discharge your Iesuites of herisie and treason the wordes of scorpions and venemous spiders are no railing termes but apt to expresse their venemous and poisonous practises for they are vsed in scripture to describe the like mischeuous workes as Apocal. 9. Esa. 59. 5. The rest of his speaches haue either the same or the like phrases iustified in the scriptures against corrupters of Religion and enimies of publike peace as we shewe your Iesuites to be for the former and their practises to the confusion of some of them haue beene discouered for the latter With Master Hanmers termes I will not meddle who is to answer for him-selfe when you haue confuted his arguments or els when he shall see it conuenient Doctor Fulke the next man whom you condemne to be of a ruffianlike spirit because he saith shew me Allin if thou canst for thy guttes as though you raile not more of him in your ruffianlike terme then he in speaking of Allens guttes whatsoeuer the cause or affection were hath answered alreadie in his own behalfe in such sort as more shame redowndeth to you that haue gathered together his vehement and sharpe speaches vttered in manie bookes and to those whome you complaine by him to be abused while he giueth a reason of his speaches then all the eloquence you haue wil be able to wipe away in a larger treatise then your defense of the Censure as yet appeareth to be Confut of Topish quarrelles page 20. and so forth in 16. or 17 pages If it were no more but your marginall note Docter Fulkes talent in railing wherein you abuse an holie phrase of scripture like an Italian Atheist to mooue Sardonicall laughter it were much more able to conuince you of a ruffianlike spirit then anie terme that D. Fulke vseth seeing such vnreligious allusions vnto the termes and matters of holie scripture cannot be defended in anie man cause or manner The like you haue of Primitias spiritus and Luthers lying with a Nunne in the Lord all which argue a prophane spirite and a licentious intemperate and almoste blasphemous tongue or penne in anie that vse them or the like When you haue almoste done with Doctor Fulke you take vpon you to shew the like rayling in the Masters as you terme them that you haue done in the schollers and beginning with Iohn Caluin you saie that his ordinarie terme especially against Bishoppes and such like as are his superiours is to call them Nebulones knaues which beside the foull gall whence it proceedeth is vnseemelie For this you neither note nor quote anie one place where he vseth that terme in such sort as either his gall might thereby be espied or the same signfying light persons might not fitlie be applied vnto them vpon whome he bestowed the terme As for your popish Bishoppes are not his superiours but for the most part deserue sharper termes then Nebulones euen such as were fitte for Annas Caiphas Ananias and the rest of that race which were as great prelates as they Hauing nothing more against Caluin you passe ouer to Luther who in his booke against King Henrie the eight of England ministreth vnto you larger matter to triumph against him where in it maie be doubted whether you had greater pleasure in discouering of Lu ther 's intemper at stile then in displaying those odious and long since buried reproches against that noble Prince so great an enimie to your Romish Antichrist which as they were vnseemelie in respect of either of their persons him that did write the Prince against whom he did write so they were afterward misliked of Luther himselfe who in as great humilitie as before he did write in disdaine craued pardon at his handes not for the matter substance of his booke but for his vnreuerent handling of the same against a King of so great nobility of so good expectation the cause that mooued him to such destemper was for that he supposed that the booke was not endited by the King him selfe but by some enimie of his to procure his dishonour as he writeth in the same booke Crederes ab insigni hoste regis hunc librum editum in perpetuam regis ignominiam You would thinke that his booke was set forth by some notable enimie of the Kinges to the perpetuall shame of the King And in his Epistle of submission he declareth that he suspected cardinall Wolsey to be the author thereof which made him the bolder to write as he did against it And in the storie of Sir Thomas Moores life written by his sonne in lawe Master Roper which I haue seene it appeareth that Kinge Henrie tooke great displeasure against Sir Thomas Moore for the edition of that booke by which he receiued more dishonour then by anie thing in all his life Luther therfore writing against him that did abuse the name of the Kinge in defence of an euill cause thought he was not bound to spare him because of the Kinges title but that he might so much the rather be free to inueigh against him But this to saie the trueth might be some part of an excuse though not a sufficient defense of his doing neuerthelesse it followeth not here of that he could not be an elect vessell of God or that he had no part of Gods spirit or that he was herein worsse then anie russian or rakehell as our seuere Censurer saith without either malice or railing spirit I warrant you For Gods elect children they that haue a great part of his spirit do sometimes fal into far greater crimes then this and yet by his grace are brought to repentance as Luther was for this vntemperat stile and thereof made open confession in his epistle of submission againe he erred by immoderat zeale yet in defense of the truth which is not the cause that mooueth ruffians and rakehelles to rage Wherefore it is well with Luther that hath alreadie answered the matter before a more wise and merciful iudge and standeth not at the curtesie of our solemne Censurer But it is more to your purpose that you bring in Luther inueighing against the Caluinistes where he had not by our owne confession a good cause the Caluinistes againe as bitter against him a tast whereof though you refer the matter to another place you wil needes giue vs here by citing of one place in stead of all the rest and that is of the Church of Tygurine against Luther Tygur 〈◊〉 3. contra supermam Lutherij confessionem whole wordes you promise to rehearse out of what edition I cannot tell for the edition of Tigure by Froshere 1545. of Gwalters translation reporteth their wordes somewhat otherwise and therefore I thinke in this place as in diuers other you are but a broaker of other mens ware to put forth that you neuer sawe your selfe but gather out of some other mans notebooke which reported not al thinges either with such diligence or faithfullnes as had beene requisite to be found in
FAVLTES ESCAPED IN THE first Booke Pag. 2. lin 37. Wylie 15. 11. vainelie 62. 21. renforce 64. 35. come 65. 8. the. 82. 8. runneth forth almost into ouer great 90. in the marg ad illumin 91. 4. soone 103. 28. immortall 111. 16. litterallie 118. 13. textes 33. as expreslie 124. 33. left 126. 13. one of other 130. 24. Spanianum 156. 32. without confusion 169. 26. brandes 177. 29. which with 184. 15. learned 186. 5. contra 206. 37. put out that 212. 8. hic 29. fiat hoc 215. 22. 〈◊〉 228. 1. is 237. 28. some 239. 17. haue 240. 30. a thought yet raueth 256. 8. dare not 274. 21. greatest fault 279. 31. Pacianus 280. 10. quotations 282 5. remaineth 299. read the 9. line before the 8. 309. 22 Ioh. 1. 321. 18. He faith 324. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 333. 8. de gen ad Lit. 336. 17. de Sp. S. 30. it is 36. not whatsoeuer 337. 36. suppose 351. 3. euer 352. in the marg cont 3. in margine 353. 37. is the. FAVLTES ESCAPED IN THE second booke Pa. 4. l. 2. to 7. 19. disorder 22. 9. euer 41. 12. to God 13. put out to 44. 33. to the. 49. 34. in the marg put out Allen. 37. where 103. 16. For. 114 8. Matthie 115. 1. thisplace 128. 23. the. 138. 2. expound 158. 6. grounded 173. 30. at hand 177. 24. strong ones 184. 2. by himselfe or by his saints and therefore remission ofsinnes by himselfe 186. 15. saide 201. 35. of mutuall offence 212. 5. but from 222. 1. as 〈◊〉 35. eordes 251. 36 Christes 311. 2. demurre 314. 3. that 〈◊〉 ters 17. Monkes 324. 28. delegaui 325. 33. put out 〈◊〉 334. 14. both 341. 1. halfe 35. deemed 342. 26. no 〈◊〉 345. 13. consortatiues 346. 33. false 350. 29. to the. 366. 27. 〈◊〉 30. I. 369 28. prostant 398. 15. mony 483. 30. put out not 521. 34 the marg 1. Ioh. 5. 529 2. and figures In the answere to Prarine p. put out the note in the marg TO THE READER AGainst this Popish and trayterous defense of the proude Censures giuen vpon Master Charkes and M. Hanmers bookes there hath bene alreadie set forth an answere conteining a maintenaunce of the creditte of those excellent Ministers and Elders of Gods Church which this malitious slaunderer hath sought to deface for staie of the simple reader till Master Charkes booke come forth There hath also bene printed and set forth by Doctor Fulke a briefe confutation of sundrie cauills and quarrel vttered by diuerse Papists against his writinges and speciallie by this Censurer in this his booke of defense whereby some parte of his vnhonest dealing is displayed to the discredite of this defender and to the shame of all Papists Neuerthelesse vnderstanding that Master Charke is not minded 〈◊〉 set forth his answere although he haue it 〈◊〉 written before this defender hath 〈◊〉 his wholl booke as he promiseth I haue thought it not amisse to write a shorte treatis for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the matters of doctrine especially which are in controuersie betweene M. Charke and the Censurer either omitting or but breiflie touching the points handled more at large in the two 〈◊〉 books Neither do I thinke M. Charkes staying to be misliked for diuerse causes First to auoyd confusion which might ensue if the defender should replic vpon his answere to the first parte before the confutation of the second parte were finished published Secondlie to auoyd misunderstanding for that diuerse pointes touched in the first parte may be more at large and otherwise handled in the latter parte vpon vew whereof Master Charke would change his answere And last of all lest replying and reioyning vpon the first parte might be occasion that the latter parte should neuer be handled For which reasons and some other perhaps better knowne vnto him-selfe indifferent readers may gather that it is expedient for him to staie vntill he see the wholl charge of the aduersarie and then more orderly and seasonablie he may publish his answere altogeather But now to the purpose taken inhande Three tall fellowes step forth vpon this bulwarke of defense the Corrector of the printe the setter forth of the booke and the graunde Captaine defender himselfe The Corrector commeth forth with his parte to stoppe a gappe or emptie place of a page with the reall 〈◊〉 of a nowne Heretike and that presuming as he 〈◊〉 without the authors knowledge to wise a man belike to be made priuie of such gramaticall trifles But whereas he weeneth that by reading his authors treatise a man shall see the moste points verified in Master Charke and his companions he is fouly beguiled For there is no wise man but seeth all the pointes of his newlie deuised declension throughly verified in his author and his Complices who hath shewed himselfe to be not in one but in all cases a proude maleperte Lyar and an obstinate seditious Atheist 〈◊〉 hereunto an impudent heretike and a malitious traytor And if any man be so simple that he cannot yet perfectlie be holde all these pointes in his owne treatise yet in the answeres and confutations thereof he that will not acknowledge them to be verified in him is like to proue a nowne of the same declension with him Thus the Owlie Corrector hauing shotte his bolte out of the bulwarke which by euil happe of a contrarie winde is caried backe against him selfe and his owne freinds retireth into a corner and doth no more appeare sauing that some notes of his negligence here and there bewraying him do declare that this was not the first time that he was ouerseene in his life that he should haue done his Master better seruise if he had imploied the time he spent in deuising this grammatication in being occupied more diligentlie about his office of Correction The setter forth of this booke hath the next place who writing an epistle to Master Charke minister as he termeth him and as he is indeede of the Church of god in England vnder colour of expostulation of some particuler matters concerning the person of M. Charke taketh occasion to be a setter forth not onelie of a seditious slaunderous booke against the Church but also of moste spitefull accusations against the prince and Magistrates of the realme a sin the particuler vew of this epistle shall moste manifestlie appeare First therefore he excuseth the long delaie of setting forth this defense of the Censure which hath beene deferred more moneths then the Censure was daies in writing vpon such cause as is easie to iudge and speciallie to Master Charke which for the moste parte is priuie to the same The meaning is that the author is so quicke a dispatcher of his matters partely by meanes of the weakenes of our cause partelie by singuler dexteritie of his owne wit and learning that hauing finished his Censure in eight or nine daies space at the moste he coulde also in like proportionable time haue
caepta 〈◊〉 quidam enim altiùs repetentes à beato Helia Iohanne sumpsere principium quorum Helias plus nobis videtur fuisse quà m Monachus Iohannes antè Prophetare caepisse quà m natus est alij autem in quam opinionem vulgus omne consentit asserunt Antonium huius propositi fuisse caput quod ex parte verum est It hath beene often douted among many by which of Monkes especiallie the wildernes began to be inhabited for some fetching the matter somewhat high haue taken the beginning of blesseá Elias and Ihon of which two Elias seemeth to vs to haue beene more then a Monke and Iohn to haue prophecied before he was borne but other into which opinion all the common sorte consenteth affirme that Antonie was the heade or cheefe of this purpose which is partlie true By these wordes it is euident that Saint Ierome counteth Helias and Ihon Baptist to be of a higher calling then that they could be called Monkes or patterns of Monasticall life ascribing the beginning of them rather to Paul and Antonie then to Helias and Iohn Baptist although they both for some time did lead an austere life in the wildernes the same doth your next author Cassianus Collat 18. Cap. 6. neither doth he once call Iohn Baptist a Monke or patterne of monasticall life but onelie sheweth that the Anachorites desiring to encounter openlie with the deuill feared not to pearse into the vast solitarie places of the wildernes ad imitationem scilicet Iohannis Baptistae to the imitation of Iohn Baptist who ledd his life in the wilderens so doe not your Popifh Monkes but lie in their warme nests in the cloysters What Sozomenus saith I haue shewed a little before Isodorus agreeth with Saint Ierome and Cassianus that the Anachorites which liue alone doe follow Elias and Iohn Baptist where as the Coenobites which liue in companies in that point more like your Monks do follow the Apostles As for Theoph. in c. 1. Lu. which you note next hath nothing sounding towards the name of monkor monastical life except you meane where he saith that Iohn liued in the wildernes as Elias did The last author you quote Nicephorus Hist. li. 8. c. 39. hath nothing more then the verie words of Sozomene that some men said that Elias was the beginner of that solitarie life of Christians some that Iohn Baptist. And among all your authors there is not one that saieth Iohn Baptist was a Monke of the newe Testament or a patern of such monasticall life as you defend that there should be so great consent there of that matter where of you bragge so much But names and quotations of Doctors are sufficient either for you that by all likeliehood neuer turned the bookes your selfe or for your sottish schollers that accept all your wordes without examination and triall After this followeth a vaine strife of words cōcerning the signification of this terme sect which of M. Charke is taken for a schisme as it is manifest by the example he bringeth of the 1. Cor. 1. The Censurer sometime taketh it in good part and sometime in euill sometime he maketh it equall with the terme of heresie sometime more particulare which contention seeing it is vnprofitable for the readers I do willinglie omit referring them that list to vnderstand ofit further to the comparison ofboth their writings where they shall finde that Master Charke in effect preuenteth all his cauillations by saying that the names of heresie and sect areoften times confounded which to prooue the Censurer busieth him-selfe in vaine It is somewhat materiall that he saith the Corinthians erred in a point of faith esteeming the vertue or power of Baptisme not to depend onelie of Christ but of the dignitie of the Baptizer And surelie there muste be some opinion touching faith where there is a schisme in the Church though there be not a dissent in the necessarie articles of faith but a schisme or sect may be where neither the generall doctrine nor the societie of the Church is forsaken as inthe example 1. Cor. 1. which is contrarie to the descriptionof the censure Sectaries are such as cut themselues of in opinion of religion from the general body of the Catholike Church for so did not the Corinth 1. Cor. 1. howsoeeur they had an opinion of some excellencie in the minister of Baptisme nor the 1. Cor. 11. 18. where Saint Paul likewise chargeth them with schismes when they came together to celebrate the communion which text being likewise quoted by M. Chark is cleane omittedby the defender But now you would cleare your sectes of Monkes and Fryers from the example of the Corinthian schismatikes by a fond similitude supposing our ministers should saie in a contrarie sense of libertie I will luie vnmaried after the order of my Lord of Canterburie I will bem aried after the platforme of my Lord of London I will haue two wiues together after the fashion of Master Archdeacon of Salisburie I will haue a wife and a wench after the custome of some other Archdeacon and preahcer Concerning your example if any Archdeacons be of such fashion as you describe them I would they had such punishment as to such fashions belongeth and if you be hable lawfullie to conuince them thereof I doubt not but they shal As for the other 2. of being maried vnmaried be matters in deede of Christian libertie that euerie minister may choose that which he findeth to be most expedient for him but if any minister should glorie of his continent life out of mariage by hauing my Lorde of Canterhurie for his patterne or of his chaste life in mariage by following my Lorde of Londons platforme he might iustlie be noted for a schismatike as Saint Paull doth the Corinthians when they saide I am of Paul I of Apollo I of Cephas and I of Christ. For the platforme order patterne or example of men in these cases must not be their warrant but the worde of God which text is plaine that in profession of Religion we may not be called by the names of men no nor by the name of Christ or Iesus therebie to make a diuision or seperation of our selues in excellencie from other to whome Iesus Christ is common as well as to our selues For euerie one of your sects termed of Benedict Augustine Frauncis Dominike Iesus c. although in the generall doctrine of Poperie they al agree yet haue they their seuerall opinions each one of the excellencie of thier orders and patrons which maketh a schisme and often times hath broken forth into great brawling and open contention It is too manifest that the Monkes commonlie hated the Fryars the Dominicans and Franciscans were at deadlie feede the not obseruants enuied the obseruants and they despised the children of their owne father Frauncis as bastardes in comparison of them selues and now the Iesuites are hated and inuicd of all other sects of Monkes and especiallie of Fryars whome they bring
