tam quod ad Thessalonicenses vt ipsius solis radio putem scriptum Ibid c 47. ita clareâ— qualtter acciptant Luci fugae isti scripturarum Go to then how wil these scripture-bats the heretiks vnderstand this place of S. Paule to thâ— Thessalonians though it be so cleare as I may think it to be wrytten with the very beame of the Sunne it self Here then yow see that heretikes are noâ— noted or called night-battes by Tertullian foâ— flâ—ing the reading of Scriptures as this faiâ—â— lad would perswade his Reader but ratheâ— the quite contrarie that reading and bragginâ— of Scriptures more then others Hovv heretiks â—re scripture bats yet are theâ—â— so blynd in the true light therof througâ— their owne pryde and malice as they fly the true sense and interpretation heâ—d by the Catholike churche as night-bats do the cleere day light and shynâ—ng of the Sunne which Tertuâ—â—â—an in the forenamed book of praescription and els where doth largely declare and it is our complaint also against Sectaries of our tyme who swarmâ—ng ouer scriptures like blynd bats in the darcknesse of theyr owne passions and imaginations and flyeng the light of auncient doctors and Churches interpretations do break their owne heades and necks of entymes vpon scripture walles in respect wherof thesayd Tertullian in this very book by O.E. alleaged concludeth thus and therein giueth vs good counsel saying â—ecundum praetudicta tot authoritatum scripturas inâ—â—lligi oportebit Ibid. c. 18. non secundum ingenia haereâ—â—corum de â—â—la incredulitaâ—e vementiae Scriptures must be vnderstood according to the fore established iudgments of so many authorities as I haue now alleaged and not according to the wits or wrangling inclinations of heretiks which proceed coÌ„monly of only incredulitie which â—s asmuch to say as that the natures of heretikes being inclyned to incredulytie not to beleue what the authoritie of the Catholike Churche hathe set downe before them they seek to draw the interpretation of scriptures to their owne phansyes Thus wryteth he and his reason is for that heretiks reading scriptures with curiosytie for feeding their owne humors and being bound to no rule or prescriptioÌ„ of interpretations but to take and leaue or like at their pleasures commonly their wits guyded by humaine spirit inclyne to incredulitie calling in question what others haue held or beleued before them and shaking of the foundations of all former belief by their new quarrelling and whether the Sectaries of our tyme haue done this or no by their much reading and tossing of scriptures let experience teache vs. And this shal suffice for this place THE SECOND PART of this Encounter contayning foure absurd groundes of Catholike religion fayned by Sir frauncis and first whether ignorance be the mother of deuotion as also about the controuersy of fides explicita implicita CAP. VII WE haue byn occupied hitherto about so many other falshoodes and vntruthes of these our aduersaries vttered in their preambles as we haue not byn able to come to the principal subiect of this EncouÌ„ter which is a quadruple number of absurd grounds positions which the knight affirmeth vs to hold for general grounds and Maximes of our religion wherof the first and ring leader is that ignorance is the mother of deuotion which he vttereth in these woords VVatch. p. 17 The first forged position In these darck and clowdy dayes saith he least the Sunshine of knowlege should disperse the mystes of ignorance and giue light to the dymme of sight this position was set downe for their Maxime or rule infallible that ignorance is the mother of deuotion that the sacred woord of God which was giuen to be a Lanterne to all our feet and a light to our steps was forbidden to the lay sorte for so they called them as matter vnfit for them to looke into To which the warder beginneth his answere thus How manifest a falshood it is that reading of scriptures is forbâ—dden to all lay men is sufficiently shewed by that which goeth before VVard p. 17. for in any of the three learned tonges any lay man or woman may read them at their pleasure and in vulgar translations also suche as haue lycens and I thinke Sir Frauncis wil not deny that many of the laytie vnderstand Latin How then and with what face complayneth he so piteously or rather hypocritically that the sacred woord of God which was giuen to be a lanterne to our fâ—ete c was forbidden to the lay sort To this interrogatioÌ„ of the warder Sir FrauÌ„cis replieth now noe one syllable more then before is sayd VVhether ignorance be the mother of deuotion And further where as the warder chargeth him sorely with malepart ignorance for scoffing at the woord laymen and aâ— the distinction betwene Laytie and Cleargie and by this occasion sheweth the true meaning of those woords with the auncient begynning vse and practize of the primitiue Churche out of Origen Epiphanius Hierome and diuers other fathers doctors general CouÌ„cels the patient knight dissembleth all this according to the first shift discouered in the beginning Sir F. and O. E. do flie shamfully and saith nothing at all to it neither doth his Proctor O. E. helpe him out herein with any one woord though woords be very good cheape with him After this the warder cometh to the positioÌ„ it self saying But we deny this Maxime or infallible rule to be ours and do say that it is your calumniation only and not our position and that among vs it is neither Maxime noâ— Minime And for yow to proue it a Maxime yow must shew that all Catholykes or the most part do hold it and to proue it a Minime at least yow must shew that some one doth hold it neither of which yow can euer doe and so yow remayne disgraced Thus said he what answereth Sir F. Thus VVast pag. 47. A strange accusation and grieuous slaunder no doubt to charge those men with nourishing the people in ignorance whom all the world knoweth to haue vsed strange meanes to bring them to knowlege For what meant they by the costly setting vp of many faire and wel guylded Images in Churches was it not that they might be lay mennes bookes and by reading on them they might attaine knowlege To this I answere first that this proof is far of from shewing that it is a Maxime and infallible rule among vs that ignorance is the mother of deuotion why is not this proued especially seing S r. F. is required in honor to do it Is the running to the controuersy of Images a sufficient discharge for this Doe not all men see this kynd of shifting But let vs say somewhat to his instance of faire guilded Images as though they made to his purpose First then I say that those faire Images of Christ and his Saints against which he enueigheth if they be ioyned with other instruments of light instruction as are preaching teaching
the first that if this woodcock or any of his crew can shew any one noueltie as an article of fayth in our religion which was not beleeued in the Apostles tyme and in all ages since by the professors of the Catholike fayth eyther explicite or implicite as diuines terme it we shal yeild in all the rest for that we hold the foresaid rule of fayth deliuered by the Apostles to haue byn ful and perfect and that whatsoeuer poynt of fayth hath byn determined of since by general councels confirmed by Popes hath byn no new thing but explication only of that which was before deliuered by the Apostles albeit not so expreslie knowne to all In the second poynt also we hold that if O.E. or his mates can shewe any one heresie taken for an heresie by the general Churche since Christs tyme vnto Luthers or after to be holden by vs truely and in the same sense wherin it was condemned for an heresy and holden by those heretykes if this I say can be truly shewed and not as this vice cometh in with fustian-apes for veluet telling vs a tale of the Coliâ—ridians that offred Sacrifice to the Virgin Mary and other like from whom he cannot deny but that we differ most manifestly though his forehead be neuer so hard If this I say can be prooued that any one heresy is truely among vs and not the similitude only or shadow therof then wil we aske no further proof of any thing against vs for that we hold absolutely that eyther all or none is trew in our religion but on the contrary syde we shal shewe and demonstrate most clearely that they hold many old condemned heresies in the self same sense wordes and meaning wherin they were condemned by the vniuersal Churche held by those heretikes And this is the true difference betweene vs and them to wit that they obiect to vs shadowes and resemblances of heresyes but we conuince them of true heresy in deed IT IS FVRTHER shewed by diuers cleare examples that O. E. and his fellowes do playnly dispayre of all certayne meane or rule to try the truth among them-selues or with vs. CAP. XVII NOtwithstanding that sufficient hath byn said before in diuers chapters of this first encounter to shew that Protestants haue no sure rule or certayne meanes at all for agreement in matters of Religion Sup. cap 3.4 5.15 16. or for consent or assurance therin yet for so much as this is a most principal poynt to be wel vnderstood deeply pondered by euery man that loueth his eternal lyfe and saluation I haue thought good to treat one poynt more in this chapter which is the confession of our aduersaries them-selues in this behalfe though not in playne words yet in manifest deedes which are not nor ought to be of lesse authoritie then wordes And first of all I wil shewe this by their passing ouer without answere this whole matter being the most principal of all this first encounter when the warder vrgeth them most earnestlie in the poynt it selfe and both of them I meane both the K t. first the minister after him do answere directlie no one woord vnto the whole demonstration which is a playne confession that they cannot answere it but yet to shewe it more euidently and to conuince them in this place I wil repeate agayne what the warder said before I would aske S. F. sayth he or any such man as he is Pag. 4. that determineth so resolutely that his only religion among so many others as are extant at this day is true and all others false wheron doth he ground his certaintie Tvvo vvayes of tryal proposed Two onely meanes can S. F. haue to guyde himselfe in this case first that he hath receaued this doctrine of such or such persons preachers ministers or doctors whose learning and knowledge in this behalfe he trusteth absolutely and then is his whole fayth buylded vpon the credit of man as is euident and consequently is nothing worth nor no fayth at all The other way is that he beleeueth it for that it is founded in Scripture but this way to S. F. must needs be as vncertayne as the other yf not more for that to be sure that it is soundly grouÌ„ded vpon Scripture he must first read himselfe his whole beleefe expresly in Scriptures which is much for a man of S.F. occupation to do and then he must be able to iudge of many other poyntes belonging to the same as namely that the book is surely Scrâ—pture that he readeth And then that the translation which he vseth is trulie made out of the learned tongues Hebrew Greeke and Latâ—n And lastly he must be sure of the true sense and exposition which also are hard matters for a man of S. F. learning and much more for others that know lesse then he Yea and when all is done yf he had all these helpes needful for such a matter as he hath not yet were it but a priuate maÌ„nes opinioÌ„ consequently his fayth should be grounded but vpon his owne particuler iudgmeÌ„t which maketh no fayth at all but opinion only as often hath byn sayd for that fayth must haue Gods expresse authoritie for her foundation So that to conclude the first blessing which S. F. in particular thinketh to haue receaued by this change of his religion is in effect that whereas before when he beleeued the Catholyke and vniuersal fayth of Christendome deliuered vnto him by the vniuersal Churche as founded on Scripture which Churche Christ his Apostles gaue him expresse commission to credit his beleef was properly fayth founded vpon a rock that could not fayle now hauing left that fortresse cast him-self into the waues of new opinions he hath nothing certayne at all but so much as he list to chose of him-self or of other mennes opinions which choise is properly called heresie for that the word heresy in Greek as all learned men know signifieth nothing els but a certayne election and choise in matters of Religion to wit when a man leauing the commoÌ„ coÌ„sent of the general Churche â—â— ooseth only to follow that which his owne priuate iudgment induceth him vnto And to make this more playne how all these people haue no other rule of beleef A playne demonstration against sir F. but only what their owne fancy leadeth them vnto I aske S. F. not of any Catholyke Doctor nor of any ancient Father as S. Augustine S. Ierom or the rest whom easely he would coÌ„temne but rather of his owne Doctors Martyn Luther Iohn Caluin Theodore Bâ—za such others whom he supposeth to haue byn seruants of God and indued with his holy spirit all the world knoweth that they were more learned then S. F. yet why should he beleeue his owne iudgement more then theirs in pointes of fayth wherin they differ from him as Luther about the real presence and the number and forme of Sacraments and many other points
