to occupie your answerer more in finding out your places then in making answere to foure of your bookes But I thought only to note your practise herein nowe let vs returne vnto the matter Martin Luther doeth neyther him selfe exclude Matthewe Marke or Luke from beyng the Gospel neyther woulde he haue anye man barre the other writings of the Apostles from that title because all that was written by the foure Euangelists and what so euer the holy Apostles wrote beside in the newe Testament all that is one Gospel in substance though there be foure whose seuerall bookes vsually are called foure seuerall Gospels Therefore to speake of the foure Euangelists first in respect that the holy Ghost vsed them as foure pennes and foure witnesses all writing the Gospel and storie of the doctrine and deedes of Christ we may say there are foure Gospels But in respect they 〈…〉 te in an heauenly harmony in one Spirite in one trueth for one and the same woorke of faith the Gospell being one and the same in all foure there are not foure but one Gospell As for the rest of the Apostles what they haue left to the treasure of the Church in the booke of God that also is the same Gospel and the Apostle doth call his doctrine and Epistles by that name which is to be obserued for auoyding a corrupt iudgement in thinking lesse authoritie or maiestie of Gospell in the Epistles then is in the bookes of the foure Euangelists for in respect that they were sent from the Apostle to the Churches absent they are called Epistles as other mens letters are called in like case but in respect of the doctrine therein deliuered it is the same which saint Luke and saint Iohn did write and beare no lesse honour howe so euer some custome of speach otherwise doeth hinder a right iudgement in this behalfe To this thirde article onely hath the Censurer giuen his Censure wherein hee hath not so much reproched Luther as bewrayed some want of exercise or iudgement in the Scriptures His wordes are that Luther saide this because the other three Gospels spake too much of good workes whereby the Censurers opinion is cleere that Saint Iohn speaketh lesse of good woorkes then the rest I graunt that Iohn hath a speciall course in describing the diuinitie of Christ and the loue of God towarde vs but that hee is inferiour to the rest in teaching good workes I can not graunt it neither can the Censurer proue it But for proofe of that I say one or two places of many may be sufficient If loue be the fulfilling of the Lawe and the newe commaundement not to loue one another as euery man loueth him self but more perfectly and more aboundantly as Christ hath loued vs if to bring foorth much fruite as branches in the vine be the fountaine of euery good work if to follow the shepheard Christ and to obey his voyce be better then al sacrifices then Iohn doth most mightily teach the true doctrine of good woorkes 4 The fourth report is if any woman cannot or will not proue by order of 〈◊〉 the insufficieÌ„cie of her husband let her request at his handes a diuorce or els by his consent let her lye priuily with his brother or with some other man Accuse not vs for your fault but couer it or take the sâ—â—me thereof to your selues True it is Luther gaue this euill counsell but as he answereth for himselfe hee did it when he was yet among you teaching shriuing priestes what to answere when such doubtes are moued by them that come to shrifte Also hee sayth it was his aduice when hee was holden with the feare of Antichrist but now saith hee speaking of the time after his conuersion my mind is to giue other counsel What holy writings can bee free from your foule reproches if you will thus racke a peece of sentence against the manifest purpose of the writer But it appeareth that you wrote these things by he are saye or made none account what examination your booke abide your name being vnknowen 5 In the fift place you laye downe these woordes against Martin Luther If the wife will not let the maide come These wordes thus barely set downe import a wicked opinion and doctrine tending to carnalitie as if Martin Luther allowed of fornication sending the vnruly husband to his maide seruant vpon any refusall of the wife But they were of set purpose and malice tent from the other words and sense of the writer to make a shewe of that opinion which was neuer in M. Luther reclaymed to the knowledge of the Gospel For in this place he speaketh of a thirde cause of diuorce when the woman shall obstinately refuse her husbandes companie bringeth in the man often threatning his wife with these wordes which if they preuayle not hee maketh his complaynt to the Magistrates and doeth nothing but after a solemne diuorcing as was that of Vasthi and after a solemne espousing as that of Esther which example he setteth downe in the same place and alludeth vnto it by some Dutch phrase not founding so west in other tongues as the matter will beare being rightly taken If this opinion of diuorce seeme grosse as it may yet your Poperie whence this proceded hath somewhat more grosse euen in this poynt For it permitteth a man if hee will to put away his wife because she was a bondwoman and he knewe it not before the mariage The like is alledged out of Austen to prooue that a man may bee diuorced from his wife for couetousnesse or such other sinnes because they are spiritual fornication 6 The sixt report of Luthers doctrine is that Matrimonie is much more excelleÌ„t then virginitie Mariage was ordained in Paradise mariage increaseth the number of saintes it is honorable among all men 〈◊〉 so much cannot be sayd for virginitie The comparison I will not stand vpon they are both good yet neither good for all but mariage for him that can not conteyne and virginitie in some respectes as the Apostle noteth which Luther in many places doth like wise acknowledge The sixt point might seeme to you a beame in his which to vs woulde not haue bene deemed a mote in your eyes 7 Your seuently report is that Christ and Saint Paul dyd not counsaile but disswade virginitie vnto Christians It is not hard I suppose to drawe out from you the iustification of this doctrine for you cannot thinke that Christ perswadeth all men to abstayne from marriage Seeing his wordes are not generally spoken to all whatsoeuer but to alsuch as can containe He that can receiue leâ— him receiue Which wordes for auoyding of sinne implie thus much also not as counsaile onely but as a commaundement he that can not containe let him marrie to auoyd fornication as S. Paul inforceth So that all Christians which haue not that rare gift of continencie for
to bring 〈…〉 able of myne owne This is to â—all 〈◊〉 to a stâ—â—ight account of that I neuer vndertooke and in nice pointes to take 〈◊〉 of syllables when you can take no iust vantage of wordes and sentences Wherefore to take away from you the only matter of shew in al your Censure I confesse that I doe not deliuer the scriptures in the number of woordes and syllables but in the ful weight of true sense and matter Which practise beside example of the fathers weâ— haue also in Christ and his Apostles This you knowe and yet of an euill purpose you dissemble the matter prouing your selfe thereby to be a manifest cauiller as was declared Therfore I need not bee ashamed to offer my booke in this point to be censured by you or examined by any Neither am I priuie as the Lorde knoweth to any purposed falshoode be it neuer so litle or to any euil practise in allegation of scripture or other writings of any man But you either with shame or without shame in the next sentence vtter w t one breath foure vntruthes For first we haue not all printes to our selues as you say for then you could not so soone haue printed your censure some other bookes Sâ—câ—â—ly our searchers are not so watchfull that nothing can passe our handes as your owne booke wil testifie against it self in this sentence Thirdly we can neither saye nor print what we will but that only which after view and diligent examination hath or should haue â—riuâ—ledge from her Maiesties lawefull authoritie Lastly you would make your reader beleeue that you were beyond Sea when you wrote and sent this shamelesse censure which now is euidently knowen to be otherwise Wherin I note the iudgement of God against you that in o 〈…〉 sentence where you haue falsely charged vs with vttering slaunderous vntrueths