worde can Master Chark now peepe against all this O you papists that with sinceritie of Religion haue not caste of all humane honestie doe you not blush at the impudent ignorance of this your defender And yet he is not ashamed to gather Master Charks absurd positions not one according to his meaning and but one onelie agreeable to his wordes First that sinne is no action where he holdeth that all sinne as the sinne of omission is no action Secondlie that no euill men doe sinne but the euill in men which he saith not but that man as he is the creature of God is not against the lawe but the euill in man Thirdlie that sinne is not voluntarie which he saieth not generally but of some sin speakeing properlie Forthlie that sinne is no humane or reasonable action which he saieth rather to be a beastlie and vnreasonable action of a man endued with reason Fiftlie that it requireth neither will nor knowledge in the doer where he saith that the transgression of Gods law is sin in some case and sort which is without the will and knowledge of the doer Last of all that fooles and madde men may as properlie commit sinne as others but this he saith not at al but that the infirmites of follie and madnes shal not excuse sin and that if a madde man or a foole kil a man in the Censurcrs iudgement it is properly no sinne Whereof you may inferr that it is sinne properlie but not that it is as properlie sinne as in others But if madde men and fooles coulde not commit sinne properlie whie are they punished for sinne To conclude where you saie that Master Charke reiecteth Saint Augustine about the definition of sinne it is false For these are his wordes Howsoeuer you alledge Austen to approoue your definition it is no waie so large as sinne and iherefore a most vnlearned definition These words of his declare that he reiecteth not Augustine in this matter but your false and fraudulent allegation of him which is manifestly shewed before by Augustines sound iudgement in his retractions The eight section Of sinne MAster Chark hauing said out of the definition of Saint Iohn which also Saint Ambrose doth vse as I haue shewed before that all transgression of the lawe is sinne was charged by the Censurer with transposition because the Apostles wordes lie thus in the text Sinne is transgression of the law Master Charke defendeth him-selfe alledging that these wordes sinne and the transgression of the law are as the definition and the thing defined which are mutuallie verified the one of the other The defender bringeth nothing to prooue that this is no definition but that which he hath saide in the section before which is ouerthrowne Onelie he quarrelleth that Master Charke said the Gospell is as generall as the power of God to saluation whereas Christ also is called the power of God to saluation As though the Gospell did not include Christ. For when it is said the Gospell is the power of God to saluation you must vnderstand the generall matter namelie the doctrine or the preaching That transposition of wordes is sometimes lawfull M. Charke sheweth by an example God is a spirite where the wordes lie in the text a spirite is God The defender wrangleth that it is not alwaies lawfull which shall be graunted vnto him without controuersie That in this question it is not lawful he hath nothing to prooue but a beggerlie demaund of that in question that transgression of Gods lawe is larger then sinne Where Master Chark alledgeth out of 1. Iohn 5. 17. that euerie iniquitie is sin he maketh no small adoe because the greeke word in that text is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which if they be not all one in sense let him enter an action against the vulgar interpreter which in both places translateth iniquitas Yea let him quarrell with Saint Augustine which vpon the place in question writeth thus Nemo enim dicat aliud est peccatum atque aliud iniquitas nemo dicat ego peccator homo sum sed iniquus non sum omnis qui facit peccatum iniquitatem facit Peccatum iniquitas est quid ergo faciemus de peccatis nostris iniquitatibus Let no man saie sin is one thing iniquitie is an other thing let no man say I am a sinful man but I am not vniust euery one that committeth sin doth commit iniquity for sin is iniquity what then shall we do with our sinnes and iniquities c You see here that S. Augustine accounteth sin iniquitie or vniustice to be all one So doth he in 1. Iohn Tr. 5. And where the Apostle vseth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is vnrighteuosnes what say you meaneth he generall iniustice or speciall If he meane generall as you must needes say for shame then it is as large as sinne and it is manifest that the Apostle vseth the worde Iustice as contrarie to sinne therefore iustice must needes be the same that sinne If you can make a diuersitie between general iniquity general iniustice you are wiser then the vulgar interpreter speciallie if he speake in this latter place of great sinnes onelie as you say whereas iniquitie in the former place may signifie such small transgression as is no sinne at all Verelie Oecumenius is against you and saith Simpliciter tanquam à genere peccati facit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 omnis iniquitas peccatum est hoc est siue sit ad mortem siue non He maketh a plaine diuision of sinne as it were from the generall and saith all inquitie is sinne that is whether it be vnto death or not And vpon 1. 〈◊〉 3. he saith Sciendum autem quòd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. We must know that sin is a falling from that which is good 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 is an offence against the law and both of them hath this beginning namelie sinne the 〈◊〉 from that which is good iniquitie to doe against the law that 〈◊〉 And they agree the one with the other and are about the same thing For he which sinneth erreth from the marke which is according to nature and in nature is selfe For the scope or marke 〈◊〉 nature is to liue according to reason farre from vnreasonablenes Likewise he that doth 〈◊〉 offendeth about the lawe giuen in nature beeing affected intemperatelie Rectè ergo discipulus domini 〈◊〉 inidem 〈◊〉 Therefore the disciple of our Lorde hath rightlie vsed the one for the other Here iniquitie is as large as sinne Against this what haue you to saie Aristotell in praedicam qual For which I send you to Aristotell Eth. lib. 5. c. 1. But 〈◊〉 euery iniquitie is not sinne you haue Saint Augustine lib. 2. cont Iulian cap. 5. When you can set downe his wordes you shall receiue an answere in the meane time as you saie Master Charke reserued a sure carde for the ende I may
tali agone diuino caelesti auxilio vt vel srater adsit qui te consoletur promissionibus gratiae foris velintus in corde spiritus sanctus verbum fratris erigat ac animet ac sustentet cor tuum vt possis sic apud 〈◊〉 statuere Confessus quidem sum Lege dei conuictus coram diabolo me peccasse me damnatum esse vt Iudam Sed verto me ad Christum cum Petro respicio eius immensum beneficium meritum c. ille omnem horrendam damnationem damnauit Here those most holie fathers will answere me here they will laugh and say art thou a famous doctour and knowest not how to answere the deuill Dost thou not know that the deuill is a lyer how say you by that I giue you great thankes as you are worthie for so sweete comforse in so weightie a matter These three wordes the deuill is a lyar I should not haue knowne vntil now except you most notable diuines had taught me If I were a Papist vnexpert of all temptations whome Satan would not neglect beeing carles and snorting as he neglecteth them that follow their lusts c. I should be such a Giant also stout and valiant against the enemie that is absent If you should beare the stripes of the deuill and heare his disputations you should not longsing the song of the Church after the accustomed manner I verilie doe see sufficientlie in Dauid and the rest of the Prophets how greeuouslie they wrestle and groone in those combates and such like against the deuill and his horrible violence And Christ him-selfe although without sinne in what aboundance of teares and anguish did he siriue for vs in those conflictes against Satan For he vrgeth mans heart exceedinglie ceaseth not except he be driuen backe with the word of God And I am plainlie perswaded that Emser and Oecolampadius and such like were sodendlie slaine wieh these horrible stripes and shakings For the harte of man cannot abide this horrible and vnspeakeable violence except God be with him For Satan in the twinckling of an eie sodendlie ouerwhelmeth the wholl minde with terrors and darkenes and if he finde nothing but a man vnarmed and not instructed in the word as it were with a litle finger he ouerwhelmeth him all at once It is true in deed that he is a lyar but his lies are not of a simple craftes man but much more craftie and prepared to deceiue then mans capacitis can comprehend He doth in such sort set vpon a man take holde of him and that sound truth which can not be denied and that he vrgeth and sharpeneth so craftelie and subtillie and couereth it so cunninglie that he may deceiue them that take the best heede of him c. As that cogitation which strake the heart of Iudas was true I haue betraied innocent blood this could not Iudas denie But this was a lie therefore I must despaire of the grace of God And yet the deuill vrged this lie this cogitation so violentlie that Iudas was not able to ouercome it but despaired Therefore good brother Sir Papist the deuill doth not lie when he accuseth or vrgeth the greatenes of sinne For thereby he hath two graue witnesses that are vnreproouable the law of God and our owne conscience I can not denie but I haue sinned I cannot denie my sinne to be greate I cannot denie that I am guiltie of death and damnation c. but there Satan lyeth when he vrgeth further that I should dispaire of grace As Cain said my sinne is greater c. And in this conflicte thou hast neede of the helpe of God from heauen that either some brother be present which may comforte thee outwardlie with the promises of God or that the holie ghost inwardlie in thy heart through thy brothers word do lift vp and encourage the and comfort thy heart that thou maist determine thus with thy selfe I haue in deede confessed before the deuill beeing conuicted by the law of God that I sinned that I am condemned as Iudas but I turne my selfe vnto Christ with Peter and looke backe to his infinite benefite and merit c. he hath condemned all horrible condemnation c. Now I reporte me to euerie indifferent reader whether Luther doe not speake here of a spirituall conflicte or tentation vnto desperation for his saying of priuate masse after he knew that it was idolatrie not of any bodelie conference about the abolishing of the masse Secondlie that Luther doth not yeald to the perswasions of the deuill wherewith the defender confesseth that both good and euill men are assaulted but according to the difference by him obserued resisteth the assault and obtaineth victorie thorough Christ. But now let vs heare what arguments our defender bringeth to prooue this bodelie conference First the confession of the Tigurine Caluenists but that is false The Tigurines did onelie reprooue Luther for his intemperat inuectiues and naming of deuilles so often our wise defender concludeth ergo Luther had deuilles Secondly he saith it is euident that this conference was more then spirituall by the deuilles preface wherein he calleth the frier right learned Doctor according to the vaine of pride wherewith he saw him puffed vp c. But what reasonable man seeth not that this presace of his title was but a bitter scorne of the deuill no flattering speach to make him readie to receiue his impressions as the defender saith As for the sound of Satans voice described in the place alledged in the Censure there is none such For the booke demissa angulari so often alledged by the papists is none other but this de missa priuata vnctione sacerdotum as appeareth by the verie wordes noted by the Papists in lib. de missa angulari which are found here in this boke de missa priuata c. Therefore the sound of Satans voice is but some papists dreame vpon the matter which our defender would now hide vnder the title of de missa angulari The third reason is for that Luther confesseth some of his fellowes to haue beene slaine by this conference What he saith in his rash iudgement of Emser and Oecolampadius where of the one was a Papist the other a Protestant you heaue hard in his own words which prooueth no bodely conference For those terrible blowes and shakinges where of he speaketh are no more bodelie then the busfeting of Satan where of Saint Paul speaketh And who doubteth but that by such spirituall buffeting of Satan a man that is ouercome with exceeding sorrow may suddenlie die except he be assisted and comforted by the grace of Christ as Saint Paul was Finally the bushell of sault saith our defender which Luther confesseth himselfe to haue eaten together with the deuill prooueth that he had bodelie conference with him First the booke is not extant and if any such were yet it prooueth no bodelie conference For no man is so madde to thinke that
