for except one onely Bristowe who obseruing no good order of replying but gathering here and there at his pleasure whatsoeuer he thought himself best able to reproue hath made a shew of defence of Allens Articles and Purgatorie none other haue as yet set foorth any iust replication to the rest of my writings And as for Bristow he hath my reioynder vnto his reply these two yeares in his hand to consider vpon the other that of late haue set forth Popish treatises haue indeuoured themselues almost cuery one of them to haue a snatch or two at some one od thing or other in my bookes wherin they would seeme to haue aduantage that belike they would haue their simple readers thinke to be a sufficient confuration of al that euer I haue written against them I haue thought good therefore as neere as I can to gather all their cauils together and briefely to shape an answere to euery one of them that the indifferēt reader may see iudge what sound matter they haue brought against me wher with in shewe of wordes they would haue it seeme as though they had confuted me First Master Allen in his late Apologie fol. 63. accusing the Protestants to feigne an appellatiō vnto the iudgement of the most auncient fathers of the primitiue Church and yet not to abide by it not esteeming them better than the present gouernment of the Popish Church but as of men deceiued as of humane traditions c. As in their writings saith he it is most euident where from Peters time downward they make the chiefest fathers the ministers and furtherers of Antichrist For this euidence he quoteth Beza in 2. Thess. 2. Retentiue p. 248. How vniustly Beza is slandered to be a witnesse of this accusation they that vnderstande y ◠Latine tongue may see in the places quoted But touching my selfe the booke which he quoteth hauing scarse halfe so many pages I might intreat him for a new quotation but that I gesse he meaneth a place in my confutation of Sanders booke which he calleth the Rocke of the church which was printed with the Retentiue and continueth the number of pages from it In that booke pag. 248. there is nothing that soundeth toward such a matter except it be these wordes As for Leo and Gregorie bishops of Rome although they were not come to the full pride of Antichrist yet the mysterie of iniquitie hauing wrought in that seat neere fiue or sixe hundred yeres before them and then greatly increased they were so deceiued with the long continuance of error that they thought the dignitie of Peter was much more ouer the rest of his fellow Apostles than the holy scriptures of God against which no continuance of errour can prescribe doth either allowe or beare withall Wherefore although he haue some shew out of the old writers yet hath he nothing directly to prooue that Peter did excell the other Apostles in bishoplike authoritie and out of the worde of God no one iote or title that Peter as a bishop excelled the other Apostles not as Apostles but as bishops First it is manifest euen to the eye that Allens slander is not expressed in these wordes Then let vs see if it may be imployed The mysterie of iniquitie did worke in the see of Rome from the Apostles time taking increase by litle litle vntill sixe hundred yeares and more after Christ when Antichrist began to be openly shewed and manie of the ancient fathers not espying the subtiltie of Sathans secret purpose were deceiued to thinke something more of Peters prerogatiue of the bishops of Romes dignitie than by the worde of God was granted to either of them this is in effect as much as I affirme but here of it followeth not that I make them the ministers and furtherers of Antichrist For those are the ministers and furtherers of Antichrist which willingly lend all their power to maintaine and vphold his kingdom after he hath inuaded the tyrannie The auncient fathers meant nothing lesse by admitting of the bishops of Romes prerogatiue vnder colour of Peters successour than to serue him or aduance him into the throne of Antichrist Not euerie one whome Satan hath seduced that he might prepare a way for the aduauncement of his tyrannie is a minister and furtherer of Satan or his tyrannie for then should all men be counted ministers or furtherers of Satan seeing the kingdome of sinne is increased by the frailtie of all men which by temptation of the diuell fall into sinne Beside that manie of the auncient fathers openly resisted the vsurped power of the bishops of Rome when it began onely to budde vp and was yet farre off from Antichristian tyrannie although it tended somewhat toward the same So did the bishops of the East churches countermaund Victor bishop of Rome contending about the celebration of Easter So did Irenaeus Polycrates and many other godly fathers in publike writings openly reprehend him So did Cyprian in diuerse Epistles expostulate with the bishops of Rome for medling with causes that pertained to his iurisdiction So did all the bishops of Aphrica make decrees against the vsurped authoritie and titles of the bishops of Rome denying all appeales vnto the sea of