traytor Thus he writeth of the beginning of the controuersy There was as authors doe affirme in that time of Henrie the second Pag 56. more then a hundred murthers besydes other felonyes proued vpon the cleargie which when the king would haue punished according to the lawes of the land A fâ—lse and slâ—undâ—rous beginning of the 〈…〉 Becket opposed himself and beardeth the king in this so iust an action vnder title of standing for the libertyes of the Churche from this strauÌ„ge ground these proceedings ensued In which words of the knight there is to bee noted first that where he saith authors doe affirmè that more then a hundred murders besides other â—ellonies were proued vpon the cleargie no other author is found to mention any such thing but onelie Nubergensis who yet doth not say that they were proued vpon the clergie but his words are Nuberg hist. Angl. l. 2 16. that it was said to haue byn tould the king at a certaine time that aboue a hundred murders had byn committed within the kingdome of England since his raigne by Cleargie men In which woords as you see NubergeÌ„sis doth not say that it was true or that it was proued as our knight doth and secondly he speaketh of the whole tyme of king Henries raigne vntil this contention which was some 14. or 15. yeares and thirdly the falling out of the Archbishop with the king was not for that he would not haue these clergie men punished if they had offended as wickedly this knight giueth to vnderstand saying presently after This proud prelate durst protect fellons and murderers against the king and iustice of the lanâ— but the controuersy was only about the maner of punishing those that did offend and by what iudges and iurisdiction they should be punished to wit whether by ecclesiastical or temporal power for that the Archbishop affirmed that equity required that clergie men offending should first be iudged condemned and degraded by ecclesiastical power according both to the cannon lawes as also the municipal lawes of the land confirmed by all former Christian Kings â—rom the first conuersion of England and that they being thus condemned should be deliuered to secular power for executâ—on of the sentence which is a case that faâ—leth out dayly in Spayn Italy France and other Cath. contreys where Bishops do defend their Eccâ—es iurisdiction in punishing Eccles. persons taking them also by force of censures out of secular iudges hands when occasioÌ„ is offered without all note of rebellion or treason And no lesse was this law of the realme of England confirmed by ancient parliaments and other antiquities then were the secular lawes for which S r. F. standeth and fondly calleth the defence of eccles lawes treason and rebellion Wherfore hauing set downe so false a relation of the beginning of this controuersy falsifying NubergeÌ„sis as yow see in many points he doth prosecute the same with lyke vntruth as presently yow shal see And first he beginneth with a certayne letter of Maud the Empresse vnto the Archbishop which she wrote at the instance of the King her sonne and vpoÌ„ the informatioÌ„ of such courtyers as were contrary to the Bishop and his cause In which letters she chargeth him that to vse S â— F. owne words as much as in him lay he went about to disinherit the King and depriue him of his crowne Whervnto I answere that truth it is Iohn Fox hath such a letter of thesaid Empresse Maud without telling where Pag â—8 or whence or how he had it or where we may read it for in none of all the authors aboue mentioned I do fynd it Yet one thing I would haue the reader to note S. F vntrue dealing in cyting matters against S. Thom. which testifieth the continuance of S r. F. vntrue dealing in this affayre that wheras in Iohn Fox the whole charge of the empresse against the Archbishop is mitigated by this pareÌ„thesius as the report is which sheweth that these were but suspitions only and reports of his enimies Fox Pag. 201. S r. F. hath left out the parenthesis as the report is as though she had charged him vpon her owne knowledge which is no true dealing or right meaning as yow see But let vs heare further S r. F. his words pretending a more certayne proof of treason rebellion in S. Thomas Pag. 58. But if the Empresse saith he might be thought to speak partialy on the K. her sonnes behalf yet the two Card. sent by the Pope to heare all this controuersy out of question wil not condemne him without iust cause and yet in a letter sent from them to the Pope they do condemne him c. Yf S. F. proue himself a true K â— in verifying this one poynt which here he sayth I am to pardon much of that which hath passed before But yf in this matter of so great moment he be taken in lyke falshood who wil then trust him hereafter Let vs examine then the matter I wil haue none other euideÌ„ces or witnesses but his owne woords for presently after he setteth downe a part of the letter of VVilliam and Otho Card. sent by Pope Alexander to heare the cause betwene the King the Archbishop and hauing trauayled therin the King being in Normandie and the Archb. at Paris they found the matter more hard then they imagined to compouÌ„d False dealing of Syr Fraunces for that the Archbishop demaunded restitution to his lyuings for himself and for his frends and reuocation of certayne lawes lately made preiudicial to ecclesiastical iurisdiction before he could end the matter wherwith the-sayd Card. being somwhat displeased for that they desired to carry with them to the Pope the glory of this accord made by them and for that the King had much gayned their good wil by liberallity towards theÌ„ for these causes they wrote to the Pope somwhat fauorably in the Kings behalf but yet nothing condemning the Archbishop as vntruly out K â— doth auow which now I shal shew out of the woords of their owne letter alleaged heere by S.F. which are these VVilliam and Otho Card. of the Churche of Rome to Alexander the Pope The letter of the tvvo Cardinals to the Pope â— VVe comming to the land of the K. of England found the controuersy betwixt him and the Archbishop of Canterbury more sharp and vehement then we would for the King the greater part about him said that the Archbishop had sâ—yâ—red vp the french King greuously against him as also the Earle of Flaunders his kinsman who was very louing and kynd to him before whome he made his open aduersary ready to wage warre against him as is by diuers euidences most certayne c. These are the words of the Card. by S. F. relation which supposing they were truly alleaged yet he that shal consider and ponder them wel wil see that out of them no more can be vrged against the Archbishop but
are extant in the Code both in Greeke and Latyn Nestorius Leg. eum recta â—eruâ—torem ibid. Euthichâ—s Apollinaris as dissenting from the Roman Church and Bishops therof Now then let the reader iudge whether these lawes of the Emperors made against heretikes do touch vs or protestants And so much of this second poynt The third poynt also touching S. Augustine his approuing S. Augustin alleaged by O. E. against himself and commending much these Emperors for punishing heresyes for making lawes against heretikes is altogither for vs in like manner and fully against protestants August lib. 1. contr Ep. Parmâ—n cap. 6. 10. ep 62. 166. Aug. ep 4â— ad Vincent for that S. Augustine dealing specially in this pointe against the Donatists Circumcellians who denyed the visible Church dispersed ouer the whole world and restrayned it to their sect only in Africa as euery sect of our Protestants doth at this day to the particuler place and Society where they liue it is easely seene who were heretikes and who to be punished by S. Augustines opinion to wit those that do rise vp against the vniuersal knowne and visible Church of their tyme do condemne it or are condemned by it and let Sir minister bring but one example to the contrarie in any age from Christ to Luther and it shal be sufficient to wit that any man condemned by the general knowne and visible Church of his tyme for an heretike was not held and taken for such by any of that tyme or any tyme after that was not an heretike himselfe let Oules eie I say spie but one exaÌ„ple of this out of all antiquitie and it shal be sufficieÌ„t Wherfore to end all his matter about Imperial lawes for punishing of heretikes and approuing therof both by the Apostle and by S. Augustine which yet other Protestants hitherto did neuer vrge as this witles minister doth let the reader marke this firme deduction and playne demonstration all those foresaid Christian and Catholike Emperors so much comended by S. Augustine and other Fathers following after him to wit Gratian Valentinian Theodosius Marcian Arcadius Honorius Iustinian and others A manifest deduction demonstration against nevv sectaties that made lawes against heretikes they held the Roman religion in their dayes to be the Catholike and true Christian religion though diuers of them were of the Greeke Church and Empyre They professed the Bishops of Rome to be the heads and cheife leaders of this vniuersal and visible Catholike Church as before hath byn shewed by the example of Gratian ValeÌ„tiniaÌ„ Theodosius to Pope Damasus of Arcadius Honorius Theodosius the second S. Augustine Pope Innocentius primus and of Iustinian to Pope Iohn the first and consequeÌ„tlie they pronounced for heretikes all those that did rise vp apart vnder particuler Authors differing in opinions from this vniuersal church as Arrians Donatists Montanists and the like This vniuersal visible and external Church hath endured euer since vnder Popes and Emperors and other gouernors of Christianitie vntil the tyme of Pope Leo the tenth and his successors and of Emperors Ferdinand Charles the fifth Maximilian and their followers when Luther began to brake out from that Church and against that Church and others following his example since that tyme. Now then I would aske by what equity or reason this later brood comming forth of this Church and