particular Synodes or general Councels yea many times commonly before the vniuersal and Catholike Church the holy scriptures and Spirite of God him self So that as the first of these two that is their mutability in faith withdraweth me froÌ„ al dealing with them as men altogether irreligious vnchristian and godles so the second that is the want of al sound arguments of disputation as much discourageth me from writing vnto them as men altogether vngrouÌ„ded vnlearned contentious such as loue to mainteine an endles talke of al things but haue no order or forme to coÌ„clude resolue of any thing These two partes I wil declare and make manifest by a fevv examples In England what point of religion is by statute more carefully prouided for by seueritie of punishment more vrged by preaching or writing more aduaunced by al meanes possible more beaten in to the heads of the subiectes then the Princes supremacie in causes ecclesiastical for denial whereof so many true and faithful subiectes in our memory haue suffered death Yet on the coÌ„trary syde the subiectes of Scotland were wel allowed to restraine or to speake playnly to keepe in captiuitie their owne Soueraine for intermedling in the Churches affaires as appeareth by their Iustification not long sithence published in their language where the author thereof and the ministers vse these wordes The discipline of the kirke was openly impugned vvhen as the king by the persvvasion of the enemies of the kirke vvas induced to make him self and his priuie councel iudges in the cognition of matters mere ecclesiastical and concerning the doctrine of the preachers and to take vpon him vvhatsoeuer iurisdiction the Pope vsurped there in of old yea and more ouer to discharge the general assembly al pastors vvithin this realme to proceede to the sentence of excommunication also to suspeÌ„d the same At the last some preachers haue bene stopped by commaundement c. This is the faith gospel in Scotland and in England how freely the Puritanes inueigh against that spiritual primacie let their bookes coÌ„monly printed testifie namely the great volume of M. Cartewright against D. Whitg wherein at large he discourseth that that part of the English faith carieth with it infinite absurdities is against the doctrine of the Apostles monstruous in diuinitie iniurious to Christ against the primitiue and Apostolike Church and the vvritten word of God yea vvhere he pronounceth boldly that whiles the common protestantes of England go about to gratifie princes with this spoile of Christ they leaue theÌ„ no place in the Church of Christ Touching the doctrine of baptisme then which nothing is more necessary as being the gate of al other sacrameÌ„ts and the first entrance of christianitie the Communion bookes commonly printed coÌ„mend and allow this faith That by that sacrament children be regenerate and graffed in to the body of Christes congregation and made partakers of the death of our Sauiour And the minister chargeth the people preseÌ„t not to doubte but earnestly to beleeue that Christ vvil sauorably receaue those present infants vvith the armes of his mercie that he vvil geue vnto them the blessing of eternal life and make them partakers of euerlasting ioye Yet coÌ„trarywise in the Tovver disputation the doctors there teach That al those vvhich are baptised are not the sonnes of God because they haue not al the spirite of adoption and children baptâ—sed if they be not gods elect baptisme can not make them his children and so many dying immediatly after baptisme are notwithstaÌ„ding assuredly damned The Communion booke turned into latin and printed at London by Thomas Vautrollerius the yere 1574 Cum priuilegio Regiae Maiestatis wherein they would seeme to notifie their faith to the rest of Christendome touching priuate baptisme ministred in houses by lay men or womeÌ„ in case of necessitie willeth al men to assure them selues that a child after that sort is lawfully and perfitly baptised And touching the parties ministring that sacrament it saith Ego vos certiores facio quod rectè praestitistis officium vestrum in bacre etc. I assure you you haue vvel performed your duety in this matter and kept a right order in the baptizing of this infant vvho being borne in original sinne and the vvrath of God novv by the lauer of regeneratioÌ„ in baptisme is ascribed into the nuÌ„ber of Gods children and made heyre of eternal life Yet M. VVhitaker in this booke teacheth the contrary and saith it is the heresie of the Pepusians and Marcionites to permit womeÌ„ such authoritie euen in case of necessitie which he calleth fained and imaginarie thereby signifying plainly that he beleeueth with the Anabaptistes that baptisme is not necessarie for the washing away of original sinne And the CommunioÌ„ booke also imprinted three yeres after vz the yere 1577 by Richard Iugge printer to the Quenes Maiestie Cum priuilegio Regiae Maiestatis drawing neere to the doctrine of the Anabaptistes and the practise of the church of Geneua where such priuate baptisme is vtterly disliked quite abolished altogether leaueth out that whole Tracte of priuate baptisme The same first booke published in latin touching the sacrameÌ„t of Confirmation containeth this good catholike doctrine that Confirmatio illis adhibetur qui iam baptizati sunt vt per impositionem manuum et orationem vires et defensionem accipiant contra omnes insultus peccati mundi et diaboli Confirmation is applied to them vvhich are novv baptized that by imposition of hands and praier they may receaue strength defense against the inuasions of sinne the vvorld and the deuil In the later Communion booke these wordes as likewise the whole Tracte appertaining to CoÌ„firmation is cleane omitted The reason whereof can be no other then that the Church of England in this point hath altered her faith and ioyneth more neerely then heretofore to the order of Geneua where as witnesseth M. Cart. though it were somtimes allowed yet afterwardes vpon better aduise M. Caluin cheefe Superintendent there thrust it cleane out of the church Touching the article of Christes descending into hel the Communion booke and Creede turned into ryme and sung commonly in their congregations beareth the word in hand that they beleeue as doth the Church catholike yet others by publike writing and disputation refelling that article geue vs iust occasion to suppose that they beleeue vvith Caluin in that point vvho acknovvlegeth no other descent of Christ into hel but his paine vpon the Crosse vvhere yet aliue he vvas damned in soule or as he speaketh sustayned the paines of a damned spirit vvithout any difference but that his torments were not eternal as theirs are In their Communion they sing and say publikely That Christ is the only begotten sonne of God begotten of his father before al vvorldes God of God light of light very God of very God of
answere to the next demonstration where to S. Austin and S. Hierome reaching Peters chayre and succession of Priests in that Sea to be the very rocke vvhich the proud gates of helâ— ouercome nor which thing they affirme vpon manifest warrant of Christes wordes he answereth vpon warrant of his owne vvord that that succession of priestes is not the rocke the gates of hel haue prevayled against that church so as the faith vvhich somtimes florished there novv appeareth no vvhere in it long since is departed into other places Whereas D. S. replâ—eth this to be false and and that church euer to haue reteyned the same true faith and neuer to haue brought in any heresie or made any chaunge of doctrine vvhich he proueth by al historiographers that euer liued in the church Eusebius Prosper Beda Regino Marianus Scotus Schafnaburgensis Zonaras Nicephorus Cedâ—enus Sigebertus Gotfridus Viterbiensis Trithemius and many others against them al this only censure he opposeth Historias vestras Sandere non moramur vve regard not M. Sanders your stories and yet him selfe for his ovvne side bâ—ingeth not so much as one story So that against scriptures reason councels fathers old and nevv historiographers al kynd of vvriters him selfe euer cometh in as an omnipotent and vniuersal Apostlâ— Doctor Father c. as though in his only vvord consisted more pith then vvas in al mens that euer liued since Christes time And now somwhat farther to descrie the incredible vanitie folie pride and selfe loue of the maÌ„ let the reader note the grosse and barbarous impossibilitie of that paradox vvhich by this his supreme authoritie he vvould defend He graunteth the Church of Rome to haue bene pure godly christian for six hundred yeres after Christ as before hath bene declared VVhen then grew it to be so impure wicked and Antichristian ten yeres after For thus he writeth Six hundred and ten yeres after Christ or there about Bonifacius the third gouerned the Romane church VVhat vvas he to ansvvere truly very Antichrist In which wordes ioyned together thus much he saith in effect That whereas within the space of ten or twelue yeres before the Romane church was religious and euangelical in such sense as they vnderstand it that is abhorred the Popes vniuersal iurisdiction as Antichristian and limited his power within the precinctes of his owne Patriarkship reuerenced euery prince as supreme head of the church within his owne dominion detested the sacrifice of the masse as iniurious to the death of Christ acknowledged no iustification but by only faith allowed mariage of priestes and religious persons as agreable to the libertie of the gospel held for sacramentes none other but Baptisme the Eucharist and Baptisme an only signe not remitting synnes and the Eucharist a sole figure from which the truth of Christes body was as far distant as heauen is from earth and so forth according to the rest of the articles of their reformed faith within the decourse of so few yeres al these thinges were turned vpside downe the contrary faith planted in steede thereof That is the Romane church of late so sound and perfite sodaynly became most corrupt and impure she approued the vniuersal authoritie of the Romane Bishop and appointed no boundes or limites to his iurisdiction which was mere Antichristian she tooke from Princes their Supremacie she brought in the sacrifice of the masse and highly aduaunced it against the death and sacrifice of Christ she acknowledged iustification to proceede not of only faith but of workes also she established the single life of priestes and votaries and condemned their mariages as sacrilegious and execrable for two sacramentes she admitted seuen to baptisme she attributed remission of sinnes and in the Eucharist she beleeued the real and substantial veritie of Christes presence so forth according to the articles of Catholike religion or papistrie as these men terme it Now whereas thus much is comprised in their paradox of making the succession of the Romane bishops Antichrist whereas such weight lieth in the matter which of it selfe to common intendement is so absurd vnreasonable and in deede vnpossible whereas we also bring forth Fathers Councels and Doctors auouching the contrary gather thou Christian reader whether vve haue not iust cause vtterly to discredite them in this so blunt sensles assertioÌ„ vntil we see their Chronicles their monumeÌ„ts their aÌ„tiquities some maner warraÌ„t besides their owne in a matter of such importance Whereas they allow vs no such and yet chalenge to be credited vpon their owne vvord assure they selfe reader their dealing in this behalfe is not only foolish vnlearned and ignorant but also inhumane furious and diabolical Notwithstanding whereas M.W. besides those former profes which to any indifferent man may seeme more then sufficient requireth of vs farther declaratioÌ„ that in these later ages the Romane church hath not departed from that faith which in her first time she professed to content him if any thing mâ—y content him and make more euident the inuincible equitie of the Catholike cause I wil proue the same by such â—istoriographers as him selfe I trust wil allow for vpright and nothing fauorable to our cause Those witnesses I meane to be first of al him selfe and then Iohn Calum Peter Martyr Martin Luther Flacius Illyricus with such other pillers founders of his owne congregation Out of him self this I gather That to haue bene the true and Christian faith which the Romane church maâ—ntained the first fiue hundred yeres at what time that church vvas must pure excellent preserued inuiolablâ— the faâ—th deliuered by S. Peter and S. Paule This proposition is commonly found almost in euery page of M.W. answere to the second DemoÌ„stration Out of the other Caluin Luther c. this I gather that the Romane church in her first primitiue puritie maintained and beleeued the Popes Supremacie the sacrifice at the masse the same to be auailable for the dead priesthode the real presence c. no lesse then we do now This thou shalt find witnessed by their seueral confessions and approued at large hereafter in places conuenient The conclusion hereof rising is this first that these are no pointes of false or AntichristiaÌ„ doctrine but such as Peter Paule taught the primitiue Romane church Next that the later Romane church hath not departed from the former but hath kept inuiolably the self same faith without chaunge or alteration And so the false supposal whereupon this booke standeth being by such euideÌ„ce refuted the rest of the building must needes come to ground Now I say farther that this point which M.W. taketh for a most certaine and cleare veritie that is the fal of the vniuersal church for after the fal of the Romane church they can shew none that stoode and it is their general both preaching and writing that she corrupted the whole world with her errors and her
States Princes and nations who withstoode the bishop Sea of Rome as they do now Nullis temporibus defueruÌ„t sayth he nec Episcopi nec Presbyteri nec Imperatores nec populi c. There neuer vvanted at any time nether Bishops nether Priestes nor Emperours nor nations nor Priuate men vvhich had not rather be condemned of your church for heretikes then to mainteine the Catholike communion of your Apostasie wherefore hauing so large a scope let him repayre to that his owne church and succession of Protestantes and of them seeke for the true written bible of whom he receaueth the sense and meaning of the same not to our church and succession of Catholikes whom he chiefly condemneth for erring in the true sense and then reproueth as bitterly for corrupting the true text The conclusion of al is this if as a Christian as an obedient child of the Church and willing to learne if thus he demauÌ„d of the Church for true bibles she can serue him with more varietie of such in mo languages then it wil stande with his ease to reade If he demaund this as an heretike as a rebellious Apostata as to picke quarels and maintaine strife the Church hath nought to do with him She answereth as our sauiour answered the Pharisees Quid me tentatis hypocritae as he taught his Apostles Nolite dare sanctum canibus She sendeth him to his owne scattered and diuided coÌ„gregation in to whose communion he hath thrust him selfe vnder whose false banner he fighteth against her vvhom the vniuersal Christian vvorld in al times and ages vntil our daies hath acknovvleged for the only true catholike apostolike church of Christ And hitherto of the hebrevv fountaines and originals vvherein I haue staâ—ed somevvhat the longer first of al that the reader may see that not vvithout iust cause I charge M.W. vvith a manifest lie in saing vve flee the hebrevv for that vve knovv it to containe the assured bane and destruction of our cause He may here perceaue in part vvhat reason vvhat argument vvhat conscience moueth the Church thus to prescribe and vs to folovv the Churches ordinance herein That vve nether feare nor contemne nor refuse it but for the vnderstaÌ„ding of the true sense studie and honour it as much as he though vve hange not our faith vpon it so as if the Ievves depraue a text touching Christs diuinitie vve therefore vvil denie him to be God and if they raze out the only text that foreshevveth the maner of his passion and crucifying vve vvil