Rome excōmunicating all them that would appeale to any place beyond the sea discouering also the forged Canon of the Nicen Councel by which the bishops of Rome challenged that prerogatiue So that M. Allen by this his slander hath done iniury to mee and hurt to himselfe while men by this example may iudge of his synceritie in other matters Next commeth in the discouerie of I. Nicols denying that they make the Catholike religion locall or of one prouince as he chargeth mee with some scornefull termes of reproche to affirme in my bad answere to Howlet I said in deede that S. Augustine De vnit Eccles Cap. 4. doth cleare vs of schisme who willingly communicate with all the whole bodie of Christs Church dispersed ouer the world and charge the Popish faction both of schisme heresie of schisme because they maintaine the Church to be onely in a part of Europe as the Donatistes did in Aphrica c. And what iniury haue I done to the Papistes in so saying The Donatists sayd the Church was perished out of all the worlde remained only in Aphrica not assigning any place of Aphrica whereunto the Church must be regardant as the Papistes do the citie of Rome but affirming that true Catholikes remained onely in Aphrica being consumed out of all other partes of the earth And what say the Papistes of all the Oriental churches of Greece of Asia of Aphrike that acknowledge not the Popes authoritie Doe they not accompt them all for heretikes or schismatikes Then it followeth that they acknowledge the Church to remaine only in those partes of Europe that are subiect to the Pope and Church of Rome But perhaps they wil alledge their newly founded Churches
ascribing that Reuelation to Sainct Iohn the Euangelist and Apostle Last of all you say it is most certaine and we knowe best by our vsuall doings that it is a principall way to discredit any booke to deny it to be the authors vnder whose name it hath bene receyued Howe certaine it is with you whereof no man else but you can see any light of reason or necessitie of conclusion I knowe not but wee are not so voyde of witte if we lacked honestie that we would discredite Paules Epistle by saying it was Peters or Augustines sermon by saying it was Ambrose or Chrysostomes worke by saying it was Basils But if wee would bring any booke out of credite by denying the auctor whose title it hath borne wee would rather intitle it to some other writer of lesse credite or later tyme or by some other argumentes proue it vnworthie of credite not by onely denying it to be the auctors vnder whose name it hath hene receyued MART. 13. But I come to the thirde point of voluntarie expositions of the Scripture that is when euery man expoundeth according to his errour and Heresie This needeth no proofe for we see it with our eyes Looke vpon the Caluinistes and Puritanes at home the Lutherans Zuinglians and Caluinists abrode reade their bookes written vehemently one secte against an other are not their expositions of one and the same Scripture as diuerse and contrarie as their opinions differ one from an other Let the example at home be their controuersie about the distinction of Ecclesiasticall degrees Arch-bishop Bishop and minister the example abroade their diuerse imaginations and phantasies vpon these most sacred wordes Hoc est corpus meum FVLK 13. That euery one of vs expoūdeth the scripture voluntarily according to his errour or heresie you say it needeth no proofe for you see it with your eyes You haue very cleere sight to see a mote in other mens eies but can not see a beame in your owne You make your demonstration by the Caluinists and Puritans at home the Lutherans Zuinglians Caluinists abroad the one for the distinctiō of Ecclesiastical degrees Archbishop Bishop Minister the other for their diuerse imaginations phantasies of these wordes Hoc est corpus meum But I beseech you sir touching the domestical dissentiō what is the text or what be the texts of Scripture vpon which these voluntarie expositions are made for the distinction or confusion of Ecclesiastical degrees If they had bene as ready as Hoc est corpus meum they should haue bene set downe as well as that But I suppose they are yet to seeke for that controuersie as I take it standeth rather in collections than interpretations and in question whether the political gouernment of the Church be distinctly expressed in the scripture or no. As for the cōtention abroad I confesse to stand a great part in exposition of that text wherin although the one part doth erre is that a sufficient cause to condēne thē both The church of Africa and the Church of Rome and the two principall lights of them both Cyprian and Cornelius dissented about rebaptizing them that were baptized of Heretikes The Aphricans not in one text onely but in the exposition of many differed from the Romanes from the truth yet it were hard to condemne them both for Heretikes least of all them that held the truth S. Augustine and S. Hierom dissented about a text of S. Paule to the Galathians of Peters dissembling as their contrary epistles doe