vpon this false grounde as though they were all brought to proue Priuat Masse Now M. Iewell knewe well enough that from the first part of this 5. Diuision hetherto profes are brought onely for the Sacrifice and substaunce of the Masse And againe he knew that in the very next Diuisâ—on only he beginneth to speake of Priuat Masse where the wordes of M. D. Harding are these Now this presupposed that the Masse standeth vpon good and sufficient groundes for the stay of all true Christen mens bâ—lefe let vs come to our special purpose and say somewhat of Priuat Masse These words of M. D. Harding do immediatly folow the former allegatyons of Dyonise Basill Chrisostom ClemeÌ„t and Cyrillus Now what Vntrue dealing is this to heape so many Vntruthes vpon one false grounde to euidently appearing God amende you M. Iewell and sende you some shame or honesty that you dissemble no more so impudently Harding The feast is common All be inuited Iewell The 13. Vntruthe They inuite no man StapletoÌ„ Though the priest expressely inuiteth no man by worde or by gesture yet the order of the Church the sermons of the Priest the counsel in Confessions do inuite al men to frequeÌ„t the holy Sacrament In this sence it is true that all be inuited In this sence wrote D. Harding Of any wordes off the Priest or gesture of the Deacon in the seruice of the Masse he meant not nor spake not Now M. Iewell bicause he will imagine no other inuiting but this he calleth it a manifest Vntruthe that all be inuited But to proue an Vntruthe in the Author yow must take the meaning of the Author and not appoint him what meaning yow list So euery foole may comptroll the wise Harding They hauing quite abrogated the other two Consecration and Oblation and not so much as once naming them in their bookes of seruice Iewell The .14 Vntruthe The Sacrifice is specially named in the Communion booke And in the masse it selfe consecration is not named StapletoÌ„ The Sacrifice of Christes body and bloud as in the last Supper our Sauiour first offred it the OblatioÌ„ of the holy Mysteries in the CoÌ„munion booke is neither named nor practised The sacrifice of Christ on the crosse is mentioned The sacrifice of prayse and thankes geuing on Our parte the offring vp of our selues our soules and bodies to be a reasonable holy and liuely sacrifice to God is in the Communion booke wel meÌ„tioned if the Daily Sacrifice of the Church the precious body and bloud of Christ vnder the forme of bread and wine were offred there also By the which we offer in dede a Sacrifice of prayse and thaÌ„kes geuing vnto God by the which we offer vnto God a reasonable holy and liuely Sacrifice not our selues onely but much more the most precious Body and Bloud of our Sauiour and by that and with that our selues also Without this Sacrifice to saye in your Communion booke that ye offer a Sacrifice of thankes geuing to saie that ye offer your selues a liuely Sacrifice vnto God it is but mockery with God and the Church you doe damnably abuse your selues and the people For M. Iewell you omitt the Institution of Christ and make one of your owne Harken to the holy Fathers to whome you offer to yelde and lerne that you do so S. Ciprian sayeth If Iesus Christ our Lorde and God he himselfe be the highe priest of God the Father and he him selfe first offred a Sacrifice to God the Father and CoÌ„maunded the same to be done in the remeÌ„braunce of him surely that Priest doth truly perfourme the office of Christ who foloweth that that Christ dyd and theÌ„ doth offer a full Sacrifice in the Church to God the Father if he so beginne to offer according as he seeth Christ to haue offred What Sacrifice is that M. Iewel which Christ offred to God the Father and commaunded the same to be done in the remembraunce of him Was it the Sacrifice vpon the Crosse Did Christ commaunde the Church to Sacrifice him on the Crosse in the remembraunce of him againe Was it not in his last Supper that he commaunded vs to do in his remembraunce Doth not S. Ciprian dispute there expressely CoÌ„tra Aquarios against such as would CoÌ„secrat the SacrameÌ„t with only Water prouing vnto them that they must vse bothe Wine and Water where you vse Wine only and no Water in your detestable Communion Dothe he not expressely speake of the Sacrifice in the last Supper Can you denie al this M. Iewell Or will you yelde to this one Clere Sentence of so Auncient a Father so longe aboue the compasse of your 600. yeares Againe S. Ciprian saieth That Priest doth truly perfourme the office of Christ who foloweth that that Christ did and then doth offer a full Sacrifice in the Church to God the Father if he so beginne to offer according as he seeth Christ to haue offred But what did Christ offer in the last supper Let S. Cyprian instruct vs. In the same place and epistle he saieth Quis magis sacerdos dei summi quà m dominus noster Iesus Christus qui sacrificium deo patri obtulit obtulit hoc idem quod Melchisedech obâ—ulerat id est panem