and their elder brethren the Lutherans heare the matter set downe clearely by Flaccus Illyricus himself their cheefest Centuriator thus he saith Now I come to the doctrine of the new Papists so he calleth Syr Francis his fellowes that wil bring in any necessity of works whatsoeuer which is as pernicious as the old They say that the Apostle means to exclude good workes from iustification non simpliciter sed ratione debiti not simply but as due but only as meritorious and causes efficient whervpon these doctors or rather seducers do diuers wayes elude that proposition of S. Paule we are iustified by faith gratis without works each one according to his owne â—ead and as his priuate spirit suggesteth to him and most of them couet diligently to mingle works as a certayâ—e harmful leuen with iustification and the lambe of God c. And then agayne But the true sense of Paules words is that without all merit condition or necessity of our workes by only faith in Christ we are iustified before Christ and saued so as our saluation doth in no sort depend of our workes neyther be they any way necessary to saluation c. Scripture Luther and all doctors of sound Iudgment think thus Lo heer Syr Francis yow are called a new Papist by your elder brethren or rather God-Fathers for holding this opinion Yow are called a seducer for only excluding works as meritorious and causes efficient of saluation and not simpliciter simply and euery way Yow are called an eluder of the proposition of S. Paul interpreting it by your priuate spirit other wayes then he ment it and different from the sense of Martyn Luther and all docâ—ors of sound iudgment Yow are accused for coueting so diligently to mingle good woorks â—â— a certayne harmeful leuen with iustification and the lamb of God defend your self if yow can from these arrowes of your owne men and to the end yow may do it better and more properly to the purpose harkeÌ„ what the same wryter saith of yow and yours in the beginâ—ing of this very controuersy Some there are who drowsily weyghing the matter â—â—ink this to be the controuersy properly betwene vs and the Papists Flac. Illyr praef ad Ro. Pag. 636. whether good works iustifie or be the â—erit and cause efficient of iustice and life and not whether they be in any respect necessary to Saluation c. Lo Syr FraÌ„cis yow are one of these drowsy â—â—llowes that vnderstand not properly the coÌ„â—â—ouersy according to Illyricus his iudgment for â—ow say that works are in some respects neâ—essary to saluation to wit as necessary fruits and â—â—â—nesses and that Saluation cannot be without them though not as any cause meritorious or efficient of Iustice. And thus much for the controuersy it self which S. Francis vnderstandeth not But if I would stand vpon alleaging the infinite sentences of other protestants quite opposite and contradictory to that flattery of good workes which S r. Francis heer and in other places of his Wastword vseth for deluding the people I should neuer make an end for in this they are as contrary one to another as in any other point For first their grandfather Martyn Luther that was the founder of this opinion and layd it for the foundation of all his new ghospel Lutheran speches against góod vvorks ioyned vvith faith sayeth Caueamus à peccatis sed multò magis à legibuâ— operibus bonis Let vs take heed of sinne but much more of lawes and good works Luther serm de nouo testam siuè de missa And according to this doctrine his schollers in a certayne counsel say thus adeò non esse necessariâ— opera bona In colloq Altemb vid. Canis l. 1. de corrupt verb. Dei Cap. 10. vt etiam ad salutem incommodent sintâ— perniciosa Good woorks are so farre of from being necessary to saluatioÌ„ as that they ratheâ— hinder and are pernicious And agayne in thâ— same Ibid. Precari nos oportet vt in fide sine operibâ— omnibus bonis vsque in finem perseueremus we muâ—â— pray that we may perseuer in fayth withouâ— all good works vnto the end And finally to conclude S r. Francis heer 〈◊〉 as he may not escape Colloq Altemberq col 4 fol. 75. 76. let vs heare their concluâ—sion which is in these words After all this 〈◊〉 conclude with that worthy saying of Luther in his fiâ— Tome printed at VVittenberg If works be necessary saluation then saluation cannot be without works then we are not saued by only faith This conclusâ—on we see is playne contradictory to Syr Frauncis which holdeth works needful in some respect as before hath byn shewed which contradiction Luther himself vrgeth yet much more Luth. tom 1. propâ—sil 3. when he sayth Fides nisi sit sine vllis etiam minimis operibus non iustificat imò non est fides Faith if it be not without all good workes euen the least that may be it iustifieth not yea it is no faith So as when Syr Francis annecteth good works to his Protestant faith as a hand-mayd without which faith is no faith Luther on the contrary sayth that if this â—â—nd-mayd be there shee killeth the maistresse And so inough of this contradiction which was the first absurdity of this Caluinian shift to couer the nakednesse of their bare faith which Luther toyleth to discouer as fast and wil not haue her couered or as he sayth defiled with the â—ttenragges of any good works To the second point of this Caluinian shift â—hat works are necessary The second point of CaluiniaÌ„ imposture about only faith but yet must not â—elp or cooperat any thing at all to our saluaâ—â—on but only attend vpon fayth as a hand â—ayd so as faith only must saue but not faith â—lone albeit that which I said in the beginâ—â—ng of the idlenes of this deuise and matheâ—atical illusion be sufficient to ouerthrow it â—nd the reasons of Luther and his Lutherans 〈◊〉 euident against it yet may the vanity therof 〈◊〉 seene also by this that wheÌ„ a protestaÌ„t hath the faith that eyther Luther or Caluyn could teach him and as vehement and feruent as both of them togeather if he should lâ—ue naughtely he can not by Syr Francis doctâ—ine be saued for that faith only saueth nor Luther saith he hath the more faith for that how do these two stand togeather Agayne when we see theeues and murderers go to the gallowes as often is seene in England with as strong a faith as any minister or preacher can haue professing the the English faith and religion openly singing our Psalmes lustely and assuring themselues and the people that stand by that they are oâ— the elect and to go presently to heauen and that albeit their break fast of hanging bâ— sharp yet shal their supper be sweet with thâ— Lord in his glory which faith and assurance thâ— ministers standing by with the rest do
