MAny if they write but a Pamphl [...]t are wont to make a great Preamble [...] they build, as the Proverb saith, the Door bigger than the House; they promise much, and perform but little. That I may not be guilty of such a fault, and intending to be brief, I shall immediately enter into my Subject, and prove thus, that the Church of Rome is Heretick.

That Church which is obstinate in her errors, is Heretick; the Roman Church is obstinate in her errors, Ergo.

The Major Proposition is true, and granted by all Divines; as for the Minor, which is in question, I prove it thus.

That Church which refuseth to obey the holy Scripture in several points both of Faith and Practice, is obstinate in her errors: The Ro­man Church refuseth to obey the Holy Scrip­ture in several points, both of Faith and pra­ctice, Ergo.

[Page] The Major Proposition is true, and granted by [...] Divines; as for the Minor which isin que­stion, I prove it thus. That Church which re­fuseth to obey the holy Scripture in several points both of faith and practice, is obstinate in her er­rors; the Roman Church refuseth to obey the holy Scripture in several points both of faith and pra­ctice, Erg [...]. The Major Proposition is also true and granted by all Divines; as for the Minor which is in question, I prove thus.

That Church which addeth something to the Holy Scripture, and diminisheth from it in se­veral points, both of Faith and Practice, and thinketh above that which is written, refuseth to obey the Holy Scripture; for we are com­manded not to add to the Word of God, nor to diminish from it, I Cor. 4. 6. And Paul forbids to think above that which is written. But the Ro­man Church addeth to the Holy Scripture, and diminisheth from it, and thinketh above that which is written, in several points both of Faith and Practice. Ergo. She refuseth to obey the Holy Scripture, in several points both of Faith and Practice, ergo, She is obstinate in her errors; ergo, She is Heretick. That the Roman Church addeth to the Holy Scripture, and diminisheth from it in several Points both of Faith and Pra­ctice, and thinketh above that which is writ­ten, I shall endeavour to prove it evidently.

In the [...]se place it is written in the Law, [Page 3] which God did pronounce and Write, Exod. 2 [...] 4. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven Image, nor any [...] of any thing that is in be aven above, or that is in the [...] beneath, or that is in the waters under the earth, thou shalt [...] bow down thy self to them, nor serve them. & Dent. 4. 15. T [...] ye good beed unto your selves, for ye saw no manner of similitude [...] the day that the Lord spake unto you in Horeb, out of the midst of the fire, le [...]t ye corrupt your selves, and make you a graves Image the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female, and in Isaiah 40. 18. it is said, To whom will ye liken God, or what likeness will ye compare unto him.

The Roman Church maketh graven Images and boweth down her self, and prayeth to them, worshippeth, kisseth, and serveth them, and offe­reth Incense to them: She maketh also Images of God the Father in the shape of an old Man, holding the Globe of the World in his hand; & of the Holy Ghost, in the form of a Dove. And though the Council of Constantinople condemned the worshiping of Images, & did forbid the pla­cing them in O [...]tories & Churches, where the Divine Majesty is worshipped, nevertheless the Church of Rome sets them up, and ordains that they shall not only be received into places of Ad­oration, but also shall be adored & worshipped: And the Bull of Pope Puts the fourth, containing the form of the Oath for professing of Faith, da­ted at Rome in the Year, 1564▪ makes Image wor­ship absolutely necessary to be believed by all [...], as an Article of Faith. And most firmly I [...] (saith [...]e) that the Images of Christ, and the Mother of God alwayes Virg [...]n, and the other [Page 4] Saints are to be had and retained, and that to them [...]our and veneration is to be given. Then it is manifest she addeth to the Holy Scripture, and sinketh above that which is written. And she must not say to excuse herself, that this for­bidding is only against Idols, and not against Images, because these words following ( nor any Likeness of any thing) do contain and signi­fie the one and the other, I mean both Idols and Images.

Likewise she must not say that she worship­peth and serveth them with a service of [...] and not with a worship of [...] for be­sides this distinction is new, and unused in the Primitive Church, and not found in the Holy Scripture; it is alwayes true, the Roman Church addeth to the Word of God, and thin­keth above that which is written. It is cer­tain: according to her own confession, she wor­shippeth with a worship of [...] the Images of God the Father, the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, and of the Cross. And these words of Samuel, Prepare your hearts unto the Lord, and serve him only, do destroy all these distinctions of the Roman Church concerning the service of [...] and worship of [...] and that it is a flat Idolatry to worship God in any Image is expressed and manifested by the Children of Israel, when they made the golden Calf to be a representation of God; for the Text, ( E [...].3 [...]) [Page 5] sheweth that it was Idolatry, for which many of them were plagued and punished: and yet their meaning was to worship the true God in the Calf; for they were not so simple as to think or believe that that dead Idol or Image was God; and therefore the Idolatry of the Church of Rome is as gross and wicked as their was.

Pray let us represent to our selves two Souls, one Protestant and the other Papist, and both before Jesus Christ at the fearful day of his Judgment. If Christ ask the Protestant Soul, why she did not make Images, nor bow down her self to them, nor worship them, nor serve them; she will answer him, it is because thou didst say unto me, thou shalt not make unto thee any Graven Image, or any likeness of any thing; thou shalt not bow down thy self to them, nor serve them. And If Jesus Christ, as I suppose should say unto her, thou oughtest to understand there­by Idols, and distinguish between the worship of [...] and [...] and hearken unto the Romish Church; she will reply boldly, Lord, thou didst tell me in thy Gospel, Mark 7. 7. In vain do they worship thee, teaching for Doctrines the Commandments of men. Thou didst tell me by St. Paul, Gal. 1. 8. Though an Angel from Hea­ven Preacheth any other Gospel unto me, than that which I have received, let him be accursed. Thou didst tell me by the same Apostle, 1 Cor. 4. 6. not [Page 6] to think of men above that which is written; thou didst tell men in thy Gospel, Mat. 40. 10. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. This is the reason why I have not made Images, nor worshipped them, nor ser­ved them. But what shall a Papist soul an­swer, when Jesus Christ will speak with her thus: I told thee, Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven Image, or the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above [...] I told thee Th [...]u shalt not bow down thy self to them, nor serve them. Like­wise I told thee these words of Isaiah, 40. 18. To whom will ye liken God, or what likeness will ye compare unto him? and thou hast not kept my words. What shall this poor Papist an­swer? I believe nothing but that the Pope and the Roman Church taught him the contrary, and Jesus Christ will undoubtedly reply, seeing thou hast preferred the Commandments of the Pope before mine; Go away with the Pope and see whether he is able to deliver thee from everlasting fire, and perpetual Prison.

Secondly, It is written in several places of the Holy Scripture, that Jesus Christ is our Saviour and Redeemer, Act 4. 12. and neither is there any Salvation in any other, for there is none other Name under Heaven given among men whereby we must be saved, as it is said in the Acts: It is also declared in 1 John 2. 1. We have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous, and he [Page 7] is the propitiation for our sins. And in 1 Tim. 2 [...] 5. There is one Mediator between God and Man, the Man Christ Jesus. And notwithstanding all that, the Papists call the Blessed Virgin the She Redeemer of the World, they say the Saints are in some way our Redeemers, they put their trust and confidence in them, as we may see in several Prayers, wherein they speak thus, O great Saint, in whom I put my trust and confidence, &c. and they take them for their Ad­vocates and Mediators: and though Christ teaching his Disciples to pray, commands them to direct their Prayers to his Father, and say, Our Father which art in Heaven, &c. And tho' the Lord saith by Hosea, 13. In me only is thy help there is no favour besides me. Nevertheless the Pope to fatten his Cheeks, and fill his Truncks with Money, will have us to have recourse un­to Saints, and take them for our Advocates and Mediators, as it may be seen in the Council of Trent, Seff. 25. It is then evident the Roman Church addeth to the Holy Scripture, and thin­keth above that which is written; and she must not say she prayeth and beggeth the fa­vour of the Saints, as we pray a Friend at Court to request a kindness from his Majesty; for in the first place it is written. We have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righ­teous, and it is not written that any other is our Advocate.

