts of Ste­phen, [Page 20]and Sergius the third all the Acts that Formosus had done, and so that which John had done, and approved the Acts of Stephen: some of these must err. In the 1408. in the Council of Pisa, consisting of 1000 Divines and Lawyers, two Popes were deposed at once, viz. Grego­ry the eleventh and Benedict the thirteenth: the Tenour of whose Deprivation calleth them Schisma­ticks, Hereticks departed from the Faith, scandalizing the whole Church, unworthy the Papacy, cut off from the Church. And whereas Benedict continued Pope still for all this, a second Council holden at Constance deposed him a­gain, commanding all men to e­steem him as an Heretick and Schismatick. John Gerson testifieth of Pope John the two and twentieth, that he held, that the Souls of just men, separated from their Bodies, do not see God, nor rejoyce with him till the day of Judgment. This was a publick Errour of his, for he taught it publickly, and com­manded it to be held by all men. [Page 21]But for this Errour of his he was condemned before the French King, by the Divines of the University of Paris, and made to recant it with Sound of Trumpet. And Alphon­sus a Castro saith, that he saw a De­cretal Epistle of Pope Celestine, wherein he publickly erred in mat­ter of Marriage. Pope Pius the fourth decreed, that it should be lawful for him to allow degrees of Marriage forbidden in Leviticus, and to forbid what God allowed.

Eastern Bishops and antient Fa­thers have sharply reproved the Bishop of Rome, as namely, Poly­crates, the Bishop of Ephesus; and as Irenaeus, the Bishop of Lions, did Victor, for his rash proceeding a­gainst the Eastern Churches. Antient Councils have withstood the Pope, as that of Chalcedon, wherein were six hundred and thirty Bishops with­standing Leo in the Question of Su­premacy. The sixth Council of Car­thage, of two hundred seventeen Bishops, resisted three Popes one after another, in that they would do contrary to the Council of Nice. [Page 22]These judged that Popes may err.

Such have been made Popes, that any wise man may think might err. Some have been unlettered Ideots, no Grammarians, that could hard­ly write their Names in Latin: some Lay-men, as Constantius the second, and Bennet the eighth: and very Boys for age; Bennet the ninth, a Child of ten years old, John the twelfth, a Bastard, a mad Lad about eighteen years old: and one Wo­man, as Pope Joan, of whom Man­tuan, that elegant Poet, writeth thus,

Some Popes have been Blasphe­mers, Dishonorers of Parents, Sor­cerers, [Page 23]Adulterers, Covetous, brea­kers of Promises. Pope Alexander the sixth upon Festival days gave himself to hear Plautus his Come­dies, and to be present at other P [...]ays. Pope Paul the third poisoned his Mother and his Nephew, that the whole Inheritance of the Farne­sians might come unto him.

34. That Saint Peter was Prince of the Apostles, and had a Primacy of power and authority above all the Apostles. They assert, that Saint Peter was Head of the Church; that Saint Peter was the only Vicar of Christ here on earth.

Their Errours concerning the Sacraments in general.

1. Rhem. Act. 22. Sect. 1. THat much is to be attribu­ted to the bare outward Work, that the Sacraments do con­fer Grace ex opere operato.

2. That the Sacraments are not Seals of the Promises or Covenant of God, nor instituted to confirm the Promise.

3. That Circumcision was a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith only to Abraham.

4. Vide Bp. Downham Catal. That Grace is contained in the Sacraments as in a vessel, nay that the Sacraments are Physical instru­mental causes of Grace, and that they do work holiness by the power put into them by God, as the heat of the fire is the cause of the burning of the Wood.

5. Bellarm. cap. 27. That there is necessarily re­quired the intention of the Admini­strator to the truth of the Sacra­ment, at least, of doing what the Church doth.

6. Vide Rhem. A [...]mot. in 2 Cor. 1 That in the Sacraments of Bap­tism, Confirmation and Order, there is imprinted in the Soul by God a character, or certain spiritual and indelible sign or mark, so that they cannot be reiterated. In the other Sacraments, viz. (according to the Popish account) there is only an or­nament or dress imprinted instead of a mark or character.

7. That the Observation of the Ceremonies which they use in the Administration of Sacraments [Page 25](though invented by themselves) through will-worship, is meritori­ous, and part of Divine Worship.

8. They add five Sacraments to the other two instituted by Christ, Concil. Trid. S [...]ss. 7. Can. 1. viz. Confirmation, Penance, Orders, Extreme Unction. And, say they, if any of these are not truly and properly Sacraments, Rhem. Annot. A­poc. 1. Sect. 3. or that they are not of Christs Institution, let him be anathema, or accursed. Their Arguments are. 1. The num­ber of seven is mystical, propheti­cal, perfect. The Prophet comman­ded Naaman to wash himself seven times. The Altar must be cleansed seven days, Exod. 29.37. So in the Apocalypse, seven Churches, seven Angels, seven Stars, seven Candle­sticks, seven Thunders, &c. And why not also seven Sacraments, saith Bellarmine? 2. Man hath seven Wounds to be healed: ergo there ought to be seven Sacraments, as Remedies against the same. Bap­tism (say they) is a remedy against Original sin, Penance against Actu­al sin, Bellarm. l. 2. c. 26. Extreme Unction against the Reliques of sin, Confirmation against [Page 26]infirmity of Faith: the Eucharist a­gainst Malice: Orders against Igno­rance.

Their Errours concerning Baptism.

1. Bellarm. lib. 1. de Baptism. THey define Baptism to be a Sacrament of Regeneration by Water in the Word: that is, not which signifieth and sealeth unto us our Regeneration, and assureth us of Remission of sins, but actually ju­stifieth and regenerateth us.

2. Bellar. de Baptism [...]. lib. 1. c. 3. They affirm, that this form of Baptism, to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, is not fully concluded out of Scrip­ture, but delivered by Tradition: for (say they) the Command of Christ to baptize in the name of the Trinity, may be understood thus; to baptize them into the Faith of the Trinity, or by the authority of the Trinity.

3. They affirm, that Baptism, is simply necessary to Salvation by [Page 27]Gods appointment: Concil. Trid. S [...]ss. 7. can. 7. so that all which die unbaptized, unless the want of Baptism be recompensed either by Martyrdom or Penance, must needs perish, and be deprived of eternal Life.

4. They grant power to baptize, Bellarm. c. 7. not only to any rank of men, but even to Women in case of necessity: they grant this also to Lay men and Pagans in like case.

5. They affirm, that the Baptism of Infants is grounded upon Tradi­tion, and not upon Scripture.

6. That the efficacy of Baptism doth not extend it self to the future, but only to that which is past.

7. That there is in Baptism a si­lent and implicit Oath of Obedience to the Pope.

8. That the laver of Regeneration is not profitable to those that fall af­ter Baptism.

9. The Baptism of John (say they) was of another kind than Christs Baptism was, Concil Trid. Sess. 8. c [...]n. 1. neither was it suffi­cient without Christs Baptism, nor had the like force or efficacy, as his Baptism had: and therefore such [Page 28]as had been baptized of John (say they) were admitted afterward to Christs Baptism.

10. They clog Baptism with ma­ny trifling Ceremonies: and by mi­xing therewith their own inventions, they have greatly polluted the Holy Sacrament of Baptism: For,

I. Vid. Dr. Willet. Controv. de Bapt. Quaest. 8. Before Baptism they have de­vised these toys to be used: 1. They do exorcise, conjure, and exuflate the evil spirit from the party bapti­zed. 2. They touch the Ears and Nostrils with Spittle, that his Ears may be opened to hear the Word, and his Nostrils to discern between the smell of good and evil. 3. The Priest signeth his Mouth, Eies, Ears, Nostrils, Breast, Forehead with the sign of the Crovs, that all thereby may be defended. 4. Then hallowed Salt is put into his mouth, that he may be seasoned with Wisdom, and be kept from putrifying in sin. 5. The par­ty is then anointed with Oil in his breast, that he may be safe from e­vil suggestions: they anoint him also between the shoulders, that he may receive strength to bear the Lords burden.

II. These Ceremonies do accom­pany Baptism it self. 1. The Font and Water therein is consecrated and hallowed in the name of the Fa­ther, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. 2. He is thrice dipped in the Water to signifie the being of Christ three daies in the Grave.

III. After Baptism they have this use. 1. They anoint the top of the head of him who is newly baptized with holy Chrism or Oile, and there­by he is become a Christian: 2. Gabr. Biel. l 4. dist 6 quaest 3. Then a white Garment is put upon him, to betoken his Regeneration. 3. A Vail is put upon his head, in token that he is crowned with a Royal Di­adem. 4. A burning Taper is put into his hand, to fulfil that saying in the Gospel, Let your Light so shine before men, &c.

11. They teach, that Baptism leaveth nothing in the baptized that hath the nature of sin.

Their Errours concerning the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, or Eucharist.

1. THey take away the Name of the Lords Supper, and call it the Sacrament of the Altar.

2. Vid. Fox Acts and Monum. In this Sacrament they teach and urge the corporal presence of the Flesh of Christ, as if that Sa­crament were instituted to nourish Bodies, and not Souls.

3. They affirm the Body of Christ to be really in diverse places, that it is in Heaven, and in the Eucharist all at once.

4. They take away the substance in the Sacrament and leave the acci­dents, as if the accidents, viz. length, breadth, figure, colour, tast, were without subject.

5. That the Priest by the force of these five words [Hoc est enim cor­pus meum] out of the Bread in the Sacrament createth the Body of Christ. Bellarm. l 4. de Sa­cra. c. 13 The whispering of those five [Page 31]words the Papists call the Consecra­tion of the Elements; and being whispered, they presuppose such a secret vertue in the syllables, as is able to chase away the substance of the Bread: and so (say they) the Bread and Wine is turned into the substance of the Body and Blood of Christ.

6. That these words [This is my Body] are to be taken literally, Bellarm. cap. 9. without any Figure.

7. That the Body of Christ is made of the Bread in the Eucharist, as Wine was made of Water.

8. That the substance of the Bread is consumed, and ceaseth to be, and yet is not annihilated.

9. That the Body of Christ doth remain in the host, as long as the acci­dents of Bread remain uncorrupted.

10. Bishop Downham Catal. That as long as the Body of Christ is in the Host, it is accompa­nied with Angels.

11. That in the corruption of the Species there is matter substituted by God, in that very instant in which those species cease to be, & in which something else is generated.

12. That the Elements of the Sa­crament of the Eucharist do not nou­rish, if taken in a great quantity, without a divine miracle.

13. But as they take away the substance of Bread and Wine, and so with that the substance of the Sa­crament; so they rob the Body of Christ of almost all the essential pro­perties of a true Body by this fiction of Transubstantiation.

14. And as they feign the Acci­dents of Bread in the Sacrament, without the substance of it, so they must needs feign the substance of Christs Body without the Accidents of it.

15. Many do teach, that one and the same Body of Christ undivided doth exist upon innumerable Altars, and is every where whole.

16. That the Body of Christ be­ing in many places at once, and yet not in the space between, is not dis­continued or divided from it self in respect of its proper sub­stance or quantity; but only is di­vided from it self in respect of place.

17. That one and the same Body of Christ being in Heaven and on Earth, yea in innumerable places on Earth at once; is indeed visible and palpable in Heaven, but on Earth invisible, and beyond all our senses: there it is limited and cir­cumscribed, here it is unlimited; there it hath dimensions, here it is free from all dimensions.

18. They teach, Vide Concil. Trid. Sess. 21. cap. 2. that the Sacra­ment is not to be taken in both kinds. Some of them confess, it is Christs institution, that we should take the Sacrament in the two kinds; but that the Church hath dispensed from that Commandment: for (say they) it belongeth to the Church to judg what Mysteries of Christ are dispensable, and the Church hath the power to use both dispensation and alteration herein. Hereby they declare the Church of Rome to be a­bove God, since she can change his Laws, and correct his Institutions.

19. They take away the Com­munion it self in the Supper, the Priest alone devouring all, the rest looking on.

20. The Priest doth adore the consecrated Host, and doth offer it to others by lifting it up to be ado­red; and for the same end they keep it, and carry it in solemn procession, that it may be publickly adored.

21. That the Eucharist, when it is carried to the sick, is to be adored by all those that meet it; those that do adore it are to have Indulgences, those that do not adore it are to be counted Hereticks, and are to be persecuted with Fire and Sword.

22. Trid. C [...]n­ [...]il. S. s [...]. [...]. 6. By this Bread-worship they commit great Idolatry, while that they adore a piece of Bread with the worship of Latria, which is on­ly due to God. It was decreed in the Council of Trent, that the Eu­charist should be adored with the highest degree of worship, which is proper to God.

23. In honour of this breaden. God they celebrate the Feast of Corpus Christi, of the Body of Christ.

24. Vide B [...]yne Vind. at. Frequent corporal appariti­ons of Christ in their Hostia's in form of a little Infant, Lamb, raw [Page 35]Flesh, Blood, are asserted in Popish Legends, to evidence the truth of their Transubstantiation, though meer Fables, diabolical delusions, or impious frauds of Popish Priests.

25. The ta­king a­way the Cup was decreed in the Council of Con­stance; yet after that, the Council of Basil granted the use of the Cup to the Bohemi­ans Bellarm. lib. 3. de Euchar. cap. 2. This taking away the Cup from the People may seem a small matter; for it is done but once e­very year, at which time the Sacra­ment is given to the People: for in all the rest of the Masses, which are continual and daily, they deprive both the People and the Clergy, that do not consecrate it, of both kinds: For in private Masses it is held forth to be seen by the People and Cler­gy, and to be adored, not to be re­ceived but only by the Priest that makes it, who is (as themselves speak) the Maker of his Maker.

26. They assert, that the Body of the Lord cannot be rightly taken, but of those that fast; and that Christians ought to eat nothing be­fore they communicate, unless in a case of great necessity.

27. They bind the people only once in a year to receive the Com­munion, viz. at Easter-time, and [Page 36]take it to be fully sufficient for them so to do. Concil. Trident. Sess. 13. Can. 9.

27. Rhem. Annot. 1 Cor. 11 Sect. 16. The wicked (say they) do in the Sacrament eat the true Flesh of Christ, and drink his Blood, though they be infidels and ill livers.

28. The Papists teach an Oral and Capernaitical Manducation of the Flesh of Christ; for they say, that the Body of Christ, in the Eucha­rist is really and sensually touched, broken and eaten.

29. The Elements in the Sacra­ment being once consecrated, whe­ther they be received or not at that instant, T [...]ident, [...]oncil. [...]ss. 13. [...]n. 47. but be reserved and kept in Boxes and Pixes, and other vessels of the Church, for days, weeks, months, to be carried solemnly to those that are sick and to be applied to other uses, are still, they say, the very Body and Blood of Christ.

30. They give the Eucharist to Infants presently after Baptism.

Their Errours concerning the Mass.

1. THere are diverse opinions a­mong them concerning the Original of this Name. Some say, Hugo de S. Vict. it is called Missa, the Mass, quia ob­latio & preces ad Deum mittantur, because Oblation and Prayers are sent to God: others because an An­gel is sent of God to be assistant at the Mass: some of the Hebrew word Missath, Deut. 16. Dr. Willet Cont. 13. which signifies an Oblation or Gift: some ex missis donariis & symbolis, of the Gifts and offerings sent or put in before the Communion. But what begin­ning soever it had, they do now ge­nerally take the Mass for that so­lemn action, whereby the Sacrament is made a Sacrifice, and offered up to God: for they have converted the Sacrament of the Eucharist, by which God communicates Christ to us, into a real Sacrifice, in which they do offer up Christ to God.

2. The Table they do convert in­to an Altar, and the Administrator of the Sacrament into a Priest after the order of Melchisedeck: whose Office it is to sacrifice Christ again, and offer him to his Father.

3. They say, that this new sacri­ficing is required, that Christs Bo­dy may begin to be an Oblation.

4. That Christ did once offer up himself for us upon the Cross, in the Mass often by the hands of the Priests.

5. Christ (say they) at his last Supper did offer up his own Body and Blood in Sacrifice under the forms of Bread and Wine to God his Father; and at the same instant made his Apostles and their Succes­sors, Priests, to offer up his Body in the Sacrament. In the Eucharist (say they) there is a true Sacrifice of the very Body and Blood of Christ, offered up to God by the hands of the Priest, in the forms of Bread and Wine.

6. Every Mass-Priest offering Christ to God the Father, prays God to accept of that Sacrifice, and [Page 39]to command that it may be carried by the hands of an Angel unto the high Altar of God: and therefore they make the Priest Mediator be­tween God and Christ.

7. The Priest in offering the Sa­crifice to God for others, is a Me­diator between God and the Men for whom he celebrates the Mass.

8. They have wrested the Mass from the end of a Communion to infinite other affairs, and altogether from the purpose; hence have ari­sen many kinds of Masses; as,

• 1. The Mass of the Crown of Thorns.
• 2. The Mass of the three Nails.
  Enchirid. Controv. by L. O.
• 3. The Mass of the Fore-skin of Christ.
• 4. The Mass for Sea-faring men.
• 5. The Mass for Travellers on horse-back or on foot.
• 6. The Mass for Women great with child.
• 7. The Mass for Women in tra­vel of Child-birth.
• 8. The Mass for Women that be barren.
• [Page 40]9. The Mass for those that be sick of a quartan or tertian Ague, and others of the like sort.

9. They assert that the Sacrifice of the Mass, which, they say, is with­out Blood, is truly propitiatory for the living and for the dead.

10. They blasphemously affirm, that it is a Sacrifice propitiatory; that is, available to obtain, ex ope­re operato, by the very work wrought, remission and pardon of all their sins.

11. They affirm, that Mass may be said and offered for all the living, yea for Pagans and Infidels, for men absent as well as present; that the Sacrifice of the Mass is available for the dead, which are in Purgatory; and that Mass may be rightly said in the remembrance, and for the ho­nour of Saints, with Invocation of them also in the Prayers of the Church.

12. They say, it is not necessary that the Mass should be said or done in the vulgar or familiar speech; but for the greater reverence to be kept [Page 41]in the Latin tongue, they say, it is more convenient: and that the words of Consecration should not be uttered in a loud and audible, but in a soft and low, voice.

13. Rhem. 1 Cor. 11 Sect. 18 Some ceremonies go before the celebration of the Mass, and they are of such things as they have always in a readiness for that impi­ous service. Such are the Vest­ments and apparel of the Priest, the Albe, Chesil, Stole, Dalmatick, with such other: Altar, Altar-Clothes, Corporasses, Pixes, Paxes, Dishes, Platters, Candlesticks, Cen­sers, Water-pots: all these and the like trumpery (say they) ought to be used in the Sacrifice of the Mass, the better to discern the Body of Christ.

There are other Ceremonies, B [...]ll [...]m. l. 2 de Missa, c. 14, 15. which they observe and use in the very action it self, and cele­bration of the Mass; as the diverse Gestures of the Priest, to lift up his Eies and cast them down again, and so lift them up the second and the third time; sometimes to cast abroad his hands, to close them a­gain, [Page 42]to warble with his fingers, to bow, to bend, to duck, to turn on this side, Concil. Trid. Sess. 22 Can. 7 and on that, now on the right hand, again on the left; to sigh, to smite upon his breast, to lift up the Chalice, and shew it to the people, and set it down again: as also the dividing of the Host into three parts, which signifies three parts of the Church, in Heaven, in Earth, in Purgatory; the rinsing of part thereof in Wine, and eating of part dry; the washing of his fin­gers before Consecration; kissing of the Altar, the Patten, the Book, the Paxe; sprinkling of holy Water, censing of Odours, crossing the Cha­lice, the Bread, their Mouth, Breast and Face, which sign of the Cross they make above twenty times du­ring one Mass. Add also unto these, their tedious and irksom Songs, the rude noise and unedifying sound of strange Instruments, and the whole course of their Mass-Musick, set forth in a strange Language, and endited to the honour of Saints.

