I would you might be féede cuē for the sauing of your credit M. Charke to alege one place without corruption Doe you translate Lex domini immaculata The Lawe of the Lorde is perfecte in sense soe that it maye not be wrested to a wronge interpretation This is maruelous Immaculata signisieth in these countryes vnspotted voyde of filthe or dishonestye wherewith prophane wrytings are often times defiled But the Law of God is deuoyde of all such thinges and therefore conuerteth soules wheras other wrytinges doe often times corrupt them But that Immaculata can not be translated perfecte in sense it is euidente by this that euerye sillable and worde in God his Lawe is vnspotted but yet not perfecte in sense and much lesse so cleare as it may not be peruerted to an euil meaning wherby your fraudulente translation is discouered 7. You reporte the Iesuites to saye The readinge of the Scripture is not onely not profitable but manye wayes verye hurtefull to the Churche Fol. 21. Did you thinke M. Charke when you wrote this that anye of these bookes whose leaues you cite were to be had or séene in Englande I thinke noe or els you are at a poynte to make none accounte what you speake hereafter The Iesuites haue not this which you reporte here in their names But onely they laye doune certayne wayghtye reasons whye the readynge of Scripture is not rashelye and without verye greate consideration to to be permitted to the rude and ignorant people which vnderstande it not and therfore maye easely misconceaue the meaning therof shewing also that al heresies from the beginning haue bene founded vpon the misunderstanding of the Scripture and yet this without al faulte of the woorde of God but by the ignorance or malyce of the misconsterer As in like manner al sinnes arise by the misuse of the creatures of God which creatures notwithstandinge are good in their owne natures as the Apostle teacheth and Christ him selfe is sayde to be an occasion of ruine vnto some and yet without any faulte of his This is the Iesuites doctrine the contrarie wherof I would sée nowe how M. Charke according to his promise will proue out of the cléere woord of God Mary saythe he Christe delyuerethe a contrarie note Math. 22. Yee erre not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God whereof he would inferre that all men must read the Scriptures A stronge argumente the circumstances considered for first the men to whome Christe spake these woordes were noe ignorante people but learned Saduces which came prepared to pose Christe about the resurrection This appeareth by the subtile question which they put for the of seuen brethren which had alone wife groūded vppon the lawe of Moyses wherby they thought to ouerthrow the doctrine of resurrection But Christe hauing heard their question toulde them that they erred not vnderstanding the Scriptures touching that poynte of resurrection which Scriptures he interpreted to them presentlye out of the iij. chapter of Exodus Also he sayde they erred not vnderstanding the power of God wherby he is able to rayse againe the selfe same bodye in nomber whiche is dead though it be vnpossible as it is in all natural reason Soe that Christ spake not here to vnlearned men nor of all Scriptures nor of readinge but of vnderstanding What maketh therfore this to your purpose M. Charke forsoothe as much as if you should reason thus my Lorde Chaunceller sayd to certayne Doctors of the Arches pleading a case vnskilfully before him you erre not vnderstandinge the common lawe in this case nor the Princesse anthoritie Ergo by these woordes he meanethe that al the clownes of Englande shall fall to readinge of the common lawe albeit they vnderstand neuer a woorde therof 8. You reporte the Iesuites to saye That the rightuous mā lyueth by faith ne hath it not in Christ but by his own woorkes fol. 118. You wearye me out with your impudent lyes there is noe suche thinge what should I aunswere you and yet as though they had sayde it you bringe in a place of S. Paule against the same sayinge If rightuousnes come by our woorkes it is not now grace As thoughe noe mans woorkes coulde be rightuous in this lyfe whiche is bothe from the purpose and false For we denye not but the firste and chéefe rightuousnes wherof Saint Paule speakethe in this place that is wherby a man is called first from sinne or infidelitye to the seruice of Christe his sinnes forgeuen him and he iustified by the infusion of grace this rightuousnes I saye is onlye of Gods merrye and noe waye of our woorkes or by anye merite of the same But yet notwithstandinge after we are nowe made iuste and by the mercye of God placed once in state of grace the good woorkes which ensue of this grace may be rightuous and meritorious not of themselues or of their owne natures as you wickedly affirme vs to hould but thorough the dignitye of that grace of Christe whiche remaynethe in the doers The whiche grace beinge once loste their good déedes are noe more rightuous or merytorious The which true doctrine of ours you will not vnderstand but alwayes of malyce report it contrarye as also you doe shamfully this place of S. Paule to make it serue your purpose For S. Paule saythe that Gods election wherby he chooseth men to be Christians is of grace onlye and not by merite of woorkes and you drawe it generallye against the rightuousnes of al good woorkes And because it would not streche soe farre you haue added vnto it of your owne these woordes If rightuousnes come by our c. which woordes are not in S. Paule 9. You reporte the Iesuites to saye Men doe surely hope that euerlastinge lyfe shall be geuen them but they doe not beleue it now hope often fayleth otherwise it were no hope Cens. 118. For confutation of which doctrine you aleage out of S. Paule Hope is the sure anchor of the soule And againe Hope maketh not ashamed In the which you shew your selfe vnlearned huddlinge vp and confoundinge faythe and hope as one thinge the whiche S. Paule 1 Cor. 13 dothe affirme to be distincte thinges The Iesuites doctrine if you vnderstoode it is true learned and cléere to wit that noe man with out a speciall reuelation from God as the Apostles had from Christ when he sayde that their names were written in the booke of lyfe maye beléeue that he in particuler shalbe saued albeit he maye well hope it And the reason of this is for that the only obiect of faythe is the woorde of God reueled vnto vs ether by writing or by tradition that is as much to saye as noe man maye beléeue or haue faythe in anye thinge excepte it be reuealed vnto him by the woorde of God Wherof it foloweth that whatsoeuer a man beléeueth must be soe certayne necessarie and infallablye true as it cannot possiblye be
