to pray to God in their beginning as they had desired were not taken awaye meanes for good order established the better to brydle the confusion of popular showtes and voyces as happen ordinarily in the Schooles of Sophisters and people inclyned to cauell Thys spéeche of the Lord Admirall kindled such a sense of reason in the Lorde of Neuers that induced chiefly by the spirite of God and partly by an heroycall instinct of heart laboring in desire to aspire to the direct truth of things hée became a sutor to their Maiesties that by their authoritie and suffraunce the sayde disputation might procéede and be eftsoones restored wherein as he preuayled to the full effect of his request and purpose so after he had ymparted wyth the Lorde Admirall the disposition of the King and Quéene they ioyned in deuise touching the order to be obserued in the sayd conference naming the sayde Lorde of Neuers and the Duke of Buyllon as Presidents of the place wyth certaine numbers of Gentlemen mutuall assistauntes to recorde and witnesse the manner of their procéedings prouyding lastly two Notaries of Parys for eyther side to subsigne and set downe in wryting the true discourse of eyther seuerall parties These condicions thus determined by the Lordes were also receyued of the Doctors Vigor and De sainctes for the Papistes and De spina and Sureau Ministers Assembling according to the appointment the ninth of Iuly at the Lorde of Neuers house where in hys presence and hearing of the reast of the assistants after the Ministers had prayed which the Doctors did shonne as retyring elsewhere till they had done Doctor Vigor vndertooke the first spéeche with protestation that neyther he nor his companion came thyther to enter argument with the Ministers in any néede or meaning to be instructed in pointes of religion and much lesse to impugne in any sort the counsels and specially that of Trent by which they were forbidden to dispute with Heretikes Assuring resolutely for themselues to abyde constantly in the fayth of the Church of Rome onely such was the request of the Lorde of Montpensier who to reclaime his daughter the Lady of Buyllon had procured that conference as they were the rather drawne thyther aswell to satisfie hym as also to declare their holy zeale to séeke and bring agayne to their flock such as were gone astray The Ministers for their partes protested lykewise not to be enforced to conference by any doubt they made in anye article of their confession as knowing the same to consent simplie and fully with the perfite worde of God but rather to strengthen and defende it agaynst the Sophistries of such as séeke to impugne it pretending also to kéepe and establish the sayde vertuous Ladie of Buyllon in that state and holye institution which Gods grace had happily instilled into hir These protestations thus mutually alledged the Ministers looked that the Doctors according to the meaning of the Lorde of Montpensier and desire of his daughter woulde beginne their disputation with the matter of the supper and the Masse albeit vsing the example and pollicy of such as pretending the siege and batterie of a towne beginne to raise their Trenches a farre off so they the better to prepare themselues to decyde and consult in the sayde two poyntes began to lay their foundation by the authoritie of the church vpon the which they sought to establishe the certaintie of the articles of fayth and generally of all the holye scripture And so the demaundes and obiections passing from the Doctors and aunswers returned by the Ministers De sainctes began and Despina aunswered as followeth Question Vpon what doe you establishe your religion Aunswere Vpon Gods worde Question What vnderstande or meane you by Gods worde Aunswere The wrytings of the Prophets and Apostles Question Doe ye receyue by their wrytinges all the bookes of the Byble as well of the olde as newe Testament gyuing to them all an equall authoritie Aunswere No but according to the instruction of antiquitie we vse distinction betwéene the Canonical and Apocryphall bookes calling such canonicall vpon whose doctrine both faith and all christian religion is founded and the other we name apocryphall as vpon whose authoritie we cannot establishe any article of fayth onely they are proper in respect of their notable sentences to instruct the state of lyfe and maners of christians Question Howe know you that the one are canonicall and the other apocryphall Aunswere By the spirite of God which is a spirite of discretion gyuing lyght to all such to whom it is communicated to make them capable of power to iudge discerne spirituall things and comprehende the truth when it is propounded to them by the testimonie and assuraunce which he kindles in their hearts wherein as we discerne the light and darkenesse by the facultie of the sight that is in our eye euen so being furnished with Gods spirite and guyded by the lyght which he kindles in our hartes may we easily deuyde and knowe the truth from deceyt and generally all other thinges which may contayne falshoode absurditie doubt or difference Question But some may vaunt to haue the spirite of God which haue him not lyke as we finde by the hystories that all the heretikes thought assuredly to haue the truth on their sides studying to authorize their doctrine by the inwarde reuelations which they fayned to receyue of Gods spirite by which may appeare what daunger it were to reappose or commyt the censure of a booke or doctrine to the testimonie of Gods spirite which a priuate man perswades or faynes to haue receyued in his hart Aunswere This perill is easily auoyded by the aduise of the Euangelist Iohn in his first Catholike as not to settle an indifferent beliefe to al spirites but rather to prooue and examine them diligently afore we admit them and then allow what they propownde wherein the examination which we ought to make in thys case is to consider first the ende of the doctrine that shall be pronounced purpose of any booke presented to vs For if it tende to rayse and establishe the glorie of God it is true according to the woordes of Iesus Christ in Iohn hee that searcheth Gods glorie is true and there is no iniustice in him in this viewe and examination we haue also to consider that if it consent with the proportion and analogie of fayth as Paule sayth it agrées fully with the chiefe groundes of religion Question All men say and may saye as much but for this reason it is an argument insufficient tyll I be warranted by effect and other proofes how I may rest and stay my selfe vppon it Besides this aunswere excéedes the lymites of the proposition as presupposing the scripture to be knowne to be the grounde of religion and the proposition was layde to giue the reason to assure me that the scripture was of God and that we must put a distinction betwéene the bookes of the same Aunswere
Neuers made request that after their Obiections and Aunsweres they would procéede to Resolution on both sides touching the conference the day before According to which motion the Doctors say that to iudge of a Booke whether it be written of the holy scripture or not and likewise to discerne a Canonicall Booke from an Apocriphal or Ecclesiastical we must not rest vpon a priuate or particulare inspiration because a singulare persone can not haue any ordinarie certaintie that it is a true Reuelation of the holy spirite but stay vpon the common consent and accorde of the vniuersal churche And also that God notwithstanding he might haue reuealed to euery one the true knowledge necessary to saluation yet he hathe ordained a certaine meane to attaine to faithe which is a truthe reuealed meaning by the hearing of Gods woord preached by lawfull ministers sent by the pastors of the true churche as appeareth by the â—exte of S. Paule to the Romaines .10 and Ephes 4. So that if they meane to haue faithe and inwarde Reuelation of the knowledge of saluation come by the hearing of Gods woorde lawfully preached by the ministers of the same according to the ordinarie meane of assurance that we haue the inwarde Reuelation it must necessarily be assured that the woorde by which faithe is gotten hath bene preached by the lawfull ministers of the true church so by consequence be assured of the church afore the inward Reuelation obseruing the meane which Iesus Christe folowed They say further that the true and certaine marke of a true inwarde Reuelation is when it is referred to the common consente of the church And that of the contrary euery preteÌ„ded inward inspiration particulare or priuate is a false persuasion if it differ from the common accorde of the churche for Gods spirite is not particulare but common They say also that to take a false Doctrine we must examine it to know whether it be priuate or common like as our Lord in S. Iohn 8. hathe giuen a true marke saying Qui de se loquitur mendatium loquitur he that saith any thing of himselfe and his proper inspiration is a lier In like sorte it is written in Ezechiel Sonne of man Prophecie against the Prophetes of Israel which Prophecie say to suche as Prophecie in their heart heare the woorde of the Lorde So saithe the Lord cursse be vpon the false Prophets who follow their spirite and haue seene nothing And a little after they sée vaine things and a Diuination ful of dreames saying the Lord saythe and the Lord sent them not and yet they haue giuen assuraunce to confirme the woorde of their Prophesie which false Prophets said they had 〈◊〉 inwarde Reuelation and the woorde of God. They woulde also that it be well wayed and considered that the stay of religion grounded and assured vppon an inwarde inspiration is the foundation of many sectes of our time as Anabaptistes and Swinfeldiens who lay their Doctrines vpon priuate â—â—â—elations alleaging proper places to serue them as a grounde of their Doctrine which the ministers inferred yesterday as Ieremie in the .3 Chap. Ioel. 2. and S. Paule 1. Cor. 2. The which being considered by Brentius and Bucer they haue confessed that by the only tradition of the church we were ascertained of the Bookes of the holy scripture according to the Doctrine of the auncientes as S. Ierome who confesseth to haue receiued by tradition of the churche and by the same to haue knowne that there be foure gospels Origen also saithe asmuch who reciting the Canonical Bookes of the newe Testament saith I haue learned by tradition that there be foure gospels neither is there fouÌ„d any auncient catholike that hath stayed his faith to discerne and iudge of Bookes vpon his only priuate and particulare inspiration And S. August lib. confess ca. 25 â—seth these woordes Veritas tua Domine non mea nec illius aut illius sed omnium nostrum quos ad communionem aduocas terribiliter admouensne priuatam veritatem habeamus ne priuemur ca. And touching the Bookes of the olde Testament whiche the Ministers will not receiue as Canonical by the iudgement of their inwarde Reuelation the Doctors auouche that before S. Augustines time or at the least in his time in the vniuersall churche all the Bookes contained in the holy Bible without distinction were holden and receiued as Canonicall according to the testimonie of the Councel of Carthage where S Augustine was present and also the Councell Laodicene the Doctors also saie that if by inwarde inspiration we must iudge of Bookes the Fathers that assisted those Councels had it or at leaste might persuade them selues to haue it with more assurance than many others But where the Ministers saie that by theire inwarde Reuelation they iudge that they are not Canonicall 〈◊〉 Doctors referre to iudgemente who oughte soonest to bâ—â—â—â—eued either the inspiration of the Auncientes receiued by the Churche by so many hundred yeres vntil this time or the priuate and particulare inspiration of the newe Ministers They saie further that they offer to proue that the Aunciente Fathers euen suche as wâ—â—e neare the Apostles time as Irenaeus S. Cyprian Origen S. Ierome S. Augustine and others vse testimonies of Bookes reiected by the Ministers euen in the proofe of the Doctrine against Heretikes yea S. Augustine him selfe in the seconde Booke of Christian Doctrine Chap. 2. puttes all those Bookes amongeste the Canonicalles as also Damascene in the fourthe Booke De Orthodoxa Fide Chap. 18. So that to knowe if a man haue the spirite of God to discerne and iudge of the Bookes of the Scripture it behooues to reste vpon the common consente and accorde of the Churche as being the ordinarie meane of God lefte for that effecte experience also whiche maie be made is a sufficiente Argumente to conuince that the Faithfull by the inwarde inspiration cannot discerne the Canonicall Bookes from the pretended Apocryphall which mighte be easily verefied if there were here at this presente euen somme of the Religion pretended reformed to whom not hauing bene as yet instructed in the diuision of Bookes if those Bookes were presented whiche the Ministers holde for Apocryphal they would not distinguish them in any sort from the other Bookes of the holy Bible And vpon all they conclude that if a man haue Goddes sprite c. vt supra Aunswere Touching the firste Article the Ministers were neuer of opinion as appeares in their former aunsweres that their Religion was grounded vppon theire particulare Reuelations but vpon the woorde of God according as it is sette foorthe in the Writinges of the Prophetes and Apostles the truthe of whiche they saide was moste principally assured by the testimonie and Reuelation of the holy Sprite They saie also that Faithe is not the Truthe in proper speache but the persuasion of the Truthe whiche is taughte vs in the Scripture Like as also this Faithe is not of our owne getting but a pure
