particular Synodes or general Councels yea many times commonly before the vniuersal and Catholike Church the holy scriptures and Spirite of God him self So that as the first of these two that is their mutability in faith withdraweth me froÌ„ al dealing with them as men altogether irreligious vnchristian and godles so the second that is the want of al sound arguments of disputation as much discourageth me from writing vnto them as men altogether vngrouÌ„ded vnlearned contentious such as loue to mainteine an endles talke of al things but haue no order or forme to coÌ„clude resolue of any thing These two partes I wil declare and make manifest by a fevv examples In England what point of religion is by statute more carefully prouided for by seueritie of punishment more vrged by preaching or writing more aduaunced by al meanes possible more beaten in to the heads of the subiectes then the Princes supremacie in causes ecclesiastical for denial whereof so many true and faithful subiectes in our memory haue suffered death Yet on the coÌ„trary syde the subiectes of Scotland were wel allowed to restraine or to speake playnly to keepe in captiuitie their owne Soueraine for intermedling in the Churches affaires as appeareth by their Iustification not long sithence published in their language where the author thereof and the ministers vse these wordes The discipline of the kirke was openly impugned vvhen as the king by the persvvasion of the enemies of the kirke vvas induced to make him self and his priuie councel iudges in the cognition of matters mere ecclesiastical and concerning the doctrine of the preachers and to take vpon him vvhatsoeuer iurisdiction the Pope vsurped there in of old yea and more ouer to discharge the general assembly al pastors vvithin this realme to proceede to the sentence of excommunication also to suspeÌ„d the same At the last some preachers haue bene stopped by commaundement c. This is the faith gospel in Scotland and in England how freely the Puritanes inueigh against that spiritual primacie let their bookes coÌ„monly printed testifie namely the great volume of M. Cartewright against D. Whitg wherein at large he discourseth that that part of the English faith carieth with it infinite absurdities is against the doctrine of the Apostles monstruous in diuinitie iniurious to Christ against the primitiue and Apostolike Church and the vvritten word of God yea vvhere he pronounceth boldly that whiles the common protestantes of England go about to gratifie princes with this spoile of Christ they leaue theÌ„ no place in the Church of Christ Touching the doctrine of baptisme then which nothing is more necessary as being the gate of al other sacrameÌ„ts and the first entrance of christianitie the Communion bookes commonly printed coÌ„mend and allow this faith That by that sacrament children be regenerate and graffed in to the body of Christes congregation and made partakers of the death of our Sauiour And the minister chargeth the people preseÌ„t not to doubte but earnestly to beleeue that Christ vvil sauorably receaue those present infants vvith the armes of his mercie that he vvil geue vnto them the blessing of eternal life and make them partakers of euerlasting ioye Yet coÌ„trarywise in the Tovver disputation the doctors there teach That al those vvhich are baptised are not the sonnes of God because they haue not al the spirite of adoption and children baptâ—sed if they be not gods elect baptisme can not make them his children and so many dying immediatly after baptisme are notwithstaÌ„ding assuredly damned The Communion booke turned into latin and printed at London by Thomas Vautrollerius the yere 1574 Cum priuilegio Regiae Maiestatis wherein they would seeme to notifie their faith to the rest of Christendome touching priuate baptisme ministred in houses by lay men or womeÌ„ in case of necessitie willeth al men to assure them selues that a child after that sort is lawfully and perfitly baptised And touching the parties ministring that sacrament it saith Ego vos certiores facio quod rectè praestitistis officium vestrum in bacre etc. I assure you you haue vvel performed your duety in this matter and kept a right order in the baptizing of this infant vvho being borne in original sinne and the vvrath of God novv by the lauer of regeneratioÌ„ in baptisme is ascribed into the nuÌ„ber of Gods children and made heyre of eternal life Yet M. VVhitaker in this booke teacheth the contrary and saith it is the heresie of the Pepusians and Marcionites to permit womeÌ„ such authoritie euen in case of necessitie which he calleth fained and imaginarie thereby signifying plainly that he beleeueth with the Anabaptistes that baptisme is not necessarie for the washing away of original sinne And the CommunioÌ„ booke also imprinted three yeres after vz the yere 1577 by Richard Iugge printer to the Quenes Maiestie Cum priuilegio Regiae Maiestatis drawing neere to the doctrine of the Anabaptistes and the practise of the church of Geneua where such priuate baptisme is vtterly disliked quite abolished altogether leaueth out that whole Tracte of priuate baptisme The same first booke published in latin touching the sacrameÌ„t of Confirmation containeth this good catholike doctrine that Confirmatio illis adhibetur qui iam baptizati sunt vt per impositionem manuum et orationem vires et defensionem accipiant contra omnes insultus peccati mundi et diaboli Confirmation is applied to them vvhich are novv baptized that by imposition of hands and praier they may receaue strength defense against the inuasions of sinne the vvorld and the deuil In the later Communion booke these wordes as likewise the whole Tracte appertaining to CoÌ„firmation is cleane omitted The reason whereof can be no other then that the Church of England in this point hath altered her faith and ioyneth more neerely then heretofore to the order of Geneua where as witnesseth M. Cart. though it were somtimes allowed yet afterwardes vpon better aduise M. Caluin cheefe Superintendent there thrust it cleane out of the church Touching the article of Christes descending into hel the Communion booke and Creede turned into ryme and sung commonly in their congregations beareth the word in hand that they beleeue as doth the Church catholike yet others by publike writing and disputation refelling that article geue vs iust occasion to suppose that they beleeue vvith Caluin in that point vvho acknovvlegeth no other descent of Christ into hel but his paine vpon the Crosse vvhere yet aliue he vvas damned in soule or as he speaketh sustayned the paines of a damned spirit vvithout any difference but that his torments were not eternal as theirs are In their Communion they sing and say publikely That Christ is the only begotten sonne of God begotten of his father before al vvorldes God of God light of light very God of very God of
that it svvarueth from the Apostolicall doctrine and teacheth cleane contrarie to S. Paule and all scriptures if Luther flatly expresly deny it to be Apostolical and affirme it to conteyne no one title or letter of such matter as the Apostels are wont to haÌ„dle if WolfgaÌ„gus Musculus vse him so contemptuouslie as though he were some poore rascall not worth the naming and teache him what he should say and sette him to schole this being euident then F. Campions conclusion standeth strong that Luther with his complices contemne that parte of scripture howsoeuer he calleth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 strawen or wodden And therefore ether let M. VV. lyke a good childe confesse with Luther vvhom gladlie he vvorshippeth as his father and vvith the Lutherans vvhom he embraceth as his most deere brethren in Christ that this epistle is no more worth then his father and brethren make of it or if he mislike such consanguinitie as sure I am they abhorre him let him then detest them as profane and wicked men who so impiouslie reiecte the written worde of God that is the foundation as they say whereon is buylte their newe congregation and so may the reader note downe one more capital and substantiall point of dissension betwene those two churches lutheran zuinglian then heâ—herto he hath consâ—dered although nether can he so doe precisely but rather note it as a diuision amonge the zuinglians also for so muche as it appeareth by Musculus that the Zuinglians of SuitzerlaÌ„d no lesse then the LutheraÌ„s of Germanye disagree from the Englishe churche in their Canon of scripture yea the Englishe church within it self as shal appeare in the nexte chapiter CHAP. II. Of the Canonical scriptures and that the English cleargie in accepting some and refusinge others are ledde by no learning or diuinitie but by mere opinion and fantasie AFTER S. Iames foloweth a questioÌ„ proposed by M. Martin how it chauÌ„ceth that the English church doth admit S. Iames epistle which sometime was not admitted and yet wil refuse Tobias Ecclesiasticus the books of Machabees which were no farther disproued then that of S. Iames. The reason in truth is the same in effecte geuen by M.VV. because these later contayne such proofe of the Catholyke religion as by no sophisticatioÌ„ can be eluded S. Iames they thinke is not so flat but shifts they haue to ridde their handes of him well inough So much writeth Caluin Some there are that thinke this epistle not vvorthie of authoritie but I because I see no sufficiente cause vvhy it should be reiected gladly vvithout controuersie embrace it for vvhereas the doctrine of free iustification semeth to be refuted in the second chapiter in his place I shall easelie ansvvere that matter As if he had sayd that therefore he admitted it because he had found out a quidditie to auoide that hard obiection agaynst only faith which answere notwithstaÌ„ding because it is false peeuish sophistical and cannot abide the tryall as wel proueth Illyricus Pomerane Musculus they therfore thought the other way more cleanlie rather vppoÌ„ preteÌ„ce of some doubte made in the primitiue churche cleane to shake it of with the rest then vppon a vaine toy which must in fine shame it selfe make hazard of their solifidian iustificatioÌ„ which must needes come to the grounde if this Apostle retaine his old credite This I say in deede is the reason but because thus to haue spoken plainlie had geuen a sure demonstratioÌ„ to the reader that they make no more account of scriptures then of fathers no more reckning of Iames or Peter then of Gregorie or Austin if they be against their conceaued heresies therefore M. VVhit semeth to shape a more cleanlie answere and this yt is All the church saith he reproued not the epistle of Iames and they that reproued it vvere moued so to doe by no sure reasons but these bookes vvhich you name Tobias Ecclesiasticus the Machabees the vvhole churche of old reiected nether vvere they vvritten in the Hebrevv tounge vvhereas no bookes of the old testament vvere Canonicall but onlie those vvhich the lord commended to the old churche Two reasoÌ„s he seemeth to geue the first that no bookes in the olde TestameÌ„t are Canonicall but such as were written in the Hebrew the proofe wherof consisting onlie in M.VV. authoritie without ether reason or probabilitye or Doctor or Councell if I oppose against him S. Augustine with the catholike churche of that age I trust the reader wil not greatlie stagger which syde he ought to take and if this reason hold I marueile what shall become of Daniel a great parte wherof is held of them for Canonical yet is not writteÌ„ in the Hebrew His other argument is of more force that the vvhole primitiue church refused the bookes of Machabees Iudith Tobie but certaine onlv that vppon no good reason refused S. Iames. These two partes if he proue and shew this difference he sayth somewhat I wil be of iudgement as he is if not whereof I assure my self then as before so here styll lust and fantasie ruleth them in mangling thus the scriptures not reason diuinytie let vs see how he proueth that the whole churche reiected the former S. Hierom sayth the church readeth the bookes of Iudith Tobias the Machabees but reckeneth theÌ„ not amongst canonicall scriptures This for them how may we fynd now that not the whole churche but some particuler men and they not vppon any good reason refused S. Iames For this part we must credit M.VV. vppon his worde for besyde his worde reason or coniecture he yeldeth none but coÌ„trariwise to disproue this his distinction and approue that without reason or conscience he and his fellowes haue made choyse of the one with condemnation of the other thus to do M.VV. him selfe ministreth vs mattet abundant for thus he wryteth in his first booke in iustifiynge frier Luther against S. Iames. Luther vvas not ignorante vvhat the aunciente church iudged of Iames his epistle Eusebius doubted not to vvrite of that epistle expresslie I vvold have all men to knovv that the epistle vvhich is ascribed to Iames is a bastarde epistle vvhat could be writteÌ„ more plainly but perhaps Eusebius pleaseth you not geue me a reasoÌ„ vvhy heare then Hierome vvhom you knovv to have bene a Priest of the Romane Church The epistle of Iames is auouched to have bene set forth by some other in his name the one affirmeth it to be a counterfeite the other saith it is supposed to have bene published not by the Apostle but by some other vvhy then are you angrie vvith Luther vvhom you see not suddenlie or rashlie first to have begon to doubâ—e of that epistle but therein to folovve the iudgement â—â—stimonie of the auncient Church Let vs now ioyne together these two proofes of M. VV. with consideration what thence
be most populous and of al nations sundry shal ioyne them selues vnto it abundantly VVherefore let the Ievves be ashamed vvhich thinke them selues alone to be the sonnes of Abraham Avvay with the Montanistes vvhich say that they alone haue receaued the holy Ghost Confounded be the Donatistes c. hovv much should vve vvithdravv and take from the church catholike if vve beleeued these men And againe vpon Ieremie God here speaketh of the eternitie of Christes kingdome and svveareth that as his league is stedfast with the sunne and moone vvith sommer and vvynter vvith day and night so also he vvil performe that vvhich he promised to Christ that he shal haue kinges and priestes and that for euer and that not a fevv but as the starres of heauen and the sand of the sea both for their dignitie and puritie and also for their multitude The like wordes he hath and confirmeth the same by sundry places of scripture in Isai ca. 64 v 13. Daniel ca. 2. v. 44. Zachar ca. 2. v. 1.2.3 et ca. 7. v. 13.14.15 et ca. 12. v. 6.7 And Illyricus gathereth very wel out of the first chap. of S. Matth. that the true church in the middest of al persecutâ—oÌ„s destructions of cities CoÌ„mon welthes and peoples is not only preserued miraculously by gods special ayde protection but also Ostendit ista series saith he ecclesiam et religionem veraÌ„ habere certas historias suae originis et progressus This genealogie proueth that the true church and religion hath assured historyes of her beginning and encrease I passe ouer very many places of these and other learned Protestantes Brentius Lauatherus Luther Bullinger who in their Commentaries vpon the scriptures refel this sauage opinion of our english Protestants by infinite and the same very euident places of scripture And wonder it were if any thing were wonderful in men forsaken of God and geuen ouer to their ovvne sense hovv these men do not perceaue yea and feele the most sensible contradiction which disputing of this question and of Christes real presence in the sacrament they runne into For here they charge vs that we take from Christ the truth of his body and deny his incarnation because we say it is inuisible and not circumscribed with a certaine place which they say are proprieties so essential to humane nature that the very glorified body of our Sauiour remayneth not a body if it wante them Of this argument M. VV. insulteth and triumpheth in this booke Hoc argumentum saith he to M Martin impetus tuos non pertimescit This argument feareth not your forces Yet talking of the Church militant which consisteth of a number of bodies by nature mortal by essential proprietie visible and bound to a certaine place by Christes ordinance dispersed thorough al quarters of the world this Church they say was a true church and yet inuisible consisted of Emperours Priests nations and peoples and yet circumscribed with no certaine place appearing in no certaine citie prouince or kingdome so tying most ethnically the glorious celestial deified and supernatural body of Christ to the base rules of corruptible philosophie from which they exempt the mortal bodies of men which by the law of God and nature are subiect therevnto But to returne to the fal of the vniuersal Church vpoÌ„ the ruines whereof M.W. booke in particular this new congregation in general is buylt and standeth the issue of that doctrine is no other nether possibly can be but a flat abnegation of Christ Christianitie as the writings of our aduersaries ioyned with their practise declare abundantly to al those who lyst to open their eyes and take a litle paines to learne that which so deepely it importeth them to know And to this purpose notable is the storie of Dauid George the Hollander who being expelled from the low countries for the Sacramentarie heresie and for the same cause honorably receaued and intertained by them of Basile being then of the same religion and many yeres wel esteemed of in that citie after proceeded so far in the gospel that he tooke to him self the name and office of Christ and accompted our Sauiour for a seducer and deceauer and secretly drew many to his opinion For which cause three yeres after his death the rulers of that Citie tooke the body out of his graue and burned it and withal set out the whole storie of his life fayth and death and the rest appertaining to his condemnation and their owne defence This man by what reason principally was he lead into that Turkish madnes forsooth his cheefe reason was this as in the same booke appeareth If that Christ had bene the true Christ then the Church erected by him should haue continued for euer But now we see and it is manifest that the Romish bishop that Antichrist hath surpressed and ouerthrowen many hundred yeres since the church which that Christ erected Hereof it foloweth that he was not the true Messias but a lying maister and a false prophet And Sebastianus Castalio in the preface of his bible dedicated to king Edward what doth he els but closely deny Christ to be the true Messias when vpon this very ground of the churches fal he thus discourseth First he laieth for a foundation the excellencies and prerogatiues of the church which should be established by the Messias as her quietnes and vnitie in religion described by Michaeas cap. 4. That the earth should be so replenished vvith the knovvledge of our Lord as the sea is vvith vvaters Esai 11. And againe cap. 60. VVhereas thou were forsaken enuied and vnfrequented I vvil make the saith God to arise into an euerlasting height so as thou shalt sucke the milke of other nations and the brestes of princes and thou shalt knovv that I thy God am thy sauiour and defender Thy sunne shal no more go dovvne nor thy moone leese her light for our lord shal be thy light which euer shal coÌ„tinue After this sort much more he hath touching the churches happy estate and continuance as before hath bene noted Then looking to the effect and accomplishment of these promises according to Protestantes learning and iudgement he protesteth expressely that this excellencie and felicitie promised to the church of Christians by the coÌ„ming of Messias the more he considereth the scriptures the lesse he findeth the same as yet to haue bene performed howsoeuer a man vnderstand those places alleaged Whereof he frameth this argument Equidem aut haec sutura esse fateÌ„dum est aut iam fuisse aut deus accusandus mendacit Quod si quis fuisse dicet quaeram ex eo quaÌ„do fuerint Si dicet Apostolorum tempore quaeram cur nec vndiquaque perfecta fuerit et tam cito exâ—leuerit dei cognitio ac pietas quae et aeterna et marinis vndis abundantior fuerat promissa Truly vve must confesse ether
no man geue any credit to the fair speaches and crakings of the Zuinglians For most certaine it is that they lye and lye agayne VVherefore Christian reader to leaue M.VV. and returne to thee and so make an ende if thou be in iudgement Catholike I know thou findest not nor euer shalt finde reason to make thee a Protestant of any sect and least of al after the English fashion And if thou feele in thy self any such temptation consider aduisedly but this only why thou shouldest encline to be of that side more then to be Lutheran a Puritan an Anabaptist a Trinitarian and so furth and thou shal neuer finde any probable cause why thou shouldest not as wel become any of these as a Caluinist or Zuinglian And vniuersally to make thee detest all Sectes if thou haue some feare of God and regard of the iudgement to come waygh only that which the very nature of our religion this treatise offereth to thy consideration and thou shalt easely find abundant reason why to reiect forsake them al. Consider the infinite difference betwene the Catholike pleading reasoning and disputing and their perpetual wrangling brawling and rayling VVe geue thee to stay thy selfe in our time vnitie of faith in al Christiā prouinces Churches wel gouerned and in due obedience florishing commō welthes quietly maintayning the doctrine which of their fathers they receaued They geue thee infinite varietie and difference of religions disordered cōgregations the sheepe controling their pastors and scholers presuming to teach their maisters And in the ciuil common-welth disobedience against the magistrate contempt of princely authoritie spoile ruine of churches of palaces of al things sacred and profane In the former ages we shewe thee consent and agreement in the religion which we professe Bishops Churches Princes Prouinces Peoples al realmes Christened ioyning in the same They tel thee of inuisible churches imagined congregations Mathematical deuises in the ayre as it were Minotautes and Hippocentaures sometimes chalenging to them selues the company of Berēgarius VVicleff Hus the like sometimes refusing them as heretikes and running per saltum vnto the Apostolical age or the first 3.4 or 5. hundred yeres after Christ condemning al the church folowing of superstition and Papistrie and sometimes yea commonly condemning those former ages no lesse then the later VVhen we treate of scriptures vve geue them vnto thee syncerely and perfitely vvithout any cutting or paring avvay of this or that booke or this and that peece of such a booke al expounded vniformely by excellent Saintes by most learned Doctors by general Councels by the most approued practise of the Catholike church in al antiquitie They geue thee scriptures so peecemele and patchedly that they cut of at the least the third part of them sometimes sentences sometimes peeces of chapters sometimes chapters commonly entier bookes And as for the exposition of them contemning al Saintes Doctors Councels of antiquitie al Doctors Fathers and Martyrs of their owne Congregations they reduce the final scope and determination of al to This is my opinion this is my iudgment and the Doctors may not take avvay from vs our liberty to iudge of them c. Consider this intolerable wilfulnes wherevnto they are now growen and the more they shew them selues to abhorre from al reason stay or moderation the more oughtest thou to obhorre from them Consider with thy selfe that neuer the founder of any common welth as Solon of Athenes or Minos of Creta was so brutish or voyd of common sense as to leaue his common welth so disordered that there should be no iudges to end controuersies no gouernours to keepe the people in peace and tranquillitie but that euery man should liue according to his lust and liking Then how much more abominable is it for vs to imagine that Christ Iesus the eternal wisedom of God should frame a larger common welth then euer was vnder the Sunne dispersed thorough al quarters corners of the world and yet for order quietnes should leaue the same worse policed then was euer the least citie or borough towne whereof we reade in any story For so much as he bound euery one of his subiectes not only to liue wel and in charitie one with an other but also vnder payne of eternal damnation he bound them al to beleeue a like and to haue the selfe same faith vnchangeably in al places times and ages touching a number of articles and yet leaft no order whereby to procure any such vnitie nay rather tooke order to driue thē into diuers innumerable faithes appointing so many supreme heads of churches as there vvere soueraine kinges princes dukes rulers in seueral kingdomes countryes prouinces and cities appointing a booke of the gospels vvhereby they should be gouerned but leauing the exposition of the same at randon in the discretion or rather fansie of euery preacher and minister Recal to memorie that which their owne principall writers and maisters teach thee who deny not but that they leade thee an other way then any of thy forefathers wēt for these thousand yeres Againe they deny not but they geue thee a faith far differing from the faith which the more auncient fathers folowed in the first fiue hūdred yeres Then whereas they praise vnto thee for most diuine and Apostolical men of later memorie those who within these 80 yeres haue restored as they cal it the gospel by those mē also thou art earnestly dehorted from the Sacramentarie faith as a faith wicked blasphemous and damnable Furthermore remember that a long time they vsed to reteyne at least the name and countenance of the written word of the Gospel of the scriptures that those were altogether for them whatsoeuer became of the Fathers Councels and Doctors But now that hold also haue they geuen ouer cōfessing thereby the scriptures to be as plainly against thē as the rest And with what conscience or reason can any man folow such blind guydes as these are who professe them selfes to folow none but to be at plaine defiance with all Fathers and Churches of this later thousand yeres with al Fathers and Churches of the other fiue hundred yeres and with the sacred scriptures and Gospel of Christ it self whom for these other reasons their owne doctors maisters and brethren condemne as heretikes most wicked and sacrilegious God indue thee with his spirite and send thee of his grace that thou maist take the right way and folow it that thou maist renounce al sectes heresies and become a true member of Christes Catholike Church without which there is no sanctification of the holy Ghost no remission of sinnes and consequently no hope of the fauour of God no hope of life eternal LAVS DEO A GENERAL TABLE OF THE PRINCIPAL THINGES conteyned in this booke A ACADEMIKES a sect of Protestants page 279. their beleefe pa. 280. Antinomi a secte
of Protestāts pa. 411. M. W. inuectiue against the Annotations of the nevv Testament page 476. The summe thereof pa. 477. Annotations of the new Testament vvhat they cōteine pa. 484.485 what fault M.W. findeth in them 484.491 Blasphemie in the Annotations touching Christes Priesthod pa. 528.529 Ansvvered 530. vsque ad 542. blasphemie touching merite of vvorkes pa. 543. ansvvered 544 c. Hovv the Protestants fel to cal the Pope of Rome Antichrist in praef pa. 42. M. W. knovveth not vvel vvhat that Antichrist is against vvhom he vvriteth Ibid. pa. 4. The absurditie of that assertion Ibid. pa. 4. The impossibilitie of that opinion 52.53.54 The end of that doctrine 72.73 Arguments ridiculous made by M. W. and attributed to vs. pa. 497.498.499.502.504.510.511.513 such arguments tend to make a mockerie of al faith 516.517.521.522.523 S. Leo the great called Antichrist by Beza pa. 155. The first Apostles of our nation were Papistes and Massing priestes by the cōfession of our aduersaries p. 165.166 Auncient archheretikes the protestants forefathers in sundrie partes of their faith pa. 31.32 S. Athanasius called Sathanasius by the heretikes pa. 84. S. Austin called a blind bussard pa. 166 S. Austin most filthily abused and mangled by the Sacramentaries pa. 166.177 S. Austin a priest 65. S. Austin S. Hierom old papistes 121. B BEza a fierbrand of sedition pa. 231. VVriters against him pa. 232. He correcteth S. Luke and our Sauiour 233.234.236.241 and is defended by M. VV. in so doing 236.237 His reasons 238.239 Refuted ibid. et 240.241 Refuted long ago by Luther 257.258 how he correcteth the new Testament 260.261 Bezaes fault in excusable for ought M. VV. ether hath said or can say 250. He doubteth of a part of S. Iohns gospel 363.364 He furthereth the Anabaptistes against Christes incarnation of the B. virgin 368.369 See Translation of scripture Bible-beaters pa. 400. The Bible neuer so mangled by any as by the protestants 400.401 Their bible is no bible 404.405 See Scriptures Ceremonies in Baptisme pa. 504.505 C Catholike doctrine vnpossible to be ouercome by any heresie least of al by this of our time pa. 41. The name Catholike not applicable to the English religion praef 87.88 Caluin condemneth the auncient fathers for approuing Melchisedecs sacrifice pa. 60.61 Caluin for the real presence pa. 223. Carolostadius exposition of Christes wordes Hoc est corpus meum pa. 254. allovved by Zuinglius 255. Castalios translation of the Testament much commended by the protestants pa. 380. His discours that Christ is not the Messias praef pa. 67.68 The Church catholike after Christes time is euer populous and spread in many nations pa. 350. et praef pa. 62.63 She is the ground of al faith 442. built vpō a rocke vnmoueable 479. No good worke or martyrdom profiteth to saluation out of the Catholike Church 116.117 Infinite difference betvvene the Catholike cause and the Protestante pa. 556.557.558 No stay in faith out of the Catholike Church praef pa. 24. To say that the vvhole Church hath fayled is to deny Christes incarnation pref p. 56.57 58.59 to make him a lyer ib. 66.67 to deny him to be the true Messias ib. 68.69.70.71 The inuisible Church a poetical fansie pref pa. 60. refelled by Melanchton 60.61 by Caluin Oecolampadius and others 62.63.64 the Protestants sensibly cōtradict them selues in deuising it 64.65 The foundation of the English Protestant church pa 480.481.482 The antiquitie thereof 524. It is ful of Atheistes 410. S. Chrysostom for the real presence p. 188.208.215.217.218 his place comparing Christ vvith Elias pa. 207. It proueth inuincibly the real presence a pa. 204. vsque ad 214. S. Chrysost for the sacrifice pa. 214.215 He is almost as ful of lies as words by the protestants doctrine pa. 227. S. Ciril for the real presence p. 198.199.200 D S. Damascene for the real presence pa. 201.202 Dauid George vpon vvhat ground he denied Christ pref pa. 66. Defendere is vvel translated to reuenge pa. 464.465.466.467 The Doctors of the primitiue Church condemned by euery priuate sectarie in that vvherein they gain say his heresie pa. 82.83 by the Zuinglians for approuing the sacrifice of Melchisedech pa. 60. and Masse pa. 69.70.71.72 and for disallowing the mariage of priestes and votaries 83. by the Puritanes for allovving holydaies in the honour of Christ his Saintes 84. by the Trinitarians for acknovvledging the B. Trinitie 84. by the Lutherans for denying the Vbiquetie of Christs body 85. by M. W. for their doctrine of penance and vvorkes 82 11◠and for sayng that Antichrist is one man pref pa. 44.45 See vvorkes E Elias cloke the Zuinglians supper compared together pa. 212.213 Elias shal come before the day of iudgment pa. 494.495 English vvriters 478. their maner of vvriting 284.285.475 and disputing 477. more absurd then others pref pa. 6.7 Those of the English religion are not Protestants pref pa. 88. they are properly called Zuinglians or Sacramentaries ibi 89.90.91 by vvhat names they cal them selues praef pa. 91. hovv they are called by Acte of parlament ibi 21. F The true meaning of Only faith iustifying pa. 280.411.412 Libertinisme the end thereof 127.128 The nature of true Christian faith pa. 517.518.519 hovv one part of faith is applied to the confirmation of an other 521. Ecclesiastical maner of fasting commeth from Christ and his Apostles pa. 89.90 The Zuinglians figure in Christs wordes touching the sacrament pa 251. The figure of the Catholikes ib. infinite difference betvvene these tvvo 252.253.254.255 Freevvil pa. 509. G Grace hindereth nothing the merite of workes pag. 102.103 To say God is the author of synne is to say God is an Idol or a deuil pa 451. The protestants say so 451.453 454. S. Gregorie much praysed by the Protestantes pag. 158. much rayled at by the Protestantes 164. A booke written against him by Vergerius 165. S. Gregorie a priest without al reason made minister by M. Iewel 164. The Greeke Testament more aduantageable for the Catholikes then the common latin pa 283.284 Our common latin Testament more pure then the greeke now extant 361.362.363 The greeke Testament now differeth much from the old 363.364 Additions rashly made to the greeke 365.366.367 Parcels of importance left out of the greeke 367.368.369.370 H HEauen is of grace vvorkes pa. 104.105.106.107 544.545 Of mercy and iustice 105.106 107.108.109 Heauen must receaue Christ Act. 3. v 21 maketh nothing against Christs presence in the sacrament pa. 179.180.181.193 handled at large a pag. 170. vsque ad 175. S. Paule to the Hebrevves as much doubted of in the primitiue church as the epistle of S. Iames. pa. 38.39 The Apostles cited not scripture alwaies according to the hebrue pa. 287.288.289 Bookes of scripture written in hebrue lost 290. S. Hierom preferring the hebrue before the latin in his time iustifieth not the hebrue of our time pa. 297.337 More probable that the hebrue hath bene corrupted then the latin pa. 297.298.299.300 Corruptions in the hebrue pa. 302. in Isai against
