Take ye Eate ye bynde them What moued you here to cite your Clement Ambrose Cyprian with others I knowe not except it were some meriment to ioyne with your similitude of singing for in good earnest you minde not by those places without matter in them to proue that the wordes of Christ Doe this in remembrance of me were onely saide to the Ministers touching Consecration and not to the people also for their participation In the twelfth Article the Iesuites are reported to say Traditions are of equall authoritie with the worde of God wee must beleeue them though they bee manifestly against the Scripture Here the reporte and the texte vouched to disproue their doctrine are both censured The first for adding we must beleeue them though they be manifestly against the Scripture for reporting the rest so generally and confusedly Touching y â— latter point if my report of your doctrine be in these wordes Traditions are of equall authoritie with the worde of God meaning it of some only for who would thinke it of all you hauing so many and so feeble why doe you charge mee as generally and confusedly saying al traditions are equal with y â— scriptures Was it I pray you to deserue your owne note of a sounde lye for a parting blowe which false mis 〈…〉 you haue doubled to make it the sounder For aunswere to the former poyut I doe not onely auow that I haue faythfully reported my authors wordes which is alwayes my iust defence against your vniust flaunder laying them vpon me but I say further that their practise compared with their wordes will â—ustifie the report as truely layde downe against them For proofe whereof not to goe further the Censurer rehearseth amongest these traditions which the Popish Church charge our faith withall the number of the bookes of Scripture the Lent fast Of al other traditions these two are taken out to stande for their owne credit and for the credit of the rest let vs therefore see what treasons there are against God in these your traditions First the Apocrypha bookes are not in the auncient Canon or language of Canaan the fathers haue disauowed them they are euidently repugnant to the doctrine of the holy scriptures and dis 〈…〉 eeing among them selues Yet your Trent conspirarie doeth adde them to the number of the Canonical bookes and bolde all men accursed that holde them not for canonicall scriptures Therefore this your tradition is manifestly against the word of God Further also what is more manifest against the woorde of God then the doctrine of deuils The Lent fast as you commaunde to keepe it for conscience sake forbidding meates created of God to bee taken with thankesgiuing is plainly called a doctrine of deuils Furthermore your opinion is playnely deliuered to be with this distinction Ecclesiasticall traditions are of no greater authoritie then the writings and other decrees of the Church and Apostles traditions are of no lesse authoritie then if they had bene written by them or then are the other thinges which they wrote This is confusedly taught and needeth yet more plainenesse for not all orders deliuered by the Apostles are to bee kept perpetually and vnchangeably of like authoritie with the doctrine of the Gospell which they preached The Apostolique doctrine is perpetuall subiect to no varietie of persons of times or places but some traditioÌ„s that is some orders are altered as that in the acts where they commaunde to absteine from strangled and from blood for it appeareth that the Apostles commanded not this for a perpetuall order alwayes inuiolably to be obserued but onely for a time to auoids offences which cause ceasing the order or tradition was no longer in force Againe some orders might be set downe by them for comlinesse which yet were not to be beleeued as necessary partes of saluation nor yet to remayne for euer in that forme or kynde and therefore can not be matched with the Apostolique doctrine of fayth which is euer al one and which whosoeuer beleeueth not cannot bee saued Nowe touching your pretensed Apostolicall traditions I vtterly denie that there are any such beside those which are euidently shewed or by iust consequence fitly gathered out of the written worde For what so euer is necessary to saluation is in this sort to be proued by the holy Scriptures Therefore your Censureshippe dyd well to adde If they be certaynly descended from Christ and his Apostles But how can this I pray you be certaynely knowen but by the holy writings can any other custome or testimonie assure your consciences what came vndoubtedly from Christ or what from his Apostles Is there any one of your traditions that you can vouch to descend from so sufficient authors otherwise then by report of insufficient witnesses What is it then for you to boast of inuincible arguments to proue diuers doctrines not written but left by woorde of mouth