haue beleued also in Christ to haue had the self same faith that we haue in substance but only by this distinction though set downe in other woordes For thus he writeth Aug. lib. â—5 Cont. Faust. cap. 14. Tunc occulta erat fides nam cadem credebant eadémque sperabant omnes iustâ— Sancti temporum illâ—rum c. Then vnder the old testament the faith of Saints wherby they beleued Christ to come and all his mysteries was hiddeÌ„ or couered for that all iust holie men of those tymes beleued the self same things that we do now and did hope for the same but now our faith is cleere reuealed Thus saith S. Augustine making the same difference in effect as yow see betwene tâ—e faith of vs Christians and of those vnder the old testament as we do betwene learned and vnlearned men at this day the one being cleere distinct particular the other obscure confuse and more general for so much as those points of Christs incarnation diuynitie person natures wils sacraments passion resurrection and the like which we beleue now distinctly and cleerly and in particuler they beleued obscurely and more confusedly as vnder a vaile 2. Cor. 3. as the Apostle termeth it and as it were in grosse and general in that they beleued whatsoeuer the Prophets and Patriarches had fortold or beleued of Christ to come and his doctrine and mysteries as the more vnlearned sort of Christians do now in beleuing whatsoeuer the Churche holdeth though in particular they knew not euery point which she holdeth but only the most notorious and needful as those general heades commonly called the Articles of the Creed some other deduced therof and appointed to be taught and explaned to euery Christian more in particular though not all but so many as are necessarie to be knowen for their saluation And this simplicitie of belief in the common sort which our scoffing knight calleth the Colliars faith himself being more ignorant in diuers pointes of true faith then many Colliars or Coblers in the Catholike Churche the foresayd holie father and learned doctor S. Augustine doth so highlie esteme as he dareth auouche against as stowt an heretike as our K â— or his Ministers this sentence Aug. 1. coÌ„tâ—a Ep. Fundam Turbam non intelligendi viuacitas sed credendâ— simplicitas tutissimam facit The vulgar sort of Christians are made most sure of their saluatioÌ„ by the viuacity of their vnderstanding but by the simplicity of beleeuing c. Wel then good readers all this that hitherto hath byn said hath byn to lay before yow the fond cauillations of wrangling Sectaries about fides explicita and implicita they vnderstanding nether the nature vtility or necessity therof For the truth is that Cath. religion doth hould them both and iudgeth both most necessary in all sorts of men though they are more in some then in others The necessity of fides explicita in all men For as for fides explicita all Catholyke wryters do agree that all sorts of Christians whatsoeuer must haue it in the principle articles of Christian beleef vnder paine of eternal damnation that is to say that all Christians learned and vnlearned of what sort so euer must be taught to beleeue expressely cleerly and distinctly the principal misteries of Christian religion as for example the misteries of the Blessed trinity and incarnation c. This doctrine is so ordinary and vniuersal among Catholiks D. Thom. 2. 2. q 2. art 6.7.8 c. as S. Thomas hath diuers whole articles therof and all other schoole diuines do agree about that matter though our K t. would gladly haue men to think that we do not teach this fides explicita as necessarie to any almost of the simple sort Secondly our Churche teacheth that albeit this cleere and distinct faith be necessary to all Christians in certayne articles yet not to all a like More things necessary to be beleeued by some than others but that the learneder sort are bound to know beleeue by this faith more thinges theÌ„ the simple especially those that must teach others as Curats Pastors Preachers and the like and more then all the rest Bishoppes and Prelates which S. Thomas declareth in these words SecuÌ„da 2. q. 2. art 7. in corp artic post tempus gratiae reuelatae c. After the comming of Christ as wel teachers as the people are bouÌ„d to haue fidem explicitam cleere and expresse beleef of the misteries of Christian faith especially touching those points that are solemnized in the Churche and are publikely proposed vnto them as are the articles of the incarnation before treated But as for more higher considerations some are bound to beleue more and some lesse according as the state and office of each one requireth c. And againe yet further plura tenentur explicitè credere maiores Ibid. art 6. ad primum qui habent officium alios instrueÌ„di quam alij Those that be in Ecclesiastical authority or haue obligation to teach others are bound also to beleeue more things expressely and distinctly then others Thus teacheth our Churche and the discreet reader wil easily iudge with how great reason piety necessity for the saluation of those that are committed to her charge And to the end yow may see with how litle iudgment the sectaries of our tyme and namely our Knight taking thesame out of Iohn Caluyn do cauil at our doctrine herin Caluin Institut l. 3. c. 2. â— 2. I shal make yow see and him also to confesse yf he be not shamelesse that himself his men do vse put in practise the very same distinction of fides explicita and implicita are forced therâ—nto yf in truth they wil confesse to haue any â—aith at all For I would aske him first whether euery â—rotestant do not professe to beleue all that Christ and his Apostles and the Prophets beâ—ore them haue taught The necessitie of fides implicita eueÌ„ in heretiks or at leastwayes so â—uch as they haue written and set downe in â—â—riptures And then would I aske againe how â—any English protestants do know distinctly 〈◊〉 this day all that is in the scriptures touching â—hristian fayth And if to the first there be no â—oubt but that he wil answere affirmatiuely 〈◊〉 that to the second he must needs answere â—â—gatiuely than it followeth that those proâ—â—stants who beleeue all things that are in â—â—riptures and yet do not know expressely or â—â—â—tinctly what they are in particular thease I 〈◊〉 do beleeue those points which they know 〈◊〉 fide implicita that is to say by an implied 〈◊〉 in that they beleeue in general whateuer is contayned in the scriptures Another like demaund may be to the simâ—â—r sort of Protestants Another demaund to Sir Francis and perhaps to Sir F. â—â—â—self though he take not himself for such â—â—ich is whether he beleeue to be false all
rashnes and leuity to haue written and printed that we all hold it so Doctor Cole might say perhaps or any other that the leardnest men are not alwayes the most deuout and so doth the Warder also setting downe the reason therof out of S. Thomas at large for that deuotion depending more of the affections of our mynde then of our knowlege and vnderstaÌ„ding is fownd more aboundant oftentymes in the simplez sorte And if S r. F. vnderstood the nature of vertues and were not obstinat in respect of mayntayning his owne heretical credit he would see and acknowlege so much also and recal his former mad calumniation that we hold Ignorance for mother of deuotion Lib de 〈◊〉 but as Tertullian saith It is easier for Sectaries to aâ— ten new errors then to recal one For which cause I wil vrge this matter no further against him THE MINISTER O. E. is called vp to help out his K. in defence of this first forged position and how he performeth the same CAP. VIII ANd yet before we leaue of this whole treatie we haue thought it best to cal vp the stage once againe O.E. the knights proctor and souldiour of succour to heare what he hath to say for it is likely that comming after the K t. he wil ad somewhat to the others inuention and bring some new knack or other to help out his graueled K t. and to intertaine the reader withall wherfore it shal not be amisse to giue him the hearing thus then beginneth this new Mowntebank his tale I say that it is most true that S r. F. doth obiect viz Pag. 42. that Papists hold Ignorance to be the mother of deuotion Loehere a new Pithagoras that wil be beleued at his woord I say quoth he And what are yow sir I pray yow that we must beleue yow after the K t. and more then him who hauing said it oftentymes before hath not hitherto byn able to proue it Let vs heare then how yow wil play your parte who came in so freshlie and auouche so stoutlie Let vs heare your proofes Yt followeth ymediatlie Doctor Cole saith he in a certaine disputation at vvest-minster did openly affirme it This is no more then was sayd before and not proued therfore foolishly brought in now againe by the supplier But heare hym out further for he hath yet more to say Hosius saith he affirmeth Ibidem An issue ioyned vpon the vvoords ascribed to Hosius that ignorance is not only worthie pardon but reward also And is it so Sir wil yow stand to it wel then let vs ioyne vpon this yssue see who shal be cast let the reader first note that the false Minister setteth downe these woords ascribed to Hosius in a different letter to make them more markable as yf they were Hosius his owne woords indeed And secondly let hym consyder that whose woords so euer they be yet do they not proue the former proposition that Ignorance is the mother of deuotion but only that some kynd of ignorance or lack of some knowlege may not onely be pardonable but meritorious also which is a different thing from auouching Ignorance to be the mother of deuotion But let vs examyne the point whose woords these are therby discouer a notorious trick of a coosening companion in this Minister who reading these woords in Hosius seing him to alleage them out of S. Hilary a most auncient and authentical author would not cyte them as the woords of S. Hillary least they should haue more credit with the reader then himself that sought to discredit them but thought best rather to forge and father them vpon Card. Hosius albeit he told hym expresly that they were the woordes of S. Hillary and so cyted them with the place quoted in the margent for that Hosius hauing set downe many other authorities of auncient fathers to proue what a great and singular benefyt we receaue by the force of that article of our Creed A coosening trick Credo sanctam Ecclesiam Catholicam I beleue the holie Catholike Churche and all that she holdeth teacheth he sheweth that among other commodityes which we receaue from thence one is that simple men vnderstanding only the principle and necessarie points of their faith and professing with S. Paul 1. Cor. 2. that they beleeue Christ Iesus crucified and therein all that belongeth therevnto for other matters and mysteries of higher capacitie it is not absolutely necessarie for euery particular man and womaÌ„ to know and beleeue them fide explicita Supra cap. 7. Num. 6. that is by distinct and cleere belief as before hath byn shewed but that by a more general and ymplied faith wherby we professe to beleue his holie catholike Churche and all that shee teacheth and beleeueth we include also these other pointes necessarie to our saluation To which purpose Hosius hauing alleaged the saying of S. Clemens Alexandrinus other fathers more auncient then S. Hillary he addeth these woordes Hosius lib. de fide Symbolo c. 14. Et eos secutus Hilarius habet inquit non tam veniam quam praemium ignorare quod credas quia maximum fidei stipendium est sperarequae nescias Hillar lib. 8. de Trin. inetio S. Hillary following the foresaid fathers saith that to be ignorant of that thow beleuest is a matter woorthie not so much of pardoÌ„ as reward for that the greatest reward of faith is to hope for that which thow knowest not These are the woordes of that great and auncient Catholike doctor S. Hilary whose name our Minister durst not cyte but of purpose omitteth thesame and affirmeth most falsely that they are Hosius his woords And this is one cosenage let vs examyne an other And in an other place saith he Hosius affirmeth that Tvvo nototorious Cosenages of O.E. nihil scire ijs Omnia scire to know nothing is to know all thinges and that it is sufficient for a man to beleue that which the Cathol Churche beleueth Pag. 42. albeit he be not able to shew what it beleueth Here I say there is an other false deceitful shift no lesse fraudulent and shameles then the former for that these woords are not the woords of Hosius no more then the former Hos. Ibid. but are only cited by hym by name and expresly out of â—ertullian de praescript Where after a long and learned discourse about the rule of faith instituted by Christ and his Apostles and left to the Churche to be deliuered vnto vs and to be conserued from tyme to tyme Tertullian saith that all good Catholike men ought to be content and acquiet their myndes with this rule summe of faith left vnto vs and not to be ouer curious in examyning discussing or seeking further knowlege then is delyuered to them in this rule by their Catholike mother the Churche Haec regula saith he à Christo instituta nullas habet apud noâ— quaestiones nisi