you haue your selfe written these foure manifest lies Moreouer that it may appeare who it is in deede that vttereth many manifest and inexcusable vntrueths let it â—â—e also considered what you thinke of the preaching of Gods word in England and what manifest vntrueths you vtter afterward saying that what I my fellowes dare auouche in our sermons speaches and discourses as you cast them we are sure shall neuer come to the examination Daily experience giueth sentence against you in this matter and one of your late bookes repeating certaine articles corruptly gathered out of Sermons made in the countrey the last Sâ—mmer Here also you distouâ—r C 〈…〉 pions veine in charging the Magistrates and learned Bishops as if they were carelesse what docttrine is deliuered vnto the people For my selfe I admitte not your comparison betweene my writings my preachings as if I durst bee bolder to faile in a Sermon then in writing a booke that may be disclosed For to answere also for my godly fellow ministers we preache as before God and Angels and dare as little in their presence presume to preache otherwyse then his worde giueth commission as wee dare to write otherwise before men then the trueth can allowe Nowe followe the XIII articles of doctrine wherewith the enemies of the trueth are charged especially the Iesuites as the chiefe mainteiners thereof And because you offer your selues to bee holden guiltie of al other doctrines whereof you are accused if these articles bee proued against you I woulde haue you stande to your owne condition for my part I accept your conclusion to bee iudged as I haue dealt with the Iesuites in wel reporting or misreporting their doctrine out of mine authour The first article out of the Iesuites blasphemous doctrine hath as â—otuisus reporteth and as you will not deny it is not sinne whatsoeuer is against the word of God The report lieth vpon my authour as I haue sayde yet you charge me with the wordes as guylefully reported as peeced and culled out for my purpose But notwithstanding this charge you presently acquite both mine authour and me graunting the wordes to bee most true in their sense If they be in their sense most true why do you take any exception to my report who onely lay them downe to yeelde what sense you can make Therefore before I wade any further let me aske you a question or two If any one of these XIII poyntes of doctrine bee false why dyd you not playnely denie it If they be all true why dyd you not playnely graunt them why dyd you wrangle making them true and false fast and loose perfect and imperfect at your pleasure Through all your discourse doe you not playnely graunt them and yet to helpe your owne credit and to purchase agaynst mâ—e some note of bad dealing would you not seeme in some fort to denie them But as this pretended deniall of those articles was an iniurie to me so the open mayntenaunce of them agayne was your trustie seruice toward the Iesuites and the couenant of your right hande It was also safe dealing to graunt them because if you woulde deny any one of them in the playne sense wherein it is aduouched yet the aduouchment shoulde bee proued agaynst you by your owne recordes Thus the good reader may see your dealing that so accuse mee that so double and redouble the lie vpon mee for laying downe nothing but knowne groundes of popish doctrine which you coulde not denie and whereof the Iesuites haue lately vndertaken the principall defence To returne to the matter the Censure of Colen was made as you saye agaynst Monhemius Catechisme among other poyntes to condemne him for saying that concupiscense remayning after baptisme is a damnable mortal sinne albeit no consent of heart be giuen vnto the same To auoyde your doubtful speach of damnable mortall sinne and the distinction of mortal and veniall sinne you must vnderstande Monhemius spake not of the sinne vnto death for the wich wee are taught that a man must not pray Otherwise vnderstaâ—diâ—g mortall sinne according to the worde of God and not as you doe without Christ all sinnes are mortall and that one sinne against the holy Ghost excepted in Christ all sinnes venial 〈…〉 which true sense Monhemiâ—s dyd truely affirme that concupiscence is a damâ—able sinne But you deny 〈◊〉 definition to establish your owne Let us therefore examine the grosse faultes which these Ieâ—uites of Colen commit in one definition notwithstanding they were so many and as you say so learned men They teach by your report first that sinne is an action Whatsoeuer they say or Thomas of Aquine in this question you shall finde that iniustice is a sinne and yet no action and that it is a sinne as well not to doe the thing commaunded as to commit the thing which is forbidden which leauing of good offices vndone you knowe is called the sinne of omission and yet no action as you woulde haue it For Andradius distinction in this matter is beside are and to no purpose Also in this place howe
A REPLIE to a Censure written against the two answers to a Iesuites seditious Pamphlet By William Charke 1. Reg. 20. 11. Let not him that gurdeth on his armour boast as he that putteth it off ⧠Imprinted at London by Christopher Barker Printer to the Queenes most excellent Maiestie ANNO. DOM. 1581. To the Christian Reader AS there haue risen vp in the Church from time to time false Prophets teachers which oppose them selues to the holye Prophets of God and true teachers of his worde so among the people where such contrarietie of doctrines hath bene deliuered like contrarietie of hearers hath alwayes followed not onely in iudgement but also in their affection For as some through the mercie of God and the sincere preaching of the Gospel haue yeelded obedience to his worde so many caried away with corrupt teachers haue for want of iudgement embraced errour in place of trueth and carnall worshippings in steade of the pure worship of God which euermore consisteth in spirit and trueth Against this so dangerous infection of false teachers the holy Apostle Saint Iohn hath giuen vs a most wholesome counterpoyson willing vs not to beleeue euery spirit but to trie and examin the spirits whether they be of God But to speake of our times this examination and trial may seeme very hard seeing the teachers on both sides are thought learned and al pretend to teach the trueth For it is not denyed but both sides haue had their education in schooles of learning they haue also laboured in the liberall artes to furnish them selues to greater matters wherupō they al bring very good words some shewe of reason seeme to haue no small force of perswasion Howe then shall the simple people iudge howe shal they discerne whose iudgement and discretion should be framed by their teachers and setled by their sownd and plaine doctrine To this I answere S. Iohn in that place maketh the matter more easy then it appeareth at the first shewe For exhorting vs not to beleeue euery spirit he doeth drawe our consideration to the spirit and doctrine of the teachers and not to these outwarde giftes of an eloquent stile or a sweete sownde of pleasing wordes which may be common to good and euil yea wherein the euil for want of a good cause labour to excell and from which the godly absteine for the sufficiencie of their cause without it are also restrayned lest our faith should stande in the wisedome of men and not in the power of God But Saint Iohn to make this his trial of spirits yet more ful plaine addeth that euery spirit which confesseth Christ Iesus to haue come in the fleshe is of God and euery spirit which confesseth otherwise is of Antichrist Now therefore let vs see bowe the Apostle frameth vs to a spirit of discretion to discerne the spirits of true and false teachers If any man shall teach and consesse that Christ was made man and ordeyned of God the Father a Prophet alone to teach a King alone to rule and a Priest alone to sanctifie vs and to reconcile vs to his Father by the obedience of faith this confession and doctrine is of the holy spirit of God and to be receiued what spirit soeuer shall mightily or cunningly perswade the contrary On the other side if any spirit shall teach that Christ is not our only teacher by his holy Gospel but that we must admit vnwritten beleefe and traditions from we know not whom to be of like authoritie with the written worde secondly if any spirit make not Christ alone our