onely whereas you bryng nothing but counterfeyt Couneils erring Fathers fabulous stories and Apocrypha scriptures This is right the bragging Apostle and a shewe of the vaine chalenger Yf a man coulde be feared with the guilte of your armour or with your plume of feathers you woulde bee a worthie champion wounding more with a vayne feare then with the force of your shrinking arme In this encounter of al your profes you haue sorted out two the first is out of that excellent chapter to the Thessalonians conteining a prophecie and reuelation of Antichrist For an answere to which place it is first to be vnderstoode that the worde Tradition in the Apostles speach commeth as it doth in Latin of a verbe to deliuer so that whatsoeuer y â— Apostle deliuered to the Churches those were the traditions hee lefte with them Therefore I denie that Paule doth in any place by tradition signifie any vnwritten veritie but that as in other places he vnderstandeth the doctrine of the Gospel which in the sundrye partes thereof he deliuered This appeareth apparauntly by the place so cited for your purpose without regarde of any more then the worde Tradition For in the verses nexte before the Apostle maketh mention of the Thessalonians faith to the trueth saying God hath called you thereunto by our Gospell to obteyne the glory of our Lorde Iesus Christ and therupon inferreth this conclusion now therefore brethren stand fast holde the tradition which you haue learned eyther by worde or by our epistle Whereby it plainly appeareth that the traditions or thinges deliuered by him partly by word and partly by writing were the diuers partes of the Gospell which hee had taught them Wherefore the written woorde affordeth you no proofe for vnwritten verities The seconde is of doctrines which you say wee holde not by record of writing but by word of mouth from Christ and his Apostles as for example baptisme of infants celebratioÌ„ of Sunday y â— number of y â— bookes of scripture the fast of
knowledge how to distinguish aright But what is this to proue all distinctions good euen those that Iesuites make only to auoyde the power of trueth Simples generally are good seruing for the health of man but what is this to proue those euill simples good which haue lost their vertue and which an euill Apothecarie may serue in place of good for a triall of the Iesuites distinctions you referre me to their disputation but I may haue a sufficient triall of them and of their disputation before hand in this your booke if there were no other proofe to iustifie my report As you would bring your quilits into credit so you labour to bring my arguments and interpretations into discredit as lying and false but in a good conscience and according to the trueth I haue auowed them true and good as will easely appeare to the indiffereÌ„t reader You that before made me much inferiour to Edmund Campion now make mee inferiour to thousandes of the Iesuites scholers Whatsoeuer I am to the meanest of them the Lorde I trust wil inable me to mainteine his trueth euen against Campion your great champion to say nothing of his disciples I confesse your distinctions offend 〈…〉 as being full of 〈…〉 ltie and sometimes so darke and vnlearned that there appeareth neither good cause nor good vse of them yet you take it to heart that I should account them vnlearned and peruish As for the accusatioÌ„ of Iude against the despisers of good 〈◊〉 ses it was corrupcly brought against mee for reiecting your sophisticall deuises against the trueth for proofe whereof I referre me to these your distinctions chosen out of many for your purpose which one excepted are all vnlearned and peeuish seruing to put darkenesse for 〈…〉 ght and â—â—olâ—trie in place of Gods seruice For as they that distinguish not where the word hath distinguished may soone fall into schisme and heresie so also you in distinguishing where the worde admitteth no distinction do offend in like â—orâ— and with no lesse danger There is you lay cleare difference betweene an Idol and an image Surely this is somwhat that you saye for an idol is the image of the superstitious Gentiles and an image is the 〈…〉 and 〈◊〉 named Christians There is I graunt a cleare difference in the letters but no difference at all in the word no more then is betweene Omnipotent and Almightie For to passe by Phauorine Hesychius and some places in Plutarch who all make these two wordes of one signification Plato maketh the matter most euident who mouing a question what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be maketh this answere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is manifest we will make answere that those things are idoles which are seene in water and in looking glasses and those moreouer that are painted or set out in types or portratures other things of this sort whatsoeuer