all matters being by both their iudgments to be referred and all other iudges and trials left a side as they require they come to fal out presently about the sense and interpretation wherin it is affirmed by their owne wryters that so many men so many myndes and so many diuers interpretations among them-selues of the selfesame words of scripture are to be found as yow may see set downe at large in another book of the softer Caluinists set forth by the same publike authority as the former and intituled A suruey of the pretented holy Discipline imprinted at London An. 1593. especially in the 31. Chapter whose title is this How and with what disagreement they wrest and misconster the scriptures c. Where hauing shewed by many examples that fiue or six diuers interpretations are giuen sometymes vpon one and the selfe same sentence of scripture by these his puritane brethren He addeth further these wordes Suruey c. 31. Caterbraulis of ProtestaÌ„ts and PuritaÌ„s Vnto these Caterbraules and pitiful distractions which now I haue shewed I might ad a great heape of other confusions all proceeding from such intollerable presumption as is vsed by peruerting and false interpretation of the sacred Scriptures And agayne whosoeuer doth deale with the Scriptures in this sort as these fellowes do wel may he speake proud things exalt himselfe promise mountaynes brag of the Prophets Apostles but in the end all cometh to nothing c. Loe heere what this brother sayth of the rest of the caterbraules and pittiful distractions from them of their intollerable presumption in peruerting and false interpreting scriptures of their swelling pryde in bragging of hauing the prophets and Apostles on their syde when they haue nothing but vanitye yet these brags of scriptures prophets and Apostles must be good and currant proofe when they deale with vs against the authoritye of the vniuersal Churche as yow shal see by O.E. in the next Chapter and when we tel them of any diuision among themselues they wil deny it on all handes as Syr F. doth heere of the Puritanes and O. E. afterward though he hath written against them most spitefully and doggedly for he hath no other style as it seemeth and fynally let all men iudge but especially the reader whom it most importeth for his instruction with what truth and conscience Syr F. can say and wryte as he doth matters staÌ„ding as I haue shewed that not only the professors of their ghospel in England but all other Churches also in Christendome where the ghospel is imbraced are of one Iudgement and thervpon coÌ„clude with this hypocritical prayer to mock God withall And in this blessed vnitie grounded vpon veritie the Lord for euer keepe vs. Whervnto I say also amen so long as they remaine enemies to Gods Catholike Churche wherin only veritie and vnitie is to be found AN ANSVVERE TO three fond obiections or interrogations of Syr F. with an addition about O. E. who is called vp agayne to the stage to tell his opinion about this first blessing of vnitie in veritie CAP. VII AND this now might be sufficient for refutation of this first ridiculous blessing set downe by the knight were it not that I am forced to follow him yet a litle further into an other poynt which is that he forseing how albeit this first blessing of vnitie among them could be proued as it cannot yet might it not be alleaged for a peculiar blessing of his men except it could be shewed also that it were singular to them alone and not commoÌ„ also to Catholikes before they and their religion sprong vp for if we had vnitie also in fayth before them then cannot vnitie be accompted their blessing more then ours for which cause he endeauoureth to shewe that Catholikes had no vnitie of fayth before Luthers ghospel began which paradox he wil needs proue by three graue interrogations which I pray yow note and therby obserue the mans singular wit and learning Yow vaunt sayth he of a general vnitie before alteration of religion Pag. 13. but how worshipped yow one God when yow worshipped so many Idols To this I answere that if we worshipped Idols Three foâ—d interrogatioÌ„s â—f the K. and so were Idolators this error was so vniuersally receyued among vs as euen in this poynt also we had vnitie which protestants cannot shew in their errors and falsityes as before hath byn declared And so this question is both ydle and easy to answere for the consequent but for the antecedent it is most false for we deny that any Idols were among Catholikes August de vtilitate ieiunij tomo 9. â—ub finem S. Hier. in c. 6. Amos in c. â—2 Ose. S. Augustines and S. Hieroms sentence is cleare and sound as before hath ben noted that heretikes are the Idolaters of the new Testament for adoring their own fansies Secondly he asketh agayne how we could haue vnitye when as we were so miserably rent into innumerable sectes of fryers and monkes To which I answere that all these professed one fayth without any difference in any one article of beliefe And consequently this question is more simple then the former for that difference of habytes or particular manner of lyfe breaketh not vnity of religion Thirdly he asketh and vrgeth yet more sharpely how caÌ„ yow haue one head of your Churche vnles yow reiect Christ that is the onely head To this I wil answere out of his owne wordes that we can haue one external and ministerial head vnder Christ by the same reason that himselfe in the same place sayth that English Protestants haue one head of their Churche which is Christ the Lord and his substitute annoynted their Soueraigne Q. vnder him So that yf it do not exclude Christ among the Protestants to haue a womaÌ„ head of their Churche vnder Christ much lesse doth it exclude Christ among vs to haue a man head a Priest head of this reason I am content to make any man iudge And with this I wil end my treatise of the first benediction of vnitie in veritie which is as truly and fitly applyed to Protestants as if a man should assigne it for a special blessing of Greeks and Germanes aboue other nations neuer to exceed in drinking or of those of Guinea neuer to fal out or fight among themselues who neuer lightly are occupyed in other things And lastly I wil close vp all with the sentence and prophesy of no worse a man then Martyn Luther himselfe Luthers prophesye of Protestants coment in Psalm 5. who wryteth thus Certè non alia ratione confligit Deus cum haereticis quam vt inter illos existat factiosus quidam dissensionis spiritus ex â—llorum enim discordia interitus quoque perditio consequitur Trulie God doth not fight by any other meanes with heretikes then by permitting among them a certayne seditious spirite of dissentioÌ„ by which their ouerthrow also and perdition doth ensue Thus
