The Mysticall Breade is made vnto vs by a certaine and knowen Consecration Such Consecration the CoÌ„munion bokes haue not And though in the Masse booke no mention thereof be made yet the order thereof being so many hundred yeres before taken such speciall mention is not nowe nedefull or required But the Communion bookes containing a new order of the Ministration if therin they had vsed any CoÌ„secration at al that being one principal parte of Christes Institution they ought to haue expressed the same Howbeit certaine it is not only by that they make no mention thereof but also by that they geue the remnant of their bread to the dogges that they vse no Consecration at all but accompte it as very coÌ„mon bread Likewise the wine that is left either the Minister drinketh it with his common meate or if very litle remaineth it is cast in the flowre as Poynet a late preteÌ„ded bishop of Winchester did in an open Communion ministred in the Cathedrall Church of Winchester By these their doinges saie and pretende what they lift in wordes all the worlde seeth and knoweth they vse no ConsecratioÌ„ at al. For good and euident proof thereof I â—eferre the studious Reader to the treatise of our lordes Supper lately sette forthe by D. Sanders In the seconde booke the xiiij Chapter it is proued that the figuratiue doctrine of M. Iewell and his felowes can not stande with a Sacrament which hath Consecration Harding The number of communicants together in one place is no parte of Christes institution Iewell The 15. Vntruthe For S. Basill thinketh the number is parte of Christes institution Exercitationis ad pâ—etatem Sermone 4. StapletoÌ„ Would God M. Iewell as to proue the Institution of Christ you alleage onely the iudgement of S. Basill so you would stande to his onely iudgement or to the iudgement of the lerned Fathers in other matters But S. Basill saieth no such thinge This he saieth in the place by you alleaged Spiritualis lex non pauciores quam duodecim esse vult mysticum pastha comedentes The spirituall lawe admitteth no lesse then twelue to eate the mysticall passeouer Now M. Iewell is this the Institution of Christ or is it not If it be why then do you in your Communion bookes take an expresse order that three may make a sufficient Communion Why breake you the Institution of Christ in the very springe of your ghospel If it be not the Institution of Christ nor S. Basill meant no such thinge why speake you so Vntruly why saie you S. Basill thinketh the number is parte of Christes Institution For other wordes tending to any such purpose in al that Sermon he hath none But S. Basill his meaning is this He willeth that such as take vpon them the contemplatiue life should liue in some number together and not vnder ten or twelue in a company that their life and behauiour might be voide of all sinister suspicion For that purpose he bringeth the exaÌ„ple of the twelue at Christes maunde where that most holy mysteries were wrought But as touching the matter it selfe whether a number of communicants be parte of Christes Institution Brefely thus I saie Christ gaue it to a number Christ gaue it after meate Christ gaue it at night time You with vs do confesse the two later pointes to be no Partes of Christes Institution You geue it neither after meate neither at night time but in the fore noone and before all other meates Why so Forsothe bicause bothe you and we beleue as S. Augustin did quòd si hoc monuisset Christus eum morem nemo variasset that if Christ had commaunded that no man would haue chaunged that maner Wherein S. Augustin and we bothe haue left the fact of Christ and folowed the tradition of the Church beleuing vpon the custome of the Church that the same fact of Christ was no CoÌ„mauÌ„dment Right so M. Iewel bicause the Church of Christ so many hundred yeares hath celebrated this holy Sacrament without a number of communicaÌ„ts we beleue verely that Christ neuer commaunded a number in this celebration and we beleue that if he had so commaunded eum morem nemo variasset no man would haue chaunged that maner or order This is our belefe M. Iewell grounded vpon the Doctrine of the Church which we are assured by holy Scriptures as I haue otherwheres at large proued can not erre in the faith but must for euer not only v. or vj. C. yeares as it shal please you to appoint continew in sounde and vpright doctrine Your opinion to the coÌ„trary procedeth by schismaticall departing from the Church Harding The maner number and other rites of receiuing is not fixed nor determined by the InstitutioÌ„ of Christ but ordred by the Churches disposition Iewell The 16. Vntruthe Christ appointed a number although no certain fixed numbre StapletoÌ„ If it be truly saied Christ appointed no certain fixed numbre why note you it for an Vntruthe The number is not fixed by the Institution of Christ What difference is there in those two sayinges Or is the one true bicause M. Iewell saieth it and the other Vntrue bicause D. Harding saieth it But how proue you M. Iewel that Christ appointed a number and yet no certain number Bicause Christ saied Take ye eate ye drinke ye all diuide ye amonge your selues doe ye this in my remembraunce All this was saied to a certain numbre as to twelue By these textes therefore if these textes be a Commaundement you must haue no lesse then twelue at a Communion Now three by the Communion booke are sufficient But as ye vrge al these textes so we may vrge you with vespere facto Caenantibus eis discumbebat cum duodecim At euening time as they supped he sate downe with the twelue and so forth we may vrge you I saye with these and saye You breake Christes institution You do it not at euening time You do it not after supper You sitt not but knele at it You haue sometime lesse sometime more then twelue to communicat and those not all waies priests as the Apostles were What answer you to this Is not all this the Scripture Is not all this writen of the Euangelistes Is not all this reported in the ghospell euen in the very same place where the rest of Christes InstitutioÌ„ touching this blessed Sacrament is writen Why then are not these partes also of Christes InstitutioÌ„ or why omitt you them as no partes thereof Why is not the fact of Christ as well a Commaundement as his wordes Diuide ye c What can you saye here but that the Practise of Christes Church hath declared that al these of time and place be no substantiall Partes of Christes Institution but Circumstances accidentall and casull Cerimonies Euen so we answer you that the Church also hath declared vs by the Practise of many hundred yeares the number to be no part of Christes Institution We
bothe parties StapletoÌ„ Phy on heresy phy vpon wilfull blindnesse One desperat Acte of One furious heretike Donatus by name must serue M. Iewell to builde Three Greate Conclusions and Principles vpon Donatus did all this But the Emperour called it Rabidamfurioris Audaciam A desperat Rage and Fury M. Iewell calleth it a Lawfull Appeale After the bishop of Romes Iudgement the Emperour graunted to Donatus yet an other S. Angustin saieth Non quia iam necâ—sse erat sed eorum peruersitatibus cedens omnimodo cupiens tantam impudentiam cohibere Not bicause that was nedefull but bicause that the good Emperour yelded to their extreme frowardnesse and desired by al meanes to ouercome their passing outragyousnesse M. Iewell buildeth vpon this fact a Principle that all men might lawfully Appeale from the Pope to the Emperour Constantin satt in Iudgement and heard bothe parties him self S. Augustin saieth A SaÌ„ctis Antistibus postea veniam petiturus Minding to aske pardoÌ„ therfor afterward of the holy bishops M. Iewel saith it was well and Lawfully done and so it should be And this is he forsoth which wil yelde to any One SenteÌ„ce of any One Father or Doctour in a nuÌ„ber of Articles O M. Iewel If you meane plainly if you will in dede yelde to the Fathers why make you a grounde of Doctrine vpon such a facte as by their Iudgement is so detested and abhorred You offred your Reader a Feast of three faire dishes But all is moued to a Calues tounge diuersly dreste All is the desperat fact of one outragyous heretike Your Arte is good But Alas you wâ—nte Matter For beholde Of so weake proufe what a stronge Conclusion you make Iewell Nowe if receiuing Appeales necessarely importe this Vniuersall Power then was the Emperours powre Vniuersall For he receiued All appeales out of all Countres vvithout exception and that euen in Causes ecclesiasticall Loe. Of one desperat facte Of One Rabida furoris Audacia One presumptuous fury M. Iewell concludeth All Appeales out of all Countres vvithout exception I can saye no more But a whetston a whetston for you Iewell Againe then was the bishop of Romes power not Vniuersall for it was lawfull then to refuse him and to Appeale to some other Lese nothinge I pray you Conclude apase and as mightely as you can What M Iewell Thinke you to outface vs with ioyly bragges and greate vauntes as if ye were playing at poste and shoulde winne all by vyeing No M. Iewell You maye not so dor vs. Your single solde facte of One desperat heretike maye not conclude a Threefolde Principle and an Vniuersall Proufe for all Catholikes to folowe If you like such presidents folowe them we like them not we defye them They are the enemies of Gods peace the Cancre of Christen common welthes the poyson of our soules We haue better presidents lerned Fathers Catholike bishops and holy Councels to folowe bothe in making Appeales to Rome and in refusing of all Appeales to the Ciuill magistrat as it hath in this Conflict at large bene proued Nowe you make an ende Iewell And this M. Hardinges reasons renne roundely against him Thus M. Iewelles proufes haue all failed him His threefolde Assaulte in Conclusion hath proued but single solde Hitherto of Appeales from the chiefest Patriarkes of the worlde to the See of Rome whereby the Superiorite and Primacy of that See ouer all Churches is vnuincibly proued All that M. Iewell coulde possibly deuise to saie against it is answered I trust sufficiently God graunte my small labour may edifye and helpe to bringe vs to the dewe Obedience of Christes vicair here on earthe without the which we shall neuer see ende of heresyes schismes and dissension Harding The speciall grace and singular priuilege of the Churche of Rome neuer to faile in the faithe is to be imputed vnto the praier of Christ by which he obteined of God for Peter and his successours 108 that their faith shoulde not faile Iewell The .108 Vntruthe For many Popes haue erred faithe as shal appeare Then it behoueth vs to answer to the reasons and argumentes by which you will persuade that it will so appeare First you alleage three places out of the prophets wickedly and notoriously wrested and wrethed as it hath before bene declared in the 105. Vntruthe where you drawe vs to this common place of holy scriptures by you wrested and wrethed from their due and right meaning And truly to this purpose they make nothinge Vnlesse M. Iewell will frame his reasons after this sorte Micheas saied that the priestes and Prophetes being wicked rested them selues vpon the Lorde Hieremy saieth of the priestes and of the elders that they had a confidence in their Councell and lawe as though it shoulde neuer faile Item Micheas againe saieth that the priestes of the Iewes should haue night and darkenesse in stede of their visions and prophecies Ergo many Popes haue erred in the faithe Who euer made any such argumentes in any schole what will M. Iewell make folcke beleue that Micheas and Hieremy the prophets haue writen in their prophecies that many Popes haue erred in the saithe Iewell Or doth M. Iewell thinke that these reasons must be taken bicause he speaketh the worde But he will saie Micheas an hieremy do tell vs that the priestes did amisse and yet craked that they coulde not be deceiued We denie it not But did they speake any thinge of the Popes of Rome did they testifie so longe before that they should erre in the faithe why maie we not thinke rather that Micheas rebuked the proude priestes and foretolde of the fall of their Synagoge and of their blindnesse they should be in at the coming of the Messias And that Hieremy rebuked their vices not their belefe their conspiracy to destroye him as he did in dede not any Councell of theirs touching the obseruation of Moyses lawes Thus M. Iewell wresteth and wretheth holy Scripture at his preasure Iewell Certainely the very glose vpon the decretalles putteth this Matter vtterly out of doubte These be the wordes It is certaine that the pope may erre And Alphonsus saieth Euery man may erre in the faith yea although it be the Pope StapletoÌ„ You knowe well M. Iewell it is not auouched by D. Hardinge neither defended by the Catholikes that the Pope in his owne person and as a priuat man can not possibly erre For so we saie with the decretalles and with Alphonsus to that the Pope may erre and hath erred bothe in faithe and in maners touching his owne priuat person But the thinge which is here auouched by D. Harding and which is by vs defended is that the Pope as the Head of the Churche can neuer erre that is he can neuer decree any thinge erroneous or contrary to the faythe he can neuer deliuer any false doctrine to the Churche contrary to the faithe You knowe M. Iewell by the debating of this controuersie amonge the
lye The Bishoppe of Rome saieth no suche thinge They are not the wordes of the Pope M. Iewell thinketh what so euer is writen in the lying libell of one of his bretherne intituled The Protestation off the Pope That it is cocke sure and vndoubtedly true But if M. Iewell had loued the truthe and tendred his readers Instruction he woulde haue looked to the originall and haue seene the wordes bothe whose they were and what they were The wordes that M. Iewell alleageth are in the decrees and in the place by him noted But they are there reported to be the wordes not of anye Bishop of Rome but of Bonifacius the Martyr And the wordes do not saye as M. Iewell reporteth them Lett no mortall man once dare to reproue him but huius culpas istic redarguere praesumit mortalium nullus No mortall men dothe presume to â—eproue his faultes here declaring thereby rather the obedience of Christen people towarde their Superiour then commaunding all Christen people to holde their peace And the reason foloweth Bicause he must Iudge all men but he is not to be iudged off any Which saying of that holy Martyr if it seme to M. Iewel ouer proude or vniuste he maye remembre that the whole Councell of 3000. bishoppes in Sinuessa in the yeare of our Lorde .300 presumed not to condemne Marcellius the pope hauing sacrificed to Idolles and being conuicted thereof by the Testimony of .72 witnesses but after he had condemned him selfe before them all they confirmed it and saied I ustè ore suo condemnatus est Nemo enim vnquam iudicauit Pontificem nec Praesul Sacerdotem suum quoniam prima sedes non iudicabitur à quoquam He is condemned iustly by his owne mouthe For no man at any time iudged the bishoppe nor the bishoppe his high priest For the chiefe See shall be iudged of no man Nowe where Bonifacius saieth that he may not be reproued onlesse he be founde to straye from the faith that dothe importe that a case may happen when the Pope may erre but not that the Pope may decree any errour or establish any thing contrary to the faithe Iewell To conclude Nicolaus Lyra is driuen to saie VVe finde that many Popes haue forsaken the faithe Stapleton This was a very simple Conclusion that hath no better Authour then Lyras a frier of late yeares Let it be true that many Popes haue forsaken the faithe yea and Christe to because of their wicked liues and hainous dedes Be it true that some of them haue had wrounge opinions Yet M. Iewell hath shewed none that euer decreed any errour or heresy This is that is auouched by Catholikes This the Reader looked for And this M. Iewell shoulde haue proued Gods name be blissed M. Iewell hath snott his poison against that holy See and in the succession of fiftene hundred yeares and vpwarde amoÌ„ge the number of two hundred and thirty Popes he hathe not founde one for all his prying and searching that euer decreed any errour or heresy or that euer deliuered to the Church any doctrine contrarye to the Faithe Thus we see Christes prayer hathe had his effecte notwithstandinge all the malyce of M. Iewell and of all other his masters and teachers against S. Peters chaire Harding That the Bishoppe of Rome had allwaies cure and rule ouer all other Bishoppes 109. specially them of the Easte for touching them of the VVest Churche it is generally confessed beside a hundred other euident Argumentes this is one verye suffieient that he had in the Easte to doo his stede three delegates or vicaires nowe commonly they be namâ—d Legates The one was the Bishoppe off Constantinople as we finde it mentioned In Epistola Simplicij ad Achatium Constantinopolitanum The seconde was the Bishoppe of Alexandria as the Epistle of Bonifacius the seconde to Eulalius recordeth The thirde was the Bishoppe off Thessalonica as it is at large declared in the 82. epistle of Leo Ad Anastasium Thessalonicensem By perusing these Epistles euerye man maye see that all the Bisshoppes off Grece Asia Syria Aegypte and to be shorte off all the Orient rendred obedience to the Bishoppe of Rome caet Iewell The .109 Vntruthe For the bishoppes of the East neuer yelded suche subiection to the Pope Stapleton What saie you then M. Iewell to three legates of the Pope placed in the Easte mencioned by D. Hardinge Did not they yelde subiection to the pope Are not the Authorityes true and good The Epistles or Simplicius to the Bishoppe of Constantinople of Bonifacius the seconde to Eulalius of Alexandria of Leo that lerned Father to Anastasius of Thessalonica are they not true Epistles Are they not incorporated to the volumes of the Councels Are they not all within the compasse of your first 600. yeares What saye you to them Why answere you not Will you euer plaie Aristoteles Asse Will you euer denie more then Aristotle can proue Good Reader looke vpon M. Iewelles text vpon this place Thou shalt see he answereth nothing to the places But like an impudeÌ„t asse of the countre standeth vpon his deniall and saieth It is not only vntrue but also vtterly without any shadow or colour of the truthe Iewell This is boldely auouched But if M. Iewel bringe any one worde to pâ—oâ—e these allegations vntrue that lett him be Aristotle and not the Asse For you shall see what foloweth These Authorites of Leo Symmachus and Bonifacius for as much as they are alleaged without wordes may likewise be past ouer without answer If they be vntrue why proue you it not If they be true why passe you them ouer without answer All that you answer is this that foloweth Iewell Howbeit this Bonifacius the seconde in defence of this quarel is forced to saye that .437 S. Augustin that godly Father and all other the bishoppes of Aphrica Numidia Pentapolis and other countres adioyning that withstoode the .438 proude attempt of the bishops off Rome and founde .439 out their open forgerie and falsifying the Nicene Councell were .440 altogether inflamed and lead by the diuell Stapleton Let vs suppose all this were true Yet is all this nothinge to the Popes legat in Alexandria the bishop thereof as in the epistle of Bonifacius it is mencioned Vnlesse M. Iewell will reason thus Bonifacius condemned the Bishops of Carthage wrongfully Ergo the Bishop of Alexandria was not his legate But now let vs see how many Vntruthes are couched in the former fewe wordes of M. Iewell First S. Augustin was none of them which wrote the last epistle of the Aphricane Councell to Celestinus vpon which M. Iewel groundeth the discouering of the Popes forgerie His name and subscription is not there Though in the other epistle to Bonifacius it be Neither should his name haue bene left out being the legat for the whole prouince of Numidia if he had bene there present Againe there was no proude attempt of the bishop of
the East that the Pope Cōfirmeth bishops that he Cōfirmeth and Approueth al General Councelles and without him none can be confirmed that he Restoreth bishops and Patriarches vniustly depriued to their Churches againe that he Recōcileth them vpō penaunce after Excōmunication last of al that all doubtes and questions of greater Importance haue bene Remoued to him Al this by the Practise of the first .600 yeres And in eche of all these Matters the whole text of the Replyer is answered lyne by lyne and stiche by stiche In fine it is proued against the Replyers Vntruthes and against his whole text thereupō bothe that the Bishop of Rome was Called Saluted and Intitled Vniuersal bishop in the Chalcedō Coūcel yea and that of the Bishops and Councell it selfe and also that many waies and oftē he hath bene called Head of all Churches and bishop of the Vniuersall Church By the meanes whereof the Replyer is forced by good and expresse euidence either to reuoke his ouerbolde Challenge or els to come to the Booke and Subscribe And thus much of the principall matters especially treated and debated in the processe of these foure Articles VVhat profit of all these Matters thus debated maye of thee be looked for gentle Reader thou mayest soone concieue considering only this one Case D. Harding in his Answer treating first most of these Matters bothe hath vttered such good lerning as he founde in other Catholike writers treating before of the same in latin and also by his lerned and priuat study beside hath added much thereunto M. Iewell hath in his Replie partly vttered such escapes to auoide the Authorites alleaged as commonly of the Latin writers of his secte are vsed partly and that most commonly hath aleaged beside against the Truthe all tha◠he coulde finde in other or hath read him selfe He hath I saie saied for him selfe as much and more then coulde honestly be saied He hath opposed Argument◠Allegations reasons and Authorytes for the Contrary parte As if he did not Replie against an other but treate him selfe freely and freshly of the matter By this meanes in these two bookes the Answer of D. Harding and the Replie of M. Iewell bothe partes haue saied their minde the one for the Catholike faithe the other not only against the Catholike faythe but also for his owne secte and opinion I haue bene therefore driuen in persecuting the text of the Replies not only to defende the Catholike but also to answer the heretike not only to vpholde our owne groūdes and to repayre them with newe defences against the Replyers newe assaultes but much more to ouerthrowe the Aduersaryes groundes and foundations which he opposeth and setteth vp afresh against the Truthe I haue done therefore herein a thirde and newe labour in most pointes not before done of any By perusing whereeof thou shalt gentle Reader be instructed not only howe to maintaine the Catholike doctrine but also howe to ouerthrowe the heresy not only to see the groundes of the Catholike faithe established fortified and confirmed but also to beholde the fickle foundations of the Lutheran and Caluinian Religion touching the pointes here treated battered shaken and ouerthrowen Brefely thou shalt see in the person of M. Iewell and of his maner of reasoning that the foundation of his and his felowes Religiō especially against their dewe Obedience to the See Apostolike standeth vpon Ignorance of the stories falsifying of the doctours of councelles of the lawes and of other good Authors bothe olde and newe For hereof loe Arise the hundreds of Vntruthes committed by this Replyer in the treating only of these principall matters aboue specified and in fighting only against the weakest and vntruest partes of his aduersaryes Answer If our purpose had bene to haue gone alonge his whole Replie and to haue persecuted his text vpon other partes of the Answer not so noted with Vntruthes and therefore of all lykelyhood the more True partes the Stronger and the lesse able truly to be reproued this Replyer then should tel by the Thousandes and might go for a Pinner for his Numbers of Vntruthes But of his Dealing in the Epistle prefixed to him it hath bene saied sufficiently To returne to our matter I saie If the Argument of these other three first Articles do lesse delight as being in dede of lesse importaunce yet Consider I beseche thee gentle Reader if thou shortly desire to be informed which waye to take and diligently peruse the Fourthe Article of this booke Namely in such places where M. Iewelles Replie against Appeales made to the Pope against the Confirmation of Generall Councelles and of Bishops that were doubtefully Ordred against the Restoring of bishops depriued the Reconciliation of bishops excommunicated and against the Authorite of the Pope ouer the East Churche is examined answered and confuted For in those places it shall appeare bothe with what shiftes absurdities Inconueniences and open Vntruthes the allegatyōs of D. Harding are impugned and much more with what extreme lying lewde and Vntrue dealing the contrary parte is by M. Iewell vpholded and defended Being in this Article persuaded euery wise and discrete Reader shall incontinently in al other matters nowe denied by heretikes retire to the vnite and belefe of the Catholike Church For the bisshop of that Apostolike See being by such Clere and so manifolde Practise by so many Graue and Irrefragable Authorities beside both of holy Scripture and of the lerned Fathers Cōfessed and proued to be the Head Chiefe Ouerseer and Guide of Gods house the vniuersall Churche being also euident that his Faith as it is also in this Article proued in any matter to be decreed and deliuered to the Churche neither hath at any time nor can possibly erre what doubte remaineth but in all pointes we must beleue as that holy See beleueth and behaue our selues in the house of God in all thinges touching the Seruice of God after no other waie or facyon then the order taken by that Souerain See hath of longe appointed vsed and accustomed This Article therefore as I haue especially laboured therein and spent more then halfe this booke thereupon so euery Reader that seketh by this my small labour to be aedified or instructed I desire most earnestly diligently to peruse If any one of my dere Countremen may hereby or by any part of this rude labour rudely in dede and hastely compyled be instructed or any waie edified to a better consideration of his duty to God as that many maie I most hartely wishe and verely hope him or them for all reward I beseche to helpe me and them selues with their good praiers to helpe I saie the Catholike Churche whereof both we and they are children and membres to call earnestly and often vpon the Mercy of God that he staie this raging storme off schisme and heresie neither suffer it to ouergrowe this part of the worlde as the Arrian heresy ouergrewe the Easte Church and to crepe on
Lewde ArgumeÌ„tes such as you knowe D. Harding did neuer make then by reason persuaded him the Truthe of the Cause so haue you in this point plaied the right Hicke Scorner But please not your selfe herein to much M. Iewell Porphyrius Lucian Iulian the Apostata and Celsus haue farre passed you in this Arte though they were neuer takeÌ„ for bishops of Christes Church But to omitte all your scoffing toyes alleaged out of Innocentius Thomas Aquinas Gerson and other which they writing onely to the Lerned Deuoute Reader thought it no such childishnes as you make it to Deuise of a good and Godly vsage Causes not euill nor vngodly though not so proper and waighty to omitt those I say I wil rest vpon that Cause which Hugo Cardinalis by you alleaged reciteth Whiche is this that whereas the daily Sacrifice of Christes Churche is a Memoriall and Remembraunce of Christes death on the Crosse as it hath before out of no childishe fathers ben proued vppon good Fridaye being the daye it selfe in which our Sauiour suffred the Churche M. Iewel which you ought not to scoffe at were you a Childe of that Mother thought good that day for the better expressing of the thinge it selfe to omitt the Accustomed remembraunce thereof Whiche omitting being Rare and Singular did more liuely strike the Affection of Christen folcke then the Accustomed Solemnities woulde haue done For this cause also that daye we see the Churche withoute all pompe or Solemnitie as though it were in heauinesse and lamentation to expresse the greate sorowe and desolation off our Lady and the blessed Apostles which then at that time being the onely Churche of Christ suffred by the death of their dere Master whom they loued so tenderly and of whose Resurrection they were not then persuaded thouroughly This is M. Iewell in fewe wordes a parte of the singular mysterie whiche the Church of God vseth in omitting the daily Sacrifice on good Friday If this do not satisfie you I maruail not Animalis homo non percipit ea quae Dei sunt The Sensuall man perceiueth not those thinges which are of God Only this maye suffise to proue that this custome which D. Harding speaketh of is not as you Vntruly charge him voide off all Colour or Shewe of Truthe Harding Christ gaue no necessary Commaundement either for the one or for bothe kindes beside and without the Celebration of the Sacrifice but lefte that to the Determination of the Church Iewell The .62 Vntruthe Christes Institution perteineth as well to the people as to the priest This Vntruthe hath before at large ben answered in this very article being before noted by M. Iewell and now againe repeted to make vp a number It was before the 49. Vntruthe Harding VVe beleue stedfastly with harte and confesse openly with mouthe that vnder eache kinde the very flesh and Bloud off Christ and whole Christ him self is present in the Sacrament 63 euen as Gelasius beleued Iewell The .63 Vntruthe Gelasius neuer beleued so Stapleton How are you sure of that M. Iewell You are very bolde and peremptory in all your assertions But you proue as litle as he that saieth nothing For notwithstanding his wordes which here you alleage he beleued as al other bishoppes of Rome beleued he beleued the reall presence of Christe in the Sacrament as it is at large proued againste yow M. Iewell in the Confutation of your Apologye fol. 98. To that place I referre you for better vnderstandinge off Gelasius his belefe herein Harding VVhereas before 64. off some the Sacrament was receiued vnder one Kinde and off some vnder bothe Kindes Iewell The .64 Vntruthe No Catholike congregation euer receiued the Sacrament in one kinde D. Harding saieth not so much but that some haue so receiued it which he saied truly and proued it before in the Article abundantly Whereby your challenge is also in this pointe answered The tenour whereof was that within the compasse of .600 yeares the Communion was neuer Ministred to the people vnder One kinde Now that you adde before Openly in the Church and then againe The whole people and nowe a Catholike Congregation this ofte Altering of the Question M. Iewel is but a mere wrangling and a plaine proclaiming of your selfe Guilty For had you ben able to haue auouched your first assertion you would neuer haue added so many newe Conditions vnto it And had not D. Harding vtterly ouerthrowen the same you woulde not haue sought such shamelesse shiftes as to make a newe Question of the whole matter and to require a proofe of that which you had not yet denied and whiche D. Harding vnlesse he had had the Sprit of prophecye to foresee these your alterations and extensions of the question was in no wise bounde to proue But M. Iewell to knitt vp this mattter to let passe your slaunderous charging of D. Harding with so many Vntruthes and not one yet found to be such finally to speake one worde shortly of this whole matter thus you shall vnderstande It hath sufficieÌ„tly appeared both by the treatise of D. Hardinge and by the Iustifiyng of these Vntruthes that the InstitutioÌ„ of Christ in the last Supper bindeth not all laye personnes or other to communicat vnder both kindes Also that within the space of the first 600. yeares thâ— Church of God of that tyme ministred vnto diuerse of Gods people the blessed Sacrament vnder one kind This being so proued this de Iure and also De facto both by Right and by Practise appearing euidently now for you M. Iewel to quarel De facto alterius generis of a practise more general for you to require proofes in Churches in OpeÌ„ Assemblies in an Open Order and Vsage off the Church it is the part of a quareller and wraÌ„gler It is not the part of one that seketh vnite It is no Bishoplike demeanour no charitable dealing no ChristiaÌ„ or Catholiâ—e vsage This is a SacrameÌ„t of vnite The Church of God hath vsed it bothe waies and hath by that double vsage interpreted vs the meaning of Christes institutioÌ„ touching the people to be indiffereÌ„t For we beleue M. Iewell and let this be the ende of al that the knowen Church of Christ not only of the first 600. yeares but also of these later 900. yeares is and hath ben alwaies so guided and preserued of almighty God according to the Clere Promises of God in the psalmes the prophets and the ghospel that neither in Doctrine of faith neither in Practise of seruing him it caÌ„ or hath at any time swarued much lesse broken his owne InstitutioÌ„ and ordonaÌ„ce in so weighty and daily a matter as the Ministration of his holy SacrameÌ„tes is This is our faith grounded vpoÌ„ holy Scripture and the worde of God By thiâ— faith we beleue and doo as the church beleueth and doth though we had no one testimonie of the ancieÌ„t primitiue Church to coÌ„firme and witnesse the
for thee that thy faith not maye saile The like confidence and trust in them selues the Priestes had in the olde times as it may appeare by these wordes of the prophet Micheas The priestes taught for hiere and the Prophets prophesied for mony and yet they rested them selues vpon the Lorde and saied Is not the Lorde in the middest emongest vs It foloweth immediatly in the Prophet Non venient super nos mala c. There shall no harme befalle vnto vs. Therefore for your sake Sion shall be plowed like the filde and Ierusalem shal be turned into a heape of stones and the hill of the temple into a highe wodde These wordes if M. Iewel had added and not broken of so vpon the sodain it would haue appeared in what sence the Priestes craked of the Lorde amonge them and what their confidence and trust was Their confidence and trust was that did they neuer so ill yet God woulde not punishe them The trust whiche we haue vpon the See off Rome is that it shall not faile in the faithe grounded vpon the wordes off oure Sauiour spoken particularly to Peter in the presence of all the rest It is of the Faithe to continewe It is not of any temporall confidence of escape harmelesse in iniquite Therefore you saied vntruly The like confidence and truste c. and therefore also you haue to a wronge and contrary sence wrested the saying of the Prophet Iewell With like confidence the priestes saied as it is writen in the prophet Hieremie The Lawe shall not decaye in the Priest nor Counsell in the Elder With like confidence or rather impudency M. Iewell hath bothe wrested to a contrary meaning and also pared the very wordes of the Prophet Hieremy as he nipped before the wordes of Micheas For thus stande the wordes of Hieremy Et dixerunt Venite cogitemus contra Hieremiam cogitationes noÌ„ enim peribit lex a Sacerdote neque Consilium a Sapiente nec sermo a propheta venite percutiamus eum lingua non attendamus ad vniuersos sermones eius And the Iewes sayed Come Let vs deuise deuises against Hieremy for the lawe shal not decaye in the Priest nor the Counsell in the wise no the worde in the Prophet Come and let vs strike him with our tonge and let vs geue no eare to all his sayinges These are the whole wordes of Hieremy in that place wherof M. Iewell hath picked out a piece only and that which stode in a parenthesis to persuade a sence which the whole place being opened confuteth it selfe For those wordes are not spoken as of the Priestes only but as of all the Iewes As the whole drifte of the Chapter declareth Againe the Prophet in this place rebuketh not their belefe or doctrine but expresseth their wicked conspiracy to destroye him which had rebuked their euill life and had foretold them of Gods vengeaunce to come vpon them He speaketh not of any Councell touching the obseruation of Moyses lawe Last of all bicause the Priestes vpoÌ„ a confideÌ„ce of Gods promise made vnto them that all ambiguites and questions betwene bloud and bloud Cause and Cause Lepre and not Lepre shoulde be determined by them thought therefore that in all other thinges their Iudgement and Councell should stande in like maner bicause I saye they abused this Authorite of deciding questions of the Lawe to liue and doe in maners what them listed therefore the prophet Ieremy vsed those wordes against them If in like maner any Pope for the defence of his Lewde life woulde alleage the promise made to S. Peter that his Faith should not faile then were the Confidence and trust of such a Pope in such a case like to the Confidence and trust that those Iuish Priestes had But nowe seing the life and behauiour of Popes is not desended to be innoceÌ„t but their faithe is defended to be Sure and not able to faile in determining matters touching Faithe therefore we trust truly to the promise of Christ that Peters faithe shall not faile therefore the confidence of vs is not like to that vaine coÌ„fidence of the Priestes that Hieremy speaketh of and therfore you M. Iewel haue lewdely and wickedly wrested this place of holy Scripture as you haue done the others But God answereth them farre otherwise Ye shall â—aue darke night in stede of Vision and ye shall haue darkâ—esse in steede off Prophecye In this prophecy the Prophet foretolde the Iewes of the fall of their Synagoge and of the blindnesse that they should be in at the coming of the Messias The Church of Christ is contrary wise promised to haue the holy Ghoste for â—uer to remaine with it and Christ hath saied I will be with you all dayâ—s euen to the ende of the worlde Therefore this iâ— wrongefully applied to the Rulers of Christâ—s Churche whose faithe shall no more faile then the Churche it selfe And therefore ones againe you haue wrested the holy Scripture In like maner M. Iewell hauing alleaged a number of gloses out of the CanoÌ„ law that the Pope can not erre for a bâ—iefe solutioÌ„ to them al he abuseth a place or two of holy Scâ—ipture and so concludeth that matter thus Iewell Thus â—hey feast and chere them selues and smoth the world with vaine talke But S. Ihon saieth Noâ—ite aâ— eâ—e Patâ—em habemus Abraham Neuer saye Peter or Abraham was our Father See we not here what a smothe Solution M. Iewel hath made and howe feately he hath glosed S. Iohns Text S. Iohn sayd to the Iewes Crake not of your Father Abraham Therefore we must thinke that the Popes faithe may fayle For that is the matter which M. Iewell laboureth to proue in that place and which the gloses immediatly befor recited do witnesse Againe M. Iewel to fournish the matter shufleth betwene S. Iohns wordes Peter or as though S. Iohn had spoken or meaned there of Peter also By such glosing as M. Iewel teacheth vs we may saie S. Iohn saieth Neuer saye this man or that man or Abraham was our Father And so by this glose of M. Iewel the Child shal be taught to denie his Father Certainely S. Paule who is to be thought to haue vnderstanded S. Iohns meaning no lesse then M. Iewel not withstanding those wordes saieth to the Corinthians Though ye haue tenne thousand of Masters in Christ yet ye haue not many Fathers For in Châ—ist Iesus I begotte you by the ghospâ—ll In which wordes he feareth not to be taken for their Father though the Iewes by S. Ihon were forebidden to crake of their Father AbrahaÌ„ So properly and sincerely M. Iewel alleageth the Scriptures It foloweth in the same place of his text immediatly Iewell S. Paule speaking of his successours saieth thus I knewe that after my departure from you there shall rauening wolues come amongest you that shall not spare the floâ—ke This was spokeÌ„ to the clergy of Ephesus This maketh nothinge to