accomplished his defense if he had not by the cause pretended beene stayed or interrupted And here the author is much beholding to the setter forth that doth so cunninglie commende his facultie in expedition of such writings which in a Papist must needes be an argument of great and wonderfull promptnes both of wit learning though in a protestant it be gyrded at by the author him-selfe with a scorneful reproche of rashnes and ignorance But what is the cause trowe ye that hath stopped the force of these flowing streames of the authors eloquent style that in so many monethes he hath not fullfilled that course which without impediment he had beene able to haue dispatched almost in as fewe daies Euerie one sayth he may imagine how difficult a thing it is in England for a catholike man to write any booke where neyther libertie nor rest nor librarie nor conference nor being is permitted But I praie you sir if I may be so bolde to aske you what greater libertie rest lybrarie conference or being had your Catholike author in contriuing his Censure which he wanted in writing his defense Or rather what cause had he to complaine of the difficultie of the tymes which with such facultie in so shorte a tyme could performe so greate and waightie a peece of worke as by his owne iudgement who you know is nothing partial in his owne cause deserued to be called by the honorable name of a Censure vnles perhaps you thinke that either the Prince her Councell or the Cleargie of the realme should haue inuited him to write against the religion of God and the state of the realme with promis of libertie rest librarie and all other thinges the lacke whereof you pretend to haue hindred him And yet whatsoeuer you say in generall you confesse in particuler that all difficulties notwithstanding the author had soone after M. Charkes replie to his Censure in greate parte dispatched his defense readie for the printe but that by misaduenture your seditious printe was discouered and taken with many things printed or in printing concerning your defense of trueth and equitie against his falshoode and violent oppressions That you speake against M. Charkes falshoode it is lawful for you to renew if you can discouer any committed by him As for his violent oppressions being a man of noe power or authority out of the Church al may know how vainly you charge him or rather how lewdlie in speaking to him you speake of the lawful proceedings of the Prince and all her magistrates against Popish traytors terming them no bettet then violent oppressions when God knoweth you haue but in a few yet tasted of most iust condemnations and executions Oflike stomach and style it is that you say the same print was so long sought and much feared by him By like he thought that your printe being taken you had noe meane to publish your authors defense against him as though you haue not printers enow in places beyonde the sea How daungerous an vnknowne printe within the lande may be to the state if it be abused by seditious persons no man of meane vnderstanding can be ignorant and therefore meruell not if the magistrates haue beene carefull to search for it and diligentlie to suppresse it being founde But of this disturbance as you tell vs had like to haue come a greate losse for the author had almost giuen ouer his enterprise of defense not onely vpon these difficulties alleadged but also because Master Charkes replie did seeme sufficientlie to answere it selfe A pitifull case but how did the replie answere it selfe so sufficientlie He telleth vs it was so obscure in many places as moste men without the Censure might not vnderstande it Admit it were so is the obscuritie of a replie a sufficient answere to it selfe but why might not he that could not vnderstande it haue recourse to the Censure whereunto his replie had relation Then he answereth for a second reason It was so weake otherwise as it needed litle confutation of others This will best appeare by the authors doughtie defense when both are compared and examined together A third reason Campian the subiect of the Censure being fallen into Master Charkes handes it was looked for that according to reason and all his promisses he should be disputed withall openlie publikelie and freelie and so the matter without writing dispatched No man is so simple but he may well perceiue that while the wordes are directed to Master Charke they are ment against the Prince and state For who can trulie say that Master Charke had Campian in his handes or that he had made promis of open publike and free disputation whoe knew full well that he was not able to performe such promis if Campian had beene taken or that any man of our profession made any one such promis what meaneth then our setter forth by these his wordes and all your owne promises but thorough fayning of many promises to slaunder vs of many breaches of faith and much falshoode This is in Poperie and Knauerie a common practize to charge men with a promisse where none was that they maie ouercome modestie with impudencie or at left to make her blush beeing vniustlie accused of vnfaithfulnes But you will saie it was according to reason that Campian should haue beene so disputed withall if there had beene no promise at all Great reason forsooth that a well knowne vaine light runnagate person challengeing all the graue wise and learned of the land to disputation should so greatlie be regarded that his chalenge should be taken Nay that an arrant traytor furnished with faculties from the Pope the Queenes open enemie whose banner of defiance at the same time was spread within her Maiesties dominions should be admitted vnder colour of an open disputation to stir vp the vnconstant people to tumult and sedition as though the religion so long by lawe established were now brought into doubte and disceptation Finallie it was small reason in wise mens iudgement that such a lustie Champion as did first cast his gloue of defiance out of a secret corner after he hath beene long sought for is at length drawne out of the bench holl shoulde be set on the open stage to answere his challenge against al commers with no smal glory of his foole hardy attempt though he loose the daie and be vanquished in the cause Neuer the lesse it pleased them that had authoritie partelie to represse the insolencie of the proud peeuish challenger and his foolish fautors that made no small accounte of such a glorious Thraso pattelie to satisfie the weake mindes of such as might surmize of his bragges otherwise then they deserued there was a conference or disputation graunted wherin although Campians learning was well knowne before to all them that knew his bringing vp and studies yet was it then throughlie discouered to many others which conceiued better of him before then at that time shewed manefestlie to be in him For
fastidia detergeret Nihil enim fere de illis obscuritatibus eruitur quod non planissimè dictum alibi reperiatur The holie ghost hath magnifically and wholsomlie so tempered the holy scriptures that with euident places he might satisfie hunger and with more darke places might wipe awaie disdainfulnes For nothing almoste is found out of those obscurities which is not found els where most plainlie vttered It were no hard matter to heape vp manie testimonies of the auncient fathers to this purpose but that the va nitie of this answerer appeereth sufficientlie in all our bookes written against the papists in which not onely by the manifest places of the scriptures but also by most euident testimonies of the doctors of the church we confute them in the most and greatest matters of controuersie that ate betweene vs. But what saith our gallant answerer that the councels fathers and anciters of theChurch haue from time to timedeclared the true sense of the scriptures vnto vs hath none of these at any time erred in expounding the scriptures may we safely beleeue them whatsoeuer they say He wil I warrant you deny it except the Pope of Rome do alow their interpretations And therfore this flying from the only scriptures to the interpretation of Coun cels fathers ancetors of the Church is nothing els but an impudent shift to reserue vnto the Pope liberty authority to make what meaning of scripture they please thereby to giue colour to euery fansie they list to father it vpon the authority of the holie scriptures The third cause he affirmeth to be that by chalenging of onely scripture they maie deliuer themselues from all ordinan ces or doctrines left vnto vs by the first pillers of Christs Church though not expressely set down in the scripture c. In deede to deliuer our selues from the burthen of mens traditions the ordinances or doctrines of men we affirme the holie scriptures to be hable and sufficient to make vs wise vnto saluation by faith in Iesus Christ as the Apostles and principall pillers of the Church haue taught vs who haue left no such ordinances or doctrines but they be either expressely set down in the holy scriptures or by plaine and necessarie collection to be gathered out of the same For how will our aduersaries prooue that anie thing is receaued from the Apostles which hath not testimonie out of the writings of the Apostles who can be a sufficient witnes of such de liuerie seeing manie things were of olde referred to the Apostles tradition which euen our aduersaries do not admit to be Apostolical seeing the most auncient and immediate successors of the Apostles as Polyearpus Anicetus can not agree about a ceremony receaued from the Apostles namelie the celebration of Easter what certentie can there be of anie other ordinances or doctines fathered vpon the Apostles without witnes of their writings yea and some times directlie contrarie and repugnant to their writings But hereof saith our aduersarie they assume authoritie of allowing or not allowing whatsoeuer liketh or serueth their turnes for the time and hereof he bringeth example First of the number of sacraments whereof some protestants haue written diuerslie because the name of sacrament is diuerslie taken sometimes largelie for euerie holie signe sometimes strictlie for such holie signes onely as being instituted of God are seales of the dispensation of his generall grace in the new teftament perteining to euerie member of the Church somtimes for al holy mysteries or secrets c. But what doth it serue anie protestants turne whether there be more or fewer signes in number that maie be called sacraments seeing all protestants agree about the things themselues that are set forth in the scriptures to be visible signes of grace inuisible and the name it selfe Sacrament in that sense we speake of when we saie there are 2. 3. 4. or 7. sacraments is not once vsed This diuersitie therefore is but of a terme and that not vsed in scripture therefore it ariseth not of anie interpretation or peruerse vnderstanding of the scripture as our answerer would haue it seeme to be But let vs heare his example Martin Luther saith he after he had denied all testimonie of man besides himselfe he beginneth thus about the number of sacraments Principiò neganda mihisunt septem sacramenta tantúm tria pro tempore ponenda First of all I must denie seauen sacraments and appoint three for the time Marie this time lasted not long for in the same place he saith that if he would speake according to the vse of onely scripture he hath but one sacrament for vs that is baptisme In this sentence how manie lies and slaunders be packed together First he saith Martin Luther denieth all testimonie of man which is false for he alloweth all testimonie of man that agreeth with the testimonie of God expressed in the scriptures and often citeth the testimonies of the auncient fathers for confirmation of the trueth which he taught indeede he alloweth man no authoritie to institute sacraments or to make articles of faith or lawes to binde the conscience of man and he would haue all mans testimonies to be examined and iudged according to the word of God but this is not to denie all testimonie of man but to distinguish true testimonies of man from false An other slaunder is where he saith that Luther in denying all mans testimonie excepteth him selfe which is altogether vntrue For he requireth none other credit to be giuen to his owne testimonie then he alloweth to the testimonie of other Neither doth he arrogate any authoritie to him selfe which he derogateth from other men And namelie in this booke of the captiuitie of Babilon he taketh not vpon him absolutelie to teach euerie point but so farr forth as he did for the present vnderstand of them promising after greater study more diligent inquirie to intreat of diuers of them more certenly euen in this verie place of the number of the sacraments he saith he will admit three onclie for the present time intending to be further a duised whether there be fewer or more to be entituled with that name Wherein our answerer offereth him the third iniurie in translating tria pro tempore ponenda I must appoint three for the time as though Luther had taken vpon him to appoint how manie sacraments the Church should haue or would challenge power to appoint more or Jesse at his pleasure where as his wordes if the answerer did not wilfullie corrupt them by false translation do import no such thing but onelie as farr as he did presentlie see there were no more but three of those that were commonlie called sacraments of the new testament which were rightlie to be called by that name The fourth slaunder is that Luther hath but one sacrament for vs which is Baptisme if he would speake according to the vse of onelie scripture yea this is a double slaunder for neither doth
Luther say that he hath but one sacrament for vs in that mea ning of the word sacrament in which he is charged by the cauiller to alter his opinion so shortlie but in an other meaning neither doth he saie that this one sacrament is haptisme in which I can but wonder at the impudency of this fellow that forgeth this last lie in his owne braine without all colour or shew of Luthers words as though Luther would allow no sacrament of the Church but Baptisme The wordes of Luther are these of the number of sacraments After he hath denied the number of seauen admitted for the present but three namely Baptisme penance the supper all which he affirmeth by the court of Rome to be brought into miserable captiuitie and the Church spoiled of all her libertie he addeth Quanquam si vsu scripturae loqui velim non nisi'vnum sacramentum habeam tria signa sacrament alia de quo latiùs suo tempore Although if I would speake after the vse of scripture I haue but one sacrament and three sacramentall signes whereof more at large in due time This one sacrament whereof he speaketh is the holie mysterie or secret of our redemption or saluation by Iesus Christ of which the other that are commonlie called sacraments are holie and mysticall signes so that herein he changeth no opinion of the thing but onelie speaketh of the diuerse taking of the worde Well yet will our a duersarie replie he alloweth three sacraments so doth the confession of Auspurge Melancthon fowre and Caluine two and all this by onelie scripture I haue shewed before sufficientlie that this question of the number of those signes that maie be called sacraments properlie or vnproperlie generallie or speciallie is not determinable by the holie scriptures because this name of sacrament is not found in them Those holie mysteries which by externall elements do testifie the inuisible grace of God workeing in vs vnto our saluation by regeneration and preseruation are plainlie set forth in the scripture Baptisme and the Lords supper without naming them sacraments which comprehend that whol mysterie of our saluation which Luther calleth the onelie sacrament by the vse of the scripture according to which explication of the word sacrament there are but two so rightlie properlie and speciallie to be termed according to the auncient vsage of the Latine Church and no more acknowledged by anie protestant of sound religion For Luther his enemies shall testifie which were appointed to gather out of his writings whatsoeuer they thought to be erroneous to be obiected against him this is their Censure Negat septem esse sacramenta sed tantùm tria pro tempore ponenda baptismum poenitentiam panem Immo non nisi vnum esse sacramentum tria figna sacramentalia Duo tamen in Ecclesia Dei esse sacramenta baptismum panem He denieth say the collectors that there are seauen sacraments but that three onelie for the time are to be admitted baptisme penance and the breade nay rather that there is but one sacrament and three sacramentall signes neuertheles there are two sacraments in the Church of God baptisme and the bread Luthers iudgement thus appearing by the confestion of his owne aduersaries that as baptisme and the supper are called sacraments there are no more that rightlie and properlie can beare that name The confession of Auspurge and Melancthon which as our answerer saith pretend and professe to follow Luther in all things can haue none other meaning in this matter of the number of the sacraments of the new testament And Melancthon expressely discoursing of the term sacrament sheweth how diuerslie it maie be taken to comprehend two three or fowre And in the last edition of his common places where he answereth the articles of the Bauaricall inquisition he holdeth but two properlie to be called sacraments as Luther before him in his Catechisme the greater and the lesser Wherefore this friuolous cauill is thus easilie discussed to the shame of the cauiller and to the attestation of our consent in the matter and substance of trueth The like brable of wordes he maketh of the title of heade of the Church which Caluine and the Magdeburgeans doe mislike and Caluine in King Henrie found to be Antichristian but Caluines folowers in England do finde by onelie scripure to be moste Christian. Where all the dissention is in the terme which being rightlie vnderstood as by law it hath bene confirmed vnto the Prince conteineth no other authoritie then Caluine and all other professors of the Gospell do acknowledge to pertaine vnto the Christian magistrate and is prooued to be moste Christian not onelie by scripture but also by testimonie of the moste auncient and Catholike Fathers of the Church as it were easie to shew but that it is here no place to decide these controuersies The title of supreme head of the Church graunted to King Henrie Caluine saieth was blaspheomus not as it was vnderstoode of the godlie at that time but as it was applied by Stephen Gardiner who in a conference at Ratisbone cared not much for the testimonies of the scripture but said it was in the Kings power to abrogate decrees and to institute new ceremonies as to appoint daies of fasting abstinence from flesh c. And not staying there he proceeded further to affirme that it was lawfull for the King to forbid mariage vnto Priests to forbid the laie people to drinke of the cup in the Lords supper and generallie to commaund or for bid in his kingdome what he would because he had soueraigne authoritie This authoritie or the title in this sense neither our princes do accept neither doth anie godlie man allow vnto them A third example he bringeth of burning of heretikes wherein he saith The Protestants a greate while by onelie scripture defended against the Catholikes that no heretikes might be burned or put to death whereof large bookes are written on both partes Now they haue found by euident scripture that they maie be burned As though there were not controuersies enow betweene the Papists and the Protestants this man will needes make more as this of putting blasphemous heretikes to death which was neuer denied the scripture of stoning blasphemers false Prophets and Idolaters being so manifest A. nabaptists indeede and such like sectaries are lothe that heretikes should be punished with death But there hath bone long bookes saith he written thereof on both partes If you aske him by whome he biddeth you in the margent looke Eckius in Encher and Luther contra Latom. de incendiariis Would you not thinke this follow had read these treatises for burning of heretikes pro contra whereunto he sendeth vs to iustifie his saying of large bookes written on both partes but in truth he either neuer saw the bookes or els he is the moste impudent forger that euer was heard of for Fckius in his litle booke called Encheridion loco 27. de hereticis Comburendis