attributed by all Catholike writers and not the secoÌ„darie instrumental meritorious cause ascribed by vs to good workes is euident first by the very next immediate woords folowing in S. Bernard vpon the former Rom. â— Quos iustificauit sayth he non quos iustos inuenit hos magnificauit God hath magnifyed and exalted to his kingdome not those whom he found iust of themselues but whom he by his grace did make iust by which words S. Bernard doth inferre that all the merits of our good workes together with the reward promised to them do come originallie and principally from God and consequentlie both the one and the other are to be ascribed vnto him as vnto the chiefest cause though also by our voluntarie concurrance thervnto when we are moued by God we haue our interest therin and are trulie said to merit lyfe euerlasting which S. Bernard doth explicate most excellentlie a litle before in the same place his wordes are these hauing spoken first verie largly of good workes Bernard ibid. Verum haec sayth he cum certum sit diuino in nobiâ— actitarâ— spiritu Deâ— sunt munera quia verò cum nostrae voluntatis assensu nostra sunt mâ—rita Wheras it is certayne that these good workes by me before mentyoned are wrought in ys by the spirit of God they must needs be called the giftes of God And for that they are done also by the consent of our wil they are our merits Thus sayth he and then doth he prosecute the same with a large and learned discourse vpoÌ„ the words of S. Paul to Timothie where he sayth Bonum certaemen certaui c. I haue fought a good fight â— Tim. 4. I haue ended my course I haue kept my fayth and for the rest then is layd vp for me a crowne of Iustice which God the iust iudge shal restore vnto me at that day Vpon which wordes S. Bernard sayth thus If it be so that the verie wil of doing good in S. Paul wherof all merit doth depend was not his owne but receyued from God how doth he cal it a croune of Iustice which he assureth himselfe to be layd vp for him is it perhaps for that whatsoeuer is freelie promised it may be iustlie after the promise made required as due debt c. he saith further for that S. Paul beleeued the promiser he now confidentlie exacteth the promise which promise though it were of mercy yet now it is to be payd of iustice c. For it is iust that God should pay whatsoeuer he oweth and he oweth whatsoeuer he hath promised c. and of this iustice it pleased God to make Paul a partener Iustitiae Paulum Deus voluit habere consortem vt coronae faceret promeritorem Bern. pag. 1069. to the end he might make him also a deseruer of his crowne and in this he made him both partener of his iustice and deseruer of his crowne when he vouchsafed to make him his helper or coadiutor in doing good works wherunto his crowne is promised further he made him his coadiutor when he made him to consent to his holy wil and motion Lo heere how S. Bernard doth connect ioyne togeather the operation of God and cooperation of man in the matter of merit attributing to God the first and principal motion of grace mercy promise and inabling vs to worke and vnto man that he concurreth freely by cooperation with Gods instinct so as the reward of this worke which is the Kingdome of heauen yf we respect the first cause which is God it is mercy and yf we consider the secondary instrumental cause which is man the promise of God made vnto him it is called iustice and dew debt let vs heare S. Augustine in the same matter Aug. hom 14. lib 50. homiliarum 2. Tim. 4. and vpon the same words of the Apostle For the rest saith the Apostle there remayneth to me a crowne of iustice which God the iust iudge shal restore to me at the last day Behould he saith that God shal restore a crowne vnto him ergo he is his debter Aug. in Psal. â—â— And againe in another place vnde debitor accepit aliquid c. Whence is God become a debter hath he receyued any thing or doth he owe any thing to any man and yet behould Paul doth hold him for his debter saying God shal restore vnto me c. what shal he restore vnto thee Paul but that which he oweth whence doth he owe any thing vnto thee what hast thow giuen vnto him Truly God hath made himselfe a debter not by receyuing any thing but by promising so as yt may not be said vnto him restore that which thow hast receyued but pay that which thow hast promised Thus do wryte these holy Fathers shewing how God becometh debiter to the merits of our good works not by their owne nature but by his owne voluntary free promise and mercy yet deny they not the truth of this merit nor blaspheme yt as our foÌ„d K. doth saying that it is a proud presumption before God to put any opinion of merit to our works Pag. 19. but yow haue heard out of the Fathers how they do not only put opinion of merit in good works but do plainly affirme and teach yt and that it is dew debt supposing Gods promise made to reward them Wherof also it followeth that albeit the saying of S. Bernard be most true in the sense alleadged that our merits be the way to the Kingdome of heauen but not the cause speaking of the first and principal cause yet were those words not truly but frandulently translated by our K. that they are not the cause wherfore we shal obtayne the Kingdome as though they were no cause at all which is false and absurd for that noe man can deny them to be the instrumental meritorious causes of obtayning heauen seing God hath promised heauen as a reward vnto them and hauing promised is bound in iustice to preforme the same as now yow haue heard by the Fathers declared And so much of this matter for this place The fift beatitude which this blessing-maker bringeth is freedome from persecution The 5. blessing freedome from persecution and as he calleth them halcyon dayes when he sayth The litle barke of Christ Iesus before tossed with the waues and stormes of furious and bloudy presecution hath found now some repose and rest Pag. 20. About which blessing I would aske the K. certayne questions therby to come to the truth of the matter auoyd impostures and first I would aske him whether this freedome from persecution be common to all or to some only that is to protestants and then whether this be passiue or actiue in them that is whether they stand out free in them-selues or do suffer other men also to be free from persecutioÌ„ for yf it be not a common blessing to all but particular to themselues then can yt
