afterward But your definition is first to bee noted as comming somewhat out of place and vntrue Touching the place I will not contend the matter cannot be iustified in that you define Sectaries to be in deede such as cut themselues off in opinion of religion from the general body of the Catholike Church For herein as not remembring your owne arte you confound heretiques with sectaries making no distinction betweene the generall and the speciall for howesoeuer the names are sometimes confounded in the receiued distinction of matter all heretiques are sectaries but all sectaries are not heretiques so that being diuers in nature they cannot haue the same proper definition Beside your fault of confounding euen in a definition which should serue to distinction and to bring cleere knowledge this also is to bee considered that of the two it doeth most fitly agree vnto heretiques whose sinne heresie standeth in cutting them selues off from the communion of the Church in opinion and doctrines of faith Lastly though one man once diuide him selfe and so be guiltie in this particular of schisme yet by the word in common vse wee call it not a sect till there bee many drawen away For if Layolas alone had troden that newe path and vowed that speciall vowe for his diuision and superstitious trade hee alone should not haue bene called a sect Wherefore your definition hath bewrayed great want of learning But to giue you a truer definition A sect according to the true etymologie of y â— word is a companie of men that differ from the rest of their religion eyther in matter of forme of their profession Seing therefore the Iesuites receiue a peculiar vowe to preache as the Apostles did euery where to do it of free cost to whippe and torment them selues after the example of a sect called by the name of whippers and condemned long agoe seeing they also as a diuided companie from all others doe followe the rule of Layolas it appeareth plainely the Iesuites are a sect As for the examples of Elias Elizeus Daniel and Iohn Baptist they are no lesse wickedly then vnlearnedly alledged to auow their order What are you able to bring out of the woord of God why Elias shoulde after more then 2000. yeeres bee brought in for a patrone of Friers What was in Elizeus or Daniel that may liken them to Iesuites Iohn Baptist that may seeme to make most maketh nothing at all for you for it is to be thought hee was an extraordinarie and perpetual Nazarite therefore his calling warranted him for his austere and extraordinarie attire and diet which restraint or the like is not nowe laid vpon those that teach in the Churche hauing all their seuerall offices expressed in the worde of God Moreouer Iohns preaching in the wildernes of Iudea did not withdrawe him as is imagined into solitarie and waste mountaines but the hillie part of Iudea was in comparison of other places called a wildernesse being notwithstanding a countrey well inhabited as appeareth in the booke of Iosua Thus it is cleere that neither your definition nor examples can proue the Iesuites to bee no sect Neuerthelesse as I haue answered one definition with another so will I answere your examples farre from the matter with examples plainelie declaring that which is in question Saint Paul doth accuse the Corinthes of Schisme only because they said I am of Paul I am of Apollos I am of Cephas I am of Christ These did not cut themselues off in opinion of religion they did not holde a seueral faith to themselues but for this Schisme hee sharpely rebuked them saying Is Christ deuided Therfore the Iesuites following in y â— like or in more wicked steppes receiue sentence from Saint Paule wherein they are accused of Schisme and condemned as a sect For do not these votaries of Rome do not these irregulars say I am of AusteÌ„ I am of Frauncis I am of Dominick and these last men I am of Iesus Is Iesus then diuided or not rather you diuided ye Iesuites being cut off as heretiques from the mysticall body of Christ and rent as Sectaries in your own bowels Also the Pharises are an other example to ouerthrowe your definition proue y â— Iesuits a sect For they did not cut off themselues from the religion of the Church yet for their seuerall order they were a notorious sect As I haue plainely shewed that the Iesuites are a sect so it is true that they are a blasphemous sect For what a blasphemy is it to abuse the most blessed name of Iesus for a colour to their blasphemous practises in rooting out the pure and sincere preaching of the Gospell that afterwarde they may bring in all the execrable superstitions heresies of Poperie and after many outrages establishe againe the intolerable yoke of Antichrist This also increaseth the offence that they drawe to themselues alone the most gracious and comfortable title of our fellowship and vnion in Christ Iesus which is common to all that do beleeue without any diuision or distinction Wherefore howsoeuer the discouerie went neere the heart and made you complaine for me to call the Iesuites a blasphemous sect was neither lewd nor vnlearned It is one of your nothings to make a shew of something when you say they call not themselues Iesuites but the Societie of Iesus making a distinction where none is or if there hee any it is made against the receiued speach euery where and against your selfe who in calling them so often Iesuites doe by the practise allowe your selfe the libertie of that speach which you reprehend in mee And to discouer your manifest vntrueth in this small matter that can yeelde you nâ— reward of a lye I must tell you that Turrian an other Layolas calleth his societie by the name of Iesuites which you denie The second note against me as contumeliously deprauing all religious men to deface the Iesuites is an other slaunder for I honor and pray for all religious men as many as for true religion are vnited in the body of Christ which is the Churche But if you account only the popish Monks and Fryers religious men and so take the tytle of religion onely to your selues excluding al others euen those also that are of your church as many as are not of some regular order and habit you haue wel layd downe my meaning for I holde them all as wicked ministers of Antichrist and worthy to be seuerely censured for making the name of religious men proper to themselues which is common to all Christians euery where Neither am I herein to bee compared with the olde Heretiques for they dispraised the good and I haue spoken against the badde they did it vntruely and I in trueth Therefore it is a manifest misconstruing of my wordes as deliuered to the dispraise of theÌ„ whâ—â— it was not in my thought to dispraise as also it waâ— a plaine iniurie to match those