gifte of God. They saie further that the lawfull Ministers oughte to he sente not of Pastors pretended and whiche haue nothing of Pastors but the Title and name onely but of God as appeares in Ieremie where this marke is sette foorthe to knowe and marke a false Pastor when he insinuates him selfe or is sente of other than of God. Touching the Article folowing they saie that the true marke by which we maie iudge certainely of a Reuelation is rather the woorde of God than the consente of many bicause it happeneth many times that the multitude in the Churche declining from the woorde doothe wholy swarne and goe astraie as in the time of Micheas Iesus Christe and since in the time of Constance the Emperour Touching those Prophetes who folow and are ledde by their sprite as they that leauing Goddes woorde reste vpon the commaundementes and traditions of men or the vanity of their braine it is not to be douted that suche are not false Prophetes and to be eschewed and reiected onely wée muste vse greate difference betwene the Reuelations and testimonies of Goddes sprite and the vaine imaginations of the minde of men To that the Doctors alleaged that Heretikes as Anabaptistes and others serue theire turne to confirme theire errors with those places of scripture whiche the Ministers haue produced they denie not but it maie be so for that the Scripture being common maye be alleaged of euery one Neither oughte wée to staie vppon that whiche is produced but to weighe and examine howe and to what ende and pourpose it is alleaged by whiche will appeare the difference that is betwene the Ministers and heretikes Touching that whiche was inferred of Brentius and Bucers opinion that by the onely tradition of the Churche the Canonical Bookes maye be discerned from the Apocryphal the Doctoures séeme to miâ—â—erue their purpose with that seing they mainteine that all the Bookes of the Bible are Canonical and yet by their reporte of Brentius and Bucer it appeares that both the one and the other according to the Tradition as they saie do put a distinction calling the one Canonical and the other Apocryphall To the Article folowing wherein the Doctors alleage certaine places of the auncients to take away the difference betwéene the Canonical and Apocriphal Bokes the Ministers answere that as they haue alleaged certaine to proue it so also they are able to produce of the same for the disproofe as S. Ierome in his Prologue named Chaleatus and in an other which beginnes prater Ambrosiuâ— to whome writing the summe of euery Booke of the Bible he makes no mention but of those which the ministers call Canonicall They are able also to alledge two or three Cataloges recited in Eusebius who receiue not for Canonical Bookes but suche as the ministers them selues approue The Councell of Laodicen alleaged by the Doctors speakes for the ministers as not comprehending that wherof there is question and touching experience they Aunswere that it is a question de facto as being better to be alleaged againste the Doctors than the ministers Lastly to the ende no more time be spente in so often repetition of one selfe thing and that we prepare to conferre the pointes of the Confession which the Doctors wil debate the ministers declare that the .xxiiij. Bookes of the olde Testament which are in the Canon of the Hebrues with all the Bookes of the newe Testament be approued Canonical of the one and other parte and they are sufficiente to decide wholy all the pointes of their Confession and generally all that belonges to true religion neither haue they occasion by the meanes of that to delay any more the conference in respecte of difference betwéene the two parties touching the distinction of the Canonical and Apocriphal Bookes Obiection Notwithstanding the Ministers say their religion is fouÌ„ded vpon the woorde of God yet they grounde Gods woorde vpon inward Reuelation so that Reuelation is the ground of the woorde and consequently of their religion for they receiue for the woorde but that which they thinke to be particularely reuealed vnto them Touching the other Article where they resiste the opinion of the Doctoures that Faithe is gotten by the hearing of Goddes woorde it séemes they offer to â—â—umble vppon small blockes as not to enter into the principall And where they alleage that faithe is a gifte of God and therfore not gotten it is moste manifest by many ordinarie textes of Scripture that it dothe not differ one thing to be giuen and gotten as the kingdom of heauen which is giuen to the blessed and yet we doe get it hauing true Faithe woorking by charitie the scripture also calles it the rewarde and recompence of good woorkes and S. Paule saithe that by liberalitie and almes men gaine the grace of God Yea there can be none other vnderstanding of S. Paules speache Fides ex auditu but that Faith comes by hearing Goddes woorde which is the obteining of the same by the meane of hearing it preached albeit it be a gifte of god They vse the like subteltie in going about to rebuke the opinion that Faithe is the truthe reuealed as putting a great difference betwéene the truthe reuealed and the Reuelation of truthe which subtiltie shoulde be of force against S. Paule who sayeth Panis quem frangimus nonne communicatio corporis Domini est which is as much as panis fractio nonne c. And therefore to speake properly the text of S. Paule must néedes lie subiecte to suche rebukes So that touching this Article to the ende not to incidente notwithstanding the Replie of the Ministers the Doctors will dispute no more of it as being a matter too muche impertinent séeing that in the ende it would procure spéeche of merito and so from one to another It gréeues them to enter vpon the vocation of the lawfull Ministers of the churche and therefore to auoide that question they will not alleage which they might without any superfluous discourse that afore their Doctrine be receiued they muste be examined whether they were lawfull ministers sent of the true church to preach Gods woord and to be heard of the people in their sermones according to S. Paules place alleaged heere before which if they of the newe Religion had well considered they might haue a moste sufficient argument not to receiue their Doctrine bicause it is no lesse cleare than the day that they are no Ministers sent by the Pastoures of the Churche but haue foisted in themselues to Preache and are not able to shewe any signe of their vocation either from men and muche lesse from GOD And if it were lawefull to euery one that saithe he is sent to Preache the woorde it were to raise infinite Sectes as wee see happeneth in this time and so they cease further spéeche in this Argument least they giue a greater heate to the matter Touching the Article declaring howe we may knowe a Reuelation to be of God which the ministers hold is
rather discerned by the woorde then by the consente of many it resembles nothing the purpose of the Doctors For the question is howe a man may iudge a Booke to containe Goddes woorde and not to iudge the Doctrine by the woorde already receiued to which the Doctoures desire and the Ministers make request that directly to the pointe they mighte dresse their Aunsweres Touching where they saide of the consent of many the Doctoures phrase was not so but spake of the consent of the Churche which is as infallible as Gods woorde for as it is certaine that the holy Spirite is author of the woorde so is it no lesse sure that he is the soule of the Churche by whose guide shee can neuer erre according to the witnesse of S. Paule who calles it Columnam firmamentum veritatis they will not enter into this Question whether the multitude of the Churche may erre or not and yet it can not be founde since the Churche was planted after the deathe of Christe that shée hathe béene in lesse number than the sectes of Heretikes neither dothe it serue to this purpose that hathe bene alleaged of Constance and of the time of the old Testament for there is greate difference betweene the Sinagoge of the Iewes and the Churche which as it is a congregation of all nations beleeuing in Iesus Christe so it can not but stande and consiste in moste great multitude for otherwayes the promises made to the Churche of the Gentiles shoulde be vaine For it is saide to Abraham that his seede we must not meane of the fleshe should be multiplied as the Starres of heauen or sande of the Sea. To the Article that beginnes touching the Prophets c. the Doctoures say and confesse that there is great difference betwéene fantasticall imaginations and Reuelation of the holy Spirite But the Ministers Aunswere not howe they woulde proue their particulare persuasions to be rather Reuelations then vaine and fonde imaginations of Prophets whereof Ezechiel speakes which notwithstanding they called inspirations as also what they saide and preached they called it the woorde of God. To the Article which beginnes touching Anabaptistes c the Doctoures Aunswer that to one ende the Ministers and Anabaptistes produce selfe places whereof mention is made as the better to assure their Doctrine to be of God bicause they haue a particulare Reuelation as God hathe promised them by his Prophetes For which selfe cause the Ministers haue broughte in the saide Testimonies of scripture to proue that euery Faithfull man may iudge by his particulare inspiration if a Booke containe the woorde of God with Distinction of the Canonicall from the Apocriphall and so discerne the true Doctrine from the false which is the very grounde of the Anabaptistes and other Heretikes To the Article beginning touching that which is produced of Brentius c the Doctors alleage that the ministers haue not vnderstande their intent For they bring not in the saying of Brentius and Bucer otherwayes than in a speache and meaning that they know the Canonicall Bookes of the holy scripture by the tradition of the Churche and not by particulare inspiration as the Ministers doe Touching the Article folowing the Doctoures say that certaine times there were that some men doubted of certaine Bookes of Scripture as the Apocalips and Canonicall Epistles of S. Iohn with others Albeit which time and of common consent the Churche led and guided by the holy Ghoste hathe receiued indifferently for Canonicall all the Bookes that be in the Bible which consent continued by so many hundred yeares had more authoritie than the saying of one or two who notwithstanding spake not but of their owne time Besides there is no comparison at all betwéene the saying of one or two particulare men and the determinations of Councels and consent of the Church as is saide it will be founde also that S. Ierome hathe approued those Bookes as Canonicall as appeareth in the Prologue he made of the Booke of the Machabees where he saithe As for the Hebrues they are not Canonicall but sunt canonicae Historiae Ecclesia or suche like woordes Touching the Councell of Laodicen they take it as it is albeit it may be they are deceiued naming one Councel for an other And for the Article beginning touching the experience c albeit it be a Question de facto yet it can not be but of special value which if it be founde as the Doctoures haue propouned whereof they doubt not the grounde of their particulare Reuelation is pluckt downe and confounded Touching the conclusion of the Ministers the Doctoures declare that many times they haue cōplained that matters were incidented laying themselues vpon the iudgement of euery one that their last Resolution was drawne in one direct line handling one selfe matter withoute varying in which notwithstanding if there had bene found any matter of difficultie and that the ministers had desired to proceede to the conference of the principal points they could easily haue cleared the said difficultie the Doctors wold haue enlarged further matter of these Articles sauing that to enforce and hasten the businesse for the whiche they are called they forbeare to multiplie speache Where the Ministers alleage that they receiue the xxiiij Bookes of the Olde Testamente with al those of the New the Doctors saie that is smal respecte of matter For al the conference whiche hitherunto they haue made as by what Rules a man might discerne one Booke from an other with iudgemente whether they were of Scripture or not was to bring them to this point that they receiued them by the tradition of the Churche who as shée is the iudge of the number of Bookes And that by the same meane when was question of the vnderstanding of Goddes woorde yea in the collation of the places of the same Scripture the Ministers Doctors might haue such reuerence to the vniuersal church that shée mighte be accessed on bothe partes as iudge of the vnderstanding of Scripture whiche they woulde acknowledge to haue receiued of her and whereof shée is infallible more certaine iudge than either the one or other Al which notwithstanding the Doctors offer to the Ministers not to inferre for that time other Bookes than such as they receiue for Canonical only when they shal fall into difficultie of the interpretation of any text or the conference of many the doctors accompte it more reasonable to haue recourse to the vniuersal Churche and Auncient Fathers than to their proper iudgements or fansies of the Ministers Aunsvvere For conclusion the Ministers consente to the offer of the Doctors to decide the pointes and Articles of their confession by the Bookes Canonical agreed vpon betwéene them as the xxiiij Bookes of the Hebrewes and all those of the Newe Testamente protesting notwithstanding that in the last writing proponed by the Doctors there be many things whiche they approue not in any sorte and whiche they hope to reuerse by Confutation