flatlie against you for he that doth not that which god commaundeth sinneth although in the meane time he doe some other thing that is good or not euill yea although he sleepe and doe nothing Where Master Charke doth distinguish the creatures and ordinances of God which are good from the corruption and preuarication that is in them which is euill you picke a fond quarrell to him and make him to saie that deuills and euill men doe not repugne against the law of God and that they doe not sinne properlie Which is false for he saith no such thing but that euill men as they are the creatures of God are not against the law but the euill in men and so of the rest yet euil men doe sinne properlie and repugne against the law of God by the euill that is in them as in your owne example the Phisitian cureth his patient not as he is a man but as he is a Phisitian and by knowledge of Phisicke which is in him And as for the repugnance of contrarietie whereof the question is in the definition of sin it is not in the creature of god but the corruption of that good crearure A blacke horsse is not contrarie to the colour of white but the colour of blacke so not an euil man but sin of an euil man is contrary to the iustice of Gods law So a Phitisian driueth away an ague yet aPhisitian is not contrary to an ague but thevertue of the medicine which he ministreth When euerie childe may vnderstand your cauilling it is no meruaile though you charge M. Chark with such absurditie and ignorance yea with heresie and that out of Augustine Tom. 8. fol. 665. not telling vs of what edition you speake so that it were harde to finde if it were worth the search that which you talke of but you are to be pardoned for your note was vnperfect did not expresse in what homelie vpon what Psalme The second fault of the Iesuites definition is that they call it an humane or reasonable action Master Charke would rather saie a beastly or vnreasonable action of a man indued with reason Here you take on and aske whether Master Charke be so vnlearned in all foundation of Philosophie And Aristotle and Saint Augustine are called to witnes that sin proceedeth from the minde indued with reason and what other thing I beseech you doth Master Charke saie his wordes are plaine as I haue set them downe and the same that you cite out of Augustine Now if you will defend that sinne is an action agreeable to right reason because it proceedeth frō a reasonable man he giueth you a weapon to play with al against your next encounter otherwise he hath better reformed the wordes of your definition thé you haue either wit or grace to vnderstand It hath a better colour that you obiect of the morall workes of iustice temperance other vertues in the gentils which M. Chark wil acknowledge to be sin and yet they seeme to be agreeable to right reason so they are in part so far forth as they be directed by that light which is left in men proceeding fró the eternal word of god but in so much as that light shineth in darkenes and the darkenes comprehendeth it not no acceptable worke to God can be brought forth therebie Yea for so much as all the morall workes of the gentiles respected not the right ende of obedience and glorie of God whome they knew not their wholl actions were therebie vitiated and corrupted so that they may iustlie be called sinne Euen as praier is turned into sin and the sacrifice of the vngodlie is abhomination to the Lord. And M. Charke faith truelie whatsoeuer is not of faith is sin be it reasonable as you speake or against reason And in deede against right reason it is that the gentiles in their morall workes sought not to obey God according to his lawe and therefore euen their best workes of iustice and temperance were sinne But this is so iumpe you saie that an horse might be a sinner for that his actions proceed not of faith In deed if Saint Paul had spoken of the actions of brute beastes as your Saint Francis witnes your Legend did preach to brute beastes you had iumped neere the matter but when none but an asse would vnderstand Saint Paul to speake of any other actions then such as proceede from men you iumpe as neere as Germans lippes that were nine mile a sunder But you will answere to Saint Paul with S. Ambrose that he meaneth whoesoeuer doth a thing against that which faith prescribeth that is against a mans own conscience and iudgement he sinneth The words of S. Ambrose are these Rectè peccatum appellat quod aliter fit quà m probatum est He doth rightlie call that sinne which is done otherwise then is allowed Now this allowance or approbation is not referred to euerie mans corrupt conscience or ignorant iudgement as you expound it but is measured by faith which is a certaine knowledge and perswasion grounded vpon the worde of God as Saint Paul sheweth in the 14. verse of the 14. Chap. I know am perswaded by our Lord Iesus that nothing is vncleane of it selfe which faith when the Gentiles had not in their workes their works were sinne And therfore you abuse S. Ambrose by your glose to restreine the prescription of faith onelie to that which a man doth against his conscience and iudgement But Saint Augustine you say prooueth at large against Master Charke that the morall good workes of infidels were not sinne lib. de spiritu litera cap. 26. 27. 28. In truth S. Augustine though he call such workes iustice liberalitie wrought by infidels as we doe commonlie good workes yet his iudgement is none other then I haue before expressed and that he declareth in the latter ende of the 27. Chapter for in the 26. he hath nothing sounding that wase Speaking of infidels Quaedam tamen fact a vel legimus vel nouimus vel audimus quae secundùm iusticiae regulam non solùm vituper are non possumus verumetiam meritò recteque laudamus quanquam si discutiatur quo fine fiant vix iuueniuntur quae insticiae debitam laudem defensionemue mereantur Yet some deedes we either reade or know or heare of which according to the rule of righteousnes we cannot not only dispraise but also we do worthily rightly praise them although if it be discussed with what end they are done they are scarslie found which deserue the praise or defense dew to righteousnes But most cleerelie his iudgement is for Master Charke against you sir defender as well for the allegation of the text Rom. 14. where you scornfullie iumped in your sinfull horse as for the matter in question that the morall workes of Gentiles are sin before God Contra Iulianum Pelagianum lib. 4. cap. 3. towarde the ende in these wordes Si Gentilis inquis nudum
wher of the high Priest was a figure Neither was the citie of refuge appointed onelie for the triall of the slaughter whether it were willinglie or vnwillinglie committed as you saie but also for a kinde of punishment and detestation of manslaughter so that if the sleaer were found out of the City before the death of the high Priest the auenger of blood might kill him and not be charged with his blood Where you refuse the mysterie of Christes death in the death of the high Priest and flie to the fantasies of the Iewes you declare that you care not what you bring so you maie obtaine your purpose But Chri stian diuines as Cyrillus Maximus and others of the death of the high priest in that place gather deliuerance by the death of Christ. Saint Ambrose also is cleere that the high Priest in this place signifieth Iesus Christ and confuteth the politike reasons by you rehearsed out of R. Mose and R. Leui for that in causis paribus there was impar euentus In equal causes vnequall end For the high Priest might die saith he the next daie after the manslaier hath taken his refuge Againe he addeth that Christ is exors omnium voluntariorum accidentium delictorum void of all offences voluntarie and chaunceable by which he acknowledgeth vnwilling manslaughter to be an offence Saint Ierome also Dialog aduers. Pel. lib. 1. is plaine in that wholl case and sinne of ignorance and that he which is fled to the citie must tarie vntill the high Priest die that is vntill he be redeemed by the blood of our Sauiour Beda also vpon this place by his allegorie sheweth how he thought of that kinde of sinne Also Theodoretus in lib. Num. quaest 51. declareth both the mysterie of the high Priests death and sheweth that such vnwilling manslaughter is sinne Cur ad obitum Pontificis praescribet eireditum qui nolens interfecit Qnia 〈◊〉 Pontificis secundùm ordinem Melchisedech erat humani peccati solutio Whte vntill the death of the high Priest doth he prescribereturne vnto him which hath slaine a man vnwillinglie Because the death of the high Priest after the order of Melchisedech was the loosing of the sinne of man and so forth to the same effect And if all the politike reasons be graunted of the mans tarying vntill the high Priest die yet the mysterie of Christes death is not thereby taken away whoos 's blood clenseth vs from all sinne voluntarie or vnuoluntarie The last fault of the definition is that the Iesuites acknowledge not the sinne of ignorance you answer they do of that ignorance whereof a man him-selfe is the cause but not of that ignorance which the schoolemen call inuincible which is not in the doers power to auoid nor he fell into it by his owne defaulte as in the example of the Queenes subiect being in his Princes affaires in India and commaunded by proclamation in Westminster to appeare there at a certaine daie in which cause his absence is excused by inuincible ignorance This case graunted betweene the Prince and his subiect prooueth not that ignorance excuseth before God because there is not the like reason seeing no such ignorance whereby a man should transgresse the law of God is in man but by voluntarie and witting transgression of the first man and his owne negligence which maketh his fact sinfull because he is cause of his ignorance by negligence or in the sinne of Adam in whome you confesse that all men sinned At least wise if originall sinne be voluntarie by the sinne of Adam so also is the transgression of gods law in these cases of inuincible ignorance wittinglie committed by the same sinne of Adam Augustine whome you quote for your purpose speaketh of naturallignorance and infirmitie which is in insants not of that whereby men fall into error and so transgresse Gods law For that he calleth penall ignorance