rebelling against it can cal those men heretikes that remayned in the fayth of the foresaid Church and moreouer wil say that they must be punished by the same lawes that the foresaid Catholike Emperors made against those that impugned that Churche This I say I would haue our new Oedipus to answere and in the meane space the discrete reader may consider how it can be answered by him so blush for him that hath not byn ashamed to bring in so cleare a conuiction against himselfe One onely sillie shift or pettie cauil this minister perhaps may run vnto as dyuers of his fellowes are wont with a brasen affirming that the visible Catholike and Roman Church when Luther began was not the same that it was when those Emperors made those lawes but theÌ„ I would aske him when it changed and how and by what meanes so great a body so generally planted so strengthened and fortifyed not only by Gods spirite but also by learned men Doctors Councels in euery age could come to be changed and perish without testimony of any one wryter or historiographer without noyse coÌ„tention or contradiction of any The Emperors are knowne that liued and raigned in this meane space and except two or 3. as Leo the third called Isaurus and his sonne Constantine the fifth surnamed Capronius which fel into heresyes and were noted and condemned by the same Churche all the rest liued and dyed in one Religion of their ancestors The Popes also from Ioannes primus before mentyoned to whom Iustinian the Emperor wrote his decree vnto Leo decimus wheÌ„ Luther begaÌ„ne are in nuÌ„ber about 17c all of one religion nor can it be shewed that any one Pope impugned his predecessor in matters of fayth This demonstration is as cleare then as that 3. and 4. do make 7. for when Luther and Lutherans began their new sects A most â—leere palpable demoÌ„stration our Churche was held for the only Catholike and true Churche of christendome and so did both Luther Zuinglius and Caluin hold it also before they fel when the one was a Fryer the other two Priests and all three said Masse how then by their falling from it the said church should be made no church and their new congregations to be the only true Cathol Church and that they should come now to-call themselues Catholikes and vs heretikes and that we should be punished for heretikes by the former Imperial lawes made against themselues and their lyke this I say is a mysterie and metamorphosis that passeth the reach of all sober men and none but mad heads can eyther say it or beleeue it for that by the same argument may English Puritanes at this day which is a yonger brood of protestaÌ„ts as yow know in our country taking some port or towne in England fortifying themselues therin cal Parlament Protestants to account saying as they do that they are the elder church and that they wil punish parlament Protestants with the same Parlament lawes which Protestants made of purpose to punish them But I am ouerlong in a matter so cleare and therfore I craue pardon of thee good reader and wil here end and so much the rather for that I am to handle this poynt more at large afterward against O. E. in his new chalenge to wit who be heretikes and who be not for that he wil needs take vpon him to defend this mad desperate paradox that papists be heretikes protestants Catholikes but I think we shal shake him out of his clouts when he cometh to that combat
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
exaÌ„ples of pardons abused by Catholyks as S.F. alleageth and both of them false with a notorious imposture about the poysoning of K. Iohn Cap. 15. The speech of the Warder is defended where he calleth the way of saluation by only faith the coÌ„mon cart-way of protestaÌ„ts The truth of which doctrine is examined c. 16. The warning and admonition about this second Encounter first to S. F. Hastings then to O.E. his chaplain and champion Cap. 17. An addition by the publisher of this book wherin he sheweth first a Reason why these two EncouÌ„ters go alone then the dâ—fference he findeth in the wryters and their wrytings thirdly how a man may vse this which heer is sayd to the decisioÌ„ of any coÌ„trouersy of our tyme. Cap. 18. THE SECOND TABLE OF THE CHEIF CONTROVERSIES HANDLED IN THESE two Encounters In the first Encounter WHo are properly Catholyks and who heretyks by the old lawes of Cath. Christian Emperors and whether the lawes made against heretyks by these Emperors do touch protestants or Papists at this day in England annotat vpon the epist. of O.E. cap. 2. num 2. How a man may make a most cleere and euident deduction of Cath. Religion by the forsaid Emperial lawes if no other proof were and whether euer any Christian were punishable before our tymes for sticking to the Pope of Rome in Religion ibid. num 12.13.27.28 c. How old Christian Emperors did promulgate lawes about Religion against the transgressors therof how different a thing it was from that which ProtestaÌ„t Princes are taught to do at this day Ibid. What was the old rule of faith so much esteemed and talked of amoÌ„g the auncieÌ„t fathers how Cathol heretyks may easily euidently be tryed by thesame Cap. 15. Whether the English-parlament rule of faith set downe by O.E. be sufficient to discerne Catholyks from heretiks and whether a paâ—lament can make any rule of faith Cap. 16. num 1.2 c. Whether Canonists do cal the Pope God or no and how false S. Francis and his Chaplayne are found in this point Cap. 2. 3. Enc. 2. cap. 3. num 10.11.12 c. In what sense a creature may be called God and how ConstaÌ„tine the great did cal Pope Siluester so Cap. 2. 3. What wonderful reuerend opinion the auncient Fathers had of the high and diuine power giuen to Priests vpon earth especially to the highest Priest Ibid. Whether protestants haue vnion among them or any meane to make vnion or to find out certainty in matters of faith cap. 4. num 10. Item cap. 5.6.14.15.16.17 What Synods and Councels conferences conuenticles and other meetings protestants haue had throughout the world to procure some shew of vnion but eueâ— haue departed more disagreeing then before Cap. 4. num 12.13 Whether Lutherans and Caluinists may any way be said to be brethreÌ„ or of one Churche as both S. F. Iohn Fox do hold cap. 3 4.5 c. Whether Zwinglians and Caluinists and other Sacramentary Protestans be truly heretiks according to the iudgment and sentence of Martyn Luther and what blessing he giueth them as to bastard children ca. 5. n. 1.2.3 c. Whether English protestants and Puritans do agree in Iesus Christ crucified as S. F. saith or may be accompted true brethreÌ„ of one Churche ca. 6. 10 n. 8. c. 12. n. 6. Whether liberty for all vnlearned to read scriptures in English without difference or restraint be a blessing or a curse profitable or hurtful to the people ca. 8. Enc. 2. c. 3. Whether publyke seruice in English be a hurt or benefit to all sort of people cap. 8. num 7. cap. 9. Whether and how the merits of holy men may stand with merits satisfaction of Christ. Cap. 9. num 7.8.9 Whether aboundance of good works be a peculiar blessing of Protestants or no as S. F. defendeth cap. 10. n. 2.3 4.5 cap. 17. 18. Whether English nobility and commonalty be richer at this day then in old tyme by change of religion cap. 11. num 7.8.9 c. Whether it be a special grace and blessed nature of Protestants to persecute no man for religion Cap. 10. Whether freedome from exactions long peace great power in other countreys great welth of the land and more aboundant multiplying of children then before be special benefits and benedictions brought into England by change of Religion Cap. 11. Whether the vniuersal Churche may be said properly to teach vs or no which O. E. denieth Cap. 11. num 12. Whether the sacrifice of the masse be a new inuention or no and whether the number of 7. Sacraments were not agreed on before the late Councel of Trent as O.E. affirmeth Cap. 13. num 7.8.9.10 c. How farre Catholyke men do depeÌ„d of the Pope for the certainty of their religioÌ„ Ca. 16. n. 17.18.19 Enc. 2. c. 13. n. 16. Whether any one new or old heresy can be prooued truly to be in the doctrine of Papists at this day and how that there be many properly and formally held by Protestants Cap. 16. num 20. What differences of doctrine or opinions may be among Cath. men without heresy or breach of the Rule of faith according to the auncient Fathers Cap. 16. num 6. How coÌ„temptuously the Protestants do speak not only of the old Fathers but also of their owne wryters when they make against them Cap. 17. num 17. Whether temporal blessings entred into England and other countreys round about with the new ghospel and change of the old religion Cap. 12. 13.14 18. How many and how great Inconueniences in matters of State otherwyse haue ensued in England by change of Religion since K. Henry the 8. his departure from the vnion of the Roman Churche Cap. 17. 18. In the second Encounter Whether there were more darknesse ignoraÌ„ce in Q. Maryes tyme former ages then now whether Protestants be better learned then Catholyks Cap. 2. num 18.19 cap. 3.4 6. Whether fryars weâ—e braue lyars in K. Richard 2. his tyme as S.F. saith and what manner of fryars they were to wit corrupted by Wickliffe Cap. 2. num 11. Whether scripture were read generally in English in S. Bede his tyme or no Cap. 3. num 5.6 c. Whether Iohn Husse and Martyn Luther offered disputation to Catholyks or no and whether they were of one and thesame religion or that any of them did agree fully with S. Francis and O. E. in their religion now professed Cap. 3. 4. Whether the Catholyks or Hugonote ministers in the conference at Poysy in France anno Domini 1561. had the better Cap 4. num 14. Whether Catholyks did euer hold it for heresy to read scriptures in English or haue euer put men or women to death for that fact only Cap. 4. 5. 6. num 12. 15. cap. 9. num 3. Whether the auncient Fathers did vse to pray to Saints and