Caluyn in matter of the Queenes Supremacy which he denyeth Beza in the whole gouernment of their Churche Or why should I beleeue S. F. or his new masters of EnglaÌ„d rather theÌ„ these that were more learned then he or his or what reason rule or foundation haue any of these men to beleeue their owne opinion more then others but only self wil and fancy This then is the first and greatest spiritual benediction or malediction rather that I fynd to haue happened to our realme and nation by this wooful alteration of religion that wheras before we had a direct rule squyre pole-starre to follow which was the vniuersal Churche now euery man being set at liberty holdeth beleeueth and teacheth what he listeth Nor is there any way or meane left to restrayne him for straight way he appealeth bodlie and confidentlie to the Scriptures and there he wil be both maister and Pilot boteswayne him-self to gouerne the bark at his pâ—easure for he admitteth no iudge no interpreter no authoritie no antiquitie nor any other manner of tryal which is the greatest madnes and malediction that euer could happen among men of reason And the very same cause that moued the Warder to be so liberal then in setting downe this poynt hath moued me now to repeat the same againe in this place And what do yow think that the knight his champion haue replyed to all this playne and manifest demonstration would not yow think that both of them for their credits sake should haue buckled vp them-selues to ioyne in this yssue with the warder shewing what certainty they haue or which of the two wayes they wil take proposed by him seeing he sayth there are no other or that they should theÌ„-selues at least appoynt some other way but consider good reader the force of euident truth they are so blanked and their mouthes so shut vp with this interrogation of the warder as the K t. thought it best to passe it wholie ouer with silence as before hath byn touched The minister with more shame then the K t. hath tatled somwhat Idle tatling in a grauâ— question telling vs that our religion is not Catholyke that the vniuersal Church could not deliuer it vnto vs quia actiones sunt suppositorum as yow haue heard that StapletoÌ„ teacheth that the Churche hath power to proue taxe and consigne the books of holy Scripture And that vniuersal tradition is the most certayne interpreter therof And finally that the fayth of Papists is buylt vpon the Popes fancie and opinion and it is ful of nouelties and old heresies and the like as before yow haue heard All these tatlings he hath vpon this discourse before rehearsed of the warder and almost in as many words as I haue recyted theÌ„ but to the matter it selfe about certainty or vncertainty in religion ne griquidem he answereth no one word at all only to the later parte or appendix of the discourse where the warder sayth that to make the matter more playne how protestants haue no other rule of beleef he asketh S. F. not of any Catholyke Doctors nor auncient Fathers whome he esteemeth not but of their owne new Doctors Luther Caluyn Beza and the like authors of their owne sects why English Protestants at this day should preferre their owne iudgments before these also whom they graÌ„t to haue had great store of the holy ghost in all matters doctrines and interpretation of Scripture where they dissent from them To this I say all the other storme being past it seemed good to the minister to make his answere in these wordes But sayth this Noddy why should yow beleeue more your owne opinions then Caluyn concerning the Q. supremacy Luther concerning the Real presence and Beza in the Churche gouernment I answere first that these mennes priuate opinions concerne not fundamental poynts of fayth Pag. 21. A most foolish ansvvere of O. E. about Luther Caluyn c. and therfore they are not to be brought foorth for instance in this cause where we talk of the foundations and reasons of Christian fayth Marke wel his answere good reader iudge who is the noddy he sayth two things the one that the iudgments of Luther Caluin and Beza be but priuate opinions among them the other that the poynts wherin they differ from them to wit the real presence in the Sacrament her Ma ties Supremacy ecclesiastical and the whole gouernemeÌ„t of the Churche are no fundamental poynts of their faith For the first I would gladly know what authority is auayleable among them in teaching preaching and interpretation of Scriptures yf Luther Caluyn and Beza be reiected as priuate and particuler men where they differ from them our Doctors and Churche they do defy the ancient Fathers they look not willingly after them their owne parlament this maÌ„ sayth a litle before doth not appoynt but admit their religioÌ„ only who then is hee or who are they that must determine and defyne in this case For the second yf the difference with Luther about the real presence of Christs real body in the Sacrament be no fundamental poynt of fayth seing they accuse vs of the highest cryme vnder heauen about the same that is of idolatry and holding a creature to be the creator and we them againe of most heynous blasphemy highest wickednes vpon earth in discrediting Christ in his owne words that said it was his bodie his whole Church that euer so vnderstood him vnto this day yf the matter of supremacy be no fundamental poynt of fayth VVhat pointes are fundamental in protestants doctryne wherby all their ecclesiastical hierarchie standeth at this day in England as their Bishops Deanes Archdeacons and other prelates and parsons of the Spiritualty who otherwise must needs be playne intruders and meere lay men If their whole gouernmeÌ„t of their Churche be not fundamental wherof dependeth whether they haue any true ministers preachers and teachers lawfully allowed or no consequentlie whether their Sacraments be Sacraments and be administred by them that haue authoritie so to doe if all these poynts I say be not fundamental in O.E. opinion what are fundamental And what Atheisme doth this Martial minister diuels deane bring in vpon vs But beleeue me good reader these good fellowes do only eate of the ministerie and beleeue as please them and this being a compagnion of many occupations wil liue by that which wil yeild him most according to that also shal be his doctrine and beleef Of their great grand-father fryer Martyn Luther he sayth here in the words folowing his former answere Pag. â—1 O. E. his contemptious speach of Luther and Caluyn VVe suspend our opinion and giue no approbation to Luthers opinion concerning the carnal presence of Christs body in the Sacrament for that we see the doctrine to be newe and not taught by the Apostolyke Churche nay we find yt to be repugnant to the Apostles doctrine deliuered in Scriptures