A REFVTATION OF SVNDRY REPREHENSIONS CAVILS AND FALSE sleightes by which M. Whitaker laboureth to deface the late English translation and Catholike annotations of the new Testament and the booke of Discouery of heretical corruptions By WILLIAM RAINOLDS Student of Diuinitie in the English Colledge at Rhemes 2 Timoth. 3. v. 8 9. As Iannes and Mambres resisted Moyses so these also resist the truth men corrupted in minde reprobate concerning the fayth But they shal prosper no further For their folly shal be manifest to al as theirs also vvas Veni vide Come and see Iohn 1. v. 46. Printed at PARIS the yere 1583. THE PREFACE TO THE READER BEING appointed by those vnder whose gouernement I haue put my selfe and to whose direction I haue willingly committed whatsoeuer facultie or abilitie is in me for the benefite of our countrie and reducing to the fold of Christs Catholike church the soules of our poore countrymen so miserably seduced appointed I say by such my Superiors to examine and answere M. W. booke of Antichrist first principally so far forth as touched this Seminarie that is the Translation of the new Testament lately published with the Annotatiōs thereof and M. Martins Discouerie of their heretical corruptions next and afterward the other argument concerning Antichrist I confesse my self to haue bene so loth to take the matter in hand as ether my duetie and obedience suffered or the loue and charitie of my countrymen and brethren permitted One reason was because I sawe many in this societie for good zeale and forwardnes as willing and for ripe knowledge in diuinitie more able to vndertake and dispatch a greater matter then that An other reason was because I thought I could not without some iniurie done to Catholikes dispute against that sauage barbarous paradox making sometime the order successiō of Popes to be Antichrist as M. VV. doth in one page sometime the whole Catholike and vniuersal Church vvhereof the Pope is head to be Antichrist as he affirmeth within 5. lines after ether of which in the iudgment of any Catholike is as notorious and palpable a lie as any of Lucians True Histories So that as if a man would with sage reasons go about to disproue some of those toies which he reporteth As that his ship being taken vp with a strong wind caried in the ayre seuen dayes seuen nights thē arriued at an Iland in the middest of the ayre where he saw a terrible battayle fought and many a thousand slayne and yet the field whereon both camps pitched was nothing els but the web or weauing of spiders which is not to be marueiled at spiders being as big there as prety Ilandes are with vs here that afterward he came to a land where mē tooke their eyes out of their heads at night time or otherwise whē they meāt not to vse them put them vp in cases at other conueniēt seasons they tooke them out thence put them on againe such like stuffe of riuers of wine seas of milke and Ilands of cheese c. as if I say a mā would go about with sober reasons to refute these reports he should thereby note his auditory of smale wit discretion who needed helpe to find out such incredible fables the very like is to be deemed of this idle inuention concerning Antichrist in the iudgment of al Catholikes Lucians fables being no more false vnreasonable and vnprobable against nature and philosophie then this deuise is peeuish lying absurd vncredible and vnpossible against Christian faith and diuinitie A greater reason was for that I vtterly abhorred in the middest of my course of studies and better exercises to spend any good houres ether in reading or refuting heretical bookes which neuer edifie to vertue deuotion and saluation but distract mens mindes from the meditation of al such religious spiritual and heauenly exercise and fil their heads only with contentions disputes and brawles of wordes Pugnis verborum as the Apostle calleth them the end where of as Tertullian of old noted is commonly no other but to wearie our selues offend the readers and exasperate the aduersarie whose proud spirite of contempt and contradiction is lightly incorrigible And of this I make the more sure reckening if at this present I write ought against our English aduersaries because by certaine experience of things past I see assuredly what must be looked for in time to come For as they passe other common heretikes in pride arrogancie and good opinion of them selues and the same ioyned with intolerable ignorance euen in the first principles of our religion so for this reason they bluntly dash into any kind of absurditie be it neuer so foule and blasphemous As that the image of Christ is as very an Idol as the image of Venus or Iupiter that S. Peter vvas neuer at Rome that Christ is not begottē of the substāce of his father that he is not god of god the father but god of him selfe that he was a Priest and offered sacrifice to his father according to his diuinitie vvherevnto may be added that The succession of popes is Antichrist or if that like you not then that The vniuersal Church is Antichrist such strange articles in our religion that Christian men ought rathet to stop their eares and shut vp their eyes from hearing them or reading them then expect any ansvver or refutation of them And vvho vvould not be greued to put pen to paper whē he knoweth he shal be troubled vvith multiplicatiō of such vnreasonable assertions of such old rotten execrable heresies such propositions as euery Christian man naturally doth abhor al aūcient stories monuments vniuersally vvithout exception reiect and refel al aūcient churches and coūcels since the time of Arrius vvith one vniforme consent haue accursed cōdemned But the chiefe and maine cause why I most of al lothed this maner of writing vvas because I find in our aduersaries doctrine no kind of stay or assurance no maner of certaintie or stedfastnes their vvhole faith being like Maie flovvers for some few monethes or yeres florishing and in estimation vvhich vvithin a short space after wythereth avvay is of them selues neglected changed and forsaken And thē vvhereas to dispute seriously of any matter requireth some certaine groūdes fountaines or heads of disputation vvherevnto euery man of learning ought to stand as we see in al other sciences of Logike Philosophie Law any kind of learning humane or diuine these men haue quite remoued and abolished al such and haue brought the whole course of their diuinitie to an idle lose vaine fantastical kynd of talking consisting most in denial of principles of religion where he is counted best diuine that can maintaine talke longest he is counted to beare the bel away that most arrogantly can preferre him self before al other be they few or many old or new
by the same authoritie Euery man sayng publishing preaching teaching affirming declaring disputing arguing or holding opinion against the first of these articles is adiudged a manifest heretike c. misbeleuers in the other are with great rigor corrected and reformed This was the state of religion left by king Henry after whose death in the time of his sonne vpon very â—ight occasion was quite disanulled al this that the father had by parlament Actes and statutes so carefully established For streight vpon his fathers funerals king Edward saith M. Fox being but a child of nine or ten yere by the instinct of his vncle the Lord protector and Cranmer by consent of parlament did first abolish these six articles and then set forth a second booke of Reformation and after that a third as the religion had dayly more encrease more perfite then the first vnder the title and authoritie of his name After which sort the Zuinglian religion being placed with much dissension and alteration held out for the time of that Prince and was of the next with like authoritie of ParlameÌ„t reiected abolished But being restored againe in the beginning of the Q. Maiesties reigne from that tyme hetherto how the body of the realme hath more and more degenerated from that Zuinglianisme to Puritanisme which as D. Whitg wel proueth is the very next degree to Anabaptisme what infinite numbers in euery shyre as their owne writers record are ioyned to tâ—e Familie of loue which is a mere abnegation of Christianitie what swarmes of Atheistes haue sprung vp with which as D. Whig telleth vs their English congregation is râ—plenished this I leaue to the knowledge remembrance experience and eye sight of the discrete reader If I should note the varietie and difference betwene our Protestantes and the Protestantes of other nations as of Germany Polonia Zuitzerland and France I should neuer make an end because most true it is there is no one article of faith ether touching the blessed Trinitie Christes incarnation and passion resurrection ascensioÌ„ touching the person of the holy Ghost or touching his office there is no one sacrament as the Eucharist Baptisme Forgeuenes of sinnes in penance confession of sinnes to a priest Holy orders there is no one rite or ceremonie ether touching gouernement or diâ—cipline of the church wherein they disagree not These few examples which I haue brought conteining matters of such weight That princes are heads of the church and are not that baptisme remitteth sinnes and remitteth not that priuate baptisme is lawful and vnlawful Confirmation allowed and disallowed Christs descending into hel graunted and denied that he is God of his father and yet is God of him self that al kinds of Religions may for their conscience sake take armes against their prince yet Catholikes may not in any case or for any cause make supposal of such a matter that women are barred by the law of God from exercising authority ouer men euen in matters ciuil and agâ—ine that women by the law of God haue supremacy ouer the cleargy bishops and archbishops eueÌ„ in matters most diuine spiritual that copes and such like ornamentes are to be vsed in church seruice and are to be abolished and burned as monumentes of Idolatrie that by like authoritie of parlaments diuers and contrary faithes are confirmed and ratified These few examples I say al appearing manifestly in the practise and behauiour of one litle Iland and in the compasse of a few yeres al notoriously to be seene in perusing a few english bookes and writers declare sufficiently how true that is which D. Whiteg affâ—rmeth of the Puritans and we find as true in all sortes of Protestants that commonly such as once diuide them selues from the Church fal from errour to errour vvithout stâ—y they declare sufficiently how true that is which I affirme â—â—at these meÌ„ haue no certaintie or stabiliâ—ie of faith therfore hard it is foâ— vs to know what to refâ—â— or dispute aâ—aâ—nst whereas we find such continuâ—l chaunge and varietie Yet al this notwithstanding albeit they haue one faith for Germany an other for Engâ—and and in England one for the South an other for the North one for the fathers reigne an other for the sonnes one for the brother an other for the sister and vnder the â—ame Prince one for the beginning of her reigne an other for the time ensuing one for the nobilitie an other for the commonaltie one for the publike church another for their priuate houses one in their CoÌ„munion booke an other in their seueral writinges although they haue Annuas and menstruas sides as S. Hilary and S. Basil said of the Arrians euery yere and somtimes euery moneth a new faith yet gladly could we deuoure the paine to finde out and learne such their yerely monethly faithes that by refelling them we might saue those christian sowles which through the same monethly dayly and hourely perish euerlastingly had we not a far greater dâ—fficultie in learning out what maner of argumentes are of force and allowable amongst them for refuâ—ing of the same Among Catholikes in al scholes and Vniuersities in al bookes writings argumentes drawen from the scriptures of God from the Traditions of the Apostles from the Authoritie of the Catholike Church of general Councels of the auncient Doctors fathers of the supreme Pastors of the Church geuing sentence definitiue in any controuersie these al and singular are of such weight and estimation that ech one coÌ„uinceth the aduersarie part and no Catholike dare euer resist or oppose him self if he heare the voice and sentence of any one of al these and besides these other argumentes in diuinitie we can not possâ—bly deuise any Vse any of al these in disputation with the Protestant he careth not for them nether wil be bound to them farther then it liketh his owne lust and fansie Approue the Inuocation helpe of Angels by the authoritie of Tobias the free wil of man by the booke of Ecclesiasticus they answere Litle care vve for the example of Raphael the Angel mentioned in Tobie nether acknovvledge vve those seueÌ„ Angels vvhereof he speaketh As litle accompt make I of the place of Ecclesiasticus nether vvil I beleeue the freedom of mans vvil though he affirme it a hundred times And as for the Traditions of the Apostles besides the written word it is their very profession to contemne them and who is there of them al that euer wrote any booke of câ—mmon places who hath not a large treatise particularly against them Alleage against theÌ„ general Councels they answere If this be a sufficient profe to say such a CouÌ„cel decreed so such a doctor said so there is almost nothing so true but I can impugne nothing so false but I can make true and vvel assured I am that by theâ—r meanes the principal groundes of our faith may be
groundes of disputation such as are vsed ether in our church or in their owne and how far these men be groweÌ„ to a headstroÌ„g desperatnes beyond the maner of al the auÌ„cient heretikes For when S. Austin and the old fathers had to dispute with such as Donatistes ArriaÌ„s Manichees Pelagians and others they vrged them with the authoritie of Gods Church with the iudgement of the Sea Apostolike the Succession of bishops in the same with the determination of general Councels finally with the name Catholike and that which was so called of al men and the heretikes seemed to be moued therewith and acknowledge such maner of argument But the heretikes of our time conteÌ„ning impudently al these Church Sea Apostolike Succession of bishops general Councels and whatsoeuer els may be inuented are come so far that they now despise and treade vnder foote the name Catholike which the Apostles by diuine wisdome found out and by their Creede sanctified appropriated to true ChristiaÌ„s members of Christs only Catholike and Apostolike Church in so much that in the sinode holdeÌ„ at Altemburg betwene the Diuines of the Palsgraue of Rhene and the Duke of VVirtemberg when one part brought forth a text of Luther against the aduersaries they perusing the place at large and finding there the word Catholike streightwaies reiect the whole as corrupt and counterfaite because Luther was neuer vvont to vse that vvord Ista verba catholicè intellecta non sapiunt phrasin Lutheri say they and vpon this only reason conclude that booke not to haue bene made by him And yet would to God our aduersaries could be content to yelde to the very scriptures them selues such peeces I meane and bookes as they leaue vnto vs and hetherto with vs acknowledge for Canonical VVouâ—d to Gâ—d they could frame them selues humbly to admitte such scriptures when of theÌ„ selues they are playne for vs against them For so surely buâ—ldâ—d is the Catholike cause that by such helpe she is able sufficiently to defend her selfe and confound the aduersaries But whereas besides the reâ—usal of al the forenamed witnesses both of our church and of their owne as though none euer besydes them selues in particular no Saint or man ether in heaueÌ„ or earth had wit learning or grace whereas I say besides al this they expound the same scriptures by plaine partialitie fantasie frensye whereas they make them selues the only arbiters both what bookes are Canonical what Apocriphal and which is the true sense of them whereas in examining the sense they runne sometime from greeke to latin sometime from lâ—tin to greeke sometimes vrge one or other greeke example against innumerable latin sometimes prosse one or other fathers reading against al greeke commonly corrupt the sense both of latin and greeke sticke only to certaine heretical versions made by their maisters in fauour of their seueral heresies whereas they are groweÌ„ to such extreme folly hardnes impudency it may seeme nothing els but wast of vvords to deale vvith men whom contention pride ignorance malice and obstinacie against the Church and her pastors hath so pitifully blinded Novv if I may vvith the readers patience descend from this vvhich I speake generally of the English protestants to apply the same more specially vnto the party vvhose booke I haue to examine it shal both iustifie more clearly that which hetherto hath bene said touching their irreligion want of faith and withal set forth the practise of those proud and arrogant rules of answering which I before haue noted and besides shew what stuffe is contained in his booke of Antichrist wherein he so vainely and insolently triumpheth It hath bene an old disease of auncient heretikes first of al to inuade the cheefe pastors of the church that they being remoued from the gouernment them selues might more freely spoyle the flocke as witnesseth S. Cyprian And for like reason their maner hath bene more malitiously to barke at the Sea Apostolike as saith S. Austin In this as in many other mad partes the heretikes of our age haue not only matched but also far surmounted the heretikes of auncient time For when as vpon their first breach from the church spreading of this new heresie they were reproued by their cheefe pastor and gouernor vpon malice and spite and desire of reuenge they brast forth into this rayling to cal him Antichrist not meaning for al that to cal him Antichrist in such a seÌ„se as the church and faith of Christian men vnderstandeth vvhen vve speake of Antichrist vvhich shal come in the end of the vvorld and of vvhom S. Paule to the Thessalonians and the scriptures in some other places specially do meane but in such a general sense as S. Iohn intendeth wheÌ„ he saith that novv there are many Antichristes and vvho so denieth Christ to haue come in flesh he is Antichrist But the later Protestants going beyond their maisters as commonly it fareth in euery heresie to make their cause more plausible and iustifie their schismatical departure from the church more assuredly haue taken vp the proposition in the more extreme and desperate sense and now hold the Pope of Rome to be that singular Antichrist of whom S. Paule and some other of the Apostles fore-prophecied This wicked and shameles assertion being refuted at sundry times and of sundry men namely of D. Sanders not only as false vnprobable but also as heathenish vnpossible M. Whitaker hath now taken vpon him to make a reply against his argumentes and maintaine that former assertion of his brethren but after such a sort as partly argueth in him want of al religioÌ„ and conscience partly declareth him to haue deepely impressed in his harte a vvonderful pride and coÌ„tempt of al others a principal note and marke of Antichrist And to beginne vvith the later I vvil shortly runne ouer one or tvvo of the first demonstrations and M. W. ansvveres framed there vnto First of al D. Sanders disputeth that the succession of the Romane bishops can not be Antichrist because Antichrist is one man vvhich he confirmeth by sundrie good testmonies of scripture vvherevnto he ioyneth the vniuersal consent of al the auncient fathers His vvordes are Denique omnes sancti patres Graeci Latini Syri quiper tot saecula vel in Oriente vel in Occidente vel in Aquilone vel in Meridie vixerunt secundùm fidem traditionem ab Apostolâ—s acceptaÌ„ de Antichristo locuti sunt velut de homâ—ne vno Briefly al the holy fathers Greeke Latin Syrian vvho for so many ages liued ether in the East or VVest or North or South according to the faith and tradition receaued from the Apostles haue spoken of Antichrist as of one man VVhat is M. VV. answere to this After certaine cauils made to the places of scripture thus at a clappe he dischargeth the fathers writing according to the faith
answere to the next demonstration where to S. Austin and S. Hierome reaching Peters chayre and succession of Priests in that Sea to be the very rocke vvhich the proud gates of helâ— ouercome nor which thing they affirme vpon manifest warrant of Christes wordes he answereth vpon warrant of his owne vvord that that succession of priestes is not the rocke the gates of hel haue prevayled against that church so as the faith vvhich somtimes florished there novv appeareth no vvhere in it long since is departed into other places Whereas D. S. replâ—eth this to be false and and that church euer to haue reteyned the same true faith and neuer to haue brought in any heresie or made any chaunge of doctrine vvhich he proueth by al historiographers that euer liued in the church Eusebius Prosper Beda Regino Marianus Scotus Schafnaburgensis Zonaras Nicephorus Cedâ—enus Sigebertus Gotfridus Viterbiensis Trithemius and many others against them al this only censure he opposeth Historias vestras Sandere non moramur vve regard not M. Sanders your stories and yet him selfe for his ovvne side bâ—ingeth not so much as one story So that against scriptures reason councels fathers old and nevv historiographers al kynd of vvriters him selfe euer cometh in as an omnipotent and vniuersal Apostlâ— Doctor Father c. as though in his only vvord consisted more pith then vvas in al mens that euer liued since Christes time And now somwhat farther to descrie the incredible vanitie folie pride and selfe loue of the maÌ„ let the reader note the grosse and barbarous impossibilitie of that paradox vvhich by this his supreme authoritie he vvould defend He graunteth the Church of Rome to haue bene pure godly christian for six hundred yeres after Christ as before hath bene declared VVhen then grew it to be so impure wicked and Antichristian ten yeres after For thus he writeth Six hundred and ten yeres after Christ or there about Bonifacius the third gouerned the Romane church VVhat vvas he to ansvvere truly very Antichrist In which wordes ioyned together thus much he saith in effect That whereas within the space of ten or twelue yeres before the Romane church was religious and euangelical in such sense as they vnderstand it that is abhorred the Popes vniuersal iurisdiction as Antichristian and limited his power within the precinctes of his owne Patriarkship reuerenced euery prince as supreme head of the church within his owne dominion detested the sacrifice of the masse as iniurious to the death of Christ acknowledged no iustification but by only faith allowed mariage of priestes and religious persons as agreable to the libertie of the gospel held for sacramentes none other but Baptisme the Eucharist and Baptisme an only signe not remitting synnes and the Eucharist a sole figure from which the truth of Christes body was as far distant as heauen is from earth and so forth according to the rest of the articles of their reformed faith within the decourse of so few yeres al these thinges were turned vpside downe the contrary faith planted in steede thereof That is the Romane church of late so sound and perfite sodaynly became most corrupt and impure she approued the vniuersal authoritie of the Romane Bishop and appointed no boundes or limites to his iurisdiction which was mere Antichristian she tooke from Princes their Supremacie she brought in the sacrifice of the masse and highly aduaunced it against the death and sacrifice of Christ she acknowledged iustification to proceede not of only faith but of workes also she established the single life of priestes and votaries and condemned their mariages as sacrilegious and execrable for two sacramentes she admitted seuen to baptisme she attributed remission of sinnes and in the Eucharist she beleeued the real and substantial veritie of Christes presence so forth according to the articles of Catholike religion or papistrie as these men terme it Now whereas thus much is comprised in their paradox of making the succession of the Romane bishops Antichrist whereas such weight lieth in the matter which of it selfe to common intendement is so absurd vnreasonable and in deede vnpossible whereas we also bring forth Fathers Councels and Doctors auouching the contrary gather thou Christian reader whether vve haue not iust cause vtterly to discredite them in this so blunt sensles assertioÌ„ vntil we see their Chronicles their monumeÌ„ts their aÌ„tiquities some maner warraÌ„t besides their owne in a matter of such importance Whereas they allow vs no such and yet chalenge to be credited vpon their owne vvord assure they selfe reader their dealing in this behalfe is not only foolish vnlearned and ignorant but also inhumane furious and diabolical Notwithstanding whereas M.W. besides those former profes which to any indifferent man may seeme more then sufficient requireth of vs farther declaratioÌ„ that in these later ages the Romane church hath not departed from that faith which in her first time she professed to content him if any thing mâ—y content him and make more euident the inuincible equitie of the Catholike cause I wil proue the same by such â—istoriographers as him selfe I trust wil allow for vpright and nothing fauorable to our cause Those witnesses I meane to be first of al him selfe and then Iohn Calum Peter Martyr Martin Luther Flacius Illyricus with such other pillers founders of his owne congregation Out of him self this I gather That to haue bene the true and Christian faith which the Romane church maâ—ntained the first fiue hundred yeres at what time that church vvas must pure excellent preserued inuiolablâ— the faâ—th deliuered by S. Peter and S. Paule This proposition is commonly found almost in euery page of M.W. answere to the second DemoÌ„stration Out of the other Caluin Luther c. this I gather that the Romane church in her first primitiue puritie maintained and beleeued the Popes Supremacie the sacrifice at the masse the same to be auailable for the dead priesthode the real presence c. no lesse then we do now This thou shalt find witnessed by their seueral confessions and approued at large hereafter in places conuenient The conclusion hereof rising is this first that these are no pointes of false or AntichristiaÌ„ doctrine but such as Peter Paule taught the primitiue Romane church Next that the later Romane church hath not departed from the former but hath kept inuiolably the self same faith without chaunge or alteration And so the false supposal whereupon this booke standeth being by such euideÌ„ce refuted the rest of the building must needes come to ground Now I say farther that this point which M.W. taketh for a most certaine and cleare veritie that is the fal of the vniuersal church for after the fal of the Romane church they can shew none that stoode and it is their general both preaching and writing that she corrupted the whole world with her errors and her