verity then in forrayne churches for this is the gay deuised title of this first benediction I could be content Vnity among forraine Protestants that our knight could shew vs yf not vnity in veâ—ity which is impossible yet vnity at least in falsity among his professors so as some name of vnity might be among them for in verity which is but one the Protestants cannot possibly be at vnity being so deuided and repugnant among themselues as presently I shal shew In falsytie also it is very hard for them to hould vnion Tertul. praeâ—script contra haeres for that as Tertullian sayth mendacâ—um mendacio difficulter cohaeret onely doth hardly stand with another ly in peace and concord for which cause he sheweth that all heresyes lightly haue fallen at bickering among themselues but in none more hath this byn obserued then in the newe gospel of our tyme brought in by Luther Zwinglius Oecolampadius Carolstadius Caâ—uyn Melanthon Beza and others the head doctors of Syr F. externe churches in Germany France Suizerland and other places which haue byn lightes and lanternes to ours of England and their first doctors and as it were Apostles who yet were no sooner knowen to the world but that they fel at mortal debate and dissention among themselues and so continued all their liues sealing it also wâ—th their deathes as by their owne workes testimonyes historyes appeareth For first who knoweth not that Luther begining his doctrine in the yeare of our Lord 1517. and going forward with adding â—leidaÌ„ Surius Lauater alij in hist. altering chopping and changing for 7. yeares togeather before it could be made any certaine body of doctryne Luthers beginning and going forvvards consisting in it selfe it fel out that with-in those 7. first yeares to wit an 1524. three of Luthers cheefest schollers Andreas Carolstadius Ioannes Oecolampadius and Vldericus Zuinglius the first and last of the number Apostate priests the second a frier as Luther also had byn began the new sect of Sacramentaries quite opposite to Luther and within two yeares immediatly following the three named doctors Sacramentaries their deuisions profited so wel in new diuisions also among themselues as by Luthers owne testimony publikely giuen in a sermon after printed they were deuided into six seueral sects Luth. ser. de sacra Haga 〈◊〉 habit anno 1527. Yea the Lutheran preachers of Brema wryting not long after that againe to VVestphalus a great Superintendent in Saxony do soleÌ„nly auouch Concionat Bremens Ep. de Eucharist ad VVestphalum that there was inâ—â—nita penè opinionum apud Sacramentarios varietas an infinite variety of opinioÌ„s amongst the SacrameÌ„taries that denyed the Real presence in the Sacrament And did this dissention euer end think yow amongst these fellowes Genebr Suâ—ius hoc an No truly but rather encreased dayly euen vnto their deathes and after also for out of Luthers doctryne besides these Sacramentaries there arose in like maner the Anabaptists Sectaries sprong from Luther Svvinglius and Caluin anno 1527. as themselues glory taking occasion by his Epistle ad VValdenses where he sayth That it is better to leaue of baptisme altogeather then to baptise children that haue no fayth Whervpon they left of baptisme of infants and went forward in the rest of their heresyes euen against Luther himselfe at the last After this there sprong vp also out of the same sect of Luther the potent diuision of molles and rigidi Lutherani which endure with open emnity to this day as their bookes do testifie Rigid and soft LutheraÌ„s VVestphalus Illiricus and others of highe Saxony being the heads of the rigid faction who resemble our puritans in EnglaÌ„d that would haue nothing but Caluins pure prescription as these men would Luthers but on the other side Melanchton and his folowers founders of the softer partie would folow Luther by discretion taking so much as â—â—rued for their purpose and no more where vnto also do draw neere our Parlament Protestants in England as yow know who receaue Caluin with the limitations and restrictions which they thinke best that is nothing at all of his ecclesiastical plot of gouernment nor diuers poynts of his doctrine And thus much of Luthers owne sect But out of that of Vldericus Zuinglius father of the Sacramentaries issued other children not much different from the former for their dissention and disobedience both to father and mother Caluin Seruetus Valent Gentils to wit Iohn Caluin and Theodore Beza and from these againe departed into another faction other good fellowes as Michel Seruetus Vid. lib. Caluini de Act. Seruet libel Geneuae editum de act Valentin Iohn Caluins coleage whome they afterward burned at Geneua for denying the blessed Trinity and Valentinus Gentilis a new Arrian whose followers yet remayne though himselfe was burned also by other Protestants at Argentine With these ioyned Ioannes Paulus Alciatus Gribaldus and others which made afterward the sect of new Arrians and Trinitarians that yet remayne in Germany Poland and especially in Transiluania as their bookes do shew All these and many others not only Sectaryes but Arch-heretikes and heades of new sectes haue sprong vp out of the new gospel with-in these fourskore yeares and haue framed Churches and conuenticles to themselues in diuers contreyes all opposite and repugnant one to another and themselues also deuided amoÌ„gst themselues though at the bâ—â—ginning all proceeded of one only diuision from Catholike vnion raysed by Luther So as we Catholikes may wel insult and rightly say of them as S. Augustine said to Parmenian Aug. contra Parm. lib. 1. cap 4. multa frusta de isto frasto per totam Africam facta sunt sic sic necesse est vt minutatim secti conscissique dispereant qui tumorem animositatis suae sanctissimo Catholicae pacis vinculo praetulerunt Many peeces are already made throughout Africa of this one peece or diuision wherwith yow began so so is it necessary that they should perish by diuision and renting into most smal peeces who haue preferred the pride or swelling of their owne animosity before the most holy band of Catholike peace and vnitie Thus saith this holy Father neither is there any hope or meane to reconcile these parties togeather as in the Ward-word I affirmed here wil prooue for that the scriptures which are the only pretented meanes admitted by them No meanes of vnion amongst Protestantes see of this morâ— infra cap. 14. 15. euery party pleadeth for himselfe with such obstinacy in his owne sense as no iudge being acknowledged it is vnpossible to come to any determination And as for Synodes councels wheron old fathers rested much for decision of controuersies these men laugh at them thoughe yet at last pressed by necessity and much wearied with continual wrangling about scriptures diuers sects of our tymes for all it is impossible to draw togeather haue byn forced
we must obay kings whether they be good or bad Knokes appel fol. 26. they answere it is blasphemy so to say Againe when these obiect That God placed euil kinges and TyraÌ„ts sometymes to punish the people The others answere So he doth sometymes priuate men also to kill them Moreouer when they alleage S. Paule That he comandeth vs we should pray for princes â—uch de iure reg pag. â—7 1. Tim. 2. The other do answere we may punish theeues and pray for them also And when these reply that the same Apostle commaundeth expresly to be obedient to such a prince 1. Tim. 3. They answere Buch. Ibid. Pag. 50. That Paul wrote this in the infancy of the Churche but if he liued now he would say otherwise except he would dissent from himselfe Ibid. fol. 56.57 I leaue much more that might be alleaged to this effect And all this and much more is testified also by a brother of their owne of the softer sort in a book printed at London by publike authority in the yeare 1593. by Iohn wolfe the title wherof was Dangerous positions c. with this posy adioyned vnto it out of the epistle of S. Iude They despise gouernment and speake euil of them that are in authority And hauing geuen testimony to this which I haue cyted much more he giueth his censure of others also of the same profession beyond the sea Lib. 1. Pa. 12. This new diuinity sayth he of dealing thus with Princes is not only held by Knockes and Bucchanan alone that are Scots but generally for ought I can learne by most of the cheefe consistorians beyond the seas being of the Geneuian humor as Caluyn Beza Hotâ—maÌ„ c. And the same wryter in his second booke afterward doth shew at large how that M â— Goodman M r. Whittingham and other English Protestants that fled to Geneua in Q. Maries dayes haue left wrytten the same farre worse positions against the authority of princes as in their bookes and in the foresaid collection of this author may be read Here then these matters being so and of so great waight and the contradiction being open and notorious concerning princely authority and obedience thervnto belonging what wil our knight say here or how wil he defend vnity in verity to be amoÌ„g his brethreÌ„ in this so principal capital a poynt or how wil he satisfie her Maiestie herâ—n after all his faire speech for he doth not deny the PuritaÌ„s to be his brethren as O. E. doth afterward but rather defendeth them with main and might as after yow shal heare But if we leaue the Prince and come to Bishops which is the second principal member of their churche and body their disagreement is much more notorious then in the former For as the protestant speaketh honorably of them so doth the Puritan quite contrary calling them Dangerous posit lib. 20. cap. 12. the greatest and most pestilent enimyes that the state of England hath vnlawful false bastardly gouernours of the churche thrust in by ordenance of the diuel petty antechrists cogging cosening knaues profane paltery pernicious pestilent Prelates in respect of their places enymyes of God their calling meere Antichristian c. And this for their bishops and cheefe pastors whome they ought to presume according to S. Paules speech to be put ouer them yf any be by the holy Ghost