false Which two reasons proue that albeit a man maye hope his owne saluation in particuler yet he maye not make it of his beléefe First for that he hathe noe expresse woorde of God that he in particuler shalbe saued for what Scripture saythe for examples sake that Willyam Charke shalbe saued none I thinke but onlye in generall and vppon conditions as if he beléeue as he should doe ioyning charitye with it 1 Cor. 13. If he kepe the commaundementes Math. 19. If he perseuer in honestie vnto the ende Math. 10. If he leaue his lyeinge Apocal. 21. 22. and the lyke The which thinges all noe man can tel whether he obserue or whether he shall obserue them vnto the end or noe Secondlye it is not soe certayne that anye man in particuler shall be saued but he maye be damned at the leaste wise it is not vnpossible for he maye denye his faythe if he will he maye committ adulterie murther and the lyke enormityes and soe damne him selfe As we sée Iudas and diuers other haue done which séemed good for a time and soe maye I toe if I liste and therfore my saluation in particuler beinge not infalliblye certayne can not be the obiecte of faythe and beléefe but onlye of hope Now this hope hath ioyned with it bothe confidence and doubte and that in respecte of two thinges For in respecte of the goodnes and mercy of God it is full of confidence and assurance and in this respecte S. Paule callethe hope the anchore of the soule whiche maketh not ashamed as you aleadge But in respect of Gods iustice and our sinfull frailtie hope hath also doubt and feare annexed with it For when I consider that God as he is mercifull soe is he iust Psal. 10. nay that he damneth more by his iustice then he saueth by his mercie Math. 7. 2. Luc. 13. also that he wil take a straite accounte of euerie little sinne at the daye of iudgement Math. 12. and that there be manie secrete sinnes which maye be in me without my remembraunce Psal. 18. 1. Cor. 4. moreouer that diuers shall come confidentlie at the laste daye hopinge to be saued and yet shalbe damned Math. 7. when I doe coÌ„sider this I say adding to it mine owne noghty inclination vnto sinne my weaknes in perseueraÌ„ce of vertue I caÌ„not chose but ioyne feare with my confidence and soe the scripture teacheth me to do saying Doe you conuerse in feare duringe this time of your habitation And agayne Worke your salutioÌ„ in feare and trembling The reason wherof is put doune also in the scripture to wit Because a man knoweth not whether he be worthye of hate or loue So that we M. Charke as you sée reconcile al scriptures together and mayntayne both confidence and feare in Christian hope and you take one part onely and leaue out the other and yet you are offended with M. Campion for saying that you confound and huddle vp matters 10 You reporte the Iesuites to saye The scripture in deede neuer teachethe inuocation of Sayntes yet we must beleeue â—eceaue and hold it fol. 230. This is falslye reported too for they doe not saye The Scripture neuer teachethe inuocation of Saintes But Monhemius against whom they wrote sayed so and thereof inferred that therefore it was not to be beléeued Which consequence of argument the Iesuites deny to be good and geue examples in many thinges which are not expreslye sett doune in the scriptures and yet are to be beléeued as I haue shewed before in your fowrthe reporte And touchinge this doctrine of Inuocation of Saintes to pray for vs and with vs to our Sauiour the Catholique Churche foundeth it in the woorde of God and deduceth it by necessarie consequence out of manye and euident places of Scripture adioyning therunto the explication and determination of the auncient general Councels and the testimonies of the holye Fathers with the vniuersall practise of all Christendome from the beginning as it maye appéere to them that will reade the Catholique bookes writen of this matter And now you Sir to ouerthrow all this bringe in onlye besides your lye a metaphoricall place of the prophet Esaye Thou art our Father and Abraham hath not knowen vs and Israel hath bene ignorant of vs. Are these your playne cléere and euidente Scriptures whiche you bragge of soe muche I will answers your place to shew your weknes First if the prophet had spoken of inuocation of Saintes in this place and of their intercessioÌ„ for vs yet were not thes wordes against vs for we graunt that the Fathers of the ould Testament vntill Christes ascension were not in heaueÌ„ as our Saintes are now but in Limbo patrum expecting Christ his coming therfore could not here vs or vnderstaÌ„d our necessities as they can now in heauen therfore in this sence the wordes may be true Abraham hath not knoweÌ„ vs c. Secondly the prophet talketh of no such matter in this place but onlye bringing in Christ all bloodye after his passion resoneth with him in the name of the whole people of Israel coÌ„fessing their great sinnes froÌ„ the which Abraham Israel were not able to deliuer them but rather had reiected cast theÌ„ of for the same sinnes so knew them no longer Wherfore they were coÌ„strained to come vnto Christ as to their father and only redéemer therfore they say to him Thou art our father and Abraham hath not knowen vs c. The which kind of spéeche S. Ierome proueth out of the Gospel wher Christ saied vnto the foolish virgins that came to late I know you not that is I know you not for my seruantes I refuse reiect you I care not for you and not as M. Charke doth interpret I know not your case or your necessities for he knew it wel inough but yet would not reléeue them 11. You report y e Iesuites to say Christ neuer sayd to lay men do this in remeÌ„braÌ„ce of me fol. 302. The which as you say S. Paul doth plainly coÌ„fute 1. Co. 11 You wil neuer vnderstand y e Iesuites a right They proue in y t place y t Christ in his last supper hauing coÌ„secrated his owne body blood coÌ„maÌ„ding his Apostles which were preists to do the very same by y e words Hoc facite do this or the faÌ„e that I haue doÌ„e they proue I sai y t this authoritie of consecrating Christ his body was coÌ„mitted only to priestes not to lay men nether doth S. Paul any way impugne this For we deny not to lay men the coÌ„munion of Christe his body but the consecration of the same the which consecration to be geuen by those woords of Christ. Hoc facite Doe this all holye Fathers of the Churche from time to time haue vnderstoode namely Clemens Romanus Li. 5. coÌ„st cap. 20. Ambros. Li. 4. de sacram ca. 6. Cyprian Li. 2. Ep. 3. Chrisostome Ho. 14.
can a man damne him selfe doe what mischefe he can except the wil refuse to beleeue In his booke de capti Babil cap. de baptis The ten commaundementes appertayne nothing vnto vs. Serm. de Moys It is a false opinion and to be abolished that there are foure ghospels For the ghospel of Iohn is the onelye fayre true and principal ghospel In prefa ad nouum Testam And this he sayed because the other thrée Ghospels spake too much of good works If anye woman can not or wil not proue by order of law the insufficiencie of her husband let her request at his handes a dyuorse or els by his consent let her lye priuilye with his brother or with some other man Lib. de matri in epithal super 1. Cor. 7. If the wife wil not come let the maid come Serm. de matrim Matrimonie is much more excellent then virginitie Li. de vot euang Christ and S. Paule did not counsaile but dissuade virginitie vnto Christians Lib. de vot monast It is as necessarie for euerye man to haue a wife as it is to eate drinke or sleepe Li. de vo coniu in asser art 16. Al Christians are as holy and is iust as the mother of God and as the Apostles were Serm. de Trin. de B. Maria com ep 1. Pet. I leaue other infinit beastly doctrines which he taught for the inuentiō wherof he had much conference with the deuil him selfe whom Bishoppe Lindan and dyuers others wryte to haue bene séene talke bodyly with him by men of very great credit And Luther himselfe confesseth in his workes that he had often and familier speache with him and that he was first moued by him to wryte agaynst the Masse in the yeare 1534. He also diserybeth his voyce sayinge that it was so terrible huge and dreadfull that he was lyke to dye dyuers times after the nightes conference with him And that dyuers men were slayne by such conference Notwithstanding it was his chaunce to escape albeit as he sayeth he did eate more then a bushell of salte together with this deuil But yet neuerthelesse he was deceaued in the ende as al men are that deale with such Marchantes For Luther going one night drunke to bed as Hosius wryteth was founde there the next day deade slayne as is thought by this his familier deuil For he was a pitifull creature to looke on as Sainctes describeth al blacke with his tonge lying out as a man stranguled And this was the end of Luther after almost thirtye yeres lyuinge in all kynde of sensualitie pryde and dissention not onelye with the Catholique Church but also with his owne broode and ofspring Carolostadius Oecolampadius Bucer and Zuinglius parents