of late by the learned Iesuites of Dilinga in Germanie intituled Augstuiniana Cōfessiō where in manner no worde is founde besides that whiche is in S. Augustins owne workes And there al seuen Sacramentes are proued at large out of S. Augustin alone and that maie suffice in this behalfe For if ye refuse S. Augustines authoritie I know not whose authoritie ye wil allowe Of the power of Baptisme in infantes and of Concupiscence The 4. Chapter Harding What M. Iewel would saye in this matter Incertaintie of M. Iewels doctrine Pag. 215. Pag. 216. Pag. 215. I can not certainly tel he is so inconstant and like a man that is halfe ashamed of his doctrine For one while he saith the Sacrament dependeth of no man At another time The iust man shal liue not by the faith of his parentes but by his owne faith And yet he saith S. Augustine Iustinus Martyr S. Cyprian S. Hierom and others write plainely that the faith of the Parentes doth helpe But how truly that is written he wil not saye Againe he saith that Infantes are not void of faith Pag. 216. A litle after he writeth God is able to worke saluation both with the Sacraments and without them And then he mingleth the Signe with the Thing and the Thing with the Signe Last of al he saith In deede Pag. 217. and in precise manner of speache Saluation must be sought in Christe alone and not in any outward signes In effecte he sticketh and maketh muche a doo and faine he woulde if he durst bring forth this proposition plainely condemned of the Churche in olde tyme That infantes maie be saued without Baptisme But it is the heresie of Pelagius and the same is against the word of God saying Ioban 3. Except a man be borne againe of water and of the holy Ghost he can not enter into the kingdom of heauen For whereas saith with the vow and desire of baptisme in a time of necessitie doth serue him that hath discretiō to beleue Augustinus Epist 23. seing the said faith is not in the child excepte baptisme which is the Sacrament of faith be receiued of him it doth folow that Children dying without Baptisme are condemned This much maye suffice for that point Iewel Concupiscence remaining in the faithful after baptisme is sinne forcing S. Paul to crie out Rom. 7. I see an other law in my members fighting against the law of my mind and leading me prisoner to the law of sinne And againe O wretched man that I am who shal deliuer me from this body of death Harding 1. Pet. 3. It is to be vnderstanded that whereas Baptisme saueth vs as S. Peter saith al sinne is washed away therein And we are made a new creature according to that S. Paul saith In Christ Iesus Gal. 6. Chrysost Ibidem ad Galatas neither Circumcision is ought worth nor vncircuncision but the new creature meaning by a new creature as S. Chrysostom and other holy Fathers expound it that our nature which was waxen old in sinne Repētè baptismi lauacro renouata est non aliter quà m si denu◠esset condita is renued in the washing of baptisme none otherwise then if it had ben made a newe So that no sinne at al can be in vs now baptized if wee haue worthily receiued Baptisme Whiche notwithstanding there is euidently perceiued in our fleashe a certaine resistance and rebellion against Reason in suche wise that as our minde and soule being indued with grace desireth to do al goodnes so do our senses and sensual appetites intise and prouoke vs to muche naughtinesse Now bicause the sensual appetite deliteth vs and so ouercommeth vs commonly more or lesse therefore it is called the law of the fleash or the law which the fleash would gladly follow and obey which law or concupiscence leadeth vs prisoners to sinne so much as lieth in it and so ofte as we obey it Whether concupiscence be sinne though we consent not vnto it But the point of the question is whether it be truly and in deed a sinne in vs although we consent not vnto it We saie it is not properly sinne M. Iewel defendeth the contrarie but S. Paules wordes proue not the concupiscence which remaineth to be a sinne except we obey it Otherwise if of it selfe it were sinne we had not benne made a newe creature in Baptisme For the creature wherein sinne is remaineth stil an old creature But albeit al sinnes be taken awaye in Baptisme yet God suffereth the concupiscence to remaine in our fleash partly that we maie by the Rebellion thereof perceiue from what an enimie our soule is deliuered and so geue thankes to God as the Apostle doth in this place Rom. 7. which M. Iewel alleaged partly that we may be exercised with tentation to th ende we may be crowned for our victorie I therefore saith S. Paule in minde or soule obey the lawe of God but in fleash I obey the law of sinne And who knoweth not it is the consent of the mind and not the desire of the fleash which maketh a man to be a sinner Concupiscence is in my fleash onely and not in my minde except I consent vnto it and so take it into my minde and then in truth it is a sinne And this is the very discourse of S. Paule For when he had said in mind or in the highest part of my soule I obey the lawe of God he concludeth thereupon Rom. 8. Nihil ergo damnationis est his qui sunt in Christo Iesu qui non secundùm carnem ambulant Therefore no part of damnation is to them who are in Christ Iesus who walke not according to the flesh For if a man walke according to the flesh then in deede his Concupiscence which before was no sinne is becom a sinne Thus albeit our flesh be the flesh of death that is to say Ibidem mortal as S. Chrysostom expoundeth it and therefore S. Paul would faine be deliuered from it as fearing lest he should at any time yeeld vnto it yet if he do not yeelde vnto it Rom. 8. there is no sinne in him For the law of the spirit of life which is the grace that iustifieth vs in baptisme deliuereth him from the law of sinne and of death euerlasting Ievvel 217. Lib. 10. epist 84. S. Ambrose saith There is not found in any man such concord betvven the flesh and the spirit but that the lavv of concupiscence vvhich is planted in the members fighteth against the lavv of the mind And for that cause the vvordes of S. Iohn the Apostle are taken 1. Ioan. 1. as spoken in in the person of al Saintes If vve say vve haue no sinne vve deceiue our selues and there is no truth in vs. Harding I graunt that in this cōtinual fight we are daily so conquered in some smal sinne or other that we neuer remaine any long time without venial sinne But that