Sledian doth briefly describe this fink of Ceremonies, speaking of the [Page 43]tumult that was raised at Strasburg, Sleidan. H [...]st. lib, 21 because of the Mass. There was, saith he, a great concourse of men, especially of the youth: for in his time it was to them a rare spectacle, and there not heard of before; that many with shaven Crowns, cloathed after a new fashion, should sing together such things as no man un­derstood; that Candies and Torches should burn (as the saying is) at noon-day: that smoak and per­fumes should be raised up with frankincense; that the Priest with his attendants should stand at the Altar, pronounce words in an un­couth Language, use divers bow­ings and gestures, bend down­ward with his hands close shut, one while fling abroad, another while pull back his arms, ever and anon turn himself, one while cry aloud, another while mutter o­ver some things with great silence, cast his eyes on high, look grove­ling to the ground, stand in no one place, turn himself now to the right part, now to the left part of the Al­tar, wagg with the fingers, breath [Page 44]upon the Chalice, and lift it up on high, and after set down; in certain places name, sometimes the living, sometimes the dead; break unleave­ned Bread, and dip it in the Chalice; strike his breast with his first, sigh, make as though he slept with his eyes shut; awake again, eat one part of the Bread, and drink up the other whole with the Wine, lest any drop should be left, wash his hands, shew to the people with his back to­ward them, and his hand stretched out, the gilded Patten, move the same to his forehead and breast, kiss one while the Altar, another while an Image enclosed in some matter or mettal. Thus He.

14. They say, they have the form of their Mass by Tradition from the Apostles: and that by Masses Souls are delivered out of Purgatory.

Many Errours and Blasphemies that are to be found in the Ca­non of the Mass, as touching the Matter, collected by Doctor Andrew Willet.

1. THe Priest saith, We pray thee accept these gifts, these holy and unspotted sacrifices. Thus he ma­keth Bread and Wine the Sacrifi­ces of the Gospel.

2. The Priest speaking of the Bread and Wine, thus saith, [Which we offer unto thee for thy holy Catho­lick Church,] and again afterwards, [Which we offer for the Redemption of our Souls.] What great blasphe­my is this, to offer Bread and Wine for the Redemption of the Church, for the which Christ in great love offered himself up? and so make his death of no force.

3. The Rubrick of the Mass wil­leth, that the Priest should pray for his own Bishop only, and for him­self, and his special friends: but [Page 46]Charity would, that he should pray for all Bishops, Pastors and Mi­nisters: and Christ biddeth us, not only pray for our friends, but also for our enemies.

4. The Priest prayeth first for the Pope, then for his own Bishop, last­ly for the King: but Saint Paul would have Prayers made first of all for all men, but especially for Kings, 1 Tim. 2.2. The Papists in their Mass and other Praiers prefer the Pope before their Prince, and ac­knowledg him to be their Pope and Bishop.

5. The Priest saith, worshipping the memorial of the Virgin: but Christ instituted the Sacrament to be kept in remembrance of himself, and not of her.

6. By whose merits and praiers (namely the Saints) grant we may be defended:] but Saint John saith, if any man sin we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the Righteous.

7. In the second Prajer of the Canon, they pray by vertue of the Oblation of Bread and Wine to be [Page 47]delivered from eternal damnation: for as yet the elements are not con­secrated.

8. We beseech thee (saith the Priest) to receive this Oblation, which we be­seech thee in all things to make blessed. Here the Priest is made a Mediator between Christ and his Father, de­siring God to sanctifie the Body and Blood of his Son. Thus beginneth the third Praier of the Canon.

9. Who, the next day before he suf­fered:] but the Scripture saith, the same night; For this is my Body.] Here they have put in [enim] of their own, and left out [Quod pro vobis datur] which is given for you. Such is their boldness, that they are not ashamed to change the words of our Saviour Christ.

10. Take ye, &c.] Why then doth the Priest take it alone, seeing Christ appointed it to be taken of many?

11. Eat ye, &c.] Why then do they hang it up in a Pixe, seeing Christ would have it eaten?

12. Drink ye all of this.] Why then doth the Priest drink it alone, [Page 48]seeing by Christs institution all are to drink of it?

13. He saith further in the fourth Prayer, The holy Bread of eternal life, which vouchsafe thou with a pleasant countenance to behold.] Whereas the Bread of eternal life is Christ himself: if this be He, how dare they presume to offer him up to his Father? Diverse other things there are of like sort.

14. Afterward the Priest praieth, Command thou this to be brought by the hands of thy holy Angel unto the high Altar in Heaven.] What an absurd thing is this, that he should desire that to be carried into Hea­ven, which he eateh and devoureth. And if this be the Body of Christ, what need the help of an Angel to carry it up to Heaven? Is not Christ able to lift up his own Body?

15. As many of us as shall receive thy Sons Body and Blood.] And yet for the most part none receive, but the Priest: and when the people do communicate, the Wine they have not.

21. Remember, O Lord, the Souls of [Page 49]thy Servants, which rest in the sleep of peace, and grant them a place of refreshing and rest.] Here they pray for the dead, and the Praier also is contrary to it self; for first, he saith, they rest in peace, and yet afterward praieth for their refreshing. Thus beginneth the fifth Praier of the Canon.

22. Deliver us by the blessed inter­cession of the Virgin.] What then is become of Christs Mediation and Intercession, who ever liveth to make Intercession for us? Hebr. 7.25.

23. Let this mingling together of the Body and Blood of the Lord Jesus Christ, be unto me salvation of Mind and Body.] Then is not Christs Blood shed upon the Cross the full, suffici­ent and perfect Salvation of Man­kind, if there be another Salvation beside. And if it be the very Body and Blood of Christ, how can they be mingled together, seeing the very Body and Blood of Christ cannot be divided.

24. Grant me so worthily to take this Body and Blood, that I may me­rit [Page 50]to receive forgiveness of sins.] O sinful man! how canst thou merit to receive that which is Christs only gift?

27. Let the Priest bow himself to the Host, saying, I worship thee, I glorifie thee, I praise thee.] What monstrous Idolatry is this, thus to worship a piece of Bread.

28. Let us worship the sign of the Cross.] What, I pray you, will not these Idolaters worship?

29. Respect not my sins, but the Faith of the Church.] By this reason one may be profited by anothers Faith, which is contrary to the Scripture, The just shall live by his Faith, by his own, and not anothers, Rom. 1.17. I shall pass by diverse other Errours, and come to the last.

30. In the end of the Mass, ac­cording to the use of Sarum, there is annexed the from of blessing, or consecrating the Paschal Lamb, with this Praier, Vouchsafe to sanctifie this Paschal Lamb, that as many of thy people as do cat thereof, may be reple­nished with all heavenly Benediction, &c.] What gross Superstition is [Page 51]this, that they should still retain the use of the Paschal Lamb, which can­not be but to the great derogation of the true Paschal Lamb Christ Je­sus, that the Body being come, the shadow should be still retained.

Other Errours in the manner of celebrating Mass.

1. ALl is done and said in the La­tin tongue, not under­stood of the people; and often not of the Priest himself: which is not to edification.

2. They use many irksome, tedi­ous and frivolous repetitions of the same words, as Benedicamus Domino, is sung ten several times to­gether: and Ite, missa est, is sung thirteen several times, with long and tedious notes.

3. The Priest is charged in the Rubrick to say divers Praiers, pri­vatim, secretly to himself: as that Praier, Deliver us from all evil, past, present and to come, &c. [...] Lamb of God that takest away [...]he sins of the world.] These and many other [Page 52]words must be pronounced secretly to himself, contrary to Saint Paul, who would have Praiers so said, that they may be understood, and there­unto Amen answered by the people, 1 Cor. 14.16.

4. The Priest is taught by the Rubeick to make thirty several Crosses, at the least, upon the Bread, the Cup, the Altar, his Forehead: but no such crossing is to be found in Christs Institution which they profess to follow.

5. Their Gesture in saying of Mass is so changeable, so ridiculous, so af­fected, that a man would think a Plaier were coming forth upon the Stage, when the Priest addresseth himself to the Mass: nay, Rossius was not so full of action, as the Massing-Priest is of gesture, varying and changing it, at least, forty or fifty times during the celebration of the Mass.

Their Errours concerning the Church.

5. THey assert that the Catholick Church is always visible, Canis. c. de fide & symb art, 18. and not seen only unto the members of the Church, but notoriously known to the whole world: neither do they mean any particular Church so to have been visible, but the uni­versal Catholick Church, which they define to be a visible Congre­gation of all faithful men.

2. Bellarm. lib. 3. de Eccles. That the Catholick Church is no other than the Roman, or that which the Roman Pope is over: Bellarmine defining the Church, makes this one part of the definition, to be subject unto the Bishop of Romes Jurisdiction: and therefore they conclude, that they are out of the Church, and no better than He­reticks, that do not acknowledg the Pope to be their chief Pastor. So they make the Roman Faith, and Catholick to be all one.

3. That the Catholick Church cannot possibly err, not only in mat­ters absolutely necessary to Salvati­on, but not in any thing which it imposeth or commandeth, whether it be contained in the Word of God or not: yea, that it cannot err in those things which beside the Word of God are commanded.

But because the Papists endeavour to invest the Popes and the Roman Church with an infallible Perfecti­on, Dr. Du Moulins Auswer to Card. Perron for King James. it will be expedient to shew, by invincible proofs, that the Roman Church hath erred, and doth err. I shall therefore only produce the Errours approved by their Popes and Councils, as the learned Doctor Du Moulin in his answer to Cardi­nal Du Perron hath set them down.

In the year of our Lord 787, a Council was assembled which the Roman Church approveth, and reckoneth among the universal Councils: there sate the Legates of Pope Adrian, who wrote a Book purposely for the defence of that Council. 1. In the seventh action that Council commandeth the Ado­ration [Page 55]of Images upon pain of Ana­thema, in these words; We hold, that the Images of the glorious Angels, and of all Saints must be adored and salu­ted: but as for him that hath not the will so to do, but staggereth, and is doubtful about the adoration of the ve­nerable Images, this holy and vene­rable Synod doth anathematize him. In the fourth Action of the same Synod these words are found, Ima­ges are of equal worth with the Gospels and the venerable Cross. And in the same place, the Image is greater than the Word and the Praier. In the fifth Action the Council declareth, that Angels are corporal, that there may be a ground for making Ima­ges of Angels. The same Council, to prove the Adoration of Images, corrupteth the Scripture in diverse places.

In the year 869. a Council was held at Constantinople, which our Adversaries call the eighth General Council. The third Canon of that Council is in these words, We de­cree, that the sacred Image of Jesus Christ be adored with the same honour [Page 56]as the Book of the holy Gospels, and the Figure of the precious Cross.

In the year of our Lord 1059. Pope Nicholas the second assembled a Council against Berengarius, where it was declared; that the Bread and Wine which is put upon the Altar after Consecration, is not only the Sacrament, but also the true Body of our Lord Jesus Christ: And that not only the Sacrament, but the Body of the Lord is sensually, and in truth, handled by the hands of the Priest, broken and bruised by the teeth of the faithful.

In the year 1076. Pope Gregory the seventh called a Council to Rome, where, among many Articles, these three Points were resolved and de­termined.

The first point attributes unto the Pope, that which is attributed un­to [Page 57]Jesus Christ alone, exclusively to all others, Act. 4.12.

The second declareth, that the Go­spels, and the Books of the Prophets and Apostles, are not to be recei­ved, unless the Pope approve them by his authority. The third attri­buteth unto the Pope an honour which Jesus Christ and his Apostles never asked or looked for: but they have been subject to Emperours, have paid them tribute, and have appeared before their Judicial Seat: neither did they ever give their Feet to any man to kiss.

In the year 1215. Pope Innocent the third assembled a Council at Rome in the Lateran Church, where it was thus resolved. If the Tem­poral Lord care not to satisfie with­in the year, let it be made known to the Soveraign Prelate; that from that time he declare his Subjects ab­solved from his subjection, and ex­pose his Country to be seized upon by Catholicks, that they may ex­termine Hereticks. In that decisi­on of the Council there are sour per­nicious errours, as my Author obser­v [...]th.

1. The first is an usurpation of the Pope approved by the Council, whereby he disposeth of the Tem­porals of Princes, as if the disposi­tion of them belonged to him, and divesteth them of their Lands and Dominions, without the authority of Gods Word, and without any example of the antient Church.

2. The second Errour is, that it makes ecclesiastical censures, which are spiritual corrections, to become temporal punishments: as if a Priest, to lay a penance upon a sin­ner, would cut his Purse, or rob him of his Cloak, or put him out of his house.

3. The third Errour is, that this Canon absolveth Subjects from the Oath of Allegiance, which they have sworn to their natural Prince; and teacheth them to be perfidious and dissoyal with a good Conscience, though against the Word of God, which saith, Thou shalt perform unto the Lord thine Oaths, Matt. 5.33. though it were to thine hurt, Psal. 15.4. And against the Rules and Exam­ples of the Apostles, who have com­manded [Page 59]Christians to pay tribute, and to be subject to Princes and higher Powers, although Princes were Pagans and persecutors in those days, Rom. 13.1, 2. 1 Pet. 2.13.14.

4. The fourth Errour is, that in the same Council, they preach murther and massacre, and set on the people to extermine those whom they call Hereticks: which is not only against the Law of God, but against that of Nations: for even Pagan Princes never permitted their Subjects to fall upon their fellow-citizens, and massacre them.

As for recovering the holy Land, at the end of that Council there is a Papal Bull, but with approbation of the Council. There a Command­ment is made to all that belonged to the Croisado, to meet in Sicily, to begin that journey in July: to per­swade the people to undertake that voyage, the Pope by the Councils au­tority speaks thus. To all that will bear that labour in their own persons, and at their charges, we grant full remis­sion of their sins, of which they shall [Page 60]have contrition and repentance: and in the Retribution of the Righteous we promise them in Paradise an Aug­mentation of eternal Salvation. What was that Pope? and what that Coun­cil, that could promise to Souldiers a degree in Paradise above the com­mon sort? especially seeing the Pope and his Prelates were not themselves sure that they should never go into Hell? But let us hear the rest, But to them that will not go in that voyage in their own persons, but only shall send fit men according to their means, we give full remission of their sins. Final­ly, the same Bull, with approbation of the Council, denounceth to all that will refuse, and not care for this Commandment, that they shall an­swer him in the last day of Judgment before the terrible Judg. As if the Pope must then be an Assessour of the Judg; or as if he must condemn sinners in the day of Judgment.

In the year of our Lord 1300. Pope Boniface the eighth instituted the Jubilee every hundredth year, in which they that come to Rome, for their great pardons, should get [Page 61]full, more full, and most full remissi­on of sins. That liberality is fetch­ed from the Churches Treasury, wherein the Pope lays up the over­plus of the satisfactions of Jesus Christ and the Saints, of which Trea­sure the Pope is the Keeper and the Steward, converting them into a pay­ment (saith the forementioned Au­thor) for those that visit the Roman Stations.

The following Popes, being moved with a fatherly compassion to the people, have brought the Jubilee first to every fiftieth year, and then to every twentieth year. It cannot be said, what a Mass of Wealth that Jubilee brings to the Pope, and to the Inhabitants of Rome by the Of­ferings and the Sojournings of Stran­gers that then flock to Rome from all parts.

The Satisfaction of Jesus Christ being suffici [...]nt for the sins of the whole world, it is an outrage offe­red to him, when to his sufferings other satisfactions are added; as that of Saints and Monks to satisfie the Justice of God for the pain due [Page 62]to our sins. By this means they will have God to take two payments for one debt. But their second payment is sufficient, seeing no man can satis­fie for the sins of another; and we learn of the Apostle, that every man shall bear his own burden. Besides, those Saints and Monks, whose sa­tisfactions the Pope will apply unto others, were sinners, and had need that Christ should satisfie for them; so far they were from satisfying for others, and for those for whom Christ hath fully satisfied.

I pass by the palpable Errour, whereby it is pretended, that the Saints have suffered more pains than their sins deserved; since there is no man be he never so holy, but stands in need that God forgive him his sins. No man but deserveth eter­nal death, if God deal with him ac­cording to the rigour of his Justice.

The same Pope Boniface the eighth attributeth to himself the Power over the Temporal and Spi­ritual of all the world, which he proveth by Texts of Scripture rare­ly applied: We are taught (saith [Page 63]he) by the words of the Gospel, that unto the Power of the Church two Swords are belonging, the Spiritu­al and the Temporal: for the Apo­stles having said, here be two Swords, that is, here in the Church, the Lord did not answer the Apostles, it is too much, but it is enough. Cer­tainly he that denieth the temporal Sword to be in Saint Peters power, doth not regard well the Word of the Lord, who said, Put up thy Sword into thy Scabbard. And to prove that the Temporal of Princes is subject unto the Pope, he alledgeth Jer. 1.10. See I have this day set thee over thee Nations, and over Kingdoms. And he will have that meant of the Ecclesiastical, that is, the Papal Power, which, he saith, cannot be judged of by any, because Saint Paul said, The spiritual man judgeth of all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. Finally, he concludes thus, Whosoever then resisteth that Power ordained by God, resisteth the Ordinance of God, &c. wherefore­we declare, say, define, and pro­nounce, that it is of necessity to [Page 64]salvation to be subject to the Roman Prelate. That venerable Pope hath found a proof of his Primacy in the first words of the Bible, God in the beginning made heaven and earth. These are Laws and Papal Ordinan­ces, pronounced with all the forms, and inserted into the body of the Pontifical Decrees; which to excuse from Errour, one must want both conscience and common sense.

Anno 14.14. a Council was held at Constance, to reform the Church; in that Council three contending Popes were deposed, of whom John the XXII. was one, for 71 Crimes; among others, for publickly denying the immortality of the Soul, and maintaining that there was neither Paradise nor Hell. To that Council J. Husse and Jerome of Prague were invited to defend their cause: a safe conduct of the Emperour Sigismond was given them, and Faith was sworn unto them, that no harm should be done unto them: But after some form of Disputation they were sei­zed on and burnt alive. And be­cause the Emperour made a scruple [Page 65]to break his Faith, the Council de­clared unto him, that he was not bound to keep Faith with Hereticks: for which purpose a Canon was made in this form; This holy Coun­cil declareth, that the safe conduct given to Hereticks, or defamed for Heresie by the Emperour Kings and other secular Princes, thinking thereby to turn them from their Errours, with what Bond soever they be bound, brings no prejudice to the Catholick Faith, or to the Ec­clesiastical Jurisdiction; Neither can put any hindrance, but that it may be lawful for a competent and Ec­clesiastical Judg, notwithstanding the foresaid safe conduct, to make inquisition of the Errours of such persons, and duly to proceed a­gainst them, as much as Justice shall require, if they obstinately re­fuse to renounce their Errours, al­though they be come to the place of Judgment, trusting to that safe conduct: declaring, that he that made that promise, remains not ob­liged by it, after he hath done that which lieth in him. The same Coun­cil, [Page 66]in the fifteenth Session, makes an enumeration of the Errours of John Husse. The nineteenth Errour, for which he is condemned, is, for say­ing, that the Popes and the Bishops Pardons avail nothing. That Coun­cil declareth, that the Popes Par­dons serve a sinner, although God hath not pardoned him, which is putting the Pope above God, since he pardoneth those that have offen­ded God, without Gods pardon, and since the Popes pardons are in force, though God approve them not. The same Council takes away from the people the Communion of the Cup. They add, that although Jesus Christ did, after Supper, institute the Sa­crament under the two kinds, yet the custom of giving to the people one kind only, which is the Bread, must be held for a Law; and those that say the contrary, must be dri­ven away as Hereticks, and grie­vously punished by the Inquisitors of heretical perversity.

In the year 1423. Martin the fifth held a Council at Siena, where the same Indulgence was granted to [Page 67]them that would fall upon the Here­ticks, as to them that go to defend the holy Land. Thus Remission of sins and Salvation is proposed as a reward of cruelty and popular fury: as if the Pope had said, because thou art a murtherer, and a wicked man, thou shalt have eternal life.

In the year 1440. the Council of Florence, assembled by the authority of Pope Eugenius the fourth, defineth and declareth in the last Session, that the Roman Church can add to the Symbol, and that the Pope hath the primacy over the whole world.

In the end of the last Lateran Council you have a thundering Bull against Luther, who then began to preach: there thirty nine Heresies are reckoned, the seventh whereof is, that the best penitence of all is a new life; which yet is a choice sen­tence of the spirit of God. Rev. 2.4. The twenty sixth Heresie of Lu­ther mentioned in that Bull, is this assertion, It is certain, that it is not at all in the power of the Church & Pope, to make Articles of Faith. If this be an Heresie, we may expect other [Page 68]Articles of Faith from the Pope, and Christian Religion is not yet perfe­cted; since other Articles of the Christian Faith may be added, such as we know not, and such as the A­postles have never taught either by Word or Writing.