their orders inioyned and comaunded in such reuerence and regard must he and his Cleargie be had that the meanest maspriest coming with authority from him must be obeyed vnder payne of damnation though he command that which is blasphemous before God in christians and disloyal to men in subiects Impudent calumniatioÌ„ This is his narration From which saith the Warder yf we separate a manifestly or two with some fond exaggerations for without this kynd of leuen the poor knight can make no batch as for example that the Pope and his Cleargy must be obeyed though they commaund blasphemies against God and disloyalty against princes which is a 〈…〉 disobedience yf 〈…〉 order inioyned by th◠〈…〉 and the like 〈…〉 ouerlashings of the 〈…〉 obiecteth is rather 〈…〉 religion then any reproch at all For in that he saith we obey the meanest priest as the highest yf he come with authority of the highest he sheweth therby that we haue among vs true obedieÌ„ce and subordination and that for conscience sake not respecting so much the person that commaundeth as him for whome in whose name and authority he comandeth and therin we fulfil the precept of S. Paul Hebr. 1â— Obedite praepositis vestris subiacete eis ipsi enim peruigilant quasi rationem pro animabus vestris reddituri Obey your Prelats and humble your selues vnto them he distinguisheth not betwene high and low for they keep diligent watch ouer your soules as men that must render account therof to God And in other places he saith that this obedience must be with such reuerence Ephes. â— humility and inward affection as vnto Christ himself whose substitutes our spiritual Superiors be though neuer so meane or contemptible in mannes sight Thus it was answered then by the warder and more also added to that purpose out of diuers places of scriptures And how replyeth Syr F. now Can he defend these ouerlashing speeches Can he shew that any one Cathol wryter that euer put pen to paper held this most absurd ground The knight is vrged to aunsvver that he setteth downe 〈…〉 when 〈…〉 almightie God 〈…〉 vpon him 〈…〉 Now he should 〈…〉 substantially he 〈…〉 proof wherof saith he that which your owne men haue wrytten of the infinit power of the Pope may abundantly suffice namely though all the world iudge in any matter against him yet we ought to stand to the iudgmeÌ„t of him c. And whosoeuer is not obedient to the lawes of the Churche of Rome must be denied an heretike c. And though he draw infinite soules with him to hel yet no man may presume to say why do yow thus c. Lo heer good reader what maner of proof this knight bringeth First new assertions as idle and doubtful as the first and cytheth no one author in the margent where these things are to be found or discussed And secondly yf all were true this proueth the greatnesse only of the Popes authority to edificatioÌ„ not to destruction to good not to euil albeit the last point wherin he affirmeth that no man may say to the Pope why do yow thus though he draw infinite soules with him into hel it being an ordinary comon place as wel to all wryters and wranglers in their books as preachers praters against the Pope in their pulpits we shal examin the same afterwards towards the end of this Chapter against the minister O.E. for that he vouchsafeth to cyte some author for the same though falsly and fraudulently as yow shal see Now then let vs heare how our knigh◠〈…〉 the premises 〈…〉 And your holy 〈…〉 to tell vs in his 〈…〉 mory that Christ 〈…〉 Paul but him that 〈…〉 this diuinity we must obey â—â—â— Pope whatsoeuer Petâ—â— and Paul teach vs to the contrary And this I hope is a sufficient iustification of my accusation c. Lo how roundly he riddeth himself But yet note good reader 4. points of Syr F. diuinity out of this one sentence with a preface conuenient thervnto 〈…〉 kind of 〈…〉 His preface consisteth in qualifying the wrytings of D. Harding and M. Iewel calling the former an inuectiue and the later of blessed memory wheras all learned men that haue read the same with indifferency and diuers great protestants also conuerted by that reading wil and do testifie the contrary to wit that D. Hardings wryting against Iewel especially his last book called D. Hardinges vvorkes against Iuel The returne of vntruthes was rather a coÌ„uictiue then an inuectiue leauing M. Iewel with the commendation rather of a lying then blessed memory And so I dare auouch that any maÌ„ shal find him who hath tyme learning store of books patience indifferency to read and examin him Now then let vs examin the foure points before mentioned wherof the first is his ordinary slieght wherby he alleageth D. Hardings assertion about S. Peter S. Paul without telling vs where to the end that the truth of this citation may not be examined and for that 〈…〉 playing 〈…〉 iustly suspect 〈…〉 the proposition 〈…〉 which is as 〈…〉 of vs now not â—◠〈…〉 sitteth in their chaire Which if it be to 〈◊〉 S. Peter S. Paul being now absent cannot personally determine all matters as when they were here in earth but haue left their successors in their place to be obeyed as themselues Why should this propositioÌ„ so much mislike our K t Sure I am that he dareth not deny the same or equiualeÌ„t therof in the magistrats of diuers citties Princes teÌ„poral successors And yf a man for examples sake should aske him whether God do commaund English men at this day to obey the Queene that now raigneth in matters belonging to her gouernment or rather VVilliam Conquerour first founder of this Monarchie or K. Henry the 8. her Ma ties Father and so in other Princes as whether the present K. of France be to be obeyed and respected or Hugo Capetus the first founder of his house No man wil doubt but that present Princes and gouernors are to be obeyed And yf in temporal successors this be to be obserued why not also in spiritual Is the K t. so simple as he seeth not the coÌ„uenience of this matter and that gouernours present and not past are to be repayred vnto for present resolution and decision of affayres If God in his Churche had willed men to obey S. Peter and S. Paul 〈…〉 wils 〈…〉 not known 〈…〉 expres writings 〈…〉 only their epistles 〈…〉 world nor were other 〈…〉 gouernors nor yet wrytings needful whiâ—â— yet is most absurd in all mennes sights for that all causes incident are not determined in S. Peter and S. Paul their epistles nor can all men read and vnderstand them and consequently is needful the authority of a present gouernour sâ—tting in their chayre and hauing thesame authority that they had which we beleeue to be in the Pope for necessary gouernment of the Churche Thirdly then consider
and partaker of his golden purposes As for that which foloweth of recusant Catholikes that they do enioy their lands goods country and libertie notvvithstanding they are secretlie reconciled to the Pope and do adhere to her Maiesties enemyes as by a marginal note he sayth doth appeare by diuers letters of priests ready to be shevved Catholykes enioying their goodes and libertie for there enioying I would the ministers ioy were not greater in his benefices and then I doubt not but he would be more calme then now he is his hawty wyues hayre would soone grow through her french veluet hood but for their adhering to enemyes testified as he sayth by Priests letters we haue as litle reason to beleeue him against Priests not shewing their letters as they should haue to write any such vntruth which we beleeue not but take it as a stratageme deuised to set vs at diuision among our selues The whole discourse next ensuing is so bitter spiteful so ful of gore blood poyson as it needeth his visour of O. E. to vtter thesame for that the cunning compagnion though he be content to fawne and flatter be knowne vnderhand therby to gather vp some morsels for the present yet fearing perhaps somwhat the future and considering that both tymes and matters and men may change he thought good to pâ—euent afterclaps by couering his true name and to purchase securitie for tyme to come with the losse or diminishment of some prayse present And therfore walking out of sight in this behalf he playeth egregiouslie the syrebrand telling her Maiestie and her counsel O.E.A. notorious fyrebrand of sedition that too much extraordinarie fauour and remissnes tovvards Catholikes hath caused diuers rebellions both in England and Ireland and that it hath dissolued the very synevves of gouernment that it is more profitable and expedient to excute lavves then to pardon offenders c. All which this sycophaÌ„t chaunted out lustely at that very tyme and season to fil vp her Maiesties eares when his Lord and yong king Essex was most busy in plotting her Maiesties ouerthrow vnder pretence of meeting at puritane sermons and seing that this plot was layd in Ireland from whence this minister vnder pretence of running away for feare of punishment of some vntemperate words spoken came into England not long before his maister as heere is reported it may be he came about this negotiation and fearing least it might be discouered before due tyme he took in hand to write this book of all-arme against Catholikes to disguyse and shadow the other A treacherous deuise and to diuert mens eyes another way but for this let her Maiesties wyse counsel looke vnto and prouide as they shal fynd need I am only to proceed in refuting of his malice and folly let them punish his treacherie and knauery if they fynd it After his spite is spit ouâ— against the Catholikes he cometh to aduauÌ„ce highlie Sir F. Hastings wach-word Bragging of Sir F. book and sayth that the good knight of a zealous mynd tovvards religion gâ—ueth the vvord to his countrimen And I say N.D. giueth the Ward and who geueth or receyueth most venewes let our countrymen be iudges as they may also of this champion his successe who seing his good knight dryuen to the wal with more hast then good speed cometh running to his succour receauing for his gaine the first broken head as wrangling sticlers ar wont to do and so I suppose yow wil say also when ye see al that passeth Yet doth he with a conâ—ident interrogation commend vnto vs the whole worke saying vvhat one sentence in all the vvhole discourse can be noted vnvvorthy eyther a true Christian or a loyal subiect or a vvorthy knight wherto I answere that there wil so many sentences be found in the treatise folowing vnworthy of al three poyntes mentyoned to wit Christianitie loyaltie and chiualry as if this worthy champion can defend them he wil shew him selfe worthie to be knighted also and to haue a K. for the first letter of his title But to returne agayne to the prosecution of this mans inuectiue against Catholikes their liues honours liberty and goods all which he impugneth at one tyme and for some florish and shew of proof he alleageth first certayne examples of Scripture where kings of Iuda were reprehended for permitting vnlauful woorship and then out of the old Roman lawes recounted dy Cicero and Vlpian â— Reg. 1â— â— Paral. â—3 Cicero lib. 3. de legâ— bus Vlpian l. quo ties ff de poeâ—is which do prescribe diuers kyndes of punishments for malefactors and â—hirdly out of the lawes of ancient Christian Empâ—rors that willed heretikes to be punished and with this thinketh that he hath proued very substantialâ—y that Catholike men also may must be puniâ—â—ed in England But thus to reason at randome is much like to boyes argumenting in Sophistry Petrus iacet in lectulo ergo hâ—â—ulus siat in angulo these examples haue no affinity or coherence with our cause but only so much as they make against this Noddy His argumeÌ„t against him â—elfe and for vs for if old Roman lawes do gyue general authority to the body of the common wealth to punish particular offencers non è contra as Cicero signifieth in his booke de legibus then foloweth it in good reason that the Catholike christian churche being the vniuersal body of Christs common wealth vpon earth hath authoritie to punish ProtestaÌ„ts Puritanes Lutherans Arrians or any other sect that doth or shal aryse but not that theâ—e haue authoritie or may haue to punish the other for matter of religion though they sâ—ould get superiority of temporal power in any place of the world for that they are but particuler men and members of members at all and the other the body and true common wealth to whom only it appertayneth to punish And leâ— * O. â— Oules eie but sâ—ewe me one example from the beginning of Christendome that euer any man or woman in any age was punished as an heretike by the Christian common wealth for sticking to the religion of the Pope of Rome and it shal be sufficient for all I aske but one example out of all antiquitie As for the examples alleaged by him of Asa and Manasses kings of Iuda who notwithstanding 3. Reg. 15. 2 Paral. 33. Idolatrous vvorâ—hip on hils among the levves out of the Temple pre-figured heresves among Christians Hierem. in c. â— Amos in c. 12. O see Aux de vriâ—â—tate ieiunâ— cap. â— Deutt â—3 Aug. de ciuit Dei l. 1â— cap 51. Cypr. lib. de vn Eccl. Hier. in cap. â— Ezech. in c 1â— Osee in c. 1â— Zach. in c. 8. â— an Aug. enarrat in Psalm â—0 part â—9 sup lib Iosue cap. 27. their other good zeale did not remooue the vnlawful seruice and sacrifice accustomed on hils and high places they make nothing against vs but
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
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 〈…〉