and for â—â—ntinuance of royal issue in thesame then â—â—otestants are wont to doe as by the exaÌ„ples â—â—eadged by the Warder is euident And to this the minister saith nothing at 〈◊〉 4 Inconuenience Succession not established as neyther to the fourth about establishâ—ent of succession which he saith could not â—â—ue byn but by allowance of the Pope and â—â—at this had byn dishonorable to her Ma tie â—â—d intollerable to the state to bring so great a 〈◊〉 to submit her-selfe to so base a slaue marke â—â—e impotent rayling of an abiect parasite Pag. 3◠〈◊〉 of him to receyue her right to the crowne And â—â—en he passeth further to the matter of state saying But let vs suppose her Ma tie should leaue 〈◊〉 issue behynd her is she the first that hath byn in 〈◊〉 case No S. Minister nor wil not be the last but what doth this remedy the inconuenieÌ„ce Heare him further Pag. Ibid. And is there noe remedy eytheâ— by lawes already prouided or by wise men to be deuisâ—â— but that we must needs fal by the eares togeather about this matter of succession This is 〈◊〉 supposition of their noddy our aduersary c. God graunt S. Minister he proue a noddâ— for his feare with-out fondation VVho is the noddy but hoâ— great a noddy yow are in the meane space 〈◊〉 setting so light by the matter and disputing 〈◊〉 fondly as yow do all men see But wheâ— yow ad further to make your aduesarâ— odious Pag. 22. that he percase desyreth some garboyle 〈◊〉 England to gratifie the Infanta the Spaniard wâ—â— slaue he is VVho are like to desyre more garboyles in England yf he be the man whome yoâ— would haue vs to weene yt is very wâ—â— knowne that he setteth lesse by the greate â—â— benefite or promotion that England or Spaiâ— ioyned togeather can giue him then yow 〈◊〉 by the least benefice of the diocesse wherâ—â— yow dwel and are a proling minister aâ—â— much more slaue were your to yow late 〈◊〉 the Eaâ—le of Essex running vp and downe 〈◊〉 by sea and land after him to gaine soâ—â— scrappes at his hands for your maintenancâ— and yow wife with her veluet hood thâ—â— this maÌ„ hath shewed him-selfe to the greatâ—â— Princes in Christendome with whome 〈◊〉 hath dealt in furderance of Cath. religion aâ—â— which of yow two hath desyred more gaâ—â—boyles in EnglaÌ„d eyther he by the lady Infanta or yow by your Lord Essex the euents haue shewed he being a man that cannot grow by garboyles and yow a broken compagnion that cannot wel remedy your needs but by innouations and with this I leaue yow and wil passe to the other foure inconueniences layd downe by the warder Fifthly sayth he yf religion in England had not byn changed 5 InconuenieÌ„ce vnion vvith Rome Sea Apostolyke we had had no breach with Rome nor consequently had the excommunication followed wherof so great noise hath byn made in the world abroad and so great trouble at home And what the vnion â—nd frendship of the Bishop of Rome may â—mport euen as a temporal Prince the effects â—hewed of late in France where especially â—y his endeauour and authority matters haue â—yn compounded that seemed very hard and â—esperate before not only betwene that King and his owne subiects but also beâ—wene that crowne and Spayne and the â—ates of Flaunders which without such an â—byter and vmpire would very hardly euer â—yn accomodated Sixtly England had continued in her ould â—ncient amity and leagues most honorable â—ith Spayne Burgundy 6 Auncient leagues with their deâ—â—ndants and consequently had auoyded all â—â—ese long and costly warres which by that â—eache we haue byn inforced to mainâ—â—yne with losse of so many worthie men â—â—d expence of so great treasure as easily may be imagined and the quarrel not yet ended 7 VVarres abroad Seauenthly so great bloody warres and tumults in Christian Kingdomes round about vs had neuer happened as before in part hath byn declared and euery man doth impute the principal causes and motions therof vnto the diuersity of religion in England And lastly most doleful alâ—erations in our owne countrey had byn auoyded Damages receyued at home as the depriuation in one day of all the sacred order of Bishops in England with their perpetual imprisonment for that they would not subscribe to this vnfortunate chaunge of religion wrong out in parlament as al men know by the oddes only of one or two voyces of lay men The disgracing and abusing of so many noble houses with ouerthrow of others wherof let Norfolk Arundel Northumberland Oxford VVestmerland and Dacres giue testimonyâ— for of the rest I wil not make mention seing perhaps them-selues would be loath I should all which had passed otherwyse by probability if religion had not byn altered The continual and intollerable affliction also of sâ— many honorable and worshipful gentlemeâ— had neuer happened for perseuering in theâ—â— Fathers faith wherto our countrey was firâ—â— conuerted from infidelity without any otheâ— offence obiected or to be prooued againâ— them but only refusing to accoÌ„modate theâ— selues to this change The torturing hanginâ— and quatering of aboue a hundred Priests fâ—â— the same cause the most of them good gentlemen and youthes of rare wit learning and other parts which other common welthes would highly haue esteemed and so would ours too in tymes past and wil agayne in tyme to come when these blasts shal once be ouerblowen Thus farre the Warder All which poynts O. E. answereth with shifts and sleâ—ghts as the former and first to the fifth about breache with Rome he sayth VVhat more absurd theÌ„ to obiect the breache with Rome when we esteeme that to be one of the greatest blessings that euer happened to this land To the other point mentioned by the Warder of the late peace made in Fraunce betweene those Monarches by the Popes mediation the minister saith nothing for that came not to his purpose yet he telleth vs againe heere now that Henry the third late K. of France and the late Duke of Ferrara and other Princes of the Popes religion were not-with-standing that troubled by the Pope A wise argument as though there were noe other cause for which the Pope might fal out with any Prince or punish him but only for chauÌ„ge of religion But this is the manner of this maÌ„nes arguing and with these manner of elenches â—aralogismes and other deceytful shifts of â—ophistry this fellow and his companions deâ—eaue the simple To the sixt about old ancient amity and â—eagues with Spayne Burgundy he answereth â—â—us 6 InconuenieÌ„ce breach of ancient leagues and amity As if yt were not more hurtful to the Spaniard â— break with vs then for vs to break with the Spaniard This as yow see is answered more like a souldiar then a minister â—g 3â— The last two points are in effect denyed by him to wit that eyther the
