we talke when we compare them with scripture impeache the teaching of Christe and his Apostles what doeth the spirituall authoritie of the pope vnder Christe diminishe the kinglie power and authoritie of Christe how doeth the preesthode of mē as from Christe or the sacrifice of the Aultar instituted by Christe disgrace Christs presthoode or his sufficiēt sacrifice ones for all offered on the crosse There is noted in the Margent the epistle to the Hebrewes where it is saied that that sacrifice on the crosse was ones offered for euer for oure redēptiō VVhiche we bothe graunt and teache in that manner as then it was done but yet that impeacheth nothing this dayly sacrifice of ours whiche must be in the churche vntill the end of the woorde as Daniel prophecyed and that in euerie place amongest the Gentiles that is in all the worlde is Malachie fore-tolde being called by Sainct Cirill and other fathers incruentum sacrificium the vnbloodie sacrifice which being one and the selfe same with that which was offered once vpon the crosse is appointed by Christe to be offred dayly in remembrance and thanks geuing for that bloodie sacrifice as Sainct Chrisostom doeth proue at large vpō the epistle to the hebrewes whom other his like yf M. Chark his felowes wolde not disdaine to reade beleeue they wold be a shamed to cauill and blaspheme gods mysteries as they doe But for a large and full answere of this common obiection of theirs owte of the epistle to the hebrewes towching Christe once bloodilie offered for all I referre the reader amōges many other to certayne particular auncient and learned fathers of the primatiue churche whoe doe handle this obiection and answere it of purpose The one is Theodoret byshop of Cyrus whoe handleth this question vvhie Christians doe novv vse to sacrifice in the nevv testament seing the olde lavv vvith all sacrifices vvere abolished by the one sacrifice of Christe The other is S. Augustin whoe proposeth this dowbt hovv vve sacrifice Christe euery daye vpon the Aultar seing he is sayd to be sacrificed once for all vpon the crosse And then he answereth it bothe fullie and largelie in that sense as I haue sayd before So that this obiection was a cómon thing in the primatiue churche and commōlie answered by euery writer which M. Chark his felowes do make so much a doe abowt now crieing owt that we denie the vertue of Christes passion the effects of his offices and the like See the same answered also by Eusebius li. 1. demonst euang cap. 6. and 10. And by Theophilact in cap. 5. ad hebr And so hauing answered now the substance of all that which M. Chark hathe in his preface I might here make an end but that I haue promised to shew how we offer hym and his felows moste reasonnable meanes of triall and that they in deede admitt none at all For what is it to name scripture in woordes when all thee controuersie is about the sense thereof wherein they admit no Iudge but them selues yf we bring scripture neuer so playne yet will they shift it of with some impartinent interpretation And what remedie or further triall haue we then I will gyue an example or two for instruction of the reader in their procedings The most of the auncient fathers wrote books in prayse of virginitie aboue wedlocke vsed to proue it by the sayeing of Christe There be Eunuches vvhiche haue gelded them selues for the kingdome of heauen he that can take it let hym take it Also by the woordes of S. Paul he that ioynethe his virgine in mariage dothe vvell and hee that ioynethe her not dothe better VVhiche woordes being alleaged against Martyn Luther whoe preferred mariage yea though it were of a vowed Nunne before virgnitie he answered it thus that Christ by his woordes terrified men from virginitie and continence and S. Paul by this speche dyd diswade them from the same Now what could be replied in this case trow you An other exāple may be towching S. Iohn Baptist of whome the scripture sayth first concerning his place of liuinge that he vvas in the vvildernesse vntill the day of his appearing to Israel Secōdlie touching his apparell Iohn vvas appareled vvith the heares of Camels Thyrdlie touching his diet his meate vvas locustes and vvilde honie Of whiche three things the olde fathers of the primatiue Church dyd gather a great and singular austeritie of S. Iohns lyfe and doe affirme with all that Eremits and Monkes and other religious people did take their paterne of straite lyuing from hym For whiche cause S. Chrisostome dothe often call S. Iohn Baptist Monachum principem vitae monastice a monke and prince of Monasticall lyfe whiche protestants being not able to abyde doe rage maruailouslie against S. Chrisostome condemning hym of rashenes and falsehode for vsinge those termes wherefore they fall to interpret the alleaged woordes of scripture farre otherwise sayeinge that by the desert wherein he liued vntill he began to preache is vnderstoode nothing els but his priuate lyfe at home in his fathers ovvne hovvse And for his apparell say they of Camels heare it was not straunge apparell but vsual to Mountain men that is vndulata◠sayeth another VVater chamblet hansome and decent albeit somvvhat plentifull in that countrie And lastlie touchinge his dyet of locusts and wilde hony it was no hard fare say they for the locustes were creuises cast awaye by the fishers of Iordan as vncleane by the lawe but eaten of Iohn by the libertie of the Gospell And the wilde hony was no vnpleasant thing as the fathers doe imagin but it was say Cossius and Strigelius that pleasant Manna whiche Apothecaires vse to kepe in their shoppes So that accordinge to these men all that austeritie of lyfe whiche the scriptures so particularlie doe recounte all antiquitie doeth wounder at in S. Iohn Baptist cometh but to this that he was brought vp priuatelie in his fathers house cladde in chāblette fedde with creuisses swete Manna VVhat great hardnesse was this A thyrd example may be aboute the controuersie of reall presence in the sacrament for whiche we bring plaine woordes of scripture oute of fower diuerse places of the new testament where the same woordes are repeated withoute exposition or alteration to witt hoc est corpus meum this is my bodie VVhiche woordes dyd seme so playne and cleare for the reall presence of Christe in the sacrament to all antiquitie as no man might without great offence doubt thereof as the woords of S. Ambro. S. Ciril are And as the same Ciril in an other place proueth at large to aske onelye quomodo how it may be is the parte of an vnbeleuinge Iewe seinge God was able as he sayeth as well to doe this as to turne the rodde of Moyses into a serpent To whiche purpose allso holy Epiphanius
Prince or people euen as a man may frame a nose of vvaxe vvhat vvay or to vvhat forme he liste And vvill you of this make them to saye that the holye Scripture is a nose of vvaxe Christ is lykened to a serpent and yet is no serpent Also to a couetous Vsurer and yet is none Nether doth the Scripture committ blasphemie in vsing such similitudes But hovv proue you M. Charke that the scripture maye not be vvrested into manye senses before the rude people as a nose of vvaxe maye be into manye formes Because it is coÌ„trarye saye you vnto the vvordes of Dauid The lawe of the Lorde is perfecte conuerting soules Suerly I vvould you might be feed euen for the sauing of your credit M. Chark to alleage one place vvithout corruptioÌ„ Doe you translate Lex domini immaculata The Lavve of the Lorde is perfecte in sense soe that it maye not be vvrested to a vvroÌ„g interpretation This is maruelous Immaculata signifieth in these countries vnspotted voyde of filthe or dishonestie vvherevvith prophane vvritinges are often times defiled But the lavv of God is deuoyde of all suche thinges and therefore conuerteth soules vvhereas other vvritinges doe often tymes corrupt them But that Immaculata can not be translated perfecte in sense it is euidente by this that euerye sillable and vvorde in Gods Lavve is vnspotted but yet not perfecte in sense muche lesse so cleare as it may not be peruerted to an euill meaninge vvherby your fraudulente translation is discouered THE DEFENCE To auoyde the reproche of belyeing and slaundering the Iesuits in this place M. Charke hath this refuge I appealle sayeth he froÌ„ your Censure to Andradius playne confession He defended the Iesuitesâ— in these poyntes agaynst kemnitius vvhiche you defend agaynst me This Andradius in handlyng this article doeth not at all crye ouâ— as you doe but acknovvlegeth defendeth the matter vvithouâ— suche needles scoffes VVhat scoffes the Censure vseth or what cryeing out there is in this article the reader seeth and can Iudge of your report M. Charke But that you are the same man which you were before that is most false and shameles in your avouchementes it shall nowe appeare You saye heere of Andradius twoo things First that he playnlye confesseth and acknowlegeth the matter Secondlye that he cryeth not owt agaynst kemnitius for this report And for bothe these things you quote Andradius in the hundred fowertie page of his second booke As for the first lett anye man see the place by you quoted and yf Andradius confesse any more of the matter than is sett downe in the Censure it selfe lett hym beleeue you an other tyme vppon your woorde For the second it is to-too impudent For albeit Andradius had not altogether so much cause to take stomach against kemnitius as I haue against you for makyng a greater lye than he dyd as shalbe shewed yet lett the reader vewe ouer but the two pages whiche goe immediatlie before that whiche you cite he shall see nothing els in them but a moste earnest sharpe inuectiue against kemnitius and all other protestaÌ„ts for malitious slaundering and misreporting the â—esuites And among other things Andradius sayeth there that for a greatâ— tyme he tooke pytie of the protestaÌ„ts thiâ—king that they had erred of ignorance But nowe seeyng their malice in forging open lyes against their owne consciences that is which they must needes know and vnderstand to be lyes his affection of compassion was turned into hatred This and much more hath Andradius in that place against kemnitius for shameles lyeing And yet M. Charke sayeth that he cryeth not owt as I doe but câ—fesseth all VVhat may be sayd to such But as I sayed before Andradius had not so much cause of Choler against kemnitius as I haue against M. Charke for that he doeth not onelie report againe an open vntrueth whiche he knewe to be a lye before he repoâ—ted it but also hath corrupted and falsified that lye to make yet a greater lye VVhiche thyng that you may see I will heere laye downe the verie woordes bothe of kemnitius of Gotuisus M. Charkes author for that their woordes are the selfe same and Gotuisus tooke them syllable for syllahle from kemnitius Gotuisus woordes then are these The Iesuites saye that the holye scripture in those thyngs vvhiche it contayneth and settetb forth is as it vvere a nose of vvaxe not yeelding any certaine and immouable sentence but such as may be vvrested into any interpretation Censura Colon. fol. 117. in opere catechestico Canisij fol. 44. For this false report of kemnitius against the Iesuites Andradius falleth into the loÌ„g and vehement inuectiue wherof I spake before But what should I doe heere with VV. Charke or rather what should the reader think of hym for so great a falshoode as in this place he vseth for first he concealeth the quotatioÌ„ of Canisius fol 44 as well in his first book as also in his second replye And the cause heerof is as often hath beene noted before for that the quoting of Canisius according as he found hym quoted in his author wolde haue discouered the lye which M. Chark hoped to conceale by passing ouer Canisius and cyting onelye the Censure of Colen whiche he was sure no man coulde fynde in England And is this dealing excusable Secondlie owt of the large sentence of Gotuisus nowe repeated M. Charke tooke onelie three or fower woordes that seemed most odious and yet falsified too therby to make them more odious For wher as Gotuisus sayeth the Iesuits holde the scriptures to be as it vvere a nose of vvaxe M. Chaâ—ke writeth that the Iesuits saye the holye scripâ—ure is a nose of vvaxe and quoteth for it Censura Colen fol. 117. whiche he knewe was not to be had concealeth purposelie bothe kemnitius Gotuisus and Canisius where the forgerie was to be discouered VVhat shall a man say of this ministers falshood shall we beleeue any longer this puritane protestation of playne and simple dealing in the lord what hypocriticall deceyuing of the reader is this And thus muche for the slaunder and falshoode in reportinge But now to come to the matter it selfe the Censure graunteth that vppon certayne circumstances the Iesuites doe compare the hereticall wreâ—ting and detorting of scripture vnto the boweâ—ng of a nose of waxe into many formes Mary the circumstances of this comparison are these Fyrst that they speake not in respect of the scripture in it selfe but in respect of heretiques and other wicked men which abuse scripture Secondlye they add apud rudem populum qui iudicare non potest This abuse and wrestinge of scripture happeneth commonlie before the rude and ignorant people whiche can not iudge of the deceyt Thirdlye they adioyne vt palpentur vitia principum aut vulgi Heretiques doe it to flatter the princes or people present in theyr vices By whiche woordes