Iohanni Baptistae confite bantur peccata sua in Actis verò Apostolis ipsis à quibus etiam omnes baptizabantur It is necessarie to cōfesse sinnes vnto them to whom the dispensation of the mysteries is cōmitted those are the priestes For so they that in old time did penaunce are founde to haue done before the Saintes He meaneth priestes For it is written in the Gospel that they confessed their sinnes to Ihon Baptist In the Actes that they cōfessed them to the Apostles of whom also they were al baptized By S. Basil then it is necessarie to confesse sinnes vnto the priestes who are Christes ministers by M. Iewel it is not necessary at al. Who is the likelier of these two to be a lyer Ievvel Pag. 133. 149. M. Harding him selfe is forced to confesse that the expresse terme of Articular or Secret Confession is seldom mentioned in the auncient fathers His tale had ben truer if he had said it is neuer mentioned Harding True it is in deede seldom we finde the expresse name of Auricular or Secrete Confessiō bicause the custome in olde time was rather to confesse great sinnes openly But what skilleth it whether we finde the expresse name of Secrete Confession seing that is ordeined only in fauour of the penitent whom if he do it not secrtely it behoueth to do it openly For done it must be if he wil enioye the forgeuenes of sinnes which to imparte vnto penitentes Christe gaue power to his Apostles Ioan. 20. and by them to such Priestes as are lawfully sent by the Superiour for that purpose But yet to gratifie M. Iewel I wil bring forth one aūciēt witnesse for secret Cōfession Leo the great vnderstāding that in some Churches of Italie the custome was the sinnes of menne to be openly published and read out of a paper willeth the said custom to be abrogated and taken awaie Leo epist 80. cùm reatus conscientiarum sufficiat solis sacerdotibus indicari per confessionum secreta forasmuch as it suffiseth that the gilte of the consciences that is to saie the faultes where of men are giltie in their consciences be shewed vnto the priestes by the secrete meanes of Confessions How thinke you M. Iewel is not this the Secrete Confession which you required to be once shewed in the Auncient fathers Leo goeth forward in declaring the mater Quamuis plenitudo fidei videatur esse laudabilis quae propter Dei timorem apud homines erubescere non veretur tamen quia non omnium huiusmodi sunt peccata vt ea quae poenitentiam poscunt non timeant publicare remoueatur tam improbabilis consuetudo ne multi a poenitentiae remedijs arceantur dum aut erubescunt aut metuunt inimicis suis sua facta reserare à quibus possunt legum constitutione percelli Sufficit enim illa Confessio quae primùm Deo offertur tunc etiam Sacerdoti qui pro delictis poenitentium precator accedit Although the fulnes of faith seemeth prayse worthy which standing in awe of God feareth not to blush before men yet bicause al mennes sinnes be not such that they haue no cause to feare the publication of those thinges which require penaunce let so disalowable a custom be remoued lest manie be withholden frō the remedies of penaunce whiles either they be ashamed or afraid to open their deedes vnto their enemies of whom they may be troubled therefore by the ordinance of the lawes Confession is to be made to God first then to the Priest For that Cōfession sufficeth which is first offered vnto God then afterward also vnto the Priest who commeth to make intercession for the sinnes of the poenitent Here M. Iewel you see it is both necessarie to cōfesse our sinnes vnto God and also vnto the Priest You see also that it is laudable for a man to cōfesse them openly but it is to hard to bind him to it seing the Secret Confession maie suffice But one of them both must of necessitie be made to the Priest for great and mortal sinnes which neede the Priestes Absolution For thereof S. Augustine speaketh notably declaring howe a sinner is brought out of death out of the graue and as it were out of the bondes of sinnes by three degrees Aug. in Psal 101. conc 2. Cùm audis hominem poenitere peccatorū suorū iam reuixit Cùm audis hominem confitendo proferre conscientiam suā iam de sepulchro eductus est sed nondū solutus est Quādo soluitur Math. 18. A quibus soluitur Quae folueritis inquit in terra erūt soluta in coelo When thou hearest that a man repēteth him of his sinnes that is by harty sorow and cōtrition now he is brought againe to life When thou hearest that a man by making his confession vttereth his conscience that is by confession either open or secret at the lest now he is brought foorth of the graue but he is not yet loosed When is he loosed Of whom is he loosed What thinges ye loose in earth saith he they shal be loosed also in heauen This Absolution is made by the Priest So that God calleth vs to life againe by inward contrition and we preuented with his grace come our selues to confesse yet if the Absolution of the Priest follow not we remaine stil bound I saie not that we are dead but we are bounde And verely as long as we are bound we can not enter into heauen For as Lazarus being called vp by Christ yet if he had either remained in the graue or if his winding sheete had not yet ben loosed as it was by the Apostles he should naturally haue ben stifled vp a fresh and haue died againe in his owne graue and bandes that he was tied withal euen so after cōtrition if confession and absolution folow not there is in deede a certaine seede beginning and towardnes of life but the man is choked vp in his owne bondes and can not enioy the lyfe which is begonne in him For Christ wil haue some ministerial part of penaunce done by his ministers in earth that his owne ordinance be not void and that the power he gaue them to remitte sinnes be not frustrate and superfluous This doctrine grounded vpon the holy Scriptures and so expounded by the learned Fathers and so practized by the Catholike Church is sound M. Iewel Knocke and beat at it as long as you wil you shal but cause it to be the better tried As for the gewgawes of Scholemen and Gloses which you bring in this matter I vtterly despise them It is wel knowen whatsoeuer the Schoolemen or Canonistes saie they taught not your sacrilegious Doctrine but would haue yelded to the holy general councels of Florence and of Trent where this our faith was discussed to the great admiration of al sober wittes in the worlde There I say mo Bishops and Doctours cōcluded that which we defend then you can bring Gloses or sophistical deuises against
Apud Euseb lib. 5. c. 24. Irenaeus do witnesse Exuperius also the Bishop of Tholosa as S. c In epist ad Rustic MonachuÌ„ Math. 24. Arius Nestorius Hus. Luther Zuinglius HieroÌ„ sheweth carried it in a wicker basket So that it is but the lewd Sowters Diuinitie to expounde here is Christ and there is Christ of the being of Christes bodie in the SacrameÌ„t And what was Christes meaniÌ„g in those wordes it is expressed in the Gospel that diuers false prophets should arise in diuers corners of his Church as Arius at Alexandria Nestorius at CoÌ„staÌ„tinople and likewise other Arch-heretikes in other corners of the which euery one should chalenge Christ to him As for example that Iohn Hus would say Christ is wel preached with vs in in Bohemia onely Not so quod Luther but Christ is wel preached here at Wittenberg only Zuinglius then would say no thereunto but that he is wel preached at Zurich only Nay saith Caluine he is most excellently and most purely preached at Geneua Tush quod Suenkfeldius Suenckfeldius he is better preached in Silesia Ye are al deceiued quod Waldo VValdo he is best of al preached in certaine dennes about Lions I perceiue quod Bernardinus Ochinus Bernardi Ochinus ye neuer were in Polonia for there is the very syncere woorde of God professed and the doctrine for a man to haue mo wiues at once is allowed But Osiander Osiander for his parte crieth out that in Prussia the Gospel hath more libertie bicause Duke Albert is for his owne tooth Wel quod Brentius Brentius when al is done there is no doctrine like to the Vbiquitie frankly taught in the Duchie of Wirtemberg Ye are al far out of the waie say the Anabaptistes