and difficultie which is iustlie laid vpon them that neglected to seeke knowledge and is sinfull therefore cannot excúse sinne Chrisostome whome you quote likewise is manifestly against you his wordes are these Quòdsi ea ignoraueris quae scriri non possunt praeter culpam eris siverò quae scitu possibilia sunt facilia extremas poenas merito dabis If thou be ignorant of those thinges which are not possible to beknowne thoushalt be blamles but if they be possible and easie to be knowne thou shalt worthelie suffer extreame punishment As in the cases of Abimelech with Abrahams wife and Iacob with Lea who if they had made diligent inquirie needed not to haue beene deceiued through ignorance Neither doth God excuse Abimelech from sinne altogether as you saie albeit he pardoned his ignorance and kept him from the fact of adulterie acknowledged his minde to haue beene free from the purpose of Adulterie For the punishmeut laid vpon him argueth what he deserued by his ouer hastie purpose of mariage with Sara and Abimelech confesseth that Abraham had brought vpon him and his Kingdom a great sinne Also when God saith to him I haue kept thee thatthou shouldest not sinne against me he declareth plainlie that if Abimelech had lien with Sara vpon that ignorance he had sinned against God But of Iacobslying with Lea in steade of Rachell you mooue a greater contention and alledge Saint Augustine in his defense But whosoeuer gaue you your notes through your negligence in not reading the places your selfe made you erre through ignorance For S. Augustine doth notin all those Chapters once touch the question whether Iacob sinned in that he did not regarde what woman was laid in his bedde by which negligence as Master Charke saith he might haue committed most horribleincest with his mother aunt or daughter Onelie he defendeth his Polygamie by the custome of that time and the contention of his wiues for their lodgeing with him and last of all allegorizeth vpon the wholl storie drawing the error of Iacob and all the rest to a mysterie Nor yet de ciuit dei lib. 16. c. 38. doth he defend his negligence rehearsing onelie how he came to haue foure wiues when he went into Mesopotamia for one onelie adding that because he had lyen with Lea vnwittinglie he did not put her awaie lest he might be thought to haue mocked her Neither hath Iustinus Martyr lib. de verit Christ. rel anie defense of Iacobs innocencie or excuse of his negligence in this fact but sheweth onelie what mysterie maie be gathered of his marriages as Saint Augustine doth Finallie Theodores your last auncient witnes agreeing with the rest saith that Iacob betrothed onelie Rachell and beside the purpose of his will had to doe with Lea. But immediatelie assoone as he perceiued the deceit he tooke it heauilie and complained to his father in law what word of defense or excuse of his fact committed through ignorance negligence haue you in this saying yet you conclude after your vaunting mannner And what one
warrant of Christ his power receiued by the holy ghost maie as ministers seruants remit or retaine sins we do most willinglie consent and confesse But then they practise this power as seruants when they beinterpreters and declarers of the Lordes will and pleasure and require not that God should followe their sentence or attend how they be affected to forgiue or retaine and so to subscribe vnto their doing for that is an Antichristian vsurpation farre from the meaning of that power which Christ did graunt to his A postles ALLEN Some holie writers vpon this text of S. Iohn in which the order of Christes authorizing his Apostles for the remission of sinnes is described doe dispute of the difference of giuing the holie Ghost then to his Disciples and afterward on Whitsondaie some note the eternall ceremonie that our Master vsed when he gaue them the holie spirit which was by breathing on them that such outward actions might both be an euidence to them of that excellent gift which they inwardlie then receiued and should further be an euerlasting instruction to the Church that Gods grace and giftes be often ioyned to externall elements for the solace of our nature that delighteth to haue our outward man schooled as wel as the inward man nourished These and manie things moe be of profitable remembrance and consideration but not so much to our purpose Therefore let vs see whether the iudgement of the holie Fathers doe not wholie helpe our present cause prouing the Priests ministerie through the holie Ghostes authoritie that our declaration standing on the plaine wordes of scripture with their vndoubted sense maie obtaine inuincible force against the aduersaries worthie credit of the true beleeuers FVLKE If you had expressed what the writers are that thus dispute or discourse vpon this text we might better haue considred how pertinent or impertinent their opinions are to our matter in controuersie S. Chrysost. seemeth to allowe the opinion of some and Euthymius plainely affirmeth the same that the Apostles at this time did not presentlie receiue the holie ghost but onelie were prepared or made capable thereof which if it were true is contrarie to the title of your Chapter I like better of Cyrillus iudgement which thinketh they presentlie receiued the holie Ghost in some measure but not so plentifullie nor with such diuersitie of giftes as on the daie of Pentecost That the grace of God is testified assured and sealed vp vnto vs for the help of our infirmitie by outward signes and externall elementes ioined thereto we know confesse but as for the solace of our nature or delight to haue our outward man schooled I knowe not what they meane It is great mercie of God to beare with our weakenes but it agreeth not with the discipline of the Gospell that we should delight in outward thinges but rather to exercise our faith in spirituall and heauenlie meditations ALLEN We will make our entrance first with Saint Cyrill whoe debating with himselfe vppon the incomparable authoritie and power giuen to the Apostles for remission of sinnes standeth first as in contention with him selfe and with Christs words how it maie be that they being but men should forgiue the sinnes of our soules being sure of this that it is the propertie onelie of the true liuing god to assoile vs of our sinnes against whom onlie all sins be properlie committed And therfore being not of stomake as men be now a daies to denie that which Christes words so plainelie do import he made answere that the Apostles were in deed deified and made as you would saie partakers of Gods nature to worke Gods owne office in the world Qua igitur ratione saieth he diuinae naturae dignitatem ac potestatem discipulis suis saluator largitus est Quia certè absurdum non est peccata remitti posse ab illis qui Spiritum sanctum in seipsis habeant Nam cùm ipsi remmittunt aut detinent spiritus qui habitat in eis remittit detines By what meanes did our Sauiour giue vnto the Apostles the preheminence and power of Gods owne nature Surelie because it agreeth verie well that they should rimit mans sins that haue in themselues the holie Ghost For when they assoile or retaine sins it is the holie spirit that dwelleth in them which by their ministery doth remit or retaine sins Thus he I maruell not now whie this same father termeth the Apostles sometimes protectores curatores animarum corporum the protectors curers both of bodies soules it is not strange whie S. Ambrose should call the order of priestood Ordinem 〈◊〉 Neither that he should terme Officium Sacerdotis munus S. S. The Priests office to be the function of the holie Ghost No I doe not wonder at some of our forefathers that in the admiration of Gods Maiestic which they same to be so present in the execution of so high in office they did simplie and plainely terme the principall Pastours of the Church halfe Gods and not meere men not hauing respect to their persons which be compassed with infirmities as other the sinfull sort of people in the world be but casting eie vpward to the holie and excellent function which they practised by the spirit of God which dwelleth in them and deifieth their persons to make them of habilitie to exercise the workes of God FVLKE Saint Cyrill is farre from that blasphemie to saie that the Apostles were in deede deified and made partakers of Gods nature to worke Gods owne office in the world For ascribing to God that which is proper to him incommunicable to anie meere creature he maketh this obiection how our sauiour did graunt to his disciples the dignitie power of his diuine nature answereth that they were only made ministers instruments of the holy ghost to expresse his power in remitting sinnes by baptisme and repentance whereof S. Chrysostome also saieth vpon the same text that the Priest giueth onelie his tongue and his hand but the Father the sonne and the holie Ghost doth all things in this case I will rehearse the whole saying of Cyrillus that his iudgement maie more fullie appeare vpon this text Et certè solius veri Dei est c. And suerlie it pertaineth to the onelie true God that he is able to loose men from their sinnes For to what other person is it lawfull to deliuer the transgressors of the law from sinne but to the author of the law him-selfe for so in mennes affaires we see it to be done For no man without punishment doth reprooue the lawes of Kings but the Kinges them-selues in whome the crime of transgression hath no place For it is wiselie said that he is implous which shall saie to a King thou doest vniustlie By what meanes then did our Sauiour graunt to his disciples the dignitie and power of the diuine nature because trulie it is not absurde that sinnes may be remitted
some to be obstinate or dissemblers he may know who is to be bound and who to be loosed which he cānot do by hearing the diuersity of their sins For if their sins be as red as scarlet if they be truelie penitent they are to be loosed and if they seeme neuer so small if they be not repentant nor humblie contrite in heart for them they are to be bound While you seeke to make a difference betweene the authoritie of the minister in the Ghospell of pardoning sinnes more properlie then the priest clensed the Leper you declare that you are not content with the sentence of Saint Ierome nor of so many of the auncient fathers as made the case all alike And where you saie it was not said vnto them as vnto ours whomsoeuer you punish with Leprosie or make vncleane he shal haue a Leprosie you speake beside the booke For this authoritie was giuen to them that they should make cleane or vncleane and whomesoeuer they made cleane he was admitted into the congregation and whomesoeuer they made vncleane he was so accounted of all men Yet properlie they made neither cleane nor vncleane but declared them so to be according to the institution which they had of Gods law in exercise whereof although they erred and so the partie might be receiued or refused according to their error yet was he neither cleane nor vncleane in deede by their sentence but by the work of God and so be sinners The blasphemie that you ascribe to Saint Hilarie I haue confuted before Your distinction of prius natura and quoad nos is foolish sophistrie in this case For except God first worke in our hearts by his holie spirit faith of forgiuenes we can haue but small comfort in the priests absolution That God doth alwaies wörke at the instant in which Baptisme is ministred it is false if Saint Augustines doctrine be true who reacheth that Baptisme may be receiued out of the Church but cannot haue effect but in the Church that is if the partie came from heresie and submit him selfe to the Catholike Church ALLEN And so it is in penance where God the principall and the priest the secondarie or