not admit which they said against others Hee euer doth that which the Arrians woulde haue and they againe saie that which hee liketh And whereas the Bishops in those dayes were wont to be lawfully chosen by the people of the place and sufficiently examined and allowed by other Bishops adioyning and openly created in the church Constantius in steede of the church would haue his palace succeed and for the multitude of people and right of assemblies to elect hee commaunded three Eunuches to bee present and three of his spies or prolers for you can not call them Bishops that they sixe in his palace might create one Felix a Bishop And noting what manner of Bishops the Emperour and his Eunuches made hee saith In illorum locum iuuenes libidinosos Ethnicos ne catechismo quidem imbutos necnon digamos de maximis criminibus malè audientes modò aurum darent veluti emptores è foro ad Episcopatus summisere They sent in their places that were banished yong men leacherous persons Ethnickes not so much as taught the first principles of faith hauing two wifes and spotted with enormous crimes so they would giue mony as cheepe-men out of a market The furious violence that was vsed in the time of Constantius to driue men to participate with Arrians not onely by imprisonmentes and banishmentes but by chaining whipping scalding with fire trampling vnder feete stoning choking and secret murdering such as refused without all respect of vocation age or sexe was so lamentable that no christian hart can read it without teares and it is so largely described and pithily disproued by Hilarie and Athanasius that no man except he be blinder than a bitle can doubt whether Constantius were a wilfull tyrant in the church of God or no. Peruse the places and you shall find proofes enough of that which I say I proclaime saith Hilarie that to thee Constantius which I woulde to Nero Decius and Maximinian thou fightest against God thou ragest against the Church thou doest persecute the Sainctes thou hatest the Preachers of Christ and ouerthrowest Religion a tyrant not in humane but in diuine thinges a newe kinde of enemie to Christ the forerunner of Antichrist I repeate nothing rather than thy doings in the Church because I would open no other tyrannie but that which thou vsest against God And Athanasius shewing the reasons why hee calleth Constantius Antichrist Who seeing or hearing saith he these thinges who considering the rage of these wicked ones and so great iniustice would not deepelie sigh at it Who hereafter will dare to call Constantius a Christian and not rather the image of Antichrist For which of Antichristes markes doth hee lacke Or what cause is there why Constantius should not in euerie respect bee counted Antichrist Haue not the Arrians and Ethnickes as it were by his precept vsed their sacrifices and blasphemies against Christ in the great church at Caesarium in Aegypt As a Giant he exalteth himselfe against the most high and hath inuented waies to change the◠Lawe of God breaking the ordinances of Christ and his Apostles and inuerting the customes of the church And since he is cloathed with Christianitie and entereth into holy places there standing and wasting the churches Abrogating the Canons and by force compelling that his pleasure may preuaile who at any time will affirme that these dayes are peaceable to christians and not rather that this is a persecution and such a persecution as was neuer before and no man after shall make the like except that sonne of perdition which is the true Antichrist Howe thinke you did not these Fathers reproue Constantius for changeing the faith oppressing Synods corrupting iudgementes infringing the Canons barbarons enforcing the christians and shortly for subiecting all to his will and violence Phi. I knowe they make mention of these things but yet they reproue him generally for intermedling with Ecclesiasticall causes Theo. I hope they reproued him for that he did Phi. The case is cleare they coulde not reproue him for that hee did not Theo. These things which I last rehearsed Constantius did as I proue by their witnesse that chiefly rebuked him ergo Constantius was reproued of Athanasius Osius Leontius and Hilarius for these thinges that is for playing the tyrant in diuine matters or as you call them in causes Ecclesiasticall Phi. But Osius saith Medle not O Emperour in causes Ecclesiastical nor do thou commaund vs in that kind but leaue such things to vs rather Theo. You were answered before but that you wil neuer be satisfied Osius dissuadeth Constantius from vsing his absolute power obstinate wil in those things that were then in question betwixt the Christians Arians He saw the manifolde and excessiue disorders of Constantius in forcing Synodes of Bishops by terror and violence to bow at his becke in making his palace a consistorie for their causes and there iudging what his Eunuches would in dissoluing the ordinances of Christ and his Apostles and doing all thinges against the Rules of the church and therefore had good cause to saie Ne te misceas ecclesiasticis neque nobis in hoc genere praecipe sed potius ea a nobis disce Enterpose not thy selfe as thou doest O Emperour in Ecclesiasticall matters neither commaund vs in this kinde but learne such things rather of vs and not as you say leaue such things rather to vs. God hath cōmitted the Empire to thee to vs the things of the church as he that enuieth thine Empire contradicteth the ordinance of God so take thou heede least drawing vnto thy selfe the things of the church thou be guilty of great sinne It is written Giue vnto Caesar that which is Caesars vnto God that which is Gods It is therefore neither lawfull for vs to holde a kingdome on earth neither hast thou power O Prince ouer sacrifices sacred things These words put a difference between the function of Priestes Princes shew that neither may intrude with ech others charge which we confesse with a good wil. But as Priestes must teach truth and conuict error that is their office so princes must commaund for truth and punish error because publike authoritie to commaund and punish is not the Priestes but the Princes right where-with Priestes must not meddle Phi. Yet the Prince must learne at the Priestes hande which is truth and which error Theo. If the Priest teach truth and the Prince reiect it the Prince shal answere to God for the cōtempt of truth but if the priest teach error in steed of truth a godly prince hath lawful power to banish the doctrine punish the teacher Phi. And if the Prince saie that truth is error error is truth shall truth be banished and the Priest punished vpon the Princes saying Theo. And what if the Priest saie that light is darkenesse and darkenesse light shall Princes be excused before God for
father and his Cardinals were eighteene yeres prouoking working the Princes States adherent to them to spill christian blood to make hauocke of al places persons that were not â—â—â—dient to the Bishop of Rome yet you count it some great absurditie for vs to reiect this Councell as not generall Phi. You acknowledge no subiection to Councels or Tribunals abroad all other Bishops Patriarkes Apostles Christ all because they were be forrainers not hauing iurisdiction or sufficieÌ„t authoritie to define against English Sectaries or Errors And this when a Realme or Prince is in error taketh away all meanes of reducing theÌ„ to the truth againe Theo. To Christ his Apostles we acknowledge more subiection than you doe We honor adore him as the true son of God equall with his father in authority maiesty We make him no forrainer to this Realm as you do but professe him to be the only master redeemer ruler of his church as wel in this as in all other Nations To whom Princes Preachers are but seruaÌ„ts the preachers to propose the Princes to execute his will commandements whom all that wil be saued must beleeue obey aboue against all Councels Tribunals be they regall or papall if they dissent from his word The preachings writings of the Apostles we receiue with greater reuereÌ„ce exacter obedience than you do We giue no man leaue to dispence against theÌ„ which your law witnesseth of the Pope Papa coÌ„tra ApostoluÌ„ dispensat The Pope dispeÌ„seth against the Apostle We neuer said as Pigghius saith The Apostles wrote certaine things not that their writinges should bee aboue our faith and religion but rather vnder Wee confesse The Apostles were men allowed of God to whom the Gospel should be committed therefore we receiue the word from theÌ„ not as the word of man but as it is in deed the word of God assuring our selues it is the power of God to saue all that beleeue detesting your erronious and heynous presumptions that take vppon you to adde alter diminish and dispence with that which the spirite of Christ spake as well by the pennes as mouthes of the Apostles To Councels such as the Church of Christ was wont by the helpe of her religious Princes to call we owe communion and brotherly concord so long as they make no breach in faith nor in christian charitie subiection and seruitude wee owe them none the blessed Angels professe themselues to bee fellowe seruantes with the Sainctes on earth what are you then that with your Tribunals and iurisdictions woulde bee Lordes and Rulers ouer Christes inheritance Peter saith Cyprian whom the Lord made first choice of on whom he built his church when Paul after stroue with him for Circumcision did not take vpon him nor chalenge any thing insolentlie or arrogantly nor aduaunce him-selfe as Primate and one to whom the nouices and puinees shoulde bee subiect And as it were in open defiance of your Tribunals and iurisdictions which Stephen the Bishoppe of Rome began then to exercise he directeth the Bishops assembled in a Councell at Carthage on this wise It resteth that of this matter wee speake euerie one of vs what we thinke iudging no man nor remouing any man from the communion though he be not of our minde For none of vs maketh himselfe Bishop of Bishops or by terrour like a tyrant forceth his collegues to yeeld him obedience whether they will or no considering euerie Bishop by reason of his Episcopal power and freedom hath the rule of his owne iudgement as one that can not bee iudged of an other nor hee him-selfe iudge an other but let vs al expect the tribunal or iudgement of our Lord Iesus Christ which only solely hath power to set vs in the gouernment of his Church and to iudge of our actes And because you be so earnest with vs for subiection to Tribunals abroade to bee plaine with you it is boyes plaie before you name them or proue that wee owe them any subiection to skore it vppe as an absurditie that wee acknowledge none vnto them and yet least you shoulde thinke vs the first that refused Tribunals abroade you shall see that ancient and worthy fathers haue done the like before vs. What Tribunals abroade did Cyprian and the 80. Bishoppes at Carthage with him acknowledge when hee saide as you hearde Christus vnus solus habet potestatem de actu nostro iudicandi Christ only and none else hath authoritie to iudge of our act And agaiâ—e Episcopus ab alâ—o iudicari non potest cum non ipse nec alterum iudicare A Bishop may not be iudged of others nor iudge others Expectemus vniuersi iudicium Christi Let vs all both abroad and at home expect the iudgement of Christ. What Tribunals abroade did Polycrates and the Bishops of Asia with him acknowledge when hee replied to the Bishoppe of Rome threatning to excommunicate him and the rest Non turbaborijs quae terrendi gratia obijciuntur I passe not for these threats that are offered to terrifie me What Tribunals abroad did S. Aug. the 216. African Bishops acknowledge when they decreed that none Appealing ouer the Sea to Tribunals abroad should be receiued to the communion within Africa And when they repelled the Bishop of Rome laboring to place his Legates a latere within their Prouince willed him nâ—t to bring Fumosum seculi Typhum That smoky pride of the world into the Church of Christ What Tribunals abroad did the Bishop of the Britons acknowledge when they proued to August the Moncke that was sent from Rome that they ought him no subiection Nay what Tribunal abroad did Greg. the Bishop of Rome chalenge when he wrote thus to Eulogius Bishop of Alexandria Vestra beatitudo mihi loquitur diceÌ„s sicut iussistis quod verbuÌ„ iussionis peto à meo auditu remouete quia scio quis sum qui estis Loco enim mihi fratres estis moribus patres NoÌ„ ergo iussi sed quae vtilia visa sunt iudicare curauâ— Your blessednes in your letters saith to me as you coÌ„maÌ„ded which word of coÌ„maÌ„ding I beseech you remoue froÌ„ mine eares because I know who I am what you are In calling you are brethreÌ„ to me in behauior fathers I did not theÌ„ coÌ„mand you but aduertise you what semed best to me The same Greg. teacheth you what it is for any one man to require vniuersall subiection of the whole church as your holie father now doth If Paul saith he would not haue the meÌ„bers of the Lords body to be subiect to any heads but to Christ no not to the Apostles themselues what wilt thou answere to Christ the head of the vniuersall church in the last daie of iudgement which goest about to haue all his members in subiection to thee by the
With you but not with the Church of God Phi. The church we say beleeueth many things which shee receiued by tradition and not by writing Theo. Your Church I know doth but the Church of Christ I say neuer did not doth Phi. Had the Church of Christ no traditions that were not written Theo. Rites and ceremonies she had but no points of fayth that were not written Phi. This is the ground of all your errors vppon this pretence you reiect the vnwritten verities of the church Theo. If this bee an error S. Paul himselfe was the first author of it and all the fathers of Christes Church with one consent auouch the same Phi. Neuer tell vs that tale Theo. Yeas we will tell it and proue it to you Phi. You can not Theo. We can and will S. Paul is short but sure Faith is by hearing and hearing by the word of God Whence wee collect ergo faith is by the word of God and not without it nor besâ—des it You heard S. Basils opinion before It is an euident slyding from the faith a point of the greatest pride that may be either to depart from that which is written or to receiue that which is not written To that you may ioyne this conclusion of his If euery thing that is not of fayth be sinne as S. Paul affirmeth and fayth come by hearing and hearing by the woorde of God ergo whatsoeuer is without or besides the diuine Scriptures because it is not of fayth it is sinne Seekest thou for faith Emperour sayth Hilarie to Constantius Heare it not out of the late scroles but out of Gods bookes Heare I beseech thee that which is written of Christ lest vnder preteÌ„ce therof of things not written bee preached And in an other place pressing his aduersarie Thou sayth he which denyest things written what remaineth but that thou beleeue things vnwritten counting that for a passing absurditie which you now would establish as the surest way to discerne the trueth Euen so doth Hierom against Heluidius As wee denie not those thinges that are written so wee reiect vtterly those thinges which are not written For Our Lord sauiour speaketh to vs in the Scriptures of his Princes that is of his Apostles and Euangelists which were not which are in the church to this end that his Apostles excepted whatsoeuer thing besides should afterward bee sayd might bee cut off and not haue authoritie Tertullian speaking in the person of all christians We neede no farther search after the Gospel When once we beleeue wee desire nothing else to beleeue for this wee first beleeue that there is nothing besides the Gospel which wee ought to beleeue And refelling the heretike Hermogenes I adore saith he the fulnes of the scriptures Let Hermogenes shew me where this that he teacheth is written If it be not writteÌ„ let him feare the curse prouided for adders diminishers Yea saith Ambrose We iustly coÌ„demn al new things which Christ did not teach because to the faithful Christ is the way So then if Christ did not teach that which we teach eueÌ„ we our selues do iudge it to be detestable The rest are of the same mind The disposition of our saluation sayth Irineus we knew by none other than by those by whom the Gospel came vnto vs the which at first they preached by mouth but afterward by Gods appointmeÌ„t they did deliuer it to vs in writing that it should be the foundatioÌ„ and pillour of our faith It is necessary for vs saith Cyril to folow the diuine Scriptures in nothing to go from their prescription The mountaines of Israel whereon God promised to feede his flocke are saith Augustine the writers of the diuine Scriptures Feeding there you feede safely whatsoeuer you learne thence count it sauorie whatsoeuer is besides theÌ„ refuse it Therefore whether it be touching Christ or his Church or any matters els which concerneth our faith life I say not if we but as followeth in Paul if an angel from heauen teach any thing besides that which you haue receiued in the Scriptures of the Law and the Gospel hold him accursed Isidorus as your owne Lawe produceth him saith A Prelate if he teach or bid any thing besides that which is euidently commaunded in the holy scriptures let him be taken for a false witnes to God a coÌ„mitter of sacrilege Neither Prelate Pope Councel nor Angel may be receiued or trusted in matters of fayth I say not against the Scriptures but not without or besides the scriptures If therefore you seeke to leade Princes vnto trueth you must guyde them thereto by the word of trueth otherwise you doe but deceiue them you doe not direct them King Dauid will teach you by what meanes himself was and all other godly Princes ought to be directed Thy word is a lanterne to my feete a light vnto my paths I haue sworne and wil performe it that I wil keepe thy righteous iudgements And God by Moses appointing his law to be the directioÌ„ of Princes coÌ„maundeth a copie thereof to be deliuered vnto the king sitting on his throne that he should reade therein all the daies of his life and learne to feare the Lord his God to keepe al the words of that lawe This charge which God giueth bindeth princes as well as others Whatsoeuer I commaund that shal you do thou shalt put nothing thereto nor take ought there from And Esay speaketh not of priuate persons only but of common-wealths also when he saith Shoulde not a people consult their God And shewing immediatly which way they might consult and aske counsell of God from the liuing sayth he to the dead to the law rather and the testimonie if they speak not according to this word it is because there is no light in them They haue Moses and the Prophets let them heare them is the surest way to saue Prince people froÌ„ the place of torment consequently the best direction for theÌ„ both Phi. The word of God is we doubt not the best direction for Princes priuate men if it be rightly vnderstood but Al heresies patch thence the pillowes which they lay vnder the elbowes of all flesh as S. Hierom sayth and They talke of scriptures perswade by Scriptures as Tertullian noteth And therefore the Scriptures being but dumble recordes that may be diuersly construed and easily wrested there must needes bee some iudge on earth that may bee personally pronounce which is the true meaning and right sense of the Scriptures before Princes may trust that direction Otherwise men may brech what blasphemies they will and pretend Scripture when they haue done as the Arrians Sabellians Macedonians and al other heretikes did and do Theo. That heretikes couet a shew of scriptures is a case so cleare that it needeth no words For howe coulde they treate of matters of faith