Anabaptistes for Friseland is alone and there onely Christ is truly preached and that should wel appeare if our kingdom begonne at Muster had gonne forward Now last of al crepeth me forth one Browne at London with his vnspotted Congregation otherwise called Puritanes Puritanes As we come laste say they so we are purest and cleanest of al others For we wil haue no iote of the Popes dregges nor any religion what so euer hath ben to fore awaie with al for al was naught vntil we came and our waie doubtlesse is without fault These and many other contrarie Sectes M. Iewel chalenging eche one of them the truth to them selues are these Corner crepers who ceasse not to crie here is Christ and there is Christ Math. 5. of whoÌ„ we are al warned to beware For in the meane time Christ is preached truly in the only Catholike Church in the light of the world where his Candle staÌ„deth vpoÌ„ the CaÌ„dlestick to geue light to al that are in his great Howse And in this sense do al the Fathers expouÌ„d these words of Christ as I might at large shew if I had your boastiÌ„g vaine and coueted to seeme to say much vpon euery thing be-it neuer so plaine Iewel 208. M. Hardings fellovves are not yet vvel agreed vvhat to make of their ovvne Consecration Harding Your long needelesse processe is answered with one worde Their question is concerning a point not necessarie to wit how Christ did consecrate But they are al agreed that he made and consecrated his owne body and bloud by what meanes so euer he did it Iewel 209. VVe vse the vvordes that Christ vsed If Christ and his Apvstles coÌ„secrated then do vve vndoubtedly likevvise consecrate And our intention is to doo that Christ hath taught vs to do Harding Christ was a Priest and consecrated as a Priest as a Lib. 2. epist 3. S. Cyprian and b Ad Heliodor ad Euagrium S. Hierom doo witnesse that as Melchisedech in foreshewing the figure of Christ had done panem vinum offerens offering breade and wine ipse quoque veritatem sui corporis sanguinis repraesentaret Christ him selfe also should make present the truth of his body and bloud And when Christ had thus consecrated his body and bloud then he made his Apostles also Ministerial Priestes Luc. 24. saying doo ye this wherein is conteined make this in my remembrance And so they consecrated alwaies as Priestes and taught vs the oblation of the new testament Lib. 4. cap. 32. as S. Irenaeus witnesseth But as for you M. Iewel beleeuing there is no external priesthoode and refusing to take the Sacrament of Oâ—ders which the Church hath alwaies had how can you haue either the intention to consecrate and offer vp Christes body or to do that thing whiche you falsly beleeue may not be donne Iewel Pag. 209. There is the body of our Lord saith M. Harding be the receiuers beleeuing or not beleeuing But S. Augustine saith In Iohan. Tract 26 This is the eating of that meate and the drinking of that drinke that a man dvvel in Christ and haue Christ dvvelling in him Harding That is in deede the worthy eating and drinking wherof S. Augustine speaketh But S. Paule sheweth that he 1 Cor. 11. who eateth vnworthily that meate is giltie of the body of our Lord which should not be so by his eating except it were the body of our Lord which he doth eate Iewel Pag. 109. Origen saith Est verus cibus quem nemo malus potest edere In Math. cap. 15. Etenim si malus posset edere corpus Domini noÌ„ scriberetur qui edit hunc panem viuet in aeteâ—num The body of Christ is the true foode vvhiche no euil man can eate For if the euil man could eate the body of our Lord it should not be vvritten he that eateth this bread shal liue for euer Harding You haue fowly corrupted this place M. Iewel Origen speaketh not of the Sacrament in those wordes nor of the Sacramental eating Yea expressely hauing spokeÌ„ before of the SacrameÌ„t Origen in Mat. c. 15. he endeth his talke thereof in this sort Et haec quidem de typicosymbolicoque corpore And these thinges I haue said of the typical and figuratiue body Where it is to be noted Figuratiue bodie that the Sacrament is called a figuratiue body bicause it is made present for a figuratiue purpose that is to thend the death of the same body whiche death is nowe past and absent may be remembred most effectually by the presence of the selfe same body that died Nowe goeth Origen forward saying Multa porrò de ipso verbo dici possent quod factum est caro verúsque cibus quem qui comederit omnino viuet in aeternum quem nullus malus potest edere Et enim si fieri posset vt qui malus adhuc perseueret edat verbum factum carnem cùm sit verbum panis vinus nequaquam scriptum fuisset quisquis ederit panem hunc viuet in aeternum Moreouer muche might be said of the word it selfe how that it was made fleash and the true foode the whiche he that eateth shal
happeth bicause we yeelde and consent vnto sinne and not bicause the concupiscence of it selfe is sinne before we haue consented vnto it Ievvel 217. S. Augustine saith in most plaine vvise Contra Iulianum lib. 5. c. 3. The concupiscnce of the flesh against vvhich the good spirite lusteth is both sinne and the paine of sinne and the cause of sinne Yet the late blessed Chapter of Trident in spite of S. Augustine hath published the contrarie Harding Thus ye speake in spite of the CouÌ„cel Verely the CouÌ„cel of Trent did determine that which it fouÌ„d in S. Augustin who teacheth most manifestly that the CoÌ„cupisceÌ„ce is not properly sin but is only called so And thereby you know how S. Augustine is to be vnderstaÌ„ded in the place by you alleged His most plaine words are these Augustin coÌ„t duas epist Pelagi li. 1. ca. 13. Dicimus Baptisma dare oiÌ„m indulgentiaÌ„ peccatoruÌ„ et auferre crimina noÌ„ radere Sed de ista coÌ„cupiscentia carnis falli eos credo vel fallere cuÌ„ qua necesse est vt etiaÌ„ baptizatus hoc si diligeÌ„tissimè proficit spiritu Dei agitur pia mente confligat Sed haec etiaÌ„si vocatur PeccatuÌ„ non vtique quia peccatuÌ„ est sed quia peccato facta est sic vocatur Sicut sciptura manus cuiusque dicitur quòd manus eaÌ„ fecerit We say that Baptisme geueth remissioÌ„ of al sinnes and that it taketh crimes quit away and doth not shaue them as who would saye it leaueth not the rootes behind But I suppose that as touching this ConcupisceÌ„ce of the flesh they be either deceiued them selues or that they deceiue others For of this ConcupisceÌ„ce he also who is baptized yea though he profit neuel so wel and be guided with the spirite of God must of necessitie suffer in his Godly mind some conflicte But this Concupiscence albeit it be called sinne yet verely it is not so called bicause it is sinne but bicause it is made by sinne As for example any writing is called the hand of him that wrote it bicause the hand made it If then S. Augustine say most distinctly that the Concupiscence in them that are baptized is not a sinne how spitefully yea how falsely also haue you said that the Councel of Trent defined the contrarie in spite of S. Augustine I pray you be not so angry with the Councel of Trent If your stomake wil not holde in that spiteful humour but you must nedes vtter it yet wil truth be truth Of the Real presence of Christes Bodie in the Sacrament of the Aulter The 5. Chapter The Apologie Pag. 218. VVe saie that Eucharistia that is to saie the