place is both to be translated so as I haue saide and to bee applied to the reuelation of the Gospell it is euidently declared by the plaine text and by the application thereof in the epistle to the Romanes Thus the first proposition is false and drawen both against the wordes of the text and farre from the sense thereof opened by the Apostle The seconde proposition is false also for neither is it true that all these first motions are altogether out of our power for the gift of continencie and mortification doth more and more subdue them neither doth it followe that wee are not subiect to the Lawe for such offences as wee can not resist the fault being ours through corruption why wee can not resist them Shall not a wholesome lawe made for drunkardes stand in force a 〈…〉 hath so accustomed 〈◊〉 selfe to the 〈◊〉 that now it is v 〈…〉 for him to 〈◊〉 Shall we iustifie our euill though 〈…〉 â—ause it is not in our 〈◊〉 to 〈…〉 good thought 〈…〉 fort iustifie the 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 you must condemne these opinions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you and your fellowes bring thâ—â—â— false daungerous propositions to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â—clusions and venture thus vpon so 〈…〉 〈…〉 pretations it wilbe easie for you both to write at will and to dispute at â—arge â—ustens opinion against lust euen before the consent appeareth by the places alledged before and in many other places therefore his owne answere serueth to exâ—ounde this place I doubt not but Auâ—â—â—n which forbâ—â—deth the disease of lusting will much more forbidde the consent and following of such sinfull steppes In these questioÌ„s of coÌ„cupisceÌ„ce the first motioÌ„s of lust a little feeling of a good conscience would cut off all this contention of speach For if they that teache otherwise woulde looke into the Law Thou shalt not couet with such eyes as Saint Paul did and would also consider the corruption the force and fruites of originall sinne and m 〈…〉 ouer regarde the power of Gods enâ—â—â—â— â—nd perfect iustice which is iustly prouoked with the least offence because hee made vs in the greatest perfection they would then speake no more in defence of the vncleane concupiscence of an vncleane heart but would with Saint Paul confesse 〈◊〉 the Lawe Thou shalt not couet teacheth â—s to knowe sinne not onely that grâ—sse sinne knowen and punished among inâ—â—â—els but somewhat more that flesh and blood cannot acknowledge euen that all concupiscence all vncleane lust is sinne because God is a spirituall Lawegiuer who hindeth our sp 〈…〉 it and bringeth all our desires into obedience restraining the least motions of vncleane coÌ„cupiscence by this holy and streight commandement Thou shalt not couet In the fourth place it commeth to bee examined how litle authoritie the Iesuites giue to the worde of God and howe much they attribute to vnwritten beleefe They are charged to saye The holy scripture is a doctrine vnperfect maimed lame not conteining all things necessary to fayth and saluation Wherein you censure mee as being to shameles in setting forth these for the Iesuites wordes Howsoeuer Gotuisus report or misreport the Iesuites if I report him faithfully it is no shame to me but to you it is some blame still to charge me with that is none of mine As for the question you handle it subtillie reporting not your owne iudgement but with some corruption what Monhemius saith and againe what the Iesuites answere whereas you are in the name of the Iesuites eyther to graunt that the scripture is perfect and conteyneth all thinges necessarie to saluation which is coÌ„trary to the Councill of Trent or els plainely and without perhappes to set downe the thinges that are to be beleeued of necessitie and yet not comprehended in the scripture which is clearely to graunt that which before you denied for the scripture is maymed and wanteth if any substantial doctrine of faith belonging to a Christian man bee left out There followe twelue particular pointes which you make of one sort to be beleeued and affirme them but with perhappes to be deduced out of scripture of the which seuen are not by perhappes but vndoubtedly conteyned in the word as that there are two natures and willes in Christ that the holy Ghost proceedeth froÌ„ the father and the sonne without generation Thirdly which you vtter in woordes that are obscure and vnsound that the worde did take the nature of maÌ„ to be one person not the person Fourthly that infantes are to be bapâ—â—sed Fifthly the change of the Sabaoth So also we receiue the foure Gospels and the epistse to the Romanes as approoued out of the worde by the inscription there expressing the names of the writers thereof For your darke wordes out of Thomas Howe the father vegate the sonne I wishe cleare and perfect woordes in so high a mysterie We beleeue by testimonie of the worde that Iesus Christ is the onely be gotten sonne of the Father and God aboue all to bee praysed for euer That I may refraine other speath I pray you examine your heart before the Lorde you that dare teach that these most high mysteries of God the Sonne and God the holy Ghost are not reuealed in y â— scriptures so farre as they concerne our faith but stande vpon the warraunt of mens traditions The rest of these twelue points as they are not euidently conteyned in the woorde so a Christian is not absolutely bounde to beleeue them as that the common Creede the articles whereof notwithstanding we beleeue as grounded vpon the Apostolicall doctrine was made by the Apostles the celebration of Easter day vpon a Sunday the perpetuall virgiuitie of the blessed Virgin The Epistle to the Laodiceans although many make mention of it Paul maketh none so that eyther you ignorantly passed ouer the Greeke or wilfully addicted your selfe to the olde translation being in this place playnely corrupted For by the originall Paul speaketh of an epistle froÌ„ Laodicea and not written to the Laodicenses as you vntruely affirme Nowe what haue you gayned by all or any one of these twelue notes seeing they are al eyther proued by y â— Scriptures theÌ„ no warrant for your traditions vnwritteÌ„ ve 〈…〉 not necessary points of our faith and therfore not of like authoritie to the holy writings of the Apostles and Prophetes After this sort you may easily publish A briefe Censure confounding and hudlyng together without distinction matters of our â—eleefe with things which we are not bound to beleeue and articles playnely conteyned in Scripture with points that are not there at all The place foloweth alleadged to ouerthrow the former doctrine of the Iesuites All the Scripture is giuen by inspiration of God and is profitable to teache to confute to correct to instruct in iustice that the man of GOD may be perfect and throughly instructed to euery good work Here y â—
the â—â—uching of the places for â—ontrarie dâ—â—trine is â—ensured for vnlearned huddling vp and confounding hope and faith as one thing which note of the Censure I may truely say came from no deepe knowledge A litle iudgement might haue serued your Censureship to discerne that the two places were not alledged to proue or disproue any thing of faith the ful certeinâ—ie wherof is proued against you by the certeinâ—iâ— of hope but to ouerthrowe that which the Iesuites say in the latter parte of the sentence against which these places serue plainely and expressely For what may more cleareâ—y proue against the Iesuites doctrine that hope neuer faileth then the Apostles wordes calling 〈◊〉 The ancre of the soule Where by he nâ—â—eth our fâ—eedoâ—e from danger in all stormes of â—entations â—idding out the time of this life wi 〈…〉 any 〈◊〉 oâ— feare and without any 〈…〉 touching 〈◊〉 〈…〉 heauen To shewe the force of this assurance the Apostle vseth very significatiue words calling it a sure and stable ancre and yet to make it so full that no feare or doubt may remayne he addeth that it entreth into the inwarde of the Vaile whereunto Christ is entred meaning thereby the heauens Which importeth as much as if hee shoulde say we that haue cast this Ancre aboue in heauen are so much more safe then they whose Ancre is cast downe into the Sea as the holde wee haue taken in heauen by the Ancre of hope is surer Yea the very Rockes shal sooner faile theÌ„ our hold settling vpon the strength truth