flesh in so much that the flesh is heere called the soule Such a man when the church casteth from her shee keepeth the spirit safe to wit the holie spirite of God which is the guider of the church For if they suffer any such one to bee amongest them hee defileth all and the holie spirite departeth Phi. S. Hierom taketh it otherwise To deliuer him vnto Satan for the destruction of the flesh saith he vt arripiendi illum corporaliter habeat potestatem that the diuell may haue power corporally to possesse him so Saint Chrysostom For the destruction of the flesh that the diuell may strike him with some grieuous sore or other disease Theo. This I told you before was a doubtfull speech and therefore woulde yeelde you no certaine conclusion For besides Sainct Augustine and Sainct Ambrose Sainct Hierom in those bookes which are assuredly his vseth these wordes To deliuer vnto Satan to the destruction of the fleshe for a perpetuall consequent to excommunication in all ages and not for corporall vexation permitted onely to the Apostles Illi si peccauero licet tradere me Satanae in interitum carnis vt spiritus saluus sit A clergie man sayth hee may deliuer mee to Satan if I sinne for the destruction of the fleshe that the spirite may bee safe And inueighing against Vigilantius I maruaile sayth hee the Bishop vnder whome hee is doeth not crush this vnprofitable vessell with the Apostolike rodde euen a rodde of yron and deliuer him into the destruction of the fleshe that the spirite may bee safe Noting by these wordes the right force of excommunication which doeth and shall indure to the ende not any corporall punishment or plague wherewith God sometimes touched such as would not otherwise be reformed A thirde interpretation of these wordes you shall finde in Sainct Augustine writing against Parmenian What did the Apostle sayth hee but prouide for the health of the soule by the destruction of the fleshe whether it were by some corporall punishment or death as in Ananias and his wife which fell down at Peters feete or else that the partie by repentance because he was giuen ouer vnto Satan should kil in himself the wicked concupiscence of the fleshe This later exposition cutteth off cleane your bodilie punishmentes and sheweth the ende of Apostolike excommunication to be this that the offendour by repentaunce should destroy the lustes of his flesh and not that an euill spirit should corporally correct and molest him which you conclude out of these wordes with as great confidence as if it were some maine principle of faith Phi. S. Augustine repeateth both expositions disliketh neither Theo. His accepting of both dischargeth your illation which is wholy grounded on the first But admit that also which Chrysostom seemeth to follow what shall your conclusion be Phi. That the Apostles punished the bodies of such as were christians Theo. Did they lay violent handes on them or vse any externall meanes Phi. They needed not the diuell did it at their word Theo. And because the diuell will not doe the like for you you will supplie the diuels roome and intermedle with his office Are you not wise Diuines that to chalenge the correction of other mens bodies make your selues the Diuels substitutes Phi. Wee make our selues the Apostles substitutes Theo. Then deliuer them to the Diuell as they did and offer them no farther violence nor torment with your owne handes and see what power you haue to chastise the bodies of such as you reiect from the church for so did the Apostles Mary if you content not your selues with speaking the word as they did but because the Diuell fayleth you you take helpe of your handes to punish the bodies of men beware least you be now not Pauls associats in deliuering but Satans in tormenting the carkasses of offendors Phi. Is euerie one that punisheth the bodie Satans associate Theo. They that beare the sworde with lawfull power from God to represse the wicked if cause require to kill the bodie they bee Gods ministers seruing for that intent but they that without this sworde claime to bee the correctors and punishers of mens bodies by violent meanes are the Diuels vicegerentes and not Gods For they bee murderers and the right members of Satan Phi. But wee appoint the Magistrate to doe it Theo. Doe you appoint Magistrates to lay violent handes on themselues Phi. No but on others Theo. And we be disputing of Princes whether they may bee defeated of their crowns and chastised in their bodies vpon your excommunications Phi. Excommunicate persons may bee corporally chastised whosoeuer bee the deede doer and that S. Chrysostoms exposition fully proueth For if it were lawfull then whiles the Apostles did excommunicate why not as well after and in other ages Theo. But if you relent from this that your selues may bee the deed doers then you misse the marke which you shot at The Magistrate wee knowe may corporally punish these and all other offendours but what is that to your position which hold that spirituall Pastors may punish the bodies of the faithful And therfore look to your footing least you faile in your leaping and backe with this legge that a meere spirituall officer may touch the liues and take the goods of heretiks and other excommunicate persons It is a wicked intrusion of Antichrist seeking indirectly and as you call it by accident that is by hooke or by crooke to bring the world and worldly things in subiection to his appetite The Apostles did nothing but separate sinners from the church and house of God because in those dayes there were no christian Princes with ordinarie power to reuenge the disorders committed in and against the church of Christ it pleased God that whom the Apostles and their after-commers for a season cast out of the church as intangled with great and haynous offences the Diuell shoulde afflict them vnto death or otherwise with some grieuous disease as the fault deserued that the rest might feare and not bee bolde to sinne because there was no magistrate to punish them yea many times God visited the sinnes of hypocrites and such as remained in the church in like maner as Paul himselfe testifieth to those of Corinth For this cause many amongest you are stroken with infirmities and diseases and many are dead For if we would iudge our selues we should not bee iudged but when wee are iudged we are chastened of the Lord that wee should not bee condemned with the world And Chrysostom alleadging this place Many such things fall out in the church at this day Because the priest knoweth them not that loden with sinne receiue the reuerend mysteries vnworthily therefore God himselfe often times culleth them out and deliuereth them to Satan And that the Apostles did nothing but cast them out of the church when they deliuered anie to Satan the same Father will teach
Athanasius writing Theo. By this let the world iudge both of your cause and cunning A thing bone by the confession of your owne stories aboue 760. yeares after Christ vnder Constantine the 5. not long before the seconde Nicene councell is coloured with Athanasius name as written by him that was deade 400. yeares before the matter happened and not onely published with his writinges but inserted into the second Nicene councell as his worke whereas the Bishops then assembled were all aliue when this outrage was attempted by the Iewes not 24. yeares before the calling of that Synode Such fables and forgeries doe well become the quarell you haue in hand but they wil neuer proue your hauing of images to be catholike or Apostolike Phi. In deede our stories doe mention such an accident at the time which you name but if it be true though it be not so old as Athanasius we care not Theo. He that wil forge must not stick to ly lying is the very ground of forging and of a lyar we looke for no truth And yet this tale of Nicodemus Gamaliel Iames Simeon and Zacheus deliuering an image from hand to hand is not the assâ—rtioÌ„ of the author but the rude report of a poore ignorant man fathering his image on them that neuer were christians as Gamaliel was not and that 700. yeares after their deathes without any proofe saue onely by hearesay By such legends you may soone proue what you will but he that hath any spark of christian courage or wisedom will vtterly abhor these lies as feeling the grosnesse of them with his fingers Phi. Since you so much dislike our proofes that the Apostles and the Primatiue church had images can you proue they had none Theo. Doth your discretion serue you to put vs to proue the negatiue Ph. You affirm they had none our demaund is how you know that Theo. You can not proue they had and that is cause sufficient for vs to auouch they had not Phi. Is that all you can say Theo. If it were you can not voide it but we haue euident proofes that the church of Christ succeeding the Apostles had none and thence we conclude the Apostles deliuered none otherwise the church would not so soone haue reiected the tradition of the Apostles Phi. You may be sure they would not Theo. And since they did reiect Images ergo it was no Apostolike tradition Phil. Howe proue you they did reiect them Theo. The christians were charged by the Pagans for hauing no images and they not onely confessed so much but also defended it as most agreeable with the law of God In Arnobius the heathen say of the christians Cur nullas aras habent nulla tenepla nulla nota simulachra why haue they no altars no temples no open or knowen images In Origen Celsus sayth Hij non patiuntur vel templa vel aras vel simâ—lachra statuas intueri The christians can not abide to beholde temples or altars or images In making their answere the Christians agnised they had none and alleadged the law of God to proue they should haue none ClemeÌ„s sayth Nobis non est imago sensilis de materia sensili sed quae percipitur intelligentia We haue no image that is materiall and seene with eyes but onely such as is conceiued with vnderstanding And addeth this reason We are plainely forbidden to vse that deceitfull art of making images Thou shalt not make saith the Prophet the likenesse of any thing The Christians and Iewes saith Origen when they heare the lawe of God thou shalt not make to thy selâ—e any grauen image nor the likenesse of any thing neither shalt thou bowe downe to them nor serue them not only refuse these teÌ„ples Altars images of God but if neede be choose rather to dy And extending this as well to the image of the true God as of those that were no gods he sayth Nec simulachra quidem nos veneramur quippe qui Dei vt inuisibilis ita incorporei formam nullam effigiamus We reuerence not images as making no figure to God who is inuisible and without all bodily shape So Arnobius What image shall I make to God whose image if you rightfully iudge man himselfe is And Lactantius as you hearde before affirmed There coulde bee no religion wheresoeuer there was an image Phi. These spake not of the christian images but of the Pagans such as in deede we may neither worship nor haue Theo. They speake namely of themselues which were christians confessing they neither had nor might haue any image of God Phi. Not of the Godhead but of Christ his Saincts they might notwithstanding these words it is euident by Eusebius they had For the woman that was cured by Christ of the bloody issue erected an image of brasse vnto him in Cesaria where she dwelt vnder the feete of which image grewe a strange herbe healing all diseases as soone as it touched the brasen skirt of his garmeÌ„t This image remained togither with the herbe to the time of Eusebius after till Iulian the Apostata in spite of Christ brake it in peeces set vppe his own image in place thereof which God strake with fire from heauen in reuenge of his sonne so dishonored by Iulian threw the head of Iulians image from the body pitching it with the face downward into the earth blasting the rest with lightning for a terror to all that euer after should offer the image of his Sonne any reproach or misuse as you may read in Sozomene And this example is a faire warning for you that haue beheaded burned so many images of Christ his Sainctes within this Realme Theo. This image the woman that was healed erected in the citie where she dwelt as a monument of the mighty power which our Sauiour had shewed on her she being then an heathen not instructed in religion thinking thereby to prouoke others to harken after him seek for his help as she had done And when many trusted not her words it pleased God not only to ratify her report as true but to shewe the Gentiles by the wonderfull euent of the herbe there growing what vertue was in his sonne to cure all their griefs thereby to lead them the rather to beleeue in him that they might be saued by him In this wee dispraise not the womans purpose minding to celebrate the benefit which shee receiued at our Sauiours handes the best way that she then knew we honor the goodnes of God in preparing the hearts of vnbeleeuers by meanes of this miracle to bee ready to imbrace his Sonne detesting the wickednes of Iulian that to discouer his contempt of Christ and malice against Christ whose faith he had openly reâ—ounced amongst other villanies which hee offered caused the Pagans in a triumph to draw this image about the streetes breaking it in
peeces to set vp the image of himselfe which God ouerthrew with fire froÌ„ heauen not in defence of the brasen shape but of his holy name prophaned and illuded by this Apostata Phi. This image the Apostles sawe and suffered Theo. A memoriall of their masters act not abused by the people and erected before they came to preach the Gospell to that place they might suffer but they neuer taught men to make the like nor allowed any to worshippe that Phi. Wee thinke they learned the setting vppe of this image from the Apostles Theo. Eusebius sayth they did it of an heathenish custome and not of an Apostolike instruction His wordes are And no maruell that the Heathens which were healed of our Sauiour did him this honour for so much as wee haue seene the images of his Apostles Paul and Peter and of Christ himselfe drawen in colours and kept in tables which kinde of honour antiquitie of a custome which they vsed when they were heathens was wont to yeelde to such as they counted Benefactors Sauiors Phi. By that you see the images of Christ his Apostles were expressed in colours and reserued by the auncient christians long before Eusebius Theo. Eusebius doeth not report it as a thing either openly receiued in Churches or generally vsed of all christians but as a secrete and seldome matter rising from the perswasion and affection of some which whiles they were heathen had yeelded that honour to other of their friendes fautors to whom they were most beholding For had the Apostles deliuered any such tradition or the Primatiue church of Christ vsed any publike erection of images as you suppose would the councell of Eliberis in Spaine assembled about the time of Constantine the great in plaine words haue banished them out of their churches Placuit picturas in ecclesiis esse non debere ne quod colitur aut adoratur in parietibus dâ— pingatur We haue decreed that pictures ought not to be in the churches lest that which is worshipped or adored be painted on walles Woulde S. Augustine thinke you haue pronounced them worthy to erre which sought Christ his Apostles in pictures paintings if the people had bin taught that way to seeke him Sic omnino errare meâ—uerunt qui Christum Apostolos eius non in sanctis codicibus sed in pictis parietibus quaesierunt So they deserued to erre which sought Christ and his Apostles not in the sacred Scriptures but in paynted walles Or would Epiphanius haue rent the image which he found hanging in the church by Ierusalem and pronounced such painted imagery notwithstanding it represented Christ or one of his Sainctes to be contrary to the Scriptures to the religion of Christ. His words are When I entered the church to pray I found hanging there in the enterance of the saide church a stained and a painted cloath hauing the image as it were of Christ or one of the Sainctes When I sawe this that against the authoritie of the Scriptures the image of a man was hanged vp in the church I did teare it in sunder And I pray you hereafter to command that such cloathes repugnant to our religion be not hanged in the church of Christ. It becommeth your fatherhood rather to haue this care to banish this superstition vnfit for Christes church and for the people committed to your charge By this you may see that images were not receiued much lesse adored in the church of Christ whiles these ancieÌ„t fathers liued and that to remoue them and keepe them out of the church was then adiudged a seemely care for Christian Bishoppes agreeable with the Catholike profession and publike vse of the church of Christ in those dayes Phi. Gregorie the first you know was of an other minde that images should be suffered and not defaced in the church Theo. Gregorie liued 300. yeares after the councell of Eliberis and 200. after Epiphanius in which time the painting of stories was crept into the church as an ornament for the naked walles and a meane to set before the peoples eyes the liues and labours of the Sainctes and Martyrs but that pictures or images in the church shoulde bee worshipped or adored Gregorie did in most manifest words abhorre alleadging the law of God which we do that nothing made with hands should be adored or serued Phi. Not with diuine honor Theo. You meane with no part of that honor which God requireth of vs. Phi. What else They must not haue diuine honour in whole or in part Theo. Then must they haue none at all For God requireth bodily honor no lesse than ghostly as due to him and by his law excludeth all thinges made with handes from hauing either in saying Thou shalt not bow down to them nor serue them Phi. Bowing the knee is not diuine honour but such as wee yeeld to Parents Magistrates Theo. Bowing the knee is a part of Gods honor as also holding vp the handes and lifting vp the eyes To me saith God shall euery knee bow For this cause saith Paul doe I know my knees vnto the father of our Lord Iesus Christ shewing that the bowing of our knees is an honour due to God euen as the lifting vppe of our handes and eyes belongeth likewise vnto him As long as I liue sayeth Dauid I will magnifie thee on this maner and lift vp my handes in thy name I will sayeth the Apostle that the men pray euerie where lifting vp pure handes And so for the rest Vnto thee saith Dauid do I lift vp mine eyes thou that dwellest in the heauens And againe Mine eyes are euer vnto the Lord. And so of our Sauiour when he praied S. Iohn reporteth He lift vp his eyes to heauen and saide The outward honor therefore of eyes handes kneâ—s God requireth of vs as his due though chiefly and principally the heart which he will not suffer any man to haue besides himselfe howsoeuer he allow those that present his goodnesse and glorie in blessing and iudging as Parents and Magistrates to haue some part of his corporall but in no wise of his spirituall honour Phi. And so many images haue part of his external though not of his internal honour which is the higher of the twaine and meeter for the diuine maiesty Theo. It is not in your handes to make allowance of Gods honour to whome you list and againe God himselfe hath made a plaine prohibition in this case that images shall haue no part of his externall honour The wordes are as cleare as day light thou shalt not bow downe to them Phi. Not to the images of false Gods Theo. It is but lost labor to reason with such wranglars Haue not I mainly proued that this precept expressely forbiddeth the Image of the true God to be made or bowed vnto Why then take you vp those shifts againe which be false and refuted
