parts of the world, the most of which at that time were subject and tributary unto Rome, her faith and obedience unto the gospel of Christ so openly professed, so generally known and taken notice of at home, were spread abroad, and carried far and near by strangers in their return from Rome into their own countries. Then the church of Rome was truly apostolical, being "built upon the foundation of the prophets and apostles, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone." (Eph. ii. 20.) And so long as she kept this foundation, her building was of" silver, gold, precious stones;" (1 Cor. iii. 12;) so long she did shine with true lustre and glory. But, in process of time, this so famous a church did decline, and by degrees degenerate; so that at length she became an infamous apostatical church, and the seat of Antichrist himself, the greatest enemy (next the devil) whom Christ hath in the world. When she left her foundation, her glorious building of purer metals and precious stones was changed into an infirm and coarse building of "wood, hay, and stubble," which is under the curse, and whose end is to be consumed with fire; (verse 13;) then her golden head fell off, and was strangely metamorphosed into feet of iron and clay, which the stone hewn out of the mountain without hands will dash to pieces. (Dan. ii. 31-45.)

This defection and apostasy of the church of Rome was foreseen and foretold by the apostle Paul, in this epistle to Timothy, as also most plainly in his second epistle to the Thessalonians. In the text he that runneth may read a true description of the apostate church of Rome : "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; forbidding to marry," &c.

The church of Rome doth assume to herself to be "the house of God, the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of truth," spoken of in the fifteenth verse of the former chapter. If it should be granted that she was so at the first, and when the apostle did write this epistle; (although he spake not of her in particular then, but of the Christian church in the general, of which she was a part;) methinks, since her corruption and apostasy, since her great degeneration into Antichristianism, she might apply unto herself (sure I am, that others do, with firm reason) what is asserted and foretold in the text; which, in every particular, is very applicable unto her.

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly-By "the Spirit," we are to understand the Spirit of God, who speaketh expressly by the mouth of this apostle, a man full of the Holy Ghost; whereby he was infallibly guided in what he here writeth and foretelleth. Or, "the Spirit speaketh expressly, that is, in some other place of Divine writ," saith the learned Mr. Joseph Mede upon the place: and he instanceth in Dan. xi. 36-39, which he interpreteth and accommodateth to this scripture.

That in the latter times—"The latter times" is sometimes taken for the last age of the world, which includeth all the times of the gospel. But I rather think, by "the latter times" we are to understand the latter age of the Christian church, which must be removed some considerable time from the times of the apostle, and so is suitable to the apostasy of the Roman church.

Some shall depart, &c.66 -"saith Mr. Mede, "we are not to Hereby," understand a small number, but only the exception of some particulars thus some is of the same import with many in scripture-usage. (John vi. 60, 66, compared with verse 64; Rom. xi. 17; 1 Cor. x. 7-10.) "

Some shall depart from the faith-That is, they shall depart from the doctrine of faith; and thus the Papists do most grossly, as in many other, so particularly in their doctrine of justification by works, so corrupt and contrary unto the doctrine which this same apostle taught in his epistle to the Romans. Or, "some shall depart from the faith;" "that is," saith Mede, "they shall break their oath of fidelity unto Christ that in and through him alone they should approach and worship the Divine Majesty:" and he interpreteth this apostasy to signify no other than idolatry, according to the ordinary acceptation of the word in the scripture, which the church of Rome, above all churches, is guilty of.

66

Giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils-" By seducing spirits,' ," saith Calvin, "is meant false prophets and doctors, who boast of the Spirit of God, but are acted by Satan, who is a lying spirit in their mouth, as 1 Kings xxii. 22." By doctrines of devils," saith the same author, "is meant the devilish doctrines of these hellishlyinspired false prophets." Prophetas aut doctores intelligit, quos ideò sic nominat, quia Spiritum jactant. Satan aliquando Spiritus est mendax in ore pseudo-prophetarum. "Doctrinis dæmoniorum :" quod perinde est ac si dixisset, attendentes pseudo-prophetis et diabolicis eorum dogmatibus.-CALVINUS in locum. Thus the Papists are under strong delusions, in their giving heed unto and belief of those lies and false doctrines, at first forged by the devils in hell, and vented afterward by the mouths and pens of their ministers upon earth. Mr. Mede interpreteth the Sidaoxadias daμoviwy, to be doctrines, not of devils, which they are the authors of, but of demons, as the word signifieth, or concerning demons, as the inferior deified powers were called by the Gentiles, whom they thought a middle sort of divine powers between the sovereign and heavenly gods and mortal men; whose office was to be agents and mediators between the heavenly gods and men, whose original was the deified souls of worthy men after death, and some of a higher degree that never were imprisoned in bodies, unto whom they consecrated images, pillars, and temples, adoring them there and their relics: and he telleth us, that "the doctrine of demons" comprehends, in most express manner, the whole idolatry of the mystery of iniquity, the deifying and invocating of saints and angels, (those middle powers between God and mortal men,) the bowing to images, the worshipping of crosses as new idol-columns, the adoring and templing of relics, the worshipping of any other visible thing upon supposal of any divinity therein. "What copy," saith he, was ever so like the example, as all this to the doctrine of demons? And is not this now fulfilled which was foretold in Rev. xi. 2,—that the second and outmost court of the temple, (which is the second state of the Christian church,) together with the holy city, should be trodden down, and over-trampled by the Gentiles (that is, overwhelmed with the Gentiles' idolatry) forty and two months?" The parallel may be read at large in that ingenious piece of Mr. Mede's, called,