Creede vppon the knowledge and conformitie of scriptures but vppon the doctrine receiued and approued of the people of God as the Auncient churche yea afore the wrytings of the newe Testament were written had a custome to propone to great and small the beléefe of the Créede afore they would commende to them the holy scriptures as appeareth by christian Antiquities And therfore the beleefe of a Christian dependes not of the woorde written by the Créede but of the woorde reuealed to the people and church of God. Aunswere Touching the firste Article it is moste necessary in teaching the Apostles Creede to a childe or other ignorante persone that therewith also he be instructed in the Doctrine of the Prophetes and Apostles seeing the Créede containes none other matter than this selfe same Doctrine and that they are things not onely conioyned but also like if not in termes at least in sense and substance For the second Article they denie that that which is alleaged before is any way contrary to the order established in the churche of Geneua or other church well directed wherin touching the reason taken of the fourme of Baptisme vsed in the saide churches it foloweth not by the woordes and speeches which haue bene alleaged that Caluine woulde shut oute the Créede and seperate it from the writings and Doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles a thing impossible but sheweth euidently that he ment to comprehende it therein when he added this woorde and generally which the Doctoures haue put in their Allegation to comprehende what mighte be ouer and aboue the holy Scriptures after the deduction which he made of the points of the Doctrine comprehended particularely in the saide Créede Touching the other reason that afore there were any Booke of the newe Testament written the Creede was proponed to such as were Catechised it is agréed vnto But it folowes not for al that that it is not founded vppon the woorde and Doctrine which the Apostles preached albeit at that time it was not set downe in wryting and likewise vppon the wrytings of the Prophetes vppon which the Doctrine of the Apostles is grounded For Conclusion the Ministers putte no difference betwéene Goddes woorde preached and written touching the sense Obiection It séemes the Ministers haue not well vnderstande the meaning of the Doctoures For there is no Question to knowe whether the Créede carie conformitie of hymselfe with the Apostolike writings but whether firste we muste vnderstande and beléeue that the Apostles and Prophetes haue set downe by wryting a Doctrine wherewith the sayd Créede dothe conforme and that other wayes a man can not beléeue the saide Créede But to vnfolde it more easily the Question is if it be not possible that a childe being come to the age of discretion or any other may by instructions of the Parentes or others beléeue the Articles contained in the Créede and be not firste instructed by them that there be certaine Apostolike writings whereunto the Articles of the Créede may be conformed And if it be necessary to moue him to beléeue it to knowe this conformitie And to these let the Ministers Aunswer absolutely Aunsvvere Faithe is by hearing and hearing by the woorde of God according to the consent of Iesus Christe who putting the hearing of the woorde afore the Faithe of the same saythe Who heares my woord and beléeues him that hath sent me c. Like as also he commaunded the Apostles to preache first the Gospell to the ende the hearers by the preaching might be disposed and led to Faithe By these reasones to knowe whether the Doctrine that is taughte be the woorde of God it is necessary to beléeue without the which also it is impossible that a man may either haue Faithe or beléeue in God onlesse he be assured that that which is taught him is Gods woorde And for the Question touching the instruction of children at the age of discretion or others whether it be necessary they knowe the woorde afore they beléeue the Aunswere is that it is néedefull And Thomas sayeth that the Faithe of the Articles of the Créede ought to be explicated that is declared which can not be done without knowledge of the woorde Obiection This Aunswere containes frothe of speache withoute any touche of the pointe proponed For there is no doubte that children and others muste not be Catechised and the Articles of the Faithe vnfolded to them by the woorde of God But the Question is to knowe if it be necessary they vnderstande that thys Woorde be wrytten in the Bookes of the Prophetes and Apostles so as wythoute the knowledge of the sayde wrytings they can not knowe nor beléeue the Articles of Faithe contained in the sayde Créede Whereunto the Doctoures pray the Ministers to Aunswere directly either yea or no. And after the aunswere to adde suche reason as they will which if they will not doe the Doctoures are of minde to procéede to an Article after they haue tolde them notwithstanding for conclusion of all that if this knowledge of the scriptures were necessary to the vnderstanding of the Articles of the Créede examining them according to the conformitie of the same Scriptures that it behoueth séeing the foundation is so necessary amōgst the Articles of the Créede to put this I beléeue there be holy scriptures and it is to note that in the said Simbole there is no mention made that there is holy Scripture so that a mā may be a true christian afore he vnderstand there is any christian Doctrine or woorde of God written therefore not necessary for the beléefe and vnderstanding of the Créede to know the woorde of God to be written in which respect the Doctors protest to speake no more of this Article Aunsvvere By collation and view of the Demaundes and Answers it is easie to iudge who offende moste in circumstaunce of woordes either the proponentes or respondentes Touching the second Article the Answere is as before that the knowledge of Gods woord is necessary to beléeue and to be a christian whether it be written or reuealed Touching the declaration that was made the Ministers Answere in their owne respecte not to approue in any sort that any thing be added to the pure woorde of God And they beléeue the Simbol of the Apostles to be no other thing than the pure woord of God which is proposed to vs by his spirite and therefore it should be a contrauention againste his commaundement to adde newe Articles to it mainteining also that if there had bene others necessary to saluation the spirite of God had not bene forgetful For cōclusion albeit there is no expresse mention of holy Scripture made in the Créede yet couertly it is vnderstande therein bicause the churche which can not subsist that it is not founded and builded vpon the grounds of the Prophets and Apostles is proponed there as an Article to beléeue Replie This Answere the Doctors say is impertinent and no more to purpose than
made and contained amongst Christians in Baptisme afore there were any Apostolicall wryting and in Baptisme it was proposed to beléeue the saide Créede afore there was entrie into the wrytings or speache therof in the primitiue Churche wrytings were examined whether they were to be receiued or not and the vnderstanding of the same together if a Doctrine were true or false by this Simboll and rule of Faithe and to imitate or confront it with it as Irenaeus Tertullian and others affirme And though it should happen that a man neuer heard but the Simboll without knowing whether there were holy Scriptures or not yet he might beleeue the said Créede and be a true Christian so that he were not infected with other particulare false opinions And of the contrarie if the beleefe of the Créede depended vppon the knoweledge of the Propheticall or Apostolicall wrytings as to vnderstand and be assured of the conformitie that therein is afore wée beleue it onely wise men and such as were wel studied in writinges who woulde assure them selues of the saide conformitie should be bounde to beleue the Symboll or at the leaste assured of the truthe of the same and so there shoulde be fewe Christians Therefore the beléefe of the Créede dependes not vpon the knowledge of the Scriptures By meane whereof the Doctoures holde by tradition of the Churche gouerned by the holy sprite that the Creede is of the Apostles and that there is no doubte thereof In like sorte by the same tradition we muste geue Faithe to it as a Doctrine of the Apostles not written and yet of equall authoritie with that whiche is in their writings notwithstanding we had no knowledge of other Scriptures The Doctoures are very sory that the other parte hath so muche declined to aunswere pertinently and absolutely to these twoo pointes why they proponed onely to shewe what Faithe and authoritie men oughte to attribute to this Symbol and all other Doctrine receiued by Tradition of the Apostles without Canonical writing whiche might haue bene lefte by them by the same meane and reason that is shewed that the Symboll was geuen to the Christians by the said Apostles without that they put it in writing For ende the Doctours persuade suche as shal reade this conference not to amaze or maruel at so many perplexities declining from the true ende of the said two pointes proponed with request to remember the conferences of S. Augustine with the Donatistes and Pelagians whose fashion resembles the presente manner of the Ministers with whom they conferre laying them selues notwithstanding vpon the iudgemente of suche as shal reade the matter of this disputation Resolution of the Ministers WHo affirme according to the former propositions alwaies mētioned by them also the better to confirme the faithe of the Duches that as S. Cyprian writeth it is incertaine whether the Symbol which beares the name of the Apostles was made composed suche one by them or els drawne and gathered of their Doctrine and also why it is called Symbolum whether it be by reason that euery one of them broughte his parte and portion to it or that it is a marke or certaine signe of Christian Religion as touching whiche Regardes it is a thing indifferente for Saluation as hauing alwayes one equall weighte and authoritie whether the Apostles write it or whether it was faithfully gathered of their writings as were also the Symbols aswel of Niceus as of Athanasius of whom the Church neuer doubted that they conteined not a pure Apostolicall Doctrine as shée hathe well and euidently declared in ordeining that the saide Symboll of Nyceus shoulde be openlye published to the people when they assembled for the Communion the same being in obseruation at this day in the Churche of Rome where this Symboll is readde and sunge euery Sonday in the Temples whiche if it conteined not Apostolicall Doctrine it shoulde impugne the 59. Articles of the Councell of Laodicene by whiche it is forbidden to reade in the Churche any thing of Priuate inuention but onely the Doctrine comprehended in the Canonicall Bookes of the Olde and Newe Testament whose number is there made The Ministers doo further affirme that the reason and principall cause of the Faithe which Christians adde to this Créed is the knowledge they haue that it is the pure woord of God and he that teacheth it mainteines also that it is Gods woorde the same appearing by the testimony and writing of S. Paule who after he hath proponed to the Corinthians the Deathe Buriall and Resurrection of Iesus Christe whiche be the principall Articles of the Créede as vpon whiche also our iustification is chiefely founded Addeth this speache that he hathe geuen them that whiche he hathe receiued whiche is that Christe is deade for our sinnes according to the Scriptures and after that he was buried and is risen againe the thirde daye according to the Scriptures Christe him selfe also proposing in like sorte his Deathe and Resurrection to his twoo Disciples alleageth to them the Scriptures for their more assurance saying Oh fonde weake of hart to beleue all things that the Prophets haue pronounced was it not méete the Christ suffred these things and that he entred into his glorie then beginning at Moyses and the other Prophetes he declared to them in all the scriptures the things that were of him selfe In the same chapter appearing to them after his Resurrectiō yea afore the créede was made speaking to them of his death and resurrection for their better assuraunce he laies vnto them the scriptures saying It is so written and it was méete that Christ suffred and rise from death the third day by which wée maie inferre that for the grounde of Faithe and assurance of the Articles of the same there is no better meane than to propone the Scriptures And albeit in the tyme of the Natiuitie of the Churche the Créede was proponed to suche as were Catechised afore the Apostles or Euangelistes had sette downe any thing in writing yet it foloweth not for all that that there were not other scriptures vppon which mighte be founded euery Article of Faithe Whiche to decypher by péecemeale the Article of Creation hathe his fundation vppon the beginning of Genesis The Article of the Almightinesse of God hathe his grounde vppon the 40. of Esaie and many other places of scripture The Article of the Conception of Iesus Christe vppon the vij of Esay For the place of his Natiuitie vppon the v. of Micheas and for the Regarde of the Time vppon the xlix of Genesis and ix of Daniel The Article of his death the Crosse vpon the xxij Psalme xxxv of Esay and ix of Daniel The Article of Resurrection vppon the xvj Psalme the Article of Ascension vppon the xcviij Psalme the Article of the Iudgemente in Daniel xij the Article of his sending the holy ghost in Ioel ij the Article of the Church in Esay 2. and Micheas 4. the Article of Remission of