seruisable cause ioyntlie forgiue together For so the words of institution of this sacrament doe moste plainlie conuince whose sinnes you shall forgiue they beforgiuen he speaketh in the present tence as though he would saie as you forgiue them or reteine them ipso facto I forgiue them or reteine them And therefore sauing the honour of the Master of the sentences he had not good consideration when he did holde as some other did after him that first mans sinnes be remitted by God in his contrition and purpose to come to the sacrament and afterwarde the same remission to be declared by the priests and as it were confirmed by his approbation in confession being therein partlie deceiued by the saying of Saint Hierome before alledged whome he tooke perchaunce to haue compared in all respects the office of the olde Priest for the viewe of the vncleane and ours of the new law in the iudgement vsed vpon mans sinnes and partlie as I take it by a sentence of Saint Augustine which compared together the receiuing of Lazarus by Christ and the Disciples loosing his bandes to Christes pardoning of sinnes first and then the priests loosing the same afterward in the face of the Church This to be shorte is a peece of Saint Augustines sentence Quid ergo facit Ecclesia cui dictum est Quae solueritis in terra erunt soluta nisi quod ait Dominus soluite illum sinite abire What doth the Church then to whome it was said vhatsoeuer you loose it shall be loosed Marie she doth that which our Lorde saied loose him and let him goe Wherein Saint Augustine meaneth nothing els but that Christ is the principall agent and that he properlie doth giue life to the soull the Priest for all that beeing his seruant and minister therein and therefore by nature is a latter agent in the same worke which els as I haue prooued ioynilie perteineth to them both for that the effect of a Sacrament commeth not to any man till it be receiued except it be in certaine cases of necessitie where the parties can not obteine the externall rse of the appointed element though they earnestlie desire the same But how the olde Priests office touching the Lepers of the law representeth our sacrament of the priests ministerie in the new Testament and how farre ours which is the truth excelleth that which was but a shadow of ours Saint Chrysostome doth excellentlic declare and therewith fullie may put out of doubt all men that our Priests properlie worke remission of sinnes as ministers in the same diuine action and not as declarers or approouers of that effect which before was wrought by God himselfe Thus he saith Corporis lepram purgare seu veriùs dicam haud purgare quidem sed purgatos probare Iudaeorum sacerdotibus solis liccbat at verò nostris sacerdotibus non corporis lepram verùm animae sordes non dico purgatas probare sed purgare prorsus concessum cst Quamobrem mco iudicio qui istos despiciunt contemnuntque multò sceleratiores ac maiori supplicio digni fuerint quà m fuerit Dathan vnà cum suis omnibus That is to saie To purge the Leprosie of the bodie or ells to saie as it was in deede not to purge but to discerne who were cleane was graunted onelie to the Priests of the olde law but it is fullie graunted to our Priests not to purge the bodilie lcprosie nor to snew who are cleaner purged but vtterlie to purge the verie filth of mans soull Therefore by my iudgement whosoeuer doe contemne or despise them they are much more worthie punishment then the disobedient Dathan with all his companie Thus saith this holie Father with many wordes moe which were worthie all consideration and rememberance in this case if the matter were not so abundant that it may not suffer ouer long abode in one place lest iniurie be done to other braunches of the cause no lesse necessarie to be knowne for full vpholding the truth thereof FVLKE Your argument taken of Christs speaking in the present tense is vaine and of no force to prooue that the forgiuenes or reteining of God and man concurre in one instant For in the latter sentence of reteining the verbe is of the preterperfect tense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but in the same sense that the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the former sentence which is of the present tence proouing Gods forgiuenes to goe before mans declaration thereof The Master of the sentences is litle beholding to you that doc so flatlie condemne him of error whereas he did write nothing in this point which was not commonly receiued in the Church of Rome in his time and long after For among the articles in quibus Magister non tenetur there is
in the sacrament of penance there is a power iudiciarie and therefore can not be practized lawfullie but vpon subiect persons and causes not exempted from their iudgement and excepted from their audience In which cases the persons of higher iurisdiction to whome by right and law the cognition of those reserued sinnes belong do sometimes vpon occasion giuen communicate their power to the said simple priestes and do license them to exercise their iurisdiction vpon persons and causes not properly pertaining vnto them as when the Popes Indulgence giueth the sinner leaue to choose his ghostlie father and by him that he maie be assoiled euen from such sinnes as be reserued to the supreame power of the Church In this matter also the Indulgence ioyneth with the ordinarie sacrament of penance and the minister receiueth iurisdiction by the Indulgence to heare and assoile the Penitent of such sinnes as before were not subiect to his peculiar regiment and therefore this is also called a pardon from sinne and the paine for sinne and a full remission FVLKE You haue hitherto held hard that neither the Pope nor anie Bishop can giue pardon of anie mortal sinne but by reseruation of cases it appeareth that the Pope challengeth this prerogatiue that he onelie may giue absolution and pardon in these greeuous crimes that be called cases papall and the Bishop in cases episcopall Now let vs see how this geare hangeth together The Pope hath this prerogatiue in respect of his high iurisdiction for in the sacramēt of penance euery priest by order as we heard before hath as much authority as he Then if these cases be reserued to the Popes iurisdiction this reseruation doth prooue that the Pope taketh vpon him to pardon the most greeuous sinnes by his iurisdiction onelie or els he deceaueth them that seeke for absolution of them at his hands And whereas you would cloake the matter by saying the Popes indulgence doth graunt that the priest in confession maie assoile a man from such sinnes as be reserued to the supreame power of the Church it is to no purpose For the Priest in this case is but the popes deputie to exercise the Popes iurisdiction as you saie as well vpon persons as causes not properlie pertaining to him but by the Popes license whereupon it followeth that the Pope may do in his owne person that which he doth by his deputie but by his deputie he taketh vpon him to remit most deadlie sinnes therefore the Pope taketh vpon him to remit deadlie sinnes by his iurisdiction onelie If you saie the absolution commeth from the sacrament and not from his iurisdiction then shew vs out of the scriptures how the Pope hath authoritie to restraine the grace of sacraments in respect of the person that ministreth them or els your reseruation of cases and exemption of persons will prooue no better then an Antichristian tyrannie For if Christ haue giuen power to euerie Priest to remitte all sinnes as you haue often affirmed vpon the text Ioh. 20. whose sinnes you remit c. what is he but Antichrist exalting himselfe aboue all that is called God which controlleth the liberall graunt of Christ exempting both persons and sinnes from their power without al ground or war rant of Gods word ALLEN That thou be not deceiued herein vnderstand good Reader that euerie Priest in his taking Orders and by Christes graunt hath full power to remit all sinnes and all men of their sinnes that be penitent and yet that this power can not be practized by the law of nature indifferentlie vpon all because this sacrament and none other is iudiciall and therfore profitablie can be extended no further but to them that be of their subiection and regiment Wheresoeuer the Priest consecrateth it is effectuall whomesoeuer he baptizeth he is lawfullie Christianed whomesoeuer the Bishop ordereth he standeth trulie ordered and so forth though they should not herein meddle in other mens cures without speciall licence sufferance or necessitie But no man can assoile anie person at all that is not subiect vnto him either ordinarilie or otherwise because it is an act of iurisdiction and therefore though his power of orders be in it selfe sufficient yet by that onelie he can not absolue anie man but in necessitie except he haue withall authoritie ouer the person and in that case wherein the penitent requireth his sentence which iurisdiction he maie haue either ordinarilie as vpon all those that be of his charge or els extraordinarilie by some special graunt of the superiour as Bishop or Pope as we maie see in the formes and course of Indulgencies diuers times And thus considering of the matter you see that the Popes pardons as they be onelie proper to the act of iurisdiction separated from the power of priesthood and sacramentall confession can not remit the sinnes them-selues neither damnation due for their reward though because licence commeth and proceedeth by them to the inferiour Priestes to remitte sinnes in all cases they maie be called as I said plenarie and most liberal graces and graunts to assoile man both from sinne and the punishment that is due therefore FVLKE You pretend as though you would render a reason why all Priestes haue not equall power ouer all men and to remit all sinnes and for the former you saie somewhat though not sufficient but for the later you saie nothing at all First you confesse that euerie Priest rightly ordered hath by Christes graunt power to remit all sinnes and all men of their sinnes that be penitent But this power can not be practized you say by the law of nature indifferentlie vpon all Then belike Christ hath graunted and they receiued an vnprofitable power for why haue they power to remitte all sinnes and al mens sinnes and yet maie practize the same but vpon some sinnes and some mens sinnes onelie In truth Christ hath giuen ful power to al his ministers according to the measure of euerie one of their charges the Apostles ouer al the world their successors the bishops pastors teachers within the compasse of their seuerall cures and therefore you saie well that God hath so ordered the case that no man maie intermedle in an others cure without licence sufferance or necessitie the Pope then doth wickedlie to exempt anie man from his laufull pastor to whome the charge of his soule is by Christ committed The reason you giue wherfore this power can not be practized vpon all is friuolous because this sacrament and none other is iudiciall For who will graunt you that the power of remitting sinnes in repentance is more iudiciall then in baptisme or in the Lordes supper For the minister ought to haue a iudgement whome he baptizeth and whome he admitteth vnto the Lords table If the children of Turks or Iews be offered to baptisme without the conuersion or consent of their parentes by what warrant shall he receiue them If Turkes Iewes or Gentiles that be of yeares of discretion offer them selues to baptisme