of the Protestantes religion whom he perseruted cursed and condemned to the very pitt of hel for damned Heretickes as yet appeareth in his bookes writen agaynst them Wherefore whether the Protestantes or the Iesuites may be more ashamed of their first father let the indifferent Reader iudge There is the lyke lyfe or worse wryten of Calum by a french man that lyued with him of the same religion at that time and was translated into Englishe by a countrye man of ours and had bene put in print ere this had not my L. of London by an euil chance gotten the copye into his handes Fourthly you wil néedes bringe the Iesuites in discredit by certayne blasphemous doctrines which you say they hold in a booke writen by common consent called Censura Coloniensis out of the which you haue for examples sake put downe thirtine blasphemies in their owne very wordes as you saye noting the leafe and adding the cleane contrarye doctrine out of the worde of God And that men should knowe that you deale playnely and bring their very words and no sillable of your owne you haue put their sayinges doune in a differēt romane letter But M. Charke in brotherly charitie let me reason the matter a litle with you Are you not ashamed of this falshode did you not thincke that this your booke might be examined by some man or other in déed you haue al the Printes to your selfe and your searchers are so watchful as nothing can passe their handes to the discouering of your doinges and therefore you may both saye and print what you wil And our eares may wel burne on this side the sea and our harts rew at the shameles vntruethes which we heare and sée vttered there amongste you dayly but we can not remedie it and this that I wryte now I make account it may as wel perishe as dyuers things of greater importāce haue done heretofore But suerly me thincketh a wise man that had care of his soule might sée the lighte at a litle hole and descrye the conclusion by a few premisses If you in so short a pamphlet vtter so many so manifest so inexcusable vntruethes as I wil now shewe which notwithstanding you might reasonably doubt leste perhapps they might be disclosed what wil you and your felowes dare auouch in your sermons spéeches and discourses which you are sure shal neuer come to the examination But now let vs consider these wicked blasphemies of the Iesuites with whom if you haue dealt truelye and honestlye thē let al be beléeued which you speake dayly of vs if you haue done otherwise then the same malice which droue you to abuse your selfe towards them may also iustelye be suspected in the reste of your doinges and sayings towards vs. 1. First therefore you reporte the Iesuites to say It is not sinne what so euer is agaynst the word of God Censura Colon. leaf 44. These wordes are guilefully reported péeced and culled out for your purpose of a large discourse and yet most true in their sense The occasion whereof was this One Monhemius a Lutherā against whose Catechisme this Censure of Colē was made would néeds proue Concupiscēce remayninge after Baptisme to be a damnable mortal sinne albeit no consent of harte were geuē vnto the same and for proofe of the same he brought in this definitiō of sinne Sinne is what so euer repugneth to the law of God The which definition the Censure of Colen affirmeth not to be in al respects perfecte but that dyuers wordes should be added to the same as for example in stéede of that he sayeth Sinne is what soeuer c. he should haue sayed Sinne is an action for that there be dyuers things which repugne against the law of God as euil men euil lawes the deuils and the lyke which notwithstandinge are not properlye sinnes for that they are not actions Secondlye he should haue sayed not onely Sinne is an action but Sinne is a humane or reasonable action for if a mad man a foole or a beast should commit an acte prohibited by Gods lawe as for example kill a man it were properly no sinne Thirdly he should haue added voluntarie for if a man should doe a noughtie acte against his will as
in ep 1. ad cor Isodorus Li. diu offic cap. 18. Damascenus Li. de ortho fid cap. 14. with others Nether importeth it anie thinge though the woorde facere dothe not signifie to consecrate of his owne nature for the facte of Christe going before draweth it to that signification as if a man should singe and afterwarde say to the standers by Hoc facite Doe the same héere facere should signifie to singe though not of his owne nature 12. You reporte the Iesuites to say Traditions are of equal authority with the woorde of God we must beleue thē though they be manifestlye against the Scripture Cens. fol. 230. You drawe towards an end M. Chark therfore you wil make a soūd lie for a parting blow You haue here added of your owne We must beleue them thoughe they be manifestlye against the Scripture The Iesuites say no such woord but they affirme the former parte of your wordes although not soe generally confusedly as you report For they say not that all traditions are of equal authoritye with the woord of God but only such as are certaynlye descended from Christ his Apostles and were deliuered by thē to be obserued as parte of the woorde of God For there are two kinds of traditions or doctrines receaued onlye by woord of mouthe the one called Ecclesiastical because they were begone and left vs only by the Church and thes ar of no greater authoritie then the writinges and other decrées of the Churche are The other are called Apostolicall or deuine left vnto vs by Christ the Apostles and thes are of no lesse authority then if they had ben writen by thē or then are the other things which they wrot For if a maister should leaue vnto his seruantes one thing in writing and an other thing by woord of mouthe they are of equal authoritie as all men wil graūt Thes traditions therfor if they be certainly knowen to come frō Christ his Apostles the Iesuites say they are of equal authority with y e written word not al traditiōs as you malitiously reporte And now that Christ his Apostles left vnto the Church diuers doctrines by word of mouth only not writen it is proued by inuincible argumētes as by the testimonies of the Councels Fathers stories of the Primatiue church by many places of scripture as namly by that S. Paule saithe to the Thessalonians Brethern stande fast and hould the traditions which you haue lerned ether by word of mouth or by our epistle Also it is proued by doctrines which we haue and hould the Church hath so done frō the beginning which doctrines notwithstanding are not writen but receaued by worde of mouth from Christ and the Apostles as baptisme of infantes celebration of the sondaye the nomber of the bookes of Scripture the fast of lent and the like wherof I haue geuen more examples before in your fourth reporte Now this being soe how vainly doe you bring in M. Charke against this the sayng of Christ touching the superstitious scribes and Pharases In vaine doe they worshipe me teaching doctrines that are but the traditions of men In your owne conscience I aske you is this anything pertaining to our purpose or contrarie to the Catholiques doctrine which I haue set doūe if it be not why doe you soe shamlesly deceaue the people with such impertinēt stuffe But this is your onlye refuge and herein lyethe the whole mayntenance of your cause to reporte vs still amisse and to refute vs with that whiche nothing pertayneth to the matter As in this place whiche you haue héere brought in let the reader marke how manye differences there be betwixt it and our purpose First Christ in this place reprehendeth the teaching of doctrins that are but of men and we talke of doctrines deliuered vs by Christ and his Apostles Secondly Christe reprehendeth not al obseruation of traditiōs of men but the noughtie obseruation of them by estéeming them more then the worde of God and by breaking the worde