not for al that geue ouer our faith that in such sort he vvas crucifyed for vs. Secondarely thus I haue done to satisfie M· VV. dâ—maund who chalengeth vs so confidently to shevve any error in the originals vvho affirmeth so peremptorily those places to be safe and vntouched which appertaine to the proofe of our Christian religion Which how true it is he now seeth if he wil beleeue ether reason or his owne maisters Besides that his argument is ouer slender when he wil conclude those originalles to be pure because there is no corruption in matters of coÌ„trouersie as though there could be no errors but those which proceede of wilfulnes and malice against Christian religion as though the Iewes could not erre by negligence ignorance and other humane infirmitie by which Caluine Beza the rest of that knot can imagine very many and the same very grosse errors to haue crepte in to our latin bibles But true is the old prouerbe Graculus graculo Like wil to like as I haue said Of the Iewes for neare alliance and brotherhode they iudge so diuinely as though they were halfe goddes who neuer erred ether of malice ether of wilfulnes or ignorance or slowthfulnes or want of due consideration or thorough any kind of like ether sinne or imbecillitie But of the Christian Catholike Church of the Bishops and Pastors by whom they haue that peece of Christianitie which yet they retaine they deeme most wickedly them they accompt more dissolute more irreligious more careles negligent in matters diuine then the worst people that liue vnder the cope of heauen These in the same kind haue erred both of malice and of wilfulnes and of contempt and of negligence by al maner of faulting voluntarie inuoluntarie wherevnto a man may possibly fal Thirdly some reason mouing me thus to doe was because nether M. Martin in his Discouerie much lesse the preface of the new testament handling only such thinges as were incideÌ„t to that booke that is geuing reason why in that translatioÌ„ the latin vulgar edition vvas folowed before the common greeke testamentes had any occasioÌ„ to treate of this matter For albeit M. Martin proueth errors in matters historical to be in our coÌ„mon hebrew bibles yet he maketh no stay therein but rather presupposing the hebrew text to be altogether true as the aduersaries pretend he so much the more discouereth their wilfulnes and peruersitie who in their translations depart sundrie times froÌ„ those hebrew originalls which they seeme to magnifie as altogether faultles and vnspotted One principal corruption of great moment and importance he obiecteth out of the 21. psalme where the prophet saith in the person of Christ They haue pearced my handes and feete which by the Iewes being maliciously altered by mutation of one or other letter in to As a lyon my hands and feete without wit reason or common sense whereby is euacuated the best and clearest prophecie in the whole body of scripture touching the maner and fashion of Christs crucifying who besides M. W. would so blindly haue dissembled it yet stil sing vs the old song of the pure fountaines It is written that not long sithence certaine euangelical Anabaptistes lately conuerted from Iudaisme reading that place of S. Peter in Castalios translation Iesum Nazarenum scelestis manibus comprehendistis et ad palum alligatum sustulistis Iesus of Nazareth you haue apprehended and binding him to a post or stake so made him avvay vpon this text fel to a great and daungerous contention among them selues in their congregations whether Christ were pearced hand and foote with nailes as the Church beleeueth or were only bound hand and foote to a gibbet as the fashion among the Turkes is now a daies as the other two theeues were done to death which were crucifyed with him And remoue the traditioÌ„ of the Church which these good felowes care not for and this place of Dauid and certainly out of the old testament it can not perhaps nether out of the new be clearely proued to a contentious heretike that he was crucified in such sort as the truth is and we beleeue For as the heretikes now a daies at home in our couÌ„trie gladly abhorre the name of the crosse al signes or memories there of both in priuate talking publike preaching and writing rather vse the name of
Paris Louane and other catholike Vniuersities And if there be any fault in our english translation it is this that this parcel was not added in the margeÌ„t as it was in the latin which we folowed Wherefore this proueth no corruption but rather great fidelitie in our latin testament that it agreeth with S. Hierom consequently the greeke examples which he interpreted with S. Ambrose S. Austin S. Bede Haymo S. Anselmus and the rest of the latin writers which in a matter not doubtful and otherwise in no respect preiudicial to any veritie of Christian profession are of that authoritie that Beza him self in this case would not disallow our doing and M.VV. him self also in iustifying his english translations for pure and perfit doth consequently approue and iustifie ours so anâ—wereth â—im self in this obiection for the later clause before noted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the lord said they haue added to their english testaments after Beza vpon the only authorite of our latin against al the auncient greeke albeit now it is thrust in to the coÌ„mon greeke prints of Geneua Basile Zuricke therefore he should not be offeÌ„ded if we attribute so much to our testament who professe to honour it seing he his felowes do as much who professe a perpetual hatred against it And this I trust may suffice for these few words to quitte our testament of any faulte considering that first they coÌ„cerne not any controuersie theÌ„ that the sense of it is in worde and deed fully euideÌ„tly coÌ„prised in the same place againe if we preferred our latin before al greeke we do no more then doth Beza then doth M.W. then do al the English and Scottish congregations in their owne pure and immaculate bibles Last of al our reading is coÌ„firmed not only by al the later ages of the church these seuen or eight hundred yeres as by S. Anselmus Haimo S. Bede and others nether only by the more auncieÌ„t latin fathers S. Austin S. Ambrose S. Hierom but also it was according to the greeke copies which S. HieroÌ„ had the same agreing in substaÌ„ce with S. Chrysostome no doubt many other and therfâ—re hath sufficieÌ„t ground to defend it self although vve confesse the other reading to be vsed of many fathâ—rs which vve therefore mislike not yet rashâ—y presume not to thrust it in to our text And this is the only fault and yet al the faultes vvhich M.VV. findeth in our latin testament The rest he supplieth vvith a lustie bragge that there are at the least Six hundred other vvherein against the faith of al the greekes and their perpetual coÌ„sent the errors of the latin traÌ„slatioÌ„ are retained of vs. Of which reckning I dare at first without any farther stay strike out fiue huÌ„dred yet the suÌ„me vvhich remaineth is sufficieÌ„t to conuince him of a maine lye But for a farther refutation he turneth vs ouer to Benedictus Arias Montanus a good priest one that serueth in the Catholike Kinges court and submitteth al his labours to the iudgmeÌ„t censure of the Vniuersitie of Loâ—ane and therefore very vnlike it is that ether he vvil bestovv so vnfruitefully his labours as to vvrite against the Sacred TrideÌ„tine CouÌ„cel or that that Vniuersitie vvil approue his endeuours if he should so heretically employ theÌ„ whatsoeuer shal become of him hereafter in his hebrew bibles alreadie set forth we see that in the places before noted he altereth not the latin according to the hebrew but letteth it stand as autentical VVhat speake I of him a catholike man and a priest whereas your selues though otherwise most obstinate and stonie harted against the truth yet dare not alter it according to the hebrew but leaue it as you found it in our bibles And therefore why you cal vs 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bible-beaters I wonder and muse what brainsicke conceite you haue therein or what reason moueth you thus to raile Because we defend the sinceritie of our bibles against your peeuish and vnlearned and fantastical and contemptible talking for what one tolerable argument bring you because we defend the inheritance left vs by our forefathers because we prefer the Church Spouse of Christ before the sinagoge of the Iewes because at their wicked appointment vve vvil not raze out so many places touching our Sauiours honour and the truth of our religion is this the cause why your wisedome termeth vs Bible-beaters Nay let the reader consider and the world iudge whether sith Christs time or before Christs time there were euer any beaters and circumciders and gelders and manglers and defacers and corrupters of those holy bookes comparable to you and your sect Who haue rent out of the bible so many partes which our auncient fathers deliuered vs and we hold fast as sacred and canonical Who haue reiected out of the old testament so many entier books as I haue noted in the beginning the prophecie of Baruch the storie of Iudith of Tobias of Hester of the Machabees and Ecclesiasticus who in the new testament haue cut out S. Paules epistle to the hebrews S. Iames one of S. Peters two of S. Iohns S. Iude and the Apocalips and the whole gospel of S. Luke who in those other which you pretend to keepe haue lopt of great peeces so many as pleased your arrogant and heretical spirit peeces of S. Iohns gospel peeces of the prophete Ieremie peeces of the prophete Daniel peeces of the booke of Cronicles or ParalipomenoÌ„ besides many lesser parcels pared away both in the epistles and gospels and al the rest by your traÌ„slations miserably corrupted Who by the same reason authoritie by which you iudge and condemne these bookes geue like authoritie libertie to euerie phantastical minister to contemne and condemne the rest For thinke you a lying reason may not be found against the gospel of S. Iohn as wel as against the gospel of S. Luke Or may not a man pretend as good arguments of humane spirit to be in the second epistle to the Corinthians or to Philemon as in that of S. Iames or to the hebrewes Or may M. VVilliam Charke oppose him selfe against the vniuersal Church of Christ by the mouth of those most holy and Apostolical fathers gathered together in the great CouÌ„cel of Nice acknowledging for Canonical the booke of Iudith and may not any other minister of like qualitie and learning do so by like example Because the booke of Tobie maketh expressely for the patronage of angels may you say disdainfully VVe passe not for that Raphael mentioned in Tobie nether acknovvledge vve those seuen angels vvhereof he maketh mention Al that differeth much from Canonical scriptures which is reported of that Raphael and sauoureth of I knovv not vvhat superstition Nether vvil I beleeue free vvil although the booke of Ecclesiasticus affirme it a hundred times c. and may not a
A REFVTATION OF SVNDRY REPREHENSIONS CAVILS AND FALSE sleightes by which M. Whitaker laboureth to deface the late English translation and Catholike annotations of the new Testament and the booke of Discouery of heretical corruptions By WILLIAM RAINOLDS Student of Diuinitie in the English Colledge at Rhemes 2 Timoth. 3. v. 8 9. As Iannes and Mambres resisted Moyses so these also resist the truth men corrupted in minde reprobate concerning the fayth But they shal prosper no further For their folly shal be manifest to al as theirs also vvas Veni vide Come and see Iohn 1. v. 46. Printed at PARIS the yere 1583. THE PREFACE TO THE READER BEING appointed by those vnder whose gouernement I haue put my selfe and to whose direction I haue willingly committed whatsoeuer facultie or abilitie is in me for the benefite of our countrie and reducing to the fold of Christs Catholike church the soules of our poore countrymen so miserably seduced appointed I say by such my Superiors to examine and answere M. W. booke of Antichrist first principally so far forth as touched this Seminarie that is the Translation of the new Testament lately published with the Annotatiōs thereof and M. Martins Discouerie of their heretical corruptions next and afterward the other argument concerning Antichrist I confesse my self to haue bene so loth to take the matter in hand as ether my duetie and obedience suffered or the loue and charitie of my countrymen and brethren permitted One reason was because I sawe many in this societie for good zeale and forwardnes as willing and for ripe knowledge in diuinitie more able to vndertake and dispatch a greater matter then that An other reason was because I thought I could not without some iniurie done to Catholikes dispute against that sauage barbarous paradox making sometime the order successiō of Popes to be Antichrist as M. VV. doth in one page sometime the whole Catholike and vniuersal Church vvhereof the Pope is head to be Antichrist as he affirmeth within 5. lines after ether of which in the iudgment of any Catholike is as notorious and palpable a lie as any of Lucians True Histories So that as if a man would with sage reasons go about to disproue some of those toies which he reporteth As that his ship being taken vp with a strong wind caried in the ayre seuen dayes seuen nights thē arriued at an Iland in the middest of the ayre where he saw a terrible battayle fought and many a thousand slayne and yet the field whereon both camps pitched was nothing els but the web or weauing of spiders which is not to be marueiled at spiders being as big there as prety Ilandes are with vs here that afterward he came to a land where mē tooke their eyes out of their heads at night time or otherwise whē they meāt not to vse them put them vp in cases at other conueniēt seasons they tooke them out thence put them on againe such like stuffe of riuers of wine seas of milke and Ilands of cheese c. as if I say a mā would go about with sober reasons to refute these reports he should thereby note his auditory of smale wit discretion who needed helpe to find out such incredible fables the very like is to be deemed of this idle inuention concerning Antichrist in the iudgment of al Catholikes Lucians fables being no more false vnreasonable and vnprobable against nature and philosophie then this deuise is peeuish lying absurd vncredible and vnpossible against Christian faith and diuinitie A greater reason was for that I vtterly abhorred in the middest of my course of studies and better exercises to spend any good houres ether in reading or refuting heretical bookes which neuer edifie to vertue deuotion and saluation but distract mens mindes from the meditation of al such religious spiritual and heauenly exercise and fil their heads only with contentions disputes and brawles of wordes Pugnis verborum as the Apostle calleth them the end where of as Tertullian of old noted is commonly no other but to wearie our selues offend the readers and exasperate the aduersarie whose proud spirite of contempt and contradiction is lightly incorrigible And of this I make the more sure reckening if at this present I write ought against our English aduersaries because by certaine experience of things past I see assuredly what must be looked for in time to come For as they passe other common heretikes in pride arrogancie and good opinion of them selues and the same ioyned with intolerable ignorance euen in the first principles of our religion so for this reason they bluntly dash into any kind of absurditie be it neuer so foule and blasphemous As that the image of Christ is as very an Idol as the image of Venus or Iupiter that S. Peter vvas neuer at Rome that Christ is not begottē of the substāce of his father that he is not god of god the father but god of him selfe that he was a Priest and offered sacrifice to his father according to his diuinitie vvherevnto may be added that The succession of popes is Antichrist or if that like you not then that The vniuersal Church is Antichrist such strange articles in our religion that Christian men ought rathet to stop their eares and shut vp their eyes from hearing them or reading them then expect any ansvver or refutation of them And vvho vvould not be greued to put pen to paper whē he knoweth he shal be troubled vvith multiplicatiō of such vnreasonable assertions of such old rotten execrable heresies such propositions as euery Christian man naturally doth abhor al aūcient stories monuments vniuersally vvithout exception reiect and refel al aūcient churches and coūcels since the time of Arrius vvith one vniforme consent haue accursed cōdemned But the chiefe and maine cause why I most of al lothed this maner of writing vvas because I find in our aduersaries doctrine no kind of stay or assurance no maner of certaintie or stedfastnes their vvhole faith being like Maie flovvers for some few monethes or yeres florishing and in estimation vvhich vvithin a short space after wythereth avvay is of them selues neglected changed and forsaken And thē vvhereas to dispute seriously of any matter requireth some certaine groūdes fountaines or heads of disputation vvherevnto euery man of learning ought to stand as we see in al other sciences of Logike Philosophie Law any kind of learning humane or diuine these men haue quite remoued and abolished al such and haue brought the whole course of their diuinitie to an idle lose vaine fantastical kynd of talking consisting most in denial of principles of religion where he is counted best diuine that can maintaine talke longest he is counted to beare the bel away that most arrogantly can preferre him self before al other be they few or many old or new