learning which he would seeme to be For all men which know what belongeth to disputation will confesse that it is easier for a learned man to answere with commendation in defense of trueth then to oppugne a true cause with hope to winne credit Wherfore the inequalitie was in the cause not in the disputers parte which was appointed to Campian For if his positions had not bene false by answering he had the aduantage against the opponents Againe Campian did first take vpon him the opponents parte in publishing his booke of tenne arguments against vs which by our side was answered and therefore it was meete and agreable to order he should be appointed to answere and our side to oppose and that by the verie law of equalitie and indifferencie although as it is euident by the reporte of the conference he was permitted somtime to oppose and propounded such arguments as his weake cause could afforde him But you are sure and dare auowe to our faces that we will neuer deale with you at euen hand or vpon equall conditions while we liue You maie be sure that to maintaine your purpose of sedition for which your challenge was made that we will not deale with you at anie hand or vpon anie conditions But to shew your falsehoode ignorance and arrogancie manifest to the world we are readie to ioyne with you in anie conditions that our prince and magistrates will allow vs and shall thinke maie stand with the quiet of the state who seing our religion after lawfull and solemne conference by vs offered and shamefullie refused by your good masters is by law established will not rashlie admitt euerie vaine and ridiculous challenge of disputation that is offered by such as Campian you are who dare auow to our faces and yet dare not shew your owne faces before you be drawen out of your creeping corners and hiding holes as Campian and his complices were Yet you are in the name of all your fellow Catholikes torenew your bublike challenge of equall disputation Who are you and what Commission haue you from your fellow Papists that we may credit you If we knew either the one or the other we might the rather consider of your pretended publike challenge Edmond Campian did more like a Champion who when he cast downe his gloue of defiance spared not his name though he hid his head But you comming with so lowd a challenge so large offers so magnifical promises not of your owne countrimen but of straungers also of matters not in priuate mens power but of the graunt of Princes that in any kingdome and countrie which you call Catholike and moreouer rather then you would faile of disputation are ready to beare the expenses not onely of our countrie-men which are manie but of all the learned Protestants of Europe whome you giue vs leaue to call for our defense must needs haue great intelligence conference with all the popish states in Europe and a wonderfull large commission from them all which we would beglad you should shew for our assurance or els you shew your selfe the noblest foole in the world to thinke that any man will credit you in so weightie matters vpon your owne bare worde not knowing so much as whome to enquire for or where to finde you if we were disposed to confer with you about anie conditions of equalitie to be vsed in the pretended disputation or about the time place or persons to be emploied in the same Neuerthelesse to shew your confidence and desire of triall in all the haste you tell vs that albeit we thinke your cause to be greatlie weakened by the taking awaie and dispatching so you cal the iust execution of Campian Sherwine yet you are the same men you were before yea much more disirous of this triall then before Indeede I am perswaded you are no changelings but euen as the deuill hardneth them whome he hath once in possession so your obstinacie daylie encreaseth both in herisie and treason For the weakening of your cause we neuer accounted any greate moment to be either in Campian or Sherwine more then to the strengthening thereof They were of the ripest frie that your seminarie could afforde sparing the olde stores and yet they were but frothe for any sounde learning that was in either of them You say we were wante for more abasement of the other to saie that M. Sherwine was farre better learned then Campian him-selfe It may be some haue saide soe and they that haue had conference with both doe affirme that is the learned tongues Greeke and Hebrewe Sherwyn had some litle sinacke so that he could talke of them whereas Campian was as blind as a betle in them both Againe Sherwyn in reasoning had for the most parte the common shiftes and ordinarie answers of Papists to the places that were cited out of the Doctors Campian had nothing but friuolous distinctions framed of his owne heade vpon the seddaine seldome or neuer vnderstanding the argument of the booke or place of the Doctors that he was pressed withall So that it might casilie appeare that Sherwin was better studied Campian quicker witted In impudencie they were almost equall sauing that Campian was impudent with arrogancie Sherwine with more shew of humilitie I wil note one example of Sherwins impudencie and an other of his small knowledge in the Hebrewe tongue wherein yet the Papists would beare vs in hand that he was excellent When after some priuate conference had with him in M. Liuetenants lodging within the tower of London My Ladie Hopton chaunsed to speake somewhat against the licentious and abhominable life of the Cardinals and cleargie of Rome Sherwin said if any such thing were they should answere for it themselues but he tooke the eternall God to witnesse that those eyes of his neuer saw in the citie of Rome which he had often walkedouer that could offend his harte or conscience which shamefull protestation of his all that heard him did abhorre seeing that if Rome were the holiest citie that is in Europe as it is wellknowne to be the moste sinfull in 〈◊〉 yet noe honest and religious man could remaine so long in it but he should see some tokens of pride wantonnes couetousnes crueltie or vanitie that must needes be a greife vnto his harte to consider Now for the other matter In the conference itselfe he would haue taken vppon him no smal iudgement in the 〈◊〉 ewe language by auouching that he woâ—â—◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and notable corruptions in the Hebrewe text of the Bible when an example was required he brought forth the â—7 v of the 22 Psalme which by like he had learned of Gregoriâ— Martin as Martin had learned of 〈◊〉 here the Hebrew text saide he is C AR I I as a 〈◊〉 my handes and my feete but the truth is as the vâ—lgaâ—e 〈◊〉 station hath they have pearced my hands and my feete Heere when it was answered that of the Mazorites doe discharge this
called the Epistle of Saint Iames Stramineam And I pray you good sir where doth Luther so call it For admitting your reporte of his wordes Iacobi autem epistola pre illis straminea est the epistle of Iames in comparison of those of Peter and Paul is like strawe or but strawie we finde not yet that he doth so call it absolutelie but in comparison which may be done without contempt or reproch As when the Apostle saith the law hath but a shadow of good thinges to come he meaneth not that the law to alintents purposes is nothing but a shadow for then it should be a vaine thing but in comparison of the truth exhibited in the Gospell The intollerable impudency therefore is yours and your fellows and the laughter and admiration of all nations if all nations may heare of your shameles follie may be against you rather then Master Whitaker that blush not to say absolutelie Luther called the epistle strawy when he spake onelie in respect and comparison of greater plentie of more waightie matter in the Epistles of Peter and Paul then in that of Iames. But the matter presseth Master Whittaker verie heauily for that he being a reader in diuinitie could not choose but haue read those wordes alledged by learned men aboue a hunddred times against Luther As though he is bound to beleeue whatsoeuer he readeth by papistes alledged against him In deede this siaunder of Luthers reiecting that Epistle and calling it strawie is often thrust in by Popish writers yet without alledgeing the place where or the wordes in which it is written Prateolus out of Lindane of late hath sette it forth in these wordes eam non modò reiecit epistolam ceu canone indignam sed contumeliosissimè quoque appellauit Praealiis verè stramineam quòd nihilipsius iudicio haberet Euangelicae indolis He did not onelie reiect that episile as vnworthie to be in the Canon but also moste contumeliouslie hath called it in comparison of other verilie of strawe because in his iudgement it had nothing of Gospellike nature in it In the preface in Dutch whereof you speake we neither finde this word verilie or truelie nor anie reiection of this epistle or anie such iudgement of Luther expressed that should containe in it nothing that sauoreth of the Gospell You see therefore what credit is to be giuen to Popish writers in their reports against Luther Now whether Saint Iohn did speake lesse of good workes in his Gospell then the other three Euangelistes you handle a vaine question when you confesse that Iohn writing by the same spirit could not but haue manie thinges to the same effect Neither are you hable to sette downe those wordes of Luther our of which it maie be prooued either that Luther affirmed that the Gospell of Iohn was the onelie true Gospell or that the other three were to be reiected or mishked because they spake too much of good workes so that you remaine stil forany defense you haue brought a famous liet animpudent slaunderer The fourth doctrine of Luther you reported to be this If anie woman can not or will not proue by order of the lawe the insufficiency of hir husband let her request at his handes a diuorse or els by his consent let her priuelie lie with his brother or some other man Master Charke answered that this was Luthers counsel while he was a Papist which he reuoked after his conuersion For this you charge him with such wilfull and shamefull dishonestie as can not be excused and aske how he will looke his owne friendes in the face hereafter with such fonde insultation against him as was vsed in the preface whereunto hath sufficientlie beene answered to discouer your impudencie For Luther would not reuoke his former counsell saie you but do farre worsse namelie take the man by she lockes and touze him except he did it Wheras in plaine trueth Luther meaneth nothing els but to compell such a man to an open diuorse as I shewed in answer to the preface and as the woll discours of Luthers wordes shall make plaine euen to a partiall reader Serm. de matr speaking of the causes of diuorse Priores autem quos Christus ex matris vtero c. The former sort whome Christ saith to be borne eunuches from their mothers wombe are those which are called impotent which by nature are vnable for procreation and multiplying In whome coldnes and infirmities do exceede or els are so affected in bodie that they are not meete for the life that is in matrimonie such as a man maie finde both men and women These as exempted by God and so created as they are not partakers of the blessing of generation and multiplying are to be put awaie For in them there is left no place for that word of God increase and multiplie euen as if God had made some lame or blinde which are free from walking or seeing Concerning such a great while a goe I committed to writing a counsell for confessours which they should vse if the husband or wife came to them to aske counsel what they should do for as much as their yoke fellow is not able to render the due beneuolence and yet the other partie can not be without it when he feeleth sufficientlie that the creature of God in him-selfe to be of habilitie Then they slaundered me that I taught thus that if the husband can not satisfie his wiues wantonnes she ought to flie from him to another But I suffered those froward triflers to lie The sayinges of Christ and his Apostles were peruerted and made worse what maruaile if the same thing happen to me But who shal be hurt thereby they them-selues shall see at the length Therefore after this manner I gaue counsell If to a woman meete for the matter there do happen a husband that is impotent and she can not openlie be married to another man and she vnwillinglie went against the common vsage and would not haue her credit and fame to be obscured whereas in this case the Pope requireth without cause manie witnesses that she should speake to her husband after this manner Beholde my husband you cannot render vnto me the due beneuolence and you haue deceiued me and my youthfull bodie beside this you haue brought me into perill of my good name and health or saluation neither is there before God anie matrimonie betweene vs. Fauour me I praie you that I maie contract a secret matrimonie with your brother or your next of kinne so that you may haue the name that your goodes maie not passe to strange heires and suffer your selfe willinglie to be deceiued by me as you haue deceiued me against my will I proceeded also further that the husband in this case ought to assent vnto his wife and by that meanes to yeelde vnto her the due beneuolence and hope of issue And if that he refused that she by secret flight should prouide for hir owne safegarde and