of God for the obseruinge of them which we also doe condemne Thirdlye those traditions of the Pharases which Christ reprehendeth were certayne idle and foolishe external ceremonies as the washing of cuppes and the lyke and dyuers of them were directe contrarye to the worde of God as certaine corrupt expositiōs of the law as Christ noteth there And these were of thrée kindes The one left by Rabbi Akiuam the other by Rabbi Iuda the thyrde by the sonnes of Asomoneus which interpretations all were called Deuteroseis that is secondarye expositions after Moyses of which peruerse expositions came al their errours of the Talmud But now what is this to the holye Traditions of Christ and his Apostles or of the Primatiue Church 13. Lastly you report the Iesuites to say We must worshippe the image of Christ with lyke honour that we doe the holy bookes of the Ghospel fol. 66. Agaynst which you bring in S. Paul askinge What agreemente is there betweene the temple of God and Idoles I answere much more agréement then there is betwéene the matter we talke of and this place of S. Paule For he talketh of drawinge the yoke with infidels and our question is whether the worshippe done to the image of Christ and to the Byble be al one or no But you by callinge the image of our Sauiour an Idole shew your selfe impious and you are accursed for it by the seuēth general Councel And by putting such great difference betwéene the worship of Christes Image and his books of the Ghospel you proue your vnderstanding to be very litle For if you graunt any kinde of worshippe to the one how can you deny the same to the other séeinge that both are creatures and as the Image was made by the Karuer so the letter of the Byble by the Printer and the hononr done to the one and the other is not to them selues but onely to God whose Image and word they are But if you denye al kinde of honour to them both in that they are creatures for we assigne no diuyne honour vnto them Thē first your place of S. Paul of difference is nothing to the purpose Secondlye what wil you saye to the worshipppe done vnto the Arke vnto the Cherubins vnto the serpent of brasse Why doth Dauid say Doe you adore the stoole of his feete Why are we commaunded to bowe our knée at the sounde of the name of Iesus which is but a creature representing Christ to the eare as his image doth to the eye S. Austen geueth this reason for it Because the honour done to these thinges doth redounde vnto him who is signified by them But you are so wilful M. Chark as you wil not vnderstād y e difference betwéene an image and an idole nor betwéene the honours done vnto a creature and to the creator but malitiously you wil stil confound the same in our names
actions bothe of God and man and al creatures in the world by likning them to some dishonest or ridiculous thing or other whiche a lewde mans inueÌ„tion may find out as this apostata hath done But dothe he charge anye one of the Iesuites in soe manye yeares as he saythe he liued in diuers places with them with any one acte of dishonestie or disorder of lyfe which he might haue done manye if he had liued amongest your ministers soe long Or dothe he improue by learning anie one poynte of their doctrine noe not one but rather vttereth that of their good discipline and orderly life in continual meditation of heauenly thinges with subduing the appetites of their fleshe as maye shame you and your loose ministerie I will put downe his owne wordes translated by you which God enforced him to let faule to his owne confusion and to the iustrifiinge of their honestie The Iesuites sayeth he doe adde vnto their earnest meditations the great toyle of studie also c. And from the time that a man geueth him selfe to such meditations he departeth farre away from al seruice and cherishinge of the body He abandonethe the societye of the fleshe to whippinges and other voluntarye punishmentes of the body He pressethe and beatethe doune pleasure as a blot of shame and as our 18. rule doth command he acknowledgeth the image of Christ in euery one of his spiritual brethren As for riches honor and al thinges which he worlde esteemeth most excellent they contemne them and make none accompt of them These are his wordes M. Charke translated by your selfe the which me thinke contayne prayse ynough especially cominge out of the mouth of a professed enemie which would not report their lyfe to the best yet I doubte lest your enemies shall neuer be able to charge you iustiy with the lyke things Thirdly and lastely I answere to this matter that in this kinde of argument we could easely represse you with many for one of these examples in learned and profounde men of your religion which by the grace of God returne dayly to the Catholicke fayth agayne and that not vpon a fancie as this Apostata left it but vppon great reasons and inuincible proofes which after long studye and toyle they haue founde to stand with the same But for examples sake I wil here recounte onely two both of them later then the running out of this Apostata and both which are exstant in print of men that were many yeares ministers and preachers of your religion The first was called Nicolaus Xylander Borussus who yéeldeth these causes folowinge of his conuersion which I haue onelye touched in general but the Reader may sée them more at large set doune and proued by him selfe in his booke for this purpose 1. His first reason is because he hathe found that the Catholiques haue endured these 15. hundreth years in concorde of one doctrine he recounteth vp 16. distincte Sectes spronge of Luther within these 60. yeares 2. For that the Catholiques can bring their succession of Bishopes one after another from Christ his time vnto ours which the Fathers say to be an inuincible demnostration of the true Churche But the contrarye side bring none at al. 3. The infinite miracles which haue bene in the Catholyque Churche the which we must ether beleue or discredit al antiquitie which reporte them 4. The authoritie of the vniuersal visible Catholique Churche the which hath deliuered vnto vs the Scriptures them selues and haue triumphed ouer soe manye enemies and heresies which from tyme to tyme haue assalted her Whose authoritie was soe great with S. Austen that he would not haue beleued the Gospel but only vppon her authorytie 5. The great holynes of infinite meÌ„ of that Church as S. Anthonie Hilarion Basil Austen Benedict Gregorie Bernard Dominic Frauncis and the like which al were monkes and fryers and professed men of that religion and yet noe doubte are sainctes in heauen which cannot be if they liued in error 6. The reuerent spéeche of Catholique writers and the rayling balsphemous and dishonest spéeche to be found in the writinges of the other side 7. The ordinarye lyinge and fraudulent dealing of Protestantes neuer almost reportinge the opinions of Catholiques trulye but faininge them to say y e which they neuer say nor thinke 8. For that Protestantes estéeme al their Ancestors to be damned and doe breake their wils and ordinaunces by conuerting to prophaâ—â— vses thos reue news and liuings which they assigned to the seruice of God THE Seconde is called Sebastianus Flaschius whoe besides the reasons which the other hath geuen for I omit them which haue bene touched before he yealdethe these reasons of his conuersion 1. For that he hathe founde the Catholiques to teache quite contrarye to that which coÌ„monlye their aduersaryes doe reporte of them 2. For that he hath found by Luthers bookes that he was moued onlye of enuye to write first against the Catholyque Churche 3. For that he hath found in Luthers writings so great dishonestie and scurrilitye of spéeche as might shame anye harlote to reade which could not come froÌ„ a man inspired with the holy Ghost 4. For that the Protestantes doe reiect easily any booke or péece of Scripture which maketh against them and that which they cannot denye he hathe proued that they corrupte it and that they estéeme noe more of Councels and Fathers then of the Turkes Alcoran 5. For that he hath found by reading of ancient histories and Fathers of the primatiue Church that the most of all their newe opinions are ould heresies condemned expressely and by name in the heretikes of the primatiue Church 6. For that he hathe founde Luther to hould manye manifest contrarieties in his woorkes 7. For that Luther séemeth to haue beleued in nothing not being ashamed to saye that he had more confidence in his Katherin Bore and in his Philipe then in Christ. 