And so againe of that and such like Many thinges are not founde in the Apostles writinges nor in the Councels of those that came after them and yet because they be obserued of the vniuersall Church Non nisi ab ipsis tradita commendata creduntur they are thought to haue bin deliuered and commended by none but by them Phi. This sense is not amisse if the words would beare it but the text is Esset as we translate it Theo. The sense which you vrge is first against your selues next against S. Austen himselfe in other places and lastly which is it that you shoote at it ouerthroweth not our assertion Phi. It requireth some paines to proue all this Theo. Not so much perhappes as you thinke For will you confesse that no custome of the church must be receiued or beleeued except it be Apostolike Admit this and see whether we will not presently cast off the most part of the preceptes and customes of your Church as not descending from the Apostles and therefore not at all to bee beleeued by your owne verdict And as for Sainct Augustine if you thinke hee woulde saie that The custome of the vniuersall Church is not at all to be beleeued except it bee Apostolik reade this resolution better you wil leaue that misconstruction of his wordes Those things which we keep saith he not written but deliuered by traditioÌ„ the which the whole world obserueth must be conceiued to haue bin commended ordained vel ab ipsis Apostolis vel plenarijs concilijs quorum est in ecclesia saluberrima authoritas either by the Apostles themselues or else by general councels whose autority in the church is most wholsom The custom of the church he saith must be retained though it be not Apostolike but decreed by others of later age meanâ—r credit than the Apostles if their assemblies synods were general And againe In hijs rebus de quibus nihil certi statuit scriptura diuina mos populi Dei vel instituta Maiorum pro lege tenenda sunt In those things where the diuine scripture appointeth no certainty the custome of the people of God ordinances of forefathers must bee helde for a law If the custome of Gods people the ordinaÌ„ces of elders must be kept for a law then the custom of the church in baptizing her infants might not be reiected though it were not Apostolike so S. Austen with your esset cleane crosseth himselfe Lastly where you thinke to giue vs the foile with pressing this place we easily grant you that The custom of the church in baptizing her infantes were not to be beleeued if it were not in Apostolike tradition You haue your own reading what are you the better Phi. Ergo some points of faith are beleeued without the scriptures besides the scriptures The. Sir I deny your argument Phi. This is beleeued by tradition ergo not by scripture Theo. A tradition it may be yet written in the scriptures S. Paul calleth the Lords supper a traditioÌ„ yet it is written Ego accepi à Domino quod tradidi vobis I receiued of the Lord that which I deliuered vnto you The death and resurrection of Christ he likewise caled a tradition confirmed by the Scriptures Tradidi vobis inprimis quod accepi I deliuered vnto you first of all which I also receiued that Christ died for our sinnes according to the Scriptures and was buried and rose the thirde daie according to the Scriptures And in plainer words to the Thessalonians Holde fast sayeth hee the traditions which you haue learned either by speeche or Epistle of ours calling those thinges that be written in his epistles his traditions Phi. But the fathers vse the word otherwise for that which is not written Theo. Sometimes they do somtimes they do not S. Cyprian sayth Whence is this tradition Whether doeth it descend from the Lordes authority and the Gospell or commeth it from the precepts and epistles of the Apostles If it be commaunded in the Gospell or contained in the Epistles or Actes of the Apostles let this holy tradition be obserued And so S. Basill Our baptisme is according to the tradition of the Lord in the name of the father the Sonne and the holy Ghost Ireneus Tertullian Hierom Augustine and others call the short rehearsal of the christian faith which is our common Creede an old Apostolik traditioÌ„ yet no part of the creede is without or besides the warrant of the Scriptures Phi. I know it may be a tradition and yet reuokeable to the Scriptures and proueable by the Scriptures but the baptisme of infantes Sainct Augustine saith hath no witnes in the scriptures Theo. Where saith he so Phi. In many places Theo. Name but one Phi. There be many things which the vniuersal Church obserueth and for that cause they be well thought to haue beene commaunded by the Apostles though they be not found written Theo. How proue you this to be one of those many Phi. Because wee finde it not written but only deliuered by tradition Theo. You say so but where doth S. Augustine say so Phi. In the wordes which we first alleaged It were not to be beleeued if it were not an Apostolike tradition If it were written it must be beleeued though it were no Tradition Theo. You deale with the fathers as you doe with the scriptures S. Austen doth not say the baptisme of infants were not to be beleeued but The custome of the Church in a matter of so great weight as the baptizing of infants were not to be trusted if the tradition were not Apostolike The church might not haue presumed to baptize infants if the Apostles had not begunne it what gaine you by that Thereby you may proue that the Apostles did it and that the Church of her selfe and her own authoritie might not doe it more you cannot proue Phi. But doth S. Austen any where say that the baptisme of Children is contained in the scriptures Theo. What if he went not so farre in wordes because the matter was not in question whiles he liued is that any ground for you to conclude that it is not allowed by the Scriptures Phi. If he keepe silence it is a shrewde signe that it is not Theo. So long as no man did impugne it there was no need he should defend it the question in his time was not whether it were lawful for infants to be baptized but whether it were needfull for theÌ„ or no. The Pelagians held it to be superfluous for yâ— infantes were void of original sinne which was their error That he mightily reproueth by manifest Scriptures and sheweth that infants as well as others bee excluded from the kingdome of God if they be not baptized Farther hee waded not as being not farther vrged and troubled enough besides with refuting other heresies and yet as occasion serued hee brought
seruice Againe the publike Seruice had but one language in this exercise they spake in many tongues In the the publike Seruice euery man had not his owne special tongue his special interpretation speciall Reuelation proper Psalmes but in this they had Againe the publike Seruice had in it the ministration of the holy Sacrament principally which was not done in this time of conference For into this exercise were admitted Catechumens and Infidels and whosoeuer would in this women before S. Pauls order did speake and prophesie so did they neuer in the ministration of the Sacrament With many other plaine differences that by no meanes the Apostles wordes can be rightly and truely applied to the Corinthians Seruice then or ours now Therefore it is either great ignorance of the Protestants or great guilefulnesse so vntruely and peruersly to apply them Theo. Before I reply let me aske you a question Phi. With a good will Theo. Are you not a Priest Phi. I am or I should be Theo. I will not oppose you after what order Aarons being abolished Melchizedecks not imparted to any mortal man But by vertue of your priesthood are you not bound to catechise as wel as to baptize that is to preach the word as wel as to minister the sacraments Phi. So we do as time and place require Theo. If I should vrge you that you your felowes neuer preach because euery holyday sunday you say Masse massing is apparently no preaching what would you answer Phi. I would answer that you made a very childish foolish argument For though the one be not the other yet we may do both at one time in one place successiuely before wee depart And if you doubt of this the meanest parish clarke in Christendome may be your master Theo. You pul not me but your self by the nose Philander and mark it not Your inuincible arguments wherby you would proue that S. Paul in this whole Chapter spake nothing of the Church seruice in Corinth are such ridiculous toyes of all the worlde as this which I brought for example to trie your patience with Phi. You shall not defeate the force of our reasons with such a iest Theo. Neither shall you delude the Apostles doctrine with such a shift The Church of Corinth had then as al other Churches nowe haue or should haue both praying preaching annexed and adioyned to the ministration of the Lords supper Both these yet are euer were the meanes which God ordained to prepare vs to be fit ghests for that Table Howe shal they saith the Apostle call on him in whom they haue not beleeued and how shall they beleeue in him of whom they haue not heard how shall they heare without a Preacher Hearing is the nurce of faith and faith is the fountaine of praier without praier wee may not approach to God nor to the Sacrament of thankesgiuing which by the very name it beareth putteth vs in mind what duty we must yeeld to God when we are partakers of it By this it is euident that teaching in the church of God doth not exclude praiing but is rather the mean that God hath appointed to direct incite the minds of the faithfull to make their praiers vnto him in such sort as they ought when they are gathered togither in Christs name to serue God the father in the spirit of his sonne And so the holy Ghost describeth the church that was at Ierusalem vpon the first spredding of the Gospel from whence we must take the forme of Apostolik churches They continued saith the Scripture in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship and breaking of bread and praiers noting doctrine prayers brotherly communion at the Lords table to be the publike exercises of christians in their assemblies where the Apostles themselues were present in their persons to guide gouerne those meetings Phi. You come not yet to the point Theo. I will not long be from it These praiers exhortations and instructions which the faithfull had in their assemblies were they not partes of the seruice which they yeelded to God Phi. Yees but not of the church seruice Theo. What seruice was there in the church besides this that I mention Phi. The ministration of the Sacrament Theo. If you meane the order and fashion of administring the Sacrament Saint Paul receiued that of the Lord and deliuered it to the church of Corinth in such manner and forme as we finde expressed not many leaues before in the 11. of this Epistle But there is no church seruice prescribed or named onely the elemēts and actions of the Lordes supper are particularly remembred and committed to the church as her chiefest iewell in her husbandes absence vntill hee come Phi. Thinke you they had no set Rites Collectes nor praiers deliuered them from the Apostles for that holy action Theo. You presume they had and vppon that false imagination you ground the most part of your headlesse argumentes that the Apostle speaketh not of the Church seruice Phi. Had they no speciall forme of prayer prescribed in their churches whiles the Apostles liued Theo. Had they say you Phi. Else they had nothing but confusion in their churches Theo. Blaspheme not so fast The power of the holy Ghost miraculously supplying all wantes and inspiring the Pastours and Elders in euery Church howe to pray was no confusion Phi. Do you thinke they changed their prayers in euery place and at euery meeting as pleased the minister Theo. You may well perceiue by the Apostles wordes that they had neither Sermons nor Seruice prefixed nor limited in his time but when the Church came togither the Elders and Ministers instructed the people and made their prayers by inspiration Phi. I knowe they did so but this was not the Church Seruice Theo. This was all the church Seruice they had to which they added the celebration of the Lordes supper but without any setled or prefined order of praier except it were he Lords praier which they obserued in all places as comming from the mouth of Christ himselfe their Soueraigne Lord and Master Phi. Mary Sir that were euen such seruice as you haue at this day where euery blind Minister bableth what he listeth Theo. Iest not at God except you wil be Iulian. Phi. I iest at your disorder which you would seeme to deriue frō the Primatiue Church of the Apostles Theo. In deede wee haue not so many turnes and touches bowtes and becks as you haue in your Masses other disorder in our Seruice I know none vnlesse it bee that wee doe not swinge the Censers rince the chalice tosse the Masse-booke plaie with the host and sleepe at Memento as you doe with a number of like toyes throughout your seruice Phi. Doe not you nowe iest at our Seruice Theo. At your stage-like gestures I may without offence but you iested at the miraculous gift of the holy Ghost guiding the
Pastours and prophetes of the primatiue church in their publike praiers and exhortations and called it a confusion and resembled it to our babling in the church at this day which you thinke to be very disordered Phi. I see no proofe that the Pastours of the Church in the Apostles time made their publike prayers as you say by miraculous instinct of the spirite Theoph. Doe but open your eyes when you reade this chapter and you can not choose but see it Both this and the twelfth chapter treate wholy of the gifts of the spirite Where you finde that to one was giuen by the spirit the word of wisedome to an other the word of knowledge to an other fayth to an other giftes of healing by the same spirite to an other operation of wonders to an other prophesie to an other discerning of spirites to an other diuersities of toungs to an other interpretation of toungs Phi. Here is not the gift of praier numbred amongest them Theo. But in the fourteenth it is where shewing them how they should behaue themselues in the Church when the congregation was assembled he laieth this downe as a rule for them to follow I will pray with thee spirite but I will pray with the vnderstanding also I will sing with the spirite but I will sing with the vnderstanding also Else when thou blessest with the spirite how shal he that occupieth the room of the simple or common person say Amen at the giuing of thanks seeing he knoweth not what thou saiest To pray sing and blesse with the spirite in this place can bee nothing else but to be guided and led by the spirit in their praiers Psalmes thanks as they were in their doctrines interpretations exhortations which was by miracle on the suddain not by learning or study This was done in the church whē al the faithful were present to these praiers psalms thāksgiuings the people were to say Amen as the Apostle sheweth which is the ende signe and proofe of publike prayer among christians What is church seruice if this be not or what other Seruice could the Church haue besides hearing the word and offering their common supplications vnto God by the mouth of one man the rest vnderstanding what he said and confirming his praier with saying Amen Phi. The Apostle speaketh of one man supplying the place of the vulgar and you stretch it to the whole people Theo. If the praiers of the Church concerned some of the people and not all you might make that obiection with some shew but now it hath no color when S. Paul asketh How shal the simple man say Amen he meaneth not this or that man but any or euery And so the indefinite signifieth generally throughout the Scripture Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth no sinne that is Blessed is euery man to whom the Lord imputeth no sin Cursed be the man that obserueth not all the workes of the Law to doe them that is by S. Pauls owne exposition Cursed is euery man that continueth not in all things which are written in the booke of the Lawe to doe them The whole Scripture is full of the like And therefore Chrysostome noteth Indoctum promiscuam plebem vocat monstratque non leue incommodum esse si Amen dicere non possit The vnlearned he calleth the vulgar people and declareth it to be no smale inconuenience if they cannot say Amen Phi. I see they did praie sing and blesse with the spirite and that the people said Amen but had they no speciall nor vsuall praiers reserued for the ministration of the Sacrament which might not be varied Theo. You think belike they had your Introite Grail Tract Sequēce Offertorie Secrets Postcommunion Pax and Ite missa est Phi. Sure they had some precise forme of seruice though we know it not Theo. And since you knowe it not why should you make it the anker hold of all your exposition vpon S. Paul Phi. Had they no order for their seruice Theo. What a stirre here is for that which the Apostles neuer did Had they set an order for the seruice of the Church durst any man after haue broken it Phi. S. Iames masse is yet extant Theo. And so are a number of other foolish forgeries as wel as that Phi. Do you think it forged Theo. Which of S. Iames masses do you meane Phi. There are not so many that you should aske which Theo. Two there are vnder his name the one nothing like the other yet both fathered vpō him Phi. We haue but one and that set in order of church seruice with mutual praiers and answers for Priest and People very perfectly Theo. And the other you shall find in the eight booke of Clemens Apostolike constitutions where the fourteene Apostles for so you haue increased their number as well as their constitutions take precise order what praiers answers and actions shal be vsed at the mysticall sacrifice their first prescription being this that Two Deacons shal be on both sides of the altar with tuffs of pecocks tails in their hands to driue away gnats left they light in the Chalice a graue consideration for Christs Apostles to meete together to make flappes to catch flies Phi. That I graunt is a matter of smal respect but yet not enough to refute the booke Theo. It is sufficiently refuted in that neither the Church of Christ nor your selues euer esteemed it Had this book beene Authentik it must needs haue beene taken into the canon of the Scriptures For if that which any one Apostle wrate be Canonical much more that which al the Apostles with common consent decreed and ordered Againe had the Apostles prescribed an exact fourme of diuine seruice for the Lords table what man would haue altered it or what Church refused it How would either Basill or Chrysostome haue presumed to make newe formes of Church seruice if those liturgies be theirs not rather forced on thē as this is on the first chiefe Apostles of Christ Why did the Latine Church and the Church of Rome her selfe neglect that seruice if it were Apostolike and preferre the praiers of one Scholasticus as worthier to be said ouer the deuine mysteries the maker being so obscure a man that his name is not knowen in the church of god why were the Bishops of Rome 600. yeares vpward patching piecing the masse before they brought it to any setled forme as your own fellowes confesse and yet then Rome had one forme of seruice Millan an other which they keepe at this day Fraunce a thirde Why did Gregorie when he was consulted by Augustine the monke what forme of diuine seruice he should commēd to the Saxons wil him to bind himselfe neither to Rome nor to any church els but to take from euery place that which he liked best and deliuer that vnto the English To