séeing if it should be so it might be falsified corrupted They say that in their confession there is nothing either ambiguous or darke which some of the saide Doctors haue wel shewed whē they haue dressed a forme of confession vpon the Patron of those of the refourmed Churches vsing proper termes and sentences whereunto they haue added nothing to make it diuerse but that which they haue in difference with the Ministers that they could hardly grounde vpon the scripture Obiection The Doctours say the Ministers conceale no whit their boldnesse to deny things that are manifest as the opinion of S. Cyprian that the Apostles were the Authoures yea and made and composed the Symboll referring them selues altogether to the present hearers and others by whom this writing shal be readde wherein for their better grounde of this denial they rest vpon a very small reason which is vppon the Article of descending into Hell whether it was brought in by the Apostles or added by others as from thence to call againe into doubte whether they be Authours of all the other Articles The same resembling as if it were said that it is incertaine whether S. Iohn made his Gospell bicause some men doubte whether the Historie of the adulterer be of him But leauing that aparte the Doctoures demaunde if they confesse not in their Doctrine that God of his Omnipotencie cannot bring to passe that one body be in two places two bodies in one place Thirdly that God cannot bring to passe that one body be inuisible and fourthly that a body may be in one place without holding place equal to his greatenesse Aunswere All these questions are impertinent estranged from the confession of the churches yet the doctors haue chosen it for the fundation of al the conference in which respecte the Ministers require pertinent disputation that they chuse one Article or more of the said confession vpon which they pretende to pitche the ground of the saide Confession Obiection These questions are very pertinent to impugne the Articles of the Ministers confession for there is no question of the proper woordes conteined in the same confession which is no other thing than a summe of the Faithe But the Doctours seeme to impugne the sense of the articles which they knowe by theire proper writings by whiche they make open the testimonie that touching the Article of the Omnipotencie God cannot bring to passe the things aforesaide The Doctoures also shewe that it is directely to impugne the Doctrine of Heretikes and the true meane to proue against them that they receiue not the holy Scripture when it is proued they comprehend not the true sense of it They also say that euen the Ministers themselues be the causes of suche Questions hauing desired to conferre of the Masse by which meane the Doctoures woulde make them come to it For the Article of the omnipotencie is the principall ground to proue and sustaine Gods woord and the Reall presence of the body of Iesus Christe in the Sacrament of the Aultare maruelling much of much declining considering that when there is speeche of their Confession they demaund the Masse and when the Masse is offred they require their Confession Aunswere The ministers maruell muche of so muche superfluous matter proponed by the Doctoures And where they say that albeit they impugne not the termes of the saide Confession yet they resiste the sense the ministers Aunswere that the sense can not be knowne but by the termes by which reason they wrap themselues in a contradiction when in leauing the termes they say they will confute the sense Touching the Conclusion affirming that one body at one selfe instante may be in diuers places the Ministers denie in good consequence that that can not be inferred of the omnipotencie of God. Obiection The Doctoures say that it foloweth that God can not bring to passe that at one time one body occupie two places God then is not almightie Aunswere The Ministers denie the consequence aforesaide and alleage the reason as that it appeares by the holy Scripture that God can not denie him selfe as also it is impossible that he can lie and yet it were blasphemie to inferre thereupon that he is not omnipotent For the almightinesse of God ought to be measured according to his wil and things which are conuenient to his nature as the Maister of sentences teacheth saying that God is almightie in that that his habilitie is of power and not of infirmitie which S. Ierome writing to Eustachius confirmes by this that foloweth I will say hardly albeit God can doe all things yet can he not raise or réestablishe a Virgine after hir fall S Augustine in like sorte in the fifthe Booke of the Citie of god Chap 10. vset◠these woordes Goddes power is in nothing lessened when it is saide he can not die nor be deceiued And a little after God is almightie bicause there be things which he can not doe The same Author in the .26 of the same worke Chap. 8. vseth this spéeche he that saithe if God be almightie let him bring to passe that things which are made be not made doth nor meane that it is as much as if he should say if he be omnipotent let him bring to passe that the things that are true in as muche as they are already true be false Theodoretus also in his thirde Dialogue conformablie to this saithe wée muste not without Determination say generally that all things are possible to God bicause he that saith so absolutely comprehendes things that are good and wicked matters also which be their contraries And a little after he affirmes that God can not sinne as being a thing farre from his nature And so concludes that albeit there be many things which he can not doe seeing there be many sinnes that yet for all that he forbeares not to be omnipotent Obiection The Doctors finde in the reasons aforesaid a Confession of the antecedēt which shuld seeme to be only supposed God could not bring to passe that one body at one season shoulde be in two places no more than he is able to do the things by them alleaged for they alleage them to this ende to shewe that there be somethings which God can not do which they can not applie to the present Question that one bodie can not vse two places without Declaration that it is impossible to god And touching the reasons recited of the holy Scripture that God can not lie nor denie himselfe those places vnder correction serue nothing to purpose For as they haue alleaged out of the Maister of sentences to lie and to be able to sinne is not power but impower so of the contrary if God could sinne he should be impuissant and weake neither coulde God do so for then he shoulde resiste and destroy himselfe And touching the Examples drawne out of S. Ierome and S. Augustine that God coulde not bring to passe that a corrupte Virgine
Booke of the Holye Ghoste Chapter 22. whose opinion is that the Aungell whiche appeared to Cornelius was not in the selfe place where Philip was and he whiche of the Aultare spake to Zacharie did not furnishe at the same time he spake to him his Seate and place in Heauen But the Holy Ghoste is in Abacuc and Daniell in Babylon and in Ezechiell vppon the Floudde of Chobar for the Sprite of God replenisheth the Earthe wherein the Prophete crying saithe Whither shall I goe to hide me from thy Sprite where shall I flée to decline from thy face And Dydimus confirming this in his Booke whiche he hathe written of the Holy Ghoste makes this question If saithe he the Sprite of God were a Creature he shoulde haue his substaunce circumscripte and limited as haue all other Creatures whiche are made and created So that as it is that Goddes Sprite replenishes the worlde and is not circumscripte in any place nor lymited so it followeth thereupon that he is God. Vigilius in his Disputation whiche he wrote betwéene Sabellius Photius Arius and Athanasius vnder the personne of Athanasius writes in this sorte By this it maye chiefely appeare that the Sprite of God is God that he is euery where and not conteined in any place as the Prophete writes whither maye I withdrawe my selfe to hide me from thy Sprite By these places wée maye conclude that if a Bodye be not circumscripte termined and closed within certaine lymittes he coulde not be a Creature whiche oughte not only to be vnderstande by other Bodyes but also euen by Iesus Christe as appeareth by Theodorete in his seconde Dialogue saying then the Body of the Lorde is risen againe exempte from all corruption impassible and immortal decked with Diuine glorie adored woorshipped with the Celestial powers And yet albeit he be in this sort qualified he leaues not for all that to be circumscript as he was afore he was glorified whereof it foloweth that being true Body Creature he cannot at one instante be in sundry places Touching their allegations that the examples aforesaide apperteine nothing to the questiō proponed bicause it stretcheth not but to know if God may change the qualities into a Substance the substance remaining The Ministers deny it bicause in the Question there is mention of a Bodye whiche cannot be without his Measures And the measures and Dimensions be not as Qualities and Accidentes which may come to a Body and departe from it without that it be corrupted which is the nature condition of Accidents but they are of their proper Essence so that it is impossible that a Body be a Body but that he be measured circumscripte The first example they produce to confirme their saying is that it may happē that a weighty thing which naturally in respect of his heauinesse enclines downward may be raised on high wherunto the Ministers answere that the same may be in déede by a violēt mouing but this example is nothing pertinent to reuerse that which they haue said bicause such things conteine no contradiction in themselues neither are they contrary to the essence of the thing where they happen for a stone which a man throwes on highe leaues not for al that to be a stone like as also by the same mouing it is not depriued of his weightinesse Touching the Example of the Fire they aunswere that there is one selfe reason bothe of lighte and heauie things and that without any corruption of their Essence their naturall mouings maie be chaunged by force and violence donne to them Touching their allegation of the fire which contrary to his nature that is to skorche and burne refreshed the three Iewes in the Furnace of Babylon they aunswere that the fire for all that was in nothing altered neither touching his Essence nor in respecte of his qualities Whereof the proofe fell oute in that it sparing the sayde thrée Children burnte and consumed the Tormentoures or suche as had office to dresse it By whiche maye be well alleaged that why it did not offende them procéeded not for that his nature or qualitie were in any thing chaunged but onely bicause his action was suspended And where they alleage that two Bodies may be at once in one place prouing the same by that whiche is written in S. Iohn that Christe entred where his Disciples were the doores being shutte The Ministers aunswere that it is not so in the Texte but that the Disciples being assembled in one place Iesus Christe stoode and appeared in the middest of them By which it cannot be inferred that he entred the place where they were without opening the doores nor that he did pearce or penetrate them to make his entrie And it is no lesse likely true that they were open and shutte againe than the doores whiche the Aungell opened shutte againe when he was sente to deliuer S. Peter out of Prison and when he was likewise sente for the deliuery of the Apostles And where they bring in a grosse Body passing throughe a straite place alleaging the example of a Cable throughe the hole of a Néedle the Ministers finde it alleaged to euill pourpose as an argumente founded vppon a thing impossible and saye further that the Doctours haue euill vnderstande the tearme of Camelos whiche is vsurped in the Scripture not for a Cable but for a Camell As is manifeste inoughe to those that are but slenderly exercised in the antiquities of the Hebrewes and as appeareth by the opinion of Angelius Caninius vppon the ende of his Chaldey Grammer Touching the conclusion whiche the Doctors drawe of the former examples it is to euil pourpose and grounded vppon the Antecedentes and premisses which they bring in presupposed and neither as yet confessed by vs nor wil not be in the sense wherein they alleage them for the reasons héere afore declared Touching that which they say against the opinion of the Ministers that one body at one instante can not be in two places yea were it the body of Iesus Christ and that it was neuer written by any the Auncientes nor proponed afore the comming of Peter Martyr and Theodore de Beza the Ministers mainteine it was aduouched afore their time as S. Augustine in his Epistle written to Dardanus vsing these termes According to this fourme saith he meaning the corporall fourme of Iesus Christ we must not thinke that it is euery where as also we must vse good héede that in establishing to him his Diuinitie we take not from him the truthe of his bodie And in an other place he saith that by reason of the nature and measure of his body he is in one place of heauen Theodoretus vsing the selfe same spéeche or Phrase in his seconde Dialogue as hathe béene alleaged heere before Like as also Vigilius in his fourthe Booke against Eutiches vseth this Question if it be but a Nature of the Worde and the Fleshe howe comes it that the Fleshe is not in euery place
