that he committed Idolatrie when he called the Bishop of Rome God for the meaning was playne that he did it only in honour of Christ his Maister which was true God and had lefte his place and power vpon earth to this his seruant as the Bishop explayneth in the rest of the wordes following which the deceytful minister left out of purpose and corrupted also those fewe wordes he alleadgeth by shutting out the wordes à Constantino therby to make it seeme that Steuchus spake this of himselfe and so to make way to his lying calumnâ—ation saying as he doth Augustin Steuchus doth honour him as a God by this yow may see in what case men are that beleeue these lying lippes of conscieÌ„celes Ministers vpon their words in matters of their saluation which are commonlie at this day without controlment in England seing they dare aduenture to falsifie so openlie in points which they may probably doubt to be called to reckning for by their aduersaries as we do O.E. in this other maters wherin we are to charge him hereafter Diuers other places he alleadgeth and heapeth togither taken out of Ministers note books to proue the flatterie of later Catholiques Canonistes to the Pope but they are such as eyther make nothing to the purpose or are corrupted or peruerted by him or may haue a very true and pious sense in respect of the Popes authoritie and place giuen him by Christ if they be wel and truelie vnderstood and as much or more was vsed by the ancient Fathers which these compagnions do auoid to recite of purpose for their credit sake alleaging only later wryters as â—or example the very first place cyted by this fellow out of Cardâ—nal Cusanus is this Cusan epist. ad Eohem Mutato iudicio Ecclesiae mutatum est Dei iudicium The iudgment of the Church being changed about any matter the iudgment of God changeth also and heere the ministers mouth ouerruÌ„neth exceedingly saying these good fellowes for their bellies sake speake rayle Ouerlashing of the minister hold their peace wryte faune flatter and vnto the Popes pleasure tuâ—ne their style But ho Sir swash-buckler harken to others that had lâ—sse care of their belly then yow and yours this of the change of Gods iudgment after the iudgment of the Church and of the supreeme Pastor in particular is a common saying of all the Ancient Fathers vpon those wordes of Christ VVhose sinnes yow loose on earth shal be loosed in heauen and whose ye retayne shal be retaâ—ned Matth. 16. And S. Chrisostome goeth so farre therin who yet was neyther belly God nor flatterer as he attributeth this of drawing Gods iudgment after theirs not to the whole Churche and cheife Pastor onlie but to all euery lawful Priest also in absoluing from sinne whose power and dignitie he preferreth before Emperors Angels and whatsoeuer els but the only sonne of God which may answere also the ydle cauillations of S. F. among his other allegations of flatterie in the former chapter where he complayneth that some canonists preferre the Popes Authoritie before Emperors and Angels let him heare S. Chrysostome Qui terram incolunt saith he in his 3. book de sacerdotio A discourse of S. Chrisost. of Priests author tie l. â— de sacerdotiâ— To Priests that dwel and conuerse vpon earth is it committed to dispence matters that be in heauen an authoritie that God hath geuen neyther to Angels nor Archangels tyme in the Churche of God what are yow I say Yow are the great Priest the highest Bishop yow are Prince of Bishops and heire of the Apostles yow are in Primacy Abel in gouernment Noë in Patriarkship AbrahaÌ„ in order Melchisedech in dignity Aaron in authority Moyses in iudicature Samuel in power The iudgmeÌ„t of S Bernard about the Popes tytles of honour Peter in vnction Christ to yow are geuen the keyes and the sheepe are committed to your trust there are other porters of heauen other feeders also of flockes besydes your selfe but yow are so much more glorious then they by how much more different your tytle is which yow haue inherited aboue them all They haue their flockes assigned seuerally to them in seueral but to yow all vniuersally are committed that is one general flocke to one general Pastor neyther only are yow the Pastor of all sheepe but of all Pastors also do yow aske me how I can proue it I answere out of the word of God Thus farre S. Bernard and then goeth he on to shew diuers playne places of Scripture for his profe and those especially which S. Chrysostome and S. Hilary before mentyoned and now I feare me our minister Oedipus wil say heere that S. Bernard is become a flatterer of Popes also as wel as Card. Cusanus Bellarmin D. Stapleton and other like whose sentences he cyteth but eyther vnderstandeth them not or wilfully peruerteth their meaning to deceaue his reader therby to seeme to haue somewhat euer to say though he say nothing or worse then nothing And heere I would leaue now O.E. with his arte of cogging to him selfe but that he passeth on to a