counsell deulie indicted and conuened But where that he compareth the doctrine of the forenamed with the damnable heresie of Arrius I wold lykewise haue wished vnto his lordship greater foresight in so graue a mater For howsoeuer the Arrians appeared to abouÌ„d in testimonies of Scriptures without all ground indistinctlie coÌ„gested and that because they made no diffreence betuix the two natures in Iesus Christe Let my lorde accuse before he coÌ„paiâ— but did foolishlie appropriat to the Godhead that which did onelie aperteane to the manlie nature yet think I that my lord shall neuer be able by plaine Scripture to impung any chief head ether affirmed or denyed in doctrine of saluatioÌ„ by the foresaides persons lyke as did the godly and learned in there ages the foresaid damnable herisie To the last I haue alreadie promised to answer to my Lordes argumeÌ„t in writ and therefore oght not to be burdened with it now especiallie because it is without our formar ground and doeth not properlie aperteane to the cause And yet therefore now last for conclusion that we shal not be compelled continually to repeat on thing I desyre my lord according to his deutie and reason of disputation Heir my lord stayed for answer offerred to me a book to bring forth his probation of his two formar groundes be me plainly denyed This conference being ended for this tyme my Lorde presentlie did rise for trouble of body and then Iohn Knox did shortlie resume the principall groundes And because the noblemen heir assembled were altogether destitute of all ê“uision bothe for hors and man the said Iohn humblie required the foresaid Lord that it wold please him to go to Air where that better easiment migh be had for all estates Which because my Lord vtterlie refused the said Iohn desired when that the said conference should be ended My Lorde did promes that vpon licence purchased Whither I haue so done or nor mo then them selues can witnes of the Quenes maiestie and her honorable counsell that he wold coÌ„peir in Edinburgh and there in there presence finish the said conference The said Iohn did promes to trauel with the secret counsel that the said licence might be obteined And desired the foresaid Lorde to do the lyke with the Quenes maiestie whereupon the said Iohn Knox took instruments and documents M. Quintyne At the conclusion of our ressoning The answer wes giuen before so that it apperteaned not to me to proue my interpretatioÌ„ but it appertened to my lord to proue that melchisedec offerred c. But that can not my lord vnderstand I gaif Iohn Knox ane argument in writ desiring him that he wald iustifie his opinion be expres testimonie of Scripture or ony apperance thereof Quhairto the said Iohn required tyme to gif answer and the tyme micht nawise serue of farder ressoning for sic causes as ar comprehended in the said Iohn Knox writing And as toward his desyre of me to Air treulie it was the thing that I micht not presentlie coÌ„modiously do Bot alwayes I will copeir before ye Quenes grace and sic as hit grace plesis to take to be auditors to defend the saides artickles and in special the artickle concerning the messe as thay ar written quâ—en and quhair it be hir grace plesure swa that the habilitie of my bodie will serue ony wise as I hope to God it sall to quhom be praise glorie and honor for euer Crosraguell The answer to my Lordes last argument proponed by him in writ the last day of disputation The argument is this M. Quintyne WHatsumeuer opinion is conceaued of the Scriptures of almichty God hauand na expres testimonie nor apperance of the samin is vtterlie to be refused as sayes Iohn Knox him self Bot swa it is that Iohn Knox a win opinion coÌ„ceaued or contracted of the Scripture concerning the bringing furth of bread and wine be Melchisedec to refresh or gratifie Abraham and his werie company is not expresly conteined in the Scripture nor hes na apperance of the samin thairfore it falâ—â— wis weiâ— that it is allâ—terlie be his awin iudgement to be refused Iohn Knox. Yf I should grant vnto you my Lorde your whole argument I should but declare my self ignorant of the art and â—â—â—lyndful of my owne affirmation but yet had ye prouen nothing of your intent The chief question and controuersie betuix you and me is not whether that my interpretation of that place which 〈◊〉 your instance and 〈…〉 not but whether that Melchisedec the figure of Christe did offer vnto God bread wine whiche ye haue affirmed and haue laid it to be the ground and cause why it behoued Christe Iesus to haue made oblation of his bodie and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine in his latter Supper Which bothe I denyed So that it rests to you to proue that Melchisedec the figure of Christ did offer vnto God bread and wine c. And apperteines not vnto me to proue my opinion nor interpretation For supposing that my opinion coÌ„ceaued of that place were to be reiected as ye are neuer able to proue it to â—e yet is your affirmatiue neuer the better prouen for if ye will conclude it wes not broght forth to refresh Abraham which yet is not prouen ergo it wes broght forth to be offered vnto God babes will mock you and send you againe to your logick But yet my Lord with your leaue I must come nerar you and say that the maior or first part of your argument is fals and that ye falsly alledge vpon me that which I neuer spak nor ment Read the whole conference betuix you and me and ye shall not find that I haue simple affirmed that all opinion of man conceaued of the Scriptures is vtterlie to be reiected onles the same be prouen by the manifest worde of God For I am not ignorant that some interpretatioÌ„s ar tollerable yea and may be to the edification of the Church althogh they do not fully expres the minde of the