At last the Council of Trent came, which, having begun in the year of our Lord 1545, lasted 18 years. In the fourth Session it was decreed, that unwritten Traditions must be received with the same affection of piety and reverence as the holy Scripture: That is, that the Invo­cation of Saints, the Distinction of Meats, the Adoration of Relicks, the Honour yielded unto Images, the Consecration of Agnus Dei's, and of blessed Beads, together with many other things, must be received with the like Piety, Faith and Re­verence as the Law of God, and the Doctrine of our Redemption in Christ Jesus, contained in the holy Scriptures. The same Council can­not be excused of Errour, for pro­nouncing in Session the fifth, that the Concupiscence forbidden in the Law [Page 69]is no sin. The same Council cannot be excused of Errour, for decreeing, that the Latin vulgar Version of the Bible should be the only authenti­cal, thereby authorizing a thousand depravations of the true original Text, which are Hebrew and Greek: yet since the time of the Council of Trent, several Popes have caused that vulgar Version to be revised, and have altered many things in it. Salmeron the Jesuite endeavoreth to excuse that Decree of the Coun­cil, speaking thus; The holy Synod would oblige us to embrace that Latin Edition, and follow it in all things, yet not absolutely, but upon condition, that it be cleansed and re-purged from the Vices and Er­rours which are crept into it. The same Council of Trent hath devised a crafty by-way to prohibit the rea­ding of Scripture unto the peo­ple: and many Prelates and Do­ctors in that Council were named and appointed to make an Index, or List of Books, the reading where­of must be prohibited. Now the very first of these prohibited Books [Page 70]is the holy Scripture, of which they say, in the fourth of those Rules they have set before that Index; that the reading of the Bible in the Lan­guage of the Country being indiffe­rently permitted, brings more harm than benefit. These few Proofs, drawn out of the most authentick Rules of the Roman Church, will be a pattern more than sufficient, to shew to any man that is not resol­ved to lose himself, and that seeks instruction, that the Roman Church can err.

4. Our Adversaries do devise ma­ny Notes, whereby their Church is descried. Driedo and P. a Soto would have three, Hosius four, Sanders six, Michael Medina ten, Cunerus twelve, Bellarmine fifteen, Socolovius twenty, Doctor Favour ( chap. 4.) one, the true and oldest Antiquity. But there are seven principal, which they do most stand upon, Antiquity, Ʋni­versality, Succession, Ʋnity, the Power of Miracles, the Gift of Prophecy, Prosperity.

Of Antiquity.

THe Papists make great brags of the long continuance of their Church; yea, that they can shew the descent of their Church from Adam: but they must come short of our Sa­viour Christ and the Apostles times, by five or six hundred years, for the most of the Opinions which they now hold.

The Romanists adulterate Anti­quity, because it is a Pearl of grea­test price: but a skilful Lapidary can soon espy the Alchymy: it see­meth Gold, yet is but brandished Brass: it seems a Ruby, one of the Stones in Aarons rich array, or a Foundation of New Jerusalem, where is no counterfeit, but it is only a polished Garnet: it beareth resemblance of a Diamond, but it is digged out of Saint Vincents Rock, as good as a Saint Martins Chain. So many things are offered by the Papists for Antiquity, which, upon [Page 72]trial, prove meer Novelty, worse Vanity, a plain Nullity. The Ro­man Church in this point is intole­rable, for she boasteth of Antiquity, but will not suffer the truth of her Doctrine to be examined: she will have us to judg of the Truth by An­tiquity, whereas we ought to judg of Antiquity by the Truth, and by Conformity to the Word of God, which is the first Antiquity. Anno 420. Zosimus Bishop of Rome chal­lenged a prerogative above other Churches, that it might be lawful to make appeals from other Chur­ches to that See; and, to set the bet­ter colour upon it, he falsly alleadg­ed a Decree of the Nicene Council, but there was no such thing found there: wherefore it was decreed in the Council of Carthage at that time, that none should appeal to Rome. Boniface the third purcha­sed of the wicked Emperour Phocas, the Title of Universal Bishop. Tran­substantiation was first concluded against Berengarius, anno 1062. un­der Pope Leo the ninth, but not pub­lickly enacted before anno 1216. un­der [Page 73] Innocentius the third. The Do­minick Friers were brought in at the same time: Auricular Confession was brought in the year before un­der the same Pope. Telesphorus brought in their Lenton Fast. Ca­lixtus instituted the four Ember Fasts: Hyginus brought in Chrism. It is easie to shew by whom every piece of their blasphemous Mass hath been patched together. Marri­age was first prohibited by Pope Ni­cholas the second, Alexander the se­cond, Gregory the seventh. The Communion in one kind forged, ur­ged, and decreed in the Council of Constance not much above two hun­dred years agone. The Church of Rome boasteth of Antiquity, and yet (as one saith) brings new things e­very day: she makes a shew of some old patched Clothes, to make the world believe that she comes from far, as the Gibeonites did: but let a man examine her Doctrine by pieces, he shall find she comes not from very far, and almost all is new. It cannot be proved, that the antient Church, in many ages, after the A­postles, [Page 74]excluded the people from the Cup; or kept them from read­ing the holy Scripture, or made Pi­ctures of the Trinity, or yielded veneration to the Images of Saints, or call'd the Virgin Mary the Queen of Heaven, or made mention of the Roman indulgences, or of the pow­er of the Pope, to depose Kings, and fetch Souls out of Purgatory, &c. In a word, saith old Doctor Du Mou­lin, as it is now another Doctrine, so it is another Church, because it is another Religion.

That true Antiquity is not of our Adversaries side: 1. The Greek Church testifieth: for the Greci­ans affirm, that their Church is the Mother of the Roman Church, and hath born the first prerogative in the orthodoxal verity. The Syrians boast themselves to be the first Chri­stians in the world, because that St. Peter had his Seat seven year at An­tioch before ever he went to Rome. 2. The Eastern and Southern Churches do give the priority and priviledg of Antiquity unto the Church of Antioch before Rome.

Symmachus, a Pagan, Symmach. writing to the Christian Emperours, Valens, Theo­dosius and Arcadius, he desireth them to have a reverence for the Pagan Religion, by reason̄ of her Antiqui­ty. If (saith he) the length of time gives authority to Religion, we must keep Faith to so many Ages, and follow our Fathers, who have so happily followed theirs. Then he personates the old Pagan- Rome, thus speaking to the Emperours. Good Princes, Fathers of your Countrey, respect my years, unto which the pious Ceremonies have brought me; permit me to use the Ceremonies of my Ancestors. This Religion hath subjected the World unto my Laws: these holy Services have beaten back Hannibal from the Wails, and the Senones from the Ca­pitol. Have I been preserved unto this time, that I should be rebuked in mine old age? The Correction of old age comes too late and is injuri­ous. What could Ambrose and Pru­dentius answer, who confuted that E­pistle, but that the Law of God is more antient than Numa Pompilius, [Page 76]the Author of those Ceremonies? and that all is new which is not from the beginning? and that Errour cannot be authorized by the num­ber of years. Our Fathers received it of their Fathers, August. saith Cresconius: sed errantes ab errantibus, saith Saint Augustine.

Of Universality.

THe Papists say, their Church is universal, both in respect of time, person and place: it hath al­ways been in the world, and hath flourished in all Countries and Nati­ons, ergo it is the true Church. That it is universal, they first prove by the name of Catholick. But if the name [Catholick] were an unchangeable mark, or natural property of any real Church, it should be of the Greek Church, or Nation, unto which the name of Catholick is prime and natural. If the real pro­perty answering to this name, had belonged to the Romish Church, [Page 77]the Holy Ghost would have expres­sed it by a Roman Name, and have called the Roman Church the Uni­versal Church: at least, the Roma­nists should have called themselves Universals; not Catholicks, as the learned Doctor Jackson noteth. It is easie to consider the vanity of this Assertion, Jack [...]on de Eccl. that a Name should be an unseparable property proceeding of the nature of any reality. But the Name of a Christian is a more honourable Title than the Name of Catholicks: for this was used in the Apostles time, Act. 11.26. and by the Apo­stles themselves allowed: but it is not certain, that the Name [Catho­lick] came from the Apostles. Se­condly, they prove their Universali­ty by the multitude of people that have received the Romish Faith: and their Church (say they) hath replenished the greatest part of the world. They would prove this by the Propagation of the Church in the Apostles time, in Tertullian, I­renaeus, Hierom, Augustine, yea and afterward in Gregories days: yea, and now also, besides many great [Page 78]Countries in Europe, they have their Church in India, America, and the unknown parts of the world, saith Bellarmine. But the truth is not al­ways to be measured by the judg­ment or opinion of the multitude. The greatest part is not the best: Christ calleth his Flock a little Flock. Besides, the Papists have nothing to do with the Church that was propagated in the Apostles time, nor for the space of five or six hundred years after Christ: and the most of their Errours are more lately sprung up than so. The Popes Jurisdiction in Europe is much dimi­nished. And for the Indians and A­mericans, it is well known what cru­elty the Spaniards used to win that simple people to Christ, as Benzo the Italian hath related it: and there are few or none of their Po­pish Catholicks in those Countries, but of their own brood that have been sent thither. Universality, un­less it be joyned with verity, is no sufficient note of the Church, saith Mr. Fox.

Of Succession.

THey boast much of the long and perpetual Succession of their Popes from the Apostles for the space of these 1500 years and more, condemning all Churches which can­not shew the like order of Succession. But the Bishops of the Churches of Antioch and Rome, and Alexan­dria, boast themselves to be Succes­sors of Saint Peter, and yet are dis­senting and separate in Communi­on. The Bishops of Constantinople fetch their Succession from the Apo­stle Saint Andrew, as Nicephorus goeth about to prove in the eighth Book of his Chronology, Chapter 6. yet these Bishops, by the Judgment of the Roman Church, are Schisma­ticks and Hereticks. Whence it appears, that the Succession of Chairs cannot be a fit mark for the true Church, since it is found in He­retical Churches. In the Papal See some Schisms have been, and di­vers [Page 80]times many Popes together, excommunicating one another, and reciprocally calling one another An­tichrist, and of those Antichrists the worst commonly overcame. So ac­cording to the very Canons of the Roman Church, factions and cor­ruptions, in the creation of Popes, have frequently made their election void, and therefore have broken the thread of that Succession.

Of Unity.

THe Papists boast much of Uni­ty, Flac. Ilyric. but it is without ground of truth, and yet they have many Dis­sentions. Illyricus hath written a Book to the purpose, concerning the several Sects and Divisions amongst them. The Scotists and Thomists dif­fer about meritum condigni & con­grui, about Original sin in the Vir­gin Mary, about a solemn Vow and a single life. Great Differences there are between their Canonists and School-men. Albertus Pius dissented [Page 81]from Cajetan, Thomas from Lom­bard, Scotus from Aquinas, Occam from Scotu; Alliancenses from Occam. The first Nicene Council allowed Priests Marriage, and the Commu­nion in both kinds. The Councils of Basil and Constance forbad the Laity the use of the Cup: the same Councils decreed likewise that the Pope should be subject to General Councils. Many Antipopes have there been at one and the same time. Much also might be said of the great Diversity of their Monks and Friers, in their Food, Habits, Shaving and the like. Various are their Opinions likewise touching the Controversie of the Sacrament. The Papists are very Schismatical, engrossing the Title of Catholicks, whereby they would imply both truth of Doctrine and universality of Consent to be found only with them: but (as one well observeth) upon no better grounds than the Turks arrogate the Title of Mussulmann [...], that is, Crocks Hyp [...]. Or­thodox, and I [...]ann [...], that is, at Uni­ty. It is not their number that ex­cuseth them from Schism, no more [Page 82]than the revolt of the ten Tribes from the house of David, could make the two Tribes that clave to it guilty of that rent, and themselves to be innocent. Unity must be in the truth; else the saying of Nazi­anzen will take place.

Though Popery appear to have in it Unity, yet the same is Vanity and Antichristianity, and not in Christs Faith and Verity.

Of the Power of working Mi­racles.

BEllarmine doth greatly upbraid our Church for the defect of Mi­racles, saying, Hereticos non potuis­se extorquere Miracula neque à Deo, neque à Diabolo, that Hereticks (meaning the Protestants) do neither extort Miracles from God, nor from the Devil. But do they take a pride [Page 83]that the Devil is forward in advan­cing their Cause, and so backward to do us any kindness; we will rest content with such Miracles as our Saviour and the Apostles wrought at the propagating of the Gospel: but when we dissent from Christs Doctrine we will cast about for new Miracles.

I. A Miracle is a marvelous, The pre­tended Miracles of Saint Francis, reported by Vin­centius, Ant [...]rine, B [...]naven­ture, and Su [...]ius, are more than marve­lous. sen­sible, real Work, above the vertue of natural causes, wrought for good ends, especially for the promoting of Gods Glory, and Mans Salvation. It is a work of wonder, Act. 2.22. Luk. 8.25. Act. 7.30, 31. So it is said of Simon Magus, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the Miracles and Signs which were done; έξίστατο, he was transported beyond himself with admiration. It is true; many things may cause wonder, which are not miraculous; as, 1. Other great Works. 2. False and seeming Miracles, wrought by the power and subtilty of Satan. But here I speak of such Works as afford just cause of wonder, such Works as deserve admiration from [Page 84]the wisest of men; false Miracles are wonders in shew only.

II. True Miracles are sensible Works, apparent to some or other of the Senses: and therefore that pretended Popish Miracle of Tran­substantiation is but an absurd fancy, a thing denied by the Senses; the Smell, the Taste, the Eye, all with one consent say, it is Bread and Wine, and not Flesh and Blood. When our Saviour turned Water in­to Wine, there was a sensible change, it had the colour and taste of Wine, and that so evident, that the Go­vernour of the Feast preferred it a­bove any they had drunk before. When Melancton was a young Scho­lar at the University, he heard one Lempus, a Popish Doctor, who would take upon him to draw a Pi­cture of Transubstantiation and so to present a shadow of it to the Eye, though it were invisible, yea and impossible in it self: but Melancton (though he was then but a youth) instead of wondering at the suppo­sed Miracle, admired the dotage and sottishness of the Doctor.

III. A Miracle is a true and real Work, false Miracles are deceitful appearances: many Popish Miracles are meer cheats of some lewd per­sons, couzening tricks of deceitful men, or wonders of lying spirits.

IV. True Miracles are above the vertue of natural causes: false Mi­racles may seem to the weakness of men to be above the power of Crea­tures, but are not so: many of them are effected by natural means, though in a secret and cunning way: o­thers of them are delusions of the Senses. Satan cannot work the least Miracle by the power of his word. No power of the Devil can raise the dead to life, which is a work simply above the power of Creatures; This Christ did with a word, Mark 5.41, 42.

V. The ends for which Divine Miracles are wrought, are always good: chiefly for the promoting of Gods Glory and Mans Salvation. So the Miracles wrought by the power of Christ tended to declare him to be the Son of God, the Saviour of the World, that men might receive [Page 86]him, and believe in him to Salvation, to prove and confirm the heavenly Doctrine of the Scripture, to seal the truth of the Gospel, to confirm the Minds of men in this assurance, that the way of holy worship com­manded in Scripture, is appointed by the Lord himself, by whose Al­mighty Power these Miracles are wrought: but the lying wonders a­mong the Papists, wrought by the cunning and power of Satan, are for evil and cursed ends, like their An­thor; to draw people from the truth, to confirm them in Errours, in Su­perstition, praying for the dead, and to the dead, worshipping of I­mages, establishing Monkish dreams of Purgatory, and the like forgeries and absurdities. Miracles are nei­ther necessary, nor perpetual in the Church. If any bring in a new Do­ctrine, it behoveth him to do Mira­cles: But we, of whom Miracles are demanded, bring no new Do­ctrine.

Of the Gift of Prophecy.

THis the Papists hold also to be a perpetual mark, whereby to know the Church: for they say, that the true Church of God wan­teth not those which are endued with the spirit of Prophecy: and they tell us, that in every age there hath flourished some Prophet in their Church. And for this they produce a few forged examples of Saint Bernard, and Saint Francis, a Popish Saint, and the Founder of the superstitious Order of the Fran­ciscans, and of such others. It is true, there have lived some among them in their Church, which in those days were counted Prophets and Prophetesses, as Hildegardis, anno 1146. likewise Bridget, Catharine Senensis, whom Bellarmine reckoneth up among others that wrought Mi­racles. But concerning these, a lear­ned man answereth, as the Jesuit doth for Sibilla, a Prophetess among [Page 88]the Heathen, that she prophecied as touching such matters as should fall out to the Church, for a testimony of the Faith of the Christians, and so to be counted herein a Pro­phetess of the Church, rather than of the Heathen. So if those three above-named were Prophetes­ses, they were of our Church, and not theirs; for they prophecied of the decay of their Church, and rai­sing up of ours. The Devil deluded many Popish Monks with strange Raptures and Visions, though in their nature far different from those men­tioned in the holy Scripture. For Saint Paul in his Revelations was caught up into the third Heaven; whereas most Monks, with a contra­ry motion, were carried into Hell and Purgatory, and there saw ap­paritions of strange Torments. Fuller in Vita Hil­dega [...]d. Also Saint Johus Revelation forbids all addition to the Bible, under heavy penalties; their Visions are com­monly on purpose to piece out the holy Scripture, and to establish such Superstitions as have no footing in Gods Word, as a judicious Di­vine [Page 89]of ours hath well noted.

We read of a notable Popish Prophetess in King Henry the eighths daies, Elizabeth Barton, a Nun, commonly called the holy Maid of Kent, who being instru­cted by the Friers, seigned as though she had many Revelations: she prophecied, that if the King pro­ceeded in his Divorce, then in que­stion between him and Queen Ca­tharine, that he should not be King one year, no not one month: but he lived almost twenty years after that: and this Prophetess worthi­ly suffered for her demerits, with all her accomplices.

Of Prosperity, which the Papists make another Mark of the t [...]ue Church.

NOw see how unlike the condi­tion of the false Church of Rome is to the condition of Saint Peter and the true Church of Christ. Saint Peter reckoneth upon suffe­ring [Page 90]persecution and death for the Gospel of Christ; & this he had from the mouth of Christ himself after his Resurrection; and so we see that the Church of Christ is not exemp­ted from the Cross by the Victory of Christ, or by his Resurrection from the dead. But wherein doth the Church of Rome (which preten­deth it self to be Saint Peters Bisho­prick and Diocess, and its Bishop to be its Successor) glory? In a flou­rishing Church-Monarchy, sufficient to make Kings, Princes, Emperours, to wait at their Gates, to hold the Popes Stirrup, lead his Horse, lay their Necks under his Feet, kiss his Foot; sufficient to depose Kings and Emperours; sufficient to kill with Fire and Sword those that oppose their Decrees and Inventions, though not convinced of any on Er­rour by the Word of God right­ly understood. And in this estate they bragg, that their Church hath continued many hundred years, without any interruption. Could the true Church of Christ ever say so much in any age? May not the [Page 91]Church say as Saint Paul of himself, Bonds and imprisonment abide me, po­verty, contempt from the world: I am made a spectacle to Angels, to the world and to men. This true Kings Daughter is all glorious with in, her Beauty consisteth in inward & spiritual Graces not in Purple and Scarlet, Gold and precious Stones. The truth is, the Popish Church glo­rieth in her shame: and that which she boasteth of, is a good argument to prove that she is not the true Church and Spouse of Christ: who do talk so much of the Cross, and make so much of the sign of the Cross as the Pope and his Followers? But who do less bear the Cross of Christ than they? they lay it upon others backs with great cruelty and vio­lence, even themselves; that instead of being a suffering Church, it is a persecuting Church; instead of giving its Blood for the Truth, it doth so out­ragiously spill the Blood of others, that it should make any one, that is not fearfully blinded, to renounce it, and to come out of her as an ac­cursed Babylon, a Cage of unclean [Page 92]Birds. Are not the Popish cruelties registred, as it were, in Letters of Blood? consult our Book of Mar­tyrs, what banishing, excommuni­cating, cursing, imprisoning, rack­ing, reviling, drawing, beheading, hanging, burning, famishing, tor­menting divers ways, sometimes of single persons, sometimes of Tow [...] and Cities, sometimes by the com­mon Executioner, sometimes by great Armies as may be instanced in the Waldenses and Albigenses, somewhat more anciently, of later times in Germany, France, Italy, Spain, England, Scotland, Ireland. The scarlet-Whore seemeth (as it were) to have surfeited on the Blood of the Saints: our Country hath been polluted with horrible Mur­thers, until the Reign of King Henry the seventh, for the space of three hundred years, we were never ex­empted from civil Wars. Here ma­ny of our sacred Kings have been deposed and murthered by their near Blood and Kindred: how much innocent Blood was shed for the space of five years in Queen Marys [Page 93]days? and how many Popish Con­spiraces were there in Queen Eliza­beths days? And this addeth excee­dingly to his wickedness, that the Pope pretendeth to be a common Father of Christians, and the Vicar or Deputy of Christ, and under this mask acteth so mischievously against Christ and Christians.