of gods promise which are al Yea AmeÌ„ in Christ Iesus This our shoote Ancre of hope hath taken holde of the mercy seate of God and of the throne of grace which except some storme be able to remoue wee are in most ioyfull and stedfast safetie The like is promised by y e other place out of y e fifth to the Romanes for if hope maketh not ashamed and shame commeth when a man faileth of that be hoped for then hope can not faile The Apostle maketh this more strong by that which foiloweth as a reason The loue of God is abouÌ„danly shead out into our hearts by the holy Ghost which is giueÌ„ vnto vs. By which reason it appeareth except the holy Ghost hath giuen vs a wrong testimonie of the loue of God the hope which we haue conceiued thereby cannot deceiue vs. Thus you see these places so truely and fitly alledged that al your falsely named learning will not be able truely to answere the allegation of them which notwithstanding it pleaseth you to call vnlearned But let vs see what you call learning forsooth the doctrine of Iesuites touching the doubtfulnes and feare which is in hope that is true learned and cleare This is as the prophet complaineth to call good badde and sweete sower whereunto you know what belongeth For aunswere to these two places of hope the Iesuiteâ— doctrine is declared at large the effect of all standing in two pointes the first concerning faith the other of hope Of faith they teach that no man may beleeue that he in particular shalbe saued without a particular reuelatioÌ„ from God A faithlesse doctrine of faith and therefore not to bee lightly passed ouer You seeme to proue it by reasons one drawen from y t obiect of faith which is the word written or tradition whereof neither as you say doeth testifie mens saluation in particular the seconde taken from the vncertaintie of the things beleeued which as the Censurer supposeth doe depende vpon such conditions as possibly may not be perfourmed Both these great points for want of scripture he setteth foorth by examples as minding rather to perswade then to proue The first is of the answerer the seconde of the possibilitie to be damned as did fall out in Iudas and may fall out a more fearefull case then I woulde put of him had bee not put it of him selfe in the Censurer him selfe Nowe let vs consider what great learning the Iesuices haue in this their opinioÌ„ of faith as the Censureâ— doth report them To iudge that without particular reuelation by name no man can be sure of his saluation is expressely against that the woorde of God â—eacheth in this great question Therefore howe leraneâ— soeuer the Iesuites make them selues yet in deede as the Apostle speaketh of the wise Gentiles they become starke fooles not knowing true wisedome out of the worde but bastard wisedome by their foolish distinctions The Censurers worde of Tradition must bee reserued for a fitter place Touching the promise of the Gospell it is general whosoeuer beleeueth shall be saued the Censurer confesseth it This generall promise hath place and is certainely verefied in euery particular y t beleeueth Euery sensible maÌ„ without further learning may easely iudge in this doctrine whatsoeuer is true in y e general must needes be true in euery particular Nowe if it be vndoubtedly true that euery beleeuer shalbe saued it must needes bee also that Simeon and Lazarus beleeuing in Christ shalbe saued Therefore what needeth any speciall reuelation in the worde for that which is sufficiently comprehended vnder the generall what neede is there by name to saye from maÌ„ to man by name Lazarus shalbe saued Citus shalbe saued and 〈…〉 we shall be saued and so infinitely Or shall we say that God in respect of persons doth particularly assure some of their certaine saluation leauing all the rest to be tossed and caried vp and downe with feare and hope as a ship in the sea caried hither and thither with contrary winds Moreouer the very place cited by the Censurer as a particular reuelation was not particular but generall to all the disciples that beleeued by vertue of a more generall couenant made to all that beleeue whatsoeuer For to examine that place neerer all the disciples and all the Apostles had not their names written in the booke of life for Iudas was excepted And here by the waye the Censurers ouersight must bee noted that draweth the place of Luke as speciall and particular to the Apostles being spoken of the seuentie disciples He wanted special knowledge herein when hee so boldly made it an argument of the Apostles speciall reuelation Of the most certayne and sure foundations of our particular fayth and hope the Apostle writeth in the eight to the Romanes saying that nothing was able to take from him the loue which God beareth to him in Christ Iesus which hee setteth out by naming such things as are most like and mightie to strike a feare and doubt into his heart as oppression anguish persecution famine nakednesse and finally death it selfe nay he addeth agayne that neyther lyfe nor death nor Angels nor things present nor thinges to come nor height nor depth that is what so euer is in heauen aboue or in the earth beneath or in the parâ—â— vnder the earth finally that no creature is able to
Take ye Eate ye bynde them What moued you here to cite your Clement Ambrose Cyprian with others I knowe not except it were some meriment to ioyne with your similitude of singing for in good earnest you minde not by those places without matter in them to proue that the wordes of Christ Doe this in remembrance of me were onely saide to the Ministers touching Consecration and not to the people also for their participation In the twelfth Article the Iesuites are reported to say Traditions are of equall authoritie with the worde of God wee must beleeue them though they bee manifestly against the Scripture Here the reporte and the texte vouched to disproue their doctrine are both censured The first for adding we must beleeue them though they be manifestly against the Scripture for reporting the rest so generally and confusedly Touching y â— latter point if my report of your doctrine be in these wordes Traditions are of equall authoritie with the worde of God meaning it of some only for who would thinke it of all you hauing so many and so feeble why doe you charge mee as generally and confusedly saying al traditions are equal with y â— scriptures Was it I pray you to deserue your owne note of a sounde lye for a parting blowe which false mis 〈…〉 you haue doubled to make it the sounder For aunswere to the former poyut I doe not onely auow that I haue faythfully reported my authors wordes which is alwayes my iust defence against your vniust flaunder laying them vpon me but I say further that their practise compared with their wordes will â—ustifie the report as truely layde downe against them For proofe whereof not to goe further the Censurer rehearseth amongest these traditions which the Popish Church charge our faith withall the number of the bookes of Scripture the Lent fast Of al other traditions these two are taken out to stande for their owne credit and for the credit of the rest let vs therefore see what treasons there are against God in these your traditions First the Apocrypha bookes are not in the auncient Canon or language of Canaan the fathers haue disauowed them they are euidently repugnant to the doctrine of the holy scriptures and dis 〈…〉 eeing among them selues Yet your Trent conspirarie doeth adde them to the number of the Canonical bookes and bolde all men accursed that holde them not for canonicall scriptures Therefore this your tradition is manifestly against the word of God Further also what is more manifest against the woorde of God then the doctrine of deuils The Lent fast as you commaunde to keepe it for conscience sake forbidding meates created of God to bee taken with thankesgiuing is plainly called a doctrine of deuils Furthermore your opinion is playnely deliuered to be with this distinction Ecclesiasticall traditions are of no greater authoritie then the writings and other decrees of the Church and Apostles traditions are of no lesse authoritie then if they had bene written by them or then are the other thinges which they wrote This is confusedly taught and needeth yet more plainenesse for not all orders deliuered by the Apostles are to bee kept perpetually and vnchangeably of like authoritie