By these words of Plato the Censurer may learne that any image carued paynted represented by a glasse or seene in water is among the Grecians where the worde is in his owne countrie and proper vse called an Idol Tullie moreouer who could aswell iudge of the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and of the Latine word image as the Censurer be in his translatioÌ„ maketh them one Lastly to returne to the holy Scriptures God in the second Commandement forbiddeth both the making and worshipping of an Image to represent the true God or any of the false Gods Thus much to she we your vnlearned and most vntrue distinction betweene an Image and an Idol which you and your fellowes repeate so often and vrge so much You doe it to vpholde Idoles vnder a more honest title of Images as you suppose but as they differ not in name so in nature they are all one euen stumbling blockes of offence the worshippers whereof are open idolaters I am taught by the word of GOD that there were materiall and are still spiritual sacrifices in the Church but for sinne I read y â— there is no sacrifice without bloud So that your second distinction of bloudie and vnbloudy sacrifices is plainly against scripture Iustice by faith wee acknowledge but merite by workes is proued to be against the worde So the mediation of Christ is according to faith but your intercession of saintes against the scripture For who is more mercifull then the Lorde that he may saue or who more ready to heare vs that he may be the Lordes remembranceâ— faith that beleeueth the promise and hope that patiently wayteth for the issue of faith we acknowledge and the distinction I haue layde downe in the ninth article Your counterfeit traditions of men and of the Apostles are al without warrant in the causes necessary to saluation But why haue you left out the distinction of the two worshippings Latria to God and Dulia to images Is it left out because wee condenine it and you now allowe no more of it All these distinctions are most daungerous when you will with some distinction or change of a name reteine still the same iniquitie forging such wicked deuises of man to disanull the truth of God Therfore they are but your vntrue assertions and vaine bragges that you distinguishe things into their proper natures that you can proue eche part of your distinction consonant to the word of God that when you haue so distinguished wee haue no more to saie that wee bewray our ignorance and finally that the truth is made manifest to euery mans eyes When any one of these fiue definitiue sentences is proued true I will acknowledge the rest I much maruaile that in such vanting speach you would not set down one true assertion of so many But you care not what you say to reproche the godly making account that your owne side will take it in good part be it neuer so vntrue neuer so reprochfull The fourth argument touching the libertie of your pen I haue answered already but I answere further you may haue it without print and if that will not content you there are printes inough neerer hande beyonde seas where you are if we may beleeue you so often affirming it The daunger persecution you speake of is a fruite of your murmuring spirits complaining without a cause For you go safely away w t many matters as much as you coÌ„playne against vs openly as intercepting all your bookes other Popish stuffe I thinke you doe much more brag among your selues of many escapes But if you had as many prints as you can set a worke what can you of lesser giftes write that the most learned of your side haue not written long agoe as Ecchius Pighius Hosius and which nowe Turrianus Andradius doenot furboish in a vaine hope at last to make an ende of Sifyphus labour What issue all these haue had of coursing discoursing againe the questious betweene you and vs we may consider it with great ioy of heart
the â—â—uching of the places for â—ontrarie dâ—â—trine is â—ensured for vnlearned huddling vp and confounding hope and faith as one thing which note of the Censure I may truely say came from no deepe knowledge A litle iudgement might haue serued your Censureship to discerne that the two places were not alledged to proue or disproue any thing of faith the ful certeinâ—ie wherof is proued against you by the certeinâ—iâ— of hope but to ouerthrowe that which the Iesuites say in the latter parte of the sentence against which these places serue plainely and expressely For what may more cleareâ—y proue against the Iesuites doctrine that hope neuer faileth then the Apostles wordes calling 〈◊〉 The ancre of the soule Where by he nâ—â—eth our fâ—eedoâ—e from danger in all stormes of â—entations â—idding out the time of this life wi 〈…〉 any 〈◊〉 oâ— feare and without any 〈…〉 touching 〈◊〉 〈…〉 heauen To shewe the force of this assurance the Apostle vseth very significatiue