contumelious calumniation or two more against a freÌ„d of myne my selfe Pag 11 Gifford sayth he calleth Philip the second the K. of Spayne the greatest Monarch vnder the sunne to shew himselfe to be one of the gressest flatterers vnder the moone About D. Gifford Deane of Lile and I say yow shew yow selfe on of the veryest fooles vnder the 7. starres to print this for so grosse a flatterie which no man of knowledge iudgment in matters of story and cosmography can deny to be truth if he consider the multitude and greatnes of countryes vnder him and your selfe that haue byn a rouing theuing about the Indyes other his dominions how large and wyde they ly cannot speake this but of wilful insolency against your conscience And as for M. Doct. and deane Gifford who hath his deanery by true adoption and not by intrusion as some frend of yours and hath his learning by studie and not by borowing wandering he I say being often iniured by yow in this book wil answere for himselfe I doubt not for that yow brag much that yow haue set foorth if I mistake yow not a booke in Latyn intituled Turco-papismus which is nothing els but an apish imitatioÌ„ of M. Raynolds Caluino-Tâ—rcimus printed by M. D. Gifford after the Authors death and that yow require so earnestly to haue it answered I hold him obliged to satisfiâ— your demand so I make accompte that he wil take the payne to looke ouer your said worthy worke and geue both it and the Author the colours which both deserue And thus much â—or my frend now for my selfe I may be briefer It followeth this Noddy to shewe himseâ—fe a nâ—ble parasâ—e Pag. Ibid. vpoÌ„ whome the 〈◊〉 of his whole inuectiue against flatterers doth moâ—â— fâ—â—lâ— fal 〈…〉
wil declare and I shal endeuour to put yow in mynd therof now and then when I passe by it Hierome said as Bishop Iewel alleadgeth that in suspition of heresie no man must be pacient Iewel is aleadged heere with more honour then Hierome Iewel is named Bishop which he neuer was and Hierome is not called Saint which he was and is no place in eyther of them is cyted where the words may be read Hierome speaketh of heresy not of flatterie S.F. would excuse himselfe of flatterie not of heresy for in heresy he delighteth and how then do these things agree and if for further proofe I should aske him whether he or M. Iewel wil stand to S. Hieromes definition of heresy and hereticks euen in those very books where he hath this sentence of impacieÌ„ce against heresie to wit in those he wrote against Iouianus and Vigilantius whom he condemneth and calleth heretiks for the very same opinions that Sir F. M. Iewel do hold for ghospelyke good doctrine Heretikes out vvith S. Hierome I meane about Virginitie prayer to Saynts lights at Martyrs â—ombes and the like If I should aske them I say this questioÌ„ whether they would staÌ„d to S. Hieromes definitioÌ„ of an heretik all the worâ—d seeth they would fly froÌ„ it for so muche as he calleth them hereticks for holding those protestantical opinions contrarie to the vniuersal consent of the catholike Churche in those dayes as our men do at this day and how then do they alleadge S. Hierome in matter of heresie as though he were there frend or fauored them But to let passe this matter of heresie out of S. Hierome whom in deed of all Fathers they least can beare and do cal him often both borne papist and scoulding doctor Ievvel against D. Harding Fulke against D. Allen and D. Bâ—istovv Let vs see in particular what our knight answereth to the charge of flatteâ—ie for making EnglaÌ„d so happie by change of Religion Diuers shiftes of S. F. for his defence whervnto he deuiseth diuers defences for first he alleadgeth very solemnely the sentence of Antistenes and of some other Philosophers in reprehension of flatterie but what proueth this or what is this to the purpose nay rather is it not much more against himselfe if he cleare not wel the charge of flatterie layd vnto him for that the more Poets or Philosophers or other Authors do condemne flatterie the more is the K. condemnation also if he be found faulty therin Wherfore this first dedefence is no defence but impertinent wasting of words as yow see let vs behold his second which perhaps may proue worse or more impertinent then this His second defence is that greater flatterie may be found in Rome to the Pope then he vseth to the Queene and state of England I would send yow sayth he to the Popes pallace where a man may fynd more shameles flatterers then I thinke were euer to be found in any Christian Princes Court VVast-vvord Pag. 5. Wel suppose it were so Syr what doth this excuse yow why should a knight flatter in England for that a Courtier or Canonist doth flatter in Rome Yow know that company in euel doing excuseth not nor dedemâ—nâ—sheth the synne and S. Hierome whom yow alleadge sayth Hieron in Epist. ad caelantiam nihil agimus cum nos per multitudinis exempla defendimus we labour in vaine wheÌ„ we go about