this your spirit attempt in the aboundance of your heart if you durst as well come to open action as you dare cast out these open and intollerable flaunders against all the godly entred We all holde the same doctrine of faith published and mainteined according to the worde of God we come to the same felloweship and communion in the exercises of religion and ioyne all in the same defence of Gods holie Gospell yea we all though not in the same measure seeke the reformatioÌ„ of that that at the Lordes time shalbe reformed to a further growth and beautie in the bodie of Iesus Christ which is the Church Therefore notwithstanding your slaunder vpon examination it wil appeare that those in Englande which are slaundered with the name of detestable Heretiques are farre from the heresie most readie to condemne it or whatsoeuer is contrarie to the publique doctrine of faith mainteined by the present Lawes of the lande which doctrine is pure and holy and agreeable to the most holy word of God which the Lorde continue for his names sake with peace vpon Israel But to returne to the Censurer hee addeth a manifest vntruth saying that all the former heresies ioyne against the Romish Church in receiuing the scripture onely To wade no further the familie of loue which you cite are against you who haue their seuerall Gospell of the kingdome they build vpon the cursed thrise cursed bookes of H.N. also they scorne the scripture learned and in their loue to you acknowledge y e ministerie of y â— word to come froÌ„ the Pope Therefore they do neyther cleaue only to y â— scriptures nor liue in such mislike of your superstitions Nowe for the matter if your argument be good Heretiques cleaue to the word onely therefore it is naught you may aswell conclude that we must not alleadge the Scriptures at all because they alleadge them we must not dispute at all because they dispute which conclusions are all absurd For heretiques eate and drinke they clothe them selues all which are lawfull for all men to doe therefore not whatsoeuer they doe but whatsoeuer they doe as heretiques that is a marke of heresie Furthermore to proue wantes in the worde of God you demaunde howe it commeth to passe that the Scripture doeth not ende controuersies among heretiques I answere they are in the faulte as you also like heretiques are by resisting the trueth the worde is not to bee charged with any want But let me moue the like question and haue your Censure touching the doubt You that haue the Scriptures the Councils the Fathers you that haue Philosophie moreouer and stories and which is most of all the Popes breast and the fulnesse of the spirite you bragge off howe commeth it to passe that you haue not yet compounded your trouble some and long controuersie whether the virgin Marie was conceyued without originall sinne or no If the euidences you so stande vpon cannot in so long time ende so small a matter what will they be able to proue in the great questions of saluation Agayne hedemauÌ„deth how such heresies can be yf y â— truth be so cleare For triall of the truth a manifest proofe what power there is in Gods worde there must be heresies and schismes and God hath alwayes suffered false prophets teachers for a iust punishment of those that loue not the trueth neuerthelesse the Scripture is cleare and plaine where God giueth an eare to heare and a heart to vnderstand if it be hidden it is hidden to them that are lost But you that once or twice beate at mee as one whose zeale ranne before his witte staye your selfe Doe you y â— make no conscience to diminish the authoritie of the worde of God crye out agaynst vs if wee refuse the determination of men will you that haue alreadie in diuers plates pleaded against y â— sufficiencie of Scriptures now pleade for Philosophie Doctours and Councils as able to end al controuersies ratifie your title If we call you onely to the worde not the bare woord but adorned and richly attired with all fulnes of light and trueth the cleerest interpreter of it selfe doe wee in calling you hither depriue you of your euidences and witnesses seeking thereby to set you together by the â—ares for the title I knowe no euidences but the worde no witnesses but the holy Prophets and Apostles if your kingdome can not iustifie it selfe by these euidences and witnesses let her bee condemned by them for euer Your beadroule of fathers naming heretiques y â— abused y â— Scriptures I tooke not the tale of them they are brought in as vnnecessary witnesses of a matter alreadie answered not in question Lastly you conclude that we drawe in one line with the most cursed heretiques and you make them our progenitors because we appeale to the worde of God as the onely teacher and iudge in causes of religion If this be a faulte let it be required at our hande if it be your horrible slaunder against the worde and agaynst the Saints of God for giuing due honour thereunto y â— Lord require it at your handes in the defence of his owne glorie Touching