Other Errours are of the Papists concerning the Church: That there are no Catholicks, but those of the Roman Church: That he is a Ca­tholick who believes all that the Ro­man Church delivereth, whether it be written in the Bible or not. That there is no Salvation out of the Roman Church: That the sin­cere preaching of the Gospel, and lawful administration of the Sacra­ments, Bp. Down­ham. Ca­ [...]al. are not a certain note of the Church: That to acknowledg the Roman Pope, and to be under him as the Vicar of Christ, the only Pastor, the Head of the whole Church, is a note of the true Church: That the particular Roman Church is the Mother, Mistress and Lady of all Churches: yea, the Mother of [Page 94]Faith: That the Roman Church did obtain this Primacy from our Lord and Saviour himself: That the Ro­man Church hath power of judg­ing all, neither is it lawful for any to judg her Judgment: That the Roman Church, as it cannot err, much less can it fail: That there is no sure ground for the authority of the Scriptures, but the infallible te­stimony of their Pope, and Catho­lick Roman Church. But the true Church must be discerned by the Scripture, and not the Scripture by the Church, unless a man would in the dark seek to find out the can­dle by the candlestick; whereas he should rather seek out the candle­stick by the light of the candle: for the Church is as the candlestick, and the Scripture as the light or candle. Finally, the Papists assert, that we are to be subject to the Church with­out limitation. So when, in the main­tenance of their Opinions, they are beaten off from the Scripture, they fly to the Church, and make use of its authority, which is with them in effect the Pope, whom they make [Page 95]the Head of the Church, and whose Sentence among them giveth all force and authority to that which the Church is said to define. How­soever the Church doth but signifie such a Society as consisteth of Men and Women: and therefore (set the Pope aside) to be absolutely sub­ject to the Church, what is it but to be the Servants of Men? which Saint Paul forbiddeth, and presseth his Prohibition with an argument drawn from the precious Blood of Christ the price of our Redempti­on. And therefore when once Co­chlaeus, a Champion of Popish Super­stition, speaking for the gross Ido­latry of worshipping Images, used this reason, Quod Mater Ecclesia hâc in parte audienda esset, cui hoc vi­sum fuisset, that our Mother the Church herein is to be obeyed, whose pleasure it is that Images should be worshiped; Brentius, a learned Divine, is said to have an­swered, Quid si Pater diversum praecipiat? what if our Father for­bid it? no Command of our Mo­ther, the Church on Earth, can bear [Page 96]us out, if our Father, which is in Heaven, speak the contrary. And therefore in yielding obedience to the Church, we must except our duty to God, and obey her no far­ther than her commands are allowed by him: much more must we reject the tyrannical and presumptuous Mandates of the Whore of Babylon, pretending her self to be the Spouse of Christ, wanting that authority which belongeth to the Church, and yet still challenging far more than the Churches right. A great mise­ry, of so many millions of poor, wretched souls, it is to be thus ensla­ved: and a most cursed practice it is of those, who go about to bring them again into such Antichristian bondage, who now are out of Baby­lon. But among all other Papists, how desperately wicked are the Jesuits, and how slavish: swearing absolute obedience to the General of their Society binding themselves by Oath to do whatsoever he com­mandeth them, Vide Ga­ges Survay of [...] W [...]st In­dies. without exception, though it be to murther Kings, and blow up Parliaments with Gunpow­der, and any such like villanies?

Of the Members of the Church.

THe Members of the Church considered severally, are

• The Clergy,
• The Laity.

Their Errours are,

1. That to make a Member of the Catholick Church, Bp. Downham Ca [...] [...]a [...]. there is not re­quired Grace or any internal vertue, but a profession of Faith is sufficient.

2. That the Clergy are not held under civil Laws, by any coactive, but only directive Bond, that is, that the Clergy are not subject to the civil Magistrate.

3. That Clergy-men are not bound to keep and observe the positive Laws of Princes, if they be contra­ry to the Canons of the Church: neither ought they to be cited be­fore the civil Magistrate for any cause, or to be judged by him. It is absurd, saith Bellarmine, that the sheep should judg the Shepherd.

4. That the goods of the Clergy, [Page 98]both ecclesiastical and secular, are free from the Tribute and Taxe of secular Princes.

5. That the election of Bishops dependeth upon the Pope, and that they all receive Jurisdiction from the Pope.

6. That single life is always joy­ned to holy Orders by divine right; that Marriage in the Clergy is a greater sin than Whoredom.

7. That men are to be prepared for holy Orders by the first shaving.

8. That the Clergy-men of the first Order are Priests, properly so called, which, they say, are institu­ted to offer an external and real Sa­crifice.

9. That preaching is not necessary to the Priesthood: and in the Ro­man Church the greatest part of Priests do not preach. They must have some other Charge or Com­mission besides the Priesthood for to be Preachers.

10. There is that which they call Irregularity, that which hinders a man from being capable of the holy Orders, or performing the Functions [Page 99]belonging thereunto after they have received them, Ignorance maketh not a man uncapable of holy Orders. Some of their Bishops could not read, [...] l. 1. c. 61. but they give them a co-ad­jutor: for they hold, that a man may serve God by an Attorney. Yea, they confer the sacred Orders upon Infants in the Cradle, as Cardinal Tolet the Jesuit teacheth. No man can receive nor exercise the Priest­hood, that hath any notable defect in his Body, especially, if he hath lost one of the Fingers wherewith they handle the Host: That man is irregular also that hath had two Wives. An Hermophrodite is not irregular, provided, that the virile Sexe do prevail, as Emanuel Sa, in his Aphorisms, teacheth. I­tem, that man is irregular, that hath cut off a member from any o­ther man. An Heretick also, though converted, is uncapable of Orders & his Children likewise, and his Chil­drens Children: yet in this never­theless, the Pope gives a Dispensati­on. Item a wilful Murtherer: in which rank they are not placed that [Page 100]disclose an Heretick to the Inquisi­tion, for to put him to death, nor those that carry wood for to burn him: nor that man that gives a wo­man a Potion to drink for to kill a Child in her Womb, as the same Jesuit there teacheth. A married man is not admitted to any Order: but he that whoreth, or keeps at home a Concubine, or more, may be a Priest, and perform the Functi­ons belonging thereunto, as Pope Innocent the third doth define in the Title de Bigamis. And thereupon the Gloss of the Doctors addeth, Whoredom hath more priviledge here than Chastity: Vide the J [...]us [...]s Morals. yea, a notorious Bug­gerer, or Sodomite, is not irregular or uncapable of holy Orders, and may sing Mass, as Navarrus teach­eth, who was the Popes Penitenti­al, and the most learned of all the Canonists.

11. They hold, that the Priests and all Spiritual persons ought to be rich, because Saint Paul saith, a Bishop must be given to Hospita­lity.

12. That no Priest is to be de­prived for Fornication.

13. That Christians may be di­stinguished by divers Names, and separated into various Professions of different Religions.

14. That those Professions are the state of perfection.

15. That publick exercises of Re­ligion ought to be in an unknown Language.

16. That private exercises are performed that way also in a more holy manner.

17. That Kings enjoy their King­doms by the Popes favour.

18. That the Pope hath right to give and take away, and translate Kingdoms.

19. That the Roman Church hath Cardinals for Sides-men to the Pope, upon whom the universal Church is turned as upon hinges.

20. That these are to be joined with the Pope in the Government of the universal Church: and that those, whether they be Bishops, or Presbyters, or Deacons, are not on­ly to be preferred before other Bi­shops, Archbishops, Primates, Pa­triarchs, but to be equalled even with Kings.

Their Errours concerning Justi­fying Faith.

1. THat Faith hath its proper seat and place only in the under­standing, not in the heart and affe­ction, and that it is not an assurance or considence of the heart.

2. That Faith is but a bare assent of the Mind, without knowledg or understanding of that whereunto it assenteth. That there is an implicit Faith, which is the Faith of simple men, who although they are not a­ble to give good reason of their Be­lief, yet it is enough for them to say they are Catholick-men, and that they will live and die in that Faith which the Catholick Church doth teach. Now this implicit Faith, which, they say, is sufficient for common Catholicks, is nothing else but to believe as the Church be­lieveth, though they know nothing themselves particularly.

3. That it is not the property [Page 103]of Faith specially to apply to every Believer the Promises of God in Christ, (for this they boldly call pre­sumption) but generally to believe whatsoever is contained in Gods Word to be true.

4. They affirm, that an historical Faith, a Faith of working Mira­cles, and that Faith which justifi­eth, are all one in substance. That the Faith of Miracles differeth only from justifying Faith in an acciden­tal quality, of more fervour, devo­tion, and confident trust: yea, the Rhemists are more absurd: that Faith (say they) which Saint James calls a dead Faith, is notwithstanding a true Faith, and the same which is called the Catholick Faith.

5. That true justifying Faith may be separated from Love, and other Christian vertues.

6. That Faith doth not justifie as an Instrument, in apprehending the Righteousness of Christ, but as a proper and true cause it actually ju­stifyeth by the dignity, worthiness, and meritorious work thereof.

7. That Works are more princi­pal [Page 104]than Faith in the matter of Justi­fication.

8. That we are said to be justi­fied by Faith, because Faith is the beginning only, the foundation and root of Justification.

9. That men are not justified by the only imputation of Christs Righteousness, or by the Remission of sins: or, that we are not formally justified by the Righteousness of Christ.

10. That our particular Salvati­on is not to be believed by Faith.

11. That a man may fall away from the Faith, which once truly he had, and be altogether deprived of the state of Grace, so that he may justly be counted among the Repro­bates.

Their Errours concerning Repentance.

1. THat Repentance (which they call Penance) is a Sacrament properly so called.

2. That Repentance in the New-Testament is another thing from that Testament is another thing from that which it was in the old: and also that in the New Testament which is after Baptism, is another thing from that which is before.

3. That these three are the true and proper parts of Penance, Con­trition, Confession to the Priest, and Satisfaction to God for our sins.

4. Contrition (which otherwise neither ought nor can be excluded from Repentance) is required by our Adversaries not simply in Repen­tance; but they teach, that sins are blotted out, and satisfied for by Con­trition.

5. They appoint a certain mea­sure to Contrition, and do teach, that unless it be sufficient, there is no Remission of sins granted.

6. In reckoning the parts of Re­pentance they omit Faith, and take away, as it were, the soul and life of true Repentance.

7. That Repentance goeth before Justification by Faith, and that it is a way rather unto Faith and Justi­fication in the Remission of sins.

8. That Contrition, which is joi­ned with an inward terrour of the Mind, and proceedeth from the sight of our sins, doth not appertain to the Law, but to the Gospel.

9. Some Papists affirm, that in Contrition it is not necessary to have a formal, that is, a resolute and ex­press purpose of newness of life, but that this is always included in the detesting of sin; which implicit or inclusive purpose is sufficient.

10. They teach, that Contrition ought to be perfect, because it must proceed from the love of God, which is the most perfect kind of love.

11. They affirm, that Contrition is a necessary means unto Justificati­on, and they make Contrition (as a part of satisfaction for our sins, so) a cause of Justification and Re­mission of sins, not only in disposing and preparing us thereunto, but in that thereby we verily obtain and deserve Remission of our sins.

12. S [...] t li 4. [...] 3. [...]. 17. Contrition (they say) is not necessary for venial, or small offen­ces, neither is a man bound there­unto. Some think that a general [Page 107]Confession sufficeth for mortal sins, which a man understandeth not.

13. That there is a kind of Con­trition, that proceedeth only from the fear of punishment, when a man leaveth to sin, not for any love to God, but only for fear of Hell.

14. That it is necessary to Justifi­cation, that sins all and every one (as far as may be) be confessed to the Priest as to a Judg.

15. That none can rightly seek for absolution at the Priests hands, unless they confess particularly, at least, all their mortal sins, whether they be committed in mind, heart, will and cogitations only; or in word and work, with all the neces­sary circumstances and differences of the same.

16. That this sacramental Confes­sion (as they call it) must be made secretly to the Priest.

17. That every Christian ought once in a year to present himself (when he is come to years of dis­cretion) to the Priest, and to make his confession to him, viz. in time of Lent.

18. This order and custom of Confession they hold to be a divine Ordinance, no humane Tradition.

19. That every one is to confess to his own Parish Priest.

20 By this means Confessors will fearch into the secrets of the Marri­age-bed, Benedict. C [...]nf s. To [...]et. de Institu [...]. Sac [...]rd Nava [...]. Sanchez. Burcha [...]d. and enquire of things which ought not to be named: & under co­lour of examining the Consciences, they play with libidinous interroga­tions, and teach all kinds of vices: you shall find there a thousand sorts of charms, philters, vices against Na­ture, and meretricious tricks, under colour of awaking benummed Con­sciences, and bringing them to Con­fession. Who so will understand some of that impure Science, let him read the Book of Benedicts Confes­sions, Cardinal Tolet of the Instituti­on of Priests, Navarrus, Sanchez, the Roman Penitential, and the Decree of Burchard Bishop of Wormes. By the same Confessions Priests disco­ver the secrets of Kings, know their weaknesses, and learn their in­tentions, of which they inform the Pope.

21. By the same Confessions the Popes have usurped a power over the Temporals of Kings, and over their persons, imposing satisfactory Penances upon them after Confessi­on, and not granting them absoluti­on but upon conditions burdensome to their Crowns, and ignominious to their persons: I pass by the sor­did trick of taking twelve pence for a Confession. It seems they hold it unreasonable, that a man should for­give sins for nothing.

22. Du Mou­lin. One of the great abuses in this point is, that the Papists put Confession among meritorious Works: as if a Murtherer deserved recompences for freely confessing his crime. By that reckoning it will prove an useful and a salutary course to commit a multitude of sins, to get multitudes of merits by confessing them.

23. It is also a rule of these Do­ctors, that a sinner may confess part of his sins to one Confessor, and part to another, and so have from each of them a demi-absoluti­on.

24. They assert, that it is not a sufficient satisfaction, to believe that Christ hath abundantly satisfi­ed for us: neither yet is it enough to amend and correct our lives, but God must also be satisfied for our sins, by the punishment and chastise­ment of our selves, as by affliction laid upon us by God, or penance en­joined by God, or by Praier, Fasting, Alms-deeds, which we do take up for our selves.

25. That satisfactory Works are not only profitable to the sufferers themselves, but also for other their fellow-members in Christ, and one may bear the burden, and discharge the debt of another.

26. Not only amendment, and ceasing to sin, or Repentance in heart before God is always enough to obtain full reconcilement, but there must be outward penalty, cor­rection and chastisement besides.

27. That Praier, Fasting, Alms, are those satisfactory Works, where­by we do satisfie God for the tem­poral punishment due to sin: and besides these there are other Works [Page 111]which we are not bound unto; as whipping, beating of the body, and the like.

28. Three ways, they say, God is satisfied. 1. By bearing patient­ly the punishment that God layeth upon us. 2. By assuming volunta­rily the laborious and painful works of penance. 3. In willing undergo­ing the Sentence of the Priest in his penal injunctions.

29. The satisfactory and merito­rious Works of the Saints which do abound, being communicable, and applicable to the faithful that want, are the very ground of the Indul­gences and Pardons of the Church, and the very treasure thereof, and to be dispensed according to every mans need by the Pastors of the Church. Here many blasphemies and untruths are couched together.

1. That a mans penalties may be greater than his sins, and so his a­bounding may supply another mans want. 2. That the Church Gover­nours may dispense the merits of one to another. They say the con­trary themselves, that the aboun­ding [Page 112]passions of the Saints are appli­cable to others by the sufferers in­tention. Rhem. 1. Colos. 2.2. Then not by the Churches dispensation. 3. It is a great blasphemy, that one may be holpen by anothers me­rits, and it doth derogate from the truth of Christ, whose only merits are the treasure of the Church. And what a presumption is this, that they dare to match the sufferings of Christ and of the Saints together?

30. That by the censure of the Church imposed upon offenders, they do not only satisfie the Church, but God also; and so consequently the Indulgence of the Church doth set them free from the guilt of the punishment of sin, both before God and Men.

Of the divers Kinds of Indul­gences, and the Profit of them.

BEllarmine rehearseth five kinds of Indulgences, and justifieth them all.

1. That there is an Indulgence of forty days, which is a release of the penance which was to be done forty days.

2. There is an Indulgence of the third or fourth part of their sins, that is, of the punishment due for so much of their sins.

3. An Indulgence plenary was for the whole punishment: and some­time Indulgences are granted for ten or twenty thousand years. T [...]en so many blasphemies and other sins, as are by some committed every moment, deserve many thousand years penance: which notwithstan­ding by the sharpness of Purgatory-pain may be satisfied for in three or four hundred years.

4. Indulgences are granted to some in their life-time, to some in the point of death.

5. Some are temporary, for a time, as limited to daies, and years, same are perpetual, which are tied to places, Churches, Altars, or to things moveable, as to Rosaries, Holy-grains, &c.

1. They hold, that Indulgences are profitable to all whosoever, not only to notorious and publick offen­ders but even to those that are ten­ding to perfection.

2. That the power of granting Indulgences doth rest only in the Pope, as the Successor of Peter, to whom Christ said, Whatsoever you loose on Earth shall be loosed in Hea­ven, Matth. 16.19.

2. That plenary Indulgences can only be granted by the Pope, nei­ther by Cardinals, whose Indulgen­ces exceed not an hundred daies, neither by Bishops or Metropoli­tans, who can grant Indulgences but for one year in the Dedication of Churches, and for forty daies at other times: nor yet by General Councils.

3. Bishops receive this power to give Indulgences, not immediately from God, but from the Pope, from whom also they receive their Jurisdiction: and this is an argu­ment thereof, because the Pope may make void Indulgences granted by Bishops: but so-can he not Orders, or Sacraments ministred by them.

4. That Parish-Pastors have no power to give Indulgences, but by Commission from the Pope or their Bishop: because they are the Prin­ces of the people of God, to whom it belongeth to distribute the com­mon Goods of the Church.

5. That the power of Order is not necessary to give Indulgences, but the power of Jurisdiction only; and therefore the Pope or Bishop may grant Indulgences, though they be not in Orders.

6. Neither is this power of Indul­gences lost by any deadly sin.

Of the Disposition required to be in them that receive Indulgences.

1. THe Papists say, that Indul­gences, D [...] Willet Controv. may be granted to a sinner, and for such works as are done while he is in the state of sin, as if a sinful man do contribute to­ward the recovering of Jerusalem.

2. Yet a man cannot perceive the fruit of such Indulgences, unless he be in the state of Grace.

3. If the good work enjoyned to be done, be accompanied or joyned with venial sin, it hindereth the fruit of Indulgence.

4. That he that will receive benefit by these Indulgences, must confess and be truly penitent.

5. He cannot enjoy the Indul­gence, that doth not perform all the works that are enjoyned.

6. That Indulgences may be pro­fitable to those that will not though they can, satisfie for themselves, but do rest in the satisfaction of others.

How the Papists hold that Indul­gences are profitable for the dead.

1. THat the Praiers of the living, and other works by way of impetration profit the dead: ergo, the same works being also satisfacto­ry, do also benefit them by way of satisfaction.

2. That the faithful departed make one Body, and one Church with the faithful living: therefore (say they) the satisfactions of the living may be applied to the dead.

3. As to the manner how Indul­gences are applied to the dead; some of them affirm, that the Pope may judicially absolve the Souls in Purga­tory, and that they do belong unto his J [...]diction and so he may ex­tend [...] indulgences to them, as un­to the living. Some say, that Indul­gen [...] [...] profitable to the dead, af­ter [...] [...]ner of the suffrage of the C [...], as the Praiers of it do [...] by way of merit, impetra­tion, [Page 118]satisfaction; so Indulgences are granted to the dead, as they are satisfactory; and so after the manner of a suffrage as it is satisfactory. Some of them think that Indulgen­ces do profit the dead of condignity and worthiness.

4. They hold that Bishops and other inferiour Prelates cannot ap­ply Indulgences to the dead, but on­ly the Pope.

5. That Indulgences directly be­long to the living indirectly to the dead, no otherwise than as the living do perform the works enjoyned for the dead.

6. That Indulgences do not profit the dead in common, otherwise than as they rejoice one for anothers good; but only those Souls are de­livered thereby, to whom they are particularly intended.

7. That the Pope may release unto a man living the pain of Purga­tory, which otherwise he were sub­ject unto.

But when the Papists have cast up their accounts, they shall find, that neither Purgatory nor Pardons will [Page 119]serve their turn: their summa totalis will be Christ crucified. As for Indul­gences and Popes Pardons, the an­tient Councils were never of Coun­cil with them, the old Fathers ne­ver favoured, nor so much as savou­red them.