Caluinian contradictioÌ„ about the Bish. cheefe Pastors Act. 20. But yf they be enymies of God cogging knaues petty Antichrists and ordayned by the diuel himselfe as these their owne children and brethren say and sweare then are English protestants wel directed by them and to a good end wil they come But let vs heare what they say of their immediate pastors and teachers I meane their ministers and present cleargie Our supposed ministers say they are a multitude of desperate and forlorne Atheists Ibid cap. 13. Of their ministers Ibid. cap. 11. accursed vncircumcised and murthering generation The cleargy is endighted as the followers of Antichrist they are wolues it is a Sinagoge of Sathan their only endeauour how to preueÌ„t Christ they are knowne to be enimyes vnto all syncerity Posir ibid. li. 2. cap. 4. c. And in another place Right puissant poysoned persecuting and terrible priests The holy league of subscripsion the crue of monstrous and vngodly wretches horned masters of the conspiration house Antichristian swynish rabble the conuocation of diuels vnder Belzabub of Canterbury cheeâ—e of diuels c. Thus of them And concerning the whole gouernment face Ibid. cap. 4. and corps of the Churche of England they say Antichrist raigneth amongst vs the established gouernment of the Churche is treaterous against the Maiestie of Iesus Christ it giueth leaue to a man to be any thing but a sound Christian c. And this of their whole Churche parts and pastors therof But I let passe what these fellowes say wryte of her Maiestie About the Q councel and parlament head of their Churche denying wholy her ecclesiastical authority and subiecting her to their pryuate excommunications when they please Dang posiâ— lib. â— c. Of the Lords of her priuy Counsel also charging them not to deale in matters ecclesiastical Of the Parlament in like maner and lawes made therby which in EnglaÌ„d is the highest court saying in particular therof Ibid. lib. 2. cap. 1. that as great indignity is offred vnto Iesus Christ in committing his English Churche vnto the gouernment of the common lawes as for hirâ—lings vnder any great king to commit his beloued spouse vnto the direction of the mistresse of the stewes c. Finally of their common book of seruice and administration of Sacraments established by Parlament The commâ—Ì„ book of Protestants wherin by name Sir F. in this reply braggeth so confidently VVast Pag. 12. that their is so great vnity amongst them these his brethren wryte thus Dang posit lib. 2. cap. 9. There prescript forme of seruice is ful of corruption in all the order of their seruice there is no edification but confusion The Sacraments are wickedly mangled and prophaned they eate not the Lords supper but play a pagent of their owne to blynd the people their publike baptisme is ful of childish and superstitious toâ—es c. All these fights warres and dissentions in most principal points of their religion are at this day in England betwene ridged or strayt Caluinists commonly called Puritans and the softer â—ort of the same Caluinian sect who are distinguished from the others by the name of moderate Protestants that do follow for their rule of faith and religion the prescript of Parlament and her Ma ties proceedings But now besides this contrariety of positions there is yet another dissention among these brethren more important then all the rest which is their disagreing and capital enimity about the interpretation of Scriptures VVarre in expounding scriptures wherunto
these that follow The summe of all that hath byn said about blessings and cursings First in spiritual affayres to haue no certayntie of religion at all as hath byn proued no stay no foundation no final rule to try or iudge to determin but onlie euery maÌ„s owne priuate head and fancie wrangling and iangling without end for that it is without iudge or meanes to make an end nouelties without number libertie of lyfe without feare or force of ecclesiastical discipline to restrayne it And then in teÌ„poral matters the blessings are such as haue byn discouered our realme deuided shiuered in a thousand peeces our Princesse in yeares without children or hope of any our crowne without succession our old frends allies made our enemyes our new frends vncertayne our owne flesh and countrymen most pittifullie deuided within their owne bowels and most miserably tossed and tormoyled both abroad and at home abroad and in other couÌ„tryes with prisons yroÌ„s chaynes gallyes and other afflictions euen to death it selfe for being protestants pyrates spyes practisers or other such imputations incident to enemyes At home afflicted with no lesse persecutions of our owne Magistrats for being Catholikes or deemed to be such So as I would fayne know who they are in our litle Iland that feele these innumerable benefits blessings by change of religion which this gentleman talketh of seing there are verie fewe eyther of one religion or other that tast not of the miseries wherof I haue spoken eyther in themselues their frends children seruants kynsfolkes goods honors or otherwise and most of al the realme and commoÌ„ wealth it selfe c. To all this speach and reason of the warder Syr F. answereth onlie in foure or fiue lynes thus Pag. 2â— Vayne and ydle ansvvering As for your building of Castels in the Ayre by supposal oâ— blessings that might probably haue ensued if religion had not byn altered because I meane not to take the paynes to follow yow in your extrauagant discourses and because they are indeed nothing but the imaginations of an ydle brayne I leaue them to M r. Moores Fictio Vtopica Who could answere with fewer words or lesse matter so large important a discourse then Syr F. doth heere or who could go further â—rom the purpose then he that leaueth out the substance of all his aduersaries allegation and entertayneth himselfe in tryfles of his owne deuising Let the reader iudge whether his answere be rightlie termed a wastword or no. I must needs conclude as S. Augustine did against Iulian with this interrogation Aug. lib. 1. contra Iulianum cap. 1. Quaero abs te cur libâ—o meo saltem spetie tenus te respondisse glorieris cum libri mei partem nec quartam reprehendendo tetigeâ—is eosque saltus in praetereundis meis disputationibus feceris quasi omnino despâ—rares veriusque operis mei scilicet tui quenquam esse posse lectorem qui ista deprehenderet I aske of yow Syr F. as good a disputer or shifter rather as was Iulian how yow can glorie to haue answered my former book wheras yow haue not so much as touched the fourth parte therof and haue made such leapes in passing ouer my arguments disputatioÌ„s as though yow dispayred that any reader would view both workes and fynd out your falshood in this behalfe VVHAT O. E. ANSVVEreth to the former chapter about diuision and vncertainty in religion CAP. XV. I HAVE signifyed vnto thee gentle reader before that where the knight fynding matters somwhat hard or vneasie to answere seeketh now and then with some regard of honor and reputation to step ouer without stumbling and to salue some matters by smothe sylence there bold bayard the minister rushing in with more resolution masking himselfe with the vizard of two vowels O. E. which may stand perhaps in his cypher for Owles Eyes to looke thorough and to see and not be seene agayne layeth on load both in babling and scoulding saying somwhat to euery thing though nothing in deed to all and folowing the threed of my speach and narration he picketh quarrels to whatsoeuer seemeth most capable of cauillation and this appeareth to be his cheifely entended exployt in this his enterprise of answering the proofe shal be seene by experience And first of all wheras the warder obiecteth diuision disvnion and disagreement to him and his as you haue heard and this not onlie from Catholikes but also from their owne ghospellers Pag. 4. as from the Lutheranes in Germany and Denmarke to vse the warders owne wordes from Zwinglians in Zuitzerland from Caluinists in Geneua France Holland and Scotland from Puritanes Brownists and other sects at home that impugne Protestants daylie of the parlament religion This fellow denyeth first verie flatlie Pag. 19. that there is any diuision among them at all And heere he wynneth the first garland of impudencie as yow see but look vpon an other more cleare then this Great impudency of O. E. Secondly sayth he the Churches of Zwitzerland Germany France England do neyther hold of Zuinglius Caluyn nor Luther but of Christ Iesus and of his Apostles and Prophets Lo reader how quicklie this matter 〈◊〉 dispatched and how soone disagreement 〈◊〉 made betweene them see the 4.5 and 6. former chapters for tryal of this poynt and note by the way that of purpose he leaueth out heere the Puritanes espetialie mentyoned by the warder for that he hauing written so earnestlie against them a litle before caÌ„not with his honour now make attonemeÌ„t with them as he doth with the Lutheranes of Germany Zuinglians of Switzerland and Caluinists of France vniting them all in one Churche and in the true doctryne of Iesus Christ and consequentlie also with himselfe and his Churche of England according to the rule principle Quae conueniunt in aliquo tertio inter se etâ—an conueniunt those things that agree in a thirdâ— agree also betweene themselues which he expoundeth also presentlie after by the wordeâ— next folowing As â—or our selues sayth he al of vs professe the doctryne of Christ Iesus Pag 19. according to that rule that was established by common consâ—â—â— of the Churche of England from which if any digresse he is no more to be accounted of our society thâ—â— the Papists c. Marke heere good reader the guyddy head of this gagling goose first he ioyneth together in the true doctryne of Iesus Christ Most foolish inconstancy and contradiction to himselfe and of his Apostles and prophets as wel all Lutherans and Zuinglians as also all kynde of Caluinists and consequently Puritanes whome yet presentlie he cutteth oâ— agayne Pag. 17. no less then Papists and those of the Popes retinue whom before he said to be no Christians nor to hold any one article a right of christian fayth if they do digresse in any thing from the rule of fayth established by common consent of the Churche of England which all doe