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 euerie man that hath but small knowledge in the tongue doth know to signifie and require a mutual confession aswell as a mutuall praier of one man for another But yet let vs examine what your authorities doe containe First Origen in the place by you cited speaketh not a word of this text confesse your offences one to another but only of the two verses going before For making seauen meanes of remitting of sinnes after his corrupt vnpure manner of teaching By baptisme by martyrdome by almes by forgiueing one another by conuerting of sinners by aboundance of charitie he addeth the seauenth in these wordes Est adhuc septima licet dura laboriosa perpaenitentiam remissio peccatorum cum lauat peccator in lachrimis stratum suum fiunt ei lachrima suae pánes die nocte Et cùm non erubescit sacerdoti Domini indicare peccatum suum quaerere medicinam secundùm eum qui ait Dixi pronunciabo aduersum me iniustitiam meam Domino tu remisisti impietatem cordis mei in quo impletur illud quod Apostolus dicit si quis autem insirmatur vocet Presbyteror Ecclesiae imponant ei manus vngentes eum oleo in nomine Domini oratio fidei saluabit 〈◊〉 si in peccatis fuerit remittentur ei There remaineth yet the seauenth kinde of remission of sins although it be verie harde and painfull by repentance When the sinner washeth his bed in teares and his teares are made vnto him breade daie and night and when he is not ashamed to declare his sinne to the Priest of the Lorde and to seeke medicine acording to him which saith I haue said I will pronounce against my selfe my owne vnrighteousnes vnto the Lord and thou hast forgiuen me the vngodlines of my heart In which also that is fullfilled which the Apostle saith if anie man be diseasedl et him call the Elders of the Church let them lay hands vpon him anoynting him with oile in the name of the Lord and the praier of faith shall saue the diseased and if he shal be in sinnes they shal be forgiuen vnto him Thus much writeth Origen Now it is to be vnderstood that after his manner he alligorizeth vpon the sacrifices of the lawe comparing these meanes of remission to them And lest you should thinke that by declaring of sinne to the Priest of the Lord he doth meane confession to a popish priest he himselfe expoundeth before whom he meaneth by this Priest In morali loco potest pontisex isse esse sensus pietatis religionis videri qui in nobis per orationem obsecrationes quas Deo fundimus velut quodam sacerdotio fungitur In morall place this high Priest may seeme to be the sense of godlines religion which within vs by praiers and supplications which we powre forth to God exerciseth as it were a certaine priesthood And so likewise he taketh the place of Saint Iames alligoricallie as his application of the seauenth waie of remission vnto the Iudaicall sacrifice doth declare Si autem in amaritudine fletus fueris luctu lachrimis lamentatione confect us si carnem tuam maceraueris 〈◊〉 ac multa abstinentia aridam feceris dixeris quia sicut frixorium confrixa sunt ossa mea tunc sacrificium similam à sartagine vel à craticula obiulisse te 〈◊〉 But if thou hast bene in the bitternes of weeping consumed with sorowe teares and lamentation if thou hast afflicted thy slesh and made it drie with fasting and much abstinence and said my bones are fried as a frying pane or a fire thing then knowe that thou hast offered in sacrifice flower of the frying panne or of the gredeyorn Origen therefore giueth a colour in words but no substance in matter vnto this popish confession Concerning the opinion and authoritie of Bede touching this matter I haue spoken before but by the circumstance of the letter you saie it may well appeere that the Apostle speaketh of sacramentall confession to be made to gods priests How so I praie you forsooth Because he had there willed them to send for the Priestes of the Church to anoynt them and streight after addeth this text of confession and praying ouer the sicke A simple reason god wot because priests were spoken of in an other matter therefore none but priests may be vnderstoode in that which followeth nay rather the circumstances make against auricular confession and popish anointing also For what needes more priests then one to be sent for to other of those popish purposes or what papist sendeth for more although there be neuer so manie priests in the Church But the companie of elders in the primitiue Church being chosen of the moste replenished with heauenly graces that were in the congregatiō both for the gift of healing for praier to be made ouer the sick man were most conuenient to be sent for But it is in vaine by couller of anie circumstances to restraine the confession to priestes when the verie wordes of the letter as you call the text doe make it generall and mutual and therefore here was no cause for Luther to denie the authoritie of the epistle or for anie other to corrupt the text But where you count it a corruption to writ in stead of send for the priestes of the Church this call for the Elders of the congregation you doe either abuse the ignorant of willfull malice to make them thinke the sounde of words being changed the sense is anie thing altered or else you ignorantlie quarell about the translation which is word for word out of the originall greeke into English as no man meanelie learned in that tongue can doubt It is not the sounde of the wordes you rehearse that troubleth vs for we both like and vse them in their right sense our selues but it sufficeth you to haue an accidentall sounde when you cannot sinde a substantiall reason of your popish ceremonies and sacraments in the holie scriptures ALLEN But that thou maiest see good Christian reader the necessity of confession the better and that it is not growne to such a generall practize and opinion of necessitie vpon anie charge giuen by man or positiue lawes marke well with me that it dependeth directlie vpon Christes owne wordes whose sinnes you doe forgiue they be forgiuen and whose sinnes you doe retaine they be retained And therefore sacramentall confession to be of Christes institution For if Christ gaue power to Priestes to forgiue or retaine mens sinnes then there must needes be some subiect to their power iudgement else in vaine were so long a confession of binding and lossing mens sinnes if the right of the power did not necessarilie charge all men that haue such sinnes to be subiect to their binding and loosing Therefore this is a cleare case that in the verie 〈◊〉 wordes that the power was deliuered vnto them the bond of obedience was also perscribed
Church added vnto the Ecclesiastical canon or rule a certeine priest or elder which should be ouer them that repented that they which were fallen after baptisme should confesse their sinnes before this appointed priest And this rule holdeth still vnto this time in other sects Onelie they that holde Christ to be of the same substance with his father and the Nouatians which agree with thē in this faith haue reiected this priest appointed ouer them that repent The Nouatians in deede at the first receiued not this additiō But they which now hold the Churches hauing obserued it for a long time vnder Nectarius haue changed it by occasion of this matter that happened in the Church A certeine noble woman came to the priest appointed for repentance and made particular confession of those sinnes she had committed after baptisme the priest charged this woman to fast and praie cominuallie that with her confession she might shew forth the worke that was meete for repentance But the woman proceeding accused her selfe of another offence for she declared that a certaine Deacon of the Church had line with her This being declared caused the Deacon to be cast out of the Church but a tumult was raised among the priests for they were sore greeued not onelie with that which was done but also because this fact tended greatlie to the slaunder and contumelie of the Church So while cleargie men were in great reproch for these thinges a certaine blessed elder of the Church borne at Alexandria gaue in councell to the Bishop Nectarius to take awaie this priest that was appointed ouer repentance and to permit euerie man according to his owne conscience to be partaker of the mysteries For by that meanes onelie he should haue the Church voide of slaunder These thinges because I heard my selfe of that blessed man I was 〈◊〉 to commit vnto this writing For as I haue often said I haue giuen all diligence to learne of euerie man that knew these matters and exactlie to search them out that I might write nothing beside the truth But I saied vnto Eudemon or that blessed man your counsell Sir hath brought into the Church God knoweth what or no. But I see that you haue giuen occasion that one should not reprehend an others sinnes nor to obserue that precept of the Apostle which saieth Communicate not with the vnfruitfull workes of darkenes but rather reprooue them But of these matters sufficient Sozomenus Lib. 7. Cap. 16. reporteth the matter after this manner About this time Nectarius which gouerned the Church of Constantinople was the first that would no longer permit that priest which was appointed for them that repented And him followed al most al other Bishops Now this matter what it is or whence it began or for what cause it ceased diuerse men report diuerselie I will declare what I thinke For seeing not to sinne at all it is a matter more diuine then agreeable to mans nature and that God hath commaunded to graunt pardon to them that repent although they offend often times and in refusing to confesse sinnes the debt groweth more burthenous as it is like it was thought good among the priestes of olde time that as it were in an open theater vnder the witnesse of the multitude of the Church men should declare their sinnes And for this purpose they appointed a priest or elder of the best conuersation continent of speach wise to whome they came which had sinned and confessed such things as they had committed in their life And he according to euerie mans sin after he had appointed a mulct what he ought to doe or to abide absolued them when they had performed their penaltie by themselues But as for the Nouatians which made no account of repentance needed not this matter But in other sects of heretikes it is obserued euen vntill this time And it is diligintlie obserued in the westerne Churches