heretikes did holde it But he rather doth offer manifest wrong to Doctor Fulke whovseth not to reason so looselie But rather concludeth that praier for the dead is an error because it was first inuented and practized by an heretike For all trueth hath an higher and more auncient spring then anie heretike or heresie But for so much as he hath answered this wholl obiection sufficientlie in his confutation of Popish quarrells I will send the reader thither where he shall finde that which maie satisfie him in this matter The last kinde of triall whereof he will speake at this time is to consider the manner of olde heretikes and to compare the same with ours And here he would haue the two former conditions obserued To wit that we consider such qualities onelie as were accounted hereticall in them and to examine them truelie in our selues The maners of heretikes is no sure way of trial for heretikes come often times in sheepes clothing pretending greater holinesse in conuersation then true Catholikes do But let vs see how he will prooue vs heretikes by this kinde oftriall For example saith he Saint Augustine doth note it as an heretcall propertie in the Donatistes to hate the sea of Rome and to call it the chaire of pesttlence Doth this agree to the Protestants or to vs as also defaming of the said sea for the euill pretended life of some particular men But here he breaketh his owne conditions For Petilian did not hate the sea of Rome as the sea of Antichrist For the Donatistes had their mock-Bishop at Rome also But he railed vpon all the chaires or sees of all Catholike Bishops and on the Bishops them selues that were not of his schisme and heresie and on the Apostolike chaire of Ierusalem as wel as on that of Rome Againe the Donatistes called the chaire of Rome the chaire of pestilence when it was the chaire of a Catholike Bishop we call it the chaire of pestilence now that it is the seat of the beast and great whore of Babilon Antichrist As Esay calleth Ierusalem an harlot which yet sometime had bene a faithful citie Wherefore the example of the Donatistes maketh nothing against vs. Another hereticall tricke Augustine noteth in them to persuade the people that the visibie Church had erred oppressed the true Church banishing her from the sight of the world Doe not our aduersaries saith the answerer saie the verie same No sir we haue nothing to doe with the Donatistes whome the Papists doe resemble more then we For in the place quoted there is no talke of the visible Church as you note in your example But this is the matter The Donastites affirmed that the Church was vtterlie lost in all other partes of the worlde and remained onely in Africa and in the part of Donatus So the Papists affirme that the Church was lost in all other partes of the world and remained onelie in Europe and in the part of the pope But we holde that the Catholike Church of Christ is dispersed ouer all the wholl world where the name of Christ is called vpon as Saint Augustine in the same place sheweth out of the scripture that it must be euen among them that either know not or els acknowledge not the Bishop of Romes authoritie That he chargeth vs for condemning all the Church for the faultes of some as the Donatists did we do not But rather the answerer faulteth herein with the Donatistes who vpon shamefull slaunders inuented to deface the godlie life of Luther Caluine Beza and such like laboureth to bring the trueth of their Doctrine in discredite as the Donatistes did by charging the Bishop of Carthage and others with treason against Christ in deliuering the bookes of his Gospell to the gentiles to be burned But yet moreouer he noteth against the same heretikes saith he for hating and condemning the life of Monkes as also for drawing nunnes out of their cloistures and ioyning them-selues with the same in pretended wedlock To reprooue the life of them that were innocent was a point of hereticall malice but to hate and condemne the life of detestable hypocrites and abhominable liuers as the moste of the Popish monkes and nunnes were and are is an argument of Godlie zeale an hypocrite and an holie man an heretike a Catholike maie doe the same actions oftentimes which differ not in the kinde of action but in the end purpose cause and manner of doeing But where findeth our answerer the Donatistes noted as he saith for hating and condemning the life of Monkes drawing Nunnes out of cloistures and ioyning them with themselues in pretended wedlock His quotation sendeth vs to the second booke against the epistle of Parmenian cap. 9. and Ep. 169. ad Eusebium But in neither of both places is this noted in them for they hated not the life of Monkes and Nunnes which had such of their owne as in the former place Saint Augustines words are Annon cum mach is particulam suam ponunt qui greges ebrios sanctimonialium suarum cum gregibus ebri is circumcellionum die noctuque permixtos vagari turpiter sinunt Do they not put their parte with adulterers which suffer the dronken flockes of their owne nunnes with the dronken flockes of the circumcellions daie and night mingled together to wander about filthelie This is all that he writeth there of monkes or nunnes which whether it do more neerelie touch the life of Popish nunnes lymiting friers then the conuersation of Protestants let the indifferent reader iudge In the epistle to Eusebius he complaineth of one 〈◊〉 which sometime had beene a Subdeacon of the Church of Sanianum who when he was forbidden to haue such accesse vnto the nunnes as was against the discipline and despised orderlie and wholsome precepts he was remooued from the cleargie and being him-selfe stirred vp against the discipline of God he remoued him selfe vnto them and was rebaptized Also two nunnes with their tenants out of the ground of the Catholike Christians whether the same man remooued or whether they followed him them selues yet were they rebaptized and were with the flockes of Circumcellions among the wandring flockes of women which therefore would haue no husbands lest they should haue discipline The proud fellow boasteth him-selfe in the madde banquets of detestable drunkennesse reioycing that a moste broad license of naughtie conuersation is opened vnto him from whence in the Catholike Church he was prohibited Here is neither the hatred and condemning of Monkes liues nor drawing of nunnes out of cloistures nor ioyning them in pretended wedlock noted in the Donatists But two light nunnes by a quondam clearke either conuaied by their consent or following him out of the ground of Christian Catholikes into the sect and groundes occupied by the Donatistes c. In the same epistle also he speaketh of the daughter of a certaine tenant of the Church that was caried awaie by the Donatists against her parents
your fault At the least it is your fault that in so straunge a report you haue not sette downe his wordes in latine if euer you sawe the preface your selfe As for the corrupt edition or often chaungeing of Luthers workes by him-selfe we haue not to do with it for whie might not Luther reforme his owne workes if ought in them were erronius or offensiue But it is a cauill that you adioyne of the confession of Auspurg whereunto the Germanes perhaps ascribe too much as Alasco writeth For though there be diuers editions thereof differing in wordes yet are they not contrarie in sense as appeareth by the harmonie of confessions latelie set forth at Gencua Now sir so much as we finde sounding toward your reporte I will sette downe that the reader maie iudge how vprightlie you do charge Luther with denying three of the foure Gospells Enarrat in epist. Petri argumentum Primùm omnium notandum c. First of all it is to be noted that all the Apostles do handle the same doctrine for which cause it is not well done that men do number but onelie foure Euangelistes and foure Gospells whereas whatsoeuer the Apostles haue left written is one Gospell For the Gospell signifieth nothing els but the preaching and publishing of the grace and mercie of God by our Lord Christ deserued and purchased to vs by his death and that thou maiest take it properlie it is not that which is conteined in bookes and is comprehended in letters but rather a vocall preaching and a liuing worde and voyce which soundeth into the wholl world and is so openly blowen out like a trumpet that it may be heard euerie where neither is it a booke which conteineth a law in which are many good doctrines as it hath beene commonlie taken heretofore for it doth not commaund vs to worke any thing where by we may become iust but it sheweth vnto vs the grace of God freelie and giuen without our meritte namelie that Christ hath beene our mediatour and hauing made satisfaction for our sinnes hath abolished them and made vs iust and saued by his workes Now whoesoeuer doth either preach or write these thinges he teacheth the true Gospell that which all the Apostles and peculiarlie Saint Paull and Saint Peter in their Epistles haue performed Therefore whatsoeuer is preached of Christ is one Gospell although one handle it after one manner an other man after another in diuerse manner of wordes do reason of it For the matter may be handled either in long or in short speach and be described either streightlie or largelie But seeing all perteineth to this end to teach Christ to be our sauiour and that we are made iust and saued by faith in him without our workes it is one word it is one Gospell as there is but one faith onelie and one baptisme in all the Church of Christ. Therefore thoureadest nothing writen by any of the Aposties which is not conteined in the monuments of the other Apostles But they which haue handled this point especiallie and with greater diligence that faith alone in Christ doth iustifie they are the best Euangelistes of all And in this respect you may more rightlie call the Epistles of Paul the Gospel then those which Matthew Marke and Luke haue written For these men describe not much beside the storie of the Acts and miracles of Christ. But the grace which is wrought vnto vs by Christ none doth sette forth more fullie or more rightlie then Saint Paul especiallie in the Epistle to the Romanes Now seeing there is much more moment in the word then in the factes and miracles of Christ and if we should want the one it were much better to lacke the Acts and history then the word and doctrine it followeth that shose bookes are to be had in highest price which handle the doctrine cheeflie and the wordes of our Lord Iesus Christ. Seeing that if there were no miracles of Christ extant and we were altogether ignorant of them the words were sufficient for vs without the which we could not so much as liue Therefore hereof it followeth that this Epistle of Saint Peter is to be accounted among the most excellent bookes of the new testament and is the true and pure Gospell as in which he doth nothing els but that which Paul and the other Euangelists do teaching sincere faith that Christ is giuen vnto vs which hauing taken away our offences doth saue vs c. This that he speaketh naming Matthew Marke and Luke say you signifieth some tooth against these three Gospells And what tooth I pray you because these three Gospells speake too much of good workes As though S. Paul in his Epistles and namelie in that to the Romanes doth not speake as much of good workes as all those three Gospells and Saint Peter though breeflie doe not speake as much in effect But in the preface in question you affirme that Luther hath these wordes The Epistles of Paul and Peter doe farre passe the Gospells of Matthew Marke and Luke which yet more prooueth Luthers euill opinion of those three Gospells I doubtnot albeit I neuer sawe the preface my selfe but Luther doth plainlie expresse in what respect the Epistles of Paul and Peter doe excell the histories of the Gospell written by Matthew Marke and Luke euen as he doth in this preface vnto his exposition of Saint Peter Because these Epistles are more occupied in setting forth the Grace of Christ and the fruit and benefit of his passion which no more prooueth his euill opinion of those three Gospells then when Christ preferreth Iohn the Baptist before al the Prophets it prooueth his euil opinion of all the Prophets or when he preferreth him that is least in the kingdome of heauen before Iohn Baptist it prooueth his euil opinion of Iohn Baptist. These brutish Papists thinke all men voide of common sense when they make such impudent conclusions As for your first charge that it is a false opinion and to be abolished that there are foure ghospels For the ghospell of S. Iohn is the onely faire true and principall ghospell when you can alledge the words of Luther in latine to iustifie your report and because we know not how to come to the sight of that preface will set downe two sentences that goe before them and as manie that followe them you shall receiue a reasonable answere But vntill you haue thus much performed I am perswaded you wil be as farre to seeke as Campian was for his reporre of Luther that he should call the Epistle of Saint Iames Stramineam strawie or like strawe And yet you take vppon you to shew the intollerable impudencie of Master Chark and his fellowes in the Tower against Master Campian for that he could not presentlie shew out of their bookes where these wordes are written by Luther especiallie of Master Whitaker whoe to the admiration and laughter of all other nations hath set forth in latine that Luther neuer
goeing into an other countrie be married to an other man Such counsell I gaue euen them when as yet the feare of Antichrist did holde me But now my minde were to giue farre other counsell and to such a husband which should with such craft beguile a woman I would laie hand on his lockes and pull him vehementlie as the prouerb is And the same I iudge of the woman although it be more rare then in men For it auaileth not anie thing to defraud the neighbour in such waightie causes as touch the bodie substance credit and happines it were needfull that he should be commaunded no tably to pay for such deceitfulnes Thus farre Luthers wordes truelie translated How say you now is not this sufficient to declare Luthers minde that he would reuoke his former counsell of priuie contract or flying awaie and compell the partie to an open diuorse But if anie man thinke this is not sufficient you shall heare what he writeth further concerning this matter while he rehearseth how many causes in Poperie are allowed for diuorces Decima quarta est quam supra recensui simaritus vxor impotentes euirati atque haec estynica inter octodecim illas causas que admatrimonium dissipandum sufficit quanquam ipsa 〈◊〉 obstringatur legibus priusquam tyranni earn permittant The fourteenth cause is that which I rehearsed before if the husband and wife be impotent and vnapt for generation and this is the onelie cause among these eighteene cause which is sufficient to dissolue the matrimonie although the same also be bound with many conditions before the tyrantes will permit it And yet againe speaking of those causes which he him-selfe allowed for diuorcement he saieth Quae nune personae segregari queant intersese videbimus Tres ergo causas noui ob quas diuortium fieri potest prima quae iam in superioribus recitataest cùm marious vxor impotentes ad rem fuerint membrorum aut naturae causa c. Now what persons may be separated one from an other we will see Three causes I knowe for which there may be diuorce The first when the husband and the wife are impotent and vnhable for the matter through cause of their members or nature howsoeuer that may be of which sufficient hath beene spoken Is not all this as plaine as can be that Lutherspeaketh of a diuorce necessarie to be had in that case As also in the same sermon afterward he teacheth that all diuorces are to be made by publike authoritie and with the knowledge and consent both of the common wealth of the Church or of one of them at the least Therefore that I maie rightlie vse your owne wordes against you which you doe vniustlie abuse against M. Charke Can this be excused from extreame impudencie and most willfull falsehoode against your owne conscience Defend this if you can with all the helpes and deuises of your fellowes er els let the reader by this one point of open dishonestie discouered iudge of the rest of your dealings and slaunderings of vs without all conscience both in your sermons and in your bookes c. Now whether he were a Papist or noe when he gaue this first counsell to such as heard shrift you moue the question and conclude against his plaine wordes as it seemeth that he was none Well let vs heare your reasons First you saie that many yeares after his conuersion he sloode in feare of the Pope and said nothing against conâ—ession How many yeares I beseech you For as soone as the Pope excommunicated him and condemned his writings to be burned at Rome he did open lie burne the Popes Canon law at Wittemberge which was Anno Dom. 1520. before that time he acknowledged the Popes authoritie and humblie submitted him-selfe to his Censure if either the grosse abuse of pardons might haue beene reformed or he him selfe conuinced by the scriptures to haue erred But from that time he neuer stoode in awe of the Pope as that open fact declared and there had passed but foure yeares before since he first began to inueigh against the abuse of pardons Your second reason is that it appeareth evidentlie by his wholl discourse in the place alledged where he saith plainlie beside other things that the Papists did seeke advantage against him for this opinion of his and to that ende did misreporte his wordes The wholl discouse I haue set downe that you may see how euidentlie it appeareth For that the Papists did slaunder him it is graunted but therebie it doth not euidentlie appeare that Luther at that time was no Papist For doth not one Papist slaunder another sometime was there not spight and malice betweene friers of other orders against them of that order that Luther was of especially the Dominicans which might cause them to peruert his words meaning As for other things beside and seeking aduantage against him for this opinion you sucked out of your fingers ends for in the wholl discourse there is no such matter Your third reason is that Papists teach no such doctrine but cleane contrarie as though some Papists haue not their priuate opinions which are not generallie receiued Neither is there any thing in substance but in circumstance contrary to the Papists doctrine in that counsell of Luthers For the Papists in the case of impotencie or frigiditie doe graunt a diuorce which Luther thought without triall of law might be made by priuate consent or in case of the impotent persons dislent by voluntarie departing of the other so that this reason disproueth him not to haue beene a Papist at that time any more then the rest The fourth reason is that putting such a thing in writing he should haue beene resisted presentlie if he had bene of your Church But that followeth not especiallie if the writing were not publike but priuate to a fewe gostlie fathers perhaps of his owne order and house and his aduise or opinion onelie not a matter obstinatelie defended And yet it appeareth that is was notwel brooked wheÌ„ his enimies had an inkeling of it Your last reason is that it appeareth by his owne wordes and the computation of time when he wrote this booke that he had left Papistrie a good while before In deede if you can conuince vs by his owne wordes that he had left Papistrie when he gaue this counsell you haue some aduantage against Master Charke but that is yet to come As for the computation of time in which he wrote this sermon of Matrimonie wil not helpe you to prooue that he was no Papist when he wrote the shrifte aduise For he speaketh of it as of matter that was verie olde olim he saieth long agoe For the booke was written much about the time of his mariage which was fiue yeare after his open renouncing of the Pope before which time he was a Papist though in some points he began to espie the grosse errors of Papistrie But as