with the doctrine of the Gospell which they preached The Apostolique doctrine is perpetuall subiect to no varietie of persons of times or places but some traditioÌ„s that is some orders are altered as that in the acts where they commaunde to absteine from strangled and from blood for it appeareth that the Apostles commanded not this for a perpetuall order alwayes inuiolably to be obserued but onely for a time to auoids offences which cause ceasing the order or tradition was no longer in force Againe some orders might be set downe by them for comlinesse which yet were not to be beleeued as necessary partes of saluation nor yet to remayne for euer in that forme or kynde and therefore can not be matched with the Apostolique doctrine of fayth which is euer al one and which whosoeuer beleeueth not cannot bee saued Nowe touching your pretensed Apostolicall traditions I vtterly denie that there are any such beside those which are euidently shewed or by iust consequence fitly gathered out of the written worde For what so euer is necessary to saluation is in this sort to be proued by the holy Scriptures Therefore your Censureshippe dyd well to adde If they be certaynly descended from Christ and his Apostles But how can this I pray you be certaynely knowen but by the holy writings can any other custome or testimonie assure your consciences what came vndoubtedly from Christ or what from his Apostles Is there any one of your traditions that you can vouch to descend from so sufficient authors otherwise then by report of insufficient witnesses What is it then for you to boast of inuincible arguments to proue diuers doctrines not written but left by woorde of mouth onely whereas you bryng nothing but counterfeyt Couneils erring Fathers fabulous stories and Apocrypha scriptures This is right the bragging Apostle and a shewe of the vaine chalenger Yf a man coulde be feared with the guilte of your armour or with your plume of feathers you woulde bee a worthie champion wounding more with a vayne feare then with the force of your shrinking arme In this encounter of al your profes you haue sorted out two the first is out of that excellent chapter to the Thessalonians conteining a prophecie and reuelation of Antichrist For an answere to which place it is first to be vnderstoode that the worde Tradition in the Apostles speach commeth as it doth in Latin of a verbe to deliuer so that whatsoeuer y â— Apostle deliuered to the Churches those were the traditions hee lefte with them Therefore I denie that Paule doth in any place by tradition signifie any vnwritten veritie but that as in other places he vnderstandeth the doctrine of the Gospel which in the sundrye partes thereof he deliuered This appeareth apparauntly by the place so cited for your purpose without regarde of any more then the worde Tradition For in the verses nexte before the Apostle maketh mention of the Thessalonians faith to the trueth saying God hath called you thereunto by our Gospell to obteyne the glory of our Lorde Iesus Christ and therupon inferreth this conclusion now therefore brethren stand fast holde the tradition which you haue learned eyther by worde or by our epistle Whereby it plainly appeareth that the traditions or thinges deliuered by him partly by word and partly by writing were the diuers partes of the Gospell which hee had taught them Wherefore the written woorde affordeth you no proofe for vnwritten verities The seconde is of doctrines which you say wee holde not by record of writing but by word of mouth from Christ and his Apostles as for example baptisme of infants celebratioÌ„ of Sunday y â— number of y â— bookes of scripture the fast of
knowledge how to distinguish aright But what is this to proue all distinctions good euen those that Iesuites make only to auoyde the power of trueth Simples generally are good seruing for the health of man but what is this to proue those euill simples good which haue lost their vertue and which an euill Apothecarie may serue in place of good for a triall of the Iesuites distinctions you referre me to their disputation but I may haue a sufficient triall of them and of their disputation before hand in this your booke if there were no other proofe to iustifie my report As you would bring your quilits into credit so you labour to bring my arguments and interpretations into discredit as lying and false but in a good conscience and according to the trueth I haue auowed them true and good as will easely appeare to the indiffereÌ„t reader You that before made me much inferiour to Edmund Campion now make mee inferiour to thousandes of the Iesuites scholers Whatsoeuer I am to the meanest of them the Lorde I trust wil inable me to mainteine his trueth euen against Campion your great champion to say nothing of his disciples I confesse your distinctions offend 〈…〉 as being full of 〈…〉 ltie and sometimes so darke and vnlearned that there appeareth neither good cause nor good vse of them yet you take it to heart that I should account them vnlearned and peruish As for the accusatioÌ„ of Iude against the despisers of good 〈◊〉 ses it was corrupcly brought against mee for reiecting your sophisticall deuises against the trueth for proofe whereof I referre me to these your distinctions chosen out of many for your purpose which one excepted are all vnlearned and peeuish seruing to put darkenesse for 〈…〉 ght and â—â—olâ—trie in place of Gods seruice For as they that distinguish not where the word hath distinguished may soone fall into schisme and heresie so also you in distinguishing where the worde admitteth no distinction do offend in like â—orâ— and with no lesse danger There is you lay cleare difference betweene an Idol and an image Surely this is somwhat that you saye for an idol is the image of the superstitious Gentiles and an image is the 〈…〉 and 〈◊〉 named Christians There is I graunt a cleare difference in the letters but no difference at all in the word no more then is betweene Omnipotent and Almightie For to passe by Phauorine Hesychius and some places in Plutarch who all make these two wordes of one signification Plato maketh the matter most euident who mouing a question what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be maketh this answere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is manifest we will make answere that those things are idoles which are seene in water and in looking glasses and those moreouer that are painted or set out in types or portratures other things of this sort whatsoeuer By these words of Plato the Censurer may learne that any image carued paynted represented by a glasse or seene in water is among the Grecians where the worde is in his owne countrie and proper vse called an Idol Tullie moreouer who could aswell iudge of the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and of the Latine word image as the Censurer be in his translatioÌ„ maketh them one Lastly to returne to the holy Scriptures God in the second Commandement forbiddeth both the making and worshipping of an Image to represent the true God or any of the false Gods Thus much to she we your vnlearned and most vntrue distinction betweene an Image and an Idol which you and your fellowes repeate so often and vrge so much You doe it to vpholde Idoles vnder a more honest title of Images as you suppose but as they differ not in name so in nature they are all one euen stumbling blockes of offence the worshippers whereof are open idolaters I am taught by the word of GOD that there were materiall and are still spiritual sacrifices in the Church but for sinne I read y â— there is no sacrifice without bloud So that your second distinction of bloudie and vnbloudy sacrifices is plainly against scripture Iustice by faith wee acknowledge but merite by workes is proued to be against the worde So the mediation of Christ is according to faith but your intercession of saintes against the scripture For who is more mercifull then the Lorde that he may saue or who more ready to heare vs that he may be the Lordes remembranceâ— faith that beleeueth the promise and hope that patiently wayteth for the issue of faith we acknowledge and the distinction I haue layde downe in the ninth article Your counterfeit traditions of men and of the Apostles are al without warrant in the causes necessary to saluation But why haue you left out the distinction