Supper of the Lorde is a Sacrament that is an euident representation of the Bodie and Bloude of Christ vvherein is sette as it vvere before our eies the death of Christ and his Resurrâ—ction and vvhat so euer he did vvhilest he vvas in his mortal Body to the ende vve maie geue thankes for his deathe and for our deliuerance And that by the often receiuing of this Sacrament vve may daily renevve the remembrance thereof to thintent vve being fedde vvith the Bodie and bloude of Christe may be brought into the hope of the Resurrection and of euerlasting life and maie most assuredly beleeue that as our bodies be fedde vvith bread and vvine so our soules be fedde vvith the Bodie and Bloude of Christe Confutation fol. 90. b. Among al these gay wordes we heare not so much as one syllable vttered whereby we may vnderstande that yee beleeue the very Bodie of Christe to be in deede present in the blessed Sacrament of the Aulter Ye confesse the Eucharistia whiche commonly ye cal the Supper of the Lorde to be a Sacrament and al that to be none other then an euident token of the Bodie and Bloude of Christe c. Iewel Defence Pag. 220. Here is no mention saith M. Harding of Real presence and thereupon he plaieth vs many a proper lesson Notvvithstanding here is as muche mention made of Real presence as either Christe or his Apostles euer made or in the Primitiue Catholique Church vvas euer beleeued Harding COnsidering how ofte this matter hath ben handled and how few men are ignorant what ech side saith I wil be the shorter in this place First I graunt the eating of Christes body by faith to be necessarie Againe I graunt the Sacrament to be a mystical figure of Christes death and of his visible body But I say farther that besides eating by Faith our flesh and body receiueth Christes body and that really Matt. 26. That these vvordes this is my body this is my Bloude are meant properly TertulliaÌ„ de resurr Carnis Which conclusion is proued bicause the wordes of Christ this is my body are meant properly and without any figure of speach albeit the manner of the presence be figuratiue My reason to proue that Christes wordes are meant properly is the perpetual interpretation of the auncient Fathers the sense and custome of the Churche To beginne with Tertullian he saith in this wise Caro abluitur vt anima emaculetur Caro vngitur vt anima consecretur Caro signatur vt anima muniatur Caro manus impositione adumbratur vt anima spiritu illuminetur Caro corpore sanguine Christi vescitur vt anima de Deo saginetur The flesh is washed that the soule may be made without spot The flesh is annointed that the soule may be consecrated The flesh is signified that the soule may be fenced The flesh is shadowed with the laying on of handes The flesh is the meane vvhereby the grace of God passeth vnto the soule that the soule also may be lightened with the holy Ghost The flesh is fed with the body and bloude of Christe that the soule also may be made fat of God In these wordes as diuers Sacramentes are ioyned together so herein they agree al that the flesh is the meane by which the grace of God passeth to the soule As therfore in Baptisme the flesh is washed that the soule may be cleansed so in the Sacrament of the Aulter the flesh is fed with the body and bloude of Christ that the soule may be nourished with the godhead which dwelleth in that fleshe It is then to be noted that the fleshe eateth not material bread and wine but the body and bloud of Christ For as the thing wherewith we are washed is water and that wherewith we are anointed is oile euen so that wherewith the flesh is fed is the body and bloud of Christ The instrument therefore of Gods grace is none other in the Supper beside that flesh wherein the fulnesse of the Godhed dwelleth It is wel knowen that our flesh hath no faith to eate Christes body withal Therefore when our flesh is said to be fed with Christes body it is clearly meant that our flesh is also really fed with Christes owne substance as it is washed with
the very last man had drunke of that cup once filled and once coÌ„secrated for to that end this word al doth serue And that may wel appeare by S. Luke Luc. 22. who geueth vs Christes wordes in this wise Accipite diuidite inter vos Take yee and diuide it betwen you Which wordes S. Augustine saith were spoken of the Cup of the newe Testament Augustin de consensu EuangelistaruÌ„ lib. 3. c. 1. Enim Matt. 26. Drinke ye al of this in vvhat sâ—â—se vvas it spokeÌ„ Marc. 14. Diuide this Cup betwen you and drinke yee al of this doth make al one sense and that may more plainely appeare by the word enim for which doth follow in Christes saying Drinke ye al of this for this is my Bloud As if he said were not this my bloud eche of you might drinke vp the whole cup if occasion of thirst so required But now it is geuen not to quench bodily thirst but to nourish the Soule Therefore drinke ye so that al may drinke of this one Cup. Et biberunt ex illo omnes And al they dranke of it Thus we see by the Circumstance of the place that the worde al doth nothing elles but warne them of the Mysterie present in the Cup whereof we may not inferre that al which at any time doo communicate in one Churche must needes drinke of one Chalice as the Apostles did as neither that there muste be stil twelue to drinke of euery Cup. For that was a Circumstance so vsed in Christes Supper as we can make no lawe thereof The true lawe to directe vs in that behalfe was committed to the Apostles who taught the Churche that alwayes at the Consecration it was needeful for bothe kindes to be offered and receiued as wel that the being of Christes Soule aparte from his Body at his death might be signified as also that the publike Minister might wholy represent by his outwarde action that here is al foode necessary for mannes comforte whether it be meate or drinke that he needeth As for the reste it shoulde be al one whether they that communicated receiued one or bothe kindes bicause the whole Body Bloude Soule and Godheade of Christe is fully present in either kinde Concerning that S. Chrysostome and Theophylactâ— haue said as wel of the cup as of the bread Doo this in my remembrance it meaneth that as wel when we consecrate the Body as when we consecrate the Bloud or when we receiue either of them bothe the end of our doing must be the memorie of Christes death Whereas Paschasius addeth expressely that the Ministers must as wel drinke of the Cup as the reste of the faithfull you name vs not the place where we maye find it And therein you haue done more politikely then vprightly or plainely For in deede it maketh not for you Paschasius speaketh of the spiritual eatiÌ„g or drinking Paschasius ca. 15. Paschasius in that place disputeth of spiritual eating or drinking and saith that as wel the faithful people as the ministers muste drinke spiritually of this Cup. His wordes immediatly before are these Solus Christus est qui frangit hunc panem per manus ministrorum distribuit credentibus dicens accipite bibite ex hoc omnes tam ministri quà m reliqui credentes It is Christ alone that breaketh this bread and diuideth it by the handes of his ministers vnto the beleuers saying take ye and drinke ye al of this as wel ministers as also the other beleeuers this is the Cup of