volume as it appeareth bothe otherwise Illyricus Luthers great defender a special Doctor of M. Ievvelles and also by your owne quotations out of that worke Yet he allegeth alwaies there and in other of his suche the like rash and false scriblinges Dominicus à Soto by his right name But this errour or ignorance might peraduenture be asscribed to some of your gatherers of stuffe and coadiutours sauing that you wil needes take vppon you al the faulte your selfe and discharge al others thereof as you haue admonished the reader in your View of Vntruthes where thus you saie what soeuer errour shal be founde in any my writinges I wil discharge bothe my Clerke and the Compositour and the Printer of the same and take the whole vpon my selfe Moreouer to shew your constancie in this errour B. iij. b. you doo allege Pag. 499. Petrus à Soto de natura gratia whereas he neuer wrote any suche worke but Dominus à Soto And herein it is to be noted also that you neither quote the number of the booke nor of the Chapter where that saying is to be founde But by like you went by heresaie and reporte and so lefte your reader to seeke at aduenture that he should either not finde or elles so hardly find that he would be lothe to take the paines to looke for it You tel me in an other place that my frende Catharinus saith I can not tel what of Schole writers Pag. 571. and you referre me in the Margent to a booke of his against Petrus a Soto But I am sure you neuer sawe any such booke against that person Wel it might be against Dominicus a Soto A man maie thinke that you reade these thinges with spectacles of a false sighte that you were neuer hable to discerne Dominicus from Petrus or elles that you wrote yow knewe not what in a dreame Pag. 169. AlphoÌ„sus de Castro mistaken by M. Ievvel for AlphoÌ„sus Viruesius Bishop of the Canaries You allege vnto me about vowes one of my greatest Doctours as you cal him Alphonsus de Castro Philippica 19. Howe great soeuer he be with me it maie be iustely said that you are greatly beholding vnto him if he make so often for you as you allege him For he hath holpen you with stuffe euen for your owne tooth as you haue handled the matter But I praie you did you euer see his Philippicas bicause you allege the 19 I know not what spectacles you vse but if you reade no better and were in case as some be who haue not murdered so many bodies as you haue soules you might be put to a harde disstresse in time of neede at the Sessions and be refused for not reading vt Clericus For as it appeareth your reading is quite beside the booke Shew me any suche booke of Alphonsus de Castro and you shal be quitte by Proclamation of al your false reportes which are more and greater then a man would weene that is not acquainted with your writinges I remember that one Alphonsus Viruesius Episcopus Canariensis made suche a worke against Philip Melanchton and called the Treaties of it Philippicas as I haue tolde you before Pag. 345. Endeuouring to disgrace as muche as you can godly and perfite obedience you doo contemptuously speake your pleasure Cassianus lib. 4. cap. 27. de Institutis coenobiorum Pag. 51. Zarabella de Sectis alleged by M. Ievv vvhereas he neuer vvrote any suche booke M. Ievvel allegeth Illyricus the heretike vnder the name of zabarella vvhom he meaneth by zarabella Defence Pag. 618. Ioannes Camotensis a Doctor of M. Ievvelles neuer knovveÌ„ Confu so 286. Defence pag. 613. and yet bicause you would not seeme to speake vnto vs without some authoritie you bring in Cassander lib. 4. cap. 27. But certain it is you misse the cuishon and haue mistaken your marke in not discerning betwen Cassianus and Cassander and naming the one for the other whiche faulte might be laide to the Printer but that yee haue taken the mater in hande your selfe In purling in the Canonistes for sayinges that might be wrested against the Pope you tel vs a tale out of Franciscus Zabarella de Sectis 115. Whether you haue seene any authour called Zarabella by which name you alwaies allege him I doo more then doubte It maie be that you meane Zabarella for that is his right name But yet can you not shewe vs any booke that euer he made de Sectis I wis M. Iewel you should haue written Illyricus De Sectis your owne greate frende You doo also allege in three diuers places Videlicet pag. 639. 648. 694. your the same Zabarella de Schemale Concilio I would aske you what is meant there by those wordes de Schemate Should it not be trow you de Schismate About Ioannes Camotensis you plaie and dallie euen as a fishe with the hooke til he be caught faste by the iawe You seeme to please your selfe muche in controlling my ghesse But therein at length you bewraie your owne ignorance and proue your selfe not to be so wise and wel learned as you would be taken in your owne authours alleged Bicause I said what worshipful Doctour you meane by Camotensis I know not You added in the margent If I knew him noâ— I might best blame myne ignorance But how iustely you are to be blamed of ignorance in the selfe same matter your selfe wherein you take your selfe to be so great a doctour let euery vpright Reader iudge After you haue a while skornefully tolde me whom I might haue ghessed this authour to be as Fulbertus Carnotensâ—â— or Ioannes Sarisburiensis otherwise called by some as you saie Rupertus Carnotensis you pronounce at length the definitiue sentence very saddely with these wordes But in deed this writers name is Ioannes Carnotensis alleged by Cornelius Agrippa Cornel. Agrippa As for Agrippas allegation it maketh no force for he is not of so honest same but that exception maie lawfully be taken against his person and therefore he is meeter for your purpose Albeit in this case it maie be that the Printer was in fault and not Agrippa him selfe And how easily Camotensis is made of Carnotensis by change of rnÌ„ into mÌ„ who perceiueth not And so would Agrippa saie were he aliue there is no doubt But you affirme plainely without al doubt that in deede it is Ioannes Camotensis that was a Bishop And there you doo very odiously without al cause make a coÌ„parison betwene him and certaine others only to serue your owne scoffing humour But Sir I praie you for asmuch as you wil haue him in deede to be a Bishop Cornel. Agrippa de vanitate ScieÌ„tiarum cap. â—1 be so good as tel vs whether he be called Camotensis of his countrie or of his Bishoprike Your great substantial Doctor Cornelius Agrippa seemeth to signifie if the Printer haue not deceiued him that he had that name of his Bishoprike calling him Ioannes Camotensis
his quotations to be in my said two Bookes whiche are not there in deede altogether in that order and meaning as he vntruly hath alleged them I proue his dealing herein partely to be agreable to his other false demeanour and partely that good and iust causes there were why I should writing against him vse suche order of language Furthermore bicause he woulde the great and manifolde Vntruthes with whiche I charged him to seeme no Vntruthes at al but that al is the Gospel what so euer commeth from his Mouthe and whereas for proufe thereof he hath set forth a View of his Vntruthes the least of al that he could espie by me noted against him and pretendeth to iustifie the same his least Vntruthes in the said View I haue made an answere to that View of Vntruthes and there doo shewe manifestly specially in the chiefe pointes where errour is most perilous that he was truely and iustly charged with those Vntruthes and that for ought he hath yet said in Defence of them he remaineth stil chargeable with the same as before This muche I haue perfourmed in the first Booke After this in foure bookes folowing I detecte his Errours Lies Cauilles shiftes Sclaunders and sundrie vntrue matters founde in the firste and seconde parte of his Defence And in respecte thereof I cal the Treatie A Detection of sundrie foule errours lies sclaunders c. At length hauing tried by very certaine experience and exacte view of the whole Booke that there was no ende of lying what place so euer in reading my eie lighted vppon I thought it most profitable and most agreable with my profession to let passe thinges of smal importance the handeling of whiche serued him specially to scoffe to vtter vile matter againste the Churche and to fil vp his Booke in tended at the beginning to be made greate and to treate of the Articles of Doctrine in defence of the Truthe and to confute what he hath brought to the contrarie Among whiche Articles of doctrine of some I haue treated briefly as being alreadie treated of in my Confutation and otherwheres of some at good length and with more diligence as of Succession and of the vnlawful Marriages of Priestes and al other Votaries wherein he is very large and copious of Doctours sayinges of al sortes but vtterly destitute of any one saying that maketh cleerely for his parte In the ende I doo most euidently disproue and refel what he was hable to bring for Defence of two pointes which he is not ashamed to affirme seming to me the one very false the other very sclaunderous The first is as he auoucheth them that matters of faith and Ecclesiastical causes are to be iudged by the Ciuile Magistrate The other is that the Papistes haue taught that simple Fornication is no sinne How weake proufes he bringeth for the one and for the other and yet how shamelesly he goeth about to prooue them by conference of bothe our Treaties it shal appeare Withal there I haue added a Comparison of Errours in mistaking names of menne bookes Chapters c. with whiche M. Iewel chargeth me and I him Matters let passe vvith treating vvhereof the Defence is grovven to a Huge Volume Thus haue I declared in fewe the Summe as it were and Order of this Treatie As for sundrie other matters as of forged Scriptures of the doctrine of Deuilles so he calleth the forbidding of Priestes Monkes Friers and Nunnes to marrie of the fruites of single life whereof he laith out great stoare of filthy sayinges of S. Iames Epistle whether it be Canonical Scripture of sundrie ancient Traditions now growen out of vse of the Fourmes and Accidentes whereat he scoffeth like a Vice plaier of the number of the Sacraments of the Churche which we defende to be seuen he affirmeth to be but two or els so many as the thinges be vnto which the name of Sacrament is by any Writer applied which are very many of the Faith of Infantes of their new found Imaginatiue Faith or rather phantastical Imaginatiō that eateth the bodie and drinketh the bloud of Christ of the Popes Dispensations of dissensions among the Fathers of Nominales and Reales of Thomistes and Scotistes of diuersitie of religious persons Apparel wherein he saith they put great holinesse of the variance betwen the Lutherās and the Zuinglians of the fable of Dame Iohane the woman Pope of the Marble Image lying in the high way at Rome of the stoole of easement of Porphyrie stoane at Lateran of Athenes and Rome whether they were Vniuersities in the time this Dame Iohane is feyned to haue liued in of the vicious life of Petrus Aloisius Duke of Parma and Placentia of Iohn Diazius death of the slaughter of the Boures of Germanie that tooke weapons against the nobilitie there prouoked by the preaching of Luther and his scholers of Constantines Donation of Poison ministred in the Sacrament as he reporteth feined fables for stories of great soothe of the abomination of desolation of the state of the Church of Rome of Antichrist of the mistaking of Cardinal Hosius of their pretensed burning of the Scriptures of S. Augustine the Apostle of the English Nation that he was a wicked man of Priestes keeping of Concubines of Images of Latine Praiers and Churche Seruice of Comparison of learning betwene the Catholiques and the Protestantes of Rome whether it be Babylon of summoning of Councelles of the Stewes in Rome whereof gladly he vttereth muche talke of kissing the Popes foote of the Popes hurling of Franciscus Daldulus fast tied in chaines vnder his table there to gnaw boanes with his Dogges of the Popes Bridle and Stirop to be holden by Princes of Pope Hildebrandes surmised wicked deedes as they fable of the Popes treadding on the Emperours necke of the Pope whether he be euer holy of the Popes Exactions of the Cheast in the Popes bosom whether the Pope be God of the Popes power feined to be ouer Angels whether the Pope can commit Simonie whether the Pope be King of Kinges whether the Pope be aboue general Councels whether the Pope maie erre or no whether the Pope be a Kinge Of these and of a great many moe suche matters whereof some be lothesom some be fabulous vaine and friuolous some be false sclaunderous and spiteful some blasphemous some alreadie sufficiently treated of briefly al tending vnto the contempt of the Catholique Religion as M. Iewel handleth them in which matters he hath vttered the stoare of his learning Of these I saie I haue said nothing much disaduantaging my selfe thereby and the common cause which I defend for so much as in the making vp of his great Booke with heaping together these ministerly matters he hath vttered as he doth euery where els good stoare of most euident and grosse Lies of which his owne frendes and best fauourers in case thei were detected would be ashamed These forenamed be the thinges which I haue briefly handled and these other and
Reader how he keepeth him selfe a luffe of from the point with what stuffe he filleth certaine leaues of his Booke how he starreth from Doctour to Doctour how he confoundeth him selfe and the Reader and though he bring neuer so much out of other Writers yet commeth not at al to the point directly First Pag. 165. he laboureth to discredite the holy Ancient Fathers as menne that haue not dealte indifferently herein but haue gonne to farre either in the auancing of Virginitie or in the disgracing of lawful Matrimonie Before he entreth his Allegations whereof that whole Treatie standeth he putteth foorth twoo sayinges the one of Origen the other of S. Hierome in reproufe of them that condemned Matrimonie And yet euen there immediatly after he allegeth them both for condemners of Matrimonie Then he laith foorth the stoare of his Allegations whereby he would haue it appeare Tertulliā alleged by M. Ievvel against the Churche in that for vvhiche he is condēned of the Churche that certaine Ancient Writers had an euil opinion of Matrimonie There he allegeth two sayinges of Tertullian in exhortatione ad castitatem whiche Booke he wrote against the Churche as S. Hierome saith and therefore it is condemned of the Churche for whiche cause he should not haue alleged him then twoo sayinges out of the Authour of the imperfite worke vppon S. Matthew vnder the name of S. Chrysostome which also is a worke ful of heresies Item certaine sayinges out of S. Hierome writing against Iouinian and Heluidius Againe sayinges out of Athenagoras S. Hierome Gregorie Nazianzen and Origen by whiche he beareth the Reader in hande they haue condemned the seconde Marriages of Widowers and Widowes After this he reckeneth vp so manie Priestes Pag. 166. and Bishops as he hath read of to haue benne married menne who in deede were married before they receiued holy Orders and not otherwise There Palea Palea that is to say the Chaffe that is set out in Gratian concerning Priestes and Bishops that were many Popes Fathers a very fonde fabulous tale is admitted to the place of a great Doctor yet by him much falsified Pag. 167. and altered from that he found in Gratians booke There also beside the report of Aeneas Syluius whiche him selfe recanted and of Polydore Vergil a man of our time and in these matters of smal credite he sticketh not to praie helpe of one Fabian a late seely Chronicler of London and with his woorshipful testimonie forsooth would faine prooue his mater that is to saie with a maine Lie that Bishoppes and Priestes lyued a thousand yeres together with their Wiues no lawe being to the contrarie Nowe were al these thinges true according to the purporte of M. Iewelles doctrine as for the more parte they are very false and the Doctours by him corrupted and very vntruly reported what should they make for his purpose I meane for the point it selfe of this Controuersie which is that it is lawful to marrie after the Vowe of Chastitie or after holy Orders receiued For I trow M. Iewel wil not vse this simple kind of Logique Certaine ancient Writers condemned Matrimonie which is vtterly false in respecte of al others by M Iewel here named excepte Tertullian that condemned the seconde Marriages whom the Churche for the same reiecteth Item certaine learned and holy menne in the Primitiue Churche were made Priestes and Bisshoppes after they had benne married Ergo it is lawful to marrie after the Vowe of Chastitie and after holy Orders taken As this reason is fonde and litle worth so al the sayinges of Writers whiche he hath heaped together hitherto serue him to no purpose but to increase the bulke of his Booke After al this feeling him selfe pressed with the force of the Vowe which being aduisedly made is of necessitie to be performed as I prooued in my Confutation to keepe him selfe stil a luffe of from the point of the Question he taketh a newe waie saying that the Priestes in England were neuer Votaries Touching this matter whether the Priestes of England were Votaries or no F◠290. ◠I referre the Reader vnto the first Chapter of the fifth booke of this Treatie Howsoeuer it be by this answer M. Iewel fleeth from the point as farre as he fled before For the Question is whether Priestes in general that haue made a Vowe of Chastitie maie marrie and he answereth that Priestes of England be not Votaries Which answer serueth as aptly in this case as if a question being demaūded of him whether Heretikes are to be burned he would answer we the Superintendentes of England and our Ministers be no heretiques From this he conueigheth him selfe to certaine common places and bringeth in a Huge number of Doctours sayinges tending to this meaning in effect that Chastitie is hard to keepe that it is the gifte of God that God geueth it not to al that it is to be counselled but not commaunded that a man consider wel of what strength he is and if he see him selfe not hable to perfourme the preceptes of Virginitie that rather then he fal into the dungeon of deadly sinne he take a wife and vse the remedie ordeined against incontinencie Al which sayinges we graunt be true and are to be vnderstanded of them whiche be free and haue not bounde them selues by deliberate Vowe to conteine To be shorte it were a very tedious thing here to reherse how he ronneth from Doctour to Doctour how he craueth stuffing of the Canonistes and Schoolemen whom God wote he litle esteemeth how he writeth out their sentences and therewith filleth vp his Booke As for the ancient Doctours sayinges that folow after al this they are spoken some against the perfourmance of wicked Vowes some serue for admonition that certaine maie be suffred to marrie who hauing made onely a simple Vowe either can not or wil not conteine and that the Marriages of suche personnes ought to stand for good and not to be dissolued some importe rebuke of filthy life and exhortation to Chastitie some be written against them that either vtterly condemned the state of Matrimonie or willed Priestes and Deacons in the Primitiue Churche to be compelled to forsake the companie of their lawful Wiues whiche they had married before they receiued holy Orders Thus he writeth out other mennes sayinges without order or discretiō skippeth from one matter to an other and emptieth as it were the stoare of his Notebookes into this Defence and when he hath shuffled in al he proueth nothing directly but onely bringeth the Reader to a Confusion and commeth not at al to the discussion of the point that we staie vpon whiche in this matter of Priestes Marriages is that to marrie it is not lawful after deliberate Vowe of chastitie made nor after holy Orders receiued What colourable argumentes or testimonies he bringeth to proue the affirmatiue Infrà lib. 5 Cap. 2 in this Treatie Reader thou shalt see them cleerely confuted Likewise to shew
great learning vertue and grauitie that al that I haue sent ouer are but toyes and trifles by like bicause I printe not my Bookes in Folio as he dooth that shee is ful of wisedome and I ful of follie There he promiseth in great sooth that he wil not tel me how lewdly I haue demeaned my selfe towardes her And what is that Nay he wil not tel it me ye may beleue him bicause it wil sound to my great shame Yet out it must the man is taken with suche a lust And bicause he was lothe it should come to the knowlege of many thus forthwith he telleth it me in a printed booke I beseeche you saith he ful courteouslie cal your wordes againe to minde if you can without blusshing Handle foisted in by M Ievvel for Blame So roughlie to handle so softe a Creature where he hath changed my honest worde Blame into his owne worde Handle of filthie imagination This Phrase of speache your very frends haue muche misliked and as it is in dede so in plaine wordes they cal it Ruffianrie c. The whole matter thus he concludeth with like truth as he beganne But this fault as I haue said I wil dissemble To al this what shal I saie good Reader God be thanked that M. Iewel who is so desirous to tel that of me whereof I should be ashamed hath nothing to tel but a Lie forged by his owne filthie imagination whereof he must needes be ashamed if he haue any sparke of honest nature in him So roughlie to handle so softe a creature be not my woordes If it be Ruffianrie so to speake as he saieth that in deede it is then is this Superintendent of Sarisburie become a Ruffian For he speaketh so I spake it not Thus roughly to blame so soft◠a creature whether it might not in that place be honestly spoken I reporte me to al that be honest Bicause he knew him selfe he had made this apparent aduantage against me by his false forgerie foisting in the worde Handle in place of the word Blame of purpose that his impudent falshed might not be espied he least out of his Booke xxvij lines of my Confutation where the wordes be with which I reproue the Lady for her false Translation if it were hers and not an others set forth in her name But my very frendes haue muche misliked this Phrase of speache saith M. Iewel I maruell how they could mislike it before it was euer written In deede bothe my frendes and his frendes too mislike this Phrase as he hath forged it very much I doubte not And as for his frendes I dare saie they are ashamed of him and wish he had not discredited his ministerly Diuinitie with suche Ruffianly humanitie or rather inhumanitie For a ful answer hereto see in this Treatie Lib. 3. cap. 2. Fol. 120. As for the Lady that translated the Apologie into English in whose quarrel this vnhonest and vncleane lewdnesse hath by this Champion ben practized I wish her no woorse but that shee tel M. Iewel when shee meeteth with him nexte that though shee were desirours bothe of Praise and also of reuenge yet shee had rather remaine vnpraised and vnrevenged then of suche a false handler to be praised and with such open lying to be revenged Thus Reader by Viewe of these fewe places noted out of the whole heape thou maist conceiue with what manner stuffe M. Iewel hath filled vp that huge Booke Suche as these are after the same rate the more parte of the reste is Wherefore al menne maie see how good cause they haue to hier their Promotours and Waiters to lie in waite for our Bookes at the Portes and Creekes and with great extremitie to pounish al menne who are founde to haue them For by that meane they hope to winne a long time before their guile and falshode be made open to al the worlde Seeing then among al that huge heape so litle can be founde whereby he maie seeme to go directly to the pointes that be in Controuersie and presently treated of seeing where he geueth out certaine shadowes as it were of proufes if the same be duely examined they be tried corrupted and falsified by one vntrue meane or other and seeing the confutation of al that is to be confuted must be made by repeating and laying forth againe the testimonies truly whiche he allegeth falsly by shewing where he clippeth of the Doctours wordes where he addeth wordes of his owne where he leaueth out the beginning or the ende of Sentences where he vseth false translation where he conceeleth and dissembleth the Circumstance of the places and foloweth the bare sounde of wordes without farther view of the Writers intent where he maketh false exchange of wordes as he is now taken in the manner changing Blame a worde of chaste meaning into Handle a worde of vnchaste imagination seing I saie this is the meane and waie whereby the Confutation of the pretensed Defence must be wrought I leaue vnto the iudgement of those who can iudge of these thinges what a long and tedious worke it would be and how litle profite would redounde thereof if I should refute his whole Booke This being wel considered specially whereas also a long time is required to the finishing of suche a worke great charges are to be emploied in printing and menne at these daies soone waxe wearie and feele lothsomnes in reading long Treaties I thought I should doo more cōueniently if I confuted the chiefe pointes of Doctrine then if I bestowed my labour about the confutation of the whole whiche for the most parte consisteth of light and vaine trifles not worth the reading And to saie the truthe what credite is he worthy to beare in the reste that in the chiefe pointes is proued to haue dealte so vntruly If I truly charge M. Iewel with thertie fortie fiftie yea with a hundred great and notorious Lies and sufficiently confute the same shal I not seeme to haue proued him a Lier and a false dealer in these causes excepted I confute him in a thousand eleuen or twelue hundred mo If the case be so then is the aduantage in the multitude of Lies and he is farthest from being confuted who maketh most Lies and specially he that maketh so many as the defender of the truth shal not haue leisure to trie them Lies It is wel knowen how muche easier it is to write Lies then to confute Lies A Lie is vttered in a worde or two the poison of an hainous Heresie is spet forth in a line or two Nor this nor that perhappes can wel and sufficiently be confuted so as it be made plaine vnto the vnlearned in foure or fiue leaues Least I should seeme to saie nothing in his commendation and not to acknowlege his worthiest qualities I graunt he is furnished with Rhetorie with humaine letters with Eloquence with a mearie wit and that he hath a readie grace in skoffing yea that he is hable to
Bastardes An. 1273. In prouisione de Martona cap. 9. paste wholy with the Lordes Temporal whether the Lordes spiritual would or no yea and that contrary to the expresse Decrees and Canons of the Churche of Rome Al these thinges saith he the wise and learned could sone haue tolde me And faine would I know of the wise and learned in deede whether al these thinges be true or other wise Verely for my parte I haue great cause to doubte If an other man had said them I should rather haue beleeued them As for M. Iewel I haue so generally founde him false in reporting al mennes sayinges whiche I examine by their bookes that I see good cause to misturst him euery where when so euer I lacke the bookes from whence he bringeth his allegations And although al that here he reporteth touching this matter were truely reported yet thereby it is not proued that al was lawfully and wel done But hereof as I said before I refuse to entre dispute But now whereas M. Iewel committeth Religion and al matters touching Faith vnto the Lordes Temporal and Commons assembled in Parlamente and wil that al orders and Statutes by them made and enacted concerning the same stand for good and lawful though the Bishoppes dissent neuer so muche By this he maketh the Faith not a Standerd to measure our opinions and iudgementes by as it ought to be but he maketh the willes and fansies of the Lordes the Standerd whereby to measure our Faith Faith made chāgeable according to the change of times And so the Faith shal be changeable according to the change of times For whereas al menne know in how fewe thinges the Lordes dissent from the wil and pleasure of the Prince who seeth not how thus it maie come to passe that our Religion and Faith shal change at the pleasure of euery Prince for the time being and that so at length we shal haue no stable Religion nor Faith at al If M. Iewel wil saie it behoueth al menne to know Gods worde and not to suffer them selues to yelde vnto any thinge that is not allowed thereby what remedie can be prouided against al errour when Princes and Lordes shal finde suche Doctours and Preachers as M. Iewel is who shal easily persuade the people that to be the meaning of Goddes worde by which the Princes and Lordes maie acheeue their desires But hereof I shal perhappes haue occasion to speake more hereafter Now whereas he complaineth so greuously of me for that I cal their Church I meane them that made the Apologie and their fauourers a malignant Churche a new Churche erected by the Deuil a Babilonical Tower a heard of Antichriste a Temple of Lucifer a Synagoge a Schoole of Satan ful of Robberie Sacrilege Schisme and Heresie If he his felowes and their folowers wil repent them hartily and vnfeinedly of their errours and heresies and returne home againe vnto the Catholique Churche if they wil ceasse to diuide and scatter abroad with the deuil the author of diuision and gather together with Christe and repaire vnitie if they wil leaue the manifolde and absurde confusion of opinions and doctrines whiche their sundrie sectes doo professe and mainteine stubbornly if they wil leaue to prepare a waie for Antichriste by their euil doctrine leading the worlde to al libertie of the flesh if they wil cal to God for grace and dispose them selues to humilitie if they wil at length heare the Catholique Churche if they wil acknowledge their wicked doctrine against the daily Sacrifice to procede out of Satans Schoole as it is confessed by Luther him selfe if they wil not mainteine their Robberies and Spoiles of Churches as iuste deedes if they wil forsake their Incestuous and Sacrilegious Marriages Briefly if they wil amende wherein they haue offended I wil gladly reuoke those wordes and how so euer in respecte of time past they haue deserued so to be spoken of I wil speake of them no other wise then of the Children of the Churche then of our dere brethren then of Goddes frendes Thus I haue answered the chiefe partes of M. Iewels epistle to the Quenes Maiestie and by repeating myne owne wordes which I was forced to doo I haue shewed euidently to the Readers eye how shamelesly he belyeth me and my Treaties Whereof the Reader maie take a view and so iudge what credite he deserueth in the rest of his Defence As for the rest of his epistle consisting wholy of flatterie I thinke not worth the answering Neither hath he vsed any more truthe in his Preface to the Christian Reader and in his Epistle to me set at the ende of his Defence where he filleth his magent with great numbers of Quotations pretending thereby the absurde and vntrue pointes in the Texte reproued to be founde in the Treaties whiche so busily he quoteth Now if I should in likewise answer to euery suche parte in the said Preface and Epistle conteined by these fewe it maie appeare to what hugenesse my booke would growe and of the whole what vnprofitable matter would rise soothly none other but a cōtinual and lothsome declaration of his vntrue dealing in one sorte or other But for so much as the same is by this briefe Answer to his Epistle dedicatorie alreadie sufficiently discouered that other labour maie seeme needelesse As we finde him in this so we finde him in the rest though otherwise not very constant yet in the rate of his writing one manner a man that is to saie one that euery where maketh his onely aduantage of lyes falsifyinges and corruptions How vniustly M. Iewel obiecteth sharpe speache and vncourteous wordes vnto his Aduersarie and how iuste cause there was that suche order of speache should be vsed The .2 Chapter GEntle Reader cōsider I pray thee indifferently how the case standeth betwixt M. Iewel and me Before he entreth into his Defence of the Apologie betwen his Epistle to the Quenes Maiestie and his Preface to the Reader he hath extraordinarily inserted foure leaues In which he laboureth al that he can to perfourme two thinges to discredit me and to aduaunce his owne credit To bring this to passe First he accuseth me next he excuseth him selfe He accuseth me of vncourteous Wordes he excuseth him selfe of fowle Vntruthes setting forth a colourable Viewe of a few of the same How reasonably he doth the one and how sufficiently the other by that I shal here declare thou maist iudge First touching wordes Where so euer godly zeale and iuste griefe moued me to vse sharpe speache albeit nowhere I vse so sharpe as the indignite of the thing required of al those places he hath caused certaine my wordes to be culled out and to be laid together as it were in a table before the Reader And bicause he would not seme scorneful euen there reprouing me for the same he calleth them forsooth certaine principal flowers of M. Hardinges modest speache And least he should at any time leaue his common