Christian Franken TOuching Christian Franken which is the last of your foure partes it appeareth he hath vsed a true reporte agaynst the Iesuites because as hee assured him selfe before hande yet no man hath denyed the idolatries the superstitious and heathenish exercises wherewith he doth so plainly charge them As for the first part of your answere hereunto it standeth altogether vpon false argumentes as that He departeth from the sect of Iesuites therfore he is an apostata He discouereth their wicked superstition therefore he reuileth al catholike religion Austen confesseth that hee knew none worse then they that fel in Monastical life while he liued therfore FrankeÌ„ must be one of them All these conclusions are barely affirmed without proofe therefore may be truely denied without any further answere Notwithstanding it is to bee noted that againe you find no fitter taunt against M. Luther and Iohn Bale then to call them Friers and therefore you repeate the matter True it is they were Friers but forgiue them that fault seeing they did cast away their habit and kept a better course An other reproch followeth in charging vs plainely with coyning the newes of Rome and with suspition to haue coyned Frankens Dialogue whereunto I answere if we haue not coyned you haue And as for AusteÌ„s place it maketh for him against whome it is alleadged and against them in whose defence you bring it For if in Austens time with some good this Monasticall life brought forth others so euill that none were worse and hath declined euer since it was time for Franken to come out from the middest of you If so long ago in such puritie of the Church as was in Austens time the Monasteries did bring forth y â— worst men of
people in that Citie Did he note your two Popes two P 〈…〉 s together at 〈◊〉 time yea somtime three somtime foure Popes who 〈◊〉 the Chatre sometime at Rome sometime at 〈◊〉 sometime in other places Did hee euer consider that they which 〈◊〉 the storie of these men can not agree either in the number nor in the succession of these your Popes Any one of all these or of many other matters written by your selues being well coÌ„sidered might haue bene a weightie cause to keepe him from that fall For these bishops many of them succeeded with such wicked conditions and for so wicked purposes that their succession may shewe out matter to proue them rather the race of Antichrist and the spirit of fornications which long agoe beganne to worke the mysterie of iniquitie but hath nowe made vp all the measures thereof so that the prophesie is fulfilled that Antichrist in the succession of his ministers exalteth him selfe against all that is called God or is worshipped and sitteth in the Temple boasting him selfe that he iâ— God This is that succession of Antichrist which is glorious in the eyes of flesh and bloud and therefore made Woodeman depart from Christ whom whosoeuer wil folowe must euery day take vp his Crosse and folow him 3 As for his third reason of miracles in the Popishe Church I leaue it as very false insufficient Notwithstanding some I graunt wil beleeue if a man come from the dead which wil not beleeue Moses and the Prophets The kingdome and Church of Christ was planted in the power of doctrine and miracles and also by the power of the holy Ghost while Christ and his Apostles liued Now it is against faith if any looke for miracles to confirme the Gospell againe which is already so confirmed that an Angel from heauen or any miracle worker perswading otherwise must bee accürsed By miracles it is an easie thing to deceiue and bee deceiued seeing Satan to that purpose changeth himselfe into an Angell of light Such were many of the lying miracles not onely printed from Rome but receiued and registred at Rome and thrust vpon mens consciences to beleeue being matters that might easely drawe them headlonges into all error and idolatrie as was prophesied of this kingdome of Antichrist and hath no we appeared by the lamentable effect Therefore his third reason was to weake to haue drawen him froÌ„ the Church of Christ if he had bene tied to it but with one bande of loue to the trueth and power of doctrine 4 Xilanders fourth reason dath huâ—â—â—e vp and confound many reasons As that he was moued with the authoritie of the vniuersall of the visible and of the Catholique Church where like a good plaine dealer he left out that which he founde not in the Romish Church namely holinesse And what are all the rest without this holinesse Againe of those three notes that moued his falling off two are all one in worde and sense For the worde vniuersal and the word Catholique are as these two wordes Wodeman and Xilander which do not signifie two but one and the same thing That the Church of God must alwaies haue a visible and glorious Maiestie vpon the earth is not yet proued Also that the Church of Rome was neuer Catholique or vniuersall as it pretendeth the Churches of y â— East while they florished the Greeke Churches such as remayne at this day doe make sufficient proofe Againe we receiue the Scriptures from God hee by inspiration hath giuen them and hath alwayes kept them in his arke and the Philistins could not keepe the Arke from vs. The pretended victorie ouer heresies must be proued before it be admitted for a reason I graunt the Romish Church hath had a victorie and a tryumph in outwarde shewe ouer many thousand Saints most cruelly murdered for the trueth But ouer heresies it tryumphed not but in the time of her chastitie before the Lorde had giuen her a bill of diuorce after which time shee embrewed her selfe in the bloud of the Saintes and became the mother of all fornications With his other reasons hee linketh Saint Augustines saying so often misalleadged to proue the authoritie of the Church aboue the Scriptures that he woulde not beleeue the Gospel but onely vpon