shaken Alleage the auncient fathers not one or other but al together affirming one and the self same thing they answere If you argue from the vvitnesse of men be they neuer so learned and auncient vve yelde no more to their vvordes in cause of faith and religion then vve perceaue to be agreable to scripture Nether thinke you your self to haue proued any thing although you bring against vs the vvhole consent and svvarme of fathers except that vvhich they say be iustified not by the voice of men but of God himself And it is their common maner as to make smale accompt of any author that is against them so least of al of the old auncient fathers whom some of them are not ashamed in most despiteful sort to cal Pillorie doctors But this their behauiour towards the auncient fathers and Doctors that be of our Church may seeme in the iudgement of many to stand with reason For why may it be said should they be bound to our Austins HieroÌ„s and Cyprians more then we wil be bound to their Luthers Caluins and Melanchthons At the least then say we they ought to be ruled by doctors of their owne such as they cal and honour for Apostles Euaâ—geâ—istes of their new church and beleefe Yet when the authoritie of such is pressed against them it weigheth no deeper then of those other whom they cal pillorie doctors For how freely contemne they Martin Luther how freely reiect they Hulderike Zuinglius VVe receaue M. Caluin saith T.C. and vveigh of him as of the notablest instrument that the lord hath stâ—rred vp for the purging of his churches and restoring of the playne and sincere interpretation of the scriptures vvhich hath bene since the Apostles time And yet vve do not so reade his workes that vve beleeue any thing to be true because he saith it but so far as vve caÌ„ esteeme that that vvhich he saith doth agree vvith the Canonical scriptures The very self same answere geueth the contrary part wheÌ„ the same mans iudgement is obiected against him I reuerence M. Caluin saith D.W. as a singular man and a vvorthy instrument in Christes church But I am not so vvholy addicted vnto him that I vvil contemne other mens iudgmentes in diuers points not fully agreing vvith him c. vvhen as in my opinion they come neerer to the true meaning and sense of scripture then he doth And because the course of this new diuinitie is now brought to rest most of al on the credit of these reuereÌ„d fathers and doctors and in steede of the auncient forme of alleaging T. us saith S. Chrysostom thus S. Augustin thus S. Basil the fashion is now to alleage Thus saith M. Caâ—uin thus M. Bucer thus M. Bullinger therefore thorough varietie somewhat to avoyde tediousnes and not greue to much the eares of their auditors by flat denyal diuers wayes and reasons haue they to passe ouer when they please the authoritie of such their owne doctors and maisters One way and the same very playne is to refuse them because they were men As for example If you presse me vvith M. Martyrs and M. Bucers authoritie I first say they vvere men and therefore though othervvise very vvatchful yet such as slept somtymes A second way is because they had some other error as M. Bucer you say allovveth priuate baptisme and consequently the baptisme by vvomen It may be that as M. Bucer although othervvise very learned hath other grosse absurdities so he may haue that A third because some other doctor of as good credite and estimation is of a contratie opinion as M. Musculus a learned man is of your iudgement and M. Caluin as learned as he and diuers other are of that iudgment that I haue alleaged This is no great profe on your side nor reprofe of ours A fourth and the same most sure is to chalenge the libertie of the gospel and therefore not to admitte their verdict but at pleasure as Touching M. Bucers M. Bullingers Illyricus allovvance of holy daies if they allovv them in such sort as M. Doctor vrgeth then that good leaue vvhich they geue the Churches to dissent from theÌ„ in that point I do take it graunted vnto me being one of the same church Although as touching M. Bullinger it is to be obserued that since the time he wrote so there are aboue 35 yeres since vvhich time although he hold stal that the feastes dedicated vnto the lord as of the Natiuitie Easter and Pentecost may be kept yet he denieth flatly that it is lavvful to keepe holy the dayes of the Apostles If these serue not the turne a man would thinke their martyrs those who were so ful of the spirite that they willingly shead their bloud and suffered death by fier for confâ—irmation of their faith these mens testimonie should be irrefragable for iustifying of those pointes especially for which they lost their liues But nether want they their old ordinary meanes to shift of the authoritie of these martyrs were they neuer so glorious For although they vvere excellent personages say they yet their knovvledge vvas in part and although they brought many thinges to light yet they being sent out in the morning or euer the sunne of the gospel vvas risen so high might ouersee many thinges vvhich those that are not so sharpe of sight as they vvere may see c. And if they had died for this or that article yet the authoritie of their martyrdome could not take avvay from vs this libertye that vve haue to enquire of the cause of their death Martyrs may not be said to seale their errors vvith their bloud or vvith the glory of their martirdome preiudice those which vvrite or speake against their errors For this is to oppose the bloud of men to the bloud of the sonne of God What remayneth now for the last cast but the maiestie not of one or other doctor or of a few martyrs but of great and ample reformed churches as of France of Germany of Zurike or Geneuâ— yet euen these also passe with like maner of answere And they haue as general a rule to reiect such as they haue the poorest doctor that commeth in their way As for exaple when other reformed churches are brought to reforme the disorders of the English church To vvhich reformed church saith the ansvverer vvil you haue the church of England framed or vvhy should not other reformed churches as vvel frame them selues vnto vs For vve are as vvel assured of our doctrine and haue as good groundes reasons for our doing as they haue except you vvil bring in a nevv Rome appoint vs an other head church and create a nevv Pope by vvhom vve must be in al thinges directed And againe I haue told you and novv I tel you againe that there is no cause vvhy this church of England
canonical scriptures And that this fault lye not altogether vpon Luther and the lutheraÌ„s VVolfg Musculus a famous wryter amongst the Zuinglians vpon lyke reason pronounceth lyke sentence They obiect vnto vs sayeth he the place of Iames. but he vvhatsoeuer he vvere though he speake othervvise then S. Paule yet may he not preiudice the truth And after he hath at large shewed the disagreemente betweene those two Apostles thus he breaketh forth into the open reproch of S. Iames. VVherefore he S. Iames alleageth the example of Abraham nothinge to the purpose vvhere he sayeth vvilte thou knovv ô vayne man that fayth vvithout vvorkes is dead Abraham our Father vvas he not iustified by vvorkes vvhen he offred his sonne Isaak He confoundeth the vvord fayth hovv much better had it bene for him diligently and playnely to haue distinguished the true and properlye Christian fayth vvhich the Apostle euer preacheth from that vvhich is common to Ievves and Christians Turks and Diuels then to confound them both and set dovvne his sentence so different from the Apostolicall doctrine vvhereby as concluding he sayth you see that a man is iustified by vvorkes and not by fayth alone vvhereas the Apostle out of the same place disputeth thus c. And after he hath made S. Paule speake as he thinketh best he inferreth Thus sayeth the Apostle of vvhose doctrine vve doubt not Compare me novv vvith this argument of the Apostle the conclusion of this Iames A man therfore is iustified by vvorks and not by fayth only and see hovv much it differeth vvhereas he should more rightly haue coÌ„cluded thus c. In which discourse the Reader may see that he not onely contemptuously refuseth to call him an Apostle and euer nameth him as opposite to the Apostle but also that he refuteth him as making false arguments and taketh vpon him to be his maister and as it were calling him ad ferulam checketh and controwleth him for a corrupter of scripture misapplying the word of God and wickedly pullinge downe that which S. Paule had so wel built vp All which beinge so plaine euident and manifest and the worde straminea found out at length acknowleged by M. VV. a man wold thinke all this matter ended and that egregious lye fathered vpon M. Campian turned vpon M. VV. head withall M. Campians first reason iustified wherein he burdened the Protestantes with denial of the holy scriptures And yet M. VV. yeldeth not but like a valiant soldiar is so farre from geuinge ouer that he pursueth his aduersarie still as though he had the better of him and whâ—e so or how can he possiblie defend him self forsoothe because Luther non plane 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 stramineam appellauit Luther sayed not playnlye and simplye that it vvas stravven or made of stravve but in comparison of Sainte Peter and Sainte Paules Epistles I beleeue in deede Nether did F. Campian or M. Martine saye so or any wise man els for although he were as madde and shamelesse in his assertions as euer was heretike yet to haue termed that epistle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 stramineam simplye made of stravve or any otherwise then to haue signified the vnworthynes of the same in respect of holie scriptures and in that sort it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a worde of blasphemous contempt had bene as wonderful as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to haue affirmed that is was made of woode or morter And here in the verie fronte and beginning let the reader note in M.VV. the liuely paterne of a perfecte wrangler maintaininge a continuall bablinge vppon wordes and neuer drawing nigh to the pointe Father Campians and M. Martins charge vppon them beinge euidente that they contemne the written worde as is proued by Luther M.VV. knowinge not wel what to say runneth he knoweth not whether vp and downe and aboute forwarde and backward now grauntinge and by and by recalling so that in the compasse of one leafe in one plaine matter he hath more contrary windinges and turnings then a graue and sober man could be driuen vnto in the wryting of a large volume First there is no suche thinge and F. Campian lyeth egregiously nowe him selfe hath founde it out then there was neuer a worde chaunged in Luthers preface now the later editions differ much from the former againe Luther calleth it not simpliciter stramineam but in respect of S. Paules epistles and S. Peters If this serue not the turne then I require you saith he to bring forth the other wordes that folow arida tumida contentiosa or els this of straminea is no great matter yet one fetche more Although I vvil not defend this of Luthers yet you haue iniuried him in saying that he called it omnino stramineam altogether made of stravv looke saith M. Martin in Illyricus and there you shall finde the matter graunted I haue so done saith M.VV. let me be counted impudent yf you finde this vvord there Thus muche I graunt Illyricus saith that Luther rehearseth graue causes vvhy this epistle ought not to be esteemed for a vvriting of Apostolicall authoritye But vvhat is this to the purpose as though he that denieth the epistle to be apostolical termeth yt stramineam made of stravv This is a copie of M.VV. vayne in wryting first to deny the matter be it neuer so euident and wheÌ„ the matter is coÌ„fessed theÌ„ to cauil vpon syllables and when matter and forme the verie syllables are founde yet to yelde to nothing but to keepe the pen or tounge walking as though in this point lyke verball grammarians and ridiculous sophisters we principallie hunted after these syllables stra mi ne am which neuerthelesse are found and not as students searchers of truth in diuinitye soughte out first and cheeflie whether by these and the lyke contemptible speeches the aduersarie laboured to disgrace deface that Apostolical writing and so impiouslie to auoyde suche authoritie when he should be pressed therewith Wherefore to draw to some issue howsoeuer Luther 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 called it stramineam or called it not or whether he spake so in respect of the matter of the epistle or the forme or by way of comparison with S. Paule or whatsoeuer other quidditie M.W. ether now hath or hereafter shall deuise if Luther did yt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to deface the epistle which M.VV. denieth not and to dispossesse it of Canonicall authoritie as the thing it self speaketh if by his example the Germane Diuines churches altogether contemne it if vppon Luthers sentence Illyricus pronounce that Luther in his praeface rendereth great causes vvhy this epistle oughte in no case to be accounted for a vvriting of Apostolicall authoritie vnto vvhich reasons I thinke euerie godlie man and not geuen to contention ought to yeld if Pomerane say the vvriter thereof maketh a vvicked argument concludeth ridiculouslie if Vitus Theodorus thrust it cleane out of the booke if the Centuries affirme