the heretical cauillation of S r. FraÌ„cis his inference vpon the forsaid premises which is this Ergo he biddeth vs to obey the Pope though he teach contrary to S. Peter and S. Paul This Doctor Harding sayth not nor is it necessary nor doth it follow of the premisses but only is a wrangling of a contentious heretical spirit as euery man may see and ought diligently to marke for their instruction how to beleeue and giue credit to those mens arguments and illations Wherfore after all these note the fourth point which is his substantial conclusion And this I hope sayth he is a sufficient iustification for my accusation His accusation was as before hath byn heard that the Pope is to be obeyed though he command blasphemies against 〈…〉 to hâ—l and the 〈…〉 iustified by 〈…〉 at the present 〈…〉 chaire 〈…〉 and not only 〈…〉 man iudge how 〈…〉 iustified himself and his accuâ—aâ—â—on But yet to the end he may seeme to say somthing to proue that Popes comaund somtymes both blasphemies and disloyalty he alleadgeth for the first about blasphemy certayne peeces of prayers out of Portiphorium vsed vpon the festiual day of S. Thomas of Canterbury Tuper Thoma sanguinem 〈…〉 our prayers c. which the K t. to shew himself a good versifier putteth downe in a poeme thus By the bloud of Thomas which he for thee did spend Make vs o Christ to climbe whither Tho. did ascend And then agayne opem nobis ò Thoma porrige c. O Thomas lend vs thy help c. Out of which words where there is not a spirit of wrangling calumniation no euil sense can be gathered For in the former there is no more blasphemy conteyned then when the holy prophets did mention the name faith and merits of Abraham Isaac and Iacob Psalm 131. Daniel 13. and other their holy fathers therby the sooner to mooue God to respect them And in that sense may Christians mention also the bloud of S. Thomas and other martyrs shed for his cause as motiues inductioÌ„s to styrre vp his 〈…〉 second where 〈…〉 vnto to lend vs 〈…〉 that he shal do 〈…〉 for vs which 〈…〉 â—n heretical and 〈…〉 hatred to Gods Saint 〈…〉 it being a thing most 〈…〉 Fathers and other pious men of all antiquity to vse lyke inuocation to Saints gone to heaueÌ„ before them as * before I haueâ— shewed by many examples and might do heer much more yf I would stand therin Nor dareth S r. FraÌ„cis or any heretyke in the world to ioyne issue vpon this point of all holy fathers practise in this behalf but only are forced to say of them as they do of vs that it was ignorance blasphemy or simplicity in them And now after this sharp encounter against the naming of the bloud and merits of S. Thomas of Canterbury the knights choller and pryde mounteth vp to the assault of a farre higher Saint which is the mother of God her self whose sacred conception he taketh heynously that it should be honoured with a seueral feast and holy day by Pope Sixtus Quartus for thus he wryteth Sixtus the fourth taketh vp the controuersy betwixt the Franciscans and Dominicks about the conception of the blessed virgin Pag. 6â— and against manifest scripture plaine teâ—â—imony of fathers and the streame of his owne doctors decreeth her conception to haue byn without original sinne so taking from Christ his prerogatiue 〈…〉 the feast of her 〈…〉 them for 〈…〉 And granting to 〈…〉 from the first 〈…〉 of the same as many 〈…〉 4. and Pope Martyn 〈…〉 the seruice of Corpus Christi 〈◊〉 c. Thus wryteth our knight wherin if yow fynd him more true sincere then in his former narrations and assertions it is maruayle for though somethings be true which heer he relateth as namely first that Sixtus the fourth took vp the controuersy betweene the Religious of S. Francis and S. Dominiks order about the conception of the blessed virgin which is the benefit of hauing one supreme head a thing not to be found among sectaries and secondly that he allowed the solemnizing of a feast vpon that day and gaue indulgences also to such as with deuotion and contrition for their sinnes should celebrate or hear diuine seruice and this to the encrease of Christian piety yet are there twice as many other points heer set downe by our knight quite false and forged of himself For first it is false that Pope Sixtus decreed the conception of the blessed virgin to haue byn without original sinne First vntruth for albeit himself being of S. Francis order before he was Pope did hold that opinion for more probable that she was conceyued pure from original sinne yet did he neuer decree the same but left it â—ree for euery 〈…〉 he would theri◠〈…〉 trouble or 〈…〉 appeareth by 〈…〉 Sixtus extant in 〈…〉 an 1466. and 〈…〉 The same 〈…〉 of Pope 〈◊〉 Quintus 〈◊〉 super specula wherin referring himself to the former constitution of Sixtus Quartus to the councel of Trent Ses. 5. in the decree of original sinne the last paragraphe where the said constitution of Sixtus is also meÌ„tioned and approued This constitution of Pius 5. hath these woords Liberam cuique faculâ—atem relinquentes opinandi huius controuersiae quamlibet partem prout vel magis piam â—el magis probabilem esse indicauerit Leauing to euery mannes freedome to hold in this coÌ„trouersy what opinion he thinketh more godly or more probable This ordayned Pius 5. withal indifferency though he were of S. Dominiks order and nothing different from that which Sixtus 4. of S. Francis order had ordayned before him So as hereby is seene the first foul vntruthe of our knight auouching that Pope Sixtus 4. had decreed the question on the other side And of this first followeth the second vntruth more foul then the former â— Vntruth if yt may be where he sayth That Pope Sixtus excommunicateth and condemneth them for heretyks that were of the other opinion The plaine opposite and contrary wherof is set downe in Sixtus his 〈…〉 simili poena 〈…〉 asserrere 〈…〉 gloriosam 〈…〉 to fuisse conceptam 〈…〉 mortale cùm 〈…〉 sede decisum We 〈…〉 and censure all tâ—ose 〈…〉 to affirme that those who hold the contrary opinion to wit that the glorious virgin Mary was conceaued in Original sinne to incurre heresy or mortal sinne therby seeing that the matter is not yet decided by the Roman Churche and Sea Apostolyke In which words we see two points most euident for conuincing the former two falshoods of the knight the one that the Pope himself affirmeth heer that the matter was not yet decyded by him or the Sea Apostolyk the secoÌ„d that he was so farre of from excommunicating or condemning for heretyks those that held the contrary opinion to his as S r. Francis saith heere he did that he excommunicateth all those that should hold them for heretyks or