King and head to rule vs by his holy spirit but teache that a mortall and sinfull man must sit in our consciences and for hatred or gaine which is his practise bynde or loose at his pleasure lastly if any spirit impeach the alsufficiencie and entier vertue of Christs sacrifice offered vp once for euer teach that themselues must renforce it from day to day by the continuance of their dayly sacrifice of the Masse offered for the quick dead it appeareth manifestly that such spirits are not of God nor their doctrine to be receiued though it be deliuered with neuer so much perswasion of eloquent speach or offered to vs with neuer so much expectation of worldly honour For to denie the most absolute vertue and effects of Christes offices is in effect to denie the authoritie of his person and to lose the benefite of all his graces because they withdrawe a part To this examination of spirits without regard of persons the godly Reader is to be exhorted For the doctrine that giueth al glorie to God is of God the doctrine that attributeth some glory and ascribeth some merites to man is of men the religion also that is agreeable to flesh and blood making an acceptable sounde and shewe to the outward senses is carnall and vayne finally what religion so euer is not ioyned with the knowledge and exercises of the worde of God that is no true religion but a disguised and blinde maske full of deuilish superstition The aduersaries take a contrary course in making triall of their doctrine for they woulde haue this examination of spirits vtterly suppressed and vnder one title of that falsly named Catholique Church of Rome they would bind all men to receiue for vndoubted true religion what corruptions so euer they teach without any further question Which being graunted them the examination of spirits neede not for if Rome affirme it the matter is sufficient and must not be denied Also these enemies of the trueth leaue the touchstone which tryeth al metalles namely the doctrine and for it they drawe the teachers into examination supposing that if they can discredit or disgrace the men they shall easily vndermine and ouerthrowe their doctrine For triall of this long practise there are so many bookes that I neede not alleadge any but this late Censure written as in defence of popish religion but the authour shifting his hands very cunningly of the direct and plaine maintenance of the questions in controuersie doth but offer at them or giue some false fire his leauell and batterie is against their persons and credit that maynteining the trueth cannot but assaile the doctrines and put in hazarde the authoritie of the popish Church Therefore I am in the name of the trueth to craue it of the good Reader to lay aside respect of men the regard of those giftes that may please him much and deceiue him more and if it be his desire not so much to see the fight as to beholde the issue enioy the victory then let him imbrace that doctrine most that attributeth least to the broken arme or blinde iudgement of man that in the Church al the power and wisedome of our saluation may be ascribed to God alone through Christ Iesus our Lorde Amen W. Ch. A Replie to a Censure written against the two answers to a Iesuites seditious Pamphlet IT
insufficient witnesses the contrary being knowen to many yet aliue written by men more indifferent of better intelligence touching the storie As Lindan hath thus flaundered his death so you slaunder his life saying that almost thirtie yeeres he liued in al sensualitie and pride If there had beene any materiall argument or some false witnesse at hande you would not haue come in your selfe all alone to be sworne vpon this deposition That which you lay against him of dissention hath somewhat to be graunted For if you call it dissention he did altogether dissent from Papists being open enemies of the Gospell but for Occolampadius Bucer and others although in some poynts they disagreed yet there was among them a singular care of vnitie in the Gospell Whereupon beside the entercourse of many louing and godly letters they set downe articles of agreement subscribing their names for a testimonie of their loue as appeareth especially by an acte of concord agreed vpon at Marburge and after that by another concluded at Wittenberge We might farre most iustly require you with this accusation of dissention among your selues although you are banded together in a consent agaynst the kingdome of Christ but this is from the question although you often fall into it After these prayses of 〈◊〉 Layolas and many folde slaunders against Martin Luther deliuered in the best maner without any proofes against the one or for the other you leaue the matter for the in different reader to iudge The iudgement is soone giuen if your proofes were as manifest as your boldnes in vttering vntrueths A most patient mynde can not brooke a libell so seasoned to itching eares Our corrupt nature is more patient and glad to read a whole booke written with a pleasing grace of scoffes and tauntes against another then a lease written sicly to correct and teach our selues and we are both more skilful to write and more apt to coÌ„ceiue reprothes then any doctrine of importance for the one is home bredde the other must come downe from aboue But notwithstanding all your cunning if the reader stande vpon proofes and not vpon bare speach if he stand vpon witnesses of credit and not vpon these false subdrued witnesses the matter will fall out against Layolas as a superstitious obscure fellow and for Martin Luther as a mâ—n that hath written more then Layolas I thinke euer read that hath taught more then Layolas coulde conceiue that hath suffered for a good conscience more then euer did Layolas vnder his voluntarie whippe who fynally was the meane by the mercie of God to plant more then all the broode of Layolas shall euer be able to hinder in y â— grouth or by their infinite and shamelesse lyes any waies to impeach in worthy estimation The Censurer not satisfied with al these vngodly iniuries against Martin Luther now breaketh out into such wordes of stomacke against M. Caluin saying that the like life or worse is written of him by a French man that liued with him sometimes of the same religion You take the best way throughout all your Censures to bring the men still into suspicion and hatred because you can effect no more against the cause But for Mast Caluin beside so many as yet remaine aliue witnesses of his godly and blamelesse life his writings shal testifie to all ages hereafter that the Lorde raised him vp as a singuler Minister of the Gospel and indued him with such a spirit of wisedome and learning as may worthely kindle greater loue to him in godly meÌ„s heartes then is malice against him in your vncharitable spirites The Lorde is most wise and testifieth his loue in the dispensation of his singular graces So great giftes of true zeale of an vnderstanding heart of a minde not ouercome with any seruice of the Church with any labour for the brethren are reall arguments that as the Lorde did sanctifie and defende him against all the malice of his enemies while he liued even against the fierie dartes of Satan so now though the man be layde vp in peace yet the Lorde will preserue his name in honour vpon the earth and they that would bring shame vpon him it shall light vpon them selues as a iust recompence from him who euermore preserueth his saintes as the apple of his eye Therefore it was no euill chaunce but the Lords good will that hitherto the translation of your libel against him should be suppressed I maruaile how you passed by the storie written against M. Bucer seruing you so wel for this purpose Seeing you haue left it out I wil briefly note it for a proofe of my exceptions taken to Lindan as to a shamelesse lyer against the holy men of God M. Bucer liued to the great good and died amongst vs with the great and publique sorow of manie His life and death is written by M. Carre a man against whom you can take no iust exception who hath these wordes of him He liued so as no man better he died so as no man more blessedly his sickenes was such that no man did set him sorowe he died so that no man did perceiue his departuâ—â— Many are 〈◊〉 aliue that will witnesse as much as M. Carre hath written Yet your great author Lindan is not ashamed to make M. Bucers death as horrible and as monstro 