and consequentlie he doth as much as if with one hand he should embrace lul and coople together both Lutherans Zuinglians and Puritanes acknowledging them for his deare and tender brethren and with the other should beat them of detest them as enemyes and publike heretikes for so he doth in effect seing it is euident that neyther the sectaryes of LutheraÌ„s Zuinglians or Puritan-Caluinists of Geneua France ScotlaÌ„d HollaÌ„d or England do agree which O. E. his rule of fayth here mentioned to wit the rule established by common consent at this day in the Churche of England And this is euidentlie and aboundantly proued by their owne books and sayings before recyted in the 4.5.6 and sequeÌ„t chapters of this Encounter But for that our Minister maketh mention heere of a certayne rule of fayth wherby he and his are directed and others that digresse from the same are to be reiected from their communion and societie I meane to examine â—he same brieflie in this place and to see what 〈◊〉 is And first of all that there is and must be â—ome certayne rule among Christians That their is some certayne rule of fayth as vvel hovv to beleeue as also vvherby to interpret scriptures wherby â—o know and stay their fayth and to discerne â—ew Catholykes from heretykes is most â—â—ident both by reason it selfe and by the authoritie of the verie first founders of our religion who often do make mention and admonish vs therof as S. Paul to the Corinthians secundum regulam nostram 2. Cor. 10. according to our rulâ— and to the Philippenses in eadeÌ„ permaneamus regula let vs persist in the same rule And to the Gallatians Phil. 3. quicúnque hanc regulam secuâ—â— fuerâ—â—t pax super illos whosoeuer shal follow this rule of fayth Gal. 6. peace vpon them and other such places Rom. 12. as namely to the Romanes Prophetia secundum rationem fidei prophesy by which iâ— vnderstood heere principallie interpretatioâ— of scriptures according to the rule or analogie oâ— fayth for so is the greek word By all which places is manifest that there iâ— a certayne publike rule of fayth and was eueâ— among the Apostles them-selues and thesamâ— continued afterward by all the Fathers oâ— euery age wherby it was easye to distinguiâ—â— betweene such as were Orthodoxi or Catholykes and others that were new fangled oâ— wrangling people that would follow no rulâ— but their owne head and fancyes of whiâ—â— rule make mention also in the primitiâ—â— Churche Ignatius after the Apostles epist. adâ—â—â—gnetianos Iustinus Apol 2. pro Christianis Irenaeus 〈◊〉 1. cap. 1. 2. Clemens lib. 4. stromatum aduersus 〈◊〉 reses Tertullianus lib. de velandis virginibus 〈◊〉 Alexandrinus as S. Basil cyteth him lib. de spiriâ—â— cap. 29. and many other Fathers commendiâ—â— highlie and inculcating often the obseruatiâ—â— of this rule as wel for beliefe as also for inteâ—â—pretation of Scriptures but especiallie to câ—â—â—cerne heretikes who to vse these Fathers owne words do no sooner begin to pratle but that by digressing from this rule do bewray them-selues and shew what they are and thus far that there is a rule which our enemies cannot deny But now what that rule is it may be that our Minister and I shal not so soone agree VVhat the rule of faith is or vvas in old tyme. but yet first of all that it cannot be onlie Scripture is euident by his owne speach and confession in this place Pag 19. where he sayth that his people of England do professe the Doctrine of Christ Iesus according to that rule that was established by common consent of the Churche of England from which rule sayth he if any digresse they are none of our societie â—o more then Papists By which words is euident that his rule consisteth of the consent and establishment of certayne men in England what to belieue which is a different matter from scriptures though they wil say perhaps that in this establishment they folowed Scriptures as wil also the Puritanes and others that heere are excluded by this established rule And besyds this confession of O. E. himselfe there are many other conuincing reasons that this rule named by the Apostles was not â—cripture and among other this that eyther â—one or very litle of the newe Testament was written when this rule of fayth was published â—or no vse and practise among Christians as â—ppeareth by the often repetition therof made â—y the same Apostles afterward when they â—ame to write Wel then not to be longer for so much as this rule could not be onlie scripture the best way perhaps to vnderstaÌ„d what it was and is at this day wil be to heare some of the ancieÌ„t Fathers describe the same Holy Ignatius writing to the same Churche that S. Paul did a litle before cyted to wit Phil. 3. Igâ— â— epist. 〈◊〉 Philippenses to the Philippenses sayth id ipsum dicatis omnes idem sentientes in hoc ipso fidei regulas praeceptáque seruaui sicut Paulus erudâ—ens nâ—s dicit Do yow say and teach the selfe same and be of one iudgment for by this haue I obserued the rules of fayth as Paul instructing vs sayd Lo heere the iudgment of Ignatius who affirmeth him-selfe to haue obserued the rule of fayth for that he said and taught that which all said and taught and thought that which all thought and folowed no singularitie eyther of his owne or others Irenaeus calleth this rule the order of traditioâ— from the Apostles tyme to his Iren. aduers. haeres lib. 2. cap 3 4. The great estimation of â—he old rule of faith by which he sayth that all heretikes are conuinced in such sorte that Catholykes shut vp their eares as soone as they heare them speake contrarie to the said rule of vniuersal fayth deliuered by tradition from age to age Iren. ibid. Traditionem Apostolorum fayth he in toto mundo manifestatam in omni Ecclesia adeâ—â— perspicere omnibus qui vera velint audire c. We may see the tradition of the Apostles in euery Churche if we wil heare the truth and we can number those Bishops that were instituted by the Apostles and their successors vnto our dayes who taught not that which these heretikes dreame c. Thus said he accompting this rule to be the whole tradition of our Ancestors coÌ„ming downe by succession of Bishops and Pastors Terâ— lib. de praescript contr haeret cap. 27. To whom agreeth Tertullian presentlie after him calling this rule the fulnesse of the Apostles preaching si ergo incredibile est sayth he ignorasse Apostolos plenitudinem praedicationis vel omnem ordinem regulae omnibus non edidisse c. if it be incredible that the Apostles did not know the fulnes of the preaching of the ghospel or that they did not deliuer vnto all Christians all the order of the rule of beliefe c. And the same man in an other place Tert.
te prolatam in qua non author esse debes sed custos non institutor sed sectator non ducens sed sequens c. This pawne or pledge is a thing geuen yow in credit and not inuented by yow a thing which yow haue receyued and not deuised a matter not of wit but of doctrine not of pryuate vsurpation but of publyke tradition a thing brought downe vnto yow not brought forth first by yow a thing wherof yow must not be author but keep only not the fownder but a follower not a leader but one that is led Thus sayth he of the rule of faith in his tyme which rule also serueth vs no lesse at this day against all sorte of protestants then it did them at that tyme against their aduersaryes but rather much more for that our prescription of this rule is by many hundred yeares elder then theirs was and so this shal suffise about this matter of the Ecclesiastical rule of fayth what yt was and what the auncient Fathers did thinke and esteeme therof and now we wil examine a litle what styrre the minister maketh about his goodly rule of the present particular Churche of England OF THE ENGLISH rule of beliefe set downe by O. E. And what substaÌ„ce or certaintie it hath how they doo vse it for excluding Puritanes other Protostantes and of diuers shameful shifts of O. E. CAP. XVI NOTHING is more true in that kynd then the saying of the philosopher A â—ift lib. 1. Phis. Contraria iuxta se posita clarius elucescunt That contraryes being layd togeather do make each other better seene and vnderstood as a ragged garment layd by another that is fayre and pretious maketh the ragges and patches more euident and contemtible and euen so this ridiculous new deuised rule of O. E. if we compare it with the former auncient rule commended vnto vs by the old holie fathers we shal see more perspicuously the vanitie therof for that he sayth Pag. 19. As for our selues that is the Protestants of England all of vs professe the doctrine of Iesus Christ according to that rule that was established by the common consent of England and whosoeuer doth digresse from this is not of our societie c. But here I would aske him what rule this is and in what yeare it was established by whom and how many and what authoritie they had to establish or to make any new rule from the old receyued before in matters of religion See the statutis anno Henr. 8.25 c. 14. an 26. cap. 1. an 27. c. 15 19. an 31. ca. 14. an 34. 35. cap 1. for yf he speake of K. Henry the 8. his dayes when the first chaunges beganne and when diuers new rules were set downe in parlament with this expresse commendation that they were taken out of the pure and syncere only woord of God I doo not think that O. E. wil admit them or stand vnto them though Iohn Fox do hold all that tyme of K. Henrie his mutations after his breach with the Churche of Rome for the tyme of the ghospel and so doth terme it euery where In K. Edward dayes also he being head of the Churche An 1. Ed c. 1.2 11. an 2. 