8. For that he hath found them by experience to be parshall and to exaggerate euerye litle thing that they can find amisse in the liues of Catholiques althoughe amongest them selues they liue most viciouslye especiallye in the sinne of the fleshe For albeit they haue wiues of their owne yet doe they in Germanie according to Luthers doctrine vse their maydes at their pleasure and more then this the ministers vse commutation of wiues amongest them selues and a preacher of no smal account would nedes enforce this man to change wiues with him And many other such thinges whiche he proued amongest them he saythe that verye shame letted him to reporte them FINIS The effecte of M. Hanmers booke The effecte of M. Charke his booke The first part Iesuites noe Secte 1. Reg. 17. 4. Reg. 1. 4. Dan. 1. Marc. 1. The name of Iesuites In psal 132. lib. 11. hist. ca. 3. Li. 3. con lit Petil. ca. 40 Bookes written in the coÌ„mendation of monkes and fryers Luc. 9. Ioh. 12. Math. 19. The true lyfe of Iesuites M. Hanmers notorious lye Vide Iaco. Payuam li. 1. de ortho explicat Ignatius the beginner of the Iesuites Vide Iaco. Payuam li. 1. orthodo explicat Pet. Maffeum in vita Ignatij de Loyola Luther beginner of the new Ghospel Vide Ioan. Cocle. in vi Lutheri LindaÌ„ li. de fug ido ca. 8. 9. Luthers doctrine Lib. de fug idolis ca. 8. Li. de miss angul pag. 228. to 7. li. de missa priua Hoss li. 1. de heres Claudi de Sainct li. de reb eucha LindaÌ„ li. de fug id ca. 8. Luth. ep ad Argenti epist. ad Io. Har. Bucer ep ad Luth. A definition of Sinne. Gen. 29. Aug. li. 3. de lib. arb cap. 19. Transposition in alledginge of Scripture Concupisence noe synne Rom. 7. Rom. 8. Li. de Nup. conc ca. 23. 25. li. 1. con ep 2. Pelag. ca. 13. et li. 1. Re tract ca. 15. Math. 5. First motions noe synne Exo. 20. Deu. 30. Li. de nupt et concupis capit 23. Eccl. 18. All things not expressed in Scriptures Thinges beleeued whiche ar not in Scripture Colos. 4. Obiection 2. Timo. 3. Profitable Necessarye Parts of scripture loste Addinge to Scripture Deut. 4. Non addetis ad verbuÌ„ c Deut. 18. The Scripture may be wrested to an euill sence Nu. 21. Ioh. 3. Math. 25. Psal. 18. The readinge of Scripture 1. Tim. 4. Luc. 2. Math. 22. Deut. 2. Faythe and woorkes Rom. 11. Faythe and hope Heb. 6. Rom. 5. Luc. 10. Faythe grounded onlye vppon the word of God Hope hathe doubte in it Heb. 6. Rom. 5. 1. Pet. 1. Phil. 2. Eccle. 9. Inuocation of Saintes Esa. 63. Ieron in ca. 63. Esa. Math. 25. Hoc facite Traditions Two kinde of traditions 2. Thes. 2. Marc. 7. Three kyndes of Rabbinical expositions of the Law Worshippe of Creatures 2. Cor. 6. Act. 5. 7. Exod. 25. Num. 21. Ioh. 3. Psal. 45. Phil. 2. Aug. li. 3. de Trin. cap. 9 10. M. Charke his lacke of modestye M. Charke his zeale Lyinge for the game Newes from Rome printed by 10. Charlewoode Ed. Whyte The 2. parte M. Charke his conclusion Religion standeth with temporall obedience Rom. 13. Tit. 3. 1. Pet. 2. Vide Apolo duas Iusâ—ni mart A bad argument Wiclif li. 4. Trial. ca. 3. Concil CoÌ„ sessi 8. Luther in Bulla LeoÌ„ 10. Caluin li. 3. inst cap. 19. li. 4. cap. 10. The third part Distinctions Epi. Iudae Arist. in Elench Libertye of pen. Proofes in disputation Councels Fathers and stories Theod. li. 1. hist. ca. 8. Syno Constan Damas. here 99. Philosophie Note this reason Flying onely to Scripture condemned as heretical The 4. Parte Aug. ep 137 ad ple. Hip. Psal. 68. Luc. 16. The Iesuites lyfe by the enemies confession Great labour Deuine meditations Chastising the fleshe Perfect charitye Contempte of riches and honour Causae motiuae N. Xilandri iÌ„pres sae Ingolsta dij 1579. IreÌ„ li. 3. ca. 3. Optat. li. 2. coÌ„tr Donat Aug. ep 165. Professio Catholica M. Seb. Flas chij impres Colo. 1580. Li. de capâ— Bab. eth 〈◊〉 Pap. Li. coÌ„t Pap. et in sermo conuiualib Vide Sand. de visib moÌ„ cap. 57. Fabius de aÌ„tilogijs Lut Serm. conuiu et tit de prophet et tit de oper Dei Ser. de matrimo
A BRIEF CENSVRE vppon two bookes WRITTEN IN ANswere to M. Edmonde Campions offer of disputation Deuter. capit 5. ver 5. Yow feared the fyre and therfore you ascended not vp the mountayne IHS Imprinted at Doway by Iohn Lyon 1581. WITH PRIVILEGE A Breefe Censure vppon two bookes writen in answere to M. Ed. Campions offer of disputation THERE Came to my handes two bookes of late in answere of Mast. Edmonde Campion his offer of disputation The one wryten by M. Hanmer the other by M. Charke Of both which vnder correction I meane to geue my shorte Censure vntill such time as ether he to whom the matter appartayneth or some other doe make more large and learned reply Aduertising notwithstanding the Reader that in myne opinion this offer of M. Campion and so many other as haue bene made required not so much answering in wryting but shorter tryall in disputation But yet séeing there can be had nothing from them but wordes I wil examine a litle what they say at least to the matter Meredith Hanmer answereth more quietly playnly and more good felow like excepting a foule lye or two wherof I must tel him whē place serueth He offereth also liberally for his part disputation who notwithstanding is not lyke to be one of the disputers if the matter should come to that passe He had gathered some notes out of Sleidan Kemnitius and frier Bale against the Pope and in dirision of the Catholique religion which he struggleth to vtter in dyuers places without occasion geuen He oppugneth féerslye and confirmeth diuers things nether sayed nor denyed nor thought of by M. Campion He frameth to him selfe an aduersarye in the aire and manfully fighteth and assaulteth the same Finallye his booke séemeth to very litle purpose but onely to spread abrode the copies of the others resonable offer which was some labour before to wryte out to so many handes as desired it William Charke dealeth more suttelly for he reporteth the Chalenge onlye for his purpose and that also some times falsified except it came corruptly to his handes He vttereth also much more malice by drawing euery thing to disloyaltye and rebellion which is donne by the Catholiques for conscience and religion He flattereth the higher states which can pleasure him palpably He wearieth his hearer with the infinite repetition of the worne out tearmes of Pope and Poperye He excéedethe in inuention of rayletyue speach He vndertaketh al manner of lyes without blushing and ventureth vppon anye assertion what so euer for the bringinge of the Iesuites in discredite with the Reader Vpon this answere therefore of Master Charke I meane to enlarge my selfe a litle in brotherlye charitie not omittinge to remember also the other where occasion shalbe geuen And for the restrayning of Master Charkes rouinge to some certayne poyntes I meane to consider first of that which he vttereth touching the Societie of Iesuites Secondly touching the man whom he aunswereth Thirdly touching the matter or demaunde propounded Lastlye touchinge the Apostata brought in for the defacing of Iesuits and the Catholique religion Towching the Societie MAISTER Charke imploye the all his power and laboureth paynfully to bring in defiance the order of Iesuites contayning most notable learned and vertuous men For the which purpose he vseth