of bishops one in Italy an other in Fraunce which last was more then nede as S. Augustin expressely saieth only to stoppe if it were possible their outragions clamours and seditious complaintes as he at the lenght was content to heare their matter him selfe after the Iudgement of so many bishops whereof he woulde afterwarde aske them pardon as hauing in dede passed therein the boundes of his Iurisdiction as this good Emperour I saie did all this not as by lawfull Authoryte but as yelding to the Donatistes vnruly appetit so that you also M. Iewell woulde ones yelde to the Truthe that you woulde no more bringe this and such like examples deceiued herein vndoubtedly by the writers of Germany especially those of Magdeburge for the Authorite of Ciuill Princes in Causes ecclesiastical whereas by the clere verdit of S. Ambrose neither by practise of the Churche neither by the doctrine of holy Scriptures Emperours did euer Iudge ouer bishops in matters of the Faithe And thus I leaue your example of Donatus whose example beside caÌ„ make no lawe he being an heretike and for mayntenaunce of his heresy seeking all helpe and succour by right and by wronge by order and beside order by meanes good and badde Nowe to that which foloweth Iewell Therefore the Emperour Constantius summoned the Bishops of the East that had bene in the CouÌ„cel of Tyrus to appeare before him and to rendre accompte of their doinges His wordes be these I will you to make your appearaunce and to shewe in dede howe sincerely and iustly ye haue delte and that euen before me StapletoÌ„ Howe this was done and vpon what occasion and in what a cause and what ensewed thereof I haue declared To that place I remit the Reader Let vs nowe consider your Conclusion Iewell By these fewe examples it may well appeare that Appeales in ecclesiasticall causes in these daies were made vnto the Prince and that it was thought lawefull then for the Prince to haue the hearing of the same Yet was not the Prince therefore the head of the Vniuersall Churche Your examples haue bene but two And bothe of one Emperour and Prince Constantin by name And with what conscience he toke vpon him to Iudge of matters decided before by bishops you haue heard S. Augustin tell you M. Iewell He did the first to pacifie those outregious Donatistes and â—he asked pardon thereof afterwarde of the bishoppes He did the latter to pacifie likewise the Arrians and in a matter not mere ecclesiasticall as hath before bene declared Of the Issue whereof he repented him at lenght also These be your examples M. Iewel that in the time of so many Christen Emperours and Princes you haue chosen out as most worthy and especiall One more you recite euen after your ConclusioÌ„ made which is this Iewell Certainely S. Gregorie thought it not amisse to committe a Spiritual matter touching the purgation of a bishop to Brunichiâ—da thâ— Frenche Quene Notwithstanding it be noted thus in the glose Fuit tamen 〈◊〉 nimâ—â—m papaliter dispâ—nsatum Stapleton S. Gregory committed a Spiritual Matter to the Quene of Fraunce Ergo Appeales may be made to the laye Prince Thus M. Iewelles reason procedeth But doth not the CoÌ„trary directly Conclude The Pope committed a Spiritual matter to the laye Prince Ergo the laye Prince was but the Popes Commissioner Verely the Commissioner is euer Inferiour to him that geueth forthe the Commission And thus M. Iewelles reason ronneth roundely against him As touching this Commission S. Gregory had a reason for his so doing But what his minde was for any Appeale to be made to Ciuill Princes in Ecclesiasticall matters or for their intermedling there withall it may appere well bothe by the vniuersall Supremacy that he practised ouer all Christendome as hath before bene declared and also by these wordes of his to Mauritius the Emperour Sacerdotibus autem non extrema potestate dominus noster citius indignetur sed excellenti consideratione propter eum cuius serui sunt eis ita dominetur vt etiam debitam reuerentian impendat Let not my Soueraine for his worldly power conceiue quicke Indignation against the priestes but by a worthy and Princely consideration for his sake whose seruauÌ„tes they are let him se rule ouer them that yet he yelde them also dewe and Bounden Reuerence Of this matter howe in Spirituall causes the Christian Princes are subiecte to their spirituall Pastours and bisshoppes I haue otherwhere out of S. Augustin S. Ambrose and Gregory Nazianzen ye out of Caluin him selfe and the right or Zelous LutheraÌ„s of Germany Illyricus and his felowes declared But bicause M. Iewell putteth it here for a principale that Princes receaued Appeales in Causes ecclesiasticall and all his examples haue failed him let vs consider what may be farder yet brought to the Contrary Athanasius that lerned Father saieth of the Arrians Qua fronte comentum Synodi appellare audent Cui Comes praecedit Howe dare they call that an assembly of a Synode where the Princes Officier was president And in an other place he saieth Quando a condito aeuo audituÌ„ est quód iudiâ—ium Ecclesiae authoritatem suam ab Imperatore accepit aut quando hoc pro iudicio agnitum est When was it euer heard that an Ecclesiasticall Iudgement toke his Authorite of the Emperour Or when was that taken for any Iudgement Beholde M. Iewell howe contrary this is to your Appeales to Ciuil Princes in Causes ecclesiasticall Yet beholde an other The Fathers of the Millenitane Councel in Africa whose Authorite so ofte and so gredely you haue alleaged decreed in this sorte Placuit vt quicunque ab Imperrtore cognitionem Iudiciorum publicorum petierit honore proprio priuetur Si autem Episcopale iudicium ab Imperatore postulauerit nihil ei obsit It hath semed good vnto vs that if any sue to the Emperour to haue him heare and determine publike Iudgementes that he be depriued therefore of his dignite But if he require of the Emperour a Iudgement of bishopps it shalll not hurte him Semblably to these holy Fathers the bishops in the CouÌ„cell of Aquileia dealed For whereas Palsadius the heretike required the laye men of worship to come in to the Councell and to heare the matters debated saying Sunt hic honorati multi Here be many men of worship S. Ambrose one of the lerned bishops of that Councell saied Sacerdotes de laicis iudicare debent non laici de sacerdotibus Priestes ought to Iudge of the laye not the laye of the Priestes And bicause that heretike Palladius persisted yet in his request that the laye men off worship shoulde enter and be a parte of the Councell S. Ambrose without any farder busynes pronounced out of hande the Sentence against him whiche the whole Councell folowed in these wordes Though Palladius hath bene taken in many faultes yâ—t this mâ—kâ—th vs ashamed that he which goeth for a Priest shoulde seme to
for any credit to be geuen him in suche matters he may nowe stande for banckeroute Certainely Leo notwithstanding Martianus summoned the Councell of Chalcedon yet he saieth that was done Apostolicae Sedis iure atque honore seruato the Right and the honour off the Apostolike See reserued And in the same Councell it is openly auouched without any CoÌ„tradiction notwithstanding M. Iewelles Nay here that Missi Apostolici semper in Synodis prius loqui confirmare soliti sunt the legates of the See Apostolike were wonte in Councels allwaies to speake first and to coÌ„firme first This loe was the right of the See Apostolike this was not by waie of Intreaty And therefor the Emperour him selfe Martianus writinge to Pope Leo about the assembling of this councell affirmeth eius sanctitatem principatum in episcopatu diuinae fidei possidere that his holynesse occupieth the Chiefty or principal roome in the bishoply charge of Gods faithe and inuiteth him therfore ad celebrandam SynoduÌ„ eo Authore that a couÌ„cel may be celebrated by his Authorite In like maner writeth Pulcheria the Emperesse vnto Leo the Pope of Rome aboute the same time as it hathe before bene declared Here is an Authorite confessed not only of Leo the Pope and the CouÌ„cel but of the Emperour him selfe in gouuerning and directing the Councel Here is no intreaty or special graunt made or required M. Iewel would faine it were so but withe al his shiftes he shall neuer be all to proue it so But saieth M. Harding the bishop of Rome allowed all Councels This is not denied If it be not denied why haue you so longe striued against it So did others not only patriarches or bishoppes but also Ciuill princes Gentle Reader Eye M. Iewel wel Vnlesse thou take good hede he will steale from thee He saieth not only the bishopp of Rome allowed all Councâ—lles but also saieth M. Iâ—well So did others Then he must proue that other allowed all Councels and that with suche and like authorite as the Pope did Nowe the Authorite of the Pope was such that without it as the ecclesiasticall story reporteth No councelles might be held Then M. Iewell must proue that nott only Patriarches and other bishops but also Ciuil Princes had such authorite in approuing Councelles that without their Authorite they mignt not be helde Such authorite M. Iewell must proue Els his so did others will not folowe Nowe let vs see howe he proueth it In the Councell of Calcedon it is writen thus Theodosius the Emperour of godly memorie hath confirmed all thinges by a general lawâ— that were determined in the vniuersall Councell So likewise the Emperour Martianus by the holy edicte of our Maiestâ— we confirme that Reuerend Councel So Eusebius witnesseth that the Emperperour Constantius confirmed the determinations of the Councel of Nice So the bishoppes in the Councell of ConstaÌ„tinople wrote to the Emperour Theodosius wee desire by your fauour by your highnes letters to ratifie and confirme the decree of the Councell You might haue added here M. Iewell so in the late generall Councell of Trent the Oratours of the Emperour and euery Catholike prince there present confirmed the decrees of the Councell And yet neither the other examples nor this late example is any thinge like to the confirming of the bishop of Rome The bishop of Romes confirmation is so necessary that without it as the Canons do commaunde no Councell can be kept No bishop nor prince hath such a confirmation As for example Theodosius which you alleaged first confirmed the Councell of Ephesus And yet that Councell was after and euer sence accompted for no lawfull Councel bicause the legates of Pope Leo were not admitted but by violence of the heretike dioscorus iniured Therefore as all your other examples do proue a godly zele in these good Catholike Emperours and do shewe howe necessary it is that the secular power do aide the spirituall yet no Emperour or laie prince euer confirmed any Councell as the Iudge and president hereof To be shorte The bishop of Rome hath in all Councelles a negatiue voice as without whose none can be approued for so doth the Canon mencioned in the Ecclesiasticall history expressely witnesse Such a negatiue voice such an absolute and supreme Authorite in approuing Councelles no Prince nor Patriarche hathe but only the bishop of Rome successour to Peter chiefe of the Apostles For why The Emperour or laye Prince as he hath no absolute authorite to iudge in matter of â—he faithe so hath he none to approue Councelles when matters of the faithe only are handled Therefore Gregory Nazianzen being a bishop calleth the Emperour Ouem sui gregis a shepe of his flocke So S. Ambrose saieth What is more honorable for the Emperour then to be called the sonne of the Churche for a good Emperour is within the Churche not aboue the Churche So Iohn Caluin in his Institions directly against M. Iewell and according to the minde of S. Ambrose saieth The Magistrat if he be godly will not exempt him selfe from the common subiection of the Children of God Wherefore it is not the least parte to submitte himselfe to the Churche iudging by the worde of God And therefore Constantin the great in the first CouÌ„cel of Nice as Sozomenus recordeth entred in to the Concell house after all the bissops had his seate and place benethe theÌ„ all neither woulde sitt Downe before the bishops had commaunded him And in that Councell he protested plainely that it was not his parte to iudge ouer the bishops Whose example the vertuous Emperour Martianus expressely folowing in the Councel of Chalcedon in his oration made to the whole Synod speaketh thus Nos ad confirmandam fidem non ad ostendendam virtutem exemplo CoÌ„stantini Imperatoris adesse Synodo cogitauimus We after the example of Constantine haue thought good to be present at this Councell not to shewe our power therein but to confirme the faithe And a litle after he saieth Our endeuour must be to applie the people to the one and right Churche being first persuaded the true and holy doctrine And therefore let your Reâ—uerentnesse expound and declare the true and Catholike faithe according to the doctrine of the Fathers in al vnite and coÌ„corde Thus this vertuous Martianus folowing the steppes of Constantinus though he confirmed the faithe of the Concell yet he iudged not in the Councell he commited the triall and iudgement of doctrine to the bishops he made his people to obey it Thus did Emperours and Ciuill princes behaue them selues in Councelles such as were Catholikes and defenders of the Catholike faithe This helpeth not hindereth this strengtheneth not ouerthroweth the spirituall Iurisdiction And thus much of the Ciuill princes and namely of Martianus and Constantinus alleaged by M. Iewell As for Theodosius the seconde whom he alleageth also in the first Councel of Ephesus holden vnder him he behaued him selfe as
the very vvordes of S. Hierom of S. Augustin Of Leontius of Origen and of the Nicene Councell out of Franciscus Turrianus All vvhich Authors being by D. Harding in those places alleaged are noted by M. Ievvell to speake vntruly If you vvoulde nedes note the matter for vntrue you shoulde haue noted the vntruth M. Ievvel vpon such and such Authors not vpon D. Harding Novve vvhat shall I call that in you grosse ignorance or vvillfull dissimulation vvhen you note those sayinges of D. Harding for Vntrue vvhich are the very saiynges of other good Authors though not alleaged then presently So you Note that for Vntruthe yea and for a foule deprauation or holi scripture vvhich is the very saying and doctrine of S. Hilary Art 2. fol. 48. b. The like you doe Art 4. folio 170. a. by a saying of Innocentius the first defended also by S. Augustin In these pointes M. Ievvell either you loued not the Truthe or els you must confesse you missed of the grounde thereof Againe vvhen you dissemble the Course of D. Hardinges treatyse and vpon that Dissimulation do score vp Vntruthes bicause that is not Concluded vvhich in dede vvas not of him in that place Intended can this your dissimulation procede of the zele and loue of Truthe In the first Article vvhen D. Hardinge alleaged Clement S. Dyonise Iustinus Martyr and Ireneus S. Basill and Chrysostom and last of all Cyrillus for proufe of the Sacrifice of the masse you note vpon al these Allegatyons a number off vntruthes bicause you saie there those Doctours do speake of a Communion and not of Priuat Masse vvhereas yet as I saied they vvere expressely brought to proue the Sacrifice of the Masse not to proue priuat Masse Of this your leude dealing you maye reade more particularly in this Returne Art 1. fol. 4. b. But this your open and manifest dissimulation can it I appeale to your ovvne Conscience procede of any Zele or loue of the Truthe Did the Truth I saie moue you to note those Vntruthes The like dissimulatyon you vse in a number of other Vntruthes vvhich you haue scored vpon D. Harding as the diligent Reader maye consider Art 1. fol. 5. 6. a. folio 9. b. 10. b. 17. b. Art 2. fo 53. a. Art 3. folio 117. b. 119. a. 121. a. 123. a. Artic. 4. fol. 185. a. 186. b. but especially in the same Article fol. 2 b. and .3 a. vvhere you charge D. Harding though not with Vntruthe in the Margin yet vvith a great Vntruthe in your text as if he had nipped a saying of S. Gregory quite in the middest scoffing also there at him as if he had you saie the Choynecyngh c. and all that bicause you saie in that place D. Harding alleaged those wordes of S. Gregory to proue that the B. of Rome was called the Vniuersall bishop vvhich thing in that place vvas not of him at all Intended but an other Matter expressely taken in hande as in that place Art 4. fol 2. b. and .3 a. you maye beholde and see to the eye M. Ievvell Novve this so open and greate dissimulation of youres in scoring and charging of Vntruthes vpon D. Harding hath it I saie on your part any Colour or Apparence of any loue or zele of the Truthe All the vvorlde seeth you did it to Deface to Shame and to discredit your Aduersary vvhom othervvise you coulde not vvith any force of good Reason any lerning truth probabilite or Authorite ouerthrovve Other your Vntruthes scored vpon D. Harding are such sayinges and Assertions as not only D. Harding but all the Catholike Churche affirmeth and holdeth for assured verites of the Catholike Faithe You coulde not then iustly note them as speciall Vntruthes of D. Harding as if they had bene of his ovvne Inuentyon but if you vvoulde nedes score them vp for vntruthes you shoulde haue scored them vpon the vvhole Church of Christ or as you esteme that Churche vpon all Papistes in generall For novve as you haue ordred the Matter your brethern do vaunte as I haue heard some of them my selfe that D. Harding hath committed this great number of vntruthes him selfe by his ovvne negligence or vvilfulnesse Such your vntruthes so noted maye shortly be sene Art 1. fol. 1. b. touching the name of Masse fol. 6. b. 7. b. 8. a. 11. b. 20. a. and. b. 32. a. Art 2. fol. 41. a. 43. a. 44. a. 54. b. 57. a. Art 4. fol. 1. a. 58. b. 71. a. 111. a. 116.126 b. 134. a. 165. a. 170. a. c. By this vvaie you might note M. Ievvel a number of Vntruthes not only vpon all Catholike vvriters of these dayes but also in the Olde Fathers and Doctours of Christes Churche vvho saie herein no lesse then vve saye as vpon these your Vntruthes it hath bene here declared Againe these matters being betvvene you and vs in question and controuersy you to proclaime them for vntruthes it is to blovve the Triumphe before the Victory But that in this your Singular Deuise of Scoring vp Vntruthes you rather sought meanes to fill vp the Score then to boulte out the Truthe it maye vvel appeare by the repeting of one selfe Vntruthe so often times For some you repete foure times in one Article as Art 1. fol. 32. a. some other three times as in the same Article fol. 40. b. and Art 4. fol. 172. but many there are vvhiche you repete tvvise only to make vp the Number As Art 1. fol. 8. a. Art 2. fol. 53. b. 54. b. Art 3. fol. 123. b. Art 4. fol. 19. By vvhich your dealing it maye easely appeare to any Indifferent Reader that in the great Number of these Vntruthes you sought more the Number then the Truthe To you therefore M. Ievvell that thus vntruly haue dealed that so many vvaies haue betrayed your corrupted Affectyon and Blotted your selfe so much intending to Blemish your Aduersary I maye vvell ansvver vvith the vvise and discrete saying of that Noble Philosopher Plato vvherevvith he touched that Rude Reprocher Diogenes Calcasti fastum Platonis sed maiore fastu Or rather I maye tell you as in the Grand Senat off Rome it vvas tolde ones to a dissolut and ryotous younge Man declayming sadly off Vertu Quis te ferat cenantem vt Crassus aedificantem vt Lucullus loquentem vt Cato VVho can abide thee to lauish in sumptuous building as Lucullus to ryot in bāketyng as Crassus and yet to talke sadly as an other Cato VVhich Reproche as he had right vvorthely before that Honourable Senat for his extreme dissimulation and vvretched Hypocryse so deserue you M. Ievvell in the estimation of all men to be taken for a dissembler and Hypocrite you I saie that vvith such and so manifolde Vntruthes do charge other of vntruthe and dealing your selfe most vntruly pretende to be a Singular proctour of Truthe For vvho may abyde you M. Ievvell to Corrupt the Fathers as haue done olde heretikes to scoffe
hath noted for Vntruthes bothe the principall Matters treated and proued in the Articles and also the Conclusions thereof as not yet proued I sawe therefore that in Iustifying these Vntruthes it was necessary to enter the Replie to labour the principall Matters and to proue that all thinges were wel proued This is in effect to answer the whole For other small matters neither so waighty as the Replyer woulde cauille at them neither so weake as he coulde finde any Coulour of Vntruthe to sett vpon them might well for breuities sake in a full and perfect Reioyndre be omitted This therfore I haue done and by this the Replyer maye thinke him selfe sufficiently answered in this former halfe of his Replie Howe in what Order and maner and howe farre I haue this done it shall nowe appeare I do first laye forthe the wordes of D. Harding printed in a seueral letter vpon and aboute the which the Replier hath noted the Vntruthe Then foloweth iÌ„mediatly the Vntruthe and the nuÌ„ber thereof noted by the Replyer worde for worde as it standeth in the Margin of his Replie vpon the text of D.H. After in an other distinct letter foloweth the Iustifying and discharging of the Vntruthe whereby the Replyer is Recharged the Vntruthe vpoÌ„ him Returned and he proued a Slaunderer VVhen occasion serueth as when some principall Matter contayning doctrine and concerning the state of the QuestioÌ„ occurreth whereby the Reader maye be edifyed the whole text of the Replie coÌ„cerning that matter is inserted and to euery parcel thereof Answer is made In the first Article I haue done this only in two places coÌ„tayning the very substaunce of the Article as I shal anon declare All the other Vntruthes I Iustifie shortly without entring to the text of the Replyer Thus I haue there done bicause D.H. hath him selfe made a full and perfit Reioyndre to this first Article In the Seconde Article as the Vntruthes there noted require very seldom such labour but may shortly be Iustified so haue I not often entred the text of the Replie but only aboute the Principall matters of the Article whereof I shall speake anon In the thirde and Fourthe Articles especially in the Fourthe I haue not lefte any whit of M. Iewelles Replie were it neuer so longe and tedyous vnanswered in such places as Vntruthes were noted VVhat principall Matters I haue after this sorte in these foure Articles treated and discussed it remayneth nowe to declare In the first Article the Vntruthe noted against the dayly externall Sacrifice of Christes Churche I haue persecuted at large and touched M. Iewelles Replie therein This I haue done at large and abundatly bicause the grounde of this Article which is of priuat Masse standeth hereupon For a daily externall Sacrifice on the priestes parte being necessary and yet the people not bounde by any lawe or precept daily to communicat it remayneth most necessary that in Case none will Receiue the priest maye and ought to Receiue alone seing without Receiuing the Sacrifice maye not be celebrated And thus priuat Masse which is the sole Receiuing of the priest is founde not only lawfull but necessary In the last Vntruthe in like maner touching the place of Chrysostom M. Iewelles whole Replie is answered priuat Masse is expressely proued out of Crysostom and the Replyer forced by all reason to Subscribe In the seconde Article concerning the very questyon of the Challenge the Replyer altereth it and enlargeth it and entreth a newe Action confessing secretly that in the former he is Guilty The groundes of the Question as that Christ is wholy receiued vnder eche kinde and that the Commaundement of Christ. Drinke ye all of this partayneth not to the laye people but to pristes only for these being graunted there is neither Inconuenience neither the breache of any CoÌ„maundement committed in receiuing vnder One kinde are bothe treated and proued in two seueral Vntruthes of that Article and the Replyers text in the later point answered In the thirde Article it is proued against Vntruthes noted to the contrary bothe that we at the first Receiuing of the Faithe in our Nation and that the East and VVest Church within the first 600. yeres had their Churche Seruice in the Greke and Latin tounges which the Common people vnderstode not VVhereby at the beginning the Replyer is forced by all reason to Subscribe VVhat other speciall Matters in this Article are treated and howe farre I haue entred the Replyers text bicause at the ende of the same Article I haue allready particularly declared I thinke it not nedefull here to repete In the Fourthe Article these principall matters are more especially treated and discussed by occasion of the Vntruthes noted First howe Iohn of Constantinople vsurped the Title of vniuersall Bishop in what sence he vsurped it and howe the holy Pope Gregory abhorred it Next that the same Lerned Father S. Gregory not withstanding he so abhorred the Name Practised yet him selfe a Supremacy vniuersall ouer all partes of the Church bothe of the East and of the VVest The greate CoÌ„trouersy touching a anon of the Nicene CouÌ„cell for the Popes primacy forged as the Replyer saieth by Pope Zosinius is againe a freshe debated and the loÌ„ge lying text of the Replyer in that behalfe thouroughly answered Zosimus clered and the Popes primacy coÌ„firmed Iustinians CoÌ„stitutions and decrees coÌ„fessing the Popes primacy are defended from the lewde and fonde expositions of the Replyer and his whole text thereupon perfectly examined By occasion of the 104. Vntruthe noted by the Replyer it is proued by holy Scripture and confirmed by the Fathers that Peter was left by Christ as the Foundation of his whole Churche and therefore as the principall Gouuerner and Vniuersall Vicair theâ—eof The next Vntruthe forced me to discouer a great number of textes of holy Scripture racked wrested and corrupted partly in generall by all protestants partly by the Replyer him selfe in this Fourthe Article VVherein many other pointes touching the Popes primacy the matter of this Article by the waie are opened The .106 and 107. Vntruthes occasioned me to enter to the Replyers text touching Appeales to Rome There it is proued against all the Argumentes and ObiectioÌ„s of the Replyer that Appeales to Rome were decreed by the holy Councels practised by the holy and lerned Fathers namely of Athanasius and S. Chrysostom two of the greatest patriarches after the B. of Rome and two of the most lerned Fathers of the greke Churche Last of all that such Appeales doe necessarely importe a Soueraine Authorite of the Pope ouer the whole Churche Item that no Appeales can be remoued from the Pope or made to the Emperour in causes ecclesiasticall as the Replyer laboureth in vaine to proue It is proued also at large in this Article by occasion of Vntruthes noted to the Contrary that the Pope erreth not in faithe that he hathe allwaies bene ouer the bishops of
thinges which be necessarely required to this Sacrament by Christes Institution either declared by written Scriptures or taught by the holy ghost as bread and wine mingled with water for the matter c. Iewell The .23 Vntruthe The mingling of wine and water together is neither Catholike nor necessary Scotus StapletoÌ„ Yes forsothe this is Catholike and therefore it is necessary That it is Catholike I proue by the coÌ„sent of the Catholike Fathers of all couÌ„tres in the primitiue church In Afrike S. CipriaÌ„ B. of Carthage affirmeth it in these words Copulatio coniunctio aquae vini sic miscètur in calice domini vt commixtio illa non possit abinuiceÌ„ separari The coupling and ioyning togeather of Wine and Water is so mingled in the Cuppe of our Lorde that the same mingling maye not be separated the one part from the other And againe Sic in sanctificando calice domini offerri aqua sola non potest quomodo nec vinum solum potest Nam si vinum tantum quis offerat sanguis Christi incipit esse sine nobis Si vero aqua sola plebs incipit esse sine Christo. QuaÌ„do autem vtruÌ„que miscetur adunatione confusa sibi inuicem copulatur tunc sacramentum spirituale caeleste perficitur In sanctifying the cuppe of our Lorde so water alone can not be offred as neither wine alone can be offered For if any offer wine alone then the bloud of Christ beginneth to be without vs. But if Water be alone the people beginneth to be without Christ. But wheÌ„ bothe is mingled and ioyned together then the spirituall and heauenly Sacrament is perfyted Thus much S. Cyprian and much more in that place disputing against those which vsed only water in consecrating the holy mysteries teaching the InstitutioÌ„ of Christ to be that both Wine and Water be mingled to the perfyting of that heauenly Sacrament S. Augustin an Africane about two hundred yeares after S. Cyprian witnesseth this practise of Christes church in his time also The seare his words In Eucharistia noÌ„ debet pura aqua offerri vt qui daÌ„ sobrietatis falluÌ„tur imagine sed vinuÌ„ cum aqua mixtuÌ„ In the Euchariste Only water ought not to be offred as some vnder the coulour of sobriete are deceiued but Wine mingled with Water In an other place he reckoneth these in the rolle of heretikes which offred Only water without Wine in the holy Sacrifice of Christes church And against such heretikes the 3. CouÌ„cell of Carthage vnto the which S. Augustin subscribed made an expresse decree not yet forbidding vtterly Water but commaÌ„ding wine and water Both to be mingled together These are the words of the decree Vt in sacrameÌ„tis Corporis SaÌ„guinis domini nihil amplius offeratur quà m ipse dominus tradidit hoc est panis Vinum aquae mixtuÌ„ That in the Sacraments of the Body and Bloud of our Lorde nothing elles be offred then oure Lorde him selfe deliuered that is bread and wine mingled with Water This the Councell decreed not as then a new Institution but as a Tradition coming from Christ him selfe Thus we see in Afrike in S. Cyprians and S. Augustins time the mingling of Water and Wine in the blessed SacrameÌ„t was accompted Catholike and necessary In Fraunce how the Sacrament was there celebrated let Ireneus a very auncient writer and nigh vnto the Apostles wtnesse Writing of this blessed Sacrament and by the verite of Christes body and bloud here in prouing the verite of his true flesh and bloud walking here on earth he hath these wordes Quando mixtus Calix factus panis percipit verbum dei fit Eucharistia corporis sanguinis Christi ex quibus augetur consistit carnis nostrae substantia that is WheÌ„ the mingled Cuppe and the made bread receaueth the worde of God it is made the Euchariste of the Body and Bloud of Christ of the which the substaÌ„ce of our flesh is augmented and coÌ„sisteth The Mingled Cuppe that Ireneus speaketh of caÌ„not be meaÌ„t of any other theÌ„ of wine mingled with water Of such a coÌ„mixtion in the blessed Sacrament a Councell holden in Fraunce aboue vnleuen hundred yeares past mencioneth In Italy what the practise of the primitiue church was by two witnesses it shall appere Alexander the fift Pope of Rome after S. Peter writeth thus not as a new decree of his owne but as he saieth vt a patribus accepimus as we haue receaued it froÌ„ the Fathers Repulsis opinionum superstitionibus panis tantum vinum aqua permixtum in sacrificio offerantur Laying aside all other superstitious opinions let only bread and wine Mingled with water be offred in the Sacrifice S. Ambrose no Pope but a lerned and blessed B. of Millain writeth thus Diximus quòd in altari constituitur Calix panis In Calicem inquit mittitur vinum Et quid aliud Aqua Sed tu mihi dicis Quomodo ergo Melchisedech panem vinum obtulit Quid sibi vult admixtio aquae Rationem accipe Primo omnium figura c. that is We saied before that vpon the aultar is put a Cuppe and bread In to the Cuppe saieth he wine is putt And what elles Water But thou saiest vnto me How then did Melchisedech offer bread and wine VVhat meaneth this Mingling of water Harken to the Reason First of all the figure and so forthe where S. Ambrose at large geueth ij causes of mingling VVater with wine in the blessed Sacrament The one to answer to the figure of the Water running out of the rocke stricken by Moyses which was Christ that is betokened Christ. An other that as water and bloud ranne out of the side of Christ on the Crosse bothe to redeme and to cleanse mankinde so in this blessed Sacrifice being an expresse resemblance of Christes passion Wine and Water be offred vp to perfit the Sacrament of Christes bloud Thus now we haue Catholike witnesses of the primitiue Church in Italy Fraunce and Afrike touching the Mingling of Water with wine in these holy mysteries In Spaine also wiâ—hin the compasse of M. Iewelles 600. yeares we reade the same confirmed in a Councel holden at Braccara and the very wordes of S. Ciprian aboue alleaged brought in Iewell But saieth M. Iewell Scotus and Innocentius witnesse that the Greke Church in their time vsed it not Is it come to that M. Iewell Must we trie our Catholike faith doctrine and euen the meanest cerimonies by the consent of the first 600. yeares and will you proue a doctrine not Catholike by the practise of certain countres litle more then 300. yeares past For about that time liued Innocentius and Scotus At that time the grekes as they had many other errours so no maruail if they had this also And you do but your kinde to disproue the Catholike seruice by the exaÌ„ple of heretikes For the greke Church