is and must be deduced to wit the cause why the Englishe congregatioÌ„ admittinge S. Iames hath reiected those other and we shall straightwaies finde not only that he ouerthroweth himself which is a comoÌ„ tricke amoÌ„gst such good writers but also concludeth the contrarie of that which here he preteÌ„deth The Church readeth the bookes of Iudith Tobie and the Machabees saith S. Hierome but reckeneth them not amongst the Canonicall scriptures In that the Church at solemne times read them it is a great argumente that she much honoured them although she admitted them not as then vniuersallie into that highest roome of supreme authoritye But of S. Iames we heare not so much but contrariwise Eusebius directlie affirmeth if M. VV. saie true and iudgeth wold all other men so to iudge that that epistle of S. Iames is a false and bastard epistle and Hierome a prieste after the order of the Romane Church and not a minister after the fashion of the English congregation is brought to proue the same Who seeth not now what greate difference there is betweene these two verdits geuen in by these auncient fathers the first being read in the Church had a degree to Canonicall scriptures the later had no such Of the first he bringeth in S. Hierome saynge onlie that as then it was not acknowledged for Canonical he bringeth in S. Hierome to saie as much of the second and for a surcharge he ioyneth Eusebius directlie affirming it to be a bastard epistle and withall wishinge all men so to iudge of it him self inferreth that Luther in his rashnes which we condemne folowed the iudgement and testimonie of the auncieÌ„t primitiue Church he affirmeth farther as a general principle namely treatinge of this epistle Quod principio statim non habet diuinam authoritatem non potest tempore hominum approbatione fieri diuinum That vvhich at the first hath not presentlie diuine or canonicall authoritye as in their opinion S. Iames had not can not be made canonicall by the approbation of men yet now of these he wold haue vs learne this distinction that the primitiue Church vniuersallie reiected the bookes of Iudith Tobie the Machabees some onlie and those without iust cause refused S. Iames epistle and therefore that the English congregation hath done verie discretelie to authorize the one disauthorize the others let him not playe to much the Sophister but answere as becoÌ„meth a Diuine saue him self in this froÌ„ opeÌ„ folie contradiction he shall shew more wisedome learning theÌ„ hetherto he hath geuen vs occasion to deeme in him And that he may the better waye the veritie and substance of his aunswere and the reader haue occasion to consider what a variable tottering gospel these men preache and how iustlie we obiect to them that at their pleasure they make hauocke of scripture I will laye to M.VV. reasoning the effecte of the late disputation had in the Tower with F. Campian touching this pointe This they make the mayne grounde of their whole argameÌ„t Those bookes vvhich olde fathers and Councels haue not receaued for canonical bookes to ground our faith vpon them can not nevâ— meâ— nor the Tridentine Councel make canonical This proposition standâ—ng for good which they so confidentlie vrge and M.VV. thinketh yâ— moste assured let vs see vppoÌ„ this rule what waste they make of the sacred bookes vppon that ground thus they buylde or rather pull downe Aug. li. 2. cap. 8. de doct Christiana leaueth out Baruch and the tvvo last bookes of Esdras Hierom in his preface vppon the booke of Kinges saith that Sapientia Salomonis Iesus the sonne of Sirach Iudith and Tobias are not in the Canon Eusebius in his sicâ—e booke and 18. chapiter it is the 19. leaueth out the third and fourth of Esdras Tobias Iudith Baruch Sapientia Ecclesiasticus and the bookes of Machabees and concerning the epistle to the Hebrevves though him selfe say plainly it is S. Paules yet he confesseth that many haue doubted thereof also coÌ„cerning the second epistle of S. Peter he saith it vvas doubted of many so of some vvere the last tvvo epistles of Iohn The same Eusebius li. 4. ca. 26. it is 25. speaketh of Melito bishop of Sardis vvho reckening vp the volumes of the old testament omitteth Esdras Tobie Hester Iudith Baruch VVisdome Sirach the bookes of Machabees And the CouÌ„cel of Laodicea omitteth Lukes gospel the Apocalyps you see therefore that these olde Fathers haue leaste these books out of the canon yet vvere not called heretikes nor blasphemers Thus farre they Afterwards they define those to be not Canonical but Apocriphal that are not in the auncient Canon receaued and allovved to haue proceeded vndoubtedly from the holy Ghost and those Apocriphal are forbid to be read and though they may be read for moral lessons yet not for matters of religion Afterward the same argument is resumed againe and especially that parte vrged that the Councel of Laodicea leaueth out those former bookes in the olde Testament Tobias Iudith the booke of vvisdome Ecclesiasticus and in the nevv Testament Luke and the Apocalyps And when F. Campian answered that that Councel was but particuler reply was made that the Councel vvas prouincial and farther confirmed by the sixte general Councel holden in Trullo Constantine being presideÌ„t as Bartholomeus CaraÌ„za vvriteth fol. 71. And therefore vve may leaue out of the canon Tobie Iudith c. vvhich your Councel of Trent thrust in as autentical Hetherto your brethren in the fourth dayes conference In the first day vpon like warrant they recken amongst Apocryphal bookes that which you labour so much to saue S. Iames which there is called a counterfeit or bastard epistle by iudgement of Eusebius Item the epistle of Iude the later of Peter the second and thirde of Iohn And against these they alleage Eusebius Hierome Epiphanius and the Councell of Laodicea confirmed as they say there againe by the general Councel holden in Trullo And yet such is their inconstancie in the same place some of these in worde they professe to receaue but only as at pleasure of curtesie and liberalitie not as of fayth dutie and necessitie For the summe of all commeth to this and it is the effect of that disputation Such bookes as of olde haue bene doubted of we are not bound to admit for Canonical but may refuse now These particuler bookes here named haue bene doubted of in olde time ergo these bookes we are not bouÌ„d to admit for Canonical but may refuse them now This being your reason and the same so manifestly approued by them and you out of the same for our presente purpose against you this I note First how iustly we accuse you for defacing and renting out so many parcels and whole bookes of scripture In the olde Testament Tobias Iudith Hester Baruch The booke of Wisdome Ecclesiasticus The two bookes of the Machabees
see and yovv shall not see and wel may they treade it vnder theire feete as our Sauiour parabolically forespake that heretikes wold doe when he said Nolite proiicere margaritas ante porcos ne forte conculceÌ„t eas pedibus suis but to refel confute suppresse it that is no more possible then that Christ should be false of his worde and promisse that the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it And whereas it hath coÌ„tinued by the protestaÌ„ts coÌ„mon grauÌ„t aboue a thousand yeares in truth euer since Christ his passion against other maner of tempests then these are heretikes of excelleÌ„t learning heresies of maruelous subtilitie most mightie Emperours rulers of the worlde now to imagine that it maie be vanquished of these grosse and contrarie heresies fortified with no maner of learning wherof manie are so base that men eueÌ„ by the light of nature abhorre theÌ„ hauing nothing to mainteine theÌ„ selues but onlie a vaine challeÌ„ginge of the Spirite and bold crakinge of the vvord of the Lord which a parrat caÌ„ doe with a litle instruction as well as they thus I saie to talke were more fit for Pasquillus Estaticus or a sicke man wheÌ„ he raueth than a sober Diuine that wayeth what he speaketh CHAP. III. Hovv M. VV. defendeth Luther preferring his priuate iudgment before all auncient fathers and Doctors NEXT commeth in againe frier Luther whoÌ„ M. Martin accused for saynge that he esteemed not a thousande Augustines CipriaÌ„s Churches wheÌ„ they are against him That the reader may better carie awaie the matter I wil first put downe Luthers wordes where vpon this controuersie standeth after it shal be easier to iudge how aptlie M. VV. defence is framed The wordes of Luther are in his booke written against King Henrie the eight her Maiesties father and are these But I saith he against the saynges of fathers of men of Angels of deuels set not old custome not multitude of men but the vvord of the onlie eternall maiestie the Gospel here I stand here I sit here I glorie here I triumphe here I insult ouer Papists Thomists Henricists Sophists and all the gates of hell much more ouer the saynges of men be they neuer so holie Gods vvorde is aboue al the diuine maiesty maketh for me so as I passe not if a thousaÌ„d Austines a thousand Ciprians a thousand Kinge-Harrie Churches stoode against me God can not erre or deceaue Austine Ciprian and likevvise all other elect might erre they haue erred here ansvvere maister Harrie here plaie the maÌ„ I coÌ„tene thy lies I feare not thy threates here thovv staÌ„dest astonished like a stock c. These are the wordes with which M. Martin findeth faulte M.VV. defendeth them thus If Luther had preferred him self before all fathers Churches he vvere not to be borne vvithal but this Luther neuer challenged to himself But in some causes Luther might esteeme more his ovvne iudgement then the authoritie of Austine or Ciprian or a thousand Churches For if that vvhich Luther taught vvere agreable to Gods vvord Luthers iudgment vvas to be preferred before all the contrary iudgments of all men liuinge Before I enter into the examination of this answere let me demaunde this one thinge in courtesie of you M.W. what the reason is whie you so busilie and eagerlie defende Luther be his wordes neuer so strange or fanatical or whie is the Pope Antichrist for resisting your Gospel whereas Luther you aduaunce if not into the place of Christ yet at least amonge the number of his Apostles Did the Pope of Rome euer persequute your zuinglian gospel with more deadly hatred then did that pope of Saxonie Did he not from the verie beginning to his later breath holde you and your brethren for most damnable wretches and professed enemies of the eternall testament of Christ Are you ignorant how for this cause he wrote whole volumes agaynst your first Apostle Zuinglius Read you neuer the Confession of your brethreÌ„ of the Tigurine church where thus they complaine Lutherus statim ab initio mâ—rdere furere conuitiari bacchari coepit c. Luther presently at the beginning began to byte to play the mad man to raile and rage and besides this he filled his bookes vvith the horrible names of Deuils Sectaries Sprites mad men and vvhatsoeuer slaunders came to his minde he cast them out agaynst vs outragiously Complaine they not in the preface of that Confession that he inueigheth against them as against obstinate heretikes and such as are guiltye to themselues of all impietie as prophaners of the Sacraments and the most vyle and pestilent men that goe on the ground He proscribeth and condemneth first of al the faithful doctors and ministers of God Oecolampadius Zuinglius and their disciples vvheresoeuer they be all frindship and communion vvith vs he compteth vvicked abominable and vvhat soeuer commeth froÌ„ vs be it letters be it bookes be it salutations be it benedictions he vvill not only not reade but he vvill not so much as vouchsafe to looke vppon them or heare them spoken of so farre forth that when Eroschouerus the zuinglian printer of zuricke sent him a bible traÌ„slated by the diuines there Luther sent it him backe againe with this greetinge that he should not send him anie thinge that proceeded from the ministers of the Tigurine church for he vvould haue no dealinge vvith them nether vvoulde he receaue or reade their bookes for the churches of God could not communicate vvith theÌ„ Yea he protesteth that he had rather susteine a hundred seueral deathes then to become of your opinion or shew any couÌ„tenance of bearing fauour to it The Lord defend sayth he that I vvittingly and vvillingly by the authority of my name should couer or confirme the verie least error of the fanatical SacrameÌ„taries Nam vel centies laniari aut igne comburi malleÌ„ c. For I had rather be torne in peeces or burnt vvith fier a huÌ„dred times theÌ„ to folovv the opinion and agree in doctrine vvith zvvinglius Oecolampadius the rest of those miserable vnfortunate fanatical men Finally know you not M. W. that thus he began thus he went foreward thus he continued thus he ended his daies dyinge such a mortal enemye to you that he seemed to make his hâ—tred and detestation of your church and gospel a peece of his iustificatioÌ„ before Christe as in his last Confession made a litle before his death and recorded in the foresaid Confession of Zurake it appeareth Ego qui iam sepulchro vicitus obambulo hoc testimoniam et hanc gloriam ad Christi saluatoris tribunal perferam c. I saith he that novv vvalke nye to my graue vvill carie this testimonie and this glorie to the tribunal seate of Christ my Sauiour that I haue vvith all earnestnes condemned and auoyded those fanaticall men and enemies of the Sacrament Zuinglius OEcolampadius
downe in forme by M.W. the Minor is the conclusion of the last argumēt and so proued sufficiently alreadie then I hope the Conclusion will stand wherefore leauinge this matter for M. W. to scanne and to recorde with him selfe who is that Baal founder of the priesthode of the new testament now may we vew with better iudgment how substantially he answereth S. Austines place de Ciuitate dei where S. Austine doth distinguishe betweene all Christians vvho are vnproperly called priestes because of their mistical Chrisme and vnitie vvith Christe others qui proprie iam vocantur in ecclesia sacerdotes episcopi that properlie are novv called in the Church priestes and byshops and properlie such are they by M. W. definition which properly offer sacrifice M.W. āswereth that the name priest vvas of olde tyme after a more peculiar sorte applied to the pastors and ministers that handled the vvorde and sacramentes but there vvas an abuse in so speakinge then you agree not with S. Austine who teacheth that propriè in proprietie of speach they were so called who if they had then to execute no other priestly function then haue now the Englishe ministers as M. W. supposeth or wolde pretend I graunte the worde prieste could not be applied to them but as abusiuely as if one woulde cal a ciuil magistrate by that name or one of the Quenes Readers in the Vniuersities For preachinge of the worde ministringe of some one or other sacramente although in the Catholike Church it be done by priestes yet properlie that is not the reason why they are called by that name but the true reason is that which M.W. rendereth quia propriè offerunt sacrificia because properly they offer sacrifice Now that S. Austine meante of priestes in this sort that himselfe was such a prieste to passe ouer many pregnante and euidente places in him for breuities sake I refer you to the knowen story of his mothers death Where she firste of al in her death-bed requesteth that her sonne vvould remember her at the altar of God When after her death the corps beinge brought into the Churche and placed beside the graue before the tyme of burial prayers were sayd the sacrifice of our price and redemption offered for her when afterwarde S. Austine in his moste deuoute zelous praier made to God for her reckneth this to her singuler commendacion that at her departure she tooke no care for costlie maner of burial or sumptuous monumente but only desired to be remembred at thy altar ô Lorde from vvhence she knew vvas dispensed that holy sacrifice vvhereby vvas blotted out the handvvrittinge vvhich vvas againste vs vvhereby triumphe vvas obtained against Satan our eternal enemie straight waies inspire saith he ô Lorde my God inspire to thy seruants my brethren that vvho-soeuer of them shal reade this may haue remembrance at thy altar of Patricius and Monica my father and mother But againste this M.W. hath an obiection as common plaine to them that know oughte in diuinitie as Dunstable hye way answered before hāde abundantlie in the annotacions of the the new testamente Heb. ca. 7. v. 12. 