charged and of whiche he hath not yet discharged him selfe The 4. Chapter AFter his heape of sharpe wordes partly forged by him selfe partly called out of my writinges and laid together as it were in a Table whiche seeme to him and to his brethren so muche irksome how muche their conscience is gilty he setteth forth in an other Table as it were certaine Vntruthes to the number of 31. whiche he founde among many moe noted against him in my first Reioinder and in my Confutation of the Apologie This Table he calleth M. Ievvels intent in setting forth the Vievv of his Vntruthes A Viewe of Vntruthes His intent and meaning is by the View of these fewe Vntruthes which he hath chosen out as the leaste among the whole number to purchase him selfe a Defence or at least waie some excuse for the reste For faine would he al menne to be persuaded that the reste noted by me and by others who haue confuted his errours and detected his manifold falshoode are of no greater weight then these are What and how great the reste are they maie see who liste to reade our bookes in which they be truly set forth How vnhable he is to iustifie them it shal appeare by that he hath said in the Viewe For if he be not hable to discharge him selfe of these one and thirty the leaste how shal he be hable to acquitte him self of a thousand and moe of greater weight scoared vp against him by those that haue written but vpoÌ„ fiue of his six and twentie Articles First 〈◊〉 layeth forth .15 Vntruthes which among many moe in my Râ—ioinder I noted against him out of his Replie to the first Article The first nyne he is driuen to acknowledge For he hath said nothing in their defence If he wil saie they be but smal Vntruthes and therefore not worthy of any thing to be said of them it may be replied they are too great to be vttered so neare together M. Ievvel is rife of Vntruthes in the very beginniÌ„g of his Replie For the first six Vntruthes be within the compasse of 12. lines in the beginning of his Replie It were strange that six great Vntruthes should be vttered within so fewe lines in the beginning of a booke For them that can not defende a matter but with great lyes it is the beste policie to beginne with smaller lyes For elles they should marre altogether This circumstance considered Vntruthes must needes seeme bothe many and great Briefly the whole fifteen Vntruthes noted out of the Replie be founde in his first Diuision that is to saie within lesse then thrise fifteen lines It were very il lucke if they should be proued al to be great and weightie Vntruthes in the first entrie of the booke and that within so litle space There was neuer any Writer so vaine or false The. 10. Vntruth Beno and VspergeÌ„sis parcially holding with the Emperour not to be beleeued against Gregorie the. 7. that sowed Vntruthes so thicke specially in the beginning of a Treatie The first nyne then being confessed to be Vntruthes vndischargeable let vs see how substancially he dischargeth him selfe of the six other It is reported saith he of Pope Hildebrand so he calleth Gregorie the seuenth that he wrought Necromancie and Sorcerie This noted I for an Vntruth saying it is not reported by any graue and true writer but by them that flattered the Emperour of that time To this he maketh a Replie This storie saith he is largely set out by Beno and Vrspergensis These be they whose witnesse I refused before as being the Emperours flatterers and bearing malice to the Pope and therfore ouer parcial to beare credite in that case Gregorie the seuenth How farre this worthy man Gregorie the seuenth was from exercising Necromancie or Sorcerie and from other vices it is largely declared by the best writers of stories of that age namely by Marianus Scotus by Lambertus Schafuaburgensis and Leo Hostiensis and specially by Otho Frisingensis and of late by Platina and Onuphrius Panuinus Furthermore Beno can not beare great credite with vs as he that is condemned by Ecclesiastical censure Vrspergensis set out by MelanchthoÌ„ only The. 11. Vntruth As for Vrspergensis he is worthily suspected to be corrupted by your felowes of Germanie among whom he was set out in printe by Philip MelanchthoÌ„ and not els Item Henrie the Emperour was poisoned in the Communion breade saith M. Iewel Vntruthe say I He was not poisoned but died otherwise For proufe he replieth and allegeth Vrspergensis Likewise Auentinus and besides Baptista Ignatius the writer of Supplementum Chronicorum Rauisius Textor the GraÌ„marian and Carion writers of our time and some of them of litle credite Neither in suche a case maketh the nuÌ„ber of writers any ArgumeÌ„t of truthe For the afterwriters being deceiued by the Vntruthe of the first writer be they neuer so many in number caÌ„not make true Henrie of Luxemburg hovv he dyed Lib. 8. that whiche was vntruly reported at the first Touching the Death of this Emperour who was Henrie of Luxemburg Paulus Aemylius a graue and a learned man who hath examined this mater to the vttermost writeth that he died of a sickenes whiche he fel into at Bonconuento in the territorie of Siena in Tuskane being come thither from Pisa The same writeth * In scholijs in Platinam Onophrius That he should be poisoned in receiuing the Sacrament by meanes of a Dominican Frier Cornelius Cornepolita seemeth to esteme it for a fable or to make the best of it for a matter of a heare saie By that which * In Chronographia The .12 Vntruth Victors Death Nauclerus writeth therof it appeareth to be no better then a fained tale Item Pope victor was poisoned in the Chalice saith M. Iewel This noted I for an Vntruth and said he died otherwise To this he replieth and for his saying allegeth Martinus Polonus that vaine fabler the first author of the fabulous Popedom of Pope Ioan the woman he nameth certaine other of our age some being as very enemies to the Catholike Church as he him selfe is namely Anselmus Rid Anselmus Rid. a ProtestaÌ„t of Berna whom we beleue in such a mater no more then we beleue M. Iewel For such menne be very ready to set out in bookes any thing wherby the estimatioÌ„ of our diuine Mysteries may be impaired in the iudgement of light heads be it neuer so vntrue Concerning Pope Victors death VinceÌ„tius Vincentius BellouaceÌ„ as good an Author as Martinus Polonus and a man of muche greater learning writeth that he died of a Dysenterie and so Platina reciteth In these three Vntruthes M. Iewel hath some colour of a defence bicause the writers of the Stories doo varie And he liketh that report best that is most fabulous and vaine and teÌ„deth to the coÌ„tempt of the Pope and of the blessed Sacrament Suche stuffe is precious in his sight Thus it is cleare that he
is newly falsified saie I by nipping of wordes from the sentēce that be of great importance and quite contrarie to that M. Iewel intendeth For the whole Decree hath these wordes Concil Cartag 3. Cap. 47. Placuit vt praeter Scripturas Canonicas nihil in Ecclesia legatur sub nomine diuinarum scripturarum It hath benne thought good that nothing be readde in the Churche vnder the name of the holy Scriptures beside the Canonical Scriptures It foloweth in the same Decree Let it be lawful also for the Martyrdomes of Martyrs to be read when their yerely Feastes are kepte This Vntruthe M. Iewel by no shifte is hable to excuse What he bringeth in his Replie out of the Abbridgement of the Councel of Hippo made in the third Councel of Carthage is to no purpose For though the Abbridgement saie that praeter Scripturas alia non legantur other thinges be not readde in the Churche beside the Scriptures yet how that is to be vnderstanded it is supplied by the Decree of the third Coūcel of Carthage by those wordes sub nomine diuinarum scripturarum So that M. Iewel maie looke to finde no better reliefe in the Councel of Hippo Abbridged then he founde in that Councel of Carthage See my Confutation of the Apologie Fol. 243. a. The. 15. Vntruth The 15. Vntruth of the Apologie which M. Iewel goeth about to make good standeth altogether vpon a point of the Canon lawe in what case the Pope committeth Simonie I alleged summa Angelica He in his Repli◠saith I vnderstande not my Summa Bicause the discussion hereof nequireth a large processe and is not very necessarie in it selfe nor perteineth specially to our profession I leaue it to M. Iewelles great lawier to treate of it to the most aduantage if he haue so muche leisure as to thinke hereof being him selfe muche encombred poore man with matters of the law about his two wiues not being yet determined whiche of them he maie kepe stil whiche he maie turne awaie Ye should do wel to amend that disorder M. Iewel Touching the. 16. Vntruth The. 16. Vntruth I neede to saie litle It pleased M Iewel of his owne humilitie to acknowledge an errour whiche I laid not vnto his charge Certainely whiles he goeth about to trie him selfe a true man he ladeth him selfe with a more huge burden of Vntruthes and maketh al menne that wil lose their time in reading his bookes witnesses how when falsehed is attempted to be defended lying and falsehed is farther multiplied By experience of M. Iewels writinges this muche I finde VVhat it is to confute M. Ievvels vvritinges that to confute him is no more but to saie where he saith ought of his owne that either al is false or light scoffing stuffe or otherwise vaine where he bringeth the sayinges of other menne wherewith in manner only his bookes be farced that either muche is true but impertinent nor by the Catholiques denied the reste false as alleged out of Heretiques or at lest in some parte aduersaries vnto the vnitie of the Churche as Bale Illyricus Iacobus Andreae Sleidan Cassander Lorichius and suche others or by M. Iewels common sleightes falsified and corrupted and wrested to an vndue sense or otherwise not very material vnprofitable and not worth the answering This shal he finde to be most true who soeuer wil examine the thinges he setteth forth as I haue If he mingled some true discourses with his other vntrue extrauagantes as other Heretikes cōmonly haue done our labour of answering should be lesse Now his vntruthes and impudent Lies be so many that to confute al it were labour bothe infinite to the writer and vnprofitable to the reader Towardes the ende of the View of his Vntruthes at last in a great brauerie he concludeth with the wordes of S. Paule tanquà m seductores ecce veraces 2. Cor. 6. We are saith he called Deceiuers and yet we saie the truth But how truly this boaste is made the Defence of these fewe his Vntruthes by me now answered doth sufficiently witnesse How be it here at length the man remembring him selfe better In the Defence B. iij. a. b. beginneth to take some conscience of the matter and protesteth that he wil not so warrant euery parcel of any his writing as though there were nothing therein conteined that might safely be iustified in al respectes What is that then wherein he acknowlegeth him selfe to haue done vntruly Let vs see how muche and how great it is for by that we shal take a View of his sinceritie and of his humilitie O saith he The errours that M. Ievvel maie be induced to acknovvledge in him selfe If I haue at any time marke this if I haue Reader for neither this muche wil he confesse simply mistaken Authour for Authour or name for name or Chapter for Chapter or booke for booke or any one Father or Doctour for an other suche erroures were neuer hitherto accompted damnable Yea the best learned haue oftentimes fallen into them Doest thou not see reader what great errours and ouersightes this man with his If confesseth to be in his writing As though we found that onely faulte in him whiche maie happen to any writer by ouersight be he neuer so diligent and not other great Vntruthes corruptions falsifyinges lyes and sclaunders that by no colour can be excused What many of them be hereafter thou shalt see in this processe August in Psal 33. Cōcione 1. The great faultes that M. Ievvel findeth in my bookes Now to requitte me he laieth certaine great crimes to my charge As that in alleging this saying of S. Augustine Christus ferebatur in manibus suis I leafte out as he saith this worde quodammodo That in an allegation I name Iosue for Osee that there is founde in the margent of my booke where Socrates is alleged lib. 8. whiche faulte was the printers whereas Socrates neuer wrote but 7. bookes Item that in the margent the printer hath put Luc. 2. for Luc. 22. and in the texte 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with whiche ouersightes I maie reasonably and truly charge the Printers Compositours and discharge my selfe for at al times I attende not vpon the printe my selfe and though I had yet suche smal faultes might wel haue escaped me though I had as many eyes as the poetes feine of Argus So of myne owne accorde I confesse whereat M. Iewel maketh no litle adoo as thoughe it were a hainous offence that where I speake of Henrie the fourth Emperour and his sonne Henrie the fifth the compositour by ouersight and negligence hath sette for Henrie the sonne against Henrie the fourth Henrie the seconde against Henrie the fourth For in that place See the Defence pag. 418. See the Confutat fol. 187. b. M. Ievvel in the Vievv of Vntruthes B. 3. b whereas M. Iewel demaundeth this question Who put in armes the Sonne against the Emperour his Father Henrie the fourh I answer in
make vs one Pope who is neither Priestes nor laie maÌ„nes sonne nor any maÌ„nes sonne at al. What a maruelous Prophet then was M. Iewels Damasus that could thus prophecie of so many Popes so long to come after his death and tel who should be their fathers so many yeres before their great GraÌ„dfathers were borne If for some excuse you say that this much you found in Gratian Distinct 56. it caÌ„ not helpe you The printed Gratian hath neither this forme of wordes nor this order of names nor so many Popes names by three For he hameth not Iohn 10. nor Iohn 15. nor Adrian 2. So that you must take it vpon you your selfe and beare the shame of it And what if the book of Gratian had it as you haue alleged Doo you not know that such thinges in Gratian be of no authoritie sometimes which be rehersed vnder this worde Palea Palea Palea good Reader is asmuche to say as Chaffe and where so euer this word Palea Chaffe is put in Gratian by the same it is signified as some doo iudge that the saying immediatly folowing is with litle iudgement infarced and that it is litle worth as Chaffe is litle worth in coÌ„parison of cleane wheate Such Chaffe and vaine fables M. Iewel is dryuen to take holde of to mainteine his brothers filthinesse for lacke of better stuffe And were it true that these Popes or some of them whose names be founde here in Gratians Chaffe were Priestes sonnes yet had he benne a true dealer in this cause he should not so vniustly haue conceeled what the Glose saith in the same place specially seing that he is so wel acquainted with the Glose and furnisheth his great booke specially and aboue al other Doctours with the stuffe of the Glose Thus there we finde Distinct 56. in Glossa Omnia ista exempla intellige de ijs qui in Laicali statu vel minoribus ordinibus orationibus parentum suscepti sunt quando suis parentibus licebat vti vxoribus suis Vnderstande thou al these examples of them that were receiued at Goddes hande by the prayers of their fathers being in the state of laie menne or in the lesser Orders when their fathers might lawfully vse their wiues Thus for any thing you haue brought hitherto is your Great Poste of Priestes Marriages thwited to a pudding pricke As for that whiche after al this you pretende to allege out of AEneas Syluius AEneas Syluius whom you cal Pope Pius whereas at the time when he wrote De gestis Concilij Basiliensis he was neither Pope nor Pius and out of Polydorus Vergilius Polydorus Vergil the late Prebendarie of Poules in London whom in the Chronicles you reporte falsly and laste of al out of fabling Fabian Fabian the late Merchant of London a man of smal learning and of as litle authoritie in these pointes though a special fauourer of your side as it is tolde and therefore the readier to reporte vntruth I am sure menne of meane knowledge wil litle esteme and I accompt it not worth the answering Make the best you can of it thereby perhaps or by some part of it ye may proue that of Married menne some were made Bishops which as I haue oftentimes tolde you we denie not but that Bishoppes or Priestes were euer in any wel ordered Churche permitted to marrie you shal neuer be hable to proue Now that you haue laid your two Principles as you cal them let vs see how substancially you defende your foure pointes aboue mencioned And first that it is lawful to marry after the Vowe of Chastitie and after holy Orders taken shewe vs by what learning or authoritie ye proue it Iewel First of al his obiection of Vovves nothing toucheth the Clergie of England For it is knovven and confessed that the Priestes of England vvere neuer Vâ—taries Yet for further ansvver vve graunte it is reason and conuenient that vvho so hath made a Vovve vnto God should keepe his promise Cyril in Leuitic Lib. 3. Cyrillus saith Si castitatem promiserit seruarâ— non poterit pronunciet peccatum suum If he haue promised 〈…〉 vvovved Chastitie and can not keepe it let him pronounce and confesse his Sinne. Harding How long wil you go about the bush as they say when come you to the purpose These bye matters not touched in my ConfutatioÌ„ haue made your booke great but the same geue euidence that you put more truste in multitude of wordes then in substance of matter If ye had the cleare truthe on your side what needed so many wordes One plaine sentence might haue better serued you That you wander not abroad here once againe I cal you home and require you to leaue your delaies and answer to the very point or to confesse your errour Remember my wordes of the Confutation be these It is not lawful for them to marrie Confutat fol. 73. b. which either haue by deliberate vowe dedicated al manner their chastitie vnto God or haue receiued holy Order Ouer against these my wordes you haue placed in the margent of your booke this note with your starre Defence pag. 163. Vntruthes two together as better appeareth by the Answeare By which you charge my saying with two Vntruthes Of such notes your booke hath great stoare But God be thanked the world seeth you are ryfer of vpbraidinges and sclaunders then of substantial proufes Nowe by your note you haue bounde your selfe to shewe vs that it is lawful to marrie after the Vowe of Chastitie likewise also after the holy Orders taken Before you came to proue either of these two pointes you tel vs that the Priestes of England were neuer Votaries that is to say that they neuer made Vow of single life and chastitie whereby to binde them selues not to marrie Neuer is a long daie M. Iewel Wel be it as it is If they be not Votaries they may marrie say you But answer directly to the point I pray you M. Ievvel ful coldly maketh that but reasonable and coÌ„uenieÌ„t that is necessary May they marrie who haue vowed chastitie Say yea or nay VVee graunte say you it is reason and conuenient that who so hath made a Vowe vnto God should keepe his promise This is somewhat though it be coldely spoken But yet you must come nearer vnto the point You speake generally and faintly We speake not of a Vowe or promise in general If a man make a promise to an other man it is reason and conuenient that he keepe it But how saie you to the vow of chastitie deliberatly made of man or woman to God Is it in any wise necessary to perfourme it or no If it be necessary why speake ye so coldly it is reason and conuenient What meane you by your reason and conuenience Is it any more but that if a Moncke or a Frier feele him selfe moued with luste he shal by and by take a woman vnder pretense of Wedlocke and so
that forbad Theafte hath not permitted Robberie but would the whole to be vnderstanded by the parte what so euer thinge of the neighbours is vnlawfully taken awaye verely likewise we ought to vnderstand that vnder the name of Moechia Aduouterie euery vnlawful carnal acte and vse of those partes not allowed by Goddes lawe is forbidden The effecte of this whole discourse is this S. Augustine confesseth the name of that which we cal Simple Fornication not to be founde expressely in the Table of the ten Commaundementes Neuerthelesse he saith that it is to be vnderstanded in the name of Aduouterie which is there expressed and that so it is forbidden vnder that name as also euery vnlawful acte and vse of those partes that serue to the Generation And al this procedeth of like reason as we ought to iudge that Rapina Robberie is forbidden though in that Table it be not expressely named as also euery vnlawful taking awaye and deteining of an other mannes thinges as being vnderstanded in the name of Theafte in that Commaundement only expressed as oftentimes by reason the whole must be vnderstaÌ„ded in the name of a parte Saepe intel ligitur à parte totum For elles we should thinke it lawful to robbe and commit rauine whereas Theafte onely is by expresse terme forbidden wherein we are controlled by reason it selfe without further aduise of Goddes written word Mow iudge good Reader what rewarde M. Iewel is worthy to haue in a wel ordered common welth for suche abusing of S. Augustines name and auctoritie to the Defence and mainteinance of Simple Fornication Certainely the libertie that through this pleasant Gospel the world is now growen vnto considered it was litle neede to teache such Doctrine in open Bookes at these daies A Comparison of Errours with whiche M. Iewel chargeth me and I on the other side charge him The 16. Chapter BIcause Reader M. Iewel to excuse a few errours with which I charged the Authour of the Apologie chargeth me likewise with errours and ouersightes committed in my Confutation and in my first Reioinder that it maie appeare euidently vnto thee who standeth more charged he or I bothe in respecte of the number and also of the weight of the matter reported in the errours I wil here truly and plainely reherse those hainous errours whiche he laieth to my charge and then also I wil laie forth certaine of his errours as they came to hande Certaine I saie for to laie forth so many as by searche I might easily finde it would require the charges of an other booke These then be the great and weighty matters wherein I seeme to M. Iewel worthy of great blame Iewel in the Viewe of his Vntruthes B iij. b. M. Harding maie remember Confut. 4. 6. a. Confut. 312. b. Confut. 47. a. Reioinder fol. 287. a. Confut. 332. a. that he him selfe in steede of the Prophete Osee hath alleged vs the noble Iosue and that by an other like ouersight he hath alleged the 8. booke of Socrates Scholasticus vvhereâ—s Socrates neuer vvrote but seuen M. Harding him selfe in hiâ— Confutation of the Apologie in steede of the 22. of Luke hath printed the 2. of Luke Likevvise in his Reioindre in steede of these vvordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be hath printed and sente vs quite the contrarie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To be shorte M. Harding in this selfe same booke in steede of these vvordes lulled a sleepe by errour hath printed lulled a sheepe Harding Of al these great and dangerous errours I acknowledge but one to be mine which is that by ouersighte I named Iosue in steede of Osee And ô that there were no greater sinne in me for which I ought to crie God Mercie And yet that it is an errour and a faulte too I confesse would God you M. Iewel woulde as readily confesse yours As for the reste you muste quarrel with the Printers seruauntes with whom I am offended not onely for these faultes but also for many mo no lesse then you Were they diligent and true workemenne I perceiue touching this case you should haue litle to say Now let the indifferent Reader compare these my errours or rather this my one errour whiche in so many places you haue obiected vnto me and whiche onely after so long searche you haue founde with a fewe of yours noted out of your late booke intituled The Defence of the Apologie Sure I am for your excuse you can not laie the faulte vpon your Printer nor by any other meanes iustifie them Thus among other infinite Vntruthes you say Iewel Pag. 634. Ye maie remember that tvvo of the principal pillers of yuor Chapter at Trent Petrus a Soto and Catharinus dissented euen there openly and shamefully and that in great pointes of Religion and vvrote the one mightily against the other the one charging the other vvith errour and heresie and could neuer be reconciled Harding Here I must tel you M. Iewel that you affirme more then you are hable to abide by By this also as by other infinite places ye geue your Reader to vnderstande what a sure carde you are to trust vnto Catharinus and Petrus a Soto be lied by M. Ievvel For Catharinus and Petrus a Soto were neuer together at the Councel of Trent as any doers there muche lesse as principal pillers Yea Catharinus was dead ten yeres before Petrus a Soto came to the Councel as one to haue any doing there For Catharinus died Anno 1552. and Petrus a Soto came to the Councel Anno 1562. Sixtus Senensis in Bibliotheca sancta lib. 4. Wherefore I maruel that you are not ashamed so precisely to affirme an open and shameful vntruth For if they were not at the Councel together how could they dissent there openly and shamefully as you terme it Hereunto you adde an other great Vntruth that they wrote mightely the one against the other For I am wel assured you can not proue that euer they wrote the one against the other at al. Albeit I wil not saie but that Petrus a Soto peraduenture doth disallowe some certaine erroneous opinion of the others in some parte of his workes That you saie they could neuer be reconcilied is most false in your meaning Howbeit in a contrary sense it maie be truely said For Reconciliation presupposeth a falling out But where there was neuer falling out as betwen them there was not as farre as it can appeare by their writinges there could not be any Reconciliation To like effecte and with as litle truthe you speake of them bothe Pagin 350. In deede some such thing there was betwen Dominicus a Soto and Catharinus Albeit their Dissension was not so outragious as you would haue it seeme I merueile that you should so much and so often after one sorte be ouerseen especially if you haue read their bookes as you pretend or elles if you haue read Illyricus de Sectis with stuffe out of whose dragges you haue somewhat enlarged your