triple Antichrists I come now to speake of the secōd part vz the want of religion and conscience which M. W. sheweth in this his answere wherein I must be the shorter because I haue stayd somewhat long in the first His want of cōscience as in sundry other pointes so in this I note especially that whereas he pretendeth to set downe M. D. Sanders arguments fully and entierly and so to frame his answere accordingly he in many and the same of best moment performeth nothing lesse then that which he most pretendeth M. Iewel amongst many false practises vsed this as one very apt to beguile the simple and whereby I thinke at this present very many learned men are deceaued That is frō the discourse of his aduersary he would cut out remoue frō the sight of the reader the principal strength were it Scripture Councels Fathers or reasō whereby the aduersary iustified his cause after shufle vp some od talke impertinent allegatiōs against the rest For exāple let the Defence of the Apologie of the English church serue vvhere there is no matter seriously handled from the first beginning to the last line of the booke but the very pith and most forcible partes as it vvere the ioyntes and sinevves are thus taken avvay and left out of the booke sometime vvhole and many pages together sometime half pages sometime fovver or fiue lines in a side sometime vvhole sentences or peeces of sentēces according as he thought requisite for the bettering of his cause and disgracing of his aduersarie yet notvvithstanding he peeceth and patcheth vp the rest as though it vvere the ful and perfite discourse of D. Harding This is as much as if some bragging Thraso appointed to combat vvith his enemy should at the time of fight cause his enemy to be tied vp in prison and shevve his chiualry vpon a man made of cloutes this is in steede of a body to fight with a shadovv I vvil not exemplifie this by any particularitie because I can assure the reader by certaine experiēce let him in that booke fal vpon vvhat place he list he shal hardly misse an example This very practise hath M.W. learned of him and putteth it in vre in this his answere to D. Sanders demonstrations For wheresoeuer D.S. disputeth most firmely out of scriptures and reasons grounded there on multitude of fathers agreing in the exposition of the scriptures wheresoeuer he preuēteth the cauils of the aduersaries and forestoppeth the common arguments which they make for the cōtrary parte there M. W. diligently and carefully taketh order to cut and leaue out al such peeces that he may haue the more libertie to runne at randon and talke his pleasure of the rest So for example in the seuenth demonstration he leaueth out in the middle almost halfe a side of D. Sanders a pece of very good importance for the fortifying of his argument In the tenth demonstration where D. Sanders preuenteth and answereth their obiections and where in deede he fully cōfuteth before hand the substance of M. W. replie there a whole page is leaft out And the self same part he plaieth in the thirtenth demonstration leauing out almost two entier pages where in like maner his replie was before hand thoroughly discharged So in the sixtenth demonstration he omitteth almost a side of the argument where D. Sanders conuinceth the Protestants of contradiction to them selues and proueth them to play the part of Antichrists for corrupting the verie letter of scripture at their pleasure And to passe by the like false demeanure in other places and to make a litle stay vpon one only example in the 36 demonstratiō he so wickedly behaueth him selfe as the reader can neuer otherwise iudge of him then that he is a mā wicked vnconscionable without al feare of God or regard of man geuen only to continue talke and serue the time without any care to search out the truth D. Sanders there disputeth thus Christ instituted a true real sacrifice at his last supper This he proueth by scriptures reasons drawen out of the scriptures fathers interpreting the scriptures This sacrifice Antichrist shal abrogate take avvay This he proueth also by fathers expoūding the scriptures and gathering so much of Daniels Prophecie These be the parts of which he concludeth the Pope not to be Antichrist who taketh not away that sacrifice but defendeth wel alloweth it Nowhere wōderful it is to note what mangling and defacing and peecing and patching he vseth in setting downe this demōstratiō In the first paragraph of D. Sanders fiue lines he leaueth out wherein is compared the state of the Iewes and Christians touching the law and sacrifice Then shufling in fower lines he furthwith leaueth out almost a whole side of a leafe where D.S. by good reasons conference of Scriptures and fathers proueth the Masse to be the sacrifice of the new testament and then putting in one line of S. Ireneus cited by D.S. and leauing out many lines folowing of the same author and pertaining as much to the matter omitting withal D.S. discourse therevpon he furthwith ioyneth an other place of S. Ireneus cited likewise by D.S. but after his maner cutting of at the least the one halfe and omitting D.S. argument therevpon as also a notable place of Hippolitus the Martyr writing that in the time of Antichrist the holy churches shal be like vnto poore cottages and the pretious body and bloud of Christ shal not be extant in those daies the Masse shal be abolished c. al which he saith is nothing to the purpose whereas D. S. bringeth in a large place of S. Hierom he setteth downe one peece of a line and leaueth out ten times as much ensuing and the same most to the purpose And finally vsing the like treachery tovvards S. Chrysostom cited as the rest by D. S. from vvhom he croppeth the greater part and the most necessary thus he maketh vp his ansvvere to the 36. demonstration And that the reader imagine not the places of those fathers S. Ireneus S. Hierom S. Chrisost to be ydle needeles let him know that they are such as whereby D. Sanders proueth directly one of his principal propositions that Antichrist shal abrogate take away the sacrifice of the nevv testament according to the prophecie of Daniel Finally in the 38 demonstration where the argument is framed that the best princes haue alwaies fauoured the Sea of Rome as Constantinus Magnus Theodosius Martianus Carolus Magnus Ludouicus Pius c. persecutors tyrannes and wicked princes haue most dishonoured it as Constantius Iulianus Valens Anastasius Theodoricus c. the answere is made by cutting away al this out of the booke and thrusting in a tale of a tub that Cardinals bishops be kings who much honour the Pope This maner of answering is not to search out the truth as becometh Diuines or to bring men
Chap. IX Wherein is refelled M.W. answere to certaine places of S. Chrysostom touching the real presence and sacrifice Pag. 203. Chap. X. Of the place in S. Lukes Gospel cap. 22. corrupted by Beza Pag. 231. Chap. XI M.W. general answere to the booke of Discouerie and of the notable impietie committed by the translators of the English Bibles Pag. 260. Chap. XII M. W. reasons against the latin bible are answered and the same bible is proued to be in sundrie places more pure sincere then the hebrue now extant Pag. 280. Chap. XIII Of the puritie of our latin testament in respect of the greeke copies now extant Item a comparison of our translator with other of this age with an answere to those obiections which M. W. deuiseth against him Pag. 360. Chap. XIIII That to leaue the ordinarie translation of the bible appointed by the Church and to appeale to the hebrue greeke and such new diuers translations as the protestants haue made is the very way to Atheisme and Infidelitie Pag. 406. Chap. XV. How M.W. inueigheth against the new testament lately set forth in this college with a cleare refutation of such faultes as he findeth in the translation thereof Pag. 443. Chap. XVI A defence of such faultes as are found in the Annotations of the new testament Pag. 474. Chap. XVII Of certaine blasphemies contained in the Annotations pag. 527. The Conclusion Pag. 548. A REFVTATION OF M. WHITAKERS REPREHENSION OF THE LATE ENGLISH TRANSLAtiō and Catholike Annotations of the new Testament and of the booke of Discouery of hereticall corruptions CHAP. 1. Of Luthers contemning S. Iames his Epistle and callinge it STRAMINEAM AMONG sundrie cōtrouersies raysed by the Protestants in our dayes one and that of greate weyght and consequence is the Canon of holy Scriptures that is what bookes are to be admitted into diuine and supreme authoritye and as certaynlye wrytten by inspiration of the holy Ghoste to be receaued without any doubte or contradiction In examininge which question the behauiour of our aduersaries deserueth diligent consideration For as in the beginning they much praysed the Fathers Church Councels of the firste fiue hundred yeares not for any respecte or reuerence they bare vnto them but by so doinge to discountenance and thrust out of credite the Fathers Church and Councels of the later thowsand by whom they saw most euidently their heresies to haue bene condemned so not long after for lyke purpose they made vaūt of the scriptures agaynst those very first and moste auncient Fathers not for any iuste honor or regarde which they had of the scriptures but by that meanes to disgrace the Fathers and ease them selues of answering their authoritye when soeuer they should be pressed therewith For that in deede they accompte not of the very scriptures more then of the Fathers but turne them ouer for vs to defende no lesse then the Fathers time and experience hath shewed their publike wrytinges professe as by that which hereafter ensueth shall manifestly appeare and M. Whitaker though in worde he would fayne dissemble the matter yet in facte and truth playnly declareth so much which being so let the Christian Reader as in other things so in this especially note the proceeding of that which these men call the gospell the grosse impietie wherevnto it tendeth and in to what open profession of infidelitie in a shorte space it is likely to breake out which in the compasse of so few yeares is growen to such a head that now already they dare as boldly call in question and deny partes of the holy scriptures as not long sithence they made the like quarels against the wrytings of the auncient Fathers Let the Christian Reader note I say not their wordes but their doinges not their coūterfeit dissimulatiō in speach pulpit sometyme vsed but their euident practise reasons asseuerations published in bookes confirmed by arguments deduced by necessarie coherence from their doctrine and many wayes expressed by them selues in sundry their Cōferences Institutions and disputations and he shall easely perceaue our aduersaries after denyall of the Fathers Councels Tradition and the authoritie of the Church Catholike now at this present to stand vpon lyke deniall of the written worde the Apostles Prophets so as they leaue no one ground whereupon a christian man can rest his fayth or stay him selfe Thus much I gather not onely by the writinges of sundry other Protestants whereof some I shall touch hereafter but euen of M. Whitakers discourse in defence of Luther about S. Iames Epistle whose words and reasons for this purpose and the Readers better intelligence I will sett downe and prosequute somewhat the more at large And firste of all concerning S. Iames his Epistle M. Martin reproueth M. Whitaker for denyinge that Luther called that Epistle stramincam and in so cleare a case charged Father Campian with a notorius lye It is easie to gesse sayth M.W. vvhat a fellovv vve shall fynde you in the reste vvho are not ashamed in the very beginning to lye so egregiously When F. Campian replyed that it was in some one of Luthers first editions though otherwyse altered in the later nether so sayth M.W. Praefationem illam purgatam esse dixisti quam tamen constat nullo vnquam verbo mutatam esse You saye that preface vvas corrected vvhereas it is certayne that there vvas neuer anye vvorde changed in it Now this being the faulte which M. Martin layeth to M. W. see how wel he defendeth himselfe First because after he had read ouer all Luthers prefaces vpon the new Testament as he sayth he found none such there of he inferreth He is not to be accounted impudent as you call me vvho denieth that to be true vvhich he knovveth not to be true but he that to deceaue others defendeth that as false vvhich he knovveth to be most true but I am so farre from acknovvledging this to be true that I neuer thought it to be more false then I thinke it novv I will not wrangle vpon the definition of impudency but whether this dealing be not moste shamelesse and detestable in a Christian let any man of indifferencie iudge First it can not be excused of grosse and insolente boldnesse and rashnesse vpon the vew of one onely edition to deny so peremptorily a thing obiected so often by so many learned men of name and for ought I coulde yet reade or heare neuer denyed by the Lutherans especially whereas withall nothing is more notorious then the manifold alteratiōs which Melanchton and those of VVittenberge haue made in Luthers works corrupting deprauing putting in and taking out so much and so far forth as pleased their chāgeable humor where of the zealous Lutherans in a synode holden at Altemburg by procurement of the Duke of Wirtemberg and Palsgraue of Rhene lamentably complayne Electorales say they Lutheri scripta enormiter quám faedissimé deprauant ita vt post obitū Lutheri c. The
is and must be deduced to wit the cause why the Englishe congregatioÌ„ admittinge S. Iames hath reiected those other and we shall straightwaies finde not only that he ouerthroweth himself which is a comoÌ„ tricke amoÌ„gst such good writers but also concludeth the contrarie of that which here he preteÌ„deth The Church readeth the bookes of Iudith Tobie and the Machabees saith S. Hierome but reckeneth them not amongst the Canonicall scriptures In that the Church at solemne times read them it is a great argumente that she much honoured them although she admitted them not as then vniuersallie into that highest roome of supreme authoritye But of S. Iames we heare not so much but contrariwise Eusebius directlie affirmeth if M. VV. saie true and iudgeth wold all other men so to iudge that that epistle of S. Iames is a false and bastard epistle and Hierome a prieste after the order of the Romane Church and not a minister after the fashion of the English congregation is brought to proue the same Who seeth not now what greate difference there is betweene these two verdits geuen in by these auncient fathers the first being read in the Church had a degree to Canonicall scriptures the later had no such Of the first he bringeth in S. Hierome saynge onlie that as then it was not acknowledged for Canonical he bringeth in S. Hierome to saie as much of the second and for a surcharge he ioyneth Eusebius directlie affirming it to be a bastard epistle and withall wishinge all men so to iudge of it him self inferreth that Luther in his rashnes which we condemne folowed the iudgement and testimonie of the auncieÌ„t primitiue Church he affirmeth farther as a general principle namely treatinge of this epistle Quod principio statim non habet diuinam authoritatem non potest tempore hominum approbatione fieri diuinum That vvhich at the first hath not presentlie diuine or canonicall authoritye as in their opinion S. Iames had not can not be made canonicall by the approbation of men yet now of these he wold haue vs learne this distinction that the primitiue Church vniuersallie reiected the bookes of Iudith Tobie the Machabees some onlie and those without iust cause refused S. Iames epistle and therefore that the English congregation hath done verie discretelie to authorize the one disauthorize the others let him not playe to much the Sophister but answere as becoÌ„meth a Diuine saue him self in this froÌ„ opeÌ„ folie contradiction he shall shew more wisedome learning theÌ„ hetherto he hath geuen vs occasion to deeme in him And that he may the better waye the veritie and substance of his aunswere and the reader haue occasion to consider what a variable tottering gospel these men preache and how iustlie we obiect to them that at their pleasure they make hauocke of scripture I will laye to M.VV. reasoning the effecte of the late disputation had in the Tower with F. Campian touching this pointe This they make the mayne grounde of their whole argameÌ„t Those bookes vvhich olde fathers and Councels haue not receaued for canonical bookes to ground our faith vpon them can not nevâ— meâ— nor the Tridentine Councel make canonical This proposition standâ—ng for good which they so confidentlie vrge and M.VV. thinketh yâ— moste assured let vs see vppoÌ„ this rule what waste they make of the sacred bookes vppon that ground thus they buylde or rather pull downe Aug. li. 2. cap. 8. de doct Christiana leaueth out Baruch and the tvvo last bookes of Esdras Hierom in his preface vppon the booke of Kinges saith that Sapientia Salomonis Iesus the sonne of Sirach Iudith and Tobias are not in the Canon Eusebius in his sicâ—e booke and 18. chapiter it is the 19. leaueth out the third and fourth of Esdras Tobias Iudith Baruch Sapientia Ecclesiasticus and the bookes of Machabees and concerning the epistle to the Hebrevves though him selfe say plainly it is S. Paules yet he confesseth that many haue doubted thereof also coÌ„cerning the second epistle of S. Peter he saith it vvas doubted of many so of some vvere the last tvvo epistles of Iohn The same Eusebius li. 4. ca. 26. it is 25. speaketh of Melito bishop of Sardis vvho reckening vp the volumes of the old testament omitteth Esdras Tobie Hester Iudith Baruch VVisdome Sirach the bookes of Machabees And the CouÌ„cel of Laodicea omitteth Lukes gospel the Apocalyps you see therefore that these olde Fathers haue leaste these books out of the canon yet vvere not called heretikes nor blasphemers Thus farre they Afterwards they define those to be not Canonical but Apocriphal that are not in the auncient Canon receaued and allovved to haue proceeded vndoubtedly from the holy Ghost and those Apocriphal are forbid to be read and though they may be read for moral lessons yet not for matters of religion Afterward the same argument is resumed againe and especially that parte vrged that the Councel of Laodicea leaueth out those former bookes in the olde Testament Tobias Iudith the booke of vvisdome Ecclesiasticus and in the nevv Testament Luke and the Apocalyps And when F. Campian answered that that Councel was but particuler reply was made that the Councel vvas prouincial and farther confirmed by the sixte general Councel holden in Trullo Constantine being presideÌ„t as Bartholomeus CaraÌ„za vvriteth fol. 71. And therefore vve may leaue out of the canon Tobie Iudith c. vvhich your Councel of Trent thrust in as autentical Hetherto your brethren in the fourth dayes conference In the first day vpon like warrant they recken amongst Apocryphal bookes that which you labour so much to saue S. Iames which there is called a counterfeit or bastard epistle by iudgement of Eusebius Item the epistle of Iude the later of Peter the second and thirde of Iohn And against these they alleage Eusebius Hierome Epiphanius and the Councell of Laodicea confirmed as they say there againe by the general Councel holden in Trullo And yet such is their inconstancie in the same place some of these in worde they professe to receaue but only as at pleasure of curtesie and liberalitie not as of fayth dutie and necessitie For the summe of all commeth to this and it is the effect of that disputation Such bookes as of olde haue bene doubted of we are not bound to admit for Canonical but may refuse now These particuler bookes here named haue bene doubted of in olde time ergo these bookes we are not bouÌ„d to admit for Canonical but may refuse them now This being your reason and the same so manifestly approued by them and you out of the same for our presente purpose against you this I note First how iustly we accuse you for defacing and renting out so many parcels and whole bookes of scripture In the olde Testament Tobias Iudith Hester Baruch The booke of Wisdome Ecclesiasticus The two bookes of the Machabees
In the nevv Testament S. Lukes Gospel The Epistle to the Hebrewes The Epistle of Saint Iames. The 2. of S. Peter The 2. 3. of S. Iohn S. Iude. The Apocalyps Vnto these partly your selues in your common bibles partly your brethren ioyne certayne other peeces both of the olde Testament and of the new as The prayer of Manasses Paralip lib. 2. The songe of the three children The story of Bel. Canticum canticorum and a parte of S. Iohns Gospel some of these held for canonicall these fiftene hundred yeares some these twelue hundred all aboue a thousand Nexte your distinction of the vvhole Church and some of the Church were it true as it is most false is vtterly refuted by these your owne doctors for by their sentence whatsoeuer hath bene doubted of not onely in the whole Church but in a part for they goe not about to proue that these were doubted of in the whole Church and leaste of all S. Lukes Gospell that may you doubte of and number amongst the bookes Apocriphal and both you and they proue as substantially that S. Iames was doubted of as you proue the same of Iudith Hester the Machabees or any other sauing that they fowly ouerreach them selues when they affirme that S. Lukes Gospell with those other was leaft out and not receaued for Canonical in the Prouincial Councel of Laodicea and the same confirmed by a general Councel afterward Then commeth to my remembrāce your profoūd argumēt against M. Campian in defence of Luther Luther despiseth S. Iames his epistle saith M. Campian you answere Bene habet crimen hoc omne Iacobi epistolam attingit c. That goeth vvell All this fault toucheth only Iames epistle Luther doth not in a vvorde violate Matthevv Marke Luke or Iohn nor Paule nor Peter only he somevvhat shaketh vppe Iames epistle A deepe reason as though S. Iames beinge canonical scripture were not to be esteemed as honorably and violated as litle as S. Peter or any of the other and as though he in so writing and you in so defendinge doe not lay the way open to shake of and violate all the reste as wel as that For now if a man burden you with the refusal of S. Luke your defence is already prouided bene habet al goeth vvel Al this faulte toucheth only S. Luke Our doctors doe not in a vvorde violate Matthevv Marke Iohn nor Paule nor Peter only vve somevvhat shake vp Lukes Gospel and so peece-meale til none be leafte you may and will shake out one after an other stil Bene habet all goeth vvell vntill you fall to open profession of Atheisme in the broade way whereof you are farre wel gone already Fourthlye because in the end of your preface yow bragge so much of your forefathers that they haue euer vāquished ours here you put vs in mind what forefathers those are Hetherto your forefathers were knowen to be Aerius in denying prayer sacrifice for the dead Vigilantius of whom yow learned to condemne the inuocatiō of Saintes honor done to them in the Church Iouinian in breaking vowes of chastitie deliberatelye made to God and making the state of matrimonye touching merite equal in the sight of God with the state of virginitie continentie Which men notwithstanding were forced to yeld to our forefathers S. Epiphanius S. Hierom and S. Augustine as hetherto al Christendom is witnes and therefore were not such victorious capitaynes as you woulde make them In this place as though your purpose were to ouerbeare vs with number and make your armye so much the more stronge you multiplye and set in ranke againste vs more fathers For whereas you so blasphemouslye speake of the booke of Iudith that it is far vnvvorthy to be called scripture and yet match S. Luke and the Apocalyps with it whereas you saye most plainlye of these and al the forenamed bookes that yow are not bound to admit them but may refuse them that they be read for moral lessons not for matters of religion you simplye disallow for canonical those two bookes And who are your fathers herein but those auncient Archheretikes Marcion and Cerdon those other for ther brutishnes called Alogi or Bruti In which your doinge as the reader may easely perceaue how yow trotte forwarde to playne Apostasie from Christe by callinge now the verye Gospel into questiō so why we should number you amongest those olde Brutishe heretikes your selues yeald vs more abūdāt reasō thē our fathers had in calling them by that name For your self M.VV. cōfesse and proue your doctors and maisters to be the most sensles and brutishe creatures that euer wēt on the earth For to auoide directe answeringe to the question proposed you hovv you knovv the bookes vvhich you call scripture to be heauenlye and penned by diuine inspiration that is by vvhat testimonie you knovv those vvritinges to be canonical or holye vvhich be so called you say and I vvith as good reason vvill demaund of you hovv you knovve the sunne to be the sunne or hovv you assure your self that God is God for vve knovv as assuredlye that these are the holy scriptures cōmēded by God to his Church vvritten by the Prophetes and Apostles and deliuered by diuine authorytie as vve knovv the moone to be the moone or at a vvord any other thinge vvhatsoeuer vve comprehend by most certaine knovvledge and this ansvvere Caluine also geueth you And this answere I admitte from you and Caluine and hereof I conclude that you are more trulye called Alogi and brutishe then were those other auncient heretikes For was there euer in the worlde any so notable a Choraebus or Grillus hauinge the shape of man that fell at brawlinge disputinge with his friēdes whether the sunne which we see were the sūne or the moone the moone as you do against Luther your churches against the Lutheranes whether S. Iames epistle be canonical then yf you thinke right as I truste you wil speake wel of your selfe with the same breath you condemne your father Luther and your brethren the Lutheranes for the veriest sottes and stockes that euer liued for they know not the moone they know not the sunne which to you shineth so bright cleare And to oppose your self vnto your brethrē at home and to your owne self how say you to S. Luke to the epistles of S. Peter Iude Iohn the Apocalyps be they canonical or no yf you say yea as I thinke you will or at the lest that was your opinion in September laste as your booke sheweth then your doctors now denyinge the same you see what is to be concluded that one parte of you is as wise as those former who know not the sunne from the moone Yf you denie and be of their iudgmente as it may be very wel your faith beinge as mutable as is the moone yet so you proue your self
no wiser then they who in so shorte space haue falleÌ„ out with your self altered your iudgmeÌ„te and now esteeme that for apocriphal which then was to yow canonical that is now iugde that to be the moone which then you thought to be the sunne Our lorde geue his people grace to thinke of you as you proue your selues that is so fantastical inconstant that you know not what to say and whyles you seeke to keepe your selfe aloofe from the Catholike churche the sure piller grouÌ„de of truâ—he you plunge your selues ouerhead and eares in such foule absurdities as neuer did heretikes before you For what is the reason of al this because besydes the written word or scripture yow wil not acknowledge any traditioÌ„ of the Church wherevnto by this question yow are enforced of necessitie For if we are bound to beleeue certaine bookes as for example the Gospel of S. Matthew S. Marke S. Iohn and S. Paules Epistles to be Canonical that is heaueÌ„ly and peÌ„ned by diuine inspiration and yet the same can not be proued by scripture theÌ„ cleare it is that we are bound to beleeue somewhat which by scripture caÌ„ not be proued and so the tradition of the Church is established And marueyle it is that yow perceaue not how grosly yow ouerthwart your self and plainly refel that which yow would seeme most earnestly to confirme For if yow march your beleefe of scripture with knowledg of the Sunne and Moone and such like as are knowen by only sense the light of nature then you deny it to be any article of your faith For these two are directly opposite and the apostle confirmeth this reason wheÌ„ he defineth faith to come by hearing and hearing by the vvord of God ergo fides ex auditu auditus per verbuÌ„ Dei And therefore if you beleeue not with humaine faith as yow beleeue Tusculanes questions to haue bene written by Cicero but with Christian diuine faith as yow beleeue Christ to be your sauiour if thus you beleeue the Gospel which beareth S. Matthews name as likewise that of S. Marke and S. Iohn to haue bene written by them then yow beleeue so because so yovv haue heard it preached and so yovv haue receaued and consequently by the Apostles authoritie that verie matter so preached vnto yow is the vvord of God which word of God whereas yow find not in the scriptures hereof it foloweth manifestly that somewhat is the vvord of God which is not scripture and therefore yow and your fellowes beleeuing only scripture beleeue not al the vvord of God but only a peece thereof and so did the worste heretikes that euer were yea so do at this day the verie Turkes and Mahometanes But to end this special matter with yow M. VV. touching your distinction betweene S. Iames and Tobias Iudith the Machabees c. where you make this to be the difference that S. Iames vvas refused but of a fevv and the other generally of the vvhole Churche tota Ecclesia repudiauit say you for declaration of your truth herein I referre you to the moste euident testimonies of the same auncient Churche S. Augustine setting downe the Canonicall scriptures as they were read and beleeued in his time placeth S. Iames I coÌ„fesse in order with the Gospels Pauls epistles yet not excludiÌ„g those other but in the selfe same place numbringe Tobie Iudith and the Machabees with the bookes of Moses and the Prophetes his saith he 44. libris veteris testameÌ„ti terminatur authoritas In these fourtie and foure bookes is concluded the authoritie of the old testament Likewise the Councel of Carthage approueth for Canonicall S. Iames but in the same CanoÌ„ it approueth as far the other forenamed and teacheth of them as directlie as of the other that they are Canonicall scriptures Somewhat before S. Augustines daies they were not by publike decree of the Church receaued as appeareth by S. Hierome and the Councel of Laodicea but then when there was as greate doubte of S. Iames epistle S. Paule to the Hebrewes and the Apocalyps touchinge the first it is manifest by that which hath bene said by you and your felowes Of the secoÌ„d there was more question then of the first and S. Hierome seldome citeth it but he geueth a note signifyinge that it was not in his time taken for Canonical In the Epistle to the Hebrevves vvhich the custome of the Latine Church receaueth not saith he it is thus vvritten Againe the blessed Apostle in his Epistle to the Hebrevves although the custome of the Latin Church receaueth it not amongst Canonicall scriptures Againe this authoritie the Apostle Paule vsed or vvhosoeuer he vvere that vvrote that Epistle In catalogo he saith that euen vnto his time it vvas not accounted the vvritinge of Paule and that Caius an auncient writer denyeth it to be his and in his epistle to Paulinus sette before the Bible he saith that a plaerisque extra numerum ponitur of the more part it is put out of the nuÌ„ber of Paules vvritinges The like might be declared by S. CipriaÌ„ Lactantius Tertullian Arnobius and S. Austine if it were needefull and the Apocalyps was yet more doubtful then ether of these two as wee see by the Councel of Laodicea leafte oute of the rolle of Canonicall writinges when both the other of S. Iames and S. Paule were put in Wherefore as false that is which M.VV. constantlie auoucheth of the auncient Church touchinge the seueringe of these sacred volumes so hath he not yet nor euer shalbe able with reason to satisfie M. Martins demaund why they of England haue coÌ„desceÌ„ded to admit the one rather then the other And here the reader may consider esteeme as it deserueth of that glorious 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in fine he singeth to him self settinge the crowne of triumphe vppon his owne head and his felowes Nothing saith he is novv more vulgar then the Papists arguments against vs. Quicquid afferri a quoquam potuit vidimus diluimus protriuimus vvhat so euer could be said of anie of them al vve haue seene it refelled it and trode it vnder foote he may consider I saie how like this man and his companions are to worke such maisteries who as yet knowe not what those weapons are which they should vse in atchiuing such conquests For whereas they vaunt to doe this by the written worde yet are not resolued amoÌ„gest them selues what that written word is and how farre it extendeth it is as fantastical a parte to bragge of victorie as if a mad man should ruÌ„ne into the field to slea his enemie and when he commeth there knoweth not with what weapon to begin the fight Wherefore wel may he and his felowes heare and see the Catholike doctrine as Esai speaketh of the Iewes concerninge the doctrine of Christ hearing shal you heare shall not vnderstand and seeing shal yovv