〈…〉 as may bee suspected comparing it with foule wordes and in all horrour to the most shamefull death of 〈…〉 ius that 〈…〉 tique I appeale to them among you if there be any which 〈◊〉 the trueth that they 〈◊〉 reforme them or giu◠〈◊〉 against such manifest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈…〉 us to God and 〈◊〉 who arâ— into 〈◊〉 of their ma 〈…〉 and 〈…〉 that 〈◊〉 in their 〈…〉 a 〈…〉 tionâ— haue 〈◊〉 〈…〉 es to thi 〈…〉 In the fourth 〈◊〉 I am 〈…〉 〈◊〉 the Iesuites 〈◊〉 â—ited out of th◠〈…〉 is it shall hereafteâ— more 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For if the Censures himselfe reporting most 〈…〉 in 〈◊〉 of M. Luther hath â—ot thought his 〈◊〉 discharged if hee report the matter as it is in his owne corrupt authors Hosius Lyndanus and Cochleus howe much more haue I discharged my credit in reporting the Censure of Colen faithfully out of a learned treatise of Don. Gotuisus alleadged for my warrant for I pretended not to cite their wordes out of the Censure of Eolen which I could neuer get but expressely protested to take them out of a treatise concerning this matter the author whereof is quoted in the most bookes and hauing performed this touching the sense faithfully as may appeare by conference I 〈◊〉 in no respect hâ—e charged with â—alsifying howsoeuer to vndermine the trueth and discredit the 〈◊〉 thereof you 〈◊〉 about wordes left out or put in with 〈◊〉 any change of matter But you that challenge meâ— for additions why doe you twise adde the worde Verie to helpe your 〈…〉 l and once misconster mee as if I would haue men know I minded
written also nowe wee can not take the Apostles wordes as vttered of all because much scripture is now wanting as he doth imagine Should these be your plaine arguments if you could obteine disputation Should this be the shorter waye I know not your name but know I pray you and teach your fellowes to knowe that the scripture hath bene in all ages sufficient for the time wherein it was written of all that which hath by seuerall encreases bene written nothing was at any time superfluous and whatsoeuer hath bene written and not come to our handes nothing for all that is now missing that is necessary vnto saluation He that hath not giuen vs the bookes of Nathan Gad Achia the Shilonite and Iehdo if they wrote any other then partes of the two bookes of Samuel after his death of the first booke of the Kings also he that hath not giuen vs the rest of Salomons Prouerbes to passe by your ouersight concerning the epistle to the Laodiceans already noted therefore gaue them not because he knewe them not necessarie or expedient for the posteritie Iohn proueth this in the conclusion of his Gospell and Christ teacheth that they which had Moses and the Prophets euen then had sufficient without miracles and traditions And you haue no sound opinion of the wisdome and mercie of God if you thinke his maiestie to leaue any age since he chose a peculiar people voide of scripture profitable and sufficient to the saluation of his Church Thus the reader may see that I neither wrest the former place agaynst my selfe neither can you doe it that would so faine In the fifth article the Iesuites are reported to say The want of holy scriptures must be supplied by peecing it out by traditions For the report of this doctrine the Censurer bestoweth more of his vndeserued tauntes If the Censure of Colen hath no such wordes Gotuisus failed in citing their booke but failed not in charging them with their owne doctrine which all Iesuites and Papistes so vpholde as Peters chaire both to mainteine their false doctrines and to vnderset their Antichristiā tyraunie But although you would for the time dissemble the matter traditiōs are not of so smal force as to peece out the want of scripture For except the Presidēt of y e Trent council haue a forge to coyne lies traditions are a liuing Gospel and hee vttereth it as a question that can not be denied This is most true saith Hosius that if traditions be reiected the very Gospell also seemeth to be reiected for what els are traditions then a certaine liuing Gospell In deede traditions make a quicke court at the Vaticane Thus by your doctors opinion it is most true y ◠traditions are made not a supplie to any wants in y ◠Gospel but an other liuing Gospel after a sort to giue life to that which in y ◠true Gospell seemeth to be dead And may not a man w tout a lie call this doctrine vlasphemous My vttering of y e Cōmandemēt in the singular number is without additiō or alteration of sense For Moses in the same Chapter speaking of the same lawe and to the same men doth change the plurall number into the singular The selfe same Lawe also is recited in the singular number in the twelfth chapter of Deuteronomie by Salomon in the thirtieth chapter of his Prouerbes and euermore that which is said to al is also said to euery one and truly taken as vttered to euery one Surely I cannot guesse what you unagined at this change of the Lawgiuers wordes without change of the sense being done by the example of the same Lawgiuer in another place and without any breach of his Lawe and wherupon your vttermost malice could inferre none absurditie in sense none iniurie to the scripture nor aduantage to my cause but a stinging guesse insinuating some cause mouing mee to this change which whether you cōcealed as forbearing me or ashamed on your own behalfe to bewraye the indifferent reader iudgeth Againe what made you adde so haynous a slaunder as if all thinges were lawfull for me and to charge me as blaming the Apostles and Euangelistes for adding the Gospel Take heede you allowe not your selfe such scope in these suggestions manifestly agaynst the trueth and your owne conscience for you knowe what that sentence implieth Blessed is he that condemneth not himselfe in that thing which hee alloweth The Lorde that addeth grace to grace and light to light he also hath added to the lawe the fulnesse and satisfaction thereof in Christ Iesus which is published in his most holy and most perfect Gospell To expounde Moses wordes forbidding to adde or take away from the Lawe as spoken of the things he deliuered by word of mouth and not of the lawe written 〈◊〉 is a doubtfull speaking and may beare a harder conclusion then I will charge you with His cōmandement respected the law eyther pronounced or written by him 〈◊〉 afterwarde to bee preached and written by the holy Prophets and Apostles in the spirite of God I dare appeale to your conscience though it be deliuered from your pen you do not thinke in your heart that I woulde haue no scriptures beleeued besides that which Moses set downe Wherfore your proofe needed not in this matter To conclude it is a great iniquirie to adde traditions or your unwritten ve 〈…〉 to the written worde of God whereunto no man may adde because nothing is wanting from which no man can take because nothing is superfluous but to him that addeth shal the curses written in the booke be added for euer In the sixth place the Iesuites wordes are thus reported The holy Scripture is a nose of waxe At the true report of this blasphemous doctrine you fall into a storme perswading that I haue therein sinned agaynst God and abused the Iesuices with other most bitter woordes as if I tooke the way to ouermatch both learning and trueth But howe wrongfully all these woordes are cast out against me your owne wordes beare witnesse for presently after the sentence of condemnation you repeale it and acquite me of the fault graunting that as a nose of waxe may bee formed what way and to what forme one list so naughtie men may wrest the Scriptures Notwithstanding because you presse the wordes against me let them be examined First to proue that the Iesuites haue them more plainely then you will acknowledge I appeale from your Censure to Andradius playne confession Hee as you knowe defended the Iesuites in these poyntes agaynst Kemnitius which you defende against mee and hath lent you no small furniture for this seruice This Andradius as hauing more learning and in his kinde more true dealing then you in handling this article doth not at all cry out as you doe but acknowledgeth and defendeth the matter without such needelesse scoffes And for the words he confesseth saying The fathers