Episcopus But whether he beareth that name of the one or of the other it maketh no great matter If it be so it remaineth that you can tel vs in what parte of the worlde whether in Asia in Aphrica or in Europa or in the new founde landes there be any place of that name I thinke you must be faine to looke ouer al the Geographical tables and bookes you haue and borrowe some of your felowes too and put on your spectales of the best sight and yet for al that I warrant you not finde it except it be in Vtopia Wel M. Iewel that you maie vnderstande that the more occasion you geue me to seeke the more I finde matter of Vntruthe and ignorance to charge you withal I tel you in deede that you haue named Ioannes Camotensis in steede of Ioannes Carnotensis if you haue respecte to his Bishoprike Ioannes Camotensis must be Ioānes Sarisburiensis vvho vvas Bishop of Chartres in France and thereof in Latine called Carnotensis Defence pag. 613. But if you wil haue his Countrie signified then must you cal him Ioannes Salesberiensis or Sarisburiensis choose whether as you haue done Pag. 132. I might saie that this Ioannes Sarisburiensis was a Bishop in al respectes farre better to vse your owne wordes not then Leontius Hippolytus or Clemens as it liketh you to skoffe at those learned and blessed Bishoppes but then Iohn Iewel of Sarisburie if you naming your selfe Iohn of Sarisburie could iustly be accompted any Bishop at al. But betwen a Bishop and no Bishop in this behalfe there can be no comparison This is not the first time that you haue alleged your witnesses by a blinde gheasse hearesaie or reporte not hauing seene their bookes nor knowing what the Authours were You can saie much by rote and prou◠litle by skil as in many other places but here moste euidently it appeareth For if you had knowen that your Ioannes Camotensis is the selfe same Ioannes Sarisburiensis otherwise named Carnotensis for that he was in his time Bishop of Chartres in Fraunce Pag. 132. named Carnotum in Latine whiche you haue alleged before out of his woorke entitled Polycraticon but neuer declaring out of what booke thereof being eight bookes in the whole or what Chapter bicause yee neuer readde the place in the Authour him selfe but receiued it by the waie of almes of frier Bale Flacius Illyricus or some suche other if I saie you had knowen so muche as you might if you had taken the paine to peruse the Polycration your selfe you would neuer haue made so muche a doo about so smal a matter Now for your better instruction and fuller satisfaction maie it please you to vnderstand that he whiche is misnamed in Epitome Bibliothecae Gesneri Ioannes Camotensis is in Partitionibus eiusdem Gesneri tituli 5. fol. 95. rightly called Ioannes Carnotensis And that your Ioannes Camotensis is by you blindly mistaken for Ioannes Carnotensis it euidently appeareth by the sentences alleged by your owne Necromantical Doctor Cornelius Agrippa and by an other of the Spritish sort of your gospel Paulus Scalichius in his railing Libel De Choraea Monachorum Paul Scalichius and by lying Illyricus in Catalogo testium veritatis which are adscribed by Baudy Bale 2. Centur. Scriptorum Britanniae pag. 212. too Ioannes Carnotensis out of his Polycraticon And in deed they are there to be founde albeit not to that purpose that al the packe of your holy brethren haue vntruely alleged them for And therefore neuer a one of you al hath quoted either number of the booke or Chapter where any of those sentences are to be founde lest your falsehed might haue benne espied and that by reading the whole discourse of the places your euil purpose should haue benne nothing furthered but much hindred But if it wil please either you or the Reader to peruse the 16. chapter of the 5. booke and the 24. of the 6. booke of the sayd Polycraticon you for your parte shal haue occasion to vnderstand your errour and folie and the Reader for his parte not to be deceiued with your blinde reporte Pag. 51. Cusanus sovvly and ignorantly belied of M. Iew. You beare your Reader in hand pag. 51. that Nicolaus Cusanus wrote a booke entituled de Auctoritate Ecclesiae Concilij supra contra Scripturam Of the Authoritie of the Churche and Councel aboue and against the Scripture And as though you had seene the booke and wel perused it you referre your Reader thereunto in 14. mo places of this your pretensed Defence as it shal appeare to him A false forged booke odiously attributed by M. Ievv to Cardinal Cusanus in xv Sundri◠places that wil take the paines to turne to these pages here truely quoted 53. 55. 78. 157. 331. 438. 439. 474. 558. 593. 665. 674. 704. 724. Now M. Iewel notwithstanding al these quotations of yours if you be hable to shewe vs any booke of Cusanus so entituled either in print or in autenticke written hande I wil saie that you wil proue your selfe a truer man then euer I tooke you to be But bicause this maie litle moue you I wil more adde on the contrary side if you be not hable to shewe the same after so many allegations out thereof it wil consequently folowe that you are a shamelesse man I might saie a false harlot If a man were disposed to dally with you in a matter most certaine as you vse to doo with others when you thinke you haue gotten any smal shadowe of some counterfeit aduantage for an vndoubted example whereof I referre the readers to the page 414. he might perchaunce dash you quite out of countenance and deface you for euer yea euen before your frendes and the flattering vpholders of your dooinges which would greeue you at the harte Now might one chalenge you and saie M. Iewel if you be hable to shew any booke or halfe booke oration or epistle or any litle pamphlet whereunto Cusanus hath geuen this title then wil the Catholiques graunt you more then euer you were hable to gete yet at their handes If you haue al the bookes in your studie either of your owne or of other menne that you allege then bring the booke with this title forth and you shal discharge your selfe of a most impudent lie and sclaunder And if you be hable so to doo then I praie you let it be proclaimed by you with your booke in your hand at Powles crosse as you haue done at other times to your worship forsooth that al the worlde maie beare witnesse thereof Verely M. Iewel it appeareth that you haue readde more then you vnderstand or at least then you haue liste to vnderstand and yet you allege more then euer you readde in the bookes whereunto you referre vs as it maie wel be proued by this present example and many other the like You maie beshrewe him to whom you gaue so light credite herein Couet not praise by
of Infantes necessarie fol. 336. a. Bastard vvorkes printed with good authours fol. 58. b. Baudie Bale vvorthily so called fol. 37. Beno parcial holding vvith the Emperour against the Pope fol. 57. a. S. Bernard reiected by M. Ievv fol. 12. a. BereÌ„garius vvordes as he laie dying 105. b. his heresie coÌ„demned fol. 105. a Beza persuaded Poltrot to kil the Duke of Guise fol. 85. a. Bigamie lavvful rather then commendable fol. 279. b. Bishoppes only in Councelle haue sentence definitiue fol. 99. a. Bishoppes not doing their dueties are yet Bishoppes fol. 181. 182. Bishoppes and Priestes different fol. 133. b. Bishoppes be Bishoppes though they be negligent fol. 181. a. A Bishop aboue a Priest fol. 235. b. The Bishop of Rome is the Successour of Peter fol. 273. a. A Bishop is not hable to doo his duetie the better for that he is married fol. 309. b. Blame a worde of honest meaning changed by M. Iew. in to Handle a word of filthy meaning fol. 121. a. Brentius the first deuiser of laying together the Aduersaries sharpe vvordes fol. 25. b. Brentius chargeth Bullinger vvith sharpe speache fol. 26. a. Brentius the authour of the heresie of the Vbiquitaries fol. 116. b. Browne the head Minister of the Puritanes fol. 336. a. Brunichildis Quene of FraÌ„ce fol. 382. a C. CAnonical Election of M. Iewel to the See of Sarisburie fol. 232. a. Capon Bishop no Protestant fol. 243. a. The Catholique Church fol. 272. 273. 274. Catholike vvhat by LirineÌ„sis fol. 124. b. Catholique Church staÌ„ding in two personnes by M. Ievvel fol. 126. a. Cathecumenus interpreted by M. Ievvel an heathen fol. 342. a. Celestinus Pope sclaundered fol. 253. b. Chams broode fol. 37. a. Character vvhat it signifieth in the Sacramentes fol. 268. a. Christopher Goodmans Traitours fol. 84. b. The Church standeth in multitude of personnes fol. 125. b. 126. Christ is the Rocke and Peter is the Rocke and hovv eche fol. 174. b. Church a plainer teacher then the Scriptures fol. 328. Christ a consecrated prieste fol. 3 2. b. Christ touched of vs in the Euchariste fol. 340. a. Christes bodie receiued of vs vvith mouth fol. 341. a. Churche hovve it is resolued in doubteful cases fol. 352. The clergie of this nevv Congregation vvhat vvorthy menne it hath fol. 262. b. Clerkes bounde to Continencie fol. 279. a. Communion in one or bothe kindes fol. 343. b. in sequent b. Communicatorie letters fol. 223. b. Concupiscence vvithout consent is not properly sinne fol. 337. a. CoÌ„tinuance of the Church vvithout intermission fol. 31. a. 89. 90. 91. 92. Councel of Laterane a great assemblie fol. 105. a. Councelles of later time in authoritie fol. 108. 109. a. b. Councelles not contrarie one to the other fol. 109. b. Councelles later preferred before the former fol. 114. b. 115. a. Concupiscence in married menne vvithout vvhiche generation is not perfourmed is an il thing fol. 283. a. Consecration of a Bishop fol. 240. b. Confession of sinnes necessary fol. 274 b. 275. 276. 277. Contradictions of M. Ievvel fol. 98. a. 101. b. Cranmar no Successour of S. Thomas fol. â—04 a. Cranmar hovv dealt vvithal for heresie and treason fol. 380. b. Cyrillus falsified by M. Ievv fol. 280. a. Cyprian nipped fouly by M. Iewel fol. 269. a. Cyprian alleaged by M. Iew. in an il cause fol. 271. b. D. DAmasus made by M. Iewel to write of thinges done after his death fol. 287. a. Degradatio fol. 7. a. Deposition of the Clergie what it is and how fol. 69. b. 70. 71. Dioscorus coÌ„deÌ„ned by Bishops not by the Ciuil magistrate fol. 72. 73. Dissensions among the ProtestaÌ„tes fol. 33. 34. 35. 151. 152. Donatistes errour renevved by M. Ievvel fol. 92. a. Dorman defended fol. 295. a. Double holinesse fol. 203. b. Drinke ye al of this in vvhat sense it vvas spoken fol. 343. b. E. ERasmus against the Protestantes fol. 163. b. Erasmus and Agrippa belie the Greke Church touching priestes marriage fol. 307. a. Ephrem praied for the healpe of Saintes and to Saintes fol. 364. b. Errour of S. Cyprian fol. 271. b. Errour of Pope Iohn 22. vvhat was it fol. 64. b. Errours that M. Ievvel maie be induced to acknovvledge fol. 77. a. Errours the greatest that M. Ievvel could find in my bookes fol. 77. b. Euchariste ministred to Children at Baptisme fol. 241. a. F. FAithe in England made changeable fol. 23. a. Faith without workes fol. 369. b. Faithe of the later thousand yeres as good as that of the first fiue hundred yeres fol. 94 b. Faithful wiues haue ben cause of the couersion of their vnfaithful husbandes fol. 315. a. Fathers charged by M. Iew. with ouersight for zele and heat fol. 295. b. Figuratiue bodie and figuratiue eating fol. 333. a. Fisher Bishop of Rochester and Luther compared fol. 108. Fleshe is a meane whereby grace passeth into the Soule fol. 339. a. Formosus Pope fol. 139. b. Fornication how it is punished in the Clergie fol. 69. 70. 71. Fornication euer pounished by the Churche fol. 81. Fruite of the Vine fol. 353. b. G. GErmanie for many partes remaining Catholike fol. 96. a. Gerson impudently belied by M. Iewel fol. 64. a. 100. b. 101. a. b. GoodmaÌ„s traiterous writing fol. 14. b. Gospel commeth vnto vs by Tradition fol. 326. b. Gratians wordes alleged by M. Iev for the CouÌ„cel of Carthage fol. 59. b. Grace necessary to the kepiÌ„g of the commaundementes fol. 366. b. Gregorie Nazanzenes saying touching a married Bishop expounded fol. 61. b. 313. b. H. HEad of the Churche one fol. 136. b. 137. seq Henrie of Luxenburg how he died fol. 57. b. Henrie the eightes bodie bruted to be taken awaie fol. 140. a. Henrie the sixt his body taken vp fol. 140. a. Heretiques it booteth not to striue with them fol. 215. b. Heretiques haue not to doo with Scriptures fol. 216. a. Heresie hath idolatrie annexed fol. 261. b Hildebrand Pope 57. b. acquited by graue writers fol. 256. b. 257. a. Hierome of Prage heretique recanted fol. 104. a. Hieromes place ad Euagrium expounded fol. 165. b. 166. 167. Hilarie a wicked man saincted by M. Iewels Canonization fol. 173. a. S. Hilaries verdite of S. Peters preeminence fol. 173. a. S. Hilarie married by M. Iew. fol. 28â— a. Holinesse of degree and of offite fol. 203. b. Honorius Pope no publike teacher of heresie fol. 253. b. 254. seq Hostiensis fowly corrupted by M. Iewel fol. 67. b. Husse said Masse a litle before he vvas burnt fol. 104. a. Hussites heretiques fol. 83. a. b. 103. a. b. Huguenotes of Fraunce Gues of the lovv Countrie fol. 37. a. Hypsistarij vvhat meÌ„ne they vvere fol. 314. a. I. M. Ievvels dignitie and degree no Bishop fol. 39. a. M. Ievvels especial Doctours fol. 8. a. 213. b. 228. b. 229. a. 251. b. M. Ievvels scoffe against Christ him selfe fol. 8. b. M. Ievvel mangleth his aduersaries text in infinite places fol. 9. b. 17. b. M. Ievvels graue sentence pronouÌ„ced against S.
holy Images in Churches and against the prâ—â—acie of his Successour to whom louing Christ more then the reste of the Apostles Iohan. 21. it was specially said feede my sheepâ— whiche are the weightiest and chiefe among al the Articles of his Chaleâ—ge and whereof al the restâ— in manner doo depende Al this is fully confuted by M. D. Sandeâ— by M. Doâ—man by M. Stapleton and by mee As for his Sophistrie and manifolde Arte wherewith he enuâ—igleth the vnlearned muche like to that by which Mountebanckes gete their lyuing and sundrie craftie false and absurde practises M. Rastel hath truly diligently and wittily detected them in three bookes written to that purpose in whiche by the very Title of eche booke he geueth al menne warning to beware of M. Iewel When I considered these chiefe and most special Articles of the Replie so wel and sufficiently confuted and the rest of that Volume to conteine nothing els but needelesse heapes of diuers Writers sayinges either true and of vs confessed or fowly falsified and corrupted and wrested to a sense quite contrarie to the authours meaning or otherwise not perteining to the proufe of any thing by the Catholiques denied or to the disproufe of any thing by them affirmed I thought I might doo wel to laie a side the Replie for a time and to go in hande with some answer to the pretensed Defence of the Apologie Here what should I doo Many as I vnderstand haue wisshed that I made a ful answer to the whole and to euery parcel of it and for the better perfourmance thereof they would allow me a yere or two more This desire requireth M. Iewels great Volume to be printed againe that is to saie the Apologie my Confutation and the texte of the Defence and further so muche of my Confutation to be added as in printing his booke of set purpose he hath caused to be cut of from the reste and to be suppressed to the intent a great parte of the best proufes brought against him should not be seene in his booke which being added would amounte to one good parte the whole Confutation being diuided into three This ought to be done of necessitie if an answer to the whole were to be made For whereâ—â— al my Treatie must rise vpon the wordes of the Apologie and of my Confutation and of the Defence how should it be vnderstanded how iustly I impugne the Apologie and the Defence and mainteine my Confutation onlesse the places were laid forth before the Readers eies The booke then of the Defence being alreadie so great The chiefe pointes of the DefeÌ„ce being ansvvered for vvhat causes a ful ansvver to the reste vvas thought not necessarie as it is by that time a iuste answer should be added vnto it euery man that hath any iudgement in these thinges maie soone conceiue of what an huge quantitie my new printed Volume would be In deed were euery idle point answered and treated of at ful it would seeme to matche yea farre to ouermatche Foxes Huge Booke of his false Martyrs Verely to saie what reasonably I maiâ— saie neither can I in three yeres doo the worke of seuen yeres nor with a fewe Dallers defraie the charges of foure or fiue hundred poundes nor can I finde in my Conscience to bring the weake into danger by setting out suche an heretical booke bicause it is not possible but that among so many heresies and erroneous pointes some wil escape my penne vnrefelled were I neuer so diligent Nor thinke I it good and profitable in that vnfruitful trauaile to spende so great a parte of my later yeres Vnfruitful I meane bicause I shal be driuen for the most parte to bestow paines about light scoffes Cauilles wranglinges and vaine trifles worthy to be contemned rather then to be answered Briefly neither haue I liste to set out so huge a Volume which I beleeue very fewe would bye I haue therfore thought vpon an other waie wherein I hope to doo more good to others sure I am that to my selfe I shal doo lesse hinderance in respecte of time and health and neuerthelesse perfourme that whiche in this case is chiefly requisite Whereas then M. Iewelles pretensed Defence maie be reduced vnto three principal Headdes from whence The Summe of the Defence as from their springes the streames of the whole Booke doo runne whiche are 1 a desire to disgrace me 2 an ernest auouching of his new false doctrines in condemnation of the Catholique Faith and of the whole state of Ancient Religion 3 the reproufe of Priestes Bishoppes Cardinalles and the Popes manners in this Treatie I haue said somewhat in Defence of my selfe as it was behooful I should the most labour I haue emploied to defende the receiued doctrine of the Catholike Faith which he hath laboured much to impugne With the liues and manners of the Clergie I meddle litle Menne be menne and wherein they haue donne euil I accoumpt them worthy of reproufe no lesse then he Howbeit what so euer he bringeth al is not the Gospel that in this point procedeth from his penne and malice could neuer yet learne to saie wel Touching bothe doctrine and manners if it shal please God to geue our Countrie grace to imbrace that onely doctrine whiche is true and Catholique that is to saie whiche we defende against the Nouelties and Heresies of our time so busily by M. Iewel and by them of that side with al diligence force and policie set forth and commended to the people concerning order of life and manners their pleasant Gospel breedeth suche libertie loosenesse and lewdnes among them that receiue it that we doubte not but it shal easily to al appeare that when the Catholiques whom they cal Papistes liued worst the time brought forth moe felowes of Angelles then their time notwithstanding the great number they crake of bringeth forth felowes of honest menne when so euer they liue best if it maie be truely said that at any time they liue wel who haue cut them selues from that bodie of Christe into the members whereof onely the grace of God is deriued The Summe and order of this Treatie If then thou be desirours Christian Reader to vnderstande the order and purporte of this Treatie made for answer to the Defence for the present time thus it is First in defence of my selfe I haue shewed how vntruly and sclaunderously M. Iewel hath burdened me with certaine hateful Crimes in his Epistle to the Queenes Maiestie The Vntruthe of these pointes I haue thought good plainely to laie before the Readers eies by conference of the places in my Confutation whence he tooke the occasions of his sclaunders as he pretendeth by the quotations noted in the Margent Nexte whereas he findeth him selfe muche agreeued with the sharpnesse of my vtterance vsed in my Confutation and in my first Reioinder and to make credite thereof hath as it were into a Table cowched together a large heape of sharpe wordes pretended by
certaine mo the like be those which I haue let passe as being partely vnnecessarie and vnprofitable partely vnmeete good houres to be bestowed about them By the handeling of these the weightier pointes it wil sufficiently appeare to al menne with what stuffe he filleth his great Bookes what smal credite he deserueth how litle pith there is to be found in his multitude of wordes how litle there is that serueth aptly to the purpose among the great heapes of testimonies that he laieth together Surely his Defence being wel examined by any man that hath skil and can iudge of these points it must needes be thought that when he saw he had not the plaine truth of his side yet with multitude of allegations he would make a shew of learning to the ignorant and trouble the answerer with confusion Euen so many Barbarous Princes as we reade in stories when they lacked a conuenient number of good and tried Souldiers haue gonne about to fraie their enemies with multitude of people who haue learned by their great ouerthrowes that oftentimes victorie is not obteined by multitude of menne In deede the Truth needeth not so many sayinges piked out of Schoolemenne of Summistes of Gloses vpon Gratian and other partes of the Canon Lawe and out of so many Canonistes of al sortes For trial of a mater to be prooued true in questions touching our beleefe one saying of the Scripture is sufficient if the expresse Scripture faile vs twoo or three Testimonies of the Ancient Fathers not being contrarie to the reste maie suffice But suche a confuse and vnorderly number of sayinges specially of suche as be not of great estimation as this man commonly allegeth of the same not one making cleerely for this purpose in moste matters what doth it els but breede a suspicion among the wise that the matter is not true for proufe whereof they be alleged But by this meane he thought to winne credit at least with the people For the people that can not iudge of these matters thinketh him best learned that hath most woordes It is knowen that when they beholde two reasoning together of any thing whereof they haue no skil commonly they commend the mainteiner of the worse cause in case he be fuller of wordes be they neuer so litle to the purpose and say in his praise that he answered the other partie to euery Quare M. Iewel vnderstanding this and making his most accompte of the people and of them that be vnlearned to whom he leaneth and by multitude of whom he and they of his side mind to stand for touching the learned they see they can winne none bestoweth great paines and charges to set out great bookes that at least in the opinion of the vnlearned and of them that haue not leisure to examine the points how substantially they are treated he maie seeme to haue done iolily and to haue acquited him selfe like a great Clerke In very deede if a man haue care howe muche he maie saie rather then how truly and feare not to vtter vntruthes he hath this aduantage ouer his aduersarie defending the truth with a conscience not to swarue from the censure of the Church that he may alwaies finde abundance of matter to vtter For as it hath of olde ben said Mendacium est multiplex veritas simplex Lying is manifolde Truth is simple Lying hath many plaites and foldinges Truth is without plaite or wrinckle Therefore it is no marueile if the Treaties of the one be narrowe and shorte of the other wide and long As for me if I prooue M. Iewel an vntrue man in so many pointes as I haue treated of I haue donne that whereby his credite must be broken His credite being broken what remaineth but that in this kinde of trade he go for a Banckroute If he be a Banckrout worthily is he to be begiled that trusteth him Some wil say perhaps it is not likely I should with so smal a booke discredit him that hath written so much But it maie please this man to remember that to saie the truth it is not M. Iewel that hath written muche He hath taken muche out of other mens bookes of his owne he hath in maÌ„ner nothing certainely very litle So that peruse his Booke who wil he shal finde that he is but a seely Translatour of other mens wordes a heaper together of al Writers sayings and that most commonly to more ostentation of tale then to the making vp of good weight So that if thinges be brought to an exact trial he shal be found no disputer no reasoner no discourser no Writer but only a gatherer together of other mennes Sentences How be it it is not the hugenesse of a booke that argueth the sufficiencie of proufes Truth is content to be set foorth with few wordes Neither yet doo I reproue him for that he allegeth what he findeth in other Writers For therby we bring credite to doubteful matters But for that alleging so much he allegeth so litle to the purpose yea in manner nothing and boldly wil I auouche it vtterly nothing for due proufe of any his new and strange doctrines being contrarie to that of ancient time hath benne beleeued in the Catholique Churche This shal seeme more probable if it be confirmed by some plaine and true examples Lette vs then examine M. Iewelles common demeanour in an example or twoo To discusse many the breuitie of a Preface wil not permitte O that he were in place to choose the example him selfe out of his whole Booke to his best aduantage that so it might euidently appeare with what weake tooles he fighteth against the truth ExaÌ„ples vvhereby it is shewed hovve vvith void and impertineÌ„t stuffe M. Ievvel filleth his great Booke Defence Pag. 163. Heb. 13. Confut. 73 b. Marke hovv M. Ievv alvvaies keepeth him selfe from coÌ„ming vnto the point in controuersie Whereas in the Apologie much is said in the commeÌ„dation of Matrimonie which no Catholique man euer discommended as that it is Holy and honorable in al sortes and states of personnes in the Apostles in the Ministers of the Church and in Bisshops and that it is an honest and lawful thing as S. Chrysostom saith for a man liuing in Matrimonie to take vpon him therewith the dignitie of a Bisshop to this I saie in my Confutation that albeit Matrimonie be holy and honorable in al and an vndefiled â—eâ— as S. Paule saith yet that it is not lawful for such personnes to marrie who haue deliberately vowed Chastitie or haue taken holy Orders This there I prooue by good and sufficient authoritie as it maie be seene in my said Confutation Now what is M. Iewels part here to proue for maintenaÌ„ce of his doctrine but that a man notwithstaÌ„ding his Vow or receiuing of holy Orders maie lawfully marrie This is the very point of the controuersie and thereto onely should he haue directed his talke If he go about any thing els it is beside the purpose But consider
thee an other example hauing taken vpon him to proue Defence Pag. 157. that the Canonistes haue taught the people that Fornication betwen single folke is no sinne it is a worlde to see what a doo he maketh what a number of Allegations he hudleth together and when he hath vttered al his stoare he is as farre from proufe of that he tooke in hand to proue as he was before he beganne So that in effecte nothing thereby is done but onely malice shewed and incke and paper spent First to make a great shewe Defence 360. and to increase his Volume for to what other purpose I see not he telleth vs of certaine beastly sayinges of Aetius the olde Heretique and of Prodicus the heathen philosopher as though the Canonistes were to be blamed for the faultes of the Heretiques and Infidelles of olde time Nexte he bringeth in Laurentius Valla the Grammarian whose saying though it be not needeful here to reherse for the reuerence of chaste eares yet it maie with a conuenient interpretation be honestly defended Then Richardus de Sancto Victore a late Schooleman and Socrates the Historiographer are haled in to geue their verdite and though they tel vs of the corrupte iudgement of certaine that made litle accompte in conscience of Fornication and whooredome yet that the Popes Canonistes taught the people that simple Fornication is no sinne thereof they speake not one word Which bicause M. Iewel him selfe perceiued right wel he preuēted that he feared would be obiected and after that number of impertinent allegations M. Ievvelles But. commeth in as his manner is with his But saying But ye wil saie al this hitherto perteineth nothing vnto the Canonistes To whom answere maie be returned that so it is in deed and whereas he knew it him selfe what meant he neuerthelesse to put it in but to increase the heape of his Volume After this he pretendeth to come to the very point and to hit the naile on the head as they saie And there he taketh aduantage of a Decree of the first Toletane Councel falsly reported in Gratian by the ouersight of the printer in an olde Copie many other Copies being true whiche aduantage neuerthelesse eftsones there he forgoeth confessing the Copie to be false Yet al must in to fil vp the great booke Then he goeth to the true Copie and either by ignorance he mistaketh the place or by malice falsifieth the sense dissembling that the worde Concubina Cōcubina is oftentimes taken in good parte to witte for a woman vsed in al respectes like a Wife and with the intent and affection of wedlocke before the Marriage be openly solemnized This shal be better perceiued by reading that I haue said hereof Lib. 5. cap. 15. From that Councel whiche was holden long before any of the Canonistes whom so fowly he sclaundereth wrote letter he goeth to peake in his Gloses the Gloses I meane vpon Otho whom like an vnskilful lawier he maketh one with Otho bonus and vpon the Decrees of Gratian. The one Gloselie falsifieth by leauing out a worde of chiefe importance the other of purpose he misconstrueth the rest that he allegeth out of an other Glose and out of one Petrus Rauennas a Canoniste is true and perteineth nothing to the wicked doctrine whereof he accuseth the Canonistes From the Gloses he starteth to S. Augustine in Enchiridio ad Laurentium Defence 361. And out of him he taketh a sentence vtterly to no purpose but to fil vp the paper From S. Augustine to the Councel of Basile then to Erasmus in Enchiridio militis Christiani belying them bothe From Erasmus he crepeth to Iacobus de Valentia Iacob de Valentia in Psal 118 saying of Iewes Saracenes and certaine il Christian menne that to excuse their detestable life they affirme simple Fornication to be lawful But what is this to the Canonistes From this Iacobus the Spaniard of Valentia he conueieth him selfe to Alexander of Hales the English man and from him to Antonius of Florence the Italian But at their handes he findeth no more reliefe then he founde at the others By Antonius it is roported onely that their errour is confuted who saie that simple Fornication is no sinne In Alexander there is nothing founde but onely a saying pretended to be S. Ambroses whiche maketh nothing to the purpose neither is it at al being vttered in suche wordes to be found in S. Ambrose At length he endeth this matter with a falsified saying of S. Augustine making that holy Father as vntruly he reporteth his tale to saie that he can not tel whether that kinde of Fornication whiche single menne committe with single womenne be forbidden or no. Whiche were it true that S. Augustine so said as in deede he saith it not but speaketh otherwise as here the reader shal finde by me declared yet by that the sclaunder vttered against the Canonistes is not iustified This muche haue I here noted for examples sake to the intent thou maist vnderstand Reader what order he keepeth commonly in his writing and whereof it commeth that his bookes rise to suche a huge quantitie And as he hath donne in these two matters so hath he donne in the reste very fewe excepted The same would I here by sundrie other mo euident examples shewe were it not ouer long Certainely this is not to answer a Booke it is not learnedly to replie it is not directly to confute a Booke It is onely an ostentation of much reading it is a copying out of common places laid vp in Notebookes it is to render wordes for reasons and heapes of impertinent sentences of what so euer Writers for apte testimonies of the ancient Fathers Briefly it is not an orderly disproufe of the doctrine that the Church hath hitherto holden For who so wil consider of it with right iudgement shal finde our proufes to stande vnshaken and my former Booke to remaine a sufficient Confutatiō not only of the Apologie but also of the pretensed Defence it selfe That it maie truly be said there was a Confutation of the Defence made before the Defence it selfe was printed For if the pointes of my former Booke be wel weighed and considered of they wil to the learned seeme a sufficient answer to what so euer he bringeth For trial hereof I referre me to the answere whiche here I haue made vnto his View of Vntruthes The View of M. Ievvels Vntruthes Among whiche Vntruthes thou shalt finde few noted out of the Apologie so by him discharged but that in respect of my Confutation notwithstanding his Defence he maie seeme stil to stand chargeable no lesse then before If he can no better discharge him selfe of suche Vntruthes which he him selfe hath chosen out of the whole heape as the least and easiest for him to defende and in iustification of which he had greatest cōfidence it maie soone be iudged how vnlike it is that he shal be hable to discharge him selfe of those