of the two worshippings Latria to God and Dulia to images Is it left out because wee condenine it and you now allowe no more of it All these distinctions are most daungerous when you will with some distinction or change of a name reteine still the same iniquitie forging such wicked deuises of man to disanull the truth of God Therfore they are but your vntrue assertions and vaine bragges that you distinguishe things into their proper natures that you can proue eche part of your distinction consonant to the word of God that when you haue so distinguished wee haue no more to saie that wee bewray our ignorance and finally that the truth is made manifest to euery mans eyes When any one of these fiue definitiue sentences is proued true I will acknowledge the rest I much maruaile that in such vanting speach you would not set down one true assertion of so many But you care not what you say to reproche the godly making account that your owne side will take it in good part be it neuer so vntrue neuer so reprochfull The fourth argument touching the libertie of your pen I haue answered already but I answere further you may haue it without print and if that will not content you there are printes inough neerer hande beyonde seas where you are if we may beleeue you so often affirming it The daunger persecution you speake of is a fruite of your murmuring spirits complaining without a cause For you go safely away w t many matters as much as you coÌ„playne against vs openly as intercepting all your bookes other Popish stuffe I thinke you doe much more brag among your selues of many escapes But if you had as many prints as you can set a worke what can you of lesser giftes write that the most learned of your side haue not written long agoe as Ecchius Pighius Hosius and which nowe Turrianus Andradius doenot furboish in a vaine hope at last to make an ende of Sifyphus labour What issue all these haue had of coursing discoursing againe the questious betweene you and vs we may consider it with great ioy of heart
soule and incourage him to the hope of mercie if hee shall consider the promise of God made towarde him of which promise Martin Luther saith it is vnpossible it should lie being entire and not changed or change able through any of our sinnes And hereupō he declareth what armour we haue in respect of Gods true promise how to answere when sin troubleth the conscience Afterwarde speaking of the riches of a beleeuer he concludeth saying Thus thou seest a Christian man or one baptised howe rich he is who though willing yet cannot lose his saluatiō through his sinnes howe great soeuer except hee wil not beleeue for no sinnes can damne him but incredulitie alone if faith in the promise of God made to the baptised returne and stand all other vices are swallowed vp in a moment by the same faith yea by the trueth of God that can not denie him selfe if thou confesse him and cleaue faithfully to him that promiseth In which wordes Martin Luther speaketh not of a faith separated from good workes or accompanyed with sinne onely but of that faith which bringeth foorch as fruites and effectes those good workes which God hath prepared that wee shoulde walke in them This is the true and comfortable doctrine of Martin Luther to proue it impossible that the elect shoulde bee deceiued or fall awaye or that the multitude of their sinnes shoulde barre the grace and promyse of God Wherefore seeing Martin Luther sayth Incredulitie is the greatest sinne and you say he affirmeth there is no sinne but incredulitie Seeing hee sayeth in respect of Gods promyse all the sinnes of the righteous man without want of faith can not condemne him and you vtter it most corruptly as if he saide a man can not damne himselfe do what sinne he can Lastly seeing Martin Luther speaketh of the elect and you vtter it as spoken of all euen of the wicked the godly reader may beholde your malicious and false reportes that haue in this first place hainously charged Martin Luther with a doctrine which was neuer in his hearte to embrace much lesse in his purpose to publish by writing Yet I confesse this his found doctrine of our certaine saluation is against your Trent doubtfulnes in so vndouted a couenaunt as is that which the Lorde hath confirmed to his children with an othe that cā neuer be repealed 2 In the second place out of his sermon touching Moses misreporting the title as I thinke you cite these wordes The ten commandements apperteine nothing vnto vs. Wherin you would bring the reader vnto an opinion that Martin Luther altogether reiecteth the morall lawe of God setting men free from the obedience or regard thereof If you could proue but this one article against him without your furder reproches it were sufficiēt to bring his honour to the dust But I dare auowe in your name that you are not so ignorant as not to know his cleare doctrine to the contrarie both in other bookes and in that from whence you drewe out these wordes leauing the sense behinde I graunt he hath such words but neuer laid downe so nakedly or to proue such an error as your report importeth For speaking against such as vrged the policie of the Iewes and layde the yoke of Moses Law vpon christians he resisted this doctrine expounding the differences betweene the two couenantes of God one in the ministerie of Moses which is the perfect obedience af all the Law the other in the mercie of Christ apprehending righteousnes by faith The first as he teacheth apperteyned for a time to the Iewes alone y t seconde afterwarde both to Iewes and Gentiles as many as beleeue Wherupon he proueth at large that the law doth not apperteyne vnto vs as it did to the Iewes the yoke and ceremonies thereof lie not vpon vs to obserue in such sort as it pressed them All which doctrine is as largely taught by the Apostle proouing that wee are not vnder the Lawe but vnder grace and in another place that the lawe was giuen because of transgression til the seede came which was promised againe in the same place the Lawe was our schoolemaster to Christ that we might be made righteous by faith but after faith is come we are no more vnder the schoolemaster Which places do cleerely shewe y t Moses Lawe apperteineth not to vs as to the Iewes wee are not vnder it as they were the yoke and condemnation thereof doth not binde vs as it did them which is al that Martin Luther teacheth distinguishing our time from their time and our estate vnder Christ and the Gospell from their condition vnder Moses and the Law according to that excellent distinction of S. Iohn The lawe was giuen by Moses but grace trueth came by Iesus Christ Wee are vnder Christ and vnder grace not vnder Moses and the yoke of his lawe we haue the trueth and not the multitude of shadowes and ceremonies that were vnder the Mosaical administration Now that Martin Luther did acknowledge the doctrine of the lawe profitable to vs though the yoke and former mynisterie thereof be taken away it appeareth by his exposition of the Lawe and by his wordes out of the same sermon which you alleadge where he saith We receiue and acknowledge Moses for a teacher in deede whence we learne much wholesome doctrine as a lawegiuer or gouernour we do not acknowledge him Also afterwarde hauing repeated the commaundementes he demaundeth saying Is it not necessarie for vs to keepe these are they not vniuersally commaunded to all men I answere saieth he they are to be kept of all and apperteyne vnto all Thus it is cleere although M. Luther acknowledgeth not the yoke the curse the Mosaicall gouernment which were proper to the Iewes and appertayne not vnto vs yet in other respectes hee is plentifull in shewing the profite and vse thereof to Christians for it is as Dauid saith a lanterne to our steppes and a light vnto our path Therefore you shall doe well to regard your steps least your selfe seeme to neglect the lawe of loue and trueth as apperteyning nothing to you if you thus misreport misconster any mans wholesome doctrine 3 Your thirde report of Luthers doctrine is that it is a false opinion and to be abolished that there are foure Gospels Touching this third place I find the effect of your report els where for these first and chiefe wordes but the latter wordes concerning Iohns Gospell that it is the onely faire true and principall gospell I cannot finde I thinke there was neuer any such preface written in latin by Luther as you cite for your defence You haue in many places vsed the auouch at large which Lawiers thinke vnlearned in their cases and oftentimes you cite bookes not to bee gotten as this preface and that booke de missa angulari and laide downe one title for an other with such like practises