for some shew that they desire agreement to make among themselues an infinite number of Synodes meetings parlies and coÌ„uenticles to wit aboue threescore and ten as Stanislaus Rescius and other writers haue gathered Rescius li. 1. de Atheis Euang cap 5. but yet to no effect not being able to agree vpon any one thing in controuersy betwene them before but rather after infinite braulings chidings and furious inuectiues the one against the other they haue departed euermore disagreeing and more enimyes then euer they weare before their meeting wherof some few examples I shal recite in this place In the towne of Hala in Saxony in the yeare of Christ 1527. to wit some nine or tenne yeares after Luther began his doctrine The first general councel of protestaÌ„ts in the vvorld 1527. there was made the first general Councel of Lutherans togeather against Sacramentarie Suinglians where by a soleÌ„ne decree which they called Syngramma they condemned the doctrine of the said Zwinglius and his fellowes Carolstadius and Oecolampadius about the Sacrament as damnable heresy and pronounced iudicially Luther being President of the councel all the followers of that doctrine to be prenicious heretikes which decree was published presently and printed in the Germaine tongue with a preface thervnto of Luther himselfe by Ioannes Agricola one of Luthers cheefe scholers in the same yeare But what did these men obay or yeld to this supreme authority of their new Church noe but presently Oecolampadius answered Luthers preface accusing him of much pride vanity Oh humility of a new gospeller Suinglius also wrote an epistle in the Germane tongue ad Eâ—sâ—igenses wherin he courseth and canuaseth Martin Luther extreamly calling him and his partakers furious and fanatical Sweâ—merers behold the spirit and this was the euent of this first Synode of Lutherans Svvermers from which tyme vntil the yeare 1529. that is for the space of some two yeares I reade of no other publike meetings Synods or councels of momeÌ„t had amongst these primitiue Church Protestants but that by bookes and wrytings only they did vex and gaule one the other extreamly and Luther himselfe gaue this seuere censure of this controuersy to them of ArgeÌ„tine demaÌ„ding his final resolutioÌ„ Luth. admonit ad Argentorat Aut LutheruÌ„ aut Sacramentarios Satanae ministros c. that eyther he or the SacrameÌ„taries were certainly the ministers of Satan but he that would say both should best perhaps determine the cause In the yeare then 1529. by meditation of Philippe Lantgraue of Hessia Three other Synods of Luth. and Suingl in vayne anno 1529. Lauat hist. 1529. Sleid. eodem an an earnest protestant there were three Synodes gathered of Lutherans and Suinglians in one yeare to make agreement The first in the towne of Marspurge the second at Suabachium the third at Smalcaldia as both Lauaâ—erus a Suinglian and Sleidanus à Lutheran do testifie in their histories and out of all these three Synodes they departed with lesse agreement then they met and after their departure euery man hasted to put in print the victory against his aduersary The Suinglians published 300. argumeÌ„ts which they said they had alleaged against the Real presence and other articles of the Lutherans in that Synod and could get no answere at all And on the other syde Melanchthon to prooue the Suinglians to be obstinate heretikes gathered togeather all the sentences of the auncient Fathers and Doctors for the Real presence and published them in printe Luther also published that Suinglins in that Synod desired him with teares in the presence of the Lantgraue that he might be receaued as a brother but could not be admitted MelanthoÌ„ also wryting to a frend of his of that Synod sayth thus Quantum attinet ad factionem Zuingli ego â—oram agnoui Melanchton epiâ—t ad Martin Goâ—â—iâ—iuÌ„ Pastor Brunsnicensem c. for as much as appertayneth to the faction of Suinglius I dyd publikely professe in the meeâ—ing at Marspurg 1592. hauing hard â—heir cheife Doctors of that sect say what they could that they haue no doctrine at all of Christ but only do dispute childishly and so they cannot endure This was Melanchtons iudgment prophesy of Suinglius as also of Caluinists in this behalfe to wit that they hold not Christ nor cannot continew but let our men consider whether this be true and like to prooue a true prophesy or no And this was the effect of these other three Synods Let vs yet go â—oward Two yeares after this to wit in the yeare 1531. died Zuinglius OecolaÌ„padius within three dayes the one of the others The death of Zvvinglius and Oecolampadius 1531. the former slayne in the field in rebellion against his countrey and comon wealth the secod found dead in his bed by his wiues side strangled by the diuel as Luther holdeth or as wryters rather thinke Luth. lib de missa priuata kylled by his owne wyfe But what was the controuersy ended with this No for to Zuinglius succeeded presently Bullenger and to Oecolampadius Michonius their schollers and others that tooke vpon them to defend that faction begone And some few yeares after that againe there arose a famous new Apostle one Iohn Caluin a FreÌ„ch man of Picardâ— The beginning of Iohn Caluin and his doctrine who though at the beginning would seeme to approue the substance of the Sacramentary doctrine in denying the Real presâ—nce yet not content to follow but to be followed framed out a new opinion quite different from the â—ormer of Zuinglius and OecolaÌ„padius as the whole churche of MaÌ„sfeld doth testifie in these wordes Confes. Mansfeldens The Caluinists say they do reiect by a new deuise tâ—e doctrine of the â—lâ—er Sacramentaries Sâ—inglius and Oecolampadius who did hold that Sacrament for an external signe only but these men confesse it in words to be the very body bloud of Christ substantially truly but yet figuratiuely and spiritually so as Christes body remayneth notwithstanding only in heauen for that it cannot be in two places at once Thus they So as heere now we see no agreeing at all hitherto but rather more eager dissention amongst protestants the further we goe downe euen in the same sect it selfe and where then is our knights first blessing of general vnity among his people But this shal be inough for Synodes and councels for the breuity of this place THE SAME MATTER is prosecuted and the disvnion of Protestantes is prooued and declared by diuers other meanes out of their owne bookes and writings especially of forraine Protestants Lutherans Zuinglians and Caluinistes CAP. V. AND wheras I might prosecute this matter with an endlesse discourse yf I would goe ouer eyther their Synodes Parlyes conferences and meetings from yeare to yeare vnto our tyme or their infinite wrytings one against another in moste bitter sort VVarre of Lutherans Sacramentaries both Lutherans against Sacramentaries and they against
all matters being by both their iudgments to be referred and all other iudges and trials left a side as they require they come to fal out presently about the sense and interpretation wherin it is affirmed by their owne wryters that so many men so many myndes and so many diuers interpretations among them-selues of the selfesame words of scripture are to be found as yow may see set downe at large in another book of the softer Caluinists set forth by the same publike authority as the former and intituled A suruey of the pretented holy Discipline imprinted at London An. 1593. especially in the 31. Chapter whose title is this How and with what disagreement they wrest and misconster the scriptures c. Where hauing shewed by many examples that fiue or six diuers interpretations are giuen sometymes vpon one and the selfe same sentence of scripture by these his puritane brethren He addeth further these wordes Suruey c. 31. Caterbraulis of ProtestaÌ„ts and PuritaÌ„s Vnto these Caterbraules and pitiful distractions which now I haue shewed I might ad a great heape of other confusions all proceeding from such intollerable presumption as is vsed by peruerting and false interpretation of the sacred Scriptures And agayne whosoeuer doth deale with the Scriptures in this sort as these fellowes do wel may he speake proud things exalt himselfe promise mountaynes brag of the Prophets Apostles but in the end all cometh to nothing c. Loe heere what this brother sayth of the rest of the caterbraules and pittiful distractions from them of their intollerable presumption in peruerting and false interpreting scriptures of their swelling pryde in bragging of hauing the prophets and Apostles on their syde when they haue nothing but vanitye yet these brags of scriptures prophets and Apostles must be good and currant proofe when they deale with vs against the authoritye of the vniuersal Churche as yow shal see by O.E. in the next Chapter and when we tel them of any diuision among themselues they wil deny it on all handes as Syr F. doth heere of the Puritanes and O. E. afterward though he hath written against them most spitefully and doggedly for he hath no other style as it seemeth and fynally let all men iudge but especially the reader whom it most importeth for his instruction with what truth and conscience Syr F. can say and wryte as he doth matters staÌ„ding as I haue shewed that not only the professors of their ghospel in England but all other Churches also in Christendome where the ghospel is imbraced are of one Iudgement and thervpon coÌ„clude with this hypocritical prayer to mock God withall And in this blessed vnitie grounded vpon veritie the Lord for euer keepe vs. Whervnto I say also amen so long as they remaine enemies to Gods Catholike Churche wherin only veritie and vnitie is to be found AN ANSVVERE TO three fond obiections or interrogations of Syr F. with an addition about O. E. who is called vp agayne to the stage to tell his opinion about this first blessing of vnitie in veritie CAP. VII AND this now might be sufficient for refutation of this first ridiculous blessing set downe by the knight were it not that I am forced to follow him yet a litle further into an other poynt which is that he forseing how albeit this first blessing of vnitie among them could be proued as it cannot yet might it not be alleaged for a peculiar blessing of his men except it could be shewed also that it were singular to them alone and not commoÌ„ also to Catholikes before they and their religion sprong vp for if we had vnitie also in fayth before them then cannot vnitie be accompted their blessing more then ours for which cause he endeauoureth to shewe that Catholikes had no vnitie of fayth before Luthers ghospel began which paradox he wil needs proue by three graue interrogations which I pray yow note and therby obserue the mans singular wit and learning Yow vaunt sayth he of a general vnitie before alteration of religion Pag. 13. but how worshipped yow one God when yow worshipped so many Idols To this I answere that if we worshipped Idols Three foâ—d interrogatioÌ„s â—f the K. and so were Idolators this error was so vniuersally receyued among vs as euen in this poynt also we had vnitie which protestants cannot shew in their errors and falsityes as before hath byn declared And so this question is both ydle and easy to answere for the consequent but for the antecedent it is most false for we deny that any Idols were among Catholikes August de vtilitate ieiunij tomo 9. â—ub finem S. Hier. in c. 6. Amos in c. â—2 Ose. S. Augustines and S. Hieroms sentence is cleare and sound as before hath ben noted that heretikes are the Idolaters of the new Testament for adoring their own fansies Secondly he asketh agayne how we could haue vnitye when as we were so miserably rent into innumerable sectes of fryers and monkes To which I answere that all these professed one fayth without any difference in any one article of beliefe And consequently this question is more simple then the former for that difference of habytes or particular manner of lyfe breaketh not vnity of religion Thirdly he asketh and vrgeth yet more sharpely how caÌ„ yow haue one head of your Churche vnles yow reiect Christ that is the onely head To this I wil answere out of his owne wordes that we can haue one external and ministerial head vnder Christ by the same reason that himselfe in the same place sayth that English Protestants haue one head of their Churche which is Christ the Lord and his substitute annoynted their Soueraigne Q. vnder him So that yf it do not exclude Christ among the Protestants to haue a womaÌ„ head of their Churche vnder Christ much lesse doth it exclude Christ among vs to haue a man head a Priest head of this reason I am content to make any man iudge And with this I wil end my treatise of the first benediction of vnitie in veritie which is as truly and fitly applyed to Protestants as if a man should assigne it for a special blessing of Greeks and Germanes aboue other nations neuer to exceed in drinking or of those of Guinea neuer to fal out or fight among themselues who neuer lightly are occupyed in other things And lastly I wil close vp all with the sentence and prophesy of no worse a man then Martyn Luther himselfe Luthers prophesye of Protestants coment in Psalm 5. who wryteth thus Certè non alia ratione confligit Deus cum haereticis quam vt inter illos existat factiosus quidam dissensionis spiritus ex â—llorum enim discordia interitus quoque perditio consequitur Trulie God doth not fight by any other meanes with heretikes then by permitting among them a certayne seditious spirite of dissentioÌ„ by which their ouerthrow also and perdition doth ensue Thus