by the greate whore of Babylon Rome shoulde be meaned Yea yea proue this Master Iewell by the Fathers of the firste 600. yeares by the Scriptures or any generall Councell of that tyme and then we will beleue yelde and Subscribe to yow in that pointe Harding And from whence he meaneth Rome all the Churches of the VVest haue taken their light As the Bishoppes off Gallia that nowe is called Fraunce doo acknowleadge in an Epistle sent to Leo the Pope in these wordes Vnde Religionis nostrae propitio Christo Fons Origo manauit From the Apostolike See by the Mercye off Christe the Fountaine and Spring of oure Religion hathe come Iewell The 32. Vntruthe The Faithe of the West Church came not first from Rome D. Harding saieth not so muche But that the West Churche toke their Light from Rome Whereby he meaned that all the West Churches haue had from Rome thoughe not their verye Apostles and first Preachers yet whiche you your selfe Confesse in the Texte M. Iewel the Cōfirmation of Doctrine and also other great conference and comfort For all this M. Iewell is it not a light and helpe to Religion This D. Harding saiyeth the West Churches had from Rome This you confesse they had and that you saye at the beginning Why then note you D. Harding for Vntruthe in the Margin which youre selfe saieth and confesseth for Truthe in the Text But the Faithe off the VVest Church saye you adding it in the margin for a reason of the Vntruthe came not first from Rome First they toke their light though not their first faith And therfore youre Vntruthe is no Vntruthe on D. Hardinges parte But on your part how Vntrue it is you shall see First for Fraunce one of the greatest pillers of the West Churche you haue in D. Harding his wordes a Confession of the Frenche bishoppes them selues aboue xj C. yeares past that the Fountaine and Springe of their Religion came from the See Apostolike recorded in the vndoubted and Authentike workes of Leo. Therefore that you bringe to the contrarye in the text off Nathanael off Lazarus whom Christe raised and of Saturninus that they should first preache the faith in Fraunce and yet as you saye no Commission from Rome appearing whereby they shoulde be sent thither it is a Vaine Gheasse against the expresse Testimonye and Confession of the Frenche bishoppes them selues aboue vnleuen hundred yeares paste that whether by Commission from Rome by the Mouthe of those that yow name or whether by Romanes them selues or other sent from Rome and not these whiche withoute any Author or Writer M. Iewel bringeth in here vpō his Owne Credit whiche waie so euer it came I saye that from Rome it came Nowe not only Fraunce receiued their very first faithe from Rome as by the testimonye of the Frenche bishoppes them selues appeareth but many other principall countres of the Weste Churche also Our owne countre being first called Britanny and possessed of the Britons whose posterite now only remaineth in Wales receiued the faith from Eleutherius Pope of Rome about the yeare of our Lorde 156. as Venerable Bede in the history of our Church of Englande recordeth In the yeare of our Lorde 411. The Scottishmen receiued their first bishop Palladius from Celestinus then Pope of Rome as witnesseth Bede also Shortly after this time the Britains being forsaken of the Romains oppressed with the Peightes and Scottes their euill neighbours and last of all so ouerronne with the Saxons and English people sent for in to ayde them that with in lesse then ij hundred yeares all that is now called England was brought vnder the dominion of the Saxons and English people the olde Brittons beinge driuē to the straightes which they yet kepe being all heathen and infidels then to our countre of England and to vs Englishmen liuing in paganisme and idolatry that holy and blessed bishop of Rome S. Gregory directed the holy and vertuous Monke S. Augustin our Apostle who in his time conuerted Kent and Essex to the faith whose felowes and Scholers conuerted in short space all the realme of England that is all the English people to the faith of Christ. So that as the olde Brittons from Eleutherius the Schottishmen from Celestinus bothe holy Popes of Rome so we Englishmen from S. Gregory a blessed and lerned Pope also receiued not only the Light of our religion but also our very first Faith and belefe in Christ Iesus All which may furder appeare to him that will peruse the History of Venerable Bede lately sett forthe in English Not only England Fraunce and Scotland but the most part of Germany receiued euen from Rome their very first faith and knowleadg off Christ. For as Saxony had their first faith of Sergius the Pope about the yeare of our Lorde 690. so shortly after an 716. all the inwarde partes of Germany receiued the faith from Gregory the second a vertuous Pope also by the preaching of Bonifacius a Schottishman borne directed thither frō Rome Friselande in like maner conuerted to the faith by Willebrorde an English monke had him their first byshop confirmed from Rome So Norwaie by the preaching of Adrian the fourth Pope of Rome Bulgaria by Nicolaus the first Dalmatia and Sclauony all much about a time from the Church of Rome also receiued the faith Socrates writeth that the Burgunyons came to the faith of Christ perceauing by them selues 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the God of the Romains did mightely helpe such as feared him How thinke you now M. Iewell Had not D. Harding good cause to saie and truly to saye that the west Church toke their light from the Church of Rome yea and to saye that the faith of it came first from Rome which is more then D. Harding saied and yet no Vntruthe neither as the lerned do knowe Harding As touching that the Oblation of the Body and bloud of Christ done in the Masse is the Sacrifice of the Church and proper to the newe Testament 33 Commaunded by Christ to be frequented according to his Institution c. Iewell The .33 Vntruthe Christ neuer commaunded or named any such sacrifice Stapleton This Vntruthe doth but serue to make vp a number It is the same in effect with the fifte Vntruthe There it is answered There it is proued that Christ Commaunded a Sacrifice though he named none And D. Harding saieth it was Commaūded by Christ not named I referre the Reader to the next Vntruthe folowing Though M. Iewell may repete Vntruthes to make vp a number yet it is not our ease nor the profit of the Reader to repete idely one thinge being ones thouroughly proued Harding The opinion of the Fathers is that the daily and continuall Sacrifice ought 34 Daily to be Sacrificed that the death of our Lorde and the worke of our redemption might alwaies be celebrated and had in memory Iewell The .34 Vntruthe
receiue of the bishops or of the Priest the holy Communion Stapleton This proueth that when the Deacons receiued in such order they should receiue it It doth not proue that at euery Ministration they were bounde to receiue Againe the decree speaketh of bishops and of their Celebrating ChrysostoÌ„ now was no bishop Iewell Likewise the Councell of Carthage Let the Deacons receiue the Communion in order after the Priestes either the bishop or the Priest ministring it Stapleton Likewise we answer as before They were not commaunded at euery Ministration to receiue c. Iewell So the Councel of Laodicea It is lawfull only for the Priestes of the Church to enter in to the place where the Aulâ—ar stanâ—eth and there to CoÌ„municate So the Councel of Toledo Let the Priestes and Deacons communicate before the Aultar the Clerkes in the Quiere and the people without the Quieâ—e StapletoÌ„ To these I answer as before It is an order howe it is no coÌ„maundement when and how often they should receiue Iewell Nicolaus Cusanus hath these wordes This thinge is specially to be noted that the Priest did neuer celebrat without a Deacon And that in euery Masse the Deacon receiued the Sacrament in the kinde of Bread at the Priestes hande and the Priest the Cuppe at the Deacons hande Yea forsothe they did so as he saieth but in the Apostles time only and certain yeares after But what nedeth much proofe in a case that is so plaine Chrysostom him selfe foloweth the same order After that the Priestes haue receiued saieth he the Archedeacon commaundeth the Deacons to come fortâ—e and they so coming receiue as the Priestes did before Stapleton This proueth they did so in certain solemne and principall feastes But that they did so allwaies euery daye or Sondaye and that of bounded duty whereby only it should be impossible that Chrysostom should communicat alone that it proueth not nor saieth no such thinge Iewell Now let M. Harding iudge vprightly whether these shiftes be so poore as he woulde make them Stapleton Now let not only M. Harding but all the worlde iudge vprightly whether these be not not onely Poore but very Beggarly and moste Miserable Shiftes and suche as proue no deale at all that Chrysostome coulde in no wyse Communicate alone and therfore did not Communicat alone Whiche is the Purpose wherefore all these Allegations are brought M. Iewell perceauing very well that for all his former Allegations he could not proue the Clergy bounde to the daily coÌ„municating nowe he goeth aboute to proue it in the People And that therefore Chrysostom must nedes haue some to coÌ„municat with him yea though he saied him selfe he had not one These are his wordes Iewell Chrysostome in diuers places Semeth to diuide the whole multitude into three sortes whereof some were Poenitent some Negligent and some Deuoute Stapleton We see presently all this is but a bare Gheasse by the very wordes off M. Iewell Semeth to diuide But let vs heare forthe Iewell The Penitent were commaunded awaye and might not Communicate The negligent sometyme departed off them selues and woulde not Communicate The deuoute remained and receaued togeather Howe proueth M. Iewell this later pointe Yow shall heare Iewell Nowe that the deuoute remained stil with Chrysostome the whole time of the holy Mysteries it is plaine by the verye same place that M. Harding here alleageth for his purpose Stapleton Yea But you must proue that those deuoute not only Remained still but also Receiued with Chrysostom How proue you that You go forth and alleage your place Iewell For thus Chrysostome saieth vnto the people Thou art come into the Church and hast songe praises vnto God with the rest and hast confessed thy selfe to be one of the worthy in that thou departedest not foorth with the vnworthy By these wordes he sheweth that some were worthy and some vnworthy That the vnworthy departed and the worthy remained Stapleton Yea M. Iewell But here is not One Worde that those Worthy whiche Remained did Receiue That is but youre Gheasse Neither yet is there any worde that those whiche Remained were all Deuoute For in dede withoute Gheasse or ayme those vnworthy which departed were the penitents only whiche were commaunded to departe the Church with the Catechumins or Nouices in the faith straight after the Sermon And those which remayned were all the reste of the people as well Deuoute as not Deuoute Agayne though they were all Deuoute yet will it not folowe that they all Receiued For by S. Augustins iudgement a man maye bothe Receiue and Refraine from Receiuing with Deuotion The one he compareth to Zachaeus which gladly and hastely receiued Christ in to his house The other to the Centurion whiche with no lesse loue of Christ saied yet Lorde I am not worthy that thou shouldest entre vnder my â—oufe Yea Chrysostom in that place After he had saied in a greate Vehemency who so doth not Communicat is one of the poenitents straightwaye refrayning him selfe lest he shoulde seme to condemne all that were present he sayeth At ex his non es sed ex his qui possunt esse participes nihil curas aut magnum opus censes O but you are not such a poenitent but of the number of those whiche maye Communicate But you care not much for the matter or you thinke it is a greate Busynes c In which wordes it appeareth plainly that those which remained were such as might Communicat but yet such as partly of Negligence partly of Feare and Reuerence did refraine And therefore Chrysostome tempering his vehement talke saieth vnto such Considera quaeso Mensa Regalis est apposita caet Consider I beseche you The kinges table is layde and so forthe in many words persuading them to come and Receiue oftener After all whiche longe persuasion he concludeth att length saying Ne maius itaque vobis iudicium faciamus vos exâ—ortâ—mur non vt accedatis sed vt praesentia vos accessu dignos constituatis Therefore that we may not encrease youre iudgement meaning that the more they were warned the more should be their Damnation if they obeied not we do exhorte you not to come and receiue but to make youre selfe worthy bothe to be present and to receiue In which words he leaueth their Coming or not Coming to the Sacrament as free vnto them charging them only to make them selues Alwayes Worthy thereof to the entent that at Easter the Epiphanye and such other principall Festes they shoulde not be founde Vnworthy For so he disputeth in fewe lynes after sayinge Dic mihi quaeso post Annum Communionem sumens Quadraginta ne Dies ad totius temporis Peccatorum purificationem tibi satis esse putas Et Hebdomade ipsa rursum ad Priora reuerâ—eris Tell me I praye thee Thow cominge to Receiue after a yeares space thinkest thow that fourty daies he meaneth the Lent time will
either the Grosse Ignorance or the Wilfull Malice of M. Iewell This very saying and proposition of D. Harding which M. Iewell noteth for an Vntruth and which Slaunderously he calleth A foule deprauation of holy Scripture those very wordes I saie are the clere saying of that most lerned and most holy Father S. Hilary vttered of him aboue twelue hundred yeres past For that holy Father alleaging against the Arrians as D. Harding doth here against M. Iewell and his felowes that many thinges Commaunded by Christ were altered by the Apostles and their Successours bringeth this very matter for an example as D. Harding dothe and vttereth these very wordes Apostoli baptisare in Nomine Patris Filij Spiritus Sancti iussi Tantum in Iesu Nomine Baptisauerunt The Apostles being Commaunded to Baptise in the Name of the Father and the Sonne and of the Holy Ghoste they baptised in the Name of Iesus Christ Only Goe nowe M. Iewell take your penne and score vp this Vntruthe vpon S. Hilary as you haue done here vpon D. Harding Tell your Reader whom you fede with lies and Slaunderous Vntruthes that S. Hilary hath made A foule deprauation of the Sâ—riptures as you Slaunderously haue tolde him that D. Haâ—ding did make Be wise I pray you Aâ—one vnderstande the Scriptures Alone Beleue your selfe no Body and yet looke to be beleued Alone By such Impudency you vpholde your Religion Harding To the Apostles only and their successours and to none other the 55 Catholike Church hath euer referred the necessite of that commaundemeut Drinke ye all of this And that in the celebration of the Sacrifice Iewell The .55 Vntruthe The Catholike or vniuersall Church neuer vnderstode it so but onely the Church of Rome which is but late and mere particular The Church of Rome is at this day the most auncient Church in Christendom The succession thereof hath continewed from S. Peter the Head of the Apostles vntill these our daies without interruptioÌ„ by the number of 230. bishops which yet M. Iewell calleth a late Church euen as he calleth the Catholike religion a corruption of late yeres Againe he saieth it is a mere particular Church and therefore no Catholike Church Yes forsothe M. Iewell it is called the Catholike Church of the lerned Fathers of the first 600. yeres When S. Paule saied the Church of God to be the piller of truthe what Churche meant he M. Iewell Meant he any particular Churche and not rather the Catholike and vniuersall churche of all Christendom which in dede can not swarue from the truthe as particular chuâ—ches bothe may and haue done Yeat S. Ambrose expounding that place of S. Paule and speaking of that vniuersall Church of God saieth Cuius hodie rector est Damasus whose ruler at this daye Damasus is This Damasus was then Pope Lo by the iudgemeÌ„t of S. Ambrose who I may be bolde to saie vnderstode the Scriptures as wel as M. Iewell the bishop of Rome is the Ruler of the vniuersall Church And how then is the Church of Rome of which the Pope is bishop a mere particular Church Verely S. Hierom calleth the faith of Rome the Catholike faith writing against Ruffinus in these wordes Fidem suam quam vocat Eam ne qua Romana pollet Ecclesia an illam quae in Origenis voluminibus coÌ„tinetur Si Romanam responderit ergo Catholici sumus Sin Origenis blasphemia illius fides est se haereticum probat What dothe he call his faith Meaneth he that faith which the Church of Rome alloweth or that which in the bookes of Origen is taught If he answer it is the faith of Rome then we be Catholikes But if Origens blasphemy be his faith he proueth him selfe an heretike Thus the faith of Rome and the Catholike faith is to S. HieroÌ„ all one Last of al S. Cyprian calleth the Church of Rome Catholicae ecclesiae radiceÌ„ matriceÌ„ The roote and mother church of the Catholike Churche Go now M. Iewell and call the Church of Rome a mere particular Church It shall be no Vntruthe neither for D. Harding nor for any man elles to call the determination of the Church of Rome the determination of the Catholike Church as longe as we haue S. Ambrose S. Hierom and S. Cyprian to saie with vs. Harding The two Disciples in Emaus as soone as they knewe Christ in breaking of the Bread he vanished away from their sighter tâ—at he tooke the Cuppe into his handes and blissed it and gaue it vnto them 56. as it appeareth euidently enough to S. Augustin to Bede and to all other that be not willfully opinatiue Iewell The .56 Vntruthe Neither S. Augustine nor Beda nor any other Auncient Father hath any such word but rather the contrary Yeas forsoth Both S. Augustin and Bede and Chrysostom an other auncient Father do teache the same Breaking of Bread to haue ben the SacrameÌ„t Which is the thing that D. Harding there affirmeth And that Christ tooke not the Cuppe at all it was no dede to alleage doctours The Scripture in that place of S. Luke is plaine Where no one worde of the Cuppe is made S. Augustin saieth of this place Non incongruenter accipimus hoc impedimentuÌ„ in oculis eoruÌ„ a Satana factuÌ„ fuisse ne agnosceretur Iesus Sed tameÌ„ a Christo facta est permissio vsque ad SacramentuÌ„â—is vt vnitate Corporis eius participata remoueri intelligatur impedimentum inimici vt Christus possit agnosci We thinke it not amisse to saye that their eyes were blinded by the Deuill so that they could not know Iesus Yet notwithstanding that was done by the permission of Christ vntill the Sacrament of the Bread To thentent that the vnite of Christes Body being participated the let of the enemy might be remoued and Christ acknowleadged This exposition yea and these very wordes of S. Augustin Bede in his commentaries vpon S. Luke foloweth and repereth As also Theophilact foloweth herein ChrysostoÌ„ whose words we shal hereafter recite and saieth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He insinuateth yet an other thinge That these Discipes participating the blissed Bread had their eies straight waies opened to knowe Christ. For the flesh of our Lorde hath a great and vnspeakeable vertu Thus lo by the iudgement of S. Augustine and Bede of Chrysostom and Theophilact that Bread which Christ gaue to the disciples in Emaus was the Sacrament of his Body Here is no one worde neither in the Scripture neither in those Doctours off the Cuppe And therfore by their iudgemeÌ„t here is a clere case of a Communion vnder One kinde Ministred by oure Sauiour him selfe And so it is proued true that Doctour Hardinge saied of a Communion vnder one kinde ministred to the disciples at Emaus What saieth M. Iewell to these Doctours He sayeth Iewell First the Breade that Christ brake at Emaus was coÌ„mon table breade and not the Sacrament S.
had ben a sobre writer and not a quarelling wrangler you might iustly haue saied Sir I finde no such thinge in Chrysostom vpon that place and therefore vnlesse you name vs where Chrysostom so saied it may be thought you haue missereported him Thus or in some like maner as you knowe best your selfe M. Iewell had not this willfull heresy taken awaye all modesty you might haue laied to D. Hardinges charge Now you first put it for an Vntruthe in the margin yea and repete it againe in the next Vntruthe folowing then you charge him in your text for an Vntrue Reporter of his doctour and al most Vntruly and SlauÌ„derously on your parte For these are the wordes of Chrysostom or as M. Nowell speaketh of an auncient writer printed with Chrysostom and longe taken for him Sed quia de sanctis caepimus dicere c. Bicause we haue begonne to speake of holy thinges it is not to be left vnspoken that sanctification is one thinge and that which is sanctified an other For Sanctification is that which sanctifieth an other But that which is sanctified can not sanctifie an other though it selfe be holy As for example Thou makest the signe of the Crosse ouer thy bread right so as S. Paule saieth For it is made holy by the worde of God and praier Thou hast sanctified it thou hast not made it Sanctification But that which the priest geueth with his hand is not only a thinge sanctified but also Sanctification For as much as not only that is geuen which is sene but also which is vnderstanded And so it is laufull to cast of the sanctified bread to beastes and to infidels bicause it doth not sanctifie the receiuer But if that which is takâ—n of the hande of the priest were such a thinge as that which is eaten from of the borde all would eate from of the borde and no man would eate of the priestes hande VVherefore our Lorde also did not only blesse the bread in the waye he meaneth at Emaus but gaue it also with his hande vnto Cleophas and his fellowe And Paule as he was vnder saile did not only blesse the bread but also gaue it to Luke and to his other disciples Now that which is geuen with the hande is not to be geuen to beastes nor to infidels for that is not only Sanctified but also Sanctification and sanctifieth the receiuer Thus farre Chrysostom In which wordes he doth bothe expounde the place of the 24. of S. Luke whereof I spake a litle before for the Sacrament and also saieth expressely touching this place which we now talke of the 27. of the Actes that S. Paule in the ship gaue the bread with his hande to Luke and to the rest of his disciples not to infidels M. Iewel and that the same was not only a holy Thinge more then Common Meate sanctified by praier and the worde of God but also Sanctification which Sanctifieth and maketh Holy the Receiuer which is the Blessed Sacrament M. Iewell not Common Meate And thus M. Iewell Chrysostom is not missereported of D. Harding but D. Harding is Slaundered by M. Iewell Harding It is not to be maruailed at albeit S. Paule deliuered to the Corinthians thinstitution of our Lordes Supper vnder bothe kindes that yet vpon occasion geuen and when condition of time so required 58 he ministred the Communion vnder one kinde c. Iewell The 58. Vntruthe S. Paule neuer ministred the Communion so This dependeth vpon the other Vntruthe that went before which being by Chrysostom iustified appeareth now no Vntruth on D. Hardinges part but on Chrysostoms part who reporteth that S. Paule in the shipp gaue to Luke and his other disciples that Sanctification which sanctifieth the receiuer which is the blissed Sacrement And in that place no mention is made of the Cuppe and therefore by M. Iewelles owne rule whereof I tolde you before it may be well gathered that he ministred vnder one Kinde Harding S. Paule toke that holy mystery vnder one kinde for the whole Sacrament as we perceiue by his wordes where he saieth One Bread and one Body vve being many are all that doo participat of one Bread 59 where he speaketh nothing of the Cuppe Iewell The .59 Vntruthe For immediatly before he saieth The Cuppe of blâ—ssing which we blesse is it not the Communion of Christes bloud To this M. Iewell you haue the answer of D. Harding already in his Briefe answer touching certain Vntruthes with which you charged him at Paules Crosse the viij Day of Iuly last Yet bicause you vaunte here as though you had neuer heard of it and prouoke your Reader by your wonte repetitions and hypocriticall exclamations which it nedeth not here to insert to take him for a Deceiuer c. I will repete the very wordes of D. Harding as they lie in his Answer These are his wordes after his other wordes aboue alleaged Harding Nowe iudge who list whether in respect of those wordes of S. Paule One Bread and one Body c. I might not saie as I did VVhere he speaketh nothing of the Cuppe And that my worde vvhere hath relation to that sentence of S. Paule Only not to the whole Chapter For neither coulde I be so blinde as not to so see mention of the Cuppe made Next Sentence before and how absurde had it bene by denying so knowen a trouth to haue geuen such aduantage to the aduersarie Now that S. Paule in that sentence speaketh nothinge of the Cuppe I will be tried by the most auncient and truest copies bothe Greke and Latine and by iudgement of them of M. Iewelles own secte them selues yea by the English Bibles and newe Testaments of best authorite This was D. Hardinges Answer then and this it is nowe Harding VVill not thy husband knowe saieth Tertullian what thou eatest secretly before all other meate And in case he do knowe it he will beleue it to be Bread not him who it is called Iewell The .60 Vntruthe Standing in the false translating of Tertullian Stapleton This Vntruthe was noted before in the first Article and is in number the xxvij There it is answered Yet here it is repeted to make vp a number Harding It hath ben a 61 custome in the Latin Church from the Apostles time to our daies that on Good Friday as well Priestes as other Christen people receiue the Sacrament vnder the forme of bread Onely consecrated the day before not without signification of a singular mysterie Iewell The .61 Vntruthe VVithout any colour or shew of truthe Be bolde and blushe not M. Iewell It may well become a bishop of your religion to scoffe at the Mysteries of Christes Church and to saie they haue no Colour or shewe of Truthe in them Truly as you haue in the whole processe of this your Replie rather moued your reader to Laughter and Contempt of the Catholike faithe by making a sorte of
doinges of this later Church of our daies For M. Iewel the Church of God is but One And hath continewed without interruption sense the coming of Christ in a knowen Multitude and shall so Continewe euen to the worldes ende A RETVRNE OF VNTRVTHES VPON M. IEWELL c. The Thirde Article Of Seruice in the vulgar tounge IF you meane M. Iewell by the peoples Common praiers such as at that time they coÌ„monly made to God in priuate deuotion I thinke they vttered them in that tounge which they vnderstode 65 and so doo Christian people now for the most parte Iewell The .65 Vntruthe For vnder the subiection of the bishop of Rome the people for the most parte praieth in latin Stapleton They do not so now M. Iewell For Now not only in these countries of the lower Germany where we now liue but also in Fraunce and Italy as I knowe by experience the common people haue their common praiers in their vulgar tounge Doutche Frenche and Italian And in our countre whatsoeuer they did fifty or fourty yeres agoe in the late reigne of Quene Marie the people had their common matins bookes bothe with latin and with english Therefore that Now the people for the most parte praieth in the vulgar tounge it was truly saied of D. Harding and the contrary on your parte vntruly auoutched Againe he speaketh of praiers made in priuat deuotion which is not allwaies bounde to the booke but oftentimes expresseth it selfe without booke as thousandes doe that can reade in no booke Harding Aboute 900· yeres paste 66 it is certaine the people in some Countries had their seruice in an vnknowen tounge as it shall be proued of our owne countre in England Iewell The .66 Vntruthe This certainte will neuer be proued Stapleton Yes M. Iewell I will make you a shorte argument whereby it shall be clerely proued At the first planting of the faith amonge vs englishmen S. Gregory sent churche bookes to England from Rome for the Church Seruice of the new conuerted Englishmen But those Church bookes sent from Rome were in the latin tongue Ergo the Churche Seruice of the new conuerted Englishmen was in the latin tounge For proufe of the Maior or first proposition I bringe the testimony of Venerable Bede a lerned countreman of oures writen in the yere of our lorde 730. His wordes be these Farder more the saied Pope he meaneth S. Gregory for so much as Augustine had aduertised him that there was a great haruest and fewe workemen sent him with his saied legates more preachers of the which the chefest were Mellitus Iustus and Ruffinianus By them also he sent al such thinges as were necessary for the furniture and ministery of the Church As holy vessels aultar clothes ornaments for the Churches apparell also for the priestes and clergy Also relikes of the holy Apostles and martyrs and many Bookes Thus farre Bede In whose wordes we see for the Furniture and Ministery of the church Bookes to haue ben sent from Rome That this was done at the first planting of Christen faith amonge vs Englishmen vs Englishmen I saie occupying at that time all that is now called England the olde Brittons being driuen in to the straights of Wales let the whole History of Venerable Bede be a witnesse to all englishmen though M. Iewell in this Article afterwarde most impiously and impudently after his maner do denie it Now touching the Minor or second proposition that these Churche bookes sent from Rome were â—n the latin tounge it nedeth not I trust to proue It is euident that our english Saxon tounge was not at that time vnderstanded at Rome neither of those which came froÌ„ Rome at their first arriual in to our couÌ„tre but the Latin tounge only And therfore those bookes sent from Rome for the Furniture and Seruice of the Church were in Latin and not in English Thus the premisses being clere the Conclusion is vndoubted Other argumentes are brought afterwarde in this Article by D. Harding to the which how well M. Iewell hath replied it will appeare in the Confutation thereof Vpon this conclusion that the Church seruiuice was in the Latin tounge it shal not nede I trowe to inferre Ergo it was in a strauÌ„ge and vnknowen tounge to English men I trust M. Iewell will not be so impudent as to saie that all Englishmen then conuerted to the faithe vnderstode the Latin tounge Which if he will saie as truly with no lesse impudency he denieth the faith to haue ben then first planted amonge vs englishmen and most wickedly violateth the blessed memory of our Apostle S. Augustin the History of Venenerable Bede lately set foorth in the english tounge shall proue him a manifest lyar in the one and a most notorious slaunderer in the other Harding I saie as I saied before that the seruice was then within the compasse of 600. yeres after Christ in a toung which some people vnderstode and some vnderstode not Iewell The .67 Vntruthe M. Harding is not able to shew one nation that vnderstoode not their Common seruice StapletoÌ„ Yes forsothe M. Harding hath shewed it as it shall well appeare before we haue ended this Article Yet presently for the iustifying of this Vntruth wherein in dede the whole Article dependeth and the which being iustified your assertion M. Iewell is ouerthrowâ—n I proue that within the first 600. yeres certain nations vnderstode not their commoÌ„ seruice Thus I reason All the inhabitans of Smyrna Pontus Cappadocia Lyaconia Caria Thracia had their Common seruice in the Greke tounge But all the inhabitants of those Nations vnderstode not the Greke tounge Ergo all those inhabitans had not their seruice in a tounge which they vnderstoode For proufe of the Maior or first proposition I wil bring the testimony of S. Hierom. S. Hierom writeth thus Alexandria Aegyptus in Septuaginta suis Hesychium laudat authorem Constantinopolis vsque Antiochiam Luciani Martyris exemplaria probat Mediae inter has prouinciae palestinos codices legunt quos ab Origine elaboratos Eusebius Pamphilus vulgauerunt totusque orbis hac inter se trifaria varietate compugnat That is Alexandria and Aegypt in their Greke copies of the Bible do vse that traÌ„slation of the 70. which Hesychius hath sett forthe From Constantinople vnto Antioche the copies sett foorth by Lucianus Martyr are allowed Other prouinces lying betwene these do reade the bookes of Palestina which Eusebius and Pamphilus being first corrected by Origen did sett foorth and all the worlde in this triple variete of copies contendeth one with the other By these wordes of S. Hierom it is euident that in all the East parte of the worlde which he calleth here the whole worlde from Aegypt to Constantinople and within all the countres lying betwene comprehending al Asia the lesse these three copies only of the Greke Bibles were vsed For in this triple diuersite he saieth all that
parte of the world contendeth Of those midle prouinces lying betwene Constantinople and Antioche are those countres aboue named of the lesser Asia except Thracia which is of the proper IurisdictioÌ„ of Constantinople and no parte of the lesser Asia As the skillfull in Cosmographie do knowe right well Now out of this place of S. Hierom for proofe of the Maior or first proposition thus I reason The common seruice of those countres was for the most parte taken out of their Bibles and holy Scripture But by S. Hieroms testimony their Bibles were only in the Greke tounge of the 70. translation sett forth either by Hysichius or Lucianus the Martyr or Eusebius and Pamphilus Ergo their common seruice was only in the Greke tounge The maior of this Syllogismus is euident bothe for that the Psalmes and the lessons are knowen to be the greater parte of the Seruice and also by diuerse canons of that age and time commaunding Scripture to be read in the Church seruice The minor is S. Hieroms So the Conclusion is certaine Againe S. Basill celebrated the Seruice in Cappadocia in the Greke tounge as it appeareth by his Liturgie yet extant in greke Chrisostom also in Thracia as it appeareth by his Liturgie or Masse yet extant also in Greke Ergo the Publike Seruice in Cappadocia and Thracia were in the Greke tounge The minor or seconde proposition of the firste Sylllogismus which is that all those countres aboue named vnderstoode not the greke tongue is proued in this Article by D. Harding by diuerse testimonies First of Strabo and Plinie as in the discussing of the 70. and 71. Vntruthes I shall haue anon occasioÌ„ more largely to speake And to speake particularly of some of these That the vulgar tongue of Lycaonia was not greke it appeareth in the Actes of the Apostles where it is sayed that the people of Lystra a City in Licaonia cried out to Paule and Barnabas in the Lycaonicall tongue Saint Luke which wrote the Actes in greke if that crye of the Lycaonians had bene in greke woulde not haue termed it a seuerall language from the greke as he doth calling it Lycaonicall Againe that the vulgar tongue of Thracia was not greke Chysostom him selfe bishoppe of Constantinople in Thracia doth witnesse For he preaching in greke reakoneth vp amonge diuersite off tonges the tongues of the Scythians of Thracians of Romaines of Persians of Indians of the Aegyptians and of other Thirdly that the vulgar toÌ„ge of Caria was no greke but a forrain and straunge tongue from the greke Strabo is a sufficient witnesse who speaking of the proper Language off the Carians faieth of it Permulta Nomina Graeca per mixta habet It hath many greke Names mingled in it Wherâ—of it is euident it was a cleane different tongue from the greke Lyke as our Englishe tongue hathe a number of Frenche wordes in it being yet a language vtterly diuerse from the Frenche Fourthely the people of Cappadocia Pontus and Asia of Phrygia and Pamphylia Audiebat vnusquisque lingua sua illos loquâ—ntes hearde the Apostles to speake euery one in their owne tongue And the Miracle was suche that they saied one to an other Are not all these that speake of Galilee Et quomodo nos audiuimuâ— vnusquâ—sque linguam nostram in qua nati sum us And howe haue we hearde euery one of vs oure tongue in the whiche we were borne Vnlesse the tongues of Pontus and Asia of Cappadocia Phrygia and Pamphylia al countres of the lesser Asia had bene so diuers and distincte natural tounges that eche one vnderstode not the other what Miracle or what cause of admonition had there bene in those peoples hearing the Apostles to pronounce and speake euery of their natural and natiue tounges What Miracle is it for the Notherne man and the Westerne man to vnderstande the Southerne preacher at Poules But if the Spanyarde the Italian and the Frenche man being only skilfull of their Mother toungues coulde yet vnderstande a Latine preacher that were a Miracle in dede For so were the the tongues of Pontus and Asia of Cappadocya Phrygia and Pamphylia deriued and deducted oute of the greke as the Frenche Italyan and Spanyshe are deriued out of the Latin And these proprietes of Languages were so diuers and infinit that althoughe of certaine as of the Atticke the Ionicall the Dorical and the Aeolical toÌ„gues proprietes might be gathered and collected in to some Orders of Rules the other yet by no meanes coulde be so reduced but were rather taken for diuerse and different toungues then for proprietes of tounges Therefore Ioannes Grammaticus writing hereof saieth Barbaras in multitudine existentes incompraehensibiles non est facile tradere Alioqui neque dicendum ipsas Dialectos sed linguas The Barbarous greke tounges being infinit can not easely be brought to any rules to be taught by And they are not so much to be called Dialectes or proprieties as tonges Such Diuersâ—tes multitudes and differences of tounges and languages there were in the greke Churche in the lesser Asia and in that which in Ecclesiasticall writers is called the East parte of Chrystendome Last of Master Iewell him selfe confesseth in this Article that Iewell The Nations of the East parte of the worlde had seuerall tounges and spake not all one onely tounge This then being so and yet the Easte parte of the worlde as it hath bene proued hauing onely the greke Seruice it remaineth clere that a Nation yea sondry Nations are shewed which hâ—d their Seruice not in their common knowen tounge but in a lerned tounge whiche they vnstoode not Againe M. Iewell is of the minde in this Article that in Rome the Seruice was euer in Latine For he saieth they had their exhortations and sermons in Latine True it is the Church of Rome had the Seruice allwaies in the Latine tongue The Sermons and Exhortations also for a greate space But howe longe thinketh M. Iewell He confesseth that S. Augustine sent in by S. Gregory to preache the Faith to vs EnglishmeÌ„ prayed in Latine and sayed Masse in Latine And it is euideÌ„t in the workes of sainte Gregorye that the Church Seruice in Rome was in his tyme Latine Anâ— he writeth that the people of Rome answered to Kyrie â—leeson at the Masse tyme as they doe to this daye Yet what thinketh M. Iewell Did the people of Rome vnderstande Kyrie eleeson Those wordes are Greke But did they vnderstande Latin in Rome at that time Verely the histories teache vs the contrary Namely Sabellicus writeth that before the time of S. Gregory eueÌ„ froÌ„ the first coming in of the Longobardes to Italy they lefte vtterly in Rome to speake latin This was longe before the six hundred yeres expired And no maruaile For before that time the Wandalles and Hunnes had spoyled Rome The Gothes inhabited the very cyte of Rome and the rest of Italy many