not already accomplished by that first righteousnesse Moreouer if this righteousnesse bee that which the Gospell teacheth and not the Gospell only but as the same Apostle writeth afterward which is testified by the law and the Prophets wheÌ„ce haue you brought vs a second righteousnesse that neither the Lawe nor the Prophets nor the Gospell haue reueiled vnto vs The vanitie of this your deuise may further appeare if we coÌ„sider the iustice of God which can not allowe for righteous any thing but y t which is absolutely perfect and holy in all respects as the Lawe is most perfect most holy Wherfore both the satisfaction for â—ur sinne committed must be such as mâ—y fully endure whatsoeuer the Lawe hath threatened for sin and the obedience so exact and precise as it faile not in any poynt But this righteousnesse is but one and is in none but in our sauiour Christ none other being able to make that ful satisfactioÌ„ for sinne nor perfectly to keepe the Lawe but he alone therefore there can â—ee but one righteousnesse which is in Christ Iesus accompted vnto those which beleeue in him according to the Gospell The holy Apostles teach that after men be conuerted from infidelitie to faith they stande righteous and liue in the sight of God not by meanes of their woorkes but by this faith whereby they beleeued Abrahams example maketh this good who after he was called from idolatrie to the seruice of God is said to haue beleeued and that his faith was reckoned to him for righteousnesse not his workes first or last least hee might haue wherein to reioyce and not in God The Apostle to the Galathians maketh this euident We knowing saith he that a man is not iustified by the works of the Law but by the faith of Iesus Christ we also haue beleeued in Iesus Christ that we may bee iustified by the faith of Christ and not by workes of the Law because by the works of the Lawe no flesh shalbe iustified In which words the Apostle plainely maketh saluation an effect of faith and not of any workes which we do after wee haue beleeued Our sauiour Christ confirmeth this in diuers places as in Ioh He that beleeueth in him that hath sent me hath euerlasting life shal not come into condeÌ„natioÌ„ but is already passed from death to life He that beleeueth in the sonne hath life euerlasting An other place to the Galathians maketh all this yet more manifest where the Apostle speaking of himselfe long after his conuersion saith That I nowe liue I liue by the faith of him that loued me and gaue him selfe for me By these proofes it is euident that there is but one onely righteousnesse for which men are accompted righteous before him which is the righteousnes of faith To this may be added that the only righteousnes of God is that which giueth all the glorie of our saluation to God only in Christ Iesus and shutteth out all vaunting and boasting of man but the second righteousnes which you imagine doth not so but Ieaueth somewhat for man to glory of therefore it is no righteousnes taught by the Apostle Lastly this also is against your second righteousnes that our workes done by faith yet are not perfect and therefore cannot make vs righteous before God These reasons may suffice in this great question of our saluation briefly to conuince the blasphemie of your deuise inuented of Satan to deceiue those that seeking saluation more or lesse by their owne workes faile of that righteousnesse which is by faith onely in GOD through Christ Iesus our Lorde Nowe seeing the folly of this absurd distinction of a first and of a second righteousnesse is euidently coÌ„uicted it is also worthy of consideration how this Censurer that taketh vpon him so iustly to deuide and giue euery thing his owne doeth here notwithstanding huddle and confound righteousnesse with regeneration and iustification with sanctification For that which hee calleth the second righteousnesse is that which the Scripture calleth the New man the fruits of the Spirit or regeneratioÌ„ Furder also where he saith The first righteousnesse is of Gods mercie only and no way of our workes or by any merit of the same it is to be noted that hee is constrayned to acknowledge a righteâ—usnesse by faith onely without any deâ—â—â—â— of workes whereupon it â—hould be obserued that the Censureâ— him selfe seemeth tâ— be ashamed of y e merit of coÌ„gruence as the Schoolemen terme it while he so â—â—atly fully affirmeth our calling to bee onely of Gods grace without any merit of ours Now to returne to his Censure againe he addeth in the end a Censure vpon the allegation of the text vouched out of the Romanes for the disproofe of the former blasphemous opinion This he blameth as impertinent and vntrue impertinent because in his construction it is against the righteousnesse of good workes before our calling and not generally against the righteousnesse of all good workes wherein hee seemeth not to haue regarded the reason of the Apostle which is taken from the nature of grace and workes so contrarie that the one can neuer nor in any wise stande with the other Therefore the argument is strong to proue that our saluation cannot â—e both deserued and also freely giueÌ„ Nâ—â—ther doth this argument holde in election onely but whatsoeuer is of grace as â—â—â—â—tion iustification sanctification glory all these are in no 〈◊〉 or part of works Thus the place is so forcible to the purpose it was alledged for that the Censurer is not able â—o escape the sentence therof He complaineth lastly of wordes added which are but to cleare the sense and taken out of the second to the Galathians where to like effect the Apostle faith If righteousnesse be by the lawe Christ dyed without cause Thus hauing satisfied all the Censurers pretensed doubtes and conuicted him of errour in the blasphemous doctrine of a second righteousnesse I may worthely leaue the Iesuice to his voluntary Whip for reformation of his iudgement otherwise if he wil not learne to giue al the honour and causes of saluation to God in Christ but will in establishing his owne righteousnesse abandon the righteousnesse of God by fayth which must stand altogether of it selfe then in so teaching he wil drawe vpon him selfe other Whippes euen Scorpiâ—ns whose sting abide for euer For auoyding hereof I pray God if it may make for his glory that you Iesuites may receiue the loue of the trueth that you maye seeke finde saluation in the merites of Christ alone to life euerlasting The ninth report of â—esuiâ—eâ— doctrine is Men doe surely hope that euerlasting life shalbe giuen them but they doe not beleeue it now hope often faileth â—â—herwise it were no hope This 〈…〉 cle 〈◊〉 coâ—fessed without any coâ—â—radiction that the wicked seruant may be iudged by his owne mouth But
separate him from the loue of God that is in Christ Iesus But in mayntenance of these errours you are wont to say this was a speciall pâ—etogatiue of the Apostle which is easely taken away by that S. Peter writeth to this purpose that the Saints had obtayned lyke precious fayth with him which was true not in the degree but in the kind and substance of faith which shoulde wholly differ if the Apostles had a faith of their particular saluation and we not Agayne the certaintie of fayth appeareth by these reasons which the Apostle alleadgeth Who shall 〈◊〉 the chosen of God It is God that iustifieth who shall condemne It is Christ that hath died nay rather who is raysed vp againe who is also at the ryght hande of God who maketh into cession for vs. These reasons of a most sure faith and hope that wauereth not are of no particular reuelation but of the generall doctrine of the Gospel and of the common saluation as Iude calleth it which of right apper 〈…〉 to euery beleeuer aswel as to Peter or to Paul The Consurers set onne reason is that the faithfull may fallaway from the fayth and from saluation where as the things beleeued remaine most certayne The grouÌ„d of this reason is to be denieâ— for it is most vntrue that any man who hath had fayth can euer afterward finally fallaway This may bee prooued by euident testimonies of