custome of falsifying al that he taketh in hande euen here also he playeth that parte as kindely as any where elles For although some suche wordes or the like be in deede founde in my writinges against him yet they beare not suche an owgly and lothsom visard as he putteth on them As for example whereas sometimes for good cause I can not finde in my harte to cal these mennes rash Innouation of the auncient religion their wicked abrogation of certaine Sacramentes their vile prophanation of the reste their horrible contempte of the body and bloude of Christe in the most blessed Sacrament of the Aulter whereas I say I can not finde in my harte to cal these thinges Godly procedinges restoring of the Gospel the sincere Worde the right Ministration of the Lordes Supper as they would al men to cal them but contrarywise Deuilish spite wickednes and villanie to cause the mater to seme more odious he reporteth my wordes thus your Deuilish spite your Deuilish wickednes your Deuilish villanie c as thoughe I had spoken them to him and to his felowes specially whereas for the more part suche wordes are spoken not in the second but in the third person of the Heretikes of our time indefinitely and in general Whiche neuerthelesse if I had spoken vnto him and them directly it had ben no greeuous sinne their desert considered For therein had I folowed the counsel whiche S. Antonie that blessed man gaue vnto his Scholers a litle before he departed this life To whom he said thus as S. Athanasius who wrote his life reporteth Athanas in vita Antonij Haereticorum venena vitate meumque erga eos odium sectamini Scitis quòd nullus mihi pacificus sermo cum eis fuerit Auoide the poisons of Heretiques and folow the hatred that I haue borne them Ye know that I had neuer any peaseable talke with them How so euer it be it had benne M. Iewels parte to haue vsed more truth in his writing But why did he not set forth my whole sayinges where suche wordes be placed What reason is it a man to burthen his Aduersarie with certaine wordes only and with silence to dissemble his entiere sentences By what laudable example hath he done thus Whiche of the olde Fathers euer did so If no man euer did it before these daies then so farre as the Catholique Church hath not erred in Faith and hath no neede now to receiue a new Gospel of Luther Zuinglius or Caluine by this practise he sheweth him selfe aswel a folower of the inuentours of new malice as a mainteiner of new Heresies Brentius the first author of this new deuise of laying the Aduersaries sharpe wordes together in one heape practized by M. Iewel This deuise of laying together in a heape al the sharpe wordes with whiche one feeleth him selfe prickte culled out of the aduersaries wriâ—â—nges is very strange and new and before this age whiche bringeth forth many rare nouelties was neuer vsed of any learned man In our time it is begonne and for ought I know first practized by Brentius who in the beginning of his booke against Bullinger entituled Recognitio propheticae Apostolicae doctrinae c written in defence of his newe doctrine of Vbiquitie laieth together in a heape al the wordes that Bullinger had vttered in his booke against him whiche might seeme sharpe rough and vngentle so softely must these menne now be handled after that they haue spent al their intemperate railing vpon the Pope the Papistes the most blessed Sacrament of the Aulter the daily Sacrifice the other Sacramentes and the godly Ceremonies of holy Churche Wherefore M. Iewel is not like to haue the glorie of this new deuise he must be content to yeelde it vnto Iohn Brentius whose ape and folower he is in this as in many other pointes worthy of smal praise Now if Bullinger the grande Captaine of the Sacramentaries of which secte M. Iewel is a professed mainteiner thought it not vnseemely for the grauitie of his Ministership to be so plaine with Brentius as to put him in minde sometimes of his deserued titles by saying he was Rixator Spiritus inflatus CaluÌ„niator c. a Branler In RespoÌ„sione BreÌ„tij ad primam partem Bullingeri pag. 8. 9. a pufte Sprite a spiteful speaker a skoffer a mocker a Hickescorner a peruerter a lyer vncleane impudeÌ„t a babler a brabler a craker a thrower of Christ out of his heauenly seate madde light childish a iangler a reuiler a sclaunderous person an Eutychian a Sophiste a railer woorse then Swenckefeldius him selfe Againe if he thought it not discommendable in him selfe being the chiefe Superintendent of Zurich to cal BreÌ„tius booke writen in defence of that new heresie Brentianas nebulas figmenta c. The mistes and deuises of Brentius Head vaine and peeuish â—oies knauish folies a doctrine dissoluing the hope of the faithfulles assured saluation in heauen a madnesse a phantasie Sophistrie crafty fetches most false deuises a feeble write Sophismes guiles a booke of Riddles a fabulous monstre a Sophistical Egypte stincking trifles prodigious Vbiquitie frantique wordes c If Bullinger I saie one of your noblest Worthies thought it not vnseemely for his degree and state to vse suche bitter eloquence and order of speach in reprouing Brentius and was neuer and it is like should neuer haue benne reproued for it among them of your owne Sacramentarie Secte M. Iewel why are you so heauy a Maister to me whom you esteeme muche lesse then Henrie Bullinger the Successour of your great Patriarke Zuinglius in the Chaier of your doctrine at Zurich as to blame that in me whiche you could not finde in your harte to disallow in Bullinger Wel how so euer in please you fauorably to iudge of your owne great Maisters and laye lode of reproches vpon me yet this muche you maie cal to your consideration Wordes considered alone without composition sounde good or euil according to their signification and al manner of wordes may be vsed without blame Of the sentences and whole sayinges onely where the circumstance may be considered and weighed faire or fowle speache is conceiued Now if thou wilt take the paines Reader to turne to the places of my bookes whence M. Iewel hath piked out those wordes for vse of whiche he reproueth me as a man of vncourteous vtterance thou shalt right wel perceiue in case heresie haue not vtterly bewitched thyne vnderstanding and bereued thee of al iudgement the verdure of my speache to be suche as may seme conuenient for a vessel of the holy Ghoste to taste of It may please M. Iewel to consider that by degree of Schoole and by lawful calling otherwise I stand in the place of teachers And therefore though at this present the Pulpite be denyed me yet I find not my selfe wholly so discharged of the office of teaching Now hauing no other conuenient meane to teache but by writing what ought I at this tyme to write