come to the .78 Vntruth to geue any one instaunce or exceptyon in any one Countre of the greke Churche And so D. Harding though he haue not proued it him selfe yet M. Iewell hath proued it for him For an Vniuersal proposition is well proued by Order of Schooles and Reason when no Instance or Exception can be brought to the Contrary Harding Bicause the first preachers of the faith came to these west partes from Rome c. Iewell The .73 Vntruthe The first preachinge of the Faith in these Weste Countries came not first from Rome This Vntruthe was noted before by M. Iewell in the firste Article and here it is repeted to make a number It was the .32 Vntruthe In that place we haue satisfied it and shewed that Fraunce Germanye and the Englishe Nation our Forefathers had all their firste faithe from Rome Maye it please thee gentle Reader to haue a recourse to that place and then iudge what the impudency of M. Iewell deserueth not only in repeting it now againe for an Vntruthe but also auoutchinge it in the texte and noting also in the Margin that M. Hardinge wittingly and willingly auoucheth Vntruthe He bringeth in surmises without Authoritye that Nathanael Saturninus and Lazarus preached first the Faithe of Fraunce For this surmise and Gheasse of his you had before alleaged a testimonye of the Frenche bishoppes them selues aboue a thousand yeares paste confessing they had their Faithe firste from Rome If that suffise not beholde the particular testimony of diuerse the principall Churches in Fraunce to recorde the same Demochares a Frenche Writer of late dayes reakoning vp the Bishops of euery bishoprike and Archebishoprike in Fraunce by the recordes of the Chapters of eche Churche nameth vs their firste bishops to be these Of Senes the first Bishop was S. Sauinianus sent from S. Peter as also Antoninus witnesseth Of Paris the first bishop was S. Denys sent by Clement as the Monuments and Antiquites of Paris do yet testifie Of Chartres Auentinus sent from S. Peter was the first bishop Of Orleans Altinus sent likewise with the other two by S. Peter By S. Clement Pope of Rome soone after S. Peter were sent also diuers Nicasius the firste bishoppe of Rhone Exuperius of Ba ieux and Taurinus of Brye The firste Bishop of Antissiodorum was S. Peregrinus sent from Sixtus the Pope of Rome in the yeare of our Lorde 30. Whereas M. Iewel writeth that Nathanael Lazarus and Saturninus preached the Faith first in Fraunce he hath taken that by lyke out of some LegeÌ„da aurea and yet hath not al together truly reported it For as touching Saturninus he was bishop of Tolose in Fraunce in the persecutioÌ„ of Decius more then 200. yeares after Christ and therfore could be none of the first that preached there the faithe For Nathanael Vrsinus is named to be the firste bishoppe of Burges Of Lazarus arriuing to Massilia with Marye Magdalene and Martha it is written but that they planted the faithe in Fraunce it is very vncertaine As for the coniectures of M. Iewell from whence our countre receiued the faithe I haue before in the 32. Vntruthe declared the contrarye oute of the approued Historye of Venerable Bede Iewell Tertullian calleth Hierusalem the Mother and the spring of ReligioÌ„ So doth the Prophet Esaie longe before Prophecye De Syon exibit lex verbum Domini de Hierusalem The lawe shall come forthe of Syon and the worde of the Lorde oute of Hierusalem Our Sauioure also sending forthe his Apostles biddeth them to beginne at Hierusalem to preache to Samaria and so vsque ad extremum terrae euen to the vttermost of the earthe In that sence all the worlde had the faith from Hierusalem And so S. Augustine in the place by M. Iewell alleaged when he saieth The faithe sprange first from the Grekes by the grekes meaneth not the countre of grece but the countre of Iury who at that tyme was a part of the greke Churche as by the greke Liturgie of S. Iames bishop of Hierusalem by the greke Homilies of Cyrillus bishop there also before S. Augustines time lâ—st of all by the wordes of S. Augustine him selfe in that selfe same epistle alleaged by M. Iewell it is euident For in that same Epistle shewing that we ought not to reiect the greke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 expressing the consubstantialite of Christ with God the father bicause it was not written in holy Scripture but made by the greke Fathers saieth thus Non enim in Africa aut in cuncta Barbariae sed in Syria vel Graecia vbi ipsa caro voluit de virgine nasci dominica decuit vel oportuit verba fidei compendiose firmare For not in Afrike nor in all the rest of barbarous and forrain countres but in Syria or Grece where it liked our Sauiour to take Flesh of the Virgin the wordes of our faithe ought or might wel be established In whiche wordes he calleth Iury where Christ was borne by the name of Grece The which also he doth in an other Epistle calling that countre Radicem Orientalium Ecclesiaruâ— vnde Euangelium in Africam venit vnde terra si eis afferatur adorant The Roote of of the East Churches from whence the Ghospell came vnto Afrike and from whence the earthe if it be brought to them is worshipped which can be meaned of no Lande but of the Holy Lande Yet notwithstanding all this that principally all Christendom hath their faithe from Hierusalem thoughe she be the true Mother to vs all though S. Augustine do confesse that from thence the faith came to Afrike yet I saye notwithstandinge all this Saint Augustine in this very epistle 70. in number confesseth also that the Faythe came to Afrike from Rome For speaking off the Donatistes condemned apud Ecclesiam transmarinam whiche was at Rome by Melchiades the Pope he addeth vnde ad istas partes Christianae fidei manauit authoritas from the which Church of Rome the authorite of Christen faith hath ben deriued in to these partes And so S. Gregory saieth that from Rome in Africanis partibus sumpsit ordinaâ—io saecerdotalis â—xordium In the Coastes of Afrike the beginning of priestly Order did springe Thus notwitstanding that Hierusalem is the Mother of all Chrystendom yet the Weste Churche as we haue particularly declared in Fraunce in Germany in our countre and last of all now in Afrike hath taken their first faith properly and immediatly from Rome And so hath there ben no Vntruthe auouched by D. Harding but a manifest and willfull falshood defended by M. Iewell Harding They planted and sett vp in the Countres by them conuerted the Seruice of the Church of Rome or some other very like and that 74 in the latin tounge onely for ought that can be shewed to the contrary Iewell The .74 Vntruthe For the first preachers them selues spake no latine If this be all that you
of Leo are Hoc ore sumitur quod fide creditur frustra ab illis Amen respondetur à quibus contraid quod accipitur disputatur That is receiued by the mouthe he speaketh off the blessed Sacrament whiche is beleued by Faithe and they doe answer Amen in vaine who dispute against that whiche they do receiue The wordes of S. Ambrose are Dicit tibi Sacerdos Corpus Christi tu dicis Amen Hoc est verum Quod confitetur lingua teneat affectus The Priest saieth vnto thee The Body off Christ. And thou saiest Amen that is It is true That which thy toungue confesseth let thy affection kepe These be the wordes of Leo and Saint Ambrose by the whiche M. Iewell will proue that Iustinians Constitution made a hundred yeares after tooke place in Rome Hathe not M. Iewell trowe ye shewed him selfe herein a trim Diuine Thinketh M. Iewell that wheresoeuer he findeth the worde Amen in the Doctours straightwayes he hath founde his Vulgar Seruice Or thinketh he that bicause the people confessed the Reall presence of Christes Body in the Sacrament answering Amen to the Priest and confessing it to be true that the Priest saied therefore the people had their Seruice in the Vulgar toungue By such argumentes M. Iewell maye make his brethern beleue that to this daye in these Countres here we haue also the Seruice in the vulgar toungue bicause in the Masse bookes here he maye reade the like Nowe to laye forthe brefely M. Iewelles argument vppon these places thus he reasoneth S. Ambrose about the yeare of our Lorde thre hundred and foure score and Leo about the yeare foure hundred and fourty do witnesse the people answered Amen to the Priest Ergo the Constitution of Iustinian made aboute the yeare fiue hundred and fourâ—y of the speaking alowde of the Prieste or as M. Iewell woulde haue it to seme off the Vulgar Seruice tooke place in the Church of Rome If suche argumentes maie serue I graunte M. Iewell hath Replyed well And then if M. Iewell had come before his Father he might haue maried his Mother Nowe let vs consider the other holy Fathers whiche M. Iewell alleageth to saye the like Iewell S. Augustine saieth of the Churche of Rome Vnum psalmum cantamus Vnum Amen respondemus We singe one psalme and we awnswer one Amen StapletoÌ„ S. Augustine saied not those wordes of the Churche off Rome more then of anye other Churche Nay he speaketh it properly of the Africanes and of the Donatistes which had separated them selues from the vnite of Christes Churche in Afrike For expounding the wordes of the psalme Veniat mors super illos descendant in infernum viuentes Let death come vpon them and let them descende into hell aliue making the Catholike to speake to the Donatiste thus he writeth Quid pateris frater c. What ayle you Brother We are brethern We call vpon one God We beleue in one Christ. We heare one ghospell We singe one psalme We answeare one Amen We sounde out one Halleluia VVe celebrat one Easter VVhy then are you withoute the Churche and I within These are the wordes of S. Augustine bothe that goe before and that folowe the wordes of M. Iewell alleaged By all the whiche we see he spake those wordes especially of the Africanes in his owne Countre and touched therein Rome nomore then anye other Countre Yet saieth M. Iewell S Augustin saieth of the Churche of Rome Thus he hathe taken suche a custome to lie that he careth not what he vtter Againe what is there here touching the Constitution of Iustinian We singe at this daye in all Christendom all that remanye in the Catholique faithe one psalme We answer one Amen We sounde out one Halleluia And so forthe What is this to M. Iewelles Vulgar Seruice whiche vpon Iustinians Constitution he woulde so faine builde Last of all S. Augustin liuing in the time of S. Ambrose a full hundred yeares before Iustinians Constitution was made howe can he possibly witnesse anye thinge for that lawe to take place in Rome Where was M. Iewelles witt and remembrance when he wrote this Will he euer forgett him selfe like to Dauus Let vs procede and see whether his next allegation be any better Iewell S. Hierom saieth Euen in Rome at the ende of the praier the people so sounded out Amen as if it had bene a thunderclappe This toucheth Rome in dede and therefore is so muche better then the other But when liued S. Hierom M. Iewell Liued he not in the time of S. Ambrose and of S. Augustine more then a hundred yeares before Iustinian was Emperour Are there not letters extant betwene him and S. Austen And dothe not S. Augustine alleage his writinges against the Pelagians What a forgetfull Dauus is M. Iewell He hathe alleaged vs here foure Doctours to proue that Iustinians Constitution toke place in Rome who all were dead and buried before Iustinian was borne It is nowe sence Iustinian made that Constitution a full thousand yeares And in all this time amonge so many writers M. Iewell whiche spareth none be he neuer so base whiche alleageth scholemen gloses lawyers of al ages with whom Nicolaus de lyra Thomas of Aquine Durandus Eckius Hugo Cardinalis Iohn Billet Cusanus Scotus Innocentius the thirde and all other late writers are currant he can yet amonge them all finde not one in the space of a thousand yeres to testifie that Iustinians Constitution touched the Churche of Rome but he is fayne to runne to Leo to S. Augustine S. Ambrose and S. Hierome and to make them speake a good worde for him that the lawe of Iustinian toke place in Rome who all as I saied liued and died longe before that Constitution was made Wherein he dealeth as if a man to proue the meaning of a lawe made in Quene Maries dayes would alleage the Iudgement of bishopp Warrham that dyed in kinge Henry the eightes dayes Verelye this was a mighty Constitution that toke place in Rome a hundred yeres before it was made Touching the place of S. Hierom his whole wordes are these Vbi alibi tanto studio frequentia ad ecclesias ad martyrum sâ—pulchra concurritur Vbi sic ad similitudinem coelestis tonitrui Amen reboat vacua idolorum templa quatiuntur Non quòd aliam habent Romani fidem nisi hant quam omnes Christi Ecclesiae sed quòd deuotie in eis maior sit simplicitas ad credendum Where els are the Churches and the Sepulchres of Martirs withe so feruent deuotion and withe so great coÌ„pany resorted vnto Where doth AmeÌ„ geue so lowde a sounde like the thunderclappe out of the ayer so as the teÌ„ples emptied of Idoles do shake with it Not bicause the Romanes haue any other faith then that whiche all the Churches of Christ haue but bicause there is in them a greater deuotion and simplicite to beleue Thus farre S. Hierom. His
anye one of that side is able to shewe that the publike Seruice was in anye other toungue then in Greke or Latine For it is easy to be shewed euen by the Doctours of his owne side By these fewe it maye appeare M. Iuell hath made but a simple brauerye in this forewarde of his doctours And if the body and rerewarde serue him no better he may wipe his bill and go to rouste Let vs see what foloweth But what if Doctour Harding him selfe haue in plaine wordes confessed the same But what if he haue not Then hath M. Iewell loste a good argument Iewell Although he haue wantonly denied Christ yet I trowe he wil not denie him selfe He denieth Christ wantonly which forsaketh his olde religion that he was baptised in and embraceth a wanton ghospel planted by a wanton frier yoked with a wanton Nonne not he which forsaketh such wanton lewdenesse to returne to his old and approued Faith Iewell Consider good Reader his owne wordes hereafter folowing in this selfe same Article But S. Paule saye they requireth that the people geue assent and conforme them selfe vnto the Priest by answering Amen to his prayer made in the Congregation Hereunto M. Harding answereth thus Verely in the primitiue Churche this was necessary when the Faithe was a learning and therefore the prayers were then made in a Common toungue knowen to the people What can there be more plainely spoken Stapleton Yes forsothe If he had added and that in neither greke nor Latin then had it ben more plainely spoken then had it bene contrary to him selfe Now it is no more then S. Thomas and Nicolaus de Lyra saied before And therefore as we haue proued before their sainges to make nothing for M. Iewell so doth not this of D. Hardinges neither As they spake of no other vulgar toungue but of Greke and Latin which then were Vulgar soo doth here D. Harding speake of none other tonges but of greke and and latin also which theÌ„ were Vulgar What nedeth nowe all this myrthe and triumphe that M. Iewell maketh saying Iewell M. Harding hath vtterly forgotten him selfe His sayinges can not 190. stande togeather If he be true in one in the other he must nedes be false Put vp your pipes M. Iewell and take your ease D. Harding remembreth him selfe well enough His sayinges do stande wel together and bothe are true Iewell Yet good Christian Reader for thy better Satisfaction it maie please thee to knowe that in the primitiue Churche the Common Seruice was not ministred by one man alone but by the Priest and whole Congregation alltogether as maye appeare by the generall consent of the olde Fathers M. Iewell speaketh faire It is reason he be hearde and beleued also if after such smothe wordes he bringeth vs sounde and substantiall proufes But if al this gaie talke wanteth matter let him be knowen for an earnest trifler Iewell Clemens Alexandrinus saieth In orationibus vâ—luti vnam vocem habent communem vnam mentem In the Common praiers they haue all as it were one voice and one minde M. Iewell hath in these fewe wordes vsed two feates of hys Arte. He hathe gelded the wordes of the doctour and shifted in a worde of his owne which vtterly altereth the doctours minde The whole sentence of Clemens is thus Est ergo quod est hic apud nos altare terrestris congregatio eorum qui sunt dedicati orationibus qui veluti vnam vocem habent communem vnam mentem The aultar therefore which we haue here he talketh of the Sacrifice of praier is an earthly congregation of those whiche are dedicated to praiers which haue as though it were one voice and one minde He talketh of such as were dedicated to praier of the clergy or other religious men who praie altogeather with one voice and minde not of the people He talketh of their vsuall Seruice not of the Common praier of the people The Worde Common M. Iewell hath added of him selfe more then he founde in the doctour Now of the clergy or religiouse men dedicated to praier that you maye not thinke I faine or fable Clemens mencioneth in this same booke within litle more then a leafe after this place where he saieth Nonnulli certas ac definitas horas constituunt orationi vt tertiam sextam nonam Many do appoint certaine set houres for praier as the thirde houre the sixt howre and the ninth howre· But what if al this were spoken of the people and that they all praied with the clergy We knowe this Clemens was a preacher in Alexandria And there the Seruice was in Greke Therefore this helpeth not yet M. Iewell any whit except he minde to reason thus The people in Alexandria had their Common Seruice in Greke Ergo they had it in no Vulgar tounge bâ—side the Greke Such straunge Conclusions become wel this strange alteration of Gods Seruice Iewell S. Chrysostom sayeth Not only the Priest geueth tankes to God but also all the People And what doest thou maruail to see the Priestes and people in prayers talke togeather Surely M. Iewell no maruaill at all But a great maruaill it is that a called bishopp as you be should blinde Gods people First with suche patched sentences of the holy Fathers then with such Betle arguments as you make For the first the whole wordes of Chrisostom are these Againe in the same dreadfull mysteries the Priest wisheth well to the people and the people wisheth well to the Priest For with thy Spirit is nothing els to say then this that al that beloÌ„geth to thaÌ„kes geuing is coÌ„moÌ„ For not only the Priest geueth thankes but also al the people For taking first their answer and gathering them together that this Mysterie might be done worthely and rightly he beginneth the Eucharist And what doest thou maruaill if the people speaketh with the Priest VVhereas also with Cherubin and other heauenly powers they sing those holy himnes in common Al this is but the Accustomed answering of the people to the Priest in the preface of the Masse as to this day it is vsed Which will easely appeare to the lerned and discrete Reader dâ—ligently coÌ„sydering the whole place Now touching the Argument these be M. Iewels reasons The people praiâ—th withe the priest And the priest praieth in Greke Ergo the people had not their Seruice in Greke Vnderstande good Reader Chrisostome was bishopp of Constantinople a parte of the Greke Churche His Masse or Liturgie is yet extant in Greke He praied in Greke and preached in Greke Aske M. Iewell when thou metest him next if all this be not true And then if he graunte it aske howe his Greke Masse can proue the Seruice was not in Greke Truly he shall haue nothing to saie vnlesse he saie that Greke is no Greke Chrysostome is not Chrysostome Nor Iewell is not Iewell Iewell And here to leaue S. Augustine S. Hierom S. Basile Nazianzenus Dyonisius
officium erat interclusus a populo defuisset turbatis ministris dum expectatur qui non aderat vnus e circumstantibus sumpto psalterio quem primum versum inuenit arripuit Psalmus autem hic erat Ex ore infantium lactentium perfecisti laudem propter inimicos tuos vt destruas inimicum Defensorem these wordes M. Iewell brake of quo lâ—cto clamor populi tollitur pars aduersa confunditur For whereas by chaunce the Reader whose office was to reade in the Church that day was shutte out by meane of the throunge and the ministres were troubled looking about for him that was not there one of the companie tooke the psalter and readde that verse that came nexte to hande The verse of the psalme was this Out of the mouthe of infantes and sucklinges thou hast wrought praise to destroye the enemy and Defensor Which being read the name of Defensor being heard the people made a shoote and the contrarye part was confounded Iewell Here saieth M. Iewell whether it were in the Vulguar tounge or in the Latin it was a tounge knowen to the people To the whiche I awnswere that whether the people vnderstode it or no certaine it is the psalme was read in Latin For the cause of the shoote that the people made was the worde of the verse Defensorem which is a Latine worde and no frenche Bicause thereby they toke the bishopp whose name was Defensor to be noted in that verse Nowe as I will not contende but that some of the people there present vnderstode that verse being read in Latin so is it moste manifest that the common frenche people had their proper frenche tounge for their Vulguar tounge beside the Latine This is euident not only by that which D. Harding alleageth in this Article but by this same writer him selfe Sulpitius Seuâ—rus testifying that then at that time and in that countre where the Seruice was in Latin as it is before manifest the people spake yet Gallicé Celticé the frenche tounge and the Celticall For in this Dialogue of S. Martins life when the course came to Gallus to speake excusing his rusticite of language his felowe saied vnto him Tu vero vel Celticé aut si mauis Gallicé loquaris dummodo iam Martinum loquaris Speake vnto vs either in the Celtes language or if thou haddest rather in the Galloes language so that thou speake of Martin And afterwarde he calleth sellulam rusticanam a countre stoole in the frenche tounge tripetiam which the lerned call tripodem Thus in Sulpitius his time all moste xij c yeares past the Latin Seruice was vsed in Fraunce and yet the Latin was not the Vulgar tounge Whereof it must folowe that either all the people vnderstoode Latin beside their mother tounge or els had their Seruice in a tounge whiche they vnderstoode not For farder proufe of the Latin Seruice in Fraunce it is to be remembred that the Latin psalter whiche S. Hierom translated at the request of Damasus is of the olde writers called Gallicanum exemplar bicause the Churches of Gallia folowed that copie Harding The faithe hath continued in this lande amonge the Englishe people from the 14. yeare off the reigne off Mauritius the Emperour allmost these .1000 yeares Iewell The 80. Vntruthe His examples reache nothing so farre Mauritius began his reigne in the yeare of our Lorde 582· In the xiiij yeare of his reigne Saint Augustin was sent to our countre to preache the faith The History of Bede in the first booke the xxiij chapter witnesseth so Therefore it is no Vntruthe for D. Harding to saie so Touching the firste coming in of the faith to vs Englishmen when I come to the 91. Vntruthe I shall speake at large Harding As concerning the order off Common prayers and publike Seruice in suche sorte as we haue nowe and that age had not Sainte Paule mentioneth nothinge neither speaketh one worde in that whole Chapter but off the vse of the miraculous gifte as is saied before And therefore his sayinges out of that chapter be not fittly alleaged of M. Iewell and the rest of our aduersaries against the maner of prayers and Seruice off the Churche nowe receiued and of longe tyme vsed Iewell The 81. Vntruthe For Sundrie Doctours bothe olde and new alleage these wordes to this selfe same purpose This Vntruthe was well noted M. Iewell if yowe be able as well to proue it Consider good Readers the whole Accusation whiche these disobedient Children of Gods Churche haue layed in against their Mother for the publike Seruice in the Latin tounge the onelye Scripture by whiche theâ— charge all Christendome beside wiâ—h the breache of Gods commaundement is the place of S. Paule in the fiâ—ste epistle the xiiij Chapter to the Corinthians It behoueth therefore M. Iewell and his felowes openlye plainelye and abundantly to proue that the wordes of S. Paule in that Chapter do proue and Commaunde a Vulgar Seruice Vpon this place of S. Paule lyeth the only Staye of all this Alteration of Gods Seruice This therefore ought clerely plentifully and without all ambiguite be proued and discussed But good Readers suche is the weakenes of their groundes that they can bringe no one olde Doctour expounding that place as a CoÌ„maundement of the Seruice to be had in a Vulguar and knowen tounge to the Common people This weakenesse this feblenesse shall nowe appeare in M. Iewell who will seme to be able to saie as muche herein as any of all the rest For in all that he hathe Replied against this place of D. Harding where this place of holy Scripture is by him opened and declared he hathe not brought one olde Doctour to expounde the place as he and his felowes dothe expounde it Let vs consider M. Iewelles whole Replie to this place Iewell We may safely graunte some parte of M. Hardinges longe talke without 214 preiudice of our cause In dede S. Paul in the place alleaged spake of the gifte of tounges as it was a speciall miracle enduring onely for a while not gotten by labour or study but freelye inspired by the Sprite of God Loe M. Iewell graunteth that S. Paule in that place to the Corinthians spake of the gifte of tounges c. This gifte off tounges the Corinthians abused whiles in Common assemblies not at praiers proper to the Christians but at Preaâ—hinges to the whiche infidels and all other resorted they talked in straunge tounges whiche the assistants vnderstode not and were not therefore edified thereby This S. Paule founde faulte withall bicause in suche assemblies it was a time of homilies and exhortations where the people ought to be edified This then being graunted to be as it is the principall purpose of S. Paule in that place let vs see howe M. Iewell can picke out his Vulguar Seruice out of the rest He foloweth and saieth Iewel But the Latine tounge saieth M. Harding as
latin Seruice as in the english Certain it is the people of Cappadocia of whom S. Basil there speaketh had not the greke for their vulgar tounge as hath bene before proued in the 69 Vntruthe and yet were these psalmes as all the other Seruice vnder S. Basill songe and saied in the greke tounge as appeareth by the praiers yet extant in greke in the Masse or liturgie of S. Basill Then as the people of Cappadocia applied the greke seruice to them selues so may the people of England applie the latine Seruice to them selues if they will assiste deuoutely geue their assent to the priest gods Minister and lifte vpp their hartes to God with him So hath the Church these many hundred yeres vsed It is not now to lerne of you M. Iewell She hath and att all times hath had marke this well M. Iewell the holy Ghoste to prompte her to guide her and to assiste her and shall so haue in aeternuÌ„ for euer if Christ be true of his promise Thus are your authorites answeared Thus is the truthe auouched and proued M. Iewell and you founde a slaunderer not so much of D. Harding as of the Truthe which shall at lenght confounde all that be against her Harding The nations that haue euer had their Seruice in the vulgar tounge the people thereof haue continued in Scismes errours and certain Iudaicall obseruances so as they haue not bene reakoned in the number of the Catholike Churche As the Christians of Moscouia of Armenia of prester Ioan his lande in Aethiopia Iewell The 86. Vntruthe For the Seruice in the Vulgar tounge neuer was cause of Schisme or heresy D. Harding saieth not so much Their Vulgar Seruice was not the cause of their Schisme But there schisme and other heresies were the cause of their Vulgar Seruice For hauing ones diuided theÌ„ selues froÌ„ the Church in Doctrine they chose also that order of Seruice which was coÌ„trary to the Church I perceiue M. Iewell It is all one with you whether a man bidde you drincke ere you goe or goe ere you drincke Harding VVherefore to conclude seeing in sixe hundred yeres after Christ the Seruice of the Church was not in any other then in the greke and latine tounge for that any man is able to shewe by good proufe c. Iewell The .90 Vntruthe The Contrary is sufficiently proued in the 15. diuision of this Article All M. Iewelles proufes are sufficiently and particulary att large disproued in the same diuision See the answer to the 78. Vntruthe So the conclusion of D. Harding is sure and M. Iewell according to promise must subscribe The heape of Vntruthes which M. Iewel saieth in his margin are here laied together in the Conclusion haue ben all before particulary examined and iustified Harding As the bolde assertion of M. Iewel is plainely disproued so the olde order of the Latine Seruice in the latine Churche whereof Englande is a prouince is not ráshely to be condemned especially whereas 91. being first committed to the Churches by the Apostles of our countrie and the first preachers off the Faith here it hath bene authorised by the continuance off allmost a thousand yeres without controll c. Iewell The 91. Vntruthe For the first preachers off the Faith in this Iâ—elande weâ—e grekes and Hebrewes and not Latines This hath ben told vs twyse or thrise before and nowe to awnswere it fully I thinke it good bothe for Countrie sake that the State of her touching the firste cummyng of Religion vnto her maie be knowen and that Trueth also maie not be suppressed by any alleaging of an other trueth And first what M. Iewells discourse is abowt this mater we shall consider After that we will shortlye declare who were in deede the Englishemens first Apostles withe defence of their honour and worthynes Touching the first Iewell Ghildas saieth that Ioseph of Arimathea that toke donne Christe from his Crosse being sent hyther by Philipp the Apostle out of FrauÌ„ce began first to preache the Gospell in this Realme in the tyme of Tyberius the Emperour Stapleton But what successe had it How deepe roote toke it How was it spreade abrode How was it receiued For the cummyng of Ioseph hither proueth not that the whole countrie was conuerted but that the Gospell was there preached And an argument maie hereof be gathered not that they openlye professed the Christian faithe but that they had the waie shewed vnto them by which they might come to the knowledge and loue of their Saluation So that yow can not inferr The whole State of Britaine was turned from their Idolatrie to the Christ by cummyng of Ioseph of Arimathea but this you might saie that euen in the vttermost partes of the world the sownde of the Gospell was heard immediatly after Christes Ascension and that al the world might see his mercie and Saluation and that al excuse was taken awaie from Idalotours if they would not repent and beleue in the onelye and true and Almightie God Iewell Nicephorus saieth that Simon Zelotes aboute the same tyme came in to this Ileland and dyd the lyke Stapleton He came in dede as Nicephorus sayeth but he came not lyke a Lieger but lyke and Embassadour not to tarye and couert the whole but to doe a message for the whole in the hearing of a few For Simon Zelotes saieth he in preaching the Ghospell went thourough Aegypte Cirene and Aphrica and afterwarde through Mauritania and all Lybia and brought the same doctrine euen to the weast Occeane and to the Iles of Britannie So that it appeereth he went a pace like a Cursor that telleth good newes but he conuerted not I trow euerye countrie through which he went Iewell Theodoretus saieth that S. Paule Immediatly after his first delyuerie in Rome vnder themperour Nero preached the Gospell in this Ileland and in other Countries of the weast It is wonder that he should not heare that Ioseph of Arimathea and Simon Zelotes had conuerted it alreadie if as yow imagine Britanie receiued the Faith when they preached there But doth Theodoretus saie that S. Paule by name preached the Gospell there I beseech the gentle Reader to consider in this place how particularly and distinctly M. Iewell setteth furth vnto the the cummyng of S. Paule in to Britannie He nameth him singularly S. Paule he noteth the tyme after his first delyuery in Rome he setteth it furth by the name of the Emperour vnder the Emperour Nero and all this he dothe to make the beleue that Theodoretus speaketh so distinctly of S. Paules cuÌ„myng in to our countrie and preaching there in his own person that it were impossible to doubt thereof Nowe if Theodoretus saie so muche then is M. Iewell discharged if he doe not what a bold and shameles felow is he that dareth so to make witnesses speake at his pleasure and so to abuse the credulitie of the vnlerned Theodoretus wordes are these Nostri illi piscatores