dyuers meanes and first his ordinarie waye of rayling by calling them A blasphemous secte new and detestable Iesuites a weake sham full order Scorpions Heretiques Iebusites poisoned spyders wicked monkish fryers and fryerly monkes scoutes to rebellion frogges and caterpillers of Egipt absurde and blasphemous Doctors bellowes to kindle persecution of beggerly estate traytours swarmes of grashoppers noysome beastes To whom M. Hanmer addeth That they are the broode of a cryppled souldiour and of the lowsiest order of al. Al which I let passe without aunswering for that it proueth nothing but one which is that they lack Christian and honest modestie which abuse so much soe manye good men whose wisdome learning and honestie of lyfe is better knowen to the world then anye such raylers can be credited to the contrarye Marye I cannot let passe to tell M. Charke that to call them A blasphemous sect séemeth not onlye lewd but also vnlearned And as for their blasphemies they come to be examined after but how they maye be termed A Secte I cannot sée For if liuing more straitlye then the common sorte in apparel dyet or order of lyfe doe make a Secte then not onlye Iesuites but Elias Elizeus Daniel and Iohn Baptist are also to be called sectaries for that they are reported in the Scripture haue lead a different and more strayte lyfe in those poyntes then the cōmon sorte and yet are commended for the same But if Sectaries are only made as in déed they are by cutting them selues of in opinion of religion from the generall bodye of the Catholique Church as branches from the trée and by houlding a seueral fayth in religion to them selues then can not Iesuites by your owen confession be any secte who differ not one iote in opinion of religion from the vniuersal Catholique Church but as you saye defend euery litle poynt of the same be it neuer soe vntrue or absurd in your sight Wherfore vnlearnedly you cal them a secte as also vnséemly you scofe at their nāe of Iesuites which they chaleng not to them selues nor euer vse it in their writinges or spéeche but only naming them selues a Societie dedicated peculierly to the honouring of the name of Iesus by preaching the same in all places of the world without any reward and with what danger bodely soeuer Secondly you séeke to deface the Societie by contemptuous deprauing of al religious men calling them Base and beggerlye monkes and fryers popishe orders and the like wherin you folow the oulde heretique of the primatiue Church whose propertie hath bene frō time to time to hate and depraue those kind of men aboue al others as S. Austen testifieth of the Manachies and Rufinus of the Arians And Petilian the Donatist◠folowing the same spirit scoffed at S. Austen for being a fryer as S. Austen him selfe writeth in these wordes After this Petilian proceeded on with his slanderous mouth to speak euill of monasteries and of monkes blaming me also for that I had set forth this kinde of lyfe the which lyfe ether he knoweth not what it meaneth or else fayneth him selfe not to knowe it though it be notorious to all the world S. Austen sayth this kinde of lyfe of Monkes and Fryers and other religious men was notorious and knowen to the world in his tyme both in in respect of the famous men that had liued in the same as Anthonie Paule Hilarion Basill Nazianzen Martin him selfe others as also of the infinit bookes and treatises which holye Fathers of the Primatiue Churche had written in defence and comendation of that kind of lyfe as Athanasius in the lyfe of S. Anthonie the Abbote besides
a peculiar treatise intituled An exhortation to monkes or to monastical lyfe S. Basil also wrot a great volume intuled Constitutions or lawes for monkes besides diuers other treatises of that argument written both by him selfe and by Gregorie Nazianzen S. Christostom hath fouer homilies extant in cōmendation of the life of monkes two whole bookes of the comparison betwixt the monke and the King wher in he preferreth the lyfe of the monke before that of the Kinge Also he wrote a booke against you M. Charke intituled Against the blamers of Monkes and monastical lyfe Iohānes Cassianus a lytle after wrote 12. bookes intituled Of the lawes and ordinances of monkes Seuerus Sulpitius wrote a dialogue contayning the notable conuersation of the Esterly monkes with Saynt Martin Abbot of eyghtie monkes And finally Saynt Austen for I will come no lower hath written manye treatises of monkes commending highly that excellent kinde of life and defending it against the detractions of heretiques Let anye man read his hundred thirty seuen Epistle wherof the tytle is That for a few euill monkes we should not infame al monkes In which Epistle hee shall sée all the slaunderous arguments of all heretiques against this kinde of men answered Wherfore M. Charke and his felowes in condemning and deprauing the lyues of monkes and fryers folowe their auncestours and make warre with all the Sayntes of Christe his holye Church who haue soe much reuerenced and commended the sayde lyfe In lyke manner bye callynge them soe often Base and Beggerly he sheweth what spirite he is of that is farr differing from the spirit of Christ whose voluntarie pouertie is noted in the scripture and the same most highly cōmended by him to al his folowers Thirdlye you endeuor to bring the Iesuites in contempt by their obscure conception as you terme it from one Loyolas a Spaniard and had not their full creation and commission vntill about thirtye yeares paste from Pope Paulus quartus wherein you erre for it was from Paulus tertius the third Pope before Paulus quartus and the thyrd Pope after Leo decimus in whose time Luther began Soe that there is not much difference betwixte Iesuites and Protestants in there antiquitie of name marye in matter very great for the Protestants faith and beléefe began at that time but the Iesuites followinge with humilitie the fayth which they found in the Catholicke Church onelye began a strayter kinde of lyfe in manners and behauiour then the common sorte of people vsed for reforminge of whose vices they dedicated them selues to God and to al kinde of labor paynes trauaile and peril with abandoninge al worldly pleasures and al possibilitie of preferment in the same so farre fourth as none of that Societie hath or may take any spiritual or temporal liuings or commodities what so euer though dyuers greate Princes haue pressed them often times with the same but of frée cost they preach and teach in al places where they are sent with al humilitie of spirite and without intermeddling with matters of estate as shalbe shewed more hereafter Wherefore M. Charke offereth them the greater wrōg in charginge them with the contrarye And M. Hanmers impudencie is the more to be woondered at who blusheth not to put in print so notorious an vntrueth in the sight of al the world and to repeate vrge and amplifie the same so often in his booke sayinge that one Theatinus a Iesuite hypocritically got to be Cardinall and Pope meaninge thereby Paulus quartus called before Iohannes Petrus Caraffa of the order of Theatines and not of Iesuites which al the world knoweth to be two seueral and distincte orders of religion And therefore M. Hanmer with fryer Bale whom he cyteth in the margent may be ashamed of soe false a slander both towardes the man and also the religion But because M. Charke obiecteth against the Iesuites their first father Loyolas whom contemptuouslye he calleth a souldier And M. Hanmer a crippled souldier which lyued in the same time with fryer Luther Progenitor of the Protestantes Let vs consider in two or thrée wordes the difference betwixt these two men whereby it may appeare which of them had the better spirit and whether of them may more iustely geue credit and commendation to their followers The lyues of them both are extant wryten by men of their owne times