vinum suam scilicet corpus sanguinem Who is more the priest of God most highe then our Lorde Iesus Christ which offred a sacrifice to God the Father And offred the same which Melchisedech offred that is bread and wine that is to saie his body and bloud This is the Sacrifice which Christ offred in the last Supper This Sacrifice the true Priestes of Christe doe offer in the church and so as Christ himselfe offred This sacrifice the CoÌ„munioÌ„ booke hath not nameth not vseth not This sacrifice this Oblation of the holy mysteries of Christes body and bloud S. Ciprian speaketh of This Sacrifice M.D. Harding most truly saied that you haue abrogated This Sacrifice most truly he saied that not ones you haue named it in your bookes of seruice Goe now M. Iewell and if ye wil note an Vntruth in M.D. Har. note not as here you note The Sacrifice is expressely named in the Communion booke but note This sacrifice is expressely named in the Communion booke And so shall yow in dede make a great manifest Lie on your owne part and finde no Vntruthe at al in M.D. Harding For alas it is to true that you haue not the Sacrifice of the church in your CommunioÌ„ booke Alas it is to true that damnably yow haue omitted Christes Institution Cursedly you deceaue the people and most miserably â—yow condemne your owne selues Other Fathers that doe witnesse an externall Sacrifice which in the Communion booke is vtterly lefte out and omitted when I come to the 34. Vntruthe I shall haue more occasion to recite As touching Consecration S. Augustin saieth speaking of the blessed Sacrament Certa Consecratione fit nobis Mysticus panis
thinges which be necessarely required to this Sacrament by Christes Institution either declared by written Scriptures or taught by the holy ghost as bread and wine mingled with water for the matter c. Iewell The .23 Vntruthe The mingling of wine and water together is neither Catholike nor necessary Scotus StapletoÌ„ Yes forsothe this is Catholike and therefore it is necessary That it is Catholike I proue by the coÌ„sent of the Catholike Fathers of all couÌ„tres in the primitiue church In Afrike S. CipriaÌ„ B. of Carthage affirmeth it in these words Copulatio coniunctio aquae vini sic miscètur in calice domini vt commixtio illa non possit abinuiceÌ„ separari The coupling and ioyning togeather of Wine and Water is so mingled in the Cuppe of our Lorde that the same mingling maye not be separated the one part from the other And againe Sic in sanctificando calice domini offerri aqua sola non potest quomodo nec vinum solum potest Nam si vinum tantum quis offerat sanguis Christi incipit esse sine nobis Si vero aqua sola plebs incipit esse sine Christo. QuaÌ„do autem vtruÌ„que miscetur adunatione confusa sibi inuicem copulatur tunc sacramentum spirituale caeleste perficitur In sanctifying the cuppe of our Lorde so water alone can not be offred as neither wine alone can be offered For if any offer wine alone then the bloud of Christ beginneth to be without vs. But if Water be alone the people beginneth to be without Christ. But wheÌ„ bothe is mingled and ioyned together then the spirituall and heauenly Sacrament is perfyted Thus much S. Cyprian and much more in that place disputing against those which vsed only water in consecrating the holy mysteries teaching the InstitutioÌ„ of Christ to be that both Wine and Water be mingled to the perfyting of that heauenly Sacrament S. Augustin an Africane about two hundred yeares after S. Cyprian witnesseth this practise of Christes church in his time also The seare his words In Eucharistia noÌ„ debet pura aqua offerri vt qui daÌ„ sobrietatis falluÌ„tur imagine sed vinuÌ„ cum aqua mixtuÌ„ In the Euchariste Only water ought not to be offred as some vnder the coulour of sobriete are deceiued but Wine mingled with Water In an other place he reckoneth these in the rolle of heretikes which offred Only water without Wine in the holy Sacrifice of Christes church And against such heretikes the 3. CouÌ„cell of Carthage vnto the which S. Augustin subscribed made an expresse decree not yet forbidding vtterly Water but commaÌ„ding wine and water Both to be mingled together These are the words of the decree Vt in sacrameÌ„tis Corporis SaÌ„guinis domini nihil amplius offeratur quà m ipse dominus tradidit hoc est panis Vinum aquae mixtuÌ„ That in the Sacraments of the Body and Bloud of our Lorde nothing elles be offred then oure Lorde him selfe deliuered that is bread and wine mingled with Water This the Councell decreed not as then a new Institution but as a Tradition coming from Christ him selfe Thus we see in Afrike in S. Cyprians and S. Augustins time the mingling of Water and Wine in the blessed SacrameÌ„t was accompted Catholike and necessary In Fraunce how the Sacrament was there celebrated let Ireneus a very auncient writer and nigh vnto the Apostles wtnesse Writing of this blessed Sacrament and by the verite of Christes body and bloud here in prouing the verite of his true