the scripture beside those alleadged aboue as that which Christ teacheth of the beleeuer in the eyght chapter of Iohn He shall neuer see death in the fourth But the water that I shall giue him shall be in him a spring of waters flowing vp to euerlasting life in the tenth The father is greater then all and none is able to take them out of the fathers hand Againe of the faithfull it is true which the Apostle vniteth that God hath iustified and glorified them So certayne it is as if it were already euery way perfourmed But it were long to repeate any inoâ—e Notwithstanding there are places that mention a fayth which seemed for a time to be faythfull but 〈◊〉 as the fig tree was full of leaues but without fruite As for the examples of Iudan who hath falne and of your selfe who 〈◊〉 saye may likewise cast your selfe away if you list I can saye of Iudas hee neuer beleeued because he was y e childe of distruction For your selfe if you haue bene alwaies of that minde you were of when you wrote this you neuer had any true faith and therfore coulde neuer yet fall awaye from it What God may vouchsafe you hereafter I knowe not but leaue it to his wisedome to dispose of his owne as it shal please him but if euer he vouchsafe you this gift I am sure the gates of hell shall neuer preuaile against you Your seconde poynt is of hope which in your doctrine hath two respectes one of Gods mercie and in that regard it is full of confidence the other in respect of Gods iustice which hath feare and doubt annexed with it The places alledged before of hope you expaunde for the confidence thereof which is true if you stayed there not adding other respects to roote out that which you woulde seeme to plant for you shoulde haue made hopesâ— firme and sure that it can not be deceiued But as being of an other iudgement you say that hope respecteth also the iustice of God and the feareful effectes of his feueritie which you quote out of the Scriptures concernyng which effectes I will not dispute with you Onely in alleadging the last I note your wantes that without all regarde or any warrant of the text dare say that those reprobates shall come confidently in the last day hoping to be saued For besides that it is vnpossible that their conscience can haue any sparke of confidence or hope of saluation there is not any mention of such confident hope in the text eyther expresly or by implication If they had some hope then also they must haue some faith for they goe together hande in hande Although I thus linke them together yet I do not confound them but acknowledge this differeÌ„ce that as faith is a full persuasion of the promise so hope is a patient expectation and looking for of the things which are beleeued It is you therfore that in deede huddle and confounde hope and a vaine perswasion as one thing where as hope is no lesse sure then fayth being grounded vpon the same foundation of the worde and hath the same fulnes of persuasion But this is ignorance and confusion which who so discrieth may well marueyle what cause you or your friendes finde to hoast of your learning or order for disputation Such coÌ„fusion must be in Babell which leauing with you I saye further that hope neuer respecteth Gods iustice nor any thing else but the things that are beleeued which are y â— most sweete and pretious promises of his life kingdome and glorie Therfore what causes shoulde hope haue to feare True it is that neither fayth nor hope is so perfect in vs but that in these respects you name we often feare but this feare is no woorke of hope no more then doubt is a woorke of fayth For to say that hope feareth in some respects is as much as to say faith in some respectes doubteth and is no faith We doe both doubt and feare such are our infirmities but that we doubt it is not of fayth but of vnbeliefe neyther doe we feare as you speake of feare by any effect of hope but by the contrary worke of desperation But after so many and sufficient reasons out of the worde to prooue this question of importance the woordes of the Censurer offer one not to be neglected He affirmeth that hope in respect of the goodnesse of God is full of confidence and assurance Therefore although he will needes against reason make confidence fearefull yet shall he neuer cast any shadowe of feare vpon assurance especially vpon a full assurance such as he confesseth Nowe for the places you alleadge they concerne not this feare nowe in question but expresse a godly care to liue woorthie our calling which is not against the confidence of hope but a remedie agaynst presumption and securitie The place which you alleadge out of the preacher sheweth you to be a great clarke able to reade and cite a place though you come not neere the matter by many degrees The wise man there disputeth of that a man may gather by prosperitie and aduersitie and not what he knoweth by the worde of God For neyther can aduersitie nor prosperitie shewe the loue or hatred of God toward vs it was the deceitfull counsell of Iobs frendes to drawe him into these argumentes of Gods purpose But Iob by fayth coulde confesse agaynst all calamities and extremities saying though he kill mee yet will I beleeue in him still
Thus the learned diuinitie of the Iesuites may appeare to them that will beholde it Howe dyd you forgette the two milstones you are wont to alledge for teachers in this matter When a man you saye doeth bebolde that he standeth vpon it maketh him holde but looking vnto that ouer his head he is in feare Wo be vnto them that teach such offensiue and erroneous doctrines deceitfully confirming them with similitudes and distinctions so farre from the trueth and yet easie to be imbraced and deceiue the ignorant It were better for them that a milstone were hanged about their necke they throwne into the bottome of the sea then thus to infeeble the faith and hope of Gods children by their faithles and fearefull doctrines Yet the Censurer and his fellowes if you will beleeue him reconcile all Scriptures together maynteyning confidence and feare in Christian hope whereas we are sayde to confounde and huddle vp matters but hereto I answere let him that offendeth herein beâ— both offend to which himselfe and not reconciled to God till he repent In the tenth article the Iesuites are reported to â—ayr The Scripture in deede neuer teacheth the inuocation of Saintes yet we must beleeue receyue and holde it Here you Censure both the alleadging of the Iesuites opinion and the text auouched to disproue the same You saye it is false that they graunt the inuocation of Saintes is no where taught in the Scriptures Neuerthelesse you graunt afterwarde that Monhemius charging them so and therfore gathering that it ought not to be beleeued they make this answere y â— many things are to be beleeued which are not expressely set downe in the Scripture To which purpose you your selfe adde afterwarde that the inuocation of Saintes is deduced out of many and euident places of Scripture whereby it appeareth that you all confesse that the Scriptures expressely teach it not Nowe that praying to Saintes is by necessary consequence to be gathered out of many euident places of the Scriptures and to be proued by generall Councils Fathers and the vniuersall practise of all Christen dome from the beginning though you boldly affirme it yet you vouch not any one place of scripture nor any one proofe of so many If you haue so good bookes to shewe it standeth vpon your credit to bryng them to lyght For where as your idolatrous praying to saints is detestable in euery sort both for the sinne it selfe and because you commende it without any likely colour of excuse if you bee not able to answere to so grieuous a crime as you are charged with herein being in deede high treason against the heauenly Maiestie of the eternall God yet you may alledge somewhat by waye of excuse to finde some fauour if so great authoritie as you pretende haue carryed you awaye like simple people to ryse vp and rebell agaynst the Lorde You sende vs to your Catholike bookes touching this question which we haue seene and read but fynde not any warrant which may iustifie your doctrine Hauing hoasted of much perfourmed nothing in your second Censure of y â— place alledged agaynst Saintes inuocation you blame me for auouching but that one text of scripture for the disproofe yet your selfe haue brought