to defend our selues by the example of the multitude this in case it were as yow say but how do yow proue it Syr harken gentle Reader and heare his wordes Panormitan sayth he as by sundry learned men he is aleadged shameth not to flatter your Pope so farre VVast vvord Pag. 6. as to make him almost aequal with God saying Eccepto peccato Papa potest quasi omnia facere quae Deus potest Synne excepted the Pope can in a manner do all things that God can doe Thus sayth our knight wherin I would aske him first why he had not cyted the worke or booke of PanormitaÌ„ or at leastwyes some one of those learned men of his syde by whom he sayth that Panormitan is alleadged if he omitted the citation by negligence it was great ouersight in so weightie a matter if of wil and purpose it was fraud if he red noâ— the Authors himself but trusted Ministers notebookes it was lightnes and simplicite if his learned men that aleage Panormitan and accuse him as he doth do not cyte or quote the place no more then he it is the same fault in them and a signe that they are afraid to be taken tripping and this complaint I shal be forced to make often for that this shifte is ordinary among them not to cyte their Authors But now to the matter it self I say that after muche seeking in Panormitan Panorm part 1. decret de Elect. c. Licet I haue found at length the place and therein the woords by him and his alleaged but with this difference that Panormitan cyteth the sentence not as his owne but out of Hostiensis and sheweth the meaning to be that in matters of iurisdiction and spiritual authoritie for gouernmeÌ„t of his Churche vpon earth Christ hath lefte so great power vnto his substitute S. Peters successor as he may do thereby and in his name and vertue in a certayne sorte what-so-euer his Mayster and Lord might do in his Church if he were now conuersant among vs vpon earth I say in a certaine sort for that all both Deuines and Canonists do agree that potestas excellentiae wherby our Sauiour could institute Sacraments pardon synnes and impart the other effects of thesayd Sacraments without their vse and the like is not lefte vnto the Pope as not necessarie to the gouernment of his Churche but all the rest requisit to that end is gyuen to him according to that great commission in S. Mathew Matth. 16. I wil giue vnto thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen whatsoeuer thow loosest shal be loosed and what soeuer thow byndest shal be bound c. vpon which commission Panormitan saith that Hostiensis founded his doctrine in these wordes Host. in c. Quanto de translat Episcoporum Panorm sup part 1. decret de Elect. cap. venerabilem Cum idem sit Christi atque Papae consistorium quasi omnia potest facere Papa quae Christus excepto peccato Seing that the Consistorie or Tribunal of Christ and the Pope is one and the same in this world as appeareth by the former commission it followeth that the Pope can do in spiritual iurisdiction whatsoeuer Christ can doe except lyuing free from synne This is the doctrine of Hostiensis expounded by Panormitan Panormitan and HostieÌ„â—is both abused and if it be rightly vnderstood it hath no more absurditie in it then if a man should say that the Viceroy of Naples can do all in that Kingdome which the king of Spaine himself can doe except being free from
treason And the like of her Maiesties deputy in Ireland or any other substitute that hath the Superiors authority fully and amply And albeit heretikes doe wrangle herein and seek to make the matter odious as they are wont by putting downe the bare propositioÌ„ of comparing the Pope with God without any explication at all VVrangling and cauelling of haeretikes yet are there so many restrictions mencioned euen in this place of Hostiensis yf they would consyder them as easely might answere all their cauillations For first where they compare the Pope with God both Panormitan and Hostiensis explicat the comparison of Christ not as he is God but as he is man that is to say betwene the head of the Churche and his Substitute Secondly the comparison is not in all things as in miracles holynes of lyfe nor power of excellency as haue byn sayd or the like but onely in the highest iurisdiction of Ecclesiastical matters deryued from Christ himself and gyuen by him as appeareth by the word consistorium vsed by Panormitan Thirdly euen in this also is added quasi which is a diminution in the excellency and generality of the thing it self Fourthly is put Excepto peccato which exception though Panormitan do affirme to be improper in Hostâ—ensis maner of speaking for that to be able to synne is no power but rather a defect of power Yet is it added here to signifie that the Pope maye synne or erre in matter of fact euen in the exercise of this power that he hath vnder Christ. Yf he vse it not wel for which respect is added also the last restriction of all euen in that very place by Panormitan where he saith Intellige