the Question For the Doctours demaunde seeing it is essentiall and naturall to a body earthly and heauie in respecte of his waight and heauinesse to tende downeward to know if God by his only vertue against the natural propertie of a body heauie and waighty can not hold and suspend it on highe And touching the euasion which the Ministers make of a most strong and mightie argument againste their Doctrine that two bodies may be in one place according to the proofe taken of the scripture not only to iustifie that God can bring to passe that two bodies may be in one place but also that he hath done it serues for nothing to couer their erroure as to say that in S. Iohn it is not written that our Lord did not enter by the gates shutte but that he was in the midst of them and stoode where the saide Ministers helde their peace and omitted this Verbe venit reasting onely vppon this Verbe stetit For the expresse Texte of S. Iohn Chapter .21 verse .19 saythe that the doores being shut Iesus came into the place where the Disciples were assembled and was there in the middest of them And therefore we nowe aske them séeing the Scripture sayeth he came thither the Doores being shutte and was in the middest of them Whether he was in the middest of them and in the saide place wythoute entring Or if he dyd enter seeing the Texte beares that the Doores were shutte when hee came how will they proue by the Scripture that he entred there but by the shutte doores the same séeming a greater miracle to be in the middest of his Disciples without entring into the place where they were This refuge is too light to saie it is not written that he entred For S. Augustine in his Booke de Agone Christiano Chap. 24. vseth these woords Nec nos moueat quòd clausis ostijs subito euâ—n apparnisse Discipulis scriptum est vt propterea negemus illud fuisse humanuÌ„ quia contra naturam huius Corporis videmus illud per clausa ostia intrare omnia enim possibilia sunt Deo. Nam ambulare super aquas contra naturam huius Corporis esse manifestum est tamen non solum ipse Dominus ante Passionem ambulauit sed etiam Petrum ambulare fecit Wherein appeares that S. Augustine holdes openly that our Lord entred by the shutte doores referring the whole to the almightinesse of God. Besides the Texte of S. Luke ioined with the authoritie of S. Iohn declares that he entred throughe the doores for the Apostles had not had reasonable occasion to thinke it was a Sprite and not a Body seeing him in the semblance of a man before them but that he entred otherwayes than a true Body and a true man can doo meaning that he entred by the shutte doores whiche a true man and true body coulde no waye doo Neither coulde it serue to any pourpose to saie that the doores were open and then shutte by myracle or otherwayes For so mighte a true body a true man enter the same taking away al occasion to thinke that it was a Sprite or Vision Moreouer the Doctours saie that all the Auncient Heretikes and Christians were of this common accorde that Iesus Christe passed through but their difference was suche as at this daye is betwene the Doctours and the Ministers The Aunciente Heretikes helde that Christe after his Resurrection had not a true bodye bicause he did woorkes contrary to the nature of a body the same implying contradictioÌ„ in the naturall body that in one instante he was in one selfe place with an other bodye as when he had passed throughe the doores The Ancient Christian Catholikes aunswered that truely the nature of the Body bare that he coulde not passe throughe the doores issue out of the bodye of the Virgyn in his byrthe without breaking it nor come throughe the stone of the Sepulcher in his Resurrection but yet that it did not imply contradiction that two bodies shoulde be together by the Omnipotencie of God bicause it was so happened in the three cases done and recited The firste that speakes of it is Iustinus Martyr in the 117. Question againste the Gentiles wherein he makes this Demaunde If a bodye grosse or thicke saith he be lette to be able to passe throughe the doores howe did our Lorde enter the doores being shutte after his ResurrectioÌ„ And if it be so why was the stone rolled by the Angel from the mouthe of the graue to the ende his body might rise againe he aunsweres euen as our Lorde withoute chaunging his Bodye into a Sprite walked vppon the sea making in deede by his Diuine power the sea harde to walke vpon it and not onely to beare his body but S. Peters also euen so by his diuine power came he out of his graue the stone lying vppon it and entred to his Disciples the doores being shutte by whiche as we haue to vnderstande that things procéeding of diuerse vertues oughte to haue a like Faithe euen so wée oughte to know that suche things as passe nature when they are done in the same by power diuine ought not be measured according to the reason and propertie of nature in whiche respecte our Lorde séeing his Disciples troubled with his entrie offered them to touch the partes of his body the markes skarres of his woundes to the end they might sée he did not enter by changing his bodye into a sprite but in his proper body composed of his conuenient dimensions thicknesse and that by his Diuine almightinesse which did al things excéeding the force of nature S. Hilarie in his third Booke of the Trinitie euen of thée saith he which wilt search things iuscrutable be iudge of Gods secrets his power I aske couÌ„sel that thou giue me reason and solution only of this deede yea to me that am ignorant beleue simply in God touching al things as he hath saide and pronounced them I meane that as the Lord hath oftentimes presented himselfe after his Resurrection to be séene and knowne of those who beleued it not So the same Lorde applying him selfe to the imbecilitie of our vnderstanding and to satisfie the doubtes of the vnfaithefull shewes a secrete an acte of his Omnipotencie Therefore expounde to me who euer thou arte that wilte be a searcher of the Omnipotencie of God the reason of this facte The Disciples were enclosed together and drawne into a secrete place the Lorde reuealed him selfe to Thomas to confirme his Faithe according to the condition he desired that is to touche his body and proue his woundes For whiche reason and cause it muste needes be that he bare euen that true body wherein he had receiued those woundes I aske then séeing he was Corporall by what parte of the house did he thruste or intrude him selfe within For I see the Euangelistes opnion is plaine that Iesus came the doores being shutte and was amidde his Disciples Did
be broughte in by Caluin and his like to eschue confession that God is able to bring to passe that one body be in diuerse places and yet the proper text of the Scripture witnesseth that two bodyes may be by the power of God in one selfe place as also that one bodye hauing colour and afore visible by Goddes power is made inuisible without any let to the eies of suche as may sée the same being confirmed by S. Luke saying Aphantos egeneto apanton I nuisibilis factus est ab ipsis notwithstanding there were no more leâ—te of the parte of the Disciples For it is saide afore that theire eies were opened to know him Whereunto all antiquitie consentes The Doctours adde to confirme the penetration of the dimensions an other acte that our Lord mounted to the Heauens which he did neither diuide nor rent and therfore it must needes be that he penetrated them as the Scripture beares in proper termes The Doctoures signifie to the saide Ministers that they cannot produce one onely Anciente of sounde renowme hauing expounded these places of whom thei may learne their so many diuerse interpretations neither dothe it serue to colour their exposition the texte alleaged of the Actes of the Apostles where S. Peter went out of prison in which place is no speach at al of opening the doores of the said prison neither is it saide as in S. Iohn that the doores of the prison being shut S Peter came foorth but that the Aungell arriued there when the Garde before the doore watched the prison where they saye the doores were open to S. Peter it agreeth not with the opinion of S. Iohn that the doores were shutte when our Lorde entred The like reason alleaged by the saide Ministers of the fifth of the Actes is vnprofitable to this purpose aswell as the firste and for the same cause And to shewe clearely and euidentely that againste the naturall propertie of Bodyes God can make that a greate and grosse Bodye maye passe into a space and place inequall to his greatenesse largenesse and thickenesse The Doctoures haue recited that whiche our Lorde saithe in S. Mathewe 19. It is more easie that a Cable enter the eie of a Néedle than a Riche man into the Kingdome of Heauen whereunto the Ministers haue aunswered two things The one that in the inuolution we must not turne Cable but rather Camel notwithstanding their own french Bible of the impression of Antony Kebul which they haue brought conteineth the versioÌ„ of this word Cable like as also Caluin in his Harmony of the foure Euangelists saith it is the better Wherein may be séene and founde true that which Tertullian inueigheth againste the Valentinians and Irenaeus againste him in the firste Booke Chap. 14. that suche as are separated from vs to putte themselues in an other schoole deuise alwayes some new thing to the end the Disciples may be founde more able than the Maisters But be it that the woorde of Camel is graunted to them which the Doctoures doubte not hathe bene expounded by S. Hilarie S. Ierome others the reason is yet stronger For it is more vnlikely and repugnante that a crooked Camel grosse and greate enter the hole of a Néedle than a Cable The other reason giuen by the Ministers is that God maye bring to passe that a Camell or Cable enter the eie of a Néedle whiche is notwithstanding againste the pure woorde of Iesus Christe whiche saith It is not impossible to God to doo it but rather easie and by comparison more easie to God than to make a Riche man enter into the Kingdome of Heauen whiche our Lorde saithe notwithstanding to be possible not to men but to God to whom nothing is impossible whereupon the doctours saie that if God can doo that whiche is moste harde he maye doo that whiche is moste easie The texte of the Scripture importes that God may bring to passe that a rich man enter into the Kingdome of Heauen whiche is moste harde then he maye bring to passe that a Camell or Cable enter the eie of a Needle whiche is more easie The aunsweres of the Ministers here before confuted tend to these absurdities and blasphemies that Iesus Christ by his Omnipotencie could not enter throughe the doores being shutte that he coulde not issue out of the wombe of his Mother through her body without breaking that he could nor bring to passe that a body visible should be inuisible that a body greate and grosse coulde be in a place inequal to himselfe that he could by his Diuine power make penetration of the Dimensions and that he maye bring to passe by the same power Diuine that one body be in two places for it is al one reason of this laste Article and the others albeit such things are declared in the Scripture not onely possible but that the moste parte haue bene done And the Doctoures doe much maruell how the Ministers dare denie this séeing themselues must necessarily confesse if the Doctrine of the Supper which they giue be true that the bodye of Iesus Christe is in diuers places which they proue thus The faithfull receiue in their soules Really the substance of the body and bloud of Iesus Christe by the operation of the holy Ghost and not onely the bread and wine or the effecte and vertue of the same Sacrament as Calume saithe in his institutions lib. 4. cap. 17. sect 11. The Doctoures conclude thus it is impossible that a person receiue the substance of the body of Iesus Christ in himself but that the body of Iesus Christe must be in him All the Faithfull which be at the Supper receiue him in their soules so that it muste néedes be that the body of Iesus Christe be in them and by consequence in diuers places as euery where where their Supper is made and likewise in Heauen They say further that Caluine in his Institutions lib. 4. cap. 17. sect 24. mainteines that in the Supper the power of God is requisite to the ende the Fleshe of Iesus Christe penetrate into vs and that humaine nature can not comprehende that but néedes must Gods power woorke in it By which meane Caluine puttes by the power of God the Fleshe of Iesus Christe in many places as bothe in heauen and vs into whom he must penetrate by the power of God And in the .10 number he saithe that the truthe signified and represented by signes muste be represented and exhibited in the very place where the signes be which he proues by reason in many places that is that the signes must not be voide no more than the pilloure was voide of the holy spirite But euen as the essence and substance of the holy Ghoste was conioyned and present with the pilloure euen so that the Fleshe and Bloud of our Lord afore there was true Sacrament must néedes be knitte and vnited with the signes The places be against Heshusius and in his Booke of the Supper