cut off al ambiguities we haue the plaine testimonie of Gregorie the great that the Church of Rome 600. yeres after Christ knew nothing of those constitutions and Church seruices which are now obtruded vnder the Apostles names Mos Apostolorum fuit vt ad ipsam solummodo orationem Dommicam oblationis hostiam consecraret This was saith he the maner of the Apostles to consecrate the sacrifice with saying no moe praiers but the Lords praier In vaine therefore doe you dreame of a settled forme of praier for the Lords supper where as the Apostles haue none but left that to the direction and disposition of the holy Ghost inspiring the ministers and elders in euery Church when the faithful were assembled to make their praiers vnto god with the people and to render him thankes for all his mercies as the spirite gaue them vtterance This Chrysostome calleth Precandi domum the miraculous gift of praiers whereof S. Paul speaketh in this place and Tertul. seemeth to meÌ„tion the same in his Apologie for the Christians as during in the Church vnto his time We saith he looking vp to heauen with our hands stretched out as being innocent bareheaded as not ashamed sine monitore quia de pectore oramus make our praiers without any prompter as comming from the free motion of our own harts Phi. Our arguments conuince that S. Paul spake not of the Churches seruice and till those be answered we cannot change our minds Theo. That which I haue alreadie saide openeth your error in mistaking or els peruerting the wordes of S. Paul choose you whether if that content you not repeate your reasons as they stand in rew that we may see their force Phi. It is euident the Corinthians had their Seruice in Greeke at this same time and â—t was not done in these miraculous toungs Nothing is ment then of the church seruice Theo. To vs it is out of question that the Corinthians had their publike prayers and exhortations in the Greeke tongue because the common people of that City vnderstood none other and the tongue which they vnderstoode not might not be vsed in the Church by S. Pauls rule but you that denie S. Paul to speak of the Church seruice in this place howe prooue you the Corinthians had their Seruice in the Greeke tongue Phi. Doe you thinke they had not Theo. For our parts as I tolde you we are resolued because S. Paul would neither haue preaching nor praying in the Church but such as might edifie addeth that an vnknown tongue profiteth nothing to edificatioÌ„ mary you are otherwise minded and therefore I see not howe you can proue that they had their seruice in the Greeke tongue which you affirme to be euident Phi. Had they their Seruice trow you in an vnknowne tongue Theo. In your opinion that is no such absurdity Phi. They could not vnderstand it except it were in Greeke Theo. This is contrary to your owne Principles For the Hebrewe Greeke and Latine as you told vs euen nowe were vnderstoode of the cyuill people in euery great Citie and were that vntrue as I know it is though you auouched it for an aduantage yet is it not necessarie to vnderstand our prayers as your selues defend in this your declaration vpon S. Paul and following the path that you leade vs in your Rhemish obseruations wee say you can not prooue the Corinthians had their seruice in the Greeke tongue Philand In what tongue else coulde they haue it Theoph. Rather in Hebrewe than in Greeke for that tongue was sacred and naturall to the Iewes who first spred the Gospel and planted the Churches Phi. The Apostle requireth the people shoulde vnderstande the prayers of the Church otherwise they reape no profite by them and to speake Hebrewe in the Church to them that vnderstood nothing but Greeke were no reason Theo. Are you there at host now Can you plea thus on both sides when you be vrged You are making inuincible arguments that the Apostle speaketh nothing in this place of the Churches seruice before you can iustifie the first proposition which you bring you bee faine to take hold of this very place to prooue the Corinthians had their Church seruice in Greeke Phi. Nay without this place it is euident they had their seruice in greeke The. Set this chapter aside and if you prooue the Corinthians had their seruice in Greeke at this very time when the Apostle wrate wee giue you the cause Phi. You be resolued they had and yet you put vs to prooue it as if it were in doubt Theo. I tel the reason It is euident they had their seruice in a knowen tongue by that which the Apostle here writeth otherwise it is not euident by any other proofe that you can make And since you will haue the Apostle to speake nothing of the Church Seruice in this chapter why shoulde wee not put you to prooue that which you lay for the ground of your misconstring Saint Pauls text Phi. A trueth it is what proofe soeuer may or may not be brought for it Theo. Let it stand for trueth what will you conclude Phi. Nothing is meant then of their Church Seruice Theo. Why so Phi. That was in Greeke and well vnderstood of all the people Theo. A worthy sequele As if it were not possible for some vaine men to disturbe the Church of Corinth notwithstanding the Apostle had left generall direction that al things should be doone in the church vnto edification The Lordes supper was rightly deliuered them was it therefore not abused by some amongst them The like say we for their praiers in the church No doubt Paul ordained at Corinth as he did in al other churches of the Saincts that the people should say Amen to euery blessing and thankesgiuing that was vsed in the Church Might not therfore some of their Elders and ministers to venditate themselues and the gift which they had of God sometimes blesse and make their praiers at the Lords table in a tongue not vnderstoode of the whole multitude Phi. Were they strangers or inhabitants Theo. It skilleth not whether they might bee either Phi. Inhabitants there would vse none other toung than their owne and strangers might not minister Sacramentes in other mens Churches Theo. Some of their own might be so vain glorious as in making their praiers at the Lordes table which was then doone by hart and not after any prescribed order or form to shew the gift of tongues which they receiued of the holy Ghost to an other end and not to commend them-selues without edifiing the hearer Strangers also if they were in place were suffered both to teach and blesse in the Church as well as others that were tied to their Cures by reason that many were sent by the Apostles and by the holy Ghost to visite the Churches and comfort the Christians as they traueled and such were according to their
that water is no necessarie part of this Sacrament The Gospell in plaine spéech reporteth of our Sauiour that he dranke the fruit of the vine His owne words are I say vnto you I will not drinke henceforth of this fruit of the vine which surely saith Chrysostom yeeldeth wine and not water Your owne Schooles conclude flatly with vs against you Non est aqua vino miscenda de necessitate Sacramenti To mingle water with wine is no necessarie point of this Sacrament Water by the position of your owne Schooles is not necessary then of consequent arbitrary that is euery church hath ful liberty to vse wine alone as Christ did with out danger of departing or dissenting frō the primatiue church though they for some respects delaied their wine with water and the Sacrament is as perfect and as consonant to Christs institution without the mixture of water as with it Phi. That Christ vsed wine we do not deny but we auouch that he also mingled it with water Theo. We knowe you auouch it but we would sée you proue it Phi. Cyprian saith it Theo. Cyprian saith it not he saith rather the contrarie Inuenimus vinum fuisse quod sanguinem suum dixit We finde it was wine which the Lord called his blood And againe Cum dicat Christus ego sum vitis vera sanguis Christi non aqua est vtique sed vinum Wheras Christ saith I am a true vine surely the blood of Christ is not water but wine And againe he saith that Noë typum futurae veritatis ostendens non aquam sed vinum biberit foreshewing a figure of the truth that should follow dranke not water but wine Phi. Not water alone but mixed with wine Theo. Then all that Cyprian either pretendeth or alledgeth Christ institution for is the hauing of wine not of water and though he vse the words mixtus and miscere very often yet his meaning is to proue by scripture the adding of wine not of water to the Lords cup. Phi. He nameth both wine water as I haue shewed you Theo. And as I haue answered you both were lawful and then vsed in the church but Christs institution is vrged by him for wine and not for water and though he call the cup mixtus mingled because there might be and were then both in vse yet the scriptures which he citeth concerning this Sacrament and the figures which he bringeth make cléerely for wine and not for water And therefore that Christ mingled water at his last Supper or commanded vs so to doe can not be prooued by Cyprian nor any other learned and ancient father but that the church of Christ tempered her wine with water though not in all places nor at all times as your boasting vaine serueth you to affirme that we grant may be proued by Cyprian and others and was euer confessed by vs mary that is not our question You charge vs with the breaches of Christs institutiō in which and in euery part of which there is an absolute necessitie that you should proue if you could tell which way to do it but your loftie words and weake proofes haue no coherence you speake it in state as if it were more than Gospell and when you come to bring foorth your proofes you wrest a poore place of Cyprians and so take your leaues Phil. We bring you S. Iames Masse which in expresse termes affirmeth that Christ after Supper taking the cup and mingling it with wine water sanctified it blessed it and gaue it to his Disciples Theop. Of Iames Masse I haue spoken before In such rotten records neither receiued nor regarded in the Church of Christ till errour and ignorance grew so great that the Pastours could not or would not discerne fables from truths and forgeries from sincerities lieth the summe of your late Rhemish religion but take back your Monkish corruptions and let vs haue likely testimonies for that you say or none you may alleage S. Iames Gospell which is yet extant with as good credit as S. Iames Masse and so the Gospels of Nicodemus Thomas Andrew Barnabas and Bartholomew or if those like you not the Acts of Peter Philip and Andrew and the Reuelations of Paul Steuen and Thomas for these be of the very same mint and stamp that Iames Masse and the Apostles canons and constitutions are but knowe you Sir that as Heretikes and other idle persons forged these things in their names so the Church of Christ euer reiected them as false and hereticall and suffered no christians to ground their actions or doctrines on such corruptiōs Phil. Sainct Basils Masse confirmeth the same The words are Likewise taking the cup of the fruite of the grape mingling it giuing thanks and blessing and sanctifieng it he gaue it to his holy Disciples Theoph. A pigge of the same sow They that would offer to broach their fansies in the Apostles names would neuer sticke at the Fathers works It is easie to put Ambrose Austens Basils and Chrysostoms names to any thing and yet the word which is vsed in Basils Liturgie doth not conuince the mingling of water with wine and Chrysostoms Liturgie doth apparently shew that water was mingled with wine for the people long after consecration and yet before distribution which argueth my saying to be most true that they delaied their wine for sobrietie they did not mixe it for any mysterie Phil. Sainct Basill I am sure saith Miscens Christ mingling the wine gaue it to his disciples Theo. The Gréek words for miscens mixtus if they come from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do not alwaies signifie the mingling of water with wine but generally the tempering or pouring out of wine for him that shall drinke though none other kind of liquour be added to it Erasmus giueth that obseruation vpon the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Sainct Iohn so vseth it whē he sayeth He shall drinke of the wine of the wrath of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is mixed or poured without mingling into the cup of his wrath where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being without mixture is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is mingled or rather infused into the cup of Gods wrath Upon which spéech Erasmus noteth Graecis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dicitur quod infunditur in calicem bibituro etiamsi non aqua diluatur aut alio potus genere The Grecians call that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when any thing is powred into a cup for him that shall drinke though it be not delaied with water or any other kind of liquour In this sense manie of the Fathers that wrate in Gréeke may vse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and yet no mingling with water can be inferred vpon those words as your interpreters ouer gréedily imagine Phil. You pare the words of Saint Basils Liturgie but Saint Iames Masse is so
The faith of our fathers is not alwaies trueth 537 God forbiddeth vs to follow the steppes of our fathers 538 The godly confessed their fathers did erre 539 All humane lawes barres giue place to God 540 The prince might make lawes for trueth maugre the Pope 541 Princes haue setled religion without Councels 542 Christian religion receiued vpon the direction of a lay man 543 Trueth authorised the Apostles against Priests Princes 544 Railing on Princes is a capitall crime 545 The contents of the fourth part No point of Poperie Catholike 546. What is truely CATHOLIKE 547 The worshipping of Images is not Catholike 547 The west Church against the worshipping of Images 548 Corruption to help the credite of the second Nicen councell 549 The worshipping of Images detested in the Church of Christ as Heresie 550 The â—mage of God made with hands may not be worshipped 552 The Iewes Gentiles did erect their Images vnto God 553 The heathen adored their stocks as the Images of God 554 The Image of man set vp vnto God is an Idoll 556 The wodden Image of Christ may not be worshipped 557 The honour done to a wodden Image is not done to Christ. 559 Adoration of Images no Apostolick tradition 562 S. Basill forged to make for adoration of Images 563 The shamefull forgeries and falsities of the second Nicene councell 564 Both Scriptures and fathers wickedly abused by the second Nicene Councâ—l 565 The second Nicene Councel conuincing it selfe of forgerie 566 What an Idole is 567 A wrong seruice of God is Idolatrie 568 The Church of Rome giueth diuine honour vnto Images 569 Christs honour may not be giuen to Images 570 The hauing of Images is not Catholike 572 Athanasius palpablie forged in the second Nicene Councell 574 The Church next to the Apostles reiected Images 574 Images came first from Heathens vnto Christians 575 Images reiected by godly Bishops 576. No corporall submission may be giuen to Images 577 The Nicene Bishops play the sophists in decreeing adoration vnto Images 577 The wodden crosse of Christ may not be adored 578 Not one word in scripture for adoration of Images 580 No point of faith may be built on traditions 581 No point of faith beleeued without Scripture 582 Baptizing of Infants is a consequent of the Scriptures 583 It may be a tradition yet grounded on the Scriptures 584 Baptisme of InfaÌ„ts prooued needfull by the Scriptures 585 Rebaptization repugnant to the Scriptures by S. Augustines iudgement 588 The perpetuall virginitie of Marie the Mother of Christ. 589 The Godhead of the holy ghost expressed in the Scriptures 590 His proceeding from the father and the sonne confirmed by the Scriptures 592 Expresse scripture is the sense and not the syllables 593 Fathers wrested to speake against the scriptures 594 The Popish faith is their owne traditioÌ„ against the scriptures 597 Their adoration of images is a late and wicked inuenâ—ion of their schooles 598 Images adored in the Church of Rome with diuine honour 600 Images reiected by Catholike Bishops 601 S. Austen condemneth Images as vnprofitable signes 602 Custome without trueth is but the antiquitie of error 603 Praier in an vnknowen toung prohibited by Saint Paul in Gods name 604 S. Paul speaketh of vnknoweÌ„ touÌ„gs 606 An vnknowen toung cannot edifie 607 Diuine seruice in a knowen toung cannot choose but edifie 608 S. Paul speaketh of three learned toungs as wel as of others 610 S. Paul speaketh of the Hebrew Greeke and Latine as well as of other tongues 611 S. Pauls wordes comprise both Church seruice sermons 612 Saint Paul 1. Cor. 14. speaketh of Church seruice 613 The Church vnder the Apostles had no set order of diuine seruice 614 The Church vnder the Apostles did sing blesse and pray by the gyft of the spirite 615 The Apostle had no certaine praiers or seruice 616 The Iesuits halting reasons that S. Paul did not speak of the church Seruice 616 S. Paul to the Corinthians speaketh of Church seruice 620 No man may say AMEN to that he vnderstandeth not 624 Necessary to vnderstand our praiers 625 The primatiue Church had neuer her praiers and seruice in an vnknowen tongue 627 The latine seruice was vnderstood in the Countries where it was 629 Alleluia is vsed in all tongues aswell barbarous as others 630 The Britans had no latine seruice 632 Alleluia soung at the plough 632 The Iesuits manner of alleaging impertiment authorities 633 Bede doth not say that the people of this Realme had the latine seruice in his time 634 The prayers of the primatiue Church were common to all the people 636 The Masse book proueth that the people should vnderstand the Priest 639 The Priest needeth no speach in his praiers but to edifie the hearers 640 Praier is as acceptable to God in a barbarous as in a learned touÌ„g 642 Seruice in an vnknowen tongue is no custome of the vniuersall Church 643 The primatiue church had her seruice in such tongues as the people vnderstood 644 The primatiue church allowed praiers in barbarous tounges Whether side commeth nearest to christs institution 650 S. Paul by the Lords supper meaneth the sacrament 651 The name Masse whence it first came 655 We doe not swarue from christes institution 657 Christ did blesse with the mouth and not with the finger 658 Blessing in the scriptures applied to diuerse and sundrie thinges 659 To doe any thing vpon or ouer the bread is not needefull 660 The rehearsall of christs wordes maketh a sacrament 661 We shew our purpose at the Lords table by our words and deedes 662 The worde beleeued maketh the Sacrament 664 Vnlâ—uened bread is not of the substance of the Sacrament 664 Water is no part of Christs institution 663. 670 Water is not necessarie in the Lordes cup euen by the confession of their own schooles 668 No water mingled whiles the Apostles liued 672 The Masse an open profanation of Christs institution 673 Priuate Masse euerieth all that christ did or said at his last Supper 674 Christ did not sacrifice himselfe at his last supper 676 The Primatiue church had no priuate Masse 678 The Lords supper ought to be coÌ„mon 679 The Lords cup was deliuered to the people as well as the bread 679 Christs precept for the cup extendeth as well to the people as to the Priest 680 In the primatiue church the lords cup was common to all 682 The causes for which the church of Rome changed christs institution 683 The auncient church of Rome very vehement against half communions 684 Forbearing the Lords cuppe condemned in laymen as sacrilege 685 Sacrilege in the Priest can be no religion in the people 686 The Iesuits proofes for their sacrifice 687 How the fathers call the Lordes supper a sacrifice 688 Their own Masse booke contradicteth their sacrifice 690 The Lords death is the sacrfice of the Lords supper 691 A memoriall of christs passion is our daily sacrifice 692 The elder sort of Schoolemen knew not their