holie Goste in that place But I haue affirmed and yet affirmes that nether the authoritie of the Church the determination of the counsell nor the opinion of the doctor is to be receaued in matters of faith in the doctrine concerning our saluation onles the same be prouen by the expres word of God And therfore my Lord with your leaue I must say that ether wilfully or els by some ouersight ye haue omitted bothe in the maior in the minor of your argument that which should haue bene the cause and assurance of your conclusion For thus ye oght to haue reasoned Whatsoeuer opinion is conceaued of the Scripture of almightie God concerning faith and the doctrine of Saluation hauing no expres testimonie of the same is to be reiected But so it is that Iohn Knox owne opinion concerning the bringing forth of bread and wine by Melchisedec is a matter concerning faith and the doctrine of our Saluation
knowledge amoÌ„gest the Philosophers I wold pacientlie abyde that he should affirme as many paradoxes as pleaseth him But in the Church of God to affirme that God hath spoken when God hath not spoken or done that which he is not able to proue by his plaine word that he hath done so to do I say is altogether intollerable and therefore let M. Q. searche the Scriptures for the probation of his affirmatiue or els I will cry al 's loud as I can that he hath lost his cause and is conuicted an manifest lear in that he hath affirmed Iesus to haue done that which no Scripture doeth witnes that he hath done Let all men therefore that will not follow lies detest the masse till that it find a ground within the booke of God as I am assured it neuer shall And that shall the reader more easylie perceaue by this conference that followeth Read and then iudge ☞ ✚ ☜ The abbotes first letter M. Quintyne IOhn Knox I am informed that c ar cum in this cuntrie to feâ—â— disputatioÌ„ and in special to makâ—â—â—pugnation to certane artickles quhâ—â—â— war pronunced and reheirsed be me to my stock in Kirkoswald on sonday last wes treulie I will not refuse disputation with Èow bot maist â—â—â—nstlie effectuouslie couatis the saâ—in 〈◊〉 it may be to ye glorie of God and tryall of ye treath lyke as I haif ye rest of ye ministers â—uhilk hâ—s bene heir and culd haifnaâ—e Quhair â—ore gifâ—t pleis Èow this day viij dayes in â—ay hous of Mayboiâ— Èe pleis prouidand alwayes thair be na comâ—cation passand xiiâ—vj or xx on ather syde quhilâ— is ane sufficient nomber to beir witnes beâ—uir vs I sal enter in restoring with Èow and God willing fall defend ye saides artickles be ye manifest word of God and all gude resson as 〈◊〉 aâ— writtin and in special ye artickle concernâ—â—â— ye messe Èœe salbe sure Èe 〈◊〉 ressaif na imâ—â—â—â—â— of me nor â—aâ—â— that me pâ—â—â—nis nor naâ—y 〈◊〉 of molestâ—tioâ— in wâ—â—d â—or work bot familiar formall and â—â—â—ll restoring and think not yâ—â— this is done for â—â—iâ—â—ng of tyme 〈◊〉 be ressone I am â—â—â—â—eit and 〈◊〉 be my Lord of Cosâ—â—â—is in name and 〈…〉 of the counsel 〈…〉 〈…〉 or any other 〈◊〉 his returning in the cuntrie quhais command I haif promist to obey nottheles and he cum not betuix and the said day I sall discharge my promis to him with diligence quhairthrouch Èe and all vthers may se how desyrous I am that ye treuth cum to ane tryall but drifting of tyme. Al 's Èe may be sure that I am verray desyrous to haif my Lord of Caâ—â—llis as my cheif and brother sone and vthers my brether freindes quhom of I haif charge to be auditors quhairthrow gif it pleis God thay micht haif proffet of our ressoning and gif Èe pleis to accept this condicion send me Èour promes vnder Èour hand writ and I sall send Èow the foresaid artickles to awise on to this day viii dayes and in the meine time Èe may prouide to be auditors sic as Èe pleis coÌ„forme to the nomber aboue â—â—heirsed and I the lyke and gif Èe will nawise enter in ressoning without coÌ„uocation of straÌ„gers the haill warld may se it is â—ot perâ—â—rbarioÌ„ tumultuation and cummer that Èe seik vnder the pretence of the trew setting furth of Goddes word and gloâ—e and this I certifie Èow I will not enter in disputation with Èow gif Èe euâ—â— with coÌ„uocation for I wil nawise be the instrument of discorde The answer thereof was seÌ„d But my lord maid no reply aâ—â— al 's it is not necessar c â—â—m with conuocation of strangers â—e 〈◊〉 Èe haâ— my Lord of Camilis proâ—â—e quâ—◠〈…〉 to Èow and all the â—est wiâ—â—â—â— Caâ—tick and in ye â—â—ines â—â—ne Èe pleis to 〈…〉 confuâ—ation of yoâ—â—â—â—â—gisme quâ—â—â— I 〈◊〉 and to Èow with the Lâ—â—d of 〈◊〉 elâ—â—eâ— and gif ye 〈◊〉 the samin weill Èe ar mair able to mak impugnation to myne Of thir heides I require Èour answer in writ with this herat with diligence quhaitthrow I may send away to my Lord of Cassillis as said is And sa fair Èe weill of Crosraguell this Sonday the serâ— of September Crofraguell the answer to the abbotes first lettter Iohn Knox. THe treuth is that the cause of my coÌ„ming in these partes 〈◊〉 not of purpose to seak disputation but simplie to propone vnto the people Iesus Christ â—cussed to be the onelie Sauiour of the world and to teach further what are the fruites that God requireth of the members of his dear sone c. But heauing that ye had in oppen audience proclamed blasphemous artickles making promes to giue further declaratioÌ„ of certane of theÌ„ this last Sonday lykewise in oppen assemblie I could not but of conscience offer my self to be your aduersat in that â—ace And this far for the cause of my coÌ„ming Èesterday to kâ—â—hos waiâ— That ye haue required disputation of the ministers of whome some are yet present could haue none I hardlie beleue it the contrary being assured to me by diuers of honest report That ye offer vnto me familiar formall and