[Page 8] Secondly, If the Kings Son should say, when ye will ask my Father any favour come ye un­to me, and not unto another; if afterwards some body should go unto another, he should be very imprudent. Jesus Christ speaketh thus, Mat. 11.28. Come unto me all ye that labour, and are heavy lade [...], and I will give you rest. There­fore we must not have another Advocate. Chrysost [...]me speaking of the Woman of Canaan who though she were a sinner was bold to come unto Christ; saith thus, En prudentiam bujus mulieris, non precatur Jacobum, non suppi [...]cat. Joanni, non adit ad Perrum, nec Apostolorum coe­tum respicit, [...]ut ullum corum requi [...]t, sed [...] his c [...]mbus poenitentiam sibi comitom adjungit, & ad ipsum fontem progreditur. Behold the wisdom of this Woman, she doth not pray to James, she doth not beseech John, she goes not to Peter, she looketh not to the company of the Apostles neither doth request of any of them; but for all this she taketh Repentance for her Compa­nion, and goeth to the very fountain it self.

Ambrose likewise answereth the carnal rea­son of the Papists. Sole [...]t, saith he, misera uti exculatione, dicentes per istos posse ire ad Deum, si­cut per comites itur ad Reges. Ideo ad Regem per tribunos & comites itur, qui [...] homo utique est Rex; ad Deum autem, qu [...]m utique nibil latet, suffraga­tore non est [...]pus, sed mente d [...]vota, abic [...]nque [...]nim tali [...] locutus suorit, respondebit illi: That is, They [Page 9] are wont to use a pitiful excuse, saying, by these ( Saints) they may have access unto God, as by Earls there is access to Kings. Therefore it is that by Officers and Earls access is made to the King, because the King himself is a man; but to come to God, from whom nothing is hid, there is no need of a spokes-man, but of a d [...]v [...]ut mind; for whereso­ever such one speaketh to him he will answer him. Hereunto I may add that which is written in Eccles. 9. 5, 6. The dead know not any thing, nei­ther have any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the Sun. And therefore I may say the Roman Church intreateth in vain the help of the Saints. And the most learned Doctors thereof cannot say how they may hear the prayers of men; for they confess it is not a property of their happiness; and some say they see in the face of God, as in a looking­glass, all things here below. Some say they see only the things which belong to them. Some say God discovereth to them the Prayers of men; Some say the faithful which are up­on the earth give notice of their desires and minds to the Saints, as the Angels do communi­cate their thoughts one with another. To make it short, the Roman Church is so uncertain, con­cerning the Saints, that oftentimes, as I think, she worshippeth and prayeth to them that are now burning in everlasting fire.

Thirdly, It is written in the first Chapter to [Page 10] the Hebrews, 1. 3. That Jesus Christ purged himself our sins; and in St. Paul to the Romans, Rom. 1. 1. There is now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus. And in Rev. 14. 13. Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord, from henceforth, yea saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours, and their works do follow them. And in the Book of Wisdom canonized by the general Council of Trent, The souls of the Righ­teous are in the hands of God, and there shall no torment touch them. Nevertheless the Roman Church believeth and teacheth that there is a place called Purgatory, wherein the Souls of the Just are tormented and afflicted, some for a short time, some for a hundred years, some for a thousand and upwards, and others to the end of this World. I do constantly hold, saith Pope Pius the fourth, finding Purgatory to be very ser­viceable for his Kitchin, there is a Purgatory, and that the souls there detained are holpen by the suffrages of the faithful. Mandat sancta Synodus, (saith the Council of Trent) omnibus Episcopis, at sanam de Purgatori [...] doctrinam a sanctis Patri­bus, & sacris Conciliis traditam, a Christi fidelibus [...] teneri, doceri, & ubique proedicari diligenter studeant. And though the Roman Church can­not tell whether this Purgatory is in the Air, or in the Earth, or in the place wherein sins were committed, yet she saith the Pope with a little Indulgence layed unto a Bead, or Cross, [Page 11] or Medal, or with a M [...]s said upon certain dayes of the week, gives power to deliver from this Purgatory w [...]m he plea [...]d, and when he pleaseth. I [...] then in the fi [...]st place since this Doctrine is not found in the Holy Scripture, the Roman Church a [...] to the Word of God, and thinketh above that which is written.

Secondly, I shew she doth destroy her self, when she will have us to believe under the pain of damnation, that there is a Purgatory. For if there be a Purgatory, either it is to purge sins or to purge the pain due unto them: It is not for the first, because the Roman Church belie­veth Jesus Christ did by himself pu [...]ge all our sins; and because they are to be purged afore we be separated from this World. It is then for the purgation of the pain; but the pain is punished and not purged; for a Gallows is [...]o [...] for the purgation of a Murther, but for the punishment of it. Therefore seeing Purga­tory, according to the Papists, is only for the pain due to sins, they destroy themselves, when they call it Purgatory. For it hath no war­rant in the Holy Scripture; Christ sheweth out two places, Heaven and Hell, saying that the rich mans soul, which was unmerciful to Lazarus, went after his death to Hell, and there was tormented, and that Lazarus soul (he be­ing dead) was carried into Abraham's Bosom, a [Page 12] place of joy and comfort. To the Thief which was executed with Christ at his passion, and believed in him, Christ answered, This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise: which sheweth that the souls of the faithful never come into Pur­gatory fire, to be burnt and punished; for all their sins are forgiven, and consequently the punishment incident to the same is forgiven al­so, and their souls pass from death to life, name­ly Heaven. Rev. 14. 13. Blessed are the dead which d [...]e in the Lord, from henceforth they rest from their labours, and their works follow them. If from the time of their death they have bles­sedness and rest, then they are not in any Pur­gatory fire to be burnt and tormented. And Austin speaketh thus, The first place the Faith of the Catholicks doth by divine Authority believe to be the Kingdom of Heaven, the second Hell; a third place we are utterly ignorant of; neither can we find any such in the Holy Scriptures. And in another place he saith, That they whi [...] believe a Purgatory fire, are much deceived, that through a humane conce [...]t. Know this, [...] he, that when the soul is separated from the [...] presently it is either placed in Paradise for its; works, or [...] [...]eadlong into the bottom of Hel its sins. And Justin Martyr saith, Post [...] stat [...]m fit [...] & impurum distinct [...], & dicuniur [...] Paradisum; That is, [...] after death there is made a separate [...] be [...] [Page 13] good and bad men, and that the good are carried un­to Paradise.

Fourthly, The Papists hold their general Councils and their Pope cannot err; but they are deceived, for St. Austin plainly teacheth, that only the Scriptures cannot err; General Councils, saith he, which are gathered of all the Christian World, are often corrected, the former by the latter, when by any trial of things that is open­ed which was shut, and that is known which was hidden. If a General Council may be corre­cted, as saith Austin, ergo it may err; and there­fore he speaketh thus to Maximiand the Bishop of the Arians; Neither ought I to alledge the Council of Nice, nor thou the Council of Arimene, to take advantage thereby; for neither am I bound nor held by the authority of this, nor thou of that; for set Matter with Matter, Cause with Cause, Reason with Reason; try the matter by the autho­rity of the Scriptures. The Council of Cons [...] ­tinople condemned the setting up Images in the Church, and the Council of Nice afterwards allowed them. One of them being contrary, must needs be erroneous. And that is granted by it self, when in a set form of Prayer, which is appointed to be said after every Council, they pray, That God would spare their ignorance, and pardon their errors.