the Churches authoritie By these wordes his minde was not to determine which had greater authoritie the Church or the Scriptures but to declare against the Maniches in his owne practise what brought him first to esteeme the worde at his conuersion from inâ—â—deâ—tie The authoritie and consent of the Church may in such a case perswade one to receyue the worde which being receyued is of it selfe founde to be greater then that which first perâ—â—â—ded Thus of many reasons heaped vp together in y â— fourth place there is not founde one good The Romish Church was neuer vniuerfall or Catholike but particular and of â—ne â—erritorie though by vsurpatioâ—it enlarged her selfe by litle and little and the visiblenes therof is nothing for the true Church of the elect is inâ—isible Moreouer as I declared it neuer triumphed ouer heretikes it hath not any peculiar custodie of the Scriptures neyther dorth the authoritie of the Gospel depende vpon hir ratification being authenticall of it selfe Therefore al these reasons and put them together coulde not open the least dore for his departure if he had euer beene placed within the Church 5 The fift reason is that the Romish Church is the true Church because many that liued there are nowe Saintes in heauen and namely Dominic and Frauncis as Xilander doeth imagine I say as before there was a time when Ephraim spake there was trembling he exalted him selfe in Israel but he hath sinned in Baal and is dead Neuerthelesse seeing Xilander went so farre for a fift reason let vs examine what he hath brought There is no doubt saith he but Dominiâ— Fraâ—ncis and others are Saintes in heauen therefore it cannot bee that they liued in errour Who hath made it out of doubt to vs that they are in heauen seeing there are writte 〈…〉 many 〈…〉 dent lyes and blasphemies of them in the Legenda and that most detestable Alcaron called the booke of confo 〈…〉 who will beleeue that Dominic raysed the dead which you teach Who can heare or reade those your blasphemies in making Fryer Frauncis an other Iesu in type and figure matching him w t Christ froÌ„ poynt to poynt and his miracles with Christs myracles If the Censurer had not menâ—ioned Frauncis the Fryer among his saints it myght haue beene hoped the Iesuites would refourme that booke or rather condemne it to the pit of hell But to returne to Xilanders argument it is a very bad one prouing the lesser doubt by the greater For it is not so great a doubt what those famous Fryers taught as whether they be in heauen Neuerthelesse if it were out of doubt they are in heauen yet
I answere If the learned erre not knowing the scriptures the vnlearned are in more danger of errour through the same want Secondly if the want were not noted in all the supplie shoulde not be made and commanded to all but all euen the people are commaunded to search the Scriptures therefore not to search them or to bee ignoraunt of them is a fault in al be they learned or vnlearned Your argumeÌ„t that Christ shoulde speake onely to the Sadduces and of the resurrection because it is added you know not the power of God is alreadie answered for it is a generall fault aswell to bee ignorant of the power of God as not to knowe the Scriptures Therefore as the ignorance of the one is condemned in all so is the ignorance of the other and the remedie for both is found in the exercise and search of the holy scriptures Your similitude of woordes spoken as by my Lorde Chauncellor to the doctors of the Arches is vnlearned for with an example of speach concerning a speciall matter you would ouerthrow that which was spokeÌ„ by Christ of a generall cause But let your example stande As the studie of the ciuill lawe is proper to all Lawyers and therefore their lawe bookes to bee read and studied of all Lawyers so the studie of the spirituall and heauenly Lawe is the profession of all christians and therefore the bookes of that law to be read and studied by all professors of the same because to erre not knowing the Scriptures is a thing common to all men as was declared An example of the lyke had bene nothing for your purpose as if my Lorde Chauncellor should say to some Iesuites Yee runne into daunger of treason not knowing the Law against al those that withdrawe the Queenes subiects from their naturall obedience to her Maiestie this should be a note not only to those Iesuites but to al whatsoeuer they be Iesuites or Seminaries or massepriestes or what persons soeuer y â— they must eyther knowe and keepe the lawe or incurre the punishment therein expressed agaynst the offenders Vse good wordes of your countreymen clowne them not for though they bee simple and not trayned in the studie of good letters yet they haue soules to bee fed with the woord and howsoeuer you prayse the Colliers fayth and would put it in execution they are to take heede they find not Christs word verefied against theÌ„ aswell as against y â— Sadduces Ye erre not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God In the eyght article the Iesuites are reported to say That the righteous man liueth by fayth he hath it not in Christ but by his owne workes First in this question I am charged with vntrueth for the Iesuites haue no such thing as the Censurer affirmeth For answere in this behalfe I referre you to my author whose wordes being truely reported the charge you laye vpon mee is causelesse and must returne But what is this stil to denie the articles to mayntaine quarell and yet to auowe the doctrine to defende the Iesuites Your owne wordes teache that a mans workes are meritorious in Christ and meanes to make him righteous with the seconde righteousnesse as you call it which is playnely to graunt the doctrine denyed before For although you vsey â— name of Christ in this question yet the Apostle coÌ„cludeth that you impute your saluation not to Christ but to