flesh and bloud walking here on earth he hath these wordes Quando mixtus Calix factus panis percipit verbum dei fit Eucharistia corporis sanguinis Christi ex quibus augetur consistit carnis nostrae substantia that is WheÌ„ the mingled Cuppe and the made bread receaueth the worde of God it is made the Euchariste of the Body and Bloud of Christ of the which the substaÌ„ce of our flesh is augmented and coÌ„sisteth The Mingled Cuppe that Ireneus speaketh of caÌ„not be meaÌ„t of any other theÌ„ of wine mingled with water Of such a coÌ„mixtion in the blessed Sacrament a Councell holden in Fraunce aboue vnleuen hundred yeares past mencioneth In Italy what the practise of the primitiue church was by two witnesses it shall appere Alexander the fift Pope of Rome after S. Peter writeth thus not as a new decree of his owne but as he saieth vt a patribus accepimus as we haue receaued it froÌ„ the Fathers Repulsis opinionum superstitionibus panis tantum vinum aqua permixtum in sacrificio offerantur Laying aside all other superstitious opinions let only bread and wine Mingled with water be offred in the Sacrifice S. Ambrose no Pope but a lerned and blessed B. of Millain writeth thus Diximus quòd in altari constituitur Calix panis In Calicem inquit mittitur vinum Et quid aliud Aqua Sed tu mihi dicis Quomodo ergo Melchisedech panem vinum obtulit Quid sibi vult admixtio aquae Rationem accipe Primo omnium figura c. that is We saied before that vpon the aultar is put a Cuppe and bread In to the Cuppe saieth he wine is putt And what elles Water But thou saiest vnto me How then did Melchisedech offer bread and wine VVhat meaneth this Mingling of water Harken to the Reason First of all the figure and so forthe where S. Ambrose at large geueth ij causes of mingling VVater with wine in the blessed Sacrament The one to answer to the figure of the Water running out of the rocke stricken by Moyses which was Christ that is betokened Christ. An other that as water and bloud ranne out of the side of Christ on the Crosse bothe to redeme and to cleanse mankinde so in this blessed Sacrifice being an expresse resemblance of Christes passion Wine and Water be offred vp to perfit the Sacrament of Christes bloud Thus now we haue Catholike witnesses of the primitiue Church in Italy Fraunce and Afrike touching the Mingling of Water with wine in these holy mysteries In Spaine also wiâ—hin the compasse of M. Iewelles 600. yeares we reade the same confirmed in a Councel holden at Braccara and the very wordes of S. Ciprian aboue alleaged brought in Iewell But saieth M. Iewell Scotus and Innocentius witnesse that the Greke Church in their time vsed it not Is it come to that M. Iewell Must we trie our Catholike faith doctrine and euen the meanest cerimonies by the consent of the first 600. yeares and will you proue a doctrine not Catholike by the practise of certain countres litle more then 300. yeares past For about that time liued Innocentius and Scotus At that time the grekes as they had many other errours so no maruail if they had this also And you do but your kinde to disproue the Catholike seruice by the exaÌ„ple of heretikes For the greke Church
Vrspergensis Sabelliâ—us and such like For as well might he saye that these later Writers had forged such bookes as S. Augustine S. Hierome S. Basill Chrysostome Ambrose and other lerned Fathers are saied to haue writen and all suche Councelles whiche in those yeares are saied to haue ben holden as to discredit other parcels off the Fathers or Canons of Councels whiche are reported by them though suche thinges in the Fathers and Councells are not to be founde And so may M. Iewell make a Religion off his owne beleue him selfe no man and yet require all men to beleue him But bicause M. Iewell speaketh so peremptorely that Nestorius neuer dreamed no suche thinge you shall see howe lykely he was not to dreame only but euen to Speake and teache suche an heresye or foly as M. Iewell termeth it as to saie that vnder the fourme of Breade in the Sacrament is contayned the Body of Christe without Bloude Whiche yet the Lutherans graunting the real presence of Christes body with the breade and teaching withall that the people receiuing vnder one kinde haue iniury and do receiue lesse then if they receiued bothâ— are not farre from For by their opinion it foloweth that lacking somewhat vnder the one kinde and hauing yet the Body of Christ they lacke the bloude whiche is vnder the other kinde only Nowe M. Iewell though he be a Sacramentary yet hathe he good cause to fauour the Lutherans for his olde Masters sake who at his first coming to Oxford was an vpright Lutheran and specially for Luthers sake who stroke the first sparckle of this greate glorious light that M. Iewell and his fellowes so vaunteth of As touching Nestorius his opinion was that we receaued the Flesh of Christe in the Sacrament without his diuinite These are the wordes of Nestorius him selfe as Cyrillus recordeth them Nâ—storius inquit