prince against prince are nothing to this purpose The defence Cap. 5. Euseb. li. 9. ca. 6. The Armenians were no subiects but consederates Euseb. li. 9. ca. 7. The defence Cap. 5. Warres made for religion It is not enough to proue that some rebelled but this also must be shewed that their rebellion was allowed * Rom. 13. Well they might shut the Church dores against Ethnickes whiles they were at the diuine mysteries but they neuer rebelled nor refused to suffer any punishmeÌ„t that Galerius or others would inflict on theÌ„ Euseb. li. 8. ca. 7.9.10.12 * Euseb. li. 8. ca. 7.9.10.12 * The defence cap. 5. Nazian de lande Basil. Ambros. lib. 5. epist. * Theod. lib. 4. cap. 19. S. Basil would not suffer the people to grow to a tumult for his defeÌ„ce See Nazianzenes funeral oration in the praier of S. Basil. The people offered to saue their Bishop froÌ„ the priuate and intemperate rage of a deputie but not from the Emperour Nazian in laudem Basilij oratio funebr This tumult seemed tollerable and yet S. Basill would not allow it S. Ambrose would not suffer the people of Millan to defeÌ„d him against the Emperour Ambros. epist. lib. 5. epist. ad Marcel 33. Ibidem Pugnare non debeo See the fifth booke and 33. epistle of S. Ambrose for this whole action This casuall disorder was much against the Bishops will yet nothing neere a rebellion Lib. 5. epist 33. * Ibidem Had the Iesuites been in S. Ambrose place they would haue tolde the Emperor an other tale The Defence cap. 5. If the people were afraid to rebell in the primatiue Church what thinke you were the Bishops The defence cap. 5. Theodoret. li. 2. cap. 13. The example of Athanasius Socrat. lib. 1. cap. 13. Sozom. lib. 4. cap. 7. Dama in Pontific Athanasius no rebell Athanasius horribly belâ—ed by the Iesuits Athanasius cleareth himselfe of that which the Iesuits father on him Athanas. ad Imperator ConstantiuÌ„ Apolog. Did this man stirre Constans against Constantius * And Iesuits Athanasius saith it had been madnes to haue done that which the Iesuits say he did Athanas. IbideÌ„ Ibidem How farre the was he from rebelling Be they sober or wel in their wits that not only thinke but openly affirm they may resist and depriue the prince The people of Alexandria were verie seditious Socra li. 7. c. 13. Euag. li. 2. ca. 8. Socrat. lib. 3. cap. 2. lib. 5. cap. 16. li. 7. cap. 13. Euag. lib. 2. cap. 5. 8. Theeues and murtherers far more tolerable than deposers of Princes Sozom. lib. 4. cap. 9. Sozom. lib. 6. Cap. 13. Athanas. euer submitted him selfe when he saw the people inclined to any tumult for his cause Sozom. lib. 8. cap. 18. And so did Chrysostome The Defence cap. 5. Socrat. lib. 4. cap. 17. 30. Sozom. lib. 6. cap. 19. * Socrat. lib. 4. cap. 37. The tumult at Alexandria for the receiuing of Peter and reiecting of Lucius Socrat. lib. 4. cap. 37. The people draue Lucius from his See but not with armes The people might cleaue to their true pastor though the Prince by force had placed an other in his steede That Lucius was expelled from his Bishopricke is confessed but the meane how it was done is not expressed Socrat. lib. 4. cap. 36. Lucius detested for sheding of blood by one that was a conuert of the Saracens The defence cap. 5. Socrat. lib. 2. cap. 18. Niceph. lib. 14. cap. 21. * Theodoret. li. 5. cap. 39. How the Persians were harboured by Theodosius the yonger * Socrat. lib. 7. cap. 18. * Socrat. lib. 7. cap. 18. * Socrat. lib. 7. cap. 20. Can the Iesuits find no difference betweene deposing princes by their owne subiects harboring of strangers by other princes Atticus no subiect to the persian can be no president for subiects Theodosius the Emperor had other good causes to warre vpon the Persian Socrat. lib. 7. cap. 20. Cap. 18. 20. The defence cap. 5. The example of Pope Leo the first Leo. epist. 75. Euag. li. 2. ca. 8. Leo requested the Prince to punish his subiects what is that to the depriuation of Princes Euag. li. 2. ca. 8. It is a glorious thing for a Prince to punish heretikes but not for subiects to rebell against their Prince The defence cap. 5. Gregorie made the like request to the Emperours deputie For 600. yeres after Christ no subiect tooke armes against his prince for any matter of religion Aug. in Psal. 124. If Apostataes were serued obaied by Christians what Princes should be deposed Caus. 11. quaest 13. §. Iulianus The defence cap. 5. What Princes may be excoÌ„municated when The Iesuites finding no example in the Primatiue church where a prince was vrged with armes by his own subiects come to this shift that they might haue doone it though they did it not If the Bishops might haue deposed princes and did not theÌ„ were they permitters increasers of their heresie and tyrannie The defence Cap. 5. The Iesuits slaunder the auncieÌ„t martyrs of christs Church as if they had been willing but not able to resist their Princes Socrat. lib. 2. cap. 22. What oportunities the christians had to distresse Constantius Socrat. lib. 2. cap. 25. Athanas. apolog ad Constant. Socrat. lib. 2. cap. 34. And Iulian. * In Psal. 124. * Socrat. lib. 3. cap. 22. And valens Socrat. lib. 4. cap. 3. Socrat. lib. 4. cap. 35. And Valentinian Paulus Diaconus de gest Romanor lib. 1. And Anastasius Euag. li. 3. ca. 44 Anastasius an heretike offered to resigne his Crowne the people would not suffer him Regard of dutie and the Apostles doctrine kept the primatiue Church from resisting hereticall princes * Rom. 13. Paulus Diaconus de gest Romanor lib. 1. The defence cap. 5. Se. S. Thomas 2.2 quaest 10. artic 10. Rom. 13. Their scroles resolue directly against S. Paul Rom. 13. Luke 20. This is nether pertinent to our question nor any part of their meaning Tertullian ad Scapulam Neuer rebels were christiaÌ„s in the primatiue Church The reasons why ChristiaÌ„s would not resist taken out of their own confessions Tertul. in apologetico Ibidem Christians commanded by God to pray for their Princes though they were persecutors Ibidem See S. Paul S. Peter for obedience to heathen Princes Rom. 13. Tertul. in apologetico Mark what faces the Christians had 200. yeres after Christ. Desolation would haue followed if the ChristiaÌ„s should haue but forsaken the Pagans The Citizens almost all Christians The defence cap. 5. The defence cap. 5. Princes excoÌ„municated depriued for defects in religion An Anti pape Heretical malice No president for the depriuatioÌ„ of princes within a 1000. yeres after Christ. Zonar annal to 3. in imperio Leon. Isaâ—ri Vrspergens in anno 718. Otho Frisingen lib. 5. cap. 18. Sigebert in anno 731. The rebellion of the ItaliaÌ„s against Leo might be the Popes secret practise but he durst not appeare in the
August Ibidem Tertul. de Idolaetria Isido OriginuÌ„ lib. 5. An Image worshipped is a false God consequeÌ„tly an Idole Quaest. super Iosua lib. 6. cap. 29. The Idole of the heart * August de verbis Dom. secundum Mat. sermo 6. * Idem in Ioan. tract 19. Hieron in Iere. cap. 32. Euery false opinion of God is an Idoll Hieron in Esaiae cap. 2. Hieron in Ose. cap. 4. * August de consens Euangelist li. 1. ca. 18. To serue God as we list and not as he will is idolatrie Why the seruing of God otherwise thaÌ„ he willeth is Idolatrie Deut. 12. * Esa. 1. * Mat. 15. * Esa. 29. The worshiping of Christ by an Image except himself commaund it is Idolatrie They must shew where Christ commaunded him selfe to be worshipped by an Image And so you doe as shal appeare by the confession of your fellowes * Tortalicium sidei contra Iudaeâ—s Saracenos c. lib. 3. Considerat 4. argumenâ— 24. Diuine honor giuen to Images by the Church of Rome * Fortalicium fidei Ibidem Iacob Nanctan in 1. cap. ad Roma They giue Christs honor to an Image and then they say they doe it in respect of Christ. The Papists thinke to shift off the art of Idolatrie with a logicall respect Esa. 42. God respecteth the act if it bee against his law and not the inteÌ„tion Mat. 25. Christ wil haue charitie shewed to others for his sake but not diuine honour to any creature or Image Whether ciuil reuerence may be giuen to Images caÌ„ be no questioÌ„ of religion Yeas but you honour not him when you honour an Image Christ hath appointed vs beâ—ter meanes than an Image to reméber his death those the papists despise preferre their owne deuises before them * If they bee not dangeâ—â—us withall superfluous Rom. 1. Neither Christ nor his Apostles deliuered or allowed Images * Libell Athan. de passion Imaginis Christi * Nicen. Synod 2. act â— 4 * Sigâ—berâ— in anno 765. Fortaliâ—ium fidei lib. 3. consid 10. mirab 5. Vincent speculi histor lib. 24. cap. 160. * In deed they doe therefore looke to your 2. Nicene Councell what grosse forgeries are in it The Apostles the Church succeeding for 400. yeres had no images al that was suffered in the Church for 600. yeres was the painting of stories The Gentils obiâ—cted this to the first Christiâ—ns that they had no Images Arnob. aduers. gentes lib. 8. Origen contra Celsum lib. 7. What the Christians answered Clemens Alexandâ— oratiâ— exhortatoria ad gentes * Ibidem * Origeâ—s â—â—tâ—a Celsum lib. 7. * Ibidem Arnob. contra gentes lib. 8. Lib. 2. cap. 19. The woman that was cured of the bloodie flixe by Christ erected an Image vnto him as vnto her benefactour her selfe being an heathen Euseb. lib. 7. cap. 18. Sozomen lib. 5. cap. 21. Iulian ouerthrew this image in detestation of Christ his person and doctrine Eusebius iudgâ—ment of the womans making this Image Euseb. lib. 7. cap. 18. This setting vp of an image vnto Christ is counted by Eusebius an heathenish custome Images reiected in Spaine Concil Eliber canon 36. August de consent Euangelist lib. 1. cap. 20. Images reiected in Africa Epiph. in epist. ad Iohan. Hierosolymitan Images erected as contrarie to the Scriptures Gregorie disliked not painting of stories in the church but he condeÌ„ned adoratioÌ„ of Images Greg. lib. 9. epi. 9 Exod. 20. Submission of knees hands eyes are parts of gods honor a Esa. 45. b Ephes. 3. c Psal. 63. d 1. Tim. 2. e Psal. 123. f Psal. 25. g Iohn 17. Magistrates Parents haue paâ—t of Gods externall honor because they present his person in iudging and blessing God hath prohibited that Images should haue any part of his corporall honor We must not bowe but to that which is better than our selues Habetur Nicen. Synod 2. act 7. What cuÌ„ning was vsed in the 2. Nicene Councel to haue Images adored * Tharasius Ibidem Nicen Synod 2. act 7. epist. Tharas totius Synodi ad Constant. Irenem * A maÌ„ by this shift may adore his horse and be no Idolater * Genes 33. * Genes 23. * 1. Reg. 20. * Luke 14. Were not these bishops well occupied to make this conclusion A right Stratagem of Satan first to bring in adoratioÌ„ of Images with an ambiguitie of wordes then to set the people to adore them in plain deeds Nicenae Synodi 2. act 7. epist. Tharasij â—oâ—ius Concilij Ibidem Ibidem Ibidem Ibidem To kisse was a signe of fauor and loue to bowe a signe of subiection The popish Doctrine touching Images agreeth not with the Councell which they would seeme to followe Two sensible chaunges in the adoration of Images Christes Crosse that is his death must be adored but not the wood on which he hung Ambros. de obitu Theodosij Arnob. adversgentes lib. 8. You reiect the bookes that were in your own keeping and will haue vs receiue what you list at your hands though it bee neuer so false It can be no point of faith that may not be proued by the scriptures They may soone be Catholike if they forge as fast as they haue doone then measure Catholicisme by those forgeries The Rhemish Testament vpon the 2. Thes. 2. How largely the word Tradition is takeÌ„ amongest the fathers The Rhemish Test. fol. 559. This is their maner of aleaging fathers throughout their Rhemish Testament a Athanas. contra gentes b Chrysost. homil 1. ad Titum c Idem opera imperfect in Mat. homil 41. d Cyril in Leuit. lib. 5. e Ambros. Hexamer lib. 1. ca. 6. f August in Ioan. tract 44. g Vincent aduers haeret h Ibidem Al that the Iesuites can inferre out of these fathers is this that their own traditions be not necessarie to saluation Tradition is good if it consent with the scriptures The Iesuites doctrine dependeth on tradition of their owne making The Rhemish Testament 2. Thes. 2. The Rhemish Test. Ibidem The Rhemish Test. Ibidem S. Augustine refuteth rebaptization by Scripture â—Aug epi. 203. Aug. epi. 166. Contra Crescon lib. 2. cap. 31. Contra Crescon lib. 2. cap. 32. Augustine refused Cypâ— authoritie as dissident froÌ„ the Scriptures Aug. de Genes ad literam lib. 10. cap. 23. Al the shew the Ies. haue for this matter is one t too much in S. Austen Esset for Esse Aug. de Genes ad literam lib. 10. cap. 23. There is no Gradation in these wordes except you read Esse which Sainct Augustâ—ment to make a De Bapt. coÌ„trae Donâ—t li. 4. cap. 24. The very same phrase in the very same matter is here vsed a De Bapt. coÌ„tra Donat. lib. 2. cap. 7. If the Iesuites read Esset it is both against themselues also against S. Austen The Iesuites tradition be not all Apostolicall c August epist. 118. d August epist. 86. Esset maketh S. Augustine contrarie to
of Rome coulde not erre which your selues dare not saie and yet you woulde wring it out of Cyprians wordes But God be thanked Sainct Paul hath preuented your wicked interprise Writing to the whole church of Rome and giuing them their due praise for their deuotion and zeale and entering at last into the reiection of the Iewes for their vnbeliefe hee warneth expresly the Romanes in these wordes Boast not thy selfe against the braunches and if thou boast thy selfe thou bearest not the roote but the roote thee Thou wilt say the braunches are broken off that I might bee graft in Well through infidelitie they are broken off thou standest by faith Be not high minded but feare For if God spared not the naturall braunches take heed lest he spare not thee Behold therefore the goodnes and seuerity of God toward them which haue fallen seueritie but towards thee goodnes if thou continue in his goodnes otherwise thou also shalt be cut off Whether the Apostle spake generally to the Gentiles and inclusiuely to the Romanes or namely to the Romanes and proportionablie to the rest it is all one to vs one of the twaine hee must needes Origen saith vppon these wordes of Paul I say to you Gentiles Now he plainely turneth his speech to the Gentiles but chiefly to those of the citie of Rome that beleeued S. Paul speaking to the Romanes no man may except the Romanes and they being included his admonition to them feare and beware least was vtterly superfluous if there coulde bee no daunger in them of swaruing from the faith and the condition implied otherwise if thou continue not and the commination annexed thou also shalt be cut off were both ridiculous and odious if it were not possible for them to fal or to be cut off Fight not therefore against the holy Ghost with broken reedes caught here and there out of the Fathers works Looke rather in time to this watchword which the apostle giueth you feare and take heede otherwise thou also shalt be cut off And marke his reason If the naturall braunches may be broken off much more the wild which were planted but in their steedes Phi. If that had beene the Apostles meaning doe you thinke the Fathers would haue gainesaide it Theo. I thinke they would not and I see they doe not and that maketh mee to interprete Cyprian in such sort as hee may agree with himselfe and not confront S. Paul Phi. His wordes do surely leane on our side Theo. They fit your humor and in that respect you be eger on them Otherwise I haue cleared Cyprian both of that speech of that intent And were you not vnshamefast wranglers you would perceiue that the ordinary vse of the phrase both in diuine and humane writinges doth acquite him of that opinion which you inforce vpon him But such is your profession you must go on as you haue begun Phi. If one alone had saide it we would not vrge it so often but S. Hierom hath likewise testified the same Know you that the Romane faith commended by the Apostles mouth will receiue no such deceites nor can be possibly changed though an Angell from heauen taught otherwise being fensed by S. Pauls authority Tom. 2. Apolog. aduers. Ruff. lib. 3. cap. 4. Theo. If S. Hierom say the same that Cyprian did he must be taken and vnderstood as Cyprian was and so you ease me of that labour Phi. He saith the same in effect but his words are more forcible Theo. That is your wilfulnesse in peruerting and racking the words of S. Hierom is more sensible For S. Hierom speaketh not one word of the persons that they shall neuer fall from the faith but auoucheth only that the doctrine which was first preached at Rome and then continued was so exact and perfect that an Angell from heauen might not bee heard against it And to this ende hee saide Scito Romanam fidem Apostolica voce laudatam istiusmodi praestigias non recipere etiamsi Angelus de coelo aâ—â—ter annunciet quam semel praedicatum est Pauli authoritate munitaÌ„ noÌ„ posse mutari Know you that the Romane faith commeÌ„ded by the Apostles voice receiueth no such delusions and that being armed with Pauls authority it may not bee changed if an Angell from hauen doe preach otherwise than once was preached Phi. You run againe to your former interpretation Non posse mutari it may not be changed in steede of it can not be changed Theo. Use which you will so you grant which I fully proued before that non posse doth vsually signifie as well that which is vnlawfull as that which is vnpossible Phi. I know non possum is vsed diuersely but how doth that answere S. Hierom Theo. You take hâ—lde of a word in Hierom which in all mens speech and writinges hath diuerse and sundrie significations by your owne confession and then you maruell why we doe not receiue the vntruest and vnlikeliest of them all for your pleasures without any farther proofe Non possum doth import that which is either vnpossible vnlawfull inconuenient or any waie impugnant to the ful persuasion and determination of our mindes as the places before alleadged doe manfestly declare and in all those accidentes our common speech is may be non possum I can not You would now by a text of Hieroms where he saith Romanam fidem non posse mutari etiam si Angelus de caelo c. The Romane faith may not or can not be charged though an Angel came from heauen infer that the Romanes vntill the worldes end can not possibly choose but abide in the same faith which was first deliuered them and that doe what they will to the contrarie they must be preserued in Christes trueth This is wee say a shamefull violence offered to Hieroms wordes against all learning against his meaning and against the spirit of God speaking in S. Paul First the wordes non posse mutari receiue both constructions a like that is either a change of the faith can neuer happen in the Romanes which is your sense or else their faith can not possibly bee changed without incurring infidelitie which is ours For it ceaseth to bee faith when once it is changed Next S. Hierom speaketh not of the persons but of the thing hee doth not say the Romanes can not change their mindes but the faith which was deliuered them in no wise may be chaunged And why Because it is the truth of God which neuer changeth Againe the authoritie of Paul writing to the Galathians which Hierom citeth doth not warrant that the Romanes shal not fall but onely that the faith once preached may not be changed though an Angell from heauen should attempt it especially since the Apostle commended the doctrine which they reserued to be the true christian faith What reason then haue you besides your parcial affectioÌ„ to the See of Rome to draw these words from their natiue sense