66

"The Apostasy of the latter Times," upon this text in Timothy; and I am very prone to think, that he hath more fully expressed and explained the mind of the Holy Ghost in this place, than any that went before him.

The second and third verses of this chapter do set forth the quality of the persons, and the means whereby this defection should enter:

Speaking lies in hypocrisy-Or "through the hypocrisy of liars." This the same author applieth to the Popish doctrines, which have obtained, 1. By lies of miracles: 2. By fabulous legends of the acts of saints, and sufferings of martyrs: 3. By counterfeit writings under the name of the first and best antiquity.

Having their consciences seared with a hot iron—“ And who," saith Mr. Mede, "could have coined, or who could have believed, such monstrous stuff as the Popish legends are stuffed with, but such as were cauterized, past all feeling and tenderness both of conscience and sense itself?"

Forbidding to marry-The applicableness of this to the Papists will appear in what I have now to say; and my discourse must be confined to the latter clause of the text, "Forbidding to marry." From which the QUESTION Which I am to speak unto is this :—

Whether the Popish doctrine which forbiddeth to marry be a devilish and wicked doctrine? This I affirm; and this, through God's help, I shall prove. And that my proceeding herein may be the more clear, I

shall,

I. Show how far the Popish doctrine doth forbid to marry.

II. Prove that their doctrine which forbiddeth to marry is a devilish, wicked doctrine.

III. Answer the arguments which are brought for this doctrine.
IV. And lastly. I shall shut up my discourse with some uses.

I. How far the Popish doctrine forbiddeth to marry.

First, Negatively. This doctrine doth not forbid all marriage: and yet this I may truly say,-that Popish writers speak so disgracefully and contemptuously of marriage in their argumentations against the marriage of some, that if all were true which they affirm, it would be unlawful for any, as they hope for salvation, to link themselves in the bonds of matrimony.

Secondly, and Positively. The Popish doctrine forbiddeth the marriage of the clergy, particularly of bishops, priests, and deacons, and of all that enter into holy orders; and not only of all those men who are employed in the service of the church and ministry, but also of all those women and virgins who have vowed continency, and have entered themselves into nunneries. Beside what is generally asserted by the Popish doctors who write of this point, the canon of the council of Trent, which the Papists universally do subscribe unto, and own for infallible truth, is plainly this: Ex octavá sessione Tridentini Concilii, can. ix.—Si quis dixerit, clericos in sacris ordinibus constitutos, vel regulares castitatem solenniter professos, posse matrimonium contrahere, contractumque validum esse, non obstante lege ecclesiastica vel voto, et oppositum nil aliud esse quàm damnare matrimonium, posseque omnes contrahere matrimonium, qui non sentiunt, se castitatis (etiamsi eam voverint) habere donum,

anathema sit; cùm Deus id rectè petentibus non deneget, nec patiatur nos supra id quod possumus tentari. "If any say, that the clergy, who have received holy orders, or regulars who have solemnly professed chastity, may contract marriage, and that such contract (notwithstanding the ecclesiastical law and their own vow) is valid; and that the contrary assertion is no other than to condemn marriage; and that all (although they have vowed chastity) may contract marriage that do not find they have the gift of chastity; let him be accursed; forasmuch as God will not deny this gift unto those who rightly seek it, neither will he suffer us to be tempted above what we are able."

The Popish ecclesiastical laws admit none into sacred orders before they solemnly vow chastity, or, as they interpret it, abstaining from marriage; and it is required of nuns, that they solemnly vow to preserve and persevere unto death in their virginity, or single estate, without any regard unto any unforeseen necessity for marriage; and amongst all the dispensations that are granted by the pope, amongst all the indulgences which he makes sale of, to allow grossly moral evils absolutely forbidden by the Lord, no dispensations or indulgences are granted by him for the marriage of such as are under this celibate vow, although they are not able to contain, and although God doth command such to marry. I shall do the Papists no wrong in saying that they account it a greater crime for ecclesiastical persons to marry, than for them to commit fornication or sodomy. The learned Chamier doth give several instances of Popish writers to this purpose; namely,