gentill reasoning with my whole hart I accept the condition For assuredlie my Lord so I style you by reason of blood and not of office chiding brawling I vtterlie abhor but that ye require it to be secrete I nether se iust cause why that ye should require it nether yet good reson why that I should grant it Yf ye feare tumult asye pretex that is more to be feared where many of euill mynd haue a few quiet and peceable men in there danger then where a iust multitud may gainst and violence if it be offered Of my Lord of Cassilles promes I nothing dout as touching my owne person for I stand in the protection of the Almightie to whom I render hartly thankes when his mercie and power boweth the hartes of men to assist the cause of the iust But I wonder with what conscience ye can require priuat conference of those artickles that ye haue publicklie proponed Ye haue infected the eares of the simple Ye haue wounded the hartes of the godlie and ye haue spoken blasphemie in oppen audience Let your owne conscience now be iudge if we be bound to answer you in the audience of 20. or 40. of whom the one half are alreadie persuaded in the treuth the other perchance so addicted to your error that they will not be content that light be called light and darcknes darcknes Yf ye be a pastor as ye brag your self to be ye oght to haue respect to your whole flock yea to the instruction of all those that are offended at your blasphemies But now to grant vnto you more theÌ„ reason I am content of the greatest nomber appointed by you prouided first that the place be S. Iohnes kirk in Air which is a place more conuenient then any
the 14. of Genesis There is no mentioÌ„ made of any oblation of bread and wine made by Melchisedec vnto God but onelie that Melchisedec being King of Salem Gen. 14. broght forth bread and wine And that being Priest of the moste hie God he blessed Abraham as the text beareth witnes And therefore I say that the text preueth not that any oblation of bread and wine was made vnto God by Melchisedec M. Quintyne Èœe do affirm that Melchisedec brocht furth bread and wine I speir at Èow to what effect Iudge now if my lord shiftes Iohn Knox. Will ye deuolue vpon me now the persone of an answerer seing that ye refused your self of before the same M. Quintyne This quhilk he calles answering is mair ê“perlie to be called impungnation in this cace Marck what is confessed by my lord in that finding the text to serue nothing for my purpose is plaine impungnation to my pretence And swa are Èe cled rather with the personage of ane impungnar nor ane defendar Iohn Knox. Whether that I susteane the personage of an impungner or of an defender I am not bound to answer what wes done with the bread and wine after that it was broght forth It suffiseth to me for my formar purpose that there is no mention made in the text that bread and wine by Melchisedec was offered vnto God M. Quintyne It ryndes to Èow to preif Let the learned Iudge if this be trew that Melchisedec made no oblation of bread and wine vnto God Iohn Knox. It suffiseth to me that in the text there is no mention made that Melchisedec made any oblation of bread and wine vnto God as ye before alledged and hath laide for your ground M. Quintyne I say the wordes of the text ar plain that Melchisedec maid oblation of bread and wine vnto God Note if so be and desires Èow to impreue the same be the text Iohn Knox. My inprobation is alreadie ledd For in the text there is no meÌ„tion of oblation of bread and wine made vnto God And therefore I am content that the whole world iudge whether the ground be not sufficientlie inprouen or not M. Quintyne Melchisedec brocht furth bread and wine quhilk he did not without cause and Èe deny yat he brocht it furth CoÌ„sider in what straitnes my lord was now for the cause that I alledge ergo for some other cause Quhilk gif Èe wil not nor can not shaw presentlie I sall do deligence to cause the present auditor vnderstand cleirly that he brocht furth bread and wine for the cause alledged be me Prouiding that gif Èe will not shaw the cause presently that Èe sal haue no place to shaw it heirefter Iohn Knox. I answer that he broght forth bread wine the text plainly affirmeth and I haue alreadie granted But that he made oblatioÌ„ of the same because the text ê‘porteth it not I can not graÌ„t it As touching the cause wherefore he broght it forth if place shal be giuen to coniectors and that not grouÌ„ded without great probabilitie and also with sufrage of some of the ancients to wit Iosephus Chrysostom It may be said that Melchisedec being an King broght forth bread and wine to refresh Abraham and his werie souldiors And this for your satisfaction of the cause why he broght forth bread and wine euer still sticking vpon the principal grouÌ„d That because no mention is made that Melchisedec made oblation of bread and wine vnto God I deny it as of before The pennult of September 1562. M. Quintyne Of Iohn Knox saying is aboue reheirsed I conceaue twa heides in special the ane is This was the beginning of the second dayes trauell after that my lord had sleaped that Melchisedec maid na oblation vnto God dot he did bring furth the bread and wine to refresh Abraham and his companie I will answer vnto the saides heides formally and on this maner First I wil mak impugnatioÌ„ vnto ye last heid quhair it is thocht that he did refresh Abraham and his companie In that the text is manifest in ye contrar in sa far as the text testifies that Abraham and his company war refreshed be the spolÈe of the enimies and was not refreshed Let my Lordes argumeÌ„t be noted nor mistered na refreshing of Melchisedec quhairfore it is manifest that Melchisedec brocht furth bread and wine vnto ane vther effect nor to refresh Abraham and his companie