conscience can there be in such men as vse so many fraudes and vtter so manifest falshoods as in this our answere we haue plainely demonstrated and then good reader when thow hast once discouered this point of singular importance which is that truthe indeed is not sought by them that preteÌ„d to seek truth nor religion by them that treat of religion but only that shifts are sought to make a shew of saying euer somwhat then I doubt not but thou wilt resolue with thy self what is behooful for thee to do for sauing of thy owne soule not leauing it vpon the waues of vncertayne disputes and altercations of men but staying it vpon the sure rock of Christs Catholike and visible Churche which is left and appointed as an infallible stay for all men wherunto I implore his heauenly grace and deuyne assistance AN ADDITION BY the publisher of this book wherin he sheweth first a reason why these two Encounters are set forth alone then the difference he findeth in the wryters and their wrytings thirdly how a man may vse this which heer is said to the decision of any Controuersy of our tyme. CAP. XVIII THREE things do I promise good Christian Reader as yow see in the title of this my addition which I shal endeauour to performe with the greatest breuity and perspicuity that I may And as for the first which is the reason why after the expectation of so many monethes wherin the defence of the whole eight Encounters that ly in dispute betwene the watchman and Warder S. F Hastings and N. D. should haue appeared we now set forth only two of the first The cause â—nd reason of this is easely declared for it was â—s followeth More then a ful yeare hath now passed â—ince the whole reioynder of N. D. to Syr F. Hastings reply about the foresaid eight Encounters and the remitter to the LL. of her Maiesties most honorable Councel was enâ—â—ed The cause of delay and sent to be put in print but then was â—here receaued a new aduise that another answere was in print also to the watch word whose author was figured by the two letters â— E. And albeit the work was said to be of such quality as it merited not a seueral anâ—were and much lesse the man yet for that was not expedient to let it passe without â—ome check of examination the Warder N. â— resolued to deferre the publishing of his â—ormer work vntil he might haue a vew of â—his book also which being more hardly â—rocured and longer expected then at the beâ—inning was presumed caused also the stay of â—his edition But when at lenght it came to sight and â—hat the author N.D. had taken it in hand to â—nswere ioyntly with the other of Sir FraÌ„cis â—ntermingling and coopling them togeather 〈◊〉 â—yow haue seene by experience in these two â—ncounters The reason vvhy these â— Encounters are set forth alone then fel there new difficultyes â—nterruptions as namely diuers monethes â—â—cknesse and diuers other lets and impediâ—ents of vnexpected busynesse to the author â—â—d besides this the corps of these two Enâ—â—unters grew to so great a bulk as of themselues they seemed to be sufficient for one book especially considering the many difficulties that we haue in printing greater volumes in these dayes and all commodity of our owne countrey prints printers and other helpes being debarred vs. Wherfore vpon these and other lyke reasons I began to deale effectually with the author of this work that he would be content to yeild vnto the publishing of these two Encounters alone promissing him that as the other should come to be ready and thorowly polished which I hope wil be very shortly I would set them forth also eyther all togeather or two or three EncouÌ„ters in a book as these go according to the quantity or bignesse which they shal grow vnto And this is so much as is needful to be sayd of this first point The second also may be dispached with the lyke breuity The 2. point of this addition which is about the difference of the wryters and wrytings of these Encounterers for so much as I do not meane to stand vpon all differeÌ„ces obserued by me in reading ouer their books but to note some few only referring me also in these to that which before hath byn set downe in the Encounters themselues especially in the seueral admonissions and warnings ensuing vpon euery Encounter and conteyning as it were a breef recapitulation of the whole only then I wil say that two notorious differences me thinketh I haue obserued in coÌ„ferring these books and wryters togeather The first is touching truthe and falshood playne dealing and shifting The first differeÌ„ce about true dealing falshood discouered almost in euery leaf of the former EncouÌ„ters which is a diffeâ—ence of somuch quality as whersoeuer it is found on the worser part it ought greatly to mooue and make deep impression in the Reader that is careful of his owne saluation for that the matters in controuersy coÌ„cerning true faith being of the highest importance that may be to our soule and euerlasting good or hurt euery man ought to be attent whersoeuer he findeth falshood or deceyt to be wilfully and purposely intended and that it cannot be excused by error or ignorance or heat of speach or other lyke infirmities there he ought to stay his foot stand fast and not to passe further without firme resolution neuer to beleue him agayne And for that in all the reply both of S r. F. and O.E. his defendant I do not find that the VVarder is so much as charged to my remembrance and much lesse conuinced of any one such wilful falsification as before I haue alleaged and that both the knight and minister are accused almost in euery leaf of this crime and that with such manifest proofes and demonstrations as I see not how possibly they can quite themselues here hence I do inferre that it importeth exceedingly euery wise and discreet Reader to remember wel this difference Another difference also there is not a litle to be marked in the very substance of their wrytings The 2. difference idle or profitable matter handled concerning the profit or losse of tyme which the reader may reap by perusing them ouer for that S r. F. and O.E. if yow look attentiuely into their books do treat nothing eyther methodically or substantially throughout their replies but following the Warder vp and downe do wraÌ„gle here and iangle there taking exceptioÌ„s against these or those words without handling any one point learnedly or with substance throughout all their whole discourses neyther coÌ„futing soundly their aduersaries nor confirming wel their owne parts so as when a man hath red ouer their whole books he remayneth with more doubts and darknes then before feeling only his spirit of incredulity and contradiction more increased by this reading but his braynes more weakened and wearied and his vnderstanding lesse cleer