you Marke howe Paul deliuered the man of Corinth to Satan Eijciebatur nempe a communi fidelium caetu hee was cast out of the congregation of the faythfull hee was cutte off from the flocke of Christ and left naked and being so destitute of Gods helpe hee lay open to the Wolfe and subiect to euerie assault So sayth Theodorete By this place where Paul deliuered the incestuous Corinthian to Satan we are taught that the diuell inuadeth them which are seuered cut off from the bodie of the church finding them destitute of Gods grace Keepe your selues therefore within your limites Pastors haue their charge which is as S. Paul noteth to watch ouer soules they haue not to doe with the goods or bodies of the faithfull Their goods are Caesars by the plaine resolution of our Sauiour Giue vnto Caesar the thinges which are Caesars Which God willed Samuel to aduertise the people of when they first demaunded a king Shew them the right or law of the king that shall raigne ouer them And so Samuel did saying This shall be the law of your king He shall take your sonnes and appoint them for his charets and to be his horsemen shal make theÌ„ captaines ouer thowsandes captaines ouer fiftyes set them to eare his grounds to reape his haruest to make his instruments of war things to serue for his charets And he wil take your fields vines best olyues giue them to his seruants And he wil take the tenth of your corn wine giue it to his Princes seruitors And he wil take your men seruaÌ„ts maideseruants the choice of your yong meÌ„ your asses vse theÌ„ to his work The tenth of your sheep wil he take ye shal be his seruaÌ„ts Phi. Make you the king Lord of al without exception Theo. Though God neuer ment that Princes inordinate priuate pleasures should wast consume the wealth of their Realmes yet may they iustly commaunde the goods and bodies of all their Subiects in time both of warre and peace for any publike necessitie or vtilitie Whereby God declareth Princes and not Pastours to bee the right ouerseers of temporall and earthlie matters and consequentlie that the power of the keyes extendeth not to those thinges which are committed to the Princes charge I meane neither to the goods nor to the bodies of christian men To a king sayth Chrysostom are the bodies of men committed to the Priest their soules The king pardoneth corporall offences the Priest remitteth the guiltinesse of sinne The king compelleth the Priest exhorteth the one with force the other with aduise the kings weapons are sensible the Priâ—stes are Ghostly The like distinction betweene them doth S. Hierom make Rex nolentibus praest Episcopus volentibus ille timore subijcit hic seruituti donatur ille corpora custodit ad mortem hic animas seruat ad vitam The king ruleth men vnwilling the Priest none saue the willing the king hath his in subiection with terrour the Priest is appointed for the seruice of his the king mastereth their bodies with death but the Priest preserueth their soules to life This power of the sword our Sauiour precisely prohibited his Apostles as I haue shewed and therefore you may not indirectly nor by accident chalenge it Phi. Why then did Paul saie Knowe you not that wee shall iudge the Angels howe much more secular matters Theo. If this bee the best hold you haue in the new Testament for secular matters you must take the paynes to light from your horse and goe on your feete as well as your neighbours For the Apostle speaketh that of all Christians which you restraine to Priests and moueth the parties striuing rather to make their brethren arbiters of their quarrelles than to persue one an other before Infidels What grant is this to you in your owne right to bee iudges ouer your brethren in all secular affaires and not onely without their consents to determine their griefes but also to bereaue them of their goods and lands and afflict their bodies yea to pull the sword out of Princes handes take their Crownes from their heades when the rulers are beleeuers as well as the Preachers Do you not know saith S. Paul that the Saincts not onely Priests shal iudge the world If the world then shal be iudged by you speaking to all that were of the church at Corinth are ye vnworthy to iudge the smalest matters He saith not it was their right to iudge secular matters but they were worthy to bee trusted with them whom God would trust with greater and shewing that hee spake this of the people not of the Priests he saith If then you haue any iudgementes concerning the thinges of this life make euen the contemptible in the church your iudges Hee saith not God hath made them your iudges but rather thaÌ„ your contending brabling about earthly things which you professe to contemn should be knowen to Ethniks such as hate deride both Christ you your selues make the meanest of your brethren whom you will your iudges Nowe ioyne your conclusion ergo the Pope hath authority to dispose the goods lands and liues of all the faithâ—ul euen of Princes theÌ„selues be they neuer so iust or religious Magistrates and see what a non sequitur you conclude out of S. Pauls wordes Phi. The Primatiue church vnderstood this place of Priests and Bishops as appeareth by Sainct Augustine complaining of the tumultuous perplexities of other mens causes in secular matters to the which troubles sayth he the Apostle hath fastened vs. 1. Corinth 5. The like hee witnesseth of S. Ambrose at Millan And S. Gregory reporteth the same of himselfe at Rome Theo. Trueth it is the Bishoppes of the Primatiue church were greatly troubled with those matters not as ordinarie iudges of those causes but as arbiters elected by the consent of both parties And I coulde requite you with Gregories owne wordes of the same matter in the same place Quod certum est nos non debere which it is certaine we ought not to do but yet I thinke so long as it did not hinder their vocation function though it were troublesome vnto them they might neither in charitie nor in dutie refuse it because it tended to the preseruing of peace loue amongest meÌ„ And the Apostle had licenced all men to choose whom they woulde in the church for their iudges no doubt meaning that they which were chosen shoulde take the paynes to heare the cause and make an ende of the strife But it is one thing to make peace between brethren as they did by heaping their griefes with consent of both sides and an other thing to claime a iudiciall interest in those causes in spite of mens heartes Which wrong you shoulde not offer the least of your brethren much lesse may you
depriue Princes of their Crownes and take their Scepters from them because the Apostle willed the christians to be tried rather by their brethreÌ„ than by their enemies which were Infidels Phi. In all which there is no difference betwixt kinges that bee faithfull and other Christian men who all in that they haue submitted themselues and their Scepters to the sweete yoke of Christ are subiect to discipline and to their Pastors authority no lesse than other sheepe of his fold Theo. In beleeuing the word receiuing the Sacraments and obeying the Lawes of God there is no difference betweene the Ruler and the Subiect but the temporall states and possessions of priuate men you may not meddle with by no color of ecclesiastical power or discipline much lesse may you touch the bodies or take the Crownes of Princes into your handes by your accidentall indirect authoritie which is nothing else but a sillie shift of yours to crosse the commaundements of God Phi. Though the state regiment policie and power temporall be in it selfe alwaies of distinct nature qualitie and condition from the gouernment ecclesiasticall and spirituall common wealth called the church or bodie mysticall of Christ and the Magistrate spirituall and ciuill diuerse and distinct and sometimes so farre that the one hath no dependance of the other nor subalteration to the other in respect of themselues as it is in the Churches of God residing in heathen kingdoms and was in the Apostles times vnder the Pagan Emperours yet now where the lawes of Christ are receiued and the bodies politike and mysticall the Church and ciuill state the Mâ—gistrate Ecclesiasticall and Temporall concurre in their kinds togither though euer of distinct regimentes natures and endes there is such a concurrence and subalternation betwixt both that the inferiour of the two which is the ciuill state must needs in matters pertayning any way either directly or indirectly to the honor of God and benefit of the soule be subiect to the spirituall and take direction from the same Theo. This is tossing of termes as men doe tenez-balles to make pastime with The state regiment policie and power temporall is in it selfe you saie alwaies of distinct nature qualitie and condition from the gouernment ecclesiasticall and spirituall Common-wealth called the Church or bodie mysticall of Christ. You seeke to confound that which you would seeme to distinguish and when you haue spent much breath to no ende you conclude that though the church and the Common-wealth be distinct states as you can not denie yet you will rule both by reason the Common-wealth as the inferiour of the two dependeth on the Church and hath subalternation to the church as to the superiour But Sir in plaine termes and more trueth to the Sonne of God ruling in his Church by the might of his worde and spirite all kingdomes and Princes must be subiect their swordes Scepters soules and bodies mary to the Pope attyring himselfe with the spoiles of Christ and his church no such thing is due The watch-men and sheepeheardes that serue Christ in his church haue their kinde of regiment distinct from the temporall power and state but that regiment of theirs is by counsell and perswasion not by terrour or compulsion and reacheth neither to the goods nor to the bodies of any men much lesse to the crownes and liues of Princes and therefore your shifting of wordes and shrinking from the Popes Consistorie to the Church the spirituall Common wealth the mysticall bodie of Christ and such like houering and vncertaine speaches is but a trade that you haue gotten to make the Reader beleeue wee derogate from Christ and would haue Princes superiours to the worde and Sacramentes which Christ hath left to gather and gouerne the church withall Howbeit this course is so common with you that now it doth but shame you A christian king must take direction not from the Popes person or pleasure but from the Lawes and commaundementes of Christ to whome alone hee oweth subiection And as for the Bishoppes and Pastours of his Realme whome you falsly call the spirituall Common-wealth and the mysticall bodie of Christ because they bee but partes thereof and not so much except withall they bee teachers of truth those he must and should consult in respect they be Gods messengers sent to him and his people but with great care to trie them and free libertie to refuse them if they be found not faithfull And when the Prince learning by their instruction what is acceptable to God in doctrine and discipline shall receiue and publish the same the Bishoppes themselues are bounde to obey and if they will not the Magistrate may lawfully see the rigour of his lawes executed vpon them On the other side if the Prince wil not submit himselfe to the rules and preceptes of Christ but wilfully maintaine heresie and open impietie the Bishops are without flatterie to reproue and admonish the Prince of the daunger that is imminent from God and if he persist they must cease to communicate with him in diuine prayers and mysteries but still they must serue him honour him and pray for him teaching the people to doe the like and with meekenesse induring what the wrath of the Prince shal lay on them without annoying his person resisting his power discharging his subiectes or remouing him from his throne which is your maner of censuring Princes Phi. The ciuill Gouernour is SVBIECT to the spirituall amongest christians Theo. I haue often tolde you howe The ciuill Gouernour must heare beleeue and obey the meanest seruaunt that God sendeth if hee speake no more than his Masters will That subiection Princes owe to the sender and not to the speaker But were they simplie subiect to the messengers of God as they are not will you reason thus Princes should obey the Preachers of God ergo if they doe not they may bee deposed This is the argument which wee so often haue denied why then labour you so much about the antecedent when we denie the consequent That Princes shoulde obey God and his worde is a clearer case than that they shoulde obey the Pope For of that no man doubteth and this wee not onely doubt but denie Take therefore that which is confessed on both sides and set your conclusion to it that the force of your reason may the better appeare Princes without all question are bounde to obey God ergo if they doe not their dueties to God they may be deposed by Priestes This is the sequele which we alwaies denied and this is the point which you first assumed to proue Phi. The condition of these two powers as S. Gregorie Nazianzen most excellently resâ—mbleth it is like vnto the distinct state of the same spirit and body or flesh in a man where either of them hauing their proper and peculiar operations endes and obiectes which in other natures may be seuered as in Brutes where flesh is not spirit in Angels
iust one Phi. We haue the iudgement of holy Church for our doinges Theo. Neuer talke of your censures as if they were the iudgementes of holy church so long as they ende in murders they bee the wicked iniurious and mischeeuous attemptes of Antichrist incensing subiectes to rebell against the powers which God hath ordained to their owne damnation and you be the blazers and abettours of that his impietie and for lacke of better proofes you bring the Pagās and Heathens which knew not God to fortifie your doinges Phi. They had meanes to deliuer themselues from tyrantes shal wee haue none They had murdering of tyrants which God hath prohibited to all christiās toward priuate men much more toward Princes Deliueraunce if you woulde haue obtaine it by praier and expect it in peace those be weapons for Christiās Somerfields dagge and Parries dagger be diuelish meanes to dispatch princes vsed by Heathens to reuenge their pursuers but to their sharpe and heauie punishment before God who hath taught his an other way to deliuer thēselues from tyrantes that is to repay no man therefore not Magistrates euill for euill to be pacient in tribulation to reioice in hope not to auenge thē selues but to blesse their persecutors to blesse them I say and not to curse them much lesse to kill them These be the manifest precepts of Christ If you be of God you will heare them If not in truth you bee heathen and then may you well follow your forefathers the heathens in murdering or as you cal it in depriuing and restraining of Princes Phi. The bond and obligation we haue entered into for the seruice of Christ and the Church farre exceedeth all other dutie which wee owe to anie humane creature and therefore where the obedience to the inferiour hindereth the seruice of the other which is superiour wee must by Lawe and order discharge our-selues of the inferiour Theo. You say you haue heapes of learning sure you shew litle There is no doubt but the dutie which we owe to Christ and his church farre exceedeth the seruice that we can owe or must yeelde to any humane creature and also against the superiour wee must yeelde no obedience to the inferiour and thence you may rightly conclude that we must not obey man aboue or against God but when you inferre that if Princes commaund some thinges against Go◠you must therefore obey them in nothing this is wicked and most absurde sophistrie Wee must not obey them in those pointes which they commaund against God in all other thinges we must because God hath so prescribed vs to doe Take an example of the Tyrantes that were in the Apostles time Did they not directly commaunde against God not in one or two but in all matters of religion It is euident they did Did the Apostles thence conclude that the christians should take them for no Princes but by law and order be discharged of all other seruice due vnto them as you doe It is euident they did not Yea rather they earnestly adiured all christians to be subiect to them in all other things and euen in those thinges which were commaunded against God to submitte them-selues with meekenesse and reuerence to indure the Magistrates pleasure though not to obeie his will Why then in matters of so great moment bring you so light and vaine delusions Why repeate you so often the same antecedent and neuer attende the fault of your consequent Phi. The wife if shee cannot liue with her owne husband beeing an Infidel or an heretike without iniurie and dishonour to God shee may depart from him or contrariwise hee from her for the like cause neither oweth the innocent partie nor the other can lawefullie claime any coniugall duetie or debt in this case The very bondslaue which is in an other kinde no lesse bound to his Lorde and master than the subiect to his Soueraigne may also by auncient Imperiall Lawes depart and refuse to obey or serue him if he become an heretike yea ipso facto hee is made free Finally the parents that become heretikes lose the superioritie and dominion they haue by Lawe or nature ouer their owne children Therefore let no man maruel that in case of heresie the Soueraigne loseth his superioritie and right ouer his people and kingdome Theophil If wee shoulde graunt you these three precedentes euen as your selfe set them downe they woulde nothing further your conclusion That hereticall Husbandes Masters and Parentes loose their right and interest which they otherwise haue in their wiues seruantes and children is no position of Gods Lawe but a terrour deuised and established by the Princes power to fraie men from Heresie Nowe Princes appoint punishmentes for their Subiectes not for them-selues therefore no good consequent can bee framed from these paternes to the depriuation of Princes It is ouer much bouldnesse in you Masters without authoritie to require to punishe your Superiours in such sorte as they with authoritie punish their subiectes They bee Princes you bee not they beare the sworde to reuenge wickednesse you doe not they may dispose of their people bee they Masters or Parentes you may not dispose of them being Magistrates Much lesse may you turne the Lawes which they made to punish subiectes against themselues That were to make them not Princes ouer others but Subiectes vnder you which I trust they bee not You see the disparison of your examples and so the disiuncture of your argument and yet your supposementes bee not simplie true Neither infidelitie nor heresie by Gods Lawe doeth dissolue matrimonie The Apostle willeth the beleeuing wife to staie with the vnbeleeuing husbande if hee bee so content and our Sauiour will haue no man putte away his wife for heresie but onelie for incontinencie Where daunger of life is feared or bodily wrong offered the Magistrate may permit the wife to dwell asunder from her husbande till hee bee reclaimed but in no case to bee diuorced The Seruaunt is not so surely bounde to his Master as the Subiect is to the Prince power of life and death the Master hath none the Prince hath refuge against the Master the Seruaunt hath to the common gouernour of them both which is the Magistrate the Subiect hath no refuge against his Soueraigne but onely to God by prayer and patience and therefore the Prince may demise the Seruaunt if the Master bee like to corrupt him but no man can discharge the Subiecte though the Prince goe about to oppresse him and that your owne example will conclude For who set free the Seruaunt from his Maister the Apostles or Princes You knowe the Apostles neither did nor might attempt anie such thing Peter in Gods behalfe requireth all Seruaunts with feare to obey their Masters excepting neither infideles nor heretikes not only if they were good curteous but though they were froward For that is thanksworthie if a man for