testifie The truth was of S. Augustines side yet was not the other an heretike following a wrōg interpretation And to come nearer home vnto you the Dominicans Franciscans Friers were at daggers drawing as we say yea at most sharpe and bitter contention betwene themselues and all the Popish Church was deuided about their brawling concerning the conception of the virgin Marie whether she were conceaued in sinne or no where many texts of Scripture must needes receiue voluntarie expositions if not of both partes yet at the least of one parte which of those will you say were heretikes If you say neither of both then must you haue stronger reasons to proue vs all heretikes than voluntarie expositions where parties be in diuerse opinions especially in matter not ouerthrowing the foundation of Christian religion And when you haue gathered the most voluntarie expositions you can finde yet shall you finde none so grosse so absurde so impertinent as you Papistes haue coyned for maintenaunce of your errours and heresies of which you your selfe are ashamed though otherwise you haue iron foreheads and brasen faces A few examples among a great many shall suffice God made man according to his owne image that is to say we must haue images in the Church No man lighteth a candell and putteth it vnder a bushell the meaning is that images must be set vpon the altar God made two great lightes the Sunne and the Moone that is the Pope to be aboue the Emperour Beholde here are two swordes that is the Pope hath power of both the swordes Put on the whole armour of God that is the Priest must put on all his vestiments before he saye Masse I am become as sownding brasse or as a tinckling Cymbal that is the bels in the steeple signifie preaching of Gods word I might fill many leaues yea a whole booke of such popish expositions as the Papistes in our dayes dare not for shame abide by MART. 14. And if you will yet haue a further demonstration this one may suffice for all They reiect Councels Fathers and the Catholike Churches interpretation vnlesse it be agreeable to Gods word and whether it be agreeable or no that Luther shall iudge for the Lutherans Caluin for the Caluinists Cartwright for the Puritans and an other for the Brethren of loue briefly them selues will be iudges both of Councels and Fathers whether they expound the Scriptures well or no and euery youth among them vpon confidence of his spirit and knowledge wil saucily controule not onely one but all the fathers consenting togither if it be against that which they imagine to be the truth FVLK 14. We had neede of a better demonstration than the former by which you your selues are proued Heretikes rather than we But let vs see how handsomly you begin They reiect say you Councels and Fathers and the Catholike Churches interpretation vnlesse it be agreeable to Gods word Thus farre you say wel We doe reiect not only those that you name but euen an Angel from heauen except his message be agreeable to Gods word But all the rest that you assume to the ende of this section is a starke staring lye except that you saye of H. N. for the brethren of loue which are more like to you than to vs. For neither Luther nor Caluin nor Cartwright is iudge among vs whether any thing be agreeable to the worde of God but whatsoeuer any of them doe
saye it is examined and tryed by the Scriptures And the Scriptures them selues where they are so obscure that neither by cōmon sense knowledge of the original tongue Grammer Rhetorike Logike storye nor any other humane knowledge nor iudgement of any writers olde or new the certaine vnderstanding can be found out they are either expounded by conference of other plainer textes of Scripture according to the analogie of faith or els they remaine stil in obscuritie vntill it shall please God to reueile a more cleere knowledge of thē But none so like the familie of loue as you Papists are which reiect councels fathers interpretation of the most auncient Catholike Church yea manifest Scripture it self except it be agreable to the iudgement of your P. M. Pontifex Max. the Pope as those familiar diuels submit all things to the sentence authoritie of their H. N. Shame you nothing therefore to quote Whitaker pag. 17. 120. as though he affirmed that we our selues will be iudges both of Councels Fathers whether they expound the Scriptures well or no because he writeth percase that we ought to examine al mens writings by the word of god Doth the Apostle make euery man iudge of all thinges when he willeth euery man to examine all things and to hold that which is good If any youth vpon confidence of his wit or knowledge presume too much in diuine matters we count it rashnesse But that any youth among vs vpon confidence of his spirit will saucily controwle all the fathers cōsenting togither against his fantasie except it be some Schismatike or Heretike that is cast out from amongest vs I doe vtterly denye neither are you able to proue it of any that is allowed among vs. MART. 15. Wherevpon it riseth that one of them defendeth this as very wel