Iohn Knox. My formar proue that Melchisedec did not offer bread and wine vnto God standeth vpon this ground that the text maketh mention of no maner oblation made there vnto God of bread and wine And therefore in a mater of so great importance darre not I affirme oblation to be made whill that the holy Ghost kepeth silence And now vnto my Lordes argument Answer to the formar argumeÌ„t first I answer that there is no contradiction betuix these two Abraham and his company were refreshed of the spoolies of there enimies and Abraham and his company were refreshed of the liberalitie of Melchisedec And first because in the tyme when Abraham and his company receaued there nourishement of the substance of there enimies they were out of the presence of Melchisedec and not returned vnto there couÌ„trie But albeit that they had bene euen in the presence of Melchisedec yet they might haue bene nourished partlie be his liberalitie and partlie be there owne prouision And thridly because the text doeth not affirme that Abraham and his wer nourished onely of the spoile I can not admit my Lordes argument M. Quintyne For satisfaction of the auditoure and to cum quicklie to the point without drifting of tyme I will refuse reasoning after scoolmaner and will go Èit to the text and depend thairupon And on this maner sayaud Saif onely that quhilk the Èong men hes eatin I inferr of this text that it dois appeir Èe and is manifest that thair remaned mair nor was eitin be Abraham and his company for the present Iohn Knox. I do not deny but there remaned substance which wes neither eatin nor consumed by Abraham and his company but what shal be hereof concluded M. Quintyne I infer yat not onely thair remaned substance bot thair remaned mekle mair substance nor Abraham and his company was able to consume Èea and to gif ane great deale away for quhy Abraham was victor of foure Kingis quhairthrouch he obtened ane great spolÈe not onely of foure bot also he gat the spolÈe of vther fyue and gat all thair viuers and meat quhairthrouch it is manifest be ye verray plaine text that Abraham and his company had mekle mair meat nor they war able to consume and swa mistered he nor his company na refresching of Melchisedec considering he and his company was bot ane meine nomber as I wold say thre hundreth auchtene Iohn Knox. The victorie of Abraham is in the text specified as also the
nomber of the Kinges vainqueshed And that there remaned substance yea mekle more then was spent I do not deny But this wil not necessarlie conclude but that Melchisedec of his liberalitie broght forth bread and wine to the purpose forsaid as be coniecture is moste probable For men of godlines and ciuill honestie do not onely shaw them selues liberal in tyme of extreme necessitie but also wil declair there beneuolence without great neid yea and in greatest aboundance M. Quintyne Because Iohn Knox speakis of substance indifferentlie I will desire him to declair his opinion conforme to the text quhither Abraham and his company recouered of the nyne Kingis spolÈeis bread and wine and vther sustenance quhilk treulie albeit the text do not proport the same in plaine wordes Èit can na man of iudgement think vtherwise as I can gif many hundreth examples in the Scriptures and ane in speciall quhair Iesus Christ our Lorde speakis in his awin prayer called the Pater noster of daylie bread quhairinto is to be vnderstand all required vnto the sustentation of man albeit the text dois not expresly declair the samin Iohn Knox. I haue spoken of substance in generall so instructed by the plaine text which maketh mention neither of bread nor wine in expressed wordes other nor of that which Melchisedec broght forth And by all apperance there could not any great store of bread and wine be caried back againe by Abraham and his company after the victorie of his enimies For plaine it is that he broght nothing back which they before did not carie away him self and his company onely excepted we read that they toke the pray of Sodom and Gomorra and caried with them the substance Let this coÌ„iectur serue for answer to my lords argumemt yea the victual Loth his substaÌ„ce c. Now albeit that in the beginning there victualles had bene great yet being suche a company as we may iustlie suppose them to haue bene and also being arriued within there own costes it is not appeariÌ„g that great store wes reserued But howsoeuer it be this mater standing in coÌ„iecture we wil of necessitie conclud no thing seing that the holie Ghost hath not expressed it As touching my Lordes allegation of the daylie bread c. I acknowledge with his lordschip that to be the familiar phrase of the Scripture that vnder the name of bread is commonly taken all thinges necessar for the vse of maÌ„nes bodie like as these Frange efurienti panem tuum c. M. Quintyne Hauand consideration that Iohn Knox wald cast in ane suspicion in the hartes of the honorable auditor saifand his pardone be continual repeticion of this word coniecture we wil do as God will giue vs grace to tak this policie out of the hartes of the auditor and that by proper discription of argumentes of inferrence or coniecture quhairfore the auditor sall consider that thair is sum conietures and argumentes of inferreÌ„ce quhilk necessarlie concludes and followes vpon Let the learned consider this proper discription of coniectural argumeÌ„ts whiche do necessarly coÌ„clude And arcalled nottheles argumentes of coniecture or inferrence because the ane worde is not the other nor dois not expresly conclud the other as for ane familiar example Spirat ergo viuit as I wald say he aindes ergo he liues Quhairfore I infer that this conference of phrase or maner of speach quhair it is said in the text al thair victuallis necessarly inferris