tauernes fieldes stables barnes douecotes or palaces vnsearched for vs. And how then is it possible to answere you by wryting Or what maruayle is there yf we offer you some tymes halfe a booke for the whole I doubt not but what soeuer extremitie or crueltie you vse which shalbe no greater nor longer than God will permit yet you are sure allwayes to be answered by some meanes or other that God wyll prouide Hytherto you haue had litle quyet repose in your intrusioÌ„ vpon gods Churche we contynuynge styll our claymâ— and tytle And heerafter you are lyke daylye to haue lesse as I hope vntill your heresie be rooted owt again as all her sisters haue bene heeretofore It is a great argument to the people that the credit of your cause is now crushed euen in your owne conceytes seyng you flye openlye and without shame all kynde of quiet tryall what soeuer and with furye moue the magistrate onelye to violence agaynst vs. VVhich thoughe we be redy to be are with all humiltie according as God shall gyue vs patieÌ„ce yet will we neuer yeeld to you therby in your heresies but in the myddest of our afflictioÌ„s will we resist your falshoode more than before This I thinke you sawe in the late martyrdome of good M. Campian and his companions whoe thoughe they dyed moste ioyfullie protesting their innocencie in all and singular the slaunders deuised against them thoughe I saye they protested pure innocencie therin both in thought word and deed and that vpon the eternall damnation or saluation of their owne sowles though also they forgaue moste franklie from the verie bottom of their hartes all their vniust accusers condemners tormentours executioners and you also ministers whoe of their deathe and tormentes were the onelie or principall instigatours yet dyd they amyddest all that humilitie modestie and Christian charitie detest with all possible vehemencie of their sowles all and singular your false and fowle heresies and so dyed moste constant pure and innocent martyres of their Lord Maister Iesus Christ. VVhose bloode I dowbt not but will fight agaynst your errours and impietie many hundred yeres after bothe you are past this worlde together And albeit yf they had lyued especiallie two of them being indued with suche gyftes and rare partes as they were which with you were greate causes of hastenyng theyr deathes they might no dowt haue done muche seruice in gods Churche and hurt to your cause yet could they neuer haue done it so strongly as they haue and doe and will doe by theyr deathes the crye wherof worketh more forciblie bothe with God man thaÌ„ any bookes or sermons that euer they could haue made VVherfore I can say no more but that they were well bestowed vpon you You haue vsed theÌ„ to the best Our Lord his holy name be blessed therfore And I beseeche hym of his infinite mercie to pardon your great offences iâ— the powring owt of their bloode And now to speake a woorde or two M. Charke as to your owne persone in particular there are twâ— things whiche principallie in this matter coÌ„cerne yoâ— The one is your writing heere answered the other your behauyour and demeanour towardes your aduesarie after that by gods permission he came to be withâ— some reache of your ministeriall power and authortie The one of these shall soâ—ewhat declare the othe For towching the first the discrete reader shall easiliâ— learne by this booke that what vaunt so euer you makâ— vnto your freendes or how great soeuer your owt-facing of M. Campian myght seeme to be in the Tower 〈◊〉 London by reason of your hygh place gaye apparel greate woordes assistance of freendes countenance â—f authoritie applause of protestants standing by yet shâ—l it appeare that you are not that maÌ„ in deede eyther fâ—r substaÌ„ce of learnyng or fidelitie in dealyng which yâ—u wolde be content to be taken for in the world abroâ—e For as for learnyng there are shewed so many brode examples heer of your grosse ignoraÌ„ce and that inâ—erye common matters bothe of diuinitie and philosophie as no man that hath iudgement can frame my other opinion of your skyll therin than as of a tâ—ing vtterly vngrounded in any of these two scieÌ„ces wherin it is well knowne that M. Campian was most excellent and coÌ„sequentlye you had litle cause to seeke triumph ouer hym as you dyd in this matter Mary as touching the second whiche is false dealing to deceyue you may haue the principalitie not onelie ouer hym whoe had to saye the trueth no talent at all therin but euen aboue the cheefe maisters of your owne syde most expert in that facultie For I assure you that of all shameles men that euer I read wherof this age God amend them hath brought forth many you maye weare the garland for bothe audacitie constancie in auouchyng open vntruthes against your ovvne coÌ„scieÌ„ce The treatise folowyng will make this playne y almost infinit exaÌ„ples Yet one or two for a tast will not omitt to touche in this place Martin Luther after his apostacie from the Caâ—â—olique church gaue counsaile to all good wyues that â—ad cold husbandes to lye pryuilye with the next of â—ynne or other that were of stronger complexion And â—ecause he was yet in some feare of the pope yf he soulde openlye haue putt in execution this doctrine h onelye counsailed husbandes for the tyme to gyue teir secret coÌ„sents heervnto Mary afterwardes when â—artin became so strong as he feared the Pope no moâ—e for that he was now pope of Germanye hym selfe â—e sayde that nowe he wolde gyue other counsayle â—owt this matter Heere M. Charke breaketh of and â—â—lleth into a sharp and bytter inuectyue agaynst the â—ensurer for charging Luther with a fowle doctrineâ—â—at after he recanted This seemeth a verie reasonable dfence But what are the woordes that immediatlye foow in Luther forsoothe that nowe he wolde doe wâ—â—se than before for nowe he wolde coÌ„pell the poore hubandes to graunt there wyues that libertie or els woâ—lde he tugge them by the lockes of the head And caâ— there be any more shameles dealynge than this of M. Chark hath that man any conscience trow yow whâ—â—e against hys owne knowleige wolde put this deceyâ— in printe heere can be no ignorance for the woordes folowed immediatlie whiche of purpose he left owt VVhat conscience then hathe this man in defending hys cause An other example may be this There was a controuersie betwene the Censurer and M. Charke whether concupiscence after baptisme be synne in the regenerat without consent And the Censurer to proue that it is not bringeth S. Augustins Authoritie in many plaine places wherby M. Chark being sore oppressed fyndeth no other releefe of his credit with the reader but to forge a place of S. Austen to the contrarye by corruption and so he doeth For wher as S. Augustin sayeth that coÌ„cupiscence is not so forgyuen in baptisme that it is not meaning therby that it is not
so taken away by baptisme but that it remaynith styll to tempt vs M. Charke to deceyue the reader foysteth in this woorde synne to S. Austens text reciting his woordes thus Concupiscence is not so forgyuen in baptisme that it is not sinne By whiche addition of the woorde synne the matter seemeth to stand cleere on hys syde And this also can not be excused by ignorance but sheweth open and willfull malice in the man I passe ouer many of these and suche lyke tryckâ—s whiche can not proceede of negligence simplicitie or ignorance but muste needes be effectes of sett-malice As where he reportinge diuers vntruethes against the Iesuites owt of Gotuisus as he now sayeth concealed the author in his first booke And now though vppon necessitie he confesse the same yet fynding the things there reported in his conscieÌ„ce to be false where as his Author citeth allwayes two Iesuites bookes for proofe of the same that is CeÌ„sura Coloniensis which is not to be had in EnglaÌ„d and Canisius his greate Catechisme which euery man may haue and reade M. Chark quoteth the page alwayes in Censura Coloniensis whiche he is sure can not be seene and concealeth the page cited lykewise by his Author in Canisius for that hys reader turning to Canisius hys places should fynde the falshoode bothe of M. Charke and hys Author And Sometimes also when Gotuisus dyd not belye the Iesuites sufficientlye M. Charke without blushing will falsifie hys woordes to make them more odious as where Gotuisus hys woordes are that the Iesuites saye the scripture is as it vvere a nose of vvax M. Chark sayeth their woordes are the scripture is a nose of vvaxe Infinite such things you shall fynde in the treatyse foloweing whiche proueth manifestlye that point wherof I spake before to wytt that M. Charke is a man of no synceritie in matters of controuersie but purposelye bent bothe wittinglie and willinglie by all meanes possible to deceyue And thus much M. Chark concerning your writing As for your other behauyour towardes M. Campian in the Tower of London els where I mean not greatlie to stand vpon It was suche as myght be looked for at a mans handes of your makyng or degree The Censure somewhat noted your inciuilitie in woords which you had vttered agaynst hym before in your booke But that was nothing to the contemptuous vsage of so learned a man in open audieÌ„ce with barbarours threatenyng of that further crueltie whiche then you had in mynde and nowe haue putt in execution vppon hym But aboue all other things that was most ridiculous and fytt for a-stage whiche you thought was excellent and became you vvell and that vvas your often turning to the people requesting them to reioyse thank the Lord that he had gyuen you suche an argument agaynst the papistes as novve you had to proposeâ— And then wheÌ„ greate expectation was moued the argumeÌ„t came forth it proued not woorth three egges in Maye for that M. Câ—mpian dispatched it oftentymes in lesse than halfe three woordes These are the comedies that you exercise to get applause of the people vvithall For vvhiche cause also you had M. Norton the Rack-maister at your elbovve to repeat and vrge your argument for you to the purpose Surelie it is pitie that you durst not make these fevve disputations publik vvhere more men might haâ—e laughed and bene witnesses of your folye especiallie of that in the end when beynge now brought to a non plus in argueing and thervpoÌ„ the people beginning to depart you M. Charke caused the dores to be shutt and no man to be lett owt vntill with one consent they had ioyned with you in prayer to thanke the lorde for your victorie that daye gotten vppon M. Campian O M. Chark how greedie are you of a litle vainglorie and how vayne are the wayes by which you seeke yt thynke you that men haue no Iudgement in the woorld abrode Trow ye not that many smylde in their sleeues to beholde this hypocrisie no no yf you had parted with M. Campian but at an euen hand as you ioyned with hym with all inequalitie we should haue had books of Triumphe sett â—oorth before novv And this secret of yours all the people of England doeth knowe Doctor Fulke dyd but looke into vvisbyche castell the last yeare past and framed to hym selfe but a certaine imaginatioÌ„ of a victorie for that those learned prisoners contemned his conference and beholde he printed presentlie a pamphlett in hys ovvne prayse as after is shevved And vvhat then vvolde you and your bretheren haue done abovvt these disputations vvith M. Campian yf you had thought yt any vvaye able to abyde the vevve And yet as I sayd you knovv the inequalitie vvherby you dealt vvith that maÌ„ being but one vnbookt vnprouided vvearyed vvith imprisoâ—ment and almost dismembred vvith the rack threatned and terrified vvith deathe to come appointed onely to ansvver and neuer to oppose All this you knovve and the vvorlde bothe knovveth and meruaileth at yt abrode Mary vve meruayle not vvhoe know your purses For that vve are sure and dare auowe to your faces that you vvill neuer deale vvith vs at euen hand or vpoÌ„ equall conditions vvhile you lyue And heere M. Charke because we are now fallen into this matter I am in the name of all my felow Catholiques to renew our publike chalenge of equall disputation to you and to all your brother ministers agayne You see M. Campian is gone whome you named in this matter our onelye Champion You see also that M. Sherwyn is made awaye with hym whome you are wont to saye for more abasement of the other to haue bene farre better learned than M. Campian hym selfe But how soeuer that was bothe of them haue you dispatched and therby in your opinion greatly weakned our cause Yet notwithstanding we are the same men that we were before yea muche more desirous of this tryall than before VVherfore we request you now at length yea we coniure you either for trueth sake yf you seeke yt or for your ovvne credites sake yf ye will retayne it that you yeald vs after so muche sute and supplication some equall triall eyther by writing preaching or disputing There is no reasoÌ„ in the worlde but onelie feare that may moue you to denye vs this our request For the reason of state which you alleage M. Charke in your replye is most vayne For what can a peaceable disputation graunted vs for religion indaunger your state but onelie that you wold saye that this disputation may chaunce to discouer your errors and so make the hearers deteste your state of heresie For other daunger there can be none to your state And yf you had the trueth with you as you pretend whose propertie is the more to shew her selfe the more she is examined you should muche increase your state by this publike tryall For that you shoulde bothe gayne more to your parteâ— by opennyng the