lib. coÌ„t 9. sectas In the booke in tituled Recta fides de Caena Domin nor by writinges nor by worde nor by deede as the Lord hath commaunded whether he be Zuenckfeldius or Zuinglius or what soeuer he be called And in an other place he condemneth by name Zuinglius Carolostadius and Oecolampadius with al their diuers and dissonant sacramentarie heresies Nicolaus Amsdorffius a famous Superindent in Germanie saith thus plainely Thirdely we condemne the Sacramentaries Zuinglius and his felowes The publike write of the princes of Mansfeld and of the yonger princes of Saxonie doth recken vp in the rolle of condemned Heretiques the Sacramentaries by name Ioachimus Westphalus saith No false doctrine is so farre spred none with such labour and hypocrisie is defended â—oâ—e hath more beguiled the worlde then this false doctrine of the blessed Sacrament meaning Caluines owne doctrine learned first of Berengarius of whom you haue no cause you saie to be ashamed If Heretiques of your own schoole can not make you ashamed of Berengarius and his doctrine what say you to the great General Councel holden at S. Iohn Laterane in Rome vnder Innocentius the third CouÌ„cel of Laterane thereof called Concilium Lateranense That Councel was an vniuersal assemblie out of al partes of Christendom Platina in InnoceÌ„tio tertio The great Assemblie of Laterane Councel as wel out of the Greeke Church as out of the Latine The Patriarkes of Constantinople and Hierusalem were there present Archebishoppes were there threescore and ten Bishoppes foure hundred and twelue Abbates and Priores more then eight hundred There were at that Councel the Ambassadours of both Emperours both of the West Churche and of the East also of the kinges of Hierusalem of Fraunce of Spaine of England and of Cyprus In this Councel so general and vniuersal the Heresie of Berengarius was condemned Concil Lateran Cap. 1. and the doctrine of Transubstantiation by occasion of his heresie exactly and fully discussed was by general consent of al plainely and clearely confirmed If the Sentence Consent and Accorde of the whole vniuersal Church can moue you M. Iewel then haue you good cause to be ashamed of Berengarius whose heresie was in so ful ample and General a Councel condemned as none in this worlde was euer greater If al this moue you not yet let Berengarius him selfe De Consecrat Dist 2. Ego BereÌ„garius whom you esteme so muche moue you to be ashamed of his doctrine of the whiche he him selfe was so muche ashamed at length and not onely in iudgement openlâ— recanted but also 〈◊〉 the houre of his Death ful bitterlâ— and hartily repented him selfe thereof as by sides otherâ— Guilelmus Malmesburiensis recordeth saying thus Guilelmus Malmesburiensis de gastis Anglorum lib. 3. Ipse Berengarius die Epiphaniorum moriens gâ—â—iâ—â—â— producto recordatus quot miseros quondam adolescenâ— primo errâ—ris â—alâ—tâ— secta infecerit bodie inquit in die Apparitionis suae apparabit mihi Dominus meus Iesus Christus vel propter poenitentiam vt spero ad gloriam vel propter alios vt timeâ— ad poenam Nos sanè credimus post benedictionem Ecclesiasticam illa Mysteria esse verum corpus sanguinem saluatoris adducti veteris Ecclesiae authoritate maltis noâ—iter ostensis miraculis Berengâ—rius himselfe as he laie dying vpon the Epiphanie daie whiche we cal Twelfth daie and with heauy be wailing called vnto remembrance how many miserable personnes he had infected with his heresie in youth at the firste heatâ— of the Sacramentarie Errour spake these wordes He alluded to the vvord Epiphanie vvhiche signifieth appearing or reuealiÌ„g This daie my Lorde Iesus Christe being the daie of his appearance shal appeare vnto me either to glorie as I truste bicause it repenteth me of my heresie or to pounishment as I feare me for the sake of others whom I haue seduced What so euer it shal please God to doe with me Truely I beleeue that after Consecration vsed in the Churche those Mysteries are the true Bodie and Bloude of our Sauiour being persuaded both by the authoritie of the auncient Churche and by many Miracles shewed of late yeres Thus ye maie see how so euer ye be not ashamed of Berengarius that yet Berengarius is ashamed of you Iewel Pag. 48. But as for your doctrine bicause it is only of your selues therefore it falleth daily and is novv forsaken the vvorlde through Harding Our doctrine is the doctrine of the Fathers not of our selues neither is the same forsaken The Catholique doctrine The .16 Chapt. The Fathers of the first 600. yeres reiected In institut Cap. 18. de coena Domi. Iacobus Acontius StratageÌ„ Sathan lib. 6. whiche you cal oures hath ben by your owne Confession welneare a thowsand yeres olde I cal your Confession your solemne prescription of the first .600 yeres For prescribing the one ye renounce the other It can not therefore seeme to be of vs that liue now whiche by your owne Confession hath ben so auncient Howbeit it is euident the first 600. yeres stande as fully for vs as doo the later Therefore Iohn Caluine accuseth the first 600. yeres of Iudaisme and of Iewish superstition namely in the matter of the blessed Sacrifice Therefore Iacobus Acontius one of your owne side in his booke dedicated to the Quenes Maiestie plainely misliketh and reproueth such as offer to be tried by the auncient Fathers calling it perniciosissimam omninoque fugiendam consuetudinem a most pernicious custome and altogether to be auoided Therefore M. Nowel as this Acontius calleth it a * Valde amplum spatium Novvel in the preface of his first booke large scope to trie matters by the Fathers And he that hath vttered so muche blasphemie against the Crosse of Christe for his parte also protesteth plainely In the booke against the Cross that he wil not be tried by the Fathers And why al this M. Iewel Mary thâ—y know â—ight wel that by the Fathers you are condemned and that our doctrine by them is clearely established Wâ— therefore haue learned of our Auncestours al that we teache We haue inuented nothing of our selues Your beginning is knowen and is yet in mannes memorie When Papistrie as you cal it beganne you can neuer 〈◊〉 for your life The Gospelleâ— I shal neuer be haÌ„ble to shevv vvhen Papistrie beganne otherwise then with the beginning of Christes gospel Shewe once M. Iewel when in what age in what place Countrie Citie or Churche of whom vnder what Pope Emperour or Prince Papistrie beganne and then saie hardely it is our Doctrine and only of our selues Except you shewe this your lie wil seme palpable If ye haue ought to shew for the worship of your cause bring it forth be it but one sentence or one halfe sentence The Catholique doctrine vntruly reported by M. Ievvel to be forsaken al the vvorld through In like manner a sensible and a palpable lie it