your owne workes I testifie sayeth the Apostle speaking of them that dyd not exclude Christ that if yee bee circumcised Christ doeth nothing profit you teaching thereby that whosoeuer will in any part bee righteous in them selues can haue no righteousnesse in Iesus Christ Therefore there was no cause of your impudent lyes You come next to the place auouched for confutation of this errour If righteousnesse come by our workes it is not nowe grace This sentence you truely conster as alledged by mee to prooue that no man 〈◊〉 can bee ryghteous in this life which you say is both from the purpose and false But if the woordes be ful of proofe to shewe there is no righteousnesse in mans woorkes if it be the manifest doctrine of the Apostle what coulde more fitly conuince the blasphemie derogating from the righteousnesse which is by Christ and arrogating to our owne workes then that place which sheweth there is no righteousnesse in our workes but in Christ alone which is imputed to vs by grace onely Nowe let vs see how false it is This you woulde proue by a distinction of a double righteousnesse the first of being called from infidelitie to gayth in Christ which you say is onely of Gods mercie and nor by any merit of our workes the seconde righteousnesse is of such workes as proceede from men after the former calling if they remayne in grace But if this reede whereupon you leane be broken you must needes confesse the former proofe against you to be both pertinent and true For this purpose it is to be considered that as there was but one blessing shewed to Isaac so there is but one onely righteousnes which is not founde in any person or subiect but in our Sauiour Christ Iesus alone This righteousnesse is accounted and imputed to all those that beleeue as their owne In which imputation it is needefull to consider the proportion betweene y t redeemer his redeemed for it giueth great light to this questiâ— As in Christ there was found no cause of death at al yet hee died onely by imputation of our sin so in vs there is fouÌ„d no cause of life at al yet we shal liue onely by imputation of his righteousnes The like proportion is betweene the couenant in the law and the couenant of faith in Christ for as y â— law admitteth no transgression if a man will liue by it so Christ admitteth no satisfaction or merit to ioyne 〈◊〉 his perfect merits if any man will liue by him that y â— whole woorke of our saluation may be of y e grace of God in Christ Iesus the auâ—thour and fynisher of our fayth But to proue this righteousnesse one there is a place to the Romanes in the which the righteousnesse wherby God saueth the beleeuers is called the righâ—eousnes of God and said to be that which is reuealed in the Gospell This is the righteousnesse of faith as the Apostle proueth out of the Prophet witnessing that the righteous maÌ„ liueth by faith which place proueth there is but one righteousnesse of men not onely because the Apostle speaketh of it as one but in naming it expressely the righteousnesse of God and giuing to this faith both righteousnesse and life For if the righteousnesse of faith be the righteousnesse of God that is such as God accompteth for righteousnesse which may also stand before him and make vs holy in his sight what second righteousnesse can there be or what can it doe before God that is
Take ye Eate ye bynde them What moued you here to cite your Clement Ambrose Cyprian with others I knowe not except it were some meriment to ioyne with your similitude of singing for in good earnest you minde not by those places without matter in them to proue that the wordes of Christ Doe this in remembrance of me were onely saide to the Ministers touching Consecration and not to the people also for their participation In the twelfth Article the Iesuites are reported to say Traditions are of equall authoritie with the worde of God wee must beleeue them though they bee manifestly against the Scripture Here the reporte and the texte vouched to disproue their doctrine are both censured The first for adding we must beleeue them though they be manifestly against the Scripture for reporting the rest so generally and confusedly Touching y â— latter point if my report of your doctrine be in these wordes Traditions are of equall authoritie with the worde of God meaning it of some only for who would thinke it of all you hauing so many and so feeble why doe you charge mee as generally and confusedly saying al traditions are equal with y â— scriptures Was it I pray you to deserue your owne note of a sounde lye for a parting blowe which false mis 〈…〉 you haue doubled to make it the sounder For aunswere to the former poyut I doe not onely auow that I haue faythfully reported my authors wordes which is alwayes my iust defence against your vniust flaunder laying them vpon me but I say further that their practise compared with their wordes will â—ustifie the report as truely layde downe against them For proofe whereof not to goe further the Censurer rehearseth amongest these traditions which the Popish Church charge our faith withall the number of the bookes of Scripture the Lent fast Of al other traditions these two are taken out to stande for their owne credit and for the credit of the rest let vs therefore see what treasons there are against God in these your traditions First the Apocrypha bookes are not in the auncient Canon or language of Canaan the fathers haue disauowed them they are euidently repugnant to the doctrine of the holy scriptures and dis 〈…〉 eeing among them selues Yet your Trent conspirarie doeth adde them to the number of the Canonical bookes and bolde all men accursed that holde them not for canonicall scriptures Therefore this your tradition is manifestly against the word of God Further also what is more manifest against the woorde of God then the doctrine of deuils The