3. cap. 1.21.23 though but 9. yeares old there was two or three new rules made and altered about matters of religion and their communion book all pretended out of the word of God with reuocation of that which K. Henry the Father and his Parlaments out of the same woord had appoynted before which rule also vnder K. Edward I do not know whether our ProtestaÌ„ts wil allow in all poyntes now but sure I am our Puritanes do not nor wil not as appeareth by theire owne bookes what assurance then is there in this mutable and controuerted rule of so fewe yeares in age But the most important question is who and what men and by what authoritie they made this rule The Warder knew no other when he writ but the Lords of the ParlameÌ„t and so called it parlament religion wherwith O. E. is very angry Pag. 19. and sayth where he calleth our religion parlament religion he speaketh like himselfe that is falsly and slaunderously for albeit the same be receyued by authoritie of the Prince state yet is it Christs reâ—igion and not the Princes Soone spoken but how doth he proue it here is styl that old shifte of petiâ—io principij hissed out by learned men which consisteth in setting downe that for a principle which most needeth proof as heere where our minister wil needs haue his religion to be Christs religion whether we wil or no and that it was but receyued and promulgated only by the parlament but then must I aske him agayne what authoritie besydes the parlament hath determyned it to be Christs religion as also that the Puritans religion is not Christs religion notwithstanding they pretend Christ and his Apostles no lesse then doth the protestant and then if we fynd that the only authoritie that defyneth this matter is the Parlament allowing the one and condemning the other for that scriptures of themselues can not do it quia actiones sunt suppositorum as a litle after he vrgeth and then must needs the credit truth of English religion depend of the parlament and therof worthelie be called Parlament religion But harken good reader what an example he hath found to auoyd An example making against himself that his religion may not be called Parlament religion The Emperors Gratian Valentinian and Theodâ—sius decreed sayth he that all people of their gouernment should hold the doctryne of Peter the Apostle Pag. 19. taught by Damasus bishop of Rome and Peter bishop of â—lexandria that they should beleeue one God and three persons yet I hope this Noddy wil not cal the fayth of the Trinitie an imperial fayth See this haÌ„dled more largely before in the annâ—t vpon the letter of O. â— to the reader c. Yes surelie Syr Noddy-maker I would cal and proue it so if the case were like that is if these three Emperors had determined this fayth as of theÌ„selues and by their imperial authoritie and that it had byn a different beliefe from the rule of fayth receyued before throughout Christendome as your parlament religioÌ„ was and is hauing no other ecclesiastical Authoritie â—or her establishment but only the authoritie of your Prince and parlament which defyned it to be trew religion and coÌ„forme to the word of God and determined that the other which was there before in vse to wit the Catholike to be opposite and contrarie to thesaid word and therfore to be abolished so as the allowance of the one and reprobation of the other proceeded from the parlament But the proceeding of the foresaid three Emperors in this their alleaged decree was farre otherwise which O.E. if he had had any more wit then a Noddy would neuer
and other like of which 〈◊〉 of diuersities Tertullian spake a litle beâ—ore 〈◊〉 he said quaeramus à nostris Tâ—â—ul cap. pâ—â—ced quae salua fidei regâ—â—â— quaestionem possâ—nt deuenire Let vs cal in questiâ—â— or dispute among our selues and with 〈◊〉 owne men to wit Catholykes such poâ—â— of religion as may come in controuersie wiâ—â—out breach oâ— the integritie of the rule of fayth and with this only dâ—stinction of old Tertullian of the different disputing among Catholykes and heretikes the one without touching the â—ntegritie of the rule of fayth the other directlie opposite against that integritie by this onlie I say all the vaine prating and babling of our aduersaries that fil vp leaues with differences among our schoolemen is quite cut of and they like barking dogs that haue weâ—yed them-selues in vayne may shake their â—ares and returne to ly downe in their keâ—els againe vntil an other fit of bawling be â—ffred and he that wil see an other like bawâ—â—ng whelp to O. E. repealed by a vauÌ„t-curre â—â—d his chaps shut vp with the verie same diâ—â—â—nction Aug. lib. 1. coÌ„tra Iulian. cap. 2. let him read S. Augustine against Iulian 〈◊〉 Pelagian obiecting the same that O.E. doth â—gainst Catholykes Alia sunt sayth S. Augustine â—uibus inter se aliquando etiam doctissimi atque opâ—ae regulae Catholicae defensores salua fidei compage 〈◊〉 consonant VVhat differences ther may be among catholikes Salua fidei regula alius alio de vna re melius aliquid 〈◊〉 verius hoc autem vnde nunc agimus ad ipsa 〈◊〉 pertinet fundamenta There are other poynts â—â—ong Catholykes in which sometymes the â—ost learned and best defenders of the Caâ—â—olyke rule of fayth do disagree among theÌ„â—â—â—ues and one doth say better and more truly â—â—â—haps then an other of the selfe same thing 〈◊〉 yet all without breach of the common â—â—ke of fayth but this whereof now we treat â—gainst this heretyke Iulian perteyneth to 〈◊〉 very foundation of our fayth Thus sayth he and thus say we and 〈◊〉 further to O. E. that which foloweth in Sâ— Augustine against Iulian that he change 〈◊〉 erroneous and furious mynd in accusing many graue Fathers Bishops and Pastors 〈◊〉 the whole visible churche of that opprobrioâ— shame whâ—ch is proper only to heretyks wit of diuision and dissention among themselues in matters of fayth To the other iest boyery that foloweâ— wherin he sayth that Catholyke men canâ— receyue their fayth froÌ„ the vniuersal church quia actiones sunt suppositorum I might answeâ— this sentence quia omnia plena sunt â—â—ultorum 〈◊〉 otherwise he pretending to make his aduâ—â—sarie a noddy would neuer haue brouâ—â—â— foorth so noddilike an aâ—gument therby to iâ—crease the number of noddyes with additiâ—â— of his owne person for who wil not 〈◊〉 him a notorious Noddy who selling him-seâ—â—â— for a doughtie doctor VVhether the vniuersal Churche may be said to teach or no. deane of a Churchâ— vnderstandeth not a proposition in Logiâ—â—â— thereâ—ore for his instruction I wil send hâ—â— to no higher a treatise for this tyme therâ— the introduction of Logique or summâ— written by Toletus Tolet. in trod ad dialect lib. 1. c. â—3 where among other â—â—uisions of terminus singularis he shal fynd thâ— Collectiuus autem terminus est qui tantum pluraâ—â— iuncta significat vt Roma c This I shal expoâ—â— after when I shal shew that this definition Terminus ouerthroweth his obiection coâ—â—sequentlie that he is ignorant in ipsis termiâ—â—â— artis in the very termes of logique it selfe But yet in the meane space I deny not but that the said proposition actiones sunt suppositoruÌ„ is true in it selfe Arist. lib. 1. Metaph. c. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and founded in Aristotles Meâ— taphysikes though Aristotle haue not the word supposiâ—orum but singularâ—um as the greeke word importeth but all is one in our sense And further I grant that this proposition is vsed by many schoole doctors for better explication of dâ—uers highest mysteries of diuinitie and namelie of the blessed Trinitie incarnation of our Sauiour and others as appeareth in diuers places of S. Thomas D. Thom. com in lib. 1. Sent. dist 5 q. 1. art 2 lib. 3 dist 2. Idem part 1. q. 34. art 5. part 3. q. 19. art 1. though yet as it seemeth neuer read and much lesse vnderstood by this rude O. E. as may appeare by his foolish application therof in this place for that the meaning of this proposition according to Aristotle and schoolemen is that Actiones non sunt vniuersalium logicorum which are otherwise called vniuersalia in predicando such as are genus species and the like neyther yet are actiones vniuersalum in essendo as were those ideae platonicae nor yet paâ—tium conslituentium vel componentium but only singularium aut suppositorum this is Aristotles meaning when he sayth actiones sunt suppositorum but what is any of this to our question and speech of the vniuersal Christian Churche and her teaching which Churche though in our speach she be called vniuersal collectiue for that she coÌ„teyneth all Catholykes yet is she reipsa and in her selfe truly and properlie indiuiduum and not vniuersale logicum vel platenicum but only as is said vniuersale collectiuum defined before by Tolâ—tus when he sayth Terminus singularis collectiuus est qui tantum plura coniunctè significat which signifieth the comprehension of many in it self as Rome London parlament cittye churche congregation and the like which according to logique are properlie particuler indiuiduals and not vniuersals though they conteyne ech of them a multitude in them and in that sense may be called vniuersals as the whole and vniuersal city parlament common wealth c. and they haue this nature that the actions of particulars conteyned in them and authorized by the whole do stand for the whole and are said to be of the whole as the acts of Parlament in England though they be done be particular men and often tymes not by all yet are they not called the actes of particular men but of the whole parlament and the like of the actes of the cittie or common wealth And further when such an act is deliuered to me by a particular man not in his owne name Actes of particular men attributed to the vvhole body nor as his owne acte or decree but as the act of the Parlament and in name therof I may wel say that the Parlament deliuereth me the same which I may also say when the cittie of London the chaÌ„cerie the kings bench the court of wardes or other coÌ„mon bodyes maketh out any order though it be deliuered by particuler meÌ„ yet is it the act of the whole vniuersal body and so called and accounted and not of the particuler men that deliuer or execute the same which being vnderstood let vs now come co the