and discretion wil be of my opinion that whatsoeuer good effectes haue come to our common wealth by her Maiesties gouernment or rare partes of Princelie commendations A note to be diligently obserued and which truelie may be termed blessings might haue byn as great as all these or farre greater vnder Catholike religion and especiallie in her Maiestie if it had pleased almightie God to haue blessed her and the realme with the continuance therof and contrariwyse whatsoeuer cursings and calamities on the contrarie syde haue ensued or may ensue herafter by the change of religion these are proper effectes and necessary consequeÌ„ts of the new ghospel and not of any defect in her Maiesties gouernment and this foundatioÌ„ being presupposed in all that I shal say let vs passe on to examine in a word or two the most ridiculous vanitie of these fiue blessings folowing which he calleth corporal accompting his former spiritual For the first of them which is deliueraÌ„ce from intolerable exactions â— Blessing deliuerance from exactions if he meane it of the realme in general as his marginal note may seeme to importe which often yet disagreeth in sense from his text let the Escheker books be compared of the tributes payments contributions and exactions that were vsed in EnglaÌ„d in former dayes before this new ghospel came in and since I meane of the summes that were payd in old tymes when Catholike religion bare rule and protestants were not knowne those that later Princes by reason of troubles warres suspicions and other like occasions rysing especially by difference in religion haue byn forced to take of their subiects since the yeare of Christ 1530. or there about at what tyme K. Henrie began vpon the aduise incitation of Cranmer Cromwel and other Protestants to breake with the Pope and churche of Rome let these summes I say be coÌ„ferred and then our knight if he be a good Auditor or Eschequer man wil for very shame stryke out this blessing and mentyon it no more But yf he meane this blessing especiallie or principallie of our Clergie men this day in England for that they pay nothing now to the Pope as in the texte and prosecution of this blessing is set downe then let the wealth and ease of the old and new Clergie be compared togither or rather the pouertie and beggerie of the one with the honor and splendor of the other and so this controuersie wil quicklie be decyded and S.F. beaten from this first corporal blessing of his new Cleargie to a Spiritual which is Matth. â— Beati pauperes spiritu blessed are the poore in spirit for in body and purse they are already miserable as them-selues euery where complayne The pouertie and myserie of the protestaÌ„t cleargie none more grieuously or more spitefullie in secret as before hath byn touched then his champion O.E. alleaging these reasons that the most of them hauing much to pay both to Prince Patron in steed of the Pope and litle to receyue the gleebe lands of their benefices being commonlie swept to their hands and their charge of women and children so great as the parishes do commonlie feele when they dy their beggerie must needs be intollerable wheras on the other syde in Catholyke Countryes yf they contribute any thing to the Pope as to their head for better maintenance of his state and gouerment of the whole Churche it is neyther so great a matter and commonlie â—â—t out of the greater benefices that caÌ„ better beare it and in recompence of that agayne he defendeth them against the intrusion or vsurpation of seculer men vpoÌ„ their liuings which importeth them much more as by experience of Catholyke Countryes and Kyngdomes is seene then is the contribution they make to Rome though it were so great and greuous as our K. maketh it in K. Henrie the 3. his â—yme alleaging a certayne complaynt of our English Churche to Pope Innocentius 4. in a general Councel at Lions an 1245. against his collectors officers in England which being taken out of Iohn Fox whom this man yet wil not name maketh no more against the Popes Authoritie A calumniation of Ihon Fox act â—on Pag. 241.242 c. nor yet conuinceth him of abuse that way then yf at this day the same complaynt should be made by the Churche of Spayne as diuers tymes it is against the lyke collectors or officers there or when any complaint is made in England of any of her Ma ties officers that abuse themselues in their collections for couetousnes vpon the Clergie at this day wherof I presuppose there would not want complaints if all Ministers should be willed to vtter their greifes therin And what then doth Syr F. and Fox vrge so much against the Pope the complaynt of some in England against his officers at that tyme VVhy Pope Innocentius required a collection of mony for recouering the holy land when the publike necessitie of christendome oppressed by Turkes and Saracens inforced Pope Innocentius as general Father of all to lay some contribution vpon the cleargie of England and other countryes for defence therof to which effect also in the very same councel of Lions he had appoynted and declared king Lewes of France for Supreme general and yet was not the summe exacted such nor so great but that more money in these our dayes hath byn sent out of the realme in one yeare by these meÌ„nes liking and good approbation for defence of heresie and rebellion in France Flanders Scotland and other countryes theÌ„ was in this many other tymes in those dayes for maintenance of the whole Churche and Christianitie and yet coÌ„playneth not our knight of this which subiects now feele for that it is present but of the other past and gone which they feele not wherby is seene his indifferencie that they seek nothing but matter of complayâ—â— and cauilling against the Pope and hâ—â— doings As for long peace which is an other blessing of his both sweet profitable as he termeth it â— blessing long peace I know not what or why I should answere seing Aristotle teacheth that to go about to proue or improue by reasonâ— that which is open and manifest to our senses is to wearie reason and offer iniurie to sense who seeth not therfore what hath passed in England since protestant religion first entred in K. Henryes dayes for if we talke oâ— domestical styrres and tumultes among our people we haue had more within these 70. yeares to wit from the one or two and twentith of K. Henryes raigne downwards vnder him and his three children respecting religioÌ„ only then in a thousand before his dayes and more then in many ages for any cause whatsoeuer setting a syde the contention for the crowne betweene the two houses oâ— Yorke and Lancaster which cannot go by reason in this accompt for that it was a particular quarrel of certayne Princes of the bloud royal not rysing of
lib de praescrip coÌ„tr hâ—r cap. 1â— Fides in regulae posita est cedat curiositas fides certè aut non obstrepant aut quiescant aduersus regulam c. Fayth consisteth in rule let curiositie yeild to fayth and let heretikes eyther not prate or be silent against this rule So saith he and in an other place if saith he we wil doubt or aske questions in matters of religion let vs inquyre oâ— our owne men to wit Catholykes Ibid. and in such matters as Salua regula fidei possit in quaestiâ—nem deuenire which without breach of the rule of fayth may be called into controuersie By all which sayings we see of what accompte this rule of fayth was in the Primitiue Churche and that it conteyned in deed the verie summe and corps of Christian doctrine deliuered at the beginning by the miracles preachings of the Apostles 1. Cor. 1â— wherof S. Paul said to the Corinthians sic praedicauimus sic credidistis so we haue preached and so yow haue beleeued And afterward partly by writing and partly by tradition continued and conserued to posteritie by the general consent and succession of the Catholyke Churche and her gouernors and among other things this rule conteyned the Symboâ—um or Creed of the Apostles VVhat the old rule of fayth conteyned Tert. lib. coÌ„t heres cap. 13. Rom. 12. Tertullian expresly testifieth and besydes this it comprehended many things more in particular as explication of diuers hydden mysteries with direction how to vnderstand scriptures as is playne by S. Paul before alleadged where he would haue prophesying or exposition of Scriptures to be according to the anologie proportioÌ„ of this rule of fayth to wit that no exposition should be made according to the priuate spirit of any man but according to that fayth and beliefe which before was generally receyued 2. Pet. 1. as S. Peter expresly aduiseth vs wherby it came to passe as sayth Epiphanius that no heretyke could euer put vp his head and begin any thing against this rule but that presentlie by the force therof he was discouered and discomfyted euen as now O.E. in this place as yow see goeth about to reiect Puritanes and exclude them from his societie for that they dissent from his particular new rule established by a fewe in the Churche Parliament of EnglaÌ„d this rule of his made but yesterday and by a fewe and not yet throughly agreed vpon among themselues is thought of such force as it can exclude reiect so many learned of their owne syde how much more the ancient rule made by the Apostles and continued euer since by all the Catholyke world is sufficient to condemne all new sectaries of our tyme that dare iangle against it And this might be sufficient for declaration of this rule the antiquitie force vse therof but that I can not wel omit a peece of one example out of old Tertulian aboue 14. hundred yeares agone who after the words before cyted where he sayth this rule is the fulnesse of the Apostles preaching and note that he sayth preaching and not wryring come downe in the Churche by dissent and tradition he not onlie teacheth but vseth also the same rule the eminent force therof against all heretikes of his tyme who as ours do now pretended that this rule corpes of fayth deliuered by the Apostles might perchance be corrupted altered misunderstood or changed by their successors and that the later Churches were not so pure as the former and consequentlie this rule so much vrged of tradition and vniuersal coÌ„sent might not be infallible to which absurditie after many other reasons reprehensioÌ„s Tertulian sayth as foloweth Tertul lib. de pâ—esâ— contr haeret cap. 26. Age nunc omnes errauerint c. Go to now let vs grant that all Churches or the most of them after the Apostles haue erred that the holy ghost sent for this cause by Christ A notable discourse of old Tertul. against all heretiks and for this cause demanded of his Father to be the teacher of truth vnto them hath not respected them and that this steward of God and vicar of Christ hath neglected his office vpon earth permitting the Churches of Christianitie to beleeue otherwise and to vnderstand matters differently from that which the selfe same holy ghost did preach by the Apostles But tel mâ— ys it likely that so many so great Churches ouer ChristeÌ„dome haue all erred and yet haue agreed in one faith Error of doctrine by all liklihood would haue brought in as it hath done among Protestants varietie also of doctrine among those Churches but that which it found to be one Quod apud multos vnâ—Ì„ inuenituâ— no est erratuâ—â— sed traditâ— and the selfe same among many is not to be thought to come by error but by tradition and can any maÌ„ dare to say that they did erre who lefte behind them those Traditions but howsoeuer yow shal cal yt error yet this Error raygned for truth vntil heresies rose vp to impugne yt belike truth beeing oppressed expected the comming of Marcâ—onithes and Valâ—ntinians to deliuer her out of captiuity and in the meane space all preaching was in error A scorne of Tertullian falling iustly vpon protestanâ—â— all beleeuing in error so many thowsands of thowsands baptised in error so many good workes of fayth done in error so many vertues so many graces miracles wrought in error so many priesthoods and mysteries exercised in error and finallie so many martyrdomes crowned by error c. Thus farre and much farther passeth on Tertullian to vrge and conuince the heretikes of his age by force of this rule deliuered by tradition of the Apostles receyued by Christendome and conserued by the Apostles successors vnto his tyme and the same rule of general consent deliuered by succession of Bishops do vrge all old auncient Fathers in like sorte each one in his age after Tertullian August Vine lyâ— lib. contr heres cap. 27. but in steed of all let S. Augustine be red vrging this rule against all sortes of heretikes but especially and more largely against the Donatests and Pelagians and after him againe the very next age Vincentius Lirenensis who after a longe discourse to this purpose vrgeth the words of S. Paul to Timothy 1. Tim. 6. o Timothee depositum custodâ— c. o Tymothy keepe wel thy pleadge or pawne lefte with thee which pawne as wel this father as the reste do interpret to be the forsayd rule of tradition of fayth Quid est deposituÌ„ sayth he what ys the pleadge or pawne lefte by the Apostles with Timothy and other Bishops of the Churche and he answereth presently Id est quod tibi creditum est non quod a te inuentum quod accepists non quod excogitasti rem non ingenij sed doctrine non vsurpâ—tionis priuatae sed publicae traditionis rem ad te perductam non a
