First then would he fain know, what Bishop of Rome did first alter that Religion, which we commend in them of the first 400 years? In what Popes days was the true Religion overthrown in Rome? To which I answer, First, that we do not hold that Rome was built in a §Iday; or that the great dung-hill of errors, which now we see in it, was raised in an age: and therefore it is a ⟨p. 2⟩vain demand, to require from us the name of any one Bishop of Rome, by whom or under whom this Babylonish §IIconfusion was brought in. Secondly, that a great difference is to be put betwixt Heresies which openly oppose the foundations of our Faith; and that Apostasy which the Spirit hath evidently foretold should be brought in by such as speak lies in hypocrisy. (1. Tim. 4.1, 2.) The impiety of the one is so notorious, that at the very first appearance it is manifestly discerned: the other is a mystery of iniquity (as the Apostle termeth it, 2. Thes. 2.7.) iniquitas, sed mystica, id est, pietatis nomine palliata, (so the ordinary Gloss expoundeth the place) an iniquity indeed, but mystical, that is, cloaked with the name of piety. And therefore they who kept continual watch and ward against the one, might sleep while the seeds of the other were a sowing; yea peradventure might at unawares themselves have some hand in bringing in of this Trojan horse, commended thus unto them under the name of Religion, §IIIand semblance of devotion. Thirdly, that the original of errors is oftentimes so obscure, and their breed so base, that howsoever it might be easily observed by such as lived in the same age, yet no wise man will marvel, if in tract of time the beginnings of many of them should be forgotten, and no register of the time of their birth found extant. We aread that the Sadducees taught, there were no Angels: is any man able to declare unto us, under what high Priest they first broached this error? The Grecians, Circassians, Georgians, Syrians, Egyptians, Abyssinians, Muscovites and Russians, dissent at this day from the Church of Rome in many particulars: will you take upon you to show in what Bishops days these several differences did first arise? ⟨p. 3⟩When the point hath been well scanned, it will be found, that many errors have crept into their profession, the time of the entrance whereof you are not able to design:
First then would he faine know, what Bishop of Rome did first alter that Religion, which wee commend in them of the first 400 yeares? In what Popes dayes was the true Religion overthrowne in Rome? To which I answere, First, that wee doe not hold that Rome was built in a §Iday; or that the great dung-hill of errors, which now wee see in it, was raised in an age: and therefore it is a ⟨p. 2⟩vaine demand, to require from us the name of anie one Bishop of Rome, by whom or under whom this Babylonish §IIconfusion was brought in. Secondly, that a great difference is to be put betwixt Heresies which openly oppose the foundations of our Faith; and that Apostasie which the Spirit hath evidently foretold should bee brought in by such as speake lyes in hypocrisie. (1. Tim. 4.1, 2.) The impietie of the one is so notorious, that at the verie first appearance it is manifestly discerned: the other is a mysterie of iniquitie (as the Apostle termeth it, 2. Thes. 2.7.) iniquitas, sed mystica, id est, pietatis nomine palliata, (so the ordinarie Glosse expoundeth the place) an iniquitie indeed, but mysticall, that is, cloked vvith the name of pietie. And therefore they who kept continuall watch and ward against the one, might sleepe while the seeds of the other were a sowing; yea peradventure might at unawares themselves have some hand in bringing in of this Trojan horse, commended thus unto them under the name of Religion, §IIIand semblance of devotion. Thirdly, that the originall of errors is oftentimes so obscure, and their breede so base, that howsoever it might be easily observed by such as lived in the same age, yet no wise man will mervaile, if in tract of time the beginnings of manie of them should be forgotten, and no register of the time of their birth found extant. Wee areade that the Sadducees taught, there were no Angels: is any man able to declare unto us, under what high Priest they first broached this error? The Grecians, Circassians, Georgians, Syrians, Egyptians, Habassines, Muscovites and Russians, dissent at this day from the Church of Rome in many particulars: will you take upon you to shew in what Bishops dayes these severall differences did first arise? ⟨p. 3⟩When the point hath been well skanned, it will be found, that many errors have crept into their profession, the time of the entrance whereof you are not able to designe:
- aAct. 23.8.