the Faythe and custome off the Catholike Churche Iewell The 92. Vntruthe ioyned with a slaunder Oure Seruice conteineth nothinge contrary to the faithe Stapleton As the Crede of the Arrians was iudged by the Fathers of the Nicene councell contrarye to the faith bicause it lacked the Consubstantialite or vnite of Substaunce of Christ with God the Father though otherwise it had no wordes in it contrary to the faith so the English Seruice containeth in it thinges repugnant to the faithe in that it wanteth the Consecration and the oblation of the Holy Mysteries as I haue before proued Also Prayer for the soules departed Memories and inuocations of the blessed Sainctes All which the Catholike faithe beleueth and practiseth in the Churche seruice though in the englishe Seruice no worde were expressed contrary to the Catholike faith But I praye you M. Iewell are the homilies parte of your Church Seruice or no You wil not denie but they are Then your homilies of only faith iustifying are contrary to the faithe of S. Iames the Apostle saying expressely man is iustified by workes not by faithe only Your homilie against Images is contrary to the faithe which the seuenth Generall Councell of Christendom established against the peuish heretikes Iconomachi your forefathers To be short the very Order of your Seruice being in the Mother tounge contrary to the practise of all Christendom hetherto as it hath in this Article appeared and of all the Catholike Church beside at this present is mere schismaticall and damnable So is also the Ministration of your bread and wine in bothe kindes by priuat authorite and condemning withall other Catholike Countres whiche vse the contrary So is in like maner the not mingling of your Communion Cuppe withe water whiche the Catholique Churche bothe Greke and Latin hathe practised as I haue before in the firste Article at large proued In these manye pointes Master Iewell youre Seruice partelye lacketh some thinges necessary partly hath some thinges repugnant to the Faithe and custome off the Catholike Churche as D. Harding moste trulye saied And thus M. Iewell you were slaundered with a Truth Now good Christian Reader for the better contenting of thy minde and for a full declaration that in Iustifying onely these Vntruthes whiche it hathe pleased M. Iewell to score vpon D. Harding most slaunderously as nowe thou seest the chiefe and principal pointes of this Article haue bene discussed and M. Iewelles Replie in the most waightiest pointes answered I beseche thee to looke backe and to consider the whole substaunce of these M. Iewelles Vntruthes in this Article and to remember what hath by occasion thereof bene saied First it hath bene shewed and proued that not onely in our Countre from the first beginning of the faith among vs Englishmen but also long before both in the greke Churche and in the Latin namely in Rome and Fraunce the Seruice was in the greke and Latin tounges whiche the coÌ„mon Vulgar people vnderstode not And herein M. Iewell is forced if he will abide to his promise to yelde and Subscribe Next the Constitution of Iustinian which hath so longe serued M. Iewell and his felowes for a mighty and principall Achilles to fortifie their Vulgar Seruice withall is proued at large to make nothinge therefore and M. Iewelles long lying Replie in that behalfe at large confuted Thirdly M. Iewelles Examples as he calleth them wherein he laboured to shewe that within the first 600. yeares some Countres had their Seruice in the Vulgar tounge are all and euery one particularly answered confuted and proued no Examples of any Vulgar Seruice in that age Whereby it remaineth that no Vulgar Seruice in all that time in any one place appearing the Only Seruice was then in the lerned tounges Greke and Latin as it is now Fourthely the Only place of holy Scripture that M. Iewell and his felowes haue to maintaine their Vulgar Seruice by namely the fourtenth Chapter of the firste to the Corinth is proued at large to make nothinge for the Vulgar Seruice but rather to ouerthrowe the same And M. Iewell in that place is founde ten times to haue corrupted the texte of S. Paule Last of all the blessed memory of oure Apostle holy S. Austin the Monke sent by holy S. Gregory to preache the faith to vs Englishmen then Heathens and paynims is defended and deliuered from the most impudent lies detestable Slaunders and desperat Reproches wherwith the tender harte of M. Iewell hath with passing Impudency charged him Other Vntruthes as they were of lesse weight so they are with lesse labour sufficieÌ„tly yet and thouroughly discharged It is nowe thy parte gentle Reader indifferently to Consider the vprightnes of M. Iewell and the Truthe of the Cause THE FOVRTHE ARTICLE Of the Supremacy of the B. of Rome THe Primacy of the Bishop of Rome that is to saye Supreme power and auctoritie ouer and aboue all Bishoppes and chiefe gouuernement of Christes flocke in matters pertaining to Faith and Christen Religion was in the first six hundred yeares acknowleadged and confessed Iewell The .93 Vntruthe For there was no such power confessed StapletoÌ„ This power is confessed by S. Gregory a Bishop of Rome within the first six hundred yeres I alleage him to you M. Iewell though he be a bishop of Rome him selfe bicause you haue in this Article alleaged him so Plentifully and so stoutely against D. Harding as if he had clerely condemned such Supreme Authorite him selfe I will alleage and vrge the very place that D. Harding bringeth and answer to all that you saie against it that the Christen Reader may see with what Passing Impudencie you alleage S. Gregory against him selfe and yet crie out with open mouthe against D. Hardinge as though he had done so The wordes of S. Gregory are these Cunctis Euangelium scientibus liquet quòd voce Dominica Sancto omnium Apostolorum Petro Principi Apostolo totius Ecclesiae cura commissa est Ipsi quippe dicitur Petre amas me pasce oues meas Ipsi dicitur Ecce Satanas expetiuit cribrare vos sicut triticum ego pro te rogaui Petre vt non deficiat fides tua tu aliquando conuersus confirma fratres tuos Ipsi dicitur Tu es Petrus super hanc petram aedÃficabo Ecclesiam meam portae inferi non praeualebunt aduersus eam Et tibi dabo claues regni coelorum c. Ecce claues regni coelestis accepit potestas ei ligandi soluendi tribuitur Cura ei totius Ecclesiae principatus committitur Et tamen vniuersalis Apostolus non vocatur It is euident to all saieth S. Gregory that knoweth the gospell that the cure and charge of the whole Church hath bene committed by the wordes of our lorde to the holy Apostle Peter Prince of all the Apostles For to him it is saied Peter louest thou mee Fede my shepe To him it
this name of Vniuersalite was offred to me as bishop of the Apostolike See But none of my predecessours euer consented to vse this prophane title Bicause verely if one Patriarche be called vniuersall other are made no Patriarches at all Which reason also in the same epistle he repeteth yet againe as being in dede the chiefè and only cause why he and his predecessours other bishops of Rome vtterly refused and abhorred that Title Thus it appeareth that S. Gregory forced not that reason only or chiefely against the bishop of Constantinople which M. Iewell imagineth bicause by that Title he woulde become Head of all the Churche but the reason which S. Gregory principally forceth against the bishop of Constantinople and for the whiche he him selfe and his predecessours refused that Title is that by the same Title he would be the bishop Alone the Patriarche Alone the priest Alone To Conclude S. Gregory forceth two reasons against the bishop of Constantinople why he may not be called the Vniuersall Bishop And he geueth one reason why he and his predecessours haue refused that Name The two reasons against the Bishop of Constantinople are these First and principally bicause appetit solus episcopus vocari he coueteth to be called the only Bishop bicause by that Name Patriarcharum nomen coeteris derogatur Other Patriarches are made no Patriarches at all This was a newe a prophane a blasphemous and an Antichristian attempt The second reason is by a consequence For so it woulde folowe that he woulde subdewe all the Churche to him whose Churche is knowen to haue bene oftentimes the Ringleader and founder of wicked heresies Which were the greatest absurdite that might de deuised For thereof it woulde folowe that the whole Churche shoulde perish the Vniuersall Bishop perishing The one onely reason that S. Gregory geueth why he and his predecessours though by the whole generall Councell of Chalcedon Vniuersales oblato honore vocati sunt they were called Vniuersall Bishoppes that honour being offred them woulde yet neuer vse or enioy that title is not bicause he and his predecessours shoulde thereby become heades of the vniuersal Churche as if that Authorite wer iniurious but lest that as in foure seueral epistles he repeteth si sibi in pontificatus gradu gloriaÌ„ singularitatis arriperet hanc omnibus fratribus denegasse videretur if any of his predecessours shoulde take vnto him that singular preferment in the degree of bishopricke he might seme to denie the same preferment of bishopricke to al his brethren that is the Pope by that meanes might seme to become the Onely Bishop ouer all Christen people as that Iohn of Constantinople attempted to be For this reason for this inconuenience emplied in that Name no bishop of Rome euer vsurped or desired that name though of other men before Saint â—regories time they were so called as it shal in the â— 8 Vntruthe appeare Nowe the other reason off being Heade ouer the vniuersall Churche of Christ Saint Gregory foâ—ceth not against him selfe or his predecessours the bishops of Rome bothe bicause the See of Rome fel neuer to heresy but by the especial praier of Christ for Peter the first bishop therof is preserued vt nunquam deficiat fides eius that their faithe maye neuer faile as in the 108 Vntruthe we shall more particulary declare whereby the absurde consequence falling in the bishops of Constantinople hath here no place and also bicause S. Gregory him selfe as his predecessours before him was in dede the Head gouuerner of the Vniuersall Churche of Christ and practised that Headship and Iurisdiction in all partes of ChristeÌ„dome as occasion serued Which nowe according to promise out of the very Epistles of S. Gregory him selfe I entend God willing to declare To omitte the particular Iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome in all Italy it selfe where he is the Metropolitane and where only at this present M. Iewell and his felowes woulde limit his Authorite if at lest they will graunte him so muche for by some of their iudgements he shoulde rule only his owne dyocese and by some other not them neither for such woulde haue no Bishops at all touching Order and Iurisdiction but to omitte the practised Authorite of S. Gregory within the bondes of Italy it selfe where in Rome standeth let vs consider howe the same was extended as well ouer the Alpes to vs warde Northe and West as ouer the sea to all the worlde beyonde bothe southe and East The Iurisdiction and Supreme Authorite of S. Gregory ouer the Realme of Fraunce appeareth euidently in one of his Epistles directed Vniueâ—sis Episcopis Galliarum to all the Bishops of Fraunce Where thus he writeth worde for worde Bicause the place is longe and the booke is common to be had I leaue the Lâ—â—ine and geue thee gentle Reader the English thereof faithefully and sincerely translated Bicause saieth S. Gregory eueâ—y duty is then semely perfourmed when there is one Ruler to whom recourse may be had we haue therefore thought it conuâ—nient to appoynte our brother Virgilius Bishop of Arles oure Legat according to the olde Custome in those Churches which are subiect to our most Excellâ—nt Sonne Childebert the kinge of Fraunce to the entent that bothe the right Catholike faithe that is such as by the foure generall Councâ—ls is dâ—fined maye with hofull deuotion by Gods helpe be preserued and also that if perhaps any contention arise among our brethern and felowe Priestes he may appease it by vertu of his Authorite as occupying the roome of the See Apostolike according to his discrete moderatioÌ„ To whom also we haue enioyned that if such questions of certaine Matters do arise for the discussing whereof the presence of many is nedâ—full let him with a competent number of our brethern and felow Bisshops gathered together discusse the matter with equite and according to the Canons vprightly determine it But if any Contention or question arise touching the faith which God forbidde or a Matter springe vp that is of some waighty coÌ„trouersie so that for the greatenes of it the Iudgement of the See Apostolike semeth necessary the truthe of the Matter being diligeÌ„tly examined let him by his owne relation bringe it to our knowleadg to thentent that from vs it may with an agreable and vndoubted sentence be determined Also because it is necessary that before oure Legat as ofte as he shall thinke it behouefull the Bisshops at conuenient times do appere for conference to be had we exhorte you that none presume to disobey his coÌ„mandements therein neither slacke to be present at such Common assembles except perhaps either bodely sickenesse or some other iust impediment do staie him from thence In which case who so euer is so absent let him yet directe in his place some Priest or Deacon to thentent that such thinges as by our Legat through Gods helpe shall be determined or decreed may by faithefull relation
called Peter of Petra the Rocke To whom by the Mouthe of Truthe it selfe it is saied To thee I will geue the kâ—yes of thâ— kingdome of heauen To whom againe it is saied And thou bâ—ing sometime conuerted Confirme thy Brethern And againe Sin on the Son of Iohn louest thou me Fâ—de my shepe Therefore whereas there are many Apostles yet for the Principalite it selfe and Chiefty Only the See of the Prince of the Apostles hath praeuailed in Authorite Which See in three places is one persons For he exalted the See of Rome wherein he Rested He honoured the See of Alexandria sending his disciple the Euangelist thither He established the See of Antioche remayning there him selfe 7. yeres though to departe To Conclude euident it is by S. Gregory that the See Apostolike wherof he saieth Cui praesidemus in the which we doe Gouuerne Pro ipso principatu sola in Authoritate coÌ„ualuit Only praeuayled in Authorite to haue the Chiefty and Principalite To that See he saieth All bishops are subiect si qua culpa in epâ—scopis inuenitur if any faulte be founde in bishops This See he calleth Caput omniuÌ„ ecclesiaruÌ„ the Head of all Churches and Cunctis praelatam ecclesiis Sett ouer all Churches What soeuer this See doth determine nihil egent firmitatis they nede no other strength and without the Authorite of this See Nullas quoecumque acta fuerint vires habâ—nt whatsoeuer dothe passe in Synod shall haue no force Of the which also agreing with S. Gregory S. Augustin saieth Cui primas dare nolle vel summae profâ—cto impiâ—tatis est vâ—l praecipitis arrogantiae to the which not to geue and graunt the primacy soothely it is a point either of most high wickednesse or of headling arrogancie And thus is in dede the estate of the See of Rome maintayned by the Authorite of this holy Father Brefely thus much is D. Hardinge furthered by the Authorite of S. Gregory And that euery English harte that any thinge regardeth the benefyt of his Faithe that reioyseth in the profession of Christianyte and that thinketh him selfe bounde to allmyghty God that euer he and his forefathers were brought to the faythe of Iesus Christ and to the knowleadg of a better life hereafter after to come that euery such I saie maie haue the better cause the more to consider the sooner to acknoweleadg the gladlyer to embrace the Primacy of the bishopp of Rome so vniuersally practised of this holy and lerned Father S. Gregory I beseche euery English Reader diligently to marke and beare away the testimony and witnesse that Venerable Bede the most of lerned light that euer shined in our Countie geueth to this holy Father and howe muche by his Iudgement we are bounde and beholding vnto him aboue all other men Thus Beda writeth of him in his ecclesiasticall History whiche for the confort of my dere Countre in this storme of schisme I haue of late sett forthe in the English tounge Of this holy Pope Gregory it becometh me in this our history of the Churche of Englande more largely to speake Bicause by his diligence he conuerted our nation that is the Englishmen from the powre of Satan to the faithe of Christe VVhome we may well and also must call oure Apostle For as soone as he was highe Bishop ouer the whole worlde and appointed gouuerner of the Churches lately conuerted to the faythe he made our Natyon the Churche of Christe whiche had bene euer vnâ—ill that tyme the bondslaue of Idols So that we may lawfully pronounce of him the saying of the Apostle That although he were not an Apostle to others yet he was vnto vs. For the signet and token of his Apostlâ—ship we are in our Loâ—de Thus farre Venerable Beda This is that holy Pope our Apostle whiche Practised this Vniuersall Authorite ouer all the partes of Christendom Let vs neuer thinke Christian english Reader that an Antichrist as the Pope for his vniuersall Supremacy is called shoulde bringe vs Englishmen to the Faithe of Christ. Neither let vs doubte but whose godly Foundations God hathe so manye hundred yeres prospered his doctrine Religion and practised Authorite was good and godly Iewell If S. Gregorie were nowe aliuâ— he would crie out as he did to the Emperour Mauritius O tempora o Mores O what a time iâ— this O what manners are these Stapleton Verely if S. Gregorye were nowe aliue he woulde crie out as he did to the Emperour Mauricius nor against vs whiche continewe in the Catholike faith planted by holy Augustin whom he sent to preache the faith vnto vs whom he created the fâ—rst Archebishop of Caunterbury whom he in his epistles commendeth and extolleth not against vs which continewe in the obedience of the Apostolike See whereof in his time he was the gouuernour through out all Christendome as hath bene declared Which celebrat the holy Sacrifice of the Masse Praye for the soules departed Call vpon the blessed Saints Adore Christ in the blessed Sacrament Acknowleadg the seuen Sacraments of Christes Churche all which thinges holy S. Gregory practised him selfe but he woulde crie out against you M. Iewell whiche call the workes of oure Apostle whom he sent the killing of the godly which denie the greatest benefit that euer God gaue to our nation the conuerting of vs from infidelite to the faith to make your selues the Apostles of the same which call that holy man S. Gregory him selfe an Antichrist and all his successours downewarde for vsurping not that name which bothe he abhorred and no other Pope euer vsed but the Authorite of supreme gouuernment ouer the whole Churche of Christ of S. Gregory so clerely Practised which being in the roome of a bishopp do condemne all the bishops that euer sate in that roome before you against you M. Iewell which corrupt the sayinges of S. Gregory which call his writinges Fables which call him an obscure and a late Doctour other where against you he would crie out and might most iustly crie out O tempora O Mores O what a time is this O what manners are these Iewell Thus muche is Master Harding furthered by the authorite of S. Gregorye StapletoÌ„ And thus much is M. Iewell furthered by his longe staying vpon S. Gregory Verely D. Harding is so much furthered by the Authorite of S. Gregory that if M. Iewell will stande to the same euidence shall force him to confesse and acknoweleadg the Charge and principalite of the whole Churche to haue bene committed to Peter by Christ and to haue bene practised by S. Gregory his Successour thourough out all Christendom Thus much are we furthered M. Iewell by the Authorite of S. Gregory Harding S. Ciprian declaring the contempt of the highe Priest Christes Vicar in earthe to be cause of schismes and Heresies writeth thus to Cornelius Pope and Martyr Neyther haue Heresies or schismes risen of ony other occasion then of that the Priest
of God is not obeied and that one Priest for the time not be Churche and one Iudge for the time insteede of Christ is not thought vpon Iewell The .94 Vntruthe For S. Ciprian speaketh these wordes of euery seuerall Bishop not only of the Bishop of Rome Stapletō If S. Ciprian speake not only of the Bishop of Rome as you confesse he doth M. Iewell then he speaketh of the Bishop of Rome D. Harding saieth no more in the wordes alleaged Ergo it is no Vntruthe that he saied Againe D. Harding meaned not that this place of S. Ciprian should be spoken only of the Bishop of Rome but that it is also well and truly vnderstanded of euery Seuerall Bishop in his owne Dyocesse not only of of the Bishop of Rome Therefore in this point D. Harding and M. Iewell do agree And therefore it is no Vntruthe in the one except it be in bothe Harding To whom if the whole brotherhood that is the whole number of Christian people which be brethern togeather and were so called in the primitiue Churche woulde be obedient c. Iewell The .95 Vntruthe Standing in the manifest corruption and falsifying of S. Ciprian Stapletō Where probabilite and reason leadeth vs to the contrary there is no manifest corruption or falsifying of the writer Manifest corruption importeth a wilfull and purposed guile No such to haue bene in this place if I talked with a Bishop of Sarrisbery and not with M. Iewell I durst to make him Iudge For first if this place be meant not only of euery seuerall Bishop but of the Bishop of Rome also by M. Iewelles owne graunte then being with vs Catholikes a sure and vndoubted truthe that the whole brotherhood subiect to the Bishop of Rome is the whole number of Christian people to interpret that whole brotherhood as D. Harding doth for the whole number of Christen people it is so farre from any manifest corruption or falsyfying that it is no corruption o◠falsyfying at all If M. Iewell will saye that this presupposed opinion of the whole brotherhood that is of the whole number of Christian people subiect to the Bishop of Rome is a wronge and false opinion he shall vnderstande our opinion herein is such as we haue lerned of the holy Fathers of Christes Churche Chrysostom saieth Christ did shead his bloud to redeme those shepe the charge of whom he committed bothe to Peter and to the successours of Peter I trust M. Iewell will exclude no parte of Christen people from these shepe which Christ with his bloud redemed Then by Chrisostoms iudgement are all Christen people the flocke not only of Peter but of Peters successours also who are the Bishoppes of Rome S. Ambrose speaking of the Church which S. Paule calleth the Piller and grounde of truthe addeth Cuius hodie Rector est Damasus The ruler of which Churche at this daye is Damasus who then was Pope of Rome This Church which is the piller and grounde of truthe is no particular Churche or parte of Christes flocke but the Vniuersall Churche and the whole number of Christen people Venerable Bede calleth the Pope S. Gregory praelatum Ecclesijs iamdudum ad fidem conuersis gouuerner of the Churches lately conuerted to the faithe From those Churches none are excluded S. Hierom saithe that Christ made Peter the Master of his house that vnder one shepheard there may be one faithe In the house of Christ and vnder one shepeard is one brotherhood the whole number of Christen people Thus then to interpret the whole brotherhood subiect to the Bishop of Rome for the whole number of Christen people as D. Hardinge doth is no Vntruthe at all nor no falsyfying of S Ciprian at all seing that by M. Iewelles owne graunt S. Ciprian speaketh there as wel of the Bishop of Rome as of other Bishops Harding Amonge the Canons made by the 318. Bishops at the Nicene Councel which were in number 70. 96. and all burnt by Heretikes in the East Churche saue xx c. Iewell The .96 Vntruthe ioyned with folie as shall appeare Stapletō If this be an Vntruthe and that ioyned with a folie then haue you your selfe M. Iewell vttered an Vntruthe and that with a folie For these are your owne wordes M. Iewell in your text folowing Iewell The true Athanasius him selfe of whom we make no doubte saieth that the Arrians of Alexandria burnte the Catholike mens bookes and 276 therewithall the Canons of the Councell of Nice in the time of the Emperour Constantius Iulius being then Bishop of Rome Stapletō And for this purpose you quote vnto vs in the margin Athanasius in Epist. ad Orthodoxos Now M. Iewell though this be a manifest Vntruthe that you reporte of that Epistle of Athanasius for in that whole Epistle there is no one worde of the Canons of the Councell of Nice reade and see the Epistle who list yet it is a farre ouersight in you to note that for an Vntruthe in D. Harding which your selfe auoucheth afterwardes for certain and true Thus we might shortly Returne vpon you this Vntruthe by your owne assertion affirming the same But bicause one Vntruthe is not well defended by an other Vntruthe though the aduersary may so be answered we tell you therefore againe that such Canons and in the number aboue mencioned were burnt in Alexandria by the Arrians We bringe for witnesse thereof the Epistle of Athansius and other Bishops writing so to Marcus the Pope of Rome and complaining thereof in their letter to him We bringe you also an Epistle of Iulius the Pope liuing at the very time of the Nicene Councel writing to the Bishops of the East such as had them selues bene at the Councell and reporting in that Epistle to the number of .xxiiij. Canons beside the twenty which commonly are to be read in that Councell Beside all this many other Canons are alleaged as of the Nicene Councell by diuerse of the Fathers which are not at this present to be founde in the Nicene Councell Diuerse of which Canons are particularly mencioned gathered together and sett forthe of late against M. Nowell It shall not nede here to repete them To that place I referre the Reader Is not all this sufficient to proue that such Canons were loste Is not Athanasius and Iulius sufficient to clere D. Harding of this Vntruthe No. M. Iewell will finde a shifte for them bothe What is that First as touching the Epistle of Athanasius to Marcus he saieth it is forged But how doth he proue that For sothe after that he had affirmed as you hearde in his wordes before that the true Athanasius writeth of the burning of these Canons to Iulius the Pope he addeth Iewell But M. Hardinges Athanasius is either so forgetfull or his 277. lies or so impudent and carelesse what he saie that he maketh piteous complainte of the same burning vnto Marcus that was Bishop in Rome before
subiect payeth but halfe as much By such lewde reasons an euill cause must be mayntayned Iewell Now if the bishop of Iustiniana and the bishop of Rome in their seuerall diuisions haue their like authoritie and if the Churche of Constantinople in .336 all prerogatiues and priuileges be made equall with the Citie of Rome then is not the bishop of Romes powâ—r vniuersall neither can he iustly be called the head of the vnuersall Churche Yea M. Iewel if the Skie fal we may happe to catche Larkes But now M. Iewell if the bishop of Iustiniana and the bishop of Rome in their Seuerall diuisions haue not their like Authorite but the one hath it of the other the one occupieth the place of the other and that by the appoyntement of the other that is of the B. of Rome as the decree expressely saieth and if againe the Church of Constantinople be not made equall with the Citie of Rome in All prerogâ—tiues â—nd priuileges as M Iewell saieth but do enioye only a priuilege of Rome as the decree saieth then neither is the bishop of Romes Vniuersall Power empaired but so farre the more defended neither then any thinge letteth why he may not be called the Head of the Vniuersal Churche Last of all then M. Iewel hath loste a couple of good arguments Verely IustiniaÌ„ him selfe writing vnto Epiphanius the bishop of Constantinople calleth him the Vniuersall Patriarche which thinge he would not haue done 337 if he had thought that Title of right had belongâ—d to the bishop of Rome Neither dothe the bishop of Rome challenge that Title neither was it commended in any bishop though it was vsed not only to the Pope but to diuerse other some time of custome sometime for honour and reuerence to the party It seemeth the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was taken for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vniuersall for Catholike As you your selfe expounde that worde afterwarde and as all true bishoppes are called Stapleton The argument that M. Harding gathereth of Iustinians wordes is this The bisâ—op of Rome had the first place in generall Councels Ergo he was an vniuersall bishop VVhich argument what weight it beareth I leaue to M. Harding to consider Vntruthe M. Iewel For D. Harding gathereth no such argument But the argument of Hardinge is this Iustinian by that decree or edict ratified that chiefty or primacy in the bishop of Rome which the Canons had determined Ergo thâ— Emperour confirmed the Popes Primacy To this purpose he alleaged the Decree of Iustinian and the Ordonnaunce of Phocas This argument beareth such weight that all which M. Iewell hath wrote and persuaded to the contrary is not able to beare it downe For it containeth a double proufe of the Popes Primacy The determinations of the Canons and the Confirmation of the Emperour Al within the compasse of M. Iewelles .600 yeares Harding Hilarius speaking much to the extolling of Peter and his Successours in that See saieth Supereminentem fidei suae confefsione locum promeruit that for the Consession of his blessed faith he deserued a place of preeminence aboue all other Iewell The .100 Vntruthe For Hilarie speaketh not one worde of Peters successour Though S. Hilarie speake not of Peters successour nor of the See of Rome yet that which is spokeÌ„ to the extolling of Peter may truly be saied to be spoken also to the extolling of his Successour So Chrysostom saieth that Christ committed his shepe Tum Petro tum Petri successoribus Bothe to Peter and to the Successours of Peter when he saied to Peter only Fede my shepe So S. Hierom calleth Damasus the Pope the chaire of Peter vpon the which he confesseth the Church to be builded And so Hilarie extolling Peter and confessing a preeminence aboue other in him is not Vntruly saied to confesse the same in his Successours Especially seing that Christ builded a Church not to remaine in Peter only but for euer Nowe whereas M. Iewell saieth Hilarie only commendeth the faith of Peter he committeth a great Vntruthe against S. Hilarie For in the same booke he confesseth that vpon Peter him selfe Christ builded his Churche where he saieth Post sacramenti confessionem Beatus Simon aedificationi ecclesiae subiacens Blessed Simon after the coÌ„fession of the mysterie lying vnder the building of the Churche For what meaneth Hilarie to make Peter lye vnder the building of the Church but that he is the rocke and fouÌ„datioÌ„ vpoÌ„ which it pleased God to buylde and erect his Church And so of S Ciprian S. Hierom S. Augustin and other fathers Peter is called Fundamentum Ecclesiae the foundacion of the Churche not to exclude the only principall foundacion which is Christ but to confesse and signifie a strength and power neuer to faile in him and his successours It is not therfore only the Faith of Peter but also the Person of him which Hilary extolleth which also is no lesse sure then his faith bicause Christ hath praied and no doubt obtained Vt fides eius non deficiat that his faithe may not faile Hard. Locum supereminentem Hard. A place of preeminence aboue all other Iewell The .101 Vntruthe standing in false translation For M. Harding addeth of his owne aboue all other Stapl. Aboue whom then M. Iewell is that place of preeminence which Peter had Aboue some or aboue none or aboue al If aboue some only you must shewe which some those are and the reason why aboue those only If aboue none it is no preeminence at all Truly the worde Supereminentia importeth a Preeminence not meane nor common butt aboue all other And herein I dare to make any grammarian Iudge How be it what so euer the grammarian saie herein the Diuinite teacheth vs plainely so Chrisostom saieth God the Father sett Hieremie ouer one nation But Christ made Peter gouernour ouer the whole worlde Which proposition he taketh to be so true that here of he maketh an argument to proue the Equalite of the Godhead of Christ with God the Father And Gregorie saieth Cura ei totius Ecclesiae principatus committitur The charge and chiefty of the whole Churche is committed vnto him And all writers bothe grekes and latin do call Peter the Prince Head and chiefe of the Apostles If he were ouer the Apostles no doubt but he was ouer all the rest of the Churche beside And so the Diuinite is true and the translation not Vntrue which geueth a true sence to the latine worde no more then the worde it selfe beareth Hard. The same S. Augustine speaking to Bonifacius bishop of Rome This care saieth he is common to vs all that haue the office of a bishoppe albeit therein thou thy selfe hast the preminence ouer all being on the toppe of the pastorall watchetoure Iewell The 102. Vntruthe standing in the false translation and corruption of S. Augustines wordes I perceiue M. Iewel we must go to coÌ„struing we must leaue
by the way of consequence considering the reason which folowed he spake no Vntruth The reason why there ought to be one high priest in the Church who should haue peerelesse authorite ouer others is the auoiding of schismes If this reason do force that euery seuerall Dyocesse must haue one head bishop it forceth a great deale more that the whole Churche being the greater in numbre and the more in danger of Diuision haue also one Head bishop Which in no man els appearing but in the bishop of Rome to whom the Scriptures the Councelles the Emperours and the Fathers haue graunted the Primacy it maketh as I saide by a right good consequence for the supreme Authorite of the Pope Thus S. Hierom by the force of his reason maye meane the Pope though in his wordes he speake not of the Pope Harding To ordeine and appoint the vicaire of Christ it pertaineth to none other then to Christ. Iewell The 104. Vntruthe For Christ neuer appointed any such vicaire First this For foloweth not The consequence I saie is Vntrue Christ appointed no vicaire Ergo it perteineth not vnto him to do so As by the like it shall appeare The kinge of EnglaÌ„d neuer appointed any high Constable or general Lieutenant ouer the whole Realme of England Ergo it perteineth not vnto him to do so This hangeth very loosely He neuer did it ergo he can not or ought not to do it Especially when we talke of God who can do all that him pleaseth Againe the proposition of M. Iewell is an other most manifest and wicked Vntruthe Which for Truthes sake I wil nowe by Gods helpe euidently proue That Christ him selfe was the Head of all the Churche appointed by God the Father the Apostle saieth plainely God gaue him to be the Head ouer all the Churche which is his Body That Christ gaue the same authorite or Headship ouer all the Churche vnto Peter I proue Christ saied to Peter Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke I will builde my Churche and hell gates shall not preuaile against it Vpon this place thus I reason To be the Foundation of the whole Vniuersall Churche vnder Christ is to haue the powâ—â— and strength of Christ ouer it is to be in Curistes place is to be his Vniuersall Vicair But Peter is the Foundation of the whole Vniuersall Church Ergo Peter was made Christes Vniuersall Vicaire The Maior or first proposition thus I proue Christ is Head of the whole Churche bicause he is the foundatioÌ„ thereof bicause he fedeth the whole flocke bicause he vpholdeth the whole house Ergo to whom Christ geueth all this that is whom he maketh the foundation of the whole Churche whom he setteth to be the feder of al his Churche whoÌ„ he strengtheneth to CoÌ„firme the Apostles and Bishops them selues he hath Christes place and power he is his Vicaire The minor or secoÌ„d propositioÌ„ I proue by the wordes of the ghospell alleaged which wordes to haue ben properly spoken to Peter I proue by the expositions of the Fathers vpon that place That the Person of Peter was made the foundatioÌ„ and Rocke of the whole Churche by those wordes of Christ Chrysostom expressely teacheth vs. His wordes are these vpon that place Quae deus concedere solus potest c. Those thinges which God only can graunte as the power to forgeue sinnes and that the Churche might remaine immoueable notwithstanding so many and so great whaues beating against it and that a poore fisher man might be made stronger theÌ„ any Rocke though al the worlde striued against him these thinges I saye which only God caÌ„ geue Christ promisâ—th in this place that he will geue Euen so God the Father saied to Hieremy the prophet I haue set thee as an yron piller and as a brasen walle But God the Father sett him ouer one natioÌ„ only but Christ sett Peter ouer the whole worlde Thus farre Chrysostom expounding that place of S. Matthew In whose wordes we see Peter to be sett ouer the whole worlde and the poore fisher man to be made stronger and more durable against all storme of the worlde then any Rocke against the whaues Againe in an other place he saieth of Peter Ecclesiae primatum gubernationemque sibi per vniuersum mundum tradidit Christ gaue vnto him the primacy and gouuernement of the Church throught out the whole worlde What is to be Christes vniuersall vicaire if this be not Hilarie expounding also this place of S. Mathewe Thou art Peter c. where Christ first gaue him that name for before he was called only Simon Bar Iona vseth this exclamation to Peter O in nuncupatione Noui Nominis faelix Ecclesiae fundamentum c. O happy foundation of the Churche in the Title of that newe name O worthy Rocke of that building which dissolued the lawes of hel the gates of the Diuel and al the boÌ„des of death O Blessed porter of heaueÌ„ gates to whose arbitrement the kayes of the euerlasting entry are coÌ„mitted whose iudgement on earthe is a preiudicated Authorite in heaueÌ„ Thus S. Hilarie acknowledgeth the person of Peter to be that foundation and Rocke vpon the which Christ builded his Church And therefore this lerned writer as he calleth Christ the Rocke of the Church and Validum excelsi aedificij fundameÌ„tum the stronge fundation of that highe buildyng so in an other place he calleth Peter also Aedificationi ecclesiae subiacens one that laye vnder the building of the Churche that is as one vpon whom the Churche is builded Which also S. Basill confesseth of Peter euen in the very same wordes in effect as S. Hylarie dothe Al which is no more to saie then that Peter was in the Churche in Christes place and roome to holde vp the Churche to builde it and to staye it In like maner S. Ambrose by this place of S. Matthew declareth Peter to be the Rocke of the Church thoughe differently from Christ when he writeth thus of Peter Pro soliditate deuotionis ecclesiarum Petra dicitur c. He is called the Rocke of Churches bicause of his stronge deuotion as our Lorde Saieth Thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke I will builde my Churche For a Rocke he is called bicause he firste layed the foundation off the faithe amonge the gentils and bicause he holdeth together the whole frame and buyldinge off Christen religion like vnto a Rocke that can not be shaken So Peter for the fortitude off deuotion is called a Rocke and our Lorde for his Power and might is called a Rocke Thus farre S. Ambrose Thus bothe Christ and Peter are called the Rocke of the Church by S. Ambrose his iudgemeÌ„t but Peter through Christ and for Christ. For as it foloweth in S. Ambrose Recte consortium meretur nomÃnis qui consortium meretur operis He is well ioyned in felowship of the name which is also ioyned in the felowship of the worke S.