let vs pardon hym this for that he confesseth hatred to haue bene the cause Yet notwithstanding I doe not see how anie learned or common honest man and muche lesse a pretended preacher of gods woord can iustifie such vnciuile and outragious tearmes against his brother by any pretence of Christianlike or tolerable hatred such as M. Charke I suppose wold here insinuate And that which he wolde seeme to alleage for his excuse in the replie that for tenne lines of railing gathered against hym he might haue gathered tenne leaues against me is neither to the purpose nor trew Not to the purpose for that yf I had answered him with bitter speache again being prouoked by his example and iniurie what excuse had this bene for him which begāne without exāple Secōdlye it is apparentlie false that he sayeth of me excusable by no other figure than by the license of a lie For yf we talk of leaues as printers accompt them there are but halfe tenne in the whole Censure But yf he take leaues as they are folded in that booke yet tenne leaues doe take vp a good parte therof VVhiche yf I filled vpp with railing tearmes onelie suche as now I haue repeated out of M. Charke I doe confesse my selfe to haue bene ouerseene and fault woorthie in writing But yf it be not so◠as the reader may see thē M. Charks tōgue hathe ouerslipped in foloweing rather the Rhetoricall phrase of line and leaues than the fathefull report of a true accusation I may not passe ouer this matter so soone For that I thinke it of importance to discrye the spirites of vs that are aduersaries in this cause You know the sayeing of Christ ex abundātia cordis os loquitur Our mouth speaketh accordinge to the abundance of our hart I meane a man may be knowen by hys speeche as S. Peter sayd to Simon Magus vpon his onelie speeche In felle amaritudinis obligatione iniquitatis video te esse I see thee to be in the verie gaule of bitternesse and in the bondage of iniquitie And the scripture is plaine in this point Qui spiritum Christi non habet hic non est Christi He that hathe not the spirit of Christ appertayneth not to Christ. Now then yf we consider the quiet calme and sober spirit of Christ and of all godlie Christiās from the beginning and the furiouse reprochefull vncleane spirit of Satan and all heretiques from time to time and doe compare them bothe with the writings of Catholiques gospellers at thys daye we may easilie take a skantlinne of the diuersitie of theyr spirits I will not talke heere of euery hoote woorde vttered in Catholique bookes by occasion of the matter neither is this in question for bothe Christ and his Apostles and many holie fathers after them vsed the same some tymes vpon iust zeale especiallie against heretiques with whome olde S. Anthonie as Athanasius writeth beinge otherwise a milde◠Saint could neuer beare to speake a peaceable woorde But for rayling and fowle scurrilitie suche as protestantes vse ordinarilie against vs among them selues when they dissent I dare auowe to be proper to them and theyr auncestours onelie VVhat more venemous woordes can be ymagined thā those of Scorpions poysoned spyders and the like vsed by M. Charke against reuerend men M. Hanmers tearmes of lovvsie crippled are but Ieastes For I passed ouer hys scurrilitie where he sayd in his first booke The first of your gentrie vvas Ignatius the creeple standinge vnder Pompeiopelis tovver and geeuinge the pellet ovvt of his taile VVhat a shamelesse slouuen ys this to write Shevv me Allen if thovv cannest for thy guttes sayeth D. Fulk is not this a Ruffianlike spirit in a preacher of the gospell But yf you will see more of this mans spirit read but hys answers to D. Bristow D. Allen and the rest Against M. Bristow he hathe these woordes with many more Levvde losell vnlearned dogbolt traiterous papist shameles beast of blockish vvitt impudent Asse vauntparler barkinge dogge and moste impudent yolpinge curre leaden blockish and doltish papist proude hypocrite of stinking greasie antichristian and execrable orders blunderinge blynde boosting bayard blasphemouse heretique blockheaded Asse And in his two bookes against M. D. Allen besides the former speeches and other infynitelye repeated he hathe these Brasen face and yron forehead O impudent blasphemer brainlesse brablyng Sycophant rechelesse Ruffian vnlearned Asse skornefull caytise desperat dicke O horrible blasphemer O blasphemouse barkinge horrible hellhounde In his booke that beareth a shewe of answere to M. D. Stapleton he vseth these tearmes amongest other Canckered stomake papist senseles blocke vvorthy to be shoren in the pole vvith a number of crovvnes popishe svvyne popishe boares gods curse light vpon you brasen face Stapleton blockedded papist shameles dogged of stomake slaunderer of grosse and beastely ignorāce dronken flemminge of dovvaye more lyke a block than a man Thus muche he hathe against thes learned and reuerend men wherof eche one for many respectes maye be counted his equall to say the least therfore in common ciuilitie setting a side all consideration of godes spirite wherof these good felowes make vaunte aboue other men thes tearmes or the lyke were not to be vsed as in deed amongest the gentiles they were not nor of any honest or Christian wryter since I might repeate a greate deale more of this ministers scurrilitie against many men whome forsoothe he answerethe for as one sayd well of hym he is the protestantes cōmō post horse to passe you any answer without a baite to any Catholique booke which cōmethe in his waye but it were to longe and lothesome to repeate all onely heare more what he sayethe in his booke against M. Martiall and by that iudge of his style against the rest He callethe him by one vile name or other in euery page of his booke as dogbolt lavvyer vvranglinge petifoggar egregious ignorant vsher goose asse prating proctor meete for a bōme courte arrogāte hipocrite impudant asse blockhedded and shameles asse blasphemous beast fylthie hogge beastely grunter shameles dogge blasphemous idolatour raylinge Ruffian slanderous deuill And is ther any iote of Christian modestie or godes spirite in this man is he to speake indifferentely more fytt for a pulpitt or for an ale benche surely if the pott were not at hand when he wrote this he discouerethe a fowle spirite within his breaste but yet not vnmeete for a man of his occupation And this now of the scollars but thinke you that the maisters were not of the same spirite reade Iohn Caluine and you shall see that his ordinarie tearme against his aduersaries in euery chapter almost especially whē he speaketh against his superiours as bishopes and the lyke is to call them Nebulones knaues which woorde beside the foule gaule whereof it procedeth is an vnseemelie tearme euen as that of M. Fulke when he calleth
so But as well heere as commonlie in all other places you lay downe some inuention or addition of your owne maliceâ— against theÌ„ As for example In this place it is moste false that you affirme of theÌ„ that they take a peculiar vowe to whippe and torment them selues There was neuer any such vowe eyther taken or talked of muche lesse is it true that they take that vovve to doe it as you saye after the example of a sect called by the name of vvhippers condemned long agoe You are a greate enemye to whippers M. Charke and you think yt good sleepinge in a whole skynne I doe not blame you for it Nether are you a greater mislyker of all whippers in generall then I am in particular of those whome you heere name for they were heretiks as you may reade in prateolus and Gerson teaching that the baptisme of water had nowe ceased the baptisme of voluntarie bloode by whipping was ordeined in place therof without which none coulde be saued and therfore they whipped themselues opeÌ„lie teaching also many other heresies beside for whiche they were coÌ„demned And what doeth this make against the sober moderate chastisemeÌ„t which good men vse in secret vpon their owne bodies at such time as they esteeme them selues for mortification to neede the same was there euer honest man but your selfe wolde haue obiected so impertiment a thing in print but you make me laugh when you say a sect condeÌ„ned long agoe How long agoe I praye you M. Charke or by whome were they condeÌ„ned the storye is euideÌ„t they beganne in Italie about the yere of our Lorde 1273. vnder pope Gregorie the tenthe and were condemned bothe by hym and his successors And is this condemnation authentical with you yf it be you know Luther Caluin were condemned by lyke authoritie And thus for lack of matter you lay holde on any thing though it make neuer so muche against your selfe The last point is about the name of Iesuits against whiche for that you quarelled muche the Censure did shew that the name was not taken to them selues of arrogancie as you obiected but geuen them by common speeche for breuities sake where as theyr true name in deede by foundatioÌ„ of theyr order was societas nominis Iesu a societie dedicated to the name of Iesus Now against this you replie that I doe call them Iesuits in my booke But what is this to the purpose is it not lawfull for me to folow the common phrase of speeche or because I call them soo doeth that proue that they chalenge that name to them selues Secondlie you say that Turrian a Iesuit calleth them soo and what yf he dyd foloweing the common maner of speeche doeth that conuince that they appoint that name vnto them selues but yet you are too too impudent to attribut this to Turrian especiallie with suche vehement asseueration as you doe For I haue reade the two chapiters by you alleaged tvvise and that vvith as greate diligeÌ„ce as I coulde and albeit he doeth call them by the name of the societie of Iesus fyftie times in the same yet doeth he not once name them Iesuits VVherfore this shevveth vvith vvhat conscience you vvrite And this beinge so let the reader iudge what cause you had to crie out in these vvoordes VVhat blasphemie is this to abuse the most blessed name of Iesus for a coulour to their blasphemous practises Euerie thing is blasphemie vvith this angrie gentleman though it be but the mouinge of a stravve but heare his reason They dravv to thâ—m selues alone sayeth he the confortable name of Iesus vvhich is coÌ„mon to all No Syr vvilliam you may haue your parte yf you exclude not your selfe For vvhen any men leaueth all other cares and businesse to serue the Quene onelie for examples sake and professeth the same by some speciall name of her Maiesties deuoute seruant doeth he iniurye other subiects hereby or doth he take from them theyr interest in her Maiestie But the truthe is that malice wold haue you say somevvhat against Iesuits mary theyr good