others whiche he thought best to conceele and dissemble One thing good Reader it behoueth thee much to be warned of in case thou desire to stande an vpright vmpeere betwen M. Iewel and me Vpon what places so euer thou shalt happen to light in which he shal seeme to haue any good aduantage against me or against the Doctrine of the Catholique Churche passe not them ouer lightly weigh wel both our groundes examine both our allegations truste not to ought that is laid forth by either of vs presently but resort to the Bookes whence euery thing is taken Doing so thou shalt most certainely perceiue whether of vs both vseth more truth Doubtlesse in such places thou shalt seldō it were much so saie neuer find him to allege the wordes whereby he pretēdeth any colour of aduantage without some false sleight or other If thou desire to vnderstand this by some examples consider I praie thee what great a doo he maketh about the name of Vniuersal Bishop Vniuersal Bishop As he handleth that matter if a man wil beleeue him al thinges seeme to be plaine on his side Defence 120. The Coūcel of Carthage saith he decreed by expresse wordes that the Bishop of Rome should not be called the Vniuersal Bishop And behold Reader the confidēce that he hath in this cause which he sheweth with these wordes speaking vnto me This you saie is forged and falsified and is no part of that Conucel For indifferēt trial both of the truth ād of the falshed herein I besech you behold the very wordes of the Councel euen as they are alleged by your owne Doctour Gratian. These they are Prima Sedi◠Episcopus c. Let not the Bishoppe of any of the first Sees be called the Prince of Priestes Dist 99. Primae or the highest Priest or by any like name but onely the Bishoppe of the first See But let not the Bishoppe of Rome him selfe be called the Vniuersal Bishoppe c. Now M. Harding compare our wordes and the Councelles wordes together We saie none otherwise but as the Councel saith The Bishop of Rome him selfe ought not to be called the vniuersal Bishop Herein we doo neither adde nor minis he but reporte the wordes plainely as we finde them If you had lookte better on your booke and would haue tried this matter as you saie by your learning ye might wel haue reserued these vnciuile reproches of falshed to your selfe and haue spared your crying of shame vpō this Defender Here is muche a doo as thou feest Reader and al standeth vpon falshed as I said at the first in my Confutation We striue not for the name of Vniuersal Bishop neither hath the Pope Challenged that title Yet these menne haue neuer donne with Vniuersal Bishop The whole matter is soone answered These wordes vniuersalis autem nec etiam Romanus Pontifex appelletur Concil Carthag 3 Cap. 26. The Bishop of Rome ought not to be called the vniuersal Bishop these wordes I saie be not the wordes of the thirde Councel of Carthage nor in the Greeke nor in the Latine but the wordes of Gratian and they stande for the Summe of that parte of the distinction whiche there foloweth And thereof M. Iewel was not ignorant as it appeareth by his owne wordes in the same place Howbeit were it true that Gratian had ignorantly added them to the Councel as wordes of the Coūcel what learned man trusteth Gratian a man not greatly trusted in respect of sundrie his allegations when it is easy to see the Original For this I referre the Reader to the 39. Chapter of the third Booke of this Treatie fol. 184. b. Perusing that I haue answered to this point there thou shalt fully vnderstand how falsly M. Iewel hath dealte therein and how litle cause he had so to triumphe For neither hath the Councel any suche woordes at al nor speaketh it there so much as one worde of the Bishop of Rome nor hath Gratian put those wordes as a testimonie of the Councel but as the Summe of that parte of the 99. Distinction which immediatly foloweth As wel might M. Iewel haue said that those other wordes there placed vnde Pelagius secundus omnibus Episcopis had ben the wordes of that Councel He that knoweth Gratians manner of writing can not but either laugh at M. Iewelles ignorance or maruaile at his impudencie To proue that it is lawful for a man to marrie a wife being in holy Orders The example of Eupsychius he allegeth the example of one Eupsychius who was a Laie Gentleman of Caesaria the chiefe Citie in Cappadocia and in a time of persecution suffred Martyrdom soone after that he had benne married Now most falsly he corrupteth the reporter of the Storie and maketh this Eupsychius a Bishop that it might appeare to the ignorant that one had married a wife after he had benne made a Bishop which would haue serued our married Superintendentes purpose gaily For yet after so many yeres searche they can not bring vs forth so much as one cleare example of the ancient Churche that euer there was any Bishop or Priest married after that degree and holy Order taken With such vncleane conueiance their vncleane treacherie is defended Defence 176. Cassio li. 6. cap. 14. His wordes be these Cassiodorus writeth thus In illo tempore ferunt Martyrio vitam finisse Eupsychium Caesariensem Episcopum ducta nuper vxore dum adhuc quasi sponsus esse videretur At that time they saie Eupsychius the Bishoppe of Caesaria died in Martyrdome hauing married a wife a litle before being yet in manner a newe married man Beholde Reader the falshod of this man First contrarie to his custome elswhere he leaueth the Greeke fonteine where this Storie was First written and goeth to the riuer of the olde translation in many places not most exactly answering the Greeke And why did he so Forsooth bicause if he had alleged Sozomenus the Greeke writer his falshod had benne fowly bewraied For he nameth this Eupsychius expressely Eupsychius a laie-man by M. Iewels forgerie made a Bishop to proue the Mariages of Priestes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as much to saie Eupsychius one of the Lordes or one of the Nobilitie of the Citie of Caesaria in Cappadocia Then bicause the Tripartite Storie of Cassiodorus setting foorth hath not so expressely that he was a nobleman of Caesaria M. Iewel was so bolde as to falsifie the place and to putte in of his owne this woorde Episcopum to helpe his matter and so corrupting his authour maketh him to cal him Eupsychium Caesariensem Episcopum Eupsychius the Bishoppe of Caesaria Thus he taketh vpon him to make him a Bishoppe who was a Laie man as wel a Bishoppe as he him selfe is that it might appeare to the vnlearned that a Bisshoppe married a wife after he was Bisshoppe Fol. 302. 318. See what I haue said hereto in this Treatie where I answer his false stuffe touching
Foxe hath raked together into that Donghil of his stincking Martyrs So then I trust good Reader this my shorter but more fruiteful trauaile shal wel content thee In which I haue defended and iustified the chiefe matters of the Catholique doctrine by M. Iewel impugned and therewith ouerthrowen his weake Defence In sundrie other pointes also whiche depende of Doctrine I haue detected his great and manifolde Vntruthes Neither haue I ioined issue with him in any point wherein I haue not sufficiently proued him either deceiued or a deceiuer Wherein as Ignorance maie stande him in some excuse for the one so muste he beare the gilte of malice for the other Eche pointe here is not handled with like diligence and like exactenesse I graunt for the matter hath not so required Yet where I haue benne least disposed to take paines and founde my selfe most weary in answering his friuolous Obiections thou shalt finde the truthe sufficiently mainteined and M. Iewel fully refuted If anywhere thou espie defecte or insufficiencie impute the blame to me If in any parte I shal seeme to haue donne wel take thou the profite geue God the praise Thomas Harding A DETECTION OFVNTRVTHES IN M. IEWELS EPISTLE TO THE QVENE THE FIRST BOOKE How vntruly and how slaunderously M. Iewel hath charged his Aduersarie with certaine hateful crimes in his Epistle to the Quenes Maiestie set before his pretensed Defence of the Apologie The First Chapter WHEREAS M. Iewel in the Epistle to the Queenes Maiestie set before his pretensed Defence of the Apologie chargeth me with diuers pointes whereby bothe to discredite the Catholique Doctrine and to stirre her Maiestie to indignation against me and other learned menne here who haue confuted his manifold erroures and detected sundrie his false partes wherewith dangerously he seduceth her Maiesties Subiectes least bothe I by my silence should seeme to acknowledge my selfe gilty of the thinges he chargeth me with and least others might be induced to beleeue him thinking him not to be so voide of dew reuerence and shame as so farre to abuse her Maiesties credulitie in these matters who hath no leisure or listeth not to examine the same I haue thought it conuenient and necessarie before I come to any parte of his directe answer to my Confutation of the Apologie to cleare my selfe of what so euer he imputeth vnto me in that Epistle and to shewe how al that he hath written against me in the same is vtterly false and sclaunderous And bicause I cannot better and in plainer wise performe it then by laying forth as it were the booke where eche thing is said whereof he taketh holde and by reporting myne owne sayinges which he hath falsified and vntruly reported Let it not seeme strange nor be lothesom vnto thee good Reader that being driuen vnto it by this necessitie I bring forth againe vnto thee certaine places before written and conteined in my former Treaties How lothsom soeuer it be thee to reade and mee to repeate againe certaine thinges before vttered verely it is the chiefe waie by whiche in this case the truthe maie clearely be opened Thus then entreth M. Iewel his accusation against me M. Iewel in the epistle to the Quene pag. 2. ad finem M. Harding doubteth not to seeke quarelles against vs euen in that vve mainteine 1 The Baptisme of Christian Infantes 2 The proceeding and 3 Godhed of the Holy Ghoste 4 The Faith of the holy and glorious Trinitie and 5 the General and Catholique profession of the Common Creede Harding To confute errours and to declare the Truthe is not to seeke Quarelles Neither ought he to be called a Quareller who of two waies sheweth whiche is the better Touching these fiue pointes First I finde no faulte with M. Iewel nor with his felowes for that they mainteine the Baptisme of Infantes For therein I hold with them The Baptisme of infantes no where reproued To my remembrance I speake not of it of purpose in my whole booke of the Confutation nor in my Reioindre only where I proue that certaine great and necessarie pointes are to be beleeued which be not expressed in the holy Scriptures In the defence pag. 191. Cōfutatiō fol. 84. a. bicause these Ministers in their Apologie saie that al thinges needful for our saluation are abundantly and fully comprehended in the Scriptures among sundrie other thinges whiche I demaunde to be shewed vs in the Scriptures I aske where in al the Bible they finde that Infantes ought to be Baptized And wel that question might I demaunde for proufe of that I intended in that place neither can it be founde expressely commaunded or spoken of I am wel assured Wherefore whiles M. Iewel accuseth me to the Queenes Maiestie of seeking Quarelles against him in this point he sheweth vs in him selfe a perfite paterne of a Quareller If I should here appose him in his owne wordes and aske him Baptisme of Christian Infantes what he meaneth by mainteining the Baptisme of Christian Infantes I thinke rather he would saie I were a seeker of Quarelles Yet would I faine heare what he would answere For what Is he of the opinion that suche Infantes as be borne of Christian Parentes be Christians before they be baptized If they be Christians what neede they to be Christened If they haue neede to be Christened why doth he cal them before Baptisme receiued Christian Infantes Is any Man Woman or Child to be called a Christian before he be Christened Latet anguis in herba There lieth a Pad in the strawe Perhappes he thinketh it is not yet time to spette out the poison of that heresie whiche it semeth he hath suckt out of Caluin against the necessitie of Baptisme of Infantes whose parentes be faithful This point I touched in my Confutation of the Apologie Fol. 67. b. Neither durst M. Iewel yet to be plaine when he commeth to that place in his Defence where he had good cause to treate fully of it and to deliuer the worlde from that Suspicion worthily conceiued and to resolue vs whether he thinke Baptisme of Christian Parentes Children to be necessarie or no. Verely by saying that by Goddes Free Election they be pure Ievvel in the Defence Pag. 250. and holy and by allowing al that Caluine saith thereof he geueth out a secrete signification his meaning to be that in them Baptisme is not vtterly necessarie These mennes Doctrine if I be not deceiued tendeth to this issue that at length Baptisme shal be nothing els but a Signe marke badge or recognizance of a Christian Whereof it must folowe that as a man maie be a Souldiour a Seruing man or a Reteiner to a Noble man though he lacke his Captaines or his Masters Badge or Recognizance likewise so many as be borne of Christian Parentes be also Christians though they neuer receiue Baptisme By the Premisses of these mennes Doctrines we haue iuste cause to thinke that at length they wil teache that the very Signes
them selues also for auoiding superstition maie surceasse and be put awaie where the thing signified is perfourmed and sufficiently beleeued And so is Baptisme like to be quite abolished with other Signes and Ceremonies For Caluine their new Apostle of Geneua teacheth that if we were mindeful yenough of Christes Death al the Sacramentes were superfluous Caluin in â— Cor. 11. I praie God in this point I be not a true Prophete Defence 150. M. Iewel laboureth al that he can in the Defence to discharge Caluin of this perilous Doctrine wherewith I burden him in my Confutation But when he hath said al he hath lost his labour bicause he coÌ„meth not to the point and dissembleth that Caluine euer said it And so he maie beginne that matter again He shal do wel to make Caluin in Antidoto to agree with Caluin in his coÌ„mentaries vpon S. Paules Epistles where he teacheth expressely that in case of sufficient remembrance of Christes Death al the Sacramentes be superfluous Whiche I gather not out of Caluines wordes by a fonde collection as M. Iewel beareth the Reader in hande but I shew it to be Caluines owne saying and for trial I directe the Reader vnto the place Concerning the Godhed of the holy Ghoste I moued no Quarel at al. The Godhed of the holy Ghoste Pag. 90. Confutat 41. b. The proceeding of the holy Ghoste Yet in the Defence of the Apologie he beareth menne in hande that I denie the holy Ghoste may be proued to be God by expresse Scripture For these be his wordes You saie M. Harding that the Godhed of the holy Ghost can not be proued by expresse wordes of the Scriptures and thereof ye saie ye are right sure This is as false as true it is that the holy Ghoste is God Reade my wordes who wil he shal finde me true and M Iewel false Mary as touching the Article of the holy Ghoste whereas the Authours of the Apologie saie it procedeth from both the Father and the Sonne whiche is most true Some thinges are to be belieued for which vve haue no expresse Scripture in consideration of this pointe of this pointe only I saie whiche is parte of the whole Article and not of the Godhed I saie in my Confutation that they haue no expresse Scripture for it nor any of the first foure Generall Councelles and that therefore we are bound of necessitie to beleeue somewhat whiche is not expressely mencioned in the Scriptures and that an other Councel where that Article was confirmed is to be receiued beside the foure first whiche only be allowed in England by Parlament Bicause he was lothe so manifest Vntruthe vttered against me should be espied he nipte awaie my wordes not suffering my whole tale to be tolde out in whiche I doo plainely signifie my denial to perteine only to the Article of the holy Ghostes proceeding and not to the Article of his Godhed For after these wordes of the Apologie Defence pag. â—0 we beleeue that the holy Ghoste who is the thirde person in the holy Trinitie is very God not made not create not begotten but proceeding from both the Father and the Sonne by a certaine meane vnknowen vnto menne and vnspeakeable c. In my Confutation I saie thus As we acknowledge this Article to be true CoÌ„futatioÌ„ fol. 41. b. and Catholique so we demaund of these Defenders how they can proue the same Haue they either expresse Scripture for it or any of the first foure general Councelles whiche be esteemed of most auctoritie Other Conucels to be allovved of necessitie besides the 4. First We are sure they haue not Therefore we doo them to vnderstand and if they heare vs not we aduertise the readers that feare God and loue his truthe that al truth necessarily to be beleeued is not expressed in the Scripture and that other CouÌ„celles be to be receiued besides the foure first whiche are allowed in England by Parlament * This much betvvene the tvvo starres M. Ievv nipt avvaie from the rest as that wherein this pointe touching the proceeding of the holy Ghost hath bene defined Concil Lugdunen Concil Florentin sub Eugenio 4. as also other definitions of the Churche when vpon a newe doubte rising an olde Truth is by later Publications declared Likewise those Councelles in whiche the doctrine hath ben defined by the Churche concerning the Two Willes and Operations of Christe whiche who so euer beleeueth not or at least refuseth to beleeue is not to be takeÌ„ for a Christian man If these Councelles be denied al these things shal come in doubt againe and if these be receiued then why should not al the reste that be vniuersal Councelles be also receiued which the Church hath allowed * Thus I saie there Iudge now good Reader whether I denie in that place that the holy Ghostes Godhed maie be proued by expresse wordes of Scripture wherewith he chargeth me in the Defence and whether this be a seeking of Quarelles against him for that he mainteineth the Proceeding and the Godhed of the holy Ghoste as he chargeth me in his Epistle to the Queenes Maiestie Likewise it is an immoderate lye where he saith I seeke Quarelles against them in that they mainteine the Faith of the holy and Glorious Trinitie Pitie it were I should be suffred to tread on Gods earth if I quarelled with any man for that he mainteineth that holy Quarel I professe my selfe bounde to mainteine that Faith with al my witte and learning and to be ready therein to spende my bloude to the last droppe Neither can I seeme to pike Quarelles against them in that they mainteine the General and Catholique professioÌ„ of the Common Creede for so should I proue my selfe an ennemie to the Faith As thus to doo it were a hainous crime so to burden me therewith in a publique Write in a printed Booke set forth for euery man to reade in a solemne Epistle Dedicatorie to a Prince and to suche a Prince the slaunder is hainous wicked and impudent Howbeit As I allow and approue the Confession of their beleefe touching the Trinitie confessing it to conteine true and Catholique doctrine so I seeme better to like of the olde accustomed manner of vtterance of the beleefe And in deede emong Christian menne when this high point of our Faith concerning the blessed Trinitie is by a publique Confession to be taught it is not yenough to vtter some parte of our beleefe whiche is true but also it behoueth vs to vtter the whole truthe and to vse suche fourme of wordes as hathe benne vsed and allowed by the Churche from the beginning What I meane and how reasonably herein I haue spoken by these my wordes vnto the indifferent Reader it shal appeare Confut. 39. b. But what fault finde ye in this confession of our Faith saith this defender Sir the first parte of your Confession wherein you vtter your Beleefe touching the Trinitie conteineth true and Catholique
the very chiefe pointes in controuersie whereby he geueth out a secret confession of the weakenes of his side he inueieth at my person and with al his Rhetorique doth what he can to bring me in discredite with the Reader for my sharpenes and vehemencie of speache And faine would he al men to beleue that I lacke Discretion that Choler ruleth my penne that I vse wordes of more heate and bitternes then it becommeth either my vocation or the cause By this he seemeth to discharge me of what so euer is reprehensible in that other extreme Wherewith I am content For I had rather his quarel should be extended to the reproufe of my person then to the preiudice of the cause And doubtelesse if I had enclined to the other extreme way of writing he would not haue failed but haue turned al to argument of weakenes of our side In deede naturally by wordes and gesture we shew courage when our matter is good and of colde manner of handling there groweth a suspition that the matter is naught Had I therefore alwayes written coldly and softely I had ministred vnto M. Iewel a ioily occasion to insulte vpon me as though our cause had ben the weaker And so he would haue taken that aduantage against me which Cicero Cicero in Brutâ— M. Callidius as he writeth of him selfe once tooke against Marcus Callidius This M. Callidius as he witnesseth of him was an excellent man and was endewed with al singular graces apperteining to a perfit Orator saue that he was not vehement nor applied him selfe to stirre and moue the mindes of them that heard him Cicero and he were once matched together in a cause Callidius accused one Quintus Gallius laying to his charge before the Iudges that he had prepared poison wherewith to haue destroied him For proufe of it he declared that he tooke him in the manner and that he had in readines against him handwritinges witnesses signes examinations and shewed the matter to be manifest and disputed of the crime very exquisitely but yet soberly and coldly When Cicero came to make Defence in the behalfe of Gallius among other thinges that he treated like a cunning Orator at length he goeth from the crime obiected and from the matter it selfe to the manner of Callidius action and made the softnes of his demeanour and coldnes of his vtterance an argument of the others innocencie And there he beareth Callidius in hand that al was but a feined matter For saith he to him wouldst thou Callidius Cicero in Brute haue handled this case in such wise except thou hadst feined Vbi dolor Vbi ardor animi c. Where shewedst thou any griefe Where any heate of the minde Nulla perturbatio animi nulla corporis frons non percussa non femur pedis quod minimum est nulla supplâ—sio In al thy handling of the matter thou shewedst thy selfe to feele no trouble of minde nor of body Thou smotest not thy selfe on the forehed thou gauest not thy selfe a clappe on the thighe thou didst not so much which is the least of al as once stampe with thy foote Thus concluded Cicero against Callidius And thus doubtelesse would M. Iewel haue concluded against me if I had written my answer my Confutation and my Reioindre in such kinde of stile as the contrary whereof he besturreth him selfe so much to disproue in me Yea he would haue borne the worlde in hande which neuerthelesse sometimes he doth in effect gathering argument of the softe and colde manner of my writing that I had but feined to please men and had benne persuaded otherwise in my harte How so euer I had written he was determined to reprehende me In very deede had I thought that he would not haue abused my softenes to shew of the more confidence in his cause and that the same should not haue brought any preiudice to our cause I would haue forborne al roughnes and sharpenes and would more gladly haue folowed the temperate and quiet vaine of myne owne nature Howbeit what he was like to finde at my hande I gaue him warning at the first where I said that In the preface to M. Ievvel before my Ansvver if perhappes I should sometimes seeme to scarre or lawnce a festered bunche that deserued to be cut of I would him to remember how the meekest and the holiest of the auncient Fathers in reprouing heretiques oftetimes haue shewed them selues Zelous earnest eager sharpe and bitter Now to ende this matter wherein I confesse I haue dwelte longer then I intended when I began I pray thee gentle Reader if feare of Excommunication staie thee not from reading heretical Bookes for some parte of my discharge and that M. Iewels falsehode in this thing also as in al other that he taketh in hand may appeare to vew his booke of the Defence and myne of the Confutatioâ— To make the case moâ—e odious on my side and to bearâ— thee in handâ— that I 〈◊〉 vsed sharpenes in writing contrarie to myne owne promise behold how fowly he hath falsified my wordes Thus falsly he layeth the matter forth Iewel M. Ievvel falsifieth this place by cuttiÌ„g avvaie and by changing vvordes M. Harding in the Preface before his Confutation of the Apologie then thus he maketh me to speake The manner of vvriting vvhich I haue here vsed in comparison of our Aduersaries is sober and gentle c. And in respecte of their heate bitternesse and railing as many tel me ouer colde svveete and milde Harding Here good Reader with his c he cutteth of my wordes that doo fully answer his obiection and quite altereth the sense of the place by changing But into And and by leauing out my whole tale that there folowed whereby any reasonable man might be satisfied Thus al his reproufes of me and al his other obiections against the catholike doctrine wil be found false if euery mannes sayinges be onely vewed and so to any indifferent man they shal seeme sufficiently confuted by conference of the bookes onely If his continual falsifyinges be not espied and tried out maruel it is not if the Reader conceiue sinister opinion of me Let al be tried by the bookes not by his false reportes and I doubt not of the iudgement of al that be indifferent in their iudgementes As for those that be parcial and wilfully addicted to their owne likinges I make lesse accompte of them then I haue pitie of them My whole saying then truly reported is this The manner of writing which I haue here vsed in comparison of our aduersaries is sober softe and gentle yet vehementer rougher and sharper then for my woont and nature but in respect of their heate bitternes and railing as many tel me ouer colde swete and milde How so euer it shal seme to thee Reader herein I haue done as I thought best Wel I am assured I haue not gone farre from the steppes of the most praised auncient Fathers of whom who haue