Ievvel 230. You saye yee exhort the people to receiue their maker VVhat Scripture vvhat father vvhat doctour euer taught you thus to saye It is the bread of our lord In Iohan. Tract 59. as S. Augustine saith it is not our Lord. It is a creature corruptible it is not the maker of heauen and earth Harding Iohan. 6. That vve receiue our maker in the B. Sacrament Good wordes M. Iewel I praie you Christ saith he that eateth me shal also liue for me Was he that spake these wordes the maker of heauen and earth or no If he were accursed be he that demeth him so to be If he be our maker and God when we exhort men to receiue him in the blessed Sacrament why maie we not exhort them to receiue their maker And the body of Christ hath no other person to rest in or to be susteined of beside him only who being the Son of God is maker of heaueÌ„ and earth You know that our forefathers were taught to cal it their maker euen as S. Augustine confesseth that his people called the Sacramente of the Aulter vitam life The blessed Sacrament our Lord and maker by verdit of S. Augustine Augustin in Iohan. Tract 59. 1. Cor. 11. You make as though S. Augustine denied the Sacrament to be our Lord which he neuer doth but rather saith Illi manducabaÌ„t panem dominum they did eate the bread their Lord but Iudas did eate Panem Domini the bread of our Lord against our Lord Illi vitam ille poenam They did eate life he did eate paine For he that eateth vnworthily saith the Apostle eateth damnation to himselfe If the Apostles at the supper of Christ did eate only the Sacrament for the scripture speaketh of none other thing eaten and yet they did eate the bread which is our Lorde as S. Augustine saith Certainely the heauenly bread of the SacrameÌ„t is our Lord. But Iudas is said to haue eaten the bread of our Lord against our Lord bicause he did eate the Sacrament vnworthily and so he did not eate our Lord as he is bread that is to say as he feedeth but as he is a iudge and as he condemneth the vnworthy eater to euerlasting paine For otherwise S. Augustine saith Augustin Epist 162. Iudas did care his maker that Iudas did eate his maker Sinit accipere venditorem suum quod norunt fideles pretium nostrum He suffereth him that sold him to receiue our price which the faithful knowe Our maker was our price through his humaine nature In illo Sacramento Christus est saith S. Ambrose quia corpus est Christi Christ is in that Sacrament Ambros de ijs qui initiant cap. 9. bicause it is the body of Christ Wherfore you see how litle cause ye haue to be so muche offended with me for saying when we exhort the people to receiue the blessed Sacrament that then we exhorte them to receiue their maker Of Transubstantiation and M. Iewels falsehod in that matter The 8. Chapter THe Real Presence is the grounde of this doctrine For seing Christ said Math. 26. take eate this is my body these being propre and not figuratiue wordes as it hath benne shewed before it followeth thereof that the body of Christe whiche is not made of nothing is at the lest wise made really present by vertue of the Consecration the substance of bread and wine conuerted and changed into it Ambros De Sacrament li. 4. cap. 4. Chrysost De Eucharistia in Encenijs For which cause S. Ambrose saith Vbi accesserit consecratio de pane fit caro Christi When consecration is come thereunto from of bread is made the body of Christe Likewise S. Chrysostom saith Num vides panem c. Seest thou bread Seest thou wine God forbid Thinke not so Like as if waxe be putte into the fire it is made like vnto it neither remaineth ought of the substance of waxe euen so here thinke the Mysteries to be consumed away with the presence of that body a. Sermone 5. de Pascha Eusebius Emissenus b. in catechetica Oratione Gregorius Nyssenus c. in Leuit cap. 22. Hesychius d in Iohan 6. Theophylante e. de orthodoxa fide li. 4. cap. 14. Theophylact in ca. Math. â—6 Damascen and al the other Fathers teache the same doctrine as it hath benne ofte tolde in other places Iewel 239. VVhat one vvorde speaketh Theophylact either of your TransubstaÌ„tiatiation or of your Real Presence or of your corporal and fleshly eating Harding Can there be any greater impudencie in the earth then to save that Theophylact speaketh not one word of these pointes Beside al that I haue alredy brought out of Theophylact in my Confutation how plaine is he where he writeth thus vpon S. Matthew Ineffabili operatione traÌ„siformatur etiam si nobis videatur panis quoniaÌ„ infirmi sumus et abhorremus crudas carnes comedere maximè hominis carnem Et ideo panis quidem apparet sed re vera caro est It is transfourmed by an vnspeakeable operation although it seeme bread to vs bicause we are weaklinges and do abhorre to eate rawe fleshe specially the flesh of man And therfore it appeareth to be bread but in deede it is flesh Can these woordes be eluded or shifted by your phrases and figuratiue speaches It seemeth bread but in deede it is flesh saith he what is then become of the bread It is transfourmed or made ouer into another thing Into what other thing but into the flesh of Christ And why remaineth the fourme of Breade whereas in deede it is made fleshe Bicause saith he we abhorre to eate rawe flesh and specially mannes flesh And yet speaketh not Theophylact one word of Transubstantiation or of the Real Presence of Christes flesh Many other places in him are as plaine as this but he that hath such a face as to denie this one wil not be moued if we bring forth neuer so many Hauing thus abused Theophylact perhappes he wil seme for antiquities sake to beare more reuerence towards S. Ambrose whom here he now taketh in hand Iewel Pag. 246. S. Ambrose saith of the bread and vvine Sunt quae erant in aliud mutantur They remaine the same that they vvere and are chaunged into an other thing S Ambrose saith not so Phie vvhat falsifiyng is this The natural creatures of the bread and wine in the supper of our Lord saith S. Ambrose remaine stil in substaÌ„ce as they were before yet are they changed into an other thing that is to say they are made the Sacrament of the bodie and bloude of Christ vvhich before they vvere not Harding Many other places M. Iewel make me doubte left you haue your conscience marked with the signe of Antichrist that is to say lest although you see and knowe your self to lie and to falsify the holy Fathers yet you wil not yeld vnto the truth in any point