haue brought in being a matter that doth cleerlie coÌ„uince him his religioÌ„ of noueltie heresie For that GratiaÌ„ ValeÌ„tinian his sonne being Emperors of the west The decree of the 3. Emp. examined and Theodosius of the East all three do agree to commend to their subiects the romane fayth and bishop of thaâ— place to wit Damasus theÌ„ sitting in that chaire vnder payne of heresy infamy and other extreeme punishments which poynt for that the false minister after his fashion durst noâ— put downe clearly as the woords themselues do ly in the text least therby he should discouer ouer much the truth I meane to do it for him in this place without other fee for my labour then to proue him a cosening companion and alleaging them brokenly to his owne purpose Cod lib. 1. de summa Triâ—it c. CuÌ„ctos eâ— Cunctos populos sayth the decree quos clementiae nostrae regit imperium in tali rolumus religione vessarâ— quam diuinum Petrum Apostolum tradidisse Romanis religio vsque adhuc ab ipso iâ—sinuata declarat quamque Pontificem Damasum seqâ—â— claret Petrum Alexandriae Episcopum virum Apostolicae sanctitatis c. our wil is that all people whom the Empyre of our clemency doth gouerne shal lyue in that religion which diuine Peter deliuered vnto the Romanes as the religion by him taught and enduring to this day doth playnly shewe which religion lefte by S. Peter it is euident that Damasus bishop of Rome doth folow as also Peter bishop of Alexandria a man of Apostolical holynes c. to wit that according to Apostolical discipline and euangelical doctryne we all beleeue one deity of the Father the SoÌ„ne the holy Ghost with equal maiesty in holy Trinity and this law whosoeuer doth follow we command that they do imbrace the name of christiaÌ„ Catholikes the rest whoÌ„ we esteeme as mad and furious men we wil haue to beare the infamy of heretical doctryne and to be punished first by God then by vs. This is the decree of these three Emperors against heretiks for neere 1200. yeare agoe wherin yow see they remit themselues all three though one were of the east Empyre to the Romane religion and to Damasus the Pope his beleefe with whom the Patriarke of Alexandria for the east Churche did also agree and heere is nothing determined of religion as yow see by their owne authoritie but only that such as followed the Romane â—eligion and Pope of those dayes should be compted Catholikes and the rest heretikes which if the parlament of England had done in these our dayes as all ancient parlaments were wont to doe as appeareth by our statuâ—es then could not the religion authorized by â—hem be called parlament religion no more â—hen this can be called Imperial though pubâ—ished and protected by Emperors Now then gentle reader consider how many folâ—yes or Nodytismes which the minister obiected alwayes to me be by him coÌ„mitted in alleaging this one example of these Emperors and on whom they light but the principal is that being alleaged by himself and for himself it maketh wholie against him ouerthroweth quite his cause which may be accoÌ„pted doltisme also in the deane besydes Nodytisme for it sheweth first the whole difference betweene these Catholike Emperors decree Poynts of the Emp. decree contrary to O. E. for defence of religion and the modernal decrees of our Parlaments that take vpon them to appoynte and defyne religion in England it sheweth that the Romane religion was receyued by S. Peter and had endured so vntil their dayes which was more then 400. yeares it sheweth also that Damasus Pope of Rome was then the cheife gouernor of christian religion throughout the world it sheweth that these Emperours accounted him for their head and not he them in matters of religion it sheweth how humbly these Emperors did submit themselues to the decree of the councel of Nice made before their dayes about three persons in one God-head confirmed by Pope Siluester and continued by Damasus and it sheweth how obedientlie and christianly these Emperors did hold them for Catholike christiaÌ„s whom thesaid councel and Pope Damasus did hold for Catholiks and condemned those for infamous heretikes who did dissent from their obedience in religion and now whether our later Parlaments of England haue done the same by the councel of Trent and Popes confirming defending the same as our former parlaments were wont to doe I leaue to the reader to iudge and whether this law of these Emperors were wyselie brought in by O. E. or no but let vs passe yet further in examyning this rule for tryal of truth The minister hauing shifted of wittilie as it seemeth to him the exprobration of parlament religion by the foresaid example of the Emperors falleth to range and roue wyde far and to obiect to vs that in Q. maryes dayes our religion was established more by parlament then by authoritie of the Apostles that we are deuided among our selues and haue more then 200. diuers opinions about the Sacrament of the L. supper that the vniuersal Churche could not deliuer vs our fayth Diuers manifest false obiections quia â—â—tiones sunt suppositorum that our fayth is neyâ—her Catholyke nor hath any certayne grouÌ„d â—t all but is buylded vpon the particular opiâ—ions of this or that mutable and â—ulearned â—ope that it is not ancient but ful of late noâ—eltyes and old heresyes and other such stuffe â—ithout end prating much and prouing noâ—ing so as no Mountebank in Italie could â—â—ewe him-selfe lesse shameles or more ridiâ—â—lous And to say a word or two to euery one of â—â—ese fooleries before rehearsed the religion â—â—at the parlament established in Q. Maryes dayes was it any new religion VVhat religion vvas planted by parlament in Q. Maries dayes or differenâ— from the rest of Christendome or did the parlament then do any other thing then thâ— former edict or decree of the Emperors thaâ— commandeth men to hold the ancieÌ„t reâ—gâ—â— of Rome descended from the Apostles anâ— follow the Bishop of that Churche theÌ„ liuiâ—â— as head of all Christendome And as for the two hundred different oâ—â—nions that Catholykes are said to haue let â—â— E. and all his compagnions together proued two only that are real differences and tâ— maynteyned by Catholykes being opposâ—â—â— one to the other and that in poynts of fayth â—â—deed and I shal yeild and pardon all the othâ—â— hundred nyntie and eyght differences that 〈◊〉 obiecteth but if he cannot proue this of 〈◊〉 only as neuer he wil be able then are thâ— not two hundred differencies of ours but â—â— lyes of his and agayne do yow note for auâ—â—ding cauillations that I require two real â—â—ferences in matters of beleef for of other câ—â—â—cumstances that touch not preciselie belieâ—â— our schooles and learned men lawfully mâ—â— haue diuersitie of opinioÌ„s as about the manâ— how bread is conâ—erted into Christs flesh the Sacrament
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
gentle Reader I wil make the Iudge of this new quarrel to wit whether this new onely lyeth on his syde onlie or on myne and I wil cal no other witnesse but the K t. owne words to try the controuersie Can I deale more franklie then this Heare then himself against himself for thus he wryteth For though it were but onely a desyre to read vpon the holy book c. heretike was his title heresie was his fault and for this he was called before the Romish Cleargie brandled c. If yow fynd only in his owne wordeâ— then do yow lay this new onely where yow find yt and there is an end of that matter for with so open impudency I wil no further stryue It shal be to no purpose also to refute that notorious Pag 43. S. Francis vvorthy to ly for the vvhetstone and ridiculously where without cyting any author at all the K t. sayth that an old Doctor among the Sorbons protested that he had studied more then 50. yeares ore he could tel what the new testament was c. Wil any man beleeue him in this or is he not worthy to ly for the whetstone that wil auouche this in print And yow must vnderstand by the way that the Doctors of Sorbon are Doctors of diuinitie and haue much exercise out of the Scriptures before they can take degree how theÌ„ did this Doctor neuer so much as heare of the new Testament in 50. yeares studie But heare yet another as improbable as this without author also An Italian Bishop sayth he told one Espeucaeus that his contremen durst not read the Scriptures least they should become heretiks therby A goodly tale And what author is cited for this none at all Yow must take it vpon the K â—s credit and what that is or deserueth to be his doings declare But now to the principal poynt how doth he proue that men were brandled to the slaughter for only reading the old or new Testament VVast-vvord Pag. 44. he alleageth diuers exaÌ„ples out of Ihon Fox in these words Our stories are ful of Examples out of your owne registers that reading of Scriptures was accompted heresie and not to stand vpon many Fox act and mom Pag. 752. deinceps vnder Longland B. of Lincolue Agnes welles was conuented and examined whether Thrustan did euer teach her the Epistle of S. Iames in English VVel proued and Thomas Chase was charged for hearing the said Epistle read in English Agnes Ashford for teaching Iames Norden certayne sentences of Scripture in English Robert Pope Ihon Mordon and his wyâ—e that they recited the ten commandements in English Ihon Fippes for that he was rype in the Scriptures and the lyke proceeding was vsed by other Bishops as namely by Tonstal then B. of London before whom many were conuented for that holy heresie of reading Scriptures c. Thus he sayth of whom a man may hardly say whether he brought these exaÌ„ples to proue or disproue his owne saying which is great simplicitie in any writer not to discerne what maketh for him or what against him seing by these examples in steed of prouing his second proposition he ouerthroweth both the first second The second about brandling to death for that these his owne examples do shewe that none of them that were accused were put to death for reading but had some lighter punishmeÌ„t only for their disobedieÌ„ce in that act his first proposition he ouerthroweth also which was that reading of Scriptures was accoÌ„pted heresie for that the fault of reading scriptures in this place is ioyned and equalled with things which no man wil say that we hold for heresies as the reciting of the 10. commandements in English and the cyâ—ing of certayne places in our English tongue out of the Scriptures And consequeutly these exaÌ„ples if they be graunted to be true in fact as the most of them are amplified by Ihon Fox yet proue they not but directly rather do disproue that which the K t. should proue Wherfore the only thing that these exaÌ„ples do proue is Examples fondly alleadged that make against him that the reading of Scriptures in vulgar language without licence and perhaps heretical translations in tymes of heresies and by such persons as can not be presumed to profit therby may be a sufficient cause to the B. to conuent apprehend or examine them vpon suspition of heresie as yf a ciuil Magistrate in tyme when many robberies are committed shal cal in question apprehend or examine certayne men that spend much and haue litle of their owne go gay in apparel play at dice and the lyke by which they may be suspected of theft though the verie act of playing be not theft and as yt should be slaunderous and ridiculous in that case yf any man would crie out of that common wealth or Magistrate saying it were tyrannical that men should be imprisoned for costly apparel faring wel or playing at dice as though those acts were theft or fellonie which in deed are not but only may induce to theft or giue suspition therof euen so in our case it is as meere a calumniation to affirme that we hold reading of Scriptures for heresies which is false though in certayne persons in whome yt may perhaps engender heresie or giue suspition therof thesame may be punished for disobedience and disposition to heresy And this is sufficient or rather superfluous in so vayne a matter against the babling of our fond kinght And by this is answered a loÌ„g tale also that he hath out of Fox of a book seller of Auinion in France condemned to death by the B. of Aix for selling french bybles in the vulgar tongue of whom S. F. concludeth in these words VVastvvord Pag. 46. And so exhorting the people to read the Scriptures he was for this cause only cruely put to death By which he would haue his reader vnderstand that only for reading Scriptures and exhorting men ther-vnto he was cruely put to death which is playne cosenage For in the storie of Fox himselfe which the K t. craftelie omitteth it is conteyned that the bookseller vpon examination was found an heretyke denied the authoritie of the Bishop and his office and other ecclesiastical Iudges saying That they were rather the Priests of Bacchus and venus then the true Pastors of the Churche of Christ Fox act and mon. Pag. â—63 col 2. whervpon sayth Fox he was condemned c. So as S. F. corrupteth also Fox and addeth more lyes to the most famous lyer that euer perhaps took pen in hand and with such men haue wee to do THE EXAMINATION of that which O. E. hath written concerning the former poyntes handled in the precedent fiue chapters and that it is farre more impertineÌ„t desperate then that which the Knight him self hath answered CAP. VI. IT may seeme much perhaps to the Reader that O. E. hath byn kept so long tyed vp from barking somwhat in these