see and yovv shall not see and wel may they treade it vnder theire feete as our Sauiour parabolically forespake that heretikes wold doe when he said Nolite proiicere margaritas ante porcos ne forte conculceÌ„t eas pedibus suis but to refel confute suppresse it that is no more possible then that Christ should be false of his worde and promisse that the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it And whereas it hath coÌ„tinued by the protestaÌ„ts coÌ„mon grauÌ„t aboue a thousand yeares in truth euer since Christ his passion against other maner of tempests then these are heretikes of excelleÌ„t learning heresies of maruelous subtilitie most mightie Emperours rulers of the worlde now to imagine that it maie be vanquished of these grosse and contrarie heresies fortified with no maner of learning wherof manie are so base that men eueÌ„ by the light of nature abhorre theÌ„ hauing nothing to mainteine theÌ„ selues but onlie a vaine challeÌ„ginge of the Spirite and bold crakinge of the vvord of the Lord which a parrat caÌ„ doe with a litle instruction as well as they thus I saie to talke were more fit for Pasquillus Estaticus or a sicke man wheÌ„ he raueth than a sober Diuine that wayeth what he speaketh CHAP. III. Hovv M. VV. defendeth Luther preferring his priuate iudgment before all auncient fathers and Doctors NEXT commeth in againe frier Luther whoÌ„ M. Martin accused for saynge that he esteemed not a thousande Augustines CipriaÌ„s Churches wheÌ„ they are against him That the reader may better carie awaie the matter I wil first put downe Luthers wordes where vpon this controuersie standeth after it shal be easier to iudge how aptlie M. VV. defence is framed The wordes of Luther are in his booke written against King Henrie the eight her Maiesties father and are these But I saith he against the saynges of fathers of men of Angels of deuels set not old custome not multitude of men but the vvord of the onlie eternall maiestie the Gospel here I stand here I sit here I glorie here I triumphe here I insult ouer Papists Thomists Henricists Sophists and all the gates of hell much more ouer the saynges of men be they neuer so holie Gods vvorde is aboue al the diuine maiesty maketh for me so as I passe not if a thousaÌ„d Austines a thousand Ciprians a thousand Kinge-Harrie Churches stoode against me God can not erre or deceaue Austine Ciprian and likevvise all other elect might erre they haue erred here ansvvere maister Harrie here plaie the maÌ„ I coÌ„tene thy lies I feare not thy threates here thovv staÌ„dest astonished like a stock c. These are the wordes with which M. Martin findeth faulte M.VV. defendeth them thus If Luther had preferred him self before all fathers Churches he vvere not to be borne vvithal but this Luther neuer challenged to himself But in some causes Luther might esteeme more his ovvne iudgement then the authoritie of Austine or Ciprian or a thousand Churches For if that vvhich Luther taught vvere agreable to Gods vvord Luthers iudgment vvas to be preferred before all the contrary iudgments of all men liuinge Before I enter into the examination of this answere let me demaunde this one thinge in courtesie of you M.W. what the reason is whie you so busilie and eagerlie defende Luther be his wordes neuer so strange or fanatical or whie is the Pope Antichrist for resisting your Gospel whereas Luther you aduaunce if not into the place of Christ yet at least amonge the number of his Apostles Did the Pope of Rome euer persequute your zuinglian gospel with more deadly hatred then did that pope of Saxonie Did he not from the verie beginning to his later breath holde you and your brethren for most damnable wretches and professed enemies of the eternall testament of Christ Are you ignorant how for this cause he wrote whole volumes agaynst your first Apostle Zuinglius Read you neuer the Confession of your brethreÌ„ of the Tigurine church where thus they complaine Lutherus statim ab initio mâ—rdere furere conuitiari bacchari coepit c. Luther presently at the beginning began to byte to play the mad man to raile and rage and besides this he filled his bookes vvith the horrible names of Deuils Sectaries Sprites mad men and vvhatsoeuer slaunders came to his minde he cast them out agaynst vs outragiously Complaine they not in the preface of that Confession that he inueigheth against them as against obstinate heretikes and such as are guiltye to themselues of all impietie as prophaners of the Sacraments and the most vyle and pestilent men that goe on the ground He proscribeth and condemneth first of al the faithful doctors and ministers of God Oecolampadius Zuinglius and their disciples vvheresoeuer they be all frindship and communion vvith vs he compteth vvicked abominable and vvhat soeuer commeth froÌ„ vs be it letters be it bookes be it salutations be it benedictions he vvill not only not reade but he vvill not so much as vouchsafe to looke vppon them or heare them spoken of so farre forth that when Eroschouerus the zuinglian printer of zuricke sent him a bible traÌ„slated by the diuines there Luther sent it him backe againe with this greetinge that he should not send him anie thinge that proceeded from the ministers of the Tigurine church for he vvould haue no dealinge vvith them nether vvoulde he receaue or reade their bookes for the churches of God could not communicate vvith theÌ„ Yea he protesteth that he had rather susteine a hundred seueral deathes then to become of your opinion or shew any couÌ„tenance of bearing fauour to it The Lord defend sayth he that I vvittingly and vvillingly by the authority of my name should couer or confirme the verie least error of the fanatical SacrameÌ„taries Nam vel centies laniari aut igne comburi malleÌ„ c. For I had rather be torne in peeces or burnt vvith fier a huÌ„dred times theÌ„ to folovv the opinion and agree in doctrine vvith zvvinglius Oecolampadius the rest of those miserable vnfortunate fanatical men Finally know you not M. W. that thus he began thus he went foreward thus he continued thus he ended his daies dyinge such a mortal enemye to you that he seemed to make his hâ—tred and detestation of your church and gospel a peece of his iustificatioÌ„ before Christe as in his last Confession made a litle before his death and recorded in the foresaid Confession of Zurake it appeareth Ego qui iam sepulchro vicitus obambulo hoc testimoniam et hanc gloriam ad Christi saluatoris tribunal perferam c. I saith he that novv vvalke nye to my graue vvill carie this testimonie and this glorie to the tribunal seate of Christ my Sauiour that I haue vvith all earnestnes condemned and auoyded those fanaticall men and enemies of the Sacrament Zuinglius OEcolampadius
you shall here note how stubborne desperate yea beyond al measure stubborne and desperate are your felowes maisters who in this so euidente a truth haue hetherto resisted the Church would neuer confesse that ether Melchisedec did the one or Christe the other I wil not stay to proue it because you confesse it only for plainer declaration I wil touch the matter briefly In the booke of Genesis where onely is described this sacrifice thus we reade Melchisedec rex Salem profereÌ„s panem vinum erat enim sacerdos Dei altissimi benedixit et Melchisedec king of Salem bringinge forth bread and vvine for he vvas the prieste of the moste high God blessed him that is Abraham In these wordes we see the reason geuen of Meschisedecs priesthode the same to consiste in his action aboute the bread and wine that is in his sacrificinge as M. W. telleth vs. But the ProtestaÌ„tes to auoide this into how many formes and fashions haue they turned them selues How many quirkes and false sleightes haue they deuised vntil in fin they haue ronne in maner generally to corrupte the sacred text for auoyding of this inconuenience In moste of their writinges manye of their translations they geue the sense thus that Mâ—lchisâ—dâ—c kinge of Salem brought forth bread wine because he was a prieste of the most hygh God therefore blessed Abraham So writeth Musculus in his common places That part of the sentence and he vvas prieste of the moste high God is to be referred to that vvhich folovveth vz and he blessed him for as a kinge he brought forth to Abraham bread vvine as a priest he gaue him his blessinge Vpon this reason to make the holy texte more aptlie serue this heretical deuise in the Englishe Bible it is turned thus Melchisedec kinge of Salem broughte forth bread vvine he vvas a prieste of the moste high God therefore he blessed him Thus the protestants commonly interprete it and to note one for al thus writeth Caluine in his commeÌ„tarie vpon the Hebrews Prius illud quod narrat regium fuit c. That firste thinge vvherof Moyses speaketh in the storie of Melchisedec vvas the parte of a Kinge to refreashe vvith bread and vvine those that came vveary from the fight the blessinge apperteined to his priestly function The difference betwene him and the aunciente fathers in the same paragraph he compriseth thus Hereby is refuted their deuise vvho seeke out the cheefe resemblance betvveene Christ and Melchisedec in bread and vvine VVe see the Apostle searcheth out euery particular point diligently and curiously he pursueth the name of the man the seate of his Kingdome the eternitie of his life the right of his tithes the benediction vvhich he gaue to Abraham In any of these there vvas lesse vveight theÌ„ in the oblation shal vve say that the holy Ghost forgat himself vvheÌ„ he maketh stay vppon these smale matters and omitteth that vvhich vvas the principal and most perteined to the purpose vvherefore I marueile the more that so many old Doctors of the Churche vvere possessed vvith this opinion that they stayd vpon the oblation of bread vvine For thus they say Christ is a priest after the order of Melchisedec but Melchisedec offered bread and vvine ergo bread and vvine appartaine to Christs priesthode Thus far Caluin the like he writeth in his coÌ„mentarie vppon the Psalmes I will not stand to satisfie his marueiling why the Apostle should pretermitte that which the holie fathers after obserued In one worde this I say that if he had wayed ether the preface of the Apostle when he began this argument saing of Melchisedec vve haue great speache and inexplicable to vtter or the same Apostles maner of writing preaching at other times to lyke auditors or S. Hierome handling this matter geuing reason of the Apostles so doing or S. Gregorie Nazianzene in his oration de moderatione in disputationibus seruaÌ„da or in his second oration de theologia he would perhaps easelie haue leaft of marueiling and rather haue marueiled at his owne folie who could be moued to marueile at a thing so reasonable and ordinarie But touching our purpose let the christian reader out of Caluin note these two pointes The one is that Caluin and the Caluinistes generally find nothing wherein Melchisedec sacrificed so by sacrificing prefigured the sacrifice priesthode of Christ The other is that the auncient fathers and the catholike Church acknowledge Melchisedec to haue sacrificed and that in bread and wine and by that sacrifice to haue foreshewed Christs sacrificing in like maner and to this side M. W. forsaking Caluin and the ProtestaÌ„ts ioyneth him selfe This therefore is cleare that Christ fulfilled this prefiguratiue sacrifice of Melchisedec we neuer finde it done but only theÌ„ when he offering bread and vvine that is sayth S. Ciprian his ovvne bodie and bloud aftervvards sayd to his disciples hoc facite in meam commemorationem and then as witnesseth S. Ireneus noui Testamenti nouam docuit oblationem quam ecclesia ab Apostolis accipiens in vniuerso mundo offere Deo he taught the nevv oblation of the nevv Testament vvhich the Church receauing from the Apostles in the vvhole vvorlde offereth vnto God This being true as M. W. grauÌ„ting so far as he doth can not go backe nor possiblie inuent any tergiuersatioÌ„ thus I frame him an argument That which Christ did and appointed to be done that may and ought to be done But Christ at his last supper offered sacrifice according to the order of Melchisedec and appointed the Apostles and priestes to do the same Ergo the Apostles and priests may and ought to offer sacrifice The Maior is euidente and no Christian will denie it The Minor hauing two parts is proued touching the later by Christes expresse commaundemeÌ„t Hoc facite in meam commemorationem doe this for a commemoration of me the former wherein lieth the difficultie is acknowledged by M. W. for if not only Aaron but also Melchisedec offered sacrifice thereby prefigured Christ theÌ„ it foloweth of necessitie that Christe offered sacrifice not only in bloudie maner as did Aaron but also in vnbloudie and mistical sort as did Melchisedec according to whose order he is specially named a priest so by perfit correspondence fulfilled that antecedent figure hereto S. Ciprian S. Ireneus S. Austine and al the auncient fathers accordinge to Caluines confession and euident truth geue witnes that M. W. be not leaft post alone to sustaine so great a burden Of this first argument I deduce one more They who may and ought to offer sacrifice as did first Melchisedec and afterwarde Christe are truly and properly sacerdotes But priestes of the new testament may and ought to offer sacrifice in suche sort Ergo they are truly and properlye sacerdotes priests The Maior is true and set
downe in forme by M.W. the Minor is the conclusion of the last argumēt and so proued sufficiently alreadie then I hope the Conclusion will stand wherefore leauinge this matter for M. W. to scanne and to recorde with him selfe who is that Baal founder of the priesthode of the new testament now may we vew with better iudgment how substantially he answereth S. Austines place de Ciuitate dei where S. Austine doth distinguishe betweene all Christians vvho are vnproperly called priestes because of their mistical Chrisme and vnitie vvith Christe others qui proprie iam vocantur in ecclesia sacerdotes episcopi that properlie are novv called in the Church priestes and byshops and properlie such are they by M. W. definition which properly offer sacrifice M.W. āswereth that the name priest vvas of olde tyme after a more peculiar sorte applied to the pastors and ministers that handled the vvorde and sacramentes but there vvas an abuse in so speakinge then you agree not with S. Austine who teacheth that propriè in proprietie of speach they were so called who if they had then to execute no other priestly function then haue now the Englishe ministers as M. W. supposeth or wolde pretend I graunte the worde prieste could not be applied to them but as abusiuely as if one woulde cal a ciuil magistrate by that name or one of the Quenes Readers in the Vniuersities For preachinge of the worde ministringe of some one or other sacramente although in the Catholike Church it be done by priestes yet properlie that is not the reason why they are called by that name but the true reason is that which M.W. rendereth quia propriè offerunt sacrificia because properly they offer sacrifice Now that S. Austine meante of priestes in this sort that himselfe was such a prieste to passe ouer many pregnante and euidente places in him for breuities sake I refer you to the knowen story of his mothers death Where she firste of al in her death-bed requesteth that her sonne vvould remember her at the altar of God When after her death the corps beinge brought into the Churche and placed beside the graue before the tyme of burial prayers were sayd the sacrifice of our price and redemption offered for her when afterwarde S. Austine in his moste deuoute zelous praier made to God for her reckneth this to her singuler commendacion that at her departure she tooke no care for costlie maner of burial or sumptuous monumente but only desired to be remembred at thy altar ô Lorde from vvhence she knew vvas dispensed that holy sacrifice vvhereby vvas blotted out the handvvrittinge vvhich vvas againste vs vvhereby triumphe vvas obtained against Satan our eternal enemie straight waies inspire saith he ô Lorde my God inspire to thy seruants my brethren that vvho-soeuer of them shal reade this may haue remembrance at thy altar of Patricius and Monica my father and mother But againste this M.W. hath an obiection as common plaine to them that know oughte in diuinitie as Dunstable hye way answered before hāde abundantlie in the annotacions of the the new testamente Heb. ca. 7. v. 12. 17.23 his argument is I say there are no priestes of the new testamēt that offer sacrifice after Christ who is the eternal priest according to the order of Melchisedec obtaineth sacerdotiū 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an eternal priesthod he hath made an end of al sacrifices takē away the succession of priestes cōmitted his church to be ruled by pastors and doctors for euer To beginne with the laste where you ende if Christ abolished all priesthod and left his Church to be gouerned for euer by pastors and doctors which were no priestes had this appointemēt and ordinance of his effect yea or no if no beware what yow say for litle differ you from a Iew a man of Mahomets religion and weake is your faith in Christes godhead if you thinke that in so manie places of scripture he appointed such a regimente for his Church which after his departure neuer tooke effect if yea then shew vs where or when was his Church so gouerned was it a hūdred yeares ago before Frier Luther first of all in our memorie induced this kinde of gouernment you must needes say no. Ascend we then 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 and ten ages vntil S. Gregories time was it al this while gouerned by such pastors as you describe I wene as yet you wil say sure I am you should say no. For those pastors were styll priestes and that in proper sense as appeareth by al stories Suche were our first Apostles the conuerters of our nation those excellent men SS Augustine Paulinus Laurentius Melitus Iustus c. sacred by the Pope of Rome or other lawfull Bishops in obediēce of the Sea of Rome offering sacrifice liuing and dying as priestes as by the goodlie storie of Venerable Bede our coūtryman you may euerie where learne Such pastors and priests they were by whom and vnder whose regiment our Churches were first builded and the ecclesiastical state of our realme ordered as now vnder the regiment of them that cal thē selues pastors no priestes and are in deede no more the one then the other all is pulled downe and ouerthrowen And if in anie other countrie of Christendome the churches had any other regiment such as you pretēd now in England of pastors no priestes shew vs your bookes and we wil beleeue you But you wil say from S. Gregorie vpward all was smooth and iumpe as it is now in the English congregation Suppose that to be true how in the meane seasō can you iustifie your owne saing that Christ delyuered his Church to be gouerned for euer by suche maner of pastors Cā Christes decree be made frustrate for so many ages Can mans iniquitye as you in your Apologie commonlie but most bluntlie obiect stoppe the course of Christes omnipotent and eternal prouidence know you not how copiouslie S. Augustine hath confuted this self same slaūderous obiectiō in your forefathers the Donatistes But passe we on come we to the first fathers of the primitiue Churche were they lay ministers after the maner of the English congregation that is pastors no priestes how dare or can you say so seing in S. Austine manifestlie you see a sacrificing priesthod seing your self acknowledge Sainte Hierome to haue bene a priest of the Romane Church which neuer yet approued any such ministery as you haue inuented seing your greate Rabbine and synke of iniquitie Iohn Bale calleth S. Leo the great and first of that name in plaine termes an idolater for this cause seing your chiefe capitayne Apostle Caluine and after him P. Martir and before him Huldericke Zuinglius affirme in generall of the fathers in the primitiue Church that for maintenāce of the vnbloudy sacrifice they forced abused the
scriptures and Caluine more execrable then the rest addeth that the aūciēt Church expressed the verie forme and type of the Aaronical Leuitical sacrificing eo excepto quòd panis hostia loco animalis vtebantur sauing that insteed of a beast they vsed bread all which proueth that in propre maner of speache they sacrificed and therefore by your owne definitiō in propre speache were priestes And finallie doth not Illyricus with his companions confesse in worde proue by deede that sacrifices were ordinarelie offered to God in the flower of the primitiue Church in the middest of the persequutions for the soules departed in the honor of Saintes for general and particular necessities as is now vsed in the Churche of Rome Thus write they To this end S. Cyprian in his third booke and sixte epistle to the priestes of Rome willeth those dayes diligentlie to be noted wherein the martyrs departed this life In the same place he speaketh of oblations sacrifices obserued in the memories of martyrs Let vs be informed sayth Tertullian vvhat be those dayes vvherein our blessed brethren by glorious death passe to immortalitie that vve here may celebrate oblations and sacrifices in remēbrance of thē And there is verie cōmon mētion of oblations in Tertullian as in his booke de corona militis vve offer sacrifices yerelie for the dead and for byrthdayes S. Cyprian saith that oblations and sacrifices vvere yerelie made in the remembrance of martyrs lib. 3. epist 6. lib. 4. epist 5. li. 1. epis 9. he speaketh of sacrifice for the dead And to end with one sentēce of S. Cyprian by them alleaged thus they cite him Our lord Iesus Christe sayth S. Cipriā lib. 2. epist 3. be is the high priest of God the father and sacrifice to God the father he first offered and commaunded the same to be done in remembrance of him And that priest trulie executeth Christs steede or roome vvho doth imitate that vvhich Christ did and thē in the Church offereth he a true and full sacrifice to God the father if he begin so to offer as he seeth Christ himself to haue offered Thus ascēding from our time vp to the primitiue and most pure and vncorrupte age of the Church yet we finde not the performance of that promise order set by Christ that his Church should be gouerned by pastors that were not priests And here by the waye to put you in minde because in this preface so freshlie you prouoke M Martin now departed and renew M Iewels challenge may it please you being put a litle besides his byas of comparing phrases together which was the verie bones and marrow of M. Iew. diuinitie to waigh how wel you can make his challenge agree with the manifest confessions of these your own doctors and if it lyke you to vew Caluine in the booke before quoted yow shal there find fiue Doctors within M. Iewels compasse by name S. Ireneus Arnobius S. Athanasius S. Ambrose and S. Augustine not the least or meanest of the fathers ether for ātiquity or holines or learning reproued and checked by Caluin for this great ouersight forsooth because to proue the vnbloudie sacrifice of the church which they beleued els would they neuer haue applied the scripture to confirme it they misinterprete and falsly applie the scriptures ita vidiculè these are his wordes vt dissentire cogat ratio et veritas so ridiculously as both reasō and truth constraineth me to dissent from thē whereas if he had lyued vntil this time and had bene acquainted but with half those phrases which in the 17 article M. Iew. hath raked together of which benefite by your labours he might now haue bene partaker he neuer neded to haue runne into that desperate vaine of bidding plaine defiance to al the primitiue church And thus much being spoken by the way through occasion of M.I. challēg renewed by you let vs returne to conclude if it may be our former matter from this age vnto the primitiue church we find not as you see pastors without priests then it foloweth say we that Christ neuer appointed anye such For then surelie in some age yea in euerie age they would haue appeared And how you wil lose this knot I muche doute yet I feare you wil take Alexanders sworde and cut it a sunder and now applie that to your self which before you yelded to Luther that when your iudgment agreeth with scripture you set more therby then by a thousand Augustines a thousand Ciprians and al the churches If you thus say as I thinke you haue nothing els to say yet remember that besides these many Augustines and Ciprians and churches you haue one Christ standing against you who promised and apoīted as you confesse far otherwyse But passe we on what scripture haue yow against priestes S. Paule vvho saith that Christ is an eternal priest after the order of Melchisedec and hath his priesthode 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what gather you of this you leaue the word in greeke as though it were so much the more terrible and able to confounde al priestes then if it were in latin Our old interpreter translateth it sempiternum Beza perpetuum Caluin immutabile Castalio nunquam transiturum the Englishe bible of one yere vnchangeable of an other euerlastinge make the best of it and take which you list or all if ye please The sense of the Apostle is easie inough by the comparison which he there prosecuteth that as Christ had many excellent prerogatiues aboue the priestes or priesthode of Aaron so amonge many other this was one that whereas the priesthode of Aaron passed from one to an other from father to sonne by reason of death Christ neuer dying but euer lyuing neuer departeth from his priesthode but reteineth it for euer To make the reader better conceaue this which though it be many times read in your congregations yet is perhaps neuer or seldome wel vnderstoode of the minister himselfe the priesthode of Aaron is brieflie to be recalled to memorie In the booke of Numbers God thus speaketh vnto Moyses Take Aaron and his sonne vvith him and leade them into the mountaine Hor. And vvhen thou hast taken from Aaron his priestlie vesture thou shalt put it on Eleazarus and Aaron shal die there Moyses did as our lord commaūded c. And vvhen he had spoiled Aaron of his garments he put them on Eleazarus and Aaron died there In this short storie is noted the nature and state of the leuitical priesthode passing from father to sonne and ending in the first by death in lyke sort as any other facultie of life or bodie ciuil or naturall endeth But in Christ it is not so who euer liuing keepeth euer his priesthode as wel as his life neuer departing with it to anie other as did Aaron to Eleazarus he to Phinees and so one to an other in course of succession So