Their Errours concerning Fasting.

VVE are so far from condem­ning of Fasting, which is so often recommended in Scripture, and joyned with Praier, that as Prai­er sanctifieth the Fast, so the Fast may add heat unto Praier, and bring down the insolency of the Flesh. Sobriety preserveth Chastity, bri­dleth Lust, and is a help to Watch­fulness. Our complaint of the Ro­man Church about Fasting, is,

1. That she hath changed Fasting into a distinction of Meats. They place their Fasts, not in Sobriety, or Temperance in Meat and Drink, neither in a total abstaining from all [Page 120]Meat and Drink for a certain time, which was used of the Antients, but in abstinence from Flesh and white Meats.

2. They put Fasting among Me­rits and Satisfactions, of an exercise of Humility making an occasion of Pride.

3. The Pope hath taken this oc­casion to raise his Empire, to set a Rule to the Markets, to the Kitchins, to the Bellies, reserving to himself the authority to dispence; having to that effect multiplied Fasting-days to that number, that they are more than one quarter of the year; ta­king upon him to give Laws to the universal Church: whereas in old time Bishops gave Orders every one in his Diocess, without any depen­dance upon the Prelat of Rome, as Doctor Du Moulin noteth.

4. That of sins against Gods Law, as Fornication, Stealing, and Lying, the least Priests can give the Absolution; but eating a bit of Flesh in the holy Week is a sin for which a man is sent to the Bi­shop, or to the Penitentiary. And [Page 121]they account that man to commit a more heinous crime, who should taste Flesh upon the days forbidden, than he that should be taken in A­dultery, or other wickedness. And in Italy and Spain men are in greater danger for tasting Flesh upon the days inhibited, than for committing capital crimes.

5. In the Roman Church he that hath eaten his belly full of Fish, is accounted to have fasted: but he that for want of other meat hath ea­ten a little Flesh, is thought to have violated the Fast.

6. They lay a strait Yoke upon mens shoulders, charging them un­der pain of damnation to keep their Fasting-days, making it deadly sin, yea Heresie to transgress them; as one Lawrence Staple was persecuted, anno 1531; because, in Lent ha­ving no Fish, he did eat Butter and Cheese.

7. There are many Mockeries in their Popish Lent-fast. 1. They permit most delicate Fishes to be ea­ten, which are more dainty than any Veal or Mutton: such as are [Page 122]Pikes, Trouts, Salmonds, Gudgeons, Lampreys, Oysters, &c. These use to be Dainties many times in the more costly Banquets of rich men, perhaps of Noble Personages: The use of these, and the drinking of choice Wines are a fit means (for­sooth) to tame the Flesh. 2. And that these Hypocrites may seem to fast till evening, they sing their E­ven-song at Dinner-time, that after­ward they may freely banquet, and take their repast, as if God did not know the hour of the day but by their Service and Singing. 3. In the evening they make a Collation (so they call it) with divers delicate Sawees, Confections, Spices, Al­monds, and Wine; and in the mean time they bear the World in hand that they fast notably.

8. In the Roman Church one man fasteth for another, as if a Judg ought to release a Fellon, because his Brother hath not dined, as a lear­ned man noteth.

9. That the Penances of Fasting imposed on a sinner, are redeemed with Money, and that corporal [Page 123]pains are changed into pecuniary.

10. That this opens a wide Gate unto Traffique: so far, that the Book called the Taxation of the Apostoli­cal Chancery puts a certain price to the Letters of such Dispensati­ons, in these Words: That a Lay­man may not be obliged to fast upon the days to which he is obliged by the Church, and may eat Cheese. The Letter cost twenty Groats.

Of their Dispensing with Fasts.

BUt the Jesuits have found many ways whereby to dispense with Fasts, and the use of Meats on Fa­sting-days.

1. They will have the obligation to Fasting to commence only at the age of twenty one years, and that it ceaseth commonly at sixty.

2. Father Bauny dispenseth for this Obligation with Labourers, Jesuits Morals. Vine-dressers, Masons, Joyners, and generally all Handicrafts-men and Artificers. To these he addeth such [Page 124]as have any infirmity of Body or Mind. They who complain of pain in Head, Heart or Stomach, and who being empty and without food cannot sleep, are not comprised un­der this Precept. Tombou rine.

3. Tambourin extends the Dis­pensation for Fasting to those who are notably sick, though they have fallen into this sickness by their own proper fault: and that the same must be said of a sick person, unto whose Health Fasting might happi­ly conduce. The same must be said of him (saith the same Author) who cannot sleep in the night for a consi­derable time, unless he sup. The Indulgence of the Church in permit­ting to eat at noon on fasting-days, is a Rite according to this Casuist, which its Children may make use of against it, to the neglect of its Com­mandment.

4. The Jesuits hardly leave any Profession which they exempt not from fasting. 1. All Labourers (as such) are exempt; for the Church (saith he) hath no intention to de­prive the faithful of the exercise of [Page 125]their Trades, and course of life. 2. Those who climb the Pulpit (saith Bauny) every day in Lent are not obliged to fast, Bauny. because of the ex­tream toyl they are obliged unto by their Profession. There is the same reason for Confessors and Missiona­ries, who spend whole days almost in Confession; and for Professors, who commonly ascend their Chairs twice a day, and continue therein commonly longer than Preachers.

5. Emanuel Sa saith, Em. Sa. when Fa­sting hinders the Husband from per­forming the Marriage-duty toward the Wife, or causeth the Woman to be disliked by her Husband, they are to be exempt from fasting.

6. Tambourin saith, a young Maid that would marry, if, by fasting all the Lent, she notably blemish her Beauty, is also exempt from fa­sting.

7. Another Casuist saith, that one may be justly excused from fa­sting, when he cannot do it without trouble: as if Fasting were not in it self troublesome, and were not insti­tuted to cause pain, to subdue and [Page 126]mortifie the Flesh. Besides, they who are most averse to fasting, have commonly more need thereof than others.

8. It sufficeth (saith Tambourin) to the Pope for to dispense with Fa­sting, that he hath a design to shew his kindness towards some persons who have obliged him. If it be kindness to dispense with Fasting, commanded by the Church, it is ri­gour contrary to the affection and humanity of the Church to com­mand it.

9. Escobar. Escobar gives also another ex­pedient to exempt us from Fasting without necessity and dispensation; which is, to depart from the place where the Fast is, & to go to another place, where it is not observed. And if any think, that this is to deceive our selves, while we think to deceive the Church, Filliut. Fulliutius answereth; That this is not to deceive the Church, nor to clude its Command, but only to avoid the Obligati­on of the Commandment, in pursu­ance of the right which every one hath to do it when he can. Non est [Page 127]ulla fraus, si quis utatur jure suo. Fil­liutius.

Their Errours concerning Oaths, and Vows.

1. THey teach men to swear by the Creatures: yea, they are bold to say, that it is not only lawful to swear by Creatures, but sometimes more convenient than to swear immediately by God him­self.

2. They say, that it is lawful to swear by the name of Saints, be­cause all is referred to the honour of God.

3. They deny Oaths to be fit for the perfect.

4. They defend Vows that are made unto the Saints.

5. They say, that the Pope can absolve from the Bond of Vows and Oaths.

6. Oaths among the Papists are taken by touching the Saints Re­liques, that so the Obligation of the [Page 128]Oath may be divided betwixt God and the Saints.

7. Upon the Question touching the necessity of keeping an Oath, and whether the Pope can dispense with an Oath made to God, you have divers and contrary Councils, where the Pope did preside; which conclude contrary things, and con­demn and reverse the decisions one of another. And the worst opinion prevailed at last: for yet at this day the Pope dispenseth from Oaths, that is; he takes upon him the pow­er of declaring that a man is not bound to be faithful to God.

8. They hold, that the proper Vows of Christians are voluntary, not of such things which Christians are bound to do in duty, but of such as they may leave undone, if they will, such as are their Po­pish Vows of Continency, and vo­luntary (or rather wilful) Pover­ty.

9. All voluntary Vows (say they) made by Christians, though not com­manded by God, as not to eat Flesh, not to drink Strong Drink, or to [Page 129]live unmarried, do concern the Wor­ship of God, and thereby men are made more acceptable unto him.

10. There are three kinds of Vows which belong unto Monke­ry, the Vow of voluntary Poverty: the Vow of Obedience unto the Mo­nastical Governours: the Vow of Continency.

11. They say, it is an acceptable Service to God, for a man to give all he hath to the poor, and by Vow to consecrate and addict him­self to voluntary poverty. They that do enter into the Monkish Profession, do Vow in all things to become obedient to their Gover­nour, and to follow his Rules and Injunctions: as the Franciscans fol­low Saint Francis's Rule, who in­stead of a Girdle put a Cord about him, went bare-foot, in Winter-season covered his Flesh with Ice and Snow. The Vow of Continency (say they) is commendable and me­ritorious in all that do take it upon them: and after the Vow made they are sure to receive that high Gift of Continence, if they duely labour [Page 130]for it: Rhem. Annotat. 1 Cor. 7.7. But (say they) whosoever marrieth after the Vow made sinneth dam­nably, and turneth back after Satan.

12. They assert, that those that are come to the years of Discretion, may at any age take upon them the Vow of Monkery: that Children may enter into Profession of Monke­ry without their Parents consent, as the Men of fourteen years old, at the least, the Women of twelve.

13. That two married persons (the Man and the Wife) may sepa­rate themselves, and vow and pro­mise single life for ever, so long as they both shall live.

14. Their opinion is, that if the Marriage be contracted only, but not yet consummate by the parties coming together, it is lawful for either of them without the others consent to vow Chastity.

15. They allow of great variety of Vows, which have various Rules of Life, invented by men beside the holy Scripture: And as if there were greater perfection in those Rules, than in the Doctrine of the Gospel, [Page 131]and a more compendious way to Perfection and Salvation.

16. They teach by the observati­on of them eternal Life, and a more excellent degree of glory is obtained.

17. To any one that is buried in a Monks Cowl, especially that of St. Francis, they promise Remission of sin in part.

Their Errours concerning Marri­age set down by Bp. Downham.

1. THat Matrimony, though it were instituted in Paradise, is truly and properly a Sacrament of the new Law.

2. And therefore doth confer Grace upon the married, making them acceptable, ex opere operato.

3. That the Church hath power to constitute impediments that shall hinder Marriage.

4. That the Church hath power to dispense with the Degrees of Consanguinity forbidden of God, and to make more Degrees, which [Page 132]shall not only hinder Marriage, but break it.

5. That the solemn Vow of Cha­stity and holy Orders are an impe­diment, both hindering Marriage to be made, and breaking it being made.

6. Also difference of Religion doth not only hinder Marriage to be made, but also break it being made.

7. That Marriage contracted be­tween Infidels, when either is con­verted to the Faith, is broken, viz. because that Marriage was not a Sa­crament.

8. They say, that the Church of Rome did rightly prohibit Mar­riage of old to the seventh, but af­terwards to the fourth degree of Consanguinity, according to the Ca­nonical Rule of Reckoning (but the fourth degree of Canonical Recko­ning is the seventh and eighth in the Civil Law.)

9. The spiritual Kindred (which ariseth, forsooth, from Baptism and Confirmation) may hinder Marri­age to be made, and break it being [Page 133]made. To these more may be ad­ded.

1. They assert, Cusan. Ep. ad. Bohem. that Virginity is to be preferred before Marriage, not only for that it is a more quiet state of life, and freer from troubles in this world, but that it is more convenient for the Service of God, and that it hath a grateful Purity and Sanctity both of Body and Soul, which Marriage hath not.

2. They prohibit the Clergy to marry, saying, that Marriage is a state which defileth a man, and makes him unfit for the exercising of sacred Offices.

3. The Pope in separating and dis­solving Marriages lawfully contra­cted, upon pretence of a greater per­fection, August. and to enter into the Mona­stical life, followed those old Here­ticks, called Priscillianists, who did the same, of whom Saint Augustine to Quod vul.-Deus, saith, that they separated Marriages, and disjoyned Husbands from their Wives against their wills. If Marriage be made a Sacrament by the Faith mutually gi­ven, or by the Blessing in the Church, [Page 134]as they hold in the Roman Church, how dares the Pope dissolve a Sa­crament?

4. The Papists use divers Rites and Ceremonies in Marriage. Bellarm. c. 33. de Matrim. 1. They which are joyned in Matrimo­ny are blessed of the Priest. 2. Ob­lation is made for them in the Sacri­fice of the Mass. 3. They are covered with a Veil. 4. They are coupled together vittâ purpureâ & candidâ, with a Scarf, or Ribbon, partly white, partly purple. 5. The Bride giveth to the Bride-groom a Ring first hallowed and blessed of the Priest. 6. He commendeth them to God in his Praiers. 7. He ad­monisheth them of their mutual Du­ty. Some of those Rites we altoge­ther allow, and use them our selves: for both Praiers are made unto God for them, and they are by the Mini­ster put in mind of their Duty: and all is done by us in the vulgar Tongue, much more to the edifying of the people, and comfort of the parties themselves: whereas their Idolatrous Priest chattereth all in an unknown Tongue.

Their Errours touching Extream Unction.

1. THey say, that Extreme Uncti­on is truly & properly a Sa­crament of the New Testament: Du Moul. Buckler of Faith. which is the anointing of those that are extream sick, to assure them of Remission of their Sins, it is done after the Letany is read, wherein above fifty Saints are named and called upon.

2. The Matter is Oil-Olive con­secrated by the Bishop, not simple or unhallowed, as is Water in Bap­tism. The form is in these words; By this holy Ʋnction, and by his most godly Mercy, God forgive me.

3. The Papists say, Dominic. a S [...]to Di­stinct. 23. qu. 1. art. 2. it gives health of Body, it wipeth away the Re­liques of Sin. And therefore the Priest thus saith, By the vertue of this holy Ointment, and the most merciful favour of God, the Lord forgive thee what thou hast offended by the sight, hearing, &c.

4. That this Sacrament doth con­fer Grace, making us acceptable ex opere operato, doth restore health to the sick, and blot out sins if any remain.

5. That by Unction (which they apply to the Eies, to the Ears, to the Mouth, to the Loyns, and to the Hands) God doth grant to the sick whatsoever is wanting by that fault of the Senses.

6. That by this Sacrament a man may sometimes be saved, who should otherwise plainly be dam­ned.

7. In the anointing of the sick. 1. They give power only unto their anointed Mass-Priest, Concil. Trid Sess 14. c 4. to anoint their sick with Oyl: Lay-men have no au­thority to do it, nor whosoever are no Priests. 2. For the Rite and Ceremony, the Priest coming to the sick must anoint his five Senses; his Eies, Ears, Nostrils, Mouth, also the Reins which is the Seat of Con­cupiscence, and his Feet, which are the Instruments of Execution; ma­king the sign of the Cross with his Thumb dipped in Oyl.

Their Errours touching Order.

1. THat Ordination is truly and properly a Sacrament of the New Law, Concil. Trid Sess. 23. can. 3. conferring Grace to the ordained ex opere operato.

2. Du Moul. Buckler of Faith. That there are eight Sacra­ments of Order, all which are truly, or properly called Sacraments, viz. the Order of Porters, of Readers, of Exorcists, of Servitors, of Sub-Dea­cons, of Deacons, of Presbyters and Bishops.

3. That to every one of the or­dained is given the seven-fold Grace of the Spirit, yea Grace making them acceptable, and that ex opere operato.

4. Tileman. H [...]shus. loc. 14. That anointing is required in Ordination. They do anoint the hands of such as are ordained with Oyl, and do enjoin them to shave their Crowns. And the higher de­gree of Priesthood they have, so much broader must their shaven Crown be.

5. Bellarm. de Sacr. Ordin. 6. ca. 11. They hold, that they are nei­ther Priests nor Deacons, which are not ordained of Popish Bishops.

6. The Sacrament of Orders, as they call it, giveth a double Grace: 1. Say they, it giveth those that are ordained, ability and power to exe­cute their Office, which is to conse­crate and offer up the Body and Blood of Christ, wherein chiefly the Priesthood consisteth, and not in preaching the Word: for they may be Priests, though they preach not. 2. Rhem. 2 Cor. 1. Sect. 7. Another effect of their Sacrament of Orders (they say) is to imprint a certain indelible character and mark in him that is ordained, which can neither by Sin, Apostasie, or Heresie be blotted out: and therefore a Priest once ordained can never lose his Orders, or become a Lay-man a­gain.

Their Errours concerning Con­firmation.

1. THat Confirmation is proper­ly and truly a Sacrament: it was so decreed in the Council of Trent.

2. The Matter of this Sacrament, they say, is Oyl mixed and tempe­red with Balm; first hallowed and consecrated by the Minister there­of, and striked in manner of a Cross upon the forehead of him that is to be confirmed.

3. As to the Minister of Confir­mation, the Papists are here divi­ded. Some think, that the Bishop is so necessarily the Minister of Con­firmation, that it can in no wise be committed to Presbyters: other of them are of opinion, that it may be extraordinarily ministred by Presbyters. But Bellarmine saith, the Bishop is the ordinary Minister thereof.

4. That by this holy Chrism [Page 140]smeered on the forehead the Holy Ghost is given, for strength and cor­roboration against all our spiritual Enemies, and to stand constantly in the Confession of our Faith even to death with great encrease of Grace. And in this respect (say they) it giveth more abundant Grace, in strengthening us against the Devil than Baptism doth.

5. That he will never be a Chri­stian, that is not by Episcopal Con­firmation chrismated.

6. There are God fathers and God­mothers, between whom and the Child that is confirmed by that Sa­crament, there is a spiritual Pa­rentage begotten, which hindereth Marriage, and which also causeth the dissolution of Marriage, not­withstanding the prohibition made by Jesus Christ, forbidding the disso­lution of Marriage, unless it be for Adultery.

7. That it ought to be celebrated Fasting.

8. That it imprints an indelible character in the Soul.

9. This Sacrament is administred [Page 141]in this manner. Du Moul. Buckler of Faith. p. 337. A Child is presen­ted to the Bishop by a Godfather if it be a Son; or by a Godmother if it be a Daughter. The Bishop sits down, washeth his hands, layeth them upon his Breast, saith cer­tain Praiers, by which he asketh or requireth the seven-fold Spi­rit. Then he asketh the God­father the Childs Name, and dip­ping his right thumb in the sacred Oil, which is called Chrism, which they bring in a bottle, whereon the Bishop breatheth to sanctifie it, speaketh to the Oil, saying, Ave Chrisma, I salute thee, Chrism. That done, the Bishop anointeth the Childs forehead therewith in man­ner of a Cross, saying, Bellarm, cap. 10. Signo te signo Crucis, & confirmo te Chrismate sa­lutis, in nomine Patris, Fili., & Spi­ritus sancti; I mark thee with the sign of the Cross, and confirm thee by the Chrism of Salvation, in the name of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. After that he gives the Child a blow on the Ear to strengthen him in the Faith, then he kisseth it, and having rubbed his [Page 142]thumbs with crumbs of Bread, after many signs of the Cross by him made, he commandeth the Godfa­thers and Godmothers to teach the Child the Creed, the Pater noster, and Ave Maria. While this is doing, the Child, if it can stand upright, set­teth his right foot upon the right foot of his Godfather or Godmo­ther. The action ended, they bind the Childs forehead with a cloth, and upon the Band put certain Gol­den Spangles in manner of a Cross, and so the whole action is ended.

The Church of England retaineth that which is commendable in this custom, where Confirmation is no other thing, but a Profession which the Child (having attained to the age of discretion) maketh to keep the Promise which his Godfathers and Godmothers made in his name when he was baptized, and answe­reth touching his Faith and Instructi­on: which done, he receiveth the Imposition of Hands and the Blessing of the Bishop, which is not called by them a Sacrament. The French Churches, instead of that, cause [Page 143]Children to be presented at Catechi­zing, and to answer publickly tou­ching their Faith, before they admit them to the Lords Supper, which is done with Praier, that it will please God to extend his Blessing on them.

Of their Corruptions in Worship.

NOw for their Corruptions in worship many are implied in their corrupt Doctrines; for they that corrupt the purity of holy Or­dinances, do frame their Doctrines accordingly, seeking to colour such abuses and refusing to reform their Corruptions by the Scripture. They seek to wrest the Scripture, and corrupt the Sense of it, that they [Page 145]may seem to favour, at least, not to condemn their Inventions.

Of their Latin Service.