Audite attendentes verba Qui manducat carâ—em meam memores estote quòd de carne est sermo quòd non a me adiectum est carnis nomen ne videar sinistre interpretari Qui manducat meam carnem bibit meum singuinem in me munet ego in eo Non ditit Qui manducat meam diuinitatem bibit meam dâ—uinitatem Qui manducat meam carnem inquit meum sanguinem bibit in me manet ego in eo Memores estote quod de carne dictum sit Nestorius saieth Heare and harken to the wordes He that eateth my Flesh. Remember that Flesh is here mentioned and that the name of Flesh is not added by me lest I seme to expounde amisse He that eateth my Flesh and drinketh my Bloude abideth in me and I in him He saieth not He that eateth my diuinite and drinketh my diuinite He that eateth my Flesh saieth he and drinketh my Bloud abideth in me and I him Remember that this is spoken of the Fleshe Thus farre Nestorius persuading his hearers that we receaued the bare Fleshe of Christe in the Sacrament without the diuinite or Godhead adioyned Againste the which damnahle Heresye Cyrillus disputing in the same place saieth Num hominis comestionem nostrum hoc Sacramentum pronuncias ad crassas cogitationes vrges eorum qui crediderunt mentes Doest thou speaking to Nestorius cal this our Sacrament the eating of mans Flesh and prouoke the Hartes of the faithefull to grosse cogitations This then being the Opinion of Nestorius as it is here euident that it was that in the Sacrament we did eate the Fleshe of Christe onely and drinke the Bloud only without the Diuinite adioyned it must consequently folowe that his opinion was that the bare Flesh was in the Sacrament a part by it self and the Bloud by it selfe For and marke well this reason the cause why the Catholike Church beleueth that vnder one part of the Sacrament whole Christ is contained and therefore the bloud with the body is bicause it beleueth that vnder that one part of the Sacraâ—ent Christ is as God and not as bare man or bare flesh Vpon this belefe also it is grouÌ„ded that whole Christ is at one time in many places by the way of this most mystical SacrameÌ„t as Chrysostom and Primasius vpon the 10. chapter to the Hebrewes do in expresse wordes declare Now Nestorius not beleuing any such diuinite to be ioyned with the body of Christ in the Sacrament but the bare flesh to be by it selfe and the Bloud in like maner by it selfe it is easy to iudge that he was of this opinioÌ„ that vnder the forme of Bread in the SacrameÌ„t was the Body of Christ without Bloud which is the thinge that D. Harding and those other lerned writers do reporte of him And the which M. Iewell peremptorely denieth without any proofe or Reason in the worlde to the contrary but only by his Negatiue Proofes Such and such mention no such thinge Ergo there was no such matter Thus whether D. Harding spake beside Truthe and lerning let the indifferent reader iudge Harding For whereas Christ commaunded the Apostles to baptise in the name of the Father and the Sonne and the Holy Ghoste they baptised in the name of Iesus Christ 54 only The .54 Vntruthe A foule deprauation of the Scriptures This deprauation M. Iewell laieth to D. Hardinges charge for putting the worde only in the last place Truthe it is that the Only baptim mencioned in the Actes of the Apostles is mencioned to haue ben geueÌ„ in the name of Iesus As in the second the tenth the eight and the seuententh chapters it may be sene And so it is no Vntruthe that by the letter of holy Scripture the Apostles baptised only in the name of Iesus Christ. The displacing of a worde which altereth not the sence vnlesse M. Iewel caÌ„ proue it was done of fraude or malice is no Vntruthe in any vpright iudgement The sence of holy scripture being kept the Scripture is not depraued though some worde be put out of order Now that the Scripture so saieth bothe the only mentioning of such forme of baptim in all the Actes of the Apostles bothe the letter it selfe I saie and the meaning also of the letter if we beleue the iudgemeÌ„t of S. Ambrose coÌ„uinceth S. Ambrose disputing of this baptim mencioned in the Actes of the Apostles hath these wordes Cum dicitur In nomine domini nostri Iesu Christi per vnitatem nominis impletum mysterium est When it is saied In the name of our lorde Iesus Christ by the vnite of the name the sacrament is complete For as S. Ambrose saieth also in that place he that is blessed in Christ is blessed in the name of the Father and the Sonne and the Holy Ghoste Thus by the letter and by the meaning of the letter if we beleue S. Ambrose baptim was geuen in the name of Christ Only without mencioning the Father and the Holy Ghoste and yet in dede in the name of all But beholde good Reader