that Leo expoundeth him selfe That which he was him selfe he willed Peter to be named saying Thou arte Peter asmuch to saie thou art a Rocke and vpon this Rocke I wil builde my Church and least we should thinke that Christ gaue him that name onely and not the thing signified by that name Leo addeth further Vt aeterni aedificatio teÌ„pli mirabili munere gratiae Dei in Petri soliditate coÌ„sisteret that the building of his euerlasting Temple should by the marueilous gifte of Goddes grace stande in the foundenesse of Peter Christ is the Rocke Christ is the Rock and Peter is the Rocke and hovv either Leo sermo 2. in Natiuitate Ap. Petri Pauli Matt. 16. and Peter is the Rocke How Christ How Peter Christ by his owne power Peter by participatioÌ„ But let vs heare Leo expounding him self more plainly Thus he saith Euangelica siquidem referente historia c. As the storie of the Gospel telleth our Lorde asketh of al the Apostles what menne thought of him And so long as they be in declaring the doubtefulnesse of mannes vnderstanding the talke of them that answer is common among them al. But when it is required of what sense the Disciples are there he is first in confessing our Lorde which is firste in the Apostolike dignitie Who when he had said Thou arte the Sonne of the liuing God Iesus answered him Blessed arte thou Simon the sonne of Iona bicause fleshe and bloude hath not reueled this vnto thee but my Father that is in heaueÌ„ Therefore blessed arte thou bicause my Father hath taught thee neither hath earthly opinion deceiued thee but heauenly inspiration hath instructed thee and it is not fleshe and bloude that hath shewed me vnto thee but it is he whose onely begotten Sonne I am And I quod he tel thee that is as my Father hath manifested my diuinitie vnto thee so I make knowen to thee thine excellencie Quia tu es Petrus id est cùm ego sim inuiolabilis Petra ego lapis angularis qui facio vtraque vnum tamen tu quoque Petra es quia mea virtute solidaris vt quae mihi potestate sunt propria sint tibi mecum participatione communia Peter is asmuche to saie as Rocke Bicause thou art Peter that is whereas I am the inuiolable Rocke I the Cornerstoane whiche make both one yet thou also arte the Rocke bicause by my vertue thou arte made sounde and sure that the thinges which are proper vnto me by power maie be common to thee with me by participation Thus farre Leo. By these laste wordes he declareth vnto vs how Christe receiued Peter into the companie of his indiuisible vnitie to witte by admitting him to enter commons as I might saie with him and by making him partaker throughe free gifte of that name and not of that name onely but also of that excellencie whiche is Christes owne by power Deceiue not the vnlearned Reader M. Iewel by suche peeces of Doctours sayinges whiche laid forth barely and alone without circumstance of the place whence they be pickte out maie perhappes seeme obscure and doubteful and being vewed in their Authours or otherwise set out in their owne colours appeare most true plaine and agreable to the Scriptures Furthermore where Leo saith The Councel of Chalcedon abhorred the prodigious deuises of the Deuilish heresie of Eutyches Leo epist 52. consenting vnto my writinges strengthened with the authoritie and merite of my Lorde the most blessed Apostle Peter My Lord S. Peter M. Iewel findeth a great fault with him for calling S. Peter my Lorde the most blessed Apostle Peter For the vse of whiche humble terme he might as wel finde faulte with S. Gregorie who calleth Mauricius the Emperour likewise by the name of Lorde the term my Lord vsed of the antiquitie Concil ChalcedoÌ„ Act. 3. pa. 834. co 2 and with the learned menne of the time that Leo liued in for so the Bishoppes at the Councel of Chalcedon spake of Leo him selfe Domini nostri sanctissimi patris Archiepiscopi Leonis lecta est epistola The Epistle of our lorde and most holy ffather and Archiebishop Leo hath benne readde with the whole nation of the Frenche menne who speaking of S. Peter of S. Iames and of suche others the frendes of God are wont to My Lord R. Peter My Lord S. Iames saie Monsieur sainct Pierre Monsieur sainct Iaques my Lorde saint Peter my Lorde saint Iames with the Italians also who vse to speake likewise That this manner of speache was not strange in the Churche it appeareth by sundrie Monumentes of the Grecians of later time Matthaeus Hieromonachus Matthaus Hieremonachus in Collectan maketh Constantine the Great so to speake 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We doo this in the worship of my Lorde S. Peter As for that other phrase Deo inspirante beatissimo Petro Apostolo by the inspiration of God and of S. Peter the Apostle so here it is tranâ—â—â—ted but falsely for whiche M. Iewel condemneth Leo as vsing immoderate and ambitious speache in the praise of S. Peter to the behoofe of his owne preeminence it seemeth strange in deede yea so strange that at the first reading my minde gaue me that M. Iewel to deceiue the Reader hath fowly abused the place As I thought so it was For now I finde that these wordes are in Leo in deede But they are to be construed farre otherwise then this translation reporteth Here I must bring M. Iewel to his smal Rules of Grammare and aske him how he construeth these wordes Leo epist 89 in fine Obtestamur vt ea quae à nobis Deo inspirante beatissimo Petro Apostolo decreta sunt seruetis Verely were he at a Grammare schoole and would tel his Schoolemaister that here beatissimo Petro Apostolo were put in the ablatiue case absolutely as Deo is and so would make S. Peter to geue inspiration to Leo as wel as God he were worthy to haue six stripes on the bare three for his negligent and grosse ignorance three for the blasphemie attributing that to S. Peter whiche is onely to be attributed vnto God There is no incoÌ„uenience in this sentence good Reader Thou maist tel M. Iewel that beatissimo Petro is here the ablatiue for the preposition à whiche requireth the nowne folowing it to be put in the ablatiue case And thus is the whole to be construed as if the preposition à were repeated againe before beatissimo we beseeche you that ye keepe the thinges whiche by the inspiration of God haue ben decreed of vs and of the most blessed Peter the Apostle Let no man thinke it strange S. Peter ioyned vvith Leo. that S. Peter is here ioined with Pope Leo. The Fathers speaking of any Godly Decree ordinance sentence or writing published by any Bishop of Rome for the benefite of the Churche haue commonly so spoken of it as both it proceded from the Pope for the