my Bloud Lo as wel the ministers as al others are bid to drinke of the bread or Cup indiffereÌ„tly to wit of Christ so that he speaketh no more of the Cup then of the bread but al in like wise of Christ alone For Paschasius saith ca. 15. that Christe brake the bread saing take yee and drink yee al of this this is the Cup of my bloud He then so mingleth the breaking of the bread with the drinking of the Cup that a man may wel perceiue that he rather spake of the thing it selfe conteined vnder those formes then of either kinde or forme by it selfe Iewel Pag. 230. M. Harding him selfe is forced to confesse by the reporte of Leo Sermone 4. De qua drages that the first knovven deuisers and authors of his Communion in one kinde vvere the olde heretikes called the Manichees Harding Where haue you any such word in al my booke M. Iewel I must beare with you for customes sake M. Ievvel forgeth vvordes vpon his Aduersarie For this is your accustomed manner to make me speake that which I neuer thought It is to be vnderstanded that before the time of Leo and in his time also the manner and custom was that the faithful people receiued either one or bothe kindes as their deuotion serued them By occasion of which custom The Manichees heresie denying Christes true flesh the Manichees also couered their pestilent heresie as they who beleued that Christ had no true flesh and consequently no true bloude but onely a phantastical or apparent body without real truth of flesh and bloud They then perceiuing that at the mysteries some Christians vsed to receiue one kind alone mingled them selues alwaies with them and wholy absteined from the Chalice Which thing when Pope Leo perceiued he gaue a watch worde thereof vnto the people saying Sermone 4. De qua dragesim Cùm ad tegendam infidelitatem suam nostris audeant interesse mysterijs ita in Sacramentorum communione se temperant vt interdum tutius lateant Ore indigno Christi corpus accipiunt sanguinem autem redemptionis nostrae haurire omnino declinant Whereas they to hide and cloke their infidelitie be so bolde as to be present at our Mysteries they behaue them selues so in the receiuing of the Sacramentes that now and then they may lurke the more fafely They receiue with vnworthy mouthe the body of Christe but as for the bloud of our redemption they vtterly refuse to receiue it Now if these men came thus to the mysteries among the Christians to hide their heresie and infidelitie it is not to be thought that they alone receiued one kinde For then they had forthwith ben betraied But whereas other men receiued either the body or the bloud as occasion or deuotion required the Manichees euer receiued only the body of Christ and neuer the bloud and that with this false and heretical opinion that Christe had no true bloud Gelasius then being Pope not long after Leo willed al the Christians who before were at libertie to receiue bothe kindes that thereby al oportunitie and occasioÌ„ might be taken from the Manichees any more so to lurke and to cloke their impietie Now to declare this muche is not to confesse that the Manichees were the first deuisers of Communion vnder one kinde Wherfore you maie haue good leaue M. Iewel to take that spiteful Vntruthe to your selfe home againe
these plaine wordes agreeth the Doctrine of the olde Fathers S Chrysostome saith Quod est in Calice id est quod è latere fluxit illius nos sumus participes That whiche is in the Chalice is that Chrysost in Ephe hom 3. whiche flowed from his side and thereof wee are partakers And againe Vasa non participant nec sentiunt Sanguinem quem in se habent nos verò planè The vesselles partake not ne feele not the bloude which they conteine in them but we do partake it And as there Chrysostome saith the vessels haue the same bloud of Christe for the time which commeth to our hartes and soules Augustin epist 86. S. Augustine also saith dicit cessisse panipecus tanquam nesciens tunc in Domini mensa panes propositionis ponisolere nunc se de agni immaculati corpore partem sumere Dicit cessisse poculo sanguinem non cogitans etiam nunc se accipere in poculo sanguinem Vrbicus saith that the Lambe of the newe Testament hath geuen place to the bread of the new Testament being ignorant that both then the shew bread was wont to be put vpon the table of our Lord and that now also he taketh his parte of the Body of the vnspotted Lambe He saith that bloude of the olde Testament hath geuen place to the cuppe not considering that he nowe also receiueth bloude in the Cuppe Marke Reader this comparison of S. Augustine that as the olde Fathers did eate of the Lambe so do we of the true Lambe Christe and as the Priestes of the Law had bloud in their basens euen so haue we in our cuppe whence we receiue it The oddes onely is that their bloude was onely the bloude of Calues not hable to cleanse man but our bloude is the bloude of Christe which cleanseth al sinnes Our Sacramentes therefore are the spiritual noueltie of the new Testament not lacking either Aulter or Fire or Breade or Lambe or Bloude but hauing them al in Christes Body and Bloud into which the breade and wine are so conuerted that the verey true and real bloude of Christe is receiued in the cuppe Oecumenius also saith Oecumenius in cap. 11. 1. Cor. Pro sanguine irrationalium Dominus proprium dat sanguinem et bene in poculo vt ostendat vetus testamentum ante à hoc delineasse Our Lord in stede of the bloud of vnreasonable beastes doth geue his owne bloude and it is wel that he geueth it in a cuppe to shew that the olde Testament did foreshadow this thing Euthymius agreeth with the same Fathers If then it be cleere by Christes owne wordes and by the interpretation of the Fahers that the same bloude which was shed for vs and which ranne out of Christes side was in the cuppe and that thence it is partaken seing that wine was not shed for our redemption it is cleere that after Consecration wine was not in Christes cuppe except as I said before we take wine by a metaphore as Christ is the vine and his bloud is the wine of that vine which Christ is Notwithstanding that I haue great aduantage in the rest of M. Iewels wordes yet seing this much doth suffice for the Catholike reader I wil not spende moe wordes therein but wil passe away to some other mater Concerning the adoration of the Sacrament Adoratiō there is much more said of it in myne owne and in other mennes bookes then as yet M. Iewel or al his fellowes haue answered And that thing wholy dependeth of the real presence Of applying the merites of Christes Death to others in the Masse The 9. Chapter Harding WEe neuer taught that by our Masses wee applied and distributed al the merites of Christes death to men how soeuer they were disposed Iewel Pag. 297. The most catholike pillers of your catholike Church as namely Caietanus haue said that faith is not necessarie for him that receiueth the Sacrament of thankesgeuing notvvithstanding he acknovvlegeth this vvas an errour Harding What vanitie is this to laie that to Cardinal Caietane which your selfe cōfesse he defendeth not but acknowlegeth to be an errour The wordes by you alleged out of a booke made by one Paralip Vrsper anno 1518. that was as false a brother as your selfe do meane no more but that a man may receiue Christes body albeit