The Pope himself may err. Pope Innocen­tius doth teach, That young Children cannot be [Page 14] saved except they receive the Baptism of Christ, and also the Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ. Pope Galatius Decreed, that all they should be excommunicated which would receive the Sacra­ment of the Lords Supper but in one kind. But this Doctrine is taxed for an error by all Pa­pists, and the Council of Trent made a Decree contrary to the Doctrine of the Pope Gelasius. Si quis dixerit ex Dei proecepto vel necessitate salutis omnes & singulos Christi fideles, utramque speciem sanctissimi Eucharistioe Sacramenti sumere debere, anath [...]ma sit. Ergo the Pope of Rome may err, and we may see it in their Decrees, wherein it is written, that he is to be judged of none except he be found erring from the faith, whereby it appea­reth that they thought he might err in matters of Faith, or else that exception was put in vain. All men are subject to error; all men are liars in their own words, and sinners in their works, therefore by their own confession, General Councils and Popes are not infallible; there­fore when they say they cannot err, they both contradict themselves and add to the Word of God, and think above that which is written.

They boast also the Popes Supremacy; they say that the Pope hath preheminence or autho­rity ove▪ all the other Bishops; but upon what ground, I know not. They say it is because he i [...] Successor to Peter, and because Peter had such a preheminence and authority over the rest of [Page 15] the Apostles, therefore the Pope being his Suc­cessor, must be so over all Bishops. But it is false that Peter had such preheminence over the rest of the Apostles. I grant that Christ said to Peter, after he had confessed him to be that Christ, and the Son of the living God, Thou are Peter, and upon this Rock I will build my Church; but these words give no superiority to Peter a­bove the rest, only they shew that the Church is builded, not upon the Person of Peter, but upon the Rock, namely upon Christ, whom Peter confesseth to be the Son of the living God; for as saith St. Paul, 1 Cor. 10. 4. That Rock was Christ, and other foundation no man can lay, but that which is laid already, namely, Jesus Christ. And in the second Chapter to the E­phesians, he saith, That the Church is builded upon the Foundation of the Prophets and Apostles, Christ Jesus himself being the head-stone in the cor­ner. Where then can they find that Peter was made Prince of the Apostles? and had prehe­minence or authority over them? they answer it is when Christ gave unto Peter the Keys of binding and losing; but hereunto I say, that Christ therein gave no authority more to Peter than to the rest; for he doth not say I give unto thee, but I will give unto thee, which pro­mise was afterwards performed, and when it was performed, the Keys or the power of bind­ing and losing was given not only to Peter, but [Page 16] also unto all the rest together. Go ye saith Christ unto all Nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, tea­ching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.

And in John, the twentieth he speaketh thus, Receive ye the Holy Ghost; whatsoever sins ye re­mit, they are remitted unto them, and whatsoever sins ye retain, they are retained. By these words we may see that Christ speaketh unto all the A­postles, and not to Peter only, and so it is evi­dent that Peter received no power more than the rest of the Apostles; Pray, let them tell me, where was Peter's Supremacy, when Paul repro­ved him to his face? Gal. 2. 11. I withstood him to his face, saith Paul, because he was to be blamed. Where was Peter's Supremacy, when at the Council held at Jerusalem where the Apostles were, yet not Peter, but James ruled the Acti­on, and according to his Sentence was the De­cree made? and when there was a contention amongst the Apostles, who should be the greatest amongst them, Christ told them plainly these words, Luk.22. The Kings of the Gentiles exer­cise Lordship over them, and they that exercise Au­thority upon them are called Benefactors; but ye shall not be so, but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger, and be that is chief as he th [...] doth serve. If the greatest must be as the least, what authority hath he above the rest? [Page 17] therefore since the Popes Supremacy over all the other Bishops, is grounded by the Papists upon Peter's Supremacy over the rest of the A­postles; and since Peter hath not such a prehe­minence or authority over them, it followeth that the Pope hath none over the other Bishops.

This is confirmed by St. Hierosm ad Evagram he saith, That the Bishop of Eugubium, or any o­ther the least See, is equal to the Bishop of Rome; for they all joyned in the same Commission, they must serve in the Church, be diligent to discharge that great charge in the Church, which their Master Jesus Christ hath equally laid upon them. And Pope Gregory himself af­firmeth, That whosoever taketh the title of uni­versal Bishop to his See, he cannot be less than An­tichrist.

Therefore the Roman Church addeth to the Word of God, and thinketh above that which is written, when she boasteth of the Supremacy, or Superiority of their Popes over all other Bi­shops, since this Doctrine hath no ground in the Holy Scriptures.

Fifthly, The Church of Rome believeth that their Pope hath authority to depose Kings and Princes, and to kill those they call Heretick. But upon what ground I know not; It is cer­tain [...]t in so doing or attempting to do, he is bo [...] notable Traitor unto God, whose Au­thority [Page 18] he doth claim and arrogate; and unto Princes, to whom he is to be subject: for the pulling down of Princes God hath reserved to himself alone that power: for it is he that put­teth down the mighty from their seats, and exalt­eth them of low degree. By me faith he, Kings Reign, and Princes bear Dominion. He remo­veth Kings, and setteth up Kings; seeing there­fore it is God, that hath this authority proper to himself, which way can the Pope claim it, without injury to the Power of God? they answer, it is by reason of his Keys; but they must remember that the Keys given, were the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, and conse­quently by authority of the Keys he cannot meddle with terrestrial Kingdoms to shut out those that are in them. And he hath no more authority by the power of the Keys, or of bin­ding and losing, than any other Bishop; for the Keys were given to all the rest of the Apo­stles as well as to Peter; For Christ spoke thus; Job. 20.23. Receive ye the Holy Ghost, whose so­ever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them, and whose so­ever sins ye retain, they are retained. And therefore for any Minister of the Gospel, there­by to claim authority above another, is con­trary to the will of Christ, for they are all in­differently joyned in one Commission, and consequently have all equal authority. And therefore the Pope hath no more authority by the [Page 19] vertue of his Keys, than any other Bishop, that is to say, none at all to depose Kings and Prin­ces: his duty is rather to obey them, and to teach the same obedience to others, as the A­postles of Christ did. 1 Pet. 2.13. Submit your selves (saith Peter) to every ordinance of men for the Lords sake, whether it be to the King as su­pream. And St. Paul saith, Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers, &c. and Christ himself said, His Kingdom was not of this world, he refused to be made a King. Himself payed tribute to Caesar, and commanded others to do the same. If Christ were subject to Caesar, is it not a shame to the Pope to exalt himself a­bove Caesar, I mean above a King?

The Papists answer that he got this sovereign Authority by donation from Constantine, but I will grant some Christian Emperour was so foolish as to give his Empire (which is neither likely, nor credible) yet I say it was not law­ful to take it, if he will be a Minister of the Gospel, or Successor of the Apostles: for Christ hath expresly forbidden his Apostles, and in them all the Ministers of the Gospel, all such Dominious, saying thus unto them, Mat. 20. 26. The Kings of the Nations reign over them, and they that be great amongst them, bear Rule or Dominion, but it shall not be so with you; which words be­ing prohibitory, shew that they must not reign like Kings of Nations, but they must serve in [Page 20] the Church, and be diligent in the great charge that Jesus Christ hath laid upon them; and therefore the Pope hath no Authority over Kings and Princes, that may be seen by these words of Tertullian; Colimus Imperatorem ut bominem a Deo secundum, & solo Deo mincrem; that is, We honour the Emperour as the next man to God, and inferiour to God only. And again he saith, that Princes are a Deo sec [...]nds, post cum primi, ante omnes, & super omnes; that is, The se­cond to God, the first next after God, and before and over all men. Optatus, saith, Super Impera­torem non est nisi solus Deus, qui fecit Imperatorem; that is, There is none above the Emperour but God only which made the Emperor: and Chrysostome saith, Parem [...]ullum super terram [...]abet, that is, He hath no equal on Earth. And Gregory Bishop of Rome himself affirmeth, That Power is given to Princes from Heaven, not only over Souldiers but Priests also; and therefore it is evident that the Pope hath no authority over Kings and Prin­ces: nor to kill those they call Heretick; for that Doctrine which they teach is contrary to Christs Doctrine, as we may read in St. Luke.