words calling it a sure and stable ancre and yet to make it so full that no feare or doubt may remayne he addeth that it entreth into the inwarde of the Vaile whereunto Christ is entred meaning thereby the heauens Which importeth as much as if hee shoulde say we that haue cast this Ancre aboue in heauen are so much more safe then they whose Ancre is cast downe into the Sea as the holde wee haue taken in heauen by the Ancre of hope is surer Yea the very Rockes shal sooner faile theÌ„ our hold settling vpon the strength truth of gods promise which are al Yea AmeÌ„ in Christ Iesus This our shoote Ancre of hope hath taken holde of the mercy seate of God and of the throne of grace which except some storme be able to remoue wee are in most ioyfull and stedfast safetie The like is promised by y e other place out of y e fifth to the Romanes for if hope maketh not ashamed and shame commeth when a man faileth of that be hoped for then hope can not faile The Apostle maketh this more strong by that which foiloweth as a reason The loue of God is abouÌ„danly shead out into our hearts by the holy Ghost which is giueÌ„ vnto vs. By which reason it appeareth except the holy Ghost hath giuen vs a wrong testimonie of the loue of God the hope which we haue conceiued thereby cannot deceiue vs. Thus you see these places so truely and fitly alledged that al your falsely named learning will not be able truely to answere the allegation of them which notwithstanding it pleaseth you to call vnlearned But let vs see what you call learning forsooth the doctrine of Iesuites touching the doubtfulnes and feare which is in hope that is true learned and cleare This is as the prophet complaineth to call good badde and sweete sower whereunto you know what belongeth For aunswere to these two places of hope the Iesuiteâ— doctrine is declared at large the effect of all standing in two pointes the first concerning faith the other of hope Of faith they teach that no man may beleeue that he in particular shalbe saued without a particular reuelatioÌ„ from God A faithlesse doctrine of faith and therefore not to bee lightly passed ouer You seeme to proue it by reasons one drawen from y t obiect of faith which is the word written or tradition whereof neither as you say doeth testifie mens saluation in particular the seconde taken from the vncertaintie of the things beleeued which as the Censurer supposeth doe depende vpon such conditions as possibly may not be perfourmed Both these great points for want of scripture he setteth foorth by examples as minding rather to perswade then to proue The first is of the answerer the seconde of the possibilitie to be damned as did fall out in Iudas and may fall out a more fearefull case then I woulde put of him had bee not put it of him selfe in the Censurer him selfe Nowe let vs consider what great learning the Iesuices haue in this their opinioÌ„ of faith as the Censureâ— doth report them To iudge that without particular reuelation by name no man can be sure of his saluation is expressely against that the woorde of God â—eacheth in this great question Therefore howe leraneâ— soeuer the Iesuites make them selues yet in deede as the Apostle speaketh of the wise Gentiles they become starke fooles not knowing true wisedome out of the worde but bastard wisedome by their foolish distinctions The Censurers worde of Tradition must bee reserued for a fitter place Touching the promise of the Gospell it is general whosoeuer beleeueth shall be saued the Censurer confesseth it This generall promise hath place and is certainely verefied in euery particular y t beleeueth Euery sensible maÌ„ without further learning may easely iudge in this doctrine whatsoeuer is true in y e general must needes be true in euery particular Nowe if it be vndoubtedly true that euery beleeuer shalbe saued it must needes bee also that Simeon and Lazarus beleeuing in Christ shalbe saued Therefore what needeth any speciall reuelation in the worde for that which is sufficiently comprehended vnder the generall what neede is there by name to saye from maÌ„ to man by name Lazarus shalbe saued Citus shalbe saued and 〈…〉 we shall be saued and so infinitely Or shall we say that God in respect of persons doth particularly assure some of their certaine saluation leauing all the rest to be tossed and caried vp and downe with feare and hope as a ship in the sea caried hither and thither with contrary winds Moreouer the very place cited by the Censurer as a particular reuelation was not particular but generall to all the disciples that beleeued by vertue of a more generall couenant made to all that beleeue whatsoeuer For to examine that place neerer all the disciples and all the Apostles had not their names written in the booke of life for Iudas was excepted And here by the waye the Censurers ouersight must bee noted