though you had not done him iniury enough alreadie you adde that in an other place he sayeth that if a man haue ten wiues or more fledde from him vppon like causes he may take more and so may wiues doe the like in husbandes Whereupon Alberus one of your owne religion noteth that Iohannes Leidensis tooke many wiues and one Knipperdolling tooke thirteene for his parte so that this doctrine was not onelie taught but also practized vpon Luthers authority I wil here like wiseset down the whol discourse of Luther in the place by you quoted Exegesi ad c. 7. ep 1. ad Cor. that the world may see whether there be a sparke of honestie or shamefastnes in Papists that make such impudent reports which may so easilie be disprooued For that which Luther speaketh of ten wiues fled from him is in a farre other cause then the cause of impotencie and nothing in the world fauoureth the pluralitie of wiues practized by the Anapabtistes whatsoeuer Alberus or any other hath written of whome there is iust cause to dout what he bath written because you are so false almost in all your reports of writers of our side As for the Anapabtistes it is certaine they practised not their polygamie vpon Luthers authoritie whome they did vtterlie abhoore and in open printed books accounted him for a notable false teacher Againe it is not like that Alberus beeing a Lutherane would father so grosse a lie vpon Luthers authoritie But let the reader marke what Luther writeth vppon these wordes of the text but if the vnfaithful depart let him departe a brother or sister is not in bondage subiect to such Hoc loci Paulus saith he fidelem coniugatum sententiam pro illo ferendo liberat vbi infidelis compar discesserit aut concedere non vult vt Christum sequatur eique copiare facit iterum cum alio matrimonium contrahendi Quòd verò hic diuus Paulus de Ethnico compare dicit idem de falso Christiano intelligendum est vs si alter coniugum alterum ad impietatem adigeret necilli permitteret Christum vita imitari tum liber hic sit solutus vt quicum libuerit se despondeat Quòd si hoc Christiano iure non liceret cogeretur fidelis infidelem suam comparem sequi vel inuitus repugnante natura viribus suis caelebs permanere magno cum animae suae periculo Id ipsum D. Paulus his denegat inquiens Quòd si eiusmodi frater aut soror seruituti non sit obnoxius neque captus neque venundatus sit ac si dicat in aliis causis vbiconiuges vnâ commorantur vt in debita coniugij beneuolentia id genus similibus alter alteri obligatus est nec sui 〈◊〉 est In 〈◊〉 vbi alter alterum ad impiam vitam cogit vel ab altero discedit ibiverò non est captiuus neque 〈◊〉 isti adhaerere porrò Quòd si captiuus non tenetur liberatus manumissus 〈◊〉 despondere se alters potest velutisi matrimonio coniuncius sibimortem oppetiissit Quid si 〈◊〉 coniugium non opportunè cederes vt alter alterum maritus vxorem vel è contra gentium in morem adeoque impiè viuere cogeret vel si alter ab altero fugeret donec tertium 〈◊〉 quartum coniugium attingeretur dareturne viro toties 〈◊〉 ducere quoties alia eiusmodi vt iam dictum est esset vt decem velplures 〈◊〉 viuentes transfugas haberet Et rursum licebitne vxori dectm aut plures qui iam omnes 〈◊〉 esse maritos Responsio D. Paulo non possumus obstruere os neque cumillo 〈◊〉 eius doctrina quoties necessum fuerit vti volunt verba eius aperta sunt Fratrem aut sororem liberos esse a coniugij lege si alter discesserit vel cum hoc habitare non consenserit Neque vt semeltantùm stat hoc dicit sed liberum relinquit vt quottes res postularit vel pergat vel consistat Neminem enim incontinentiae discrimine couictum vult vt eo captus teneatur alienae temeritatis malitiae causa In this place Paul setteth at libertie the faithfull maried person geuing sentence one his side where the vnfaithfull match shall departe or will not graunt that the other may follow Christ and giueth him leaue to contracte matrimony with another And that Saint Paul here sayeth of a heathen yokefellow the same is to be vnderstood of a false Christian that if any of the maryed persons would compell this other to impietie and not permit to follow Christ in life then is the party free to match in maryage with whome he listeth Which thing if it were not lawfull by Christian right the faithfll man should be compelled to followe his vnfaithfullmate or els against his wil his nature and strength repugning to remaine vnmaried with great daunger of his soule But that Saint Paull here denieth saying in such a brother or a sister is not subiect to bondage nor captiue nor solde as a slaue as if he said in other causes where man and wife dwell together as in the due beneuolence of mariage and such like cases the one is bound to the other and is not at libertie But in such where the one compelleth the other to impietie or departeth awaie there the other is not captiue nor compelled to cleaue to this person anie longer And if he be not holden as a captiue he is set at libertie and made free he may betroth himselfe to an other as if the other party that was ioyned in matrimonie to him were dead But what if the second mariage fall not outrightly that the one would compell the other the husband the wife or contrariwise to liue after the manner of the Gentiles and that impiouslie or if the one fledde from the other vntill the third or forth mariage were come vnto should the husband haue license so often to mary a new wife as the other is such a one as we haue said alreadie so that he should haue tenne or more wiues 〈◊〉 awaie from him yet liuing And againe shall it be lawfull for the wife to haue tenne or more husbands which are all come awaie from hit The answer We cannot stoppe Saint Paules mouth nor wrestle against him they that will vse his doctrine his words are plaine that a brother or a sister are free from the lawe of wedlock if the one depart or do not consent to dwell with the other Neither doth he say that this may be done once onelie but leaueth it free that as often as the case shall require he may 〈◊〉 proceede or stay For he will haue none to be cast into the daunger of incontinencie that he should be holden in 〈◊〉 thereby through cause of the rashnes or malice of another By this long discourse of Luthers own words let the reasonable reader iudge what occasion the Anabaptistes might iustlie take to defend their beastlie keeping of
many women together vnder the cloake of mariage by his authority or what carnall liberty of mariage Luther graunteh otherwise then the Apostle alloweth in the case of the infidels departure Albert he put the case of the second third fourth tenth or more beinginfidelis or false Christians which is altogether vnlikely and almoste vnpossible to come to passe For he that is once ridde of an vnfaithfull match being himselfe a good Christian will not 〈◊〉 take a wife but of Christian Religion and if he be deceuid twise it were mōstrous that he should be deceiued in his third choise But if he should wilfullie and wittinglie match with so manie knowne heathen women it would breed another case then Luther speaketh of and he were worthie to be cut of from the congregation of Christians as one that sheweth him-selfe to be a dissembling hypocrite rather then a faithful Christian. The fift doctrine that you reported of Luther is that if the wife will not come les the maide come Which M. Chark hath answered sufficientlie to be spoken of a third cause of diuorce when the woman shall obstinatelle refuse hir husbandes companie But this you saie cannot be excused either by M. Hanmers shameles denial or by M. Charks impertinent interpretation For you saie that this was practised in Germanie to all kind of lasciuiousnes yea among the Ministers them selues as Sebastian Flaske sometime a Lutheran Preacher doth testifie Here is vpon the testimonie of a lewd baudie knaues confession of his owne filthines for which it is like that he was banished frō the Church and so becam a papist a slaunder raised vpon the wholl ministery yea vpon the wholl nation of Germanes that professe Luthers Doctrine that by authoritie of Luthers writting they vse to call their maides to bed when their wiues will not come c. But to iustifie Master Charkes interpretation and to let the reader see the intolerable impudencie of this wretched defender I will set downe as I haue done in the rest Luthers wordes concerning the matter in question more at large by which it may appeare that Master Hanmer might iustlie denie the wordes to be Luthers where they were drawne so farre from his meaning After he hath shewed three causes of diuorce in his iudgement the first being impotencie the second adulterie the third desertion or forsaking he speaketh ofit in these words Tertia ratio est vbi alter alteri sese subduxerit vt debitam beneuolentiam persoluere nolit au habitare cum 〈◊〉 Reperiuntur enim interdum adeò pertinaces vxores quae etiamsidecies in libidinem prolaberetur maritus pro sua duritia non curarent Hic 〈◊〉 est vt maritus dicat Si tunolueris alia voler si domina nolit adueniat ancilla it a tamen vt antea iterum tertiò vxorem admoneat maritus coram aliis eius esiam pertinaciam detegat vt publicè ante conspectum Ecclesiae duritia eius agnoscatur reprehendasur Situm renuat repudiae eam in vicem Vasthi Esther surroga Assueriregis exemplo Porro hîc tu Diui Pauli 1. Cor. 7. imitaris verbis maritus proprij corporis potestatem non habet sed vxor Et vxer sui corporis ius non habet sed maritus Ne fraudetis vos mutuò niss vterque consenserit Ecce 〈◊〉 hîc fraudem 〈◊〉 Apostolus Nam in desponsione alter alteri corpus 〈◊〉 tradit ad matrimonij obsequium vbi ergo alter debitum obsequium negat tum alteri corpus 〈◊〉 deditum spoliat vi aufert quod propriè coniugij repugnat iuri immo coniugium dissipat Igitur hanc vxorem cohihere magistratus est atque interimere Hoc si 〈◊〉 magistratus imaginandum est marito suam 〈◊〉 vxorem à Latronibus raptam interfectam esse confiderandumque vt aliam ducat Ferendum est aliquando vt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tollatur spolieturque corpus tollerandum non est si vxor sese marito ipsademat praedetur aut ab aliis adimatur The third way is when the one withdraweth himselfe from the other so that he will not pay the due beneuolence or refuseth to dwel with the other For there are found women sometimes so obstinat that although their husbands should ten times fall into filthie lust such is their hardnes that they would not care Here now it is good time for the husband to saie if thou 〈◊〉 not another will if the mistres will not let the maide come but yet so that the husband before do admonish his wife the second and third time and discouer her 〈◊〉 also before other men that openlie and before the sight of the Church her hardnes may be knowne reprehended If then she refuse be thou deuorced from hir and in steed of Vasthi take Ester by the example of King Asuerus and in this case thou maiest leane vnto the wordes of Saim Paule 1. Cor. 7. the husband hath not the power of his owne bodie but his wife and the wife hath none authoritie of hir owne bodie but hir husband Doe not defraud one another except it be by consent of both Beholde the Apostle here forbiddeth fraud one both partes For in their betrothing they deliuer their bodies one to the other to the seruice of matrimonie Therefore where the one denieth the due seruice then he robbeth taketh away by force his body which he hath giuen to another which is properly repugnant to the right of mariage yea and dissolueth the mariage Therefore it is the Magistrates dutie to bridle his wife yea and to put hir to death This if the magistrat omit the husband must imagine that his wife is stollen awaie and slaine by theeues and consider how to marie another Is it to be borne at any time that a man should be spoiled and robbed of his owne bodie and is it to be tollerated if the wife doe take awaie and steale hir selfe from hir husband or be taken awaie by other Now reader it is thy part to iudge whether Master Charke haue made an im pertinent interpretation of Luthers wordes and whether any practize of such lascuiuiousnes as was touched can be defended by this doctrine of Luther Last of all whether there be anie honestie in the defender that faseth out the matter still as though Luther spake not of a cause of diuorce but of licentious lecherie to be committed with the maid so often as her mistres should chaunce to refuse her husbandes companie vppon anie occasion yea he rubbeth his forehead hardlie and saith to Master Charke when you are not ashamed to defend the doctrine ye are more bolde then the Lutheranes them-selues who for verie shame do suppresse the Germaine booke wherein it was written as Cromerus a Germane testifieth If the Lutheranes had beene so ashamed of the doctrine as you saie they were whie suffer they the latine booke to be so often printed As for suppressing of the Germane booke for verie shame
doth not he ouerthrow of all Christian commmon wealthes Luthers short answere to this is Hoc non de ciuilibus legibus sed de Ecclesiasticis dixi est sententi a Pauli Coll. 2. This I speake not of ciuill lawes but of Ecclesiasticall lawes and it is the sentence of Saint Paul Coll. 2. What foundation now doth he ouerthrow or teach of any Christian common wealth when he speaketh of the freedome of conscience from all constitutions of men These be the great monsters of impiety which cut the sinewes of al vertue do open the high way to all dissolution Wil you neuer be ashamed to slaunder their doctrine which you are not hable to confute But now for the bodelie and sensible conference of Luther with the deuill you wonder with what face Master Charke can denie it we wonder with what mouth you can affirme it That the Tygurines giue testimonie of it is a lie as I haue shewed before And the wholl discourse of Luthers wordes shall make manifest that his confession is onelie of a spirituall fight in minde no bodelie conference as Master Charke answered at the first His wordes in his booke de missa priuata vnctione sacerdotum are these Sed forsitan agnoscatis quà m firmis nitatur columnis vestra causa si in horam incidatis tentationum Eg o coram vobis reuerendis sanctis patribus confessionem faciam date mihi absolutionem bonam quae vobis opto quà m minimum noceat Contigit me semel sub mediam noctem subitò expergefieri Ibi Satan mecum caepit eiusmodi disputationem Audi inquit Luthere doctor per docte nostietiam te quindecim annis celebrasse missas priuatas quotidie Quià si tales missae horrenda essent idololatria c But peraduenture you may acknowledge vpon how sure pillers your cause leaneth if you fall into the howre of tentation I will make my confession before you reuerend holy fathers giue me good absolutition which I wish may hurt you least It happened that once I waked sodainlie about midnight There Satan began this disputation with me Hearken saith he thou verie wel learned Doctor Luther c. thou knowest also that thou hast saide the priuate Masse by the space of 15. yeares almost euerie daie what if such priuate Masses were horrible idolatrie c These words are manifest that Luther speaketh of a spirituall temptation such as euen good men are subiect vnto in which Sathan obiecteth vnto the conscience of men such things wherein they haue offended God moste greeuouslie The atguments that the deuill layeth against him are not so much against the Masse as against Luthers sinne to bring him in dispaire for saying masse being a sinfull man as appeereth by these wordes which he attributeth to the deuill Prome vbi scriptum est quód homo impius incredulus possit assistere altari Christi 〈◊〉 ac conficere infide Ecclesiae vbi iussit ac praecepit hoc deus Bring forth where it is written that an vngodly man an vnbeeleeuer may stand at the altar of Christ and consecrate and make the sacrament in the faith of the Church where hath God bidden or commaunded this For Luther had defended him-selfe and sought to quiet his conscience because he was an annointed priest because he celebrated in the faith of the Church although he was vnworthie in respect of the weakenes of his owne faith the multitude of his sinnes But this you clippe as your note booke serued you which was not of your owne gleaning Agè prome vbi scriptum est vbiiussit aut praecepit hoc Deus Goe to now shew me where the masse is written in scripture where hath God commaunded it and scoffe at the Protestants fashion of disputation and conclude that Luther not beeing able to answere finallie yelded to banish the masse vpon the deuills appointment which is a tale of a tubbe for there is no such conclusion but that Luther by faith in the merites of Christ ouercame this temptation For after his conflict described thus he proceedeth Hîc respondebunt mihi sanctissimi patres hîc ride bunt dicent tune es doctor ille celebris non nosti respondere Diabolo An ignoras Diabolis esse mendacem papè vestro merito vobis gratias ingentes ago pro tam suaui consolatione in re tanta Has tres voculas Diabolus est mendax ignorassem ego 〈◊〉 nisi monuissetis vos eximij theologotati Si papista essem omnium tentationum ruà is quem securum 〈◊〉 Satan negligeres vt ipsos negligit indulgentes suis cupiditatibus c. etiam talis gigas essem contra absentem hostem alacer fortis Sed si vobis sustinendi essentictus Diaboli audiendae disputationes non diu essetis cantilenam de Ecclesia veteri recepto more cantaturi equidem satis video in Dauid reliquis Prophetis qu à m grauiter luctentur ingemiscunt in his certaminibus similibus contra diabolum horribilem impetum eius Et Christus ipse quamuis sine peccato propter nos in quantis lachrimis in quibus angustiis agonizauit in his agonibus contra satanam Vrget enim in immensum corda nec 〈◊〉 niss repulsus verbo dei Et ego planè persuasus sum Emser um Oecolampadium similes his ictibus horribilib quassatio nib subitò extinctos esse Nec n. humanum cor horrer dum hunc ineffabilem impetum nisi deus illi adsit perferre potest Satan enim in 〈◊〉 oculi repente totam mentem terr oribus ac te nebris adobruit si nihil quà m hominem inermem verbo no instructum inuenit quasi digitulo totum 〈◊〉 Verum qui dem hoc est quód mendax sit sed eius mendacia non sunt simplicis artificis sed longè callidiora instructiora ad fallendum quà m humanus captus assequi possit Ipse sic adoritur vt apprehendat aliquam solidam veritatem quae negarinon possit atque eam adeo callidè versutè vrget acuit adeo speciose fucat suum mendacium vt fallat velcautissimos c. vtî cogitatio illa quae Iudae cor percussit vera Tradidi sanguinem iustum hoc Iudasnegare non poteratised hoc erat mendacium ergo est desperandum de gratia Dei Et tamen diabolus hoc mendacium hanc cogitationem tam violenter vrsit vt Iudas eam vincere non possit sed desperaret Proinde bone frater domine papista non mentitur Satan quando accusat aut vrget magnitudinem peccati ibi enim habet duos inconuincibiles graues testes legem dei nostram propriam conscientiam Non possum negare quòdreus summortis damnationis c. Sed ibi mentitur Satan quando vltrà vrget vt desperem de gratia Sicut Cain dicebat maius est peccatum meum c. Et ibi tum opus est in