lyfe and vertue excludeth you from matter you might haue done vvell to haue consulted with Eldertons ryme vvhoe proueth that they can not be called Iesuits for that they can not rayse the deade cure the lame restore the blynde nor vvalke vppon the vvater as Iesus dyd VVhiche proueth also that they can not be called Christianes for that Christ dyd the same things and they can not Nor yet old Elderton I thinke hym selfe OF religious men and their vocation THE CENSVRE Secondlie you seeke to deface the Societie by coÌ„temptuouse deprauing of all 1. religiouse men calling them Base beggerlie monkes fryars popish orders and the like vvherein you folovv the 2. olde heretiques of the primatiue Churche vvhose propertie hath bene from time to time to hate and depraue those kynde of men aboue all others as S. Austen testifieth of the Manachies and Rufinus of the Arians And petilian the donatist folovving the same spirit scoffed at S. Austen for being a fryar as S. Austen hym selfe vvriteth in these vvordes After this Petilian proceded on with his slauÌ„derouse mouth to speake euill of monasteries and of monkes blaming me also for that I had set foorth this kynde of lyfe the which lyfe ether he knoweth not what it meaneth or else feigneth him selfe not to know it though it be notorious to all the world S. Austen saythe this kynde of lyfe of monkes and fryers and other religiouse men vvas notoriouse and knovvne to the vvorlde in his time both in respect of the famous men that had liued in the same as Anthonie Paule hilarion Basill Nazianzen Martin Austen hym selfe and others as also of the infinit bookes and treatises vvhich holie fathers of the primatiue Churche had vvritten in defence and commeÌ„dation of that kinde of lyfe as Athanasius in the lyfe of S. Anthonie the Abbote beside a peculiar treatise intituled An exhortatioÌ„ to moÌ„kes or to Monasticall life S. Basill also vvrote a great volume intituled CoÌ„stitutions or lawes for monkes beside diuers other treatises of that argument vvritten both by hym selfe and by Gregorie Nazianzen S Chrisostom hathe fouer homilies extant in commendation of the lyfe of monkes and tvvo vvhole bookes of the comparison betwene the Mounke the king vvherin he preferreth the lyfe of the monke before that of the king Also he vvrote a booke against you M. Charke intituled Against the blamers of Monkes and Monasticall lyfe Iohannes Cassianus a litle after vvrote 12. bookes intituled Of the lawes and ordinances of Monkes Seuerus Sulpitius vvrote a dialogue contaynyng the notable conuersation of the Esterlie monkes vvith S. Martin Abbot of eyghtie monkes And finallie S. Austen for I vvill come no lovver hath vvritten manie treatises of Monkes commending highly that excellent kinde of lyfe and defending it against the detractions of heretiques of his tyme. Let any
lyfe time But say you he vvas no friar In deede the englishe names of friar or Monke were not then extant for that we were not yet Christians But the Latin names frater and monachus were attributed to hym as may appeare in the places alleaged VVhiche ioyned with the vowes whereof I spake before doe proue the thinge what soeuer you may wrangle of the Englishe name But what require you more to make hym a friar after the englishe fashion yf you will haue me gesse at his apparell it were hard and nothinge pertinent for that onelie the vowes make the vocation as hathe bene shewed yet S. Ambrose maketh mention de nigro cucullo câ—ngulo ex corio Of the blacke hoode and the girdell of leather that S. Augustin dyd weare Now they whiche know the habit of Austen fryars let them consider how nighe this goeth to that matter Albeit as I sayd the weede litle importeth when we haue the substance of the vocation The last woordes of the Censure touching Christs spirit of voluntarie pouertie offeÌ„dith greatlie our replyer The example of Christ sayeth he is alleaged moste blasphemouslie against his Maiestie Still the woorde blasphemie must be one But what is the reason vvhen dyd Christ euer vvhipp hym selfe sayth M. Charke Yet the choler of whipping is not past from M. Charks stomacke But I answer he had no rebellion in his fleshe as we haue by reason of the conflict of concupiscence left vs for resisting whereof we vse mortification of our bodie according to S. Pauls counsaile coloss 3. Neyther is it necessarie that we should doe nothing in this kynde but what we reade expresselie Christ to haue done Albeit to geue vs also example herein we reade of his great fasting and long prayeing with lyeing all nyght on the ground which not withstanding I think you ministers will not imitate But you adde Christ frequented publike assembleys vvas sometimes entertained at great feasts Yea marie this is for good cheer this is more pleasant than the doctrine of the whippe And dyd you neuer heare Syr of religiouse men inuited also to a feast or assemblie You are wont to call theÌ„ bellie gods for that cause and how is this â—tile so soone chaunged O malice how blynde and frantike art thou But you aske agayne VVhat vvorldlie blessings gyuen hym by his father dyd he at â—ny time abandon hovv doeth his example recommend voluntarie pouertie I aske you M. Charke yf he that was Lord of all chose to lyue of almes and of such things as were sent hym as the scripture signifieth Io 12. Luc 8. was not this voluntarie pouertie in hym selfe And he that counsailed men to renounce all they possessed for his seruice and to gyue all to the poore that would be perfect dyd not he recommende voluntarie pouertie to other thoughe he comaunded it not Yf the Apostles left all proprietie and dyd lyue in common as the scripture noteth and many good Christians chose to sell all they had and to offer it to that communitie though not vpon constraint as S. Luke testifieth And yf Ananias and Saphira for breakinge their vowe of pouertie made with the Apostles as S. Basil and S. Ierom and other auncient fathers doe testifye were so terriblie punished by death for the terrour of all vowe breakers then no dowt but this was done eyther by the example or by the recommendation of Christ whiche you make so straunge as yow sticke not to affirme it Anabaptistical condemning of proprietie Good God how farre may fond furie dryue a man that hathe no guyde I pray you reade but S. Ierom vpon the woords of Christ goe and sell all Also S. Basil vpon the same woordes As also S. Chrisostome vpon the wordes of S. Paul Saâ—utaete prisâ—am and perhaps you will alter your iudgement espiciallie yf you will credit S. Augustin who proueth out of the same chapiter that the Apostles them selues votum paupertatis vouerunt made a vovve of pouertie But as for the worldlie blessings which you talke so much of in this and other places of your bookeâ— I know that all creatures are blessings of God but yet all vse of all is nether commaunded nor commended to all You know whoe sayeth All things are lavvfull but all are not expedieÌ„t The carnall Iewes were much entysed by those blessings in the olde testament but in the new testameÌ„t you shall neuer fynde Christians eyther allured to theÌ„ or dandled and smothed in them as you doe your folowers but rather to the contrarie many threates and hard sayeings are vttered against richemen and such as liue in pleasures and ease of this woorlde And therfore your often repeating and tickling fleshlie harts with naming carnall and worldlie blessings proueth you yf I be not deceiued to be one of them whereof the Apostle sayeth they serue not Christ but their ovvne bellye and doe seduce innocent hartes by svvete vvoordes and blessings THE CENSVRE Thirdlie you endeuour to bring the Iesuites in coÌ„tempt by their obscure conception as you tearm it from one Loyal as a Spanyard and had not their fulll creatioÌ„ and commission vntill about thirtie yeres past from pope paulus quartus VVherein you erre for it vvas froÌ„ Paulus 1. tertiê° the third pope before Paulus quartus and the third pope after leo decimus in vvhose time Luther began Soe that there is not muche difference betvvene Iesuits and protestants in their antiquitie of name marie in matter verie greate for the protestants faythe and beleefe began at that time but the Iesuites folovving vvith humilitie the fayth vvhich they fovvnd in the Catholique Churche onelie beganne a strayter kinde of lyfe in maners and behauiour than the common sorte of people vsed for reformyng of vvhose vices they dedicated them selues to God and to all kinde of labour paines trauaile and perill vvith abandonyng all vvorldlie pleasures and all possibilitie of prefermeÌ„t in the same so farre furth as none of that Societie hath or may take any spirituall or temporall liuings or coÌ„modities vvhat soeuer though diuers greate princes haue pressed them often times vvith the same but of free cost they preache teache in all places vvhere they are sent vvith all humilitie of spirit and vvithout intermedling vvith matters of estate as shalbe shevved more hereafter VVherefore M. Charke offereth them the greater vvrong in charging them vvith the contrarie And M. Hanmers impudencie is the more to be vvondered at vvho blusheth not to put in print so notoriouse an vntrueth in the sight of all the vvorld and to repeat vrge and amplifye the same so often in his booke sayeing that one 2 Theatinus a Iesuit hypocriticallie got to be Cardinall and pope meanyng thereby Paulus quartus called before Iohannes Petrus Caraffa of the order of Theatines and not of Iesuits vvhiche all the vvorlde knovveth to be tvvo seuerall and distinct orders of religion And
dishonour of his Maister yet maketh he mention bothe of this feare and also of the deathe of his companion and graunteth it to haue bene one principal motiue of his entraunce into religion His wordes are these Hos terrores seu primum seu accerrime sensit eo anno cum sodalem nescio quo casu interfectum amisisset Luther felt thes terrors feares eyther first or moste sharplie that yeare wherein he lost his companion slayne I know not by what chaunce Nay Martin Luther coÌ„fesseth the matter him selfe in an epistle to his father Iohn Luther to whome he yeeldeth a reason of hys runninge owt of religion by his vnlawfull entrance thervnto Memini nimis sayeth he praesente cum iam placatus mecum loquereris ego de coelo terroribus me vocatum asserereÌ„ Neque enim libens cupiens fiebam monachus sed terrore agone mortis subitae circumuallatus voui coactum necessarium votum I doe remember too well when yow beinge pacified talked with me present I affirmed that I was called by terrours from heauen to enter into religion For I was not made a friar willinglie and of my owne desire but beinge enuironed with terrour and with the agonie of suddain deathe I made a vow vpon necessitie and enforcement Heere the matter is euident by Luther hym selfe whiche M. Charke so confidentlie denieth and cryeth out against bishope Lindan for reporting the same sayeing That he vvill not beleeue Lyndan in this no more than he vvill beleeue his reporte that the Caluinistes doe vvorship the Image of the deuyll In deede he sayeth that Caluinists doe adore theyr owne imaginations suggested by the deuyll aboue all authoritie or proofe besides as all other heretiques doe and in that sense doe honour the deuyll Againe he sayeth that in the yeere of our lorde 1572. when Caluinistes went to ouerthrow a monasterie at a towne called Leyden in flauÌ„ders they erected the signe of the deuyll in theyr publique banner whiche neuer Christians dyd before Yf M. Chark could haue refuted any of these particulars he should haue done well But by his generall reporte though he seeke to bring Lyndan in hatred yet it turnethe to his owne discredit releeueth nothing his cause in haÌ„de For the deuyll crieing out of Luthers mouthe thoughe M. Chark woolde seme to denye yt yet bringeth he not one syllable in disprofe thereof so many particulars are put downe by Coclaeus whoe liued with hym as euerye man may see that the matter was euideÌ„t And no protestant in Germanie where the matter was done as where also being Lutherans they doe esteeme Luthers honour more than Caluinistes doe neuer yet hathe bene able to reproue the same But now come we to the doctrines of libertie and carnalitie whiche the Censure affirmeth Luther to haue taught after he had once coped with a Nonne VVhiche M. Charke after his ministeriall phrase expresseth in these woordes VVhen the lorde had opened hys eyes thinkinge hym selfe no longer tyed to hys vnaduised and superstitiouse vovv he maryed in the lorde and all this vvas laufull But how soeuer you name the lorde M. Chark to couer this lasciuiouse lecherie of a renegate frier with his vowed ladie yet I haue shewed before out of the auncient fathers that this pretended mariage on bothe partes was esteemed worse than adulterie in the primatiue churche whereof he that will see more lett hym read S. Basil de monast const cap. 22.34 35. Also quest 14. fuse explicat Also S. Augustin in Psal. 78. 