that draweth the place of Luke as speciall and particular to the Apostles being spoken of the seuentie disciples He wanted special knowledge herein when hee so boldly made it an argument of the Apostles speciall reuelation Of the most certayne and sure foundations of our particular fayth and hope the Apostle writeth in the eight to the Romanes saying that nothing was able to take from him the loue which God beareth to him in Christ Iesus which hee setteth out by naming such things as are most like and mightie to strike a feare and doubt into his heart as oppression anguish persecution famine nakednesse and finally death it selfe nay he addeth agayne that neyther lyfe nor death nor Angels nor things present nor thinges to come nor height nor depth that is what so euer is in heauen aboue or in the earth beneath or in the parâ—â— vnder the earth finally that no creature is able to
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
place is both to be translated so as I haue saide and to bee applied to the reuelation of the Gospell it is euidently declared by the plaine text and by the application thereof in the epistle to the Romanes Thus the first proposition is false and drawen both against the wordes of the text and farre from the sense thereof opened by the Apostle The seconde proposition is false also for neither is it true that all these first motions are altogether out of our power for the gift of continencie and mortification doth more and more subdue them neither doth it followe that wee are not subiect to the Lawe for such offences as wee can not resist the fault being ours through corruption why wee can not resist them Shall not a wholesome lawe made for drunkardes stand in force a 〈…〉 hath so accustomed 〈◊〉 selfe to the 〈◊〉 that now it is v 〈…〉 for him to 〈◊〉 Shall we iustifie our euill though 〈…〉 â—ause it is not in our 〈◊〉 to 〈…〉 good thought 〈…〉 fort iustifie the 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 you must condemne these opinions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you and your fellowes bring thâ—â—â— false daungerous propositions to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â—clusions and venture thus vpon so 〈…〉 〈…〉 pretations it wilbe easie for you both to write at will and to dispute at â—arge â—ustens opinion against lust euen before the consent appeareth by the places alledged before and in many other places therefore his owne answere serueth to exâ—ounde this place I doubt not but Auâ—â—â—n which forbâ—â—deth the disease of lusting will much more forbidde the consent and following of such sinfull steppes In these questioÌ„s of coÌ„cupisceÌ„ce the first motioÌ„s of lust a little feeling of a good conscience would cut off all this contention of speach For if they that teache otherwise woulde looke into the Law Thou shalt not couet with such eyes as Saint Paul did and would also consider the corruption the force and fruites of originall sinne and m 〈…〉 ouer regarde the power of Gods enâ—â—â—â— â—nd perfect iustice which is iustly prouoked with the least offence because hee made vs in the greatest perfection they would then speake no more in defence of the vncleane concupiscence of an vncleane heart but would with Saint Paul confesse 〈◊〉 the Lawe Thou shalt not couet teacheth â—s to knowe sinne not onely that grâ—sse sinne knowen and punished among inâ—â—â—els but somewhat more that flesh and blood cannot acknowledge euen that all concupiscence all vncleane lust is sinne because God is a spirituall Lawegiuer who hindeth our sp 〈…〉 it and bringeth all our desires into obedience restraining the least motions of vncleane coÌ„cupiscence by this holy and streight commandement Thou shalt not couet In the fourth place it commeth to bee examined how litle authoritie the Iesuites giue to the worde of God and howe much they attribute to vnwritten beleefe They are charged to saye The holy scripture is a doctrine vnperfect maimed lame not conteining all things necessary to fayth and saluation Wherein you censure mee as being to shameles in setting forth these for the Iesuites wordes Howsoeuer Gotuisus report or misreport the Iesuites if I report him faithfully it is no shame to me but to you it is some blame still to charge me with that is none of mine As for the question you handle it subtillie reporting not your owne iudgement but with some corruption what Monhemius saith and againe what the Iesuites answere whereas you are in the name of the Iesuites eyther to graunt that the scripture is perfect and conteyneth all thinges necessarie to saluation which is coÌ„trary to the Councill of Trent or els plainely and without perhappes to set downe the thinges that are to be beleeued of necessitie and yet not comprehended in the scripture which is clearely to graunt that which before you denied for the scripture