third question you haue what difference is betweene these speaches namelie of proceeding and begotten which question you saie with the rest though Master Charke seeme ignorant in them all and not to vnderstand so much as the verie 〈◊〉 themselues yet Catholike diuines know what the Church hath determined herein But concerning this question Saint Augustine shall answere for our ignorance Cont. Maximin lib. 3. cap. 14. Quid autem inter nasci procedere incersit de illa excellentissima natura loquens explicare quis potest Non omne quod procedit nascitur quamuis omne procedar quod nascitur 〈◊〉 omne quod bipes est homo est quam nis bipes sit omnis qui homo est haec scio Distinguere autem inter illam generationem hanc processionem nescio non valeo non sufficio Ac per hoc quia illa ista est ineffabilis stcut Propheta de filio loquens alt Generationem eius quis enarrabit ita de spiritu sancto verissimè dicitur processionem eius quis enarrabit c. What difference is betweene begotten proceeding speaking of that moste excellent nature whoe is able to expresse Not all that proceedeth is begotten although al proceedeth that is begotten As not euerie two legged thing is a man although euerie one is two legged that is a man Those thinges I know But to distinguish betweene that generation and this procession I know not I am not able I am not sufficient And for this reason because both that and this is vnspeakeable as the Prophet speaking of the sonne saith whoe shall declare his generation so of the holie ghost it is saide moste trulie whoe shall declare his procession This is Saint Augustines iudgement of this question Yea this is the Master of the sentences iudgement also as well of this question as of the proceeding of the sonne from the father against you Yet you saie of these as wel of as the other they are no lesse to be beleeued then other mysteries of the trinitie wherewith your conclusion is that you would not haue troubled Master Charke if you had supposed him so grosse therein as by examination you finde him Alacke poore Sir William A lacke for pitie what high points of learning you haue shewed which in the Master of the sentences whome soeuer he wil of an hundred schoolemen that wrote vpon him euerie sophister may finde mooued debated and defined in lesse then one daies studie no meruaill then if Master Charke be so grosse in them as you by examination finde him But while you in your owne imagination are so subtile in them that you thinke your crest perceth the clowdes you haue bewraied more shamefull proude ignorance then any of vs would haue suspected that it might be found in such a great Champion of the Papistes such a Lorde he censuter such a doughtie defender When in some of the questions propounded by your selfe you neither know the doctrine of the scripture the iudgement of the auncient fathers the determination of your Church nor the conclusion of your owne schoole doctors in whole mysteries neuertheles you would seeme to be an other Mercurie For the rest of the handes that you draw against Doctor Fulke you are answered in this consutation of popish quarrelles from pag. 48. vntill pag. 55. And where you saie that euerie litle gesse at our pleasure is sufficient to prooue what we will whereas no testimonies of your part will serue except they be so plaine and euident as by no waits they maie be auoyded and thereupon charge vs to be Lordes of the scriptures it is as manie other of yours a detestable slaunder For as I haue shewed before in matters necessarie to saluation we admit no gesses but either manifest wordes of scripture or els that which is necessarilie concluded out of manifest wordes and principles confessed and such if you haue anie bring them forth and we will hearken vnto them Ouer against the article of punishing heretiks by death which you saie was a long time denied by our selues to be allowable by scripture you note in the margent Luther against Latomus de incendiariis of burners For what purpose I maruell seeing in that booke he complaineth of the Louanistes not for burning heretikes but for burning of his bookes For the mention which Saint Paull is thought of some to make of an Epistle written to the Laodicenses you are not a litle netled that Master Chark condemneth both you and Saint Ieromes translation of ignorance You saie he should not obiect ignorance so peremptorilie to you you ought not so rigorously to haue beene reprehended and you name a great manie auncient writers which may be sufficient to wipe awaie Master Charkes bitter reproch against you But let vs see howrigorously and bitterly he hath delt with you yea how peremtorilie he obiecteth ignorance to you by his own wordes The Episile to the Laodiceans although manie make mention of it Paull maketh none so that either you ignorantlie passed ouer the greeke or willfullie addicted your selfe to the olde translation being in this place plainlie corrupted For by the originall Paull speaketh of an Epistle from Laodicea and not writen to the Laodicenses as you vntrulie assirme Here is all that he saieth you are a daintie Parnell that count your selfe so rigorouflie reprehended and so bitterlie reproched in those wordes where ignorance is not peremptorilie obiected as you saie but either that or willful addiction to the olde translation which I know not vpon what ground you doe so peremtorilie call S. Ieromes translation Master Charke hath more cause to complaine of you for that you affirme that he saith the greeke text hath of an Epistle written by S. Paull from Laodicea For he saith not an Epistle written by Saint Paull but from Laodicea by whome soeuer it was written Where you cite manie that thought mention to be made of one written by Saint Paull to the Laodiceans he confesseth as much But it is more against Master Charke that you haue two Greeke editions the one of Pagnine the other of Plantine which make for you as you affirme But what if you be deceiued in them as great a clarke as you would seeme to be that maie not be touched with the least suspicion of ignorance The most of the copies both printed and written haue 〈◊〉 the Epistle from Laodicea Your two editions leaue out the preposition and then it must be translated that Epistle of Laodicea which it seemeth your vulgar interpreter followed in sense though not in wordes which saith eam quae Laodicensiumest that which is of the Laodiceans Where is there now in anie of these that which maketh for you that Saint Paull speaketh of an Epstle written by him to the Laodicenses For the Epistle of Laodicea which your two greeke editions haue and the Epistle of the Laodicenses which your vulgar translation hath cannot signifie an Epistle written to the Laodicenses but from
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which are able to make thee wise you harpe onelie vpon the word of instructing which the vulgar interpreter vseth not sufficient to answere the greeke verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and yet if it be rightlie vnderstood as perhappes he meant it signifieth to furnish and not to teach properlie so the sense might be that the scripture is able to furnish thee with knowledge to saluation and that 〈◊〉 a sufficiencie Now to your pelting cauilles You aske if the Scriptures which can shew Timothie the waie to saluation and bring him also to it if he will follow them be sufficient for the wholl Church so that all Doctrine by tradition is superfluous I answere yea For there is but one waie to saluation for all the Church But you obiect that euerie Epistle of Saint Paull enstructeth a man to saluation yet it not sufficient for the wholl Church I answere that euerie Epistle of Saint Paull is not sufficient to instruct a man to saluation or to make him wise vnto saluation But that which Saint Paull spaketh is of the wholl scripture not of euery epistle For you might as well obiect that euery chapter and verse instructeth a man toward saluation rather then to saluation but not sufficientlie yet the wholl is able to make a man wise vnto saluation Your second obiection is that the Apostle speaketh principallie of the olde Testament and will Master Charke saie that the olde Testament is sufficient to Christian men for their saluation without anie other writt Yea I warrant you for there is no Doctrine in the new but it was taught in the olde Saint Paull affirmeth that he said nothing but that which the Prophetes and Moses had spoken of thinges to be performed The new Testament hath no other Doctrine then the olde onelie it testifieth the performance of those thinges in Christ which the olde Testament foreshewed to be performed Againe because you grate so much vpon the exclusion of other writt Saint Paull addeth by faith in Iesus Christ which containeth all that is written in the new Testament concerning the storie of performancet and seales of this faith And if the olde were sufficient how much more is the olde the new together a rich aboundant Doctrine The 〈◊〉 that you make against his translation of the wholl Scripture which you would referre to euerie Scripture is answered before the translation must be according to the circumstance of the place Euerie Scripture which is euerie seuerall booke or euerie seuerall Chapter or euerie seuerall verse is not able to make the man of God perfect and perfectlie prepared to euerie good worke but the wholl is therefore the translation must be the whole scriptures and not euerie scripture But now to your tow reasons In the first you saie that Saint Paull could not meane to Timothie of all the scriptures together which we now vse for that all was not then written To this you confesse that he answereth there was inough written then for the susficient saluation of men of that time and therest is not superfluous But this you saie is from the purpose Yea is how so I praie you you answere it was sufficient with the supplie by worde of 〈◊〉 vnwritten but that is contrarie to the purpose for Master Charke telleth you that from the time that any 〈◊〉 was written that scripture contanied sufficient 〈◊〉 to saluation without anie supply of anie other Doctrine that was not in that Scripture comprehended although preaching and other meanes were necessarie to reach men which is beside the purpose Before the scripture was written the same doctrine in substance was deliuered by reuelation that afterwarde was written The continuance thereof was not onelie by bare tradition but also in euerie age renewed by reuelation Againe the age of men was lo long that there remained alwaies faithfull and ceratine witnesses of the doctrine aliue so that it could not be corrúpted but it was easie by those witnesses to be refuted But when the age of man was drawne into the streights of 70. yeares or litle more as Moses sheweth the Doctrine of the Church was committed to writing euen as much at the first as was sufficient for the instruction of the people vnto saluation without anie supplie of traditions The 〈◊〉 of the Prophetes and Apostles writinges is a more full and plentifull declaration of thesame Doctrine of saluation not anie addition of anie new Doctrine or waie to saluation Your second reason is that 〈◊〉 partes of scripture be wanting now which were in Saint Pauls time But that you are not able to prooue For although there is mention in the olde testament of diuerse bookes written by Prophets which are not now extant yet it followeth not that those were extant in Saint Pauls time And if any were yet were they but explications and interpretations of the bookes of Moses which are extant euerie syllable and pricke and shall be to the ende of the world But Epiphanius affirmeth that all thinges cannot be taken from the scripture wherefore the Aposties 〈◊〉 somethings in writing and somethings in tradition To this I answere first that Saint Paul is greater then Epiphanius Secondlie that Epiphanius saith not that anie thing necessarie to saluation cannot be taken out of the scripture For he speaketh onelie of this opinion that it is sinne to marrie after virginitie decreed which neuertheles maie be taken out of the scripture if the vow were aduisedlie taken and no necessitie of incontinencie requiring mariage But of tradition we shall haue further to consider in the next section The thirteenth section intituled Of teaching traditions besides the scripture Art 5. GOtuisus reporteth the Iesuits to saic that the want of holie scriptures muste be supplied by peecing it out by traditions Cens. f. 220. Here you repeat your olde friuolous quarrel that the Iesuites haue no such vnreuerent words Master Chark chargeth you out of Hosius with a farre worseisaying that if traditions be reiected the verie Gospell it selfe seemeth to be reiected For what els are traditions then a certaine liuing Gospell But thereto you answere not one worde and the meaning of those words reported by Gotuisus you mainteine egerlie thorouhout this section as you did in parte in the 12. section that the scriptures are not sufficient and that there must be traditions receiued beside the scripture To what ende but to supplie the want and insufficiencie of the holie scriptures Nay saie you Though both parts of Gods worde that is both written and vnwritten be necessarie vnto Gods Church yet both of them do stand in their full perfection assigned them by God neither is the one a maime or impeachment to the other You meane they are as perfect as God made them not that the written word is sufficient to teach all trueth vnto the perfection of the man of God And so for all your vaine compasse of wordes the sense is all one The scripture is but a part or a
peece of Gods worde and traditions are an other peece and this peece must be added to that or els it is not a perfect or sufficient instruction of itselfe for Gods Church The comparison you make of ioyning S. Lukes Gospell to that of Saint Matthew or Saint Paules epistles to them both to resemble your patching of traditions to the written word of God is both odious and vnlike and without begging the wholl matter in question gaineth nothing For the adding of the writings of one Euangelist to another or of an Apostle to the Euangelistes is but the heaping of heauenlie treasure to the further inriching of the Church in all light of spirituall knowledge so the accession of the bookes of the new testament is as it were the vnfolding or laying open of the same diuine riches that was perfectlie contayned in the olde testament for the saluation of all Gods elect that liued vnder that discipline But your traditions as you maintaine them argue an insufficiencie of the holie scriptures which allso you confesse your selfe and are not a more plaine or plentifull application of the mysteries comprehended in them Therefore though you can for manners sake otherwhile forbeare odious speeches aginst the dignitie of holie scriptures yet euen that odious conclusion gathered by Gotuisus must needes follow of your doctrine concerning the insufficiencie of scriptures and the necessitie of traditions That your traditions are Gods word and of equall authoritie with the scriptures you promise to shew more largelie in the twelft article together with certaine meanes how to know and discerne the same Sed haec in dicm minitave Parmeno You haue taken a pretie pause of three yeares long since you were interrupted as you 〈◊〉 in the end by a writte de remouendo But the daie will come that shall paie for all Whether anie cause or matter hath beene ministred by you of odious speeches against the dignitie of holie scriptures Mastet Charke declareth by one example out of Hosius which with all the rest that he saith you omit to answer as trifling speech to litle purpose So whatsoeuer by anie colour of reason you can not auoid by your censorious authoritie you maie contemne and passe ouer But his conclusion seemeth worthie the answer which he maketh in these wordes To conclude it is a great iniquitie to adde traditions or your vnwritten verities to the written word of God whereunto no man maie adde because nothing is wanting from which no man maie take because nothing is superfluous But to him that addeth shall the curses written in the booke be added for euer Against this conclusiō you note in the margent great iniquitie to adde one veritie to another or to beleeue two verities together A fine ieste but a grosse begging of the wholl cause For who shal graunt that your vnwritten vereties be truth and not falsehood falselie by you termed verities vnwritten There is no veritie of matters necessarie to be knowne vnto saluation which is not written in the holie scriptures that are hable to make vs wise vnto saluation But good Lord what a sturre you keepe because M. Chatk noteth in the margent Apoc. 22. ask how this place is alledged against you c. As though that which is true of one booke yea of euery booke of the scripture maie not iustlie be verefied of the wholl bodie and boke of the the Bible Because adding to the word of god argueth imperfection in the word of god Your stale obiection of Saint Iohns Gospell written after the Reuelation is alreadie answered For al bookes of scripture that haue beene written since the fiue bookes of Moses are no addition to the word of God but a more cleere explication of the 〈◊〉 first com mitted to writing by inspiration of God Neither do they teach an other waie of saluation then Moses did but set forth the same more plainlie by demonstration by examples of Gods iustice and his mercie by threatenings by exhortations by explication of his promises by shewing the accomplishment and the manner of perfourmance of them in Christ and his Church And this they do moste absolutelie sufficiently and plentifully to the saluation of Gods people These things saith S. Iohn are written that you should beleeue that Iesus is Christ the sonne of God and that beleeuing you maie haue euerlasting life in his name Here you maie as well cauill that not onelie the Gospell of Saint Iohn or the miracles written in the same is necessarie to be beleeued vnto saluation but all the rest of the scripture also foolishlie opposing thinges that are no waie repugnant but the one including the other For the beleeuing of Saint Iohns Gospell doth not exclude but include all other bookes and partes of holie scripture which teach the same meane of saluation or any thing thereto pertaining But how holdeth this argument saie you no man maie adde to the booke of Apocalips ergo no man maie beleeue a tradition of Christ or his Apostles Maie we not as well saie ergo we maie not beleeue the actes of the Apostles No sir for we make our argument in this man ner No man maie adde to the booke of the Apocalips much lesse may anie man adde to the wholl Bible of the olde and new testament And consequentlie there are no traditions of Christ and his Apostles to be credited as needefull to saluation which are not contained in the holy scriptures Thus we alledge scriptures and thus we argue vppon them not as it pleaseth you to deseant vpon our allegations and to dissigure our arguments But it is lamentable you saie to see the 〈◊〉 dealings of these men in matters of such importance It is verie true vnderstanding you and your complices to be the men that vse such fleightes in 〈◊〉 waightie causes As for our doctrine is plaine without any seame that the scriptures are sufficient to saluation therfore al tradition besides them are 〈◊〉 to that purpose But let vs see who 〈◊〉 sleightes by your iudgement First you aske Master Charke what he 〈◊〉 by adding Who doth adde Or in what sense as though his meaning and sense of adding were not manifest as also his accusation that the I suites the Papistes do adde to the word of God their traditions a necessarie to saluation yet not expressed or contained in the word of God But if God saie you left anie doctrine by tradition vnto the Church and our ancetours haue deliuered the same vuto vs especiallie those of the 〈◊〉 Church what shall we do in this case Shall we refuse it It seemeth dangerous and I see no reason The question is not whether we should refuse anie thing that God hath left but whether God hath left anie such tradition to be beleeued vnto salua tion which is not contained in the holie scriptures But if our ancetours of the primitiue Church haue deliuered anie such tradition vnwritten as left by Christ what shall we doe you