breid wine and all vther thingis expedient to be eatin coÌ„sidering thair was great aboundance in the citeis quhilk war spolÈeit as do this phrase break vnto the hungrie thy bread and swa quhatsumeuer may be inferred of the ane phrase necessarlie may be inferred of the vther Iohn Knox. Hitherto I haue trauelled to make difference betuix that that man of necessitie is bouÌ„d to beleue and that which man may either beleue or not beleue without any hurt of conscience What God in expressed wordes and sentences hath committed to vs within the Scriptures coÌ„manded the same to be beleued he requireth of vs that necessarlie we beleue the same But where the spirit of God hath keped silence and hath not in plaine sentences declared vnto vs the will of God our Father there may a man suspend his iudgement without hurt of conscience yea and more sure it is not bouldlie to affirme that which is keped close by the wisdome of God then that we should rashelie affirme any thing without the warrand of Gods worde as we are taught by the admonition of Augustine As touching the diuersitie of arguments I know bothe the strength of them that are called Necessario Concludentia and of those whiche stand in probabilitie The grouÌ„d of fayth is the word of God reuealed which bothe I grant to haue the strength in persuasion but the faith of man requireth a surer ground then any argument that can be deduced from nature to wit it requireth hearing and that hearing of the worde of God according to the doctrine of the Apostle Now to my Lordes argument I say it doeth not necessarlie conclude that Abraham and his souldiors broght more reddie meat suche as bread and wine back from there victorie then they were able to spend albeit that they caried with them the whole substance yea That is the Kings vicust by Abraham the whole victualles of Sodom and Gomorra c. Because that in the iorney some might haue bene lossed in the iorney no dout but muche wes spent and in the victorie the rest might haue bene dispersed or lost For by all apperance Abraham had smal respect to bread wine Let the reader aduert more then to that which might reasonablie susteane him and his company vnto there returne And thus from coniecture we shal coÌ„tinually pas to coÌ„iecture onles that my Lord be able to proue that the text affirmeth in plane wordes that suche superflouous aboundance of bread and wine wes broght back vnto the time that Melchisedec met him althogh his Lordship be able so to do as I am assured no man is able yet shal alwayes Melchisedec and his libiralitie stand still vnconuicted M. Quintyne To meit all the heides coÌ„tened in Iohn Knox partickle aboue rehearsed notwithstandinge appearanlie I am constrained to the same Èœit alwayes in fauoris of the auditure Let the indiffireÌ„t iudge I will go schortlie to sum speciall heides And first quhair he makes ane meine that I go by naturall ressonis to persuade to take the suspicion of men iustly of me in this heid I say and do affirme that I haue done not in that cause as Èit bot coÌ„forme to the Scriptures althrouch And quhair Iohn Knox speakis in general of meat our contention was for bread and wine quhilk I inferred necessarlie of the text And desires him to giue me ane resson schortlie grounded vpon the Scripture quhairfore the phrase alledged be me concerning
the meat sal not include bread and wine asweil as his phrase concerning the bread be his opinion without expres Scripture sall include all kinde of vther meatis Iohn Knox. I purge me first that I neither burden my Lorde with informalitie neither yet that his lordship trauelleth by naturall reason onelie to persuade to man But because the whole state of the cause as I vnderstand standeth in this whether that Abraham and his souldiors broght back againe superfluitie of bread wine or not I haue desired the same to be prouen by the expressed worde The phrase is not mine onely but I did aggre with my Lorde Let all men iudge if this reason be not fufficient bringing in the same first And now why I think that Abraham and his broght no superfluitie of bread and wine back againe the reason is because the text doeth plainlie affirme that victualles besydes the other substance wes caried away by the enimies But that any victualles besydes the substaÌ„ce were broght back againe there is no specification M. Quintyne Because I perceaue Iohn Knox dois not meit the heid of my partickle quhair I do mark the conferrence betuix the phrases of the Scriptures alledged be vs baith quhairin efter my iudgement consistes the marckis point of the purpose I will trauell na further thairin notwithstanding that I haue ground of ye Scripture abundantlie And swa I wil go to ane vther heid to assure the reader that Melchisedec brocht not furth bread wine to refresch Abraham and his company I wil ground me properlie vpon the text and on this maner The text sayis Protulit or proferens quhilk is in the singular nomber as ane person bringand furth bread and wine quhairfore necessarlie it concludes he brocht not furth bread and wine to refresch ane multitude as Abraham and his company was quhllk was not possible to ane person to do but onelie to mak Sacrifice conforme to my beginning Iohn Knox. What I haue answered the beneuolent reader shall after iudge to the present coniecture of my Lorde I answer that if Melchisedec allone without al coÌ„pany had broght onely furth so muche bread wine as he wes able goodly to carie yet shal it not be necessarlie concluded that therefore he broght it not forth to gratifie Abraham for an small portion may oftentymes be thankfull to many but my Lorde appeareth to shoote at that ground whiche I haue not laid for my principal And therefore albeit his lordship shuld win it yet my formar strength were litle deminished