Art Phi. You vnderstand vs not When wee giue diuine honour to the image in respect of Christ we giue it to Christ and not to the image Theo. God graunt you vnderstand your selues You first dishonour the Sonne of God by exhibiting the heauenly seruice that is due to him to an Image made with handes and then with a shift of wordes you thinke to delude him in telling that hee may not choose but like of your doinges because you ment it vnto him when you did it to a dumbe creature for his sake But awake out of your frensie God will not thus be mocked by your relations or intentions Hee is zealous of his honour he will not resigne it to any other and namely not to grauen or carued images If against his worde against his will against his truth and glorie you impart it to anie other or take vpon you to conueie it to him by creatures or images as if hee were not present in all places with might and maiesty to receiue the seruice that is done vnto him you not onely make new Gods but you reiect him as no GOD who alone is the true GOD and will be serued without mate or meane of your deuising Phi. Our Lord shewing what account he maketh of such as represent his person sayth In as much as you haue doone it to one of the least of these you haue doone it vnto me Theo. Did Christ speake that of images Phi. Noâ— but thereby you see it passeth â—â—to Christ whatsoeuer is done in his name or for his sake to others Theo. If you meane such charitable reliefe as Christ hath commaunded vs to yeeld to our brethren in respect of his will their neede and our dutie you say well wee haue for that the manifest precept and promise of our Sauiour accepting it as done to himselfe whatsoeuer is done to any of his brethren or seruauntes but if you leape from men to images from humane comfort to diuine honour you leape too farre to haue the sequele good Philand If diuine adoration may not bee giuen to Images yet humane reuerence may with-out anie daunger Theo. Religious honour may not and as for externall and ciuill reuerence whether that may bee giuen to images can bee no doubt of Doctrine nor point of fayth The one is impious to bee defended the other superfluous to bee discussed Philand So you giue them either wee care not Theophil If you flie from adoration to saluation and stande not on pietie but on ciuilitie then is it a question for Philosophers and not for Diuines and to bee decided rather in the Schooles than in the Churche neyther can any manne bee praysed or preiudiced for vsing or omitting that kinde of curtesie which neyther the Gospell nor good manners conuince to bee necessary Philand Shoulde wee not honour Christ and his Sainctes by all the meanes wee can Theophil Christ you must honour with all power and all your strength as being the Sonne of the liuing GOD but you may not fasten his honour to any Image or creature since hee is alwayes present to beholde and willing to receiue as well the religions submission of knees handes and eyes as the inwarde sighes and grones of the heart neither can you bestowe the least of these gestures on an image in your prayers without open and euident wrong to him to whome you shoulde yeeld them Phi. For adoring of images I am not so earnest as for hauing them in the Church that they may put vs in remembraunce of the bitter paines and death which it peased our Lord to suffer for our sakes and that I am sure is catholike though adoration be not Theo. We doe not gainesay the remembring or honouring the death and bloodshedding of our Sauiour hee is not onely dull but wicked that intermitteth either but this is the doubt betwixt vs whether wee shoulde content our selues with such meanes as hee hath deuised for vs and commended vnto vs thereby dayly to renue the memorie of our redemption or else inuent others of our owne heades fitte perhappes to prouoke vs to a naturall and humane affection but not fitte to instruct our fayth The hearing of his worde and partaking of his mysteries were appointed by him to leade vs and vse vs to the continuall meditation of his death and passion a crucifixe was not hee knowing that images though they did intertaine the eies with some delight yet might they snare the soules of many simple and sillie persons and preferring the least seede of sounde faith beholding and adoring him in spirit and truth before all the dumbe shewes and imagery that mans wit could furnish to winne the eye and moue the heart with a carrâ—all kind of commiseration and pitie such as wee finde in our selues when wee beholde the tormentes and pangues of any miscreant or malefactour punished amongest vs. Phi. All meanes are good that bring vs in minde of his death Theo. By sight you may learn the maner of his death but neither the cause nor the fruits which are the chiefest thinges that the sonne of god would haue vs remember in his death and you very peruersely and wickedly keeping the people from those meanes which Christ ordained as the hearing of the word and right vse of the sacraments which you drowned in a strange tongue that the people vnderstood not set them to gaze on a Roode taught them to giue all possible honour both bodily and ghostly to that which they sawe with their eyes bearing them in hand it passed from the image to the originall that is from a dead and senselesse stocke to the glorious and euerlyuing Sonne of God which in effect was nothing else but to worship and serue the creature before the Creator which is blessed for euer Phi. You are now besides the matter We speake of hauing images for remeÌ„braunce not of adoring them for religion and that is catholike if this be not Theo. Since the hauing of images being neither deliuered nor allowed by Christ nor his Apostles is superfluous and the abusing of them is so daungerous and yet so frequent and often that in all ages and places it hath intrapped many Gentiles Iewes and Christians I see no reason why for a curious delight of the eyes which the Apostles neglected and the primatiue Church of Christ wanted we shoulde scandalize the ignorant and exercise the learned as for a necessarie point of catholike doctrine Phi. Had the Apostles and their scholers no images Theo. Had they thinke you Phi. Remember you not the image which Nicodemus that came to Christ by night made with his owne handes and left to Gamaliel S. Pauls master he to Iames and Iames to Simeon and Zacheus This report you shall finde written by Athanasius 1300. yeares since and besides that it is amongest his workes at this day it was repeated 800. yeares agoe in the second Nicene councell as
Your later allegation is grouÌ„ded on the former conuinceth your author to be but a yong father in respect of S. Basil. For where S. Basil died before Meletius your bastard Basil rehearseth Meletius as a Bishop of ancient memorie dead long before his time In super MeletiuÌ„ illuÌ„ admiranduÌ„ in eadeÌ„ fuisse sententia narrant qui cuÌ„ illo vixerunt Sed quid opus est vetera coÌ„memorare Immo nuÌ„c qui sunt Orientales Moreouer Meletius that admirable Bishop was of the same opinion as they that liued with him report But what neede I repeate auncient times The East Bishops which are at this day c. Now the true S. Basill not onely liued at the same time with Meletius but was made Deacon by him and wrate many letters to him and departed this life before him as the church storie witnesseth affirming that Helladius S. Basils successour and Meletius were both present at the second general councell at Constantinople vnder Theodosius and that must needes be when S. Basill was dead Phi. You did wel to discredit the place it were otherwise able to ouerthrowe all your new doctrine Theo. Then you do not well to build the antiquitie of your religion on this and such other apparent forgeries but were the places not forged they could do you no such seruice as you spake of in the question which we now handle yea rather they confirme that which we affirme that Things necessary to saluation are comprised in the Gospell Phi. Many traditions were receiued from the Apostles without writing which are not in the Gospel Theo. You must also proue those traditions to be necessary to saluation before you can conclude out of this place any thing against our assertioÌ„ Phi. As though the Apostles deliuered thinges which were not necessary to saluation Theo. The christian faith they deliuered in writing the rest they left vnwritten because those things which were no parts of faith were deliuered to the church of Christ for decency not for necessity Phi. For decency what a cauill that is Theo. The Traditions which your counterfet Basill here rehearseth as descending from the Apostles are no such deepe mysteries of religion as he pretendeth That the people should euery sunday and likewise betweene Easter and Whitsuntide pray standing is that any point of faith or help to saue their soules The words of inuocatioÌ„ at the Lords supper the praiers before after which the Greeke church vsed haue you not long since left them or to say the trueth did you euer accept them for catholike Singing with the crosse turning to the East thrise dipping him that is baptized and annointing him after with oyle bee these essentiall parts of Baptisme or rather externall Rites declaring the power and vertue of that Sacrament Your author himselfe will tell you they be not within the compasse of that faith which is common to all ChristiaÌ„s and must be rightly beleeued of all that will be saued For shewing the cause why they might not be written What things saith he such as were not baptized might not behold how could it be fit they should be publikely caried about in writing And againe The Apostles and fathers which prescribed certaine rites in the first beginning of the church reserued to these mysteries their dignitie by silence and secrecie For it is no mysterie which is open to the eares of the people and vulgar sort Now things necessary to saluatioÌ„ must openly be preached to the people and be fully conceiued of them and stedfastly proâ—essed by theÌ„ before they can be saued These things therefore be not of that sort but are rather excluded from necessitie because they were deliuered vnder secrecie Phi. But S. Basil or whosoeuer he be that wrote that booke saith vtraque parem vim habent ad pietatem Things vnwritten haue equal force to godlines with things written Theo. He saith not that all things vnwritten but vtraque both sortes haue like force to godlines not that dumbe ceremonies or outward gestures haue equall force with the word of God to lighten the minde conuert the soule and clense the heart it were arrogant blasphemie so to say but amongst things vnwritten he numbreth the praiers of the church proportioned by the word and hauing in them the very contents of the worde and also the Creede and profession of the faith it selfe whereby wee beleeue in the Father the Sonne and the holy ghost in truth godlinesse equiualent with the scriptures and in substaunce the very same that is witnessed by the scriptures Both these your Author in that place counteth for things vnwritten and these wee graunt haue equall force to godlinesse with those things that are written Phi. In effect they be all one with those things that are writteâ— Theo. That maketh his speâ—ch the truer which otherwise were absurd and vngodly Phi. Is it not a wâ—lie shift that sometimes you will admit no traditions and at other times when you bee hardly pressed fayth scriptures and all shall bee traditions with you Theo. Is it not a wilier that hauing framed to your selues a religion without the scriptures you woulde nowe fortifie the same by tradition against the scriptures But you may not so preuaile Wee haue the warrant of Saint Paul and the catholike consent of Christes Church that our faith shoulde depende on the word of God and since God speaketh not now but in his scriptures it is euident that our fayth in all pointes must bee directed and ruled by the scriptures Stand not brabling with vs about the worde Tradition which is very doubtfull and diuersely taken amongest the fathers Bring some faire and true demonstration for that which you holde as reason is you should to counterpâ—iâ—e so many proofes in a matter of such importance or else admit our assertion to be true Philand That wee can doe and yet not hurte our cause Theophil Wee knowe you can doe much You can bouldly call your selues catholikes though you bee vnshamefast heretikes and tell the people you teach nothing but antiquitie when the chiefest pointes of your religion bee meere nouelties and barbarous absurdityes Philand You can exemplifie a lye the best that euer I hearde Theophil Keepe that praise as proper to your selfe I will not disturbe your profession Touching the matter in question whether I speake ought that is vntrue let the reader iudge You will haue your religion and doctrine to bee Catholike that is confirmed by the Scriptures and professed in all places of all persons at all tymes euen from the first beginning wheresoeuer the Church of Christ hath beene receiued And when wee come to see the specialities wee finde you to swarue not onely from the sacred Scriptures and auncient Fathers but euen from those later ages and Churches which you woulde seeme to followe and to haue gotten you a religion of your owne without Councell Canon antiquitie or
full consent of all ages and Churches in expounding the same but also to chase the people by terror of secular power and ecclesiasticall curse from the cup of their saluation from the communion of Christs blood and felowship of his holy spirit Such fathers such fansies What is mockerie what is iniurie to God and man if this be Religion or pietie The Church of Rome you will say concluded with them That increaseth her sinnes and excuseth not their follies If an Angel from heauen had conspired with them our duetie bindeth vs to detest both him and them as accursed if they step from that which the primatiue church receiued from Paul and Paul from Christ Howe much more then ought wee to reiect that which the church of Rome presumeth not onely besides but against the sacred scriptures And yet to speake vprightly the auncient church of Rome maketh wholy with vs in this cause For no church euer resisted your mangled communions with greater vehemencie than the church of Rome did till couetousnesse and pride blinded her eyes and hardned her heart against God and his sonne Pope Iulius that lyued vnder Constantine the great made this decree We heare that certaine led with schismaticall ambition against the diuine ordinances and Apostolike directions doe giue TO THE PEOPLE the Eucharist dipped in wyne for a full communion They receiued not this from the Gospell where Christ betooke his body and blood to the Disciples For there is recited the deliuering the bread by it selfe and the cup by it selfe Let therefore all such error and presumption cease least inordinate and peruerse diuises weaken the soundnes of fayth If the communion bee neither perfite nor agreeable to Christes institution and Apostolike prescription except the people receiue both kinds seuerall and asunder the bread from the cup and the cup from the bread as Christ ordayned and the Gospel declareth Ergo your excluding the people cleane from the cup is altogether repugnant to the manifest intent of our Sauiour and right imitation of his Apostles And what if the first authors of your drie communion were the Manichees are you not wise men and well promoted to forsake the precept which Christ gaue you the president which Paul left you the course which the christian world for so many yeeres obserued and followe so pestilent and pernicious a sect of heretikes reprooued and long since condemned by the church of Rome for that very fraude and abuse in the Sacraments which you bee nowe fallen vnto The Manichees sayth Leo to couer their infidelitie venter to bee present at our mysteries and so carie them-selues in the receiuing of the Sacraments for their more safetie that they take the body of Christ with an vnwoorthy mouth but in any wise they shunne to drinke the blood of our redemption Which I would haue your dâ—uoutnes speaking to the people learne for this cause that such men might bee knowen to you by these markes and when their sacrilegious simulation is founde they may bee noted and bewrayed by the Godly that they may bee chased away by the priestly power Against this disorder of Manichees wrate Pope Gelasâ—â— as your friende Master Harding confesseth Wee haue intelligence that certaine men receiuing onely a portion of the sanctified body abstaine from the cup of the sacred blood who for that it appeareth they be entangled with I knowe not what superstition let them either receiue the whole Sacraments or be driuen from the whole because the diuiding and parting of one and the same mysterie can not bee without grieuous sacrilege The sense is plaine To take the Lordes breade and not drinke of the Lordes cup is a seuering and distracting of this mysterie which by the iudgement of these two Popes is open sacrilege ergo neither Catholike or christian What shift nâ—we Philander to saue your selues from sacrilege Spake Gelasius of the Manichees as Master Harding resolueth Graunt it were so Then what was sacrilege in them can it bee catholike in you If that auncient church of Rome condenmed this in the Manichees howe commeth your late Church of Rome not onely to suffer but also to commaund the same Can you turne darkâ—nes to light and sacrilege to Religion That were a marueilous alteration But Siâ—s your minds may change wee knowe Christes institution can not changâ— The contempt thereof in Manichees in Papistes as then so still was and will be sacrilege Spake Gelasius not of the Manichees but of certaine Priestes that receiuing the bread at the Lordes table neglected the cup Yet Leo speaketh of the Manichees by name and â—hose Laymen and mingled with the people and calleth their forbearing the Lords blood a sacrilegious sleight reason were you should prooue that onely Priesâ—es are ment in this place of Gelasius and not suppose what you list at your pleasures as the gloze doeth and others of your side that stand on this answere The woordes are indefinite and touch as well people as Priest but let vs imagine that Gelasius spake of Priestes first then you commit sacrilege in restraining all Priestes from the communion of both kinds except they say Masse themsâ—lues Next if it bee sacrilege in the Priest why not in the people The precept of our Sauiour drinke ye all of this compriseth all both Laymen and Priestes His Apostle extendeth the same to the whole Church of Corinth Chrysostome sayth the Priest differeth nothing from the people in receiuing the mysteries but one cup is proposed to al In Chalice nobiscum vos estis You sayth Austen to the people are in the Lordes cup no lesse than we The cup was deliuered to all men Priest and people with like condition as Theophilact affiâ—meth Drinke yee all of this that is sayth Paschasius as well other beleuers as Ministers Hence wee frame you this argument The cup was by Christ deliuered to Priest and People with like condition and like precept the refusing of the Lordes cup is sacrilege in priests by the position of Gelasius and the confession of your friends it is therefore no lesse than sacrilege for the people to refraine the same What then is it for you to pull the Lordes cuppe out of their handes by rigor and force for so trifling respectes as you pretende but apparent violent and wilfull sacrilege Phi. It was sacrilege then for the people to refuse or refraine the cup because the church was content to admitte them to it But now the church is otherwise resolued it were sacrilege to expect or demand it Theo. What shall the man of sinne and sonne of perdition when he commeth if hee bee not already come and you his supporters to hold vp his seate in the temple of God say more than you now say that you at your lists may breake the commandements of the great and euerlasting God and alter his ordinances and to blame you for