99. also Concill Chalced cap. 26. Also fulgentius de fide ad Pet. ca. 3. And finallie S. Leo. ep 92. ad Rusticum But now to the doctrines them selues in whiche I will be as short as I may in defence of my reportes being moste true as shall appeare by luthers owne wordes and that in those books of his and editions whiche are to be had in England publiquelie So that the aduersarie shall haue no more refuge to saye he can not finde the booke And as M. Charks vntrue dealing hathe bene indifferentlie discryed by that which went before so shall it be muche more by these doctrines of Luther And because bothe M. Hanmer and M. Charke haue taken vppon them seuerallye to answer the same I will couple them together where soeuer they haue any thing woorthe the notinge aduertising the reader by the waie that whereas Luther hathe diuerse editioÌ„s of his woorks and diuerse of them diuerslie traÌ„slated out of duche into latin he must not maruayle yf the same booke some tymes haue diuerse titles though I meane now to cyte them vnder such names as nighe as I can as they are to be sene in the editioÌ„ of wittenberge sett furthe and as I haue seene them my selfe in England by melancthon Anno 1562. The first doctrine Fyrst then I affirmed Luther to teache that there is no synne but incredulytie neyther can a man damne hym selfe do vvhat mischefe he can except he vvill refuse to beleue M. Hanmer denieth not this doctrine but defendeth it onelye addinge that I haue racked Luthers vvoordes vpon the tentors of preiudice and then sheweth at large how all synnes doe lye sooking in the roote of increduâ—itie VVhiche is some what too fine for me to vnderstand M. Chark goeth further sayeing I may plainlie pronounce that in this place you doe in vvoords and matter reporte an open vntruthe For M. Luther hathe no suche doctrine Heere is no agreemeÌ„t in the deffeÌ„ders the one grauÌ„tinge it the other so flatly denyeynge the same But who wolde think M. Charke could answer thus without blushing heare Luthers owne woordes Ita vides quà m diues sit homo Christianus siue Baptizatus qui etiam volens non potest perdere salutem suam quantiscunque peccatis nisi nolit credere Nulla enim peccata eum possunt damnare nisi sola incredulitas So thou seest how riche a Christian man is who can not leese his saluation though he wolde with neuer so great sinnes except he will not beleeue For no synnes can damne hym but onelie incredulitie Again in the same tome he sayeth Infidelitas sola turbatio est conscientiae onelie infidelitie is a trouble of conscience Is not heere now as muche as I haue sayed If nothing must trouble a mans conscience but onelie vnbeleefe then nothing is sinne but onelye vnbeleefe Again yf a man can not leese his saluation yf he wolde neuer so fayne by committing neuer so greate sinnes except he will not beleeue then may a man doe what he will so he fall not into incredulitie But yet to shame these shamelesse men a litle further and to shew the wicked licentiouse doctrine of this loose apostata heare more what he sayeth in an other place Nihil prauum facit praeter infidelitatem Nothing maketh a man euell besides infidelitie And a litle after he concludeth thus Ex
and affirmed that the husband ought to geue consent to his wife in this matter and that yf he refused then shee might prouide for her healthe by secret flyeing from him and goeinge into an other countrie might marie an other This counsaile I gaue when I was yet in feare of Antichrist But now my mynde should be to geue farre other counsaile that is layeing my hands vppon the locks of suche a husbaÌ„d that should so craftelie deceyue a woman I wold shake hym as the prouerbe is and that vehementlie and the same is my Iudgement of the woman also albeit it falleth out more seldome in women than in men to neede this counsaile Now let the reader Iudge whether M. Charke be a true man or no in cutting of the woordes that folowed immediatlie in Luther after the sentence by hym alleaged and notwithstandinge with a moste impudent face to crye out and insult against me as reading a peece of Luthers senteÌ„ce against the manifest purpose of the vvriter can this be excused from extreme impudencie and moste willfull falsehoode against his owne coÌ„science Lett hym defend this yf he can with all the helpes and deuises of his felowes or else lett the reader by this one point of open dishonestie discouered Iudge of the rest of their dealings with vs of their slaundering of vs without all coÌ„scieÌ„ce in their sermons where they are sure not to be controlled Lutheâ— goeth on to inueigh against that husband that wolde not in this case permitt his wyfe to lye with an other he being not hable to serue her turne hym selfe coÌ„cludeth egregie deberee solucre eiusmodi imposturam that he ought to pay sweetly for deceauing her so And in an other place he sayeth that yf a man haue tenne vvyues or more â—ledde froÌ„ hym vpon like causes he may take more so may vvyues doe the lyke in husbands VVhereupon Alberus one of your owne religion noteth that IOHANNES Leidensis tooke many wyues and one KNIPPERDOLLINGE tooke thirtene for his parte So that this doctrine was not onelie taught but also practized vpon Luthers authoritie The fifthe dostrine Fyftlye Luther is reported to teache Yf the vvyfe vvill not come let the mayd come To this M. Hanmer answereth You â—ather vpon Luther an impudent slaunder being not in deede his ovvne vvordes but alleaged by hym as spoken by an other M. Charke graunteth them absolutelye to be Luthers owne woordes but seeketh an interpretation for Luthers meanyng sayeing In this place Luther speaketh of a thyrd cause of diuorse vvhen the vvomaÌ„ shall obstinatlye refuse her husbands companie So that these men doe litle care what they answer so they say somewhat and we may see how trymlye they doe agree But the truthe is they are Luthers owne wordes deliuered to the husband to vse to his wyfe as the woordes before were for the wyfe to vse against her husband and they can not be excused eyther by M. Hanmers shamelesse deniall or by M. Charks impartinent interpretation thus they stand in Luther Hic nunc oportunum est vt maritus dicat si tu nolueris alia volet si domina nolit adueniat ancilla Here now is oportunitie for the husbande to say to the wyfe yf you will not an other will yf the mistresse will not lett the handmayde come And that this was practized in Germanie to all kynde of lasciuiousenesse yea among the ministers them selues Sebastian flaske a preacher once of Luthers owne familie doeth testifie And when you are not a shamed to defend the doctrine you are more bolde than the Lutherans them selues who for verie shame doe suppresse the Germane booke wherein it was written as Cromerus a Germane testifieth And Smideline hathe no other waye to answere it against Staphilus but to aske vvhy Luther might not retract this as S. AusteÌ„ dyd maniâ— thinges but yet proueth not that euer he offered to recant it Now whereas you seeke to couer this dishonest doctrine of your prophet by alleaging two positions of the Catholiques about deuorse in mariage as absurd in your sight as this the one that a man may deuorce hym selfe from his vvyfe for being a bondvvoman yf he kuevv it not before the mariage the other that he may do the same for couetousnes in her by Peter lombards opinion the first is true allowed by all lawes of nature Ciuill and Canon that vpon great reason for that he which marieth a bondwoman vnwittinglie leeseth his free choyse by ignorance nor can not haue power ouer her bodie as mariage requireth she beyng in bondage to other Also he can not beget childeren but bonde cum partus sequatur ventrem And coÌ„sequentlie can not bring them vpp at his pleasure nor instruct them necessarilie which things doe repugne to the state of mariage The second albeit it be but the sayeing of one man yet his meanyng is that yf this couetousnes or other notoriouse vice of the wyfe should break out to the husbands notable dammage or daunger as yf she should fall to stealing or the like then he might dimittere eam as lombards woordes are that is dimisse her from his companie but not dissolue the knott of wedlock as bothe S. Thomas doeth expounde it 3. p. q. 59. art 6. and Dominicus Sotus in 4. sent dist 39. art 4. But yet what are all these things to the lasciuiouse doctrine of Martin Luther The last fovver doctrines The other fower doctrines foloweing for that you graunâ— them as they lye think them sownd enough to â—tand with your gospell I nede not to repeat in particular or alleage other places where Luther holdeth the same By your Censure they are curraÌ„t Catholique and good But yet in the first where you preferre matrimonie before virginitie yt may be noted of the reader for examples sake how farre you differ from the spirit of the primatiue churche whiche condemned this position as an intolerable heresie in IOVINIAN and others onelye to make equall matrimonie with virginitie as appeareth by S. Ierome in his two moste learned and vehement bookes against Iouinian and by S. Augustin recounting the 82. heresie of his time And by S. Ambrose also in his epistle to Syricius the pope and by other fathers And yf this auncient churche whiche our aduersaries in woordes will graunt to be the true and pure churche dyd detest this heresie in IOVINIAN HELVIDIVS BASILIDES I mean to affirme matrimonie paris esse meriti cum virginitate as their woordes are that is to be of equall meritt with virginitie what wolde the same churche doe to M. Luther M Chark for preferringe mariage before virginitie And yf to omitt all others S. Cyprian Athanasius Basil Ambrose Chrisostom and S. Augustin did write whole books in commendation and preferment of virginitie aboue all other states of lyfe comparing it to the lyfe of Angels and affirming the dignitie thereof to be incomparable what
matter of great secrecie whiche might turne the gospell to great credit and them selues to great gaine if they wolde doe it faythfullie And this was that the husband shoulde feyne hym selfe sicke so to dye and that he wolde seeme by the woord of the Lord to rayse hym agayne VVhiche they were cōtent to doe And so all circunstances being agreed vpon and the daye appoynted for his death yea and the verie howre Iohn Caluin that day inuited of purpose many gentlemen to dynner after dynner walked owt with them and kept hym selfe alwayes neare the doore of that feined sick man for whome he had caused muche prayer to be made in the citie At last when the hower was come the good wyfe came owt cryeing that her husband was deade VVhervpon Caluin requested the gentlemen to goe in and see hym And there he falling downe on his knees as rapt with zeal begāne to praye vehemently and to trouble hym selfe in spirit after the imitatiō of Christ desiring the rest to praye with hym whiche they dyd And then Caluin breaking owt in great feruour desired the Lord for more manifestation of his gospell to restore that man to lyfe againe therwith in great vehemencye tooke the man by the hand and willed hym agayne agayne in the Lords behalfe to ryse But he moued not vvherat the good wyfe maruailing remoued quickely the clothe from his face and fownd hym bothe deade and colde at which sight she beyng greuouslie astonished cryed owt that her husband was murdred and falling into a rage ranne vpon Caluin exclaming that he was a deceyuer so opened the whole matter to the standers by whoe remayned muche amazed to heare her tell suche particulars as she dyd but yet for not discrediting the cause they rebuked her but shee continued cryeinge owt still Caluin sayde she was madde or else the deuyll was entred vpon her and so left bothe her and the house But yet soone after he caused her to be banished the citie and to stoppe her tongue the sooner she was maryed to a minister named Cowldrye abowt Ostune But yet all that sufficed not to staye her speeche but that euer more she continued in the same tale The lyke euent almoste had he in coniuring an euell spirit owt of the bodie of a certaine gardener belonging to a citizen of Geneua called Domen Faure in whose house the sayd Gardener being greuouslie possessed as I haue sayd Monsieur