and especiallie in the Church of the Romans For there is a certein open place appointed for them that are in exercise of repentance For they stand with heauie cheere and as it were sorowing And when the seruice of God is ended being not made partakers of those things that are lawfull for the holie ones with weeping lamentation they cast themselues downe flat vpon the earth the Bishop beholding them runneth to them weeping and likewise falling vpon the earth the wholl multitude of the Church is then filled with mourning and weeping Then first the Bishop riseth vp and lifteth vp the sinners that lie on the ground after he hath praied as it is meetes for the penitents that haue sinned he dismisseth them Then euerie one of them willinglie afflicting himselfe either with fastings or abstinēce from washings or certein meats or with other things that are enioyned thē cōtinueth a seaso so long as the Bishop hath appointed vnto him And at the time appointed after he hath payed as it were a certaine debt he is released of the punishment of fin and com meth into the congregation with the rest of the people These things the priests of Rome obserue euen vntill our daies But in the Church of Constantinople the priest or elder that was appointed ouer the penitent did exercise that office vntill ā certein noble woman being appointed by the priests to fast and pray to God for those sinnes which she had declared while she continued in the Church for this purpose confessed that shee had committed fornication with a Deacon whereof the multitude hauiug vnderstanding was sore greeued for defiling the Church and it was an exceeding great slaunder vnto the whol cleargie Nectarius beeing in doubt how to handle this matter that had happened first depriueth the fornicator of his ministerie And beeing counselled by certein men to permit euerie man as his conscience serued him and as he might be bolde to cōmunicate the mysteries he caused the priest to giue ouer that was appointed for repentance and from that time this custome taking holde hath hetherto continued Now I thinke the auncient grauitie and precisenes hauing begon by litle and litle to fall awaie into a diuerse and negligent custome seeing before as I suppose the offences were lesse both through shame of them which declared their owne transgressions through the precisenes of them that were appointed iudges in this case And for the same cause I gather that the Emperour Theodosius prouiding for the good name grauitie of the Churches made a law that women should not be admmitted to the ministerie of god except they had children and were aboue threescore yeares old according to the expresse cōmaundement of the Apostle and to expell out of the Churches those women that were shorne in the head to depriue such Bishops from their Bishoppricke which did admit any such women The storie beeing as I haue set it forth out of the reporte of the Ecclesiasticall writers now let vs see how sincerely you handle the matter and report thereof at
not to recompence Gods iustice but to make satisfaction to the Church which is not to graunt remission in those cases but vpon good hope of the parties true conuersion and inwarde and vnfained repentance But as Augustine speaketh here of open satisfaction not to Gods iustice but to the Churches iudgement so you haue his authority or as good for secret satisfactiō which is now more vsed lest any man should feare that were not sufficiēt to satisfy for the remnant of the debt due for mortall sinnes forgiuen I know not whether to impute it to ignorance or impudencie but most intollerable presumption it is to make that author whatsoeuer he was a faulter of your popish secret satis faction now vsed to be prescribed in your secret shrifts For this writer as I haue before declared aloweth no secret satisfaction for the loosing of mortal crimes but vpon a verie hard condition namely sed mutato priùs saeculari habitu c. but so that the secular habit be first changed and the studie of religion be confessed by correction of life and continuall and perpetuall sorow thorough the mercie of God but so onelie that he doe contrarie things to them for which he repenteth euery Sundaie humby and submmissiuelie vnto his death he receiue the Eucharist c. This is not to say pater noster in rememberance of the fiue wounds or to giue fiue pence grotes or shillings to fiue poore men or to fast fiue frydaies or such single satisfaction as your Popish priests in shirst doe enioyne Touching the worde satisfaction vsed by this Monkish Augustine it is neuer vsed by the right autentike Austine to graunt that the sufferings or doeings of man can satisfy the iustice of god who is satisfied by Christs obedience onelie and by none other meane the vertue of whose satisfaction is communicated vnto vs by the holie Ghost whereof we are assured by faith onelie but not by a solitarie faith as this heretike doth slaunder vs but by a faith accompanied fruiteful huelie effectuall and workeing by loue as the holie scripture teacheth vs whatsoeuer these blasphemous dogs barke against it ALLEN Now to this ende haue we saied al this that the faithful may vnderstand perfectlie what the Pope may by right remit thorugh his Pardon and Indulgence For looke what the officers of Gods Church may binde that without all doubt may they vpon good consideration release againe Therefore if they may enioyne penance for yeares and daies both openlie out of the sacrament and also in priuate satisfaction after Confession then may they release certaine daies and yeares of the same penance which was prescribed before For loosing and binding pertaine by reason law Christs owne graunt as to one act of iurisdiction that the one beeing lawfull the other must needes so be also If the Church be of right power and authoritie to prescribe penance of seuen yeares she hath the like right to remit vpon iust respect either all those yeares or some part of the same especiallie hauing meanes otherwise to supplie the lacke of fatisfaction of Gods iustice in the partie penitent FVLKE There is no faithfull man can perceiue by any thing that you haue saide what right the Pope hath to remit by his pardon and indulgence that which is enioyned by an other It is out of doubt that the officers of the Church vpon good consideration may release that which they binde except for in emissibie sins they binde with insoluble bandes And therefore they may release daies or yeares appointed for triall of the repentance if the Church can be satisfied in shorter time But for priuate satisfaction of Gods iustice or any satisfaction of his iustice they can neither binde nor loose enioyne nor release Therefore if the Church be of power to enioyne and prescribe penance for seauen yeares shee is of power also to release seuen yeares or part of the same but shee hath no meanes to supplie the satisfaction of Gods iustice which is fullie satisfied in Christ whose satisfaction is not to be disposed according to the iudgement of men but is applied to all the elect of God according to his will and pleasure Now whereas you speake of seauen yeares penance and the streightest Canons of Ancyre prescribe but 25. yeares for the greatest crime whereto serue so many thousand yeares of Pardon If therefore all that you haue saide tende to this ende that men may vnderstand that the Pope hath power to release times of penance enioyned seeing no councell euer enioyned a thousand yeares penance nor any penance beyonde the time of a mans life in so much that the Councell of Nice decreed that they which departe out of the world should be receiued into the communion although their time were not expired why doth the Pope take vpon him to graunt an hundred thousand yeares of pardon at a clap as I haue shewed before out of a pardon imprinted and confirmed by Leo 10 But if the Pope haue authoritie to graunt pardon for so many thousand yeares of penance enioyned by the right of binding and loosing which you saie by reason law and graunt of Christ pertaine to one act of iurisdiction that the one beeing lawfull the other must needs be so also Then may euerie priest enioyne an hundred 50. 40. 10. or 7. thousand yeares of penance to them that come to shrift as wel as the Pope giue pardon for so many thousand yeares for hundreds be but beggerly things to talke of where thousand be so rife If you answere that the Pope doth pardon not onelie yeares of penance enioyned but also of yeares due to be enioyned the difficultie is nothing auoided for if thousands of yeares be due the priest may enioyne thousands of yeares But then he shal exceede al the Canons penitential that euer were made in any councel and yet be forced to graunt pardon at the houre of death ALLEN And therefore I ioyne in argument and open reason with our aduersaries thus To giue pardon in moste common and Catholike sense of that worde is to release some part or all the enioyned penance for sinnes remitted But the Pope because he is the principall gouernour of Gods Church may release any penance enioyned vpon iust considerations Ergo the Pope may lawfullie giue Pardons The Minor wherein the aduersaries may perchance giue backe I prooue thus That which was bound by the Churches or Popes authoritie may be lawfullie loosed by the same authoritie againe because Christ himselfe ioyned in his graunt both these acts togetber and they are prooued to be proper to one iurisdiction But the Church by the Decrees of Bishops and Councells hath appointed such penance and so many yeares of correction for sundrie faults therefore the same Bishops or such as be of the like authoritie when they see occasion may remit the penance of the saied yeares or some part of it by limitation of daies or seasons as the state of the penitent requireth or the
there can neuer be anie reason or sufficient cause alledged that innouation of religion should be attempted by force of armes by warre and rebellion by fier and sword by murder and blood shed of good and faithfull subiectes Let this also be graunted for this nothing toucheth the cause of them which to mantaine a law made for religion and to defend them-selues from the crueltie of priuate persons are required by the gouernours of the realme to arme themselues for defence of the King his lawes and their owne liues The lawe of the Locrensians pleaseth him well that the procurer of anie alteration should preach with a rope about his necke wherewith he should be strangled if the audience misliked his deuise The rope had neede to be in wise mens handes where that lawe should be practised or els the Apostles and first preachers of religion in the world might haue bene hardlie handled before they had halfe vttered their message And therefore the Princes and rulers of the word in this our time are wiser then Peter Frarine or Iohn Fowler in not establishing and practising of this Iawe as these men would wish they had But the default thereof saith he hath caused so lamentable an estate of all thinges warres tumults slaughters ruines Churches and townes ouerturned c. Admit these were the effectes as they are nothing lesse of the Protestants preaching what woulde the lawe of the Locrensians haue staied in this case when with the good liking both of the Prince and of the people these preachers haue bene heard and their doctrine receiued It greeueth him that it was free for these preachers without anie feare of the rope frankelie and boldelie to perswade with the people And thinketh he that feare of the Locrensians rope woulde haue restrained them whome the terror of Antichristes fire and tragicall torments neuer discouraged to publish the message of Christ their master Naie they went further from wordes to woundes and blowes they attempted reformation by ciuill warre and