of the canonicall scripture which was receiued by Christ and his Apostles and the primitiue Church long after them But the Papists adde of their owne authoritie to the holie canon and therefore as much are they subiect to gods curse as if they did take away Neither doth Luther discredit or deface the whol epistle of Saint Iames as you saie although in comparison of some other bookes of scripture by a similitude he maketh it farre inferior to them What Doctor Fulke and Master Whitaker haue written the one of the booke of Maccaebees the other of Tobie they haue sufficientlie maintained in their replies whereunto I remit the reader and for Master Charkes reuiling of Iudith to the reporte of the disputation in which your impudent slaunder is confuted Where you conclude that no man in the world euer spake more reuerentlie of holie scripture then Iesuites do you ouer reach very much as you do very often They which teach that the holyscripture is sufficient to make vs wise vnto saluation speake more reuerently then the Iesuits whichdeny the sufficiency of the scripture for the instru ction of the Church Last of al the Censure ridiculously charged M. Charke with fraudulent translation of this worde Immaculata when he alledgeth this text psal 19. as oppo sit to your nose of waxe The law of the Lord is perfect out of the original tongue the best translations from which the greek in sense dessenteth not not out of the olde latine translation Now you trifle to no purpose about the Hebrew Greeke Latine termes which to those that are but me anelie learned are well enough knowne what they signifie And first if you should graunt al that M. Chark said you thinke he had gained nothing For you also confes that the law of the Lord is perfect but not in that sense wherein M. Chark vsech it to wit that because the law of the Lord is perfect therefore the scripture cannot be wrested And afterward when you haue tolde vs that these wordes vnde filed irreprehensible and perfect which answer the latine greeke and Hebrue wordes 〈◊〉 not much in sense for whatsoeuer is irreprehensible and vnspotted may also be called perfect you conclude that this doth not prooue the scriptures to be perfect in sense in such sort as it maie not be wrested or peruerted You say true but it is false that Master Chark maketh anie such illation as you charge him For thus he inferreth the lawe of God is perfect ergo it cannot be wrested as a nose of wax or as his owne wordes are the scripture is perfect and manteineth her perfection against all corruptions as a right line sheweth it selfe bewraieth that which is crooked The lawe of a wise man as hath beene said before may be so perfect as it cannot be wrested like a nose of waxe into anie sense that the wrester wil imagine but that his vaine cauillation shall be odious and ridiculous to al men Much rather is the lawe of God so perfect as though all the deuilles in hell should breake their braines to wrest and peruertit yet can they neuer wrest it like a nose of wax to euerie side or shape but that the perfect sense of the scripture remaineth ful constant and manifest to them that haue the spirit of God yea euen to them that will iudge but indifferentlie according to right reason By the waie you charge Master Charke with railing and inueighing against your olde translation and with running he careth not whether forging he careth not what and reprehending he careth not whome yet in all that discourse he hath no more wordes of it but these your olde translation doth goe alone In which wordes what rayling running forging reprehending inueihing may be conteined let ihe wiser sort iudge and fooles learne to be wiser But where he saith that the best translations differ from the olde translation you aske what best or better or other good latine translation hath he then the olde As though none might be good but your olde translation I perceaue you would not acknowledge any good of them that were set forth by Munster Leo Iude or anie other professed protestant yet what saie you to the translation of Vatablus a famous and learned reader of Paris How dare you condemne the translation of Pagnine of the olde testament and Erasmus of the new testament as naught which the Pope allowed as good Finallie what exceptions can you take to the translation of Isidorus Clarius censured and approoued by the deputies of the Councell of Trent maie none of these be good better or best but that your olde translation hath the prerogatiue in goodnes in all degrees that it leaueth all other behinde it as nought O waightie censure of a wise Papist But let vs see wherein the excellencie of the olde translation doth consist as you suppose First you saie it was in vse in Gods Church aboue 13. hundred yeares past as maie be seene by the citations of the fathers which liued then But euen those verie citations doe prooue the contrarie at the least that it was not in generall vse in the latine Church Saint Augustine in the place by you quoted for the bowe of heretikes where your translation hath in obscuro did reade in obscura luna and standeth much vpon exposition of the darke moone Yea throughout the wholl Psalter whosoeuer wil compare the text which Saint Augustine vsed with your olde translation shall finde great difference betweene them But this your olde translation you tell vs was afterward oueruewed and corrected by Saint Ierome we know verie well that Saint Ierome did oueruew and correct a certaine auncient translation of the septuaginta that was vfed in his time But how are you hable to prooue that this your vulgar translation is the same either corrected or vncorrected For it appeareth by the citations of diuerse of the latine Church which liued after Saint Ierome that they vsed an other text then this translation euen vntill the daies of Bernard When you saie that this your olde translati on was highlie commended by Saint Augustine you make such a shameles 〈◊〉 as you obiect without shame to M. Charke when he saith that the Septuaginta agree with the hebrue in signification of the word perfecte for they saie irreprehensible which must needes be perfect but so is not your latine 〈◊〉 vnspotted or vndefiled which you your selfe in your censure do egerlie contend to be differing from perfection You name the translation of Erasmus and Luther of which the one translated onelie the new testament which Leo. 10. and Clemens 7. did both allow the other translated not the Bible at all in latine except perhappes some partes vpon which he wrote commentaries Here your Printer will make vs beleeue that you were remooued with a writ de remouendo so as you could proceede no further but now there is a writ de renouando sued against you if you
Christes owne person Which prouing and iudging of mans selfe to be meant by the diligent dif cussing of our consciences sinnes and misdeedes by contrition and confession of them to our ghostlie Father the practise of the Church doth most plainlie prooue which neuer suffered any greeuous sinner to communicat before he had called him selfe to a reckning of his sinnes before the minister of God and so iudged him selfe that he receiue not to his damnation that which to euery worthy person is his life and saluation Whereof S. Augustine or the authour of the booke de Ecclesiasticis dogmatibus set forth with his name giueth vs good notice for his time Quem mortalia crimina post Baptismum commissa premunt hortor priùs publica poenitentia satisfacere ita sacerdotis iudicio reconciliatum communioni sociari si vult non ad iudicium condemnationem sui Eucharistiam percipere sed secreta satisfactione solui mortalia crimina non negamus I exhorte euerie man saith this holie doctour that is burdened after his baptisme with mortall sinne to satisfie for the same by publique penance and to be reconciled by the priests iudgement to be restored to the communion of saints if he meane to receiue the holy Sacrament not to his iudgement and condemnation And I denie not in this case but deadly sinnes may be remitted by secret satisfaction Thus he By whose wordes you see in what a damnahle state men now of daies stand seeing that whosoeuer receiueth the sacrament of Christes bodie and blood before he be reconciled by a priestes sentence and assoiled of his sinnes he doth receiue it to his euerlasting damnation Vnto whose iudgement I ioyne Saint Cyprian in this same matter complainig verie earnestly vpon certaine Conuersies in his daies that would aduenture vpon Christes bodie and blood ante exomologesim factam criminis ante purgatam conscientiam sacrificio manu sacerdotis Before their sinnes be confessed and their consciences purged by sacrifice and the Priests hand Al these thinges might be at large declared and confirmed farther by the iudgement of mostauncient Fathers but because I haue bene verie long and enough alreadie maie seeme to be said for such as by reason will be satisfied a great deale more then anie Protestant will answere vnto and also the scriptures them selues giuing the Priest so plaine power of binding and retaining as wel as of remitting and loosing will do more with these that haue charged themselues with the beleefe of nothing that is not in expresse writing of Gods word then the vniforme consent of all ages and the moste notable persons in the same In respect of their humor therefore I will not saie much more for this point then I haue said onely my meaning now is for the Catholikes comfort to repeat a few such euident sentences out of moste authentique authors by whom we take a 〈◊〉 not onely of their meaninges which is much for the matter but especiallie of the Churches practise in all ages and moste countries christened since the Apostles time which I account the moste surest waie to touch trie truth by that by the example of al our forefathers euery man may willingly learne to submit him selfe to the sentence of such as God hath made the iudges of his soule and sinnes FVLKE Yf Saint Poul had meant Popish shrift he could and would haue said Submit your selues to the examination iudgement of the Priest and not as he hath said Let a man trie him selfe Iudge your selues brèthren Yf auricular confession be necessarie vnder paine of damnation for euerie one that receiueth the sacrament of Christes bodie and bloode immediately before it many thousandes of your priests which saie masse euerie daie without shriuing themselues are in a damnable case I or there passeth no day of mans life without some deadelie sinne if not in deede not word yet at the least in thought but that you popish hypocrites by your distinction of veniall sinnes flatter your selues to be cleare when you are moste foull and filthie but the perpetuall practize of the Church you saie prooueth the necessitie of auricular confession whereof you take witnes the author of the booke de Ecclesiasticis dogmatibus for his time which you doe honestly not to father vpon Saint Augustine being a man of much later time lesse learning and more corruption of doctrine but you do fraudulentlie cut of his saying in the waste because that which followeth declareth plainlie that either he meaneth not of mortall sinnes as the Popish Church now doth holde or else his opinion for secret satisfaction is farre differing from that you would haue men weene that he meaneth namely such as you vse to inioine in your confession fiue Ladies Psalters fiue fridaies fast fiue pence groates or shillings to so many poore men in remembrance of the 5. wounds and such like stuffe but these authors wordes require another manner of satisfaction Sed secreta satisfactione solui mortalia crimina non negamus sed mutato prius secularihabitu confesso religionis studio per vitae correctionem iugi immò perpetuo luctu miserante Deo it a duntaxat vt contraria pro his quae poenitet 〈◊〉 eucharistiam omnibus dominic is diebus supplex submissus vsque ad mortem percipiat Poenitentia vera est penitenda non admittere admissa deflere Satisfactio paenitentiae est causas peccatorum excidere nec eorum suggestionibus aditum indulgere But also that by secret satisfaction mortall crimes may be loosed we doe not denie but so that the secular habite be first changed and the studie of religion confessed by amendment of life and by continuall yea perpetuall sorow God being mercifull so onelie that he doe the contrarie things to those for which he doth penance and humblie and lowlie receiue the Euchariste euerie sondaie to his dying day It is true repentance not to committe things to be repented and to bewaile such as are committed The satisfaction of repentance is to cut of the causes of sinnes and to yeald no entrie vnto their suggestions Wherefore it is plaine that in this writers time there was no auricular confession but an open confession and publike penance for open and hainous offences and that none was admitted to secret satisfaction except he changed his habite became a Monke performed other conditions by him required by which it is manifest that the iudgement of this writer though corrupt yet is contrarie to the practize of the popish Church at this daie But Saint Cyprian is a better witnes I trow for the necessitie of auricular cōfession of secret sins sauing that he speaketh of them that had openlie fallen to Idolatrie and without open confession of their fault and publike satisfaction of the Church by some vndiscreete pastours were admitted to the Lordes table describing them he saith Mortiferos Idolorum cibos adhuc pene ructantes exhalantibus etiamnum
the least they disdaine to submit themselues to the Priests whom God hath giuen power vnto to discearne the cleane from the vncleane But I would thou shouldest not beguile thy selfe by false perswasion or some respect of shame that thou hast to confesse vnto the priest who is Gods Vicare For I tell thee thou must vnder his iudgement whome God doth not disdaine to constitute his Vicegerent But this Doctour made a wholl worke of penance and the waies of recouerie of Christian mans fall after Baptisme by the Priests iudgement and sacrament of Confession Of the which bookes if any man list doubt yet let him be assured that they be both auncient Catholike learned and agreeable to the doctrine of Saint Augustines daies whosoeuer made them And our cause is so much more holpen because not onelie Saint Austine who is plaine in these matters vpon Saint Matthwes Gospel and els where as it is declared alreadie but also other of great antiquitie confirme the same and plainly confound the pride of our daies in which men are not somuch ashamed of their sinnes as they be disdainefull to confesse their sinnes vnto a poore priest though he iustlie accupie the verie iudgement seat of God FVLKE You doe wiselie to deuorce vpon his meaning when you haue not his wordes to warrant you For so you maie blinde the eyes of the ignorant to beleeue that you haue som farther intelligence of meaning then can appeare euen by the words that you haue cited out of him For the 〈◊〉 of condemnation is not by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against them which are ashamed to confes their faults to men if they amend them before god but against them that flie the knowledge and iudgement of men and yet doe not repent before God And therefore he saith si ea confiteri aut emendare noluerirt if they will not confesse them or amende them and againe si in maio suo permanserint if they shall continue in their euill But if they will amend their faultes and not continue in sinne he dare promise them forgiuenes and life euerlasting as is declared in the last section But now you charge vs with Saint Agustines authoritie and yet you will not abide by it that it is Saint Augastines authoritie wherein you deale more sincerely then Papists are commonlie wont to doe to acknowledge that these bookes you vouch are not admitted for Saint Augustines authoritie Among so many great and large volumes as are certeinlie knowne and generally receiued to be of Saint Augustines writing where you can finde nothing but these bookes of vncerteine credit to mainteine the necessitie of auricular confession the indifferent reader may well gather how litle ground your purpose cā finde in that age of S. Austins For that you haue declared alreadie out of S. Austine vpon S. Matthewes Gospel ells where how plaine it is for these matters let the reader iudge by that I haue answered in those seuerall places But as touching the bookes de visitatione 〈◊〉 being one of the two treatises that you cite as it is certaine that it was not of S. Austines writing so hath it no similitude with the doctrine of his time or with the stile of anie learned or auncient father The Censure of Erasmus vpon these bookes is this Sermo locutulei nec docti nec diserti Quid habuerunt vel frontis vel mentis qui talia scripta nobis obtruserunt nomine Augustini c. These bookes are the speach of a pratler neither learned nor eloquent What shame or wit had they which haue thrust vpon vs such writings vnder the name of S. Augustine Yet you dare assure vs that they be auncient Catholike learned and agreeable to the doctrine of Saint Augustines daies But the reasons of your assurance you spare to shewe giuing vs nothing but your bare word which is sufficient among vnlearned and sottish Papists whose ignorance you knewe would accept whatsoeuer you brought and therefore were carles what all the learned of the contrarie parte might iudge of your impudent and shameles assertions Concerning the other whole worke of penance which you affirme that this doctour made although it were graunted that Saint Augustine was author of that worke of repentance as it shall be easilie graunted that if not Saint Augustine yet some other auncient and learned father was the writer of them neuertheles there is nothing in them by which you are able to prooue the matter in controuersie namelie the necessitie of confession of all mortall sinnes to a Priest And therefore albeit you set a good face vpon the matter you haue neuer a sentence to set downe out of those bookes that is able to giue but onely a glosse or colour to your Popish confession For if you had you woulde not haue beene silent in setting forth the sentence of another beside Saint Augustine as you saie and as I thinke of great antiquitie who against them that be impenitent and neither acknowledge their sinnes vnfainedlie before God nor studie to amend and reforme their wicked life writeth vehementlie shewing three kindes of repentance one before baptisme in them that are of yeares another after baptisme which is dailie sorowing for our infirmities in saying the Lordes prayer the third of heinous and notorious sinnes offensiue to the Church of them that are excommunicated and are not to be receiued without open confession and signes of humilitie But the necessitie of confessing all thinges to a poore priest iustlie occupying the verie iudgement seate of God there is no word in either of those two bookes De medicina poenitentiae de vtilitate poenitentiae ALLEN And Saint Ambrose these mens auncient somewhat did knowe this practise so well and allow it that he did sit in his owne person on confession as Paulinus doth recorde whose behauiour in that diuine office that all Priestes maie perceiue and all the people note I will report Quotie scunque illi aliquis ob percipiendam poenitentiam lapsus suos confessus esset it a flebat vt ilium flere compellerat Causas autem criminum quas illi confitebaniur nulli nisi Domino soli apud quens intercedebat loquebatur bonum relinquens exemplum posteris sacerdotibus vt intercessores apud Deum sin magis quà m accusatores apud homines That is to saie So often as anie man came vnto him to confesse his faultes and receiue penance he so wept that he made the Penitent to weepe also But the faults themselues which they confessed he vttered to no man but to God alone to whome for their sinnes he made sute leauing a blessed example to all Priestes of the posteritie to account themselues rather as intercessours to God for sinnes then accusers of men before the worlde for their sinne This saieth Paulinus of Saint Ambrose whereby at once we see the iudgement of them both for our matter FVLKE The iudgement of Saint Ambrose concerning the necessitie of popish thrift or auricular confession we haue