ALl that is spoken in the Church should be to edification, 1 Cor. 14.6. but it is impossible to edifie by that which we cannot under­stand. If we understand not our selves when we speak, then we edi­fie not our selves: if our hearers un­derstand us not, then we edifie not our hearers: if neither of us un­derstand, then neither of us is edified.

I know what they plead for their Latin Service, and their Latin Praiers, that though it be a Tongue not commonly understood, yet it is none of the strange Tongues that the Apostle speaks against, for it is one of the learned Languages: and besides, it was dedicated to the use of the Church upon our Savi­ours Cross. I answer, that the Greek and Hebrew are learned Lan­guages too, and that they were de­dicated [Page 146]upon our Saviours Cross, as well as the Latin: nay, all Lan­guages were as well, and better, de­dicated to the use of the Church by the coming of the Holy Ghost, than those by Pilat's writing upon our Saviours Cross. It follows not, be­cause it was one of the learned Lan­guages, it is none of the strange Tongues; for any Tongue not un­derstood, is to him that heareth it barbarous, and strange, not ob natu­ram vocis sed ob imperitiam, as Chry­sostome noteth on that place.

Against the use of all such the Apostle speaketh, and sheweth, that they be as Trumpets uncertainly sounding, therefore they serve not for edifying, in utiles sunt in quan­tum ignotae sunt; they be unprofita­ble, so far as they be unknown, for we cannot say Amen to a Prai­er, when we understand not the matter of a Praier. I had rather speak five words (saith Saint Paul) to the understanding, than five thou­sand in a strange Language. Il­lud plus ostentationis habit, iscud plus utilitatis: there may be more ostentati­on [Page 147]on in that, but there is more edifi­cation in this. As it is the work of an Architect to build up an house, so of Christians by spiritual endea­vours to build up one another: but that which is not for the understan­ding of Christians, cannot be for the building up of Christians, there­fore of no use in the Church of God.

The Pope and his Clergy pro­pound themselves two ends for the celebration of the Mass and the or­dinary Service in the Latin tongue. The first is to keep the people in ig­norance, and use them to believe without knowing, to follow their leaders blind-fold, and to obey with­out enquiring. They were afraid, that even the Latin should be too in­telligible, and therefore they would have the principal parts of the Mass to be said with such a low murmur, that the voice of the Priest cannot be heard. The second end, was to plant the marks and Standard of the Popes Empire among the Nations which he had conquered. The sim­ple people believe, that their Reli­gion must be Roman, as well as [Page 148]the Tongue which is used in Religi­on, and that both Christian Faith and the Language come from the same place. But the chief cause why the Pope will not have the Mass to be understood by all, is, that the Mass contains many things, which would either instruct or offend the peo­ple.

Of praying for the Dead.

THeir Opinion is, that the Prai­ers of the Living are neither avai­lable for the Saints in Heaven, for they need them not, nor for the damned in Hell, for they cannot be helped; but only for the Souls tor­mented in Purgatory, who do find great ease (say they) by the Praiers of the Living.

Of the Canonizing of Saints.

THe Canonizing of Saints is no­thing else, but the publick De­termination and Sentence of the Church, whereby some that are dead are judged to be Saints, and worthy of Honour and Worship; as to be praied unto, Temples and Al­tars to be set up in their names, Ho­ly-days to be appointed for them, and their Reliques to be adored. And thus (say they) it is lawful, profitable, and expedient for the Church to canonize Saints. This was the Popes own invention eight hundred years after Christ, at the least; set abroach and continued in Policy, for the confirmation of cer­tain idolatrous Superstitions, which he laboured thereby to advance, and now are made the seven Points wherein the Canonization consisteth, fetting the new Saints in the Calendar with red Letters. Who gave the Pope that priviledg to be infallible in that [Page 150]Judgment? for our Adversaries themselves acknowledg they may be mistaken how many Factions and Sollicitations are used in the Court of Rome by Princes and States, that a man of their Countrey or Ci­ty be canonized. And at what vast expences have they been to pur­chase it? The City of Barcelona and the whole Country of Catelona spent many thousand pounds in the canonizing Raimond de Pennafort, a Dominican Frier. The Jesuits spent ten millions for the Canoniza­tion of their two twins, Ignatius Loiola and Francis Xavier, whom they call the East-India Apostle. The Book of sacred Cerimonies doth acknowledg, that the Pope some­times was constrained, in some sort, to canonize a man against his opi­nion, and therefore made a Pro­testation. By that Protestation he thought to discharge his Consci­ence.

The words whereby the Pope ca­nonizeth a Saint are these: The manner of cano­nizing a Saint In the authority of God Almighty, Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and of the bles­sed [Page 151]Apostles, Peter and Paul, and in our own, we decree and define, that N. of good memory is a Saint, and must be put into the List of Saints, &c. But before the pro­nouncing of that Sentence the Cause is pleaded in the Consistory, and an Advocate presents himself, who re­presents the Reasons why such a one ought to be sainted. The A­postles were not so sainted, nor their Disciples, nor those Fathers, who were called Saints; as Ireneus Cyprian, Basil, Hierome, Augustine, as a learned Divine noteth. It hap­pens, saith he, to some poor Saints, for whom the dignity of Saints is begged in the Court of Rome, to be cast in their suit, and they cannot be Saints in Heaven, because men on earth were not favourable to them. Sometimes the degree of Beati is obtained for them, which is a middle degree, and an expectati­on of Saint-ship. By this means Popes will give their Servants to be worshipped by the Nations of Chri­stendom: whch new Saints are far more honoured than the Patriarchs [Page 152]and Prophets: for in the Roman Church it fareth with Saints as with Clothes, the newest are the best, and most esteemed.

Of Invocation of the Saints.

THe Papists maintain the Doctrine of Angel-worship, of Invocati­on of Saints, and of the Virgin Mary, and canonized Saints; calling espe­cially upon the Virgin Mary. They usually carve, pourtray, paint the Statue of the Virgin, and represent her by them to the Eyes and Thoughts, when they pray unto her in all their Offices, Primers, Psalters, Rosaries, Missals, Breviaries, Books of Devotion, Churches, Chappels, Monasteries, Altars of our Lady; e­specially on all their publick Festi­vals dedicated to her Honour, in greatest state, crowned with a Crown of Glory, as the Empress, Queen, Lady of Heaven, Earth and all Creatures in them. In their pub­lick Liturgy they have a Letany [Page 153]whereby they pray. 1. To her. 2. To the Arch-Angels and An­gels. 3. To Patriarchs and Pro­phets. 4. To the Apostles and Evan­gelists. 5. To the Martyrs. 6. To Fathers and Doctors. 7. To Popes and Confessors. 8. To Monks and Eremites. 9. To all the Saints, Virgins and Widows, that they would joyn together to make Inter­cession for them. And to these Saints they have their set Holy-days; to them they burn Tapers, perform Masses and Trentals: each have their sundry Collects, Hymns, Prai­ers, and Oblations; each have their sundry Offices designed them. Some are over particular Towns and Ci­ties; some over Trades and parti­cular Professions; same are over Diseases; some have the special gift of bestowing Arts and Sciences.

Now what is this but to forsake the Fountain of living Waters, and to hew out broken Cisterns that can hold no Water, as the Lord com­plaineth in a like case? The rise of all this was from a preposterous ad­miration of Saints departed, or (I [Page 154]may say of some of them, they were rather Devils incarnate:) and from the perverse opinion of those who make no difference between civil Praier to Men living, and religious Praier to Saints departed; which Errour hath been maintained and heightened by the great ambition, and avarice of the Popish Clergy: so that now the French Proverb is not without ground. [...] or ne [...]ogn [...]ist Dieu plus [...]ntre les Saints. God cannot be known among so many Saints. Thus have they jumbled together God and his Saints in a promiscuous man­ner of worship. Saint Peter tells them to whom he writes, that he will endeavour that they may be a­ble, after his decease, to have these things always in remembrance, [...]hem. in 2 Pet. 1 2 Pet. 1.15. Whence the Rhemists (those Popish Corrupters, rather than Interpreters of the holy Scrip­ture) take upon them to tell us, if we will be so sottish as to believe them. And they say it was this, that the meant to pray for them: and as in his life­time he meant to further their Salva­tion by instructing them, so after his death, when he was in Heaven he [Page 155]would help them by his Praiers. And upon this rotten foundation they lay on loads of hay and stubble: upon this Popish abuse and mis-con­struction of the holy Scripture, they would build not only the Saints praying for us, but also our praying to the Saints: the former as being directly grounded upon this Text, and the second as a consequent of the former.

Of their Distinction of the two kinds of Worship, Latria and Dulia.

THat kind of Worship which is proper to God, they say, See The Bee-hive of the Ro­mish Church. ch 7. is fitly expressed by the Greek word λατρεία. The other word, δουλεία, is taken for all kind of Service both of God and men: so that the Religi­ous worship, which is called λατρεία, is to be only given to God, the o­ther, called δουλεια, may be attri­buted to Angels and Saints, saith Bellarmine. The Papists say, they make not Gods of Saints, because [Page 156]they worship them with a lower de­gree of worship than is Latria, or the worship proper to God: viz. they worship the Saints with Dulia, the Virgin Mary with Hypordulia, a super-service. The learned David Pa­reus, to disprove this distinction be­tween λατρεία and δουλεία, Pareus Dub. 9. in [...] 2. ad Rom. hath ta­ken pains to shew the use of these words in the Scriptures: first, that the worship of God is ofner signifi­ed by δυλεια than by λατρεία. The first is found 39 times so used in the Old Testament, the other about 30 times, as he hath summed and set down the places. Secondly, he shew­eth that the word Latria is given to the Creatures, as in ten several places it is found, Thou shalt not do, [...], any servile work. Thirdly; the worshipping of Images is forbidden under the term, Latria, 34 times in the Old Testament, and more in the New, Rom. 1.23. and 23 times under the other term Du­lia. There is but one kind of Reli­gious worship, and that due unto God, and no Religious worship is to be given to any Creature, no, not [Page 157]that inferiour kind which they make less than the Divine. This of the Papists is the same, as was that of the Heathen, who (as Plato wit­nesseth) did worship one God; that is, Jupiter for the chiefest God: the rest they called lesser Gods, and wor­shipped them with a lower degree of worship.

Of Image-worship.

1. THe Papists assert, that there is great difference between an Image and an Idol. Ἐικων, an Image (say they) is the true similitude of a thing; ἐιδωλον doth represent that which is not, as were the Idols of Venus, Minerva, &c. But an Idol is that Image which is set up with an intent to be worshipped. An I­mage is a general name, as well to unlawful Pictures set up for Ido­latry, as lawful, which have but a civil use.

2. They affirm, that it is lawful to express the Trinity by Pictures, [Page 158]as God like an old man, and with the World in his hand; Christ as he walked upon the Earth; the Holy Ghost in the likeness of a Dove; the Angels with Wings: and these Pi­ctures (say they) are very meet and profitable to be set up in Chur­ches.

3. That Images are to be reve­renced and worshipped, say they, so it be not with the Divine Ho­nour due unto God.

4. They affirm, that Images may not only be set up in Churches, but that they are no where better pla­ced than there.

5. As to the manner of Worship that is to be given to Images, Bellar­min [...] saith: 1. That Images, though they are not properly to be wor­shipped with Divine Honour; nei­ther is it safe so to teach in the hea­ring of the People; yet improperly they may have the same worship, which properly belongeth to the Saint whose Image it is. 2. There is a Religious Worship proper­ly due unto Images, as they are considered in themselves, and not [Page 159]only as they represent another thing. After Images crept into the Church, the Clergy receiv [...]d great profit thereby: for the advancem [...]nt of this new Doctrine, new Saints were canonized, new Holy-days appoin­ted: new Prayers and Services de­vised, new Chappels erected and consecrated. Pope Leo the fourth appointed sundry Holy days.

6. Touching making of Images, Image-makers, before they made an Image were wont to go to the Priest, and shrive themselves as clean as if they should then die, and take penance, and make some Vow of Fasting, or Praying, or Pilgrimage: praying also to the Priest to pray for him, that he might have Grace to make a fair and devout Image. In the Pontifical, the peculiar form of consecrating Images and Crosses doth shew the same. They paint the Image of our Lady all in Gold, Silver, broidered Hair, &c.

7. Order was also taken how Images should be consecrated; as first, with Exorcism of Water and Salt, then with Praier, afterwards [Page 160]with censing, kissing, anointing, and other Ceremonies. When the Rood in Saint Pauls Church was e­rected, Bishop Bonner being in his Robes, with his Prebends about him, the Rood was laid upon the Pave­ment. Then the Bishop, with others, sung divers Praiers to the Rood: that being done, they forthwith anointed the Rood with Oil in divers places: after the anointing they crept to the Rood, & kissed it; then they took the said Rood, weighed him up, and set him in his place. All the while this was doing, the whole Quire sung Te Deum, and they rung the Bells.

Of the Image of the Cross.

THe Papists say, that the Wood of the Cross, both the whole and every piece thereof, is worthy of great Worship and Reverence. They give Divine Worship to it, they pray and burn Incense, it is visited in Pilgrimages, and honou­red with Festival days, as Inventio Crucis on May 3. and Exaltatio Cru­cis, [Page 161]on Septemb. 14. In the Adora­tion of the Image of the Cross, the errour is palpable: for in the Roman Church upon Passion-Sunday they speak thus to the Image of the Wood of the Cross; Crux ave, spes unica, &c. I salute thee, O Cross, our only hope, in this time of the Passi­on, encrease righteousness to the God­ly, and give pardon to the Guilty, thou hast been alone worthy to bear the price of the world. And a little af­ter, Thou faithful Cross, the only no­ble among Trees. And in another Hymn, Thou blessed Cross, out of whose arms the price of the world did hang. Can any without great im­piety speak unto Wood, and call it our hope, and ask of it encrease of Grace and remission of sins?

In the Missal of Sarum no less so­lemnity is used in carrying of the Cross, than if Christ him­self were present: there is such curtfying, kneeling, kissing, at­tendance of Priests, bowing of the whole Quire, until the chiefest Clerks proceed barefoot to the A­doration. Then it is carried through [Page 162]the midst of the Quire, and with great reverence laid upon the high Altar. Then they sing Hymns and Praises unto it, and adore it. Cru­cem tuam ador [...]mus, Domine, thy Cross O Lord do we adore, &c.

There were so many pieces of the Cross dispersed in several pla­ces (as they pretend) that as Eras­mus writes; Erasmus. if they were all laid to­gether in one place, they would load a Ship. Some write, that the Cross was found by Helena the Em­press, and that she left the greater part thereof at Jerusalem, and the other part she sent to her Son Con­stantine the Emperour. If there had belonged unto the Church any Religious care of it, the Apostles (doubtless) would have procured the safe keeping thereof, and not have suffered the Church to want it 325 years; and it had been an ea­sier suit for Joseph and Nicodemus to beg the Cross, than the Body of Jesus. Moreover, if the Cross were to be adored, yet who knows which is it, and where it is to be found? and so one might worship a common [Page 163]piece of Wood for the Wood of the Cross. But if the right Cross were to be had, ought it not to be served as Hezekiah served the Brazen-Ser­pent, when the people began to make an Idol of it? Damascen would have the Spear, the Nails, the Cave, the Sepulchre, the Maunger, the place it self, Golgotha, and all things that touched Christs Body, to be adored, as well as the Wood of the Cross. The Wood of the Cross then being forged in so many pla­ces, how can worship be yielded un­to it without great Idolatry?

Of Reliques.

THe Fathers that lived neerest Christ were freest from wor­shipping Reliques. But the Romish Church aboundeth in this kind. Chemnit. Chemnitius hath noted twelve Er­rours and Abuses of the Papists concerning Reliques.

1. That the Bodies, Ashes, or Bones of the Saints are to be taken [Page 164]out of their Graves, and to be pla­ced upon some high place, as upon the high Altar, or some other visible place, and to be dressed with Gold, Silver, Silk, &c.

2. That those Reliques ought to be carried in publick Processions, and Prayers, and to be shewed and offered for Christian people to see, touch, and kiss.

3. That such Reliques are to be ap­proved by the Pope; and that appro­bation is to be by canonizing them.

4. That it is a singular and merito­rious worship of God, if the people, to obtain help by it, shall touch, kiss, or walk before with an ado­ring mind and gesture, or shall do reverence to these Reliques by Can­dles, Silk-coverings, Garlands, or o­ther the like Ornaments.

5. That the Grace and Power of God (which they say is in them, or present by them) is to be sought for in these Reliques; and that they are made partakers of it, who do touch them, or behold them.

6. That it is an acceptable Sacri­fice to God to offer up precious gifts to these Reliques.

7. Many Indulgences for sin are promised to such as touch and kiss them, &c.

8. That our Prayer is the bet­ter, worthier, and more acceptable to God, if it be done by or before the Saints Reliques, by whose me­rits we may obtain help. And there­fore in our necessities we must make Vows, and take Pilgrimages unto those places where the Reliques of Saints are held to be, that we may call upon them for their help.

9. That it adds much to the Ho­liness of the Sacrament of the Eu­charist, if the Saints Reliques are set enclosed upon the Altar; nay, that the Altar is consecrated by their touching it.

10. That the Saints Reliques may be lawfully laid over one, or carried about ones Neck, in de­votion and Faith to God and the Saints, whose Reliques they are.

11. And places among the Papists are full of uncertain, counterfeit, and false Reliques, to which with­out difference the same veneration [Page 166]and honour is given. They say, that at Beavois there is one of Saint Chri­stophers Teeth, so great, that a dozen such Teeth would fill the mouth of an Oven. In Rome in St. John de Laterans Church they pretend they have in their keeping the Foreskin of Jesus Christ: In the Church which is in the Park of Wood at Vin­cennes, they have some of the Pow­der of St. Martins Cloak, and one of Jesus Christs sucking Teeth: At Courchiverny near unto Bloys they keep Josephs Hemme at the sound of his Breathing when he hew­ed timber: Pilgrims that come from Galicia bring Feathers of Hens, that are of the race of that Cock which crowed when St. Peter denied Jesus Christ. Baronius makes men­tion of a Lock of the Hair of Saint Peters Beard, which did Miracles, although, saith he, those that do sit in his throne, seek to overthrow it by evil manners. And these Re­liques are kept so many ages, and never corrupt. They say that the Virgin Marys Milk hath continued 1600 years, and never was sowr. [Page 167]And yet the Hosts that are called Jesus Christ become mouldy in a few days. At Chartres they have the Virgin Marys Smock, which was brought from Constantinople into France by Charles the bald, as they say that kept it. But Charles the bald was never in Constantinople; and in the Virgin Marys time they wore no Smocks, which was the reason they used so many Baths to wash the Sweat from their Bodies.

Richard Earl of Cornwal, Brother to King Henry the third, and King of the Romans, brought (as was pre­tended) some of our Saviours Blood into England, and builded the Ab­bey of Hales for the keeping of that Relique. King Henry the third car­ried a Viol of Christs Blood between his two eyes, barefoot, in a Beggers habit, in procession from St. Pauls Church to Westminster, where it was preached, esteemed to be reserved, and adored as Christs very Blood, though a gross imposture. And such was the Ignorance and Superstition of that age, that the King, Prelats, Clergy, and generality of the peo­ple [Page 168]received, and really adored it as Christs very Blood wherewith they were redeemed. And not only then ( viz. anno 1247.) but the next en­suing years by the Kings special Summons, all Fairs, or Sales of Wares in London, and else-where, were on that day prohibited, viz. on St. Edwards day, to draw multi­tudes of people to Westminster, to adore this false Relique, and en­rich the Abbot, Monks, and Inhabi­tants by the Profits of this Fair: which undid many Merchants resor­ting to it with their Ware, as Mat­thew Paris there present doth re­late.