Caluin wolde needes goe to the house after his accustomed proude fashion accompanyed with many gentlemen and others and wold presume as the preacher and seruant of the lord to cast owt the sayd deuyll But god refusing to geue testimonye to fashoode suffered the deuyll to beare the man possessed with great violence vpon Caluin and to beate him with his fyst to scratche hym with his nayles to byte hym with his teeth and to torment hym in moste terrible maner Nor all the people present were Able to resist hym and in the ende Caluin hardlie and with much a doe escaped a waye with hys lyfe all beaten scratched and moste pityfullie handled he beyng besydes the hurt almoste owt of his wyttes withe feare This was done in the presence of many people whereof dyuerse are yet a lyue and doe testifye the same that Monsieur Caluin wolde neuer after goe againe to cast owt deuylls Touching the lasciuiouse dealing of this prophet there be many examples put downe in the booke gyuing open signes of his loose behaueour and importing great suspitiō of fowle dishonestie bothe with man and woman kynde thoghe he had alwayes a wenche of his owne His dyet was verie dayntie bothe for rare meates choyse wynes varietie of dishes and furniture of seruice And when he wolde shew so muche fauour to any man as to goe furth and dyne or suppe with hym a brode alwayes a siluer pott of his owne wyne must be caryed with hym for his owne mouth He had also a baker that made breade of purpose for hym onelye of fine flower wette in rose water myngled with sugar Cynomome and Aniseseeds beside a singular kynde of Biskette made for hym selfe alone And this was so knowne ower all Geneua that all excellent bread was cōmonlye compared to the bread of Monsieur Caluin VVhereof the Lordes of Berna hauing good information were greatlie scandalized and offended thinking that neuer any of the olde prophets tooke such care of their bodies as this new prophet dyd By which means he came to be so wanton with woman kynde as many scādalouse things fell owt which I passe ouer referring my reader to the foresayd booke it selfe As the gentlewoman of Mongis which stealyng from her husband at lausanna went made residence at Geneua with Monsieur Caluin whether her husband durst not folowe her Also the yonge straunge gentlewoman that tooke a howse nigh Geneua wher Caluin vsed to lye when her husband was from home and the seruāt found his place in his mistresse bedde and the like Yet one prank I can not lett passe touching a verie noble man called Iames Bourgongne Lord of fallaise vvhoe for religion came laye at Geneua with his ladie a goodlie gentlewomā whose name was Iolland of Bredrode This man being verie sicklie in Geneua and muche in the Phisitians handes wolde haue Monsieur Caluin come and visit hym often which he willinglie dyd but more for the wyues sake than for the mans as appeared after for besides many significations of his good will towardes her in the ende he opened hym selfe fullie vnto her telling her in great secrecie that this man vvas but a burden vnto her novv and coulde doe her no more seruice being rather as a dead man than alyue VVherfore sayeth he yf you vvill folovv my counsail lett hym goe ladye Iolland and he beyng dead vve tvvo vve tvvo vvill marry together VVhiche the ladye tooke in great disdayne and for auoyding of further inconueniēce persuaded her husband to forsake Geneua presentlie and to goe to Lausanna where they being arriued she opened the whole cause and matter vnto hym to many other her frendes besides And the Author sayeth that he heard all this from the mouthe of the same ladye her selfe in the presence of her sayde husband and of many other honorable personages then present I leaue infinite matters of other qualitie as of his singular cosonage especiallie towards the Queene of Nauarre by diuers feygned and contrarie letters and the like which the reader may see at large in the book But yet at last after all this Ioylitie and shysting for the time death came on hym in the end payd hym home for all Beza confesseth sayeth our Author that he was greatlie tormented before his death with all these diseases together the ptisick the cholik the Astma the stone the gowte the hemoroids and the megrim in his head But he leaueth owt that which was the principal that is the
vvhat vvee vvill for it muste be vvith examination and pryuilege You are not beyonde sea as you vvolde haue vs beleeue for it is novv knovven this booke vvas vvritten in England These are fovver manifest lyes this is the Iudgement of God against you Doe not you take pittie of this poore minister that stowpeth to so miserable helpes for his releefe But this doore not seruing his turne to gett ouâ— he runneth to an other You charge the magistrates learned byshopes sayeth he as yf they vvere carelesse vvhat doctrine is deliuered vnto the people Yea marie this is to the matter for yf you caÌ„ make the state to answere for your doeings you may lye by authoritie no maÌ„ with safetie shall dare to controll youâ— I haue seene a gentleman named M. Pasye whoe had a custome that when he went after his Lorde and had played some pranke with his companions in suche sorte as he feared a blow coÌ„ming towardes hym againe he wolde steppe before his maister and say beware Sir there is one that will strike you Euen so deale you ministers in your generation with vs that are of the Catholique part VVhen you haue excited vs by demaunds offers chalenges prouocations when you haue styrred vs with lyes slaunders reproches and other iniuries yf you see any litle rebuffe draweinge towards you againe you steppe with facilitie behynde the clothe of estate putting her Maiestie her Magistrates and the whole realme betwene you and vs sayeing that we offer at them and not at you we impugne them not you whereas in dede in many things there is nether woorde nor thought that toucheth them And in the matter of religion it selfe wherein they are amisse we seeke to doe them good by discryeing of your falshoode But yet you as not able to defeÌ„d any one thing youre selues drawe them alwayes as principall to euery matter though neuer so farre of from their affaires Shall I geue an exaÌ„ple besides your selfe for you doe it almost in euery leafe M. Howlet complaynethe of theese our wicked and loose times whiche is common as you know to all that lyue in theÌ„ Doctor Fulke to scrape a litle fauour from the courte and to make the other odiouse cryeth out against hym for that he had not consideration of her Maiesties singular vertues and others of high estate vnder her VVas there euer parasite that flattered so palpablie vvhen men accuse the times must they except princes by name or else be accounted traytours what Apostle what auncieÌ„t father dyd euer so but we pardone your necessitie extreme pouertie dryueth you to these shyfts whiche I thought good once to note to the reader that I may not trouble my selfe with them in euery place where they are vsed The third hole where at this afflicted byrde seeketh to wring out is by layeing all his lyes vpon one Goâ—visus from whome as he sayeth he tooke these reportes against the Iesuits adding notwithstanding for preuenting of after clappes that he promised not to myngle no sillables of his owne nor to delyuer the scripture in precise wordes as it lyethe but rather as he sayeth in full weight of true sense and matter And thervpon he maketh a solemne protestation of his true dealing But I will shew and proue notwithstanding this hypocrisie that admitting this libertie whiche M. Charke requireth of chopping and chaunging in his reportes yet that he is a false man and malitiouslie meant to deceyue in the same And yf I proue not this let me be taken for false my selfe And I doe moste willinglie stand to my offer made before which M. Charke taketh holde of that yf these reportes as they are here layde downe and denyed by vs can be verified eyther in woordes or true sense against the Iesuits lett all be beleued which they speake dayly against vs. And that you may take some foresight of M. Charks vntrue meanyng euen now at the begynning his falshoode appeareth first in that he citing his reports owt of an other maÌ„ against the Iesuits without seing their book as he sayeth dyd not in all the whole discourse so muche as once name or quote his author Gotvisus eyther in text or Margent the cause whereof shall appeare after And albeit he now sayeth that Gotvisus was quoted in most of his bookes yet I dare scarse beleeue hym for that I coulde neuer yet happen vpoÌ„ any that had hym quoted And yf some had it whye not all Secondlie he had seene the most of these reportes set downe by keÌ„nitius against the Iesuits from whome it seemeth that Gotuisus borowed them and refuted by Payuas a learned Portugall and conuinced of so manyfest forgerie falshoode as kemnitius to my knoulege durst neuer to defend them agayne nor anie other for hym How then coulde M. Charke without shameles false meanyng laye downe the verye same reportes againe without namyng his authour or seing the booke wheÌ„ce they were cited especially hauing besides many other Canisius a Iesuit before his eyes in England whiche teacheth the verie contrarie as after shall be shewed Thyrdlie his author Gotuisus in the moste of these reportes citeth not onelye the Censure of Colen but also the large Catechisme of Canisius for his proofe whiche was common in England to be seene and wherby M. Charke muste nedes know that Gotuisus slaundered the Iesuits most impudentlie For couering whereof M. Chark not onelie suppressed the quotation of Canisius and cited onelye the Censure of Colen whiche he knewe was not to be had in England but also supressed his cheefe Author Gotuisus hym selfe which no writer vseth in suche matters of importaÌ„ce to the end the reader might not by hym learne out the quotations of Canisius and thereby discouer the falshoode And this was the true cause of the omission of Gotuisus his name And is not this moste willfull treacherie Lastely M. Charke as not contented with this doeth help out often tymes the reportes of Gotuisus being but short and breef sentences with new falsifications of his owne or with fraudulent recitall when they seeme not of them selues to sounde absurdlie enough against the Iesuits And can this be excused froÌ„ malitiouse and false meanyng Now theÌ„ let vs see whether these things be so in deede or no. Of the nature and definition of sinne THE CENSVRE First therfore you report the Iesuits to saye It is not sinne what soeuer is against the woordâ— of God Censura Colon. leafe 44. 1. These voordes are guylefullie reported peeced and culled out for your purpose of a large discourse and yet most true in their sense The occasion vvhereof vvas this One Monhemius a Lutheran against vvhose Catechisme this Censure of Colen vvas made vvolde nedes proue Concupiscence remayning after baptisme to be a mortall sinne albeit no consent of hart vvere gyuen vnto the same for proofe therof he brought in this definition of sinne Sinne is what soeuer