Hierom vpon this place of S. Matthew expoundeth Peter to be the Rocke vpon the which Christ builded his Churche saying Sicut ipse lumen Apostolis donauit c. As Christ gaue all the Apostles light that they might be called the light of the worlde and had their other names of Christ so vnto Simon which beleued in Christ the Rocke he gaue the name of Peter And by the metaphore of a Rocke it is well saied of Christ vnto him I will builde my Churche vpon thee And how many Fathers may be here alleaged which all with one mouthe do confesse that vpon Peter not only vpon the faithe or Confession of him the Churche is builded Tertulliam saieth Latuitne aliquid Petrum aedificandae ecclesiae petram dictum Was there any thinge kept hidde from Peter which was called the rocke of the Church to be builded S. CipriaÌ„ almost as ofte as he speaketh of Peter so ofte he calleth him the foundatioÌ„ of the Churche Petrus saieth he super quem aedificata ab eodem domino fuerat Ecclesia c. Peter vpon whom our lorde builded his Churche And againe Loquitur illic Petrus super quem aedificanda fuerat Ecclesia Peter speaketh there vpon whom the Churche should be buylded â—xpounding also the Authorite which Christ gaue to Peter in this place of S. Matthewe he sayeth that although the Apostles had aequal power yet vt vnitateÌ„ manifestaret vnitatis eiusdem originâ—m ab vno incipientem sua authoritate disposuit to expresse an Vnite in the Churche Christ by his Authorite disposed that the fountaine and springe of that Vnite shoulde procede of One which was Peter Therefore also in the disceptation of Peter with Paule touching circuncision S. Ciprian Commending the humilite of S. Peter towarde S. Paule saieth Nec Petrus quem primum Dominus elegit super quem aedificauit Ecclesiam suam se vindicauit c. Neither did Peter whom God chose to be the chefest and vpon whom he builded his Church reuenge him selfe etc. Olde Fater Origens wordes in this matter seme very plaine Thus he saieth Petro cum summa rerum de pascendis ouibus traderetur super ipsum velut super terram Fundaretur Ecclesia nullius confessio Virtutis alterius ab eo nisi Charitatis exigitur When the chiefe gouernement of feeding Christes flocke was committed to Peter and the Church was builded vpon him like as vpon earthe the profession of no other Vertu is required of him but Charite For after Christ had three times asked him Peter louest thou me yea and ones Diligis me plus his Doest thou loue me more then these other doe and to euery question Peter had answered Yea Christ concluded with him and saied Pasce oues meas Fede my shepe In these demaundes only loue was required of him And at this time saieth Origen Summa rerum de pascendis Ouibus traditur The chiefe and principall gouernement of feding Christes shepe was deliuered vp vnto him and Super ipsum velut super terram fundata est Ecclesia The Church was builded or founded vpoÌ„ him vpon Peter him selfe euen as vpoÌ„ earthe That earthe truly which our Sauiour called a Rocke and made it by his special praier for him that his Faith should not faile stroÌ„ger and stedfaster then any Rocke or Quarre of what euer stone it be Therefore Cyrillus an other greke Father saied expressely Nulli alij quà m Petro Christus quod suum est plenum sed ipsi soli dedit Christ gaue his whole ful power to none other then to Peter But to him only he gaue it And what is to be Vicair of Christ if this be not If he haue Summam rerum traditam the Chiefe gouuernement and Authorite left vnto him as Origen saieth if Christ gaue to him ful power and to none other as Cyrillus sayth if vpoÌ„ him the Church was builded as so many Fathers doe witnesse not only S. Hilary S. CipriaÌ„ S. Ambrose S. HieroÌ„ and Tertullian of the West Church but also S. Chrysost S. Basill Origen and Epiphanius of the East Churche how can it be doubted but that Peter succeded to Christ by his owne most blessed appointment in full power and Authorite and was therefore his true Vicaire It will here be saied Many other Fathers yea and some of these alleaged do expound this place of Matthewe in such sorte that not vpon the person of Peter but vpon the faith of Peter the Church is builded To this I answer that bothe is true And that I declare by two causes First by most euideÌ„t reason next by Authorite The reason is this The Churche is builded vpoÌ„ the faith of Peter and yet vpoÌ„ the person of Peter bicause the person of Peter touching his faithe is no fraile mortal creature but is a stroÌ„g vnshakeable Rocke as the faith it self is And why so Forsothe bicause to the person of Peter it is promised that his faith shal not faile Christ sayd I haue praied for thee Peter that thy faith may not faile We beleue this praier is obtained And therefore vpon this warrant of Christes praier the person of Peter and his faithe shall neuer be seuered Thus the fathers calling sometimes the faith of Peter sometimes Peter him self the Rocke of the Churche do meane one selfe thinge By Authorite thus it is proued No writer doth more often and more earnestly interpret that place of the faith of Peter or of Christ him selfe and call that faith and coÌ„fession of his and sometime Christ him self the Rocke vpon the which Christ builded his Church then doth S. Augustin Yeat the same lerned Father in his Retractations remembring that he had also expounded the same of Peter him selfe quod in eo tanquam in petra fundata sit Ecclesia that the Churche was builded in Peter as vpon the Rocke which sence also he saieth was songe by many in the hymnes of S. Ambrose where it is saide of the cocke hoc ipsa petra ecclesiae canente culpam diluit At the crowing of the cocke the Rocke of the Churche Peter lamented his faulte he concludeth the whole matter of those two expositions either off Peter to be the Rocke either of Christ with these wordes Harum duarum sententiarum quae sit probabilior eligat lector Of these ij sentences which is the more probable I leaue it to the Readers choyse Wherein as he condeÌ„neth none so he alloweth bothe And thus much out of the lerned Fathers for confirmation of the Minor or second proportion of my former Argument that the wordes of Christ in S. Matthew were properly spoken to Peter and that he was made by Christ the foundation and Rocke of the whole vniuersall Churche Which with the Maior or proposition being thus proued the Conclusion I trust will well folowe that Christ hath lefte and appointed in his Churche a Vicair vniuersal and that S. Peter And so farre is the rashe
the Supremacie the discussing whereof standeth most vpon the history and practise of the Churche either to vse or to abuse any Scripture Yet by occasion howe many M. Iewell hath abused it shall nowe in parte appeare First these wordes of S. Paule Sollicitudo omnium ecclesiarum the hofulnesse of all Churches howe violently you haue wrested it to proue a Chiefty and power ouer all Churches in the like sence as the same is in S. Peter confessed by S. Gregory you haue heard before towarde the ende of the first Vntruthe of this Article In the same place you alleage to the like sence these wordes of the Apostle I recken me selfe to be no thinge inferiour in trauail to the highest Apostles Nowe what is wresting of holy Scripture if this be not S. Paule trauailed as muche as any off the Apostles ergo he had Chiefty Power Iurisdiction ouer the whole Churche no lesse then S. Peter had By the like reason M. Iewell may proue that S. Paule was Heade and Chiefe ouer S. Peter him selfe contrary to al holy Fathers and lerned writers which haue euer called S. Peter the Head the Chiefe and the Prince of the Apostles which also is by M. Iewell him selfe in this Article otherwhere confessed For S. Paule saieth speaking of him selfe and of the Apostles abundantius illis omnibus laboraui I haue trauailed more then al they But as S. Paule though he trauailed more then all the Apostles yet he was not therefore the Head or chiefe ouer them all so muche lesse it will folowe that he had the Chiefty or the Charge off the whole Churche bicause he trauailed as much as the other Apostles If trauail and paynes may proue a Iurisdiction perhaps some busy Minister in Englande might claime to the bishoprike that M. Iewell occupieth With the like vaine of witt M. Iewell to disproue the epistle of Athanasius vnto Felix bicause he saied that from Rome the Churches receiued the first preaching of the ghospell alleageth the saying of the prophet Esaie From Sion the lawe shall procede and the worde of the Lorde from Hierusalem Howe vnfittely this place is wrested of M. Iewell to proue it false that many Countres receiued the faithe of Christ from Rome it hath bene before declared in the third Article vpon the 73. Vntruthe Immediatly and properly many Churches as allmost all the west parte of the worlde receiued their faithe from Rome though Rome it selfe receiued it of S. Peter who preached first off all in Hierusalem In the same page M. Iewell wresteth two other places off holy Scripture at one time thus S. Paule saieth Other foundation none can be layed but only that which is layed already which is Christ Iesus And findeth great faute with the Corinthians that saide I holde of Apollo I holde of Paule I holde of Peter but M. Hardinges Athanasius saieth Thou art Peter and vpon thy foundation the pillers of the Church which are the Bishopps are surely sette and thus he deuise than other foundatiō besides Christ and Contrary to S. Paules doctrine would haue al the bishoppes of the world to holde of Peter Thus farre M. Iewel Wilt thou see good Reader how ignorātly and grossely these places of holy Sripture are wrested and abused of M. Iewel S. Paule in the first place speaketh of the principall foundatiō which only is Christ. Peter is called of Athanasius not the principall and absolut foundation of him selfe but such a foundation as is layde by Christ. Els the worthy wisedome of M. Iewel maye comptroll S. Paule and proue him contrary to him selfe whiche in an other place saieth that the Ephesians were superaedificati super fundamentum Apostolorum prophetarum builded vpon the foundation of the Apostles and the prophets Of the which also S. Iohn in his Reuelation saieth the holy Citie of God had fundamenta duodecim in ipsis nomina duodecim Apostolorum twelue foundatyons and in those foundations the names of the twelue Apostles Thus vnlesse M. Iewell will admitt the distinction of a principall foundation and of a secondary foundation not only Athanasius but S. Paule him selfe and S. Iohn also may be accused of M. Iewell to haue deuised an other foundation besides Christ. In like maner also maye be accused of M. Iewell S. Hilary S. Ambrose S. Ciprian S. Hierom S. Augustine S. Chrysostom Epiphanius Origen and Tertullian who all as you heard in the next Vn-the before do call Peter the Rocke vpon the which Christ builded his Churche Neither is S. Peter layde as any other foundation beside Christ bicause he was layed and made so off Christ him selfe as all the sayed holy Fathers haue witnessed In the second place alleaged by M. Iewell out of S. Paule he not only wresteth S. Paule to a contrary meaning but he falsifieth him also For those wordes I holde of Peter are not in S. Paule And if they were it made no more against the saying off Athanasius callinge Peter the foundatyon off the Churche then it maketh against all the other Fathers whiche did so call him or then it maketh against the Authorite and Iurisdiction either off laye princes and lordes either of spirituall pastours and Curats For as the subiect holdeth of his Prince and the Tenent of his lorde as the dyocese is subiect to his bishopp and the parish to the vicair by S. Paules Doctrine commanding vs to obey our ouerseers and to be subiect to those which haue charge of our soules and yet neither the subiect nor the dyocese so holdeth either of Prince or of bishop as S. Paule rebuked the Corinthians to holde of Apollo and of Paule so neither Athanasius nor the olde Fathers calling Peter the foundation of the Churche and confessing thereby the Authorite of Peter ouer the Churche do make as M. Iewell saieth contrary S. Paules Doctrine all the bishoppes of the worlde to holde of Peter as the Corinthians helde of Apollo and of Paule For the Corinthians made a schisme in the Churche and such as were baptised of Apollo they helde of Apollo such as were baptised of Paul they would holde and craof Paule This schisme and diuision S. Paule rebuked as bothe in the text it shall euidently appeare to him that will but reade it ouer diligently and also as S. Augustin expoundeth that text This text therefore M. Iewel you might better haue applied to your selfe and your brethern which do holde some of you of Luther some of Zuinglius some of other euen as S. Augustin applied it to the Donatistes who helde some of Donatus some of Rogatus some of Primianus some of Maximianus all Donatistes but yet diuided amonge them selues as protestants are at this day into Lutherās Sacramentaries Anabaptistes Suenckfeldians Osiandrins and so forthe Peter is the foundation and Rocke that Christe builded his Churche vpon as sett to gouerne and direct the same vnder Christ by Christ and through Christ. Al Christendō holdeth by
liued after and in the time of all the cases alleaged by M. Iewell and who was no doubte muche more skilfull in these matters then is M. Iewell or any man that liueth nowe At what time Valentinian the younge Emperour would haue called Saint Ambrose in iudgement before him as M. Iewell would here persuade the reader that Emperours of olde time did he saieth vnto the Emperour Quando audisti clementissime Imperator in causa fidei laicos de episcopis iudicasse When diddest thou euer here most gracious Emperour that laye men haue iudged ouer bishops in any cause pertaining to the faithe This was after the time of Constantius of Theodosius and of Valentinianus the elder alleaged before by M. Iewell to haue had ecclesiastical matters before them in like sorte as the Pope had which is to haue iudged and determined other them Then if M. Iewell had bene by S. Ambrose when he wrote those wordes to the Emperour and had bene of the minde that he is nowe of he would perhaps haue corrected S. Ambrose and saied No Sir Neuer hearde you that Athanasius fledd to Constantinus that Flauianus to this mans Father Valentinian the first that Donatus also to Constantinus neuer heard you that the Emperours called sometime the parties and heard the matters themselues and that in like sorte as the Pope determined the causes of Athanasius and Paulus Hearde you neuer of al this If you did how then saie you to the Emperour VVhâ—n heard you c If you did not then yet lerne of me that you haue misse informed the Emperour This M. Iewell might haue as well instructed S. Ambrose then as auouched it so stoutely nowe But. What trowe we would S. Ambrose haue answered here to this painted prelat ouerthwarting so such a lerned Bishop Truly S. Ambrose notwithstanding all those examples alleaged by M. Iewell notwithstanding the wordes of Constantinus Coram me euen before me which M. Iewell maketh so much of which he blaseth so forthe with great letters bothe in the text and in the Margin notwithstanding I saie all that either Constantinus or Theodosius or Valentinian did or had done before that time he woulde haue saied to M. Iewell farder as he wrote then to the Emperour these wordes Certè si vel scripturarum seriem diuinarum vel vetera tempora retractâ—mus quis est qui abnuaâ— in causa fidei in causa inquam fidei episcopos solere dâ— Impâ—ratoribus Christianis non Imperatores de episcopis iudicare In good sothe M. Iewell if we call to minde the whole course of holy Scripture or the practise of auncient time passed none I trowe will denie but that in matters touching faithe in matters I saie M. Iewell touching faith bishops are woÌ„te to Iudge ouer ChristeÌ„ Emperours Emperours are not wonte to Iudge oâ—â—r bishops Thus S. Ambrose hath answered you M. Iewel And this his answer that you may the better like and contente your selfe withall I wishe you to remembre what your olde Master Iohn Caluin hath writen of this very answer of S. Ambrose to the Emperour He saieth these wordes Worthely do al men prais his câ—nstancy in this bâ—halfe Then you M. Iewell I truste will not dispraise it Then you will yelde to the lerning of S. Ambrose who telleth you in good earnest that neither by holy Scripture neither by any practise of the Churche Emperours haue iudged ouer bishops in matters of the faithe Iewell The Emperour Constans wrote vnto his brother Constâ—ntius to call before him the bishoppes of the East parte to yelde a reâ—ckening of their doinges against Athanasius Stapleton Of this Matter we shall speake more when we come to the 113. Vntruthe Yet presently this maye suffise to note that Constans wrote to his brother he shoulde in any wise restore Athanasius and Paulus partly bicause of Pope Iulius his letters writen in that behalfe partly bicause by the whole Councell of Sardica they were Iudged Innocent The Emperour herein did but execut the Popes request and the Determination of the Councell Iewell The Emperour Honorius gaue his endeuour that Athanasiuâ— might be restored M. Iewell talketh he can not tell what him selfe Athanasius was dead and buried at the lest twenty yeres before Honorius was Emperour His endeuour at that time coulde stande Athanasius in small stede Iewell Constantinus the Emperour vpon Athanasius complainte commaunded the bishoppes of the Councell of Tyrus to appeare before him Stapleton He did so animo commodandi ecclesiae nolens illaÌ„ discerpi as Socrates writeth vpon the desire he had to helpe the Churche and to bringe it to Vnite So he restored Arrius him selfe to Alexandria So he threatned Athanasius to depose him if he receiued not Arrius So he called those bishops before him And so in fine he banished that good Catholike Father Athanasius But in the ende he repented him and commaunded in his last will that Athanasius shoulde be restored These thinges donâ— of Zele beside right caÌ„ be no preiudice to that which is right Let vs nowe see what M. Iewell will conclude hereof Thus holie men being in distresse sought healpe wheresoeuer they had hope to finde it This seeking of remedy by waie of complainte aâ— it declareth their miserie so is it not sufficient to proue an ordinarie Appeale If your former talke had bene true and to the purpose this conclusion might haue had some likelyhood Nowe it is euident by that which hath bene brought that all this seeking to Rome was not by waie of complainte only but by waie of Appeale especially in ChrisostoÌ„ and Athanasius as we haue declared And touching ChrysostoÌ„ vpoÌ„ whose wordes we haue bene occasioned to entre so farre with M. Iewell this shifte of seeking to Rome by waie of complainte is most ignorantly or els very deceitefully alleaged of M. Iewel For what a poore shifte were this to seeke for succour in distresse at his hande who was him selfe in more distresse then the party that sought for succour And so was it with Innocentius when Chrysostom being banished wrote and sent his legates vnto him For at that very time the Gothes wasted and spoiled Italy in most miserable sorte first vnder Rhadagaisus and next vnder Alaricus who Innocentius yet liuing sacked Rome it selfe and afflicted al that coste most cruelly At that time the WaÌ„dales and Hunnes inuaded the west Empire the Frenche men entred in to Gallia now called of them Fraunce and the miserable Emperour Honorius lurked at Rauenna so carelesse and negligent of all these matters that when worde was brought vnto him that Rome was vndone what saied he is Rome my Cocke slaine which fought while here so lustely thinking it had bene spoken of a cocke that he had so called and hauing more minde of his cockefight game then of the great Citie of Rome And in all these miseries of the west parte of all Italy of Rome it selfe will M. Iewel persuade vs that Chrisostom sent
lerned of this age as well on your side as amonge the Catholikes this to be the State of the question For so the faithe of Peter was prayed for not only for the person of Peter in whom it was very weake when he denied Christ euen after that praier made but for the whole Churche committed to Peter This is the State of the question Now to your Proufes Alphonsus de Castro saieth It is certain that Liberius was an Arrian By Theodoretus and Athanasius better Authors then is Alphonsus it is certain he was banished two yeres for nott yelding to the Arrians and resisted also the Emperour Constantius face to face in defence of the Catholike faithe against the Arrian heresy Of hâ—s yelding afterwarde though Athanasius do mention yet he excuseth him expressely for no Arrrian And certain it is he neuer decreed for the Arrian heresy Iewell Pope Honorius was an heretike off the secte of them which were called Monothelite condemned for the same in the sixt Councel holden at Constantinople Stapleton That Councell in dede as it is nowe sette forthe Dothe recken Honorius the Pope of Rome amonge other bishopps condemned for that heresy But Bloudus Aeneas Syluius Sabellicus Platina do reporte that this Pope Honorius was the first that condemned the same heresy That also by the meanes of this Pope Heraclius the Emperour being fallen in to that heresy was reduced to the Catholike faithe and persuaded to bannish one Pyrrhus by whom he had ben seduced into Africa Therefore as this very sixte Councell of Constantinople confesseth that the Actes of the fifte general councel had bene corrupted by heretikes yea and epistles forged in the name of Vigilius the Pope vnto Menna the bishop of Constantinople and againe of Menna to Vigilius in defence of that same heresy of the Monothelites so it may seme this sixt Councell hath bene by the grecians corrupted â—nd the name of Honorius the Pope thrust in among other bishops And this to haue ben the maner of the grecians to faine writinges of Popes off Rome or to corrupt theÌ„ with heresies it appeareth wel by the complainte off Pope Nicolas the first in his epistle to Michael the Emperour of Athanasius in the 8. Synod of leo the first in his letters to the bishopp of Palestina and in S. Gregory in his letters to Narses But an vnuincible argument that Honorius the Pope was no heretike nor condemned in that Councell are the wordes of Agatho the Pope whose legates were president att that Councell the wordes I saie off his epistle sent to the Councel and read in the Councel where he hath these wordes Hec est verae fidei regula quam in prosperis aduersis viuaciter tenuit Apostolica Christi ecclesia que per Dei gratiam a tramite Apostolicae traditionis nunquam errasse probabitur nec hereticis nouitatibus deprauata succubuit quia dictum est Petro. Ego pro te rogaui vt non deficiat fides tua tu aliquando conuersus confirma fratres tuos Hic dominus fidem Petri non defuturam promisit confirmare eum fratres suos admonuit quod Apostolicos pontifices meae exiguitatis predecessores confidenter fecisse semper cunctis est cognitum This is the rule of the right faithe whiche the Apostolike Churche of Christ hath earnestly defended bothe in prosperite and in aduersite which also by the grace of God shall neuer be found to straie from the pathe of Apostolike tradition neither hath yet yelded to hereticall nouelties Bicause it was saied to Peter I haue praied for thee Peter that thy faithe shall not faile And thou being sometime conuerted Confirme they bretherne Here our lorde hath promised that the faithe of Peter shoulde not faile and our Lorde here commaunded him to confirme his bretherne Which the Apostolike bishops my predecessours to haue allwaies earnestly done it is knowen to all men Thus Farre Agatho the Pope in that epistle sent to the Sixt generall Councell read in that Councell and allowed by their commom consent all crying in ea per Agathonem Petrum loqui that Peter speake in that letter by the mouthe of Agatho Nowe howe is it possible that Honorius the Pope who liued not three score yeares before that tyme shoulde there presently haue bene condemned for an heretike and yet the epistle of Agatho then Pope auouching constantly that none of his predecessours euer were heretikes be allowed for Catholike Therefore vndoubtedly either that Councell is nowe corrupted as the fifte general Councell was by heretikes or els Honorius was condemned not as Pope nor as decreeing and defending that heresy by publike authorite but as holding that hereticall opinion by him selfe and as vttering the same in his letters to Sergius of Constantinople And then Honorius was in dede condemned there for an heretike but not the Pope Els Pope Agatho had most impudeÌ„tly abused the Councell and the Councel no lesse wickedly dissembled his falshood when bothe he auouched that none of his predecessours had bene heretikes and that his auouching the Councel allowed Hereunto may be added that Photius the bishop of Constantinople writing of the seuen generall Councelles and reakoning vp al that were in those Councelles condemned maketh no mencion at all of this Honorius Pope off Rome And thus farre it appeareth that the example of Honorius dothe nothinge weaken the praier off Christ praying for Peters faithe neuer to faile either in him or his successours Iewell Pope Marcellinus openly made Sacrifice vnto an Idole StapletoÌ„ So S. Peter denied Christ euen after Christ had praied for him that his faithe should not faile But as Peter notwithstanding suffred after Martyrdome for Christes name so did this Marcellinus also suffer Martyrdome euen by that Emperour Diocletian by whom he had bene before constrayned for feare of deathe to commit Idolatry And againe S. Peter is not saied to haue erred in the faithe or to haue loste his degree of Apostleship bicause for feare of deathe he denyed Christ and by penaunce recouered againe so neither can Marcellius be saied to haue erred in the faithe or to haue corrupted the succession of Christes Vicaires seing he repented of his wickednesse and suffred afterwarde Martyrdome in that cause But suche is the good will of M. Iewell to the See of Rome from which we englishmen receiued our first faithe and baptisme that he omitteth no one Pope that did amisse that so he may disgrace that successyon And truly if such exceptions may be heard M. Iewell may proue that S. Peter also lost his Apostleship and erred in the faithe Iewell Pope Iohn the .22 helde a wicked heresie against the immortalite of the soule Stapleton This is a wicked blasphemy of Iohn Iewell against Pope Iohn of a protestant against Christes Vicaire of an heretike superintendent against a Catholike bishop He helde no opinion against the immortalite of the soule It is a
a man of great vertu lerning and holynesse as it appeareth in Nicephorus and Trithemius Of him there appeareth no such writing neither any Councel to be holden by him or in his time If this Gennadâ—â—s therefore be a later writer he beareth no Authorite in this matter bicause as all the lerned do knowe the Churche of ConstaÌ„tinople hath remained in schisme these certain hundred yeres not only for disobedience to the See of Rome but for diuers other particular heresies as for denying the proceding of the holy Ghoste from the Sonne and such other Beside the Churche of Constantinople as it hath bene twelue times reconciled to the Churche of Rome so hath it longe and many yeres continewed in schisme vnreconciled It was therefore necessary and conuenient that M. Iewell alleaging the testimony of so suspicious a place shoulde haue tolde vs when and in what age that Councel was holdeÌ„ and where it might be founde Certainly Chrysostom a lerned and holy Bishopp of Constantinople farre within the first 600. yeres confesseth that to Peter and to the successours of Peter Christ committed those shepe which he had redemed with his bloud also that Peter had the primacy ouer the whole worlde And for proufe of Supreme Authorite he appealed him selfe being one of the greatest Patriarches to Innocentius the Pope of Rome as hath before bene declared So did Flauianus a holy Martyr and Patriarche of Constantinople Appeale to Leo the first Iewell The Councell of Alexandria committed the visitation and reforming of all Churches in the East vnto Asterius And of all the Churches in the west vnto Eusebius the bishop of Vercellae By Authorite of which Commission Eusebius togeather with Hilarius visited and corrected all the Churches of Illyricum Fraunce and Italy A man might saie where was then the Vniuersall power of the bishop of Rome Nay a man might saie more if your tale were true M. Iewell where was then the bishop of Rome him selfe Where was his priuat iurisdiction where was his dyocese Euen now you confessed that bothe by the Nicene Councell and by the testimony of Athanasius Rome was the fourthe Patriarche of the worlde and the Chiefe Church of all the Romain Iâ—risdiction Now what was vnder the bishopp of Romes Iurisdiction if Italy it selfe were not in the which Rome standeth Illiâ—ycum you confesse afterwarde M. Iewell and proue by the Authorite of Damasus that it was a parte of the bishop of Romes iurisdiction Fraunce if it were not vndeâ— the Patriarche of Rome shewe vnder what Patriarche it was This then if neither Illyricum nor Fraunce nor Italy it selfe be founde to be sâ—biect to the See of Rome if this tale of youres be true M. Iewel then not only a man might saie where was the vniuersal power of the bishop of Rome then but also a man might saie where was the power at all And so M. Iewell to disproue the Vniuersall Authorite of the bishop of Rome hath nowe founde a knacke to proue him no bishop at all no not of Rome it selfe And verely as well he may conclude the one as the other But it is not possible for M. Iewell to leaue his lying For first theâ—e was no commission geuen in that Councell to Correct the Churches that is the fâ—irst Vntruthe Againe that which Hilarius dyd was not by vertue of that Councell but of his owne zele and authorite Thirdly all this matter was no reformation by waie of commaundement but a voluntary zele to call home to the Churche such as by the storme of the Arrians persecution had yelded These many lies M. Iewell hath committed in so fewe wordes as it shall now appeare by Ruffinus whom M. Iewell alleageth At what time Constantius the Arrian Emperour being dead Iulianus succeding in the Empire not of zele to the faithe but for ouerthwarting the decrees of Constantius had called home the bishops from banishment a number of the good bishops meeting together forthewith before they returned to their owne Churches at Alexandria tooke counsell and aduise together what order were best to be taken touching such as in their absence had yelded and subscribed to the Arrians Some thought good that none of the clergy should be receiued again to their offices which had subscribed Other thought better to remoue only the chiefe authors and promoters of the heresy and to receiue againe all other which would abiure the Arrian heresy and submitt them selues to the decrees of the Fathers This sentence preuailed straight waye ex concilij decreto Asterio caeterisque qui cum eo erant Orientis iniungitur pâ—ocuratio Occidâ—ntis verò Eusâ—bio decernitur by the decree of the Councell Asterius and his felowes were commaunded to see vnto the East and Eusebius to see vnto the west Now what this commission was whether it were to Correct by waie of Authorite or no you shall heare by the wordes of the History in the next chapter folowing Eusebius circuiens Oâ—iâ—ntem atque Italiam medici pariter sacerdotis fungebatur officio Singulas quasque ecclesias abiurata infidelitate ad sanitate recte fidâ—i reuocabat maximè quòd HilariuÌ„ regrâ—ssum iaÌ„ in Italia positum hec eadem erga instaurandas ecclesias sedemque patrum reparandam reperit molientem Eusebius saieth Ruffinus going aboute all the East and Italy did the office bothe of a Physitian and of a priest He called backe euery Churche to the holsome right Faithe all infidelite being vtterly abiured Especialy finding Hilarius who was now returned from bannishement and was in Italy labouring in that same matter to the restoring againe of the Churches and of the Catholik faithe This is all that Ruffinus telleth of them They laboured to reduce men to the Catholike Faithe They founde Hilarius so doing of his owne heade without any commission Here was no correcting or visiting by waie of authoritye but only a zelous labour towarde a reformation such as Hilarius tooke vpon him without any commission or commaundement and such as manye a good man woulde perhaps take in our owne countre if a tyme of reformation were graunted without any breache or diminishing of euery bishops Authorite in his owne Dyocese or of the Popes primacy ouer all Thus M. Iewell by falsifying and wronge applying of histories will establish his schismaticall disobedience towarde the See off Rome Iewell S. Basill saieth The state and safetye of the Churche of Antioche dependeth off Athanasius the Bishoppe off Alexandria and not as M. Hardinge here sayeth of the Bishoppe off Rome And therefore he desireth Athanatius to see vnto it Stapleton Not one Sentence of any weight or Authority can be alleaged of M. Iewell without some manifest and notorius Vntruthe The later wordes of his sentence alleaged out of S. Basill and printed with a diuers letter and the wordes of S. Basill these wordes I saie and not off the Bishoppe off Rome are not in that place of S. Basill neither in the Latin nor in