that Christ hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a sempiternall euer lasting vnchangeable or vnremoueable priesthod far otherwise then Aaron and the Leuitical priests had This being the Apostles reason and sense and word what foloweth hereof or what would M.W. inferre I see not what may be concluded but ether it is so true that we wil neuer denye it or it is so foolish that he should be ashamed to mention it if he say Christ is a priest for euer we affirme no lesse that his priesthod passeth not from him it is our beleefe that the force and vertue thereof endureth foreuer we liue and die therein and all the baptismes recōciliations sacrifice sacramentes al grace vertue sanctification which is in the church Catholike dependeth of this faith and floweth from the eternity of this one euerliuinge priest and priesthode But will he inferre hereof that therefore there ought to be no other inferior priestes and that this derogateth from his priesthode this lo is so chyldish that amongest meane learned diuines it deserueth rather laughter then answeare Christe is a priest for euer therefore there are no priestes whie then let vs argue Christ is a true man for euer therefore we are not or he hath a soule for euer therefore we haue none or he is a kinge for euer therefore let vs depose all princes and remoue princelie authoritie Christ is our doctor maister and teacher for euer and so farewel al maisters and doctors so the Eschequer shal saue that which the Q. Maiestie bestoweth on the Vniuersitie readers finallie because Christ liueth for euer therefore let vs rid our selues out of the way lest we derogate from Christ For as Christ in most excel lent sorte hath the one that is priesthod so hath he all the rest bodie soule kinglie power prophecie to be a maister doctor and teacher all agree to him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that eternallie vnchangeablie and vnremoueablie But ô miserable people whose soules are committed to such teachers most vnfortunate church where such doctors possesse the principal chaires where the very learned mē who should be lightes to the rest are so blinded with heresie that they see not so much as ether common knowledge of meane diuinitie or the continual practise of ciuil policie or their verie Communiō booke thrusteth into their eyes and cares for how is it possible that a learned man hauing any sense of diuinitie should be moued with this new deuise hanging vpon one Greeke or Latine worde which so many hūdreds of learned fathers Greeke and Latine could neuer yet espie but though they knew both this particular controuersie and generallie all truth by many degrees more fullie then possiblie can any of these sectaries or secte-maisters yet were they so far from anie such collection that euermore in saynge and writing in teachinge and confutinge in lyfe and death they practised the contrarie And what reasonable man castinge his eyes vpon the Q. maiestie should not by and by descrie the vanitie of this sophistication for if she may conferre vpon some of her subiectes in euerie shier of her realme authoritie and gouernemēt to rule to imprison to chastise to correct to release to decide controuersies to arraygne in iudgement to condemne and execute euen vnto death al this with out empayringe or diminishinge her princelie authoritie nay to the much greater shew declaration thereof for so much as her subiectes doinge these offices vnder her hauing al their power depēding of her she absolutely rulinge dependinge of none by these so manye litle riuers as it were doe more excellētly set forth the largenes of the mayne springe how much more easelie may we conceaue this of Christ our vniuersal and absolute kinge and priest in the regiment of his Church that he without empairinge of his supreme euerlastinge and incommutable priesthode may communicate these sacred priestlie functions with his ministerial officers for the benefite of his subiectes the Christiā-Catholikes dispersed thorough out the world and so much the more as in euerie holie action wrought in the Church in euerie consecration in euerie sanctification in euerie reconciliation in euerie baptisme in euerie sacramente and sacrifice whatsoeuer is done to the benefite of mans soule Christ our high priest hath therein a more true and effectual operation concurring with his minister then hath any prince vnder the sunne in lyke case in regiment of his owne realme And if this can not sinke into their heads how is it that they consider not their verie Cōmuniō booke where the Parlamēt from whēce that booke hath his authoritie geueth power to the minister in some case to remitte sinnes then which nothing is more proper to Christ nothīg more 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nothing more neerelie vnited to his diuine person And yet thus it is appointed there Here shal the sicke person make a speciall cōfession if he feele his consciēce troubled vvith any vveightie matter after vvhich confession the priest that is the minister shall absolue him after this sorte And so foloweth a verie forme of Absolutiō borowed from the vse of our Catholike Church Our Lord Iesus Christ vvho hath least povver to his Church to absolue al sinners vvhich trulie repente and beleeue in him of his great mercie forgeue thee thine offences And by his authoritie committed to me I absolue thee from all thie synnes in the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the Holie Ghost Amen Wherefore if ether reason or sense or experience or humanitie or diuinitie preuaile with M. W. he can not vpō Christs sempiternall priesthode make any probable coniecture against the priesthode of the Church or say it derogateth from Christ Contrarywise if he wil stand ether to his owne writing or to the iudgement of his felow-zuinglians Martir Bale and Caluin or to the proofes and testification of the lutheranes his brethren for so he calleth them Illyricus wigandus c. or will admitt the vniforme consent of the fathers in the primitiue Church or the veritie of Christs promise he must needes acknowledge not onlie that in S. Augustines time but euen from the Apostles time priestes properlie so called were pastors rulers of the church and haue had their origine from Christ And therfore as before so here I tell him againe that in calling them Baalites Antichristians he calleth Christ Baal he calleth our Sauiour Antichrist And therefore if I thought my counsaile might preuaile with such prophane ministers geuē ouer I feare into a reprobate sense and vessels of damnation I would say as S. Peter said to Simon Magus Repente thee of this thy vvickednes and pray to God if perhaps this cogitation of thy harte may be remitted thee For in this blasphemous sentence most certaynly he hath troden the sonne of God vnder foote and esteemed the bloud of the Testament polluted vvherein he is sanctified and hath done contumely to
iustifie or be the merite cause efficient of iustice life and not vvhether they be in any respect necessarie to saluation which in deed is or was when you first began the verie point of the controuersie which he therefore defendeth vz that they are in no respect necessarie by 26. most firme and stronge demonstrations as he calleth them and reckeneth this your doctrine for a papisticall error and calleth you a nevv papist for putting the questiō as you doe These are his wordes Hetherto touching the papistes corruption of this doctrine novv I come to the doctrine of the nevv papistes vvhich is as pernicious as the old they say that the Apostle meant to exclude good vvorkes from iustification non simpliciter ratione debiti not simply and as due but only as meritorious causes efficient vvhere-vpon these doctors or rather seducers do diuers vvayes elude that proposition of S. Paule vve are iustified by faith gratis vvithout vvorkes eche one according to his ovvne head and as his priuate spirite suggesteth to him and most of thē couet diligently to mingle vvorkes as a certain harmefull leauen vvith iustification the lambe of God And there he reckneth twelue such corruptions the last where of is yours the very self same which here you defend against which he setteth downe the protestantes faith thus But the true sense of Paules vvordes is that vvithout al merite condition or necessitie of our vvorkes by only faith in Christ vve are iustified before Christ saued so as our saluation doth in no sort depend of our vvorkes nether be they any vvay necessarie to saluation c. Scripture Luther and al doctors of sound iudgment thinke thus of vvhich doctrine these be most firme demonstrations c. and in fine he saith Iste ipse error est omnino papistica corruptela articuli iustificationis This verie error is altogether a papistical corruptiō of the article of iustificatiō And if you can recal to memorie the common argumentes gathered to your hand by euery heretike that hath writtē vpon the epistle to the Romanes namely the fourth chapter you shall soone perceiue that your opinion and their commentaries can neuer match together out of the mayne heape I wil note one or two such as are most common to euery preacher and found in euery booke whereby you shal see how by this assertion you ouerthrow your whole doctrine S. Paule excludeth al our boastinge from iustice and saluation and that in Abraham a man most holie ergo vvorkes are by no meanes so much as causa sine qua non of saluation othervvise vve shoud haue some occasion of boasting Againe Paule him selfe separateth his vvorkes and iustices so far from his saluation that he accounteth them for trashe and hinderances of saluation If such an Apostle vvho for Christ and the Gospel laboured more then al the rest be constrained to cast avvay his innumerable most excellent vvorkes as trashe and hinderances to saluation hovv madly do vve say that our vvorkes are necessarie Againe all our iustices saith Esai ca. 64. are as foule stayned clothes hovv can a thinge so filthie and disallovved of God do any thinge or be necessary to iustice before God Out of which M.W. may of two cōclusions choose one which shal lyke him best ether that his principall doctors interprete S. Paule peruersly and wickedly when in S. Paules epistles they interprete the vvorkes of the lavv our iustice legal iustice I esteemed my vvorkes dunge durte that I might obteine the iustice of Christ when I say they stil expounde these places of the workes of Christian men done by the grace and spirite of God or els that his assertiō is against al sense and reason to make that necessarie to saluation which the Prophetes Apostles do so abase so condemne make so filthie in the sight of God of these two which he wil choose I know not but because I thinke he wil rather cōdemne them then deny him self for so long as he may be his owne iudge the word of God shal be cleare on his side I finallie oppose against him as in this self same question the zelous Lutherans opposed against the cold Melanchthonistes in the Councel of Altemburg after manifold argumentes brought for only faith against any necessitie of workes After al this say they vve conclude vvith that vvorthy sainge of Luther in his first tome printed at VVittemberge if vvorkes be necessary to saluation then saluation can not be had vvithout vvorkes and then vve are not saued by only faith And thus you see how wel you haue disproued M. Martins saing and approued your owne so wel that by verdite of your great writers in fine you haue marred the topp and crowne of your Kingdome your solifidian iustification and by them for your paines are iudged to be a Papist which I wish were true for your owne sake CHAP. VI. Hovv vnreasonably M. VV. behaueth him self in reprouing and approuing the auncient fathers for their doctrine touching good vvorkes NOw come I to the third part that is your accusatiō of the fathers wherein also M. Martine noteth you of contradiction to your self for with what reason could you call them most holy sanctissimos when in the self same place you defaced them as most iniurious to the bloud passion or Christ you answere smoothing so much as you may the matter and say that they erred a litle and yet within fiue lines before you say they erred greuously and diminished not a litle the force of Christes death passion and there error proceded rather of lacke of vvitte then of malice and though vve graunt that herein they erred a litle yet in respect of yours their errors seeme ether light or none at all Here of you conclude that vvel you might cal them most holy although they erred once or vvere not so vvise as they might haue bene This is that which in the beginninge I tolde you that you speake doubtfully and stammer falter in your tale know not wel what to say for to let passe that in one page you make it a greuous error and in the next ether none at all or a verie light one compare your cruel and bloudie wordes whereof riseth M. Martins reprofe with this second modification then let euery man iudge what a miserable defender you are you say there that the fathers thought by their external vvorkes of penance to pay the paines due for sinnes and to satisfie Gods iustice and to procure to thē selues assured impunitie remissiō iustice that thereby they derogated not a litle from Christes death attributed to much to their ovvne inuentions and finallie depraued repentance Here you say it vvas a litle error a smale ouersight they slipt a litle and that they vvere not vvithstanding most holymen You a Christian M.W. dare thus to write you
a refuter of errors make this a light one had you any part ether of the spirite of S. Paule S. Cipriā S. Austine or such Saintes of the Catholike Church or some zeale and sense of your owne Gospel and religion how could this euer haue slipt out of your penne to cal them most holy who by your doctrine were as far from al true holynes as euer was Scribe or Pharisee to cal thē most holy who had not in them the first stepp or degree where holines beginneth for whereas to holines first of al and principally is required faith in the death and passion of Christ then zeale and feruour in good woorkes to cal a man holy without the first is to commend for strenght and valor a man that hath neuer a sound ioynt or to praise for eloquence such a one whose tongue is cutt out of his head In the number of Christians professors of Christianity there haue bene from the beginning many that haue liued very hard seuere lyues that haue bestowed their goods amōge the poore that after many labours and trauails rare workes of extraordinarie zeale haue at lenght suffered death for the testimony of Christ And this oftentimes chaūced in the primitiue Church within the tyme of the first persecutions before Constantinus Magnus yet if such men liued and died schismatikes that is not beleeuing rightly in the church did euer any true Christian holde them for good holie If I spake vvith the tongue of men and angels saith the Apostle and knevv al mysteries and could moue mountaines if I bestovved al my goods vpon the poore and my bodie to the fier for the testimonie of Christ yet wanting the charitie of my brethren being without ecclesiasticall vnitie it profiteth me nothing wherevpon S. Ciprian They cānot dvvell vvith God that be not in vnitie vvith the Church though they burne amidst the flames being deliuered to the fier or cast to vvild beastes so yeld their lyues yet that shal not be to them a crovvne of faith but a punyshment of infidelitie such a one may be slaine he can not be crovvned he professeth him self such a Christiā as the deuil many times pretendeth him self to be Christ For as S. Austine saith vvhosoeuer is separated from this Catholike Church though he thinke him self to liue verie commendablie yet by reason of this only offence that he is deuided from the vnitie of Christ in his Catholike Churche he shal not haue life eternal but the vvrath of God remaineth vpon him And is al this true of men Christians by profession beleeuing rightly in euerie other article of faith onely erring in a secondarie point against the visible church and is it not much more true when the error runneth so grossly against the first and chief and capital article of Christianitie and that proper and peculier part whēce Christianitie hath his name the death and passion of our sauiour the verie hart life and soule of our religion can a fault against the bodie so pollute and contaminate a man that he becometh with al his supposed holines an infidell vvicked prophane an enemy of God and a damnable creature and can such sacriledge against the head be so light and contemptible that the offender remaineth notwithstanding faithfull a good Christiā and most holie S. Paule in the beginning when the law of Moyses was not yet quite abolished nor the gospel so vniuersallie and clearlie published said of the Galatians who would haue ioyned the law with the gospell O ye sensles Galatians vvho hath bevvitched you not to obey the truth Beholde I Paule tell you that if you be circumcided Christ shal profite you nothing and though an Angel of heauen teach you so that is preach you workes wherebie you should be withdrawen from Christ anathema be he that is the curse of God light vpon him how thē may a Christian that ether loueth or feareth Christ thus extenuate the fathers error being by M. W. declaration in substance the self same by reason of circumstance farre more haynous the light of the gospel spread more larglie the truth of doctrine more deepely rooted the law more vndoubtedlie abolished and euerie part of Christian religion more clearly acknowledged and professed wherefore in this I take M. Whit. inexcusablie rather for a Pagane then for a Christian when he saith The fathers by their penitentiall vvorkes derogated from Christ and thrusting them selues into his roome ascribed to their ovvne inuentions the satisfying of Gods vvrath and remission of their sinnes and yet for al this calleth them sanctissimas most holy whereas this being true they were the most impious and detestable men that euer the sunne saw Luther in his booke aduersusfalsò nominatum ordinem episcoporum describing his iustifiing faith writeth thus although wickedly yet agreablie to his owne doctrine and the common doctrine of the protestants Marke me saith he vvhat is Christian faith Christian faith is to beleeue that by no vvorkes but by onlie faith in Christ as thy mediatour and by mercy in him geuen thee freely thou art iustified and saued Gal. 1. so as a man despaire of all his ovvne strength vvorkes and endeuours and depende altogether of an other mans merites and an other mans iustice Iudaical faith is to entend to be iustified to blot out thy sinnes and be saued by thy ovvne strength and merites Rom. 10. by this Christ is cast avvay To like effect he writeth in his second commentarie vpon the Galatians expounding these wordes his qui natura non sunt dii seruiebatis ye serued them vvhich by nature vvere not gods vpon these words he maketh this question and thus solueth it is it all one in S. Paule to depart from the promise to the lavv from faith to vvorkes and to serue gods vvhich by nature are not gods I ansvvere vvhosoeuer falleth from the article of iustification he becommeth ignorant of God and is an idolater And therefore it is al one vvhether he returne to the lavv or to the vvorshipping of idols al is one vvhether he be a monke a Turke a Ievv or Anabaptist for this article once taken avvay there remaineth nothing but mere error hipocrisie impietie idolatrie although in shevv there appeare excellent truth vvorship of God holines c. Yea speaking expresly of the auncient fathers and in respect of this special matter he most wickedly but most plainly adiudgeth them to hell fier for their wicked faith in this verie cause I speake not saith he against the papistes for their life but for their faith because they vvil not come to God by only faith but by faith and vvorkes and therfore if the fathers those old papistes liued now I would speake vnto thē as I do to these new papistes thus stand his wordes Si illa facies veteris papatus c. if that face and forme of old papistrie stoode novv if that discipline vvere
him self and his brethren more then against vs. For vvhereas they pretend to translate after the greeke and hebrue as vve do not and yet in sundrie places svvarue from the greeke hebrue this his long idle talke conuinceth vs of no faulte but it condemneth him and his brethren of greate and inexcusable corruption vvho pretending reuerence to the greeke and hebrevv yet at their pleasure depart frō both And this is that vvhereof M. Mar. reproueth them in a great part of his Discouerie Example vvhereof see thou in his preface Num. 16.17.18.23.43.44.45.46.47.48.49.50 51. and after in euerie chapter of the booke vvelnie and so much M. Mar. protested to them in the beginning in plaine termes sayng And if they folovv sincerely their greeke and hebrevv text vvhich they professe to folovv and vvhich they esteeme the only autentical text so far vve accuse them not of heretical corruption but if it shal be euidently proued that they shrinke from that also and translate an other thing and that vvilfully and of intention to countenance their false religion and vvicked opinions making the scriptures speake as they list then vve trust c. And of this first riseth a second note which I wish likewise to be remembred that their deflecting from the greeke is alwaies in matter of controuersie and so discrieth their malicious wilfulnes If there be any in the latin it is no such thing but in matters for any cōtrouersie mere indifferent and so quiteth the translatour of malice and euil meaning and iustifieth his vpright and plaine sinceritie And hereof ensueth the third touching our simple and plaine dealing in folowing the latin that we decline not from the greeke or hebrue because it more harmeth our cause then the latin as the aduersaries gladly pretend and M. W. verie confidently auoucheth but only in respect of the truth it self And thus much also was he told in the preface of the new testament to wit that as for other causes vve prefer the latin so in this respect of making for vs or against vs vve allovv the greeke as much as the latin yea in sundrie places more then the latin being assured that they haue not one and that vve haue many aduantages in the greeke more then in the latin And this is there manifested by sundrie and verie euident examples touching traditions priesthode iustification by workes the real presence fasting freewil the mystical sacrifice and against their only faith and assurance of saluation wherein the greeke is more pregnant for vs then the latin Contrarywise let M. VV. frame against the Catholike religion or any part thereof one argument out of the scriptures which we refuse to stand vnto vpon this pretence because it is in the greeke and not in the latin and I am content to excuse him here of a lye Otherwise he can neuer saue him self from a lye and a lye in sight to obiect that vnto vs which nether he nor any of his can proue and we before hand haue in precise termes warned him of it and professed and proued the contrarie And therefore although in truth reader whatsoeuer he saith a great deale more is answered verie sufficiently and abundantly alreadie in the preface of the Testament as thow wilt confesse if it shal please thee with diligence to pervse it and I accompt it a peece of our miserie in this time to be matched with such blunt aduersaries whose maner of writing is now to cloy vs with crābe recocta cole vvorts tvvise yea tē times sodden nether thē selues can bring any new stuffe nor scoure more brightlie or otherwise mend vp their old nor refel our answeres confutations made to them but dissembling any such matter as though it had neuer bene treated of before vse to runne idelly and ministerlike vpon a cōmon place as M. VV. doth here which is more against them selues then against vs yet because it is my lotte to deale with him now the first time and therefore am loth to pretermit any thing wherein him self seemeth to put any force I wil take his argumētes as new and suppose that he neuer read the preface of the Testament against which he writeth and therefore will likewise hereafter borow some part of my answere thence Two argumentes he maketh against our latin translation and consequently against vs for folowing the same in our English The first is that the fountaines vz the greeke and hebrew are more pure thē the latin which he proueth by certaine sentences of S. Hierō S. Austin and S. Ambrose The other is one particular fault wherein as he sayth the vulgar translation is vniuersallie false the greeke contrarie is true Before his arguments he premitteth certaine interrogatories wherein he seemeth to auouch if I vnderstand him that only to be the word of god which is written in the lāguage wherein first the holy Ghost by the Prophets and Apostles vttered it That I misreporte him not I will set downe his wordes Thus he opposeth vs. Quid interpretandum suscepistis nonne scripturas Quaenam vero sunt scripturae quis nescit dei verbum scriptum illud esse c. VVhat tooke you in hand to interprete not the scriptures and vvhat are the scriptures vvho is ignorant but that is the vvritten vvord of god vvhich the lord committed to his church in bookes and letters and those oracles of god vvere they vttered by the holy Ghost in latin or can they better or more diuinely be declared in any tonge then that vvhich the holy Ghost vvould vse where vnto I answere that if his questions haue such meaning sense as the wordes beare and may stand ful wel with his skil and knowledge then are they not so much fantastical as phrenetical For accounteth he nothing the vvritten vvord of god but that vvhich is in hebrevv and greeke and vvas vvritten by the prophetes and Apostles in that language Then vvhat meaneth he and the rest of his Euāgelical confraternitie so perpetuallie to brag that they haue geuen vs nothing but the pure vvord of the lord vvho haue geuen vs nothing but their ovvne contaminated translations in English French Flēmish Dutch and such vulgar languages Is this the word of God M. W vttered the holy Ghost his oracles euer in Flēmish or English why inscribe yow your English testamente The testamente of our Lord Iesus Christ if nothing but the greeke or hebrue be the written word and testament of god But let this passe for an example of his singular foolishnes speaking he knoweth not what See we herein an other example of his notable impietie Our Sauiour Christ the Euangelistes and Apostles when they cited places of the old testament not according to the fountaines hebrue but according to the Septuaginta cited they not scripture In omnem terram saith the apostle Paule exiuit sonus eorum Their sound is gone forth in to al the vvorld whereas in the hebrew
sanctus in omnibus operibus suis Which verse in hebrew should haue begun with that letter which of al the alphabete only misseth So as most certaine it is that the hebrew is faultie And thus to end this matter of the hebrew fountaines originals I wil gather that which I haue said in to a fevv conclusions vvithal ansvvere M.VV. allegations The first is that this opinion of the Protestants detracting so much from the latin bibles and yelding so much to the hebrevv is Iudaical iniurious to the Church to the holy Ghost and state of the nevv testameÌ„t as vvhereby they professe to thinke more religioÌ„ care of Gods word to haue bene resident in the Iewish synagoge theÌ„ in al the Kingdomes Princes Pastors Prouinces of Christianitie for these thovvsaÌ„d yeres The second that albeit S. Hierom in his tyme so soone after the great persecutions the Church being troubled vvith that most busye terrible and potent heresie of the Arrians against the diuinitie of Christ and the holy Ghost vvhen as yet the Canon it selfe comprehending the sacred bookes of scriptures by general authoritie vvas not confirmed and receaued vvheÌ„ as saith S. Austin there vvas inâ—umerable varietie of latin traÌ„slations Qui ex hebraeâ— lingua scripturas in graecam verterunt numerari possunt latini autem interpretes nullo modo and they infinitely differing among them selues as in the same place he noteth when for these causes there vvas not nor vvel could be any one vniforme translation approued although at this tyme S. Hierom might iustly appeale from them al to the hebrew as in coÌ„parison being most pure incorrupt yet nether then were the hebrew copies simpliciter faultles as hath bene shevved by playne examples and demonstrations by the very ProtestaÌ„te bibles and by confession of the best learnedst among them and S. Hâ—erom though M. W. seeme to ground him self most vpoÌ„ him acknovvledgeth so much For examining tvvo places of Deuteronomie vrged by the Apostle S. Paule in his epistles both differing in that point vvhich he most presseth froÌ„ the hebrew bibles extant in S. Hieroms daies he resolueth in fine that the hebrew vvas corrupted othervvise then the Apostle read it The one place is Scriptum est Maledictus omnis qui pendet in ligno It is vvritten Cursed is euerie one that hangeth on tree in vvhich short place compared vvith the original in Deuteronomie there is somevvhat to much and somevvhat to litle To much because here is omnis euery one and in ligno on tree which are not now found in the Hebrew though both in the Greeke of the Septuaginta To litle because there is in the hebrew Elohim which wanteth in S. Paule maledictus Deo or Dei cursed of God is euerie one so hanged S. Hierom answereth thus My iudgement herein is this ether that the old bookes of the Hebrevves had othervvise then they haue novv or that the Apostle put the sense of the scripture not the vvordes or vvhich I rather suppose after the passion of Christ both in the Hebrevv and in our bookes the name of God vvas added by some maÌ„ that he might make vs more infamous vvho beleeue in Christ accursed of God The other place is this Scriptum est Maledictus omnis qui noÌ„ permanserit in omnibus quae scripta sunâ— in libro legis vt faciat ea Cursed is euerie one that abideth not in al thinges vvhich are vvritten in the booke of the lavv to do them Where the Apostles argument hanging principally vpon the two wordes omnis and in omnibus euerie one and in al thinges both which are in the Septuaginta 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nether in the hebrew he thus answereth the matter I am vncertayne vvhether the Septuaginta added omnis homo and in omnibus or vvhether it vvere so in the old hebrevv and aftervvard put out by the Ievves Thus tâ— suppose I am moued for this reason because the vvordes omnis and in omnibus al and in al as necessary to proue that they be al accuâ—sed vvho are of the vvorkes of the lavv the Apostle skilful in the hebrevv tonge and mâ—st cunning in the lavv vvould neuer haue so sett dovvne had it not bene so in the hebrevv VVherefore I perusing the hebrevv volumes of the Samaritanes found there vvritten the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as much to say as omnis siue omnibus al or in al and so that to agree vvith the Septuaginta In vayne therefore haue the Ievves razed that out lest they should seeme to be accursed vvhereas the more auncient examples of an other nation testifie that it vvas vvritten so Thus S. Hierom. Thirdly this I gather that since S. Hieroms time much more haue the hebrew bookes bene corrupted and that not in smale indâ—fferent matters which might better be borne but in very hye pointes touching the diuinitie and humanitie of our Sauiour touching his passion and the redemption of the world And therefore when S. Hierom speaking of the puritie of the bibles before his birth is applied to iustifie the copies written so many ages after his death and so consequently to iustifie al their new English FleÌ„mish and Germane interpretations made according to some hebrew copies as they pretend this is as iust as Germanes lippes according to our english prouerbe whose hartes mindes religions we see to differre infinitely This is to answere of chalke when the question is proposed of cheese Next this we see that the condition of the hebrew tonge is such that errors are very soone coÌ„mitted therein by reasoÌ„ of smale points of distinctioÌ„s of letters so nighly resembling one an other Wherevnto ioyne we the malice of the Rabbines their hatred of the Christians and Christian religion whom Luther confesseth to be as very crucifiers of the word of Christ especially such places as most appertaine to him as they were of Christ him selfe and that they employe their studie herevnto And if we consider withal how in time of the law thorough their default they lost whole bookes volumes of their diuine Prophetes we shal fynde smal reason to moue vs to beleeue that since Christ they should become so holy and deuout watchful circumspect as M.VV. by commending their fountaines and originals would make them Finally al this hath bene declared not only by plaine reasons factes examples demonstrations but also by plaine confession of those whom our aduersaries principally reuerence and honour and in this matter were most skilful by Munster by Pellicane by Sebastianus Castalio by Luther and such others And hereof may the reader easely learne an answer to that questioÌ„ which many frame as a matter of intricate difficultie wheÌ„ these corruptions should come in to the hebrew bibles whether before Christs time or betwene that and S. Hieroms or from S. Hieroms time to vs. Not the first say they because