which knew them and liued with them and therefore I shal easely discharge my credit for that which I shal out of these wryters report of them Ignatius de Loyola was a gentleman of a Noble house in Spayne which yet remayneth who being chéefe captayne of Pompeiopolis and defending it against the frenchmen in the yeare 1536 was hurte and taken prisoner by the same But afterward beinge perfectly healed and curteously restored to libertie agayne and now in great possibilitie of honour and prefermente in his countrye resolued him selfe to serue God onelye for the time to come and to take paynes for the gayning of Heauen Wherupon leauing al his frends and distributinge al that he had to the poore stale away from the Courte and betooke himselfe to a maruelous straite lyfe and after he had with contynuall labour of manye yeares gotten learninge and gayened manye soules from sinne vnto vertue and from the Deuill vnto Allmyghtye God by his example of auster lyfe and godly persuasions there adioyned them selues vnto him nyne other of diuers nations in the Vniuersitie of Paris to the like trauelsome lyfe for gayning of soules Which kinde of lyfe was afterward after diuers examinations and probations of their spirit and purpose alowed and confirmed by Pope Paulus tertius and soe consequently dyuers worthye men leauing the worlde and taking vppon them that order of lyfe was made a distincte order of religious men in the which this Ignatius bothe liued and dyed with singuler example of al humilytie vertue and holynes but espetially in zeale of gayninge of soules and recalling men from sinne and his posteritie after him hath by imitatiō of the same vertues broght forth infinit frute vnto the world Martin Luther walking in his youth in a certayne medowe was stroken with a thunderboult and thervppon sodaynlye for very feare made him selfe an Austen fryer where after in the Abbaye of Erford seruinge in the Church vpon the third sunday in Lent when the ghospel was read of the deafe and dumme deuil throwē out by Christ he sodenly fel doune on the pauemente and the deuil cried horriblye out of his mouthe sayinge I am not I am not dūme I wil speake yet vnto the world After this vpon a certayne emulation and contention betwixt him and the fryers of S. Dominiks order he lefte his religion cast away his habite broke his vowes married a nonne and by litle and litle began to preache straunge new doctrines especiallye tending to al libertie and carnalitie as for example saying There is no Sinne but incredulitie nether
God the Father begat his Sonne onlye by vnderstanding him selfe That infantes without reason should be baptised That the common Créede was made by the Apostles The celebration of the Sondaye in stead of the satterdaye The celebration of Easter onlye vppon a Sonday The foure Gospels which we vse to be the true Gospels and not fayned or corrupted That our epistle to the Romains was wryten by S. Paule and the other whiche is to be séene to the Laodycenses is fayned and not wrytten by him séeinge notwithstanding Saynt Paule neuer mentioneth any epistle wryten by him selfe to the Romanes but yet sayethe that he wrote one to the Laodicenses Al these things I say and many more are beléeued by vs generallye and yet none of them expressye to be founde in scripture But how doe you now ouerthrowe this doctrine and prooue it blasphemie M. Charke By a place of S. Paule Al the scripture is geuen by inspiration of God and is profitable to teach to confute to correcte and to instructe in iustice that the man of God maye be perfect and throughly instructed to euery good worke Wherof you inferre that the Scripture is sufficient to perfection but how wrongefullye it shal now appeare And first I let passe your ordinarie misusinge of scripture by adding fiue wordes of your owne in this litle sentence to wit the is and and throughlie which audacitie if it were in translating of Aesops fables it were follerable but in the holie Scriptures where euerie worde must be taken as from the holie Ghoste it is impious Secondlie this place maketh nothinge for your purpose which I proue by two reasons The first is because S. Paule saieth not here that the Scripture is sufficient to perfection but onelie that it is profitable Nowe you know that a thinge maie be verie profitable yea necessarie to an effecte and yet not sufficient to doe the same without all helpe As meate is profitable and necessarie to maintaine life and yet not sufficiēt without natural heat clothes and the like The second reason is for that S. Paule signifieth in this place that euerie parte or canonicall booke of Scripture is profitable to make a man perfecte but yet we can not say that euerie part or booke is sufficient for then al other bookes of scripture besids that were superfluous And that S. Paule meaneth in this place euerie seuerall canonicall booke or parte of Scripture by the wordes Omnis scriptura it is euident by that he vseth the worde Omnis and not Tota which two words how much they differ both in Gréeke and Latine all Logisioners know For omns homo signifieth euerye man And M. Charke him selfe in this verye same sentence hath translated Omne opus bonum Euerye good worke And yet deceatcfullye hath he trāslated Omnis scriptura Al the scripture As though S. Paule had mente onelye that al the Scripture put together is sufficient to perfection which sense can not stand Firste for that al the Scripture at such time as S. Paul wrote this wanted dyuers important partes as the Ghosepl of S. Iohn the Apocalips and some other which were writen after and consequentlye should haue bene superfluous if the other before had bene sufficient Secondly because we lacke at this day many parts of Scripture which of likelihoode were in S. Paules time As the booke of Nathan the Prophet with the volume of the Prophet Gad 1. Paralip vlt. The booke of Ahias Salonites and the vision of Addo the Prophet 2. Paral. 9. Many of the Parables and verses of Salomon for he wrote thrée thousande of the one and fiue thousand of the other 3. Reg. 4. Also the epistle of S. Paul to the Laodicēses Colos. 4. wherof it foloweth in M. Charks owne sēse that if al the Scripture put together is onely sufficient to perfection then our Scripture now lacking dyuers partes of the same is not sufficient And so me thinkethe M. Charke wrestethe this place against him selfe 5. You reporte the Iesuites to saye That the want of holy Scriptures must be supplyed by peecing it out by traditions Cens. fol. 220. This is coyne of the former forge all false and noe one such word to be found in al their booke But yet as though they had sayed soe you fight manfullye agaynst this your owne sentence sayinge in manner followinge Contrarye to this is the lawe in Moyses Thow shalte not adde to the wordes which I speake to thee nether shalte thou take from them But why do you breake the law M. Charke in reportinge the law you haue héere added the singuler nūber in the Verbe and the plural in the Noune and haue taken awaye the numbers which the law geuer vsed and changed the same at your owne pleasure and that for a purpose which I could gesse at But let al thinges be lawful vnto you what maketh this law for your purpose By your meaning the Apostles and Euangelistes did offend in adding any thing besids the law of Moyses which is absurd Nether did Moyses in this place forbiddinge to adde or take awaye speake of his wryten law for he had not yet writen it but of those thinges which he deliuered them by worde of mouth at that time the which he willed them to kéepe and obserue whollye and perfectly without chaunging it by additiō or diminutiō or by their owne corrupte gloses as noughtie men are wonte to doe And this is the true meaninge of that place and not as you would haue it that nothinge should be beléeued besides that which Moyses set doune for a litle after Moyses him selfe commaundeth the Iewes to heare the Prophet which God should rayse after him as himselfe mening therby Christ. 