no other cause but bicause the suggestion was vntrue it foloweth that if it had bene true the sentence had bene good and he lawfully restored Otherwise if the Pope had no authorite to restore Basilides it might haue serued for a quicke exception to saie as no doubte M. Iewell had he ben here in S. Cyprians place would haue saied Pope Steuen hath no authorite in this matter He hath naught to doe here to restore or confirme any bishops But nowe the faulte is layed not vpon the Popes restoring but vpon Basilides his wronge information And this Sabinus continued bishop not contrary to the confirmation of Pope Cornelius but contrary to the restitution of Pope Steuen And yet not bicause Pope Steuen restored Basilides but bicause Basilides had misse informed Pope Steuen Thus M. Iewell altereth and falsifyeth stories choppeth and mangleth S. Cyprian and yet can name no one bishop whom the Pope confirmed not Nowe foloweth a decree of Anacletus touching the ordering of bishops and the question is of confirming bishoppes either allready ordered or to be ordered And here endeth all M. Iewelles proufes for this matter But he wil disproue the allegations of D. Harding and so establish his negatiue proposition off not all bishoppes confirmed by the Pope First he answereth to the place of S. Gregory complayning to Constantia the Emperesse that the bishop off Solom was ordered neither he nor his deputie being made priuie vnto it and saying farder Herein that thinge hathe bene done whiche neuer happened in the time of anye Princes before our daies and saieth Iewell That Gregorie meant this not of all bishoppes but only of the bisshoppes within his owne charge it is euident by his wordes For thus he writeth My bishops being Bishops within my cure S. Gregory saieth well M. Iewel he calleth his bishops and the bishops of his Cure not only the bishops of his owne prouince as he was bishop of Rome but also of his Patriarkship as Illyricum and all the West whereof he was Patriarche and so are we of England specially brought to the faithe by him subiect thereunto What haue ye now gotte M. Iewell Will you that England be subiect to Rome as Illyricum was Or will you breake the order of the first 600. yeres Iewell VVhere as it is alleaged that the bishop of Rome was required to ratifie the election of Flauianus Anatholius and of the Arrian bishops that was meant of a generall allowance such as was common to al bishoppes specially to the foure principall patriarches and not only to the bishop of Rome Stapleton Yes only to the bishop of Rome of necessite for ought that you M. Iewel haue shewed to the contrary And for you to saie thinges without proufes being now taken in so many Vntruthes when you seme to proue most it is no time M. Iewell Your credit is not such Certainely the Confirmation of the Arrian bishoppes denied by Pope Iulius restored againe Athanasius Paulus and his felowes to their bisshopprickes and declared thereby the necessite of his Authorite This before hath bene declared in the matter of Appeales The Confirmation also of Anatholius and of Proterius was so necessary that the Emperours Theodosius and Martianus wrote therefore And to Theodosius requiring of Leo the Pope the Confirmation of Anatholius in the Patriarkeship of Constantinople Leo writeth this answer De ordinatione eius qui Constantinopolitanae caepit ecclesiae praesidere â—iâ—il interim in alterutram partem temere rescribendum putaui non dilectionem negans sed manifestationem Catholicae veritatis expectant As touching the Ordering of him which hath begonne to gouuerne the Churche of Constantinople I haue thought it good as yet to make no certaine answer thereunto not denying vnto him my good will but looking for a declaration of the Catholike Truthe And the reason hereof he specifieth in an other letter where he saieth Et ipse Constantinopolitanus Episcopus qui eundem consecrâ—â—ant preter id quod ad ordinationem noui Antistitis pertiuebat nihil nobis de compressis vel abdicatis erroribus indicarunt Bothe the bishop him selfe of Constantinople Anatholius and those which had consecrated him beside that which appertained to the Ordering of the newe bishop haue signified nothinge vnto vs of the wroÌ„ge opinions in doctrine layed aside or coÌ„demned This was the Cause why the Pope would not out of hande CoÌ„firme him before he knewe he was a man of a Catholike and right beleue And therefore in his letters to the Emperour Theodosius he willeth this Athanasius to reade ouer and peruse certaine writinges of Cyrilius against the heresy of Nestorius and his owne epistle writen to Flauianus against the heresy of Eutyches Ita sinceram Cummunis fidei Confessionâ—m absolutissima Subscriptione coram omni Clero vniuâ—rsae plebe declaret Apostolicae Sedi vniuersis domini Saecerdotibus Ecclesiâ—s publicandam So that he pronounce before all the Clergy and the people the right CoÌ„fessioÌ„ of CoÌ„mon belefe with a most exacte Subscription which after might be published to the See Apostolike and to the Priestes and Churches of God Moreouer in the same epistle he desireth the Emperour thus Agat clemeÌ„tiae vestrae dâ—uotissimae fides câ— Let the most holy faith of your ClemeÌ„cy bringe to passe that the letters of the B. of Constantinople as it bâ—cometh a Catholike and approued bishop to write be sent vnto vs opeÌ„ly and playnely protesting that if any man doe beleue or tache any other thinge touâ—hing the Incarnation of Christe our God thâ—n al Catholikes and I doe professe Iâ— doe exclude him vtterly froÌ„ his CoÌ„munion that so we may rightfully bestow vpon him our brotherly Charite in Christe VpoÌ„ such coÌ„ditioÌ„s and no otherwise woulde that lerned and holy Pope Leo Confirme this Anatholius though the Emperour the bishop him selfe and the other which had consecrated him had written to the Pope theâ—fore So necessary and of such importaunce semed at that time the Confirmation of the Pope euen for the Patriarche him selfe of Constantinople as light a matter as M. Iewell would haue the worlde to thinke it Therefore also this Anatholius hauing at lenght vnder Maâ—tianus that Catholike and Zelous Emperour of whose vertue and Zele Theodosius the second his predecessour lacked much subscribed to the Catholike faithe according to the pleâ—â—ure of the See Apostolike Leo the Pope confirmeth his doinges in an other letter writen to the same Anatholius where he saieth these wordes Societatem tuae dilectionis amplectimur gestorum quae sampsimuâ— serieÌ„ necessarijs sicut oportuit munitaÌ„ Subscriptionibus approbamus We embrace the felowship of your and the whole processe of your doinges which we haue receiued witnessed with the Subscriptions requisit thereunto as it behoued we doe approue and allowe And that this Approbation off the Pope was in dede the Confirmation off this Anatholius in this bishopricke it appeareth otherwhere For at what
of Chalcedon we shall haue occasion hereafter to speake in the 118. Vntruthe Now let vs see what M. Iewell will conclude of all the allegations out of Liberatus and the epistles of Leo. He saieth Hereby we may soone coniecture howe true it is either that Pope Gelasius writeth That onely the Apostolike See of Rome decreed by her Authorite that the Councell shoulde be summoned or els that M. Hardinge woulde haue vs beleue That all Councelles were summoned by the Pope Hereby we may soone coniecture how truly and faithfully M. Iewell meaned when he offred to yelde and subscribe to any olde father or Councell of the first 600. yeres whiche nowe so litle estemeth the Authorite of Gelasius a lerned Father of lesse then 500. yeres after Christe that he taketh vpon him to comptrolle him and to proue him a lyar So that nowe the question is no more betwene vs whether the lerned Fathers do write so teache so or witnesse so but whether their writinges their doctrine their witnesses be true or no. And whom shal we beleue if we beleue not such auncient writers so many hundred yeres before vs so longe taken for lerned Fathers bishoppes of Christes Churche in their life time Shall we leaue Gelasius and beleue Iewell This impudent arrogancy must nedes procede of Lucifer the first creature that sinned in pride If this be admitted what doe we professe a Christen faithe any longer What do we talke of Fathers and Councelles if when Fathers and Councelles are brought we must yet proue farder that the Fathers speake truly and that the Councelles saye well This is not to be tried by the Fathers but it is to trie and examine the Fathers them selues And then they are not our Fathers but our scholers This is the righte waye to paganisme and infydelite and to the vtter abolishment off all Christianite To suche issue these newe altercations haue brought matters Iff we be Christen men lett vs abhorre these enormites If we be no Christen men what talke we of Christ and the ghospell To this digression the impudency off M. Iewell hath forced me Touching the saying of Gelasius which M. Iewell malapertly comptrolleth first Gelasius talketh not of summoning but of holding and making the Councell His wordes are Authoritate vt Synodus Ghalcedonensis fieret sola decernit Onely the See Apostolike by her Authority decreed that the Councell of Chalcedon shoulde be holden And this to be true it appeareth euidently by the letters of the Emperoure Martianus and the Emperesse Pulcheria to Leo the Pope and by the letters of Leo to the Councell it selfe as we haue before declared Againe this Gelasius wrote those wordes litle more then fifty yeres after the Councel of Chalcedon was finished It is credible he knewe as well what was done there as M. Iewell doth Thirdly what doth all this conclude against the allegations of D. Hardinge What maketh it against the expresse and most manifest testimony of the Ecclesiasticall Storye witnessing expressely that without the Authorite of the bishopp of Rome no Councels coulde be helde and that by the vertue of the Ecclesiasticall Canon What is all this to the Councelles of the Arrians disproued and disanulled for lacke of the bishoppe of Romes Authorite Forsothe M. Iewell concludeth that Hereby it may appeare that all Councells were summoned by the Pope D. Hardinge saied not so muche But that all Councelles must be approued by the Pope euen as the ecclesiasticall history witnesseth And that certaine namely those of the Arrians were not accompted for lawfull Councelles bicause they were not summoned nor approued by the Pope Against this Master Iewell hathe nothing concluded vnlesse he will reason thus The Pope Leo approued and summoned the Councell of Chalcedon and graunted to the Emperours pleasure touchinge the place Ergo the Pope hath no Authorite to summon or approue Concellâ—s Or thus Gelasius saied truly that only by the Authorite of the Popâ— thâ— councell of Chalcedon was helde Ergo the Pope hath not Authority to approue the Councelles These are weake reasons God wotteth And yet so he must reason if of the premisses he will conclude to the purpose And if it be not to the purpose what maketh it here M. Iewell goeth forthe and multiplieth Vntruthes He sayeth Iewell Neither was the Bishop of Rome nor his legate in his absence euer more the President or Chiefe of the Councell Stapleton The contrarye before hath expressely bene shewed out off the Epistles of Leo and the Actes of the Councell of Chalcedon touching the Councell there kept And oute of the Epistles of Cyrillus touching the Councell of Ephesus Iewell For it is knowen that in the Counell of Nice Eustathius the Patriarke of Antioche was the President and the Bishoppe off Romes legates Vitus and Vincentius sate in the fourthe Roome beneathe StapletoÌ„ This is knowen to be a manifeste Vntruthe Osius Vitus and Vincentius were the firste of all that subscribed according to the Order mencioned in the volumes of the Councelles Iewell In the Councell of Constantinople Menna was the chiefe This Menna was not the president of the Councell alone Sabinus Epiphanius Asterius Leo Rusticus bishoppes Theophanes and Pelagius Deacons sent from the Apostolike See of Rome considebant illi coadiutores did sitt in the like and aequall Authorite with him as the Actes of the Councel do expressely declare Iewell In the Councell of Sardica Osius and Corduba in Spaine This Osius of Corduba with Vincentius of Capua Ianuarius of Beneuentum and Calepodius of Naples bishoppes were the legates of the See Apostolike and were all presidents in that Councell Iewell In the Councell of Aquileia S. Ambrose of Millaine In the Councell of Carthage Aurelius the B. there StapletoÌ„ These were prouinciall Councelles not generall And yet bothe the Africanes sent the Actes of their Councells to Innocentius to be confirmed as appeareth in S. Augustin and Celestinus witnesseth that they were confirmed by the See Apostolike As for the Councell of Aquileia we haue it not perfectly sett forthe as by the ende of it is easy to be seme In the Councell of Chalcedon Leo the bishop off Romes Legate had chiefe roome but by waie of intreaty only and by the Emperours speciall graunte and not of dew right or vniuersall Authorite Beholde the lying impudencie of M. Iewell before he saied Neither was the Bishop of Rome nor his legate in his absence â—uermore the president or Chiefe of the Councell Nowe he confesseth that in the Councel of Chalcedon Leo the bishop of Romes legate had the chiefe Roome Wherein he proueth him selfe in the former to haue made a manifest lie But nowe he spiceth the matter withe an other Notorious and lewde lie only auouched but no waye proued that the Popes Legat had there thâ— Chiefe Rome by waie of intreaty only c. It shoulde haue behoued M. Iewell to haue proued this verely he hath bene so often taken in lying that
was not only contrary to the pleasure of the See Apostolike but also to the decrees of the Nicene Councell which the See Apostolike herein defended not only then by Leo but afterwarde by Gelasius and other bishoppes of Rome Againe to this prerogatiue of the bishop of Constantinople not only the legates of the bishop of Rome resisted but also more then foure hundred bishops then present For whereas there were at that Councell as it appeareth in the Actes thereof six hundred and thirty bishops which subscribed to the other decrees of the Councell yet to this decree of the prerogatiue of Constantinople there subscribed but two hundred and twelue scant the thirde parte of the Councell Therefore neither it is put at this present amonge the decrees of the Councel neither was it allowed longe after for any Ecclesiasticall decree but only as Liberatus saieth boreÌ„ out and maintained by the Emperour after a sorte And therefore in the sixt generall Councel helde many yeres after in CoÌ„stantinople petitioÌ„ was made that the See of Constantinople might be the seconde in priuileges after Rome and before the See of Alexandria This petition made in that generall Councell more then two hundred yeares after the Councell of Chalcedon had not neded if in all that time that priuilege of Constantinople had bene in quiet and lauful possession But bicause it was but maintayned after a sorte by the Emperours as Liberatus sayeth who continuing al that time in Constantinople woulde magnifie their owne Citie bicause also it was not by the iuste Authorite of the bishop of Rome grauÌ„ted therefore it was then againe required and requested to be in that CouÌ„cel enacted an confirmed Hereunto might be added the sentence and verdit of lerned Leo against Anatholius for so vsurping that prerogatiue to the iniury of the bishops of Alexandria and of Antioche the schismaâ—ical presumptioÌ„ of Acacius and Anthemius bothe Entychianâ— shortly after that time and last of all the Antichristian presumption of Iohn of Constantinople in S. GregorÃes time coueting to be the vniuersall bishop of all the Churche But these fewe may suffise to declare how litle this allegat on of Liberatus helpeth M. Iewell Especially if it had plaesed him to haue geueÌ„ thee leaue gentle Reader to peruse his whole wordes and had not so pared quite of the laste worde of the place Quodammodo after a sorte which in dede being added did vtterly marre all M. Iewelles matter and therefore was by him feately in dede and rhetorically dissembled but guilefully and wickedly depraued By such euill dealing an euill cause must be maintayned what saie you farder M. Iewell Iewell Which thinge seemeth agreable to that S Hierom writeth The Authorite of the worlde is greater then the Authorite of one Citie Meaning thereby the Citie of â—ome This saying of S. Hierom agreeth very litle with a decree maintayned by the Emperour against the See Apostolyke S. Hierom in that place talketh not of Authorite in doctrine and in matters of faithe common to al the Church but of certaine particular customes proper to any particular Churche Wherein the custome of one Citie no not of Rome it selfe can prescribe against the general custome of the worlde And therefore S. Gregory informing S. Augustin our Apostle touching certaine his demaundes and namely of the variable customes of diuers Churches vnder one faithe dothe not prescribe vnto him precisely the custome of the Citie of Rome to be folowed in all thinges but It pleaseth saieth he that if you haue founde any thinge be it either in the Churche off Rome off Fraunce or of any other which may more please God that ye choose the same And plante it in the Englishe Churche Yet in matters concerning faith bothe the same Gregory acknowledged and practised a Supremacy of the Church of Rome ouer al other Churches as hath before bene declared and S. HieroÌ„ him self writting to Damasus a bishop of Rome for his senteÌ„ce in a matter of doctrine saieth expressely vnto him Qui tecum non colligit spargit He that gathered not with thee he scattereth And againe Extra hanc domum quicunque agnum comederit prophanus est Whosoeuer eateth the lambe without this house he meaneth the Churche of Rome he is an alienat And thus S. Hierom agreeth well with Liberatus not for M. Iewell but directly against M. Iewell Such profes M. Iewell hath picked out to weaken the Authorite of the See Apostolike the Churche of Rome Nowe he Concludeth Iewell It may appeare by that I haue thus shortly touched that the Bishop of Rome had Authorite neither to Summon Councelles or to be president and chiefe in Councelles nor to ratifie and confirme the decreâ—s of Councelles more then any of the foure Patriarches And last of all that Councelles may stande in force although the Pope mislike them and allowe them not Stapleton It may appeare by that I haue answered and farder saied to the Contrary that the bishop of Rome had Authorite within the first 600. yeres partly to Summon Councelles allwaies to be president and chiefe in all generall Councells and especially to ratifie and Confirme the decrees of Councelles Last of all that no Councell coulde stande in force if the Pope misliked it and allowed it not It may appeare also by that I haue saied that the Canon reported in the ecclesiasticall History is truely and faithefully reported of Socrates truly and faithfully alleaged of D. Harding vntruly and shamefully impugned of M. Iewell The Canon I saie which commaundeth that no Councell be helde without the Authorite of the bishop of Rome It may appeare again howe many notorious impudent and outragious Vntruthes M. Iewell hath committed in this paragraphe of the Confirmation of Councelles as beinge not able to alleage one true Authorite against it Iewell I thinke it will be harde hereof to geather M. Hardings Conclusion That the bishopp of Rome was Head of the Vniuersall Churche I doubte not but it will be easy to gather his Conclusion The Pope was president in al generall Councells confirmed and ratified all generall Councelles and by his Authorite hath disproued Councelles But in generall Councelles the Vniuersall Churche is represented as in a parliament the whole Realme Ergo the Bishop of Rome was at that time the Head of the Vniuersall Churche And thus M. Iewell must subscribe Except he will allwaies quarell and wrangle aboute termes the thinge being clere and euident Harding Athanasius of Alexandria and Paulus of Constantinople depriued and thrust out of their bishoprikes by the Violence of the Arrians assisted with the Emperour Constantius appealed to Rome to Iulius the Pope and bishop there and by his authorite were restored to their roomes againe So Leo assoiled Flauianus the Bishop of Constantinople excommunicated by Dioscorus Iewell The 113. Vntruthe For the Emperour restored Athanasius and not the Pope StapletoÌ„ This Vntruthe may soone be iustified not only by the
had bene bothe a consenter and a promoter of that wicked Acte submitted him selfe humbly to Innocentius the Pope and by all meanes sought to be assoiled and reconciled And therefore sent his legates to Rome to exhibite to Innocentius a solemne Instrument of his Repentaunce and lowly submission and to accepte what should be enioyned By whiche his humblenesse Innocentius moued graunted to his petitions receiued him into the lappe of the Catholike Church againe and thus was he reconciled Iewell The 115. Vntruthe This storie is here interlaced with many Vntruthes Stapleton What are those Vntruthes M. Iewell You tell vs in your text Iewell For in all that is writen thereof by Innocentius there is no maner mention neither of Solemne Instrument of repentaunce nor of accepting of Penance nor of Subiection or humble submission Innocentius writinge to one Maximianus a bishopp who had moued Innocentius about the Reconciliation of Atticus the bishop of Constantinople who also had bene a consenter to the deposing of Chrysostom and declaring to that bishop why he had not reconciled Atticus of Constantinople in like maner as he had reconciled AlexaÌ„der the bishop of Antioche by the waie toucheth somewhat off the Reconciliation made by the same Alexander in these wordes Communio suspensa restituitur demonstranti causas c. A man suspended from the CoÌ„munion is restored when he sheweth the causes why he was suspended to be taken awaye and professeth the Conditions off reconciliation to be fulfilled Whiche Atticus neither hathe signified neither proued to be fulfilled by any messenger either to you or to vs. As our brother and folowe bishop off Antioche Alexander by a iuste embasye hath prosequuted and proued Whereat also you being present do knowe that I haue particularly examined all our writinges touching the cause of the holy bishop Chrisostom wherein they haue euidently shewed that at Antioche all thinges haue bene perfourmed as they ought to be Whose reconciliation we embracing truly we haue made a waye for all that wil aske it to obtaine the like iff at the lest they will att any time proue that they haue done and perfourmed for their parte suche thinges as haue bene in others examined and perfourmed and also if they desire to be reconciled by sending solemnely their legates as these of Antioche haue done Thus farre Innocentius In whose wordes we see that this Alexander bishop of Antioche sent his legates solemnely to Rome that by those legates he desired to be reconciled that he had perfourmed the condicions of Reconciliation and that thereby he was reconciled Now this solemne sending of legates desiring to be Reconciled what was it but a Solemne Instrument off Repentaunce For suche was the maner of Reconciliation in those daies So vrsatius and Valens did offer vp to Iulius the Pope Libellum penitentiae An Instrument of repentance when they were reconciled from their Arrian heresy to the Catholoke vnite The perfourming of the Conditions of Reconciliation was the accepting of that which was enioyned The worde Penaunce as it is not in InnoceÌ„tius so neither is it in the wordes of D. Harding And who doubteth but all this was done with an humble submission seing that no repentaunce can be without humble submission nor no reconciliation without repentaunce seing also that Conditiones pacis complere to perfourme the Conditions off Reconciliation requireth expressely an humble submission for lacke of whiche Atticus was not att that time yet reconciled but continued suspended and through the which afterwarde as it appeareth in an other epistle off Innocentius he was also reconciled Touchinge this Reconciliation of Alexander of Antioche to Innocentius it shal the better appeare if the diligent Reader remembre in this place the solemne Excommunication of Theophilus and other bishops his adherents in deposinge Chrysostom off the which this AlexaÌ„der was one made by this Pope innoceÌ„tius Of the which I haue at larg spokeÌ„ before about the matter of Appeales For by reason of the ExcoÌ„municatioÌ„ this Alexander Patriarche of Antioch was necessarely recoÌ„ciled Therefore InnoceÌ„tius hauing receiued his submissioÌ„ answereth him in these wordes QuaÌ„ grata mihi quaÌ„ pia quaÌ„ necessaria legatio a tua sanctitate frater Charissime ad nos directa fuerit gestoruÌ„ ipsorum replicatione cognosces How acceptable how godly how necessary derely beloued brother your sending of your legates to vs hath bene you shall knowe by the tenour of our dealing with you As for the worde SubiectioÌ„ which M. Iewel saieth is not in InnoceÌ„tius no more it is in the text of D. Harding The Spirituall Iurisdiction M. Iewell requireth no Subiection as Ciuill Princes doe of their subiectes But as S. Gregory saieth vbi Culpa non exigit omnes ratione humilitatis â—quales sumus Where no faulte is committed by the waie of humilite we be all equall Therefore Innocentius after this Alexander was reconciled he calleth him Fratrem Charissimum derely beloued brother and as you alleage for a mighty argument against the Popes primacy Condiscipulum sedis Apostlice Scholefelowe of the See Apostolike And sending his letters at that time calleth them primitias pacis nostre the first frutes not of frendship as you vntruly in this place translated it but of the reconciliation made by vs. And so Crist is called in holy scripture Pax nostra Our recoÌ„ciliation to God So this Alexander Conditiones pacis completas esse digna legatione prosequutus est probauit by his worthie legates he went thouroughe with it and proued it to the Pope that he had perfourmed the conditions of Reconciliation Had all bene but a matter of frendship and equalite neither had he bene before by the Pope excommunicated neither had that solemne sending of legates to Rome bene necessary neither neded any such Conditions to be perfourmed nor the perfourmance thereof so expressely to be prosecuted and proued Thus therefore was the Patriarche of Antioche reconciled neither as a Subiect vnto his Prince nor as one equal frende to an other but as a party before excommunicated to his Spirituall head that ioyning with his head Christes vicaire he might be a part of Christes mysticall body Touching the examples alleaged by Iewell the writing of the Africanes to Pope Innocentius aboute a Reconciliation betwene the Churche of Alexandria and the Churche of Rome was aboute this very matter of Crysostoms deposing and maketh very well to proue a necessite of the same Reconciliation But saieth M. Iewell Iewell It was not that the Churche of Alexandria shoulde submitte her selfe as vnto her Head and liue in Subiection but that they might be reconciled and liue in peace together Stapleton The Churche neuer liued in Subiection to the bishop of Rome This is but an odious terme of disobedient heretikes The Churche hath liued in obedience of the See Apostolike for the redresse of faultes committed either in faithe or in maners not otherwise The Churche of Rome had no quarell
to the Churche of Alexandria But the Churche of Alexandria by Theophilus the bishop thereof hauing wrongefully deposed Chrysostom bishop of Constantinople and being therefore iustly excommunicated of the See Apostolike the good bisshoppes of Aphrica thought good to write not to the Churche of AlexaÌ„dria which was iustly excommunicated but ad sanctum Papam Innocentium to the holy Pope Innocentius who had excommunicated them that they might be Reconciled This expresseth clerely howe necessary it was for the Church of Alexandria to be reconciled to the See Apostolike And thus farre M. Iewelles owne alleagation hath helped our matter Iewell So Liberatus saieth Petrus Moggus was reconciled vnto Asatius not as vnto his superiour but as vnto his brother This Petrus Moggus was an heretike excommunicated of the See Apostolike and of Acacius also whome M. Iewell calleth Asatius but after was reconciled vnto him WherevpoÌ„ they were bothe of Felix the bishop of Rome excommunicated The conspyring of heretikes can be no president against the Reconciliations of Catholikes Who listeth to see the whole tragedy of this Petrus Moggus whiche accursed the Chalcedon Councell and of this Acacius consenting vnto him by an edicte of Pacification made by Zenon the Emperour against the See Apostolike and the ende thereof let him peruse Liberatus sett forthe in the seconde tome of the Councelles The primacy of the bishop of Rome ouer the other patriarches appeareth therein most euidently As by Appeales by Reconciliations by ExcoÌ„munications and such like Practise In this sense writeth Hormisda bisshop of Rome vnto Epiphanius the bisshop of Constantinople Seing we haue one frendsship in CoÌ„munion and in faithe let vs therfore take like study and like care Yea. But what foloweth M. Iewell It foloweth immediatly To thentent that as we do now both equally reioyse in our Lorde that the Churche of Constantinople is vnited to the Apostolike See so also we may as you doe charitably moue me prouide for the Reconciliation of other Churches also For vnder Iohn the predecessour of this Epiphanius the Churche of Constantinople was reconciled from the schisme that Acacius before had made to the See Apostolike Being thus reconciled they wrote as felowes and equalles For vnlesse bishopps had offended either against the Canons or against the Catholike faithe the Bishop of Rome vsed no Superiorite ouer them Thus M. Iewell by titles and phrases woulde disproue that whiche the clere and open practise of the Churche euidently proueth That whiche M. Iewell alleageth oute of Socrates for an example of Reconciliation was 519 no Reconciliation at all They were or at lest pretended to be Catholikes which went to Pope Liberius They went for a redresse and ease of their great aduersites and miseries which they sustained by the Arrians They sued also at that time to the Empeâ—our of the West Valentinianus the first All this was not for a Reconciliation but for the establyshing of the Catholike faith against the Arrians and to haue some redresse of the disorders in their Churches Iewell An other like example of Reconciliâ—tion we haue made by one Arsenius the bisshop of Hâ—psilitae to Athanasius the B. of Alexandria This Submission or Reconciliation was made vnto Athanasius yet was not Athanasius the bisshop of Rome This Reconciliation that Arsenius the bishopp of Hipsilitae made to Athanasius was not as to his equall but as to his own primate and Metropolitane For so in the very sentence alleaged by M. Iewell it foloweth Neque citra tuam Metropolitani Episcopi sententiam vllum de episcopis aut alio dogmate coÌ„muâ—i ecclesiastico decretum aedituros We promise also that without your Authorite being the Metropolitane bishop we will make no decree either concerning bishops or any other pointe of common and ecclesiasticall doctrine This Submission therefore or Reconciliation made to Athanasius though it were not made to thâ— bishopp of Rome yet it was made to the Metropolitane and superiour not to a felowe or equall And thus the maner of Reconciliation of Churches was done not betwene frendes and felowes as M. Iewell fansieth but with humble submission and knowleadge of a Supremacie ouer the party reconciled Finally thus Reconciliations being made to the Bishop of Rome of Patriarches and Metropolitanes them selues as of Alexander the Patriarche of Antioche and of Atticus the Patriarche of Constantinople bothe to Innocentius the B. of Rome also of the bishoppes of the East to Leo the B. of Rome as before hath bene declared is a sufficient token of primacy and Supremacy in the Churche of Rome ouer all other Churches Patriarches and Metropolitanes Harding Thus hauing declared the Supreme Authorite and primacy of the Pope by the Common practise of the Churche I neede not to shewe further howe in all questions doubtes and controuersies touching Faithe and Religion the See of Rome hathe allwaies bene consulted Iewell The 116. Vntruthe For many greate questioÌ„s were neuer remoued to Rome What were those great questions that were neuer remoued to Rome M. Iewell nameth in his text not one question greate or small And shall it be true bicause M. Iewell saieth it onely He hath bene taken in Vntruthes to often to require now such credit It had bene an easy matter amonge many to name one Nowe no instance or exception beinge made the vniuersall remaineth true For to proue an vniuersall it is impossible But if it like M. Iewell to stande by this Vntruthe he maye take his penne and turne to the 91. and the 93. epistles in S. Augustins workes and score it there also vpon Innocentius the first who in his epistle answering to the Fathers of the Councell of Carthage who had required him vt statutis eorum mediocritatis etiam Apostolicae sedis adhibeatur Authoritas that to their decrees and Canons the Authorite of the Apostolike See might be added saieth no lesse then D. Harding in his text saied For these are his wordes Patrum instituta sacerdotali custodientes officio non censetis esse calcanda quod illi non humana sed diuina decreuâ—re sententia vt quicquid de disiunctis remotisque prâ—uincijs ageretur non prius ducerent finiendum nisi ad huius Sedis notitiam peruenireâ— vbi tota huius Authoritate iusta quae fuerit pronunciatio firmaretur You obseruing the decrees of the Fathers according to the duty of priesthoode do shewe that they are not to be trode vnder foote whereas they not by the senteÌ„ce of maÌ„ but of God him selfe haue thought good that what soeuer should be in debate concerning suche prouinces as are farre distant it shoulde not be determined before the matter were brought to the knowleadge of this See where by the whole Authorire of the same the right and iuste Sentence might be confirmed In these wordes Innocentius affirmeth that whatsoeuer was in debate or controuersy in farre distant prouinces shoulde be referred to the See of Rome and there shoulde take