is maymed and wanteth if any substantial doctrine of faith belonging to a Christian man bee left out There followe twelue particular pointes which you make of one sort to be beleeued and affirme them but with perhappes to be deduced out of scripture of the which seuen are not by perhappes but vndoubtedly conteyned in the word as that there are two natures and willes in Christ that the holy Ghost proceedeth froÌ„ the father and the sonne without generation Thirdly which you vtter in woordes that are obscure and vnsound that the worde did take the nature of maÌ„ to be one person not the person Fourthly that infantes are to be bapâ—â—sed Fifthly the change of the Sabaoth So also we receiue the foure Gospels and the epistse to the Romanes as approoued out of the worde by the inscription there expressing the names of the writers thereof For your darke wordes out of Thomas Howe the father vegate the sonne I wishe cleare and perfect woordes in so high a mysterie We beleeue by testimonie of the worde that Iesus Christ is the onely be gotten sonne of the Father and God aboue all to bee praysed for euer That I may refraine other speath I pray you examine your heart before the Lorde you that dare teach that these most high mysteries of God the Sonne and God the holy Ghost are not reuealed in y â— scriptures so farre as they concerne our faith but stande vpon the warraunt of mens traditions The rest of these twelue points as they are not euidently conteyned in the woorde so a Christian is not absolutely bounde to beleeue them as that the common Creede the articles whereof notwithstanding we beleeue as grounded vpon the Apostolicall doctrine was made by the Apostles the celebration of Easter day vpon a Sunday the perpetuall virgiuitie of the blessed Virgin The Epistle to the Laodiceans although many make mention of it Paul maketh none so that eyther you ignorantly passed ouer the Greeke or wilfully addicted your selfe to the olde translation being in this place playnely corrupted For by the originall Paul speaketh of an epistle froÌ„ Laodicea and not written to the Laodicenses as you vntruely affirme Nowe what haue you gayned by all or any one of these twelue notes seeing they are al eyther proued by y â— Scriptures theÌ„ no warrant for your traditions vnwritteÌ„ ve 〈…〉 not necessary points of our faith and therfore not of like authoritie to the holy writings of the Apostles and Prophetes After this sort you may easily publish A briefe Censure confounding and hudlyng together without distinction matters of our â—eleefe with things which we are not bound to beleeue and articles playnely conteyned in Scripture with points that are not there at all The place foloweth alleadged to ouerthrow the former doctrine of the Iesuites All the Scripture is giuen by inspiration of God and is profitable to teache to confute to correct to instruct in iustice that the man of GOD may be perfect and throughly instructed to euery good work Here y â—
Lent If this be not hudling and confounding of things together of vnlike sort I knowe not what may be called confusion For what order is it to repeate vpoÌ„ the Censurers occasion y â— which was noted in the fourth article to match the baptisme of children with the fast of Lent The one being by plaine argument gathered out of the worde as namely out of the wordes of the conenant I will bee thy God and the God of thy seede and thy children after thee for euer This couenaunt dyd appertayne to both a like to Abraham and his seede whereunto the seale and practise was adioyned in circumcising infantes of eyght dayes as well as Abraham of great age and that by expresse commaundement of God Thus the doctrine is so prooued out of the written worde as that no doubt remayneth Nowe circumcision was the sacrament or seale of that righteousnesse which is by fayth as Saint Paul teacheth wherein it is equall our baptisme But this is your great learning when you are not able for your ignorance to prooue a doctrine out of the written worde to say we haue it by tradition and by worde of mouth from the Apostles Now your Lent fast as you vse it hath not onely no grounde out of the worde but is agaynst the worde as I prooued before If this bee your methode and discretion I maruell not if good order be huddling and confounding in your accompt For the number of the bookes and for the Lordes day I myght likewise make proofe out of the worde so that if you can bring vs nothing by worde of mouth from the Apostles but your Lent fast your letters of credence will not serue you to be deleeued The seconde Censure is that the place alleadged by me to confuce the aucthoritie of traditions should be impertinent This the Censurer woulde shewe by three differences betweene it and this purpose First of the diuers cause of those traditions which our Sauiour Christ inueyeth against