Because the Samaritans would not receive Je­sus Christ, his Disciples James and John seeing this, said, Lord wilt thou that we command fire to come down from Heaven, and consume them; but Christ turned and rebuked them, and said, ye kn [...]w not what manner of spirit ye are of, for the Son of [Page 21] man is not come to destroy mens lives, but to save them. It is certain that all Papists are not in that Opinion; some of them are very good, and I know some who would start, if they should hear such a Doctrine; but yet it is clear that this Doctrine is taught and practised a­mongst them. Their several Plots here in En­gland, their Massac [...]es in Ireland, France and other Countries, as we may read in History, and their proper words as they are written here prove it evidently.

Si vero Dominus temporalis requisitus & moni­tus ab Ecclesia, terram suam purgare neglexerit ab bac Hereticz faditate, per Metropolitanum Excom­municationis vinculo Innodetur, & si satisfacere contempserit, ex tunc vasallos ab ejus fidelitate de­ [...]unciet absclutes, & terram exponat Catholicis oc­cupandam; That is, If a Prince being admonished and required by the Church, shall refuse to purge his Countrey of that soul Heresie, let him be Excom­municated by the Bishop; and if be refuseth to give satisfaction, from that time let him pronounce his Subjects discharged of their Allegiance, and ex­pose his Countrey to be possessed by the Catholicks.

And in the following words, great Indul­gences and Priviledges are granted to them which shall endeavour to destroy those they call Hereticks; Catholici, que crucis assumpta Charactere, ad Hereticorum exterminium se ac­cinxerint, ill [...] gaudeant indulgentia, illoque Privi­legio [Page 22] sint muniti, quod accedentibus in Terroe Sanctoe subsidium conceditur; That is, Let the Catholicks who taking the sign of the Cross, shall attempt to root out the Hereticks, rejoyce in that indulgence, and be defended with that Priviledge, which is granted to them who go to the Aid of the Holy Land.

Therefore I conclude that the Pope hath no power to depose Kings and Princes, nor to kill those that he calls Heretick, and that the Ro­man Church addeth to the Word of God, and thinketh above that which is written, and therefore she is Heretick. And if according to their Doctrine, those which are Heretick may be killed lawfully, and their Land possessed by the Catholicks, they being themselves He­retick, as it is proved clearly; I let to the Rea­der to draw the Conclusion.

6 ly. Jesus Christ being about to leave the World, and his Disciples afflicting themselves, he doth not comfort them, by saying I leave you my Body, under the Species of Bread and Wine, but he tells them, The poor alwayes ye have with you, but me ye have not alwayes; I came forth from the Father, and am come into the World; again I leave the World, and go to the Father, Joh. 12.8.16,28. He tells them that his Father will protect them, and send them his Holy Spirit, and that he is going to prepare them a place in Heaven. He tells them of his [Page 23] Intercession, and of his second coming, and that the Heaven must receive him, until the time of the restitution of all things, Act. 3.21. By these words it appeareth clearly that it is contrary to the Holy Scripture, to say, that the Body of Jesus Christ is yet upon Earth; yet the Roman Church believes that Christs Body is still upon Earth in several places, therefore she addeth to the Word of God, and thinketh above that which is written, therefore she is Heretick.

I know what the Church of Rome saith for the Proof of her Belief; her principal Argu­ment is this; Mat. 26.26. Christ took bread and gave thanks, and said, Take ye and eat, this is my Body, which is broken for you. Jesus Christ saith the Roman Church, is true: He hath said in gi­ving the Bread, this is my Body, therefore this Bread ought to be changed into the true Body of Jesus Christ; and to shew (she saith) that it is not the Figure of Jesus Christ, and these words, this is my Body, are not Metaphorical (as the Protestant Church believeth) because he said, which is broken for you; now it is not the figure of Jesus Christ, which was broken for us, but the true Body.

To which I answer, it is certain that Jesus Christ is true, and though he said, This is my Body which is broken for you, and that it was the true Body of Jesus Christ which was broken for us, and not the Figure; that doth not hinder [Page 24] these words from being Metaphorical: And to let you see clearly, observe my reason. This is my Body which is broken for you, (is) that is to say signifieth or representeth, as you may see in several other passages of the Scripture, as for example in this; the Rock was Christ, where this word ( was) means did signifie or represent. Which is broken for you, the Relative ( which) doth not serve to shew the Transubstantiation, or that the Bread is changed into the true Body of Jesus Christ, because it is related to the word ( Body) and not to the proposition, This is my Body; it hath relation to the Attribute, and not to the Subject; that which, according to Cardinal Cajetan, hindereth not this Propo­sition to be Metaphorical, no more than this, the Rock was Christ; for if the Evangelist had added, which was crucified, or which was rai­sed again; as the Relative ( which) would not hinder this Proposition from being Metaphori­cal; likewise these words, which is broken for you, hinder not the other Proposition, to be Improper or Metaphorical.

Mark, that his Body was not broken before he Suffered. How did he say then, which is broken, before it was broken? there is no sense of it but this; the Bread was broken, and sig­nified that his Body should be broken; now as the breaking of the Bread, did signifie the breaking of his Body, so the Bread must signifie [Page 25] his Body: but as his body was not broken in­deed, when the Bread was broken, so the Bread could not be his Body indeed, for then his Body should have been broken, when the Bread was broken. If because Christ saith This is my Body, this is my Blood, they will have these words to be expounded Literally; why then do they not expound the other words of Christ litterally also, as concerning the Cup? for the Text saith, that he took the Cup, and said, This is my Blood. I am sure they will not say that the Cup was the Blood of Christ, (as the words be) but they will grant a Figure in those words, namely Continens pro Contonto, that by the Cup is meant the Wine in it; if then they will admit a Figure in this, why may not there be a Figure in the other? namely Signa­tam pro [...]igno, that these words, this is my Body should be understood thus, the Bread is a Sign of my Body.

I may prove as well that Christ is a Door, because he saith, I am a Door; or a Vine, because he saith, I am a Vine; for his sayings are alike; Figurative Speeches must not be construed Lite­rally: Now that they may see, that not we on­ly say it is Bread and Wine after Consecration, Christ himself doth call it Bread and Wine af­ter he had given it as he did before; Mark 14. 25. there he sayes, I will drink no more of the fruit of the Vine: Here Christ saith, that it was [Page 26] the fruit of the Vine, which he drank, but his Blood is not the Fruit of the Vine, therefore Wine was his Drink, and not Blood; There­fore after Consecration, Wine was still Wine. And St. Paul saith plainly and expresly, 1 Cor. 11. 26,27,28. That the Communicant doth eat Bread, Ergo, it remaineth Bread after the words of Consecration: For if it were Tran­ [...]tantia [...]ed into the Body of Christ, thou were there no Bread to eat, but the Body of Christ is the thing that should be eaten, and so it should not be called Bread.

What I say, may be seen again by these words of Jesus Christ: when he said, Ep [...]. 3.17. That he was the Bread of Life, and that all which would live, must eat him: his Disciples murmured un­til he expounded his words, and how did he ex­pound them? thus, He that cometh unto me hath eaten, and be that believeth in me hath drunk. Af­ter, when he instituted this Sacrament in like words, they murmured not, which they would as before, if he had not resolved them before, that to eat his Body and to drink his Blood, was nothing but to come to him, and believe in him: After he had said so, they murmured not, because they did see some reason in it. And as it is plainly said, Joh.6.63. This is my Body, so it is plainly said, These words are Spirit, that is they must be understood Spiritually, and not [...] so saith Austin, Believe and thou hast eaten.