ignorance to others notwithstanding the K t. and Ministers babble to the contrarie And with this we end our speeche of this first forged position obiected vnto vs. OF THE SECOND forged principle that laymen must not medle in matters of religion wherein is handled againe the matter of reading scriptures in English and why the Catholyke Churche doth forbid some bookes purge others CAP. IX THE second ground or position attributed by Sir F. to Catholykes is set downe by him thus VVatch-vvoord Pag. 20. VVhen they had saith he thus setled this blynd course to keep the people from knowlege c. Then they offer an other position that it was not for Laymen to medle with matters of religion The second fayued position for that beloÌ„ged onely and wholy as a priuilege to Priestes thereby making them secure and carelesse of God and all godlynes This is the position wherevnto the Warder answereth in these woords In setting downe of this forged position by the knight there is some subteltie ioyned with impudency VVachvvord pag. 20. For first in the former parte where he saith we hold that it is not for laymen to medle with religion he subtelly leaueth doubtful this woord medle eyther to signifie that laymen must not determyne or defyne matters of religion or els not to medle or care for them at all In the former sense we graunt that in Synods and councels where controuersies of faith are to be treated Bishops and cleargie men haue only authoritie to defyne and determyne For that S. Paul saith Act. 20. that they are appointed by the holie Ghost to gouerne the Churche though before they do come to determyne they do help themselues also in the searche of truth by the labors learning of laymen and take their iudgment when they may giue light as in all Councels is seene But in the second sense it is most impudent that he inferreth that hereby we would make laymen secure and carelesse of God and all godlines This is the charge How doth Sir F. defend himself now stoutly no doubt for he saith it may be iustified in eyther sense Wel then let vs examine it a litle in the second sense for in the first we striue not muche how with what face caÌ„ the K â— auerre againe that laymen are so barred by vs from medling in matters of religion as therby we make them secure and carelesse of God and all godlines what proofes doth he bring now think yow for answering so notorious a charge Yow shal heare his owne woords Pag. 52. In the later sense saith he I need not labor any more for proof then that before is set downe touching your breeding of Gods children in blyndnes and ignorance and with-holding the key of knowlege from them Very fond reasoning of the Kâ— Doe yow see what he bringeth If the K t. had talked of breeding yong geese he could speak no more fondly then here he doth And what I pray yow is his key of knowlege with-holden from the lay sorte forsooth the reading of the English Byble from such as understand yt not And how many apprentices and good wiues of London with others of other places haue opened so many dores of later yeares to disorders with this key as neither their husbands nor Maisters nor Magistrate could or caÌ„ wel remedy let puritanes brownists louing-families and other like be witnesses And yet as though all stood in this point of reading English Bybles he asketh vs very earnestly in the next woordes following Pag. 52. And how wil yow haue them lay people medle with crâ—are for that they know not And then againe How doe yow permit laymen thus to medle with matters of Religion when as yow take from them the vse of scriptures Did yow euer heare such demands or did euer man deale with suche aduersaries is there no care of piety God or godlines for this is our question but in suche only as read scriptures in English What wil yow say to all those Protestants among yow who can not read nor haue tyme to heare them red wil yow say there is no godlines or care of God in them if yow do I say and yow can not deny it that they are the greatest part of your English protestant people But from this he leapeth to two places of scriptures the first out of the Acts of the Apostles of the men of Berraea who are much commended saith he for searching the Scriptures whether things were so as the Apostles had deliuered The second out of S. Iohns Epistle saying Dearly beloued beleue not euery spirit 1 Ioan. 4. Examination of tvvo places of Scripture for vulgar reading therof but tâ—ie spirits whether they be of God or not Out of both which two places he would haue vs take it for proued that all kynd of lay people men and women learned and vnlearned must searche scriptures dayly in the vulgar tonges to examine and iudge whither their Pastors and teachers say truly or noe And thereby also trie spirits and that without this there is no care of God or godlines in the lay sorte euery man woman and damozel must haue their key of knowlege to open scriptures and trie spirits But first what a common wealth this would make if it were wel executed all men can see secondly the places of scriptures are as fitly alleaged as these men are wont to doe as yow shal see by examination For to the first of the men of Berraea which euery where is alleaged and vrged by Protestants most impertinently to this effect I would aske our K t. how he can proue their case to be lyke ours to wit first that they were vnlearned and vulgar Iewes that searched those scriptures in Berraea to see whether the places of the Prophets alleaged by Paul and Silas about Christ were so or no and secondly that those scriptures which they searched were in the vulgar Syriak tonge and not in the Hebrew which the common people for the most part vnderstood not and thirdly that this searching was a general promiscuous reading of all scriptures translated into vulgar languages for all sortes â—f people to read and examine therby their Priests Pastors doctrine and to iudge therof which three points the K t. and his Minister wil neuer be able to proue so indeed do proue nothing in alleaging this place most impertinent to their purpose For as for the case of the men of Berraea it was a very particular and different yea extraordinary case for that S. Paul and Silas were not the ordinary teachers Pastors of those Iewes of Berraea but taught rather a new and strange doctrine different in many substantial points as appered froÌ„ the auncient Religion of the Iewes and yet they alleaged the sayings and testimonies of the old Prophets and Patriarches for the same Hovv the Ievves of Berraea did search the Scriptures so as the learned sort of Iewes of
The second is that this matter of miracles is an ordinary common place wherin the scurrility of incredulous and scoffing heretiks doth enlarge it self very much and often it being a subiect sit for that purpose seing that miracles being aboue the common course of natural things must needs haue some disproportion or improbability in the sense of ordinary vnderstanding that measureth all by that they see with their eyes and then being set forth also with mocks and moes in the most ridiculous sort that malice can deuise and the improbability increased commonly by such lying circumstances as are added by the reporter it serueth to entertayne and make mery the incredulous ignorant or light of hart and to bring them by litle aed litle to trust or beleeue nothing that passeth sense or excedeth the reach of euery particular mannes reason These two obseruations then being premised in this matter vve shal passe to examine what our vnbeleeuing knight bringeth in to discredit miracles And first to beginne withall and to make some path and preamble to the infidelity which heere he meaneth to teach he alleadgeth vs an old prouerbe as he calleth it which for more credit he setteth downe in different letter VVastvvord Pag. 58. That many are worshipped for Saints in heauen whose soules are burning in hel And for this in his margent he quoteth ex Auentino Ex Auentino but Auentinus his works and storie being verie great why did he not quote the book chapter or place For though Auentinus be not of much credit with Catholikes in his historie yet might we haue examined vpon what occasion and in what sense he said it for that in some sense it may be somwhat true and yet help nothing Syr F. his cause nor the infidelity he endeauoureth by his doctryn to establish For suppose yf that should fal out so that some christians were deceaued about the particular holines of some persons who being honored vpon earth for Saints were none in deed but rather damned as it is reported by some that S. Ambrose by reuelation discouered that two bodyes which had byn honored by some simple people for martyrs not to haue byn those martyrs but rather the bodyes of two malefactors which suppose it were true what hurted that the Churche of God or what hindred that the merit and deuotion of those simple people that being deceaued honored those memories as of special seruants and saincts of Christ and receaued no doubt the reward of their deuotioÌ„ according to their meaning and holy intention not according to the external error happened in the material obiect Material error in honoring saintes huâ—â—eâ—h not the deuout as yf when Christs body was rysen from the sepulcher the Iewes had put one of the two theeues bodies there that were crucified with him and S. Mary Magdalyn and the rest had annoynted that body thinking it to be Christs had this think yow diuinished their merit or made their act superstitious as heretyks cal it So as theÌ„ this material error litle importeth and consequently the place out of Auentinus yf it be there is nothing to the purpose For auoyding notwithstanding of the which and lyke errors great care was had in the primitiue Churche that the acts of Martyrs deathes and burials should be diligently obserued and distinctly coÌ„mitted to wryting for which cause not only the Bishops themselues were imployed therin euery one in his owne diocesse but a deacon also vnder euery Bishop The diligeÌ„ce of the primitiue Churche about Martyrs and S. and a subdeacon vnder euery deacon and a publyke Notarie vnder euery subdeacon were assigned to attend to this particular care And in Rome for that it was so big and deuided into 7. regions seauen deacons and seauen subdeacons with seueral notaries vnder them had this charge as appeareth in the Romane register ascribed to Damasus in the lyfe of Clement Damas. Pontifical in vit Clement Fab. c. Fabian Anteros Iulius and other Bishops of Rome And the-same to haue byn obserued also in the Churche of Millan testifieth Paulinus the Notarie of S. Ambrose Bishop of that cittie who wryting the lyfe of thesayd sainct sayth he was vnder the charge of Castus deacon to gather such things togeather of saincts Paul in vita Ambros. c. And before this agayne Pontius the deacon of S. Cyprian afirmeth that blessed Bishop and Martyr to haue byn so sollicitious in gathering the gests of Martyrs Pont. Diac in vita Cypriani as he would haue the very dayes exactly noted in which each one suffred which S. Cyprian testifieth also himself in his Epistle to the Priests Deacons of his Churche of Carthage Ep. Cyprian ad presb Diacon and of other Bishops before him Pont ibid. thesayd Potius sayth that they were so studious in this care as not only of all Baptised Christians but also of Catecumeni if they were martyred order was giuen to haue their acts written c. And this we read also put in practise by many other Churches of the world as by that of Vienna in Austria by Lions in France by AlexaÌ„dria in Egypt and the lyke as appeareth by their Epistles registred by Eusebius and other wryters This was the spirit of the ancient primitiue Churche and the very same diligence by lyke spirit hath byn continued by the Catholyke Churche euer since The processe needful to CanonizatioÌ„ of saincts not only in the acts and gests of martyrs but of other holy men also since martyrdome in great part hath ceased as may appeare by the long processe and most diligent examination of hundrethes of witnesses by lawful and indifferent iudges appoynted when any man is to be Canonized or declared for holy in the Churche after his death which thing for more certayntie and lesse partialitie is done by order and authoritie of the highest iudge and Pastor in spiritual causes and it is not done but vpon many yeares examination commonly except the cause be otherwayes made euident to all This is the practise of the Cath. Churche heere now let S r. F. or any other wrangler or calumniator equal to himself tel me if any meane of trying meÌ„nes merits holines be to be had in this lyfe what better or more indifferent way can be taken then this which is by the highest and most vniuersal Magistrate that we haue in our Churche Fox-made-saincts not to be compared to Pope-made-saincts wheras amoÌ„g them euery particular man as Ihon Fox for exaÌ„ple maketh saincts and vnmaketh them at his pleasure and putting them downe in his Calender in great red letters for martyrs or confessors or in black lesser letters for lesser saincts as he thinketh best without any other examination or approbration of superior authority and that which is most ridiculous of all he careth not of what fayth or religioÌ„ they were of among themselues so they were contrarie in any one part to the Catholykes yea