it or recall you backe from your enterprise is sacrilege Woe bee to you that call good euill and euill good which set darkenesse for light and light for darkenesse and put bitter for sweete and sweete for bitter Woe bee to you that are so wise in your owne eyes and so prudent in your owne conceites that you preferre your owne Counsell before the wisedome of God Philand Nay you preferre your wittes before the whole Church of GOD you woulde not other-wise take vppon you to controle your forefathers and teachers in such sort as you doe Theoph. If they forsooke their fathers yea GOD him-selfe why shoulde wee not renounce them rather as parricides than resemblance of their auncestours Philand They were Catholikes and so are wee Theoph. You leaue the steppes both of Christ and his Church and yet you must and will bee catholikes Philand Wee followe them better than you doe Theoph. So it appeareth by your halfe communion which they condemned for sacrilege and you embrace for Religion Phi. Here is such a stirre about eating and drinking as though all consisted therein and in the meane while you neglect and abolish the holy and vnbloody sacrifice which is farre more Catholike than your communion Theo. You neede not make so light of eating and drinking at the Lordes table There depende greater promises and dueties on that than on your vnbloody sacrificing the sonne of God As often as yee shall eate this breade and drinke this cup yee shewe the Lordes death till hee come Without eating and drinking therefore the Lordes death is not shewed The bread which we breake to be eaten is it not the communion of Christes body The cup of blessing which wee blesse that all may drinke of it is it not the communion of Christes blood If wee refuse eating the one or drinking the other can we be partakers of Christ or his spirit Hee that eateth my flesh sayth our sauiour and drinketh my blood dwelleth in mee and I in him and except you eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his blood yee haue no life in you These bee the fruites and effectes of religions and worthie eating and drinking at the Lordes table shewe vs the like for your sacrificing and wee will thinke you had some occasion though no reason to turne the Lords Supper into an offering Philand This one Sacrifice hath succeeded all other and fulfilled all other differences of Sacrifices and hath the force and vertue of all other to be offered for all persons and causes that the others for the lyuing and the dead for sinnes and for thankesgiuing and for what other necessitie soeuer of body or soule Bee not these as great and good effectes of our Sacrifice as those which you nowe rehearsed for eating and drinking at the Altar Theo. They bee great if you had as good authoritie for the one as wee haue for the other Philand Wee haue better Theo. Wee must giue you leaue to say so but you shall giue vs leaue not to beleeue you Phi. All the fathers with one consent stand on our side for the Sacrifice Theoph. Were it so that yet is many degrees beneath the credite of our conclusion You bring vs the speaches of men wee bring you the woorde of God I trust you will aguise some difference betwixt them Phi. As though wee coulde not bring you Scriptures as well as fathers for the sacrifice of the Masse Melchisedec by his oblation in bread and wyne did properly and most singularly prefigurate this office of Christes eternall Priesthoode and sacrificing himselfe vnder the formes of breadâ— and wyne which shall contynue in the Church throughout all Christian Nations in steede of all the offeringes of Aarons Priesthood as the Prophet Malachie did foretell as Saint Cyprian Saint Iustine Saint Irineus and others the most auncient Doctors and Martyrs doe testifie Cyprian epistola 63. num 2. Iustin. dial cum Trypho post med Iren. libro 4. capit 32. And Saint Augustine libro 17. cap. 20. de ciuitat Dei libro primo contra aduers. leg prophet ca. 18. lib. 3. de baptism ca. 19. S. Leo sermone 8. de passione auouch that this one sacrifice hath succeeded all other and fulfilled all other differences of Sacrifices c. Yea in S. Pauls epistle to the Church at Corinth the first and tenth chapter We maie obserue that our bread and chalice our table and altar the participation of our host and oblation be compared or resembled point by point in all effectes conditions and properties to the altars hostes sacrifices and immolatious of the Iewes and Gentiles Which the Apostle woulde not or coulde not haue done in this Sacrament of the altar rather than in other Sacraments or seruice of our Religion if it onelie had not beene a Sacrifice and the proper worship of God among the Christians as the other were among the Iewes and heathen And so doe all the fathers acknowledge calling it onelie and continuallie almost by such termes as they doe no other Sacrament or ceremonie of Christes Religion The Lamb of God laide vpon the table Concil Nicen. The vnbloodie seruice of the Sacrifice In Concil Ephesin epist. ad Nestor pag. 605. The sacrifice of sacrifices Dionys. Eccles. Hieronym cap. 3. The quickning holie sacrifice the vnbloodie host and victime Cyril Alex. in Concil Ephes. Anatâ— the propitiatorie sacrifice both for the liuing and the dead Tertul. de cor Milit. Chrys. ho. 41. in 1. Corinth ho. 3. ad Phil. Ho. 66. ad pop Antioch Cypr. epi. 66. decaena Do. nu 1. August Euch. 109. Quaest. 2. ad Dulcit to 4. Ser. 34. de verb. Apost The sacrifice of our mediator the sacrifice of our price the sacrifice of the newe Testament the sacrifice of the Church August li. 9. ca. 13. li. 3. de baptist ca. 19. The one only inconsumptible victime without which there is no Religion Cyprian de caen Do. nu 2. Chrysost. ho. 17. ad Hebr. The pure oblation the newe ofspring of the newe Law the vital and impolluted host the honoâ—râ—ble dreadful Sacrifice the Sacrifice of thankesgiuing or Eucharistical the Sacrifice of Melchisedec This is the Apostles and fathers doctrine God grant you may find mercy to see so euident and inuincible a trueth Theo. You be nowe where you would be and where the fathers seeme to fit your foote But if your sacrifice bee conuinced to bee nothing lesse than catholike or consequent to the Prophets Apostles or Fathers Doctrine what say you then to your vanitie in alleaging if not impietie in abusing so many Fathers and Scriptures to proppe vp your follies Phi. Bee not these places which we bring you for this matter vndeniable vnauoydable indefeatable vnanswerable Theo. In any case lay on loade of termes You haue made vs so many in your late Rhemish testameÌ„t that now you must not seeme to lack But what if all these places neede
heades whiles you were working an other feate Phi. What feat could we haue in hand but the testifieng of trueth to our Countrie men that wee haue done to the vtter confutation of your hereticall doctrine The. You must needs coÌ„fute vs for besides abusing of scriptures which you wind like a withe about your fingers where the Fathers will not serue your turnes you will force them euen by skores tâ— depose what you list and though they vse but generall and indifferent wordes yet you will by and by quote them to be of your opinion Phi. Where haue we so done Theo. Omit the places that are past in this beadrole of Fathers which here are brought shewe but one that euer mentioned your kinde of sacrifice wee will trouble you no farther you shall set vp your Masse againe Phi. What wee shall not Theo. I will helpe you the best I can Phi. Any of the places which wee bring is sufficient to iustifie our sacrifice Theo. As well euery as any They cal the Lordes Supper ministred according to his institution an OBLATION and SACRIFICE or as your pen runneth an HOST and a VICTIME what then Phi. Then wee say trueth when we teach it to be a sacrifice not only a sacrameâ—t The. Then you lie the more when you say that you really corporally sacrifice the Sonne of God vnder the formes of bread and wine and that the Priestes act though the people neither vnderstand what he saith neither know what he doth but gaze on him whiles he alone murmureth to himself in a touÌ„g vnknown maketh that priuat to one which should be common to al by Christs institution is notwithstanding very profitable before God for such as hire his paines or please his humour to bee had in minde when hee rubbeth his memory Phi. You peruert our doctrine Theo. It may bee my termes doe not please you but I tell you the thinges which wee reiect in your sacrifice Leaue your presumptuous and meritorious application of Christes death as pleaseth the Priest leaue your reall and corporall inclosing of Christ vnder accidentes and shewes of bread and wine confesse the Lords Supper to be a publike actioÌ„ pertinent to the whole church as it was ordained and let your prayers instruct and direct the hearts of the simple and haue their open euident assent as for the name of sacrifice and oblation it shall not offend vs. Phi. The chiefe occasion of your hatred against the dayly sacrifice is this that you do not acknowlege the real presence of Christ in this sacrament that maketh you neither to offer him nor to adore him as we doe yea skant to abide the fathers wordes wherein they witnesse that he is offered and must bee adored vnder the formes of bread and wine Theo. We hate your follies we hate not their speeches and yet there are reasons why wee doe not thinke our selues bounde to take vppe the frequent vse of their termes in that point as wee see you doe For first they bee such wordes as Christ and his Apostles did forbeare and therefore our faith may stand without them Next they be darke and obscure speeches wholy depending on the nature and signification of Sacramentes which the simple doe hardly conceiue Thirdly wee finde by experience before our eyes howe their phrases haue entangled your senses whiles you greedily persued the wordes and omitted the rules that shoulde haue mollified and directed the letter These causes make vs the warier and the willinger to keepe to the wordes of the holy Ghost though the fathers applications if you therewithall take their expositions doe but in other termes teach that which we receiue and confesse to bee true and sincere Philand Woulde you make vs beleeue that the sacrifice of the Altar hath no warrant in the Scripture Theo. Shewe mee the place where it is so called and then will I graunt that in the worde I was deceiued Phil. First you hearde the worde OBLATION in Malachie Theo. I did but I heare him not applie it to the Sacrament Philand Melchisedec by his oblation of bread and wine did properly and most singularly prefigurate this sacrifice Theo. But the Scripture doeth not say that either Melchisedec did sacrifice bread and wine or that Christ at his last supper did imitate Melchisedec Phi. Hee was a Priest according to the order of Melchisedec Theo. Saint Paul sheweth in what thinges Melchisedec resembled Christ as in that hee was the king of righteousnesse and peace without father without mother hauing neyther beginning of his dayes nor ende of his life and remaining a Priest for euer without partner or successour but of sacrificing bread and wine as you say Melchisedec did Saint Paul saith nothing Phil. The Fathers do almost euerie one of them Theo. I doe not deny the resemblace to be both tolerable and vsuall among the fathers but I say the scriptures haue no such thing Phil. Sainct Paul himselfe maketh an whole discourse to proue the Sacrament to bee the Sacrifice of Christs body and blood in the church Theo. Where In his Apocalypse which your law mentioneth Phi. No Sir I alleadge his canonicall writinges Theo. Where may a man seeke to finde it Phil. Looke our obseruations vppon his 10. chapter of the first to the Corinthians Theo. Nay in your obseruations I knowe wee shall finde many thinges that are not in the scriptures they were purposely made that where your religion stood not in the text at lest it might stand in the gloze but I would heare Saint Paul saye so much or but halfe such a worde and then I were aunswered Phi. In all that discourse you may obserue that our bread and chalice our table and Altar the participation of our host and oblation bee compared or resembled point by point in all effectes conditions and proprieties to the Altars hosts sacrifices and immolations of the Iewes and Gentiles Which the Apostle would not nor could not haue doone in this Sacrament of the Altar rather than in other Sacramentes or seruice of our religion if it onely had not been a Sacrifice the proper worship of God among the Christians as the other were among the Iewes and Heathen Theo. Tel me not what I may obserue but what you can conclude Is the worde sacrifice attributed to the Lordes Table in that chapter Phi. By resemblaunce and comparison it is Theophil Speake first whether so much bee expressed by the Apostle in plaine wordes and then after wee will examine what may bee collected Philand In plaine wordes it is not but point by point it is compared in all effects conditions and proprieties to the altars hostes sacrifices and immolations of the Iewes and Gentiles Theo. Where is this resemblaunce of your bread and Chalice table and altar host and oblation point by point in all effectes conditions and proprieties to the altars hostes sacrifices and immolations
maketh the praier publike Howe shall the simple man say Amen that is any simple man * 1. Corinth 14. Rom. 4. * Deutero 27. * Galat. 3. Chrysost. in 1. Corinth 14. By the common or vulgare person Sainct Paule meaneth the people The forme of the Lords institution was certaine but the praiers made and thanks giuen at the Lords table were left to the discretion of the minister Masse forged in the Apostles names Iacobi Missa Iacobi Missa * Constitut. Apost lib. 8. a cap. 15. ad cap. 24. * vide Constitut. Apost lib. 6. cap. 14. lib. 8. cap. 15 Clemens booke of Apostolike constitutions neuer receiued in the Church * Grego lib. 7. epi. 63. * Polidor de inuent rerum lib. 5. cap. 10. * Polidor de inuent rerum lib. 5. cap. 10. * Gregorij responsio ad 3. interrogat Augustini Gregor lib. 7. epist. 63. No praiers vsed by the Apostles at the Lords table but only the Lords praier * In 1. Cor. 14. Tertul. in apologet To pray by hart dured a while amongst the Christians The Iesuits will haue the ordering of S. Pauls words whether he will or no. If Sainct Paule in this place did not speake of the Church seruice howe can the Iesuites proue the Corinthians had their seruice at this tyme in Greeke The Iesuites thwarted with their owne principles Except they take hold of Sainct Paules reasons here vsed in this chapter they shall neuer proue the seruice at Corinth in Saint Paules time was in Greeke It is true they had their seruice in greek but the â—esuits cannot proue it but by ouerthrowing their owne conclusion which they woulde infer and so their anâ—cedent choketh their consequent Their antecedent being granted their coÌ„sequeÌ„t doth not followe A wise reason because Saint Paul had set an order to haue their seruice in the tongue which they knewe therefore some might not inuert that order This disorder might come either by straungers or by such as were fastned to their cures Yet was it some cunning to set a good face on the matter The Rhemish Testament 1. Corinth 14. Neither antecedent nor consequent true Ambros. in 1. Corinth 14. The Rhemish Testament 1. Corinth 14. And why might not euerie pastour and minister haue his Psalmes his thankes giuing as wel in praying as in preaching The Rhemish Testament 1. Corinth 14. Why maie not doctrine praier and the Lordes supper follow ech other in one continual action though they be things different in themselues * Cor. 14. All must be done to edification eâ—go Church seruice The Rhemish Testament 1 Corinth 14. Sainct Paule in this chapter speaketh both of the sermons where Infidels might be and of the praiers and blessings where they might not be The Iesuits inuincible arguments are grounded vpon nothing but their own false surmises The loosnes of their last argument One part of the churches exercise doth not exclude but rather employ the other Church praier is Church seruice and that Saint Paul speaketh of Saint Paul speaketh of al the words that were to be vsed in the Church either at the Lords table or otherwise but not of the actions because they are not performed with the tongue Diuine seruice is pâ—operly that which is done with the mouth and not hâ—nds or gestures Wordes in the Lords supper as essential as elements or actions and those the people must vnderstand Al things must come to edification and therfore Church seruice The Rhemish Tâ—st â— Cor. 14. O miserable vnderstanding The Iesuites as men in a maze defend sometimes that the people neede not vnderstand their praiers sometimes that they doe vnderstand them though they can neither spel nor speake one word of Latine 1. Cor. 14. Nothing so absurd which the Iesuites will not defend A new kinde of Grammar for the simple to vnderstand the latin touÌ„g in one halfe houre * This is perfect ware A noble kind of vnderstanding how vnwise was Sainct Paule not to foresee this method to edifie with all Is this all the vnderstanding that priest or clark for the most part had 1. Corinth 14. 1. Corinth 14. Amen to the sauncebâ—l is euen as good as to that they vnderstand not The heart must vnderstand and consent before the lips saie Amen A position of the Iesuits which I think the Turkâ— theÌ„ selues would be ashamed to defend The heart doth not pray without vnderstanding 1. Cor. 14. Ephes. 5. Aug. in Psal. 99. * To great purpose the Iesuits say Aug. in Psal. 18. exposis 1. * And therefore dutie The Iesuits praier is like the chatteâ—ing of birdâ— in S Austenâ— iudgement Chrysoâ—t in 1. Corinth 14 * Is that necessarie or no Ambros. in 1. Corinth 14. * Ought and must do not set vs at libertie Cassiodor in Psal. 46. Concil Aquisgranens sub Ludouico pio cap. 123. * Ibide ca. 133. If they ought theÌ„ had they need so to doe The Rhemish Testament 1 Corinth 14. The Iesuits ouerthrow their own positions The people barred by the Iesuits from that they know from the means to 〈…〉 Were they not better let the fault be in others and not in themselues as now it is The Rhemish Testament 1. Corinth 14. How doe our mouths offer our hearts to God when we vnderstand not what we say Praiers are very needful instructions especially for the simple that cannot direct themselues in making their praiers to God * Rom. 15. Do not the Fathers often draw their arguments to perswade the people from the very praiers of the Church See S. Aug. ad Bonifac li. 4. ca. 9. They be no prayers when the tongue speaketh with out the hart and the voice of the hart is vnderstanding * Mat. 25. Mark 7. Psal. 31. * Aug. in Psal. 18. Where vnderstanding wanteth maÌ„ differeth not from a beast The Rhemish Testament 1. Corinth 14. It skilleth not in what toung the seruice of the Church was so the people vnderstood it The Rhemish Test. 1. Cor. 14. Gregor moral lib. 27. cap. 6. EleueÌ„ fathers abused by the Iesuits at one clappe Nine of those fathers speake of such countriâ—s as vnderstoode the latine tongue and the other two speake not one word of the latine seruice The latine toÌ„gue was vnderstood in Africa where Cyprian and Augustine preached August cofess lib. 1. cap. 14. Aug. Retract lib. 1. cap. 20. The rudest among the people in Africa vnderstood the Latine tongue August de verbis Apost sermo 26. The Iesuits heap vp fathers in their Rhemish Testament to no purpose but only to amaze the simple * Linguae meae hominibus None of these Fathers which they alleage speak of all the west Countries or Churches * Greg. moral in Iob lib. 27. cap. 6. * Hieron to 1. epist. 58. Alleluia is no proofe for the Latin seruice Alleluia is a better argument for the Hebrew than for the Latine seruice * Epist. 178. August epist. 178. The Barbarians in their tongues vsed Alleluia as wel as the