styl that parcel but most vvanted it and manifest it is that the Ievves nether in our time keepe so honorably the translation of the 70. in their sinagoges much lesse did they keâ—pe it in S. Iustines daies vvhen as appeareth by the vvhole discours and manifest vvordes of this author in this same place they much more detested it The third a ligno is vvanting in al greeke and hebrevv bibles is only reserued in our ecclesiastical Breuiarie certaine Doctors as Tertullian Lactantius Cassiodorus and S. Austin vvho notvvithstanding so readeth it as though it vvere the common reading in the churches of Africa in his time and maketh no mention of any other reading vvhere those vvords should be leaft out And from S. Hieroms time vntil our daies very probable it is that these errors and corruptions haue multiplied not only for the general and particular reasons already touched but for this especially that whereas since that time the Iewes obstinacie barbarousnes impietie and ignorance in their owne tonge hath much increased the Christians notwithstanding haue not had any great occasion to handle much or exercise that language therefore haue had smaler regard to bookes written therein without which as first of al they perfectly receaued the Christian faith and planted it in these partes of Christendome so without it haue they as perfectly continued in the same and now enlarged it euen to the extreme corners of the world and without the which they haue for these thousaÌ„d yers liued most christiaÌ„ly as Saintes christianly as Saintes finished their teÌ„poral liues after liued with Christ for euer And now touching M. W. question demaunding how the Church hath faithfully conserued the bookes of scriptures who thus findeth fault with the hebrew bibles as corrupt I answere as before that the Church hath most faithfully conserued the scriptures albeit not in this or that tonge which the wanton curiositie of euery fantastical heretike coueteth We haue the true word and gospel of Christ though perhaps we haue not ten words in that laÌ„guage which our Sauiour spake And then why may we not haue the law the prophetes though there were neuer an hebrew bible in the vvorld Againe vnreasonably demaundeth he of our church for hebrevv bibles vncorrupt vvhich perhaps neuer had any such and neuer vndertooke to keepe the vvord of God in that language more then in Arabike or Syriake no more then she vndertooke to keepe S. Matthevves Gospel in hebrevv or S. Paules epistle to the hebrevves But if she deliuer faithfully to the Christians that vvhich she receaued of Christ and his Apostles touching al parts of Christian faith and religion be it vvritten or vnvvritten in one language or other she performeth that vvhich Christ committed to her charge and vvhich is sufficient for the saluation of euery Christian and vvhereby she proueth her selfe to be the House and Church of the liuing God the sure Piller and ground of truth the Spovvse of Christ and faythful mother of al Christians M. D. Whitgift thinketh it vntolerable that the English ministers should appoint vvhat maner of apparel is coÌ„uenient for them selues to vveare vvhat ceremonies or rites should be vsed in their poore Seruice He by many arguments taketh from them al authoritie in such matter vvil haue the vvhole Ministerie altogether to depend be directed by the superior magistrates the Quene and the Lordes of her CouÌ„cel Then hovv much more vntolerable is it that some one or other single minister should appoint the vniuersal Church gouernours thereof in what maner and fashion the word of God must be kept in what language as it were in what kind of paper or parchement he wil haue it written As if some busye headed felow in a coÌ„mon welth not contented to be ruled preserued by his Prince in true religion iustice and quiet possessioÌ„ of his owne should farther take vpon him to prescribe vvhat maner priestes hovv qualified and in vvhat Vniuersitie brought vp should preach vnto him the vvord of God minister the sacraments vvhat sort of men should exequute vnto him iustice and examine his cases of law by what capitaynes of vvhat byrth countrie and experience by vvhat kind of defence open force or secret policie fight by sea or rather land strength of horsmen or footemen he vvil be mainteined in peace and quietnes And vvhat meaneth he to require for pure bibles in any language of our Church vvhich he holdeth for Antichristian and the prelates thereof and al other Catholikes for members of Antichrist For vvhiles he thus thinketh vvhat soeuer bibles hebrevv or not hebrevv Greeke or Arabike vve offer him he can by reason yelde no more credite vnto them then to our latin no more then to our traditions or any other thing proceeding from vvarrant and credite of such professed enemies of Christ as vvel and learnedly proueth S. Austin in his booke de vtilitate credendi Much more agreable to reason ChristiaÌ„ diuinitie is it for him and his to resort to their ovvne church of elect predestinate or hovv so euer he list to terme them vvhich hath so florished these many hundred yeres by vvitnes of their ecclesiastical stories by report of M. Fox in his Actes and monumentes Let him resort to the brethren of Lions to VVycleffe and the VVycleffisâ—es to Robert Rigges Iohn Puruey Henry Crompe Iohn of Chlum Iohn Scut William Havvlam Richard VVich Iohn Hus alias Iohn Goose the Hussites and Thaborites of Bohemia and such other vvho as they tel vs vvere glorious pillers doctors and maintainers of their church and Protestant-gospel and like glistering starres shined in the face of the ChristiaÌ„ world And that I tye him not to particular meÌ„ or one only prouince of Bohemia in many other prouinces and kingdomes of the world hath their church continued as most confidently writeth D. VVhitgift against T. C. who framing an argument against the Archbishops authoritie draweÌ„ from this supposition VVhat if the vvhole church be in one prouince or in one realme vvhich hath bene and is not vnpossible to be againe M. D. VVhit answereth it thus To your supposition if the vvhole church c. I say that if the skie fal you may catch larkes as the common prouerbe is making it as vnpossible a case to haue the church of Christ in one only kingdom as it is vnpossible for the skie to fal And presently in the same page Do you not knovv that the church of Christ is dispersed thorough the vvhole vvorld and can not novv after Christs ascension be shut vp in one kingdome much lesse in one prouince except you vvil become Donatistes He that is not vvilfully blinde may see in to vvhat straightes you are driueÌ„ vvhen you are constrained to vse such impossibilities for reasons And M. VV. in this booke telleth vs that there neuer wanted mightie
then the greeke if our latin be framed exactly though not to the vulgar greeke examples now vsual yet to more auncient and perfect examples as Beza hath obserued if the greeke testaments haue in them many faultes errors corruptions as Beza in word auoucheth and by manifold examples sheweth if this be so true that our english translators them selues at their pleasure leaue the greeke and folow our latin with what face reason or conscience can M.W. crie vpon the pure and vncorrupt originals which him self and his masters proue to be so impure and contaminated With what honestie can he cal vs to the greeke from which them selues depart so licentiously Vnto these I wil ioyne only three short obseruations which the diligent reader perhaps may amplifie by verie many particular examples and so wil come to confer our translator with our aduersaries The first may be the difference of our greeke copies now from the old whereof let this be an example Beza reiecteth the whole storie of the adulterous womaÌ„ whereof mentioÌ„ is made in the eight of S. Ihon. His reason is because the old fathers did so and it was not in the old greeke testaments which he proueth by the authoritie of S. Chrysostom of Theophilact of Nonnus and S. Hierom. and amongst 17 old copies of Henrie Stephen one vvanted it the rest had it but so that in their reading there vvas maruelous varietie whereof he inferrteh TaÌ„ta varietas lectionis facit vt de totius istius narrationis fide dubitem This great varietie of reading maketh me to doubt of the truth of the vvhole matter Yet notwithstanding this coÌ„trarie practise of the old greekes and greeke testaments and infinite varietie in the copies the new printes haue it for ought I can find vniuersally and agreably and in al our english testaments traÌ„slated after the greeke it is as canonical as any other part of S. Iohns gospel So that herein appeareth a great diuersitie betwene the old greeke testaments and the new and therefore daungerous it is to folowe these new if we can not do it but with condeÌ„nation of the old yet as daungerous is it to folow the old if we can not do it without condeÌ„nation of that which the church holdeth for a part of S. Iohns gospel The like noteth thae same writer in the epistle to the Ephes the 3. chap. a parcel whereof in S. HieroÌ„s time VVas not in the greeke bookes but only in the latin but saith Beza In omnibus veteribus libris et scholiis quoque graecis haec particula additur Novv it is added in al the old greeke copies scholies also A second obseruation may be the rash vnconsiderate additions which haue bene made in the greeke text an example whereof may be taken from the same Euangelist and the ende of the same chapter where in the greeke is added this peece Exiuit e templo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Transiens per medium illorum et sic praeteriit touching vvhich thus writeth Beza These vvords are found in verie auncient copies but I thinke as doth Erasmus that the first part is taken out of Luke the 4. v. 30. and creapt into the text by fault of the vvriters vvho found that vvritten in the margeÌ„t and that the later part 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vvas added to make this chapter ioyne vvel vvith the next And thus to thinke I am moued not only because nether Chrysostome nether Augustine make any mention of this peece but also because it seemeth not to haÌ„g together very probably for if he withdrew him selfe out of their sight hovv vvent he through the middest of theÌ„ etc. so forth disputeth against this parte as altogether vnprobable not likely to be true Yet is it now generally in most greeke copies how beit the english translators leaue it out of their testaments The reason I take to be because howsoeuer they bragge of their greeke and hebrew originals the truth is they translate nether the one nor the other except sometimes some few words for a shew but only take that which Beza in latin deliuereth vnto them And yet whereof I marueil the freshest translation which professeth to folowe Beza inscribeth the booke thus The Testament of our Lorde Iesus Christ translated out of greeke by Theodore Beza and Englished by L. T. putteth this in which Beza leaueth out and against vvhich Beza disputeth so earnestly that it can not be scripture as being contrarie to it self But for excuse of the English translator it may be and true it is that Beza one yere thought thus an other yere thought otherwise And so in one Testament of his held that for false Apocryphal which in an other Testament he gaue out autorized as sacred Canonical Vnto this place thou maist referre that peece which the ProtestaÌ„ts so gloriously sing and say in the ende of the Lords praier For thine is the Kingdome the povver and glorie for euer and euer Amen which as Erasmus disliketh confessing it notwithstanding to be In omnibus graecis exemplaribus nulla latino In al greeke testaments and no one Latin so Bullinger himself counteth it to be a mere patch sowed to the rest by I knowe not whoÌ„ and alloweth wel of Erasmus iudgmeÌ„t reprouing Laurentius Valla for finding fault with the latin editioÌ„ because that lacketh it Non est saith he quod Laurentius Valla stomachetur c. There is no reason vvhy Laurence Valla should take the matter so hotely as though a great part of the Lordes praier vvere cut a vvay Rather their rasâ—nes was to be reproued who durst presume to peece on their toyes vnto the Lords praier A third obseruation may be that the greeke testaments omit vpon light occasions often times that which they should not and which the latin retaineth for autentical canonical Example where of may be the place before noted of the incarnatioÌ„ Quod nascetur ex te sanctum vocabitur filius dei That saith the Archâ—ngel to our blessed ladie vvhich of thee shal be borne holy shal be called the sonne of God In which sentence the two syllables ex te 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what force they cary against the Anabaptists hath bene declared Now consider the generâ—l corruption of the greeke copâ—es in that behalf Of them thus writeth Carolus Molineus a great Protestant in his new testament I haue read exte in most auÌ„cient bibles of vvhich one copie I haue printed at Lions the yere 1479. and that is the old vndoubted reading for so reade the old and nevv Breuiaries and Romane offices But Erasmus vvhom Bucer and Bullinger folovv seemeth only to haue fallen vpon a copie in this part vnpâ—rfite the error vvhereof is spread a broade in many copies both greeke and latin printed at Basil Zuricke Paris and Lions you and at Geneua also in the ordinarie
Paris Louane and other catholike Vniuersities And if there be any fault in our english translation it is this that this parcel was not added in the margeÌ„t as it was in the latin which we folowed Wherefore this proueth no corruption but rather great fidelitie in our latin testament that it agreeth with S. Hierom consequently the greeke examples which he interpreted with S. Ambrose S. Austin S. Bede Haymo S. Anselmus and the rest of the latin writers which in a matter not doubtful and otherwise in no respect preiudicial to any veritie of Christian profession are of that authoritie that Beza him self in this case would not disallow our doing and M.VV. him self also in iustifying his english translations for pure and perfit doth consequently approue and iustifie ours so anâ—wereth â—im self in this obiection for the later clause before noted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the lord said they haue added to their english testaments after Beza vpon the only authorite of our latin against al the auncient greeke albeit now it is thrust in to the coÌ„mon greeke prints of Geneua Basile Zuricke therefore he should not be offeÌ„ded if we attribute so much to our testament who professe to honour it seing he his felowes do as much who professe a perpetual hatred against it And this I trust may suffice for these few words to quitte our testament of any faulte considering that first they coÌ„cerne not any controuersie theÌ„ that the sense of it is in worde and deed fully euideÌ„tly coÌ„prised in the same place againe if we preferred our latin before al greeke we do no more then doth Beza then doth M.W. then do al the English and Scottish congregations in their owne pure and immaculate bibles Last of al our reading is coÌ„firmed not only by al the later ages of the church these seuen or eight hundred yeres as by S. Anselmus Haimo S. Bede and others nether only by the more auncieÌ„t latin fathers S. Austin S. Ambrose S. Hierom but also it was according to the greeke copies which S. HieroÌ„ had the same agreing in substaÌ„ce with S. Chrysostome no doubt many other and therfâ—re hath sufficieÌ„t ground to defend it self although vve confesse the other reading to be vsed of many fathâ—rs which vve therefore mislike not yet rashâ—y presume not to thrust it in to our text And this is the only fault and yet al the faultes vvhich M.VV. findeth in our latin testament The rest he supplieth vvith a lustie bragge that there are at the least Six hundred other vvherein against the faith of al the greekes and their perpetual coÌ„sent the errors of the latin traÌ„slatioÌ„ are retained of vs. Of which reckning I dare at first without any farther stay strike out fiue huÌ„dred yet the suÌ„me vvhich remaineth is sufficieÌ„t to conuince him of a maine lye But for a farther refutation he turneth vs ouer to Benedictus Arias Montanus a good priest one that serueth in the Catholike Kinges court and submitteth al his labours to the iudgmeÌ„t censure of the Vniuersitie of Loâ—ane and therefore very vnlike it is that ether he vvil bestovv so vnfruitefully his labours as to vvrite against the Sacred TrideÌ„tine CouÌ„cel or that that Vniuersitie vvil approue his endeuours if he should so heretically employ theÌ„ whatsoeuer shal become of him hereafter in his hebrew bibles alreadie set forth we see that in the places before noted he altereth not the latin according to the hebrew but letteth it stand as autentical VVhat speake I of him a catholike man and a priest whereas your selues though otherwise most obstinate and stonie harted against the truth yet dare not alter it according to the hebrew but leaue it as you found it in our bibles And therefore why you cal vs 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bible-beaters I wonder and muse what brainsicke conceite you haue therein or what reason moueth you thus to raile Because we defend the sinceritie of our bibles against your peeuish and vnlearned and fantastical and contemptible talking for what one tolerable argument bring you because we defend the inheritance left vs by our forefathers because we prefer the Church Spouse of Christ before the sinagoge of the Iewes because at their wicked appointment vve vvil not raze out so many places touching our Sauiours honour and the truth of our religion is this the cause why your wisedome termeth vs Bible-beaters Nay let the reader consider and the world iudge whether sith Christs time or before Christs time there were euer any beaters and circumciders and gelders and manglers and defacers and corrupters of those holy bookes comparable to you and your sect Who haue rent out of the bible so many partes which our auncient fathers deliuered vs and we hold fast as sacred and canonical Who haue reiected out of the old testament so many entier books as I haue noted in the beginning the prophecie of Baruch the storie of Iudith of Tobias of Hester of the Machabees and Ecclesiasticus who in the new testament haue cut out S. Paules epistle to the hebrews S. Iames one of S. Peters two of S. Iohns S. Iude and the Apocalips and the whole gospel of S. Luke who in those other which you pretend to keepe haue lopt of great peeces so many as pleased your arrogant and heretical spirit peeces of S. Iohns gospel peeces of the prophete Ieremie peeces of the prophete Daniel peeces of the booke of Cronicles or ParalipomenoÌ„ besides many lesser parcels pared away both in the epistles and gospels and al the rest by your traÌ„slations miserably corrupted Who by the same reason authoritie by which you iudge and condemne these bookes geue like authoritie libertie to euerie phantastical minister to contemne and condemne the rest For thinke you a lying reason may not be found against the gospel of S. Iohn as wel as against the gospel of S. Luke Or may not a man pretend as good arguments of humane spirit to be in the second epistle to the Corinthians or to Philemon as in that of S. Iames or to the hebrewes Or may M. VVilliam Charke oppose him selfe against the vniuersal Church of Christ by the mouth of those most holy and Apostolical fathers gathered together in the great CouÌ„cel of Nice acknowledging for Canonical the booke of Iudith and may not any other minister of like qualitie and learning do so by like example Because the booke of Tobie maketh expressely for the patronage of angels may you say disdainfully VVe passe not for that Raphael mentioned in Tobie nether acknovvledge vve those seuen angels vvhereof he maketh mention Al that differeth much from Canonical scriptures which is reported of that Raphael and sauoureth of I knovv not vvhat superstition Nether vvil I beleeue free vvil although the booke of Ecclesiasticus affirme it a hundred times c. and may not a
Lutheran an Anabaptist a Suinkseldian say the like with as good countenance against other partes of scripture which stand as plainly against their conceaued heresies Is Beza to be allowed pronouncing peremptorily touching the storie of the aduouterous woman in the 8. of S. Iohn vpon the diuersitie which is in the greeke writers and testaments that so great difference he found in that narration that he doubteth altogether of the vvhole storie which is as much as to take from it vtterly al authoritie Canonical and is not euerie man els to be allovved vpon like vvarrant geuing like censure vpon other partes of scriptures Reade S. Hierom vvriting to Edibia and see vvhether a part of S. Markes gospel may not by like reason be called in question yea reade Bezaes notes vpon the sixt chapter the 18. and 19. of S. Iohn and 22. of S. Luke see vvhether that diuine sermon of our Sauiour and his very passion by such argument ought not so to be cut out of the testament The like is to be said of verie many places of S. Matthew and S. Paules epistles Then iudge thou Christian reader whether these meÌ„ be not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bible-beaters or rather in deede bible murtherers For the first presupposeth the hauing of a bible whereas they haue none For that which they cal their bible and word of God is in deede no word of God no bible at al. For how can a maÌ„ cal that the bible and word of God vvhich hath in it so many foule and filthie corruptions so many vvicked Ethnical and Iudaical errors as I before haue noted in their bible by confessionâ— of their ovvne brethren Is that the bible of God vvhich hath in it so many places maliciously peruerted against the eternal truth and testameÌ„t of God Can vve call him a man vvhom vve see to lacke head hand foote hart and other principal and essential partes of humane nature and hovv then is that a bible that lacketh for canonical the vvritinges of so many Prophetes Apostles and Euangelistes S. Luke S. Paule S. Iames S. Peter S. Iohn S. Iude some of which no bible euer vvanted since Christs time nor can vvant remaining a bible The rest vvere euer true scriptures though not euer in al places so accouÌ„ted as nether was the Godhead of our Sauiour the dignitie and office of his Apostles of al and alwaies at first acknowledged But al haue bene so accounted for these thousand yeres and more by general prouincial councels the great and Apostolike councel of Nice of Laodicea of Carthage by the supreme pastors of Christs church by the general consent of the same Catholike Church in most times ages These meÌ„ therefore good reader folowing the steppes of their old fathers Marcion Cerdon Carpocrates the Arrians and Manichees despising and reiecting so many bookes of sctipture are in deede not beaters but maÌ„glers and defacers and extreme murtherers of the bible And that not only for this plaine and euident reason now geuen but also for their prophane irreligious varietie of translations whereof now in the last part I haue to speake CHAP. XIIII That to leaue the ordinarie translation of the Bible appointed by the Church to appeale to the hebrevv greeke and such nevv diuers translations as the protestants haue made is the very vvay to Atheisme Infidelitie IN this later parte this haue I to shew that whosoeuer taketh to him self that libertie which the heretiks geue here M.W. most busily striueth for that is to refuse the latin and appeale to the greeke and hebrew and these new translations which as they beare vs in hand are framed according to the greeke and hebrew he taketh the high way to denial of al faith to Apostasie from Christ and plaine Atheisme This to do the fittest way were historically to declare how certaine knowen Sects of the Protestants principally vpon this very reason of pretending the greeke and hebrew veritie and therefore running to infinite varietie of diuers translations and resting in no one haue fallen to despise al Bibles Scriptures and concluded as a most assured Euangelical veritie that nothing is certaine but euerie man is to be left to his owne fansie to beleeue as he list Such is the sect of the Swinkfeldians Anabaptists and Academikes and it is the very drifte of Castalio so much commended of many in the preface of his Bible to King Edvvarde the sixte although he beate pretily vpon an other point much of like effect vz that the Messias promised in the law is not yet come but vvil come hereafter according to the Iewes expectation Thus vvriteth he Profecto si verum fateri volumus est adhuc nostrum soeculum in profundis ignorantiae tenebris demersum cuius rei certissimuÌ„ testimonium sunt tam graues tam pertinaces taÌ„ perniciosae dissensiones tam multi et irriti coÌ„uentus de hisce controuersiis c. Truely if vve vvil confesse the truth this our age is as yet drowned in extreme darknes ignoraÌ„ce a most assured proofe vvhereof are these so greuous so obstinate and so pernicious dissensions so many and the same so vnprofitable meetinges about these controuersies so great number of bookes euery day sett out and the same differing one from an other so far as heauen differeth from earth And prosecuting this his plaine and irrefutable argument vvhereby he proueth the Protestants notvvithstanding al their latin greeke and hebrevv to be most ignorant in true diuinitie and matters spiritual thus he addeth For if the spirit of God be one truth one it must of necessitie folovv in vvhoÌ„ that one spirite one truth is that they also be one amoÌ„g theÌ„ selues of one iudgment in matters spiritual And if the day of the most cleare truth of the gospel shined vnto vs vve vvould neuer lighten so many darkesome obscure candles of bookes and vvritinges The vvhich reason concluding this euangelical state and age to be ful of ignorance grosse grosse againe Crassa crassa inquaÌ„ saecuâ—um tenet ignorantia and that there is no certaine vvay to find out the truth and come to an end of these controuersies hereof he inferreth that euery man is to be leaft to his ovvne iudgement suffered to beleeue as he list Thus he speaketh addressing his wordes to the king Cum haec it a sint o rex et cum aetas nostra in tanta adhuc ignorantiae caligine caecutiat c. VVhereas these things are so O king vvhereas our age as yet is blinded in so great darkenes of ignorance I thinke vve ought to vse maruelous diligence lest by error vve offend And if there be any controuersies in the case of religion as there are verie many in these I thinke it good that vve folovv the exaÌ„ple of Iudas Machabeus his felovves vvho vvhen they knevv not vvhat to determine touching the altar