condemned for omitting to sounde the trompette whiche notwitstanding was no action saye you This is a common obiection borowed of our owne schoolemen and answered by the same Euery omission that is a sinne M. Charke implyeth some action that is cause ether directlie or indirectlie of that omission and so is principall part of the sinne as S. Chrisostome Ambrose and Basil doe proue I saye directlie or indirectlie and I wyll gyue examples of bothe First then I saye that I beynge bounde for example sake to goe to churche at a certaine hower I maye make a resolution with my selfe that I will not goe and then this acte of resolution in my mynd called no litio is the direct cause of this omission and the ground of the sinne And this was the sinne of Hely and of the watchemen before mentioned whereof the one determined not to punishe his childeren and the other not to sounde the trompet though they sawe the enemie comming as the text sheweth Secondlie I may omitt this goeing to the churche at the hower appointed not vpon any resolution made to the contrarie but for that I doe sett my selfe to doe some other action at that time as to write or the lyke whereby I doe occupie vp the time wherein I should goe to churche and so doe committ that omission without any particular resolution that I will not goe and in this case the action of writing coÌ„mitted in the tyme when I should haue gone to churche is the indirect cause of this omission and the grounde of the same being done wittinglie at suche time as it should not And so we see that euery omission includeth an act ether directly or indirectly goeing before and causing the sayd omission As also appeareth playnlye by the definition of synne so often repeated owt of S. Austen l. 22. contra Faustum cap 27. and owt of S. Ambrose li. de Paradiso capi 8. And that whiche M. Charke addeth for ouer throw of my instances sayeing that not deuills but the euill in deuills not euill men but the euill in men doeth repugne against the lavve of god ys too too chyldysh and absurd to come from hym that professe the Learnyng For I am sure there is no yong scholler whiche hathe studyed Logik in Cambrige but knoweth that actio tribuitur toti concreto non acâ—identi inhaerenti that action is attributed to the whole coÌ„cret and not to the accident inhereÌ„t Althoughe the accident inherent be ratio formalis of the action As for example the phisitian is sayd to cure his patient and not the Phisick in the phisitian though he doe it by his phisick The vniust iudge synneth in gyuing wronge sentence and not the iniustice in the iudge for proofe wherof the iudge shalbe damned and suffer tormentes for it and not the qualitie of iniustice in hym The lyke is in deuills and in all euyll men whoe doe properlie repugne against gods lawes and doe sinne properlie and not the euill within them And the contrarie thereof is olde heresie as may appeare by S. Augustin writing against some that sayd not we but the darkenesse within vs haue offended Nether is it contrarie to this as M. Charke imagineth that all things were created good by God For God created not lucifer a deuyll but a good Angell nether Herod an euill man but a good Theyre owne lewdnesse made them euyll Therfore albeit wicked men and deuylls be euill and doe repugne the lawe of God yet the creatures of God are not euill at leastwise as they are creatures of God for that God as I haue sayde created them not euill Secondlie you reprehend that I call sinne an humane or reasonable action and you wolde rather call yt as you saye an vnreasonable action whiche argueth in you some lack of reason For what doeth not all electioÌ„ bothe good and badde procede of reason doeth it not procede ab intellectu practico whiche is the seate of discourse and reason as the philosopher proueth is M. Charke so vnlearned in all foundation of philosophie Doeth not S. Augustin proue of purpose that peccatum fit ab anima rationali that sinne procedeth froÌ„ the minde endewed with reason againe that consentio ad peccatum fit in ratione that consent to sinne is made in reasoÌ„ what saye you by the good morall woorkes of the gentils as their iustice theyr temperance and the like whiche you though falsely doe Iudge to be sinnes for that they proceded not of faith were they all vnreasonable actions But you obiect against this owt of S. Paul vvhat so euer is not of faithe is sinne therfore saye you vvhether it be reasonable or vnreasonable it is sinne Iumpe by this a horse might be a sinner for that his actions proceede not of faithe But I answere to S. Paul with S. Ambrose that he meaneth who soeuer doeth a thing against that whiche faith prescribeth that is against a mans owne conscience and iudgement he sinneth But yet that all morall good woorkes of infideles as iustice liberalitie the like were not sinnes S. Augustin proueth at large against M. Charke lib. de spir lit ca. 26.27 and 28. And S. Ierom. in cap. 29. Ezechielis Finallie to returne and conclude our purpose S. Aug. proueth against the Manaches that peccatum est defectus voluntarius animae rationalis Synne is a voluntarie defect of a reasonable mynde and therfore is it a resonable action But what doe I talke of voluntarie M. Charke denyeth synne to be voluntarie VVhat shall I saye It were infinit to stand and proue euery principle of diuinitie against so peruerse and obstinate a man And theÌ„ prouerbe is common a long eared creature maye denie more in an hower than the best learned in the worlde can proue in a yere But he that will see long and large proofes of this with infinite scriptures and reasons for the same lett hym reade but S. Augustin in anie of these places li. de duabus nat c. 11. de spiritu lit ca. 31. Et li. 3. de lib. arb c. 18. and li. de vera relig c. 14. lib. 1. retract c. 13. 15. li. 4. confes c. 3. and in diuerse other places where he repeateth often these woordes Sinne is an euill so voluntarie as it can be by no meanes sinne except it be voluntarie And Christ hym selfe proueth the matter euidentlie when he sayeth that those thinges vvhiche doe defile a man doe come from the hart Matth. 15. v. 18. But yet heere M. Charke hath two obiections First originall sinne is not voluntarie sayth he ergo all sinne is not voluntarie This albeit it be not to the purpose the CeÌ„sure talking onelie of actuall sinne as it professeth yet is it moste false and neuer diuine sayde so before VVilliam Charke but onelie the pelagians whoe therby wolde haue taken awaye originall sinne from infants as hauing no will as S. Augustin testifieth
truelie manslaughter is vvicked and prohibited by godâ— lavve And againe manslaughter is good and commended by gods lavve for bothe these are verified in some of her braunches So in respect of diuerse braunches of concupiscence S. Augustin might saye concupiscence is synne the punishement of synne and the cause of synne But yet this is not true in euerie particular braunche of concupifcence and namelie of that braunche we now dispute of that is of concupiscence in the regenerat without consent as a man can not saye that euerye manslaughter is good nor that euerie manslaughter is euill And the cause why S. Augustin vsed this sentence against Iulian was for that Iulian dyd prayse concupiscence as a thing commendable for that it was a punishement of God sor sinne But S Augustin refuteth that sheweing that concupiscence in generall is not onelie a punishement for synne but sometimes also and in some â—eÌ„ it is sinne it selfe the cause of sinne thersore an euill thinge though no sinne without consent For so he sayeth against the same Iulian. Quantum ad nos attinet sine peccato sen per essemus donec sanaretur hoc maluÌ„ si ei nâ—nquam consentiremus ad malum sed in quibus ab illo rebellame eâ—si non lethaliter sed venialiter tamen vincimur in hiis contrahimus vnde quotidie dicamus Dimitte nobis debita nostra â— As for vs that are baptized we might be allwayes without sinne vntill that day when this euill coÌ„cupisceÌ„ce shall be healed that is in heaueÌ„ yf we wolde not consent vnto yt to euill But in these things wherein we are ouercome by this rebelliouse concupiscence veniallie at least though not mortallie by these I saye we geather matter daylie to saye forgyue vs our trespasses Heere Loe S. Augustin proueth concupiscence to be euill against the pelagian yet not to be sinne without consent against the protestant Thyrdlie that accordinge to the mesure or degree of coÌ„sent yeelded it may be ether veniall or mortall sinne against M. Charke a litle before obstinatlie denyeinge this distinction of sinnes And finallie S Augustin doeth not onelie proue this our pâ—sition purposelye in almoste infinite other places of his woorkes but also in his second booke against Iulian doeth confirme it by the vniforme consent of other fathers of the Churche as of S. Ambrose Nazianzen and others VVhat then shall we say but onelye pittie william Charke whiche fyndeth Augustin the doctor as hard against hym in all pointes as Augustin the monke The woordes of Christ alleaged by you to ouerthrow our position to witt euerie one that shall see a vvoman to lust after her hathe novv committed adulterie vvith her in his hart are truelie sayd of the Censure to be alleaged by you bothe ignorantlie against your selfe Fyrst for that the woorde hart there expressed importeth a consent without whiche nothing defileth a man as may be gathered by Christ his owne woordes in an other place sayeing that the things which defile a man doe procede froÌ„ the hart Secondlie for that the woordes import a voluntarie looking vppon vvomen to that ende to be inflamed with lust as bothe the latin muche more the greeke and Syriake textes insinuate and S. Chrisostom interpreteth hom 8. de poenitentia as S. Augustin also expoundeth them sayeinge qui viderit mulierem ad concupiscendam eam id est hoc fine hoc animo attenderit vt eam concupiscat quod est plene consentire libidini He that shall see a woman to lust after her that is shall looke vpon her to this end and with this mynde to lust after her which is in deede fullie to consent vnto the lust Now what replieth Sir william to all this surelie nothing but maketh along idle speake of praedicatum subiectum as pertinent to the matter as charing crosse to byllingsgate And in the end to quite the Lorde as he saythe moste carefullie from synne he alleageth S. Iames sayeing that God tempteth no man but euerie man is tempted dravven and allured by his ovvne concupiscence and then concupiscence vvhen it hathe conceyued bringeth furth synne But what is this against vs Doe we charge God with this sinne of coÌ„cupiscence when we denie it to be sinne at all except onelie when a man consenteth to it or rather doe you charge God withe it when you affirme it to be sinne as it is of nature without consent are we or you they that make God author of sinne is not Caluin condemned of our churche for this impretie a doeth he not holde that God is author of sinne in diuers places of his woorkes b Doeth he not condemne S. Augustin by name for holdinge the contrarie c Doeth not Peter Martyr his scholer holde the same How then talke you of quitting carefullie the Lorde from synne as though he were charged or accused therof by vs what hypocrisie what dissimulation what falshode is this in you Now the place of S. Iames as commonlie all other thinges that yow alleage maketh singularlie against your selfe Heare S. Augustins exposition argument whiche proueth our position out of the same woordes Cum dicit apostolus Iacobus vnusquisque tentatur a concupiscentia sua abstractus illectus deinde concupiscentia cum cònceperit parit peccatum profecto in hiis verbis partus a pariente discernitur Pariens enim est concupiscentia partus peccatum Sed concupiscentia non parit nisi conceperit non concipit nisi illexerit hoc est ad malum perpetrandum obtinuerit volentis assensum VVhen the apostle Iames sayeth euery one is tempted drawen awaye and Intised by his owne concupiscence afterward concupiscence when it hathe conceyued bringeth furthe sinne surelie in these woordes the childe is distinguished from the mother the mother that beareth is concupiscence the childe borne is sinne But concupiscence beareth not except she conceyue and she conceyueth not except she obtaine the consent of hym which is willing to doe euill Now goe M. Charke and acquite your selfe of grosse follie and ignorance whereof you are conuicted which wolde so carefullie quitte the Lorde of that wherewith we neuer meant to charge hym Of the first motions of concupiscence THE CENSVRE Thyrdlie you reporte the Iesuits to saye That the first motioÌ„s of lust are without hurt of sinne CeÌ„s 54. 89. It is moste true and playne as they delyuer it but you by clipping their vvoords make euerie thing to seeme a paradoxe They say the first motions of lust yf they come of naturall instinct only vvithout any cause gyuen by vs are no sinnes so long as vve geue no consenâ— of hart vnto them And the reason is because it lyeth not in vs they being naturall to prohibit them to come no more than it dothe to prohibit our pulse from beating And therfore seing no sinne can be coÌ„mitted vvithout our vvill consent of harâ— as I haue shevved before the first motions