by your vulgare translations corrupted them that lamentable it is to consider And when we burned the same corrupt translations or any parte thereof or any of your heretical treatises we burned not the Scriptures no more then one doth the Apple tree that burneth the Caterpillers The Scriptures we honour and kepe most reuerently and diligently Therefore your comparing of vs with the wicked kinges Aza Antiochus Maximinus and Herode is false and sclaūderous Reade the reste that foloweth there good Reader and if thou wilt iudge as thou findest and saie as thou iudgest and write that thou maist truly saie M. Iewel shal be said to be a false sclaunderer and regestred in the booke of lying sclaunderers Iewel Pag. 10. As for Iohn VViclef Iohn Hus VValdo and the rest they vvere godly men their greatest heresie vvas this that they complained of the dissolute and vitious liues of the Clergie of vvorshipping of Images of feined miracles of the tyrannical pride of the Pope of Monkes Friers Pardons Pilgrimages and Purgatorie and other like deceiuing and mocking of the People and that they vvished a reformation of the Churche Harding That Wiclef mainteined sundrie hainous Heresies The. 3. Chapt. Beside these heresies whiche you accompte for none M. Iewel they had sundry other farre greater As for example Among the Articles of Wiclef condemned in the Councel of Constance Art 4. this was one That if a Bishop or a Priest be in deadly sinne he doth not order consecrate Lib. 1. cōtra Petilianū ca. 1. Art 6. Art 10. nor baptise This was the plaine heresie of the Donatistes as it appeareth by S. Augustine Item that God ought to obey the Deuil Item that it is against the Scripture that Ecclesiastical Ministers shoulde haue any temporal possessions If this be no greater heresie then the reste M. Iewel then allowe it as you allowe the reste But the gaine is to sweete you can not brooke it Item that no man is a temporal Lorde Art 15. no man is a Prelate no man is a Bishop whiles he is in mortal sinne If ye make this no Heresie then ye denie the Queene to be Queene of England when so euer she falleth into Mortal sinne And whereas by your doctrine ye make euery sinne mortal vtterly reiecting the distinction of venial sinnes the Quene as no man elles lyuing not without sinne What meane you by this doctrine to allowe her in this case for no Quene of England She is muche beholden vnto you Item by Wiclef the common people maie at their arbitriment correcte their Lordes when they doo amisse Art 17. If you and your fellowes wil allowe this for a true Doctrine and preache it in your Pulpites lustily ye shal like the people ioilily and wel and thereof doubtelesse wil followe suche order and obedience as becommeth your Gospel and as Satan the Authour of it shal be pleased withal Suche the like and worse were the Heresies of Huss and Waldo These Articles and many other were recorded both in the general Councel of Constance Cōcil Cōstant Sess 8. pag. 96. and in your felowe Fox in his booke of the Deuilles Martyrs But touching Iohn Hus sith ye make him so godly a man and so voide of al Errours and Heresies how wil you defend him for that so commonly he said Masse whereat ye enueigh and raile so muche Masse said by Hus. Looke in the Teutonical historie of the Councel of Constance written by one Huldrick Reichental Citizen of Constance and ye shal finde by him reported who liued at that very time and marked wel what happened 〈◊〉 those daies that Iohn Hus oftentimes said Masse in his hostes house during the time of his abode in Constance and that the people came much vnto it Itaque Dominica Oculi quae tertia est in Quadragesima In histor Teutonica de Concil Costātien vbi celebrasset Missam mane c. When he had said Masse saith he in the Sundaie named Oculi whiche is the third Sundaie in Lent And this did Hus not onely before he had read the Bookes of Wiklef by whiche he was carried awaie into an other Gospel but also at the ende of his life euen a litle before for his detestable heresies he was burnte as it is at large reported by the said Reichental and witnessed by Ioannes Cochlaeus lib. 2. De Historia Hussitarum The 4. chapt Pag. 11. In the matter of planting the faith among the Britaines and the English M. Iewel telleth vs againe a longe tale which he tolde vs before in his Replie the vntruthes whereof are already largely and specially confuted in the Returne of vnthruthes vpon his Replie M Ievvel dissēbleth al ansvvere made to his vntruthes Art 3. pag. 124. sequent Wherein he dissembleth vtterly al answer made thereunto though it be wel knowen that he hath seene the said Returne and that he had one with the first presented vnto him at Oxforde at what time the Quenes Matie was there in progresse In that page he belieth extremely Theodoritus S. Augustine the Apostle of the English nation sclaūdered by M. Ievvel vnder the name of Golfridus Monemuthensis Nicephorus and Galfridus of Mounmouth sclaundering immoderately vnder Golfridus name our blessed Apostle S Augustine See the Returne pag. 30. In the page following he belieth Beda twise first applying that to the English menne which he spake of the Britaines namely of 7. Bishoppes and one Archebishop c. For what soeuer he telleth vs of the Queene King Ethelbertes wife who being a Frenche woman liued in the exercise of her Religion that she was Christened in among the Christian people of Fraunce certaine it is that our English Nation of whom in my Answer to his Chalenge I spake and not of the Britaines were not Christiās before S. Augustine came sent by S. Gregorie frō Rome Secondly he belieth Beda in saying as out of his ecclesiastical storie that the Christians of our Countrie vtterly refused to receiue this newe Apostle with his religion For Bede speaketh only of the Britaine or welshe Bishoppes but nothing so muche as M. Iewel fableth They refused to obey him as their Archebishop they refused not his religion They were also in many pointes Schismatikes as Bede in the same place recordeth whom M. Iewel here so commendeth See Bede either in Latine or in English lib. 2. cap. 2. The matter is of right good importance and worthy to be tried Pag. 12. The 5. Chapt. The iudgement of Constantine the great in a cause Ecclesiastical betwen Cacilianus and Donatus à Casis nigris he reneweth againe M. Ievvel in the Defence repeteth againe the old stuffe of his Replie in many pointes as if the same were not ansvvered vtterly dissembling the Answer made thereunto in the Returne Art 4. pag. 105. sequēt Pag. 14. He bringeth in againe the commō obiections against the Real Presence out of Tertullian and S. Augustine dissembling vtterly
iudgement and minde touching obedience to princes and that in a booke dedicated and offred to be read euen of the Quenes Maiestie her selfe Confut. 15. a. Among other thinges thus I saie in my Confutation of the Apologie It standeth not with Goddes promises made to the Church touching his being with the Church al daies to the worldes ende and the holy Ghostes remaining with it Math. 28. Iohan. 14. the spirite of Truthe for euer that he should suffer his Churche to continewe in Darkenes and lacke of Truthe these thousand yeres past and now at the later daies to reuele the truthe of his Gospel by Apostates Vowebreakers Churcherobbers and suche others most vnlike to the Apostles Hereunto thus answereth M. Iewel Iewel pag. 32. You saie it standeth not vvith Gods promise to forsake his Churche a thousand yeres It is muche for you M. Harding openly to breake Gods cōmaundementes to defile his holy Sanctuarie to turne light into Darckenesse and Darckenesse into light and yet neuerthelesse to binde him too his promise Harding Goddes promise being infallible the Churche neuer erreth Se◠good Reader The. 7. Chapt. how absurdely and wretchedly M. Iewel answereth to this most euident and inuincible argument taken out of holy scripture I reason thus God promiseth he wil neuer Math. 28. no not one daie forsake his Churche Ergo if he forsooke it a thousand yeres as these menne tel vs he broke his promise M. Iewel answereth by a lewde kinde of Sophistrie called Petitio principij Petitio Principij that is the bringing forthe for proufe the thing it selfe whiche he ought to proue and whiche chiefely lieth in question and whiche wil neuer be graunted bicause it can neuer be proued That thing I saie he bringeth forth for a proufe and procedeth thereupon as vpon a matter vndoubted and graunted You M. Harding saith he haue broken Gods commaundementes you haue defiled his holy Sanctuarie c. Ergo you ought not to binde God to his promise This Antecedent or former proposition is the thing whiche he shoulde specially haue proued and then in Gods name he might thereof haue cōcluded what he coulde Now to bring it for proufe it selfe in respecte of true doctrine being most in question and vtterly denied by vs it is a lewde kinde of reasoning Againe beholde good Reader how he ouerturneth the Argument taken out of Gods worde I reason thus God hath promised his Churche should neuer erre Ergo it hath not erred these thousand yeres past he answereth The Church by our defaulte hath erred For we saith he haue turned light into Darckenesse c. Ergo God was not bounde to his promise What meane you M. Iewel As though God promising that his Churche should not erre prouided not also suche meanes whereby to preserue it from errour As though Gods promise depended of vs and of our wel doing As though any power of man or the worlde were hable to frustrate Gods promise As though if any suche power should haue come as you imagine the Popes power to haue darckened Christes Gospel Christe could not or would not haue foresene it or foreseing it would yet notwithstanding promise that Al daies he would be with his Churche Math. 28. Esaie 59. Iohn 14. and againe that the spirite of Truthe should assiste it for euer Thinke you M. Iewel that Christe our Sauiour forsawe not the Ruine or Darckenesse of his Churche of whiche so blasphemously you affirme Or thinke you that foreseing such an vniuersal Darckenesse to come and that for the space of so many hundred yeres together he would neuerthelesse haue said The Churches errour of a thousand yeres and the foreknovvledge of Christ can not stand together onlesse vve make Christe false of his promise as he said and haue so assuredly promised vnto his Apostles and in them vnto their Successours the perpetual assistance of the holy Ghoste the spirite of truthe with his Churche How could suche foreknowledge of Christe and suche a promise stand together Choose M. Iewel which you wil. The one of these you must of necessitie graunte that either Christe forsawe not the great Darckenesse to come whiche you saie you doo see and so you see more then Christe God and man euer sawe or foresawe or that Christe promised one thing and intended to performe an other thing He promised Al daies and for euer but intended to performe only fiue hundred yeres at the beginning and after the leape of a thousand yeres to graunte certaine yeres moe God knoweth how many O haynous blasphemie whereby Christe the Sonne of God the wisdome of his Father is proued either to haue ben ignorant of that whiche Protestantes knowe or elles to haue ben false of his promise But what neede many wordes M. Iewel him selfe immediatly after his former wordes to his owne condemnation saith Al menne be liers but God only is true Psal 50. 2. Tim. 2. and preuaileth when he is iudged God knoweth his owne Christe wil be euermore with his Churche That the light of truth hath not ben put out in the Churche yea although the whole Churche of Rome conspire against him Al this is true and the same doth euidently condemne you and your Religion Al menne be liers Protestantes for example whiche saie that these thousand yeres the Church hath ben corrupted and light hath ben turned into Darknesse God only is true Christes worde is true the Light of faith hath not benne turned into Darckenesse these thousand yeres nor any one yere at al onlesse Darckenesse and the Spirite of truth maie dwel together God knoweth his owne The Churche is his therefore he knoweth his Churche And bicause it is built vpon a hil it is euer sene and is neuer vnknowen Math. 5. Math. vlt. Christe wil be euermore with his Churche But with your Congregation or Synagog how shal I cal it he hath not ben these many hundred yeres for you saie in your Apologie The Pope hath blinded the whole worlde many hundred yeres and in this your Defence you saie againe that when Doctour Luther beganne to Publish the Gospel of Christe there was a general quietnesse suche as is in the night when folke be a sleepe c. Ergo your companie is not the Churche Let vs see vvhat you can ansvver to this argumēt M. Ievv Marke the Argument I require you and auoide it if you be hable To repete it once againe thus we saie Christe promiseth euermore to be with his Churche but Christe hath not ben euer more with you and your fellowes Ergo you and your fellowes are not the Churche The maior is true not only bicause it is Christes promise but also by your owne Confession The minor you confesse also in your Apologie it resteth ye discharge your selfe of the Conclusion Touching the minor the Pope you saie blinded the whole worlde many hundred yeres Then in those so many hundred yeres no man saw the light where then were they
the reprehension of my vehement speache doo fal into the selfe same Vehemencie Whose wordes are these M. Iewel M. Ievv blameth my vehemencie of speache him selfe being also no lesse vehement Pag. 94. Beholde your owne wordes so many so vaine so bitter so firie so furious al together in one place Are not these your owne wordes Are not these as vehemeÌ„t as you could deuise Wil you finde faulte with me for that you vse your selfe If vehement speache be to be vsed when the matter requireth why blame you me If not why doo you so often vse it Whether you and Luther doo vse it iustly for the zeale of Goddes glorie aske that of them that wrote the Confession of the Churche of Zurich Your owne frendes the Ministers of that congregation doo set forth Luther for his outragious and filthy railing against them in his colours and speake of him as of a very vile felow and paie him home againe with as good as he brought Reade the booke and ye shal finde it to be true Howbeit I could sende you to many other bookes of your brethren fraught with muche more vile stuffe of railing then that litle booke conteineth with al whiche you are better acquainted then I am The Confutation of the Apologie The seconde parte the 2. Chapter Confut fo 44. b Againe the name of Head is attributed to Christe aâ— other waie bicause Christe is head of the Churche by his owne power and authoritie Menne be called heades in as muche as they be in steede of Christ and vnder Christ after whiche meaning S. Paule saith to the Corinthians for if I forgaue any thing to whom I forgaue it 2. Cor. 2. for your sakes forgaue I it in persona Christi in the person of Christe And in an other place 2. Cor. 5. We are Ambassadours in the steede of Christe euen as though God did exhorte you through vs. To conclude in few 〈◊〉 vvhat sense Christe is named the Head of the Churche and in vvhat sense the Pope is so named according to inwarde influence of grace into euery faithful member Christe onely is the head of the Churche according to outward gouerning the Pope vnder Christ and in steede of Christ is head of the same Iewel Pag. 94. To the matter ye saie that touching the influence of grace Christe onely is the head of the Churche but touching direction and gouernemeÌ„t the Pope only as the head Al this is but your ovvne tale M. Harding ye speake it onely of your selfe other authoritie of Scripture or Doctour you bringe vs none Harding Dogge eloquence proued no vnwoonted terme and how the Pope is Head of the Churche To the mater ye saie And truly wel said of you The .7 Chapt For hitherto you haue not directed your talke to the mater but to the person of your Aduersarie with whom you shew your selfe greuously offended for calling the Currish and snarling vtterance of Luther Dogge eloquence And whereas you would faine draw the same to the preiudice of my modestie I trust you that are so great a Rhetorician and so wel seene in poetes Fables wil iudge so muche the better of me for so muche as Quintilian that modeste and graue Oratour and Ouide also no Poete Satyrical thought suche phrase of speache not vnmeete for the countenance of modestie and humanitie that they bare in the worlde For if you remember Canina Eloquentia QuintiliaÌ„ lib. 12. c. 9 Ouid. in Ibin is Quintilians worde calle it dogge eloquence dogged eloqueÌ„ce or dogges eloquence or how soeuer otherwise it please you to terme it And Ouid saith Latrâ—◠〈◊〉 in toro verba canina foro If for the vse of this auncient terme I seeme to passe the boundes of modestie specially attributing it vnto Luther whose heretical and Deuilish vtterance is coÌ„monly in deede farre worse then the barking of any Dogge or the hissing of any Serpent what wil you saie of the Scolding of your hote brother M. Calfhil But now that after muche idle and impertinent talke you are come to the mater what saie you that is worth the hearing M. Iewels foule falsifying of my vvordes Thus you saie Ye saie that touching the influence of Grace Christe onely is the Head of the Churche I graunt I say so in deede Go ye forth and make no lye but touching direction and gouernement the Pope only is the Head Yea sir Where saie I so You should haue caused your printer to haue falsified that senteÌ„ce of mine that at your owne pleasure the simplest of your owne poore Fauourers who take al for the Gospel that you saie or write might not in your owne booke espie your shamelesse lying For euen there notwithstanding your coÌ„mon falsifyinges other where 's and also there they maie finde my saying otherwise reported It is an euident argument that myne owne wordes were to true for you to confute sith that you thought it necessarie least you should seme ouercome to alter and change them for other wordes of your own which being false to the vnlearned reader I might seeme to speake fondly and besides al truth For how is it likely I should saie that touching Direction and gouernement the Pope only is the Head Your fetche was to bring your vnlearned fauourers by whom you are magnified to beleeue that from the Direction and gouernement of the Church I excluded Christe and the holy Ghoste the spirite of truth Which God forbid I should doo Now the true wordes of my Confutation in this place are these Defence Pag. 92. whiche the Reader maie see also in the booke of your Defence although very much mangled and falsified of set purpose to thintent the force of truth by me opened should not be seene as by view of my booke it maie clearely appeare Where thus I saie For Head and Spouse alone he is of his kingdom in one respecte not alone in an other respect * Confut. fol. 44. a. left out by M. Ie. For a cleare declaration whereof it is to be vnderstanded that being of a Head maie be considered after two waies The being of a Head considered tvvo vvaies either according to the inward influence so as the vertue and power of mouing and of sense is deriued from the head vnto the other members or according to outward gouernment right so as a man is directed in his outward actes according to the sight and other senses AccordiÌ„g to it ward influence of grace Christe onely is Head of the Churche In respect of outvvard gouernement the name of Head is attributed to others beside Christe which haue their roote in the head Now the inwarde influence of grace is not of any other but of Christe only Bicause Christes manhood onely hath power to iustifie for that the same only is ioyned personally to the Godhead * According to this inward influence of Grace Christ properly and only is Head of his mystical body the Church But as touching
the outward gouernment the being of a Head is common to Christe with others For in this respecte certaine others maie be called Headdes of the Church as in Amos the prophete the great states be called the Heades of the people So the Scripture speaketh of King Saul When thou were a litle one in thine owne eyes thou wast made Head emong the tribes of Israel So Dauid saith of him selfe he hath made me Head of Nations Amos. 6. 1. Reg. 15. Psal 17. Headship in respect of gouernement diuers in Christ and in menne * Left out by M. Ievvel In this sense the name of Head is attributed to princes and gouernours And yet not altogether so as to Christ First forasmuche as Christe is Head of al those that perteine to the Churche according to euery place euery time and euery state But menne are called Heades in regard of certaine special places as Bishoppes be called heades of their Churches Or in respect of a determinat time as the Pope is Head of the whole Church during the time of that calling And according to a determinate state euen so as menne be in the state of this mortal life for further stretcheth not this humanie Headship Againe the name of Head is attributed to Christe an other waie bicause Christe is Head of the Churche by his owne power and authoritie * Menne be called Headdes in asmuch as they be in steed of Christe and vnder Christe after whiche meaning S. Paule saith to the Corinthians 2. Cor. 2. For if I forgaue any thing to whom I forgaue it for your sakes forgaue I it in persona Christi in the person of Christe and in an other place we are Ambassadours in the steede of Christe 2. Cor. 5. euen as though God did exhorte you through vs. To conclude in fewe according to inward influence of grace into euery faithful member Christe onely is Head of the Churche according to outward gouerning the Pope vnder Christe and in steede of Christe is Head of the same These be my wordes there M. Iewel To whiche bicause you had nothing to saie you answer by your accustomed arte of mangling hewing awaie what liked you not by falsifying them and by putting in your owne selfe wordes in place of myne that teache the truthe And at length you fal to skoffing at my Logique making fonde and peeuish Argumentes of your owne forging bearing the simple reader in hande they are mine whiche God knoweth I neuer made nor no wise man elles For they are suche as of al that peruse your writinges you maie be knowen by them as a Begger is by his patched cloke or rather as a Vise is knowen by his Babul The greatest thing you saie is that al is myne owne tale that I tel and that I bring in no Scripture nor Doctour To this I answere Were it true that you saie as my Booke it selfe prooueth it false yet in this case my Yea hytherto is as good as your Nay and better too bicause it standeth with the vniforme Doctrine of the Churche Be it I allege no Authoritie of Scripture or Doctour to prooue the Pope Head bicause I am not yet comme to the place where I minde to prooue it Yet my case standeth as good as youres that bring neither Scripture nor Doctour to the contrarie If it had pleased you ye might haue founde bothe Doctours and Scriptures more The Rock of the Churche then you would gladly heare of in M. D. Sanders booke entitled the Rocke of the Church written for that behalfe and in M. Sapletons Returne written against your so many grosse Vntruthes and errours The Returne of Vntruths You crake muche of your great skil in Logique in comparison of other mennes ignorance searche out I praie you emong your rules of Logique whether Distinctio multiplicis in quaestione positi the Distinction of a worde that hath diuers significations placed in a controuersie ought not to goe before the disputation of the controuersie If it ought then haue I done rightly and orderly in that I made a Distinction of the terme Head before I entred to proue the Pope to be Head and you ignorantly and disorderly in calling vppon me to doo two thinges together against al good order of nature reason and learning or to doo the later before I had ended the former Testimonies auouching the Pope to be head of the Churche Peter the chiefe mēber of the Churche Gregor li. 4. epis 38. Now bicause you be so hasty to haue some Doctour to proue that the Pope is Head somewhat to satisfie your hasty humour the Authoritie of S. Gregorie afterwarde alleged by your selfe maie suffice any wise man who calleth S. Peter the chiefe member of the Church which the Pope succeding in that right of Peter is al one with that we saie the Pope is Head in gouernment vnder Christe What difference I praie you can your wisedome put betwixte the chiefe member and a Head vnder an other or in the steede of an other Chrysost in Matth. homil 55. It is your happe alwaie to allege Doctours to your owne Confusion S. Chrysostome also witnesseth that Peter was such a Head saying of him Ecclesia Pastor Caput Piscator homo The fisherman by whom he meaneth Peter is the shepehearde and head of the Churche Againe he saith in an other place Quod si quis percontaretur Chrysost in Ioan. Hom. 87. quo modo Iacobus Sedem Hierosolymis acceperit responderem hunc totius orbis magistrum praeposuisse In case any man would demaunde of me this question how Iames came to haue the See at Ierusalem I would answere him that this Peter the Maister of the whole worlde made him Bishop there Lo Peter Maister of the vvhole vvorlde he calleth Peter the Maister of the whole worlde by whiche worde what elles signifieth he but that he was the Head touching spiritual gouernment of the whole worlde He saith furthermore and that most plainely in an other place Ieremiam Genti vni pater Chrysost Hom. 55. in Matth. hunc autem vniuerso terrarum orbi praeposuit God the Father made Ieremie the Head and Gouernour ouer one nation onely that was the nation of the Iewes but as for this man Peter made hed of the vvhole vvorlde by Christ to wit Peter Christe made him Head and Gouernour ouer the whole worlde Are you contented now Verely I haue folowed your minde willingly And if ye require mo the like testimonies of me I remitte you to the Answer Ansvver I made vnto your Chalenge Art 4. fol. 9. b. c. where you shal finde that maie satisfie any learned man touching this pointe Neither are you hable to auoide the plaine force of those testimonies for al the great a doo you haue made in your huge Replie Iewel Pag. 94. Ye saie S. Paule saith If I forgaue any thing for your sakes 2. Cor. 2. I forgaue it in the personne
saie Bonifacius obteined verely not that the See of Rome should be made Vniuersal or be made Head of al Churches for so it was euer but that it might be so taken and called of al men lest the Grecians should thinke that the chiefe Pastour of Gods sheepe sate in Constantinople Whereof it would folow that if the chiefe Postour once taught Heresie as now the Bishop of Constantinople doth concerning the proceding of the holy Ghost then the whole Church should perish sith al the flocke dependeth vpon the chiefe shepeheard Now M. Iewel as he is woont to doo hath most guilefully endeuoured to persuade the Reader that the Popes cal them them selues Vniuersal Bishoppes and bringeth Platina forth in suche sorte that he wil not let him speake his whole minde His wordes are these Platina in vita Bonifacij 3. Bonifacius tertius à Phoca Imperatore obtinuit magna tamen contentione vt sedes beati Petri Apostoli quae caput est omnium Ecclesiarum ita diceretur haberetur ab omnibus quem quidem locum Ecclesia Constantinopolitana sibi vendicare conabatur fauentibus interdum malis Principibus affirmantibúsque eò loci primam sedem esse debere vbi Imperij Caput esset Affirmabant Romani Pontifices vrbem Romam vnde Constantinpolis Colonia deducta est Caput Imperij meritò habendam esse cùm etiam Graeci ipsi literis suis principem suum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est Romanorum Imperatorem vocent ipsique Constantinopolitani etiam aetate nostra 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non Graeci vocentur Omitto quòd Petrus Apostolorum Princep◠Successoribus suis Pontificibus Romanis regni coelorum claues dederit potestatémque à Deo sibi concessam reliquerit non Constantinopoli sed Romae Illud tamen dico multos Principes maximè verò Constantinum comparandae Synodi ac dissoluendae confutandi vel confirmandi ea quae in Synodis decreta erant Romanae sedi tantummodo concessisse Meritò igitur sedes Romana caeteris antefertur cuius integritate constantia cunctae haereses confutatae sunt explosae Boniface the third obteined of Phocas the Emperour although not without great difficultie that the See of the blessed Apostle Peter whiche is the Head of al Churches should both so be called and also taken of al men the which place or preferment the Churche of Constantinople went about to chalenge wicked princes sometimes helping foreward the matter affirming that the chiefe See ought to be in that place where the Head of the Empire was The bishops of Rome auouched that the citie of Rome was for good cause to be taken for the Head of the Empire as from whence the citie of Constantinople had benne translated Whereas also the Grecians them selues cal their Prince the Emperour of the Romains and they of Constantinople euen in our daies are called Romaines and not Grecians I let passe how Peter the prince of the Apostles gaue vnto his Successours the Bishops of Rome the Keies of the Kingdom of Heauen and leafte the power that was geuen him of God not to Constantinople but to Rome Onely this I saie that many Princes but specially Constātine graunted to the See of Rome only power and authoritie to gather and dissolue Councels to reiecte and allow those things that were decreed in Synodes Therefore the See of Rome is worthily preferred before the rest as by whose integritie and constancie al Heresies haue ben confuted and quite put awaie This was the Platina M. Iewel whom you alleged and durst not let him to tel out his tale But he saith not that the Popes laboured to be called Vniuersal Bishops but onely to staie the Grecians from a false and erroneous opinion and to kepe them in the vnitie of the Romaine Churche from whence that vsurped name did by litle and litle withdraw them Thus haue we seene two errours of yours the one Three errours of M. Ievv touching this point of vniuersal Bishop whereas you reproue me for saying that the name of Vniuersal taken in a right sense is no prowd name in respect of the Bishop of Rome the other bicause you impute to the Bishops of Rome that they laboured for that ambitious name The third errour foloweth Pag. 118. which is worse then the other two For you saie these be the wordes of the Coūcel of Carthage as Gratian allegeth them Dist 99. Prima Vniuersalis Episcopus nec ipse Romanus Pontifex appelletur The Bishop of Rome him selfe may not be called the vniuersal Bishop And this thing you prosecute Pag. 121. 122. and repeate againe and againe But you belie the Councel and Gratian and the Glose too al at once And yet you are so highly auaunced in your owne conceite that ye seeme to make a glorious triumphe for it Thus you saie Iewel Pag. 121. Novv M. Harding compare our vvordes and the Councelles vvordes together VVe saie none othervvise but as the Councel saith The Bishop of Rome himselfe ought not to be called the Vniuersal Bishop Herein vve do neither adde nor minish but reporte the vvordes plainely as vve finde them If you had lookte better on your booke and vvould haue tried this mater as you saie by your learning ye might vvel haue reserued these vnciuil reproches of falshed to your selfe and haue spared your crying of shame vpon this defender Harding I neuer cried so ofte shame vpon the Defender as he deserued and that he is a shamelesse man it shal now be here as cleerly tried as euer it was before I laie three maine Lies to your charge in this mater Three main lyes laid to M. Ievvels charge Pag. 118. Pag. 121. Let the worlde vnderstande how wel ye are hable to discharge them One for that you say the Coūcel of Carthage forbiddeth the Pope to be called Vniuersal Bishop An other for that you saie that Gratian saith so The third for that you saie that so muche is noted in the Glose First the Councel of Carthage is extant bothe in Greke and in Latin but those wordes be founde in neither of bothe Copies In Greeke the Decree is thus vttered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In whiche wordes there is no mention made of the Vniuersal Bishop Now the Latin wordes are these in the first booke of the Councels Carthag Conc. 3. c. 26. Vt primae sedis Episcopus non appelletur Princeps Sacerdotum aut summus Sacerdos aut aliquid huiusmodi sed tantùm primae sedis Episcopus It is by vs decreed that the Bishop of a first See be not called the Prince of Priestes or the highest Priest M. Iev falsifieth the Coūcel of Carthage In Nomocanon or any the like but onely the Bishop of a first See Where also no mention is made of the Vniuersal Bishop Balsamon also making a Comment vpon the same Canon yet speaketh no worde of the Vniuersal Bishop We see then plainely that M. Iewel hath falsified the said Canon by