much and the reader much more Because I must be driuen to talke of titles and pointes and rules of the Rabbines and readings of the Massoreth and such other obscure matter troublesome for me to laie together and vvrite out and not intelligible for a common reader I vvil therefore put dovvne only certaine propositions exemplifying theÌ„ in one or tvvo vvordes vvhereby the learned shal vnderstand how true that is which I affirme and the vnlearned shal be able to conceaue somwhat I say therefore that of the hebrew far lesse hold can be taken in binding a contentious heretike then of any other language The reason is first because their tonge hauing in it no great store of words euery word almost is vsed in verie diuers significations farre more then is found in latin or greeke or many vulgar languages and therefore if you presse him with one translation or sense he forthwith hath sundry and diuers senses to flee vnto Hence coÌ„meth that diuersitie in the Psal 54. Extendit deus manum suam in retribuendo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the 70. God hath stretched forth his hand to revvard or recompence as the church readeth which place the catholikes both of late and auncient times vse to proue the reward and recompence of good workes The english bibles turne it thus He hath laide his hands vpon such as be at peace vvith him the more common Protestant translation as it appeareth by Marlorate Misit manus suas in paces suas He hath laid his haÌ„ds vpon his peaces This diuersitie riseth of the same hebrew word but hauing diuers senses An other reason is because their substantiues being in maner al deriued of verbes often times one substantiue may haue diuers deriuations from diuers verbes which bringeth as great varietie as is possible So the church readeth ps 59. Dedisti metuentibus te significationeÌ„ vt fugiant a facie arcus Thou hast geuen to those that feare thee a signe that they flee from the face of the bovve according to the 70. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so vvas the hebrew in S. Hieroms time as vve see by his translation The Protestants Luther Bucer Caluin as vve see by Marlorate vvil haue it Dedisti metuentibus te vexillum ad vexillaÌ„dum propter veritatem Thou hast geuen to them that feare thee a flagge to flagge for truth the english of one yere thou hast geuen a token for such as feare thee that they may triuÌ„phe because of thy truth of an other Thou hast geueÌ„ a baÌ„ner to them that feare thee that it may be displaied because of thy truth This differeÌ„ce in one part coÌ„meth of the 2. radical hebrew verbes the old church the 70. S. HieroÌ„ folowing one the new congregation of the ProtestaÌ„ts rather liking the other The difference in the other part bovv and truth no doubt came thence that the old hebrew bookes had that vvorde vvritten vvith one kinde of T the later vvith an other Againe touching the literal seÌ„se of the hebrew words what masters shal we follow The old Rabbines Dauid Kimhi Aben Ezra and such other Thus to say Beza Munster Caluin Castalio the Protestants commonly induce vs. But Master D. Humfrey holdeth the contrary and not without reason if we had a good pilote to rule the sterne and containe vs in mediocritie VVe ought not to credit saith he in my iudgment the Rabbines touching the very exposition deriuation of the hebrevv vvords Christ pronouÌ„ceth of them that they are blinde guides of the blinde Therefore this is not the vvay to interprete rightly nether may vve folovv them except vve vvil preferre darknes before light errors before truth doubtful things before assured daungerous before safe and vvicked and blasphemous before Godly and Catholike By which rule al your new hebrew translations are called in to question yea are pronounced to be darkesome erroneous doubtful daungerous wicked blasphemous For your best and greatest translators whom did they folow in the sense of the hebrew wordes but their common dictionaries And out of whoÌ„ are they drawen looke vpon the title of Munsters Dictionarium Hebraeum vltimò ab autore Sebastiano Munstero recognitum et ex Rabbinis praesertim ex radicibus Dauid Kimhi auctuÌ„ et locuplet a tum This hebrevv dictionarie is novv last renevved by SebastiaÌ„ Munster and encreased and enriched out of the Rabbines especially out of Dauid Kimhi And Munster in his translations which is accompted most exact to the hebrew protesteth that he regarded therein no Christian fathers but only the Iudaical Rabbines Nobis saith he in animo fuit talem parare aeditionem scripturae quae per omnia hebraismo esset coÌ„formis ideo solos hebraeos coÌ„suluimus scriptores And here perhaps I might propose vnto you an Insoluble an argument that you wil neuer aunswere sauing the honour of your maisters doctors Your maister Beza correcteth the new testameÌ„t generally and draweth the greeke citations in the same and al doubtful wordes to the sense of the hebrew and the Rabbines Doctor Humfrey on the coÌ„trary side wil haue the hebrew words of the old testament drawen to signifie as the Apostles cite them according to the 70. in the new testament and condemneth your translators for doing otherwise and namely whereas in the 2. of the Actes your English bibles after Beza translate Shâ—ol Graue he acknowledging that in hebrevv and according to the Rabbines It may so signifie many things besides as pitt the state of the dead and damned death a ditch the east or birth and hell this last saith he must vve folovv by authoritie of the holy Ghost Act 2. interpreting a place of the psalme 15. Where you see one wil haue the hebrew word in the psalme translated Hel because so it is in the greeke Act. 2. the other will haue the greeke Act. 2. traÌ„slated Graue because so may be the signification of the hebrevv ps 15. et sic in caeteris vvhere by the way you may note that your pure and vndefiled bibles are not altogether so iudged by this vvriter a man of such credit and name in your coÌ„gregation yea that he iudgeth them corrupt in so great a matter as a principal article of our faith commeth vnto And yet al this vvhich hetherto I haue spoken is nothing touching the true controuersie vvhich is about the hebrevv originals that is whether vve must take them as novv vve haue them geuen vs vvith the ordinarie pointes and vovvels put to by the Ievves and Rabbines or vvhether vve must take the consonantes only and put to the points or vowels by our owne discretion If the first then al those horrible absurdities must stande which before I haue noted against Christs Diuinitie Humanitie Passion Incarnation If the second then must the Protestants fal to translate a freshe for al their bibles hitherto are litle worth
obiecteth and so maketh an end His wordes are The like boldenes they vtter in that most goodly place of S. Paule vvhere thus he vvriteth to the Romanes Stipendia peccati mors donum autem Dei vita aeterna The stipend of sinne death but life eternal is the gift of God Here the Sorbonists of Rhemes haue noted that the sequele of speach required that as he sayd the stipend of sinne is death so on the contrarie part he should haue sayd the stipend of iustice is life eternal And this to be true they plainely affirme vvhereas it is manifest that S. Paule spake in this sorte that he might leaue no place to merites and he vseth such a vvorde as vtterly excludeth al respect of stipend for that vvhich is a free gift can in no case be a stipend and repa◠to merites To answere this as al the rest there needeth nothing els but to compare our wordes with his Thus we say Rom. 6. vers 23. The sequele of speach required that as he said death or damnation is the stipend of sinne so life euerlasting is the stipend of iustice and so it is and in the same sense he spake in the last chapter That as sinne reigneth to death so grace reigneth by iustice to life euerlasting But here he chaūged the sentence somevvhat calling life euerlasting Grace rather then Revvard because the merites by vvhich vve attaine vnto life be al of Gods gift and grace Augustin epis 105. ad Sixtum Because the sense and summe of the annotatiō is takē out of S. Austin I wil set downe his owne wordes although they be somevvhat long because they may help the reader both to vnderstād the truth of this point vvithal discouer M.W. notorious ignorāce Thus vvriteth S. Austin in the place quoted Eternal life vvhich in fine vve shal obteyne for euer is repayed to merites going before yet because those merites vnto vvhich it is repayed are not gotten of vs by our ovvne abilitie but vvrought in vs by grace therefore life eternall is called grace for no other reason but because it is geuen gratis not because it is not geuen to merites but because those merites are geuen to vvhich life is geuen That eternal life is called Grace vve find in S. Paule Rom. 6. The stipend of sinne is death life eternal is the grace of God See hovv vvarely he put these vvordes For vvhen he had sayd The stipend of sinne is death vvho vvould not haue thought he should haue sayd most aptly and conueniently The stipend of iustice is life eternall And true it is For as to the merite of sinne death is rēdered as the stipēd so to the merite of iustice Life eternal is rendered as the stipend Vnde merces appellatur plurimis sanctarū scripturarum locis Quod est autem merces operanti hoc est militanti stipendium Sed Apostolus aduersus elationem c. And so it is termed merces vvages in very many places of scriptures For that vvhich is called Stipendium Stipend to a souldiar that is called merces vvages to a labourer But the Apostle vsed that vvord against the pride of men c. Thus far S. Austin of vvhose vvordes our note is only a short sūme abbridgment and so vvhatsoeuer sport M. VV. maketh to him self of the Sorbonists of Rhemes it nothing toucheth vs but good S. Austin the Sorbonist of Hippo. And yet not to rest there S. Austin quitteth him selfe vvel inough frō that drye iest vvhen he affirmeth the same to be taught Plurimis sanctarum scripturarum locis In very many places of holy scriptures For if they be Sorbonists that say Vita aelerna est stipendium iustitiae or vvhich is the selfe same Vita aeterna est merces bonorum operum then not only S. Austin is a Sorbonist vvhich to say perhaps you streine not greatly for in this place so you cal vs in word S. Austin in deede but long before him the Prophetes were egregious Sorbonists in whom both in sense and word this proposition is cōmonly founde Salomon was a Sorbonist Dauid a Sorbonist Esay a Sorbonist Ieremie a Sorbonist S. Peter a Sorbonist S. Iohn a Sorbonist S. Paule a notable Sorbonist who hath it more oft then the rest that I name not our Sauiour for honors sake who notwithstanding in the gospel many times teacheth his Christians this Sorbonical conclusiō But as for M.W. if he continue in this simplicitie or rather stupiditie that he suppose eternal life not to be the stipēd of iustice or good workes because it is the grace or gift of God I wil geue him a quittance for euer deseruing the name of a Sorbonist For I thinke there is scant any boy frequenting the Sorbone schole that is so dul and ignorant as to doubte but that heauen is the gift and grace of God though he trust to atteine it by his good workes I meane that knoweth not how to reconcile these two propositions together heauen is the stipend of good workes and heauen is the gift of God which in deede to euery lad wel catechised is no harder then it is to beleeue that the father is God the sonne God and the holy Ghost God yet there is but one God Christ is God and yet Christ is man our Lady was a mother and yet a Virgin our bodies are corruptible and yet shal liue for euer and almost any other article of our religion But hereof I haue spoken more at large before to which place I refer the the reader And this is the last intolerable blasphemie vvhich M. W. hath found in the Annotations common to vs vvith Christ him self and euery prophet Apostle Euangelist Father and good man that since Christs time liued in the vnitie of his Church THE CONCLVSION AND thus haue I examined and I trust answered sufficiently whatsoeuer faultes M. W. hath found ether in the Testament of late set forth by vs or the Annotations adioyned or M. Martins booke of the Discouerie vvherein I haue bestowed somwhat longer time then ether so smale a trifle required or my self at the beginning intended partly for the more cleare defense of truth and fuller instruction of the reader partly also because in the diligent perusing of his discourse his manifold errors and ouersightes multiplied far beyond my expectatiō And withal I vvould not haue him or his brethren so far deceaue them selues as to suppose they may set forth against this Colledge freely hand ouer head what they list without controle or gainsaing For howsoeuer we be loth to spend our time in such contentious disputes and gladly vvould imploy it otherwise to our better commoditie yet the zeale of God and honour of his Church regard of truth and loue of our countrimen vvhom vve see so pitifully seduced and due obedience to Superiors vvil and must enforce vs to take some paines that
vvay though in part against our vvilles especially vvhen vve are prouoked by aduersaries so insolent and ful of brauerie in vvordes and the same most feeble impotent vnable to performe any thing in deedes and therefore lying verie open to receaue a blovv of any scholer be he neuer so meane and indifferent And albeit no heretical opinion can lightly be defended vvithout many foule shiftes and inconueniences yet M.VV. hath brought him self vvithin harder straightes thē any other by reason of most straunge paradoxes which he hath taken vpon him to maintayne for vvhat man bearing the name of a Christian vvere he othervvise as excellent as euer vvas Cicero or Demosthenes can possibly without increase of infinite absurdities defend Luther against the Apostle S. Iames Beza against the Euangelist S. Luke Illyricus against S. Cyprian and al fathers of the primitiue Church And which in truth is more false wicked more vnreasonable and vnpossible then the rest M Iewels Challenge made at Paules crosse against al men liuing which long since is knowē for a mere shameles proud lying vaunt to Catholike and Protestant Lutheran and Zuinglian learned and vnlearned lippis tonsoribus and in effect notified for such by publike proclamation of the prince and Realme And therefore if he finde in this treatise some wordes more sharpe rough thē he is vsed to heare let him attribute that not to hatred of his person whom I neuer saw and for whose good and amendmēt in Christ God is my witnes I would refuse no paynes how soone I may fall into his handes our Lord knoweth but to hatred of his heresie and his immoderate heate ostentatiō vttered to colour and saue such things as can neuer stand but with open iniurie of Christ disgrace of his Apostles and ruine of Christian religion Our aduersaries Christian reader are now proceeded beyond their ordinarie beyond that which at first they pretended They pleade not now for scripture against fathers for the liuelie word of the Lord against mans traditions which a few yeres sithence was their common songe they are gone far beyond that note and oppose them selues not against S. Hierom S. Austin S. Gregorie but against the self same scripture the self fame liuelie word which they seemed so to honor against S. Iames S. Paule S. Luke against the Apostles and Euangelistes against the verie Gospel of our Sauiour And what can be their next steppe but to cal Christ him self in question to doubt whether he be the true Messias and redeemer of the world And if any of their brethren do moue that doubt as infinite there be that do yea that denie it vtterly what way in the world remayneth for profe thereof al other authoritie besides the written word as the old Fathers Coūcels Tradition Church being by these men quite abandoned and novv the vvritten vvord it self being reiected as far and vvhat Christian talking of these matters and seing these horrible mischeefes not intended in thought surmises cogitations and secret vvhisperings but practised and put in vre by vvriting defenses publike bookes open disputations manifest violences and most vniust murtherings of those which withstand it who I say though he were as pacient as Iob and as voyd of galle as the doue but would be moued Scriptū est saith the Apostle credidi propter quod locutus sum et nos credimus propter quod et loquimur It is vvritten I haue beleeued and therefore I speake vve also beleeue constantly therefore we speake boldy And as saith S. Hierom Quod simpliciter creditur simpliciter confitendum est And if Spiridion that reuerend and auncient Bishop in a great assemblie of Bishops were wel allowed for that he sharply rebuked in publike audience an other in learning his superior in vocation his equall who in citing a text of the gospell altered of finenes and curiositie one only word and the same of no great moment grabatum into lectulum what rigor and vehemencie of speach deserue not they who in Sacramentes chief pointes of faith in the Sacrifice in Baptisme in Priestes in Bishops in Church in Apostles in Angels in Christ him self haue made most prophane innouations and reduced all to the first ethnical termes But of this hitherto The rest which remaineth is only touching Luther Caluin whom M. W. singularly commendeth wherevnto he addeth certain ordinarie wordes of course concerning him self and his felowes how heroically they haue alwaies gotten the victorie ouer vs our forefathers Of these matters somwhat hath bene spoken before and therefore here I wil not say much Luther and Caluin if they were such notable good men they finde it now the better they were the better it is for them if otherwise M.W. commendation standeth them in smale steede Neuertheles certain it is both can not be so excellent as he would make thē being continually in opinion faith in word and worke in the whole trade of their lyfe and maners so opposite so contrary such deadly enemyes as their bookes testifie the world knoweth And M.W. doth verie vnwysely so oft and so painfully to range abrode in praise of that man who is so far abhorring from him and his secte that if Luther be right they are surely out of the way if Luther be a restorer of the gospel they are enemies and destroyers of the gospel if Luther be in heauen they continuing as they do are certain of hel For so Luther euery where pronounceth of them As for the other I meane that vulgar bragging and boasting it proueth not much It is a common itching humour of most kind of heretikes Omnium haereticorum quasiregularis est ista teme ritas saith S. Austin And S. Peter long before gaue it as a general marke of them that they shal be superba vanitatis loquentes speaking provvde arrogant vaine thinges Howbeit it seemeth in our dayes more proper in some special sort to M. VV. sect then to any other as iudgeth that excellent man of whom we last spake Martin Luther who reporteth of them and that by experience that they wil say any thing boast of any thing confidently affirme any thing bur proue nothing by any sound reason or argument nisi gloriatione inani de certissima veritate saue only by friuolous craking of the most cleare truth And if once they fal in to that veyne then is there no ende In suis libris gloriandi finem et modum nullum faciunt But against al such kind of talkatiue vanitie he geueth a very general and resolute lesson vvhich if I professe to take from him and commend the same to others M. w. can not be offended because he extolleh the man for so peerles a maister And this it is Nemo eorum obtestationibus et iactationibus quicquam cred at saith he Nam eos mentiri et dupliciter mentiri certissimum est Let
418. They leaue corrupte the greeke 420. vsq ad 427. They interprete at pleasure greeke latin and euerie tong els 429.430 their straunge interpretations of scripture pa. 324.382.429.430.424 of fathers 217. Their maner of arguing 225. of one figuratiue speach they conclude as many as they list ibi et 226. The foly thereof 226.251.252 The agrement betwene the Protestants of our time and old heretikes pa. 430.431 they are most desyrous of noueltie 455.456.457 they mocke at the Prophetes and sundry writers of scripture 458. their preaching a verie mockery of scripture 458.459 they proceede to infidelitie pa. 2.3 559.560 et pref pa. 21.22 they make thēselues supreme iudges of scripture al other authoritie pa. 54 pref p. 19 20. c. they are obstinate in what soeuer absurditie they once take 237. they honour the Iewes more thē S. Paul 325 326. or the Church of Christ 353. like to the Iewes in malice against the Sea of Rome 329.330.331 they vse more reuerence to the images of beastes thē of Christ 514.515 Be they neuer so cōtrarie they are all assured of the truth pref 32. The Protestants allow all Sectes to rebelle for their seueral heresies pref pag. 16.17 R The Rabbines of the Ievves not to be folowed in the sense of the hebrue wordes pa. 434. the Protestants translating after them translate wickedly 434.435 They corrupt the text of scripture by mispoynting it 314.315 Power to Remitte sinnes geuen to the English ministers by act of Parlament pa. 79.80 M. Iewels chalenge touching the real presence artic 5. answered pa. 182. vsque ad 196 the Zuinglians most vsual and popular argument against it 178. answered at large 179. c. the first heretikes of the English church approued it 182. Many things in scripture as vncredible as that 183.184.186 the Zuinglians argument against the sacrament is the roote of Paganisme 184.185.193.199 It ioynerh them to the Anabaptistes Ebionites Nestorians 185.187 It is reiected by the auncient Fathers 188.198.199 Condemned by the Lutherans 189.190 answered at large by Luther 191.192 he supposeth it to proceede rather from Turkes then Christians 194.195 In the sacramēt al humane philosophical reason must yelde to faith p. 188.189.190.192.198.199.201.202 Scriptures and fathers for the real presence S. Luke 235.236 Ieremie 342.343 S. Chrisostom S. Leo. 238. S. Ciril 200. Heretikes for the real presence Melanchthon 190. Westphalus 190.191 Luther 221. Caluin 223. The ground of the Sacramentarie diuinitie p. 191. The Sacramentaries infidels 193. Infidels their forefathers in mocking Christians for their beleefe in the sacrament 222. how they deale with the fathers 193.194 no one father euer was of their religiō 167. See more in Supper The sacrament a figure ioyned with the veritie pa. 223.224 The Romane Church constant in holding fast the doctrine once deliuered pa. 300.301 pure for six hundred yeres after Christ in pref pa. 47. It can not be proued that she euer changed her faith ibid. 47.48.49.55.56 S Christ sacrificed at his last supper pa. 62. the sacrifice of the Church deduced thence 62.63 sacrifice offered by S. Austin for the dead 66. sacrifice for the dead and in the honour of Saints was vsual in the primitiue church 70.71 Christ a priest in respect of the churches sacrifice 530.531.532 In the church we see Christ sacrificed 217 218.219.220 True sacrifice in the church 214.215.229.230 Melchisedechs sacrifice See Melchisedech M. Ievvels chalenge touching the sacrifice artic 17. ansvvered by the chiefe protestants pa. 70.71.72 Saintes heare our praiers pa. 500.501 Sundry bookes partes of scripture denied by the protestants pa. 26. vsque ad 32. et 401.402 they refusing the authoritie of the church beleeue not the scripture 33.34.35.36 they open the vvay for euery man to deny vvhat he listeth 402.403 A part of S. Iohns gospel doubted of 364. S. Peters second epistle 441.415 the epistle to the Hebrues denied ibidem See S. Iames. S. Luke scripture made ridiculous vvhē it commeth to profane handeling 498. somevvhat is the vvord of God besides scripture 36.37 Scripture corrupted by heretikes in fauour of their heresies 176.177 in Genes against the sacrifice pag. 59.60 in S. Peter against freevvil and good vvorkes 416 417. Christs vvordes in S. Luke notably corrupted for the same purpose 420.421.422 Esai translated detestably agaistn Christs incarnation 439. S. Peter corrupted to make God the author of sinne 451.452.453.455 S. Paul against Christs diuinitie 315. Act. 3. against the real presence 174.179.180 against the immortalitie of the soule 273.274 scripture falsly interpreted by heretikes is the vvord of the Deuil 180.50 The protestāts by their exāple make the text of scripture very vncertaine pa. 241.242.243 one yere canonical the next yere not 366. It is not to be altered vpon one doctors reading 244.245 the partialitie of heretikes choosing precisely one or other reading because it best serueth their heresie 246.247.248.249 they apply scripture to proue any thing be it neuer so vnreasonable 255. to proue Atheisme 408.409 Bookes of scripture faithfully kept by the church though the hebrue text be false 346.347 heretikes may not prescribe the church in what tonge to keepe them 347.348 Stancarus iudgement of the principal Protestant writers pa. 96.97 The Septuaginta interpreters condemned by Luther pa. 305. The Zuinglians true opinion of their Supper p. 209. it differeth nothing from common breakfasts 209.210.211.213 it is no more the body of Christ then a paynted scutchion is king of France 210. only bread 210.214.222 the Supper of the Sacramentaries hath no vse of Christs wordes 257. their arguments against the words of Christ in S. Luke foretold answered by Luther 258.259 T Tradition of the Church necessary pa. 36. S. Hierom author of the common Translation of the nevv Testament vsed in the Church p. 294.295 by appointemēt of Pope Damasus 294. it is approued by the Councel of Trent 281.389 It agreeth with the auncient greeke 372.373 commended for synceritie by the Protestant writers 374.375 defended by them preferred before al nevv 383.387.388.389 preferred before the greeke 393. not to be corrected by the reading of some doctor 394.395 M.W. argument against the same 391.392 the answere 392.393 c. English translations of the nevv Testament al approued by M.W. pa. 262. his wickednes therein 263.264 Such translations leade men to Atheisme 271. are condemned by the learned Protestants 271.272.273.274.275.436 for Hel they trāslate Graue most wickedly 272. thereby mouing men to thinke that the soule is mortal 273.274 A briefe sūme of damnable faultes cōmitted by those translators 278.279 English Translations made in schisme al naught 385. English Translations leaue the hebrue 312. differ notably one from an other 321. Protestante Translations of the new Testament all partial in fauour of their peculiar heresies pag. 365. Luthers condemned by Zuinglius 376.377.378 Al Zuinglian translations condemned by Luther 378.379 that of Basile condemned by Beza 379. item Castalios 380. Caluins corrupteth the text 381. Bezaes most variable and
vvorst of al other 381.382.383.384 he then most busily corrupteth scripture vvhen it is most to the dishonour of Christ 384.385 M. W. inuectiue against the late Catholike translation of the new Testament 444. it is mere histrionical 445.446.448 in condemning it he reproueth himself 447.454.455 the hypocrisie of his accusation 449.450 Notable bragging and lying 459.460.461 how weakely he iustifieth his inuectiue 462.463 he obiecteth only two faults 263.264 both false and if they were true of no importance 464.470.472.473 What they are in particular 464. his vnconscionable dealing 472.473 What is principally requisite in a Translator of scripture pa. 371.372.375 Translations more autentical then the original pa. 290.291.306 V Of the name Vniuersaliâ— See Primacie W Arguments that Good vvorkes are not the cause of saluation pa. 95. refuted at large 99.100.101 c. Good vvorkes in Christians are cause of saluation pa. 99.100 vsque ad 106. 418.421.422.423 as euil workes are cause of damnation 104.105.106.107 See Heauen Good vvorkes are in no respect necessary to saluation by the Protestants doctrine pa. 110.111.113 their argumentes prouing the same 112.113 The fathers doctrine touching good vvorkes set downe by M. W. pa. 115. the wickednes thereof 116.118.119 they are therefore condemned by Luther as verie Iewes 120.121.122 M.W. notable wrangling pa. 14.15 his manifold ouersights 97.98 he vnderstandeth not the Protestants doctrine of only faith 109. he commonly contradicteth him self 23.25.114.115.123.126.319 he proueth the English ministers to be Antichrists for sayng Communion 127.128 how fondly he answereth a place of S. Chrysost 204.206.211.212 his straunge assertion that only the hebrue text is scripture 286.287 Refuted 287.288.289 he calleth S. Austin a Sorbonist for his doctrine touching the value of good workes p. 543.545.546 and by like reason al the Apostles and Prophetes pag. 545.546 his arrogancie in condemning al doctors 495.496 et praef pag. 44.45 The summe of his answering D. Sanders consisteth partly in preferring him self before al other pref pa. 42. ad 51. partly in leauing out the substance of D.S. arguments ibid. pa. 75. vsque ad 81. Z Zuinglius the Apostle of the English church pref pa. 89.90 Zuinglians notable lyers pag. 525.526.555 and braggers 554. their maner of writing pref pa. 81.82 The faultes correct thus Pa. 4 linea 13. for charged reade charging Ibidem in many copies wanteth a marginal note Contra Campian pag. 11. Pa. 41 li. 26. Estaticus reade Ecstaticus Pa. 85. lin 6. Christ reade Christes Pa. 145. lin 18. forth reade forth Pa. 195. l. 17. argumenr reade argument Pa. 328. li. 8. for the two hebrew letters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where also in some few examples the later hebrue word is diuided which should be ioyned Some other faultes there are of like qualitie especially of one letter for an other as s for f and r for t and in one place of some copies is vvhich for vvhich is al which considering the ordinarie difficulties of printing where straungers are the workers coÌ„positors correctors besides other extraordinarie mishaps I trust the Reader of his curtesie wil easely pardon Whom I request if by reading hereof he fynde ought for the encrease of his faith towardes Christ and his Church Catholike euen for loue of the same Christ and Church to help me with his prayer FINIS Contra Sand. pa. 5. in fine Ib. pa. 6. in principio M.W. knoweth not wel what that Antichrist is against whom he writeth Lucian de vera historia lib. 1. Cyclades Lucians historical verities the Protestants Euangelical verities are of like nature and probabilitie Much good time spent in reading or refuting heretical bookes 1. Tim. 6. Tertul. de praescript Heretikes are generally proude and ignoraÌ„t 2. Timoth. 6. v. 4. W. contra Sand. pag. 250. See after chap. 7. pag. 130.131 Whit. contra Camp pag. 154. Ibi pag. 153. Fulke con Mart. pag. 64 65. in sine Supra pa. 4. A strange proposition to say the church is Antichrist In the Protestants faith there is no cercertaintie In their writing and disputing there is no ground That the Protestantes haue no certaine fayth The Prince supreme head of the church The Prince not supreme head of the church A declaration of the iust c. Printed by special commaundement and licence â—no â—532 a pag. 411. Cart. in his second reply b 412. c 413. d 414. Ibi. 419 Communion booke in the forme of publike baptisme Baptisme remitteth sinnes Baptisme remitteth not sinnes Tower disputatioÌ„ the second day Priuate baptisme allowed Priuate baptisme disallowed M. W. contra Sander pag. 276.278 Ficta quaedam necessitas Great difference and coÌ„trarietie in the Communion bookes The sacrameÌ„t of confirmation admitted Refused T.C. pa. 174 apud Whitg pag. 785. Christ descended into hel Christ descended not into hel Carlile Caluin Instit aedit anno 1553. ca. 7 ¶ 28. et in postre aeditione l. 2. c 16. ¶ 9. Christs diuinitie graunted Christs diuinitie denyed M. Whit. contra Campian pag. 25.2.153.154 Sleid. Coâ—â— 17. an 1546. Rebellion against princes iustified and commended Ibidem lib. 8. an 1531. fol. 124. Ibid. lib. 22. an 1550. fol. 411. Sleid. li. 18 anno 1546 fol. 320. Beza ad D. Elizabeth Angl. Regi in praefat noui testament aedit 1565. Fox Actes and monumentes pa. 250.255.257 Ibi. pa. 251.252 a pa. 250. ad 260. Vbi supra pag. 250. Ibi. pag. 260 Gilbie Goodman c. WomeÌ„ may beare no rule ouer men in matters temporal The boâ—kes were pâ—inted at Geneua the yere 1558. yere 1559. Women may beare rule ouer men in al matters temporal and spiritual The Communion booke in the beginning before morning praier Copes and such like ornaments approued CoÌ„demned General chaunges and contrarieties in faith Foâ— actes monumeÌ„tes pag. 586. Real presence CommunioÌ„ in one kynd Mariage of priests vnlawful Vowes of chastitie Priuate masse Auricular confession These articles were according to the law of God in king Henries time Ibi. pag 587 The same articles were contrarie to the law of God in king Edwards time Fox vbi su in historia Cranmeri pag. 1473. A realme pitifully ordered where a chyld of 9 yeres old may by order of law ouerthrow al religion Chaunge vpoÌ„ chauÌ„ge D. Whitg Defensâ—a pa. 31. vsque ad 51. Ibi. pag. 178 Infinite difference betwene our English protestants and those of other nations Whit. Def. Tract 1. p. 74 A rule most assured Groundes or heads of disputation In the protestants writing or disputing there is no grouÌ„d Scripture denyed Whit. contra Camp pag. 17. Traditions of the Apostles denyed General Councels denyed T.C. pag. 16. apud D. Wh. Tract 2. p. 95 Of this see more chap. 3.5.7.17 after in the praeface Auncient doctors of the Catholike Church denyed Whit. coÌ„tra Sand. pa. 92. then we perceaue to be agreable to scripture Si vel intogrum patruÌ„ Senatum in nos commoueris D.