Lent fast as you commaunde to keepe it for conscience sake forbidding meates created of God to bee taken with thankesgiuing is plainly called a doctrine of deuils Furthermore your opinion is playnely deliuered to be with this distinction Ecclesiasticall traditions are of no greater authoritie then the writings and other decrees of the Church and Apostles traditions are of no lesse authoritie then if they had bene written by them or then are the other thinges which they wrote This is confusedly taught and needeth yet more plainenesse for not all orders deliuered by the Apostles are to bee kept perpetually and vnchangeably of like authoritie with the doctrine of the Gospell which they preached The Apostolique doctrine is perpetuall subiect to no varietie of persons of times or places but some traditioÌ„s that is some orders are altered as that in the acts where they commaunde to absteine from strangled and from blood for it appeareth that the Apostles commanded not this for a perpetuall order alwayes inuiolably to be obserued but onely for a time to auoids offences which cause ceasing the order or tradition was no longer in force Againe some orders might be set downe by them for comlinesse which yet were not to be beleeued as necessary partes of saluation nor yet to remayne for euer in that forme or kynde and therefore can not be matched with the Apostolique doctrine of fayth which is euer al one and which whosoeuer beleeueth not cannot bee saued Nowe touching your pretensed Apostolicall traditions I vtterly denie that there are any such beside those which are euidently shewed or by iust consequence fitly gathered out of the written worde For what so euer is necessary to saluation is in this sort to be proued by the holy Scriptures Therefore your Censureshippe dyd well to adde If they be certaynly descended from Christ and his Apostles But how can this I pray you be certaynely knowen but by the holy writings can any other custome or testimonie assure your consciences what came vndoubtedly from Christ or what from his Apostles Is there any one of your traditions that you can vouch to descend from so sufficient authors otherwise then by report of insufficient witnesses What is it then for you to boast of inuincible arguments to proue diuers doctrines not written but left by woorde of mouth onely whereas you bryng nothing but counterfeyt Couneils erring Fathers fabulous stories and Apocrypha scriptures This is right the bragging Apostle and a shewe of the vaine chalenger Yf a man coulde be feared with the guilte of your armour or with your plume of feathers you woulde bee a worthie champion wounding more with a vayne feare then with the force of your shrinking arme In this encounter of al your profes you haue sorted out two the first is out of that excellent chapter to the Thessalonians conteining a prophecie and reuelation of Antichrist For an answere to which place it is first to be vnderstoode that the worde Tradition in the Apostles speach commeth as it doth in Latin of a verbe to deliuer so that whatsoeuer y â— Apostle deliuered to the Churches those were the traditions hee lefte with them Therefore I denie that Paule doth in any place by tradition signifie any vnwritten veritie but that as in other places he vnderstandeth the doctrine of the Gospel which in the sundrye partes thereof he deliuered This appeareth apparauntly by the place so cited for your purpose without regarde of any more then the worde Tradition For in the verses nexte before the Apostle maketh mention of the Thessalonians faith to the trueth saying God hath called you thereunto by our Gospell to obteyne the glory of our Lorde Iesus Christ and therupon inferreth this conclusion now therefore brethren stand fast holde the tradition which you haue learned eyther by worde or by our epistle Whereby it plainly appeareth that the traditions or thinges deliuered by him partly by word and partly by writing were the diuers partes of the Gospell which hee had taught them Wherefore the written woorde affordeth you no proofe for vnwritten verities The seconde is of doctrines which you say wee holde not by record of writing but by word of mouth from Christ and his Apostles as for example baptisme of infants celebratioÌ„ of Sunday y â— number of y â— bookes of scripture the fast of
in other questioÌ„s it appeareth that either you are ashamed of your owne doctrine or els you will not defende it in such sort as you teach it least the vantage should be euen in your own opinion too open and too great against you Also it commeth to bee noted howe you huddle the karuer of an image that is cursed with a printer and an image that is an abhomination with the holy Bible as if it were all one to make an image of God and print the worde of God Secondly being herein coÌ„trarie to your self you vndertake to proue that creatures may be worshipped and as if the matter were out of doubt you demand what we will say to the worship done vnto the Arke vnto the Cherubins vnto the Serpent of brasse For some shewe of proofe you alledge the fiue twentieth of Exodus the 45. Psal mistaken by you for the 99. In the place of Exodus there is no woorde leading vs to worshippe but onely a commandement of making the Arke and the Cherubin of such fashion as is there prescribed If wee condemned all vse of grauing or painting this myght haue serued your turne but speaking only against your worshipping of creatures it maketh nothing against vs or to iustifie your idolatrie The place of Dauid doth not shewe what we must worship but where we must worshippe euen at the footestoole of the Lorde with all humilitie being there prostrate vpon the ground and humbled before him The other two places of Numb the 21. and Iohn 3. are brought by you to proue the worshippe of the brasen serpent In which places there is no such matter but a