Sermon Preached 14 February 1607, Part 6
The sixt Wound.
THus I hauehave shewed, First, that the Pope makes his Decrees equall with the Scriptures; Secondlie, that they are of greater authority then the Scriptures: Is it possible to hauehave a worse? Yes: for the measure of her iniquity will neuer be ful; and therfore she goeth one steppe higher in this impiety, and teacheth that the holy Scripture is so farre inferiour vntounto the Popes decrees, that vnlesse hee by his authority giuegive them strength… they are not of credit, nor necessary to be belieued.
Let me be of no credit nor worthy to be beleeued, if I repeate not their words truely out of their owne booke; namely, their authenticall glosse vponupon the Popes Decretalls: where the Text of the Decretall being no more nor lesse, then only one verse of the 26. Chapter of the Prouerbs, the glosse (that is, the approued Commentarie) vpō that decretal is in these words;*Vide Decretal, lib. 2. tit. 23. de praesūptionibus. cap. 1. …ic…t.. Obserue heere, that the wordes of the Text are not the wordes of the Pope, but of SALOMON in the Prouerbes, the sixe and twentieth Chapter: but because that Text of SALOMONS is heere canonized by the Pope11The 6. wound. The holie Scriptures are therefore of credit & to be beleeued because they are allowed and authorised by the Pope: & being so by him authorised, they are of as much authority as if the Pope himself had beene the Author of them. Therefore it is of credite and implyeth necessity of beeing beleeued, (or it bindeth as strongly) as if it had been pronounced or vttered by the Pope, because wee make all those things as good as our owne vponupon which we bestow or impart our authority.
The high & holy God, that is the Author of the holie Scriptures, be mercifull vntounto vsus, in hauing any thing to doe with this vnchristian blasphemie; and graunt that wee may not any way communicate with their sins, no… hauehave fellowship with this wicked worke of darkenesse. The Impiety and Atheisme that lyeth in it is such, as if it had but crept into some secret pamphlet, I would neuer hauehave brought it into light: but being that it is registred in the Glosse vppon their lawe, a booke of so great authoritie, and so common in the hands of all the learned, I cannot but discharge my dutie to the trueth, tho it may giuegive vantage to the Atheist and Libertine. For what can such men think, when they heare him that pretends to bee Christs Vicar and Peters successor, teache that Salomons wordes are not of as good authority as his bee; when as Christ himselfe did approue and iustifie himselfe, and all his wordes, and deedes, and doctrines, by the olde Testament; and that the words of God in the olde Testament do therefore binde, and are therefore to bee beleeued, because the Pope pleaseth to insert and canonize them in his lawe; & that being by him so canonized, they bee therefore as good as if the Pope himselfe had spoken them. What I saie can they iudge, but that the Pope is one of their profession, a plain Atheist, that holds the Scripture & all religion, as farre as pleaseth his humour and serueth his turnes.
And if any of his faction hold this too hard a censure, I would intreate him to answere mee but this question (grounded vponupon these words of his);
Whether is God the Author of the olde Testament, or no?2. Pet. 1. 20. 21 If they say no, Saint Peter answereth; that Prophecie came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men spake as they were inspired of the holie Ghost. If he be, then the Prouerbs of Salomon, being a Canonicall Booke of the Olde Testament, is Gods Booke; and the wordes of the Text are Gods words, and not Salomons. This beeing so, let vsus then take the wordes as they are, in their true and full meaning, and see what a peece of Popish diuinitie heere is; Obserue that the words of the Text are not the words of the Pope,A strāge peece of popish doctrine, that gods word if it bee authorized by the Pope, is thē of as good credit, as if the Pope himselfe had spoken it: therefore if the Pope please not to Canonize it, then it is not… So that either Gods word must b…e beholden to the Pope for the authority of it, or else it hath none. but of God: but because these words of God are heer canonized by the Pope, therfore they are of credit & worthy to be beleeued, as well as if they had ben spoken by the Pope himselfe.
Loe heere the Pope in his owne colours: this is Diuinity fit to be hatched at Rome, and to be coyned in his mint… Let the words be examined, and see what can follow of them; but that either the Pope holdes not the Prouerbs to bee Gods booke, but SALOMONS (which is horrible Atheism) or else if he hold them Gods, that the words of God beare no credit, nor hauehave authority to binde mens conscience till the Pope do canonize them; and that Gods word in a booke knowne, receiued and graunted to bee Canonicall, is not of as good authority in that booke, as being translated into the Popes Canon lawe. If he refuse both these, then let him refuse his owne lawe, and burne his glosse vponupon his decretalls… as containing Atheisme, and Heresie in a high degree.12The sixt wound not healed.
But to goe forward; Is this wound healed? Surely, if they hauehave left it out, or reformed it in any later impression, so it be with open confession and detestation of the fault, it is wel: But sure I am it is in the impression I hauehave, and in al other which I could borrow. And further I do not know any Pope, or popish writer that hath with authority and allowance condēned or reproued this Atheisme: if they know any, they may doe well to produce them. Meane time, I am also sure of this, that in stead of healing it, they hauehave suffered their Doctors, & Writers, continually since to speake and write almost as ill, if not worse. In Queene Maries time, an English Papist wrote thus cProctor in his booke called the waie home to Christ printed at …ō don in. 8.; Religion is occasioned by Scripture: but perfected, and authorized by the Church.