in my iudgement for onles his lordship be able to proue by the ê‘taine wordes of the text that the bread and wine wer broght forth to be offered vnto God my principall ground doeth alwayes abyde But the phrase of the Scripture and al 's the ordinarie manere of speaking doeth often tymes attribute to the principall man that which at his coÌ„mandement or wil is done by his seruandes or subiectes whereof I offer my self to shaw in Scriptures mo testimonies then one with tyme. And yet this is not my chief ground but this I speak for explaning of the text M. Quintyne Of the formar pertickle I mark twa heides in speciall quhilk dois not onely giue apperance for my pretence bot plainlie dois conuict as the godlie and ineffectionat reader may cleirly perceaue The first heid is quhair Iohn Knox dois allege that Melchisedec brocht furth bread and wine CoÌ„sider what shifts my lord sought to refresch Abraham and his werie companie quhilk plainly differis fra his speaking present say and that it was to gratifie Abraham and his company quhairinto thair is sic manifest diffirence as it giues plaine persuasion his ground in this heid to be nochtis Secondly it is against the ordur of nature to think that ony ane man lat be ane King and ane Preist sould bring furth that might gratifie lat be to refresch sic ane multitude as thre hundreth and auchtene werie personis Iohn Knox. What my Lordes iudgement doeth moue in the harts of the auditure I remitt to there own iudgement but I plainly affirme that neither in my worde nor in my dytment is there any such repugnance or diffirence as iustlie may conuict me to haue an euil ground For in my formar sayinges my wordes were that by probable coniecture the bread wine were broght forth by Melchisedec to refresh Abraham and his werie company I did not affirme Note that he and his whole coÌ„panie were thereof wholylie refreshed And in my latter wordes I say that albeit there had bene no more bread and wine then Melchisedec onely broght forth yet doeth it not thereof necessarlie conclude that the same were not broght forth to gratifie Abraham In which maner of speach this terme gratifie doeth nether repung nor yet differ from the terme refresh otherwise commonlie doeth in maner of speach Benus and Species that is to say the more generall and the inferior For in sofar as Abraham and his company were refreshed by the bread wine were it neuer so litle in sofar doeth he bring it forth to gratifie him Protesting plainly that vnwillinglie I am compelled thus to answer And thus endeth the second dayes trauell all whole spent to answer my Lordes shifting Whereto he wes moued because he wes not able to proue that Melchisedec offered bread and wine vnto God as willinglie ones he tooke to proue M. Quintyne As dois Iohn Knox sa do I with all my hart remit me to the iudgemente of the auditor in this heid and will not report the heides of his formar pertickle for auoiding of prolixtnes But now will I conclude with ane argument And thus beginnes M. Quintyne the thrid day hauing this argument written in paper which he caused to be red M. Quintyne QuhatsuÌ„euer opinion is conceaued of the Sciptures of almichtie God hauand na expres testimonie nor apperance of the same is alluterlie to be refused as sayis Iohn Knox him self Bot swa it is that Iohn Knox a win opinion conceaued or contracted of the Scripture coÌ„cerning the bringing forth of bread and wine by Melchisedec to refresche or gratifie Abraham and his werie company is not expresly contened in the Scripture nor hes na apperance of the samin therefore it followis weill that it is alluterlie be his awin iudgement to be refused Moued on godlie zeill honorable auditor that in this dangerous tyme the treuth sould cum to tryall in sic maner as the conscience of sic as ar perturbed safar as lies in oure sober possibilitie sould be establesed and at quietnes we set furth certane artickles as plesed God to gif vs grace vnto the quhilkis Iohn Knox tuik on hand to mak impungnation specially to the artickle concerning the messe Day houre place beand appointed and obserued I come to defeÌ„d my artickles and in speciall my artickle concerning the messe Let the blindest amongs the Papistes iudge
And according to the samin tuik me properlie to my warrand grounded vpone Goddes word vnto the quhilk warrand Iohn Knox as Èit hes maid na impungnation bot desyred me to sustene and defend the name the actor the ceremonies the opinion of men coÌ„ceaued of the messe and gif it wes ane Sacrifice Propiciatorie I beand willed that we schortlie sould go to the ground and effect and substance of the purpose quhairfore we come I stude be my artickle and warrand as they ar written not refusand to defend the heides aboue reheirsed as tyme and place sould serue And notwithstaÌ„ding that I was sufficientlie grounded vpon Gods worde quhilk I tuik to be my warrand Note that my Lorde confesses that he wes persewer that he hes hurt his own cause and tuik lykewise vpon me farr aboue my habilitie the place and personage of ane defender nottheles throuch occasion that serued as work will beir witnes I was coÌ„strained to tak vpon me the personage of ane persewer farre by my appetit Èea and the weill of my cause and al 's by the opinion of all sic as wald the weill of the samin moued on godlie zeill as God be iudge that the trueth sould cum to a tryal Sed sero sapiunt Poriges to the pleasure of God and satisfaction of the honorable auditor I beand cled with the personage of ane impungnar expres contrar to my mynd for sic causes as ar abone reheirsed I maid impuÌ„gnation not be manlie imaginationis bot be the manifest worde of God And that thre maner of wayes Let your freinds yet iudge first to tak away Iohn Knox conceaued opinion that Melchisedec