imagined in a â—â—eame tolde it before you were awake In the seuenth article the Iesuiâ—es are reported thus to teach The reading of the holy Scripture is not only not profitable but many wayes very hurtfull to the Church Here the â—ensurer would seeme to denie the doctrine that in so doing hee may both somewhat couer the absuâ—diâ—ie and accuse me for my author as â—â—steporâ—ing the same Yet after a storme of needelesse wordes hee doth in effect graunt the matter But his maner is for some aduantage to report their doctrines otherwise then they are caught or brought into question For the Papistes doe restraine the common people from reading the Scriptures vsing many reasons to proue them hurtful Besides other your bookes to this purpose there is one wâ—â—thie of remembrance written to y e Parliament in Queene Maries time where fiftie reasons such as they be are brought not â—nely to keepe the people from the Scriptures but for a more fure waye to keepe the Scriptures from them not suffering the translation thereof in the English tongue Wherupon the question wee haue in hand is this whether the reading of Scriptures be hurtful and therefore to bee forbidden Nowe the Censurer saith the rash and vnconsiderate reading is forbidden which is from the matter We doe not ioine issue in this whether the people shoulde rashly reade them or without consideration but whether you may make men beleeue that the reading of holy scriptures is hurtfull and therefore to be resâ—râ—yned There is no doubt but you holde both and teach both carefully 〈◊〉 appeareth by a late Iesnites booke written of this matter yet in disputation you woulde seeme onely to forbid the cash and unaduiâ—ed reading whereof we make no question But your reason is to be layde downe Whatsoeuer may hurt though it be in no fault yet it is to be restrayned the worde of God hath done such hurt therefore it is to be restrayned So you may aswell take away the foode of the body that body and soule may perish together because men may surfeit by good meates and fall into drunkennes by wholsoÌ„e wine Here let me for the scriptures fitly plead against you your owne rule pleaded in an other place for Philosophie It is say you a grosse ignorance for an abuse that may be to◠〈◊〉 demne the things which bee excellent giftes of God and sparks of his most high and infinite wisdom If this he true theâ— is it a blasphemie for an abuse not at all growing by the worde yet to forbidâ—◠〈◊〉 vse thereof and to keepe it in an vnknown tongue in a barbarous translation 〈◊〉 condemne not sparkes of Gods most higâ— and infinite wisedome but to conde 〈…〉 euen that high and infinite wisdome it selfe by making such restraintes and taking such sure wayes to debarre the children of God from the most necessary euidences of their heauenly inheritance But in this question agayne Payua doth deale more plainely to the purpose then the Censurer who borowing of Payua this place also yet leaueth out all that which maketh not to his purpose of couering and shielding the Iesuites from the trueth that fighteth against them For Andradius plainely confesseth that this is the first argument of the Iesuites why the Scriptures should not be read because as the Iesuites teach they haue giuen occasion to all heresies A very strange assertion but howsoeuer vnlearned and vnstable men deale yet the Scripture giueth no occasion of heresie much lesse of all heresies as these fellowes doe thus openly maintaine Therefore the Iesuites in teaching that such harme commeth by reading the word of God accuse the scriptures as hurtful many wayes and not profitable which is asmuch as they are charged withall in the 7. place The Censurer commonly faileth in leauing the question and prouing that which is not called into doubt as in this place bee proueth that the worde is without all fault when men misconster it or founde heresies vpoÌ„ the misunderstanding of it This was not in question yet it is wel prooued 〈◊〉 fitly to ouerthrowe the former doctrine of Iesuites for if the scripture be in no fault testraine not the Scripture but reforme the wrangling and peruerting wit if it be in no fault it is neither the occasion of all heresies nor a nose of waxe Your exaÌ„ple of Christ is easely truely returned against you For as Christ is a ruine to none but to those that receiue him not and to those that beleeue not in him so the Scripturè hurteth not but those that despise the reading the hearing and the practise thereof The contrary doctrine to alleaged â—ut of Matthew Yee erre not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God The Censurer woulde 〈…〉 we the application of this place by two circumstances one to proue the word 〈…〉 articular the â—ther because as he sayth Christ spake not to the ignoraÌ„t people but 〈…〉 〈◊〉 Touching the first 〈◊〉 although the Cen 〈…〉 doth wel lay 〈…〉 the particular application of Christ 〈◊〉 spect of the present matters and hearers yet it will bee founde more then audaritie for any man so to restraine the doctrines of Christ deliuered in particular that they must reach no further then the present circumstances of the matter and of those disciples or aduersaries to whome hee spaket for this is nothing els but to make Christ a Prophet for a time not a Prophet for euer Also by that interpretation his wondeful workes most heauenly doctrines shall bee made to vs nothing els but a bare and naked storie to tell vs what Christ taught others and not what he hath taught vs and to declare what hee reprehended in them not what he reprehendeth in vs. But the Censurer will answerâ— hee mindeth not to 〈◊〉 other doctrines to the particular circumstances And why not any other sentence aswell as this to the Sadduces for nothing can be more generall then errour nothing more vniuersall then the ignorance of Scriptures which is I thinke in y â— Censurers iudgement the fountaine of all errour How commeth it then that he will stop so generalle streame restrayning that to a fewe which apperâ—â—â—neth to all And for the Sadduces they did not only erre in the doctrine of y â— resurrection but were otherwise enemies ignorant of Christ not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God to saluatioÌ„ in him Wherfore Christ noted vpoÌ„ one particular occasion y â— fountaine of al their blindnesse and infidelitie as well as the cause of their ignorance touching the resurrection their foolish doubt of the seuen brethren Thus notwithstaÌ„ding y â— Censurers iudgement it is plaine that the doctrine of this place hath aswel a general vse as a particular that Christ noted the fountaine of all ignorance not the ignorance of Sadduces touching resurrection alone To your seconde point that Christ spake not this to the people but to y â— learned Sadduces first
the â—â—uching of the places for â—ontrarie dâ—â—trine is â—ensured for vnlearned huddling vp and confounding hope and faith as one thing which note of the Censure I may truely say came from no deepe knowledge A litle iudgement might haue serued your Censureship to discerne that the two places were not alledged to proue or disproue any thing of faith the ful certeinâ—ie wherof is proued against you by the certeinâ—iâ— of hope but to ouerthrowe that which the Iesuites say in the latter parte of the sentence against which these places serue plainely and expressely For what may more cleareâ—y proue against the Iesuites doctrine that hope neuer faileth then the Apostles wordes calling 〈◊〉 The ancre of the soule Where by he nâ—â—eth our fâ—eedoâ—e from danger in all stormes of â—entations â—idding out the time of this life wi 〈…〉 any 〈◊〉 oâ— feare and without any 〈…〉 touching 〈◊〉 〈…〉 heauen To shewe the force of this assurance the Apostle vseth very significatiue words calling it a sure and stable ancre and yet to make it so full that no feare or doubt may remayne he addeth that it entreth into the inwarde of the Vaile whereunto Christ is entred meaning thereby the heauens Which importeth as much as if hee shoulde say we that haue cast this Ancre aboue in heauen are so much more safe then they whose Ancre is cast downe into the Sea as the holde wee haue taken in heauen by the Ancre of hope is surer Yea the very Rockes shal sooner faile theÌ„ our hold settling vpon the strength truth of gods promise which are al Yea AmeÌ„ in Christ Iesus This our shoote Ancre of hope hath taken holde of the mercy seate of God and of the throne of grace which except some storme be able to remoue wee are in most ioyfull and stedfast