said of Luther That he esteemed not the worth of a rushe a thousande Augustines Cyprians Churches against him selfe And an other very finely figuratiuely as he thought against the holy Doctor Martyr S. Cyprian affirming that the Church of Rome can not erre in faith saith thus Pardon me Cyprian I woulde gladly beleue thee but that beleeuing thee I should not beleeue the Gospell This is that which S. Augustine saith of the like men dulcissimè vanos esse non peritos sed perituros nec tam disertos in errore quà m desertos à veritate And I thinke verily that not onely we but the wiser men among them selues smile at such eloquence or pitie it saying this or the like most truly Prodierunt oratores noui stulti adolescentuli FVLK 15. Why shoulde you not at your pleasure vpon your false assumption generall inferre one or two slaunders particular M. Whitaker defendeth that it was well said of Luther That he esteemed not the worth of a rush a thousand Augustines Cyprians Churches against himselfe Woulde God that euery Papist would reade his owne words in the place by you quoted that he might see your impudent forgerie For I hope there is no Christian that will imagine that either Luther would so speake or any man of honestie defend him so speaking For Luther was not so senselesse to oppose his owne person but the truth of his cause grounded vpon the holy Scriptures not only against one thousand of men holding the contrary but euen against tenne thousand of Angels if they should oppose them selues against the truth of God But I am too blame to deale so much in M. Whitakers cause who ere it be long will displaye the falshoode of Gregorie Martin in a Latine writing to his great ignominie The next cauil is vpon M. Rainoldes words in his preface to his sixe positions disputed vpon at Oxford where against Cyprian affirming that the Church of Rome can not erre in faith he sayth Pardon me Cyprian I would gladly beleeue thee but that in beleeuing thee I shoulde not beleeue the Gospel These wordes you confesse that he spake figuratiuely and finely as he thought but that he vsed the figures of Ironve and concession you will not acknowledge but all other men may easily see For first he no where graunteth that S. Cyprian affirmeth that the Churche of Rome can not erie in fayth But immediatly before the wordes by you translated after he had proued out of the eleuēth to the Romans that the particular Church of Rome may be cut of as well as the Church of the Israelites which were the naturall braunches he asketh the question Quid Cypriano secus est visum What And did it seeme otherwise to Cyprian Pardon me Cyprian c. His meaning is plaine that Cyprian thought not otherwise than S. Paule hath written or if he did it was lawfull to dissent from Cyprian As a litle after he sayth Quare si Romanam Ecclesiam errare non posse c. Wherefore if Cyprian thought that the Church of Rome could not erre in that point by the sentence of the Papistes he him selfe is to be condemned of errour for diuerse Papistes whome he nameth confesse that euery particular Church may erre and Verratus one of them affirmeth that the Church of Rome is a particular Church which the rest can not deny And in deede that which Cyprian writeth is about certaine runneagate Heretikes that flying out of the Church of Carthage sought to be receiued of the particular Church of Rome All this while here is no graunt that Cyprian affirmeth that the Church of Rome cannot erre in faith And if Cyprian had so affirmed contrary to the scripture it might haue bene iustly replied vnto him which S. Augustine saith when he was pressed with his authoritie Contra Crescon lib. 2. cap. 31. Nos nullam Cypriano facimus iniuriam We do Cyprian no wrong when we distinguish any writings of his from the Canonical authoritie of the diuine Scriptures And in truth the wordes which M. Rainolds before cited out of S. Cyprian lib. 1. ep 3. ad Cornel. are spoken of no matter of faith but in a matter of discipline Neither doth Cyprian say that the Church of Rome can not erre in faith but that those Heretikes which brought letters from schismatikes profane persons did not consider that they are Romans whose faith is praised by the cōmendation or preaching of the Apostle to whom perfidia falshood or false dealing can haue none accesse Meaning that the Romans so long as they cōtinue in that faith which was praised by the Apostle cā not ioyne with Heretikes and Schismatikes that are cast out of other Catholike Churches For that he could not meane that the Pope or Church of Rome cannot erre in faith as the Papistes affirme it is manifest for that in a question of religion he dissented both from the Bishop and Church of Rome as all learned men knowe he did which he would neuer haue done if he had beleeued they could not erre And that his meaning was not that the Bishop of Rome could not erre in matters of