conscience can there be in such men as vse so many fraudes and vtter so manifest falshoods as in this our answere we haue plainely demonstrated and then good reader when thow hast once discouered this point of singular importance which is that truthe indeed is not sought by them that preteÌ„d to seek truth nor religion by them that treat of religion but only that shifts are sought to make a shew of saying euer somwhat then I doubt not but thou wilt resolue with thy self what is behooful for thee to do for sauing of thy owne soule not leauing it vpon the waues of vncertayne disputes and altercations of men but staying it vpon the sure rock of Christs Catholike and visible Churche which is left and appointed as an infallible stay for all men wherunto I implore his heauenly grace and deuyne assistance AN ADDITION BY the publisher of this book wherin he sheweth first a reason why these two Encounters are set forth alone then the difference he findeth in the wryters and their wrytings thirdly how a man may vse this which heer is said to the decision of any Controuersy of our tyme. CAP. XVIII THREE things do I promise good Christian Reader as yow see in the title of this my addition which I shal endeauour to performe with the greatest breuity and perspicuity that I may And as for the first which is the reason why after the expectation of so many monethes wherin the defence of the whole eight Encounters that ly in dispute betwene the watchman and Warder S. F Hastings and N. D. should haue appeared we now set forth only two of the first The cause â—nd reason of this is easely declared for it was â—s followeth More then a ful yeare hath now passed â—ince the whole reioynder of N. D. to Syr F. Hastings reply about the foresaid eight Encounters and the remitter to the LL. of her Maiesties most honorable Councel was enâ—â—ed The cause of delay and sent to be put in print but then was â—here receaued a new aduise that another answere was in print also to the watch word whose author was figured by the two letters â— E. And albeit the work was said to be of such quality as it merited not a seueral anâ—were and much lesse the man yet for that was not expedient to let it passe without â—ome check of examination the Warder N. â— resolued to deferre the publishing of his â—ormer work vntil he might haue a vew of â—his book also which being more hardly â—rocured and longer expected then at the beâ—inning was presumed caused also the stay of â—his edition But when at lenght it came to sight and â—hat the author N.D. had taken it in hand to â—nswere ioyntly with the other of Sir FraÌ„cis â—ntermingling and coopling them togeather 〈◊〉 â—yow haue seene by experience in these two â—ncounters The reason vvhy these â— Encounters are set forth alone then fel there new difficultyes â—nterruptions as namely diuers monethes â—â—cknesse and diuers other lets and impediâ—ents of vnexpected busynesse to the author â—â—d besides this the corps of these two Enâ—â—unters grew to so great a bulk as of themselues they seemed to be sufficient for one book especially considering the many difficulties that we haue in printing greater volumes in these dayes and all commodity of our owne countrey prints printers and other helpes being debarred vs. Wherfore vpon these and other lyke reasons I began to deale effectually with the author of this work that he would be content to yeild vnto the publishing of these two Encounters alone promissing him that as the other should come to be ready and thorowly polished which I hope wil be very shortly I would set them forth also eyther all togeather or two or three EncouÌ„ters in a book as these go according to the quantity or bignesse which they shal grow vnto And this is so much as is needful to be sayd of this first point The second also may be dispached with the lyke breuity The 2. point of this addition which is about the difference of the wryters and wrytings of these Encounterers for so much as I do not meane to stand vpon all differeÌ„ces obserued by me in reading ouer their books but to note some few only referring me also in these to that which before hath byn set downe in the Encounters themselues especially in the seueral admonissions and warnings ensuing vpon euery Encounter and conteyning as it were a breef recapitulation of the whole only then I wil say that two notorious differences me thinketh I haue obserued in coÌ„ferring these books and wryters togeather The first is touching truthe and falshood playne dealing and shifting The first differeÌ„ce about true dealing falshood discouered almost in euery leaf of the former EncouÌ„ters which is a diffeâ—ence of somuch quality as whersoeuer it is found on the worser part it ought greatly to mooue and make deep impression in the Reader that is careful of his owne saluation for that the matters in controuersy coÌ„cerning true faith being of the highest importance that may be to our soule and euerlasting good or hurt euery man ought to be attent whersoeuer he findeth falshood or deceyt to be wilfully and purposely intended and that it cannot be excused by error or ignorance or heat of speach or other lyke infirmities there he ought to stay his foot stand fast and not to passe further without firme resolution neuer to beleue him agayne And for that in all the reply both of S r. F. and O.E. his defendant I do not find that the VVarder is so much as charged to my remembrance and much lesse conuinced of any one such wilful falsification as before I haue alleaged and that both the knight and minister are accused almost in euery leaf of this crime and that with such manifest proofes and demonstrations as I see not how possibly they can quite themselues here hence I do inferre that it importeth exceedingly euery wise and discreet Reader to remember wel this difference Another difference also there is not a litle to be marked in the very substance of their wrytings The 2. difference idle or profitable matter handled concerning the profit or losse of tyme which the reader may reap by perusing them ouer for that S r. F. and O.E. if yow look attentiuely into their books do treat nothing eyther methodically or substantially throughout their replies but following the Warder vp and downe do wraÌ„gle here and iangle there taking exceptioÌ„s against these or those words without handling any one point learnedly or with substance throughout all their whole discourses neyther coÌ„futing soundly their aduersaries nor confirming wel their owne parts so as when a man hath red ouer their whole books he remayneth with more doubts and darknes then before feeling only his spirit of incredulity and contradiction more increased by this reading but his braynes more weakened and wearied and his vnderstanding lesse cleer
the heretical cauillation of S r. FraÌ„cis his inference vpon the forsaid premises which is this Ergo he biddeth vs to obey the Pope though he teach contrary to S. Peter and S. Paul This Doctor Harding sayth not nor is it necessary nor doth it follow of the premisses but only is a wrangling of a contentious heretical spirit as euery man may see and ought diligently to marke for their instruction how to beleeue and giue credit to those mens arguments and illations Wherfore after all these note the fourth point which is his substantial conclusion And this I hope sayth he is a sufficient iustification for my accusation His accusation was as before hath byn heard that the Pope is to be obeyed though he command blasphemies against 〈…〉 to hâ—l and the 〈…〉 iustified by 〈…〉 at the present 〈…〉 chaire 〈…〉 and not only 〈…〉 man iudge how 〈…〉 iustified himself and his accuâ—aâ—â—on But yet to the end he may seeme to say somthing to proue that Popes comaund somtymes both blasphemies and disloyalty he alleadgeth for the first about blasphemy certayne peeces of prayers out of Portiphorium vsed vpon the festiual day of S. Thomas of Canterbury Tuper Thoma sanguinem 〈…〉 our prayers c. which the K t. to shew himself a good versifier putteth downe in a poeme thus By the bloud of Thomas which he for thee did spend Make vs o Christ to climbe whither Tho. did ascend And then agayne opem nobis ò Thoma porrige c. O Thomas lend vs thy help c. Out of which words where there is not a spirit of wrangling calumniation no euil sense can be gathered For in the former there is no more blasphemy conteyned then when the holy prophets did mention the name faith and merits of Abraham Isaac and Iacob Psalm 131. Daniel 13. and other their holy fathers therby the sooner to mooue God to respect them And in that sense may Christians mention also the bloud of S. Thomas and other martyrs shed for his cause as motiues inductioÌ„s to styrre vp his 〈…〉 second where 〈…〉 vnto to lend vs 〈…〉 that he shal do 〈…〉 for vs which 〈…〉 â—n heretical and 〈…〉 hatred to Gods Saint 〈…〉 it being a thing most 〈…〉 Fathers and other pious men of all antiquity to vse lyke inuocation to Saints gone to heaueÌ„ before them as * before I haueâ— shewed by many examples and might do heer much more yf I would stand therin Nor dareth S r. FraÌ„cis or any heretyke in the world to ioyne issue vpon this point of all holy fathers practise in this behalf but only are forced to say of them as they do of vs that it was ignorance blasphemy or simplicity in them And now after this sharp encounter against the naming of the bloud and merits of S. Thomas of Canterbury the knights choller and pryde mounteth vp to the assault of a farre higher Saint which is the mother of God her self whose sacred conception he taketh heynously that it should be honoured with a seueral feast and holy day by Pope Sixtus Quartus for thus he wryteth Sixtus the fourth taketh vp the controuersy betwixt the Franciscans and Dominicks about the conception of the blessed virgin Pag. 6â— and against manifest scripture plaine teâ—â—imony of fathers and the streame of his owne doctors decreeth her conception to haue byn without original sinne so taking from Christ his prerogatiue 〈…〉 the feast of her 〈…〉 them for 〈…〉 And granting to 〈…〉 from the first 〈…〉 of the same as many 〈…〉 4. and Pope Martyn 〈…〉 the seruice of Corpus Christi 〈◊〉 c. Thus wryteth our knight wherin if yow fynd him more true sincere then in his former narrations and assertions it is maruayle for though somethings be true which heer he relateth as namely first that Sixtus the fourth took vp the controuersy betweene the Religious of S. Francis and S. Dominiks order about the conception of the blessed virgin which is the benefit of hauing one supreme head a thing not to be found among sectaries and secondly that he allowed the solemnizing of a feast vpon that day and gaue indulgences also to such as with deuotion and contrition for their sinnes should celebrate or hear diuine seruice and this to the encrease of Christian piety yet are there twice as many other points heer set downe by our knight quite false and forged of himself For first it is false that Pope Sixtus decreed the conception of the blessed virgin to haue byn without original sinne First vntruth for albeit himself being of S. Francis order before he was Pope did hold that opinion for more probable that she was conceyued pure from original sinne yet did he neuer decree the same but left it â—ree for euery 〈…〉 he would theri◠〈…〉 trouble or 〈…〉 appeareth by 〈…〉 Sixtus extant in 〈…〉 an 1466. and 〈…〉 The same 〈…〉 of Pope 〈◊〉 Quintus 〈◊〉 super specula wherin referring himself to the former constitution of Sixtus Quartus to the councel of Trent Ses. 5. in the decree of original sinne the last paragraphe where the said constitution of Sixtus is also meÌ„tioned and approued This constitution of Pius 5. hath these woords Liberam cuique faculâ—atem relinquentes opinandi huius controuersiae quamlibet partem prout vel magis piam â—el magis probabilem esse indicauerit Leauing to euery mannes freedome to hold in this coÌ„trouersy what opinion he thinketh more godly or more probable This ordayned Pius 5. withal indifferency though he were of S. Dominiks order and nothing different from that which Sixtus 4. of S. Francis order had ordayned before him So as hereby is seene the first foul vntruthe of our knight auouching that Pope Sixtus 4. had decreed the question on the other side And of this first followeth the second vntruth more foul then the former â— Vntruth if yt may be where he sayth That Pope Sixtus excommunicateth and condemneth them for heretyks that were of the other opinion The plaine opposite and contrary wherof is set downe in Sixtus his 〈…〉 simili poena 〈…〉 asserrere 〈…〉 gloriosam 〈…〉 to fuisse conceptam 〈…〉 mortale cùm 〈…〉 sede decisum We 〈…〉 and censure all tâ—ose 〈…〉 to affirme that those who hold the contrary opinion to wit that the glorious virgin Mary was conceaued in Original sinne to incurre heresy or mortal sinne therby seeing that the matter is not yet decided by the Roman Churche and Sea Apostolyke In which words we see two points most euident for conuincing the former two falshoods of the knight the one that the Pope himself affirmeth heer that the matter was not yet decyded by him or the Sea Apostolyk the secoÌ„d that he was so farre of from excommunicating or condemning for heretyks those that held the contrary opinion to his as S r. Francis saith heere he did that he excommunicateth all those that should hold them for heretyks or