tamen quod Papa omnia potest claue disâ—retionis non errante Panorm Ibi that the Pope can do all things of iurisdiction which Christ his Maister can VVhat is Claâ—is discretionis in the â—ope so long as the key of discretioÌ„ doth not erre which is asmuch as if he had sayd that the Pope is bound in conscience to vse discretion consultation inquisition due deliberation and other fyt meanes to informe himself in matters that he wil do or determyne which in points of faith we are most certayne that Gods holy Spirit promysed to his Churche wil euer direct him vnto and neuer suffer him to erre And so much of this scornful obiection guilfully cast out by heretiks to deceaue the symple and to terrify them by comparing God and the Pope without any exposition or explication as yow haue heard which fraud I passe ouer with diuers other such ridiculous speeches auouched out of other Canonistes in this place without cyting booke volume place or chapter and not woorth the answering and therfore I wil only mentyon our knights conclusion which is this And in a woord saith he the Canonists say roundly in the glosse Dominus noster Deus Papa our Lord God the Pope If the Canonists so roundly affirme it Syr F. taken in cyting Canonists why hath not Sir F. eyther roundly or squarely quoted vs the text Sure it is that I can not fynd it though muche I haue sought and hard yt is to beleeue that any suche text may be fownd which is muche confirmed by that S. F. Proctor comming after him to fil vp the gappes that he had left open and strayning himself muche about this point could not find any one text of Canonist or other that had those wordes and therfore was forced to Father them vpoÌ„ Aug. Steuchus with a notorious falsification as in the chapter following shal be shewed But yet heere to help out S.F. with some parte of his credit A deuise to helpe out Syr F. for very compassion I wil ad a coniecture of a frend of his how he might chance to haue byn deceaued about Dominus Deus noster Papa if he cite it vpon his owne reading for that perchance he might fynd it written thus D. noster D. Papa both D.D. signifying a double Dominus which some cauilling heretike espying iudging it inconuenient to repeat Dominus twyse would needs inforce the second D. to be set for Deus This is my coniecture confirmed somwhat by the similitude of a like fond chance wherof I haue heard as happened in the subscription of an English letter written from certayne Maryners to the Lord Admiral in these words To the right honorable our good L. the L. Admiral which secoÌ„d L. a simple fellow interpreted to signifie the lady Admiral saying that the first L. signifying the Lord himselfe the second L. must needs signifie also his lady If I misse in this coniecture or comparison S. F. is cause therof that cyted not the text therby to cleare all matters and to deliuer both vs of this doubt and himselfe of new suspition of imposture And albeit this were a sufficient answere to so foolish obiections without testimony or authority yet for that our K. wil needs seeme so learned a bible clarke as to terrifie the people with the name of God imparted to creatures Hovv a creature may be called God I wil aske him and his ministers in this place the meaning of a text or two out of scripture it selfe Exod. 7. v. 1. as first those wordes of God in Exodus dixitque Dominus ad Moysen ecce constitui te Deum Pharaonis and God sayd vnto Moyses behold I haue made thee the God of Pharao did God giue away his deity with this thinke yow And againe I would aske him the interpretation of those wordes of Christ wheÌ„ he sayth Nonne scriptum in lege vestra est Ego dixi Dij estis Io. 10. vers Psalm 81. vers 6. Is it not written in your law I sayd yow are Gods And then answereth to the question himselfe thus Si illos dixit Deos ad quos sermo Dei factus est noÌ„ potest solui scriptura If God called them Gods to whom the speach of God was directed and that this scripture cannot be answered or denyed c. These two questions I haue proposed from S. F. and his Ministers instruction not for that I do think any wryter to haue byn so simple as to calle the Pope expressely God though yet we see clearlie by these examples that the word Deus in some sense may be appyed Hierom. lib. 1. in Mat. also to creatures without iniury of the creator And S. Hierome waying and pondering the wordes of Christ vnto his disciples 6. mat Quem dicunt homines esse filium hominis c. And then agayne Vos autem quem me esse dicitis hath these words Prudens lector attende quod ex consequentibus textuque sermonis Apostoli nequaquaÌ„ homines sed Dij appellantur Marke prudent reader that it is euident by the consequence and illation of Christ his wordes that the Apostles are not called men heere but Gods Thus said S. Hierome who yet knew aswel what Idolatry meaneth as S.F. of whom I would