shal succede him that is your accursed addition but he saith non parcentes gregi which you haue left out Those rauening Wolues shal not spare the flocke but shal diuide the faith and scatter the flocke as you haue doone For where one Faith was you haue made two and where charitie was you haue set debate Now whereas S. Paule farther saith men speaking peruerse things shal spring out of them selues he saith not Act. 20. they shal spring by Succession That is your foule corruption of the holy texte He addeth also other wordes immediatly whiche you haue leaft out as vtterly betraying your foule Heresies It foloweth in the selfe same clause and sentence vt abducant discipulos post se There shal spring out of your selues men speaking peruerse thinges Act. 20. to leade away scholars after them Vt abducant to lead away Whence shal they lead them from the Apostles and from their Successours and from the flocke wherein they liued before Whither shal they lead them Post se after them selues That is to saie they shal not keepe the former Succession of Doctrine and order teaching as their Fathers haue donne but they shal departe from that Succession and shal leade and cari◅ others awaie with them and become peruerse Teachers in suche sorte that they shal haue Disciples of their owne who shal beare their name as Luther hath the Lutherans Zuinglius hath the Zuinglians Caluine hath the Caluinistes after him who goe away from their forefathers Doctrine and them selues set vp a new beleefe comming in Christes name and pretending his Gospel but yet not teaching his truth bicause thei leaue the Succession where only his truth was and is taught For it onely doth by open practise shewe and witnesse the true meaning of his worde vvho be the leaders avvay of the Flock 3. Reg. 12. This this M. Iewel is the Succession that we claime by Tu abducis you leade awaye the flocke from their auncient Pastours and shepeherds we tarie stil behinde in the old Succession of Peters Chaier Ieroboam went out from Moyses Chaier and caried ten tribes after him so did Arius and so did Luther so did Caluine so doo you The Prophetes taried behind with Moyses Chaier in so muche that good Simeon Anna Zacharias Elizabeth and our Ladie the Blessed Virgin Marie chose rather to dwel in Gods Church with the vnclean scribes and Pharisees then to goe out ofter the Samaritans and to seeke a cleaner Congregation either in the mount Garizim or in Egipte in the Scismatical Temple of Onias Euen so doo we abyde stil in the olde Church neither are we greatly moued with your mockes and scoffes when ye cal it the Mumpsimus Churche Yea we abide contented with the olde translation of the Bible with the olde Portuises and Masse bookes yea perhappes also emong some Scribes and Pharisees But yet there by Goddes grace we wil looke for our Lords glorious comming who commended our forefathers to the special charge of Peter Ioan. 21. and therein vs to his Successours We are within the Fold ye without we are Sheepe ye are Goates we keepe in al that we can ye drawe away and pul out al that ye can we sprang not out of you but ye out of vs. If S. Paule had spoken of his Successours in that place he would not haue said Vt abducant to leade away scholars For when some be leadde away some others tarie behind Now the Successour if he abide not behinde he is no Successour Nestorius a skatterer of the flock but a leader away In so muche that Nestorius being Bishop of Constantinople yet when he taught otherwise of Christes Person then his Predecessours had donne he was then no Successour of Alexander Paulus and S. Chrysostome because he disalowed those his Predecessours but he was a scatterer of the flocke and a leader away of Scholars after him selfe and not after his Predecessours Thinke you that any true beleeuing man taketh you M. Iewel for one of the Successours of S. Augustine our Apostle M. Ievv no Successour of our Apostle S. Augustine who conuerted our English nation from Idolotrie to Christe Are you his Successour Why you lead men away from him and persuade in this your booke that he was not our true Apostle nor any true teacher of Gods worde but a cruel and blouddy man 1. Ioan. 2. and proud aboue measure Away Woolfe and deuoure thy Goates abroade thou camest from vs but thou wert not of vs for if thou hadst benne of vs thou hadst remained stil with vs. I exhorte al Christian menne to returne vnto the Succession of Peter and of al other faithful menne who abide in the same faith with him Iewel S. Hierome saith they be not alvvayes the children of holy men that by Succession haue the places of holy men Dist 40. Non est Harding Double holines There is a double holinesse one of life an other of state or office Concerning life it is true that many times euil men succede in the place of good And so meant your Author M. Ievv falsifieth S. Hierome Dist 40. Nō est facile as his owne wordes whiche in the same sentence you haue leafte out doo witnesse For thus he saith Non Sanctorum filij sunt qui tenent loca sanctorum sed qui exercent opera eorum They are not the children of the Saintes who holde the places of the Saintes but those who practise the workes of the Saintes In this sentence you haue leaste out the ende and haue caste in of your owne the worde alwayes and these two wordes by Succession And when al is done the sentence is not S. Hieromes but Gratians owne added to the former woordes of S. Hierome Howbeit they are somewhat altered Hierom. epist ad Heliodorū For thus saith S. Hierome Non est facile stare loco Pauli tenere gradum Petri iam cum Christo regnantium It is not an easy thing to stande in the place of Paule and to holde the Degree of Peter now raigning with Christe of whiche ye can take no aduantage against Succession whereof we treat Holinesse of degree and office Ioan 1. But concerning holinesse of Degree state and office there is the same holinesse in the Successour which was in the Predecessour For it is Christe that baptizeth and that in like ministeries worketh by the euil man as wel as by the good so long as the Succession is not broken of and forsaken For if that be once done he that maketh the breache is not properly a Successour in truthe but a beginner of errour As for example Who wil say that Cranmer was the Successour of S. Thomas Cranmer no Sucessour of S. Thomas the blessed Martyr or of Bishop Warrham in the Chaier of Cantorburie I trowe he him selfe would not say it if he were a liue seing he succeded not in their Faith and Doctrine Iewel Pag. 127. Not vvithstanding the