and the Popes to be his successours He hath shewed also how the other Apostles were equal with Peter and how in other respectes they had lesse power for ordinarie continuance in their successours then Peter had But if I were of M. Iewels boasting humour I should now dissemble al this and write it in here a fresh as though nothing had benne said thereof before But I trowe wise men espie that smoky pride in him wel ynough I wisse lesse bookes might haue serued him for any good stuffe that is to be founde in them The fourth Booke conteineth a ful refutation of al that M. Iewel hath laid together in his pretensed Defence touching the Succession of Bishops in the Churche from the Apostles time vnto this present age Item a proufe of the necessitie of Confession WRITING the Confutation of the Apologie I had occasion to speake of the Succession of Bishoppes Thereto M. Iewel in his pretensed Defence hath replied at great length Wherein bicause he may perhaps to the vnlearned seme to haue some colour of aduantage against vs the matter being of good weight I iudge it not vnprofitable to bestow some labour and here to coÌ„fute his whole Defence touching that point whereby I doubte not it shal appeare how litle credite he deserueth if his sayinges be throughly examined where he blazeth forth most shew of learning That it maie appeare how directly he answereth the pointes of this Controuersie and of what pith his owne sayinges and how muche to the purpose his testimonies be and how truly alleged and that al be made the more plaine and cleere I wil reherse first the place of the Apologie that gaue me occasion to treat of Succession then the wordes of my Confutation against whiche M. Iewel bendeth the force of his Defence After this I wil laie forth his whole Defence sentence by sentence worde by worde as I finde it in his booke and so briefly as I can refel the same I am driuen to reherse that discourse of my Confutation againe bicause a great parte of the Defence depending thereof and being directed against the same onlesse it were againe by rehersal commended to the readers view and memorie our whole disputation would be obscure and vncertaine And this haue I donne also the rather to thintent the reader might haue that parte of my Confutation intier and whole whiche M. Iewel hath caused to be set forth in his booke pared hewed dismembred and altogether disgraced The Apologie parte 2. Cap. 5. Diuis 1. in the Defence Pag. 125. Furthermore vve saie that the miâ—ister ought laufully duely and orderly to be preferred to that office of the Church of God and that no man hath povver to vvrest him selfe into the holy Ministerie at his ovvne pleasure VVherefore these persons do vs the greater vvrong vvhiche haue nothing so common in their mouthes as that vve do nothing orderly and comely but al thinges troublesomly and vvithout order and that vve allovv euery man to be a priest to be a teacher and to be an interpretour of the scriptures Confutation fol. 56. a. Al from starre to starre leafte out by M. Ievvel Saing and doing are two thinges Ye saye wel in outward appearance Would God your doing were accordingly Albeit the manner of your saying had ben more coÌ„mendable if in so weighty a point you had spokeÌ„ more particularly and distinctly not so generally and confusely * Ye saye that the minister ought laufully to be called for so hath your Latine and duely and orderly to be preferred to that office of the Churche of God Why do ye not so why is not this obserued among you Gospellers What so euer ye meane by your Minister and by that office this are we assured of that in this your new Church Bishops Priestes Deacons Subdeacons or any other inferiour Orders ye haue none No holy orders among the gospellers Leâ—â— out by M. Ievvel In saying thus we speake not of our Apostates that be fledde from vs vnto your congregations Who as they remaine in the order which they receiued in the catholike Church so being diuided and cut of from the Church and excommunicate laufully they may not minister the sacramentes * For where as after the doctrine of your newe Gospel like the foreronners of Antichrist ye haue abandoned thexternal Sacrifice and priesthod of the newe Testament and haue not in your secte consecrated Bishops and therefore being without Priestes made with lawfull laying on of handes as Scripture requireth al holy Orders being geuen by Bishops only how can ye saie that any among you can laufully minister or that ye haue any lauful Ministers at al This then being so let me haue leaue to oppose one of these Defenders consciences And that for the better vnderstanding I may directe my wordes to a certaine person let him be the author of this Apologie or bicause his name to me is vnknowen let him be M. Iewel for with him gladly would I reason in this point the rather for acquaintaince and for that he beareth the name of a Bishop in that Churche where my selfe had a rome How saye you Syr minister Bishop ought the Minister to be laufully called ought he duely and orderly to be preferred to that office or as the Latine here hath promoted or put in authoritie ouer the Church in the Apologie this Defender saith yea Leaft out by M. Ievvel Then answer me directely How proue you your selfe laufully called to the roume you take vpon you to occupie First touching the ordinary Succession of Bishops from which as you knowe S. Iraeneus Tertullian Optatus and S. Augustine bring argument and testimonie of right and true religion do you allow the same with those fathers or no If not then dissent you from the learned and most vncorrupte antiquitie which is not reasonable neither then are you to be heard If yea then how can you recken vs vp your succession by which you may referre your imposition of handes and consecration to some of the Apostles or of their scholers as the foresaid fathers did to repel the nouelties of heresies and defende their continual possession of the Churche Which if ye go about how can ye but to the great hinderance of your cause bewraye your weake holde For whereas succession of doctrine must be ioyned with the succession of persons as Caluine in his institutions affirmeth and Beza auouched at the assemblie of Poyssi in Fraunce and we also graunt Succession of doctrine ioyned vvith succession of persons how many Bishoppes can you recken whom in the Churche of Sarisburie you haue succeded as wel in doctrine as in outward sitting in that chayre How many can you tel vs of that being your Predecessours in order before you were of your opinion and taught the faithful people of that Dioces the doctrine that you teache Dyd Bishop Capon teach your doctrine did Shaxton did Campegius did Bishop Audley Briefly did euer any Bishop of that See
Counters the Kinges Beanch and other prisons in London be hable to kepe men fast But if you speake of your owne Church surely you had Apostates and renegate priestes in it Aduersus LuciferiaÌ„ or you had no Church at al as out of S. Hierome I shewed before who saith no Priest no Church And verely no trew Church euer was there without an External and publike Sacrifice which it might offer to God to acknowlege that he is the beginning and ende of al grace and goodnes But where no external Priesthod is as you now beleue ther is none there is no external Sacrifice and coÌ„sequeÌ„tly no true Church And seing renegate priestes can not make a true Church nor their Sacrifice can be acceptable vnto God yea rather seing they are of the mind and belefe that it is not lawful to honour God with the external Sacrifice of Christes owne body and bloud leaft to vs for that intent it doth stil follow that although ye haue true Priestes which runne from vs yet haue ye neither true Sacrifice by them nor true Church Ievvel Pag. 131. Tâ—rtullian saith Nonne laici sacerdotes sumus scriptum est c. And vve being laye men are vve not priestes it is written In exhortatione ad CastitateÌ„ Christ hath made vs both a kingdome and priestes vnto God his father The authoritie of the Church and the honour by the assemblie or Councel of Order sanctified of God hath made a difference betwen the laye and the clergie whereas there is no assemblie of ecclesiastical Order the priest being there alone vvithout the companie of other priestes doth both minister the oblatioÌ„ and also baptize Yea and be there but three together and though they be laye men yet is there a Church For euery man liueth of his owne faith Harding Wonder not M. Iewel as you confesse that once you did at your misfortune and euil lucke in that by vs a thowsand faultes are sooner fownd in your bookes then you could wel without blushing if any shame were in you note two hundred in myne For who so euer writeth against the truth can not possibly bring one word which for maintenance of an vntruth may be altogether truly applied after the writers minde out of whome the same is alleged onlesse that writer were him selfe an Heretike or in that behalfe by better iudgement noted of some errour Therefore it is easier to find many thowsand Lyes in your bookes then any fewe in myne And as that hath ben shewed in many other examples heretofore so shal it now appeare most euidently in this which you bring out of Tertullian TertulliaÌ„ in exhort ad castitatem MoÌ„tanus and Tertullian coÌ„demned the secoÌ„d Mariages First the booke and worke that you allege is one of those which Tertullian wrote against the Churche after that he became an Heretike and was one of the disciples of Montanus For as Montanus did condemne the second Mariages so did his scholar Tertullian Who hauing corruptly interpreted many places of S. Paule commeth at the length to proue his heresie by conferring the olde Testament with the new Ecce in veteri lege c. Beholde saith he in the olde lawe I finde the licence of mariyng ofte to be inhibited It is enacted in the booke of Leuiticus Sacerdotes mei non plus nubent my Priestes shal not marrye any more But the fulnes of the law as in other pointes so in this was reserued to Christe alone VVhereupon it was more fully and more streightly prescribed that those ought bo be of one matrimonie who are chosen in the Priestly ordâ—r In so much that I my selfe remember certaine menne for hauing had two wiues to haue ben remoued from their place of Priesthod An obiection of TertulliaÌ„ against him selfe But thou wilt say Then is it lawful for other menne to marrie twise for so much as exception is made against them to wit against Priestes to whom it is not lauful to haue ben twise maried Hitherto Tertullian hath gon about by the example of the Priestes of the olde and new Testament to shew that Laye men also may not marrye but once For in the newe Testament S. Paule would haue them only chosen to Priesthod Tit. 1. The husband of one vvife who are or haue benne the husbandes of one wife that is to saye haue neither had two wiues at once nor haue married a widowe nor haue had two wiues one after an other For al this doth the Apostle meane and the auncient Fathers do so witnesse Now Tertullian saw euidently that there was a difference betwen Priestes and laye menne whereupon he made the former obiection to him selfe that the second mariages which only do staye a man from being Priest are absolutely lawful for him who wil be no Priest but wil remaine stil in the degree and state of laye men To the which obiection being to strong for Tertullian it behoued him so to answere as yet his heresie against the second mariages might be mainteined So that nowe M. Iewel bringeth forth his heretical answer made vnto a Catholikes argument Thus then Tertullian goeth forwarde Vani erimus si putauerimus quòd Sacerdotibus noÌ„ liceat laicis licere nonne laici Sacerdotes sumus We shal be deceiued or we shal be vaine men if we shal thinke that to be lawful for Laye menne whiche is not lawful for Priestes We that are Laye men are we not Priestes also And so he goeth forward with that which M. Iewel did allege for his purpose Double priesthod For wheras there is a double Priesthod one publike and external which is onely coÌ„mon to those that receiue power to consecrate Christes Body and Bloud at the Altare the other priuate and internal which is indifferently common to the Priestes and to laye men whereby they al receiue power in Baptisme to offer spiritual Sacrifices vnto God 1. Pet. 2. as S. Peter saith Tertullian would haue the argument to be good that as none are made publike and external Priestes whiche haue had two wiues so none who are internal priestes might haue two wiues But Tertullian is deceiued in his heretical argument as wel as M. Iewel is in alleging an heretical authoritie Whereupon S. Hierome saith Montanus TertulliaÌ„ enemie â—o sâ—coÌ„d mariages qui Nouati schisma sectaÌ„tur putant secunda matrimonia ab Ecclesiae communione prohibenda cùm Apostolus de Episcopis Praesbyteris hoc praecipiens vtique in caeteris relaxârit non quòd hortetur ad secunda matrimonia sed quòd necessitati carnis indulgeat Montanus and those who followe the schisme of Nouatus thinke that the second Mariages ought to be forbidden from the Communion of the Church whereas the Apostle geuing that commaundement vnto Bishoppes and priestes hath doubteles released it in other men Not that he exhorteth them to secoÌ„d mariages but bicuase he yeeldeth to the necessitie of the flesh So that S. Hierome reproueth
Succession aboue thirtie martyrs who died for Christes sake and as many confessours or moe whom al the good men in the Church haue accompted for holy and blessed men There was neuer general Coūcel holden by catholique Bishops which did not cōmunicate with that See and reioysed to be honoured and cōfirmed by it From S. Peters time to our age you cannot name any one daie or howre marcke wel M. Iewel you can not name one daie or howre I say in which any knowen Catholike Bishop in al the world did or might euer say with the approbation of good men I defie or I despise or I do not communicate with the Church of Rome how soeuer some one Pope might seeme not cōmendable yet the Church the faith the Doctrine the Succession was euer commended of al Catholike men To that See appealed and resorted as to the chiefe Light of the Church a Li. 3. c. 3. Irenaeus b De Praes Tertullian c Lib. 2. Optatus d Ad Siriciū ep 81 S. Ambrose e Ad. Damasum S. Hierome f Epi. 165. S. Augustine g De vocat gent. li. 2. c. 16. Prosper with al the fathers besides That See promoted the Gospel into the endes of the world into England Scotlād Ireland Denmarcke the low Countrie Germanie Polonia Lituania Prussia Liuonia Hungaria Bohemia Bulgaria and presently into the new founde Landes That See conquered al heresies cōfounded them and al their authours and mainteiners from Simon Magus to Martine Luther and Ihon Caluin who now beginneth to be brought very lowe and by Gods wil shal be brought lower shortely the follie and rebellious sprite which his Doctrine breedeth in his adherentes breaking out and shewing it selfe daily to the world more and more See M. Iewel you and your fellowes are as sore a fraid as euer was the gilty theefe of his iudge or the naughty boye of his maister But do I say trow you that ye therfore haue no Succession or that yee are no Bishops and haue no Church bicause in your Churches of England there are not to be founde so many Idolatours so many Necromācers so many Heretiques Aduouteres Churcherobbers Periured persons Mankillers Renegates Monsters Scribes and Pharisees as many easily be founde in the Church of Rome Nay I trow M. Iewel you take your marke amisse For if I thought so as it pleaseth you to thinke of me I would not haue denied you neither Succession such as it is nor Bishops nor Churches or rather Congregations nor Ministers nor Minstrels neither for the better furnishing of them withal if these so many worthy qualities could worke so great an effecte For that I speake not here of Heretikes The clergie of these nevv cōgregatiōs vvherby Successiō is claimed and so cōsequently of Idolatours which faulte is common to you al what aduouterers whoremasters Incestuous persons Churche robbers Church breakers Periured persons Mankillers Renegates Abiured men Friers Apostates Lecherous Munkes Tapsters Hostlers Pedlers Tinckers Coblers Summoners Viceplayers Deuil Players Fellons Horse stealers Newgate menne briefly what vile and rascal rable want ye to fournish vp your Succession your bishoprikes your Synagogues and Ministring roumes withal Verely if this geare could make a Succession it shal soone be made good that ye haue also a Succession such as it is And ye neede not to mistrust any whit at al hauing so many of euery sorte as shal be more then inough for you Marie put these away out of your congregations I would cal them Churches were not that name to good for you I feare me you would leaue but a poore seely clergie behinde See hovv M. Ievvel vvil proue his so many Idolatours c. In the Church of Rome But how easy is it trow you M. Iewel to find so many Idolatours in the Churche of Rome as you beare vs in hande there may be founde Doth one poore facte of S. Marcellinus alone for the whiche he repented foorthwith and dyed a glorious Martyr of God make vp with you so many Idolatours I am wel assured that if you could haue found but one Pope more that had done the like you would not haue spared him your modestie is such but he should haue ben scored vp also to make vp your number of so many Idolatours Be it that Syluester was a Necromancer So many Necromācers and Hildebrand too who was of that crime as of many other vntruly sclaundered by his enemies that could not abide to heare of any correction for their enormous faultes and therefore spited that good Pope as you doo al the Popes wil yet those two make such a number of Necromancers in that See that it were a very easy matter to finde so many as you would gladly make your Readers beleeue there were Be it that Liberius Leo Coelestinus Honorius So many heretikes and Ihon the 22. holding priuate opinions without open maintenance of them had ben Heretikes as you most sclaunderously reporte them out of baudye Bale and braine-sicke Illyricus yet these fiue make not so great a number pardy that it should be an easy thing for you to finde so many Heretikes in the See of Rome as ful rhetorically you set the matter forth Now with what face pretende you vnto the worlde that it is an easy matter to finde so many Heretiques emong the Bishops of Rome whereas with long prying and pooring in al your brethrens bookes you could finde but fiue to whom you durst to impute that crime of whiche yet three are vniustly sclaundered and the other two only misliked for their priuate assertions and neuer denounced Heretikes for stubborne maintenance or making any open Decree touching that whereof once they erroneously iudged But yet you wil saie that among the Bishops of Rome there were many Aduouterers So many aduouterers c many Church Robbers many Periured persons many Mankillers many Renegates It is happy M. Iewel that your worde is no sclaunder But I pray you good sir how many can you truly name of al these For of so great a number as you speak of it is wel likely you can name some and your malice is such against the Popes that you wil spare none howe smal a surmise soeuer you haue inducing you to thinke so euil of any Pope Go to then M. Iewel of your so many name vs some one infamous in eche of these great crimes which indifferently you laye to the charge of the Bishops of Rome leauing an euil suspicion in your Readers head that for the most parte al the Bishoppes of Rome were giltie of the one or the other How many Aduoutrers then can you name to vs Pope Hildebrand saye you was an Aduouterer that is a starke sclaunderous lie But were it true how many mo can you name let vs heare them Is there no mo but Pope Hildebrand Is one now become many with you and many but one So many Churche robbers Perchaunce yet of your Churche
that there is no succession in doctrine Now I saie ronne ouer al the Bisshops of Rome and you can saie of neuer a one this man coÌ„ming into his Predecessours See did oppugne his doctrine or preached with the Churche of Romes contentation against that which was in vse before So that in Rome al thinges are euen at this day concerning faith as S. Peter leafte them For euery man hath agreed in outward Decree senteÌ„ce and profession with al the predecessours and successours Iewel Pag. 132. S. Bernard saith Quid prodest si canonicè eligantur In concil Remen non canonicè viuant VVhat auaileth it if they be chosen in order and liue out of order Harding It auaileth nothing to the euil liuer but yet it auaileth muche to him that obeieth the good and true doctrine of the euil teacher Iewel So saith S. Augustine Ipsum characterem multi lupi Cont. Donatist lib. 6. 1. q. 3. vocantur caâ—es Character vvhat it signifieth in the Sacraments lupis imprimunt The outvvarde marke or right of a bisshop many geue to vvolues and be vvolues them selues Harding By Character is not meant an outward marke but rather an inwarde marke and print which through the receiuing of certaine Sacramentes is imprinted in the soules of them who receiue them of whiche sorte are Baptisme Confirmation and holy Orders And those sacramentes being once receiued caÌ„ not be repeated or be againe receiued of the same person For the Sacrament of Christes body and bloud although it be an outward signe yet it leaueth not any Character or suche inward print in the soule as may be no more repeated But letting that errour passe of the true interpretation of this worde Character I graunt that Heretikes may baptize heretikes euen without the Churche and the Baptisme shal stand although it be vnlawfully ministred What maketh that against the Suceession of Bishops It rather proueth that seing the Sacramentes may be ministred if not to saluation of them that are of discretion yet truly and really without the true Churche there must be an other rule taken to know the true Church by besides the administration of Sacramentes And that true and certaine rule is the perpetual Succession of the See Apostolike Iewel Pag. 132. Therefore the auncient father Irenaus geueth vs this good counsel Eis qui sunt in Ecclesia presbyteris obedire oportet Iren. lib. 4. ca. 43. qui successionem habent ab Apostolis qui cum episcopatus successione charisma veritatis certum secundùm beneplacitum patris acceperunt It becommeth vs to obey those Priestes in the Churche vvhich haue their succession from the Apostles and together vvith the Succession of their bishoprikes according to the good vvil of God the Father haue receiued the vndoubted gifte of the truthe Harding Al this maketh against you M. Iewel For seing you can shew no such Priestes hauing their Succession from the Apostles and hauing receiued the vndoubted gifte of the truth whom ye doo obeye it is certaine that ye haue not the gifte of the truthe among you On the other side seing we haue Priestes that is to say Bishoppes of Rome who are also Priestes which haue their SuccessioÌ„ from the chiefe and most glorious Apostles Peter and Paule and seing such Priestes and Bishops keeping stil the same faith and doctrine from man to man haue receiued the vndoubted gifte of the truth according to the good wil of God the Father doubtelesse the vndoubted marke of the truth is with vs only and not with you at al who haue no Succession at al of any Priestes and much lesse of any suche Priestes that succede lineally from the Apostles them selues Iewel 132. S. Cyprian being likevvise charged for dissenting from his predecessours Lib. 2. epist 3. ansvvereth thus Si quis de antecessoribus meis c. If any of my predecessours haue not obserued and kepte the same that our Lorde hath taught vs both by his example and also by his coÌ„maundement his simplicitie may be pardoned but we if we doo the like can hope for no pardon being nowe admonished and instructed of our Lorde Harding Cough vp man it wil choke you Phy. vvhat a fowle corruption is this Lib. 2. epist 3. if you let it tarry within your throte Here is but halfe the bone there is yet in S. Cyprian no ful point it foloweth in the same sentence Vt calicem Dominicum vino mixtum secundùm quod Dominus obtulit offeramus We can hope for no pardon who are now admonished and instructed of our Lorde that we should offer our Lordes chalice mixed with wine accordingly as our Lorde offered the same Either M. Iewel tooke this saying of S. Cyprian vpon the Germaine credite as he found it noted in their bookes and then his false brethren deceiued him or els he wrote it out of S. Cyprian himselfe and then his studie and wil was to deceiue vs. He would ful gladly haue geuen vs an authoritie that we might forsake the example of our Predecessours but he was loth we should see the thing wherewith the authoritie was exemplified For if at any time he say al he is sure to speake against him selfe and no wonder because he speaketh against the truth and euerie good saying euermore agreeth with the trtuh First he corrupteth S. Cyprian in putting in meis for nostra my predecessours in stede of our predecessours For S. Cyprian speaketh not of his owne Succession but of what soeuer Priest or Bishoppe that liued before his time Againe S. Cyprian spake not of any such custome as had ben generally vsed of al Bishops for then it had ben of ful authoritie but of that which some one man vsed priuatly and without keeping the lawe of Succession And therefore S. Cyprian said Si quis if any man Thirdly the thing he spake of was that some were said to offer water alone in our Lordes supper and not wine withal Now saith he if any before our time haue vsed to offer water and not wine mingled with water wel he may be pardoned by our Lordes mercie but we that are admonished and instructed to offer our Lordes chalice mingled with wine that is to say consisting not of water alone but of water and wine mingled together we caÌ„ not be pardoned except we mingle water with wine and so do offer our Lordes Chalice as he him selfe did offer it Nowe applie this geare Christian Reader to our new brethrens deedes Do they offer our Lordes Chalice at al Or do they graunt that our Lord in his Supper offered it Do they mingle water with wine at the time of consecrating the mysteries If they do neither of both what folie yea what madnesse was it for M. Iewel to bring foorth these wordes of S. Cyprian thereby to accuse him selfe and his owne Communion as not obseruing that whiche our Lorde commaunded to be obâ—â—rued It is a worlde to see how these men applye the witnesses of
Castro maketh quite against you Viruesius Philippica 19. and your Brethren For this is that Viruesius writeth If a man haue vowed saith he and can not conteine and hauing assaid al meanes yet preuaileth not in this case I would aduise him to prouide for his safetie by Marriage not doing it of his owne head but by the authoritie of the Pope Thus he In which wordes he geueth but his priuate aduise referring the partie so standing in danger vnto the Pope for dispensation of his Vowe Your Brethren on the other side notwithstanding their solemne Vowe as being some Religious personnes some Priestes ronne hedlong to Marriage as they cal it hauing assaied fewe due meanes or none at al for the obteining of Chastitie neuer calling better menne then them selues to counsel nor sticking for any dispensation for their Vowe to be had at al. To say the least of both his aduise is sober and leaneth to ObedieÌ„ce these men seeme to play the merchants venturers their dooing is rash comtemptuous and altogether disobedieÌ„t But how farreforth this aduise of Viruesius is to be allowed whether the case be to be admitted that by Praiers fasting by streight discipline and chastisment of the flesh by any asking seking knocking nor by any meanes a man hauing deliberatly and deuoutly made a Vowe of continencie with intent the more expeditely and purely to serue God can not obteine at his mercie the necessarie gifte of continencie and whether if through frailtie and negligence perhappes he fal he shal not repent and study how to amend that he hath done amisse and continually fight against temptatioÌ„s but streight waie take a woman and marrie and how safe it is for a man in this case to sue vnto the Pope for a dispensation of his Vowe and whether when he hath married he be sure to be deliuered from al temptations of incontinencie these pointes I wil not take vpon me here to determine but leaue them to the consideration of their consciences that be learned in these cases Novv M. Ievv coÌ„meth to the point at length and haue the true feare of God At length M. Iewel commeth vnto that point which he should haue answered long before At length I say bicause after that he hath filled fiue leaues of Paper with diuers sayinges of the Doctours gathered out of his Notebookes and heaped together to litle other purpose then to shewe of a great booke Now then thou shalt here see good Reader how substantially he proueth it to be lawful for Priestes to marrie and that the Marriage of Priestes hath ben accompted lawful As concerning Monckes and Friers and Nonnes that haue taken the vaile of their profession they must defend their Marriages or rather yokinges aswel as they can them selues for this man hath nothing to say in their defence If he had out it should to help to make vp the heape neither could he be spareful of it fauouring the cause so much as he doth That then being leaft as a desperate cause let vs see what good stuff he bringeth for the Mariages of Priestes Iewel M. Harding vnvvares falleth into the same Negatiue Diuinitie that hâ—sâ— often and so muche abhorreth For thus he saith vve denie vtterly that any man after that he hath receiued holy Orders maie marrie Neither can it be shevved that the Marriage of suche vvas euer accompted lavvful in the Catholique Churche If this tale be true then be al the Greeke Priestes Votaries as vvel as the Latines Distinct 31. Quoniam in Margine But it is noted vpon the Decrees Graeci continentiam non promittunt vel tacitè vel expressè The Greekes make no promise of continent or Single life neither secretly nor expressely Harding If you take them to be Votaries In vvhat sense are the Greke Priestes Votaries that make a Vowe neuer to marrie for time to come so are the Greeeke Priestes Votaries by law of the Greeke Churche as wel as the Latines but if you accompte them to be Votaries that Vowe vtterly to absteine from the vse of a woman whether they had wiues before they tooke holy Orders or otherwise in this sense the Greekes are not ne haue not ben Votaries generally that is to say in al places and at al times as the Latines were and yet be as among whom more austeritie of life hath alwaies ben vsed M. Iewels chiefe autoritie is a marginal note vpon the Glose So that in this respecte your Argument is naught and concludeth not As for your marginal note it is besides the texte and therfore of smal authoritie It is a signe ye lacke good euidence for this matter fith that for proufe of it ye are driuen to serue your selfe of such weake stuffe Albeit the same note is thus to be vnderstanded that they of the East Church what time they were promoted to holy Orders made no promise to absteine from the companie of their lawful wiues vnto whom they were married before they tooke suche Orders And so muche you might haue found in the texte Distinct 31. Quoniam being a Decree of the sixt synode that you needed not to haue scraped helpe out of the bookes margent Now shew vs your better stuffe For this is litle worthe Iewel Concil Ancyran cap. 9. In the Councel holden at Ancyra it is concluded thus Diaconi quicunque ordinantur si in ipsa Ordinatione protestati sunt dixerunt velle se Coniugio copulari quia sic manere non possunt Hi si postmodum vxores duxerint in Ministerio maneant propterea quòd Episcopus illis licentiam dederit Deacons as many as be ordered if at the time of receiuing Orders they made protestation and said that they vvould marrie for that they finde not them selues hable so to continue vvithout Marriage if they aftervvard marrie let them continue in Ministerie for asmuch as the Bishop hath geuen them licence M. Harding I trovv vvil not denie but Deaconship is one of the holy Orders Harding Ansvver vnto the Canon of the CouÌ„cel of Ancyra This proueth not that Deacons did marrie nor that any Bishop euer gaue them licence to marrie but onely that if they would marrie the Bishops licence therto obteined they should not be remoued from the ministerie Whether any with licence married or no you are not yet hable to shewe And whereas no deacon might marrie but such as had made protestation that he would marrie before he tooke holy Orders and had obteined leaue of the Bishop so to doo by this we vnderstand that for a Deacon to marrie simply to speake and of it selfe it was vnlawful For otherwise what needed protestation leaue and licence What so euer is lawful may be done without protestatioÌ„ or licence and what may not be done but with protestation and licence the same of it selfe is vnlawful And so my saying by this testimonie is confirmed it is not confuted Againe it is to be considered that by this Councel a