and for â—â—ntinuance of royal issue in thesame then â—â—otestants are wont to doe as by the exaÌ„ples â—â—eadged by the Warder is euident And to this the minister saith nothing at 〈◊〉 4 Inconuenience Succession not established as neyther to the fourth about establishâ—ent of succession which he saith could not â—â—ue byn but by allowance of the Pope and â—â—at this had byn dishonorable to her Ma tie â—â—d intollerable to the state to bring so great a 〈◊〉 to submit her-selfe to so base a slaue marke â—â—e impotent rayling of an abiect parasite Pag. 3◠〈◊〉 of him to receyue her right to the crowne And â—â—en he passeth further to the matter of state saying But let vs suppose her Ma tie should leaue 〈◊〉 issue behynd her is she the first that hath byn in 〈◊〉 case No S. Minister nor wil not be the last but what doth this remedy the inconuenieÌ„ce Heare him further Pag. Ibid. And is there noe remedy eytheâ— by lawes already prouided or by wise men to be deuisâ—â— but that we must needs fal by the eares togeather about this matter of succession This is 〈◊〉 supposition of their noddy our aduersary c. God graunt S. Minister he proue a noddâ— for his feare with-out fondation VVho is the noddy but hoâ— great a noddy yow are in the meane space 〈◊〉 setting so light by the matter and disputing 〈◊〉 fondly as yow do all men see But wheâ— yow ad further to make your aduesarâ— odious Pag. 22. that he percase desyreth some garboyle 〈◊〉 England to gratifie the Infanta the Spaniard wâ—â— slaue he is VVho are like to desyre more garboyles in England yf he be the man whome yoâ— would haue vs to weene yt is very wâ—â— knowne that he setteth lesse by the greate â—â— benefite or promotion that England or Spaiâ— ioyned togeather can giue him then yow 〈◊〉 by the least benefice of the diocesse wherâ—â— yow dwel and are a proling minister aâ—â— much more slaue were your to yow late 〈◊〉 the Eaâ—le of Essex running vp and downe 〈◊〉 by sea and land after him to gaine soâ—â— scrappes at his hands for your maintenancâ— and yow wife with her veluet hood thâ—â— this maÌ„ hath shewed him-selfe to the greatâ—â— Princes in Christendome with whome 〈◊〉 hath dealt in furderance of Cath. religion aâ—â— which of yow two hath desyred more gaâ—â—boyles in EnglaÌ„d eyther he by the lady Infanta or yow by your Lord Essex the euents haue shewed he being a man that cannot grow by garboyles and yow a broken compagnion that cannot wel remedy your needs but by innouations and with this I leaue yow and wil passe to the other foure inconueniences layd downe by the warder Fifthly sayth he yf religion in England had not byn changed 5 InconuenieÌ„ce vnion vvith Rome Sea Apostolyke we had had no breach with Rome nor consequently had the excommunication followed wherof so great noise hath byn made in the world abroad and so great trouble at home And what the vnion â—nd frendship of the Bishop of Rome may â—mport euen as a temporal Prince the effects â—hewed of late in France where especially â—y his endeauour and authority matters haue â—yn compounded that seemed very hard and â—esperate before not only betwene that King and his owne subiects but also beâ—wene that crowne and Spayne and the â—ates of Flaunders which without such an â—byter and vmpire would very hardly euer â—yn accomodated Sixtly England had continued in her ould â—ncient amity and leagues most honorable â—ith Spayne Burgundy 6 Auncient leagues with their deâ—â—ndants and consequently had auoyded all â—â—ese long and costly warres which by that â—eache we haue byn inforced to mainâ—â—yne with losse of so many worthie men â—â—d expence of so great treasure as easily may be imagined and the quarrel not yet ended 7 VVarres abroad Seauenthly so great bloody warres and tumults in Christian Kingdomes round about vs had neuer happened as before in part hath byn declared and euery man doth impute the principal causes and motions therof vnto the diuersity of religion in England And lastly most doleful alâ—erations in our owne countrey had byn auoyded Damages receyued at home as the depriuation in one day of all the sacred order of Bishops in England with their perpetual imprisonment for that they would not subscribe to this vnfortunate chaunge of religion wrong out in parlament as al men know by the oddes only of one or two voyces of lay men The disgracing and abusing of so many noble houses with ouerthrow of others wherof let Norfolk Arundel Northumberland Oxford VVestmerland and Dacres giue testimonyâ— for of the rest I wil not make mention seing perhaps them-selues would be loath I should all which had passed otherwyse by probability if religion had not byn altered The continual and intollerable affliction also of sâ— many honorable and worshipful gentlemeâ— had neuer happened for perseuering in theâ—â— Fathers faith wherto our countrey was firâ—â— conuerted from infidelity without any otheâ— offence obiected or to be prooued againâ— them but only refusing to accoÌ„modate theâ— selues to this change The torturing hanginâ— and quatering of aboue a hundred Priests fâ—â— the same cause the most of them good gentlemen and youthes of rare wit learning and other parts which other common welthes would highly haue esteemed and so would ours too in tymes past and wil agayne in tyme to come when these blasts shal once be ouerblowen Thus farre the Warder All which poynts O. E. answereth with shifts and sleâ—ghts as the former and first to the fifth about breache with Rome he sayth VVhat more absurd theÌ„ to obiect the breache with Rome when we esteeme that to be one of the greatest blessings that euer happened to this land To the other point mentioned by the Warder of the late peace made in Fraunce betweene those Monarches by the Popes mediation the minister saith nothing for that came not to his purpose yet he telleth vs againe heere now that Henry the third late K. of France and the late Duke of Ferrara and other Princes of the Popes religion were not-with-standing that troubled by the Pope A wise argument as though there were noe other cause for which the Pope might fal out with any Prince or punish him but only for chauÌ„ge of religion But this is the manner of this maÌ„nes arguing and with these manner of elenches â—aralogismes and other deceytful shifts of â—ophistry this fellow and his companions deâ—eaue the simple To the sixt about old ancient amity and â—eagues with Spayne Burgundy he answereth â—â—us 6 InconuenieÌ„ce breach of ancient leagues and amity As if yt were not more hurtful to the Spaniard â— break with vs then for vs to break with the Spaniard This as yow see is answered more like a souldiar then a minister â—g 3â— The last two points are in effect denyed by him to wit that eyther the
poynts contayned in this matter the one we haue gotten that in some cases spiritual prelates though subiects in temporalityes may reprehend and resist yea chasten also by Ecclesiastical punishment their liege lords and temporal princes without being traytors for the same The second whether the examples be like we are to examine a litle in this place And first I would aske our minister that denyeth the fitnes of the examples The comparison of S. Thom vvith S. Ambrose Hillary and other fathers as also his master that chafeth at them what and where about were the foresayd Saints contentions with their temporal Princes were they not for the defence of the lawes of Christ and his Churche did not S. Iohn Baptist withstand Herod his temporal Lord to his face for breaking the lawes of wedlock and was not the strife of S. Ambrose with Valentinian his Emperour first for that he would not deliuer vp a Catholike Churche to the vse of Arrians as he and his mother had commaunded and secondly for that he would not giue vp the treasure and vessels of his Churche into the Emperors owne hands as he required Heare his owne testimony thereof S. Ambr. in orat in AuxoÌ„ de Basilicia traden Cum esset proposituÌ„ saith hee vt ecclesiae vasa iam traderemus c. when it was proposed vnto vs in the Emperours name that wee should deliuer him the vessel of our churche I gaue this answere If any thing of my owne were demaunded eyther land howse gold or siluer I would easely yeild vnto him any thing that were belonging vnto mee But from the Churche of God I told him that I could take nothing for that I had receyued it not to deliuer but to keep And that with this I had respect also of the Emperours saluation For that it was neyther expedient for mee to giue nor for him to receyue Accipiat ergo vocem liberi sacerdotis c. Let his Maiestie then receyue the word of a free priest if he wil haue care of his owne saluation let him cease to offer iniury to Christ. Lo here the answeare of an ecclesiastical Prelate but a temporal subiect to his highest Prince doth not this seeme to bee speach of some Catholyke Bishop to a Protestant Prince that would inuade Churche goods possessions against which poynt S. Ambrose was so resolute to stand as he sayth in the same place that yf sorce were vsed towards him his flesh might bee troubled but not his mynd and that he was readie yf the Emperour would vse his kingly authority in offring violence to stuffer that which belonged to a good Priest to beare And what doth this differ now from the cause of S. Tho. of Canterbury who stood vpon defence of his Ecclesiastical iurisdictioÌ„ against K. Henry his temporal Prince that vsurped the same Heare the words of S. Thomas himself vsed to K. Henry in a CouÌ„cel at Chynon in FraÌ„ce as D. Houeden sets them downe Rog. Houe in vit Henr. 2. pag. 285. Non deberetis Episcopis praecipere absoluere aliquem vel excommunicare trahere Clericos ad saecularia examina iudicare de decimis de ecclesits interdicere Episcopis ne tractent de â—ransgressione fidei vel Iuramenti c. Yow ought not to take vpon yow to commaund Bishops to absolue