commandement as before to make it set it vpon a perch that it might bee the better seene with a promise that they which had beene slung with firie serpentes if they looked vpon the brasen serpent should receiue their health Now except to looke vpon a thing be to worship it here is no place at all to prooue that you saye If you had cited the place out of the kinges there is a cleare testimonie that the brasen Serpent was worshipped but it made not for your purpose seeing good Ezechias in the same place did therefore breake it downe because it was worshipped Thus you may see what we haue to say out of the worde against your false suggestions and against your mistaking and misconstruing the Scriptures But this place and that of Iohn were answered in the sixt Article The second to the Philippians sheweth a great iudgement and skill in you it is there written thus of Christ God hath exalted him and giuen him a name which is aboue euery name that at the name of Iesus euery knee should bow of things in heauen of things on the earth and things vnder the earth Hereupon you gather first that the name of Iesus is to be worshipped so as at the hearing of it we should bow our knees Now if this bowing be due to y â— sound of a name which is but a creature then in your iudgement some creature is to bee worshipped and so consequently such as your Censureship shall appoint But as when you spake of the Cherubines you were not vnder the winges of y â— Cherubines nor being before y â— Arke receiued any Oracle so now though you speake of the Lorde Iesus exalted to the right hand of his Father yet you are neuer a whit neerer drawen vnto him nor vnderstand what his glorie meaneth The name of Iesus is here no creature to feede the eare as an image feedeth the eye which is your distinction borowed with the rest our of Lindane but it signifieth the soueraigne power and authoritie which Christ hath receiued ouer all creatures both in heauen and in earth as appeareth in the same place where it is saide that God hath giuen him a name aboue euery name and in the eleuenth where hee speaketh of confessing Iesus Christ to be the Lorde The â—owing of the knee is not that which these words in their proper signification declare for how should it agree to Angels and other creatures which haue no kneeâ— as men haue but obedience and subiection is figuratiuely noted by this outward signe of obedience vsed among men The meaning therefore of the Apostle is to shewe that our Sauiour Christ when he had humbled and as it were empâ—â—ed him selfe for our sakes and became as nothing that was all was afterward exalted euen as hee was man aboue all creatures hauing soueraigne power and authoritie giuen him ouer all so that all creatures are made subiect to his commaundement This being the meaning of the Apostle that I may not returne home your wilfull and malitious termes I leaue to shewe what good grace you had in alleadging this text for your purpose But the Lord reforme it thus you are constrained ignorantly or wilfully to straine and constraine the holy Scriptures when you haue once set down a resolution to maintaine errour Neuerthelesse as I noted the Scripture is not commaunded or made to serue for euery frame as a leaden rule it is not pliable to serue euery purpose as a nose of warâ— but freeth it selfe from all inâ—uries and conâ—â—â—ueth the same course to condemne all errour and iustifie the trueth for euer As for Austens place your notes deceâ—â—ed you for he is farre from allowing idol or image worship neyther can you finde any such speache to mainteine your idolâ—â—rie as is allâ—aged Austen hath some such words as you aâ—â—eadge but in an other booke and to another purpose for after a disputation against images and idols hee speaketh of the signes and sac 〈…〉 s of the Church which represent the Lord vnto vs not as images but as signes seales ordeyned of God to informe strengtheÌ„ our vnderstanding in y e faith Further you giue a Censure vpon this that I call the image of Christ an Idol I knowe in it selfe it is a creature and an idol is nothing in the worlde but as the image imagined of God is an idol and the worshippers thereof idolaters which is prooued by the first to the Romanes so the Image of Christ worshipped by you is an idol of yours and you are idolaters for woorshipping of it As for the curse of Ladie Irenes Councill wherewith you threaten me because it fleeth away like a birde I feare it not But I heartily wish you to feare his curse who hath threatned idolaters w t that lake that burneth as you know froÌ„ which your â—uilet of Image and Idol of Dulia worship Latria worship wil not be able to deliuer you but a true repentance onely conuersion from the worshippe of idols to the seruice of the true and liuing God which notwithstanding all your tauntes and want of your promised Christian charitie the Lorde vouchsafe to worke in you by his powerfull worde and mightie spirit I can not altogether content my selfe thus