[Page 27] It was Christs manner to teach by Simili­tudes, and Figures, shewing one thing by ano­ther. For Example, Christ calleth the Lamb the Passeover, in place whereof this Sacrament succeeded, and therefore presently after they had eaten the Passeover, Christ Instituted this Sacrament to be used for it; Christ, I say, cal­led the Lamb the Passeover, and yet the Passeo­ver was this, an Angel passed over the Houses of the Israelites, and struck the Egyptians; this was not a Lamb, and yet because a Lamb was a Sign of this Passeover, as the Bread and Wine is of Christs body, therefore Christ called the Lamb the Passeover, as he called the Bread and Wine his Body. That may be seen again in Circumcision, Baptism, and the Cup. For Circumcision is called the Covenant, and yet Circumcision was nothing but the cutting away of a skin; and the Covenant is this, In Abra­ham's Seed all Nations shall be blessed, I will be their God, and they shall be my People, I will de­fend and save them, and they shall serve and wor­ship me. This is not Circumcision, and yet as though Circumcision were the Covenant it self, it is called the Covenant, because it signi­fieth the Covenant; so Bread and Wine are called Christs Body, because they signifie Christs Body.

Baptism is called Regeneration, and yet Ba­ptism is [...] dipping our Bodies in Water, and Rege­neration [Page 28] is the renewing of the mind to the Image wherein it was Created. This is not Baptism, and yet as though Baptism were Re­generation it self, it is called Regeneration; be­cause it signifieth Regeneration; so the Bread and Wine are called Christs Body and Blood, because they signifie them.

And the Cup is called the New Testament; and yet the Cup is but a piece of Metal, filled with Wine, and the New Testament is, He which believes in the Son of God shall be saved. This is not a Cup, and yet as though the Cup were the New-Testament it self, it is called the New Testament; so the Bread and Wine are called Christs Body and Blood, because they sig­nifie Christs Body and Blood.

And this Doctrine of ours may be confirm­ed, because every Sacrament was called by the thing which it signified, and yet never any Sa­crament was taken for the thing it self, It is the consent of all Writers, that a Sacra­ment is a Sign, therefore not the thing signifi­ed, no more than the Bush at the Door, is the Wine in the Cellar.

But what then will the Papists say, is there nothing in the Sacrament but Bread and Wine? Nay, we say not that the Sacrament is nothing but a bare Sign, or that we receive no more than that you see; for Christ saith, that it is his Body, and Paul saith, that it is the Communion of [Page 29] Christs Body and Blood: Therefore there is more in Sacramental Bread than in common Bread; though the nature be not changed, yet the use is changed; it doth not only serve the body as it did before, but also it bringeth a bread with it which nourisheth the Soul; for as sure we receive bread, so sure we receive Christ. And you may see this by this Similitude; Thou hast an Obligation in thy hand, and I ask thee what hast thou there? and thou sayest, I have here an hundred Pounds; why, say I, there is nothing but Paper, Ink and Wax. Oh, but by this, sayst thou, I will recover an hundred Pounds, and that is as good. So this is as good, that under these signs you receive the vertue of Christs Body and Blood by Faith, as if you did eat his Body, and drink his Blood indeed.

7 thly. This Doctrine of Transubstantiation is also contrary to the Senses, to Reason, and to the Holy Fathers.

When the Church of Rome would oblige me to believe that what my Senses behold, is not Bread nor Wine, but the true Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, it is clear that it is contrary to them, since they are sensible of the contrary; for my eyes see them to be Bread and Wine; I smell Bread and Wine; I tast Bread and Wine; and my hands feel Bread and Wine.

They confess with us, that it is contrary to the Senses, but that this Mystery ought not to [Page 30] be measured by the Senses, and that Jesus Christ being true, and having taken Bread and Wine, saying, this is my Body, and this is my Blood; this Bread and Wine must be changed into his Body and Blood: that indeed it is contrary to the Senses, but they ought not to be Judges in the Mysteries of Faith.

I answer, that Jesus Christ made use of the Senses to prove to his Apostles, that he was not a Spirit, but a body, when he saith to them, Luk.24.32. Handle me and see, for a Spirit hath no flesh and bones as ye see me have. And if the Fathers Disputing against the Marcionites and Eutichians, the former of which believed that Jesus Christ had not a true body, but only the appearance; and the latter, that the substance of his body was changed into the Godhead after his Resurrection: they made use of the same words of Jesus Christ, Handle me and see, for a Spirit hath no flesh and bones as ye see me have. To provethe falsity of their belief, I may, after their example, make use of my Senses in the Sacrament of the Eucharist, and and say, to let the Church of Rome know, that what they believe to be the true Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, is truly Bread and Wine, Handle and see.

They say besides that, the reason why Christ Body was not seen in the Sacrament, it is be­cause he is there miraculously, and that there [Page 31] is a Miracle in the Sacrament; whereunto I answer, that if the Bread be turned into the ve­ry Body of Christ, by a Miracle, then should it appear visibly so: for the nature of every Mi­racle is to be visible to the outward eye and sen­ses, as when Christ turned Water into Wine; it was visibly Wine; when Moses's Rod was turned into a Serpent, it was visibly a Serpent [...] and so if the Bread be turned into the very Body of Christ, it is visibly a body, if they will hold a Miracle therein. But Austin answereth there is no Miracle in the Sacrament, saying thus, Honorem tanquam Religiosa possunt habere, staporem tanquam Mira non possunt: That is, the Sacraments may have honour as things Religious, but are not to be admired as Miracles.

8 thly. It is also contrary to reason, first, be­cause it supposes the same body in several pla­ces at one time; a body may be considered objectively at one time in several places, but that it should be physically or substantially in many places at one time altogether, as the Church of Rome would have, which saith and obligeth to believe, that the body of Jesus Christ is substantially in Heaven, and Earth, and in every place, where the Priest pleaseth to consecrate, or pronounce these words, This is my body, this is my blood; and in every part of the consecrated bread: so that if you divide it into a thousand parts, it is there in every part [Page 32] wholly: it is that which is contrary to reason, because according to reason, a body of six foot in dimension, cannot occupy no more place, than the circumference of six foot; and though it may be successively in several places, yet it cannot at the same time.

And these words of Peter, Act.3.22. whom the Heaven must receive until the times of re­stitution of all things prove my sayings evi­dently. For if his Body be in Heaven, and that he hath a true Body (as all men know he hath) how can it be that it should be both in Heaven and in Earth, as touching his Body, at one time? for though he have a glorified Body, yet he retaineth the nature and property of a true Body still, which can be but in one place at once; and so saith Austin, Corpus Domini in quo resurrexit, uno tantum loco esse potest [...]: That is The Body of the Lord wherein he rose again, can be but in one place only.

Secondly, It is against Reason, because it maketh Accidents exist without any Subject; it is the nature of Accidents to be joyned to their Subject: as for Example, it is the nature of the whiteness of a Stone to be joyned to the Stone; so that if you destroy the nature or substance of the Stone, you must of necessity destroy its whiteness, and other its Accidents, and according to the Opinion of modern Phi­losophers, who say that Accidents are nothing [Page 33] else than matter modified, that is to say, as it is disposed to this or that fashion, it followeth that matter cannot be destroyed without its Acci­dents being destroyed likewise with it. It is the Opinion of Iraeneus, who saith, That we cannot consider water, without its humidity, nor fire without heat, nor a stone without hardness; these things being so united, that the one cannot be without the other, but that they must exist together. And the Church of Rome teacheth the con­trary, for in their mystery of Transubstantia­tion, they put the Accidents without any Sub­ject; they put colour and quantity without matter, smell and tast without substance; hard­ness and humidity without their being any thing that is hard and moist, which I may very well say or affirm is contrary to reason.

Ninthly, Likewise it is contrary to the holy Fathers; they say that the Eucharist Consecra­ted is Bread, such as we eat, and which satisfieth the Belly.

Theodoret saith, Neque enim signa mystica post sanctificationem recedunt a matura sua, manent enim in priore substantia, figura & forma, & videri & tangi possint sicut prius, That is, The mystical signs after Consecration do not depart from their na­ture, for they abide still in their former substance, figure and form, and may be both seen and felt as before.