safetie The like is promised by y e other place out of y e fifth to the Romanes for if hope maketh not ashamed and shame commeth when a man faileth of that be hoped for then hope can not faile The Apostle maketh this more strong by that which foiloweth as a reason The loue of God is abouÌ„danly shead out into our hearts by the holy Ghost which is giueÌ„ vnto vs. By which reason it appeareth except the holy Ghost hath giuen vs a wrong testimonie of the loue of God the hope which we haue conceiued thereby cannot deceiue vs. Thus you see these places so truely and fitly alledged that al your falsely named learning will not be able truely to answere the allegation of them which notwithstanding it pleaseth you to call vnlearned But let vs see what you call learning forsooth the doctrine of Iesuites touching the doubtfulnes and feare which is in hope that is true learned and cleare This is as the prophet complaineth to call good badde and sweete sower whereunto you know what belongeth For aunswere to these two places of hope the Iesuiteâ— doctrine is declared at large the effect of all standing in two pointes the first concerning faith the other of hope Of faith they teach that no man may beleeue that he in particular shalbe saued without a particular reuelatioÌ„ from God A faithlesse doctrine of faith and therefore not to bee lightly passed ouer You seeme to proue it by reasons one drawen from y t obiect of faith which is the word written or tradition whereof neither as you say doeth testifie mens saluation in particular the seconde taken from the vncertaintie of the things beleeued which as the Censurer supposeth doe depende vpon such conditions as possibly may not be perfourmed Both these great points for want of scripture he setteth foorth by examples as minding rather to perswade then to proue The first is of the answerer the seconde of the possibilitie to be damned as did fall out in Iudas and may fall out a more fearefull case then I woulde put of him had bee not put it of him selfe in the Censurer him selfe Nowe let vs consider what great learning the Iesuices haue in this their opinioÌ„ of faith as the Censureâ— doth report them To iudge that without particular reuelation by name no man can be sure of his saluation is expressely against that the woorde of God â—eacheth in this great question Therefore howe leraneâ— soeuer the Iesuites make them selues yet in deede as the Apostle speaketh of the wise Gentiles they become starke fooles not knowing true wisedome out of the worde but bastard wisedome by their foolish distinctions The Censurers worde of Tradition must bee reserued for a fitter place Touching the promise of the Gospell it is general whosoeuer beleeueth shall be saued the Censurer confesseth it This generall promise hath place and is certainely verefied in euery particular y t beleeueth Euery sensible maÌ„ without further learning may easely iudge in this doctrine whatsoeuer is true in y e general must needes be true in euery particular Nowe if it be vndoubtedly true that euery beleeuer shalbe saued it must needes bee also that Simeon and Lazarus beleeuing in Christ shalbe saued Therefore what needeth any speciall reuelation in the worde for that which is sufficiently comprehended vnder the generall what neede is there by name to saye from maÌ„ to man by name Lazarus shalbe saued Citus shalbe saued and 〈…〉 we shall be saued and so infinitely Or shall we say that God in respect of persons doth particularly assure some of their certaine saluation leauing all the rest to be tossed and caried vp and downe with feare and hope as a ship in the sea caried hither and thither with contrary winds Moreouer the very place cited by the Censurer as a particular reuelation was not particular but generall to all the disciples that beleeued by vertue of a more generall couenant made to all that beleeue whatsoeuer For to examine that place neerer all the disciples and all the Apostles had not their names written in the booke of life for Iudas was excepted And here by the waye the Censurers ouersight must bee noted that draweth the place of Luke as speciall and particular to the Apostles being spoken of the seuentie disciples He wanted special knowledge herein when hee so boldly made it an argument of the Apostles speciall reuelation Of the most certayne and sure foundations of our particular fayth and hope the Apostle writeth in the eight to the Romanes saying that nothing was able to take from him the loue which God beareth to him in Christ Iesus which hee setteth out by naming such things as are most like and mightie to strike a feare and doubt into his heart as oppression anguish persecution famine nakednesse and finally death it selfe nay he addeth agayne that neyther lyfe nor death nor Angels nor things present nor thinges to come nor height nor depth that is what so euer is in heauen aboue or in the earth beneath or in the parâ—â— vnder the earth finally that no creature is able to
Take ye Eate ye bynde them What moued you here to cite your Clement Ambrose Cyprian with others I knowe not except it were some meriment to ioyne with your similitude of singing for in good earnest you minde not by those places without matter in them to proue that the wordes of Christ Doe this in remembrance of me were onely saide to the Ministers touching Consecration and not to the people also for their participation In the twelfth Article the Iesuites are reported to say Traditions are of equall authoritie with the worde of God wee must beleeue them though they bee manifestly against the Scripture Here the reporte and the texte vouched to disproue their doctrine are both censured The first for adding we must beleeue them though they be manifestly against the Scripture for reporting the rest so generally and confusedly Touching y â— latter point if my report of your doctrine be in these wordes Traditions are of equall authoritie with the worde of God meaning it of some only for who would thinke it of all you hauing so many and so feeble why doe you charge mee as generally and confusedly saying al traditions are equal with y â— scriptures Was it I pray you to deserue your owne note of a sounde lye for a parting blowe which false mis 〈…〉 you haue doubled to make it the sounder For aunswere to the former poyut I doe not onely auow that I haue faythfully reported my authors wordes which is alwayes my iust defence against your vniust flaunder laying them vpon me but I say further that their practise compared with their wordes will â—ustifie the report as truely layde downe against them For proofe whereof not to goe further the Censurer rehearseth amongest these traditions which the Popish Church charge our faith withall the number of the bookes of Scripture the Lent fast Of al other traditions these two are taken out to stande for their owne credit and for the credit of the rest let vs therefore see what treasons there are against God in these your traditions First the Apocrypha bookes are not in the auncient Canon or language of Canaan the fathers haue disauowed them they are euidently repugnant to the doctrine of the holy scriptures and dis 〈…〉 eeing among them selues Yet your Trent conspirarie doeth adde them to the number of the Canonical bookes and bolde all men accursed that holde them not for canonicall scriptures Therefore this your tradition is manifestly against the word of God Further also what is more manifest against the woorde of God then the doctrine of deuils The Lent fast as you commaunde to keepe it for conscience sake forbidding meates created of God to bee taken with thankesgiuing is plainly called a doctrine of deuils Furthermore your opinion is playnely deliuered to be with this distinction Ecclesiasticall traditions are of no greater authoritie then the writings and other decrees of the Church and Apostles traditions are of no lesse authoritie then if they had bene written by them or then are the other thinges which they wrote This is confusedly taught and needeth yet more plainenesse for not all orders deliuered by the Apostles are to bee kept perpetually and vnchangeably of like authoritie with the doctrine of the Gospell which they preached The Apostolique doctrine is perpetuall subiect to no varietie of persons of times or places but some traditioÌ„s that is some orders are altered as that in the acts where they commaunde