brocht furth bread wine to refresche or gratifie Abraham and his werie company I called to remembrance how that the spulÈeis of nyne Kingis and of certain citeis to was recouered be Abraham quhairthrouch he and his company was sufficientlie refresched and had yneuch to be refresched on swa that they mistered not to be refreshed with breid and wine of Melchisedec Secondlie quhair Io. Knox maid question that they had not bread wine I returned againe to the text to werifie the samin Quhilk sayes and all thingis pertenand vnto meat Inferrand that in this phrase was contened bread and wine conforme to the phrase of the Scripture quhair mention is maid onelie of bread contenand all thingis necessar for maÌ„nis sustentacion he find and this not sufficient satisfaction Èœit Èeid I not to maÌ„nis imagination bot to the plaine text and grounded me vpon the wordes of the text sayand Melchisedec brocht furth bread and wine Inferrand in that it was spokeÌ„ in the thrid person singular How shal that be prouen it was against the ordoure of nature to think that ane maÌ„ sould bring furth especially he that was ane King and ane preist to tak that paines to bring furth bread and wine that micht gratifie lat be to refresch thre huÌ„dreth and auchtene men Seand that inuinsible persuations properlie gathered vpon the text But did nor does not so appeir to others could na wise bring Iohn Knox to confesse that thing quhilk appered vnto me conforme to the Scriptures of almichtie God and all gude resson he sould haue confessed Then concluded I with the Scriptures Nor yet will do to hurt a iust cause as I did begin as my conclusion wil beir witnes that he wald haue iustified his opinion conceiued of the Scripture coÌ„form to his awin sayingis be the expres word of God And of my liberalitie wil grant him Èit gif he hes any maner of apperance of the samin notwithstanding he said to me he wald not gif me ane hair of his heid gif I sould stand thir seuen Èeires Iohn Knox. Protesting first that I may answer in writ vnto the formar argument because as I perceiue it wes before conceiued in writ I enter in shortlie vnto the long discourse made by my Lorde not willing to answer euerie part thereof but onely so muche as may appear to infirme the iust cause And first where that my Lorde affirmeth that I haue made no impungnation vnto his lordships artickle concerning the masse I am content that not onelie this honorable audience but also the whole earth be iudge in that point For I haue plainly denied Note that ether the masse hath approbation of the plaine worde of God ether in name action opinion to witt written of the masse taucht of the masse and in the conscience of men conceiued of the masse finally that the actor therof for his vsurped power hath no greater assurance of Gods worde Which whole heades being denyed to be disputed at the present against my Lordrs artickle and ground I did thus reason that his lordeship wes not able to proue that Christ Iesus in his latter Supper did offer his bodie and blood vnto God his Father vnder the formes of bread and wine His lordeship taking for his proue the alledged Sacrifice of Melchisedec in bread and wine offered vnto God I did lykewise deny that Melchisedec did at that tyme to wit in the presence of Abraham offer ether bread or wine vnto God which hath bene these two dayes by-past in controuersie betuix his lordeship and me I haue alwayes denied that the holy Spirit in any notable or euident place of Scripture doeth affirme suche an sacrifice to haue bene made by Melchisedec vnto God whil the I did hear no place of Scripture adduced for the approbation thereof my Lorde demandand of me what then I thoght wes done with the bread wine I answered that albeit I wes not bound to giue my iudgement because that he wes bound to proue his affirmatiue as yet I say he is bouÌ„d and thereof I wil be content Considder what iudges I admit that his lordshipes moste fauorable freindes of best iudgemeÌ„t yea euen if his Lordeship please the Lordes of the Session be iudges in that point I answered I say that be coniecture the bread and wine were broght furth by Melchisedec to refreshe Abraham and his werie company Vpon which occasion his lordship how iustlie let all meÌ„ iudge did cleith him self againe Contrar the obiectioÌ„ made of impossibilitie that it was against nature that Melchisedec allone should briÌ„g forth bread c. without my procurement with the personage of ane impungnar And did adduce suche thinges as best pleased his lordship whereto I did answer as the whole conference will report and as I suppose sufficientlie to euerie thing obiected except that because my Lord did not touche the exposition alledgede by me vpon the wordes Melchisedec allone did bring forth bread and wine as my Lorde alledgeth I differed to bring in the conference of Scriptures to proue that it is an thing in Scripture verrie commone that the thing that is done at the coÌ„mand of any notable persone is attributed vnto him self althogh it be done be