hearde of the faithefull people to 〈◊〉 that thereof the hartes of the heareâ—s maye be sturred to more deuotioÌ„ and honour geuing to God For so the holy Apostle teacheth saying in the first epistle to the Corinthians For if thou only blisse with the Spirit how shall be that supplieth the roume of the ignorant saye Amen to God at thy thankes geuing For he knoweth not what thou saiest Thou geuest thankes well But the other is not edified For these causes therefore it behoueth that the praier at the holy Oblation and also other praiers be offred with lowde voice of the holy bishoppes and priestes vnto our Lorde Iesus Christ with the Father and the holy Ghoste Thus farre the Constitution of Iustinian His wordes do require as S. Augustins also before that the Priest do speake alowde at the holy Oblation time And the cause thereoff he geueth Not that the people may vnderstande him For in Iustinians time fewe or none of the common vulgar people vnderstode the lerned Greke or Latin wherein the Church Seruice was then only saied But that the people hearing the priest might thereof be stirred to more deuotion and honour geuing to God To the which deuotion the people is stirred when the priest lifteth vp his voice stretcheth his handes and knocketh his breast with other such godly tokens of the inwarde man though they vnderstande not the very wordes that the priest speaketh Yea and better also then if they vnderstode them as the very experience of deuotion in olde time and at these dayes dothe euidently declare For nowe the people as I haue heard them my selfe complaine harkening to the Minister reading the Scriptures in English and vnderstanding the meaning thereof as much as if they were readd in greke they spende the litle time which they abide in the Churche rather in wondering at suche straunge matters then in priuat deuotion and praier Yea by that externall noyse of the English Seruice familiar to their eares and strange to their vnderstanding they are forced to harken to that which they attaine not and remaine distracted from that which they woulde doe But in the olde Latine Seruice when the priest saied his Confiteor all the Parishe woule knele downe and lifte vp their hartes to God with him Likewise somewhat before the Sacring when the priest speaking more alowde beganne to saie Per omnia secula seculorum and that which foloweth the whole Parish woulde stande vp and lifte vp their hartes also to God with the priest deuoutely attending the presence of their Maker in those most Holy and Dreadful Mysteries Neither was there any so ignorant in al the parishe which did not at that time lifte vp his harte to God with the Priest though he vnderstode no one worde that the Priest saied For they came then to the Seruice to praye vnto allmighty God They came to Sermons to lerne and to be instructed In this deuotion many a thousand of englishmen though they vnderstode no one worde of the Priest haue yelded their soules to Cod and attained to the blisse euerlasting these nyne hundred yeres and vpwarde all which time the English Church hath bene Christened and hath had the Church Seruice only in the latine tounge Thus much of the meaning of Iustinians Constitution of the which M. Iewell for all his Replie can not yet picke out his Vulgar Seruice But nowe it shall farder appeare that though that Constitution had bene made of such Countres where the people vnderstode the Seruice yet it was no generall Constitution nor touched not the latin Church as you haue hearde in the wordes of D. Harding before alleaged vpon the which M. Iewell though him selfe to haue a good occasion to note a Couple of Vntruthes His Note in the Margin you haue heard before Nowe he prosecuteth it in his text and saieth Iewell M. Harding saieth further This lawe toke place onely in Constantinople and not in the Churche of Rome And so he coucheth two manifeste Vntruthes together in one sentence First M. Iewel alleageth not the wordes of D. Harding truly D. Har. saieth Iustinian ordained thus for the Greke Church onely and to that onely it is to be referred Nowe Constantinople is but a parte of the greke Church M. Iewel therefore after his maner hath restrained much the wordes of D. Harding thereby to make the Vntruthe more apparent and the matter more odious But nowe M. Iewell Howe proue you this to be Vntrewe Thus he flourisheth Iewell But what wil he saye Iustinian was not Emperour of Rome or had nothinge to doo in the Churche of Rome StapletoÌ„ What nede is there that D. Hardinge shoulde saye so muche You knowe M. Iewell by your lawe that the lawes and statutes of Emperours do not allwaies extende to all the prouinces of the Empire Which shall euidently appeare by that which your selfe anon alleageth Iewell Verely he writeth him selfe the Emperour of Rome of Fraunce of Almanie and Germany c. Iustinian dothe no where write him selfe Emperour of Rome And it is euident by the stories he had in Italy as Contius noteth But dubium Imperium a doubteful and not settled Empiere It is knowen that the Gotthes then possessed Italy that Belisarius the Capitaine of Iustinian ouerthrewe them in often battailes but did not yet vtterly extinguish them And the first depute of the Greke Emperour at Rauenna in Italy â—â—lled Exarchus