rebellion There was a companie of desperate persons that ranne about the strcetes of Parris with naked swordes in their hands and cried out the gospell the gospell as Claudius de sanctes an vtter enemie of the gospell beareth witnes But I praie you M. Frarine were these preachers that so ranne and cried that beside varnished wordes disbursed woundes and blowes If they were not preachers as your author Claudius cannot saie they were how hangeth your talke togither Must the preachers be charged with euerie disorder of their hearers Then let the Popish preachers answere for all thefts murders treasons incests rebellions and other offenses of papists but if anie such desperate persons ranne about as you saie how prooue you that they were disciples of the protestant Preachers and not rather futious firebrands of the popish friers and Sorbonicall teachers by whose seditious sermons they were incensed to murder the Protestants and true professors of the Gospell for how like is it that so smal a number of the Protestants as was neuer able to afford but an handfull of fighting men in Parris would attempt to arme themselues against such an infinite multitude of zealous mutinous Papists as were in that Citie Where the verie Croisters and common porters that I speake nothing of so manie thousand artificers had bene able not onlie to haue withstood their attempt but also to haue chased them out of the citie Notwithstanding if you willneedes vrge your Authors reporte that they were Protestantes why doe you not tell vs how manie they slewe with those glistering swordes At least wise name one whome they wounded with those weopons in their handes when they cried out The gospell the gospell Contrariwise how thirstie of bloode the Papistes their preachers haue beene it is an easie matter to make manifest proofe For that I speake nothing of the horrible massacre most cruellie executed not onelie in Paris but throughout al the realme of France the crueltie whereof would ouer whelme at once and swallow vp whatsoeuer can be fained of the Protestantes seueritie There be manie hundreth witnesses aliue which can reporte that in the latter end of the reigne of King Henrie the second the Popish preachers perceiuing how greatly he fauoured their cause stirred vp the people in their dailie sermons vnto sedition affirming that it was a thing acceptable vnto God and meritorious if anie man should kill a Luthe rane whereupon insued manie horrible murders of which some are perticularlie recorded in historie In the Church yeard of Saint Innocents immediatlie after a sermon when two were brawling as the people came forth of the Church and the one more of spite then of anie cause called the other Lutherane the people streight waie ranne vpon him and pursued him into the Church whether he fled for sanctuary A certaine gentleman passing that waie with his brother which was a Popish Priest hearing that a man should be slaine of the people in deuoureth to pacifie their mindes with faire words to deliuer the pore man from their hands A hedge Priest by and by crieth out that this gentleman was the man whome they sought for which durst defend a Lutherane The people immediately set vppon the gentleman The priest his brother began to speake for him but thereby they were more inraged To be short after they were both drawne out of the Church the gentleman hardlie escaped into the Curats house The poore priest with manie woundes was cruellie murdered saying his Confiteor by which it did sufficientlie appeare he was no Lutherane Not manie daies before that a certaine Sorbonist whom they called the Picardes soule a common trumpet of sedition in those daies to inflame the people against the Lutheranes vsed often to beate vpon this point that it was an holie thing to shed the Lutheranes blood The slaughter of whome as of the Cananites of olde time was verie acceptable to God and that the handes of the godlie Catholikes should so be consecrated Acertaine student which came to heare one of his sermons chaunced to smile vpon his fellow which sat by him an olde woman that espying cried out that there was a Lutherane which mocked the preacher The brutish people no sooner heard that voice but without further enquirie they drue that student out of the Church and most cruellie digged out his eies and dinged out his braines The indiferent reader may reasonablelie by these examples gather what hauocke was made of them that were knowne to be Protestants indeede when vpon so light occasions they that were not knowen nor iustlie suspected were so suddenlie murdered when the Priestlie apparell could not defend the priest who fauoured the Lutherans no further then to speake a worde for his owne brother who was in manifest daunger of beeing murdered while he sought no more but by honest perswasions to deliuer a thirde person from murder against whom there passed no sentence to conuict him of Lutheranizme but the malitious reproch of his
Luther free from all thinges and there could be no hope of reformation except all lawes of men were abolished and the Gospell of libertie 〈◊〉 home with much more to the like effect whereupon Fowler the wise man con cludeth in the margent that Luther chiefe preacher of that Gospell would haue beene king alone him selfe and of those his pardoxes sprang the rebellion of Muntzer and the Boores. But good God what shame haue the Papistes in slaundering Luther in that booke speaketh of the spirituall freedome of conscience which Christ hath purchased for vs and which ought not to be entangled with anie traditions or preceptes of men against ciuill lawes and ordinances he writeth not one sillable But whereas the false Prophet and traitor Muntzer boasted that he did fight the Lordes battells Frarine calleth Melancthon to witnes that Luther affirmed the same namelie that God him selfe did rise and stand against the estates of Germanie and their tyrannie And who doubteth but how wicked soeuer the attempt doings of those seditious persons were that God vsed them as a scourge to punish the sinnes of the rulers That Luther prophecied of the victorie of the rebells it is a fable as manie others are which Frarine reporteth but contrar iwise in his writing against them he threatneth them destruction both of bodie and soule except they gaue ouer their diuelish enterprices After the discourse of the Muntzerian rebelles he commeth to Luthers marriage with a Nunne against which he inueigheth in two respectes First of the time which was immediatlie after the calamitie of Germanie And then of the person which was a Nunne stolne with eight others out of the Nunnerie of Nimike vppon good frydaie by his Bawde Leonard Knoppen after which time shee was broken with wanton toies and lecherous recreations by the space of two yeares among the schollers of wittenberg yea Luther tooke it no scorne to daunse and drinke carouse c. and all for verie penance and sorow of these mischiefes whereof he himselfe was author Though manie men misliked Luthers mariage with a Nunne which he perhaps did the rather to confirme by his owne act the libertie of matrimonie in them that had made a rash vow which they were not able to performe yet no wise man I hope beleeueth that he made no better choise then Frarine affirmeth or that he was of so light behauiour to daunse drinke carouse of all which slaunders there is no proofe brought but Frarines bare affirmation whose bould lying els where dogged scorning here let indifferent men iudge what credit it deserueth But whereas Luther did write most vehe mently against the seditious Boores by which the impudent slaunders of Frarine are most manifest he conuicted he now faineth that Luther turning with the blast of fortune when they were ouerthrowne did write most bitterlie against them affirming that the nobles might winne heauen by shedding the blood of such traiterous rebelles whereas it is manifest that Luther hauing diuerse times before by his writings at their first attemptes diswaded them from rebellion and exhorted them to obedience when by no meanes they would yeelde to his Godlie persuasions did at the last most sharplie inueigh against them and denounce their vtter destruction but yet at such time as they were in the ruffe of their rebellion when they were moste terrible to all good men after they had cōmitted many horrible outrages yet may Luther the traiterous Cateline of our time be thanked for al these bloodie tragidies not of them onlie but for the turkish wars also For he citeth out of Stoltius in somnio Luth c. that Luther came in fauour with Soliman the great Turke by such practises yea Solyman wrote in plaine wordes but he sheweth not to whome that he wished Luther long life that he hoped the daie should come that Luther should finde him his good ma ster Doth any man beleeue these vanities yet Fowler in his infamous picture would haue it seeme as though the Turke by his letters was called to make warre vpon Christendome But Frarine saith more craftelie that by occasion of debate about the Lutherane Gospell and so through Luthers meanes the Turke conceaued hope to conquer all Germanie when he came to the Citie of Vienna beeing the key of Christ endome with such a huge great host What if this be graunted is Luther which preached the Gospel of Christ the cause of the Turkes inuasion or they that will not embrace the trueth of God by him reueiled But he cleane omitteth by whose good seruice that noble Citie of Vienna was defended against the Turke that worthy prince Phillip the Palesgraue a fauerour of the religion reformed As also it is certaine that Solyman by the prouocation of Iohn the vaiuode made by his embassadour Ierome Laske an Hungariā was called into Hungarie Austrige against the Emperor and his brother Ferdinande by whome he was debarred to enioy that right which he pretended to haue to the kingdom of Hungarie so true it is that Luther was the onelie cause of Solymans inuasion of Christendome Likewise where Charles the fift without iust cause made war vpon the princes and states of Germanie that were entred into the legue of Smalcalde as the stories of that warre and the protestation of the states sufficientlie declare to satisfie the Popes crueltie and oppresse the libertie of Ger many Frarine maketh a great matter of their resistance saying that Germanie should haue obeyed him at a beck as though the king of Spaine were made Emperor of Almaine not for the defence of Germanie according to the auncient priueliges and liberties thereof but to the vtter ouerthrough and destruction of the same But his victorie pleaseth Frarine well and no cause why it should displease vs seing it pleased god so to punish the securitie of Germanie and to shew how vaine it is to trust in the strength of men Albeit Charles caried not this victorie cleare for while he keepeth no couenantes with the conquered and against the laws of armes deteined the Lantgrane prisoner who of his owne accord came vnto him to entreat of agreement his vniust dealings prouoked euen those whome he had most aduaunced to seeke reuenge of his falsehood by meanes where of he susteined more ignomine in the end then euer he gat glorie in the beginning of those warres But if Frarine thinke it so necessarie for Germanie to be at the Emperours beck in all cases whie did he not perswade the Louanians and all other Popish states of the lowe countries to be obedient at a beck to all the commaundements of the Spanish King their sufferaigne But if the King of Spaines sufferaignetie was not so absolute but that it was limited within the compasse of certaine conditions against which they were not bound to obey let him not doubt but Germanie hath better ground of their doings then all the young Oratours of Louane haue witte to controll As