6 You reporte the Iesuites to saye The holy Scripture is a nose of waxe Cens. 117. God forgeue you for abusing so much these learned men Marie you take the waye to ouermatch both learninge and trueth too if you may haue your desire He that wil reade the place by you quoted shal finde the Iesuites vpon occasion geuen them to say in effect thus that before the rude and ignorante people it is easie for a noughtye man to wreste the scripture to what interpretation pleaseth him beste for the flatteringe ether of Prince or people euen as a man may frame a nose of waxe what way or to what forme he liste And wil you of this make them to saye that the holye Scripture is a nose of waxe Christ is lykened to a serpent and yet is no serpent Also to a couetous Vserer and yet is none Nether doth the Scripture cōmit blasphemie in vsinge such similitudes But how prooue you M. Charke that the Scripture maye not be wrested into manye senses before the rude people as a nose of waxe maye be into manye formes Because it is contrarye saye you vnto the wordes of Dauid The law of the Lorde is perfecte conuerting soules Suerly
them are condemned of bastardie and other not guiltie of that crime yet were they but men how great so euer they were Of natural and moral Philosophie you say That they are enemies of true religion and two great nourses of Atheisme and heresie To which I answere that albeit we grounde our beléefe onelye vppon the worde of God and make that onely the obiecte of fayth more then you doe as I haue shewed before in your ninth reporte yet doe we mislike this audacitie of yours in reiectinge these verye notable helpes lefte vs by God for the better vnderstanding of his word For by Councelles Fathers and stories we come to knowe not onlie which is the worde of God and whiche is not but also which is the righte meaning of the same among soe infinite wrong interpretations which so manye hereticks from time to time haue inuented vpon the same with whom I might easely erre if I had not this certaine way to knowe what the true Catholique Church which can not erre hath alwayes holden And this can not I tel but onelye by the testimonie of Councels Fathers and stories by the which onely Theodoret wryteth that the famous hereticke Arrius was conuicted and not by the bare letter of Scripture which he and al other hereticks would interpret as they list The seuenth general Councel also conuicted the Monothelites and proued two distincte wills to be in Christ by the helpe of natural Philosophie by which they shewed it to be a most sure and necessarie consequence that If Christ had two natures he must needes haue also two distinct willes For that there could not be a nature indewed with reason without a wil. And as for moral Philosophie who séeeth not the necessitie of it for the vnderstandinge the natures of vertue and vice and al other actions belonginge to man And albeit these thinges may be abused as also Scripture may yet is it grosse ignorance for an abuse that may be to condemne the thinges which are excellent giftes of God and sparkes of his most high and infinite wisdome To depriue vs therfore of al these helpes and to turne vs ouer onely to a bare letter of scripture the which eche man may ether deny to be scripture or wrangle at his pleasure vppon the sense it is as much to saye as that controuersies in religion shall neuer be ended as both reason teacheth vs and experieÌ„ce not only of al ages past but also of our times sheweth For séeinge there are at this daye the Hussites in Boemeland the Trinitaries in Transiluania the Anabaptistes in Pooleland the Adamites in dyuers partes of Germanie the Lutherans in Saxonie the Caluinistes in France the Puritanes and family of Loue in England and other the lyke sectes in the worlde abrode which all with one voyce agrée agaynst the Catholicke Church in this poynte that Scripture only is to be receaued and al other testimonies to be reiected How comethe it to passe that these sectes groundinge their seueral religions vpon the méere word of God as they say can not yet end their controuersies If the scripture be so playne cleare easie euident and sufficient to ende al controuersies as they say why doe they so long disagrée Howe can they vppon so manifest and cléere a thing as they say the scripture is build so manye contrary opinions and defend them out of the same Scripture But it is but a shifte of the â—ommon enemie to depryue men first of their euidences and witnesses and afterward to set them by the eares for the tytle And I find this poynte of flying onely to scripture to haue bene an old tricke of al hereticks of the Primatiue Church for the maintenance of their owne deuices and therefore condemned in them as hereticall by the same Church Namely in the ValentiniaÌ„s as testifieth Ireneus li. 3. con He. And Tertulian li. 8. de prescript Also in the Marcionistes as the same authors witnes Also in the Arrians as Epiphanius wryteth Her 69. And S. Austen li. 5. con Maximum ca. 1. And Socrates li. 1. hist. ca. 14. Also in the Aetians as S. Basil wryteth lib. de spirit sanct ca. 27. And finallie in the Aerians as Epiphanius writeth Her 75. And S. Augustine Her 53. Wherefore M. Charke affirminge the same draweth in on line with thes progenitors of his Touching the Apostata M. Charke in the ende of his booke bringeth in for the defacinge of Iesuites and al Catholique religion a dialogue writen by one Christian Franken a GermaÌ„ brought vp as he saithe amongest the Iesuites as one of that Societie but afterward being made a ProtestaÌ„t reuileth in that booke bothe Iesuites and al Catholicke religion as frier Luther frier Bale and manye other Apostatas before him haue done Touchinge whom first if it be true and not coyned by them selues as the newes of Rome before was I must answere as S. Austen did to the lyke thing whose wordes are these Simplye I doe confesse before our Lord whoe is witnes vppon my soule that since I began first to serue God as I haue hardely found better men then thos which haue profited in monasteries soe I neuer founde worse then such as fel in monasteries And agayne in the very same epistle handling the place of the psalme where Christ sayeth They insulted agaynst me which sate in the gate and songe in my reproche which droonke wine He applyeth the whole to such as you are M. Charke which insulte against Christ and his religion for the faule of some on religious man Wherfore doe these men sitt sayeth S. AusteÌ„ of hereticks scoffing at religious men and for what doe they watch but onely if any bishoppe or clarke or monke or nonne should chance a faule that they may make it to be thought that al are such though in al it be not manifest And yet notwithstandinge these felowes do not cast out their owne wiues or accuse their owne mothers for that some one maried woman is founde to haue committed adulterie But when any fault or falsehode doth ether sound or appeare in any of them that professe the holy name of religious lyfe these felowes labour enforce and striue by all meanes possible that this faulte may be thought to be in all These men therefore which seeke the pleasure of their tonges by our greefes and sorowes may be compared to the doggs which licked and tooke pleasure in the sores and woondes of good Lazarus Secondly I answere that this rayling treatise of this Apostata translated and intituled by you A discouery of Iesuites hath noe foundation at al in it but only a lewd foolish applying of euery good thing in that religion to some euil absurd and wicked meaning framed by his owne imagination without geuing any reason or profe of the same By which kinde of argument it is easye to depraue not only al religion but also al other ordinances al common welthes all