The same Theodoret saith, That Jesus Christ [Page 34] hath honoured the visible Symbols with the Name of his Body and Blood, not in changing their na­ture, but in adding grace to it.

Chrysostome saith, That the Mystical Symbols do not [...]ase their proper nature, but remain in their first substance, as the Body of Christ hath preser­ved the true substance of a Body when it was glo­rified.

And Pope Galasius saith, That the Conse­crated Bread is honoured with the name of the Body of the Lord, and yet the nature of Bread remaineth in it; non desinit, inquit, substantia vel natura Panis & Vini: & certe, Imago & Simili­tudo Corporis & Sanguinis Christs in actione miste­ [...]iorum Corporis Christi Celebratur. That is, The substance saith he, or nature of Bread and Wine doth not cease, and verily there is the Image and Si­militude of the Body and Blood of Christ, celebra­ted in the action of the mysteries of the Body of Christ.

Origines saith thus, The Bread that is sancti­fied with the Word of God, as touching the material substance thereof, goeth into the belly, and forth again like other meats.

Chrysostome writing to the People of Antiocb, saith, God giveth us things spiritual under things visible and natural; and again, Being sanctified it is delivered from the name of Bread, and is ex­alted to the name of the Lords Body, although the nature of the Bread still remaineth.

[Page 35] Justin Martyr Bishop of Lion saith, That ou [...] flash is nourished with the Cup, which is the Blood of Christ, and is increased with the Bread which is the Body of Christ. This passage destroyeth those of the Roman Church, who because that the Bread and Wine are changed into the Bo­dy and Blood of Christ, are compelled to say, that our Body is not nourished with the Bread and Wine but with their Accidents, or by some substance that God createth.

Tertullian saith, Jesus Christ took the Bread, and giving it to his Disciples made it his Body, saying this is my Body, that is to say, (saith Tert.) the figure of my Body.

And Austin saith, Non dubitavit dominus di­cere, boc est Corpus meum, eum daret signum cor­poris sui. That is, The Lord doubted not to say, this is my Body, when he gave but the sign of his body.

Christi miranda patientia adhibuit Judam ad convivium, in quo corporis & sanguinis sui figuram discipulis tradi [...]; That is, The admirable pa­tience of Christ, (saith Austin) admitted Judas to the Banquet, wherein be delivered to his Disci­ples the figure of his Body and Blood.

He saith that the Sacraments are called by the name of the things they represent.

The Sacrament then of the Lords Supper may be taken either conjunctively with what it represents, and in this sense it is said to be [Page 36] the Body and Blood of Christ; or separately from the things which it signifieth, and in this sense, it is the type, the symbole, or figure of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ: and that is to be seen in the affairs of the World, where we say the Letters which are brought, wherein is contained the pardon, which the King gi­veth to a Criminal, are the Kings Pardon.

Baronius saith, that Theodore Bishop of Rome, for the Condemnation of Pyrus, and the Coun­cil held at Constantinople for the Condemna­tion of Photius, took the Consecrated Cup, and poured Ink into it, and having dipped their Pens into these two mixt Liquo [...]s, they sub­scribed the Depositions of these Men. If they had believed that the Consecrated Wine was the Blood of Jesus Christ, as now the Church of Rome believeth, is it credible that they would have mixt Ink with it, and dipped their Pens with it? no, it is not to be believed, for the Church of Rome would not do so now, but would believe they should commit an horrible Sacriledg.

That which confirms all that I am about to alledge from the Fathers against the pretended mystery of Transubstantiation, is, that when they Disputed against Idolaters, they confuted them with these words; Why do ye adore what your hands have made, and which hath neither Speech, nor motion, and which is subject to fire, [Page 37] and to corruption, and to be stollen away by Thieves? If at that time, they had believed that Jesus Christ had been under the Accidents of Bread and Wine, and if the Fathers had taught that Doctrine, it is most certain the Idolaters would have retorted their Argument, and have said, that the God which they adored in the bread was a work of their own hands, which hath neither speech, nor motion, but was subject to corruption, to fire, and to be stolen away; but we do not find they made such an Answer. Therefore it is a sign that this Doctrine was not taught by the Fathers but was contrary to them. Moreover, if they had believed Tran­substantiation, that is to say, the changing of the Bread and Wine into the true Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, they would not have failed to instruct us that a body is under a point that it hath Accidents without any Subject; that it is after the manner of a Spirit; they would have taught us what nourishes our bodies in the receiving of the Sacrament and from whence come the worms which are ingendred in the bread; they would have told us what kind of action it is which maketh Christ exist under the species of bread and wine; whether it was a Reproduction, or Adduction, or U [...]ifi­cation? I say they would have taught us all these things, since the Church of Rome giveth now a particular Instruction in it; now since [Page 38] they were as wise and learned, as the present Doctors of the Church of Rome now, and since they said nothing of it, it is a mark that this Doctrine was contrary to their Opinion.

And when they disputed against the Mar­cionites and Eutichians the former of which believed that Jesus Christ had not a true body, but only an appearance; and the latter that the substance of his body was changed into the Godhead after his Resurrection; they alledged these words of our Lord, Luk. 24. 39. Handle me and see, for a Spirit hath no flesh and bones as ye see me have. If they had believed that in the Lords Supper the Accidents had continued without the substance of bread and wine (as the present Church of Rome believes) the Marcionites would not have failed to alledge this example to prove that the senses perceived in Jesus Christ an appearance of a body with­out reallity, as they did see in the Lords Supper an appearance of bread and wine when they were not really there. But so it is that they did never alledge such an Example; therefore I may truly say that this was not the belief of those times, and that it was contrary to the opinion of the antient Fathers.

And to shew you the right Father of Tran­substantiation, it was one of the Dreams of Innocentius the third, in the year of our Lord 1215. So many years passed before [Page 39] Transub­stantiation was named, and then a Pope set it first on foot; so it came out of Rome, and for want of Scriptures hath been defended with Fire and Sword.

You see then that the Doctrine of Transub­stantiation is contrary to the Holy Scriptures; and since notwithstanding the Roman Church doth believe it, it is evident they add to the Word of God, and think above that which is written, and therefore they are Heretick.

The Roman Church doth not only think a­bove that which is written, and add to the Word of God; but also diminisheth from it, as I will shew you evidently.

First, The Apostle of the Gentiles will not only have us to speak in the Church with a known tongue; but also he sheweth the con­fusion of them which speak in an unknown. Except Pipe or Harp saith he, give distinction in the sound, how shall it be known what is Piped or Harped? If the Trumpet giveth an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the Battle? So likewise you, except ye utter by the tongue words easie to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air. I thank my God, saith he, I speak with tongues more than you all, yet in the Church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that i [...] my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue. And the Roman Church [Page 40] must not say St. Paul thereby speaketh concern­ing Sermons, and consequently doth not speak against her, because she preacheth in known tongue, for St. Paul speaketh concerning Pray­ers Psalms, and Thanksgivings. vers. 14, 15, 17. If I pray, saith he, in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruit­ful. What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also, I will sin with the Spirit, and I will sing with the under­standing also; else when thou shalt bless with the Spirit, how shal be that occupieth the room of the un­learned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest? And notwith­standing this ordinance of Paul, and the confu­sion of them which go against it, as it is declar­ed by the comparisons of the Pipe, Harp, and Trumpet, the Roman Church prayeth, sing­eth, and giveth thanks in an unknowen tongue: and though in the Primitive Church the Bles­sings of other common Prayers are performed in the vulgar tongue, Gretzer. def. cap. 16 lib.2. & lingua auditoribns non ignota omnia perageban­tur, & consitetudo it a ferebat ut tota Ecclesia si­mul psalleret, all things were dispatcht in a lan­guage not unknown to the People, and the custom, was that the whole Church did sing together. And a multitude of their Authors acknowledge, that the publick prayers in the first age were in a tongue, that the people understood. And [Page 41] though Austin saith, Deus vult ut quod canamus, intelligamus, & humana ratione, non quas [...] avium voce canamus; God requires that we understand what we sing, like m [...]n endued with reason, and not chatter like birds.