whiche beare the name of Christians And to the Apostles Christe said Matt. 28. I am with you al daies vntil the worldes ende If he be with them til the ende they likewise are in the worlde til the worldes ende But they liued not so long in this worlde therefore it is meant that from age to age and from man to man Christe will haue alwayes some to sitte in the Chaieres and Seates of his Apostles by ordinarie Succession vntil the worldes ende Of this Succession Dauid in the person of Christ spake in spirite saying to the Church For thy Fathers Psal 44. Sonnes are borne vnto thee Thou shalt ordeine them the Chiefe Gouernours ouer al the earth The Church answereth I shal be mindeful o Lorde of thy name in euery Generation and Generation therefore the peoples shal geue praise and thankes to thee for euer and from age to age .. So that the cause why the Churche continueth are the Gouernours by God appointed vnto it and as the Churche continueth from age to age so do they gouerne from age to age For the Visible Flocke of shepe can not long lacke their Visible shepeheard at any time but that the Wolues wil enter in and disperse them a sunder Iewel VVhen Christ beganne to refourme their abuses and errours they said to him Luc. 20. Mark 11. Beda in Lucam li. 5. cap. 80. by vvhat povver doest thou these thinges and vvho gaue the this authoritie vvhere is thy Succession Vpon vvhiche vvordes Beda saith They vvould haue the people vnderstand for that he had no solenne Succession that al that he did vvas of the Deuil Harding See vvhat cōueiāce M. Ievv vseth to helpe his cause Scarse one line hath passed your handes into the whiche you haue nor conueied of your owne head the worde Succession Whereas neither S. Luke nor S Mathew nor S. Marke nor S. Paule nor S. Hierome nor the Pharisees nor Bede whom you allege vsed that worde at al. But to make your tale sound against Succession M. Ievv falsifieth al his testimonies you driue al to that point and thereby you falsifie euery place that you bring as euery man shal finde who doth conferre the matter with the Originals and so al your Defence standeth vpon fialsified Authorities But our cause God be praised for it is so strong Christes true Succession that we neede not to care though al that were true whiche you allege For albeit the Pharisees would not harken to Christes Succession yet in deede he Succeded lineally to al the Kinges and Patriarkes and thereby to the Priestes also of the best Order to wit of the Lawe of nature and not of the Law of Moyses whiche was an inferiour Lawe in respecte of that of Nature Christ therefore had not onely a most perfite Succession which is described in the Gospel from Adam til Ioseph the husbande of the Virgin Marie but also with that his Succession he stopped al the mouthes of his Enemies For thus he said to them VVhat thinke you of Christe that is of your Messias whom you looke for Matt. 22. VVhose Sonne is he They say to him the Sonne of Dauid Christ saith to them Psal 109. How then doth Dauid cal him Lorde in spirite saying The Lord hath said to my Lord sit at my right hand vntil I put thy enemies as a foote stoole vnder thy feete If then Dauid cal him Lorde how is he his Sonne And no man was hable to answer him a worde Neither durst any manne after that daye aske him any moe questions Here it is first to be noted that the Scribes and Pharisees knew Christ to haue a Succession from Dauid For his Sonne they said he must be Therefore M. Iewel in making the Pharisees to acknowledge no Succession of his hath corrupted the texte of the Gospel and vttered a great Vntruthe The Pharisees knew that Christe should succede in the very beste line but they would not attende nor consider how that Succession was now brought to passe in the Sonne of Marie who being of the howse of Dauid had miraculously brought forth Christe the perfite ende of the Lawe So likewise M. Iewel knoweth that the Churche of Christe must needes haue a perpetual Succession but he wil not consider how it is preserued chiefely in the Chaier of Peter Ioan. 21. to whom aboue al others the sheepe of Christ were committed Wel Christe then geuing the Iewes to vnderstand that he succeeded in the line of Dauid Christ not only the Sonne of Dauid but also the Sône of God would haue had them farther to consider that he also was the sonne of God and so shewed that he who was Dauids Sonne was also called the Lord of Dauid his Sonne by flesh his Lord by Godhed which thing did put them al to silence Euen so that weake mortal and some time miserable and sinful man whome sitting at Rome M. Iewel despiseth when he heareth him to be according to the gifte of God the Vicare of Christes loue as S. Ambrose calleth him in feeding his shepe Ambr. in cōmment in Luc. c. 24. and the Successour of the chiefe Apostle he is surely astoined at it and would be put to silence if he were not worse then a Pharisee For admitting that the Pope were not S. Peters Successour but onely one of the lowest Bishoppes of Christes Churche yet who would not woonder to see him keepe his Succession so notably fiften hundred yeres together wheras al the Patriarkes and thousandes of Bishops besides are so mangled and so brought to nought But now if wee adde hereunto that the same is euen by our enemies confession and euer was the first See how muche more ought they to woonder at the special prouidence of God in that behalfe Therefore euen as it was miraculous that the line of Dauid was so notably preserued in so many changes and captiuities of the Iewes right so may we say of the Bishoppes of Rome in suche sorte as smaller thinges doo imitate the greater and may in their manner be compared to the greater Iewel Cyrillus frameth the Pharisees vvordes in this sorte Cyrillus in Cathen in Luc. 20. Thou Being of the tribe of Iuda and therefore hauing no right by Succession vnto the Priesthood takest vpon thee the office that is committed vnto vs. Harding Here againe you adde these wordes hauing no right by Succession vnto the Priesthode of your owne head M. Ievv falsifieth Cyrillus by adding vvordes of his ovvne Howbeit euen there Cyrillus sheweth that Christe had right by Succession which you should not haue conceeled had you dealt truly For there it foloweth Sed si nouisses ô Pharisee scripturas recoleres quòd hic est Sacerdos qui secundùm ordinem Melchisedech offert Deo in se credentes per cultum qui legem transcendit O thou Pharisee Christe had right also by successiō if thou haddest knowen the Scriptures thou wouldest remember that this