of God Traditions c. The second Chapter Ievvel Pag. 193. In prooem in prouer Salomon Touching the booke of the Machabees vve saie nothing but that vve finde in S. Hierome S. Augustine and they holy fathers S. Hierom saith the Church receiueth them not emong the Canonical allovved scriptures Harding The bookes of the Machabees canonical emonge the faithful S. Hierome speaketh of such Canonical Scriptures of the olde Testament as the very Iewes allowed for Canonical Such in deede the bookes of the Machabees are not But why haue you not alleged S. Augustines wordes as wel as S. Hieromes Certainely bicause they condemne you For if yee said al that of the bookes of the Machabees which S. Augustine saith you would allowe them for Canonical Scriptures amonge faithful Christians August de De Ciuitat Dei lib. 18. ca. â—6 He saith Machabaeorum libros non Iudaei sed Ecclesia pro Canonicis habet As for the bookes of the Machabees not the Iewes but the Church accoÌ„pteth them for Canonical Hereunto I maiâ— adde but M. Iewel and his Companions accompte not the bookes of the Machabees for Canonical 〈◊〉 theâ—â—in they are of the Iewes Synagog and not of the Church of Christ Now see good Reader â–ª 〈…〉 be made when he said as thou findest noted in the mâ—rgeâ— of his booke Pag. 191. that he would denie no more then S. Austine S. Hierom and other Fathers haue â—enied If you say ye deny not the bookes of the Machabees â–ª 〈◊〉 â—eproue you praying for the dead which is so sufficiâ—â—â—y proued by those bookes Soothly if you allow the one you must allow the other Ievvel Pag. 193. S. Iames epistle Eusebius saith S. Iames Epistle vvas vvritten by some other and not by S. Iames VVe must vnderstand saith Eusebius that it is a bastard epistle Harding You haue abused Eusebius For he leaueth not there but goeth forward shewing what he ment by his word li. 2. c. 23. li. 2. c. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whiche you turne is a bastard But Ruffinus more ciuilly translated it à noÌ„nullis non recipitur The epistle is not receiued of some men And Eusebius him selfe addeth Nos tameÌ„ scinius etiaÌ„ istas cuÌ„ caeteris publicè aplerisque fuisse Ecclesiis receptas Yet we know that S. Iames and S. Iudes Epistles with the rest haue ben publikely receiued of most Churches wherby we learne that Eusebius meaÌ„t by the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 asmuch to say as it is accompted of some men not to be S. Iames owne Touching his owne iudgement he sheweth him selfe to be of the opinion that it is S. Iames epistle Of some he coÌ„fesseth by those wordes that it was doubted of Therfore you haue reported Eusebius vntruly making him to pronounce negatiuely of the epistle which directly he hath not don Iewel S. Hierome saith It is said that the Epistle of S. Iames vvas set forth by some other man vnder his name Hiero. iâ— catalogâ— Harding I graunte But S. Hierom had said before those wordes which you allege Vnam tantum scripsit Epistolam quae de septem Catholicis est He wrote onely one epistle which is one of the seuen Canonical Epistles Hiero. iâ— catalogâ— Ecclesi script Againe after the wordes by you alleged it followeth that the said epistle in processe of time hath obteined authoritie Ievvel 194. VVe Lutherans and Zuinglians agree throughly together in the vvhole substance of the Religion of Christe Harding I perceiue the Sacrament of Christes body and bloud is no substantial point with you and yet he that receiueth it vnworthily 1. Cor. 11. receiueth his damnation And he can not receiue it worthily who beleeueth amisse of it But either the Lutherans or the Zuinglians or bothe beleeue amisse thereof bicause in that behalfe they â—eache cleane contrary doctrine Therefore either both as the truth is or one of those two sectes as them selues must confesse receiueth alwaies vnworthily and consequently they must confesse that one of the two sectes is vtterly damned without any hope of saluation And certainely the Zuinglians as also the Caluinistes are the worse bicause they beleeue Goddes word lesse in some degree then Luther taught and go further from the literal sense of his Gospel 1. Timo. 3. and from the beleefe of the Church which is the piller of truthe Iewel 194. The Church is not God nor is able of her selfe to make or alter any article of the faith Harding Esai 59. Ioan. 14. But she is the spouse of God and to her he hath promised both his wordes and his spirite to remaine with her for euer And therefore she is the chiefe witnes of al the articles of the faith Wherefore seing you hearâ— not her witnesse you ought to be vnto vs as an Heathen Matt. 18. and a Publican Iewel Isai 8. Esaie saith to the lavv rather and to the testimonie If they ansvver not according to this vvorde they shal haue no Morning light Harding Iere. 31. Hebre. 8. This lawe is written also in our hartes as Ieremie and S. Paul doo witnesse And the successours of the Apostles geue also a testimonie of Christe no lesse Ioan. 15. then Christe said the Apostles should doo Therefore the lawe and testimonie whereunto Esaie calleth is as wel that which is written in faithful mennes hartes and which is witnessed in the Church as that which is written in the olde and new Testament Iewel Pag. 194. M. Harding saith further If quietnesse of Conscience comme of the vvorde of God onely then had Abel no more quietnesse of conscience then vvicked restlesse Cain c. VVho vvould thinke that M. Harding bearing suche a countenance of Diuinitie vvould thus goe about to deceiue him false vvith a pointe of Sophistrie Harding Who would thinke that M. Iewel being pressed with a point whereunto he is not hable to make answere would not thus go about to deceiue his vnlearned Reader with a point of Sophistrie I praie thee reader take the paines to peruse what the Apologie saith what I haue said in my CoÌ„futation and what M. Iewel bringeth in the Defence touching this matter I desire no more but that thou read it and then iudge as thou seest cause It is an easy matter for M. Iewel when he hath made me to speake what he listeth to frame an answere accordingly But I must alwaies warne the reader not to beleue M. Iewel when so euer he reporteth either my wordes or any other mannes M. Ievv shifteth him selfe from Scripture to Goddes vvorde but to repaire to the Original Fot seldom is he founde cleere of the crime of falsifying And here he entwiteth me of Sophistrie wheras in deede he vseth the grossest sleight of Sophistrie him selfe He conueigheth him selfe from the Canonical Scriptures to Goddes worde Now I spake of the Scriptures and he answereth of Goddes worde Defence pag 191. Whereas it is said in the Apologie that
onely in the Canonical Scriptures of the olde and new Testament mannes harte can haue setled reste Against this I bring the example of Abel Noe Abraham Isaac and Iacob and of those holy menne that liued before the time of Ezdras when the Scriptures were loste and here I demaund whether their hartes neuer founde setled reste For if reste be founde onely in the Scriptures how could they haue reste when no booke nor parte of the Scriptures was written If it be true as the coÌ„trarie can not be proued that Moyses was the first that euer wrote any parte of the Scriptures shal we iudge that al the holy Patriarches that were before that time had no setled reste in their hartes CoÌ„fut fol. 82. b. If this be true then say I had good Abel no better reste in his harte then wicked restlesse Cain As I said in my Confutation so for ought that M. Iewel is hable to bring in his Defence I saie here againe what foolish and absurde Doctrine is this Now how dooth M. Iewel defende this Doctrine of his Apologie What is his answere I wish no more but that it be read and coÌ„ferred with my CoÌ„futation here to write out al againe it were too long He slincketh awaie from his own wordes and by change of wordes maketh of it a new question M. Harding saith he saith further If quietnes of coÌ„science come of the word of God only then had Abel no more quietnes of coÌ„science then wicked rest lesse Cain You belie M. Harding as your custome is he saith not so Let the booke be trial betwen vs bothe The question is not whether mannes harte findeth his setled reste only in Goddes worde the quietnesse of the conscience was not spoken of but whether that reste you spake of in the Apologie be found only in the Scriptures In your Apologie ye said yea in my Confutation I saie nay And now in your Defence your selfe also saie Nay Galat. 2. and so ye destroie what ye builded before and therby proue your selfe a preuaricatour asmuch to say a false hartlot For in that now ye coÌ„ueigh the matter from the Canonical Scriptures of the old and new TestameÌ„t vnto Gods word what is this but a secrete recantatioÌ„ of your former false tale If your said former tale were true and might be mainteined why do you so shifte your handes of it are you a shamed to be accoumpted a Recantour and yet recante in deede Who seeth not great diuersitie betwen Gods word and the written Scriptures These be more special that is more general By skipping from the writteÌ„ Scriptures to Gods worde you thought to set your selfe at hâ—â—re libertie And yet hauing taken your libertie as it were by breaking loose out of your chaine neuer so much as you seme to geue ouer your former saying and to recant so you proue not your later saying You allege S. Chrysostome saying In Gen. Ho. 2. Heb. 1. in Iob. 27. that God from the beginning spake 〈…〉 mâ—n by him selfe S. Paule that God in olde times spake mâ—ny waies and in sundrie sortes vnto the Fathers S. Hierome that the holy Scriptures be euerlasting though the wâ—â—ld shal haue an ende and that the thing which is promised by the holy Scriptures shal last for euer though the paper parchement and leaues of bookes shal be abolished Againe you allege S. Chrysostome saying 2. Cor. hom 18. that S. Paule calleth Preaching not written the Gospel But to what purpose al this How proueth this either that you auouched in your Apologie touching the setled rest of mannes harte to be founde only in the Canonical Scriptures of the old and new testament or which now you teache hauing reuoked your former doctrine that it is founde onely in Goddes worde Verely by ought that you haue said yet either in your Apologie or in your Defence you haue neither shewed where mannes harte shal finde the reste you spake of nor where we shal finde you so like a hunted foxe you starte from one thing to an other as it were from bushe to bushe from hole to hole So must they doo who seruing the Maister that you serue take vpon them to impugne the Catholique Doctrine and to defende Vntruthe Iewel Ibidem God him selfe in his ovvne person and presently spake vnto Abel c. Harding That would I confesse But he spake not to him by paper and incke And yet we are not now in worse case then the old fathers were And the word of God in their hartes whereof they could not doubte was euer much more cleere and plaine then that which is in our bookes whereof some men doubt many times Therefore we also in Christes Church haue as wel Gods word in our hartes as in our bookes whence also to wit out of our hartes we may resolue the doubtes which arise vpoÌ„ our bookes But let vs see this matter ripte vp more deeply Iewel Pag. 194. VVe speake not so precisely and nicely of Gods vvord vvritten in paper for so it is a corruptible creature and shal perish Harding Why then bind you vs in al cases to the written word and wil haue nothing to be beleued or done that is not written Iewel Pag. 195. Chrysostom saith Preaching not writteÌ„ Paul calleth the Gospel Homil. 18. in 2. Cor. Harding But we only haue preaching not written Preaching not vvritten for you wil haue nothing preached which is not also written Therefore we only haue the whole Gospel and you haue but one peece thereof Iewel Pag. 195. S. Antonie the Eremite vvas notably learned Aug. de Doctrinae Christ li. 1. in prologo and perfite in the scriptures Harding But without knowledge of letters as with S. Augustine your selfe must confesse This proueth that by the Scriptures the sense and meaning is vnderstanded and not the bare letter Now the meaning of the Scriptures not only tolerateth but conuinceth the vnbloudy Sacrifice of Christes body Transubstantiation praiers to the Saintes and praiers for the dead as diuers learned men haue declared at large Iewel The force and substance bothe of prayer and of meditation dependeth of reading Aug. de scalis paradisi .c. 11 Harding Not only of reading For then vnlearned persons should neither praie nor meditate nor haue Gods word Marke stil we denie not the written word but we say besides it there are vnwritten Verities Basil de Spiritu Sancto cap. 27. which thing you impudently denie Iewel Pag. 195. S. Basil reckeneth Traditions to be equal vvith the vvorde of God but that he vvrote those vvordes rather of zeale then of iudgement it 〈…〉 appeare bicause the traditions he nameth are forgotten euen in the Churche of Rome as not to kneele in the Churche vpon the sonnedaie Harding If bicause some Traditions be altered TraditioÌ„s or abolished they were not Gods word then the precepte of absteining from strangled meates Actor 15. is not Gods word bicause it is now abolished
But you misse M. Iewel What soeuer God commaundeth but for a time it is his worde And whatsoeuer his ministers do commaunde as profitable to the Church for the present tyme it is Gods word as him selfe said Luke 10. He that heareth you heareth me He that despiseth you despiseth me How be it S. Basil speaketh not altogether as you reporte He maketh not al Traditions equal with Gods worde simply and in al respectes he speaketh of three thinges of Doctrines written and doctrines vnwritte and of customes for which we haue no scripture Of the vnwritten doctrines it is that he speaketh not of customes that they haue equal force with the written doctrines ad pietatem to traine vs to godlinesse As touching vnwritten customes many thinke your example false For we were neuer forbidden to kneele at al vpon the Sonnedaie but at our Lordes prayer whiles it is said at Masse time as some interprete it At which time al the Popes Chappel to this daie vseth to stand vp and not to kneele Iewel Pag. 195. The reste of S. Basiles traditions stand in hallovving of vvater and blessing of oile c. Harding Those Traditions which belong to Sacramentes as that of the blessing of the oile doth maie neuer be changed Those that are mere ceremonial maie be abrogated by custom as the thrife dipping of the childe or of any other that is to be baptized and such others the like which neither S. Basile nor we euer made equal with Goddes expresse worde Iewel Pag. 196. S. Paule saying holde the Traditions which yee haue receiued 2. Thess 2. either by epistle or by worde calleth them traditions although thei vvere conteined in his epistles and deliuered to them by vvriting Harding And also though they were not deliuered by writing You leaue out halfe For he saith by writing or per sermonem that is to saie by speache The writing contemed wordes ergo the speache which differeth from writing were wordes without writing Iewel Pag. 196. VVhereas S. Paule vvil haue his ovvne thinges to be kepte Hieron in 2. Thes 2. he vvil haue no straunge thinges thereto to be added Harding We adde no strange thinges but beleeue that S. Paule preached and deliuered the Sacrifice of the Masse vnto the faithful people so plainly in practise and wordes that the writing was not hable to shew his minde so fully in that behalfe And by Tradition we haue as wel that which he taught by practise as that which he preached whether he wrote it or no. Iewel Pag. 197. S. Paule by the vvord Traditions meant not Ceremonies or certaine secrete vnknovven Verities â— Cor. 15. but the substance of the Gospel I haue deliuered vnto you that Christ died for our sinnes saieth he Harding M. Ievvels Secret vnknovven verities He meant not only Ceremonies I graunt And as for secrete vnknowen verities we haue no suche excepte you are so mad as to cal praying for the dead a secrete vnknowen veritie which hath euen benne knowen to al menne yea wemen and children in the Church of God And that custome of praying for the dead S. Paule did teach as wel as al other the Apostles as Tradition telleth vs Homil. 69. Ad populuÌ„ AntiocheÌ„ witnessed also by S. Chrysostom So that as the whole Gospel commeth vnto vs by Tradition so doth Masse Dirige Holy water Lenten fast and others Iewel Pag. 197. Epist â—6 S. Augustine findeth is not appointed by Christ or the Apostles vvhat daies vve ought to fast Harding Lenten fast is not founde in the Apostles vvritinges but in the Apostolike Traditions Aug. in epist 86. You kepe your kinde in alleging thinges out of their kinde S. Augustine there speaketh of that which is to be founde in the writinges of the Apostles For thus it went before In Apostolicis literis in the Apostolike writinges There he findeth not the Lenten fast But he findeth it in the Apostolike TraditioÌ„s saying in the very same epistle In his rebus de quibus nihil certâ— statuit scriptura diuina mos populi Dei vel instituta maioruÌ„ prolege â—edendasunt Looke in what thinges the holy Scripture hath determined nothing of certaintie the custome of the people of God oâ— the ordinauÌ„ces of the Forfathers Custom is a lavve are to be kept as a lawe Marke that the custom of Gods people must be â—olden for a law prolege for a law M. Iewel It is the epistle alleged by you that saith TraditioÌ„s and customes must be kept for a law And his owne wordes another where are Vt quadraginta illi dies ante Pascha obseruetur Augustin epist 118. Ecclesiae consuetudo roborauit That the fortie daies before Easter should be kepte the custome of the Church hath confirmed and strengthened it And generally he saith Quae non scripta sed tradita custodimus quae quidem toto terrarum orbe obseruantur dantur intelligi vel ab ipsis Apostolis vel plenarijs Concilijs commendata atque statuta retineri Looke what thinges we kepe not being written but deliuered by tradition which are obserued al the worlde ouer thereof intelligence is geuen vs that they be kepte in vre as thinges coÌ„mended vnto vs and ordeined either by the Apostles them selues or by the General Councelles Nowe seing the Faste of the fortie dayes was and is generally kepte in the Churche and yet not firste commaunded by any general Councel it remaineth according to S. Augustines rule that it was instituted of the Apostles And S. Hierome by name saith it came from the Apostles In fidei regula discrepamus We differ in the rule of faith from the Montanistes For they denie three persons confounding them into one They accompt the second Marriages as il as Aduoutrie and make three Lenten fastes Nos vnam Quadragesimam secundùm traditionem Apostolorum toto anno tempore nobis congruo ieiunamus We faste at a time conuenient one Lent in the whole yere according to the Traditions of the Apostles Iewel 199. M. Harding saith Persona Ingenitus Homousion are not founde in the scriptures but the sense and meaning is found there Harding So is the sense and meaning of Masse of transubstantiation and of praying to Saintes founde there Iewel Pag. 200. Gennadius saith the perpetual Virginitie of our Ladie is proued sufficiently by scriptures In catalogo Harding Gennadiin catal in Heluid This is a lowde lie Trie it out who wil Gennadius saith not so but only that S. Hieromes booke which he wrote against Heluidius affirming that our Ladie bare children after she had borne Christ was sufficiently fournished with * Documentes testimonies of the Scriptures For although it be not expressely written that she was a perpetual Virgin yet the faith thereof is most agreable to the Scriptures and most certaine in Tradition But were not the Tradition so strong the Scriptures certainely might be doubtful ynough in that behalfe Iewel Pag. 200. Of God and
be sure to liue for ouer the whiche no euil man can eate For if it could so be that he who continueth euil stil should eate the worde made fleash whereas it is the woorde and liuing bread it should not haue ben written whosoeuer eateth this bread shal liue for euer Origen fovvly corrupted by M. Ievv These are the true wordes of Origen But M. Iewel hath so mangled them that the sense is cleane altered For in steede of verbuÌ„ caro factum the worde made flesh he hath placed the body of Christ referring it to the Sacrament And whereas in Origen it is edere verbum factum carnem to eate the word made flesh he hath made exchange thereof into edere corpus Domini to eate the body of our Lorde And so whereas Origen meant that euil men can not eate spiritually and effectually the Diuinitie of Christ so as it dwelleth corporally in his flesh M. Iewel hath taught him to say that an euil man can not in the Sacrament eate Christes bodie Iewel Pag. 210. VVe say vvith S. Augustine the Sacrament is not our Lorde In Iohan. Tract 5â— but the bread of our Lord. Harding S. Augustin denieth not the SacrameÌ„t to be our Lord he hath no such wordes Howbeit we our selues would denie it in some sense For some tyme the Sacrament is taken for the forme of bread and wine and that in deede is not our Lord. Iewel 212. M. Harding might accompt not only seuen but also seuenteen sundry Sacramentes Harding I accompt onely seuen in such sense as the Churche properly taketh a Sacrament And how that is I shewed before Iewel pag. 213. Thus vve say it can not be proued that this number is so specially appointed As for the reasons of seuen seales seuen trumpettes seuen starres seuen golden Candelstikes and seuen eyes they are childish Harding We ground not our seuen Sacramentes vppon those similitudes Seuen Sacrametes August de Ciuit. Dei li. 11. c. 30. de doctrina Christiana lib. 2. cap. 16. Albeit if any man applie some of those matters to the seuen Sacramentes it is not childishely done seing S. Augustine confesseth that the Mysteries of numbers be great in the holy scriptures Iewel 213. Vnto euery Sacrament tvvo thinges are necessarie a sensible outvvard Element as in Baptisme VVater in our Lordes Supper Bread and VVine and the vvord of Institution Harding Thus farre we are agreed with you Iewel Matrimonie Order and penaunce haue the vvoorde of God but they haue no outvvard creature or Element Extrems Vnction and Confirmation haue neither vvoorde nor Element Harding To answere you herein M. Iewel I can not doo better Conci Florentin in vnione Armeniorum then to send you to the Councel of Florence and to the bookes wherein the order of our Sacramentes are conteined Where you shal finde that there lacketh neither the woorde of Institution nor conuenient Element It is yenough to vs that both by the woorde of God and by the perpetual doctrine of the Churche we are taught Act. 8. Iacob 5. Luc. 22. Ioan. 20. that these seuen are Sacramentes Confirmation is proued in the Actes of the Apostles Extreme Vnction in the Epistle of S. Iames Order in S. Luke and in S. Iohn Now baptisme and our Lordes supper your selfe graunt of penaunce and Matrimonie I haue said sufficiently already To be short we are in possession of seuen Sacramentes neither can you nor any man now aliue or that euer liued sith the Apostles shewe that euer the Church was without so many Sacramentes Impugne them when you list I doubt not but you shal be answered For that ye haue said hitherto is litle worthe and most thinges are lyes Iewel pag. 213. 214. De SacrameÌ„tâ— Eucharistia The auncient Fathers hauing occasion to intreate of purpose and specially hereof speake only of tvvo Sacramentes and so Bessarion namely saith Harding None of them al hath written purposely of al the Sacramentes of the Church but as occasion serued M. Ievvel belyeth the ancient Fathers touching the number of the SacrameÌ„tes Dionysius De Ecclesiast Hierarch TertulliaÌ„ lib. de resur carnis Cyprian lib. 2. Epist 1. ad StephanuÌ„ Bessarion de SacrameÌ„to Eucharistiae Bessarion belyed by M. Ievvel they now speake of two now of moe Of two they speake the more specially bicause the custome was to geue them both together to those that were of discretion Howbeit Dionysius Areopagita the most auncient of al intreateth of many moe as his booke de Ecclesiastica Hierarchia doth witnesse Tertullian besides Baptisme and the body of Christ nameth together with them Anointing and Signing and Imposition of handes And the Doctours which you bring affirme two but they denie not moe Yea S. Cyprian whom you cite in the first place can not be proued there to meane by both Sacramentes Baptisme and the supper of our Lorde Bessarion saith two were deliuered plainely in the Scriptures but he confesseth moe whiche are deliuered also in the Scriptures though not so plainely as the other two And he expressely nameth Chrismatis Sacramentum the Sacrament of Confirmation or of Bishopping Of the other Sacramentes in general he speaketh twise in the beginning of that Treatie Wherefore there is an impudâ—nt he included in your wordes where you saie that I haue in expresse wordes The onely two Sacraments of the Churche So that nowe we maie couple you with Beza â—â—o teacheth the same doctrine in his Confession and iuâ—â—ly cal you bothe false teachers Iewel 214. Al these thinges not vvithstanding the Tridentine Councel concludeth seuen Sacramentes Harding So it ought and maie easily doo M. Iewel any thing that you haue yet brought notwithstanding You proue in dede that there are two Sacramentes but that there are no moe you haue not brought so much as one apparent authoritie Sauing that of Bessarion who neuerthelesse is vtterly against you For he beleued and taught that there were seuen Sacramentes Bessarion De Sacramento Eucharistiae as by that Treatie it maye wel appeare But what should I do good reader should I now proue that there are seuen Sacramentes Certainely it were easy for me so to doo and to set out a booke of that Argument farre greater then M. Iewels is And that may wel appeare true by that Ruardus Tapper Cardinal Hosius and Petrus a Soto with diuers other learned menne haue done in this behalfe I am sure M. Iewel wil not denie but I were hable to english at the lest that which I should find in their Latin bookes And yet therein standeth his whole shewe For in deede he doth litle els but english that which the Germaines and Geneuians bookes haue The 7. SacrameÌ„tes proued out of S. Augustine Augustiniana CoÌ„fessio The vntruthes and scoffes that he addeth of his owne though they be many in number yet doo they not greatly increase the bulke of his volume Besides al other Catholique bookes there hath one benne set forth