ascribed to Ignatius which heere I wil not dispute there is nothing sayde in this that you cite of the Bishops preeminence aboue the king but wee acknowledge it to be true of y e meanest priest of Gods Church in matters properly belonging to his office which yet doth not exempt him from subiection to his prince but that in causes ecclsiasticall also he is to be commanded by his prince to doe his duetie and to be punished by him if he doe otherwise MART. 24. But in the former sentence of S. Peter though they haue altered their translation about the kings headshippe yet there is one corruption remaining still in these words Submit your selues VNTO AL MANER ORDINANCE OF MAN Whereas in the Greeke it is worde for worde as in the olde vulgar Latine translation omni humanae creaturae and as we haue translated to euerie humane creature meaning temporall Princes Magistrates as is plaine by the exemplification immediatly following of king and dukes and other sent or appointed by him But they in fauour of their temporall statutes actes of Parliament Proclamations and Iniunctions made against the Catholike religion doe translate all with one consent Submit vour selues to all maner ordinance of man Doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie ordinance or is it all one to be obedient to euery one of our Princes and to all maner ordinance of the saide Princes FVLK 24. The worde ordinance you doe violently drawe to euerie statute proclamation or iniunction which is vnderstood of the ordinance or appointment of magistrates in what forme soeuer they be created or at the worst cannot be referred but onely to such decrees as are not contrarie to the worde of God The worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we knowe signifieth a creature or creation which speeches being not vsuall in our English tongue to signifie magistrates our interpretors haue expressed the same by the worde ordinance You your selues translate that which is in Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Latine Creaturae mark 16. of the creation and in the same sense doe our translators vse the worde of ordinance MART. 25. A strange case and much to bee considered how they wring and wrest the holy scriptures this way and that way and euery way to serue their hereticall proceedinges For when the question is of due obedience to Ecclesiasticall canons and decrees of the Church and generall Councels where the holy Ghost by Christes promise is assistant and whereof it is saide if he heare not the Church let him be vnto thee as an heathen and Publicane and He that heareth you heareth me he that despiseth you despiseth mee there they cry out aloude odiously terme all such ordinances mens traditions and commaundementes of men and most despitefully contemne and condemne them But heere for obedience vnto temporall edictes and Parliament statutes daily enacted in fauour of their schisme and heresies they once malitiously forged and still wickedly retaine without alteration a text of their owne making the Apostle to commaunde submission vnto all manner ordinance of man whereof hath ensued the false crime of treason and cruell death for the same vpon those innocent men and glorious martyrs that chose to obey God and his Churches holy ordinances rather then mans statutes and lawes directly against the same FVLK 25. It is no strange case for an heretike and a raytor that hath solde his tongue to vtter slaunders against the Church of God and the christian magistrate protector of the same to deuise and surmise that which neuer was intended neuer was practised As y t against the godly and laweful decrees of the Church we should translate mens traditions commaundementes of men and to the maintenance of all temporall lawes be they neuer so wicked we should translate ordināce in steede of creature As for the crime of treason and iust execution of them that haue suffered of your viperous brood I referre to the try all of the lawes and iudgements that haue passed vpon them as no matter meete for mee to dispute of onely this all good subiectes knowe yea all the worlde may knowe that they which take part with the pope our princes open and professed enemie not in matters of religion onely but in cases concerning her crowne and dignitie her Realmes and Dominions can not beare dutiful obedient hearts to her maiesty Whose clemencie hitherto hath spared them that acknowledge her princely authoritie although in all other pointes of poperie they continue as obstinate as euer they were CHAP. XVI Hereticall translation against the Sacrament of Matrimonie BVT as they are iniurious translatours to the sacred order of Priesthoode so a man woulde thinke they should be very friendly to the sacramēt of Matrimonie For they would seeme to make more of Matrimonie then we do making it equall at the least with virginitie Yet the trueth is we make it or rather the Church of God esteemeth it as a holy sacrament they do not as giuing grace to the maried persons to liue together in loue concorde and fidelitie they acknowledge no such thing So that Matrimonie with them is highly esteemed in respect of the flesh or to say the best onely for a ciuill contract as it is among Iewes and Pagans but as it is peculiar