whereof they had beene authors to them selues and of these which he affirmeth to descende from Christ and his Apostles But as in deede the difference woulde be great if this were true so being false and vntrue as it is it can make no difference at all Theirs were in deede such as they affirme and though you deny it so are yours also For which of all your traditions came eyther froÌ„ Christ or from his Apostles wheÌ„ you proue them froÌ„ either of them your difference shall be allowed Secondly you say Christ reprehendeth not al obseruation of meÌ„s traditioÌ„s but the naughtie obseruing of theÌ„ which was as you affirme in that y â— Pharises esteemed them more then Gods word brake it for the keeping of them which you condemne This also if it were true were a sufficient difference but it is vntrue that our Sauiour Christ reproued onely the esteeming of them more then Gods commaundementes It can not bee denied but he reprooued this in them in the same chapter before but in the woordes alleadged You worshippe mee in vaine teaching doctrines that are but traditions of men which are no wordes of comparison our Sauiour simplie rebuketh them for esteeming the keeping of mens traditions to be any seruice of GOD to which â—ude the sentence had bene first vttered by the Prophet The thirde note is double first that these traditions were idle foolish of which sort are yours and whatsoeuer the idle brayne of man deuiseth to serue â—od withall the second that some of them were impious direct contrary to the word of God such as were certayne corrupt expositions of the lawe where you are as like to them as the sonne may be to the father For neuer were there more false gloses vpon the word of God violently thrust and by litle and litle secretly conueyed into the Church peruerting the true meaning of the Scriptures and corrupting the simple worshippe of GOD then haue beene brought in by your Rabbines that haue obtayned the highest seates and the most honourable names more then euer did any among the Iewes You speake of the Talmud as dyd bastarde Denis of the orders in heauen but this florish of your skill in those bookes because it hurteth not the cause let it serue you and your frendes for as much credit as it may Lastly the Iesuites are reported to teach that we must worship y e image of Christ with like honour that wee doe the holy bookes of the Gospell In this article the doctrine is graunted without any word of contradiction your Censure onely toucheth the second to the Corinthes the sixt chapter as not alledged to the purpose In deede if you list not to vnderstand to what end it is vouched you may well complaine against the alledging thereof as from the matter You take it as brought to proue that we may worship the image of Christ with greater honour then the bookes of the Gospell but you mistake the matter and wilfully as it shoulde seeme to haue some what against the cause for how could you think that he which detesteth al idols would alledge a place to prooue that the image of Christ is worthy honour more then Gospels Or howe may not any maâ— note you of open contradiction against the word of God that being deuoutly madde vpon idols would for their loue prophane the temple of God and therefore dare to say there is more agreemeÌ„t betweene them which yet the Apostle maketh most contrarie then there is betweene the place of Saint Paul the matter which the same place doth fitly disprooue But if you liâ—â— to vnderstand the place serueth to prooue that no image at all is to be worshipped for which the wordes are so pertinent and is strong as all the wisedome of your Censureship and of the rest will neuer bee able to answere them Therefore you lost your labour in framing arguments to prooue why the material booke of Gospels should be no lesse worshipped then the image of Christ for neither of bath are to bee worshipped nor any other creatures whatsoeuer according to that which was before alledged to this purpose Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serue You can not escape for saying you giue no diuine honour vnto them for this bowing downe before them which is one of the least deuotions you vse is chalenged as diuine honour and expressely forbidden in any respect of religion or deuotion to images or any other creature as hath beene often declared But here saying the honour done to the image of Christ and to the letter of the Bible is not done to them selues you dissemble your owne idolatrous doctrine which alloweth the same honour to the image that is due to the paterne and namely the same most honourable and diuine worship of Latria to the Crucifix which is due to the Lord Iesus Christ himself Your bookes that teach this are many and not vnknowen So
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
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