heard before out of his owne writinges Neither doth Paulinus testifie anie other thing of him nor any other thing then might be said of Luther and Caluin whoe were no friendes of Papisticall confession For if anie man did confesse vnto them his offences that he might shew himselfe truelie penitent and receiue comfort and counsell for his amendment no doubt but those holie men were greatlie grieued at his fall which mooued the offendour to greater sorow for his sinne and yet those faultes as were discouered to them being such as might with duetie to God and the state be concealed they would neuer vtter to aniebodie What would this make to prooue that they saie on confessions like popish Priestes and required all men vnder paine of damnation to confesse vnto them their secret deadlie sinnes as pop sh Priests doe But popish prelates disdaine to doe that which they faine Saint Ambrose to haue done Manie of them being such for their knoweledge as you might rather seeke water out of a pumise stone then the doctrine of comfort out of their mouthes and for their liues and conuersations such as deserue if there were anie hope of amendment in them to stand in the Church among open penitents rather than to sit in the chaires of gouernment and iudgement ouer other men Wherefore by this citation we neither see the iudgement of Paulinus nor of saint Ambrose for your matter of the necessitie of auricular confession For that secret confession maie be made in some case we denie not but that it is necessarie to be made of all deadlie sinnes that man can remember you haue not yet prooued ALLEN But to go forward Saint Cyprians meaning is so plaine for confession of sinnnes that he prescribeth the verie thoughtes of man that be sinnefull and damnable to be vttered vnto the Priestes praising them that vpon onelie intent and purpose of committing idolatrie hoc ipsum apud sacerdotes Dei dolenter simpliciter confitebantur did simplie and sorowfullie make confession thereof to the Priests of God And now that we are for the practise and proofe hereof at S. Cyprian which is high in Gods Church we neede not staie here though we be farre enough paste our aduersaries account in such cases that laie it downe at I ateran Councell a whole thousand yeares shorte of those daies I will not much speak of Tertullian whome Saint Cyprian calleth Master his wholl booke writen of penance doth make altogether for this sacrament and for confession to be made to Gods Priestes which he calleth exomologesin prosternendi atque humiliandi hominis disciplinam and amongst other things pertaining to the act of confession and penance which then was much more publike and seuere then it is now he reckeneth this to be one Presbiteris aduolui to be humblie laid at the Priests fecte where he also resembleth a man that is lothe to confesse his inwarde faultes to him that hauing a filthie botch in the secret partes of his bodie had rather let it 〈◊〉 vp the member then for foolish shamefastnes vtter the griefe to his surgeane FVLKE You slaunder Saint Cyprian greatlie to make him be so plaine of your meaning that he perscribeth the verie thoughts of man that be sinneful and damnable to be vttered vnto the priests although he praise them that vpon onelie intent and purpose of committing Idolattie did sorowfullie and simplie confesse the same before the priests of God His wordes are these Denique quando fide maiore timore meliore sunt qui quamuis nullo sacrificij aut libelli facinore constricti quoniam tamen de hoc vel cogitauerūt hoc ipsum apud sacerdotes dei dolenter simpliciter 〈◊〉 exomologesin conscientiae faciunt animi sui pondus exponunt salutarem medelam paruis licet modicis vulneribus exquirunt scientes scriptum esse Deus non deridetur Finallie seeing they are both of greater faith and better feare which although they be guiltie of no wicked fact of sacrifice or libell yet because they haue so much as thought of such a matter they sorowfullie and simplie confesse the same before the Priests of God they make confession of their conscience they declare the burthen of their minde they seeke for wholsome medicine although for small and litle woundes knowing that it is writen God is not mocked What prescription is in these wordes of anie necessitie of confession of all the sinnefull thoughts of men his meaning is that they shewe them selues more faithfull and to feare God better which voluntarilie when there is no necessitie offer themselues to open repentance For their onelie purpose of sacrificing to the better quieting of their conscience then they which being polluted with libells as they called them by which they professed to paie monie that they might not be compelied to sacrifice to Idolls yet would not acknoweledge that they were in anie faulte which was necessarie for them to doe before they could be admitted into the congregation And therefore you haue neither practize nor proofe of the necessitie of auricular confession in Cyprians time which was 1000. yeares before the Lateran Councell which decreed the necessitie thereof That you will not speake much of Tertullian it is because you haue litle yea nothing at all in him to vpholde your purpose His booke de Poenitentia is well knowen to be written of open penance for such as were to be baptized or els had openlie fallen with offence of the Church but as for your popish sacrament of penance or confession before the priests otherwise then before the whole Church you haue nothing in that booke and therefore among other thinges pertaning to that seuere discipline of publike repentance where he reckeneth Presbyteris aduolui to be one he addeth immediatelie arie dei adgeniculari omnibus fratribus legationes deprecationis sue 〈◊〉 And to kneele before the altars of God to require all the brethren to praie for them And immediately it followeth haec omnia exomologesis vt poenitentiam commender All these things confession requireth to set forth repentance And as touching him that refuseth this discipline for shamefastenes his wordes are these Plerosque tamen hoc opus vt publicationem sui aut suffugere aut de die in diem differre praesumo pudoris magis memores quà m salutis velut illi qui in partibus verecundioribus corporis contracta vexatione conscteniam medentium vitant ita cum rubescentia sua pereunt Yet I suppose that many doe either eschew or defer from day to daie this worke as a defamation of themselues being more mindeful of shamefastnes then of their health as those men which hauing gotten a vexation in the secret partes of their bodie do auoide to haue it knowne to them that should heale it so perish with their shamefastnes This saying doeth not prooue the necessitie of confession of all our sinnes so often as we fall but the necessitie of open
the beginning of this Chapter that the satisfaction limited by the Canons was agreeable in all points to the debt of sinnes forgiuen which God required for answer of his iustice Further you must remember that the Canons did limit times of penance not onelie for an act of sinne but also for customable continuance in such sinnes as you may see in the decrees of Iuo quoted by you before and in the Ancyran Councell Now if you will faine a man to be such a monster as that he haue committed all these sinnes for which the Canons doe limit times and haue continued in them also accustomablie yet by those Canons he could not deserue so many thousand yeares of penance as the Pope graunteth of pardon Nay if you make your Audit of the times limited sor all offences adding all the daies yeares and Lents prescribed in the Canons together you shall not finde the sūme of one thousand yeares of penance due to be inioyned if a man had commited al those sinnes Whereof it followeth that so many 1000 yeares as haue bin ordinarily graunted by the Popes pardons can haue no such meaning as your dreame of Audit and account surmiseth and so it remaineth that these numbers of yeares were multiplied onelie to set a greater price of the pardons so to robbe both the purses of the people and deceiue their soules For the old Canons neuer appointed anie time of penance for anie time exceeding the time of a mans life but 7. yeares 14. yeares 24. yeares c or to the end of a mans life at the most and alwaies the partie to be receiued at his end though he had not accomplished his time perfixed It is not the time appointed by the old canons therefore that can excuse so manie thousand yeares of pardon for paine to be suffered in purgatorie seeing you acknowledge the time by them limited to be limited by the spirit of god as agreeable in all points to the debt of sinnes forgiuen which God requirerth for answer of his iustice But blessed be god who hath taken sufficient satisfaction to answer his iustice in the obedience suffering of Iesus Christ which is our iustice in whome seeing we are made the iustiee of God we neither feare Allens Audit for purgatorie nor desire the Popes mercie for pardon ALLEN Neither is it necessarie for the due paiment of that great debt of so manie yeares that the paine of purgatorie should endure so long or so manie yeares as had bene necessarie for the accomplishing of his penance in this life For the might the force the hougenes the excesse and the nature of the paine in the next world is so fearefull and so great as Saint Augustine often noteth that a great deale lesse time sufferance of the same is answerable to much more in the world and this present life For what comparation is there berwixt a daies fasting here a daies punishment in purgatorie better it were surely to suffer a hundred yeares such penance as the Church prescribeth in this mortall life that hath in it much worldlie ease and comfort for the release of the inioyned paine then to abide one daie or wecke in so greeuous a torment as the holie Doctours and all the Church holdeth Purgatorie to be Therfore to forgiue such a greeuous sinner in the latter end of his life receiued to mercie as we haue now spoken of a thousand or two thousand yeares of penance is as much in effect and nature of the termes as to remit and release him of so much punishment or the debt and bond of so much punishment in purgatorie as is proportionall and correspondent to so manie daies or years of penance as the penitent in this life was bound vnto by the Canons of the Church or the iust inioyning of his Ghostlie Father For the Pardons measure the matter not by the limites of Purgatorie the bonds borders or waie of limitation whereof the Church knoweth not but by the yeares and times of penance prescribed to sinners by the holie Canons vpon the bond wherof Gods iustice temporall in the next world doth as I haue prooued much depend To be short then plaine to giue a pardon of a 10001. or 2000. yeares or moe if the graunt goeth so is as much to saie as to forgiue so much punishment as might be answerable for so great penance not fullfilled in this life As if I were behinde with the Church and indebted to God hard before my death of a hundreth daies fasting in which case I cannot recompence if my Bishoppe then or the chiefe head of all the Eccle siasticall Hierachie doe forgiue me twenty of the said daies then my punishment shal be so much lesse in Purgatorie not by twenty daies I saie of Purgatorie paines but by as much as in force of satisfaction there is answerable to twentie daies fast here So that the Church measuring her mercies by the yeares of penance deserued by the law in this life or else where taketh effect not onely in this life where there cannot be so manie daies in our short time but especially in preuenting Purgatorie paines where there may well be punishment answerable in a verie short time to all the daies prescribed by the measures of the lawe and discipline of our present daies in the world FVLKE If the fire of Purgatorie be so much hotter then this elementall fire as this is hotter then a fire painted on a wall as some of your owne Poetes haue fained you maie adde this imaginarie proportion of greatnes of paine against length of time And whoe can let you to imagine what you list seeing you require to be credited vpon your bare worde without authoritie of scripture or witnes of the auncient Doctors But the holie Doctors you saie and all the Church holdeth purgatorie to be so greeuous a torment and Saint Augustine noteth it often namelie in Psal. 37. Verilie Saint Austen in that place saith that the fire by which some that builde strawe hay c. vpon the fundation Christ shal be more greeuous then anie thing that anie man can suffer in this life but else where he can say nothing of certaintie of the fire of Purgatorie whether anie such fire after this life be or no as de fide operibus c. 6. de oct dulcit qu. 1. as I haue shewed more at large in confutatiō of your booke of purgatorie You quote Origen also but I knowe not how nor what to finde by your quotation but certaine it is that Origen knew not the Popes purgatory although he allegorize of a certaine purgatory which neither the papists themselues do alow and it teacheth the heresie wherewith he is charged that the deuills and all wicked persons at length shall be saued To conclude the old canons graunting remission to euerte man that is preuented by death at his last end had no meaning of anie recompence of yeares and daies in Purgatorie as without all
proofe or authoritie you doe so confidentlie affirme ALLEN And yet I talke not now of taking or deliuering anle man out of Purgatory so much sooner as so many daies release doth import when he is in it alreadie but I meane as I often saie for the simples sake of him that is yet aliue and in the Churches iurisdiction and therefore may haue by the keies of the Church a pardon of his dets either all or part to preuent the paines of Purgatorie or discharge the debt thereof before that terrible daie come when it shal be actuallie required And in this sense vndoubtedly are the great number of yeares daies to be taken which be exceeding necessarie to procure mercie in these euil times wherein we may behold the pitifulwaste of Christian workes euerie where and litle penance to be done no not of the better sort of Christan people As for the other disobedient children that euerie way laugh their mother to scorne whether she vse sextritie of discipline or lenitie in remission they haue no part neither of the Churches blessing nor of the holy workes of Saintes nor of Gods owne peace and pardon Our Lord giue them the grace of repentance that they may haue a tast either of the Churcher discipline or of her mercy and lensty FVLKE You talke and meane that men should make haste while they are aliue to take their pardons whereof perhapes you are a proctor or pettie marchant vnder the Pope not regarding so much what the Popes iurisdiction is ouer poore soules in Purgatorie as how to get monie out of liuing mens purses for pardons and dispensations to mantaine you in your traiterous popery Your complaint of litle penance done is vaine hypocritical seeing you your selfe by mantaining of pardons are occasion that none at all need to be done of them that haue mony to paie for them God open the eies of the simple if it be his will to see your treacherie and either giue you true repentance orels that which your treasons heresies hypocrisie haue long agoe deserued It is prooued as wel by sundry examples of the old law as by Christs one often fact his Apostles that inioyned or deserued punishment may be released by the gouernours of the Church in their pardons THE 9. CHAP. ALLEN Some may here maruel perchance that such power should be giuen to mortall men as to remit such great portion of penance as by iustice ought to be enioyned or such a number of yeares as are appointed for satisfaction correction of former misdeeds thereby to remooue from the partie the heauy hand of god prepared for iudgement who would not wonder much hereat if they considered that the debt of hell paines and eternity of punishment which incomparablie exceedeth manie thousand yeares might by the Priestes office and alwaies is in the due execution of the sacrament of penance fully remooued from the partie penitent And where mercy putteth away deserued damnation there may much lesse force of grace turne awaie the punishment of Purgatorie being not transitorie and equivalent onelie to the penance of a number of yeares prescribed In which case if the Church of God should haue no preheminence now after the incarnation of Christ since which time the waiet of mercie towardes mankinde must needs be much enlarged our state gouernment should be much inferiour to the regiment and to the priesthood of the old law which trulie did in al things but as a shadow and figure resemble the Maiesty of our Churches prcheminence especiallie there where mercy grace were to be shewed which came by Christ Iesus Behold then some sleppe of this most excellent power giuen to our chiefe Priestes in the persons of Moses and Aaron whoe are noted in the booke of Exodus and Numbers meruelouslie to haue procured Gods mercie and sometimes by force of sacrifice praier and singular zeale to hauereleased some great portion of the paines and punishment which God himselfe by his owne mouth and determination had laied vpon the people With what meruelous confidence of his office and pitie of the afflicted sort did one of them crie out vnto god to holde his hand and pardon the people after they had deserued se great punishment for worspiping the golden Idoll of the Calfe in the wildernes Lord saith Moses this people hath committed an horrible sinne and they haue erected golden Gods Forgiue them this sinne Lord or ells if thou wilt not dash me out of thy booke to which thou hast written This gouernour and this priest praied not after a common sort for pardon of the peoples punishment but he claimeth it wish confidence and in a manner requireth it as by his iurisdiction and office Such was the force of praier and priesthood before Christs spirituall souer aignitie was honoured in the worlde otherwise then in a figure And yet god in a manner was at that point with them then that he would pardon punish at their pleasures For when the sinne was exceeding greeuous he maketh as it were meanes to Moses that he should not stay him nor his anger from punishing of the offendors Let me alone Moses saith our Lord suffer me to be angrie FVLKE Men may iustly maruell that you professing methode doe set the Cart before the horse and frame of your building the roofe before the foundation but if they consider that this way you take is of more force to confounde a simple witte then to teach a matter plainlie they maie cease to maruell and acknowledge that the compasse of your cause whereof you speake in the beginning will abide none other order But to the matter and argument of this Chapter it hath bin answered before that in the discipline of the Church the gouernours thereof haue power vpon good consideration and triall of the offenders repentance and not otherwise at their pleasure to release enioyned time of repentance which was enioyned for none other end so much as to bring the party to repentanes and thereof to assure or satisfie the Church But as the discipline of the Church militant serueth for the onelie time of her warfare in this life so the gouernors of the Church haue no authoritie either to inioyne or to release out of the compas of this life And therefore this power of binding loosing vpon earth cannot be extended to anie purgatorie paines or rather pickpurse after this life and consequentlie it can be no shadowe to couer the filthie and blasohemous nundination and chaffering of the Popes pardons for thousands and hundreth thousands of yeares What authority the ministers of the Church haue in remitting sinnes hath beene handled sufficientlie before They are Gods messengers to declare his forgiuenes to them that trulie repent and so they are to release the bande of discipline in open offenders where the fruites of repentance doe appeare Your argument that the priesthood in the new law is of more power to purchase mercie then in the
