Reply Against Gilbert Brown, Summary
The ſeuerall things that are handled in the firſt part concerning the Maſſe are theſe.
1. COncerning the name it ſelfe, the variety of their opinions concerning the deriuation of it, and the cauſe wherefore they giuegive it this ſtile of Maſſe is ſhewed: and that neither in proper termes, nor in ſubſtance it is to be foūd in the Scriptures of God, & therfore to be reiected
2. That the ſacrifice of the Maſſe is neither figured nor foretolde in the olde Teſtament, nor yet inſtituted by Chriſt in the new Teſtament, in the latter Supper.
3. Is ſhewed the difference betwixt the Maſſe, and the latter Supper, whilk Chriſt inſtituted: & it is proued that the Prieſts in the Maſſe does not the ſame whilk our Sauiour either did, or commanded to bee done in the latter Supper.
4. It is proued by the teſtimonies of ſundry learned Papiſts, and great defenders of their Religion, that the Maſſe is not ſet downe in the Scripture, and inſtituted by Chriſt in the ſame.
5. That we hauehave all theſe things whilk our Sauiour compriſed in the inſtitution of the Supper, and they hauehave them not.
6. Solide, moſt cleare, and euident proofes out of the Scripture, againſt the abhominable ſacrifice of the Maſſe, whereby it is ſufficiently confuted, amplified alſo by their doctrine and teſtimonies.
7. By the teſtimonies of the auncient Fathers euen vntill the 1000 yeare after Chriſt, it is confuted.
8. That it may bee knowne howe this abhominable ſacrifice of the Maſſe crap in. Firſt, the eſtate of the publik worſhip of God in the celebratiō of the ſacramēt of the Supper the firſt 300. or 400. year after Chriſt is ſet downe: next the manifolde meanes and degrees, wherby it crap in peece and peece: how it was firſt conceaued, formed, brought forth into the world, and then nouriſhed, ſtrengthened, and rooted in the hearts of all men, and vniuerſally imbraced. And thirdly, the authors of the ceremonies of the Maſſe, who put to eueryevery point of it, and in what yeare of God is ſet downe. So that betwixt the firſt that put to the firſte peece, to the laſt that clamped to the laſt cloute, is a thouſand yeare and more.
9. Is ſet downe the manifolde abſurdities, abhominations, idolatries blaſphemies, vaine, idle, ſuperſtitions, Iewiſh and Ethnick ceremonies of their abhominable Maſſe, as in a table, a great nomber: whereby it is made euident and plaine to all thoſe who are not blinded, that of all worſhips and ſeruices that euer was deuiſed by man, it is the moſt abſurde, blaſphemous, and idolatrous.
10. The manifolde oppoſitions and contradictions amongſt themſelues, concerning this their Maſſe, both in the matter, forme, effect, ſubſtance, and circumſtances of the ſame: whereby it is euident, that it is Babel a towne of confuſion: and that they and their kingdome cannot ſtand, ſeing they are ſo deuided amongſt themſelues in this point.
IN THE SECOND PART CONCERNING the Antichriſt, theſe heades are handled
1. The reaſons that M. Gilbert brings for to defend his Popes frō being Antichriſt are anſwered. Wherin it is ſhewed: firſt, that Antichriſt ſhould not be a Iewe, and repaire to the temple of Ieruſalem, and the Iewes ſhoulde not receaue the Antichriſt, as their Meſſias: next, that the Pope. ſuppoſe he pretends that he come in the name of Chriſt, & that he is the Vicare of Chriſt, and the ſeruand of ſeruands: yet he is nothing leſſe. He hes neyther his calling of God in his worde, nor is left in the roome of Chriſt: but hes entered in, not by the doore into the ſheepefolde, but another way, as a thief and briggane, to ſteale and deuoure, and does no true ſeruice to Chriſt, but tyrannizes ouer his pure flock, and ouer the princes of the earth. Thirdly, that the Antichriſt ſhould not bee one ſingular perſon, but a ſucceſſion of manie, in the ſelf ſame, Apoſtate kingdome and tyrannie. Fourthly, that for all his pretenſes of humility and piety, yet he is an aduerſary to God, and lifted vp aboue all that is called God.
Secondlye, it is proued by all the markes whereby the Antichriſt is diſcriued in the Scriptures of God. in the 2. Theſ. 2. Apoc. 13. & 17. that the Popes of Rome are the vndoubted Antichriſt, becauſe to him only aggrees all theſe markes, and to none other. And firſt they are prooued to be the men of ſinne, and ſonnes of perdition, by their moſte monſtrous and abhominable liues, as their owne friends and flatteters, and Hiſtoriographers of the time, hes deſcriued them: a few are brought forth as examples to proue this. Secondly, it is proued that he is an aduerſary to God, by comparing of his doctrine with the doctrine of Chriſt how it ouerthrowes his perſon, offices, Propheticall, Prieſtly and Kingly, and all his benefites, and all the meanes, outwarde and inwarde, of the knowing and applying of them: and that it depriues the Lord of his ſoueraigne glorie, in communicating to ſtockes and ſtones, oyle and water a peece of bread, Angell and man, bones and aſhes, and the moſte vyle things that can be. And alſo howe it ouerthrowes the Sacramentes of Chriſt, and puts to others whilk he neuer inſtituted: & the whole frame of his Diſcipline and gouernment, whilk he hes commanded in his word His officers, his offices, his Lawes. And hes put himſelf in Chriſts roome and hes made newe offices, officers, & lawes, whilk the Scripture knows not of. Thirdly, that he hes lifted vp himſelf aboue al that is called God, or that is worſhipped. Firſt, aboue the whole Kirk, and all general coū cels: next, aboue al Kings, Magistrates, and powers: And thirdly, aboue the Angels in heauen, and aboue them in Purgatorie and Hell: & hes equalled himſelf with God himſelf, in his ſtyles, and properties, and workes, and equalled himſelfe to Chriſt Ieſus. And hes alſo lifted vp himſelf aboue the God of heauen and his ſonne Chriſt Ieſus. Fourthly, that he ſittes in the Temple of God as God, and ſo forth of the reſt in the 2. Theſſal. 2. chap. and in the Reuelation. Whereby it is ſhewen, that eueryevery thing that is foretolde of the Antichriſt, is fully filled & accompliſhed in them: and that Babylon that harlote, that is ſet downe in the Reuelation, is by their owne confeſſion, Rome. Further, it is alſo prooued by the teſtimonies of ſundry of themſelues, and others, that the Popes of Rome is the vndoubted Antichriſt, and Rome is that Babel.