he haue no faith as Iudas did What is this to the purpose that we speake of Moreouer if Caietane once had thought which he neuer did that by the Masse we applie Christes merites to menne not wel disposed yet seing you say he tooke it for an errour afterward by this meane I might prooue that M. Iewel were a Papist bicause once he professed the beleefe of the Catholike Church when verely that Church was only meant by Godfathers Godmothers and the Ministers which had the Sacrifice of the Masse and praiers to the Saintes and Praiers for the Dead But you can not M. Iewel allege vs any one man that saith that by the Masse we applie the merites of Christ to menne howsoeuer they be disposed Neither doth Gabriel Biel nor Iacobus de Valentia De venerab Sacramento altaris c. 1. nor S. Thomas teache so whose wordes you corrupt with false translation englishing Pro quotidianis delictis for the debte of daily sinnes where debte is not in the Latine And in deede the debte of al sinnes as wel actual as original was taken awaie by the Sacrifice of the Crosse But we see euidently that the acte or actual doing of al sinnes was not then taken awaie For euen now faithful menne do sinne daily Therefore wee neede stil a dayly Sacrifice of none other substance then that of the Crosse was but euen of the very same substance which substance hath in it al his merite of the Crosse And thus we offer Christes body and bloude not now in truth by bloudshedding as once only vpon the Crosse it was offered but in mysterie by changing the breade and wine into his body and bloude We offer it thus I saie to applie vnto deuoute persons by faith and sacramentes the merite of the Crosse praying vnto God that the death of Christ which is euer auaileable in it selfe may through his bloude which we offer in the chalice and drincke with our mouth and partake in our soules by faith and charitie be made auaileabe vnto vs. Iewel Catharinus one of the VVorthies of your late chapter of Trident saith Deincruēto Sacrificio Apparet c. Harding Whatsoeuer he said he is none of our Worthies nor yet is he allowed of the Councel of Trente when soeuer in any matter of Doctrine he speaketh otherwise then that Councel doth I doubte much M. Iewel how in the iudgemēt of wisemen these boish flowtes become a man of your professiō in that so vainly you praise vnto vs now Peter Lombard now Gratian now the Gloser vpon him now Lorichius now Cusan now Catharinus now Caietane now Alphonsus now Pighius
now Bitontino and I can not tel how many moe As though we leaned to them more then to the Scriptures or to the ancient Fathers If you wil know what we beleue and wil not be deceiued therein reade the Councel of Trent the doctrine I meane of the Canons in the same decreed and so shal you not lose your labour We tel you though ye be not ignorant thereof that sundrie thinges haue ben said and written by Glosers which we defende not no more then you defende either al baudie Bales lyes al Luthers diuelish doctrines Beza in c. Luc. 22. or al Bezas filthy verses wicked writinges in defence of hainous actes and blasphemies against S. Lukes Gospel And yet Catharinus saith not that which you should proue when al is done He saith in dede fondly but he vttereth not that fondnesse which you lay to vs as his wordes and yours doo shew to him that listeth to reade bothe Iewel We receiue the merites of Christes death only by faith Harding That we receiue the merites of Christes death by faith The merites of Christes death be not recâ—iued by Faith only we graunt but that by only faith we receiue them it is a false doctrine and repugnant to many expresse sayinges of the holy Scriptures God according to his mercie hath saued vs saith S. Paule by the washing of the second birth and of the renuing of the holy Ghost Tit. 3. By receiuing saluation we receiue the merites of Christes death but we receiue saluation by Baptisme Ergo we receiue the merites of Christes death by Baptisme And sith that Baptisme is not faith but a different grace from faith verely we receiue not the merites of Christes death by faith onely Againe the merites of Christes death are receiued of him whose sinnes are forgeuen Christes Merites receiued by Loue or charitie Luc. 7. 1. Cor. 13. But Marie Maudelenes sinnes being many and great were yet forgeuen her bicause she loued much as Christ him selfe said and yet loue is not faith for S. Paule saith faith hope and charitie are three thinges Wherefore the merites of Christes death are not receiued of vs by faith only The like ArgumeÌ„tes might I make out of Gods word for the feare of God for hope and for many other vertues and specially for the grace of God Matth. 5. whereby wee suffer vniustly for righteousnes sake For as Christ specially was exalted according to his manhod in glorie for that in humilitie and meekenesse he suffered most vniustly Philipp 2. euen so he graunteth to them the greatest merites of his death who by his grace suffer together with him vniustly for the defence of his iustice as the holy Apostles and Martyrs haue donne That in Ioan. tractatu â—0 which M. Iewel here saith out of S. Augustine that the water of Baptisme worketh bicause it is beleued proueth Faith to be necâ—ssarie which thing we graunt but it proueth it not to be sufficient alone which was the point we spâ—ke of Iewel Pag. 29â— Hesychius saith the grace of Goâ— is receiued by onely faith in Leuit. lib. 4. ca. 14. Harding Lib. 4. cap. 14. You lâ—aue out halfe as your custome is For Hesychius saith The grace of God is receiued by faith alone non ex eperibus vt Paulus dicit not of workes as S. Paule saith Nam gratia iam non erit gratia For if the grace of God were deserued by workes now grace were not grace Thus Hesychius saith that Gods grace is receiued by faith alone onely to exclude their vaine opinion who thought workes which were without faith to deserue faith or iustice which is not so For we are iustified freely without workes that may deserue the grace that God geueth Yet it is not denied but that when faith is geuen vs then hope in God and the loue of him is also geuen vs. By which hope and loue spread in our hartes we receiue the merites of Christe and not by faith onely For Purgatorie matters wee referre you to M. Allens Booke and to that I said thereof in my Confutation whiche is more railed and scoffed at then answered Of the Intercession made to Saintes to praie for vs. The 10. Chapter Iewel Pag. 311. If Christ only be the mediatour of Saluation vvherefore do you thus cal vpon the blessed virgin Christes mother Salua omnes qui te glorificant Saue thou al them that glorifie thee Here ye intrude vpon Christes office Harding A Wrangler wil neuer lacke wordes Saue vs o blessed virgin in vvhat sense is iâ— taken Whereas you know by our doctrine and profession that we beleue not the blessed Virgin but only Christ to be our mediatour what fishe you for wordes to trappe vs in them When we saie to the Virgin saue vs we meane thus praye for vs to God that we may be faued And herein we speake as S. Paule did speake who saith to Timothee doing thus that is to saie preaching and geuing good example of life teipsum saluum facies 1. Tim. 4. eos qui te andiunt Thou shalt saue bothe thy selfe and those that heare thee What Doth S. Paule make