plaine wordes he hes denied that Iesus Christe into his latter Supper did make ony Sacrifice of his bodie and blude vnder the formes of bread and wine vnto God his Father or that Melchisedec did offer vnto God bread and wine Your warraÌ„d is so weak that it neides no other impugnation theÌ„ to say it is not as of before I answer that it is his deutie to mak impugnation to my assercion conform to my warrand for denying is na proper nor sufficient impugnation And quhair he sayes that because I haue not hidderto prouen the saides grouÌ„dis c. I answer that it is my deutie to defend and not to preif conform to my artickle my warrand And quhair he desyres tyme to answer to my argument ê“poned this day in writ I frely grant it vnto him And quhair Iohn Knox sayes Then ye ouersaw yourself yat my assertioÌ„ is not onely rashe bot also maist dangerous Èea and in ane pairt blasphemous I answer that quhair he sayes I am to rashe I wis his modestnes in this samin sic as becuÌ„is ane sinceir christiane like as he is reckned to be Blasphemie is blasphemie before that maÌ„ proue it And quhair he callis my assertioÌ„ in ane pairt blasphemous than had bene tyme to haue called it blasphemie quhen he had prouen it in deid sufficientlie And quhair he sayes it is dangerous thair is na danger it be and vnderstand as I say and treulie meines For I am mair nor assured that Iesus Christ our Lord is ane substance with the Father Not as papistes haue vsed it al 's that Iesus Christ is the author and institutor of the messe And swa dois not ane veritie mak impugnation to ane vther Bot in this maner of speaking I wil plaine my industrie giuen vnto me be the grace of God Aduerr what ye speak willing to contrafit the wisdome and prudence of the wise and prudeÌ„t medicinar for we are and sould be of resson medicinars to the saule for lyke as the prudent medicinar dois expell ane vennome or poysome be contrapoysone Swa wald I expel the damnable herisies of the Caluinistes My lord wolde haue bursen if this byle had not broken Lutherians and Accolampadians against ye blissed Sacrifice of ye messe be conference with the damnable herisies of the Arrians quha did alledge ten testimonies of Scripture for ane geuand mair appearance to preif that Christ was not ane substance with the Father nor dois the Caluinistes Lutherians and Aecolampadians to preif that the messe is idolatrie as I fall sufficientlie iustifie as may stand to the glorie of God and weil of my cause To the latter pairt quhair he sayes to cut the mater schort the fâ—râ—nar question be and decided to wit quhither that Melchisedec did offer breid and wine vnto God or not he offeris him selfe without farther delay to proue yat Iesus Christ is ane substance with the Father c. I answer to the hinder pairt of this partickle I wis of God he and all vthers of his opinion mistered al 's lytle probation or persuasion to the ane as I do to the vther as I wald say to beleue the messe to be the institution of Christ Iesus as I do mair nor assuredlie beleue Christe to be ane substance with the Father That ar you neuer able to do and desyres na probation thereof bot sall God will and preif ye ane be the Scripture al 's expres as he sall preif ye vther And quhair he humblie desyres me to prepair me for the probatioÌ„ of the formar to wit of the oblation of Melchisedec I humblie and hartlie desyre Iohn Knox as he will testifie his feruor that the treuth cum to ane tryall and as he will satisfie the expectation of the noble auditor that he will mak impugnation formallie according to his deutie to my last argument and conclusion Iohn Knox. Where my Lord to vnburden him self of that which by all reason he oght to susteane to wit to proue his affirmatiue by him self proponed Your lordship took to proue your ground by the text and that you haue not don sayeth that to deny is not properlie to impung I answer that in that cace it is moste proper For he that ê“poneth for him self an affirmatiue and his aduersar denying the same is euer still bouÌ„d to the probation thereof and the aduersar hath euer still impungned it vnto he proue it and thereupon I desire iudgement To the Second I stil affirme that it is his lordships deutie to proue his affirmatiue whereupoÌ„ standeth the victorie of his whole cause which is be me in plaine wordes denyed To the thrid I thank his lordship hartlie And that he hes receaued and promises vnto him an answer againe in writ this present conference being put to an sufficient end To the fourt As my protestation will witnes I speak against the assercioÌ„ onelie and not against the persone whiche yet in my iudgement lacketh not suspicion of the formar crimes For howsoeuer my Lord be persuaded of the ground and assurance of the messe the assurance whereof I haue not yet hard I my self am fully assured that there be mo then ten thousand which euidentlie do knowe the vanitie and impietie of that masse which I haue impungned who nottheles moste constantlie beleue Iesus Christe to be of one substance with the Father yea that do beleue whatsoeuer by the Scriptures of God can be prouen necessarie for the saluation of man Therefore yet againe I say that to lay in any maner of equalitie that which is moste sure and that which was neuer yet plainlie prouen by the Scriptures of God to be the institution of Iesus Christ is more subiect to the crymes foresaid then that I can be subiect to any suspicion of immodestie for my formar wordes To the blasphemie I answer as before Immediatlie to the sext How that euer my Lord vnderstandeth and meaneth that his lordship is al 's able to proue the masse to be the institutioÌ„ of Iesus Christ as I am able to proue Christ to be one substance with the Father I think that an great nomber will think my lords affirmation verrie hard to be prouen And I my self will still continually dout vnto the tyme I hear the probation led To the seuent as touching my Lordes comparison of the mediciner and of his lordships industrie What the pastors of the Church oght to be the Scriptures plainly do teach vs but what vniuersallie they haue bene these nyne hundreth yeares bypast histories experience and recent memorie hath taught vs yea and presentlie do teach vs to the great greif of all Christianitie Where that his lordship doeth in plaine termes condempn the Caluinistes Lutherians and Aecolampadians of herisie I wold haue required of his lordship delay of time according to his desyre of me vnto the tyme that there cause had bene sufficieÌ„tlie tried in an lawfull vniuersal