See, we are more beholden to the Church then to the Scripture, for our Religion. About the same time Cardinall Poole out of his Pope-holy deuotion is said to hauehave affirmed, that The written word of God is but a seede of TurcismedScriptura scripta est semen turcicum..
And certaine Popish Doctors in Germanie, beeing pressed in a disputation with the euidence of Scripture, boldly answered, We are not tyed to the Scriptures: those goose quils do not tie vsuseNo… pen…is illis …n…eri …is minime su… alligati..
I will not affirme both these two vponupon mine owne credit: but they hauehave beene charged with them both, manie yeeres agoe, and neuer yet disprooued them. But that that followeth I speake vponupon knowledge.
A little after, a great English Papist pretending to summon a parliament for poperie, in his booke so called, tells a story of one whome hee hearde, vponupon reading the Booke of Ecclesiastes, earnestly say, that The Booke of Ecclesiastes is a naughty bookefHeskins, a Doctor of di…ty, in his parliament of Christ, lib. 1. cap. 2. printed at Antwerpe 1…66… in folio..
He voweth to God, and cals him to witnesse, that this hee heard him, himselfe: but what was hee that spake it, a protestant? no, a papist: and no mad fellow nor ignorant foole, nor profane scoffer; but (sayth Heskins) hee was a man of worship, of grauity, of wisedome, of godly life and competent learning, able to vnderstand, and likewise exercised in the Scriptures: and this is all the censure he giues of him that spake these wordes.
Hee addeth further (a litle after in the same Chap.) that a popish Gentlewoman hearing a text (out of a booke that papists holde to be Scripture) which shee misliked: and being tolde by him (for he heard her speak the words) that the booke was Scripture; shee answered, that if the Scripture had such (I will not say what shee saide) words in it,
She would no more beleeue the Scripture; for it was naughtgHeskins in his parliament, the next page after.:
And what was she that saide this? A vertuous Catholick gentlewoman (saith Heskins) and one that feared God hObserue wel, how a great popish doctor cōmends that man and woman… for de…o…t and zealous papists, who blasphemo…sly saide, that the scriptures were naught & not to be belieued, and doth not reproue the parties for their blasphemie. So little doth it touch a papists hart to heare Gods word abused in the highest kind.. (Lo, what tokens poperie giueth of a vertuous Catholick woman, and that feares God). And tho Heskins cannot but graunt that these are blasphemies: Yet did he not reproue the one nor the other; but contrariwise, cōmends them both, & turnes it to the aduātage of the Romish cause, & saith that hereby we may see, what a perillous thing it is for lay people to read the Scriptures. But (with his leaue) hereby we may see, what a filthy heart & vile estimation popish doctors hauehave of the holy scriptures, who hearing their disciples thus horribly blaspheme them, and God in them, doe not reproue it, but make vse of it; nor burie and quench them, but write and publish them, rather with an approbation, then any detestation of them.
But will you heare his owne wordes, and his owne iudgement, not related from others (as these) but vttered out of his owne heart: How little incitement to vertue appeareth to bee in the songs of Salomon? yea, rather how vngodly and wanton seeme they to be, in the outward face, rather teaching and prouoking (I …raue pardon of all Christian eares) wantonnesse then godlinesse: and what can the vnlearned finde, or vnderstand in many sentences? anie thing to edification of godly life? or rather a prouocation to wanton life. And after certaine sentences alledged, hee concludes: The whole booke is no better: like vntounto these, saith he, is all that booke.
You hauehave heard how the Prouerbs were disgraced in the glosse vponupon the decretalls, and heere the Canticles: Now that Salomon may not hauehave one book left in credite, Heskins addeth touching Ecclesiastes; What may appeare more vehement to disswade a man from wisedome, then the booke of the Preacher? how much is wisedome, the goodl…e gift of God, abused to appearaunce in this bookekHeskins in the same book and Chapter.?
And to conclude, of another booke which they hold also to be canonicall scripture, & some of them to be Salomons, he saith, that The booke of Ecclesiasticus, seemeth to hauehave such vnseemely wordes in it, as an honest men would be ashamed to speake them: and I also ( …aith he) would be ashamed to write them, if they were not ScripturelHeskins a little after in the same chapte….
If the words be as immodest as he pretends they be: then why do they hold such a booke to be Scripture? And if they holde it to be Scripture, then how dare a Christian man say, that it hath such speeches in it, as an honest man would bee ashamed to speake or write? I leaue this for them to answere: in the meane time I goe forward.
Not long after, comes Hosiu…, a greate Doctor of theirs, and after a Cardinall, and writes thusmHosius editionis vlt. tom. 20. lib. de expresso dei verbo. pag. 5.; The word of God (of it selfe doth not, but) as it is written in the Scriptures, it dependeth on the authority, testimonie and approbation of the Church: and it ought no otherwise, nor no further to bee esteemed the word of God, then as farre foorth as it is approued by the authority of the Church.
Lo, what doctrine heere is: for hence it followeth, that therefore if the Church should not allow the new Testament it were not scripture.
Put all these together, and then it will soone appeare, how pittifully this wound is healed. Nay further if the …ime & present occasion would giuegive leaue to looke into their latter and moderne Writers, we should see by the last, and latest of all, this wound is so farre from being healed, that it rankles further & deeper; euen like an incurable leprosie, that cannot be healed: but this may be sufficient. Therefore let vsus go forward to another wound.