1. cal 4. v. 27. see before pag. 59 The end of M.W. doctrine touching Antichrist If the Pope of Rome be Antichrist there be many worse Antichristâ— in the world M. Iewels maner of answering D. Harding He leaueth out the best part of D. Hardings booke An vnconscionable way of answering Apud Sander pa. 764. Sander pa. 767. Ibid. pag. 770.771 â—â—g 774. Vnreasonable mangling corrupting and falsifying Apud Sander pa. 785. Apud Sand. pag. 789. Illyr Luther Luther To. 7. Defensio c. contra fanaticos sacramentariorum spiritus fo 381. The Protestants forbid the reading of scripture See after pa. 459. The heretikes alter their workes continually Of the name Protestants and Sacramentaries Ful. in the Answere to M. Martins preface pa. 17. Pag. 653. 1717. Those that professe the English religion are not Catholikes Brentius et Lutherani passim See before pa. 39. Nor Protestants Sleidan li. 6 fol. 102.101.109 Ibid. lib. 7. fol. 110. et 114. et lib. 8. fol. 128.131 Those of the English fayth are most properly called Zuinglians or Sacramentaries Apol. Ecclesiae Anglicanae d. â— Protestants Hussites Gospellers See before pa. 16. Actes and monumentes pa. 901.902 Ibid pa. 993. aeditionis postremae Sacramentaries Lutherans Zuinglians These names them selues vse besides a more general name vsed and confirmed by Act of Parlament see before pag 21. Sleid. lib. 8. fol. 128.131.133 et lib. 9. fol. 150. Ibid. lib. 7. fol. 107. et lib. 20. fol. 368. lib. 21. fol. 382.390 ibid. lib. 5. fol. 75.78 The proceding of the new gospel In prefat pag. 2. In respons ad episto Campiani prefa pag. 2. The Heretikes corrupt their ovvne vvryters Anno 1568. Colloq Alt. in respo ad excusa cor fol. 227. 2. RespoÌ„ ad Hipothe a fol. 284. ad fo 290. fo 353.355.441 442.443.526 Ibi. Saxoni ad respons de difcess fo 539.540 Vvestphalus in apologia contra caluÌ„ Cal. ca. 46. pag. 458. The vvorks of Luther corrupted by the Caluinistes in Geneua Detruncaeti Bull resp ad Cocle. ca. 3. Pag. 4. Ibid. Manifest contradiction Duraeus fol. 8. S. Iames epistle denyed by the ProtestaÌ„ts Pomeran ad Rom. ca. 8. In Annot. in â—o Test pag. vâ—i S. Iames epistle the Apocalips lefte out of the Protestants bibles Câ—â— 1. li. 2. c. 4. colum 54. Cent. 2. ca. 4. colum 71. Luther 10.5 in 1. Pc. ca. 1. Muscu in locis coÌ„mu ca. de lusti num 5. pag. 271. pag. 4. M.VV. notable vvranglinge pag. 3. Illirieus in praefa Iac. Had it not bene a goodly matter vvorthy the labour of such greate men in the Tovver disputations to discusse vvhether Luther called S. Iâ—mes Epistle stramineâ— made of stravve simply or oÌ„ly in comparison * Cont. Campi pag. 198. Pag. 4. Whit. cont Camp pag. 17 1â—.19 Cal. in argument ep Ia. The Heretikes sit in iudgemente vpon the scriptures allovv disallovve as they find moste fit for their sectes Whit. pag. 5. The reason why the english cleargie admitte some books of scripture and refuse others Aug. de doct chri li. 2. c. 8. A ca. 2. vers 4. vsque ad finem 7. ca. Pag. 5. Contr. CaÌ„p pag. 9. vide ibi pa. 10.12 M. VV. reasons make most against him selfe pag. 5. The summe of the Tower disputation touching the scriptures The fourth dayes conference Whit. pref pag. 4. 5. con Camp Pa. â—0 Ibi. A. 2. â— Ibi. 3. b. 8. The firste dayes conference in the Tower D. 1.2 Sundrye bookes of the scripture denied by the protestantes S. Lukes gospel doubted of Contr CaÌ„p pag. 9 exagitat The open way to deny al scripture pag. 24. Aug. de heresiâ— heresi 53. Epiph. here 75. Hiero. cont Vigilanti Ioâ—iniat The protestantes as in suÌ„dry other partes of their doctrine so in denying certaine books of scripture imitate the auncieÌ„t heretikes The 4. daies conference Epiph. here 42. Epiph. her 51. W. contra Cam. p. 28. Insti li. 1. ca. 7. ¶ 4 The protestants refusing the authoritie of the church can neuer geue reason how they know some bookes and not other to be canonical scripture Cont. Campian pag. 9. I. Tim. 3. v. 15. The protestats refusing the churche beleeue not the scriptures See after chap. 16. Rom. 10. ver 17. 1. Cor. 15. ver 11. Somewhat is the word of god besides scripture Aug. de doc Chris l. 2. ca. 8. Con. Cart. 4. ca. 47. Con. Laod. can 59. The epistle of S. Paule to the hebrewes as much doubted of in the primitiue Churche as that of S. Iames. and bâ—â—n as much as those books of the olde testament which the protestants reiect Hier. in Esai cap. 6. et 8. Latina coâ—suetudo IdeÌ„ in Hier. cap. 31. Hiero. in Catalogo Caius CoÌ„ei Laod. can 59. Pap. 24. M.VV. brag of coÌ„futing the catholike doctrine vayne and impossible Mat. 13. v. 14 Mat. 7. v. 6. Mat. 16. Luc. 22. Luther tom 2. contr Regem Angl. fol. 342. The coÌ„mon vaine spirit of euerie Secte of protestants Henricianae ecclesiae Pag. 6. Luthers extreme hatred against the Sacramentaries Zuinglians Cleâ—â—â—ius a Zuinglian made a booke intituled victoria venitatis â—utiâ—a papaâ—us Saxonici an 1561 Confess orthodox Eccles Tigâ—r tractat 3. â—o 108. Immaniter contra nos expuit Ibid. in prefat fol. 3. â— Lauatieâ— in historia Sacram. fol. 32. Luther reiâ—cteth the bible translated by the Zuinglians how much more ought catholiks to auoyded the same In coÌ„fessio Tigur vers supra fo 30. Confes Tigur tract 3. fol. 108. The Zuinglians condemne them selues in defending Luther M.W. distinctioÌ„ wheÌ„ Luthers iudgemeÌ„t is to be preferred before al the Church The folie of M.W. distinction Cone Chal. actio 1. Lirine cont haeres ca. 43. Mat. c. 4. v. 6. Ioan. c. 14. et 16. Ephes cap. 4. b. c. Esa ca. 59. v. 21. In this case the authoritie of the deuel as wel as of Luther is better theÌ„ all Fathers or al the angels of heauen Gal. 1. Ierem. 31. g. 33. d. Luthers iudgement with scripture against the Sacrametaries Luther to 7. A defence of the literal sense of our Sauiours wordes etc. against the fanatical sprites of the SacrameÌ„taries Ibi. fol. 383. The Sacramentaries enemies of the gospell by Luthers iudgmeÌ„t coÌ„firmed with scripture Euerie protestant soueraine iudge of scripture CouÌ„cels doctors old new See the 5. chap. in the beginning pa. 7 Mat. 10. v. 24. pa. 6. Who are truly priests Melchisedec did sacrifice The sacrifice of Melchisedec denied generally by the protestants though confessed by M. W. Gen. 14. Heb. c. 7. v. 6 Mus in loc com cap. de Miss papist pa. 492. Bib. printed anno 1579. Corruption of the scriptures Cal. in com in episto ad Heb. c. 7. v. 9 Ibid. Caluin reiecteth the auÌ„cieÌ„t fathers touchinge the sacrifice of Melchisedec Cal. in psal 110. Heb. 5. v. 11. 1. Cor. ca. 2. ver 5. ca. 3. ver 2. Hier. ep 126 ad Euagri Greg. Nazi Christ did sacrifice at his
apostasie from Christ these later hundred yeres vpon which as I haue said dependeth the verie substance of this his booke is an absurditie in Christian religion so foule monstruous and abominable that it can not be defended of any man except he first of al deny the very incarnation of Christ his preaching his death and passion his eternal kingdome priesthod the sending of the holy Ghost the entier summe of all whatsoeuer hath bene written by the Apostles or foretold by the prophetes For to what end was Christes incarnation but to ioyne him selfe vnto a Church from which he would neuer be separated To what end was his preaching but to erect and instruct such a Church To what end his death and passion but to redeeme sanctifie such a Church leaue vnto it an euerlasting remedie to blot out her sinnes and offences How is he an eternal king who hath not an eternal people obeyng him and obseruing his lawes how an eternal priest whose priesthod and sacrifice for so many hundred yeres was applied to none auailed for none and to what puâ—pose was the holy Ghost sent but to remayne vvith the church for euer and leade her into al truth And vvhat is the summe of the gospels but a declaration that Christ by him self by the holy Ghost by his Apostles founded such a church in vvhich his wil should euermore be openly preached his sacramentes rightly euermore ministred true faith and religion alvvaies preserued a certain vvay for conuerting infidels to the faith for coÌ„futing errors and heresies be continued and al true ChristiaÌ„s maintained by lawful pastâ—rs in vnitie of his true faith against al blastes of vaine doctrine euen vntil his coming to the general iudgement Finally that such a citie and common welth it should be so coÌ„stant so stroÌ„g so vnmoueable that it should vpholde the glorie and name of Christ â— gainst Princes against Potentates against Kings and Emperours against al the force of the world the deuil though they al with might and mayne applyed their whole power to the suppressing and rooting out of it And the self same is the effect of al the auncient Prophetes that the preachers of Christes catholike church should neuer cease day nor night to preach the truth that howsoeuer darknes couered al other nations yet the light there of should neuer be extinguished that the spirite of God and truth of doctrine should neuer depart from it but remayne in it froÌ„ one generation to an other euen for euer that it should neuer be brought in to a narow roume as was the synagoge of the Iewes but should be diffunded thorough al prouiÌ„ces of the earth that the course of heauen of the sunne of day and night should rather faile then priests and preachers of the new testament that albeit other monarchies had an end were altered as the Assyrians the Persians the Macedonians the Romanes yet this should neuer suffer any such a teration but should stand vnchangeâ—ble for euer Wherefore to affirme that this Church hath failed is to affirme that Christ his Apostles Prophetes are al liers that what soeuer is written in the old and new testameÌ„t is all vaine and fabulous For touchâ—ng the straunge deuise of an inuisible church which some of them haue of late imagined it is nothing els but a mere poetical fansie a fansie vvhich consisteth only vpoÌ„ their ovvne vvord and credite for profe vvhereof they neuer yet brought any scripture couÌ„cel father doctor chronicler or writer nor euer shal be able a fansie by which any sect neuer so horrible may defend them selues to be a Church as wel as they a fansie framed and patched together of mere contrarieties and contradictions a fantastical opinioÌ„ which being long since abandoned of the learned protestants in other countries as most vvicked and pestileÌ„t is novv I knovv not vpon vvhat miserie and necessitie receaued of our English Diuines VVhensoeuer vve thinke of the church saith Melanchthon let vs beholde the company of such men as are gathered together vvhich is the visible church nether let vs dreame that the elect of God are to be found in any other place then in this visible societie For nether vvil God be called vpon or acknovvledged othervvise then he hath reuealed him self nether hath he reuealed him self els vvhere saue only in the visible church in vvhich only the voice of the gospel soundeth Nether let vs imagine of any other inuisible church but let vs knovv that the voice of the gospel must sound openly amongst men according as it is vvritten Psal 18 Their sound is gone forth in to al the earth Let vs knovv that the ministery of the gospel must be publike and haue publike assemblies as it is sayd Ephes 4. Let vs ioyne our selues to this company let vs be citizens and members of this visible congregation as vve are commaunded in the 25. and 83. Psalme VVhich places and other the like speake not of Platoes Idea but of a visible church c. And in sundry other places refelling this mad fansie he euer concludeth Necesse est fateri esse visibilem Ecclesiam de qua filius Dei c. It is of necessitie that vve confesse a visible church whereof the sonne of God saith Matth. 18 Dic ecclesiae Tel the church vvhereof Paule saith 1. Cor. 4 VVe are made a spectacle to the vvhole vvorld to angels and to men VVhat a spectacle I beseech you is that vvhich is not seene and whereunto tendeth this monstruous speach vvhich denieth the visible church Delet omnia testimonia antiquitatis abolet iudicia facit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 infinitam illam Cyclopum politiaÌ„ in qua◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vt est apud Euripidem It abolisheth al testimonies of antiquitie it taketh avvay al iudgementes it causeth an endles confusion and induceth a common vvelth of vnruly ruffians or Atheists vvherein no one careth for an other And Caluin interpreteth the article of our creede Credo Ecclesiam CatholicaÌ„ of the Catholike visible Church saith furthermore that the knowledge therof is so necessary that there is no hope of life by grace in this world except we be conceaued brought forth nourished aâ—d ruled by her so long as we liue Adde quod extra eius gremium nullae est spâ—randa peccatoruÌ„ remissio neque vlla salus teste Iesai c. 37. vers 32. Ioel. ca. 2. v. 32. Ezechiel ca. 13. v. 9. psal 106. v. 4. Adde here vnto that out of the lap of this visible church no pardon of synnes is to be hoped for nor any saluation as vvitnesse Isaie Ioel Ezechiel and the Prophete Dauid And OecolaÌ„padius writing vpoÌ„ the Prophete Isaie and those wordes ca. 2. Fluent ad eum omnes gentes Create is the dignitie saith he of the Christian church aboue the synagoge of the Ievves in that it shal
canonical scriptures And that this fault lye not altogether vpon Luther and the lutheraÌ„s VVolfg Musculus a famous wryter amongst the Zuinglians vpon lyke reason pronounceth lyke sentence They obiect vnto vs sayeth he the place of Iames. but he vvhatsoeuer he vvere though he speake othervvise then S. Paule yet may he not preiudice the truth And after he hath at large shewed the disagreemente betweene those two Apostles thus he breaketh forth into the open reproch of S. Iames. VVherefore he S. Iames alleageth the example of Abraham nothinge to the purpose vvhere he sayeth vvilte thou knovv ô vayne man that fayth vvithout vvorkes is dead Abraham our Father vvas he not iustified by vvorkes vvhen he offred his sonne Isaak He confoundeth the vvord fayth hovv much better had it bene for him diligently and playnely to haue distinguished the true and properlye Christian fayth vvhich the Apostle euer preacheth from that vvhich is common to Ievves and Christians Turks and Diuels then to confound them both and set dovvne his sentence so different from the Apostolicall doctrine vvhereby as concluding he sayth you see that a man is iustified by vvorkes and not by fayth alone vvhereas the Apostle out of the same place disputeth thus c. And after he hath made S. Paule speake as he thinketh best he inferreth Thus sayeth the Apostle of vvhose doctrine vve doubt not Compare me novv vvith this argument of the Apostle the conclusion of this Iames A man therfore is iustified by vvorks and not by fayth only and see hovv much it differeth vvhereas he should more rightly haue coÌ„cluded thus c. In which discourse the Reader may see that he not onely contemptuously refuseth to call him an Apostle and euer nameth him as opposite to the Apostle but also that he refuteth him as making false arguments and taketh vpon him to be his maister and as it were calling him ad ferulam checketh and controwleth him for a corrupter of scripture misapplying the word of God and wickedly pullinge downe that which S. Paule had so wel built vp All which beinge so plaine euident and manifest and the worde straminea found out at length acknowleged by M. VV. a man wold thinke all this matter ended and that egregious lye fathered vpon M. Campian turned vpon M. VV. head withall M. Campians first reason iustified wherein he burdened the Protestantes with denial of the holy scriptures And yet M. VV. yeldeth not but like a valiant soldiar is so farre from geuinge ouer that he pursueth his aduersarie still as though he had the better of him and whâ—e so or how can he possiblie defend him self forsoothe because Luther non plane 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 stramineam appellauit Luther sayed not playnlye and simplye that it vvas stravven or made of stravve but in comparison of Sainte Peter and Sainte Paules Epistles I beleeue in deede Nether did F. Campian or M. Martine saye so or any wise man els for although he were as madde and shamelesse in his assertions as euer was heretike yet to haue termed that epistle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 stramineam simplye made of stravve or any otherwise then to haue signified the vnworthynes of the same in respect of holie scriptures and in that sort it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a worde of blasphemous contempt had bene as wonderful as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to haue affirmed that is was made of woode or morter And here in the verie fronte and beginning let the reader note in M.VV. the liuely paterne of a perfecte wrangler maintaininge a continuall bablinge vppon wordes and neuer drawing nigh to the pointe Father Campians and M. Martins charge vppon them beinge euidente that they contemne the written worde as is proued by Luther M.VV. knowinge not wel what to say runneth he knoweth not whether vp and downe and aboute forwarde and backward now grauntinge and by and by recalling so that in the compasse of one leafe in one plaine matter he hath more contrary windinges and turnings then a graue and sober man could be driuen vnto in the wryting of a large volume First there is no suche thinge and F. Campian lyeth egregiously nowe him selfe hath founde it out then there was neuer a worde chaunged in Luthers preface now the later editions differ much from the former againe Luther calleth it not simpliciter stramineam but in respect of S. Paules epistles and S. Peters If this serue not the turne then I require you saith he to bring forth the other wordes that folow arida tumida contentiosa or els this of straminea is no great matter yet one fetche more Although I vvil not defend this of Luthers yet you haue iniuried him in saying that he called it omnino stramineam altogether made of stravv looke saith M. Martin in Illyricus and there you shall finde the matter graunted I haue so done saith M.VV. let me be counted impudent yf you finde this vvord there Thus muche I graunt Illyricus saith that Luther rehearseth graue causes vvhy this epistle ought not to be esteemed for a vvriting of Apostolicall authoritye But vvhat is this to the purpose as though he that denieth the epistle to be apostolical termeth yt stramineam made of stravv This is a copie of M.VV. vayne in wryting first to deny the matter be it neuer so euident and wheÌ„ the matter is coÌ„fessed theÌ„ to cauil vpon syllables and when matter and forme the verie syllables are founde yet to yelde to nothing but to keepe the pen or tounge walking as though in this point lyke verball grammarians and ridiculous sophisters we principallie hunted after these syllables stra mi ne am which neuerthelesse are found and not as students searchers of truth in diuinitye soughte out first and cheeflie whether by these and the lyke contemptible speeches the aduersarie laboured to disgrace deface that Apostolical writing and so impiouslie to auoyde suche authoritie when he should be pressed therewith Wherefore to draw to some issue howsoeuer Luther 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 called it stramineam or called it not or whether he spake so in respect of the matter of the epistle or the forme or by way of comparison with S. Paule or whatsoeuer other quidditie M.W. ether now hath or hereafter shall deuise if Luther did yt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to deface the epistle which M.VV. denieth not and to dispossesse it of Canonicall authoritie as the thing it self speaketh if by his example the Germane Diuines churches altogether contemne it if vppon Luthers sentence Illyricus pronounce that Luther in his praeface rendereth great causes vvhy this epistle oughte in no case to be accounted for a vvriting of Apostolicall authoritie vnto vvhich reasons I thinke euerie godlie man and not geuen to contention ought to yeld if Pomerane say the vvriter thereof maketh a vvicked argument concludeth ridiculouslie if Vitus Theodorus thrust it cleane out of the booke if the Centuries affirme