Nevertheless, when the Bishops of Rome had mounted themselves to an eminent degree of grandeur in the world, then nothing would serve their turnes, but they must be giving Laws, and prescribing Rules, though never so irregular and unreasonable; and as Conque­rors usually bring in, and oftentimes impose their own language, on those they have subdu­ed, and intied for their Slaves; so the Popes made it their business to plant their Roman Rites, Ceremonies and Language in what o­ther Churches they could, that the same might afterwards serve as an argument of their Juris­diction, and the others dependence.

It is then manifest the Roman Church dimi­nisheth from the Word of God, and thinketh a­bove that which is written.

Secondly, St. Paul writes to the Colossians, Col.2. 16. Let no man judge you in meat or drink; And to the Corinthians, 1 Cor. 10. 24, 25, 27, Whatsoever is sold in the Shambles, that eat, ask­ing no question for conscience sake: If any of them that believe not, bid you to a feast, and ye be dispo­sed to go, whatsoever is [...]et before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake; and writing to [Page 42] Timothy, he saith, 1 Tim.4. 4. Every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be re­ceived with Thanksgiving. And concerning Marriage, he saith, Have we not power to lead about a Sister, a Wife, as well as other Apostles, and as the Brethren of the Lord and Cephas. And a Bishop can be the husband of one Wife, and in the thirteenth to the Hebrews, Marriage is ho­nourable to all, and the bed undefiled; but Whore­mongers, and Adulterers God will judg: and in writing to Timothy, he saith, forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, is a Do­ctrine of Devils; if thou puttest brethren in re­membrance of those things, thou shalt be a good Minister of Jesus Christ nourished up in the words of saith, and of good Doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained. And Jesus Christ himself honoureth so much the marriage of the Priests, that he chuses the Son of the High Priest Zacbarias, to be his forerunner, 1 Cor.7.2. Because of Fornica­tion; saith Paul, let every man have his own Wife; that is, whoever hath not the gift of Conti­nency; whether Clergy or Lay man; so saith Chrysost. [...]om. 19. upon these words. And the Roman Church commandeth to abstain fro [...] meat in certain time and dayes, and all Bishops & Priests to marry; and in the Council of Nice, of which the Ecclesiastical Historian Socrates, Lib. 1. Cap. 11. writes thus; It pleased some of the Bis [...]o [...]s to bring in a New [...]aw into the [Page 43] Church, that those that were dedicated to the holy Ministry viz. Bishops, Priests, or [...] and Deacons should not sleep any longer [...] their wives: But Paphnutius an Egyptian Bisho [...] who had one of his eyes p [...]nckt out formerly for the Testimony of Jesus, stood up in oppo­sition thereunto, crying out aloud, that they should not impose so heavy a yoak, for [...] Marriage Bed was honourable, and Matri [...] ­ny unpolluted, lest with too much precis [...] they should rather hurt the Church; for all [...] could not bear the exercise of Continency, and that accompanying with mans lawful wife, [...] not breach of chastity. Which prevailed so [...], that the Council acquie [...]cing in his opinion, only decreed that the Clerks should not accom­pany with other women, besides their wives.

But Gregory the seventh by cruel decrees [...] Excommunication, deprived Ministers of the [...] lawful wives, and compelled the Clergy to the Vow of Continency; and the Council of Treat forbids Marriage unto all those that are in O [...], [...] and curseth those that say that they [...]. Si quis dixerit Cleric [...] in sacris Ordini [...]ng [...]titutos, vel Regulares costitatem solem [...]ter professos posse Matrimonium contrahere, contractum que v [...]dum esse, non obstante. Lege Ecclesias [...]ica vel Voto, & oppositum nibil aliud esse quam d [...] ­nere Matrimonium, posseq [...]e omnes contrahere Ma­trimonium, qui [...] senti [...]t se castitatis, [...] [Page 44] [...]overint, [...]abere donum, Anat [...]ema [...]it.

[...]ls then manifest the Roman Church dimini­ [...]heth from the Word of God, and thinketh a Marc that which is written.

She forbiddeth also the holy Scriptures to the common People; and in the Council of Trent it is written, if the reading of the holy Scrip­ture, is permitted indifferently in a know [...] Tongue amongst all People, it will be more hurtful than profitable. And so the Roman Church is wiser than St. John [...]b.5.39. which saith Search the Scriptures, for in them ye think [...] have eternal life; and wiser than St. Paul, who writting both to the Bishops, and all his Bre­thren, either Men or Women, either young or old, speaketh thus: I charge you by the Lord, that this Epistle be read unto all holy Brethren. 1. Tess.5. 27. and writing to the Colessians, he saith, When this Epistle is read amongst you, cause that it be read also in the Church of the Laodiceans, and that ye likewise read the Epistle from Laodicea Coloss. 4. 16.

The People of Beroea were higly commen­ded that they searched the Scriptures, to see whe­ther those things were true or no, which Paul himself theacheth. Act. 17. For whosoever he be, though he were an Angel from Heaven, if he teach Matters contrary to the Doctrine of the holy and Canonical Scriptures, were to hold him accursed, as the ( Gal.1.8.) Apostle of [Page 45] Jesus Christ commandeth; and the Church of Rome forbiddeth them to the common People, saying, it is perilous, it causeth schisms, Sects, and Heresies, as if she were wiser than Christ, St John and St. Paul.

Thirdly, We read in St. Matthew, Mat. 26. 27. Christ took the Cup and gave it to them, say­ing, drink ye all of it; and the Roman Church will have no body to drink of the Cup but the Priests; thinking Jesus Christ spake to the Priests only, when he said, drink ye all of it. But St. Paul writing to the Corinthians amongst whom were more Laicks than Priests, sheweth the contrary, saying Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that Bread, and drink of that Cup. And though in the general Council of Constance, the Roman Church doth confess this holy Sacrament was received in the primitive Church with the Bread and the Cup; yet in the general Council of Trent she speaketh thus: If any man saith, that the Catholick Church had no just reasons to give the Communion to the Laicks, and Clerks who do not say Mass, under the Acci­dents of Bread only, and that she erred in that, let him be Anathema.

Their Reasons why they took the Cup from them, are (say they) many Inconveniencies and several Absurdities. But besides, there is no [...]conveniency; though there should be any, it [...]ught not to be above the Commandment of [Page 46] Christ and Paul. Christ', the primitive Church and the Apostles, were very wise and prudent and seeing they have commanded and give the Sacrament with the Cup, the Roman Church ought to follow their example, and obey the [...] If there were any Inconveniency, Jesus Christ who is very wise, and the Apostles, should have remedied it; therefore since they have not fo [...] ­bidden the Cup, the Roman Church must n [...] forbid it. And as well and by as good Authori­ty may they take the Bread from the People likewise; and Pope Gelasius did decree that [...] should be Excommunicated, which wou [...] receive but in one kind; therefore, as you m [...] read in the beginning of this Treatise, since th [...] Church is Heretick, which addeth to the Word of God, or diminisheth from it, or thinketh [...]bove that which is written; the Church of [...] me taking away the Cup from the comm [...] people, and from the Clerks which are [...] Priest, it is clear that she diminisheth from [...] holy Scripture, since we are commanded [...] drink of the Cup; for, as it is said here abo [...] Christ saith, Drink ye all of it; and St. P [...] speaking indifferently unto all, says thus; L [...] man examine himself, and so let him eat of [...] Bread, and drink of that Cup; and consequen [...] it is manifest, that she is Heretick.

They say true the Church of God her [...]p Earth is visible to the outward eye, and was [Page 47] always; and so they tell us, that our Church is not the true Church of God, because it was not always visible to the outward eye; for where was your Church (say they) before Calvin, Luther, and those that you call Reformators?