application of our particuler case of the vniuersal Churche her teaching and therby discouer the deep lurking of our souldiour-masked minister When we Catholykes say that our fayth is taught The application of the former discourse or deliuered vnto vs by the vniuersal Churche our meanings that albeit particular men as Priests Pastors or preachers do immediatly deliuer the same vnto vs yet for that they do yt not as of them-selues nor as their owne but from the said Catholyke vniuersal Churche and by her order we say truly and properlie and cannot say otherwyse but that we are taught it by thesaid vniuersal Churche which is the body and not by perticuler men which are parts only euen as when a man striketh an other with his foot or hand it cannot be said so properly that the foot or hand strook him as the man him-self and this argumeÌ„t ruÌ„nneth also in our aduersaries cause yf he had wit to see it for when a maÌ„ is taught at this day the protestant fayth of England allowed by the state may he not say more truly and properly that it is the teaching of the vniuersal Churche of England then of this or that particuler contemptible minister but this he foresaw not when he came in with his actionis sunt suppositorum therby wil see what reason I had to ad stultorum for so much as his obiection besydes the ignorance and falshood therof ouerthroweth no lesse him-selfe and the teaching of his Church Ignorance of O.E. yf it had any force so much of this which indeed is ouer much for the fondnes of the instance There remayneth then that part only of his babble where he cryeth out that our religion is not Catholike but his and that ours is buylded only vpon Popes which are mutable and subiect to error his vpon the eternal truth of God c. All which to yes though they haue byn sufficiently refuted before in that I haue alleaged and a thousand tymes before that agayne by other writers yet these men as hungry flyes beaten of from hunny do returne stil with the very same clamors agayne for lack of other better matter and heere yow see are two poynts the first whether we or they be Catholikes and then whether we depend of Popes and they of God For the first which of our Churches is truly Catholike much hath byn said or at leastwyse may be gathered by the former discourse about the ancient rule of true Catholike fayth VVho are Catholykes but more particularly it remayneth to be handled in this fellowes first new foolish chalenge added after this for Syr F. wherfore heere I wil say no more of that mad paradox for which shame ynough abydeth O.E. in that when I shal come to answere it Now for the second about our depending of Popes and they of God and the scriptures it hath appeared by the two or three precedeÌ„t chapters how they depend ech man of their owne fancy and iudgment of scripture and not of God or godlines and as for our depending of Popes as heads successiuely of our Churche we confesse it willingly and do glory therin that we are not heretical acheuâ—â— as our aduersaries are but yet to meet with this prating calumniators exprobation we say that we depend not of any Pope as a priuate or particular man Hovv Catholyke men depend of the Pope in their religion and subiect to infirmities eyther of ignorance euel lyfe or the like but as he is head and cheife pastor of Christs vniuersal Churche Gods substitute vpon earth to whom he hath assured the perpetual assistance of his holy spirit and of the omnipotent power of his aeternal Godhead euen vnto the worlds end and by vertue of this promis let Peters successor be neuer so vnâ—earned rude feeble or infirme as hardly can be chosen one meaner then himselfe was in all or most of these poynts before he receyued vertue from his maister yet shal his learning be incontrolable for gouernment of Gods Churche taking that helpe by councels doctors other learned meanes which he may and Gods prouidence wil euer prouide that he shal do his rudenes also shal be wysedome his feeblenes fortitude his infirmity vertue in respect of his place and dignity and this did our ancient holy Fathers esteeme the matter not by the talents or merit of the man as heretikes bable but by his office place and dignitie As for example who knoweth not but that Pope Damasus before mentioned in the decree of the three Emperors was not perhaps the learnedest man in the world nor otherwise the best qualifyed for humayne giftes though he were also a notable man but other might exceed him in these poynts Yet do the said Emperors preferre him before all in directing men for their fayth and beleefe as yow haue heard S. Hierome also was farre more learned then he by studdy as all men wil confesse and himselfe also for that he wrote often to S. Hierome to requyre his opinion in poyntes of learning and yet when the matter came to determyne poyntes of fayth S. Hierome subiecteth himselfe to him with that humility as a chyld and scholler would vnto his father and Maister and much more for that he saith most absolutely in a most hard and perilous controuersie