12. Oaths among the Papists are taken by touching the Saints Re­liques. The Catechism of the Coun­cil of Trent, in the exposition of the third Commandment, approveth the custom to swear by the Reliques of Saints. Now to swear by any thing, is to take it for a witness of the uprightness of our heart, and for a revenge in case of perjury, which belongs only to God, whose Commandment in Deut. 6. runs [Page 169]thus: Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God, and shalt serve him, and swear by his Name. It is a frivolous ex­cuse, to say, that to swear by Re­liques, is to swear by God which hath sanctified them. Also when they speak to those Reliques, wor­shipping them, they say things unto them which are agreeable unto God. When they say, God preserve thee, Fuller H [...]st. of the holy War. [...]assander hath ob­served a corrupti­ons about Relicks, viz. a su­perstiti­ous con­fidence in the worship of true Relicks, and a sa­crilegi­ous for­ging of false Re­licks. triumphant Wood, they speak not to God, which is not Wood: Or, if men speak to any thing in honour of God, they must always under­stand that which is spoken to it. Richard the first, King of England, redeemed from the Turks in Pale­stine a Chest full of holy Reliques (which they had gotten at the ta­king of Jerusalem) so great, as four men could scarce carry any away. And though (saith my Author) some know no more than Esops Cock how to prize these Pearls, let them learn the true value of them from the Roman Jewellers. First, they must carefully distinguish between publick and private Reliques. In private ones some forgery may be [Page 170]suspected, lest quid be put for quo, which made Saint Augustine put in that wary Parenthesis, Si tamen Martyrum, if so be they be the Re­liques of Martyrs. But as for pub­lick ones approved by the Pope, and kept in Churches (such, no doubt, as these of King Richards were:) Oh let no Christian be such an infidel, (saith my Author) as to stagger at the truth thereof. If any object, that the Head of the same Saint is shewed at several places, the whole answer is by a Synechdoche, that a part is put for the whole. As for the common exception against the Cross, that so many several pieces thereof are shewn, which put to­gether would break the back of Si­mon of Cyrene to bear them; it is answered, saith he, Distrahitur, non diminuitur, and like the Loaves in the Gospel, it is miraculously mul­tiplied in the dividing. If all these fail, Baronius hath a Rasor that sha­veth all scruple clear away: Baron an­nal. E [...]cl. in an. 1226. For, saith he, Quicquid sit, fides purgat faci­nu [...]. So that he that worshippeth the false Reliques of a true Saint, God [Page 171]takes his good intention in good part, though he adore the hand of Esau for the hand of Jacob. But enough of these fooleries.

Now as for those true Reliques or Remembrances of the Saints; they are not those which the Papists do so magnifie, and superstitiously reverence, not their old shooes, not pieces of bones, and the like; but their holy instructions and ex­amples, which should be had in re­membrance for our furtherance in the way of Godliness after their death. And as for the Bones of Saints and such kind of Reliques of them, I shall conclude with the words of King James: If I had any such (saith he) that I were assured were members of their Bodies, I would honourably bury them, and not give them the reward of con­demned mens members, Premonit. p. 9. which are ordained to be deprived of burial: but for worshipping them, or Ima­ges, I must account it Idolatry.

Of the Vigils, and night-watches annexed to festival-dayes.

THe Papists were wont upon Saints Eeves to give them­selves to fasting and watching. But their night-vigils, or watches, they do not now so strictly observe, because of the great abuses which did grow thereupon: yet they have not altogether left them, for they have their nocturns, or mid night mattens, and their prime hours in the Morning. It is true; the Christians in time of persecution had their ante­lucanos hymnos, their early Songs and Hymns before day-light; they met to­gether to worship God before the Sun arose, because they could not assemble together in safety in the day-time. But that is no reason why the Church now should use Vigils or Nocturns, seeing we now have free exercise of religion in the day-time, saith Dr. Wil­let; no more than St. Pauls example is to be urged, that prayed by the Rivers side with the people, and [Page 173]there preached unto them, because in idolatrous Cities they could have no places of meeting, that therefore we now ought to do the like, having Churches and Oratories to assemble in.

How well they kept their Vigils may appear by that Decree of Inno­centius, Decret. Greg. lib. 3. tit. 41. ca. 9. we speak it with grief, that cer­tain, not only inferiour Priests; but Prelats, spend the time in eating and drinking till midnight, &c.

Of their Wax-Candles and Tapers.

THey have another superstitious custom, to set up Wax-Candles, and Taper-light before Images, and upon the Altar, to carry them about in procession, and even at mid-day, and high-noon. And Bellarmine would authorize this custom by the continual burning of the Lamps day and night, as he saith, in the Taber­nacle among the Jews. But the [Page 174]Lamps among the Jews, who aboun­ded in Types and Ceremonies, were lighted in the evening, and so bur­ned all night for those that kept the Watch in the Temple, 2 Chron. 13.1. and in the morning again they were put out, 1 Sam. 3.3. And St. Hierome upon those words, [Before the Lamp of God went out] thus writeth, Intelligi oportet antequam lux diurna fieret, it must be under­stood before it was day when the Lamp was put out. Tertullian speaks against this use of Gentilism in bur­ning Candles by day. Let them set up Lights daily which have no Light, saith he, the testimony or sign of Darkness well agreeth unto them. This then having been taken up by the Heathen, is worse to be liked of, than if it had been a Jewish Ceremony; for it is a less fault to play the Jews, than the Heathen. The ancient Eliberine Synod in Spain, misliking the superstitious use of Candle-light by day, decreed thus: It seemeth good unto us, that Can­dles should not be lighted in Church­yards by day.

Pope Zosymus ordained, Beacons Reliques of Rome. that the Paschal Taper should be hallowed on Easter even, and set up in every Parish Church, and also that a fire should be made in every Church on that day and hallowed: Again, that the Paschal should be lighted with the flame of that fire, and all other Candles in the Church.

Of their Holy Water.

POpe Alexander the first (they say) ordained Water mingled with Salt to be hallowed, and afterwards to be sprinkled upon the people to put away their sins, and to make them pure and holy. He also com­manded, that it should be kept in Churches, and in Houses, to chase a­way Devils and wicked Spirits, not only out of houses where men dwell, but also out of the hearts of the faithful, as though Faith and the Devil could dwell together in one heart. The words of Pope Alexan­ders Canon are these: we bless the [Page 176]Water mingled with Salt for this purpose, that all that be sprinkled therewith may be made holy and pure; which thing we command all Priests likewise to do: For, saith he, if the Ashes of an Heifer sprink­led, made holy, and cleansed the people from venial sins, much more Water sprinkled with Salt, and hal­lowed with holy Prayers, doth san­ctifie, make holy, and cleanse the people from venial sins. And if the Salt being sprinkled by Elizeus, the barrenness of the Water was healed; how much more Salt, being hallow­ed by Godly Prayers, takes away the barrenness of such as appertain to man; and sanctifieth and purgeth them that are defiled, and multipli­eth such Goods as we have need of, and turneth away all the deceits of the Devil, and defendeth men from all wicked fancies.

Are not the Scriptures here well applied? doth not this Ceremony turn Christ out of Office, with all his works and merits? Gulielmus Du­randus saith, that the holy Water hath deserved to have of God so [Page 177]great vertue, that as outwardly it washeth the Body from filthiness, so it inwardly cleanseth the Soul from sin. O intolerable blasphemy!

When men sprinkle themselves with this Water in the Church-Porch, before they enter into the Church, they are taught and com­manded to say, Aqua benedicta sit mihi salus & vita, &c. let the bles­sed Water be unto me health and life: grant me, O Lord, by this creature of the sprinkling of Wa­ter, health of mind, wholeness of bo­dy, defence of health, safeguard of hope, strengthening of faith, now and in time to come.

Of Pilgrimages.

1. THe Papists hold, that Pilgri­mages made to Rome, and to Jerusalem, and the holy Land (as they call it,) and to the memories of the Saints in other places, to ask and obtain their help, are godly and religious, and to be much used of Christians.

2. Large Indulgences were pro­mised to Pilgrims; especially to vi­sit St. Peter and St. Paul the Apo­stles. Pope Anacletus excommuni­cated, cursed, and pronounced all such guilty of Sacriledg, as should hinder any man to go on Pilgrimage, or to visit the Sepulchres of Saints. Pope Calixtus ordained, that who­soever spoileth, robbeth, or hurteth a­ny such as go in pilgrimage to Rome, or to any other holy places of Saints, the same should be excommunicated and accursed.

3. [...]reg. [...]en. Some desired to worship in that place where Christs feet had wal­ked. Some superstitiously attribu­ted more sanctity to that place, than to any other. Gregory Nyssen hath a whole oration of this matter against those who go in pilgrimage to Jerusalem. This going in pilgri­mage, is in a manner to deny the coming of Christ: for if Christ be come, there is no more difference in regard of holiness between one ground and another. Whether it were then or not, now I am sure it is a fond superstition for any to ask, [Page 179]as Naaman the Syrian did for two burthens of earth out of that Coun­try, as more holy than any other dust, 2 Reg. 5.17. Such idle vaga­ries do the Papists make to some o­ther special places, where perhaps the Devil hath obtained leave to work some jugling feats and lying miracles. Then presently the Saint his name is up, and well is he that can spare time and money for a vi­sitation of a sensless stock. Yea, ma­ny a Saint, as good as he or she, shall be passed by with little more than a good morrow, while the heat of their blind devotion carrieth them on to this selected one: Yea, now and then the same Saint shall have little courtesie at their hands, if they meet any where but at his Manner-house, as it were. Saint James at Compostella is taken for a better man than when they find him other where. Such brutish follies the Ho­ly Ghost himself disdaineth with an heavenly scorn, as appeareth by Eli­jahs mocking of Baals Priests, and Isaiahs character of the blind Ido­later.

The Writer of the History of the Holy War tells us, Fuller Suppl. of the Hist. of th [...] Ho­ly War. that besides those that went, many were ei­ther driven, or fled to the Holy Land. Those were driven, who ha­ving committed some horrible sin in Europe, had this penance imposed on them, to travel to Jerusalem, to expiate their faults. Many a Whore was sent thither to find her Virginity: many a Murtherer was enjoyned to fight in the Holy War, to wash off the guilt of Christian blood by shedding the blood of Turks. The like was in all other offences. Now God forbid, saith my Author, we should condemn them, if truly penitents, for impi­ous. But we find that many of them reverted to their former wickedness. Others fled thither, who having su­pererogated the Gallows in their own Countries by their several mis­demeanours, to avoid the stroke of Justice, protected themselves under this voyage, and coming to Palestine, so profited in those Eastern Schools of Vices, that they learned to be more artificially wicked. Thus He.

Of the Agreement between Pa­ganism and Popery.

NOw let me shew how the Pa­pists in their Religion, have borrowed many things from the Pa­gans; I will here insert them, as I find them in the Writings of divers Learned Men.

I. The Heathen had their Pilgri­mages: The Heathen were wont to go on Pilgrimage to such an Idol. So do the Papists; they go many of them on Pilgrimage to our Lady of Lauretto, to St. Michael, to St. James, to visit the Holy Sepulchre, and the Holy Hand-kerchief; which is a Relique in Rome, wherein they say, the Picture of Christ's Face is, after it was wiped therewith. But con­cerning Pilgrimages I have spoken in the former Section.

II. The Heathen made great Feasts, and kept a great number of solemn Holy Dayes in honour of their Idols. And have not the Pa­pists [Page 182]brought in many Holy Dayes instead of the solemn Feasts of the Heathen. Calvin speaking against this Superstition, Calvin Serm in D [...]ut. 12. in one of his Ser­mons upon Deuteronomy, saith, men will say, we must not now do as the Heathens did, for that were a ser­ving of the Devil: But every Parish will have a Church-Holy-day, to Play, to Dance, and to feed in, till they burst again; and all in the Ho­nour of God. Besides this, every one had his Patron whom he wor­shipped; and said they, these things are not done any more in Honour of the Idols, but in Honour of St. Mar­tin: And let them Dance, and play the Drunkards, all is well enough, so it be done in Honour of God, and his Saints.

1. Twelftide was an Imitation of the Saturnales, in which the Ser­vants were Masters. And the Lord of Misrule in Christmas is also a trace of the Saturnales at that time of the Year.

2. Ashwednesday falls much upon the same time; as the Day of Puri­fications and Propitiations for the [Page 183]Dead in the Pagan- Rome; which was upon the Eighteenth of Fe­bruary.

3. As for Candlemas, Rhenanus acknowledgeth; that Candlemas is an imitation of the Februal Ceremo­nies of the Romans; and the Insolen­cies of Shrovetide came from the Bacchanales.

4. The Rogations and Processions about the field of Corn, have suc­ceeded to the Processions called Am­barvalia.

5. The Heathens were wont to keep an Holy-day; which they cal­led the Feast of all Spirits. And the Papists change the word, and have the Feast of All-Souls.

III. The Heathens had a Temple, which they called the Temple of all their gods: The Papists call such a Temple the Church of All-hallowes, the Church of All-Saints; and they added a Church Holy-Day unto it.

IV. The Heathen had their Sa­crifices to their gods: And the Pa­pists have their Masses set up in the room of them. The Pagans had sa­crificer for the Rain; which were [Page 184]called Aquilicia: For the same use is the Shrine of St. Genovefa at Paris.

V. The Jubilee was instituted af­ter the Imitation of the Roman secu­lar Games; as Onuphrius acknow­ledgeth it, Lib. de ludis seculari­bus.

VI. The Pagans suffered not any Male to enter into the Temple of Bona dea: So into some Popish Chappels, women enter not, as the Chappel of St. Laurence at Rome without the Walls; as the Book of the Roman Indulgences sheweth it; and the Quire of the Lateran Church at Rome.

VII. Agnus Deis hang'd about the Neck, saith Baronius, have been instituted after the imitation of those Brooches, called Bullae; which the Pagan Boys wore about their Necks to avert Charms.

VIII. The Pagans had their Con­vents of sacred Virgins; as the Ve­stals, and the Faustinian Virgins, instituted by Marcus Antoninus Pius, as Julius Capitolinus saith in his Life.

IX. The Lacedemonians would whip themselves, as the Penitents at Rome do now. This custom came from the Luperci of the old Rome; for when they celebrated the Lupercal Games, they went naked and masked through the Town, and smote with whips such as they met in the way.

There are many other things also, which will shew the Agreement be­tween Paganism and Popery.

1. The Pagan Emperours caused themselves to be called Gods. Ca­ligula gave his feet to Pompeius Pen­nus to kiss, as Seneca testifieth. Ju­lius Capitolinus saith the same of the young Emperour Maximinus. Pom­ponius Laetus saith the same of Dio­clesian. The same Emperours cau­sed themselves to be adored; and the Roman Senate had the right of Canonizations. The Pope having usurped the place of the ancient Emperours of Rome, hath also usur­ped these Honours, and is also cal­led God on earth. He offereth his Foot to be kissed by the greatest Princes, Kings and Emperours. [Page 186]Hence it is said of him,

And another saith of him, The Prin­ces of the world adore and worship the Pope as perpetual Dictator, the Successor, not of Caesar, but of Peter the Fisher. It is said of Charles the eighth King of France, that he made a vow suppliciter adorare, humbly to adore the Pope, and performed it: it is said of him, adoravit Pontificem projectus, casting himself down he a­dored the Pope. And of that po­tent Prince, Charles the fifth King of Spain, and Emperour, it is said, Ille pie inflexo genu, pronus exosculato pe­de Pontificem adoravit, he piously bending his knee, and bowing him­self down, worshipped the Pope, [Page 187]kissing his foot. Yea, it is said, that in the Lateran Council under Pope Leo the tenth, this passage spoken of Christ by the Prophet, was blas­phemously applied to the Pope; The Kings of the Earth shall worship him, all Nations shall serve him: Yea, and in divers ages before, in the time of Alexander the third. It seemeth, that Gregory the seventh, in his Bull of excommunication against Henry the fourth, pretending to honour Pe­ter and Paul, but intending to exalt himself as their Successors, giveth them the Title of Christ's: The Kings of the Earth stood up, and the Princes [Secular and Ecclesiastical, Courtiers and common people] as­sembled together against the Lord, and [you] his Christs, or his anoin­ted ones, saying, let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their Yoke from us. And that which the Prophet Isaiah saith, Isai. 28.16. Behold, I lay in Sion a Stone, a tried Stone, a precious corner-Stone, a sure foundation, &c. applied to Christ by the Apostle, 1 Pet. 2.6. this place was applied to the Pope. It is said [Page 188]of Pope Innocent the third, that he said thus of himself, He that hath the Bride is the Bridegroom. Am not I the Bridegroom, who have the noble, rich, comely, chast, gracious, sa­cred Church of Rome, which by Gods Ordinance is the Mother and Mistress of all the faithful. So in a flattering Oration directed to Pope Leo the tenth in the Council of Lateran: Stir up thy self, arise, compass about Sion our Mother, and thou Spouse, her do thou embrace: But St. Paul acknowledgeth no other Bride­groom, or Husband of the Church, but Christ only, 2 Cor. 11.2. I am jealous over you with a godly jealousie, for I have espoused you to one Hus­band, that I may present you as a chast Virgin to Christ. See the audacious wickedness of Antichrist, assuming to himself the honour and dignity proper unto Christ. Again, where­as our Saviour saith, Matth. 28.18. All power is given unto me in Heaven and in Earth. It is said in the Coun­cil of Lateran under Pope Julius, that it was said to the Pope, All pow­er is given to thee of the Lord in Hea­ven [Page 189]and in Earth. So in the Book of Ceremonies concerning the blessing or consecrating of a Sword, this Papal Sword figureth the supream temporal power bestowed by Christ upon the Pope, his Vicar in Earth; according to that, [All power is given to me in Heaven and in Earth.] And elsewhere; He shall rule from Sea to Sea, and from the River to the ends of the Earth. Again, it is said in the Council of Lateran under Pope Leo, that these words were belched out: Behold the Lion of the Tribe of Judah, the Root of David.] And it seemeth, it was said of the See of Rome, This is she alone which shutteth, and none openeth, and open­eth and none shutteth. So it is recor­ded of Pope Martin the fourth: They cried unto him, Thou that ta­kest away the Sins of the world, have mercy upon us. And again, Thou that takest away the Sins of the world, have mercy upon us. And the third time, Thou that takest away the Sins of the world, grant us peace. Boni­face said, we declare, that it is ne­cessary to Salvation, that every hu­mane [Page 190]creature be subject to the Pope of Rome. Another saith, the power of the Pope excelleth all power.

2. Papal Dignity was brought in­to the Church from among the Hea­thens. The Idolatrous Romans had their superiour and subordinate Priests. They had their Salii, Fla­mines, Diales, their Augures, Ponti­fices, and above them all there was a Pontifex maximus: the same Title which the Pope assumeth. A Dig­nity esteemed (it seemeth) by their greatest Nobles: such as Fabius ma­ximus, Crassus, Aemilius, Lepidus, and Caesar himself. And Sozomen writeth, S [...]zom. l. 5. ca. 1. & ca 15. when Julian the Emperour had revolted from the Christian Re­ligion to heathenish Idolatry, [...], he called himself a chief-Priest. And in the same Book and 15 Chapter he co­pieth out an Epistle written by this Heathenish Apostate Emperour, to Arsacius, whom he stileth chief-Priest of Galatia, and enjoyneth him to censure, and (if need be) to de­prive the inferiour Priests of their [Page 191]Office or Functions. So the Pope to this day hath the very same Title of Pontifex maximus, which was the proper Title of the chief-Priest in Rome, while Rome was Heathenish. Gratian a meek and religious Em­perour, who was slain by the men of Maximus the Tyrant, is the first of the Christian Emperours, that refused to be called Pontifex Maxi­mus, holding that Title which his Predecessors (though Christians) had born, to be unsutable with a Christian Prince, as derived from the Pagans, and relishing of Paga­nism: yet soon after the Bishops of Rome suffered themselves to be cal­led so, and took up that which an Emperour had rejected, as a lear­ned man well noteth.

3. Secrat. l. 3. ca. 23. The Popish fashion of swearing by Saints is but an imitation of the Pagans Superstition, who used to swear by their Gods, as Libanius doth oftentimes in his Books swear by Hercules, Bacchus, Asclepius: The Heathens were of opinion, that their swearing by their Idols was a token of their serving of them. [Page 192]And it is a common thing for the Pa­pists to swear by the Virgin Mary, and by the rest of the Saints. They set the Virgin in Gods seat, as though it belonged to her to judg the world▪ It is horrible treachery to swear by the Virgin Mary, or by any other creature.

The Pagans had also divers Rites belonging to th [...]ir superstition.

1. The Heathen for Devotion­sake made shadows about their Al­tars, in plashing of Trees to make places dark, that when men entred into them, they might be moved to a kind of aw and fearfulness. So it is among the Papists, if a place be darksome, it seemeth to them to carry some Majesty in it, and the simple sort are as it were amazed when they come into a Cave, and where the Windows be dimmed with red or blew Glass, mens Eyes dazzle at it, and simple folk feel a kind of motion in themselves, which makes them afraid and astonished; and to their seeming it is good to stir them up to Devotion, thinking it is a reverencing of God, where­as [Page 193]indeed it is stark foolishness.