Much a doo we had to perswade you that Sabellicus wrote Decades and I think you would neuer haue grauÌ„ted it except other men might haue found the booke in Powles Churchyard and so haue sene your fâ—lsehood But of al other impudencies this which you staÌ„d in coÌ„cerning this saying of S. Ambrose is not the lest of al. Confutat fol. 97. For you defend it and repeat it againe and again notwithstaÌ„ding it was fully by me coÌ„futed and yet it is so childish an errour that I can not thinke you to be deceiued therin but rather to be set desperatly in defence thereof for which ye haue nor learning nor reason and onely bicause you would not seeme ouercome Who would thinke that a man of your studie and learning and of that place would say and maintein it that S. Ambrose meaneth bread and wine after Consecration to remaine stil in substaÌ„ce that which they were before M. Ievvel defendeth his parte by falsifiyng S. Ambrose Ambros de Sacra lib. 4. cap. 4. To beginne first here with the terme of bread and wine is no part of S. Ambroses wordes it is your forgerie it is your corruption it is one of your owne falsifiyinges His words are these Panis iste panis est ante verba Sacramentorum vbi accesserit consecratio de pane fit caro Christi Hoc igitur astruamus Quomodo potest qui panis est corpus esse Christi Consecratione Consecratio igitur quibus verbis est cuius sermonibus Domini Iesu Nam reliqua oiÌ„a qua dicuÌ„tur laus Deo defertur oratio praemittitur propopulo pro regibus pro caeteris vbi venitur vt coÌ„ficiatur venerabile SacramentuÌ„ iam noÌ„suis sermonibus sacerdos sed vtitur sermonibus Christi Ergo sermo Christi hoc coÌ„ficit SacrameÌ„tuÌ„ Quis sermo Christi Nempe is quo facta sunt oiÌ„a Iussit Dominus et factuÌ„ est coeluÌ„ Iussit dominus et facta est terra Iussit Dominus et facta sunt maria Iussit Dominus et omnis creaturage nerata est Vides ergo quaÌ„ operatorius sit sermo Christi Si ergo taÌ„ta vis est in sermone Domini Iesu vt incipereÌ„t esse quae noÌ„ eraÌ„t quantò magis operatorius est vt sint quae eraÌ„t in aliud commutentur Coelum non erat mare non erat terra non erat Sed audi dicentem Ipse dixit facta sunt ipse mandauit creata sunt Ergo tibi vt respondeam non erat corpus Christi ante Consecrationem sed post Consecrationem dico tibi quòd iam corpus est Christi Ipse dixit factum est ipse mandauit creatum est This bread is bread before the wordes of the Sacramentes when Consecration commeth to it of breade is made the flesh of Christ Let vs confirme this How can that which is bread be the bodie of Christ By Consecration With what wordes then is Consecration made and with whose wordes With the wordes of our Lord Iesus For as for al the rest that is there said praise is geuen to God praier for the people is sent before for kings and for al other When the Priest commeth to make this honourable Sacrament he vseth not now his owne wordes but the wordes of our Lord. The worde therefore of Christ maketh this Sacrament What worde of Christ Verely that wherwith al things were made Our Lord coÌ„maunded and heauen was made Our Lord commauÌ„ded and the earth was made Our Lord coÌ„maunded and the seas were made Our Lord coÌ„maunded and euery creature was brought forth Thou seest therefore howe workeful the word of Christ is If then so great force and streÌ„gth be in the word of our Lord Iesus that those things should beginne to be whiche were not of how muche more strength is it to worke that the things which were be that is to say haue a beeing and be changed into another thing The Heauen was not the Sea was not the Earth was not But harken to him who saith He saied and they were made he coÌ„maunded and they were created Therefore that I maie make thee an answere to this question it was not the body of Christ before Consecration but after Consecration I tel thee that now it is the body of Christe He said and it was made he commaunded and it was created Who seeth not here this drifte of S. Ambrose to proue that as the Worde or speach of our Lorde made al thinges of nothing euen so it is much more hable to change one thing into another thing And bicause I required M. Iewel to coÌ„strue S. Ambroses wordes which yet he would not do though he promised to do it I wil construe them for him and wil shewe his extreme blindnesse or rather his wilfulnesse in the vnderstanding of that sentence Ergo then si tanta vis est if so great strength be in sermone Domini Iesu in the speach of our Lord Iesus vt that quae non erant the thinges which were not inciperent esse beganne to be that is to saie to haue a being quantò magis operatorius est how much more is our Lordes speach workful vt that quae erant the thinges which were sint be that is to saie haue a being in aliud commutentur and be changed into an other thing By these wordes it is cleere that S. Ambrose here speaketh generally of al thinges whiche God worketh by his word and not particularly of bread and wine Now wil I construe the same woordes as M. Iewel would haue them to be takeÌ„ First he vnderstandeth and supplieth bread and wine to be the nominatiue case to the verbe sint be or rather to the verbe SuÌ„t as for his aduantage he altereth that holy Doctours wordes Wheras it is euident that in the same whole sentence breade and wine are not particularly once named Secondly he beginneth the construction with the verbe sint whereas quae erant should go before it as it may wel appeare by setting the one part of the comparison against the other For the one part is thus to be set Quae non erant incipiunt esse the thinges which were not beginne to be Therefore the other must be thus set accordingly quae erant sunt in aliud commutantur The thinges whiche were be and be changed into an other thing Thirdly betwen quae and erant M. Iewel conueieth in a pronowne demonstratiue which hath no place there saying which they were as if bread and wine were respected Againe you translate Sunt quae erant they remaine the same that they were And those wordes you put forth in great texte letters Is Sunt to be englished They remaine the same Sunt is no more but They be If S. Ambrose would haue said as you vntruly translate him his wordes had benne these manent eadem for that is the Latine of this your English they remaine the same But S. Ambrose meaneth thus Those thinges
addeth priuilegijs omnibus custodit is quae reuerend issimis Clericis sacrae praestant cōstitutiones al Priuileges kepte whiche the Emperours lawes doo graunt vnto the reuerend Clerkes And saith farther Si verò Ecclesiasticum sit delictum egens castigatione ecclesiastica mulcta Deo amabilis Episcopus hoc discernat nihil communicantibus clarissimis prouinciae Iudicibus Neque enim volumus talia negotia omnino scire ciuiles iudices quum oporteat talia ecclesiasticè examinari emendari animas delinquentium per Ecclesiasticam mulctam secundùm sacras diuinas regulas quas etiam sequi nostra non dedignantur leges If the faulte be ecclesiastical and neede ecclesiastical pounishment and discipline let the wel beloued Bishop of God iudge and discerne it and let not the honorable Iudges of the Prouince intermedle with it at al. For it is not our pleasure that Ciuil Magistrates haue at al the examination of suche matters seing suche matters must be examined ecclesiastically after the order of the Canons and the offenders must be punished by Ecclesiastical discipline according to the holy and diuine Canons whiche our lawes doo not disdaine to folow Seing Iustinian hath so ordeined no wise man that hath read his Lawes wil saie that either he in fringed those Priuileges or as one contrarie to him selfe made a lawe against the Liberties of the Churche without any mention of the former that he him selfe had made Wherefore Iustinian in the Law that you reherse M. Iewel is to be vnderstanded to speake of ciuil and tēporal cases and that in those cases no Bishop should be brought before the Lieutenant and Ciuil Magistrate except the Prince so commaunded it Now whereas you vpon those wordes say that a Bisshop maie be conuented before a Ciuil Magistrate we graunt and euer so said that in Ciuil causes and temporal maters of which Iustinian speaketh Bishops may be cōuented before a temporal Magistrate But that is not our question But this is that which we say The very point of this Question that it is not lawful for a Prince to cal a Priest to his seate of iudgemēt in Ecclesiastical causes And in this your owne authour Iustinian condemneth you He saith as you heard before Autent 83. col 6. vt Clerici Si ecclesiasticū sit delictū c. If the faulte be ecclesiastical let the welbeloued Bisshop of God iudge and discerne it Let the honorable Iudges of the Prouince intermedle nothing at al with it For we wil not that Ciuil Magistrates haue the examination of suche matters And againe Cod. de Episco clericis L. Clericus Si verò crimen sit Ecclesiasticum episcopalis erit examinatio castigatio If the faulte be Ecclesiastical the examination and pounishing of it shal apperteine vnto the Bisshoppe But peraduenture you wil replie to this and saie that Iustinian in the lawe by you rehersed speaketh not onely of Ciuil but also of ecclesiastical causes and willeth a Bishop in qualibet causa in any cause to be conuented before the temporal magistrate if the Prince do so commaunde If you or your lawier make this obiection we answer that it can not be shewed out of al Iustinians lawes Anthent 83. col 6. vt Clerici that he willed a Bishop or Prieste to be conuented before a temporal Magistrate in an Ecclesiastical cause or to be pounished for any hainous offence before he were degraded of his Bishop And hereof if you had but a meane smattering in the Ciuil Lawe you could not be ignorant Besides that already alleged you find in the Code this Lawe Cod. de Episco Clericis L. Statuimus Statuimus vt nullus Ecclesiasticā personam in criminali quaestione vel ciuili trahere ad iudicium seculare praesumat contrae cōstitutiones imperiales canonicas sanctiones We ordeine and decree that no man presume to bring any Ecclesiastical person to the seate of iudgement of any seculare Magistrate in a criminal or ciuil cause contrarie to the Imperial Constitutions and canonical Decrees By this you see that it is against both the Emperours constitutions and Canons of the Churche that a Bishop should be conuented before a Magistrate in an Ecclesiastical cause As for the vantage which you seeke in those wordes In qualibet causa in any cause it is none at al. Had not you benne blinded with malice and your lawier with ignorance you might haue learned A Maxima amōg the lavviers that it is a Maxima and a Principle with the lawiers that Leges tales indefinitè loquentes intelligendae sunt secundùm aliam legem speciatim loquentem Such lawes speaking indefinitely must be vnderstanded by an other lawe that speaketh specially and particularly Wherefore seing the lawe Clericus in the Code and the Antentike vt Clerici in the new Constitutions make special mention that Bishops and Priestes should not be conuented before Ciuil Magistrates in Ecclesiastical causes and permitte no temporal Iudge to meddle with Ecclesiastical personnes excepte it be in Ciuil matters and that with a Limitation and a Prouiso also it had ben your parte and your blinde Lawiers also to haue vnderstanded those wordes In qualibet causa in any cause spoken there indefinitely by the other Lawes that speake more specially But then had you lost a peeuish sophistical Argument and menne had not knowen your worthy skil in the Lawe which no doubte wil appeare great by your practise Iewel pag. 637. 638. The Emperour Martianus cōmaundeth if the cause be criminal that the Bisshop be conuented before the Lieutenant vt coram Praeside conueniatur Harding For your credite touching Martianus commaundement you referre vs to the Code of Iustinian L. Si qui ex consensu de Episco Audient L. Cum Clericis de Episco Clericis As for the first you may tel your lawier that he hath fouly deceiued you and therefore is not worthy to haue his fee. That lawe Si qui ex consensu Cod. de Episcop Audient was neuer made by Martianus the Emperour but by Arcadius and Honorius and requireth neither Bishop nor Prieste nor Clerke to be conuented before the Lieutenant but declareth that if any by mutual consent wil haue their matter debated before the Bishop as an arbiter it shal be lawful for them so to do as euery man that either considereth the law or readeth the Summe set before it may easily see M. Ievv forgeth As for the other lawe Cum Clericis although it be Martianus decree yet hath it not those wordes vt coram Praeside conueniatur that the Bishop be conuented before the Lieutenant nor any clause or sentence sounding to that pupose For trial whereof I referre me to the booke and to any indifferent man that can reade and vnderstande it But suppose it to be true that the Emperour Martianus had geuen suche a commaundement what could it aduantage your cause M. Iewel You should proue
vnto a man without any formal writinges according to the Ciuil Lawes and is taken with intent and affection of marriage This woman the intent and affection maketh a wife but the lawe that is to saie the Ciuil lawe nameth her a Concubine Yea the Canons also doo name such a Woman a Concubine sometimes and not a wife vntil the Marriage be solemnized not that shee is a whoore but that with the reprocheful name of a Concubine as it were with a secrete rebuke suche personnes be driuen to solemnize and publish their marriage in the face of the Church Nowe let it be iudged by the Learned what you are worthy to haue for dissembling this much Gratian had alleged certaine Canons Dist 33. c. Laici c. Fin. wherein mention was made that they might continue in holy Orders and minister who before they were made Priestes had had Concubines In this sentence therefore that now I translated he expoundeth how the worde Concubine is to be taken in those Canons asmuche to faie for a wife taken priuately without publique Solemnization For saith he the Ciuil law taketh not for a wife but nameth a Concubine whiche is a baser and a more reprocheful name her which a man taketh and vseth for his wife without any solemne and publike instrument made concerning the dowrie and other matters accustomed to be agreed vpon betwen the man and wife And this with diuers other solemnities to take away occasion of strife 30. q. 5. c. ◠3. 4. and sinne was politikely ordeined by the Ciuil Lawe and Canon also But assoone as that writing was made and publique Solemnite perfourmed the children borne before were accompted lawfully borne and the Concubine to haue ben a wife from the beginning And this woman the lawe nameth in the meane time a Concubine § Nec non Iustin de nuptijs Concil Toletan 1. cap. 17. and not a whoore And Gratian to proue this exposition to be true and good alleged the Councel of Toledo saying De hac dicitur in Concilio Toletano Is qui non habet c. Of this Woman it is said in the Councel of Toledo he that hath not a wife but hath a Concubine for a wife let him not be put backe from the Communion Whiche wordes you bring to proue that the Churche doth allowe Concubines Wherein it is plaine that the worde Concubine is taken for a wife taken priuately and not openly married with due solemnitie in the face of the Churche yet kepte in bed and at burde as a wife with intent of wedlocke which was in olde time very common in Spaine and yet is in some places And the Councel there holden doth not repelle from the Communion those that haue suche wemen in that sorte Whereas if the worde Concubine signified a whoore in that Canon of the Councel of Toledo as it doth most commonly in other places the Councel would not haue wincked at that sinne nor suffered suche personnes to comme vnto the Communion but would haue repelled them Dist 56. Toto titulo ext le filijs presbyt 3. Reg. 12 as by many other Decrees the Church doth and also repelleth their children and bastard broode from the holy order of Priesthoode whereunto ye admitt◠the rascalles and the outcastes of al the people to further your carnal Doctrine as Ieroboam admitted the like to bring the people of Israel to Apostasie and Idolatrie Dist 34. Audite Aug. li. 50 homiliarū homi 49. That the Church alloweth not Concubines taken in the worse sense euen in the same place it is witnessed by S. Augustine alleged in the Decrees in whom thus we finde Concubinas habere non licet vobis si non habetis vxores tamen non licet vobis habere Concubinas quas postea dimittatis vt ducatis vxores tantò magis damnatio erit vobis si volueritis habere vxores Concubinas It is not lawful for you to haue Concubines Albeit ye haue no wiues yet it is not lawful for you to haue such Concucubines as which afterward ye maie put away to the ende to take wiues so muche the greater shal be your dānation if ye wil haue both wiues and Concubines And this signification of Concubina is not strange that when a man mindeth to marrie a woman she be called a Concubine whiche in deede is a true wife before God though she be not knowen so to be in the publique fame of the people til the marriage be solemnized A concūbine is a vvife secretly takē vvith out solēnitie of marriage It maie please you to looke on your brother Matthias Flacius Illyricus in his booke entitled Clauis Scripturae in the word Concubina And you shal find the word takē in this sense and the same proued by diuers authorities Ioannes de Turre Cremata a man right wel learned vpon the Chapter Omnibus before alleged saith thus Abraham praeter Saram habuit Agar ancillam vxorem sic enim dicitur Genes 16. Dedit Sara ancillam viro in vxorem Suam post mortem verò Sarae accepit Abraham Ceturam vxorem vt legitur Gen. 25. Et quia istae non fuerunt acceptae cum illa solennitate quamuis essent vxores affectu in veritate dictae tamen sunt Concubinae vt Genesis 25. vbi dicitur dedit Abraham cuncta quae possidebat Isaac filijs verò Concubinarum munera In libro etiam Iudicum idem habetur videlicet quòd vxor vocetur Concubina vt patet Iudic. 19. c. Abraham beside Sara had Agar to wife that was his wiues maide seruaunt for so it is said in the 16. Chapter of Genesis Sara gaue her maide vnto her husband to be his wife And after the death of Sara Abraham tooke Cetura to be his wife as we reade in Genesis the 25. chapter And bicause these wemen were not taken with that solemnitie as the wiues were although they were wiues in affection and in truth yet were they called Concubines as in Genesis 25. Chapter where it is said Abraham gaue al the thinges which he possessed to Isaac but to the sonnes of his Concubines he gaue giftes The same is also to be founde in the booke of the Iudges that a wife is called a Concubine as it appeareth Iudges 19. chapter c. This therefore proueth not your sclaunder M. Iewel wherewith you burthen the Canonistes as defending Simple Fornication to be no sinne Let vs see whether your other stuffe be any better to that purpose Constit Othonis Boni decō cubinis clerico remonendis licet ad pro sugandū in glossa In eadem glossa Iewel Pag. 360. Likevvise it is noted in the Glose vpon the constitutions of Otho Bonus Videtur quòd crimē meretricij Ecclesia sub dissimulatione trasire debeat It semeth that the Church ought to passe ouer the crime of vvhooredom vnder dissimulatiō and not to see it In vvhich Glose ye shal finde these vvordes Si
making great bookes Write fewer wordes more truth Truste not euery pelting booke that seemeth toothsom vnto you yea write nothing but truth and ye shal ease vs of much paynes Now a mannes life wil not serue him to discouer the multitude of your Lies to such impudencie ye are growen What man is there hauing any sparke of shamefastnesse that would referre vs so often and so confidently to a booke by a title which it neuer had ne neuer was any such written And therefore vntil you bring forth your authour hereof you must be content to beare al the blame of a sclaunderous and impudent Lier It had ben an easie matter for you to haue vowed Tritemius de Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis Conradus Gesnerus Bibliotheca or his Epitome or elles Cusanus workes printed at Basile anno 1565. which was out almost two yeres before your Defence was published where you should haue founde that he neuer wrote booke of any suche title What is to be thought hereof but that either you haue maliciously inuented this Lie of your selfe to deface the authour withal or elles that you haue vnwisely receiued it of some other who is not hable to abide by it If of your selfe then maius peccatum habes if of any other then bring him forth a Goddes name to discharge your selfe of malice albeit not of folie I do ghesse that you wil peraduenture bring forth a greate Stoareman of yours who furnisheth you with suche gaie stuffe and maketh you a greate Truant a felowe meete for the purpose that wil neuer faile suche a false merchant at a neede I take him to be that sures bee of yours Matthias Flacius Illyricus For you declare your selfe that you beside other bookes of his haue benne busie with his Norma Concilij Tridentini And there I finde written In altera parte clauis Scripturae pa. 541. Nicolai Cusani post quam factus est Cardinalis sententia de auctoritate Ecclesiae Concilij supra contra Scriptutam But yet this wil not discharge you of malice For he saith not that he entituled his booke so as you doo affirme but doth pretende to recite Cusanes minde of that matter as this worde Sententia declareth Now one maie gather an other mannes minde concerning any matter out of his writinges though he neuer made any worke of that title Neither doth Illyricus specifie in that place the worke out of the which he hath drawen that whiche he there allegeth and whiche you receiued of him againe at the seconde hande So that I can not perceiue but that the blame bothe of folie and of malice must reste stil vpon your owne persone For I suppose you wil not haue your selfe taken for so ignorant as to thinke Sententia is latine for a booke or if you wil then why doo you so bragge as it were and boast of your great reading and learning Moreouer you haue not onely geuen vs a false title of your owne imagination to Cusanus writinge but also of an Epistle you haue made a Booke That your good intente and plaine dealing herein maye be more euident I wil recite the title of thal Epistle as it is to be founde amonge his workes printed at Basile Anno 1565. Pagin 851. 852. Epistola 7. Nicolai de Cusa Cardinalis ad Clerum Literatos Bohemiae and thereunto in the toppe of the leafe is added De amplectenda vnitate Ecclesiae Let bothe these Titles be conferred and your malicious intent in so wilfully deprauing the authours wordes to bring him out of credite must most manifestly appeare Wel perchaunce you wil saye though the title be altered yet his wordes out of that same Epistle be truely recited wherein consisteth the chiefe effecte and principal purpose If you so saye you wil be proued no lesse a Lier and false reporter herein then you haue benne in the reste And for example hereof I wil bringe euen the very firste place that you haue alleged out of him You tel vs page 55. that thus he saith Sequuntur Scripturae Ecclesiam non è conuerso Cusanus fovvly falsified by M. Ievvel The Scriptures of God followe the Churche but contrariwise the Churche followeth not the Scriptures You haue here clipped the Authours sentence and quite altered the sense His wordes are these Ecclesia igitur sicut recipit Scripturam ita interpretatur Pag. 858 Sequuntur Scriptura Ecclesiam quae prior est propter quam Scripturae non è conuerso The Churche as it receiueth the Scripture so doth it expounde the same The Scriptures therefore do follow the Churche which is the former and for the which the Scripture is ordeiined and not contrariwise What oddes is betwixt this sentence of Cusanus and that whiche you haue fathered vpon him any meane witted man maie ealsily perceiue For Cusanus wordes in their right forme doo bothe stande wel and haue a good meaning But your false changing of them causeth them to importe an intollerable Derogation to the Scriptures without any colour of truth For as it is most true that the Church was before the Scriptures that is to saie the written worde of God and that the Scriptures were ordeined and appointed for the Churche but not contrariwise the Churche for the Scriptures so is it very false that the Scriptures doo followe the Church and the Church not the Scriptures For why hath the Church receiued the Scriptures but to follow them and put them in execution both in our inward beleefe and in our outward actions Doo you not blush M. Iewel thus wilfully to peruerte that with your false iuggling and conueying awaie of those wordes quae prior est propter quam Scripturae whiche before had a right good sense You thought by like you should neuer heare thereof againe nor be called to any reckening or elles you would haue had more regarde ro your good name and honestie You can pretende no tollerable excuse as that you had not Cusanus workes at hande For euen Illyricus vpon whose credite you haue taken vp al that you haue out of this epistle doth not otherwise reporte the same Pag. 544. in 2. parte Clauis Script then they are to be founde in the authour But you thought you would passe him an ase in falsehood although he be his craftes master therein How fowly you haue ouershote your selfe in falsifying sentences and misreporting authour for authour and booke for booke that which hath hitherto ben declared maie be sufficient instruction to any man that is willing and desirous to vnderstande the truthe and not content to be lead into wilful blindnes and errour Howbeit to make the matter a litle more sensible and plainer and also to geue you occasion the better to know your folie and not to exalte your selfe ouermuch with pride vaine glorie and presumption of I can not tel what extraordinarie knowledge as you seeme to doo I wil set before your eyes such a glasse of your grosse
ouersight ignorance and blindnes to looke in as you may and peraduenture wil be ashamed thereof if you be not altogether past shame already Many times either to hide your ignorance or to weary the searcher or to couer your falsehood you bring vs in such general quotations without number of Booke or Chapter as a man shal be litle the nearer For examples whereof Pag. 15. 158. 265. August Pag. 51 August de Ciuitate Dei Pag. 50. 267. Cyprianus Pag. 37. Eusebius Pag. 29. Theodorit in Histor Ecclesiast Pa. 11. Theodorit de curand Graec. affect Pag. 482. 532. Baldus pa. 486. Eckius Pag. 564. Hieronymus 629. Fortalitium fidei Itē 401. 313. Antoninus 498. Liriensis Episcopus 447. Eusebius Emissenus Pag. 13. You referre vs to a Councel of Carthage as you remember you can not tel whiche In al these and such like places a man hath occasion iustly to suspect your couert dealing that either the place maketh nothing for your purpose if it were considered or that there be no such wordes there at al or at the least that you doo not speake of certain knowledge but by some ghesse or vpon an other mannes reporte But where you are so bold as to quote vnto vs the Chapters there it were to be supposed that you shoulde speake ex speciali scientia of your precise knowledge and so muche the more as you ofte inculcate one place And yet for al that it is to be proued that euen in suche places you doo but set a great looke on the matter to outface your readers and gainesaiers withal Example most notable hereof is to be taken of your quotations of one Heruaeus de Potestate Papae a greate and familiar Doctour with you About 37. times and euery where sauing in two places that is to wit Pag. 331. 608. you haue quoted vnto vs precisely the Chapter and yet he hath not diuided his booke into any Chapters at al. Therefore by like you had a good sight that could so often see so many and distincte Chapters where there be none Yea whiche is more that you could recite so many sentences out of him and some of them not without lothsomnesse oftentimes repeated and yet neuer a one of them to be founde in such forme of wordes in al the booke This maie seme a very strange matter vnto them who tooke you to be the chiefe Doctour and the most precious Iewel of al our Ministers of this English Congregation And therefore they wil surmise that I speake this in a dreame of you But that they maie knowe I speake not of reporte but by trial and experience I wil here set out before the Readers eyes the Pages where Heruaeus is quoted in the margent of your booke that if he can come by the booke whiche is in deede of an olde printe he maie by conference proue whether I haue said herein otherwise then truthe Al these here following are not in Heruaeus but in one Iohannes de Parisijs Pagina 119. Cap. 13. 162. 12. 399. 13. 400. 12. 13. 401. 19. 405. 13. 13. 528. 16. 532. 16. 533. 20. 536. 11. 12. 13. it should be 14. Pagina 537. Cap. 19. 538. 19. 544. 12. it should be 13. 607. 14. 615. 18. 651. 18. 652. 8. 653. 18. 660. 18. 692. 17. 694. 13. 696. 18. 15. Now is neuer a one of al these places in Heruaeus but in Ioannes de Parisiis Whom M. Iewel maketh a distinct Authour from the other and yet doth he recite out of the selfe same booke of his diuers sentences and referreth them vnto him as it maie appeare Pagina 53. Cap. 3. 102. 3. 467. 3. 535. 5. 649. 5. 652. 5. A Note of certaine places of the texte of my Confutation leafte out by M. Iewel in his Defence GOod Reader I haue here set before thee a briefe Note or Table of certaine places of purpose and guilefully leafte out by M. Iewel in his recital of the texte of my Confutation printed in the booke of his Defence whiche places in making this Detection I had occasion to expresse By the same thou maist see and as in a fewe haue a taste for to note al it woulde amounte to a iuste volume how he deceiueth thee in the reste bearing the countenance of one that hath answered the substance of the whole Confutation For so much he telleth thee him selfe with these wordes To ansvver M. Hardinge to euery parcel of his Booke being so long it vvould be tedious M. Ievvel in the beginning of his De fence Pag. 2. VVherefore leauing many his impertinent speaches and vnnecessarie and vvaste vvordes I vvil touche onely so muche thereof as shal beare some shevve of substance and maie any vvaie seeme vvorthy to be ansvvered How wel and truely M. Iewel hath kepte this promise and how at the first greeting and entrie of his Booke he begileth thee by these fewe places here noted and in this Detection at large set forth thou shalt see and perceiue For trial therefore of his truthe haue recourse vnto the leaues of this Booke here quoted and looke what places of the Texte of my Confutation there recited be comprehended within two starres as I doo also there in the Margent warne thee assure thy selfe that al those and an infinite number of suche other places are by M. Iewel in this his Defence quite leafte out as if no such thing had ben written And then whether such places by him so leafte out be but impertinent speaches and vnnecessarie and waste wordes or right worthy to be answered I leaue it to thine owne indifferent iudgement to discerne Verely if it maie be lawful thus to deale in the handling of Controuersies it shal not seeme harde to confute the workes of any write◠be they neuer so learned and substancial But nowe to the Note wherein I direct thee to the Leaues and Pages of this my Detection in such order as by occasion such his false sleightes haue bene by me detected The first place fol. 3. b. line 27. vntil fol. 4. a. line 9. The ij fol. 21. b. line 31. vntil fol. 22. a. line 3. The iij. fol. 43. b. line 7. The iiij fol. 45. a line 6. The v. fol. 121. b. line 28. The vj. fol. 129. a. line 16. The vij fol. 129. b. line 8. The viij fol. 193. a. line 22. The ix fol. 193. b. line 4. The x. Ibidem line last The xj fol. 194. a. line 29. The xij fol. eodem b. line 10. The xiij and xiiij fol. 195. a line 7. and line 28. The xv fol. eodem b. line 17. The xvj fol. 196. a. line 11. The xvij fol. eodem b. line 13. The xviij fol. 197. a. line 15. The xix fol. eodem b. line 2. The xx fol. 198. a. line 2. The xxj fol. 230. a. line 24. The xxij fol. 278. b. line 4. The xxiij fol. eodē line 24. The xxiiij fol. 279. a. line 18. The xxv fol. 279. b. line 23. The xxvj fol. 280.