of that tyme not yet determined to wit whether one or three hypostacies or subsisteÌ„ces were to beholden in the Trinitie The faith humilitie of saynst Hier. epist. ad Damas. the most learned humble father I say writeth thus to Pope Damasus out of Syria Obtestor BeatitudineÌ„ tuam vt mihi Epistolis tuis siue dicendarum siue tacendarum hypostasâ—on detur authoritas I beseech your Hol. that yow wil giue me leaue and authoritie by your letter to hold or deny three hypostacies Loe heere the different spirit in a learned humble Catholike saynct from an ignorant prowd contemptuous heretike S. Hierome regardeth not the personal partes of Pope Damasus but his place roome and dignity of his office our heretikes not only do contemne his place but also most maliciouslie do lode the persons of al or most Popes with infinite calumniations and slaunders therby to discredit their office and ordinances what then may we say of these men but that they are gyuen ouer as S. Paul sayth in reprobum sensum to a reprobate sense and synne maliciouslie and desperately to rayle against their owne consciences God ameÌ„d them and let all wyse men take heed of them As for the last and lowdestâ— ly which this prating minister affirmeth VVhether Catholyke religion be ful of nouelties and heresies to wit that Catholike religion is ful of new noueltyes and old heresyes this also is to be discussed in his foresaid chalenge when it commeth to be aunswered wherunto I might remit the matter without saying any thing here as I meane to do but only to premonish the reader of two poynts that there I am to handle
Caluyn in matter of the Queenes Supremacy which he denyeth Beza in the whole gouernment of their Churche Or why should I beleeue S. F. or his new masters of EnglaÌ„d rather theÌ„ these that were more learned then he or his or what reason rule or foundation haue any of these men to beleeue their owne opinion more then others but only self wil and fancy This then is the first and greatest spiritual benediction or malediction rather that I fynd to haue happened to our realme and nation by this wooful alteration of religion that wheras before we had a direct rule squyre pole-starre to follow which was the vniuersal Churche now euery man being set at liberty holdeth beleeueth and teacheth what he listeth Nor is there any way or meane left to restrayne him for straight way he appealeth bodlie and confidentlie to the Scriptures and there he wil be both maister and Pilot boteswayne him-self to gouerne the bark at his pâ—easure for he admitteth no iudge no interpreter no authoritie no antiquitie nor any other manner of tryal which is the greatest madnes and malediction that euer could happen among men of reason And the very same cause that moued the Warder to be so liberal then in setting downe this poynt hath moued me now to repeat the same againe in this place And what do yow think that the knight his champion haue replyed to all this playne and manifest demonstration would not yow think that both of them for their credits sake should haue buckled vp them-selues to ioyne in this yssue with the warder shewing what certainty they haue or which of the two wayes they wil take proposed by him seeing he sayth there are no other or that they should theÌ„-selues at least appoynt some other way but consider good reader the force of euident truth they are so blanked and their mouthes so shut vp with this interrogation of the warder as the K t. thought it best to passe it wholie ouer with silence as before hath byn touched The minister with more shame then the K t. hath tatled somwhat Idle tatling in a grauâ— question telling vs that our religion is not Catholyke that the vniuersal Church could not deliuer it vnto vs quia actiones sunt suppositorum as yow haue heard that StapletoÌ„ teacheth that the Churche hath power to proue taxe and consigne the books of holy Scripture And that vniuersal tradition is the most certayne interpreter therof And finally that the fayth of Papists is buylt vpon the Popes fancie and opinion and it is ful of nouelties and old heresies and the like as before yow haue heard All these tatlings he hath vpon this discourse before rehearsed of the warder and almost in as many words as I haue recyted theÌ„ but to the matter it selfe about certainty or vncertainty in religion ne griquidem he answereth no one word at all only to the later parte or appendix of the discourse where the warder sayth that to make the matter more playne how protestants haue no other rule of beleef he asketh S. F. not of any Catholyke Doctors nor auncient Fathers whome he esteemeth not but of their owne new Doctors Luther Caluyn Beza and the like authors of their owne sects why English Protestants at this day should preferre their owne iudgments before these also whom they graÌ„t to haue had great store of the holy ghost in all matters doctrines and interpretation of Scripture where they dissent from them