to absteine from strangled and from blood for it appeareth that the Apostles commanded not this for a perpetuall order alwayes inuiolably to be obserued but onely for a time to auoids offences which cause ceasing the order or tradition was no longer in force Againe some orders might be set downe by them for comlinesse which yet were not to be beleeued as necessary partes of saluation nor yet to remayne for euer in that forme or kynde and therefore can not be matched with the Apostolique doctrine of fayth which is euer al one and which whosoeuer beleeueth not cannot bee saued Nowe touching your pretensed Apostolicall traditions I vtterly denie that there are any such beside those which are euidently shewed or by iust consequence fitly gathered out of the written worde For what so euer is necessary to saluation is in this sort to be proued by the holy Scriptures Therefore your Censureshippe dyd well to adde If they be certaynly descended from Christ and his Apostles But how can this I pray you be certaynely knowen but by the holy writings can any other custome or testimonie assure your consciences what came vndoubtedly from Christ or what from his Apostles Is there any one of your traditions that you can vouch to descend from so sufficient authors otherwise then by report of insufficient witnesses What is it then for you to boast of inuincible arguments to proue diuers doctrines not written but left by woorde of mouth onely whereas you bryng nothing but counterfeyt Couneils erring Fathers fabulous stories and Apocrypha scriptures This is right the bragging Apostle and a shewe of the vaine chalenger Yf a man coulde be feared with the guilte of your armour or with your plume of feathers you woulde bee a worthie champion wounding more with a vayne feare then with the force of your shrinking arme In this encounter of al your profes you haue sorted out two the first is out of that excellent chapter to the Thessalonians conteining a prophecie and reuelation of Antichrist For an answere to which place it is first to be vnderstoode that the worde Tradition in the Apostles speach commeth as it doth in Latin of a verbe to deliuer so that whatsoeuer y â— Apostle deliuered to the Churches those were the traditions hee lefte with them Therefore I denie that Paule doth in any place by tradition signifie any vnwritten veritie but that as in other places he vnderstandeth the doctrine of the Gospel which in the sundrye partes thereof he deliuered This appeareth apparauntly by the place so cited for your purpose without regarde of any more then the worde Tradition For in the verses nexte before the Apostle maketh mention of the Thessalonians faith to the trueth saying God hath called you thereunto by our Gospell to obteyne the glory of our Lorde Iesus Christ and therupon inferreth this conclusion now therefore brethren stand fast holde the tradition which you haue learned eyther by worde or by our epistle Whereby it plainly appeareth that the traditions or thinges deliuered by him partly by word and partly by writing were the diuers partes of the Gospell which hee had taught them Wherefore the written woorde affordeth you no proofe for vnwritten verities The seconde is of doctrines which you say wee holde not by record of writing but by word of mouth from Christ and his Apostles as for example baptisme of infants celebratioÌ„ of Sunday y â— number of y â— bookes of scripture the fast of
Lent If this be not hudling and confounding of things together of vnlike sort I knowe not what may be called confusion For what order is it to repeate vpoÌ„ the Censurers occasion y â— which was noted in the fourth article to match the baptisme of children with the fast of Lent The one being by plaine argument gathered out of the worde as namely out of the wordes of the conenant I will bee thy God and the God of thy seede and thy children after thee for euer This couenaunt dyd appertayne to both a like to Abraham and his seede whereunto the seale and practise was adioyned in circumcising infantes of eyght dayes as well as Abraham of great age and that by expresse commaundement of God Thus the doctrine is so prooued out of the written worde as that no doubt remayneth Nowe circumcision was the sacrament or seale of that righteousnesse which is by fayth as Saint Paul teacheth wherein it is equall our baptisme But this is your great learning when you are not able for your ignorance to prooue a doctrine out of the written worde to say we haue it by tradition and by worde of mouth from the Apostles Now your Lent fast as you vse it hath not onely no grounde out of the worde but is agaynst the worde as I prooued before If this bee your methode and discretion I maruell not if good order be huddling and confounding in your accompt For the number of the bookes and for the Lordes day I myght likewise make proofe out of the worde so that if you can bring vs nothing by worde of mouth from the Apostles but your Lent fast your letters of credence will not serue you to be deleeued The seconde Censure is that the place alleadged by me to confuce the aucthoritie of traditions should be impertinent This the Censurer woulde shewe by three differences betweene it and this purpose First of the diuers cause of those traditions which our Sauiour Christ inueyeth against whereof they had beene authors to them selues and of these which he affirmeth to descende from Christ and his Apostles But as in deede the difference woulde be great if this were true so being false and vntrue as it is it can make no difference at all Theirs were in deede such as they affirme and though you deny it so are yours also For which of all your traditions came eyther froÌ„ Christ or from his Apostles wheÌ„ you proue them froÌ„ either of them your difference shall be allowed Secondly you say Christ reprehendeth not al obseruation of meÌ„s traditioÌ„s but the naughtie obseruing of theÌ„ which was as you affirme in that y â— Pharises esteemed them more then Gods word brake it for the keeping of them which you condemne This also if it were true were a sufficient difference but it is vntrue that our Sauiour Christ reproued onely the esteeming of them more then Gods commaundementes It can not bee denied but he reprooued this in them in the same chapter before but in the woordes alleadged You worshippe mee in vaine teaching doctrines that are but traditions of men which are no wordes of comparison our Sauiour simplie rebuketh them for esteeming the keeping of mens traditions to be any seruice of GOD to which â—ude the sentence had bene first vttered by the Prophet The thirde note is double first that these traditions were idle foolish of which sort are yours and whatsoeuer the idle brayne of man deuiseth to serue â—od withall the second that some of them were impious direct contrary to the word of God such as were certayne corrupt expositions of the lawe where you are as like to them as the sonne may be to the father For neuer were there more false gloses vpon the word of God violently thrust and by litle and litle secretly conueyed into the Church peruerting the true meaning of the Scriptures and corrupting the simple worshippe of GOD then haue beene brought in by your Rabbines that haue obtayned the highest seates and the most honourable names more then euer did any among the Iewes You speake of the Talmud as dyd bastarde Denis of the orders in heauen but this florish of your skill in those bookes because it hurteth not the cause let it serue you and your frendes for as much credit as it may Lastly the Iesuites are reported to teach that we must worship y e image of Christ with like honour that wee doe the holy bookes of the Gospell In this article the doctrine is graunted without any word of contradiction your Censure onely toucheth the second to the Corinthes the sixt chapter as not alledged to the purpose In deede if you list not to vnderstand to what end it is vouched you may well complaine against the alledging thereof as from the matter You take it as brought to proue that we may worship the image of Christ with greater honour then the bookes of the Gospell but you mistake the matter and wilfully as it shoulde seeme to haue some what against the cause for how could you think that he which detesteth al idols would alledge a place to prooue that the image of Christ is worthy honour more then Gospels Or howe may not