to Christians and as S. Augustin◠sayth in the sanctification also and holinesse of a Sacrament they make no account of it but flatly denie it FVLK 1. VE make no more of matrimonie than the holy scripture doeth teach vs neither doe wee in all respectes make it equall with virginitie howe so euer you doe slander vs. But you so make it an holy sacrament that you thinke the holy order of priesthoode is prophaned by it Wee acknowledge that God giueth grace to them that bee faithfull to liue in loue concorde and fidelitie euen as he did to the fathers of the olde testament liuing in the same honorable estate which prooueth that matrimonie is no sacrament of the newe testament although it be an holie ordinance for Gods children to liue in and in it is contained a holy secret or mysterie of the spirituall coniunction of Christ and his church It is therefore nothing else but a diuelish slander to say that wee esteeme it but in respect of the flesh or for a ciuill contract MART. 2. And to this purpose they translate in the epistle to the Ephesians 5. Where the Apostle speaketh of matrimonie This is a great secret Whereas the Latine Church and all the Doctors thereof haue euer read This is a great Sacrament the Greeke Church and all the fathers thereof This is a great mysterie because that which is in Greeke mysterie is in Latine Sacrament and contrariwise the wordes in both tongue◠being equiualent so that if one be taken in the large signification the other also as Apoc. 17. I will shewe thee the sacrament of the woman And I will shewe thee the mysterie of the woman And so in
Presbyter Doeth not Priest come of Presbyter as certainly and as agreeably as Deacon of Diaconus Doth not also the French and Italian word for Priest come directly from the same Will you alwaies followe fansie and not reason doe what you list translate as you list and not as the truth is and that in the holy Scriptures which you boast and vaunt so much of Because your selues haue theÌ„ whom you call Bishops the name Bishops is in your Englishe Bibles which otherwise by your owne rule of translation should be called an Ouerseer or Superintendent likewise Deacon you are content to vse as an Ecclesiasticall word so vsed in antiquitie because you also haue those whom you call Deacons Only Priests must be turned contemptuously out of the text of the holy Scriptures Elders put in their place because you haue no Priestes nor will none of them and because that is in controuersie betwene vs. And as for Elders you haue none permitted in EnglaÌ„d for feare of ouerthrowing your Bishops office and the Queenes supreame gouernment in all spiritual things and causes Is not this to followe the humour of your heresie by Machiauels politike rules without any feare of God FVLK 12. Here I must aunswere you that we haue no degree of Ministers distinct from Deacons but by vulgar and popular vse of speaking which we are not curious to controule Otherwise in truth we account Bishops Elders and Deacons all Ministers of the Church It is no more therefore but the common speache of men which vseth that worde which is common to all Ecclesiasticall persons as peculiar to the Elders or Priestes Why we keepe the name of Deacons in translating Diaconus rather than of Priestes in translating Presbyter I haue tolde you often before The name Priest being by long abuse of speache applied to signifie Sacrificers of the olde Testament called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we could not giue the same name to the Ministers of the new Testament except we had some other name whereby to call the Ministers of the olde Testament wherein we followe reason and not fansie for it is great reason we should retaine that difference in names of the Ministers of both the Testamentes which the holy Ghost doth alwaies obserue But you follow fansie altogither imagining that Priestes onely are put out of the text because we haue no Priestes Whereas we haue Priestes as well as we haue Bishops and Deacons and so are they called in our booke of common prayer indifferently Priestes or Ministers And where you say we haue no Elders permitted in Englande it is false for those that are commonly called Bishoppes Ministers or Priestes among vs be suche Elders as the Scripture commendeth vnto vs. And although we haue not suche a consistorie of Elders of gouernemente as in the Primitiue Churche they had and many Churches at this daye haue yet haue wee also Elders of gouernement to exercise discipline as Archbishoppes and Bishoppes with their Chauncellours Archedeacons Commissaries Officialles in whome if any defecte bee we wishe it may be reformed according to the worde of God MART. 13. Apostles you say for the most parte in your translations not alwayes as we doe and Prophetes and Euangelistes and Angels and such like wheresoeuer there is no matter of controuersie betwene you and vs there you can pleade verie grauely for keeping the auncient Ecclesiasticall wordes as your maister Beza for example beside many other places where he bitterly rebuketh his fellow