To this I say all the other storme being past it seemed good to the minister to make his answere in these wordes But sayth this Noddy why should yow beleeue more your owne opinions then Caluyn concerning the Q. supremacy Luther concerning the Real presence and Beza in the Churche gouernment I answere first that these mennes priuate opinions concerne not fundamental poynts of fayth Pag. 21. A most foolish ansvvere of O. E. about Luther Caluyn c. and therfore they are not to be brought foorth for instance in this cause where we talk of the foundations and reasons of Christian fayth Marke wel his answere good reader iudge who is the noddy he sayth two things the one that the iudgments of Luther Caluin and Beza be but priuate opinions among them the other that the poynts wherin they differ from them to wit the real presence in the Sacrament her Ma ties Supremacy ecclesiastical and the whole gouernemeÌ„t of the Churche are no fundamental poynts of their faith For the first I would gladly know what authority is auayleable among them in teaching preaching and interpretation of Scriptures yf Luther Caluyn and Beza be reiected as priuate and particuler men where they differ from them our Doctors and Churche they do defy the ancient Fathers they look not willingly after them their owne parlament this maÌ„ sayth a litle before doth not appoynt but admit their religioÌ„ only who then is hee or who are they that must determine and defyne in this case For the second yf the difference with Luther about the real presence of Christs real body in the Sacrament be no fundamental poynt of fayth seing they accuse vs of the highest cryme vnder heauen about the same that is of idolatry and holding a creature to be the creator and we them againe of most heynous blasphemy highest wickednes vpon earth in discrediting Christ in his owne words that said it was his bodie his whole Church that euer so vnderstood him vnto this day yf the matter of supremacy be no fundamental poynt of fayth VVhat pointes are fundamental in protestants doctryne wherby all their ecclesiastical hierarchie standeth at this day in England as their Bishops Deanes Archdeacons and other prelates and parsons of the Spiritualty who otherwise must needs be playne intruders and meere lay men If their whole gouernmeÌ„t of their Churche be not fundamental wherof dependeth whether they haue any true ministers preachers and teachers lawfully allowed or no consequentlie whether their Sacraments be Sacraments and be administred by them that haue authoritie so to doe if all these poynts I say be not fundamental in O.E. opinion what are fundamental And what Atheisme doth this Martial minister diuels deane bring in vpon vs But beleeue me good reader these good fellowes do only eate of the ministerie and beleeue as please them and this being a compagnion of many occupations wil liue by that which wil yeild him most according to that also shal be his doctrine and beleef Of their great grand-father fryer Martyn Luther he sayth here in the words folowing his former answere Pag. â—1 O. E. his contemptious speach of Luther and Caluyn VVe suspend our opinion and giue no approbation to Luthers opinion concerning the carnal presence of Christs body in the Sacrament for that we see the doctrine to be newe and not taught by the Apostolyke Churche nay we find yt to be repugnant to the Apostles doctrine deliuered in Scriptures
he had done to the end they should not presently discouer him And so he declared that the first of his examples was taken out of the book of Kings where is recounted of the head of an hatchet made swymne by the prophet Elizeus the 4. book of kings 6. Chapter The second of the dead man raysed by touching Elizeus his bones is in the same book 13. Chapter The third of increasing the milk is expressed in the same book and chapter by increasing the oyle of the poor woman of Sarepta The fourth of the talk which the monke hath with his mule is veryfied in the speech of Balaam his asse in the book of Numbers 22. chapter The fifth of passing of many monks through a great riuer by help of a monks cloak is shewed in Elias his fact in the 4. book of Kings 2. chapter 〈…〉 by a fish and gotten 〈…〉 in Ionas chap. 2. The 〈…〉 from sending a girdle to heale a to 〈…〉 is the fact of S. Paul recounted by S. Luke Act. 19. And the last of men cured by standing only in the shaddow of other men is testified by the same Euangelist Act. 5. And so we see that by iesting at monks miracles as also of bishops and other godly men that are recorded to haue wrought such woÌ„derful works in Christs Churche by the same power and vertue of their master as the former saints did these scorners come to deryde also and cal in doubt the miracles of all ages as wel of the primatiue Churche as of later tymes for that there is no other reason of beleeuing them of those dayes but only the testimony of the Churche in that tyme and of graue wryters therin The