none for your necessary defence To ouerthrowe the place you bring two answeres but tel vs to which of them you will stand The first is grounded in Limbo patrum that is to say hath no grounde at al as there was neuer any such Limbus but framed setled in your imagination The seconde which you seeme to relie more vpon is in effect this assertion not to knowe is not to allowe This if I might graunt you it doeth not take away the force of the place Out of y â— which allowing you your owne sense I reason thus Because GOD onely is here declared to be of fatherly loue toward vs who also is readie to pardon vs when Abraham by your sense would not knowe vs but condenme vs therefore it is both wisedome and duetie to praie to God and the contrary both vanitie sinne But because you require other reasons and places for this purpose take these of a number It is not lawfull to giue the worship of God to any other according as it is writteÌ„ Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God him only shalt thou serue I wil not giue my glory to any other nor my praise to idols But prayer is a speciall honor and seruice that God requireth of vs as it is said in the fiftieth Psalme Call vpon me in the day of trouble and I wil deliuer thee and thou shalt glorifie me Whatsoeuer you shall aske the father in my name he will graunt it vnto you Againe a man cannot praye to any but to those in whom he doth beleeue Rom. 10. How shall they call vpon him in whom they haue not beleeued But it is not lawfull to beleeue in any but in God alone which is proued by the former places faith being a principall part of Gods seruice Therefore it is not lawfull to pray to saintes or to any creature whatsoeuer I might here shewe all promises made to prayer all precepts and examples of prayer in all the whole bodie of the Scriptures to be onely of prayer to God and no one precept promise or approued example of prayer to any saint liuing or dead or to any other creature But this place being cleare and mightie against you I will conclude with the Prophet Ionas They which obserue lying vanities let them forsake the goodnes shewed vnto them but with the voyce of thankesgiuing will I sacrifice vnto the Lorde I will pay that which I haue vowed all maner of saluation is of the Lorde In the eleuenth the Iesuites are charged to teach that Christ neuer sayd to the lay men Doe this in remembrance of mee Seeing you pretend that notwithstanding you expound Do this of the Ministers only yet you meane not so but that the people are also commaunded to communicate at the Lordes Supper as well as they I can the more easely leaue you to followe your owne sense for the doctrine against lay mens consecration or ministration is not in controuersie but it is except you faile holden on both that none but called Ministers should minister the sacraments But if as you haue alreadie committed the greatest sacriledge and churchrobbery that may bee in taking away from the people the Cup of the newe Testament and the Communion of the pretious bloud of our Sauiour Christ so nowe by this exposition you would leaue the people at libertie to chuse whether they will be partakers of this bodie too or no y â— you may driue them altogether from the table of the Lorde the sacriledge shalbe so made the more intollerable If the Commaundement Doe this in remembrance of me binde not the people to come to the Lords table howe shall the other wordes
Lent If this be not hudling and confounding of things together of vnlike sort I knowe not what may be called confusion For what order is it to repeate vpoÌ„ the Censurers occasion y â— which was noted in the fourth article to match the baptisme of children with the fast of Lent The one being by plaine argument gathered out of the worde as namely out of the wordes of the conenant I will bee thy God and the God of thy seede and thy children after thee for euer This couenaunt dyd appertayne to both a like to Abraham and his seede whereunto the seale and practise was adioyned in circumcising infantes of eyght dayes as well as Abraham of great age and that by expresse commaundement of God Thus the doctrine is so prooued out of the written worde as that no doubt remayneth Nowe circumcision was the sacrament or seale of that righteousnesse which is by fayth as Saint Paul teacheth wherein it is equall our baptisme But this is your great learning when you are not able for your ignorance to prooue a doctrine out of the written worde to say we haue it by tradition and by worde of mouth from the Apostles Now your Lent fast as you vse it hath not onely no grounde out of the worde but is agaynst the worde as I prooued before If this bee your methode and discretion I maruell not if good order be huddling and confounding in your accompt For the number of the bookes and for the Lordes day I myght likewise make proofe out of the worde so that if you can bring vs nothing by worde of mouth from the Apostles but your Lent fast your letters of credence will not serue you to be deleeued The seconde Censure is that the place alleadged by me to confuce the aucthoritie of traditions should be impertinent This the Censurer woulde shewe by three differences betweene it and this purpose First of the diuers cause of those traditions which our Sauiour Christ inueyeth against whereof they had beene authors to them selues and of these which he affirmeth to descende from Christ and his Apostles But as in deede the difference woulde be great if this were true so being false and vntrue as it is it can make no difference at all Theirs were in deede such as they affirme and though you deny it so are yours also For which of all your traditions came eyther froÌ„ Christ or from his Apostles wheÌ„ you proue them froÌ„ either of them your difference shall be allowed Secondly you say Christ reprehendeth not al obseruation of meÌ„s traditioÌ„s but the naughtie obseruing of theÌ„ which was as you affirme in that y â— Pharises esteemed them more then Gods word brake it for the keeping of them which you condemne This also if it were true were a sufficient difference but it is vntrue that our Sauiour Christ reproued onely the esteeming of them more then Gods commaundementes It can not bee denied but he reprooued this in them in the same chapter before but in the woordes alleadged You worshippe mee in vaine teaching doctrines that are but traditions of men which are no wordes of comparison our Sauiour simplie rebuketh them for esteeming the keeping of mens traditions to be any seruice of GOD to which â—ude the sentence had bene first vttered by the Prophet The thirde note is double first that these traditions were idle foolish of which sort are yours and whatsoeuer the idle brayne of man deuiseth to serue â—od withall the second that some of them were impious direct contrary to the word of God such as were certayne corrupt expositions of the lawe where you are as like to them as the sonne may be to the father For neuer were there more false gloses vpon the word of God violently thrust and by litle and litle secretly conueyed into the Church peruerting the true meaning of the Scriptures and corrupting the simple worshippe of GOD then haue beene brought in by your Rabbines that haue obtayned the highest seates and the most honourable names more then euer did any among the Iewes You speake of the Talmud as dyd bastarde Denis of the orders in heauen but this florish of your skill in those bookes because it hurteth not the cause let it serue you and your frendes for as much credit as it may Lastly the Iesuites are reported to teach that we must worship y e image of Christ with like honour that wee doe the holy bookes of the Gospell In this article the doctrine is graunted without any word of contradiction your Censure onely toucheth the second to the Corinthes the sixt chapter as not alledged to the purpose In deede if you list not to vnderstand to what end it is vouched you may well complaine against the alledging thereof as from the matter You take it as brought to proue that we may worship the image of Christ with greater honour then the bookes of the Gospell but you mistake the matter and wilfully as it shoulde seeme to haue some what against the cause for how could you think that he which detesteth al idols would alledge a place to prooue that the image of Christ is worthy honour more then Gospels Or