17.23 his argument is I say there are no priestes of the new testamēt that offer sacrifice after Christ who is the eternal priest according to the order of Melchisedec obtaineth sacerdotiū 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an eternal priesthod he hath made an end of al sacrifices takē away the succession of priestes cōmitted his church to be ruled by pastors and doctors for euer To beginne with the laste where you ende if Christ abolished all priesthod and left his Church to be gouerned for euer by pastors and doctors which were no priestes had this appointemēt and ordinance of his effect yea or no if no beware what yow say for litle differ you from a Iew a man of Mahomets religion and weake is your faith in Christes godhead if you thinke that in so manie places of scripture he appointed such a regimente for his Church which after his departure neuer tooke effect if yea then shew vs where or when was his Church so gouerned was it a hūdred yeares ago before Frier Luther first of all in our memorie induced this kinde of gouernment you must needes say no. Ascend we then 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 and ten ages vntil S. Gregories time was it al this while gouerned by such pastors as you describe I wene as yet you wil say sure I am you should say no. For those pastors were styll priestes and that in proper sense as appeareth by al stories Suche were our first Apostles the conuerters of our nation those excellent men SS Augustine Paulinus Laurentius Melitus Iustus c. sacred by the Pope of Rome or other lawfull Bishops in obediēce of the Sea of Rome offering sacrifice liuing and dying as priestes as by the goodlie storie of Venerable Bede our coūtryman you may euerie where learne Such pastors and priests they were by whom and vnder whose regiment our Churches were first builded and the ecclesiastical state of our realme ordered as now vnder the regiment of them that cal thē selues pastors no priestes and are in deede no more the one then the other all is pulled downe and ouerthrowen And if in anie other countrie of Christendome the churches had any other regiment such as you pretēd now in England of pastors no priestes shew vs your bookes and we wil beleeue you But you wil say from S. Gregorie vpward all was smooth and iumpe as it is now in the English congregation Suppose that to be true how in the meane seasō can you iustifie your owne saing that Christ delyuered his Church to be gouerned for euer by suche maner of pastors Cā Christes decree be made frustrate for so many ages Can mans iniquitye as you in your Apologie commonlie but most bluntlie obiect stoppe the course of Christes omnipotent and eternal prouidence know you not how copiouslie S. Augustine hath confuted this self same slaūderous obiectiō in your forefathers the Donatistes But passe we on come we to the first fathers of the primitiue Churche were they lay ministers after the maner of the English congregation that is pastors no priestes how dare or can you say so seing in S. Austine manifestlie you see a sacrificing priesthod seing your self acknowledge Sainte Hierome to haue bene a priest of the Romane Church which neuer yet approued any such ministery as you haue inuented seing your greate Rabbine and synke of iniquitie Iohn Bale calleth S. Leo the great and first of that name in plaine termes an idolater for this cause seing your chiefe capitayne Apostle Caluine and after him P. Martir and before him Huldericke Zuinglius affirme in generall of the fathers in the primitiue Church that for maintenāce of the vnbloudy sacrifice they forced abused the
the spirite of grace CHAP. V. Of Penance and the value of good vvokes touching iustification and lyfe eternal NEXT in place foloweth Penance wherein M.W. keepeth his accustomed speaking so doubtfullie and ambiguouslie that he semeth not fullie resolued what to affirme yet in fine as commonlie his maner is he yeldeth sufficient matter to ouerthrow him selfe M. Martin here noteth him of two faultes one that he iniurieth the fathers the other that he contrarieth him selfe the iniurie done to the fathers is this that he affirmeth S. Ciprian and other fathers to haue depraued the doctrine of penance Before he come to iustifie this accusation he falleth into a common place common to all sortes of protestātes taking to him selfe supreme iudgement ouer the fathers complayninge of the Catholikes that so it fareth vvith them that excepte those thinges may preuaile vvhich in the fathers are most corrupte or vitious they are not able to maintaine their cause Whereunto I answere that so it fareth with the protestantes that except they may be soueraigne iudges of fathers Councels Church and al they must hold their peace and say nothing for this is as stale a tricke and currant amōgst any sect as any thinge hitherto spoken of to protest much reuerence to the fathers whē they are not against the word of God that is against their cōceiued heresies marie thē boldlie to stande with the word against them and say they were all beetle-blynd and saw nothinge for when and wherein the fathers hold with them then in such matters they were worse then madde altogether voyde of common sense if they would thus inueigh against thē In the last question presse them with the fathers and the primitiue Church touchinge external pristhod and the sacrifice it was their error saith Caluin Illyricus Zuinglius and Bale Presse the sacrilegious vowbreakers with the consent of the primitiue Church for condemnation of their vnlawful mariages I knovv saith Peter Martir and declared no lesse to my auditors in Oxford that Epiphanius vvith manie others of the fathers erred in that they helde it a fynne to breake the vovv of virginitie and they do ill to number it amongest the Apostolicall traditions Charge the English Puritanes with the consent of Antiquitie for obseruation of feasts holy-dayes in honour of Christ and his Saintes M. T. C. answereth VVhereas M. D. VVhiteg citeth Augustine and Hierom to proue that in the churches in their tymes there vvere holy-daies kept besydes the Lordes day he might haue also cited Ignatius and Tertullian and Ciprian vvhich are of greater aunciencie and vvould haue made more for the credite of his cause for it is not to be denied but this keepinge of holy-dayes especially of Easter and Pentecost is verie auncient and that these holy-dayes for the remembrance of Martyrs vvere vsed of long tyme. but these abuses vvere no auncienter then other vvere grosser also then this and therefore I appeale from these exāples to the scriptures Charge the Trinitarie Protestantes the Arians of Polonia Seruetus with the Coūcel of Nice and Crede of Athanasius the Councell of Nice say they vvas a congregation of Sophisters and the Crede of Athanasius may more iustlie be called the Crede of Sathanasius the first Nicene fathers vvith Athanasius inuented this tripartite God they vvere all blind Sophisters Ministers of the Beast slaues of Antichrist and bevvitched vvith his enchauntmentes for that the Pope is Antichrist in that as in verie manie other pointes they are iust of M.W. faith In like sorte dealeth the Lutherane Vbiquitarie against vvhose monstrous heresie vtterlie destroyng the mysterie of Christe Incarnatiō vvhen Bullinger vrged the consent of al the auncient fathers Brentius presētly gaue this general answere The fathers altogether in this question are of no vveight or authoritie They vvere taught not in the schole of the holy Ghost but in the schole of Aristotle they vvere deceiued and blynded by Aristotle humaine reason of celestial matters they haue childish imaginations and grosse dreames earthlie fansies and carnal conceites Thus answered Brentius and thus saith Bullinger of him Inuenit compēdium ad omnia veterum testimonia respondēdi A shorte compendious vvay hath he founde to solue all places of the fathers thus sayth euerie heretike touching euerie controuersie wherein the fathers stād against him the selfe same way hath M.W. taken But because this way is ether to large therefore to daūgerous as lying wide open for euerie kind of heretike that hath bene is or cā be or to straight if M. W. wil make it priuate to him self and deny it to all others let him therfore without this preiudicate condemnation geue reason whie he offereth the fathers this intolerable iniurie for so it must be called vntill he proue the cōtrarie his reasons are these Penance consisteth not in certaine externall penalties or in a certaine exquisite seueritie of discipline vvhich the Apostle calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vvherebie the bodie is chastised vvith certaine voluntarie punishmentes but in internal dolour conceiued through remembranco of out sinnes and in amendmente of lyfe and the fathers vvhen they supposed that by such greuous penalties their sinnes should be acquited and God pleased they erred greuously and somevvhat diminished the force of Christes deathe and bloud by vvhich onlie our sinnes are expiated for pardon of sinnes is to be expected of nothinge but of the bloud of Christ In which wordes three thinges I note his description of penance his reason prouinge the same and the sequele or absurditie which he inserreth thereof wherein stoode the auncient fathers error His description of penance is partlie affirmatiue as that he requireth internal greefe of hart and correction of life partlie is negatiue as that he remoueth from it all externall chastisement or discipline In the first we agree with him in the seconde we say he erreth and vnderstādeth not the scriptures As without the first the second is worth nothinge so ioyne them bothe together they greatlie please God are highlie commended in the Gospel our Sauiour when he denounced vae to Corozain and Bethsaida sayng if the miracles vvrought in thee had bene done in Tyre and Sidon they had not onlie done penance longe agoe but they had done it in beare-cloth ashes he sheweth this external afflictiō to be verie commendable and to make the penance more auaylable and withall pointeth the Iewes to their Prophetes who willed them with such external humiliatiō to prostrate them selues before God thereby the sooner to procure his mercie Conuert ye to me sayth the Prophete Ioel vvith al your hart in fastinge and mourninge and lamentation and rente your hartes and not your garmentes saith our Lorde omnipotent In the later parte of which sentence as he disproueth externall signes without internall remorse as being hipocritical reiected of God by
able to proue any of these articles by any one cleare or playne clause or sentence ether of scriptures or of the old Doctors or of any old general Councel or by any example of the primitiue Church vvithin 600. yeres after Christ I promise to geue ouer and subscribe vnto him Thus M. Iewel promised and do you promise as much what els and so longe as you haue a day to liue you wil stand in defence here of But how dare you say so whereas litle know you what al the doctors haue written and much lesse know you what books of theirs hereafter may be found and your selues if you remember not long sithence in your owne wasted libraries found out certaine straunge sermons in the Saxon tonge against some knowen and confessed partes of religion as you wold pretend And how cā you so confidently hazard your faith if you haue any vpon one sentence or clause of those men of whom sundrie times you professe that they wrote clauses sentences chapters and bookes in defence of as grosse errors as these Remēber your stomake against them in this same booke thus you write Al our faith and religion you meane I suppose so far as it is allowed by act of Parlamēt and practised within the Q. dominions for other ye defend not is grounded not vpon humane but vpon diuine autoritie Therefore if you bring against it vvhat some one father hath beleeued or vvhat the fathers al together haue deliuered except the same be proued by testimonies of scripture it vvaygheth nothing it proueth nothing it concludeth nothing for the fathers are such vvitnesses that they also haue neede of scriptures to be their vvitnesses if deceaued by error they haue said ought differing from the scriptures hovv soeuer they may be pardoned erring through vvant of vvit vve can not be pardoned if because they erred vve also vvil erre vvith them Being thus perswaded touching them all how dare you venture your faith vppon a clause or sentence of any one It is a peece of faith far more sure by al antiquitie and more surely grounded in the hart of any catholike that Christ is perfect God consubstantial and equal to his father then any of these paradoxes can be possiblie setled in your opinions and we honour the fathers much more then you do yet was there euer any Catholike so frantike mad that would promise to subscribe to Arianisme if out of any father greeke or latin within 600. yeares any one clause or sentence might be brought against the catholike beleefe wherefore this verie assertion is a most sure argument that you haue no kind of faith no faith I say at all nether diuine nor humane not diuine because you would neuer so lightlie esteeme it nor vpon so smal warrant hazard it not humane because it wel appeareth that nether you nether maister Iewel euer meant to stand to that which to the world in publike writing ye haue so solemly promised Wherefore albeit touching you affected as you are I accompt this labour as clearly lost as if I should water a fruitles tree tvvise dead and plucked vp by the rootes yet for the readers cōmoditie that he may perceaue how ignorant and foolish and proude and fantastical that vaunte of M. Iewels was and how like it is that you who know much lesse yet comonly who more bold then such can maynteine the quarel and wade thorough that myre wherein M. Iew. him self stucke fast I wil speake a few wordes of these his principal questions And because I couet so far as may be to cut of al occasion of cauilling I wil not run to any other doctors lest you take exceptiō against them then those who are named here of M. Iewel as his pretended maisters in these heresies and againe out of them I wil bring nothing but that only which I haue learned of your owne writers and read in your owne bookes and that againe in such sense without any alteration as your selues alleage them So that your heroical courage in answering shal first be exercised vpon these your owne brethren and what so euer blunted dartes you shal cast against me they shal not reach vnto me but thorough their sydes I wil passe ouer Christ and S. Paule vvho taught M. Ievvel these heresies as he saith which is not verie likely whether he meane in ieast or in earnest seing S. Paule willeth vs so to detest any kind of heretike that after one or two warninges we should let him alone and suffer him to perishe in his sinne knovving that he is damned in his ovvne iudgment our sauiour chargeth vs to hold them for no better then ethniks and publicanes who shal oppose them selues vnto his church and therefore i◠can not be that ether of those should teach you that for which before hand they threaten and assure you of damnation But Anacletus and Xistus old bisshops of the Romane church before that Sea grew to this vsurped primacie they perhaps taught you this herisie that the bishop of Rome hath no soueraintie ouer the rest of bishops and that such claime is altogether Antichristian If that be so then egregious lyers are your brethren the makers of the Centuries who tel vs the cleane contrarie Anacletus say they in the epistles vvhich beare his name in the general regiment of churches so ioyneth them together that to the Romane churche he attributeth primacie and excellencie of povver ouer al churches and ouer the vvhole flocke of the Christian people and that by the autoritie of Christ saing to Peter thou art Peter and vpon this rocke vvil I build my church c. the second sea after that he maketh the church of Alexandria by reason of S. marke scoler of S. Peter The third Antioche because S. Peter abode there before he came to Rome degrees of Bishops he maketh thus The bisshop of Rome is placed first as the supreme head of the church vvho though he erre yet vvil he not haue him to be iudged of others but to be tolerated the second place haue Patriarkes or primates the third Metropolitanes the fovrth Archbishops and aftervvard bishops he saith also that certaine cities receaued primates from the blessed apostles and from S. Clement epist 3.1 Tom. Conciliorum pa. 63. The same Anacletus appointing how controuersies in particular churches should be taken vp ended after the order of S. Paule 1. Cor. 5. willeth that greate matters should be referred to the higher bishops and primates but if greater difficulties arise or causes fal out among the bishops primates them selues let them be brought to the Sea Apostolike if such appealt be made for so the Apostles ordayned by the apoinment of our Sauiour that the greater and harder questiōs should alvvayes be brought to the Apostolike Sea vpon vvhich Christ builte his vniuersal church Mat. 16. And Xistus who succeded not long after Anacletus in his 2.