Timothee a mediatour and Sauiour in these wordes They are thus wel meant Thou shalt be a meane to saue thy selfe and others that is to saie whereby the sooner saluation may freely for Christes sake be geuen of God to thee and to others Euen so saue vs virgin is to saie O virgin praie to God and to thy sonne Iesus that through his death saluation may be geuen vnto vs. I might bring many such speaches out of the holy Scriptures if I thought this might not suffice He is a contentious wrangler who knowing our meaning doth pike quarels of dissensioÌ„ vpon wordes only taken in euil sense the good sense dissembled Iewel Ibidem VVherefore saie yee thus of Thomas Becket O Christ make vs to ascende vnto heauen vvhither Thomas is ascended euen by the bloud of Thomas that he shead for thy sake Here you seeke saluation in the bloud of Thomas Harding This is an obiection for a Cobler as the other was and not for a Diuine Hovv it is lavvful to saie in praier super Thomae Sanguinem and the like Esai 37. whose duetie it were to depend of thinges and not of wordes Albeit you make it otherwise to your aduantage then the Latin wordes reporte yet thus we saie It is lawful to aske mercie of God onely for his owne sake it is lawful also at the time of asking mercie to present to him the remembrance of any gifte or grace of his God him selfe saith by his Prophete Isaias Protegem ciuitatem istam vt saluem eam propter me propter Dauid seruum meum I wil defende this citie to saue it for mine owne sake and for Dauides sake my seruant Now bicause we know it was a most gracious gifte of God that he gaue S. Thomas grace to dye for his honour
licensed our most reuerende brother and felowe Bishoppe Menna to returne home after he had made his Purgation and was assoiled of the crime laid to his charge specially sith that after long enquirie made concerning those thinges whiche were reported of him we founde him culpable and blame worthy in none And he him selfe besides making satisfaction vppon his othe at the moste holy body of the blessed Apostle S. Peter hath declared him selfe to be free and cleere from al those thinges that were obiected to impaire his good name For as it was conuenient that we should seuerely haue pounished him according to the Canons if he had benne giltie in any thing So it was not meete that we should staie him or trouble him any longer seeing his owne innocencie did so helpe him Notwithstanding we haue geuen charge that he him selfe taking before two Priestes vnto him make his purgation when the accuser hath geuen ouer his action before you at your arbitrement Thus farre S. Gregorie But this proueth not your intente and purpose M. Iewel For I beseeke you Sir M. Iewels forgeries where is it said in al this Decree that the Pope committed a spiritual mater in a cause of Simonie to be heard and ended by a woman Where is it said that Brunichildis being a woman by vertue of the Popes commission summoned a Bishop to appeare and solemnely to make his purgation before her In the texte it is not nor in the glose that you so solemnely allege Or if it were had your lawier forgotte to tel you or were you so simple that you could not conceiue that whiche is commonly said Maledicta est Glosa quae corrumpit textum it is a cursed glose that corrupteth the texte But seeing you builde so muche vpon the Glose let vs see what the Glose saith Iewel 638. In your Glose vpon the same place it is noted thus Fuit tamen hoc nimium papaliter dispensatum The Pope vvas to Popelike in this dispensation Harding To let passe your scoffing and ministerlike interpretation let vs come to the matter M. Ievvel corrupteth his Glose by nipping avvay the ende of the sentence alleged What dispensation is it that the Glose speaketh of Why suffred you not the authour of the Glose to tel forth his whole tale Ye alwaies make your aduantage among the vnlearned of falsifying and corrupting your testimonies It followeth there Quòd Episcopus expurgatus coram Papa cogitur adhuc coram muliercula se purgare that a Bishoppe hauing made his purgation before the Pope is forced to purge him selfe before a woman And this is the dispensation that the Glose misliketh as to popelike according to your interpretation But if either the Gloser had considered the reason that moued the Pope or you that followe the Glose would haue marked the litle cause that standeth by the Glose in the margent in the last printe of Paris where it is said hoc totum ideo fuit vt fama eius clarior appareret al this was done by the wisedom of S. Gregorie to the ende his good name might appeare more cleare neither he would so rashly haue controlled S. Gregories order in that behalfe nor you so fondly alleged it And of a worde spoken in ieast as the Canonistes sometimes speake you take a weake holde as of a matter spoken in great soothe Notwithstanding you wil saie the wordes of the Decree are plaine tuo cōmisimus arbitrio We haue geuen a commission to your arbitriment that he purge him selfe before you If you make this obiection we answer that if the wordes were exactely sifted by the true and grammatical construction you would hardly maineteine this interpretation But I wil not contende about wordes Let it be as you would haue it Let Brunichildis haue a commission from the Pope to see that Bishop Menna made his purgation before her Your purpose and saying is nothing proued by it For first you saie The Pope committed a spiritual mater in a cause of Simonie to be heard and ended by a woman And this is a vaine tale and vntrue fansie of yours not hable to be gathered by any worde of that decree For the cause of Simonie whereof Menna was accused was heard and ended by the Pope and he not founde faultie in it was absolued and sent home And a cause once heard and determined by the Pope is not wonte to be committed afterward to the hearing and determination of a woman After this as though this lie had not ben lowde ynough you tel vs that Brunichildis being a woman by vertue of the Popes commission summoned a Bishop to appeare and solemnely to make his purgation before her and for your credite you referre vs in the margent to Gratian. 2. q. 5. Mennam It is 2. q. 4. But that Brunichildis did either summon a Bisshop to witte Menna to appeare or required him to make his purgation before her it is not to be found there nor any where elles that M. Iewel hath alleged or can allege as I doubte not For Brunichildis Queene of Fraunce being so holy so vertuous so religious a Lady as S. Gregorie reporteth she was it is to be presupposed that she would not disquiet a good and an innocent man nor put him to farther trouble who when his cause was heard and ended by the Pope was founde in nullo culpabilis blame worthy in nothing that was laid to his charge by the euident testimonie of S. Gregorie declared in his epistle sent of purpose to Queene Brunichildis Wherefore M. Iewel these fantasies of yours are but wanton and vaine emploied to none other ende but to deceiue the vnlearned Iewel Pag. 638. The Emperour Constantinus vvrote thus vnto the Bishoppes that had ben at the Councel of Tyrus Cuncti Socrates lib. 1. c. 34 quotquot Synodum Tyri compleuistis c. Al ye that haue ben at the Councel of Tyrus come vvithout delaie to our campe and shevve me plainely and vvithout colour hovv vpprightly ye haue delte in iudgemement and that euen before my selfe vvhom ye can not denie to be the true seruant of God Harding These letters were written by the Emperour Constantinus to Arian Bishoppes that had made a false conuenticle or conspiracie and not a lawful Councel M. Iewel at Tyrus and they were written vnto them vppon the complainte of S. Athanasius that worthy Patriarke of Alexandria made both against the iniuries and violences that Flauianus Dionysius the Emperours Lieutenant attempted against him and also against the sclaunders that his enemies the Arians had wrongfully laied to his charge And these sclaunders were not of Faithe maters but that Athanasius had murdered one Arsenius Ruffin in Histor Eccles li. 10. cap. 17. Socrates Li. 1. c. 29. and had committed a foule rape with a woman and that with an Arme cut of from Arsenius bodie he practized Witche crafte for the whiche crimes these Arians sought Athanasius death Wherefore no marueile if that good Emperour being