know bothe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in greke and Praesideo in Latin dothe sometime signifie to sitt in the first place But doe not yow knowe also that it signifieth to Beare rule and to gouerne Is not our englishe worde President taken out of the Latin Praesidere a worde of Authorite and gouernement more then of sitting in the first place Wil you measure and limit the Office of the Lord President in Wales with the prerogatiue of only sitting before other and hauing the first place But that Theodoret calling the Churche of Rome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orbi terrâ—rum praesidentem the Churche that is president and beareth rule ouer the worlde meaneth a farre greater prerogatiue then of sitting in the first place and that therefore this traÌ„slation is true and yow but a fonde wrangler to finde faulte therewith the whole place of Theodoret him selfe shal testifie and beare witnesse Theodoret that lerned father and bishopp of Cyrus beginneth his Epistle vnto Pope Leo in this sorte Si Paulus praeco veritatis c. If Paule the Preacher of Truthe the truÌ„pet of the Holy Ghoste ranne vp to the great Apostle Peter to bring from him a determination touching the question which those of Antioche moued about the obseruations of the lawe of Moyses much more we whiche are abiecte and off small regarde doe runne to youre Apostolike See that we maye receaue from you some holesome medicine to cure the woundes and sores of the Churches For to you it belongeth to beare the chiefty in all thinges For your See is decked with many praerogatiues whereby you are Superiour to other For other cities are commended for greatnesse for beauty and for multitude of inhabitants And many are noble for certain spirituall giftes peculiar to them But God the geuer of all good thinges hathe geuen to your Citie a plentifull and abundant copie of al goodnesse For that Citie is the greatest and noblest of al Cities and it is shee that gouâ—rneth the whole worlde and is full of inhabitants Furthermore this Citie gotte that Empire whiche nowe gouerneth the worlde and of her owne name hathe called her subiects But chiefely and principally the Faithe commendeth her and the worthy witnesse S. Paule who crieth out and saieth Your faithe is preached through oute the whole worlde Thus farre Theodoret in commendation of the Citie of Rome and not so muche of the Citie it selfe as of the Churche and See of that Citie For these wordes to haue bene spoken of the Churche not of the Citie M. Ieweâ—l him selfe confesseth chaunging the wordes Quae praeest orbi terrarum into Ecclesiam orbis terrarum primariam The most Notable and chiefe Churche of the worlde For the chiefe Citie of the worlde at that time Rome was not but rather Constantinople whiche also was therefore called Noua Roma Newe Rome Againe it sâ—all the better appeare by the suite and request of Theodoretus in this epistle to Pope Leo whether he called the Churche of Rome the president of the worlde for preeminence of place only or no. Theodoret in that epistle to Pope Leo being wrongefully depriued and deposed from his bishopricque by Dioscorus the Patriarche of Alexandria in the Conuenticle of Ephesus of which we haue often mentioned before declaring firste the iniurious iudgement of Dioscorus the longe continuaunce in his bishopricke hauing serued therein xxvj yeares the largenesse of his charge hauing in his prouince for he was a Metropolitane Archebishop eight hundred Churches his great paynes and trauail in preseruing all that people from heresy namely from the heresy of Marcion from the which as he writeth he had deliuered aboue a thousand soules conuerting them to the Catholike faithe declaring I saye all these thinges to the Pope particularly he cometh to his suite and saieth Et post tot sudores labores c. And beholde after all this sweate and trauail I am condemned being not so muche at accused But I looke for the Sentence of your Apostolike See And I beseche and require your holynes to aide me in this case Appealing to your right and iuste iudgement and to commaunde me to come before you and to shewe that my doctrine and belefe foloweth your Apostolike steppes And a litle after hauing reakoned vpp what workes he had writen partly against heretikes partly vpon holy Scripture of the whiche to this daye a great parte is extant he repeteth his suite and saieth But I beseche yowe caste not of my humble request nor despise not my hore head which after suche paynefull trauailes is thus iniured Before all thinges I beseche yow I maye knowe from you whether I ought to stande to this wrongefull iudgement or no. For I looke for your sentence and if you shall commaunde me to abide the iudgement I will abide it and neuer trouble man here aboute any more but abide the iust iudgement of my God and Saviour Christ Iesus God is my witnesse I haue no regarde of my honour and promotion but of the great offence that maye rise hereof in the mindes of many simple folke and specially of suche whom we haue before conuerted from heresy VVho hauing an eye to the See of Alexandria and other bishops whiche haue condemned vs will perhappes iudge that we are not able to discerne the true and right doctrine Thus Farre Theodoret in his supplication and Appeale to Leo the Bishopp of Rome he hymselfe beinge a bishop of Cyrus in the East and subiecte properly to the prouince and Patriarkeship of Antioche not of Rome By this his Appeale and by the Restitution also to his bishopricke whiche ensued hereupon by Leo the Pope as I haue before declared out of the Chalcedon Councell and by the whole wordes of Theodoret it is euident that calling the Churche of Rome Orbi terrarum praesidentem or quae preest orbi terrarum the President and gouuerner of the worlde he meaned not a preferment only of sitting in place before other bishoppes but a Superiour Authorite and Primacy ouer other bishoppes and such as to whome from a Patriarche and Councell of Bishops he might yet Appeale Yet saieth M. Iewell Iewell He might 548. better haue turned it Ecclesiam orbis primariam The most notable or châ—â—sâ— Churche of the woâ—lde And so woulde his translation haue well agreed with the Constitutions of the Emperour Iustinian wherein the preeminence of sitting in the first place in all Councelles and assemblies is by special Priuilege graunted to the bisshop of Rome To the Constitutions of Iustinian touching the bishopp of Romes prerogatiue I haue answered before in the 99. Vntruthe And declared there the greate vntruthe of M. Iewelâ— falsifying and corrupting the Constitutions of Iustinian And nowe touching the translation of this place I leaue it to euery indifferent Reader perusinge the whole wordes of Theodorets epistle considering the cause and ende of his writing to iudge whether the translation
Cap. 175. Ad Quoduult deum haere 64. Con. 3. Carth. can â—4 Irenaeus Lib. 5. Concil Auraicense Can. 17. Epi. 1. To. 1. Conc. Lib. 5. de SacrameÌ„t Cap. 1. Two causes geuen by S. Ambrose of Mingling the VVater with VVine in the B. Sacrament Conc. Bracaâ— â— Can. 1. pag. 34. M. Ievvel claimeth by heretikes In capituliâ— gâ—acarum SynodoruÌ„ Cap. 55. Iustinus Apolog. 2. S. Basill S. Iames. In serm ea techetico apud Euthy â—nium lib. 2. Pano pliae tit 21. In cap. 19. Cap. 32. diuis 14. pag. 38. The .34 Vntruthe Slaunderous Diuis 15. Euseb lib. 5 cap. 24. â—ist eccles pag. 30. The 35. Vntruthe Slaunderous Eusebius hist. â—ccâ—es liâ— 5. cap. 24. Diui. 16. Apologia 2. pag. 41. The .36 Vntruthe Slaund A Communion in distinction of places is proued Diuis 17. Lib. 2. ad vxorem Pag. 43. The. 37. Vntruthe Slaunderous Ioan. 6. The .38 Vntruthe Slaund Lib. 4. contra MarcioneÌ„ Luc. 22. Ioan. 6. Diuis 18. pag. 47. The .39 Vntruthe Slaunderous Pag. 49. The .40 Vntruthe For it may not be well so vnderstanded Aug. Lib. de moribus eccles Cath. c. 31. Bas. in Asceticis Xeâ—ophoÌ„ in Cyro Iâ—well pag. 49. The .41 Vntruthe Slaunderous The lewde dealing of M. Iewel the 21. diuision pag. 56. The .42 and 43. Vntruthes both Slaunderous For Rome is nowe thâ— Mother of Vertue M. Iewelles Arguments Fol. 161. Epist. proxima post 51. inter Epist. Leonis The .44 Vntruthe Slaunderous and the 45. Vntruthe touching the faithe of the Vvest Church Iewell pag. 56. M. Iewell confuteth him selfe Fraunce toke their first faith from Rome S. Gregory witnesseth that the first faith of Fraunce came froÌ„ Rome Lib. 4. epist. 51. Bothe Englande Scotlande receiued their first faith from Rome Beda Lib. 1. Cap. 4. Lib. 1. Cap. 13. Howe the faith came to vs Englishmen In the first and second bookes Germany receiued their first faith froÌ„ Rome Platina in Sergio in Gregorio 2. Henr. Mutius lib. 7. Bedali 5. Cap. 10. Vide Platinam Blondum lib. 2. dec 2. Lib. 7. Cap. 30. Diuis 23. pag. 57. The 46. Vntruthe Slaund 1 Diui. 25. pag. 60. The 47. Vntruthe Slaund And the 48. Vntruthe For no Fathers saie planely the contrary pag. 61. Linea 16. Heb. 7. 10. Iewell pag. 61. Lin. 58. How the Church offreth a daily Sacrifice at the Aultar notwithstanding the One and SufficieÌ„t Sacrifice vpon the Crosse. Chrysost. Hom. l· 1â— ad Habr Howe One Sacrifice vppon the Crosse and â—ow One daily in the Church One christ euery vvhere One Body The Real presence proueth one Sacrifice bothe vpon the Crosse and vpoâ— the Aultar Theodoret. In cap. 6. ad Hebr. Primasâ—us In ca. 10. ad Hebr. The olde Sacrificâ—s The daily Sacrifice of oure Priestes VVhy it is daily Howe it differeth from the olde being yet repeted as that was Note these two Causes Eusebius Emissenus Homil. 5. de Pascha The third Cause off a daily Sacrifice Oecumenius In commentar in Hebr. ca. 5 The euer lasting Order off Melchisedech proueth a continuall Sacrifice August epist 23. ad BonifaciuÌ„ Lib. 10. cap. 6. De ciuâ— Dei The 49. Vntruthe standing in false translation Iew. pag. 61. Lin. 24. Immolari populis Lib. 10. per totum M. Iewell maketh the people his God Offred in the Crosse and Offred euery daie â— August M. Iewel Augustin Lib. 9. confess Cap. 13. lib. 1. ep 2. An Obiection putt of The daily Saâ—rifice is Offred by priestes Ambrosius In cap 3.1 ad Timoth Hieronymus li. 1· in Iouinianum Innocentius 1. ad Decentium dist 31. Cap. Tenere Iewel as before Pag. 43. a. Can. 49. b. can 52. In Ioan. tract 26. In epi Timoth. 1. cap. The .50 Vntruth For none saieth Not euery daie pag. 36. M. Iewel confuteth him self Au. Hom. 28. de ver Dom. sec. Luc. Amb. lib. 5. de saâ—r Cap. 4. Concil Tol. 4. caÌ„ 9. The .51 Vntruthe For this can not be well gathered diui 26. De verbis domini sâ—cundum LucaÌ„ Homil 28. * Thse be the ve very wordes of S. Augustin pag. 62. The .52 Vntruth Slaunderous and peuish Cum iste panis c. not vbi diuis 28 pag. 64. The .53 Vntruthe Slaunderous Diui. 29. Dist. 1. hoc quoque pag. 66. The .54 Vntruthe Slaunderous pag. 68 Dist 2. per acta The .55 Vntruthe For this decree is of the bishops Masse Soteâ—â— decree is of the Priestes De consecr dist 1. Epis Deo M. Iewell maketh two allegatioÌ„s off one De Cons. Dist. 1. vt illud The .56 Vntruthe Standing in fâ—lse Application pag. 68. The 57. Vntruthe touching Soters decree The 58 Vntruthe For more then an inckling of Priuat Masse is founde in Soters decree Diuis 31. pag. 71. The 59. Vntruthe Slaund The 60. Vntruthe For the Contrary dothe noâ— appeare Can. 21. The reason of D. Harding M. Iewell Replieth not to the reason of D. Harding but apposeth of his owne pag. 71. The 61. Vntruthe standing in manifâ—st falsyfying of the decree M. Ievvel maketh false construction to maintayne his false reliâ—ion M. Iewelles Argument The .62 Vntruthe ioyned with a SlauÌ„der Co. Agath Can. 60. Epist. decret Siricij M. Iewelles Argument diuis 23. In the wordes of Leontius pag. 74. StapletoÌ„ The .63 Vntruthe Slaunderous The .64 Vntruth impudeÌ„tly auouched pag. 78. This LeoÌ„tius is much coÌ„mended in the .7 Generall Councell Act. 4. He liued aboute the time of S. Gregory within the first 600. yeres Con. Nice â— Act. 4. M. Iewel outfaceth matters when proofes faile him The 65. Vntruthe aboute the significatioÌ„ of Missas facere Ambros. lib. 5. Epist. 33. Gregor lib. 4. epist. 34. Concil Arelae Can. 2. Tit. 3. M. Iewell denieth the Conclusion diuis 33. pag. 81. The .66 Vntruthe Slaunderous Articu 6. diuis 34. pag. 87. The .67 Vntruthe Slaunderous Stapleton Homi. 61. ad pâ—p Aâ—tioch The .68 Vntruthe Slaunderous The .69 Vntruthe Slaunderoâ—s How the Sacrifice and the preaching is called daily pag. 63. lin 11. M. Iewell contrarye to him selfe pag. 62. lin 3. pag. 63. lin 35. The 70. Vntruthe For before he saied The people receiued euery daie M. Iewell confuteth him selfe The 71. Vntruthe For there was no Vntruthe so boldely presuued The 72. Vntruthe Slaund M. Iewell repeteth one Vntruthe foure times Pag. 91. The 73. Vntruthe ioyned with passing impudency pag. 88. The 74. Vntruthe the Slaund Priuat Masse proued out of Chrysostom pag. 88. The 75. Vntruthe For it foloweth not by Chrysostoms wordes that he him selfe did not Communicat The .76 Vntruth For S. Chrysostom speketh no one word of small compaines The purpose of Chrysostom in the place alleaged Homi. 61. ad Pop. A tioch The 77. Vntruth as before pag. 89. The 78. Vntruth For this only Answer is in sufficient as shall appeare The InteÌ„t of M. Iewelles ChaleÌ„ge VVhy Priuat Masse cannot easely be proued in plaine termes Pâ—iuâ—t Pater Noster The .79 Vntruthe For it is Master Iewelles Nemo not D. Hardings nor Chrysostoms neither
M. Iewell stealeth from the Matter Marke what the Answere of M. Iewell ought to be M. Iewell wil proue S. Chrysostom a lyar M. Iewell iuggleth one word for an other to make pastime pag. 89. Euseb. lib. 6. cap. 43. Nazianzen in Apologet The effect of M. Iewelles former Allegations Hom. 6â— ad Pop. Antioch Socrates li. 6. cap. 3. Niceph. li. 31. ca. 2. Al M. Iewelles allegations haue proued nothinge The 80. Vntruthe ioyned with a Slaund scoffe The .81 Vntruthe ioyned with a scoffe The .82 Vntruth For these plaine wordes of Chrisostom include no nuÌ„ber to Receiue vvith him CaÌ„ Apost 8. De Cons. Dist. 1. Episcopus The .83 Vntruthe in falsifying the CanoÌ„ of the Apostles pag. 90. Can. 14. Carth. 6. Can. 18. Can. 59. Tâ—l 4. cap. 17. Aâ— CleruÌ„ eâ— literatos Bohaemie The .84 Vntruthe â—â—uching the time of Chrysostom In liturgia The .85 Vntruthe For the deuoute Receiued not alwayes Ad pop Antioch Homi. 61. Ad Ianuarium epistol 118. Luca. 7. Homi. 61. aâ— pop Antoch Those which remained in the Churche Receiued not The drifte of Chrisostom in the Homilie alleaged Ones Receiuing in the yeare The 86. Vntruthe standing in the manifest Corruption of Chrysostom Stapleton Hoâ—â—lia 61. ad pop Antioch â—riuat â—asse Concluded pag. 64. Diuis 1. pag. 89. The 87. Vntruth Slaunderous In Concil Lateran· pag. 98. The .88 Vntruth ioyned with a folie TransubstantiatioÌ„ proued by Scripture Luc. 22. Genes 1. Rom. 11. TransubstantiatioÌ„ proued by the Fathers Lib. de ijs qui initiantur mysteriis Cap. 9. Nature is Chaunged De Pascha Homil. 5. The Catholike Doctrine of Christes Reall presence in the Sacrament pag. 98. By D. Sanders ProtestaÌ„ts do a thousand folde more Iniury to the People by their double kinde then the Catholikes in One Kinde diuis 2. pag. 99. The .89 Vntruthe Slaunderous The 90. Vntruthe Slaund The 91. Vntruthe in belying the state of the questioâ— Pag. 96. * Those wordes are not in in the Sermon nor in any part of the Chalenge M. Iewell crieth Guilty and yeldeth diuis 3. The .92 Vntruthe Slaund Stapleton Iewell pag. 191. The .93 Vntruthe For S. Paule there hath not opened these wordes drinke ye all of this in that sence as M. Iewell fancyeth The .94 Vntruthe That practise declareth no such meaning â— is by â— Iewell before â—uouched In The Foâ—tresse c. M. Iewel is cast in his owne turne diuis 4. pag. 102. The .95 Vntruthe Slaunderours and peuish M. Iewelles Argument Diuis 6. The .96 Vntruthe Slaunderous In the leafe 21. The .97 Vntruthe Slaunderous The .98 Vntruthe Slaunderous The singular lâ—wdenesse of M. Iewel M. Iewell coÌ„fesseth a foyle in the Lutherans Peter Martyr Cyrillus ad Euoptium In opposâ—tione ad Anamathe â—ismum 11. Tom. vlii VVhy the Catholikes beleue that vnder either kinde whole Christ is present See their wordes before fol. 22. Diuis 10. Iâ—well pag. 113. The .99 Vntruthe Slaunderous not only to D. Hard. but to S. Hilary whose very wordes those are De spiritu S. lib. 1. Cap. 3. A clere Example of M. Iewellâ—s Grosse IgnoraÌ„ce or els of VVilfâ—ll Malice In lib. de Synodis aduersus Arrianâ—s M. Iewell in Slaunderiâ—g D. Harding slauÌ„dereth S. Hilary diuis 10. pag. 118. The 100. Vntruthe Slâ—und The 101. Vntruthe For the Churche of Rome is neither late nor particular 1. ad Timo. 3. In commentar in 1. ad Tim. 3. In Apologia 1. aduersus RufinuÌ„ The faithe of Rome Lib. 4. â—pist 8. Diuis 12. pag. 122. Tâ—e .102 Vntruthe Slaunderous The .103 Vntruth For beside S. Augustin and Bede S. Chrystom one other auÌ„cient fathâ—r is of that minde August In li. 3. de consensu euangelistarum cap. 25. Beda li. 6. Theophyl In cap. Luc. 24. * In the .57 Vntruth pag. 123. The .104 Vntruthe For it was the Sacrament as it hath bene proued The .105 Vntruthe For it is gathered by good proofe oute of Gods worde Lucae 28. pag. 68. Luc. 28 M. Iewell saieth and vnsaieth The .106 Vntruthe For Christes example proueth well our purpose The 107. Vntruthe For these two disciples in Emaus were theÌ„ no priestes The .108 Vntruthe For in your challenge you speake not of the Churche The .109 Vntruthe For that appeareth not in the Scripture August in catenâ— in 24. Lucae Greg. in Euang homil 23. M. Iewels ArgumeÌ„t M. Iewell alleageth late writers againste the olde Doctours diuis 13. Iewell pag. 125. The 110. Vntruthe Slaunderous pag. 126. The .111 Vntruth â—or he gaue it to S. Luke and his other disciples VVho were no infidels pardy The .112 Vntruth For this expositioÌ„ is not contrary to the other saying of Chrysostom The .113 Vntruth For D. Harding hath made no vntrue reporte of his doctour Hom. 17. operis imperfecti The signe of the Crosse. The Bl. SacrameÌ„t is a sancticationfi â—uc 24. Actâ— 27. diuis 14. pag. 126. The .114 Vntruthâ— slaunderous 1 Cor. 10. The 11â— Vntruthe slaunderous diuis 19. pag. 131. The .116 Vntruthe Slaunderous Diui. 22. pag. 135. The .117 Vntruthe Slaunderous VVhy the Sacrifice is not celebrated on good Fridâ—â—e 1. Cor. 2. diuis 28. The .118 Vntruthe Slaunderous diuis 31. pag. 147. The .119 Vntruthe Slaunderous Ex Gelasio contra Euâ—ic ben diuis 31. Iewell pag. 148. The .120 Vntruthe Slaunderous M. Iewellee chalenge is answered But he Altereth the Question pag. 69. and .142 pag. 132. pag. 148 The Institution off Christ Practise of the Churche The double Practise of Gods Churche See the Fortresse annexed to Venerable Bede D. Hard. Diuis 1. The .121 Vntruthe Slaunderous The 122. Vntruthe Slaund The Maior Bedâ— Lib. 1. Cap. 29. Histor. Angl. The Minor Diuis 3. The .123 Vntruthe Slaunderous Churche Seruice proued in a touÌ„ge not vnderstanded The Maior Praefat. in Paraliâ— Concil Carthag 3. CaÌ„ 40. The Minor Actâ— 14. In 1. Cor. 14. Homi 35. Strabo lib. 14. Actor 2. Iâ—an GraÌ„ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pag 166. pag. 167. Lib. 7. Epist 63. Aenead 8. Lib. 5. diuis 3. pag. 154. The 124. Vntruthe Slaund Hieron in epitaphio Panloe The 125. Vntruthe For this was no parte of the common Seruice as it shall appeare bothe here and more at large in the 78. Vntruthe M. Iewelles Argument Hieron in Epitaph Paulae De â—aâ—eâ—hi sandis rudib cap. 9. The .126 Vntruthe For it is spoken only of latin tounge M. Iewelles Argument middot The .127 Vntruthe for none of these examples are of the primitiue Church The 128. Vntruthe Slaund It is the 78. Vntruthe The principal Issue of this Article pag. 160. pag. 162. D. Har. Diuis 8. The .129 Vntruthe Slaunderous D. Hard. pag. 160. The .130 Vntruthe For by this Authorite of Strabo it is clerely proued The singular lewdenesse of M. Iewel The .131 vntruthe iâ—altering the texte of D. Harding Iewell pag. 161. The .132 Vntruthe Slaunderous pag. 160. The .133 Vntruthe For Plinie can not so meane Rom. 1. The 134. Vntruthe For it appeareth not so by Plinie Vhe .135
place alleaged The 332. Vntruthe Slaund The .333 Vntruthe For the contrary appearâ—th â—y that which folowâ—th 〈…〉 The .334 Vntruth For it â—oloweth immediatly According as the Holy Pope Vigilius hâ—th appointâ—d The .335 Vntruth For the B. of Iuâ—â—iniana had his Authorite from the B. of Rome M. Iewell hath twise nipped Iustinia Lib. 1. Cap. 27. M. Iewâ—lles Argâ—meâ—t M. Iewelles Arguments The .336 Vntruthe For the lawe spâ—aketh not of â—ll prerogatiues The .337 Vntruth For tâ—at Title in a sâ—nce might belonge to bothe pag. 299. Thâ— .338 Vâ—â—râ—tâ—e mâ—re Slaund aâ—d â—euiâ—h D. Hardingâ—s arguâ—ent The 339. Vntruthe Slaund Lib. 2. de sacerdo io In epist. ad Dam. De Trinita te lib. 6. Luc. 22. The .340 Vntrâ—the Slaunderous Homi 55. in Matth. Lib. 4. epist 32. The .341 Vntruthe Slaunderous Tâ—â— .342 Vntruthe mâ—re Slaunderouâ— The .343 A BurtheÌ„ of Vntruthes al slaunderous The 344 Vntruthe standing in false translation The 345. Vntruth Slaund Lib. de vt litate cre-i dendi Cap. 17. The 346 Vntruthe Slaund The 347. Vntruthe For Christe appointed such a vicaire That Christ appointed a Vicaire Generall Ephes. 1. Mat. 16. Ioan. 21. Luc. 22. Homilia 55. in Mattheum Hierem. 1. Homil. 1. de penitentia Hilarius in Matth. Can. 16. In Matth. can 6. De Trinitate lib. 6. Lib. 2. de Spir. Sancto Serm 67. Tom. 3. Commeâ—tar in Matth. 16. In praescript lib. 1. epist. 3. lib. 4. epist. 9. De simpliprelaâ— In epist. ad QuintinuÌ„ Orig. li. 5. Cap. 6. In epist ad Rom. Ioan. 21. Lib. 12. in Iohan. Cap. 64. EpiphaÌ„ in anchoraâ—o et 2.1.56 2. â—8 An Obiâ—ction The Answer Luc. 22. How the Churche is builded vpon Peters person and yet vpon the faith of Peter Lib. 1. retract at â— 21. CoÌ„tra epistolam Donati Lib. 2. de sacerdotio Homil. 1. de paenitentia The .348 Vntruthe Slaund and Facinge Scriptures vvrested by Protestants Luc. 22. pag. â—26 Ibidem M. Iewell Contrary to him selfe pag. 561. Iacob 5. Ioaâ— 20. Iac. 2. Philipp 2. Act. 2. 2. Thess. 2. 2. Tim. 4. 1. Petr. 4. Cap. 17. in fine Scriptures wrested by M. Iewell in this 4. Article 2. Cor. 11. Iewell pag. 227. sol 5. A. The 349 Vntruthe in wresting of Holy Scripture â— Corinth 11. Iewell pag. 302. 1. Corint 15. Iewell pag. 233. The .350 Vntruthe in wâ—sting of Holy Scripture Esa. 2. Esa. 2. fol. 67. B. The .351 Vntruthe and .352 in wresting at ones two places of holy Scripture Iewâ—ll pag. 233. 1. Corinth 3. Ephes. 2. Apoc. 2â— M. Iewel falsifieth S. Paule Hebr. 13. In expositione in Math. ser. 13. in Psa. 54. Ioan. 10. Li. 1. CoÌ„â— Ioniniâ— Lib. 3.1.3 pag. 244 The .353 Vntruthe in wresting holy Scriptâ—re Math. 20. â—â—th 20 Contra Hosium in dâ—fens prologum Breâ—tij Act. 20. a In 1. Timoth. 3. b Hom. 1. de paenit c Li. 4. epist. 34. Hebr. 13. Math. 20. De vocat· Gent. lib. 2 Ca. 6. â—ap 248 The .354 Vntruthe in false traÌ„slating S Peter and false aplication also 1. Pet. 2. a Serm. 2. de bapt ca. 8. b lib. 20. de ciuit dei Ca. 10. c Contra Luciferianos Apocal. â— Exod. 19. Rom. 1. pag. 25â— 2. Thess. â— The 355. Vntruthe bothe fonde and wicked The Antichrist 2. Thes. 2. Ambros. in CommeÌ„tar ibideÌ„ That the Pope is not Anti-Christ pag. 275. Luc. 22. The 356 Vntruthe in wresting the Prophets wordes Mich 3. The .357 Vntruthe as before Deute 17. The .358 Vntruthe as before Ioan· 14. Math. vlt. pag. 276. The .359 Vntruthe as bâ—fore Math. 3. 1. Cor. 4. Acto 20. The .360 Vntruthe as shall appeare Euseb. lib. 3. cap. 31. pag. 292. pag. 304 Matth. 23. Stapleton Matth. 23. diuis 20. pag. 261. The .361 Vntruthe Slaund pag. 265. The 362. Vntruthe threefolde as shal appeare Cap. 5. The 363. Vntruthe For they stande bothe wel together Concil Nic. câ—n 5. The .364 Vntruthe False Translation * huiusmo di queâ—tiones examinent Appeales to Rome decreed in the Nicene CouÌ„cell Epist. 1. ad Orientales In rescripto ad Orientales Histor. trip lib. 4. cap. 9. pag. 264. In rescripto ad OrieÌ„tales ToÌ„ 1· CoÌ„c See before Fol. 33. B. and 34. A. Historia tripart lib. 4. cap. 23. Theodoret. li. 2. ca. 8. Hist. Concil Sard. Cap. 7. M. Iewelles baren ArgumeÌ„t The 365. Vntruthe For in that Councell appeareth no suche decree The 366. Vntruthe False translation Vide tomom 1. Concil pag. 420. Fol. 36. sâ—q Aug. epist. 90.91.92.93.95.96 Celest. ep 1 ad gal episc Cap. 3. The passing Impudency of M. Iewell Theodor. lib. 2. cap. 5. The 367. Vntruthe In Nipping awaye the first wordes of S. Cyprian Ciprianus lib. 1. epist. 5. The 358. and 359. Vntruthe with the vauntage as shall appeare Sess. 22. Cap 8. 10. M. Iewelles true dealing The .370 Vntruthe Slaund AutheÌ„ de Sanctiss episc Coll. 9. Si quis vero The .371 Vntruth For the Contrary shal now appeare Lib. 11. Epist. 54. L. si extraneus ff d. condict caus dat l. com modissinâ—è ff d. lib. posthâ—mis The .372 Vntruthe For this lawe speaketh not of Ecclesiasticall matters Câ—d de Satrâ—sanctis Ecclesijs omni The .373 Vntruthe In falsyfying the text of the lawe Glosa in verbo Prae rogat Cod. dâ— summa Tâ—init eâ— fid Cath. Nâ—s reddentes The 374. Vntruthe For the Churche of CoÌ„staÌ„tinople is not in Al Respectes of preeminence c. * Vid glosam in verbo vetuâ—tatem vâ—bi supra Cod. de episcopis cler Omnes * Ciuile Actions The .375 Vntruthe For the lawe speakâ—th only of Ciuill actions Bernard ad Eugenium de Considerat lib. 3. Bernardâ—s Epist. 190 The 376. Vntruthe as shall appeare The .377.378 and diuers other Vntruthes as shall appeare The .380 Vntruth For not out of Chrysostomes own workes as M. Iewell supposeth The .381 Vntruthe Slaunderous A Truth of M Iewell August de Gâ—aâ—â—a Châ—isti lib. 2. cap. 2.6 7.8 〈◊〉 17. In epist. ad BonifaciuÌ„ In the .97 Vntruthe The .382 Vntruthe Slaunderous Epist. Chrysost ad Innocentium Tom. 5. * The .383 Vntruthe in false translating as it shalanoÌ„ appeare The .384 Vntruthe Slaunderous three wayes The 385. Vntruthe For these wordes are oll to be founde in Chrysostom The .386 Vntruthe Slaunderous Palladius in vita Ioan Chrysostom Et extat in Aloysio Lipoma no. Tom. 2. lib. 3. par 2. M. Iewelles Vntruthes particulary layed forthe That S. Chrisostome Patriarâ—he of Constantinople Appealed to Pope Innocentius Chrysostomus in epist 1. aâ— Innocentiâ—Ì„â—om 5. Nicephorus li. 13. ca. 19 * Câ—ntâ—â— omnes Canâ—â—es lâ—geâ— And â—ontâ—a toâ— ac 〈◊〉 canâ—nes Nicephosrus lib. 13· cap. 32. cap 33. Li. 8. cap vlt. Leo epist. â—â— Li â—3 cap. 32. 33. In epist. 2. ad Innocentium 〈◊〉 5. * Neque caeâ—uabijâ—iantur Nicephorus li. 13. Cap. 30. Idem li. 13. Cap. 34. Ibidem * Exâ—uthoramus * Consultò pag. 268. Epist. 2. ad Innocentium * Clerus Socrâ—tes li. 2. câ—p 11.
intent in this place was to shewe that the faithe of the Romanes whiche the Apostle S. Paule commended remayned still in the same feruour and zele as it did from the beginning For proufe whereof he bringeth in their frequenting of Martyrs toumes How like you that deuotion M. Iewell Then also their crying out Amen so lowde and so thicke in the Churche that he compareth it to the noyse of a thunderclappe Suche a noyse I haue heard in the Churches of Fraunce many times my selfe and also at Rome in the Lent tyme. Yet I neuer heard there or otherwhere the Vulgar Seruice If the crying out of Amen maye either prouethe Vulgar Seruice or the Constitution of Iustinian to be generall and to extende to Rome then M. Iewell hath talked to the matter If neither of these twayne then what hathe he done but trifled and deluded the ignorant Reader withe idle allegations and shewe of lerning To furder the matter M. Iewell hathe the added to the wordes of S. Hierome these wordes At the ende of the praier For those wordes are not to be founde in S. Hierom. Suche shifting and toyling is made to proue a Vulgar Seruice out of Iustinian and yet it will not be Let vs procede Againe if this Constitution serued onely for the Greke Churche and only the priestes there spake alowde and the others of the Latine Churche spake in silence howe then doth M. Harding expounde this lawe by S. Augustine who as he supposeth did the contrary and was neuer subiect vnto that lawe Or howe can he make contrarietes agree together Hath he so soone forgotte him selfe Or will he expoūde speaking by silence or singing out by whispering The verye wordes of D. Harding being laied forthe will soone answer all this wondering of M. Iewell His wordes in the texte are these And thus he ordeined for the greke Churche onelye and thereto onely it is to be referred for that some thought the Sacrifice should be celebrated rather with silence after the maner of the Churche of Rome specially at the Consecration In these wordes D. Harding reporteth the maner of the Churche of Rome specially at the Consecration time to haue bene to speake in silence where as the grekes vttered those wordes allwaies alowde But the agreing of S. Augustins wordes withe the meaning of Iustinian is spoken of the Churche of Afrike not of the Churche of Rome And againe of vttering the wordes before the Consecration as Sursum corda and such like as by the Conference of S. Cyprian alleaged by M. Iewell it appeareth not of the very Canon of the Masse whiche in the Latin Churche hathe euer secretly bene pronounced Thirdly the agreing is this that neither Iustinian nor S. Augustine do speake any thinge for the Vulgar Seruice but only for the lowde speaking of the priest whiche though it were vsed in Afrike yet will it not folowe that it was vsed in Rome Last of all though we graunted that bothe Afrike and also the Churche of Rome vsed suche lowde speaking of the priest at the Common Seruice in Saint Augustins time yet it will hardly folowe that the same was done by the force of Iustinians Constitution made a full hundred yeares after or that the Churche of Rome shoulde therefore be subiect to that the lawe made so many yeares after The expounding therefore of the sence and meaninge of Iustinians Constitution by the wordes of Saint Augustine bredeth no Contradiction in D. Hardinges Collection vnlesse M. Iewell wil haue this Argument to stande for good The Priestes in Afrike spake alowde in S. Augustins time according to the meaning of Iustinians Constitution Ergo the Churche of Rome a hundred yeares after was subiect to that Constitution If M. Iewell will this to goe for an argument then let him cōsider it better Els it will proue I trow but a childish argumēt Iewell To conclude Iustinian saieth The Constitutions were generall M. Harding alone saieth they were not generall To conclude Iustinian saied no such thinge either of all the Nouell Constitutions of the which Contius confesseth many where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 locales proper and peculiar for certaine places either of this same Constitution of which we haue so long treated which bothe the lawe proueth it was not generall and by the reason of Contius alleaged semeth to be a mere particular Constitution touchinge onely the Greke Churche Therefore D. Hardinge not alone but with the lawe and with Contius affirmeth this Constitution to be not generall Iewell Iustinian saieth They toke place in all the VVorlde M. Harding alone saieth They toke place only in Constantinople In these wordes M. Iewell hath committed two manifeste Vntruthes For neither Iustinian spake those wordes of these Nouell Constitutions of whiche this is one that nowe is in Controuersie but he spake those wordes in the Code of other lawes comprised there Neyther dyd D. Hardinge saye that this Constitution toke place only in Cōstantinople but he saied Only in the Greke Church of the whiche Constantinople is but a parte Iewell S. Ambrose S. Augustine S. Hierome Leo and others say They were obserued in the Churche of Rome M. Harding alone saieth They were neuer obserued in the Church of Rome Leo liued at the lest foure score yeares S. Ambrose S. Augustin and S. Hierome liued well nere two hundred yeares before these Nouell Constitutions of Iustinian were made and therefore they could not possibly except it were by Spirit of prophecy or reuelation speake anye one worde off or on of these Constitutions of Iustinian whiche were so many yeares after made and writen Beside the Wordes of these Doctours as hath before bene declared haue no lyke matter to the Vulgar Seruice whiche M. Iewell would so faine picke out of this Cōstitution Iewell Iff he will thus deceiue vs in plaine thinges howe may we thē trust him in doubtefull thinges Stapleton Be it a bargaine M. Iewell He that deceaueth in plaine thinges let him neuer be trusted in doubtefull thinges But what deceite can be more plaine more euident more manifest then to alleage for the sence and meaning of a lawe the witnesse off those men who were dead and buried many a score of yeares before the lawe was made yea before the man was borne that made the lawe Howesaie you M. Iewell Haue you not here deceiued youre Reader in a verye plaine and manifest matter Haue you not alleaged to proue that Iustinians Constitution was obserued in the Churche of Rome and that the Churche of Rome was subiect to that lawe the testimony of foure Doctours who all were dead so many yeares before the lawe was enacted Can you denye that those foure Doctours lyued all and died as I haue saied many a score of yeares before Iustinian made that lawe Do not all Histories yea Carion Pantaleon and your brethern of Magdeburge testifie the age of those Fathers all before Iustinian the Emperour Then by your owne