or excomunicate any man neyther to draw cleargie men to the examinatioÌ„s of seculars neyther to iudge of tythes or of churches or to forbid Bishopâ— to treat of transgressioÌ„s against faith or against oathes broaken or the like c. Doe not wee seme to heare in this place the voice of S. Ihon Baptist to his K. Herod It is not lawful for the to haue the wyfe of thy brother S. Marc. 1â— Or is not this agreable to the speach of S. Ambrose to Valentinian that he could not force him to deliuer any churche or holy vessels thereof and that he would dy in that quarrel against him But let vs heare an other controuersy of his with another Emperour more deuout religious then the former The contention of S. Ambrose vvith Theodosius the Emperor to wit Theodosius the great in Millain for that he would not do publike pennance prescribed by this holy B. to him for the excesse in punishing those of Thessalonica and had not this beene rebellioÌ„ and treason by Protestants law for a priest to driue his king and Emperour that by their diuinity was head of their churche to publike penance and to go out of his Churche as S. Ambose did compel Theodosius to go out of the churche of Millan But let vs go forward and see the rest of examples before touched Pallad in vit Chrysost. was not the contention of S. Chrisostome with Arcadius and Honorius his Princes Emperours and with their wyues when he kept some of them by force out of his churche about ecclesiastical liberty and iurisdiction also And that also of S. Athanasius Hilarius against Constantius their Emperour and supreme head also according to the Protestants opinion in spiritual matters for that he fauored Arrians deposed Catholike Bishops and made himself vmpyre in ecclesiastical affayres as Protestants Princes doe now a dayes Did S. Tho. Primate of England say or write more to K. Henry at any tyme then S. Gregorie Nazianzen a particular Archbishop sayd vnto his Emperour that was present and angry with him Nazian orat ad Ciues Imper. â—rasceÌ„tem Vos quoque potestati meae meisque subsellijs lex Christi subiecit scio se esse ouem mei gregis sacri gregis sacram ouem Yow also o Emperour the law of Christ hath made subiect vnto my power and to my tribunal I know thee to bee a sheep of my flock a sacred sheep of a holy flock If Nazianzene had sayd this to an English King or should doe at this day how would our Protestants Prince-parasytes cry out and say that he were a proud Prelate as they say of S. Thomas The cheif and onelie contention of king Henry with the Archbishop as before in part you haue heard was about ecclesiastical iurisdiction as the articles set downe by all wryters doe testify The articles vpon vvhich S. Tho. disagreed vvith the king as namely that no Bishop might appeale to the Sea Apostolike without licence of the king that no seruant or tenant holding of the king might be excommunicated without his licence that no Bishop should bee able to punish any man for periury or breaking his faith that all cleargie men might bee forced to secular iudgments as all controuersyes also pertâ—yning to tythes and other like cases And now yf these controuersyes should haue fallen out as in part they did betweene the auncient christian Emperours and the holy Bishops before named would they not think you haue stood in them with no lesse feruour then S. Thomas did But now let vs heare and examine how Syr F. doth proue this holy Archbishop to bee a
4. num 12. Protestants books and wrytings one against the other in general Enc. 1. cap. 5 6. per totum Protestants shal perish finally by diuision among themselues according to Luthers prophesy Enc. 1. cap. 7. nu 4. Protestants of how good lyfe commonly they be according both to Erasmus and Luther Enc. 1. cap. 10. num 1.2.3 c. Protestant cleargie poore and miserable Enc. 1. cap. 11. num 3. Puritans feare greatly toleration of Cath. Religion and why notes vpon the Epist. of S. F. num 8.9.10 c. Puritans books and iudgments against English Protestants Enc. 1. cap. 6. per totum Puritans do complaine greeuously of protestants for persecution Enc. 1. cap. 10. Puritans and Protestants contempt of their owne Doctors when they make against them Enc. 1. cap. 17. nu 13.14 c. R. ROman faith and the practise therof in visiting martyrs sepulchers in S. Hieromes tyme. Enc. 1. cap. 9. nu 3.4 c. Religious men corrupted by VVickliffe Enc. 2. cap. 2. num 10.11 c. Rule of faith what it is among Catholyks that protestants haue none at all wherby to haue any certainty Enc. 1. cap. 14. per totum What Rule of faith O. E. doth appoint by the parlament of England and what authority the Parlament hath or may haue in that case Enc. 1. cap. 15. per totum cap. 16. num 8. S. SAcrifice of the masse acknowledged by auncient Fathers by the Magdeburgians owne confession Enc. 1. cap. 13. num 13. Saints what processe is needful in the Cath. Churche for their Canonization Enc. 2. cap. 11. num 15.16.17 c Fox-made Saints not comparable to Pope-made Saints Ibid. Saints bloud and merit how it may be named in our prayers to God Enc. 2. cap. 12. num 9. Scriptures expounded diuersly by protestants and Puritans one contrary to the other Enc. 1. cap. 6. num 11. Scripture Reading in vulgar tongues hath byn occasion of ruine to many of the simpler sort Enc. 1. cap. â— num 2.3 c. Scriptures in the vulgar tongue permitted in England with moderation and licence in former ages Enc. 2. cap. 3. num 7. See thesame handled more largely ibid. cap. 6. nu 14.15 Et cap 9. per totum Intricate dealing of heretiks about vnderstanding of Scripture ibid. cap. 6. num 22. who are properly Lucifugi scripturarum heretiks or Catholyks ibid. num 25. How Scriptures must be interpreted ibid. nu 26. How the Iewes of Berrea did read the Scriptures act 17. Enc. 2. cap. 9. num 4. Sectaries sprong vp from Luther and their diuisions among them-selues Enc. 1. cap. 4. num 7.8 c. Sectaries burned by Protestants when they are against them though they condemne burning by the Catholyks Enc. 1. cap. 8. num 3.4 c. Stankarus a Polonian Sectary His contumelious woords against Peter Martyr Bullinger and others Enc. 1. cap. 5. num 6. Synods and Councels held by Protestants with more disagreement then before Enc. 1. cap. 4. num 11. 12. c. T. S. Thomas of Canterbury how egregiously he is abused by S. F. and Iohn Fox Enc. 2. cap. 10. nu 17.18.19.20.21 c. S. Thomas his constancy much lyke to that of S. Ambrose and Nazianzen and other Bishops with their Princes Ibid. num 13.14 c. S. Thomas his Miracles and how authentical they are proâ—ed Enc. 2. cap. 11. per totum V. VErtue what effects therof hath new religioÌ„ brought into England Enc. 1. cap. 18. n. 2. Vnity betwene Protestants and Puritans what noteâ— vpon the ep of S. F. n. 9.10 c. Vnion of doctrine among Protestants what it is and how falsely affirmed by Sir F. Enc. 1. cap. 4. n. 3.4.5.6 c. No meanes of vnion among Protestants ibid. n. 10. Vnity in Catholike Religion in S. Bedes tyme among different and opposite nations that were in warre with themselues A great argument for the truthe of that religion Enc. 2. cap. 3. n. 5.6 c. W. WArre of Protestants among themselues in matter of doctrine Enc. 1. cap. 5. per totum VVestphalus what he saith against Caluyn and Caluynists Ibid. n. 5. Good works are not only not profitable but pernitious also to saluation and iustification as Luther holdeth Enc. 1. cap. 10. n. 3. About good works what is the Catholike doctrine ibid. n. 6. Enc. 2. cap. 16. n. 11.12 c. Wickliffe his doctrine what horrible styrre it made in England at the very beginning Enc. 2. n. 10.11.12 c. Wickliffe not only made a saint by Iohn Fox but a martyr also though he died in his bed Encont 2. cap. num 13. THE FIRST TABLE OF THE CHAPTERS OF THE FIRST ENCOVNTER A Brief Summarie of all that before hath byn said or now is to be added about this first Encounter of blessings cursings by change of Catholike religion Cap. 1. Of the first charge of flattering the state of England laid to Sir Francis and of his owne contradiction to himself therin about the deuised blessings of his new ghospel Cap. 2. Procter O. E. is called vp the stage to tel his tale to help out Sir Francis in this matter of flattering the state and how he playeth his parte farre worse and more ridiculouslie then the knight himself Cap. 3. Of ten new deuised blessings brought in by Sir F. as peculiar to his ghospel wherof the first is vnion in doctrine tearmed by him vnitie in veritie And how false and vayne this is Cap. 4. â—he same matter is prosecuted and the disvnion of Protestants is proued and declared by diuers other meanes out of their owne books and writings especially of forraine Protestants Lutherans Zwinglians and Caluenists Cap. 5. The continuation of thesame narration about vnitie in veritie among ridged and soft Caluenists named Protestants Puritans in EnglaÌ„d ScotlaÌ„d Cap 6. An answere to three fond obiections or interrogatioÌ„s of Sir â—rancis with an addition about O.E. Cap. 7. Of the second third blessings which are reading of scriptures publike seruice in English Cap. 8. The second part of the answere about Churche seruice in English conteyning some authorities alleadged for it but much corrupted and abused by the knight Cap. 9. Of the fourth and fifth blessings affirmed to haue byn brought in by Protestants which are aboundance of good workes fredome from persecution Cap. 10. Of the other fiue imagined blessings that remayne to wit deliuerance from exactions long peace power in forraine countries wealth of the land multitude of subiects encreased Cap. 11. How the contrarie effects to blessings that is to say of great damages and cursings brought in by change of religion both spiritual and temporal and how Syr F. and his Proctor O. E. do answere them Cap. 12. VVhat Procter O. E. saith to this matter of cursings and how absurdly he behaueth himself therin Cap. 13. That Protestants haue not only no agreement or vnitie among themselues in matters of religion but also are depriued of all sure