the head of the house But if he will saie this other man was no frier then he must shewe what he was whoe was the testator what fraude Luther and his Prior vsed to deceiue him and bring good proofe thereof or els who is bound to beleeue him But to goe forward other estate or degree or Apostleshippe he knoweth not that Luther had anie what then was not this sufficient calling for him that was a Doctor of the Popish Church to preach against the abuses and errors thereof and when his doctrine and conclusions were vndoubtedly agreeable to the holie scriptures might he not iustlie affirme that they were from heauen And that he was sent from heauen to teach the Germanes the trueth of the Gospell which of long time had beene hidden from them For that he was their first Apostle or that before his daies they neuer had any true religion or Christian doctrine he neuer said Neither did he make more account of himselfe then of Saint Augustine and all other Fathers of the Church although in the booke quoted by Frarine he preferreth that doctrine which is agreeable to the holie scriptures before the iudgement of Augustine and all men that euer were As for the familiar conference and talke with the Deuill which Frarine affirmeth that he reporieth of himselfe And that Cocleus and al his enemies doe gnaw so much vpon to prooue that he was set on by the Deuil to gainesaie the masse Is nothing but a ridiculous cauill For Luther speaketh of a spirituall conflict that he had with Sathan for saying masse so long which at length he acknowledged to be blasphemous against the death of Christ. Not of any bodelie appeerance of the Deuill or familiar talke with him as the malice of the Papists doe expound him Next Luther our Orator will examine Caluins vocation Caluine saith he was borne at Nouiodunum in Picardie What of that He was banished from his countrie for his wicked behauiour That is false For he liued in his countrie in good credit both of learning and honestie till the crueltie of the Papists caused him to seeke the libertie and profession of religion abroad which he could not haue at home That he was the veriest vnthrist naughtiest varlet of all his companions when he was in his countrie is an impudent slaunder for at Orleans he red the lawe lecture oftentimes in the place of Petrus Stella the publike reader and was so well accounted both for his learning and vertue that the degree of Doctorship in that facultie with full consent of all the teachers was offered him without anie expences as one that had verie well deserued of the vniuersitie Afterward at Paris he set forth that notable commentary of his of Seneca de Clementia He was of great familiaritie with Nicolaus Copus Rector of the vniuersitie of Paris and in good credit with the Queene of Nauarre sister vnto King Frauncis He had conference with Iacobus Faber Stapulensis in Aquitanes and after he had set forth that worthie booke of his called Psychopanuchia at Orleans against them which taught that the soules departed doe sleepe vntill the resurrection without sense of good or euill he came to the Citie of Basill This course of his life as it is written in his storie with much more to this effect doth witnes that he was euen from his youth a man indued with singuler modestie temperance and godlines whatsoeuer his aduersaries without all proofe or shewe of truth are not ashamed to inuent and brute against him When he was at Basill he did not hide his head as the slaunderer saieth but desired in deed to be priuate that he might better applie his studies and especiallie the Hebrew tongue But such was his excellencie that he could not be hid from the principall learned men of that vniuersitie and so litle was he hid that there he first set forth his Institution dedicated to King Frauncis Our declaimer saith that from Basile he passed to Strasburg and there began to shew his head and preach to the Runnagats But that is false for from Basill he went into Italie to visit the Duchesse of Ferrara from whence he returned into Fraunce where hauing set all his affaires in order he brought away his onely brother AntonieCaluine intending to settle him selfe either at Basill or at Strasburg But al other passages being stopt he was forced to trauaile thorough Sauoye and comming to Geneua onely to visite Farellus and Viretus by whose zealous earnest labours Popery being banished and the Church there reformed he was staied by the terrible obtestation of Farellus and by the Presbyterie and Magistrates chosen to be a teacher and intepreter of the Scriptures in that Church But that he put out the deputie of the citie expelled the Bishops and Popish cleargie reigned there like a conquerour by the law of ireason and force of armes as Frarine saieth it is a moste impudent lie though an hundred Lindanes had sworne that it was true For the Bishoppe with his Popish cleargie was departed out of the citie and the Religion reformed by publike authoritie receiued long time before Caluines first arriuall thether Of like trueth it is that Beza in his baudie and filthie epigrames as it pleaseth Frarine to call them farre passeth the wanton Pagan Poetes Martiall and Tibullus For in the moste licentious of these epigrames first condemned by Beza himselfe there is not one word of obscenitie although they were made in a fained argument after the immitation of those Poets And if they had bin as full of baudie tearmes and matters as Martiall himselfe Yet so long as Beza cōtinued in popery where they were freely printed selde they were catholike enough What should I speake saith he of Bernardinus Ochinus the preacher of Polygamie Verelie there is no cause why he should speake of him seeing both the man and the doctrine are detested in our Churches and by our writings confuted He nameth also Bernard Rotman and Iohn of Leyd authors of the Anabaptisticall sedition at Monster as though wee had any thing to doe with them Yes saith he they conquered the field against the Lutheranes by pretence of scripture onelie as Rotman before vanquished the Papists The storie is written who list to reade wherein may be found they vsed other craftes beside force of armes then pretence of scripture onelie to compasse their diuelish attempts And what if they had vsed the pretence of scripture onelie as the diuel did in tempting our sauiour Christ was the scripture onelie of lesse force to confute their false pretence then when it was vsed by our Sauiour Christ against the Deuill He telleth vs of Hosiander reprooued of vs for heresie of Carolostadius who thorough folly madnes became a ploughnian The names also of Peter Martyr Illiricus Musculus Farellus Viretus and Bucer a gainst whom he hath nothing to say besides I know not what Marote Malote And that these should vsurpe
a lordly authoritie and imperiall souer aignitie he knoweth not by what right except it be from sathā But we know that frō sathā the first father of falsehood come these shameles lies of their vsurpation of Lordship or affectation of imperiall soueraignitie Wel yet he proceedeth and saith the Bishops doe excommunicase them and the Princes banish them God sheweth no signe for them except it be a miracle to make the liue starke dead while they faine that they are able by the vertue of there gospell to restore the dead to life as one Mathias did in Polonia And the like is reported of Caluine credibly in Geneua Touching the excommunication and banishment by the Prelates of Antichrists Church and Princes thrall vnto the same it ought to be no more preiudice to the preachers of the Gospell now then the condemnation of the high priestes of Pilate and Herod was to the author of the Gospell of olde As for miracles they are not to be required where the same doctrine is taught which so long agoe hath beene confirmed by the miracles of Christ and his Apostles and those fables of raising vp dead men by Caluine and others are like the tales of Robin Good-fellow which are reported to be done in so many places that no wise man thinketh them to be done in any Next this followeth a wholl floode of tedious rhetoricall railing in generall accusations of schisme heresie tumulis sedition rebellion contempt of Princes and lawes order and honestie At length he desireth to be excused of his bitternes in respect of the cursed mouthes of them which raile against Princes and Prelates Yet bringeth no example but of Luthers penne whome many men wish in deede to haue vsed a more temperate stile sometime especiallie against Princes temporall estates and he himselfe did openlie acknowledge his faulte therein especiallie his immoderate inuection against King Henrie the 8. But as For the Pope and his wicked cleargie of heretikes the vngodlie enemies of Christ and his Gospell it were a hard matter to exceede measure in vehemencie against them so lies slaunders be alwaies auoided If Luther saied that the Turke in suffering all religions is wiser then Popish Princes in persecuting the gospell I see not that his saying is greatlie to be misliked For it is more wisedome to follow Gamaliels councell in letting all alone then to fight against god against whome they are sure not to preuaile That Luther diswaded al men to obey the vngodlie decree of the Emperour proclaimed at Wormes who can iustlie be offended which knoweth that the obedience to Princes may not be yealded with manifest disobedience vnto God But here a great matter Luther saied in hearing of the Emperour at Wormes vpon those wordes of our Sauiour Christ in the Gospell I came not to send peace but the sword That it ought to be a thing wished for as moste acceptable to Christistian men and especiallie vnto him that strife and contention should rise and grow about the worde of God The witnes of this report is Lindane who farseth his Dialogues of dubitantius with al manner of fables that he can heare sounding to the discredit of Luther and the Protestants Although I see not what great harme should be in these words being vnderstood according to the saying of our sauiour Christ that seeing all men will neuer agree to imbrace the word of God it were to be wished that many men would contend against the impugners for it then that al men should agree to withstand it But Luther is charged to haue set out to the view of the wholl worlde seditious and heresicall bookes wherein he laboured to abolish all due obedience and to perswade the people torebellion robbing murth er sacking and burning of Citties and Churches I hope there is no man so farre caried beyond all iudgement of reason that he will beleeue this slaunder to be true seeing it is not possible that such a monster as he faineth him to be should haue beene so much fauoured and cherished by Princes and estates as Luther was Neuerthelesse you shall heare his proofes First Wicelius Luthers enemie reporteth that he saied that men should wash their handes in the bloode of the Romish cleargie If this reporte were true it prooueth not the former accusation For allbeit the Popish cleargie were all slaine by lawfull authoritie in detestation of there blasphemie and idolatry The gouernment both of the Church and common wealth should neuer the more decay but how are we bound to beleue Wicelius without proofe in this or in any other matter Then saith Frarine he affirmed in his writinges that it was the verie nature of the Gospell to mooue and stirre vp warre sedition that there ought to be no Magistrate no superiour at all among Christian men For which he quoteth Epist. ad frat infer Ger. which is an impudent fiction For he neuer writte anie such epistle or taught anie such doctrine but the cleane contrarie of the necessitie of Magistrates in al Christian common wealths Secondlie he chargeth him to haue written lib. de Potest seculari that men ought to pray to God that the vplandish men obey not their Princes nor goe to warre against the Turke the title of which booke finde not in his workes And sure I am no such matter is conteined in anie booke of what title soeuer but contrariwise he writeth many treatises against the rebellious Bowres verie earnestlie condemning their disobedience and sedition Thirdlie he quoteth lib. contr duo edict Caesaris that men shoulde contribute nothing towardes the charges of the warres against the Turke which is malitiouslie construed as though he denied tribute to the Emperour whereas he commendeth the iudgemét of the slates of Germany which when the Emperour would yelde nothing to their requestes for the libertie of religion denied to graunt him a subsidie or contribution which he required vnder a pretence to resist the Turke when his purpose seemes rather to be bent against the French King and perhaps euen against them whose monie he defireth to be giuen him He warneth them also that they attempt not rashly to warre vpon the Turke who in councell and moderation doth farre excell these Princes and liuing as they did might hope of no victory Forthlie he noteth lib de bello contra Turcam and Luther assert artic 24 that it was not lawfull for Christian men to warre against the Turke and whosoeuer did fight against the Turke fought against Gods punishment Whereas Luthers meaning was in anie such writings that those Christians which were vnder the Turkes dominion and had free libertie of there religion should not rebell against him although they were otherwise grieuouslie oppressed Last of all he alledgeth out of his booke de 〈◊〉 Babil that neither man nor angell had anie authoritie at all to make anie law or one syllable whereunto Christian men should be bound to obey more or longer then it pleaseth them For we are said
Luther free from all thinges and there could be no hope of reformation except all lawes of men were abolished and the Gospell of libertie 〈◊〉 home with much more to the like effect whereupon Fowler the wise man con cludeth in the margent that Luther chiefe preacher of that Gospell would haue beene king alone him selfe and of those his pardoxes sprang the rebellion of Muntzer and the Boores. But good God what shame haue the Papistes in slaundering Luther in that booke speaketh of the spirituall freedome of conscience which Christ hath purchased for vs and which ought not to be entangled with anie traditions or preceptes of men against ciuill lawes and ordinances he writeth not one sillable But whereas the false Prophet and traitor Muntzer boasted that he did fight the Lordes battells Frarine calleth Melancthon to witnes that Luther affirmed the same namelie that God him selfe did rise and stand against the estates of Germanie and their tyrannie And who doubteth but how wicked soeuer the attempt doings of those seditious persons were that God vsed them as a scourge to punish the sinnes of the rulers That Luther prophecied of the victorie of the rebells it is a fable as manie others are which Frarine reporteth but contrar iwise in his writing against them he threatneth them destruction both of bodie and soule except they gaue ouer their diuelish enterprices After the discourse of the Muntzerian rebelles he commeth to Luthers marriage with a Nunne against which he inueigheth in two respectes First of the time which was immediatlie after the calamitie of Germanie And then of the person which was a Nunne stolne with eight others out of the Nunnerie of Nimike vppon good frydaie by his Bawde Leonard Knoppen after which time shee was broken with wanton toies and lecherous recreations by the space of two yeares among the schollers of wittenberg yea Luther tooke it no scorne to daunse and drinke carouse c. and all for verie penance and sorow of these mischiefes whereof he himselfe was author Though manie men misliked Luthers mariage with a Nunne which he perhaps did the rather to confirme by his owne act the libertie of matrimonie in them that had made a rash vow which they were not able to performe yet no wise man I hope beleeueth that he made no better choise then Frarine affirmeth or that he was of so light behauiour to daunse drinke carouse of all which slaunders there is no proofe brought but Frarines bare affirmation whose bould lying els where dogged scorning here let indifferent men iudge what credit it deserueth But whereas Luther did write most vehe mently against the seditious Boores by which the impudent slaunders of Frarine are most manifest he conuicted he now faineth that Luther turning with the blast of fortune when they were ouerthrowne did write most bitterlie against them affirming that the nobles might winne heauen by shedding the blood of such traiterous rebelles whereas it is manifest that Luther hauing diuerse times before by his writings at their first attemptes diswaded them from rebellion and exhorted them to obedience when by no meanes they would yeelde to his Godlie persuasions did at the last most sharplie inueigh against them and denounce their vtter destruction but yet at such time as they were in the ruffe of their rebellion when they were moste terrible to all good men after they had cōmitted many horrible outrages yet may Luther the traiterous Cateline of our time be thanked for al these bloodie tragidies not of them onlie but for the turkish wars also For he citeth out of Stoltius in somnio Luth c. that Luther came in fauour with Soliman the great Turke by such practises yea Solyman wrote in plaine wordes but he sheweth not to whome that he wished Luther long life that he hoped the daie should come that Luther should finde him his good ma ster Doth any man beleeue these vanities yet Fowler in his infamous picture would haue it seeme as though the Turke by his letters was called to make warre vpon Christendome But Frarine saith more craftelie that by occasion of debate about the Lutherane Gospell and so through Luthers meanes the Turke conceaued hope to conquer all Germanie when he came to the Citie of Vienna beeing the key of Christ endome with such a huge great host What if this be graunted is Luther which preached the Gospel of Christ the cause of the Turkes inuasion or they that will not embrace the trueth of God by him reueiled But he cleane omitteth by whose good seruice that noble Citie of Vienna was defended against the Turke that worthy prince Phillip the Palesgraue a fauerour of the religion reformed As also it is certaine that Solyman by the prouocation of Iohn the vaiuode made by his embassadour Ierome Laske an Hungariā was called into Hungarie Austrige against the Emperor and his brother Ferdinande by whome he was debarred to enioy that right which he pretended to haue to the kingdom of Hungarie so true it is that Luther was the onelie cause of Solymans inuasion of Christendome Likewise where Charles the fift without iust cause made war vpon the princes and states of Germanie that were entred into the legue of Smalcalde as the stories of that warre and the protestation of the states sufficientlie declare to satisfie the Popes crueltie and oppresse the libertie of Ger many Frarine maketh a great matter of their resistance saying that Germanie should haue obeyed him at a beck as though the king of Spaine were made Emperor of Almaine not for the defence of Germanie according to the auncient priueliges and liberties thereof but to the vtter ouerthrough and destruction of the same But his victorie pleaseth Frarine well and no cause why it should displease vs seing it pleased god so to punish the securitie of Germanie and to shew how vaine it is to trust in the strength of men Albeit Charles caried not this victorie cleare for while he keepeth no couenantes with the conquered and against the laws of armes deteined the Lantgrane prisoner who of his owne accord came vnto him to entreat of agreement his vniust dealings prouoked euen those whome he had most aduaunced to seeke reuenge of his falsehood by meanes where of he susteined more ignomine in the end then euer he gat glorie in the beginning of those warres But if Frarine thinke it so necessarie for Germanie to be at the Emperours beck in all cases whie did he not perswade the Louanians and all other Popish states of the lowe countries to be obedient at a beck to all the commaundements of the Spanish King their sufferaigne But if the King of Spaines sufferaignetie was not so absolute but that it was limited within the compasse of certaine conditions against which they were not bound to obey let him not doubt but Germanie hath better ground of their doings then all the young Oratours of Louane haue witte to controll As