HOSIUS, who doth defend "the saying of Pighius, as not only true, but pious, that a priest, through the infirmity of the flesh falling into the sin of fornication, doth sin less than if he should marry; and telleth us, that although this assertion seem foul, yet the Catholics account it most honest:" Reprehenditur Pighius qui, non verè magis quàm piè, scriptum reliquit, minùs peccare sacerdotem, qui ex infirmitate carnis in fornicationem sit prolapsus, quàm qui nuptias contraxit. Turpis videtur hæc oratio; contra, Catholicis honestissimum.-HOSIUS, Confessionis capite 56. COSTERUS, who doth assert that "a priest who doth fornicate or nourish a concubine at home in his house, although he be guilty of great sacrilege, yet he doth more heinously offend if he contract matrimony :" Sacerdos si fornicetur, aut domi concubinam foveat, tametsi gravi sacrilegio se obstringat, gravius tamen peccat, si contrahat matrimonium.-CosTERUS De Lætib. Sacerd.

CARDINAL CAMPEGIO, who doth aver, "that for priests to become husbands, is by far a more heinous crime than if they should keep many whores in their houses:" Quòd sacerdotes fiant mariti multò esse gravius peccatum, quàm si plurimas domi meretrices alant.-CARDIN. CAMPEG. apud SLEIDANI Commentar. libro quarto.

MATTHIAS AQUENSIS, who doth profess his opinion, that "such who marry after their vow of continency, do offend more than such an one as through human frailty doth deviate" (as he terms it, which, in plain English, is, who through the power of burning lust is unclean) "with a hundred divers persons:" Qui post continentiæ votum devovet potestatem corporis cuivis mulieri, magis offendit, quàm iste qui humaná fragilitate deviaret cum centum diversis personis.-MATTHIAS AQUENSIS.

Our MOLINEUS telleth us, that by the rules of the Roman church, a sodomist may exercise the priesthood, and by that abominable vice doth not run into irregularity; whereas marriage is judged altogether incompatible with sacred orders;" and he quotes Navarrus, saying, "The crime of sodomy is not comprehended amongst the crimes that bring irregularity; and giveth several reasons for it.-Du MOULIN'S "Novelty of Popery," book vii. chap. 5.

And no wonder, when John Casa, archbishop of Benevento, and dean of the apostolical chamber, printed a book at Venice in defence of sodomy. Sleidan saith, that "he wrote a sodomitical book, than which nothing more foul could have been thought upon by man; neither did he blush to celebrate with praises that most filthy sin, too much known in Italy and Greece:" Ille quem diximus, archiepiscopus Beneventanus, libellum conscripsit planè cinædum, et quo nihil fœdius excogitari possit; nec enim puduit eum, scelus omnium longè turpissimum, sed per Italiam nimis notum, atque Græciam, celebrare laudibus.-SLEIDANI Comment. lib. xi. p. 652. This was that Casa by whom Francis Spira was seduced to revolt from his profession, the cause of such hideous terrors of conscience afterward, and so miserable an end.

It is evident, then, that the marriage of the clergy, and of all under the celibate vow, is forbidden by the Popish doctrine.

II. The second thing is, to prove that the Popish doctrine which forbiddeth the marriage of the clergy, and of all under the celibate vow, is a devilish, wicked doctrine: and this I shall do by several ARGUMENTS.

ARGUMENT I. That doctrine which is a false doctrine, and contrary unto the word of God, is a devilish, wicked doctrine: But the Popish doctrine which forbiddeth the marriage of the clergy, and of all under the celibate vow, is a false doctrine, and contrary unto the word of God: Therefore it is devilish and wicked.

All such doctrine as is false, is devilish; the devil being the father of lies, especially of lying, false doctrine, whereby he doth blind the eyes of them who believe not, and corrupt the minds of them who are his children and followers. Likewise that doctrine which is contrary unto the word of God, is of the devil; who is the greatest enemy which the word of God hath, because of the great mischief which the word of God hath done to his cause, and the interest of his kingdom. And be sure, that all such doctrine as is devilish, is wicked; the devil being such a foul and wicked spirit as is wholly void and empty of all moral good, and from whom nothing but wickedness doth proceed.

If there be any question, it will be of the minor proposition, which is this, that the Popish doctrine which forbiddeth the marriage of the clergy, and of all under the celibate vow, is a false doctrine, and contrary unto the word of God. I need no other proof that it is false, than that it is contrary unto the word of God; this word proceeding from the Fountain of light and truth, I mean, from God who is all Light, and with whom dwelleth no darkness at all, who is Truth itself, and with whom it is impossible any lie or mistake should be found. The chief thing, then, that is to be proved is this, that this Popish doctrine is contrary unto the word of God. And this will appear in that,

1. This doctrine forbiddeth that which the word of God alloweth.