2. The Pagans assigned particular Offices to each of their Gods: one governed the Sea, another ruled in Hell: one took care of the Corn, another of Women with Child: and every Land or Country had his Titu­lar God or Goddess. Juno was the Pa­troness of Carthage, Venus of Paphos, and Pallas of Athens. The Church of Romc hath transported these Titles to the deceased Saints, & hath given to every one their Office: St. Mar­garet Patroness of Child-bed Wo­men did succeed the Goddess Laci­na: St. Nicholas, who is invocated by Navigators, did succeed Castor and Pollux: St. Eustache succeedeth the hunting Diana: St. Christopher succeeds Hercules: Jupiter Pluvius hath given the Rain unto Genivieve: Ceres hath given over the Corn unto S. John and S. Paul: Esculapius gives Medicine unto S. Cosm, Bacchus the Vines unto St. Ʋrban: Mercurius the Oxen to Pelagius. And every King­dom Town and City hath its titular Saint: St. Mark is the Patron and Protectour of Venice: St. James of [Page 194] Spain: St. Dennis of France: Saint Martin of Germany: St. George of England, &c.

3. The Canonization of Saints is an imitation of the Pagan Apotheo­ses, that is, Deifications, or making of Gods, whereby a man is made one of the Gods by the authority of men. And the Senate of Cardinals hath the right of Apotheoses, or Cano­nizations, and to admit whom they please into the list of the Saints of Paradise. The Preface of the second Book of the sacred Ceremonies cal­leth the Canonization of Saints of the Papacy, Divorum nostrorum A­potheosis, the Deification, or Apo­theose of our Saints.

4. The Church of Rome hath bor­rowed from the Pagans the Equi­page and Ornament of her Images. They gave a Key to Janus, as the Church of Rome gives to Saint Peter. They represented Jupiter Hammond with horns, as Moses is now pictu­red. The Gen [...]i, or Houshold-Gods, had a Dog with them, so hath the Popish Saint Hubert. Vulcan of old had an Hammer, so hath Saint [Page 195] Eloy now. Hercules had a Club, so hath St. Christopher. Before the Pagans Images Wax-lights were lighted, and Incense was burnt, which is done still to the Images of Saints in the Church of Rome. A custom much derided by Tertullian, Arnobius and Lactantius. Of bur­ning of Incense, it was so common a custom among the Gentiles, as that Julian the Apostate, that he might cunningly bind the Christians to the same, ordained, that when any man came to him according to the cu­stom, to receive any gifts at his hands, they should burn Incense be­fore him: whereupon some notable Christians having understanding of his purposed intent, came and brought them back again unto him, that they might not be polluted. A­bout the year 800. Pope Leo the third ordained it should be used in the Mass. Then for Tapers, Wax-Candles and Lights in the Churches, this Ceremony took its passage from the Gentiles to the Christians in the time of S. Hierome, that is, more than 400 years after the death of [Page 196]Christ. And Vigilantius, Pastor of Barcelona, wrote against the same, complaining of it, that he should see the superstition of the Pagans drawn into Religion, and fetched from the Gods of Paganism to be bestowed on the Christian Martyrs.

5. Their Doctrine of Purgatory, and satisfaction after this life came from the Heathen. Plato, in his Dia­logue of the Soul, saith, those that live indifferently well come to that Lake, and there dwell, and being purged, and having born the pains of their iniquities, they are released. Virgil followeth him, speaking thus of the Souls of Purgatory.

Hence Purgatory arose. As for the purgation of Souls at the Wind, or in the Water, Pope Gregory the first teacheth it in the fourth Book of his Dialogues, where there are many apparitions of Souls, saying, that they are in Purgatory in the Wind [Page 197]or in the Water, or in hot Bathes: for the Purgatory in a subterra­nean fire was not yet invented. The Paynims divided man into two parts, taking the Body for one, and the Soul for the other. Again, after that the Soul was separated from the Body, they divided it into three parts. The same that went down into those places called they called Inferos, or Inferna, they called Ma­nes, comprehending thereby all that which now-adays they call the Hell of the damned, Limbus and Purga­tory. Then there remained the Spi­rit, and that which they called Ʋm­bram, that is, a shadow. As touching the Body and the Spirit, they were not of opinion, that any of them did ever come again into this world, or that they were ever seen after that a man was once dead and buried: for they did well see, that the Body did turn again into dust and into ashes. And as for the Spirit, they were of opinion, that it went up a­gain into Heaven, from whence it had its original, and there did abide. And as for that which they [Page 198]called the shadow, because it had no true bodily substance, they said it did vanish away suddenly, as smoak, when any body came near it, and and would have touched it. And therefore they named it Ʋmbra, be­cause it was but a salse representati­on, like unto the shadow of a Body. They said, that it did remain about the Graves, and upon the Earth, where it was to wander and to appear unto men. So, say the Pa­pists, though the Bodies of men may be corrupted in the Grave, and brought into ashes; so that they can­not come out of it before the day of the general Resurrection, except it be by Miracle, yet it is otherwise of the Souls, for they be immortal, and go not down into the Grave as the Bodies do: therefore they may come again, and appear unto men on earth, and to converse with them. But some of the Heathen have deri­ded at these toys. Cicero Tuscul. quaest. l. 1. Cicero, where he makes mention of the Lake A­vernus, saith, they will that these Images and Visions should speak: which thing cannot be done without [Page 199]Tongue, Mouth, Throat, without the force and shape or figure of Lungs and Ribs. Chrysost. de Lazar [...] & Divite. Chrysostom saith well, ne quaeramus audire à mortuis, quae multo clarissimè nos docent sacrae Scripturae; let us not seek to hear those things from the dead, which the holy Scriptures do teach us most plainly.

6. Macrob. in somn­scipio. l. 2. Singing and Musick was also used in the Funerals of the Paynims, of which Macrobius speaketh. Py­thagoras and Plato speak of the Mu­sick and Harmony of the Heavens proceeding from the continual mo­ving of the heavenly Sphears, or Circles. And Plato and they that held opinion with him, that the Souls were immortal, did think that they had their off-spring and origi­nal from Heaven, and that they were come down from thence to in­habit and dwell in the Bodies of men; whereupon Macrobius saith, that it was established by the Laws and Statutes of many Coun­tries, that they should follow the dead unto their Graves with good Musick and Singing; for the Pay­nims [Page 200]did believe, that the Souls, af­ter they were separated from the Bodies, did return to the original of the sweet Musick and Harmony, that is, into Heaven.

7. Before Bells were invented, the Pagans used Trumpets, which they consecrated by washings and purifi­cations, and the day of that Cere­mony was called Tubilustrium, as Ovid tells us, that is, the purifying and hallowing of Trumpets. And because they were wont to use them in Funerals, they were wont to purifie and hallow them at the Feast of Minerva, called Quinquatria, and at a certain Feast of Vulcan, as Festus Pompeius and Varro do testifie; they did in a manner the like with them, as the Pope who baptizeth Agnus Dei's, and Bells also are bap­tized in the name of the sacred Tri­nity: and they have a God-father and a God-mother that give them a Name. Thus wickedly do they blas­pheme the holy Institution and Ordi­nance of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath ordained Baptism for a Seal of his faithful Congrega­tion and People.

8 The Pagans applied Reliques to women with Child: they used to gird their Belly about with Rol­lers made before the Idols, much like the women in the Abby of St. German at Paris, girding them­selves with the Girdle of S. Mar­garet.

9. Many popish Monks place merit in going barefoot. The superstiti­ous had an holy-day in which they went barefoot, which S. Jerome in his first book against Jovinian, calleth Nudipedalia, of which Ju­venal speaketh: ‘ Observant ubi festa mero pede Sab­bata Regis. Juvenal.’

10. The Papists are full of beg­ging Friers. Such there were a­mong the Pagans, among whom the Priests of the Syrians Goddess, Ovid. F [...] ­sti l. 4. and those of Cyb [...]le went about begging from Town to Town, bea­ring sacks where they put the Pro­vision that was given them. An ex­act description hereof you may find in the fourth book of Ovids [Page 202]Fasti, and in the eighth book of the Milesia of Apulcius.

11. The spittle used in Baptism by the Roman Church is derived from the Pagans, who made use of spittle for a preservative and ex­piation, as Persius saith.

12. The Indians had Gardens of Herbs and sweet Trees with Ro­ses and Flowers for the Altars; and this is also the Church of Rome's custome and superstition to trim and deck their Saints and Altars with Garlands and Crowns of Roses and other Flowers. The Pagans cloathed their Images as the Papists do. The history of Di­onysius the Tyrant is known, who eased the Images of their golden heavy cloakes, and gave them o­ther cloaks of Cloath, saying those of Cloath were both lighter & warmer.

The Indians had 2000 Gods, whose Images stood highest in the Temple upon the Altars. They were made of stone in full proportion as bigg as a Giant, They were covered with a lawn called Nacar: they were be­set with divers Pearls, pretious [Page 203]Stones and pieces of Gold wrought like Birds, Beasts, Fishes, Flow­ers, adorned with Emeraulds, Turquies, Chalcedons, and other little fine Stones, so that when the Lawn was taken away, the Ima­ges seemed very beautiful to be­hold. So doth the Church of Rome deck and adorn their Idol-saints, as the Heathens did their chiefest Gods, called Vitzilopuchtli, and Tezcatilipuca. They cover their wooden and stony Statues of Saints, and of the Virgin Mary with fine lawn-shirts, and hide them with Curtains of cloth of Gold, and enrich them with costly and pretious jewels and Diamonds, not consi­dering that they are the work of their own hands.

13. In Mexico, and without the great Temple, and over against the principal door thereof a stones cast distant, stood a Charnel house on­ly of dead-mens heads, Priso­ners in War, and sacrificed with the knife. This Monument was made like unto a Theatre, more large than broad, wrought of lime [Page 204]and stone, Gages Hist. of the West-Indies. with ascending steps, in the Walls whereof was graffed between stone and stone a skull with the teeth outward. At the feet and head of this Theatre were two Towers made only of Lime and Skulls the Teeth outward; which having no other stuffe in the Wall, seemed a strange sight. So the Ro­mish Church makes much of their dead mens skulls and rotten bones, laying them up in their Church­yard, under some arches made for that purpose in their Church-Walls.

14. At the Consecration of an Heathenish Idol, a certain vessel of water was blessed with many words and ceremonies; and that water was preserved very religiously at the foot of the Altar, for to consecrate the King when he should be crow­ned; and also to bless any Captain General, when he should be elected for the Wars, with only giving him a draught of that water. Justin Mar­tyr saith, that the Gentiles, when they enter into their Temples, do sprinkle themselves with water, and then they go and offer sacrifice to [Page 205]their Gods. And Hippocrates saith, in going in we sprinkle our selves with this water; to the end, that we may be made clean from our sins. And is not this practised in the Ro­man Church? They had also among the Gentiles a peculiar form of san­ctifying it, dipping therein, as Athe­naeus tells us, a firebrand taken off from the Altar, whereupon they of­fered their Sacrifices. So likewise have they a peculiar manner of ma­king this, exorcising the salt first, then the water, and after that both of them being mixed together: which being done, both the Papists and the Gentiles do think that it purgeth away sins.

Of the Papists imitating the Jews and Pharisees in many things.

1. THe Pharisees boasted of Mo­ses's Chair, as the Church of Rome doth of that of S. Peter, and of an imaginary succession.

2. The Pharisees were strict main­tainers of Traditions, and unwrit­ten [Page 206]Word, as the Papists are. These were strict burdens they laid upon the people, Matth. 15.4. They per­swaded the people, that these Tradi­tions were as necessary as the Scrip­tures. The Jewish Rabbines affirm, that during the forty days that Mo­ses was in the Mount Sinai to learn the Law, Almighty God taught him in the day-time Sepher Thorah, the Book of the Law; and by night for want of Candle-light the Law not written, or orales Traditiones, oral Traditions, which they call Simanim: and the Thorah without this, they say, is imperfect. And this (as well as the Law written, Chemnit. ha [...]m [...]n. E [...]a [...]g. ca. 79. they say) was delivered by God himself to Moses, by Moses to Joshua, by Joshua to the Elders of Israel, by them to the Prophets, from the Prophets to a great Council, whose Register, and chief Notary (they say) was Esdras the Scribe, who (as they affirm) com­mitted many of them to writing, and gathered them into seventy two Books which they kept till their Ci­ty and Temple was destroyed, and themselves dispersed. Afterwards [Page 207]one Rabbi Judas Ben-Simon, an holy man (as they say) having saved that Book, gathered the Sum of it into one Book, whence afterwards all the Talmudists and Cabbalists took their ground. The Papists borrow their esteem of unwritten vanities and traditions from the Jews: they tell us, they have many things by Tradition from the Apostles them­selves, who taught them viva voce, when they bring never a word out of the Scriptures for the confirmati­on of them.

3. The Scribes taught that children might neglect their duty to their Pa­rents, under pretence of a religious Corban, that is, that whosoever should be liberal toward their Trea­sury in the Temple, and offer freely, with this protestation, that he meant it not only for his own good, but al­so for his Parents, should herein suf­ficiently discharge his duty to his Pa­rents, and owe them no other Ser­vice: so that by this means (it may seem) they provided well for their own purses, and exempted Children from those duties towards their Pa­rents, [Page 208]which the Commandment of God tyed them to perform. So do the Papists allow Children to give their Means to Monasteries, though their Parents starve for want of maintainance.

4. The Jews boasted of the Tem­ple of the Lord, crying up the Tem­ple of the Lord; and in the mean­time profaned it by an evil life, Jer. 7. The carnal Jews were much af­fected with pomp in matters of Re­ligion, and many of them men of dissolute lives. So it is among the Romanists, in those Cities and Coun­tries wherein is most wickedness of life, there is also most cost in the Temples, and most publick super­stitious worshipping of God and the Saints. What stately Churches, Chappels, and Cloisters are in Rome? what Fastings, what Processions, what appearances of Devotion? and yet on the other side, what Whore­domes, Sodomies, and Profanations are committed in it? so that it was the saying of a certain Frier, that there were more Atheists in Rome than in any other City in the world. [Page 209]But no where doth sin and wicked­ness so abound, as in Mexico, and yet no such people in the world to­ward the Church and Clergy, who in their life-time strive to exceed one another in their gifts to the Cloi­sters, Nuns and Friers; some ere­cting Altars to their best devoted Saints, worth many thousand Duc­kets; others presenting Crowns of Gold to the Virgin Mary; others Lamps; others Gold-chains; others building Cloisters at their own charge; others repairing them; o­thers at their death leaving to them two or three thousand Duckets for an annual Stipend.

5. The Jews boasted, that their Prophets and Priests could not err, saying, Jerem. 18.18. The Law shall not err from the Priest, and the Coun­cil from the antient. This is also the boasting of the Church of Rome, that the Pope (as Pope) cannot fall into errour, and that the Church of Rome cannot err.

6. The Pharisees used vain repe­titions in Prayer, after the manner of the Heathen, thinking to be heard [Page 210]for their much speaking, for which our Saviour taxeth them, Mat. 6.7. repeating the same things over and over again, not out of affection, but out of affectation. The same doth the Church of Rome, repeating the same Prayers while they turn their Beads, and binding themselves to a certain number of reiterated words.

The Pharisees preached Justifica­tion by the Works of the Law, and the Jews were forestalled with that Doctrine, which made S. Paul so careful to confute that Errour in the Epistles to the Romans and to the Galatians, establishing Justification by Faith, without the Works of the Law. In this the Papists agree with them, teaching Justification by Works.

8. Our Saviour taxeth the Scribes and Pharisees for their Hypocrisie. They pretended great love to the antient Prophets, Matt. 23.29. whom their fore-fathers had persecuted and slain: and to shew this, they used both words and actions. They professed, that if they had lived in the days of [Page 211]their fore-fathers, they would not have joyned with them in their per­secution and murther of the Pro­phets. They bestowed cost in ador­ning the Sepulchres wherein they were entombed. But now in the mean-time they hated to death, and bitterly opposed Christ then living among them, to whom all those Pro­phets bear witness. Thus may you see in the Papists their bitter hatred against the Preachers of the Gospel, together with their pretended love to the ancient Doctors: their proud conceit of Merit with their glorious outward Performances: their gross Idolatry covered under a shew of much reverence to the Saints.

9. The Jews were most strict in matters of smallest moment; they would pay Tythe of Mint, Annis, and Cummin, but neglected the weightier matters of the Law, Judg­ment, Mercy, and Faith, Math. 23.23. So doth the Church of Rome ex­actly observe distinction of meats, and amuse the people about a thou­sand petty Ceremonies of Candles, Pilgrimages, Crossings, &c. and let [Page 212]Righteousness, Peace, and Joy in the Holy Ghost stand by unsaluted; yet therein doth the Kingdome of God consist.

Thus the superstitious Priests a­mong the Jews made no scruple to hire a Traitor, to suborn false Wit­nesses, to Apprehend, to Bind, to Smite, to Scourge, to Blaspheme, to Condemn the Innocent Lamb of God, and to Crucifie the Lord of glory; yet made great Conscience not to step over the Threshold into the Judgment-Hall of an Heathen-Judg, lest (forsooth) they should be defiled, but that they might eat the Passover, John 18.28. yet this shunning of Pilates Hall was no Commandement of God. They made no Conscience to give a price for Innocent blood, but made great scruple of putting it into the Trea­sury, as being unlawful. So do the Papists, speaking lies in hypocrisie, forbid Marriage, and yet allow Stews. They are very severe in en­joyning abstinence from meats, which God hath created to be re­ceived with Thanksgiving; yet [Page 213]make no scruple to Stab or Poison the greatest Princes (whom God hath forbidden to be touched) for the promoting of the Catholick Cause, as they varnish over their own Interest. They will not touch money, nor eat flesh on a Friday, but will take Rent for Brothel-Hou­ses, and allow Priests an Absolution for defiling silly Women, laden with divers Lusts upon a slight Penance; while they make their taking of Wives to avoyd Fornication, to be a damnable sin. They are all for Sacrifice, nothing for Mercy. A great part of their Religion (as a Judicious Divine observeth) con­sisteth in meats and drinks, in days, wherein they place both Holiness and Necessity, yea merit and per­fection. Their Fasts, Feasts, their Jubilees (at first every fistieth, and of late (because gain is sweet) every fifteenth year) are all professedly as­cribed to the Jewish Solemnities. Their Priests, Altars, Sacrifices, their Sanctum Sanctorum, are all an imita­tion of the Jewish Ordinances. And in the Lateran Church in the holy of [Page 214]Holies (if ye will believe them) in­stead of the Tables of the Law, and the pot of Manna;

Yea at length they have found out Aarons Rod, and put it in an Ark. They have an High-priest after the manner of Aaron: they have their Unction and Consecration of Altars, and of all Vessels and Utensils be­longing to their superstitious Devo­tion.

10. The Pharisees misinterpreted the Law, for which our Saviour re­buketh them, Matth. 5. And what is the singularity of the ordinary Po­pish School-Divinity, but an adulte­rated body tempered with the drugs and dregs of human Reason? A re­conciling of S. Paul to Aristotle and Plato, rather than a transferring of them over unto Paul. There is more [Page 215]Dross than Gold in it, more Poison than wholesom Food in it; and therefore dangerous to young Stu­dents, and raw Divines, who for want of use and experience have not their senses exercised to discern both good and evil; nor judgment to dis­cern of things that differ, and to ap­prove the things that are excellent, and to hold fast that which is good. Luther complained of the School-men, that they turned usum into u­trum, all practices of Religion into needless Disputes. In the dark times of Popery, when the truth was almost banished out of the world, then was the world full of Scholastick curiosities, which Luther calls phiolas illas aureas, the golden vials of the wrath of God. How have they intru­ded on things which they have not seen? The Popish Doctors can tell you punctually, how many Orders and Degrees there are among the Angels, their very Names, Natures, Offices and Employments; their Knowledg, their manner of Confe­rence; as if they had travelled as many years in Heaven, as Lucian [Page 216]did in the orb of the Moon; and can tell as many stories of them, as Lucian did of that Lunary world: only with this difference, as one saith, that whereas Lucian, although an enemy to Religion, and to God the Author of it, was yet so ingeni­ous, as to acknowledg in his Book de vera Historia, his Readers should take nothing for true in it, but only this one Confession, that in it there was nothing true. The Romanists will have all their lies taken for truth, and those no less than Divine. They can describe Paradise, Purga­tory, Hell: they can tell you what the Angels, the Virgin Mary, S. Pe­ter, S. Paul, do in Heaven, and what the cursed fiends do in Hell; how many years such a one must lye in Purgatory, when he shall be deli­vered thence, if his Friends will pay down such a round sum of money. But much more would his Goodness be extolled, if the Pope would deli­ver at once all those his Purgatory prisoners without that simonaical receipt of Money.