in lyfe by this new religion but all worse And Luther himselfe vpon his owne tryal Luth Poâ—â—iâ— sup Dom. â— Aduent both wrote and printed Mundus fit quotidiè deterior sunt nunc homines magis immodesti indisciplinati multoque deteriores quam fuerunt in Papatu The world is daylie worse men are now more immodest more indisciplinable and a great deale worse then they weare vnder the Popedome And Aurifaber Aurif de dictis Luth. Pag. 623. one of his cheife schollers testifieth these woords of him that he was often wont to say Post reuelatum Euangelium virtus est occâ—sa iustitia oppressa temperantia ligata deuotio pulsa nequitia facta quotidiana Since the ghospel was reuealed vertue of lyfe is slayne iustice is oppressed temperance is bound deuotion is put to flight wickednes is daylie increased Thus said these men in the very primitiue Churche of their new ghospel and what our men especially in England may say now of this argument I leaue it to common experience to iudge And Syr F. least he should goe to farre in this matter of good workes saith Tvvo cautions of the K. against good vvorkes we must take heed to auoid two extremities The first proud presumption before God that we put no opinion of merit in our workes secondlie that before men we auoid all hypocritical ostentation Lo heere good reader two great peryls of good workes layd before thee but no vtilityes remeÌ„bred Trulie I had thought when I heard him talke of two extremityes that as the one was to attribute to much to good workes so the other should haue byn to attribute to litle but both are cautioÌ„s against good workes and therfore I maruaile how they may be called extremities Absurdity seing they may be both in one and the selfe same man to wit presumpsion hipocrisy which yet is against the nature of extremes yf S. F. remember wel his Sophistry learned in Oxford But marke I pray yow the difference of spirit and Doctrine in these men from holy Scripture which euery where encorageth vs exceedingly with the merit and reward of good workes Math. 5. Rom 2. 7. Cor 9. Coloss 1 1. Timoth 2. Iam 2. 2. Pet. 1. 2. Pet. 1. as also that they should shine before men wheras our ProtestaÌ„ts are careful to warne vs that they are perilons things to engender presumption and ostentation Wher-vnto their Father Luther addeth further that they are also pernicious to saluatioÌ„ which yf yow ponder wel is but a cold exhortation to the exercise of good workes Luth. â—om 2. â—ol 322 rom 5 in Gal cap. 4. fol. 382.400 for that yf not only they haue no merite but are perilous also for presumption and hypocrisie yea pernicious sometymes to saluation and that on the other syde our corrupt nature sensualitie flveth them and swayeth to the contrarie of her owne inward instinct who wil leese his pleasure to labour in them and consequently it is no maruaile though these fruits grow so thinly vpon protestants trees as their neighbors I weene wil beare them witnesse in England And as for Syr F. himselfe notwithstanding his protestatioÌ„ afterward that he would be loath to yeild to any Papist whatsoeuer in this poynt of good workes seing it is a peculiar blessing of his people as yow see yet I do not heare nor vnderstand that this blessing doth so abound in him for the practise Syr F. not so famous for good vvorkes as he vvould seeme as that his tenants and neighbours wil be his witnesses thervnto especiallie if the common fame be true of certayne things which heere I wil not name for christian modestie sake for respect eyther of himselfe or his familie or of both though he in his owne person litle sheweth to deserue that respect not hauing held the same with others of greater moment yea princes themselues but I shal deale more modestlie with him and let him goe free from further â—ouch at this tyme but for the matter it selfe concerning him and his in general for good lyfe and workes excepting in particuler those that may be excepted I may coÌ„clude as S. Augustine did a litle before about the Churche that as it is most insolent madnesse to dispute against that which the whole Churche doth practâ—se so to auouch that of Protestants liues and good works wherof all countryes and nations do see and proue the contrarie and their owne authors also do coÌ„fesse as hath byn shewed is litle lesse madnesse And with this I might end this poore protestant blessing of good works especially seeing that after againe I am to treat of the same subiect but that our knight wil needs alleadge S. Bernard for his former caution against the merit of good workes in these words Cap. 15. S. Bernard abused Bona opera sunt via regni non causa regnandi which he according to his fashion fraudulentlie expoundeth thus good works are the way wherein we must walke to the kingdome of heauen but not the cause wherfore we shal obtayne that kingdome c. Wherein first yow must note that he vseth heere also his foresaid old shifte not to quote the place or book where we may fynd this in S. Bernard least he should be taken tripping as a litle before about the other two Fathers S. Hierome S. Augustine yet hauing sought much in S. Bernard at length we fynd the place in the verie end of an excellent treatise he wrote Catholike doctrine about merites of good vvorkes De gratia libero arbitrio shewing therin how Gods grace doth concurre with mans freewil in all meritorious workes by stirring vp mans wil to worke with promise of reward and strengthening him to the performance therof by the assistaÌ„ce of his diuyne grace in respect wherof to wit of the free promise made by God to reward our good workes wherto he was not bound and of the preuenting and assisting vs by his holie grace to the working of the same our merites are to be attributed vnto him as to the first and chiefe efficient cause and not to our selues though our concurrance be necessarie thervnto also and in this sense S. Bernard in the place by our knight aleadged hauing spoken much of the merits of good workeâ— wrought in Christ and by the force of his grace he concludeth thus Merita nostra spâ— quaedam sunt seminaria Bernar. traâ—â— de gratia libero arbitrio ad finem charitatis incentiuae occultae praedestinationis indicia futurae felicitatis praesagia via regninon causa regnandi Our merites are certayne seedes of hope inkindlers of charitie signes of secret predestination foresages or tokens of our felicitie to come the way to the kingdome of heauen but not the cause of our raigning Thus sayth he and that he meaneth heere by the cause of our raigning the principal efficient cause and author which titles are proper only to God and so