was in the time of Iustinus successour to 〈◊〉 Iustinian Neither was Iustinian Emperour of Fraunce Foâ— though he be called Francicus yet that was not as Blondus semeth to saie of that we call nowe Fraunce but of a parte of Almanie so called as diuers other do write And certain it is by the Chronicles of Fraunce and other that in the time of Iustinians Empire Chilperic and Clotarius were kinges of Fraunce succeding to Clouis who one hundred yeres before the Empire of Iustinian in the time of Theodosius the seconde occupied the realme of Fraunce Sence which time Fraunce was neuer subiect to the Empire more then other realmes were Iewell And deposed two Bishops of Rome Syluerius and Vigilius VVhereof it may appeare he had somewhat to doo in the Churche of Rome Verely a small power woulde serue to bringe this to passe The Emperesse Iustinians wife being an Eutychian heretike and offended with Pope Siluerius for not restoring Anthemius the Eutychian bishop of Constantinople whom Agapetus the Pope predecessour to Siluerius had deposed and ordred in his place Menna founde the meanes by her Capitaine Bellisarius who occupied and defended Rome at that time against the Gotthes to banishe the Pope Siluerius This was no great Acte for such a Capitain as Bellisarius was to banishe a holy bishop Such Imperiall despositions you vse Vigilius in like maner being placed in the roome of Siluerius by the drifte also of Belisarius at the Commaundement off the Eutychian Empresse to whom he had promised that being Pope he would restore
a matter and so greately tendered of his holynesse is sufficient inough to proue that he knew S. Augustiâ—eth right wel what he was But we haue other ArgumeÌ„tes out of S. Gregorie hym selfe by which it shall be perceaued not only thath he knew S. Augustine but also lyked and praised him For he commendeth hym to Desiderius and Sigarius bishoppes or Fraunce by speciall letters requiring them to helpe and cumfort Augustinum seruum dei praesentium portitorem cuius zelus studium bene nobis est cognitum Augustine the seruant of God the bearer of these present leters whose Zeale and good wil ys well knowen vnto vs. By the selfe same wordes he commendeth him also to Theodoricus and Theodebert kinges of Fraunce calling him The seruant of god whose Zeale and good mind is well knowen vnto vs. Besides this he calleth him his brother Augustine And in an other place testifieth that he was A Monke of his Monasterie and sent by him into England which vnto that tyme continued wicked and naught in cultu lignorum ac lapidum in the worshipping of Stockes and Stones And further he testifieth that either Augustine himselfe or they that were Sent with him dyd shyne by so many miracles in that Countrie that the notable thinges which they doe maie seeme to folow and resemble the workes and Power of the Apostles And againe That at Christmassetyde S. Augustine baptized more than ten thowsand Englishmen He saieth further to the praise of S. Augustine that so grete a multitude of the Englishe nation was turned to the grace of the Christian Faithe that he had neede to send more laborers thither And in that epistle he calleth him our most ReuereÌ„t brother and felowbishope Augustine To be short God so wrought by the handes of S. Augustine to the conuersion of England that S. Gregorie thought it good to write vnto him a most wyse and louing letter least the greatnes of his giftes and miracles should extol him For after he had woÌ„dered at the mighte Grace of God which had brought greate thinges to passe in England by the meanes of simple and weake men yet saieth he there is in this heauenly gift most deere brother Augustine a thinge that with greate wil ought to be feared most vehemeÌ„tly For I know that almightie God hath shewed by meanes of the greate wonders towardes that CouÌ„trie which he would to be Chosen Wherefore it is necessarie that of the self same heauenly gift thow bothe reioyce with feare and be also afried with gladnes I meane that thow shouldest be glad because the sowles of Englishemen are drawen by the outward myracles vnto an inwarde grace and that thow shouldest feare least emong the signes and myracles which are wrought the weake mynd should lift it selfe vp with presumyng vpon it selfe Now least any peruerse interpretour should thinke S. Gregorie by this care ouer S. Augustine least he should be puffed with any vanie glorie to signifie that he was a proued and high minded felow it foloweth in the same epistle Haec autem dico c But I speake these thinges because I would laie downe the mynde of my hearer vpon humilitie As for thy humilitie saieth he to S. Augustine Let it haue her proper hope and trust for Synner as I am I hold this most Sure hope that by the grace of our almightie maker and redemer God and lord Iesus Christ thy synnes are already forgeaueÌ„ and that thow art an Elect and Chosen to the end other mens Synnes might be forgeauen through thee Thus far S. Gregorie Let M. Iewell now