Castalâ—ons translation in one place writeth thus I can not in this place dissemble the boldnesse of certaine men which would God it rested within the compasse of words only These men therefore concerning the worde Baptizing though vsed of sacred writers in the mystery or Sacrament of the new Testament and for so many yeares after by the secrete consent of all Churches consecrated to this one Sacrament so that it is now growen into the vulgar speaches almost of all nations yet they dare presume rashly to chaunge it and in place thereof to vse the word washing Delicate men forsooth which neither are moued with the perpetual authority of so many ages nor by the daily custom of the vulgar speach can be brought to thinke that lawfull for Diuines which all men graunt to other Maisters and professors of artes that is to retaine and holde that as their owne which by long vse and in good faith they haue truly possessed Neither may they preteÌ„d the authoritie of some auncient writers as that Cyprian sayeth TINGENTES for BAâ—PTIZANTES and Tertullian in a certaine place calleth SEQVESTREM for MEDIATOREM For that which was to those auncientes as it were newe to vs is olde and euen then that the selfe same words which we now vse were familiar to the Church it is euident because it is very seldome that they speake otherwise But these men by this noueltie seeke after vaine glorie c. FVLK 13. If in any place we vse not the name of the Apostles Prophetes Euangelists Angels and such like wee are able to giue as sufficient a reason why we translate those wordes according to their Generall signification as you for translating somtime Baptismata washings and not baptismes Ecclesia the assembly and not the Church with such like Therefore as Castaleo such other Heretikes are iustly reprehended by Beza for leauing without cause the vsuall Ecclesiasticall termes so when good cause or necessitie requireth not to vse them it were superstition yea and almost madnes sometimes in translating to vse them as to call the Pharisees washings Baptismes or the assembly of the EphesiaÌ„ Idolaters the Churche yet both in Greeke and Latine the wordes are Baptismata ecclesia MART. 14. He speaketh against Castaleon who in his newe Latine translation of the Bible changed all Ecclesiasticall wordes into profane and Heathenish as Angelos into genios Prophetas into Fatidicos Templum into fanum and so foorth But that which he did for foolish affectation of finenesse and stile do not our English Caluinistes the very same when they list for furthering their Heresies When the holy Scripture saith idols according as Christians haue alwayes vnderstood it for false goddes they come and tell vs out of Homer and the Lexicons that it may signifie an image and therfore so they translate it Do they not the like in the Greeke worde that by Ecclesiasticall vse signifieth penaunce and doing penaunce when they argue out of Plutarch and by the profane sense therof that it is nothing else but chaunging of the minde or amendment of life Whereas in the Greeke Church Poenitentes that is they that were in the course of penance and excluded from the Church as Catechumeni and Energumeni till they had accomplished their penance the very same are called in the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 FVLK 14. That Castaleo did for foolish affectatioÌ„ of finenesse you slauÌ„der vs to do for furthering of heresie
the difference betweene a storie at large and an abridgement c. If you be able to defende that booke to be Canonicall answere my reasons prepare your selfe to answere as many â—â—re as may bee alledged to conuince the vanitie and falshod of that stories and so I leaue you to a better minde if it be Gods will to giue it you I finde also that in the Popish annotations vpon the new Testament printed at Rhemes my writings are carped at in two places the former vpoÌ„ 2. Thes. 2. where my wordes against Saunders Rocke page 248. page 278. are rehearsed In which I say that Leo Gregorie bishops of Rome although they were not come to the full pride of Antichrist yet the mysterie of iniquitie hauing wrought in that seate neere fiue or sixe hundred yeares before them and then greatly increased they were so deceiued with the long continuance of errour that they thought the dignitie of Peter was much more ouer the rest of his fellowe Apostles than the holy scriptures of God against which no continuance of errour can prescribe doeth either allowe or bearâ— withall Againe the testimonies of Leo Gregorie bishops of Rome as alwayes so nowe I deeme to bee vnmeete to be heard in their owne cause though otherwise they were not the worst men yet great furtherers of the authoritie of Antichrist which soone after their dayes tooke possession of the chayre which they had helped to prepare for him For this I am called a malepeart scholer of Bezaes impudent schoole But by what reason For placing the mysterie of Antichrist as woorking in the see of Rome euen in S. Peters time That the mysterie of Antichrist did worke in S. Peters time the text of S. Paul is plaine That it did worke in Rome where Antichrist should be openly shewed S. Iohn is plaine in the Reuelation Ca. 17. ver 9. 