any maâ— note you of open contradiction against the word of God that being deuoutly madde vpon idols would for their loue prophane the temple of God and therefore dare to say there is more agreemeÌ„t betweene them which yet the Apostle maketh most contrarie then there is betweene the place of Saint Paul the matter which the same place doth fitly disprooue But if you liâ—â— to vnderstand the place serueth to prooue that no image at all is to be worshipped for which the wordes are so pertinent and is strong as all the wisedome of your Censureship and of the rest will neuer bee able to answere them Therefore you lost your labour in framing arguments to prooue why the material booke of Gospels should be no lesse worshipped then the image of Christ for neither of bath are to bee worshipped nor any other creatures whatsoeuer according to that which was before alledged to this purpose Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serue You can not escape for saying you giue no diuine honour vnto them for this bowing downe before them which is one of the least deuotions you vse is chalenged as diuine honour and expressely forbidden in any respect of religion or deuotion to images or any other creature as hath beene often declared But here saying the honour done to the image of Christ and to the letter of the Bible is not done to them selues you dissemble your owne idolatrous doctrine which alloweth the same honour to the image that is due to the paterne and namely the same most honourable and diuine worship of Latria to the Crucifix which is due to the Lord Iesus Christ himself Your bookes that teach this are many and not vnknowen So
knowledge how to distinguish aright But what is this to proue all distinctions good euen those that Iesuites make only to auoyde the power of trueth Simples generally are good seruing for the health of man but what is this to proue those euill simples good which haue lost their vertue and which an euill Apothecarie may serue in place of good for a triall of the Iesuites distinctions you referre me to their disputation but I may haue a sufficient triall of them and of their disputation before hand in this your booke if there were no other proofe to iustifie my report As you would bring your quilits into credit so you labour to bring my arguments and interpretations into discredit as lying and false but in a good conscience and according to the trueth I haue auowed them true and good as will easely appeare to the indiffereÌ„t reader You that before made me much inferiour to Edmund Campion now make mee inferiour to thousandes of the Iesuites scholers Whatsoeuer I am to the meanest of them the Lorde I trust wil inable me to mainteine his trueth euen against Campion your great champion to say nothing of his disciples I confesse your distinctions offend 〈…〉 as being full of 〈…〉 ltie and sometimes so darke and vnlearned that there appeareth neither good cause nor good vse of them yet you take it to heart that I should account them vnlearned and peruish As for the accusatioÌ„ of Iude against the despisers of good 〈◊〉 ses it was corrupcly brought against mee for reiecting your sophisticall deuises against the trueth for proofe whereof I referre me to these your distinctions chosen out of many for your purpose which one excepted are all vnlearned and peeuish seruing to put darkenesse for 〈…〉 ght and â—â—olâ—trie in place of Gods seruice For as they that distinguish not where the word hath distinguished may soone fall into schisme and heresie so also you in distinguishing where the worde admitteth no distinction do offend in like â—orâ— and with no lesse danger There is you lay cleare difference betweene an Idol and an image Surely this is somwhat that you saye for an idol is the image of the superstitious Gentiles and an image is the 〈…〉 and 〈◊〉 named Christians There is I graunt a cleare difference in the letters but no difference at all in the word no more then is betweene Omnipotent and Almightie For to passe by Phauorine Hesychius and some places in Plutarch who all make these two wordes of one signification Plato maketh the matter most euident who mouing a question what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be maketh this answere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is manifest we will make answere that those things are idoles which are seene in water and in looking glasses and those moreouer that are painted or set out in types or portratures other things of this sort whatsoeuer By these words of Plato the Censurer may learne that any image carued paynted represented by a glasse or seene in water is among the Grecians where the worde is in his owne countrie and proper vse called an Idol Tullie moreouer who could aswell iudge of the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and of the Latine word image as the Censurer be in his translatioÌ„ maketh them one Lastly to returne to the holy Scriptures God in the second Commandement forbiddeth both the making and worshipping of an Image to represent the true God or any of the false Gods Thus much to she we your vnlearned and most vntrue distinction betweene an Image and an Idol which you and your fellowes repeate so often and vrge so much You doe it to vpholde Idoles vnder a more honest title of Images as you suppose but as they differ not in name so in nature they are all one euen stumbling blockes of offence the worshippers whereof are open idolaters I am taught by the word of GOD that there were materiall and are still spiritual sacrifices in the Church but for sinne I read y â— there is no sacrifice without bloud So that your second distinction of bloudie and vnbloudy sacrifices is plainly against scripture Iustice by faith wee acknowledge but merite by workes is proued to be against the worde So the mediation of Christ is according to faith but your intercession of saintes against the scripture For who is more mercifull then the Lorde that he may saue or who more ready to heare vs that he may be the Lordes remembranceâ— faith that beleeueth the promise and hope that patiently wayteth for the issue of faith we acknowledge and the distinction I haue layde downe in the ninth article Your counterfeit traditions of men and of the Apostles are al without warrant in the causes necessary to saluation But why haue you left out the distinction of the two worshippings Latria to God and Dulia to images Is it left out because wee condenine it and you now allowe no more of it All these distinctions are most daungerous when you will with some distinction or change of a name reteine still the same iniquitie forging such wicked deuises of man to disanull the truth of God Therfore they are but your vntrue assertions and vaine bragges that you distinguishe things into their proper natures that you can proue eche part of your distinction consonant to the word of God that when you haue so distinguished wee haue no more to saie that wee bewray our ignorance and finally that the truth is made manifest to euery mans eyes When any one of these fiue definitiue sentences is proued true I will acknowledge the rest I much maruaile that in such vanting speach you would not set down one true assertion of so many But you care not what you say to reproche the godly making account that your owne side will take it in good part be it neuer so vntrue neuer so reprochfull The fourth argument touching the libertie of your pen I haue answered already but I answere further you may haue it without print and if that will not content you there are printes inough neerer hande beyonde seas where you are if we may beleeue you so often affirming it The daunger persecution you speake of is a fruite of your murmuring spirits complaining without a cause For you go safely away w t many matters as much as you coÌ„playne against vs openly as intercepting all your bookes other Popish stuffe I thinke you doe much more brag among your selues of many escapes But if you had as many prints as you can set a worke what can you of lesser giftes write that the most learned of your side haue not written long agoe as Ecchius Pighius Hosius and which nowe Turrianus Andradius doenot furboish in a vaine hope at last to make an ende of Sifyphus labour What issue all these haue had of coursing discoursing againe the questious betweene you and vs we may consider it with great ioy of heart