To which I answer, That though the true Church of God here Militant upon Earth we­re always, yet she was not always visible to the outward eye; pray let them tell me, where the Church was visible, when being gathered at Jerusalem, there arose a great Persecution against her, in so much as they were all scatter'd: for as it is said in the Acts 8.1. At that time there was persecution against the Church that was at Jerusa­lem, and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria. Where was the Church of God visible when Jesus Christ was sn [...]tten, and all the rest were scattered and hid, as it is written in Mark? Where was the Church visible in the time of Elias the Pro­phet, when he complained that he was left alone? O Lord, said he, they have forsaken thy Covenant, they have destroyed thine Altars, and slain they Prophets with the sword, and I am left alone. By these words, I am left alone, every body may see that Elias knew not where was the true Church of God; though as it is manifest by the Answer which God gave him, there were, be­sides him, seven thousand true worshippers of God yet remaining, which had not bowed their [Page 48] knee to Baal. The true Church of God the [...] may be though she is not visible to the outward eye. So was the primitive Church, in the time of the Heathen Emperors; so she was in the days of Queen Mary here in England; so she was in the other Times, when she was perse­cuted by the Romish Popes; and so she was before the days of Calvin, Luther, and all the other Reformators; she had her secret Me [...] ­tings and Assemblies, though unknown to he [...] persecutors; there were in those days many true worshippers of God, which were not par [...]takers of the Errors and Corruptions of th [...] Church of Rome and who had their secret Meet­ings amongst themselves, though they we [...] unknown, though they were not visible to the Papist. And therefore they do not conclude well, when they hold stifly that the Church o [...] England, is not the true Church of God, be­cause before the days of Calvin, Luther, and other Reformators; she was not visible to their eyes; seeing I have proved clearly that a Church may be a true Church of God, though not vi­sible to the outward eye.

They hold besides, their unwritten Tradi­tions to be received with equal and like Autho­rity, as the holy Scripture; and consequently they hold the sacred Scripture to be imperse [...] [...] not contain all things necessary to Salva­tion. That this is their Doctrine, may be seen [Page 49] in the Council of Trent, by these following words. Nec non Traditiones ipsas, tum ad [...]idem tum ad mores pertinentes, [...]anquam vel ore tenus, a Cri [...]sto, vel a Spiritu Sancto dictitas, & co [...]xinua suc­cessione in Ecclesia Catholica Cons [...]va [...]as, pari pretatis affectu ac reverentia suscipi [...] ac veneratur. That is, This general Council receiveth and ho­noureth with an equal piety and reverence the Tra­ditions as well belonging to faith as manners, as they were dictated by the Holy Ghost, or by the v [...] ­ry mouth of Christ, and kept in the Catholick Church by a continual Succession. And again [...] this same Session, [...]ui traditiones praedictas scio [...] & prudens contempserit, Anathema, [...]it. Whosoe­ver knowing the said Traditions, and shall purpose [...] com [...]n them, let him be Anathema. And Pope Leo the fourth, saith thus He that receiveth not without difference the Papish Ca [...], as well as the four Gospels, believeth not a right, nor bol­deth the Catholick Church effectually; and so they do not hold the holy Scriptures to be perfect, and to contain all things necessary to Salva­tion, which is against these words of [...] These things are written that ye may believe, and that in believing you may have life eternal. Con­trary to St. Paul 2. Tim. 3. 15. who saith, Thou hast [...] the holy Scriptures, which are able to make th [...] [...] unto Salvation through Faith which is in Christ Jesus. And contrary to Christ [...], who saith, Whatsoever is requisite for our [Page 50] Sal­vation is contained in the Scriptures: And in another place he speaketh thus; All things are [...]ear and manifest in the Scriptures; and whatsoe­ver things are needful, are manifest there.

Therefore I conclude thus, since, as saith Ireneus, l. 5. c. 17. Heretici sunt qui supra Scrip­turam sapiunt; and since that Church is He­retick which is obstinate in her Errors; and since that Church is obstinate in her Errors, which refuseth to obey the holy Scripture in several [...]nts both of faith and practice; and since that Church refuseth to obey the holy Scripture which addeth to the Word of God, and dimi­ni [...]th from it, and thinketh above that which is written; for God saith, Deut. 4. 2. Ye shal not add unto the word which I command you, neither shal you diminish from it. The Roman Church ad­ding to the Word of God, and diminishing from it, and thinking above that which is written, [...]as I have prov'd clearly) it followeth that she refuseth to obey the divine and sacred Scri­ptures; and consequently, that she is obstinate in her Errors; and therefore that she is Here­tick. I could say more, but I think this suffi­cient to prove what I did undertake in this small Treatise.

It is then with good reason I am [...] out of that Communion; when I was amongst them, I dare say, both my Ignorance and Zeal were [Page 51] such these last few years, that the special Moti­ves which induced me to enter into a Covent, being about 17. years old, was to Preach the Holy Gospel unto them that I did believe decei­ved, and to give the light of the Truth to the Protestants, which I thought to live amidst the darkness of Ignorance. I continued in that resolution about 11. years, and being ready to perform it, that which happened to St. Paul, al­most happened unto me; for as he went unto the High Priest, and desired Letters from him to Damascus to the Synagogues, that if he found any of this way, whether they were Men or Wo­men, he might bring them bound unto Jerusa­lem; and as he came near Damascus, suddenly shined round about him a light from Heaven [...] he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, [...]aul, Saul, why perse [...]test the [...] me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks; and he trembling said, what wilt thou have me to do, O Lord? the Lord said unto him, Arise and go into the City, and it shall be told thee what thou must do. The men which were in journey with him, brought him in to Damascus, he there received his [...]ight by Ananias, land was [...] with the Holy Ghost, and having lived certain days with the Disci­ples which were at Damascus, he Preached Christ, [...] he did persecute, that he was the Son of God. And when I was ready to [Page 52] ask and receive Letters to Turky or England, that I might bring unto the Roman Church those that I could find separated from her, whe­ther they were Men or Women, and being [...]dy to perform my resolution, I heard an in­ward voice saying unto me, Thy zeal is not just, those which thou wilt persecute, are the true Children of God; astonished by that voice which spoke to my heart, I answered, Lord, let me know the truth; and after I had several [...]mts instantly begged that favour from the Lord, his Divine Providence presented me two Books, The Perpetuity of Faith, writ­ten by one Claude Minister living at Paris; and Calvin's Institutions; and after I had exa­mined, and compar'd these two Books with the holy Scripture, and discours [...]d some few days with the said Claude Minister, I found that this inward voice which spoke to my Heart was true; therefore leaving my first resolution I came in to England, not that I might bring unto the Roman Church those that I should find separated from her, but that I might separate them, that I should find of that Communion.

I thank God, because he made me know, the truth, and I will give him thanks as long as I live; it is certain I am out of my countrey, and separated from my Friends an Kindred; it is, because they would not give me leave to serve God and worship Him according to his Will, [Page 53] and Commandments. I know they curse me, and call me Heretick and Excommunicated; but I had rather bear the Curse of men, than of God. Whosoever, saith Christ, Mat. 10. 31. loveth Father or Mother, or Brethren, or Sister more than me, he is not worthy of me; such love bet­ter their Brethren than Christ, who to please and humour them, keep not his command­ments. Christ taught me not to be ashamed, nor to blush for the Gospel, and whosoever shall [...] him before men, he will deny him before his Fat­her which is in Heaven: Mat. 10. 33. I will confess him before all men, and obey him, and suffer what he pleaseth for his sake; there­fore I say, who shall separate me from the truth of the holy Scriptures? shal tribulation, or distress, persecution or famine, or naked­ness or peril, or sword? I hope that neither death nor life, nor Angels, nor Principalities, nor Powers, nor things present nor things to come, nor any other Creature, shall be able to separate me from the truth of the Holy Scri­ptures. I pray to my God to keep me in that mind as long as I live, Amen.