firste place they alleage that God can not do a thing to derogate the order which he hath established in the world in the seconde that it were to establishe mutabilitie and chaunge in Gods councels to confesse that he is able to doe any thing contrary to the said order established in the world in the third that if it were so there should be contradiction in his will whereof should folow that he were a lier And for the fourth blasphemie that the power of God is his will and likewise his not power his not wil And for the fifth they pretende that God would haue a body which in one instant might haue bene in many places afore they beleue that God could haue made it otherwayes they meane to infer that he neither hath could nor can make it by which the Ministers will acknowledge nothing of Gods power but so muche as he shewes by effect for which matter they alleage Tertullian All these blasphemies are drawne out of the propre woordes of the first Article of the Ministers Touching the firste that God can not doe a thing to derogate the order he hath established in the worlde it is proued an apparant blasphemie by the Scripture who in infinite places makes mention of Gods works aboue nature which the Ministers call order established in the world the Scripture teacheth in proper termes the God can do infinite things aboue the order established in the world As the wife of Lot which was conuerted into a piller of Salte that a barraine woman in hir last age hauing an olde husband had a childe That a Vine all drie hathe flourished A shée Asse hath spoken that the Sunne stayed and went backe againe with other innumerable Examples contained in the olde Testament And for the new Testament that a virgin brought forth a childe That a body hath walked vpon the Sea and mounted to heauen and generally all the miracles done by Christ and his Apostles aboue nature the same being contrary to the order established in the worlde From this blasphemie growes an other that God séeing he hathe established his order in the world hath not done nor coulde nor can doe any miracle But to proue by the Authoritie of the scripture that God can do against the order established in the world it is writteÌ„ in Esay 50. My hand which is my power is it abridged that I can not redéeme buy againe is there no more power in me to deliuer Behold by threates I wil make dry the sea wil put the fluddes into the deserte so that the fishes shal perishe for wante of water and shal die of thirste I apparel the heauens with darkenesse and putte a sacke for their couer But more expressely in the newe Testamente where it is saide by S. Iohn that God can raise children to Abraham of the stones Which place albeit may be expounded Allegorically yet by the literall sense S. Iohn declares it was possible to God the Deuil knewe and hath confessed that if Christe were the true sonne of God he might transeforme stones into breade The same notwithstanding contrary to the order established in the worlde And we haue to note that there is no lesse impossibilitie that bread be turned into Flesh by Gods omnipotencie than a stone transnatured into bread Wherin for such as denie this last done by the power of God they declare that they beleeue lesse of the almightinesse than Deuilles The confuting of the seconde blasphemie dependes vpon the disproofe of the first for albeit God contrary to the order established in the world hath done many miracles as hathe bene recited héere before yet there is no mutabilitie or chaÌ„ge in his Councell Touching the third blasphemie that if God did any thing contrary to the order established in the worlde there shoulde be contradiction in his will and therfore he should be a lier The Doctoures Obiecte that it would folowe that suche should be the will of God neuer to doe any thing against the order established in the world and that he wold haue stayed and declared that to be his will by his woorde For otherwayes it coulde not haue bene knowne what was Gods will. And as the ministers neither haue nor can make appeare by Gods woorde that suche is Gods wil as not to do any thing against the order established in the world so they must firste teache and instructe that suche is Gods will afore they conclude that if God made one body to be in two places or other thing against the order of Nature established in the world he should be a lier Touching the fourth blasphemie that Gods power is his will and that his impower is his vnwill According to the sense which the ministers giue it if God can not doe but what he will to be an Heresie of the Heretikes called Monarchians in the primitiue Church against whom Tertullian writes in his Booke aduersus praxeam and since renued by one Petrus Abaillardus and continued by one VVickleffe they in déede measured Gods power according to his will the same contrary to the expresse woord of God which oftentimes declars many things to be possible to God which notwithstanding he wil not doe as appeareth in Sap. 2 where it is recited that God could sende many sortes of afflictions to the children of Israell to chastise them but he would not doe it hauing disposed all things by measure number and ballance and that he might destroy suche as had offended him but he would not but vsed mercy to them In the gospel our Lorde saide to S. Peter Thinkest not thou that I can pray to my Father and he will sende me more than twelue legions of Aungels and yet as he would not pray to him so his Father did not send them although he was able to haue done it in the persone of his sonne Christe might haue let his enimies to haue taken away his life but he would not And the Father might haue saued him from corporall Deathe saithe S. Paule by his power but neither the one nor other would doe it which albeit the ministers might say was foreordained yet the Scripture holdes expressely that he might haue done it notwithstanding it was foreordained And touching the authoritie of Tertullian the Doctoures are glad they produce it as making altogither for the truthe againste their blasphemies and yet they haue omitted many of his woordes and sentences to confute their erroure as the text it selfe heere witnesseth Nihil Deo difficile Quis hoc nesciat in possibilia apud seculum possibilia apud deum qâ—is ignorat Et stulta mundi elegit Deus vt confundat sapientia Ergo inquiunt heretici monarchiani scilicet difficile non fuit Deo ipsum se patrem filium facere aduersus traditam formam rebus humanis Nam sterilem parere contra naturam difficile Deo non fuit sicut nec virginem planè nihil Deo difficile sed si tam abruptè in
the shut doores by the Omnipotencie of God. S. Ierome in the place noted by the Doctors writes manifestly that the body pierced the shut doores euen as the Poetes persuade that the sight of Lynceus pierced the wals without opening to sée through The said S. Ierome at that time did argue vpon the nature of the body which the Bishop of Ierusalem infected with the Heresie of Origen helde was not true in Iesus Christ after his Resurrection bicause he had passed through the shut doores coÌ„trary to the nature of a body to whoÌ„ S. Ierome as also other ancients persuades that that actâ— nothing derogates the nature of the body as procéeding of a supernaturall vertue affirming no lesse in his first Booke against Iouinian in this phrase Iesus entred the doores being shut quod humanoruÌ„ corporum natura non patitur And so with others he puttes the myracle in the body of Iesus Christ It is moste true that S. Augustine in thrée Bookes at the leaste vseth expresse opinion that this bodye passed throughe the shut doores and that as the same was wrought by Gods power aboue the nature of Bodyes so the Heretikes for all that ought not to denie the true Body of Iesus Christe this he speakes in his Booke de Câ—uitate Dei besides his place de Agone Christiano and the Epistle ad Volusianum already alleaged Epiphanius in his first Booke in the Heresie 20. and in the second Booke 64. againste the Origenistes declares that it is but a spirituall bodye meaning that he loseth nothing of his corporall substance but changeth and draweth to him newe qualities and spiritual perfections conuenient to Sprites as to passe throughe the walles without opening giuing example of the bodye of Iesus Christe after his Resurrection who pearced and passed throughe the doores being shutte And so iudgeth with others that the myracle was done in the body of Iesus Christe as pearcing the shutte doores as a Sprite albeit he was a true Body Cyrillus Alexandrinus determines also with others that this myracle happened in the body of our Lorde who by the same woonder marched aboue the waters contrary to the nature of a body by the power of God reprehending al such as stoode in any ielous suspition that Christes body was not Naturall By al these authorities the foure fundations afore proponed are true and therefore it is too greate an impudencie to séeke to corrupt the intente and faithe of so many Aunciente and Learned Christians to introduce a confusion of new interpretations For besides the diuersitie of Caluin and Beza the Ministers auouche twoo others as firste that the Angell opened the doore as if Iesus had not had the power to open it himselfe or had needed other opening The other is that he made his opening where he woulde by which diuersities the Ministers giue open declaration that they knowe not whereupon to reste And whiche woorse is they coulde not alleage one onely Aunciente as Authoure of their fiction or that is contrary to all the other since the Primitiue Church it serues them to nothing to alleage that the iron doore in the Actes of the Apostles opened to S. Peter of himselfe for the Doctors did neuer denie it only we said that the Scripture spake not of the doore of the prisone And if at the entrie of Iesus Christe the doores had bene so opened the Euangelist had as easily graunted it as he said they were shutte and as S. Luke said that this doore of iron opened of himselfe There is no difficultie that the firste that doubted of the body of Iesus Christ in this world did not agrée of the place touching the doores with the other Christians And all be it they thoughte to serue and aide themselues with it in the mainteining of their heristes as with all the other miracles hapned in the body of Christe aboue nature yet the Auncients neuer denied this facte nor the other like to it for feare to giue occasion of erroure to the Heretikes but they declared and distinguished what was the nature of the said body and that which hapned to him by the omnipotencie of God The Christians for any herisie did neuer abandon truthe albeit the Heritikes haue sometimes abused it But now seeing Christes body passed thorowe the doores without opening it is certaine that two bodies haue bene in one place and that they may be so by which we haue well proued our proposition which without either scripture or auncient testimonie the Ministers denie Touching the birth of Iesus Christe without breaking of the Virgine we say that a great part of the Auncientes produced for the place of the doores holde that this miracle also was done in the body of our Lord and not in the body of the Virgine sauing in that shée remained in hir integritie without breaking or opening And for their reason the Auncients haue alleaged the scripture Ecce virgo concipiet pariet and Ezechiel porta haec clausa erit as also S. Ambrose recites in his Epistle .80 wherin is contained a councel which S. Ambrose did assist determining againste Iouinian and other heritikes that virginitie and integritie remained in the mother of God in hir deliuerie S. Augustine repeating the same in the place alleaged by the Doctoures in his first Booke against Iulian Chap. 2. And where the ministers say that the virgin should not haue loste hir virginitie though our Lord had issued out as other men doe in this they are condemned of heresie by the Auncients who note Iouinian to derogate the virginitie as holding opinion with the ministers to whom the Doctors make this question what miracle they would acknowledge in the birthe of our Lord as touching his body and the virginitie of his mother if he came from hir as other men do from their mothers as the Ministers write And touching that which they alleage of Tertullian Origen S. Ambrose S. Ierome the Doctors say that Tertullian and Origen held suche heresie and many others which were reproued afore Iouinian of this they haue bin coÌ„demned with him his consorts But for the respecte of S. Ambrose it is apparant that he beléeued the contrary as wel by the Councel which he assisted as by that which he writes in his Booke de institutione Virginis wherin we haue to interprete his woordes that Christus vuluam aperuerit not that it was by breaking but by effecte of generation and production of his true body out of the bellie of his mother by miracle and vertue supernaturall in suche sorte that euen as his Conception was miraculous so also was his birthe And aperire vuluam is a phrase and manner of spéeche in the Scripture as to say and name the firste borne in what sort he might haue bene borne And touching S. Ierome he saithe nothing of the breaking but only that the body came out bloudie as he was in the wombe of his mother to be bloudy is not required breaking of the mother