come furth and shew either that there is One which better saw and knew Augustine than S. Gregorie Or that S. Gregorie dyd euer compt him Superstitious Cruell Bloudie or Proude aboue measure Or that euer any man that knew S. Augustine hathe reported so wickedly Cruelly and Proudly of him Galfridus to whom only M. Iewell referreth vs could not know S. Augustine and againe he hath no such wordes against him as are obiected by M. Iewell On the other syde S. Gregorie knew his coÌ„uersatioÌ„ alowed his behauyour sent him of Trust in to England Commended him to bishoppes and kinges wondereth at the workes that God shewed by him calleth him seruant of God most Reuerend felowbisshoppe moste deere brother and hopeth most certainly that he shall haue no accompt to be made after this life for anye fault or gyltines remaining And dareth a wretched heretyke loden with Synnes either to burden an holye and Vertuous Father withe Slaunders vnproued either to refuse the testimonie of true and wel deserued praises geauen to S. Austen by S. Gregory him selfe which knew him so well Iewell Now that which M. Iewell alleageth out of the History of Beda to bringe that holy man S. Augustine our Apostle out of credit is withe passing impudency auoutched of him I beseche thee good Christen Reader to haue recours to the History it selfe it beinge nowe set forthe and published in the english tounge If thow be lerned and missetrust the translation conferre the latin therwith all Reade the whole second Chapter of the seconde booke out of whiche M. Iewell hathe culled a piece for his purpose and thou shalt easelye see that Venerable Bede in recordinge that Historye had a farre other iudgement in it then the spiderlike venim of M. Iewell hathe sucked out But one thinge I maye not presentlye omitte to warne thee of M. Iewell alleageth out of Bede that vpon the refusal of the Britains accorde with S. Augustin Ethelbertus the kinge raised his power and slewe great numbers of the Brittains and a thousand and two hundred godly Religious men For in this one sentence he hath couched three moste manifest Vntruthes First that the same slaughter was made vpon the refusall of the Brittaines accorde For longe before that slaughter the holy bishop Augustin departed this life as Bede in that Chapter recordeth Wherby it is euident that S. Austin was not the cause of that slaughter as M. Iewell woulde haue it to seme Secondarely it was not Ethelbertus the kinge of Kent whom S. Austen had conuerted who made that slaughter but Ethelfridus the king of the North partes of England whom Bede in the last chapter of the first booke compareth to Saul for his great Victories M. Iewell named for Ethelfridus the heathen Ethelbertus the Christened kinge that it might seme to haue bene done by S. Augustins procurement Thirdly he calleth them godly Religiouse Men who were in dede obstinate schismatikes as the which being gently admonished of their schismatical ObseruatioÌ„s coÌ„tinewed notwithstaÌ„ding peruersely in the same as appeareth more largely in Bede Thus much by occasioÌ„ of M. Iewelles blasphemyes I haue sayed in Defence of our Apostle blessed S. Austen and of the faith first planted by him among vs Englishemen Harding She Seruice of Englande that now is lacketh some thinges necessary and hath some other thinges repugnant to
Father so to debace his saying and much more villany to this holy Scripture so to racke it and wreste it Iewell For an other example of your lewde wresting of holy Scriptures M. Iewell let vs consider what Scripture you bringe to proue that Christ lefte no Vniuersall Vicaire ouer his Churche Thus you saie Other Vniuersall Vicaire of Christ there is none in the Scriptures onlesse it be he of whom S. Paule forewarneâ—h vâ— Homo ille sâ—eleratus filius perditus c. That wicked man that Childe of perdition that setteth him selfe vp against God and that so farre forthe that he will sitte in the Temple of God and shewe him selfe as if he were God But this Vicaire Christ shal destroie with the spirite of his mouthe Stapleton It had ben enoughe M. Iewell for the younge Iannizzers of your Secte thus to talke You that beare your selfe for a Bassa amonge them shoulde nowe leaue suche grosse shiftes to other that haue yet lerned no farder This place of S. Paule hath in dede semed a gaye place to a number of your faction to proue the Pope an Antichrist Yea and a lerned man forsothe of the brotherhod of Zurich hath made a booke only of that Argument whereof this place is bothe the beginning and chiefe foundation Which booke also hath bene set forthe in english and is I trowe not a litle estemed of a greate many But Gods name be blissed Though your gaie glistering Inuentyons dafeled the eyes of a greate many at the first you stealing vpon vs in our deade slepe and ouermuche reste yet nowe we being waked with your heresies and stirred vp to a nerer consideration of matters by you called in doubte we haue thanked be God easely discouered the