therein and therefore I refer the reader to the same storie vvhere he shal see a good and large treatise aboundantly prouīg the same of S. Gregorie vvhich novv hath bene shevved of S. Leo. he shal find there confessed by those Protestants who hated the Sea of Rome as deepelie as did ether M.W. or M. Iewel but were not so extremelie hardned in face and forhead as M. Iewel was and as M.W. must be if he take vpon him the others quarel he shal finde I say confessed by them and proued in lyke maner that this S. Gregorie taught that Apostolica sedes est omnium Ecclesiarum caput the Apostolike Sea of Rome is head of al churches lib. 11. epist 54. Indict 6. that bothe the Emperour and Eusebius his felovv-bishop professed that the church of Constantinople vvas subiect vnto that Sea li. 7. epis 63. indict 2. that he cited Maximus bishop of Salona in Dalmatia to come to Rome there to render accompt hovv he came by that bishoprike lib. 5. indict 14. epist 25. he apointed the bishop of Siracusa to be iudge ouer the bishop of Constantinople lib. 7. indict 2. epis 64. he sent into Spaine one vvho should restore Ianuarius deposed from his bishoprike vniustly lib. 11. indict 6. epist 50. 54. he apointeth the bishops of Fraunce hovv they should cal a synode for the rooting out of simonie and auarice lib. 9. indict 4. epist 49. sequentibus and those thinges vvhich in the synode they should agree on he vvilleth should be sent to him streightly chargeth them that at the least once in the yere they keepe a synode according to the canonical decrees lib. 7. epist 110. numer 2. And Virgilius bishop of Arelatum or Arles vvhom in the French church he made his Vicar and Legate and preferred before al other bishops he vvilleth to send to him al harder controuersies li. 4. ind 14. epi. 52. The like priuilege he graunteth to Maximianus bishop of Siracusa in Sicilia to be supreme ouerseer of those churches and to end lesser controuersies and send the greater to him vvhich priuilege for al that he geueth to the person not to the place lib. 2. epist 4. indict 10. Isychius bishop of Ierusalē he biddeth to exterminate from his churches the Simoniacal heresie lib. 9. indict 4. epist 40. To Columbus bishop of Numidia and the primate of that prouince he enioyneth that he vvith other examine the cause of Donadeus deposed by Victor his bishop and if he be guiltie to binde him to penance if he be guiltles that they rebuke Victor that he may knovv hovv vniustly he hath dealt lib. 10. indict 5. epist. 8. vvhen the bishop of Constantinople had condemned a priest of Chalcedon Gregorie retracteth that sentence and commaundeth him being innocent to be absolued lib 5. indict 14. epist. 15.16.17 Finally he affirmeth againe and proueth by scripture that the Romane churche is head of al churches caput omnium Ecclesiarum Greg. in 4. Psal penitentialem lib. 12. indict 7. epist 32. and so forth for what should I stand vpon particulars which are in maner innumerable there rehearsed and by these writers it seemeth and true it is that his 12. bookes of epistles conteyne in effect nothing els but the exercise of suche vniuersal iurisdiction practysed by Gregorie the first in al Christian churches from East to West frō North to South in far more ample maner with more shew of authoritie then appeareth now in Gregorie the thirtenth his successor These things I say and very many other of this quality did S. Gregorie the first a man for humilitie commended of Caluin singularly of Luther who seeldome spake good of any Pope acknowledged for a good holy bishop And Bale sometime an Irish prelate though afterward a common minister who rayleth fowly at the most glorious martyrs and confessors Popes of that Sea before S. Gregorie yet speaking of him attributeth this vnto him that he was the best for life and learning that euer sat in that place Gregorius omnium Romanorum pontificum doctrina vita prestantissimus But against al these examples consisting not onlie in plaine wordes but much more in manifest deedes factes iudgments corrections iurisdictions appellations excomunications al euident practises of souerayne principalitie M. Iewel hath a number of wordes and they al depending of one only worde that is the name vniuersal which S. Gregorie doth so condemne as he accompteth him for Antichrist that would be called vniuersal bishop and here what a sturre he keepeth Paules crosse his replie against D. Cole and D. Harding the English Apologie and the defence of the Apologie witnesse abundantly For this is a common storebox when so euer the Pope commeth in the way so far forth that in one side of a leafe he quoteth S. Gregorie against this name no lesse then 19. tymes and M. W. with his felowes at this day singeth that song as freshly as though it neuer had bene heard before But if ether he or they regarded the searching out of the truth and sought not continual wrangling about words they would neuer so blindlie haue snatched at one worde against so many facts and examples of continual custome so many wayes testified and expressed by worde and deede But the answer is easy and often tymes geuen by S. Gregorie often times repeted proposed by the late catholike writers but because M. W. hath nor perhaps seene the one and not greatly considered the other I wil geue him the same and the true sense of such words out of one of his owne felowes Andreas Fricius of Polonia a man though bearing deadly hatred to the Pope of Rome yet one that could be content wel inough to haue the like office amōg his Euangelical churches to keepe them in vnitie which he thinketh otherwise wil neuer be handling that matter and laing against him self this old auncient obiection of the Protestants thus answereth it that truly Some there be sayth this writer that against this office of vniuersal superintendent obiect the authoritie of Gregorie vvho saith that such a title apperteyneth to the precursor of Antichrist But the reason of Gregorie is to be knovven it may be gathered of his vvordes vvhich he repeteth in many epistles that the title of vniuersal bishop is contrarie doth gainsay the grace vvhich is cōmonly poured vpon al bishops He therefore that should cal him self vniuersal bishop calleth him self the only bishop and taketh bishoply povver from the rest VVherefore this title he vvould haue to be reiected vvhich is vsurped vvith the iniurie of other bishops Such sentences to this purpose are oftentimes repeted by S. Gregorie in many epistles c. this title he doth abhorre both in him selfe and in al other so far of is he frō graunting the same to the bishop of Constantinople and vvhy so because bishoply grace is generally bestovved from god vpon al bishops
and it is no reason that any one should take to him selfe that vvhich by equal right agreeth to al. This being the true meaning of such places and this being verie often times geuen by S. Gregorie him selfe saepe et in multis epistolis you see how iustly we accuse both M. Iewel you of wilfulnes and blindnes how iustly we obiect vnto you a verbal and talkatiue diuinitie who could not or would not see that is which so commonly repeted againe and againe in so many epistles But maketh S. Gregorie ether in this word or in al his words or workes ought against the primacie of that church This writer proceedeth on thus Verumtamen ex aliis constat c. notvvithstanding by other places it is euident that Gregorie thought that the charge and principalitie of the vvhole church vvas committed to Peter by the voice of our Lord. And thus much he vvrote plainely almost vvord for vvord lib. 4. epistola 32. to the emperour Maurice and confirmed it by testimonie of scripture It is manifest saith Gregorie to al men that knovv the gospel that by the voice of our Lord the care of the vvhole church vvas cōmitted to holy S. Peter Prince of al the Apostles For to him it is said feede my sheepe Iohn 21. To him it is said I haue prayed for the that thy faith fayle not Luc. 22. To him it is said thou art Peter and vpon this rock I vvil build my church c. Mat. 16. Behold he receaueth the keys of the kingdom of heauen povver to bind and loose is geuen to him to him is committed the charge principalite of the vvhole church And yet for this cause Gregorie thought not that Peter vvas the forerunner of Antichrist Thus he prouing both by scripture by reason that S. Gregorie though he disliked and condemned that proude name of vniuersal bishop both in him selfe and others as doth also Pope Gregorie the 13. at this day yet he nether disliked nor condemned the supreme charge and gouernment of the church for Antichristian which him selfe exercised nether could he so do except he first cōdemned for Antichristian S. Peter the Apostle who receaued it and Christ our Sauiour who gaue it So tha◠M. Iew. hath hetherto shewed smal wit learning faith or honestie in making these mē S. Gregorie Leo Xistus Anacletus his maisters in that heresie against the supremacie who haue not only no one word or sillable against it but contrariwise haue whole and long epistles chapters discourses examples and factes arguments reasons scriptures to proue it And here the reader may gesse how like I were to cloy him with abundance and store if I would in like sort go thorough with the other articles which I might do as wel and with as great aduantage But I wil not cast more water into the sea and therefore nether wil prosequute in this order the other two questions but only touch them in a word and so proceede to other matter As here against the Pope so against the real presence for the zuinglian imagination M. Iewel likewise chalengeth al the fathers vnto him namely those aboue rehearsed S. Gregorie S. Leo c. and besides S. Austin S. Hierom and S. Chrisostome then which I thinke he could not haue picked out amongst al the fathers more heauy and deadly enemies to him touching any parte of his false faith and those two partes of the real presence and sacrifice especially For was there euer besides this wicked man any Luther or Bucer or who so euer was worse then other so desperate in lying that would say S. Gregorie was a minister and ministred the holy communion as now is the fashion in England when his bookes in so many places shew him to haue bene a prieste and a prieste to celebrate masse and not to minister communion vnto whom other protestants commonly attribute the framing of the masse because of two or three rites which he ordeined therein Whom for this cause Theodorus Bibliāder scornfully nameth patriarcham caeremoniarum the Patriarch of ceremonies Melanchthō that he horribly prophaned the Communiō allovving by publike authoritie the sacrifice of Christes body and bloud not only for the liuing but also for the dead Flacius Illyricus that by miracle he cōuerted a faithles vvoman vvho beleeued not that the body of Christ vvas substancially in tbe Sacrament ex Paulo Diacono lib. 2. cap. 41.42 and that euery vvhere be doth inculcate sacrifices and masse and by diuers miracles confirmeth the same against whom Petrus Paulus Vergerius for authoritie place and estimation as great a Protestant as any in our dayes hath written a whole booke entituled de nugis fabulis Papae Gregorii primi and finally to passe by many others when your owne English writers protest him to haue bene a perfite and absolute Papist that therefore your first Apostles and Euangelistes in bringing in this your Gospel did directly oppose them selues vnto him and rooted out that which he and his Legate our Apostle S. Austin had planted Gregorie the first saith your Chronicler Iohn Bale the yere of our lord 596. sent Austine the monke to plante in our churches his Romane religion But Latimer is much more vvorthie to be called our Apostle then Austine For Austine brought nothing but mans traditions masse Crosses litanies c. vvhereas Latimer vvith the hooke of truth cut of those superstitions vvhich he had planted and cast them out of the Lords vineyard And doth not M. Horne the late called bishop of Winchester in playne termes reuile this glorious Apostle and name him most ethnically a blinde bussard because he was ignorant of your Alcoran and knew nothing els and therefore induced our forefathers to no other Gospel then to the auncient Gospel of Christ and religion Catholike And doth the other S. Austin make more for you in this point of your vnbeleefe then doth this later S. Austin or S. Gregorie I know you alleage him much more but with what honestie I had rather you should heare of your owne father Luther then of me In my iudgement saith Luther after the Apostles the church hath not had a better doctor then vvas S. Austin And that holie man hovv filthilie hovv spitefullie is he mangled and disfigured by the Sacramentaries that he may become a defender patrone of their venemous blasphemous and erroneous heresie Verely as much as in me lieth so long as I haue breath in my body I vvil vvithstand them and protest that they do him iniury vvhich thing any man may do vvith an assured and confident mynde because the Sacramentaries only pul teare his vvords into their ovvne sense prouing their applicatiō by no reason but only by vayne boasting of their most certaine truth And concerning the rest of the fathers whereas M. Iewel affirmeth that they all taught as he did against the real presence Luther contrarywise
of my opinion and thinke the sense which I geue to be the onely true and yours to be the false shal he be so bold to shut out yours and thrust in his owne with like necessitie restraynt as you haue done if so then you know the Lutherans thinke as I say For thus writeth Illyricus and he writeth as it may seeme directlie against your Beza Some vnderstand this place that Christ is receaued or coÌ„teyned of the heauen vvhich sentence is against the scope of the Apostle and should set forth rather the infirmitie then the glorie povver of Christ For so of angels yea of deuils it may be sayd that they are receaued or coÌ„teyned of heaueÌ„ because the vvorde coeluÌ„ sometime in the scripture signifieth the ayer A goodlie matter he vvho by vvitnes â—o the scripture filleth al thinges vve vvil say is receaued or conteyned in a certen place almost as it vvere in a prison Secondarily what wicked and vncoÌ„scionable dealing is this in spending so many wordes not to speake any one worde to the purpose whereunto you should speake al or els hold your peace speake nothing Was not that the point of his reprehension not because you gaue a passiue for an actiue or deponent but because you did it in this place and did it to this end that so you might seeme by scripture to exclude Christ froÌ„ the sacrament For this reason Beza geueth and for this reason M. Martin reproueth Beza Bezaes corruption and of this M.W. speaketh not a worde or if he do it is a manifest falsitie For if M. Whit. sayng that Beza did it for that only cause to auoyde doubtful speach oppose him selfe to M. Martin in this it can not be excused froÌ„ a playne lye for so much as in Bezaes behalfe he auoucheth that to be true which Beza him selfe protesteth to be false They so conclude Christ in heaueÌ„ saith M. Martin that he can not be on the altar and Beza protesteth that he so translateth of purpose to kepe Christes presence thence Yet a third faulte you haue committed besides in iustifying this smal demie sentence and that is whereas M. Martin for the better strengthning of his reason against you ioyned to it the authoritie of Illyricus and Caluin you omit them bothe This translation of Beza is so far from the Greke saith M. Martin that not onely Illyricus the Lutherane but Caluin him selfe doth not like it Which wodes if you had ioyned to the rest if you had