of Popes at the first succeding one an other fol. 219. b. Ordination and Confirmation diuers fol. 227. b. Origen falsified by M. Iewel fol. 286. a. 333. b. Orders Ecclesiastical fol. 134. b. 135. a. P. Papistrie can not be shewed when it beganne fol. 106. b Patriarkes fol. 180. Peter Martyr in Strasbourg a Lutheran in England a Zuinglian fol. 34. b. Peter Martyr and dame Catherine his wife fol. 36. b. Peter Martyr at variance vvith Brentius fol. 117. b. Peters authoritie and prerogatiue fol. 174. a. 175. 176. Peter ouer the Christian Gentiles at Rome fol. 221. 〈…〉 Peter when he came to Rome fol. 221. b. Peter the feeder of al sortes in the flocke fol. 148. b. c. Peters humilitie fol. 153. Peter offended twise fol. 157. Peter foloweth the rest yet head of al by S. Augustine fol. 158. Peter receiued into indiuisible vnitie with Christ fol. 174. a. Peter ioyned with fol. Leo. 176. a. Pelagius heresie mainteined by the Caluinistes fol. 367. a. Perfection double one of Pilgrimes the other of heauen fol. 368. b Petitio principij muche vsed by M. Iewel fol. 89. a. Platina no flatterer of the Pope fol. 257. b. Pope the Heade of the Churche fol. 130. b. The Popes Supremacie proued fol. 146. 147. 148. 149. 159. b. 179. 186. a. b. The Pope Prince of Pastours fol. 177. b 178. a. The Pope leaft the Vicare of Christes loue towardes vs. fol. 148. a. The Popes confirming of Bishops fol. 223. b. 224. seq Popes charged with heresie and other enormites defended fol. 248. 249. 250. 251. 252. 253. 254. 255. 256. 257. 258. The Pope Peters Successour fol. 273. a. The Pope laufully called the Princâ—… of Pastours fol. 177. b. Possibilitie of keping Gods Commaundementes fol. 366. b. Priesthood double fol. 239. a. Priest aboue a Deacon fol. 164. b. Priestes of England are Votaries fol. 290. b. Priestes of Greece in what sence they are Votaries fol. 298. a. Priestes and religious menne whether they maie be dispensed to marrie fol. 300. b. Priestes only Iudges ouer Priestes fol. 377. a. Praying for the dead taught by S. Paule fol. 326. b. Protestantes dissent not onely one from an other but also from them selues fol. 34. a. Protestantes varie from the Primitiue Churche fol. 270. b. Protestantes be Apostates fol. 336. b. Protestantes are proued by an inuincible Argument to be no part of Christes Churche fol. 90. a. b. 92. Puritanes fol. 139. a. 332. a. R. RAymeris made king of Arragon of a Monke and married by dispensation fol. 301. a. Real presence cleerely witnessed fol. 79. a. proued 339. sequentib Rebellion against Princes mainteined by M. Iewel fol. 86. a. Religious menne married the first fouÌ„ders of this new Gospel fol. 36. b Reseruation of the Sacramente fol. 331. b. Righteousnes competent for this life fol. 368. a. Rounde capped Ministers fol. 86. b. Ruffianrie of M. Iewel detected fol. 120. b. Ruffinus belied by M. Iew. fol. 285. b. S. SAbellicus falsified by M. Iewel fol. 139. b. Sacramentes meanes to receiue grace fol. 330. a. Sacramentes seuen fol. 334 a. Sacrament of the Aulter called our maker and Lorde by S. Augustine fol. 346. a. Sacramentaries persecuted by the Lutheranes fol. 95. b. 96. a. Sacramentaries condemned by the Lutheranes fol. 104. b. Seruus seruuorum Dei the Popes stile fol. 187. b. Seuerus a blinde man by touche of a Martyrs garment recouered sight fol. 364. a. Shaxton Bishoppe no Protestant fol. 241. b. Shaxton and Capon Bishoppes of Sarisburie repented fol. 194. a. Shaxton B. not of M. Iewele side fol. 242. b. Sharpe vvordes founde in the Scriptures fol. 27. b. Sheepe of three sortes fol. 149. a. Siritius and Innocentius vvere not the first ordeiners of Clerkes coÌ„tinencie fol. 279. a. Sozomenus Gregorie Nazianzen and Eusebius belied by the Apologie fol. 309. a. Sophistrie of M. Ievvels shifting from the Scriptures to Goddes vvorde fol. 323. a. Spiridion made Bishop of a married laie man fol. 285. a Syluester 2. Pope fol. 249. a. Succession of Bishoppes treated of at large Lib. fol. 4. Succession of Bishoppes a certaine rule to knovve the Churche by fol. 198. b. 199. sequent Succession can not lacke the Truth fol. 199. 200. Succession lavvful can not be taken avvaie by man fol. 211. T. TErtulliaÌ„ of a married man made a Prieste fol. 285. a. Tertullians errour fol. 239. 240. Three vvaies of vvriting against an aduersarie fol. 42. b. Tradition fol. 270. a. Traditions belonging to SacrameÌ„ts maie not be changed Ceremonies maie fol. 326. a. Traditores what they were in the primitiue Churche fol. 91. a. Transubstantiation fol. 110. b. treated of 346. b. This is my Bodie meant properly fol. 339. a. Turkes inuasion brideled fol. 266. a. V. VAriance of opinion betwen two Ministers of Valencenes in the time of the Siege fol. 84. b. Victor the Pope his death fol. 58. a Virgilius Pope his CoÌ„stancie fol. 200. a Vnitie can not be without a supreme head fol. 140. b. 141. a. 152. 153. a. Vniuersal Bishop truly attributed to the Pope fol. 185. b. 186. 187. 188. sequent Votaries maie not conueniently marrie by M. Iewel fol. 289. a. Vow breakers in what danger they stande fol. 278. a. Vow of Chastitie annexed to holy Orders fol. 291. a. Vow of Chastitie made in facte though no vvordes be spoken fol. 292. b. Vovve made in vvhat case marriage holdeth or holdeth not by the determination of the Churche fol. 294. b Vrspergensis set out by Melanchthon onely fol. 57. b. VV VVAldenses heresies fol. 102. b. VVedlockes il thing is inordinate luste fol. 283. b. VVickleff his heresies fol. 82. b. 63. a. VViues that couerted their vnfaithful husbandes fol. 61. b. 350. a. VVordes of God not written fol. 270. a. VVorkes hovv meritorious of infinite revvarde fol. 371. b. Faultes escaped in the printing Faulte leafe line Correction my 27. a. 27. may sor 38. a. 12. sory Golfridus 83. b. 25. Galfridus lustly 135. b. 23. lusty famofum 170. b. 9. fumosum to 179. b. 28. lut it out least 180. b. 28. leaft S. of 198. a. 19. of S. In the margent 202. a.  a note superfluous Liber hic D.M.N. Thomae Hardingi lectus approbatus est à viris Anglici idiomatis Theologiae peritissimis vt sine periculo imprimi publicari possit Quanquam alioqui ipse D. Hardingus mihi tà m probè notus est vt de eius cruditione fide prudentia nihil sit dubitandum Cunerus Petri Pastor S. Petri Louanij 21. Maij. An. 1568.