vanite of them For as touching this place of S. Paule the very text laied forthe and considered openeth your lewde and wrested interpretation thereof and sheweth to the eye that it procedeth vtterly either of grosse ignorance or els of wilfull Malice S. Paule saieth thus VVe beseche you brethern by the coming of our Lorde Iesus Christ and of our meeting with him that you be not lightly caried awaye from your vnderstanding nor conceiue any feare either by reuelation of Spirit or by worde of mouthe or by any letter as sent from vs that the daye of the Lorde should be at hande Let noman deceiue you in any wise For vnlesse the defection come first and that wicked man be reueled that Childe of perdition that setteth him selfe vp against God and is exalted aboue all that is called God or that is worshipped so that be sâ—â—â—eth in the temple of God shewing him selfe as God Remembre you not that when I was yet with you I tolde you of these matters And nowe what doth staye it you knowe that it may be reueled in dewe time For the mystery of iniquite worketh euen nowe only that he which holdeth nowe maye holde vntill it be out of the waye And then that wicked man shall be reueled whom our Lorde Iesus shal kil with the Spirit of his mâ—uthe and destroye him in the brightnes of his coming Him I saie whose coming is in all power in Signes and false miracles by the working of the diuel Thus farre the Apostle All this to be spoken of Antichrist most men do agree S. Ambrose is expressely of that minde And so woulde you also and your felowes M. Iewell haue it to be meante Herein therefore we vary not But who is nowe this Antichrist that shall come that shall worke such false miracles that shall proclaime him selfe God and that shall at length be destroyed at the glorious coming of our Sauiour It is the Pope saye you It is he that beareth him selfe for the Vniuersall Vicaire of Christ. Answer then M. Iewell to these fewe reasons which I bringe to the Contrary First this Antichrist is but one Person he hath no Succession on CoÌ„tinuance Therefore the Apostle speaketh of One wicked man and of One Childe of perdition The Pope in this Vniuersall Supremacy hath had a Continuance and Succession of many hundred yeres euen from the time of S. Gregory at the lest who practised such Authorite of Vniuersal vicaire through out all Christendom as hath bene before particulary declared Therefore the Pope can not be the Antichrist that S. Paule speaketh of Againe before this Antichrist come there must as S. Paule saieth a defection come first This defection S. Ambrose expoundeth to be of the Romaine Empire That is when the Romaine Empire is vtterly lost and gone then or shortly after at the lest not before the Antichrist shall be reueled The Romaine Empire standeth yet and without an Emperour descending from the first Romain Emperour the Churche hath not yet bene at any time Therefore this Antichrist is not yet come And so it can not be the Pope that came so many a daye a goe Thirdly that wicked man must be reueled saieth the Apostle Shewe then M. Iewell when that was That is When this Anchrist the Pope beganne to plaie the Antichrist What Pope it was When he liued and howe he was reueled This can not be shewen therefore the Pope can not be he Fourthly he shal shewe him selfe as God and shall be exalted aboue al that is called God or worshipped for God Such honour was neuer practised by any Pope geueÌ„ to any Pope or so much as attempted or coueted of any Pope Therefore he can not be that Antichrist that the Apostle speaketh of Fiftely this Antichrist shal worke signes and miracles by the diuell The first Pope that practised this vniuersall vicaireship whom so euer you name M. Iewel whither it be Zosimus S. Gregory Leo or Bonifacius the 8. you can shewe no such false miracles wrought Therefore the Pope is nott this Antichrist Sixtely this Antichrist shall be destroyed at Christes coming The first Antichrist of the Popes if any such were haue not bene so destroyed Therefore no Pope hath bene that Antichrist Or thus Therefore that Antichrist is not yet come whom Christ shall so destroye Last of all this Antichrist if the Pope be he hath Gouerned and Ruled the vniuersall Churche of Christ these thousand yeres and vpwarde The whole Church hath folowed his Doctrine hath obserued his Decrees hath obeyed his Authorite But that the vniuersall Church of Christ shoulde be guided by an Antichrist in such a CoÌ„tinuance of time yea at any time at al it is expresse contrary to Gods promises in the Prophets in the Psalmes and in the ghospell as I haue otherwhere at large proued Therefore it is by no meanes possible that the Pope shoulde be Antichrist Yea it is a most hainous and horrible blasphemy so to thinke teache or write So well and truly so godly and clerckly hath M. Iewell applied this place of holy Scripture Nowe to an other Iewell M. Hardinge saieth The See of Rome can neuer faile in Faithe For Christ saied vnto Peter I haue praied