like wherof we haue for witnesses of those of S r. Thomas which our heretical English spirits of these dayes do so malitiously deryde contemne and iest at But with mad men there is no disputing and so to their phrensy of heresy I leaue them And yet if I thought they weare cureable of this phrensy The auncieÌ„t fathers seeling sense about miracles of holy Saints and would heare good counsel I would send them to a treatese or two of S. Ambrose as also of some other fathers about this incredulous humour of heretiks in scoffing at miracles wrought by Saints after their deathes for that S. Ambrose hauing found out by reuelatioÌ„ from God the buryed bodyes of S. Geruasius 〈…〉 and shewed them 〈…〉 due honour to be 〈…〉 miracles were wrought 〈…〉 wherof S. Augustine also was an eye 〈…〉 as he testifieth in these words Tantae gloriae maâ— tyrum etiam ego testis fui 〈…〉 〈…〉 uita vbi Mediolani eranâ— facta miracula noui c. Of this so great glory of these martyrs I was also a witnesse and knew the miracles to be done when I was at Millayne But more largely then the rest doth S. Ambrose himselfe testifie of this matter in a large epistle to his sister Marcellina Ambâ—e 〈◊〉 ad Marâ—â— that was a nunne saying Cognouistis imò vidistis ipâ—i multos à daemonijs purgatos c. Your selues haue known nay rather yow haue seene many deliuered of diuels by the reliques of these martyrs great numbers also deliuered from their sicknes as soone as they had touched with their hands the Saints apparel Yow haue seene the miracles of old tymes restored and very many made hole with the very shaddow of these holy bodyes c. Thus he saith and then presently prosecuting the same about the deuotion of the christian people of those dayes he addeth Amb. ibid. Quanta oraria iactitantur c. How many handkerchefes or napkyns were cast vpon these bodyes how many garments were made medicinable to heale others euen by their very touching of these most holy reliques All did desyre to touch the very vttermost parts and whosoeuer touched was healed VVe thank thee ô lord Iesus that in this tyme thou hast 〈…〉 of these holy martyrs 〈…〉 most need such helpes 〈…〉 from holy Father and doctor to 〈…〉 agoe of the practise of true 〈◊〉 out christians in his dayes against the â—coffing incredulity of Arrians wherwith he was no lesse troubled at that tyme then we are at this day with Lutherans Caluenists like faithlesse humors of heretikes who with thesame spirit scoffe now as they did then against whome the said holy father made a sollemne sermon the very next day after the inuention of the bodyes inueighing against the said Arrians Qui pertinacia quadam Iudaica atque haeretica in tanta hominum ac etiam daemonum confessione negarent illos esse martyres Ambr. serm 5. de Sanctis Paulin. in viâ—â— Ambrosij detraherent miraculis seque calumniarentur cuius arte ea omnia composita esse dicerent Which Arrians by a certayne Iewish and heretical obstinacy in so publike confession both of men and diuels did stil deny that they were martyrs detracting from their miracles and calumniating himself S. Ambrose and affirming all these things to haue byn deuised by his fraud Thus said these heretiks against S. Ambrose and the miracles of S. Geruasius Protasius as ours do at this day with the same spirit against those of S. Thom. of Canterbury And it is to be marked that Paulinus in the life of S. Ambrose doth note that only diuels and Arrians did contradict the said miracles but the Arrians more obstinately then the diuels for that diuers diuels did 〈…〉 holynes of S. 〈…〉 cyteth S. 〈…〉 But diuers 〈…〉 some of the 〈…〉 inuaded and 〈…〉 by the saâ—â— diuels Which dreadful examples being recorded by so ancient and holy men ought to mooue our scoffers and scorners at the works of God in his saints to beware least for like impiety they incurre not the like daunger at leastwise of being giuen ouer to the possession of an inward diuelish spirit much worse both for themselues and others then the corporal possession by the wicked fiend from which God deliuer them And so we passe on to the third feigned position layd vpon vs by Syr F. with whome we haue dealt aboue in this matter of miracles for that this minister O. E. seing perhaps his case to be desperate thought best to leaue him in the lurche and to say no one word for his help or defence 〈…〉 GORGED 〈…〉 are said 〈…〉 or any comming 〈…〉 though he comaund 〈…〉 â—gainst God and disloyalties against Princes CAP. XII BVT now saith the Warder let vs see his third position 〈…〉 position VVardvv p. 23. that he feigneth to be amoÌ„g vs Catholykes as a ground of religion These two irreligious and prophane grounds saith he being layd though yow haue seene that the knight hath layd them as fictions of his owne and not foundations or grounds of ours they proceed to a third and set it downe for a popish grouÌ„d also that it was a dangerous and deadly sinne for any man to disobey the Pope and his Clergie in any of