that there is no succession in doctrine Now I saie ronne ouer al the Bisshops of Rome and you can saie of neuer a one this man coÌ„ming into his Predecessours See did oppugne his doctrine or preached with the Churche of Romes contentation against that which was in vse before So that in Rome al thinges are euen at this day concerning faith as S. Peter leafte them For euery man hath agreed in outward Decree senteÌ„ce and profession with al the predecessours and successours Iewel Pag. 132. S. Bernard saith Quid prodest si canonicè eligantur In concil Remen non canonicè viuant VVhat auaileth it if they be chosen in order and liue out of order Harding It auaileth nothing to the euil liuer but yet it auaileth muche to him that obeieth the good and true doctrine of the euil teacher Iewel So saith S. Augustine Ipsum characterem multi lupi Cont. Donatist lib. 6. 1. q. 3. vocantur caâ—es Character vvhat it signifieth in the Sacraments lupis imprimunt The outvvarde marke or right of a bisshop many geue to vvolues and be vvolues them selues Harding By Character is not meant an outward marke but rather an inwarde marke and print which through the receiuing of certaine Sacramentes is imprinted in the soules of them who receiue them of whiche sorte are Baptisme Confirmation and holy Orders And those sacramentes being once receiued caÌ„ not be repeated or be againe receiued of the same person For the Sacrament of Christes body and bloud although it be an outward signe yet it leaueth not any Character or suche inward print in the soule as may be no more repeated But letting that errour passe of the true interpretation of this worde Character I graunt that Heretikes may baptize heretikes euen without the Churche and the Baptisme shal stand although it be vnlawfully ministred What maketh that against the Suceession of Bishops It rather proueth that seing the Sacramentes may be ministred if not to saluation of them that are of discretion yet truly and really without the true Churche there must be an other rule taken to know the true Church by besides the administration of Sacramentes And that true and certaine rule is the perpetual Succession of the See Apostolike Iewel Pag. 132. Therefore the auncient father Irenaus geueth vs this good counsel Eis qui sunt in Ecclesia presbyteris obedire oportet Iren. lib. 4. ca. 43. qui successionem habent ab Apostolis qui cum episcopatus successione charisma veritatis certum secundùm beneplacitum patris acceperunt It becommeth vs to obey those Priestes in the Churche vvhich haue their succession from the Apostles and together vvith the Succession of their bishoprikes according to the good vvil of God the Father haue receiued the vndoubted gifte of the truthe Harding Al this maketh against you M. Iewel For seing you can shew no such Priestes hauing their Succession from the Apostles and hauing receiued the vndoubted gifte of the truth whom ye doo obeye it is certaine that ye haue not the gifte of the truthe among you On the other side seing we haue Priestes that is to say Bishoppes of Rome who are also Priestes which haue their SuccessioÌ„ from the chiefe and most glorious Apostles Peter and Paule and seing such Priestes and Bishops keeping stil the same faith and doctrine from man to man haue receiued the vndoubted gifte of the truth according to the good wil of God the Father doubtelesse the vndoubted marke of the truth is with vs only and not with you at al who haue no Succession at al of any Priestes and much lesse of any suche Priestes that succede lineally from the Apostles them selues Iewel 132. S. Cyprian being likevvise charged for dissenting from his predecessours Lib. 2. epist 3. ansvvereth thus Si quis de antecessoribus meis c. If any of my predecessours haue not obserued and kepte the same that our Lorde hath taught vs both by his example and also by his coÌ„maundement his simplicitie may be pardoned but we if we doo the like can hope for no pardon being nowe admonished and instructed of our Lorde Harding Cough vp man it wil choke you Phy. vvhat a fowle corruption is this Lib. 2. epist 3. if you let it tarry within your throte Here is but halfe the bone there is yet in S. Cyprian no ful point it foloweth in the same sentence Vt calicem Dominicum vino mixtum secundùm quod Dominus obtulit offeramus We can hope for no pardon who are now admonished and instructed of our Lorde that we should offer our Lordes chalice mixed with wine accordingly as our Lorde offered the same Either M. Iewel tooke this saying of S. Cyprian vpon the Germaine credite as he found it noted in their bookes and then his false brethren deceiued him or els he wrote it out of S. Cyprian himselfe and then his studie and wil was to deceiue vs. He would ful gladly haue geuen vs an authoritie that we might forsake the example of our Predecessours but he was loth we should see the thing wherewith the authoritie was exemplified For if at any time he say al he is sure to speake against him selfe and no wonder because he speaketh against the truth and euerie good saying euermore agreeth with the trtuh First he corrupteth S. Cyprian in putting in meis for nostra my predecessours in stede of our predecessours For S. Cyprian speaketh not of his owne Succession but of what soeuer Priest or Bishoppe that liued before his time Againe S. Cyprian spake not of any such custome as had ben generally vsed of al Bishops for then it had ben of ful authoritie but of that which some one man vsed priuatly and without keeping the lawe of Succession And therefore S. Cyprian said Si quis if any man Thirdly the thing he spake of was that some were said to offer water alone in our Lordes supper and not wine withal Now saith he if any before our time haue vsed to offer water and not wine mingled with water wel he may be pardoned by our Lordes mercie but we that are admonished and instructed to offer our Lordes chalice mingled with wine that is to say consisting not of water alone but of water and wine mingled together we caÌ„ not be pardoned except we mingle water with wine and so do offer our Lordes Chalice as he him selfe did offer it Nowe applie this geare Christian Reader to our new brethrens deedes Do they offer our Lordes Chalice at al Or do they graunt that our Lord in his Supper offered it Do they mingle water with wine at the time of consecrating the mysteries If they do neither of both what folie yea what madnesse was it for M. Iewel to bring foorth these wordes of S. Cyprian thereby to accuse him selfe and his owne Communion as not obseruing that whiche our Lorde commaunded to be obâ—â—rued It is a worlde to see how these men applye the witnesses of