commaundement against grauen Idoles where as they leaue it not owt but doe include it in the first commaundement and that for the same reasons whiche moued S. Austen to doe the same as hath bene sayde These earnest odious slaunderous accusations whiche our aduersaries in theyr owne coÌ„sciences doe know to be meere false doe argue nothing for them but onelie great malice in theyr hartes singular lacke of modestie and great shame in theyr behauyour and extreeme pouertie and necessitie in theyr cause M. Charkes second charge that I make the seuerall breaches of tvvo diuers commaundementes but one synne is also false For I make them two distinct synnes though they haue one generall name gyuen them by Christ that is I make the breache of the nyenth commaundement after our account whiche is thou shalt not couer thy neyghbours vvyfe to be mentall adulterie yf it goe no further but onelie to coÌ„sent of mynde And the breache of the sixt coÌ„maundemeÌ„t thou shalt not commit adulterie I make to be the sinne of actuall adulterie when it breaketh owt to the woorke it selfe which two sinnes thoughe they agree in the name of aldulterie yet are they distinct sinnes often tymes and one seperated from the other and coÌ„sequentely may be prohibited by distinst commaundementesâ— And so in lyke wyse I make actuall theft to belong to the seuenth commaundement and mentall theft vnto the tenth This is my meanyng M. Charke whiche you myght haue vnderstoode yf you wolde and consequentlie haue forborne so malitiouse falshode in misreporting the same There remayneth onelie to be examined abowt this article the reason touched by the Censure and fownded on the scripture for the coÌ„firmation of S. Austens Catholique exposition of the commaundement thou shalt not couet VVhiche lawe sayeth the Censure forbyddeth onelye consent of hart to the motions of lust and not the verye first motions them selues which are not in our power consequentlie not comprehended vnder that prohibition of the lawe as the scripture signifieth when it sayeth this commaundement vvhiche I gyue thee this daye is not aboue thee To this M. Charke answereth first that our first motions are not altogether ovvt of our povver For that the guyft of contineÌ„cie dothe more and more subdue them VVhiche is true if wee vnderstand of yeelding consent vnto them But yf we vnderstand of vtter suppressing and extinguishinge of all first motions of lust and concupiscence as M. Charke must needes meane our question beinge onelie therof then must we know that albeit good meÌ„ doe cutt of by mortification infinite occasions and causes of motions and temptations whiche wicked men haue yet can they neuer during this lyfe so subdue all motions them selues of theyr concupiscence but that they will ryse often against theyr willes as S. Paul complayneth of hym selfe in many places and all other Saints after hym haue experienced in their fleshe whoe notwithstanding had the gyft diligence of mortifieing theyr fleshe asmuche I weene as our ministers of England haue whoe talke of continencie mortification eche one hauinge hys yoke mate redye for hys turne as those good felowes doe of fastynge whiche sitt at a full table according to the prouerbe To the place of Moyses he hathe no other shyft but to saye that the translation is false and corrupt for that Moyses meant onelye the lavve is not hydden from vs and not that it is not aboue our povver as yt is euidentlye declared saythe he by the playne text by explication therof in the Epistle to the Romans This sayeth M. Charke mary he proueth yt nether by the woordes of the text nor by S. Pauls application But yf I be not deceyued S. Ierome whose traÌ„slatioÌ„ this is esteemed to be or els before himâ— corrected by him knew as well what the Hebrew woords of Moyses imported in the text also how S. Paul applyed theÌ„ as williaÌ„ Chark dothe S. Pauls application of that parte of this senteÌ„ce which he towcheth maketh wholie for vs as after shalbe shewed The Hebrew woord of the text is NIPHLET coÌ„ming of the verb PHALA which as I denie not but it signifieth to be hidden so signifieth it also to be maruailous to be hard difficult As appeareth psa 139. 2. Sam. 1. where the same woord is vsed The same signifieth the Chaldie woorde Mâ—PHARESA coÌ„ming of the verbe PHARAS that besides the significations signifieth also to seperate The greke woord HYPERONGOS signifieth as all men knowe exceeding immesurable greate passing all meane c Howe then doe not these three woordes vsed in the three auncieÌ„t tongues hauinge a negation putt before them as they haue in the text expresse so muche as S. Ierom hathe expressed by sayeing the lavve is not aboue thee Doe not all these woordes putt together importe that the lawe is not more hard or difficult than thy abilitie may reache to perfourme or that it is not seperated from our power that it is not exceedinge our strengthe wolde any horse but bayard haue beene so bolde with S. IeroÌ„ and withe all the primatiue churche whiche vsed this our common latine translation to deface them all I saye vppon so lyght occasion VVolde any impudencie haue durst it besides the pryde of an heretique If S. Ierom will not satisfie you take S. Austen who haÌ„dleth bothe the woordes alleaged of Moyses and also the application vsed by S. Paul of parte of the sentence and proueth owt of bothe the verie same conclusion that we doe to wytt that the lawe is not aboue our abilitie to kepe it and for confirmation therof he addeth many other textes of scripture as my yoke is svvete and my burden is lyght also his commaundementes are not heauye and the lyke concluding in these woordes vve must beleeue moste firmelye that God being iust and good could not commaunde impossible things vnto man And in an other place VVe doe detest the blasphemie of those men vvhiche affirme God to haue commaunded any impossible thing vnto maÌ„ The verie same woords of detestation vseth S. Ierome in the explication of the creede vnto Damasus byshope of Rome And the same proueth S. Chrisostome at large in hys first booke of impunction of the hart and S. Basil his breefe rules the 176. interrogation Of defacing of scripture Artic. 4. THE CENSVRE You report the Iesuites to saye The holie scripture is a doctrine vnperfect maymed lame not coÌ„taynyng all things necessarie to saith and saluatioÌ„ Cen. fol. 220. you are too shameles M. Charke in setting forth these for the Iesuites vvoordes Lett anye man reade the place and he shall finde noe such thing but rather in contrarie maner the holie scripture vvith reuerent vvordes most highlye commended Notvvithstanding they reprehend in that place Monhemius for sayeing that nothing is to be receyued or beleued but that vvhiche is expreslie found in the Scripture For reproofe of vvhich heresie they gyue
the church some we haue opened to vs by writinge and some agayne we haue receyued delyuered vs by tradition of the Apostles in secret bothe whiche doctrines are of equall force to pietie nether doeth any man gaynsaye this whiche hathe anye litle knowleige in the lawes of tâ—â— Churche Heere now are S. Basil and VV. Charke at an open combate abowt traditions The one sayeth it is iniquitie to admitt them The other sayeth it is ignorance to reiect them The one sayeth they are of no authoritie or credit at all The other sayeth they are of equall force and authoritie vvith the vvritten vvoord of Christ and his Apostles VVhome will you rather beleeue in this case VVith S. Basil taketh parte Eusebius sayeinge Christi discipuli ad magistri sui nutum illius praecepta partim literis partim sine literis quasi iure quodam non scripto seruanda commendarunt The disciples of Christ at theyr Maisters beck dyd commend his precepts to posteritie partlie in writing partlie without writing as it were by a certaine vnwriten lawe Marke heere that traditioÌ„ is called an vnvvriteÌ„ lavve the things delyuered therby are the precepts of Christ and that they were left vnwryten by the becke or appointment of Christ hym selfe Epiphanius is yet more earnest than Eusebius For writing against certaine heretiques named Apostolici whiche denyed traditions as our protestants doe he proueth it thus Oportet autem traditione vti Non enim omnia a diuina scriptura accipi possunt Quapropter aliqua in scripturis aliqua in traditione sancti Apostoli tradiderunt quemadmodum dicit Sanctus Paulus Sicut tradidi â—obis alibi sic doceo sic tradidi in ecclesiis we muste vse traditioÌ„ also For that all thyngs can not be had owt of Scripture For which cause the holye Apostles haue delyuered some things to vs in scriptures and some thyngs by traditions according as S. Paul sayeth euen as I haue left vnto you by tradition And in an other place This doe I teache this haue I left by traditioÌ„ in Churches Heere you see Epiphanius doeth not onelye affirme so much as we holde but also proueth it out of Scripture VVith Epiphanius ioyneth fully and earnestlye S. Chrisostome writyng vpon these woordes of S. Paul to the purpose State tenete traditiones Stand fast and holde traditions Out of which cleere woordes S. Chrisostome maketh this illation Hinc patet quod non omniae per epistolam tradiderint sed multa etiam sine literis Eadem verò fide digna sunt tam illa quám ista Itaque traditionem quoque ecclesiae fide dignam putamus Traditio est nihil quaeras amplius By these woordes of S. Paul it is euident that the Apostles delyuered not all by epistle or writing vnto vs but many things also whiche are not wrytten And yet those are as woorthie fayth as the other For whiche cause we esteeme the tradition of the Church woorthie of faythe It is a tradition seeke no more abowt it VVhat can be spoken more effectualie against VV. Charke than this Is it now greate iniquitie to receyue traditioÌ„s or no how will he auoyde this vniforme coÌ„sent of antiquitie against his fond malepeartnes condemning all traditions for iniquitie Heere you see are the verie woordes auowed as also in S. Basil alleaged before which these new maisters doe so odiouslye exaggerate to the people dailie that we matche traditioÌ„s with the written woord of God These woordes I saye are heere maintained bothe in Chrisostome and Basil affirming the vnwrytten traditions of Christ and his Apostles to be of equall force and authoritie with the written woorde of the same And yet I trowe were they not blasphemous for sayeing so as these yonge gentlemen are accustomed to call vs. And this now in generall that traditions are that is that diuers things belonging to faythe are left vs vnwriten by Christ and his Apostles Also that this sort of traditions are of equall authoritie with the wrytten woord because they are the vnwriteÌ„ or deliuered woorde But now yf any man wolde aske me what or which are these Apostolicall traditions in particular I could alleage hym testimonies owt of the auncient fathers for a great number wherof some examples haue bene gyuen in the former article But lett any man reade S. Cyprian Serm de ablut pedum Tertullian de coron miiltis and S. Ierom. Dialog cont luciferianos and he shall finde store And albeit some thing hathe bene sayd of S. Austen before yet will I adde these few examples owt of hym for endinge of this article He proueth the baptisme of infants by tradition of the Churche lib. 10â— de gen cap. 23. He proueth by the same tradition that we must not rebaptize those whiche are baptized of heretiques li. 2. de bapt c. 7. lib. 1. cap. 23. li. 4. cap. 6. He proueth by tradition the celebration of the pentecost commonlie called whit-sondaye epist. 118. c. 1. He proueth by tradition that the Apostles were baptized ep 108. He proueth by tradition the ceremonies of baptisme as delyuered by the Apostles Li. de fide oper cap. 9. He proueth by tradition of Christ his Apostles that we should receyue the blessed sacrament fasting ep 1â—8 cap. 6. He proueth by lyke tradition the exorcisme of suche as should be baptized li. 1. de nupt concup cap. 20. li. 6. contra Iulian. ca. 2. He proueth by the same tradition that we must offer vpp the sacrifice of the masse for the deade li. de cura pro mort ageÌ„da ca. 1. 4. Serm. 32. de verbis Apostoli I omitt many other suche thinges whiche aswell this learned doctor as other most holye fathers of the primatiue Churche doe auouche by onelye tradition of Christ and his Apostles without writing whiche to beleeue or credit if it be such great iniquitie and blasphemie as VV. Charke will haue vs to esteeme then were these auncient fathers in a miserable case and this new minister in a fortunate lot But yf the countenance of this new Sir doe not surpasse the credit of those olde Saints I weene it will not be hard to iudge how fond and foolishe hys raylinge speeche ys against a doctrine so vniformlie receyued in Christ his Churche as the doctrine of traditions hath bene from the beginning VVhether the Iesuites speake euill of Scripture Art 6. THE CENSVRE You reporte the Iesuites to saye The holy Scripture is a nose of waxe Cens. 117 God forgyue you for abusing so muche these learned men Marie you take the vvaye to ouermatch both learning and trueth too yf you may haue your desire He that vvill reade the place by you quoted shall finde the Iesuites vpon occasion geuen them to saye in effect thus that before the rude and ignorante people it is easie for a noughtie man to vvreste the scripture to vvhat interpretation pleaseth hym beste for the flatteringe ether of