18. yea the Papists confessing that S. Peter called Rome Babylon must needes grant as much this onely then remaineth in controuersie whether in the sea or church of Rome the mysterie of iniquitie did worke from the Apostles time vntill Antichrist was openly shewed Seeing it wrought at Rome it wrought either in the church or altogether out of the church but it wrought not altogether out of the church therefore it wrought in the church That the mysterie of iniquitie preparing for that Antichrist wrought not altogether out of the church it is manifest because the seat of Antichrist is prophesied to bee in the Temple and Church of God Without the Church was not the mysterie of iniquitie against Christ but open wickednesse and persecution of Christes Church Therefore within the Church that mysterie did worke By what meanes first it is not certaine because it was a secrete not reuealed by the Apostle Some coniecture that it was by preferring one bishop before all the clergie of elders or priests which at the first were equall Some thinke that such factions began at Rome as afterwarde were at Corinth one holding of Cephas that is Peter another of some other How euer it was the challenge made to Peters chayre and from the dayes of Victor diuerse bishops of Rome creeping vp by litle and litle pretending authoritie ouer other Churches other churches reuerencing that see for many good respects were abused by Satan to set forwarde his purpose in aduauncing the throne of Antichrist And where I saide that Leo Gregorie were great furtherers of the authoritie of Antichrist my meaning was not that they did wittingly willingly prepare a seat for Antichrist but that the dâ—uel by Gods permission because he was to send the efficacie of error into the world tooke hold in the time appointed of that authoritie which the bishops for the dignitie of their see and as they thought for the benefite of the church did labour so greatly to maintaine encrease Neither write I any thing contrarie to the challenge of that reuerend father the bishop of Sarum as they charge mee who saide at Paules crosse O Gregorie O Leo if we be deceiued you haue deceiued vs For his meaning was not thereby to allow whatsoeuer they had done or written but that in some such matters as are in controuersie betweene the Papistes and vs euen Gregorie and Leo are witnesses against them A great accusation is in the note vpon Heb. 5. ver 6. in these wordes You must beware of the wicked heresie of the Arrians and Caluines except in these latter it be rather an error proceding of ignorance that stick not to say that Christ was a priest or did sacrifice according to his godhead which is to make Christ God the fathers priest and not his sonne and to do sacrifice and homage to him as his lorde and not as his equall in dignitie and nature Therefore S. Augustine sayeth in Psal. 109. That as he was man he was priest as God he was not priest And Theodoret in Psal. 109. As man he did offer sacrifice but as God he receiued sacrifice And againe Christ touching his humanitie was called a priest and hee offered none other host but his owne bodie c. Dâ—m 1. circa med Some of our newe masters not knowing so much did let fall out of their pennes the contrarie and being admonished of the error and that it was verie Arrianisme yet they persist in it of meere ignorance in the grounds of diuinitie First note the intollerable pride of these Popish interpreters that challenge to themselues all learning and knowledge in diuinitie condemning all other men of ignorance meere ignorance in the groundes of diuinitie So playeth Bristowe with the bishop of Sarum whome in the place by them quoted I reproued in these words The like impudent cauil he bringeth against M. Iewel whoÌ„ no man I thinke without laughter can read to be charged with ignorance by blundering Bristowe for affirming Christ to be a priest according to his deitie whom the Apostle expressely sayeth by his eternall spirite to haue offered himselfe Heb. 9. ver 14. But that you may the better vnderstand this controuersie betweene vs we denie not that Christ was a priest according to his humanitie but wee affirme that whole Christ is a priest as he is both God and man For in the office of priesthood two things must be considered a ministerie and an authoritie In respect of the ministeriall part our Sauiour Christ perfourmed that office as man but in respect of authoritie of entring into the holiest place reconciling vs to God presenting vs vnto God which was the principall part of his priesthood hee did perfourme it as the sonne of God as Lorde and maker of the house and not as a seruant but as God which hath created all things Heb. 3. vers 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Against this sound doctrine let vs examine what the heretikes alledge First they charge it most odiously with Arrianisme but without all â—parke of reason seeing wee distinguish plainly