but named those men your slender reasoÌ„s in the eyes of your reader would forthwith haue appeared contemptible And wel he might haue marueyled how you durst defend such a translation which not only Illyricus a famous LutheraÌ„ but also Caluin a prince amongst the ZuingliaÌ„s in plaine speach reprehendeth whereby a man may see that you seeke not for truth but only to talke on and serue the tyme abuse the reader And yet once againe vnder preteÌ„ce of a litle simplicitie and most rude and simple sophistrie a fourth fault haue you made worse then the former running first from one sense to an other and then from one worde to an other and so in fine whiles you would seeme to make S. Peter speake clearly and plainly you make him speake falsly heretically whereof forthwith I shal haue occasion to treate The place which you cite out of Nazianzene oportet Christum a coelo recipi maketh no more for you then doth the article of our Creede ascendit ad coelos or sedet ad dexteram patris and I marueile what Catholike beleeueth the contrarie and therefore I let it passe As ye proceede the reason beginneth to appeare why you would so fayne haue that forged interpretation of Beza to stand for good For now you beginne to frame against the real presence argumeÌ„ts drawen from natural and mathematical conditions of a bodie whereby the reader may learne the more to detest and abhorre the whole race of your heretical translators For as our Sauiour saith in the field of his Catholike church in the night vvhen men vvere a slepe his enemie came and ouersovved cockle among the vvheate and vvent his vvay and some time passed before the cockle thus sowen appeared in like maner these feedemen of the same aduersarie wicked corrupters of the good feede and worde of Christ first fall a traÌ„slating of the scripture with many goodlie and plausible pretenses of gods honor the peoples commoditie and publishing gods blessed booke c. And so while no man thinketh amisse of them as it were in the night and darknes being espied of none among the good seede of god they mingle sow their owne wicked and abhommable darnel which at first is not seene but in tyme sheweth it selfe For when M.W. so smoothly went away with the matter and found fault with M. Martins ignorance for dislyking so plaine a thing when he told vs of actiues and passiues that there was no difference betwene the first quem oportet coelum capere and this second quem oportet coelo capi but that this later is more cleare and perspicuous who would haue supposed any great mischeefe to haue bene hidden therein But now euen thereof he frameth his principal argument to spoyle the church of Christes real presence VVith like sinceritie translate the Lutherans for their Lutherish the Brentians for their Vbiquitarie the Trinitaries of Pole for their Arian and Sebastianus Castalio for his Academical heresie sprinkling heare and there many drops of poyson with which symple soules are daungerously infected before the mischeuous practyse be of many discouered But let vs heare M. W. argument drawen as he would haue vs suppose from the former falsified text of scripture but in deede from Aristotle and Euclide If Christes body sayth he be natural and of the same substance that ours is then can it be conteyned but in one place and if it be in heauen it is not in the sacrament But Christs body is such a body consubstantial to ours in al things sauing glorie and immortalitie and that body of Christ is novv conteyned in heauen as Peter saith therefore it is not in the Sacrament much lesse in infinite Sacraments This argument feareth not your forces For if Christs body be together in heauen and in the sacrament then Christ hath a double body or rather infinite bodies but this is false ergo that Furthermore if Christs bodie be circumscribed vvith some certaine place in heauen and reteyneth all properties of a true body the selfe same in the sacrament be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 incircumscript inuisible c. then contradictories maye be verified of the same bodye But this can not be therefore the other is vnpossible Of this kinde of reasoning which may be enlarged as far and amplified by as many circumstances as ether Geometrie or Philosophie or any sense seing hearing tasting handling or humaine reason or
they I shal I doubt neuer be vvorthie to be named scholers example vvhereof take thou Charkes scornful abusing of Father Campian in the Tower for ignorance in such trifles as these are or were I disposed to disgrace the fountaines and originals which I am not but honour them as I may and sauing the euident truth and faith of Christ which standeth fast and vnmoueable though heauen and earth fall much more though the Iewish Pharisees and Scribes write their text amisse this cause faith I say foreprised I esteeme of them as of things deseruing much studie and reuerence because how soeuer some grosse errors partly of malice partly of ignorance haue crept in yet commonly and for the most part the text I hold to be true and sincere And againe I suppose this kinde of writing can not be but tedious to the English reader whose profit I principally intend and therefore will go from these particularities so far as I may to talke of a few resonable the same general arguments and questions wherein M.W. if he haue some part of that wit intelligence and modestie which a scholer diuine should haue wil not I hope much stande against me And first gladly would I learne of him what reason he and his fellowes haue why they should thinke the hebrew text to be so inuiolate so sincere and vpright is it because of Gods promise and prouidence or of mans circuÌ„spection and wisdome if because of Gods promise where finde they any such how many examples in the scriptures haue they to the contrarie whole bookes of the prophetes are perished bookes of singular coÌ„moditie made by Gods owne appointment and they perished then in that time of the sinagoge when Iacob vvas the peculiar people of God and Israel the lot of his inheritance when of al nations they vvere to God a holy nation a kingly priesthode when al other people vvere suffered to go their ovvne vvaies the Iewes only were in Gods special protection For touching the bookes of the auncient prophets somtime extant and now not appearing we reade coÌ„monly in the old testameÌ„t as of Liber bellorum domini The booke of the vvarres of our Lord The booke of the iust men The booke of Iehu the sonne of Hanani The bookes of Semeias the prophete and Addo and Samuel vvrote in a booke the lavv of the kingdome hovv kings ought to rule laid it vp before our lorde and the vvorkes of Salomon vvere vvritten in the vvordes of Nathan the Prophete and in the bookes of Ahias the Silonite and in the visioÌ„ of Addo the Seer and many other which were to long to rehearse VVhich entier bookes of the warres of our lord of the iust of those excellent prophets of Iehu of Semeias of Addo of Samuel of Nathan of Ahias and others are quite perished and perished then when the Iewes were so chosen a people such a kingdome in such order gouernment of Kings and princes and Senate ecclesiastical regiment And now when they are no people haue no gouernment no king no Priest no comparable regiment may we reasonably thinke their diuine and ecclesiasticall bookes to haue bene so warelie kept that euerie parte is safe euerie parcel sound no points letters or titles lost al sincere perfit and absolute If the protestaÌ„ts will claime this to them by mans wisdome and policie see how notably they contradicte themselues Al the bishops and princes and states of Christendome were not wise inough by the protestants opinioÌ„ these thousande yeres past to keepe them selues in the true religion and Gospell of Christ But whereas vntil 600. yeres as we learne by M. Iewels chalenge they were protestants and enemies of the Masse of the Real presence of the Pope of Rome and as M. W. telleth vs here vniuersally protestaÌ„ts quo ad praecipuas religionis partes in the principall parts of religion they fell from that pure protestant-Gospel to serue Antichrist to worship bread and wine for God to adore Images which is most grosse idolatrie in steed of a true bible and word of God to haue our coÌ„mon translation which is most impure fullest of corruptioÌ„ Al this M.W. telleth vs and he telleth vs in this booke and it is the common songe of them al. And therefore how is it credible that al this while the Iewes should be so wise so prudent so politike and circuÌ„specte that they admitted no faults kept their bible so sincere and immaculate that there only the water of life was reserued and the minde meaning of the holie Ghost vvas to be found no-vvhere so assuredly as there what is this but to make the Christians al this while more brutish then beastes and the Iewes almost equal to Angels Againe so great likenes and similitude is there betwene some hebrew letters that excellent learned men haue bene deceaued by mistaking one for an other as appeareth by comparing the olde translations of the bible with the later and S. Hierom affirmeth the same of the Septuaginta This if a man would declare by examples I thinke he might gather some hundreds out of the psalter I wil note only one verse of a short psalme which also may serue for a higher pointe In the psalme 109 after our translation thus we reade with the Septuaginta Tecum principium in die virtutis tuae in splendoribus sanctorum ex vtero ante luciferum genuite The ProtestaÌ„ts for the more parte as we see by Marlorate folowing therein Bucere Musculus Caluine and Pomerane translate it thus Populus tuus cum voluntariis oblationibus in die exercitus tui in pulchritudine sanctitatis ex vtero ab aurora tibiros adolescentiae tuae The english bible of the last edition differing notably both froÌ„ olde and new from vs and the Protestants translate thus Thy people shal come vvillingly all the time of assembâ—ing thine armie in holie beauty the youth of thy vvoÌ„be shal be as the morning devv which translation is farthest from the hebrew farthest from al sense and reason for who would make youth to rule vvombe and ioyne them together being sundred so far and the bible geuen out two yeres before hath scant one worde like and touching the later part is cleane opposite for thus it translateth In the day of thy pâ—vvâ—r shal the people offer thee free-vvil offeringes the devv of thy birth is of the vvombe of the morning there is youth of the vvombe and devv of the morning here is devv of the birth or youth for that is one word in hebrew and vvombe of the morning If a man would translate it precisely vsing only the libertie to make choise of diuers significations which the hebrew words yelde and drawe it so far as the hebrew wil beare to the sense of the Septuaginta which I take to be the best then word for word thus it should
these two translations howsoeuer it seeme to thee Christian reader the difference is as great as is betwene our doctrine theirs And first they make a wilful fault and corrupt the text by making a fuller pointe then ether the greeke or latin beareth And Beza doth somewhat more desperately who maketh a downe ful point thereby more diuiding and distracting the later parcel from the former as though it contained not a reason of that which went before as it doth but were some new matter wherein he is controled of fowle dealing by his owne translation set out the yere 1556 and by the very greeke prints of Geneua Zurick Basile other Germane cities who point it as doth our latin and english But the reason of his and their turning Quoniā in to Nam Because in to For descrieth yet more their obdurate harts against Christ and his worde For where as Christ by S. Lukes reporte saith in effect thus because she loued much therefore manie sinnes are forgeuē her they by this peruersion and mispointing make a cleane different and almost contrarie sense thus because she had many sinnes forgeuen her therefore she loueth much this loue folowing was a token of the remission which she by only faith had obtained before so turning the cause in to the effect the antecedent into the consequent and hereby vtterly spilling the doctrine which Christ by his words and reason geueth and the Church of his words reason gathereth That this is the true groūd reasō why they so Luciferlike alter the speech of Christ Beza plainly cōfesseth Thus he writeth Nam dilexit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For she loued The vulgar translation and Erasmus turne it Because she loued but I had rather interprete it as I do that men may best vnderstand in these vvords to be shevved not the cause of remission of sinnes but rather that vvhich ensued after such remission that by the consequent is gathered the antecedent And therefore they vvhich abuse this place to ouerthrovv free Iustification by only fayth are very impudent and childish wherein he speaketh very truly the words and sense being so as he hath framed them But if he had not plaid the part rather of a diuel then of an heretike to alter in pointing worde and sense the speach of our Sauiour and so taught him his lesson what he should say it had not bene impudencie for vs thus to argue but it had bene more then brutish ignorance in him to haue denied that charitie is required as wel for obtaining remission of sinnes as is faith which both in this place our Sauiour most diuinely conioyneth saying of charitie Many sinnes are forgeuen her because she hath loued much and adding straight way Thy faith hath made thee safe goe in peace And so of this text gathered al the auncient fathers who were for al that nether impudent nor childish So S. Chrysostom As first by vvater and the spirit so aftervvard by teares and confession vve are made cleane And he proueth it by this place So S. Gregorie expounding the same place Many sinnes are forgeuen her because she loued much as if it had bene said expresly He burneth out perfectly the rust of sinne vvhosoeuer burneth vehemently vvith the fier of loue For so much more is the rust of sinne scoured avvay by how much more the harte of a sinner is inflammed vvith the great fier of charitie And S. Ambrose vpon the same words Good are teares vvhich are able to vvash avvay our sinnes Good are teares In quibus nō solū redemptio peccatorum sed etiam refectio est iustorum vvherein is not only the redemption of sinners but also the refreshing of iust men And S. Austin debating this storie in a longe homelie saith This sinful vvoman the more she ovved the more she loued the forgeuer of her debtes our lord him selfe affirming so Many sinnes are forgeuen her because she loued much And vvhy loued she much but because she ovved much Quare fecit illa omnia nisi vt dimitterentur sibi peccata VVhy did she al those offices of vveping vvashing c. but to obtaine remission of her sinnes I omitte other fathers al agreing in the selfe same veritie al making her loue to be a cause going before nor only an effect or sequele comming after the remission of sinnes And this was the gathering of the auncient fathers S. Chrysostom S. Gregorie S. Ambrose S. Austin c. who were euer reuerenced for holy and learned fathers by the children of Christs Catholike Church vntil this Chams broode and prophane generation inuaded their roomes who now condemne them for impudent and childish But let me with thy leaue and patience Christian reader prosecute in one worde more their wonderful tossing and turning and inuerting this shorte sentence of our Sauiour And in this one allegation which I wil now produce thou shalt see the very image of Atheisme of contempt of God and man of impossibilitie to do any good by scriptures so longe as this licence of framing new translations is allowed Thou seest what sturre Beza hath kept and to serue his turne what fowle and detestable corruption he hath vsed But to make vp the matter and reconcile Christs words a litle better to this new solifidian gospel commeth in Wolfgangus Musculus with a deeper fetch after this maner First because S. Lukes words be very plaine and he can not so probably wrangle vpon thē in greeke he in his owne fansie imagineth what Christ ether did or should haue spoken in hebrew Next that fansie he putteth to be true and forthwith according to the same he correcteth S. Luke and so concludeth that al matcheth right with their Lucianical only faith For nowe by this time with his good helpe not one worde in effect stādeth as Christ spake it at least by S. Lukes reporte Thus he discourseth Ecce inquiunt manifestò datur dilectioni remissio peccatorum Ergo non sola fides iustificat c. Behold say the Papists remission of sinnes is attributed to loue ergo faith alone iustifieth not but vve ansvvere that loue in this vvoman vvas not the cause of remission of sinnes but a token declaration thereof Remissiō of her sinnes she obtained by faith in Christ Therefore vvhereas Christ saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The vvorde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as vvitnesseth Suidas is a Dorical vvorde signifieth not in the imperatiue Remittantur Remitted be they but in the preterperfect tense Remissa sūt Haue bene remitted Next the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth here not the cause but the probatiō of that vvhich is put before Thirdly the vvord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath loued is an hebrew phrase by vvhich the preterperfecttense is put for the present For the hebrevves speake thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is because she hath loued much in