the presence of Christes Body in the Sacramente bicause they saie that the faitheful receiue no more in the time of the Gospel than the Ancientes before the Lawe and vnder the Lawe And it is certaine the Ancients receiued not Really the body of Iesus Christ which was not then formed so that we muste conclude that vnder the Gospell is not receiued Really the Body of Iesus Christe in the Sacrament which the Ministers cal the Sacrament of the Supper To the 31. Article they aunswere not as in déede they coulde neuer answere And necessarily they must confesse that in vertue of theire Faithe they doo that whiche implies contradiction for they mainteine a thing in one instant one place to be present and not present neither doth their spirituall or rather fantasticall presence any thing seeing according to their Doctrine the body cannot be present but with his dimensions Locally Diffinitiuely and Corporally otherwayes it were to take cleane away or corrupte the body And the manner to be there spiritually cannot make that the body be not there otherwayes they saye falsely that it is present in the Supper and abuse the worlde wherefore it is necessary that if the body be there yea spiritually if their Doctrine be true of the nature of a body that the body of Iesus Christe be Corporally Diffinitiuely and Locally in the Supper Besides séeing he is absent according to their confession it folowes that he is not there present And as to conclude the Ministers saie he is there and that he is not there so for an absolute solution without entring into the principall of the argument they thinke to escape with obiecting to vs certaine woordes of briefe which wee haue not yet seene which wée thinke they haue found in certaine Breuiaries of Monkes as that thei remember wheÌ„ they were in the Couent they vsed so to chaunt and say But albeit such things were found in the Breuiaries vsed in the Romish Church yet such manner of speach might be defended in the sense which the Auncients haue giuen when they said the Apostles Conficiunt Corpus Christi Like as also the scripture saith that they baptize they forgiue sinnes saue those whom thei conuert which is vnderstand as Ministers of God who of his authority and as Maister baptiseth forgiueth sinnes and iustifieth the faithful persons Where the Ministers maruel that the Doctors cal faith humaine vertue considering the great woonderfull effects it woorketh the Doctours replie that they haue no great occasion of woonder séeing that all woorke so long as it is in man that it woorkes there with God is reputed humaine as also the scripture cals the Faith of man the woorke of man The Doctours delare to the Ministers that according to their custome resting alwayes vpon smal things they folow not that which is the principal in the mater not vnderstanding or faining not to vnderstand where lies the difficultie of that which is handled as they doo in their aunswer vppon the Argument proponed by the Doctours by which they obiect that the Ministers by their faith whether it may be called Diuine or Humaine may doo more than God can to whiche Obiection the Ministers without entring to the pointe aunswere with songs In the 32 Article thei passe ouer very lightly many obiections made by the doctors wherin whether ther be superfluity or repetition or whether they be impertineÌ„t the iudgment remaines to the Reader notwithstaÌ„ding al the the doctors wil not forbeare once againe to require theÌ„ to bring foorth some place of scripture to ground that God cannot bring to passe that one body be in twoo places séeing this coÌ„sequence is too foolish vaine God cannot lye he cannot then bring to passe that a body be in twoo places for so must thei subsume Wel God hath said ordeined that one body cannot be in two places then he cannot make that it be so but they shall neuer teach the truth of the assumption or Mâ—nor propositioÌ„ the contrary wherof hath bene verified sufficiently by many testimonies of the Scripture We demaund also that the Ministers produce some Ancient yea a man euer reputed Catholike that durst pronouÌ„ce that God could not bring to passe that one body be in twoo places But in all their answeres they coulde not bring foorthe any of that opinion excepte S. Augustine albeit falsely alleaged bothe in respecte of the Letter and for the sense of the Letter neither will wée cease to vrge aswell the Ministers as al others that there is founde neither place of Scripture nor Booke of any Auncient that God cannot bring to passe that one body be in twoo places Touching the laste Article wée are fully determined to shewe by the pure and expresse Woorde of God interpreted by the common consent of all Antiquitie that our Lord hath instituted the Sacramente and Sacrifice of the Aultare And wée wil teache the effecte and vertue of the Masse according to the Institution and Ordinaunce of Iesus Christe making also to vnderstande that the Ministers haue polluted and defiled the Sacramentes instituted by Iesus Christe And lastely that the Supper mainteined by the Ministers is no Sacramente in any sorte but a prophanation of Holy things conteining execrable Blasphemies which al the worlde ought to abhorre Sondaye the xxij of Iuly the yeere aforesaide The Aunswere of the Ministers to the writing of the Doctours sente to them by the Duke de Neuers xxij of Iuly aboute fiue of the clocke in the Euening 1566. THe Ministers afore they enter into particulare Answere to the Obiections and Reproches of the Doctours séeing in all their speaches withoute any occasion they laie vppon them imputation of blasphemie thinke good in their beginning to tel them that albeit thei haue heaped iniuries vpon them yet they holde themselues neuer the more wronged and muche lesse to be guiltie in blasphemie bicause they repute them for such no more than our Lorde Iesus Christe in the iudgemente and opinion of Caiphas the soueraigne Sacrificator and S. Stephen vppon whom the saide crime was vrged by the enimies of truthe and also Naboth notwithstanding he was innocent for it is a custome common to suche as hate the truthe and the light to blaspheme that which they vnderstande not and so yeelde to their proper and naturall furie as S. Peter Iude write that impudently they denie things moste apparante without shame confesse others that are straunge and obscure the same being offered of the Doctoures to the Ministers of whom they will heare nothing with iudgemente nor iudge their Doctrine vprightly but séeme in all the course of this Disputation either to confront them generally without respecte or at least to giue sentence without examination that what so euer they produce is either lyes or matter of blasphemie And albeit the Ministers handling the Omnipotencie of God according as they haue learned by the consent and contentes of the Scriptures agrée alwayes that he is
God Almighty as being able without exception to doo what so euer he will and that there is no power neither in Heauen nor Earthe which may hinder change or delay in any sort the effect and perfecte execution of his eternal and immoueable councelles yet his Omnipotencie ought not to be stretched without discretion or distinction to all things generally that men maye conceiue and imagine in their fonde fansies but to those onely whiche neither are nor can be contrary to his iustice bountie wisedome nor by consequence againste his holy and eternall will wisedome and truthe which is and shal be for euer to doo al things wel and wisely with number weight and measure without any iniquitie disorder or contradiction in any thing he doothe All whiche things being well vnderstande and considered are able to cleare the Ministers to all indifferent people of the slaunderous imposition of the Doctours raised and falsly pronounced by them to make vs hateful to the worlde And to proue it by degrées and set a truth of their slaunders they chaunge and alter almoste al the speaches of the Ministers either by additions or retractions as knowing that without that policie they were without meane both to grounde their saide reproches and giue them any colour of likelyhoode whiche shal nowe appeare by the deduction and particulare confutation of their pretended blasphemies against vs. Firste they accuse vs as to haue saide that Gods Omnipotencie oughte not to be measured but by the onely things which are conformable to his will and not to derogate his wisedome his truthe his nature or the order which he hath established in the worlde Wherein to verifie their accusation and slaunder they choppe and hacke this sentence taking the laste parte of it onely whiche they haue separated from the rest and which the Ministers had limit to the whole for a more expresse and cleare declaration howe Goddes Almightinesse ought to be knowne beleued and woorshipped of al the worlde neither haue they vnderstande the terme of order according to the sense and meaning of the Ministers who signifie thereby the estate and disposition whiche God hath established conserues and enterteines in all things by his eternall prouidence and immoueable will onely to intercept that no confusion happen in his workes according to the Diffinition of S. Augustine in his Bookes de Ordine and himselfe hathe vsed in the fifth Booke of his Confessions the which being not vnderstande by the Doctours they haue translated the opinion of the Ministers to the ordinary and accustomed course of Nature and to the mouing of the creatures whiche be in this worlde Wherein to procure a more exception to the Doctrine aforesaide they obiecte the myracles that God did aboue nature inferring thereby that God doothe and maye doo againste his Order established To the whiche the Ministers aunswere that albeit the myracles be done ouer and aboue the ordinary course of nature yet they are not done contrary to the Order aforesaid bicause al things referred to the prouidence and ordinaunce of God be well done and rightely disposed notwithstanding theire reason and Order be many times vnknowne to men according to the opinion of Salomon God doothe all things in their time to the whiche maye be appropriate a testimonie out of the Sentences of S. Augustine 283. and 284. God who is the Creatour and Conseruer of Natures doothe nothing in his myracles contrary to nature Neither doothe it followe that that whiche is newe in custome is contrary to reason c. whereof if the Doctours will knowe further lette them reade the seconde Booke made by the saide Holy Personage of the Order and likewise what he writes of the myracles in the fifth and sixth Chapter of the thirde Booke of the Trinitie This aunswere may suffise to confute the twoo other pretended blasphemies which folowe in the obiection of the Doctours And touching the fourth wée aunswere that the will of God maye be considered in twoo sortes as the Diuines teache which is as it is declared to men by woordes signes and effectes and according as it is retained and hidde in himselfe the one is called Wil knowne by signes and the other the Will of the good pleasure of god For the regarde of the firste consideration the Ministers confesse as heretofore they haue said to the doctors that God can doo many things which he wil not But to the other we saie his wil is equal with his power as also his power in that regard is equal to his wil According to which consideration ought to be vnderstanded and interpreted the sentence of Tertullian alleaged by vs and euill applied by the Doctours to the Monarchians as beste may iudge all suche as heedefully reade that place produced by vs who to aunswere an other reproche of the saide Doctoures accusing vs of wrong to the Auncientes as to accepte some matter of the Omnipotencie of God are here enforced to reiterate Theodorete in his thirde Dialogue who writes as foloweth Wée muste not saie without some determination that all things are possible to God for who so holdes suche absolute opinion comprehendes all things aswell good as euill whiche oughte not in any sorte be attributed to God. By whiche maye appeare that neither this good Authour nor the others before alleaged by vs woulde not submitte all things indifferently to Goddes power But doo excepte what so euer is contrary to his will and essence To be shorte to qualifie the difference betwéene the Ministers who holde it impossible one body to be in diuerse places at one instant and the Doctours which affirme the contrary there is but one meane which is that the Doctours without entring into so long a circuit and wasting of speache in alleaging so many superfluous matters doo proue summarily by one onely place of the Scripture that God wil doo it To knowe whether the Ministers haue wel or euil alleaged S. Augustine as to proue that a body cannot be withoute place and measures and also whether they haue well or euill defended that the Quantity is essential in a body and not accidental as the Doctours holde they laie themselues vppon the vpright iudgement of the Readers of the Acts of this conference Touching that which foloweth in the writing of the Doctours that there is no place aboue the Heauens wherein Iesus Christ is not comprehended conteined that the Bodies and Sprites are therein differently without any distinction and distaunce of place The Ministers saie that touching all those pointes they rather beleue the Scripture expresse woorde of God which they haue alleaged than all the suttleties and Sophistries which the Doctoures or others are able to bring foorthe of their vaine Philosophy Besides the same is expressely conteined and taught in one of the Articles of our faithe in this phrase From thence shal he come to iudge both the quicke the deade By whiche muste be noted that there is Vnde which is an Aduerbe signifying