knowledge how to distinguish aright But what is this to proue all distinctions good euen those that Iesuites make only to auoyde the power of trueth Simples generally are good seruing for the health of man but what is this to proue those euill simples good which haue lost their vertue and which an euill Apothecarie may serue in place of good for a triall of the Iesuites distinctions you referre me to their disputation but I may haue a sufficient triall of them and of their disputation before hand in this your booke if there were no other proofe to iustifie my report As you would bring your quilits into credit so you labour to bring my arguments and interpretations into discredit as lying and false but in a good conscience and according to the trueth I haue auowed them true and good as will easely appeare to the indiffereÌ„t reader You that before made me much inferiour to Edmund Campion now make mee inferiour to thousandes of the Iesuites scholers Whatsoeuer I am to the meanest of them the Lorde I trust wil inable me to mainteine his trueth euen against Campion your great champion to say nothing of his disciples I confesse your distinctions offend 〈…〉 as being full of 〈…〉 ltie and sometimes so darke and vnlearned that there appeareth neither good cause nor good vse of them yet you take it to heart that I should account them vnlearned and peruish As for the accusatioÌ„ of Iude against the despisers of good 〈◊〉 ses it was corrupcly brought against mee for reiecting your sophisticall deuises against the trueth for proofe whereof I referre me to these your distinctions chosen out of many for your purpose which one excepted are all vnlearned and peeuish seruing to put darkenesse for 〈…〉 ght and â—â—olâ—trie in place of Gods seruice For as they that distinguish not where the word hath distinguished may soone fall into schisme and heresie so also you in distinguishing where the worde admitteth no distinction do offend in like â—orâ— and with no lesse danger There is you lay cleare difference betweene an Idol and an image Surely this is somwhat that you saye for an idol is the image of the superstitious Gentiles and an image is the 〈…〉 and 〈◊〉 named Christians There is I graunt a cleare difference in the letters but no difference at all in the word no more then is betweene Omnipotent and Almightie For to passe by Phauorine Hesychius and some places in Plutarch who all make these two wordes of one signification Plato maketh the matter most euident who mouing a question what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be maketh this answere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is manifest we will make answere that those things are idoles which are seene in water and in looking glasses and those moreouer that are painted or set out in types or portratures other things of this sort whatsoeuer By these words of Plato the Censurer may learne that any image carued paynted represented by a glasse or seene in water is among the Grecians where the worde is in his owne countrie and proper vse called an Idol Tullie moreouer who could aswell iudge of the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and of the Latine word image as the Censurer be in his translatioÌ„ maketh them one Lastly to returne to the holy Scriptures God in the second Commandement forbiddeth both the making and worshipping of an Image to represent the true God or any of the false Gods Thus much to she we your vnlearned and most vntrue distinction betweene an Image and an Idol which you and your fellowes repeate so often and vrge so much You doe it to vpholde Idoles vnder a more honest title of Images as you suppose but as they differ not in name so in nature they are all one euen stumbling blockes of offence the worshippers whereof are open idolaters I am taught by the word of GOD that there were materiall and are still spiritual sacrifices in the Church but for sinne I read y â— there is no sacrifice without bloud So that your second distinction of bloudie and vnbloudy sacrifices is plainly against scripture Iustice by faith wee acknowledge but merite by workes is proued to be against the worde So the mediation of Christ is according to faith but your intercession of saintes against the scripture For who is more mercifull then the Lorde that he may saue or who more ready to heare vs that he may be the Lordes remembranceâ— faith that beleeueth the promise and hope that patiently wayteth for the issue of faith we acknowledge and the distinction I haue layde downe in the ninth article Your counterfeit traditions of men and of the Apostles are al without warrant in the causes necessary to saluation But why haue you left out the distinction of the two worshippings Latria to God and Dulia to images Is it left out because wee condenine it and you now allowe no more of it All these distinctions are most daungerous when you will with some distinction or change of a name reteine still the same iniquitie forging such wicked deuises of man to disanull the truth of God Therfore they are but your vntrue assertions and vaine bragges that you distinguishe things into their proper natures that you can proue eche part of your distinction consonant to the word of God that when you haue so distinguished wee haue no more to saie that wee bewray our ignorance and finally that the truth is made manifest to euery mans eyes When any one of these fiue definitiue sentences is proued true I will acknowledge the rest I much maruaile that in such vanting speach you would not set down one true assertion of so many But you care not what you say to reproche the godly making account that your owne side will take it in good part be it neuer so vntrue neuer so reprochfull The fourth argument touching the libertie of your pen I haue answered already but I answere further you may haue it without print and if that will not content you there are printes inough neerer hande beyonde seas where you are if we may beleeue you so often affirming it The daunger persecution you speake of is a fruite of your murmuring spirits complaining without a cause For you go safely away w t many matters as much as you coÌ„playne against vs openly as intercepting all your bookes other Popish stuffe I thinke you doe much more brag among your selues of many escapes But if you had as many prints as you can set a worke what can you of lesser giftes write that the most learned of your side haue not written long agoe as Ecchius Pighius Hosius and which nowe Turrianus Andradius doenot furboish in a vaine hope at last to make an ende of Sifyphus labour What issue all these haue had of coursing discoursing againe the questious betweene you and vs we may consider it with great ioy of heart