howe may not any maâ— note you of open contradiction against the word of God that being deuoutly madde vpon idols would for their loue prophane the temple of God and therefore dare to say there is more agreemeÌ„t betweene them which yet the Apostle maketh most contrarie then there is betweene the place of Saint Paul the matter which the same place doth fitly disprooue But if you liâ—â— to vnderstand the place serueth to prooue that no image at all is to be worshipped for which the wordes are so pertinent and is strong as all the wisedome of your Censureship and of the rest will neuer bee able to answere them Therefore you lost your labour in framing arguments to prooue why the material booke of Gospels should be no lesse worshipped then the image of Christ for neither of bath are to bee worshipped nor any other creatures whatsoeuer according to that which was before alledged to this purpose Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serue You can not escape for saying you giue no diuine honour vnto them for this bowing downe before them which is one of the least deuotions you vse is chalenged as diuine honour and expressely forbidden in any respect of religion or deuotion to images or any other creature as hath beene often declared But here saying the honour done to the image of Christ and to the letter of the Bible is not done to them selues you dissemble your owne idolatrous doctrine which alloweth the same honour to the image that is due to the paterne and namely the same most honourable and diuine worship of Latria to the Crucifix which is due to the Lord Iesus Christ himself Your bookes that teach this are many and not vnknowen So
people in that Citie Did he note your two Popes two P 〈…〉 s together at 〈◊〉 time yea somtime three somtime foure Popes who 〈◊〉 the Chatre sometime at Rome sometime at 〈◊〉 sometime in other places Did hee euer consider that they which 〈◊〉 the storie of these men can not agree either in the number nor in the succession of these your Popes Any one of all these or of many other matters written by your selues being well coÌ„sidered might haue bene a weightie cause to keepe him from that fall For these bishops many of them succeeded with such wicked conditions and for so wicked purposes that their succession may shewe out matter to proue them rather the race of Antichrist and the spirit of fornications which long agoe beganne to worke the mysterie of iniquitie but hath nowe made vp all the measures thereof so that the prophesie is fulfilled that Antichrist in the succession of his ministers exalteth him selfe against all that is called God or is worshipped and sitteth in the Temple boasting him selfe that he iâ— God This is that succession of Antichrist which is glorious in the eyes of flesh and bloud and therefore made Woodeman depart from Christ whom whosoeuer wil folowe must euery day take vp his Crosse and folow him 3 As for his third reason of miracles in the Popishe Church I leaue it as very false insufficient Notwithstanding some I graunt wil beleeue if a man come from the dead which wil not beleeue Moses and the Prophets The kingdome and Church of Christ was planted in the power of doctrine and miracles and also by the power of the holy Ghost while Christ and his Apostles liued Now it is against faith if any looke for miracles to confirme the Gospell againe which is already so confirmed that an Angel from heauen or any miracle worker perswading otherwise must bee accürsed By miracles it is an easie thing to deceiue and bee deceiued seeing Satan to that purpose changeth himselfe into an Angell of light Such were many of the lying miracles not onely printed from Rome but receiued and registred at Rome and thrust vpon mens consciences to beleeue being matters that might easely drawe them headlonges into all error and idolatrie as was prophesied of this kingdome of Antichrist and hath no we appeared by the lamentable effect Therefore his third reason was to weake to haue drawen him froÌ„ the Church of Christ if he had bene tied to it but with one bande of loue to the trueth and power of doctrine 4 Xilanders fourth reason dath huâ—â—â—e vp and confound many reasons As that he was moued with the authoritie of the vniuersall of the visible and of the Catholique Church where like a good plaine dealer he left out that which he founde not in the Romish Church namely holinesse And what are all the rest without this holinesse Againe of those three notes that moued his falling off two are all one in worde and sense For the worde vniuersal and the word Catholique are as these two wordes Wodeman and Xilander which do not signifie two but one and the same thing That the Church of God must alwaies haue a visible and glorious Maiestie vpon the earth is not yet proued Also that the Church of Rome was neuer Catholique or vniuersall as it pretendeth the Churches of y â— East while they florished the Greeke Churches such as remayne at this day doe make sufficient proofe Againe we receiue the Scriptures from God hee by inspiration hath giuen them and hath alwayes kept them in his arke and the Philistins could not keepe the Arke from vs. The pretended victorie ouer heresies must be proued before it be admitted for a reason I graunt the Romish Church hath had a victorie and a tryumph in outwarde shewe ouer many thousand Saints most cruelly murdered for the trueth But ouer heresies it tryumphed not but in the time of her chastitie before the Lorde had giuen her a bill of diuorce after which time shee embrewed her selfe in the bloud of the Saintes and became the mother of all fornications With his other reasons hee linketh Saint Augustines saying so often misalleadged to proue the authoritie of the Church aboue the Scriptures that he woulde not beleeue the Gospel but onely vpon the Churches authoritie By these wordes his minde was not to determine which had greater authoritie the Church or the Scriptures but to declare against the Maniches in his owne practise what brought him first to esteeme the worde at his conuersion from inâ—â—deâ—tie The authoritie and consent of the Church may in such a case perswade one to receyue the worde which being receyued is of it selfe founde to be greater then that which first perâ—â—â—ded Thus of many reasons heaped vp together in y â— fourth place there is not founde one good The Romish Church was neuer vniuerfall or Catholike but particular and of â—ne â—erritorie though by vsurpatioâ—it enlarged her selfe by litle and little and the visiblenes therof is nothing for the true Church of the elect is inâ—isible Moreouer as I declared it neuer triumphed ouer heretikes it hath not any peculiar custodie of the Scriptures neyther dorth the authoritie of the Gospel depende vpon hir ratification being authenticall of it selfe Therefore al these reasons and put them together coulde not open the least dore for his departure if he had euer beene placed within the Church 5 The fift reason is that the Romish Church is the true Church because many that liued there are nowe Saintes in heauen and namely Dominic and Frauncis as Xilander doeth imagine I say as before there was a time when Ephraim spake there was trembling he exalted him selfe in Israel but he hath sinned in Baal and is dead Neuerthelesse seeing Xilander went so farre for a fift reason let vs examine what he hath brought There is no doubt saith he but Dominiâ— Fraâ—ncis and others are Saintes in heauen therefore it cannot bee that they liued in errour Who hath made it out of doubt to vs that they are in heauen seeing there are writte 〈…〉 many 〈…〉 dent lyes and blasphemies of them in the Legenda and that most detestable Alcaron called the booke of confo 〈…〉 who will beleeue that Dominic raysed the dead which you teach Who can heare or reade those your blasphemies in making Fryer Frauncis an other Iesu in type and figure matching him w t Christ froÌ„ poynt to poynt and his miracles with Christs myracles If the Censurer had not menâ—ioned Frauncis the Fryer among his saints it myght haue beene hoped the Iesuites would refourme that booke or rather condemne it to the pit of hell But to returne to Xilanders argument it is a very bad one prouing the lesser doubt by the greater For it is not so great a doubt what those famous Fryers taught as whether they be in heauen Neuerthelesse if it were out of doubt they are in heauen yet