of Protestāts pa. 411. M. W. inuectiue against the Annotations of the nevv Testament page 476. The summe thereof pa. 477. Annotations of the new Testament vvhat they cōteine pa. 484.485 what fault M.W. findeth in them 484.491 Blasphemie in the Annotations touching Christes Priesthod pa. 528.529 Ansvvered 530. vsque ad 542. blasphemie touching merite of vvorkes pa. 543. ansvvered 544 c. Hovv the Protestants fel to cal the Pope of Rome Antichrist in praef pa. 42. M. W. knovveth not vvel vvhat that Antichrist is against vvhom he vvriteth Ibid. pa. 4. The absurditie of that assertion Ibid. pa. 4. The impossibilitie of that opinion 52.53.54 The end of that doctrine 72.73 Arguments ridiculous made by M. W. and attributed to vs. pa. 497.498.499.502.504.510.511.513 such arguments tend to make a mockerie of al faith 516.517.521.522.523 S. Leo the great called Antichrist by Beza pa. 155. The first Apostles of our nation were Papistes and Massing priestes by the cōfession of our aduersaries p. 165.166 Auncient archheretikes the protestants forefathers in sundrie partes of their faith pa. 31.32 S. Athanasius called Sathanasius by the heretikes pa. 84. S. Austin called a blind bussard pa. 166 S. Austin most filthily abused and mangled by the Sacramentaries pa. 166.177 S. Austin a priest 65. S. Austin S. Hierom old papistes 121. B BEza a fierbrand of sedition pa. 231. VVriters against him pa. 232. He correcteth S. Luke and our Sauiour 233.234.236.241 and is defended by M. VV. in so doing 236.237 His reasons 238.239 Refuted ibid. et 240.241 Refuted long ago by Luther 257.258 how he correcteth the new Testament 260.261 Bezaes fault in excusable for ought M. VV. ether hath said or can say 250. He doubteth of a part of S. Iohns gospel 363.364 He furthereth the Anabaptistes against Christes incarnation of the B. virgin 368.369 See Translation of scripture Bible-beaters pa. 400. The Bible neuer so mangled by any as by the protestants 400.401 Their bible is no bible 404.405 See Scriptures Ceremonies in Baptisme pa. 504.505 C Catholike doctrine vnpossible to be ouercome by any heresie least of al by this of our time pa. 41. The name Catholike not applicable to the English religion praef 87.88 Caluin condemneth the auncient fathers for approuing Melchisedecs sacrifice pa. 60.61 Caluin for the real presence pa. 223. Carolostadius exposition of Christes wordes Hoc est corpus meum pa. 254. allovved by Zuinglius 255. Castalios translation of the Testament much commended by the protestants pa. 380. His discours that Christ is not the Messias praef pa. 67.68 The Church catholike after Christes time is euer populous and spread in many nations pa. 350. et praef pa. 62.63 She is the ground of al faith 442. built vpō a rocke vnmoueable 479. No good worke or martyrdom profiteth to saluation out of the Catholike Church 116.117 Infinite difference betvvene the Catholike cause and the Protestante pa. 556.557.558 No stay in faith out of the Catholike Church praef pa. 24. To say that the vvhole Church hath fayled is to deny Christes incarnation pref p. 56.57 58.59 to make him a lyer ib. 66.67 to deny him to be the true Messias ib. 68.69.70.71 The inuisible Church a poetical fansie pref pa. 60. refelled by Melanchton 60.61 by Caluin Oecolampadius and others 62.63.64 the Protestants sensibly cōtradict them selues in deuising it 64.65 The foundation of the English Protestant church pa 480.481.482 The antiquitie thereof 524. It is ful of Atheistes 410. S. Chrysostom for the real presence p. 188.208.215.217.218 his place comparing Christ vvith Elias pa. 207. It proueth inuincibly the real presence a pa. 204. vsque ad 214. S. Chrysost for the sacrifice pa. 214.215 He is almost as ful of lies as words by the protestants doctrine pa. 227. S. Ciril for the real presence p. 198.199.200 D S. Damascene for the real presence pa. 201.202 Dauid George vpon vvhat ground he denied Christ pref pa. 66. Defendere is vvel translated to reuenge pa. 464.465.466.467 The Doctors of the primitiue Church condemned by euery priuate sectarie in that vvherein they gain say his heresie pa. 82.83 by the Zuinglians for approuing the sacrifice of Melchisedech pa. 60. and Masse pa. 69.70.71.72 and for disallowing the mariage of priestes and votaries 83. by the Puritanes for allovving holydaies in the honour of Christ his Saintes 84. by the Trinitarians for acknovvledging the B. Trinitie 84. by the Lutherans for denying the Vbiquetie of Christs body 85. by M. W. for their doctrine of penance and vvorkes 82 11◠and for sayng that Antichrist is one man pref pa. 44.45 See vvorkes E Elias cloke the Zuinglians supper compared together pa. 212.213 Elias shal come before the day of iudgment pa. 494.495 English vvriters 478. their maner of vvriting 284.285.475 and disputing 477. more absurd then others pref pa. 6.7 Those of the English religion are not Protestants pref pa. 88. they are properly called Zuinglians or Sacramentaries ibi 89.90.91 by vvhat names they cal them selues praef pa. 91. hovv they are called by Acte of parlament ibi 21. F The true meaning of Only faith iustifying pa. 280.411.412 Libertinisme the end thereof 127.128 The nature of true Christian faith pa. 517.518.519 hovv one part of faith is applied to the confirmation of an other 521. Ecclesiastical maner of fasting commeth from Christ and his Apostles pa. 89.90 The Zuinglians figure in Christs wordes touching the sacrament pa 251. The figure of the Catholikes ib. infinite difference betvvene these tvvo 252.253.254.255 Freevvil pa. 509. G Grace hindereth nothing the merite of workes pag. 102.103 To say God is the author of synne is to say God is an Idol or a deuil pa 451. The protestants say so 451.453 454. S. Gregorie much praysed by the Protestantes pag. 158. much rayled at by the Protestantes 164. A booke written against him by Vergerius 165. S. Gregorie a priest without al reason made minister by M. Iewel 164. The Greeke Testament more aduantageable for the Catholikes then the common latin pa 283.284 Our common latin Testament more pure then the greeke now extant 361.362.363 The greeke Testament now differeth much from the old 363.364 Additions rashly made to the greeke 365.366.367 Parcels of importance left out of the greeke 367.368.369.370 H HEauen is of grace vvorkes pa. 104.105.106.107 544.545 Of mercy and iustice 105.106 107.108.109 Heauen must receaue Christ Act. 3. v 21 maketh nothing against Christs presence in the sacrament pa. 179.180.181.193 handled at large a pag. 170. vsque ad 175. S. Paule to the Hebrevves as much doubted of in the primitiue church as the epistle of S. Iames. pa. 38.39 The Apostles cited not scripture alwaies according to the hebrue pa. 287.288.289 Bookes of scripture written in hebrue lost 290. S. Hierom preferring the hebrue before the latin in his time iustifieth not the hebrue of our time pa. 297.337 More probable that the hebrue hath bene corrupted then the latin pa. 297.298.299.300 Corruptions in the hebrue pa. 302. in Isai against
that it svvarueth from the Apostolicall doctrine and teacheth cleane contrarie to S. Paule and all scriptures if Luther flatly expresly deny it to be Apostolical and affirme it to conteyne no one title or letter of such matter as the Apostels are wont to haÌ„dle if WolfgaÌ„gus Musculus vse him so contemptuouslie as though he were some poore rascall not worth the naming and teache him what he should say and sette him to schole this being euident then F. Campions conclusion standeth strong that Luther with his complices contemne that parte of scripture howsoeuer he calleth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 strawen or wodden And therefore ether let M. VV. lyke a good childe confesse with Luther vvhom gladlie he vvorshippeth as his father and vvith the Lutherans vvhom he embraceth as his most deere brethren in Christ that this epistle is no more worth then his father and brethren make of it or if he mislike such consanguinitie as sure I am they abhorre him let him then detest them as profane and wicked men who so impiouslie reiecte the written worde of God that is the foundation as they say whereon is buylte their newe congregation and so may the reader note downe one more capital and substantiall point of dissension betwene those two churches lutheran zuinglian then heâ—herto he hath consâ—dered although nether can he so doe precisely but rather note it as a diuision amonge the zuinglians also for so muche as it appeareth by Musculus that the Zuinglians of SuitzerlaÌ„d no lesse then the LutheraÌ„s of Germanye disagree from the Englishe churche in their Canon of scripture yea the Englishe church within it self as shal appeare in the nexte chapiter CHAP. II. Of the Canonical scriptures and that the English cleargie in accepting some and refusinge others are ledde by no learning or diuinitie but by mere opinion and fantasie AFTER S. Iames foloweth a questioÌ„ proposed by M. Martin how it chauÌ„ceth that the English church doth admit S. Iames epistle which sometime was not admitted and yet wil refuse Tobias Ecclesiasticus the books of Machabees which were no farther disproued then that of S. Iames. The reason in truth is the same in effecte geuen by M.VV. because these later contayne such proofe of the Catholyke religion as by no sophisticatioÌ„ can be eluded S. Iames they thinke is not so flat but shifts they haue to ridde their handes of him well inough So much writeth Caluin Some there are that thinke this epistle not vvorthie of authoritie but I because I see no sufficiente cause vvhy it should be reiected gladly vvithout controuersie embrace it for vvhereas the doctrine of free iustification semeth to be refuted in the second chapiter in his place I shall easelie ansvvere that matter As if he had sayd that therefore he admitted it because he had found out a quidditie to auoide that hard obiection agaynst only faith which answere notwithstaÌ„ding because it is false peeuish sophistical and cannot abide the tryall as wel proueth Illyricus Pomerane Musculus they therfore thought the other way more cleanlie rather vppoÌ„ preteÌ„ce of some doubte made in the primitiue churche cleane to shake it of with the rest then vppon a vaine toy which must in fine shame it selfe make hazard of their solifidian iustificatioÌ„ which must needes come to the grounde if this Apostle retaine his old credite This I say in deede is the reason but because thus to haue spoken plainlie had geuen a sure demonstratioÌ„ to the reader that they make no more account of scriptures then of fathers no more reckning of Iames or Peter then of Gregorie or Austin if they be against their conceaued heresies therefore M. VVhit semeth to shape a more cleanlie answere and this yt is All the church saith he reproued not the epistle of Iames and they that reproued it vvere moued so to doe by no sure reasons but these bookes vvhich you name Tobias Ecclesiasticus the Machabees the vvhole churche of old reiected nether vvere they vvritten in the Hebrevv tounge vvhereas no bookes of the old testament vvere Canonicall but onlie those vvhich the lord commended to the old churche Two reasoÌ„s he seemeth to geue the first that no bookes in the olde TestameÌ„t are Canonicall but such as were written in the Hebrew the proofe wherof consisting onlie in M.VV. authoritie without ether reason or probabilitye or Doctor or Councell if I oppose against him S. Augustine with the catholike churche of that age I trust the reader wil not greatlie stagger which syde he ought to take and if this reason hold I marueile what shall become of Daniel a great parte wherof is held of them for Canonical yet is not writteÌ„ in the Hebrew His other argument is of more force that the vvhole primitiue church refused the bookes of Machabees Iudith Tobie but certaine onlv that vppon no good reason refused S. Iames. These two partes if he proue and shew this difference he sayth somewhat I wil be of iudgement as he is if not whereof I assure my self then as before so here styll lust and fantasie ruleth them in mangling thus the scriptures not reason diuinytie let vs see how he proueth that the whole churche reiected the former S. Hierom sayth the church readeth the bookes of Iudith Tobias the Machabees but reckeneth theÌ„ not amongst canonicall scriptures This for them how may we fynd now that not the whole churche but some particuler men and they not vppon any good reason refused S. Iames For this part we must credit M.VV. vppon his worde for besyde his worde reason or coniecture he yeldeth none but coÌ„trariwise to disproue this his distinction and approue that without reason or conscience he and his fellowes haue made choyse of the one with condemnation of the other thus to do M.VV. him selfe ministreth vs mattet abundant for thus he wryteth in his first booke in iustifiynge frier Luther against S. Iames. Luther vvas not ignorante vvhat the aunciente church iudged of Iames his epistle Eusebius doubted not to vvrite of that epistle expresslie I vvold have all men to knovv that the epistle vvhich is ascribed to Iames is a bastarde epistle vvhat could be writteÌ„ more plainly but perhaps Eusebius pleaseth you not geue me a reasoÌ„ vvhy heare then Hierome vvhom you knovv to have bene a Priest of the Romane Church The epistle of Iames is auouched to have bene set forth by some other in his name the one affirmeth it to be a counterfeite the other saith it is supposed to have bene published not by the Apostle but by some other vvhy then are you angrie vvith Luther vvhom you see not suddenlie or rashlie first to have begon to doubâ—e of that epistle but therein to folovve the iudgement â—â—stimonie of the auncient Church Let vs now ioyne together these two proofes of M. VV. with consideration what thence