are or euer were and attribute it to the onely companie of those that folowed their customes and erroures as at this day the Doctoures allowe not to be of the Catholike and vniuersall Churche other than suche as folowe the traditions and abuses of the Romishe Churche Bisides as the Donatistes persecuted such as stode against their Doctrine vsing euery violence and crueltie they coulde imagine according to S. Augustines testimonie in many places so the whole worlde standes to iudge of the rage and furie as well of the Doctoures as their complices priests and hipocrite Monkes againste the poore Christians in times past like as also for the present there is none that knowes not bothe by their Sermones wrytings and conferences what hatefull and grudging mindes they beare againste the seruauntes and children of God and howe much they would delite to roote them vp if their power were equall with their desire By which may be iudged whether they or we resemble nearest the example of the Donatistes And where they say we are neuerthelesse blasphemers bicause we shake of and detest the name we Aunswere that they are also neuerthelesse reprochers and backebiters notwithstanding they denie it and disauow the title Like as the mutuall effectes on bothe partes stande as Arbitrators to which of vs these crimes and names may appertaine or be attributed And where the Doctors in the same Article say that it is a blasphemie against the bountie of God to charge him with imputacion to be Authoure of vice and sinne we confesse it with this addition that it is also a blasphemie againste his truthe to say that in him is yea and no as they doe who vnder a coloure and false pretence to establishe the omnipotencie of God affirme that in one instant he may bring to passe that one body be in diuers places which is to say that he is and is not Touching that which they say after that we erre in the groundes of the omnipotencie of God as saying that he was almightie for that he dothe what he list and that nothing can hinder or let the execution of his Councelles we Aunswers that in that we folowed the Definition of S. Augustine in the Enchiridion cap. 96. whose woordes be these verbatim truely he is not called Omnipotente by any other reason than that he dothe all that he will and that the effecte of the will of the almightie is not hindred by the wil effect of any creature Touching an other their matter of imputation againste vs in that we should say that the almightinesse of God ought not to be stretched generally to all things that mennes wit◠can conceiue and imagine we Answer and vnder correction of the Doctors say we said not so but that Gods omnipotencie ought not to be stretched withoute some discretion or distinction to all things generally that men may forge and imagine in their foolishe fansies wherein it may eftsoones appeare to euery one howe they cut of and falsifie our speaches and sentences as to haue meane and coloure to slaunder vs. Against that they say after that it is a blasphemie to holde that God can doe nothing againste order we say in the contrary that to thinke and speake that he can doe any thing which is not well ordained is to blaspheme his wisdome and eternall prouidence In the Article folowing the Doctoures pretende that for one body at one instante to be in diuers places is not a thing that derogates the truthe of God we maintaine the contratrary that it would derogate bothe his truthe bicause there should be in him as is sayde yea and no and also his wisdome for that in his woorkes there shoulde be disorder and confusion and by consequent it woulde derogate his omnipotencie séeing that in his doings there would be imperfection And we say further that it would not only be againste the disposition and ordinary course of nature as the Doctors faine to thinke and vnderstande but also against the eternal and immoueable will of our God. And where the Doctoures to proue that God may doe any thing againste order affirme that he may chaunge and alter the order he hathe established in the world we confesse it but denie that in doing so he shoulde doe any thing that was disordained as for Example all the Faithfull and Christians beléeue that God in the ende will renue the state of all the worlde and yet in this time notwithstanding there shall be nothing which is not well ordained perfect and accomplished in all his partes In the Article folowing the Doctors confound the distinction proponed by vs in our Aunswere betwéene the will of God manifested that which he holds hid in himselfe and is equall to his power as we haue héeretofore amplie declared wherin the Doctors propone a false touching the wil of God manifested as taking generally that which we agréed vnto thē only in certaine particulare cases which is that God can doe more in certaine things than he hath declared he wil which no man doubtes as S. Augustine saith in his booke of perfecte iustice that he cā not wel bring to passe that a man be perfect in this worlde and so sanctifie him that there rest no more infirmitie or imperfection in him and yet he neuer declared to vs by his woorde that he would doe it But of the contrary that the fleshe will alwayes resist the spirite in all those that are regenerate in suche sorte that all the time of their liues they shal be imperfect in many partes But be it that in this case and any other like to it God can doe more than his will beares that is manifest to vs in his woorde yet it is not to say for all that but that there be other cases wherin God hathe reuealed to vs his will against the which he can not do or order any thing as for example he hathe tolde vs that he is one that he is immoueable incomprehensible altogether good wholly iust no way imperfecte and euery way true against all which things which are disclosed to vs and plainely pronounced in his woorde it is impossible to him euer to thinke say do or order any thing it is not so then that the matter proponed and debated by the Doctoures touching a body to be in diuers places at one instant is comprehended within this being as is said contrary to the truth of God which shal serue to answer their flaūders and to al else which they haue proponed in this Article as also in an other Article folowing where they say the God can not only but that he wil also bring to passe that one body occupie diuers places in one instant which shal be more impossible to them to proue the power aforesaide by the which they haue made so muche laboure hithertofore in vaine In the definition which they vse of a body in the Article folowing they say against themselues in holding that the dimensions are essentiall
caÌ„ change the order which he hath established in nature then he caÌ„ also bring to passe that one bodie at one time be in many places we denie the consequence and by this reason suche a case would not only chaunge the order but also woulde intangle contradiction which euen by the Confession of the Doctors is out of the omnipotencie of God. In the Article folowing they doe the same which they reproche in vs as darkening that which we clearely proponed in our last wryting by meane whereof if they will that we Answere them at large let them vnfolde it better Where the Doctors accuse vs to haue malitiously concealed this woord place in the matter of circumscription of a body measured we say it was not néedeful to vse that woord expresly there bicause there is no man so ignorant who vnderstanding that a body is circumscripte inferreth not immediatly that then he is comprehended in a certaine place Touching the Camell if they suffice not with that hathe bene already saide let him read againe S. Ieromes opinion in his firste Booke againste the Pelagians who expounding the woords of Iesus Christe saithe as foloweth in this the Lord hath not saide that which might be done but hath compared one impossibilitie with an other for as a Camel caÌ„ not enter the hole of a needle so a rich man shal not enter into the kingdome of heauen or if thou shewe me that a rich man entreth there it shall folowe also that a Camell may passe thorowe the hole of a needle doe not alleage to me Abraham and others whom we reade in the olde Testament to be riche and being suche did enter into the kingdome of heauen bicause they vsing their riches well and employing them to good woorkes did cease by that meane to be riche thus it is written in S Ierome So that as it is necessary by his opinion that for the saluation of the riche man there be a chaunge in his heart and that he forbeare to be riche to the ende to enter into the kingdome of heauen so there muste be mutation in the Camell and he to chaunge his proportion to make him passe thorowe the eie of a néedle Touching the Article folowing we say that with gods grace we can discerne the light froÌ„ darknesse dreames froÌ„ mater of truth the same being the occasion that we cannot approue either the argumentes or the conclusions of the Doctours touching one body to be in many places at one instant being most assured by good and certaine testimonies of the Scripture that all that they go about to proue proceedes not from other where than of the spirite of errour and lyes Who by this meanes labours to retayne the impietie and idolatrye which heretofore he hath established in the world to the destruction almost of all Christendome Touching the Verbe Diâ—rchestaâ— the Doctors finde them selues somewhat troubled to saue their penetracion whych they cannot any way ground vpon the proper signification of that tearme neither yet vpon any authority of the scripture as hath bene to them by the places heretofore produced To proue that faith comes partlie of our selues and not wholy of God the Doctors alledge that no man beleues nisi volens which is that no man beleues but willingly we answer that vnder correction of our Maisters that is to euyll purpose bicause suche wyll and consent are of God who workes in the faithfull the wyll and well doyng the same being very well taught by S. Augustine in one of hys Epistels where he saith that when God cals the faithfull to saluation he findes in them no good wil at al but that he makes and creates it in their heartes if he meane to finde it there That which the Doctors alledge of S. Paule that we worke with God serues no way to their purpose For the Apostle speaketh therof the Minister not meaning there other thing than that which he writes more clearely to the Corâ—â—â—â—â—â—s in these wordes we are Embassadours of Christ as if God exhorted by vs And that which they adde that none of the auncient Doctors haue taught that a body cannot bée in diuers places at one time we saye they haue As our former writinges haue proued as being alledged in the textes of S. Augustine ad Dardanum and in the .30 treatise of S. Iohn We aunswer onely to two pointes of the aduertisement of the Doctors The first is that our sermons our writings the discipline obserued in our Churches the censures wee make of the slaunders there committed the care we haue to discouer reprehende and correct them the payne we take to reforme what is there disordered the publike prayers we make in all places to that ende defende vs towardes all honest men and iustifie vs agaynst the slaunders of the Doctors The seconde is that the Doctors abuse their aduertisement in saying that Abraham doubted of the promise the same beyng all together contrarye to the opinion of the Apostle in the fourth to the Romaines where he sayth in proper tearmes he made no doubt of the promise of God by distrust but was strengthened by faith giuing glory to God. To aunswer the last obiection of the Doctors made as they say against our aunswere giuen to their former question vpon the matter of the supper how soeuer they fayne not to haue delayed the conference and disputation of the Supper and the Masse yet they are not able to persuade any of any iudgemeÌ„t that hetherunto they haue not alwaies and yet do not shift off to enter into it For what requestes so euer came from the Lady of Buyllon or at any time made by vs yea notwithstanding the desire wyl many meanes made by the Duke of Nyuernois to drawe them to it yet they haue stand alwaies vnwylling yea and as it were impossible to enter vpon these two pointes The which when wée well perceiued contayning notwithstanding our desire not to depart from them tyll wée had first conferred therein We often protested not to dispute further with them if those two articles were not first decided and resolued To which ende we proponed certaine argumentes as well of the one as the other by order and good Methode to the end they might aduise what they wold oppugne and gaynsay in the sayd argumentes But the doctors dissimuling herein in place to pursue theÌ„ propone other friuolous and vnprofitable questions drawne out of theyr schoole diuinitie And notwithstanding our iust occasion of greefe in that our arguments were omitted by the Doctors yet to cut of all further pretence or colour to defer we haue answered their last questions And now in place to followe our answers reuerse them if thei had meane they propone eftsoones other new questioÌ„s no lesse friuolous than the first the same reuealing sufficiently their fansies dissimulation with discouery to euery man that they disguise their wyl to conferre vpon the sayd pointes seing they do what they can to alter the