it Of the povver of Priesthod He that listeth to see more of the necessitie of Confession maie resorte to M. Allens learned booke of the lawful power of Priesthod to remitte sinnes The fifth booke conteineth a Detection of M. Iewelles errours lies sclaunders c. touching the Marriages of Priestes and Votaries the Canonical Scriptures the Sacramentes and other pointes of Doctrine The wordes of the Apolagie In the Defence 2. parte ca. 8. Diuision 1. Pag. 163. VVe saie that Matrimonie is holy and honourable in al sortes and states of personnes as in the Patriarkes in the Prophetes in the Apostles in the holy Martyrs in the Ministers of the Churche and in Bishoppes and that it is an honest and lavvful thing as Chrysostom saith for a man liuing in matrimonie to take vpō him therevvith the dignitie of a Bishop Confutation fol. 73. b. Matrimonie is holy and honorable in al persons and an vndefyled bedde as sayth S. Paule Hebre. 13. Yet is it not lawful for them to marye whiche either haue by deliberate vowe dedicated almaner their chastitie vnto God or haue receiued holy order For the vowed be forbidden mariage by expresse word of God Those that haue taken holy orders by tradition of the Apostles and auncient ordinaunce of the Church Touching the first the Scripture is plaine bicause a vowe is to be performed Psal 75. Vouete reddite Domino Deo vestro Vowe ye and paye or render that ye vowe to your Lorde God Christ also sayeth in the gospel Matt. 19. there be some eunuches that haue made them selues eunuches for the kingdome of heauens sake He that can take let him take Vovve-breakers in vvhat danger they stād 1. Tim. 5. Againe S. Paul speaking of young widowes which haue vowed and promised chastitie sayeth that when they waxe wanton against Christ they wil mary hauing damnation bicause they haue broken their first faith Whether these scriptures perteine hereto and be thus to be vnderstanded we referre vs to the primitiue Church and to al the holy Fathers * Frō starre to starre leafte out of M Ievels booke VVhat the Fathers haue iudged of mariages after vovv of chastitie De bono viduitatis Whosoeuer haue thus vowed chastitie or by receiuing holy orders haue bound them selues to the bond of cōtinencie to the same by auncient constitution of the Church annexed if afterward presuming to marye excuse the satisfying of their carnal lust with the name of wedlocke be they men be they women they liue in a damnable state and be worse then Aduouterers * Suche mariages or rather slydinges and falles frō the holier Chastitie that is vowed to God S. Augustine doubteth not but they be worse then aduowtries S. Cyprian calleth this case plaine incest S. Basile accompteth the mariages of vailed Virgins to be void of no force and facrilegious She that hath dispoused her selfe to our Lorde sayeth S. Basile is not free lib. de virginitate For her husband is not dead that she may mary to whom she list And whiles her immortal husband lyueth she shal be called an aduoutresse whiche for lustes of the flesh hath brought a mortal man into our Lordes chamber * Leaft out by M. Iev The case is like in the man And whereas such persons with deliberate vowe purposed to consecrat them selues to our Lord only maides by virginitie widowes by chastitie of widowehod priestes by single life and continencie they may not with good conscience marye bicause the lust of the flesh foloweth not that former purpose but draweth the soule to her vices from that whereto it is bounde For what so euer is the worke sayeth S. Basile before whiche reason and lawe goeth not in the mynde the same is of the conscience noted for vnlawful Of al such after many wordes vttered in reproufe of their lewdnes he concludeth that they folow not wedlocke but aduoutrie But for proufe that vowed persons may not marye it were not hard to alleage so muche out of the fathers as would fil a volume * Clerkes boūde to cōtinēcie Li. 1. c. 11 Paphutius Li. 1. c. 23. Touching the second the Apostles forbidde those that come single to the Clergie to marye except such as remaine in the inferiour orders and procede not to the greater as we find in their canons Can. 25. Paphnutius as Socrates and Sozomenus record in their Ecclesiastical storie said at the Nicene Councel that it was an old tradition of the Church that such as come to the degree or order of Priesthod single should not marye wiues And this is that holy Bishop Paphnutius whom these Euangelical vowe-breakers pretend to be their proctour for their vnlawful mariages * Leaft out by M. Iev Siritius and Innocentius vver not the first ordeiners of clerkes cōtinēcie Neither Pope Siritius and Innocentius the first who liued long aboue a thousand yeres past were the first makers of the lawe that forbiddeth Priestes to marie but declaring that the same was of olde time ordeined and vsed of the Church they condemne the disorders against the same committed * Reade who list the epistle of Siritius ad Himerium Tarraconensem cap. 7. the second epistle of Innocentius to Victricius Bishop of Roen cap. 9. and his third epistle to Exuperius B. of Tolouse cap. 1. and weighing wel these places he shal perceiue that these holy Popes forbad the ministers of the Church the vse of wedlocke by the same reason by which the priestes of Moses lawe were forbidden to come within their owne houses in the time when their course came to serue in the holy ministeries By the same reason also by whiche S. Paule required maried folke for a time to forbeare the vse of their wiues 1. Cor. 7. that they might attend praying The place of S. Chrysostome alleaged by this Defender wel considered Ansvver to Chrysostoms place disproueth no part of the Catholike doctrine in this hehalfe but condemneth both the doctrine and common practise of his companions these newe fleshly Gospellers His wordes be these vpon the saying of S. Paule In 1. cap. ad Tit. homil 2. that a Bishop ought to be without crime the husband of one wife The Apostle sayeth he stoppeth the mouthes of Heretikes which condemne mariage shewing that it is not an vncleane thing but so reuerent that with the same a man may ascend to the holy throne or seate he meant the state of a Bishop and herewith he chastiseth and restraineth the vnchast persons Tvvise married may not be Bishops ād vvhy Secōd mariages lauful yet open to accusations Leaft out by M. Iev not permitting thē who haue twise maried to atteine such a rome For whereas he kepeth no beneuolēce toward his wife deceased how can he be a good gouernour Yea what greuous accusations shal not he be subiect vnto daily For ye al knowe right wel that albeit by the lawes the secōd mariages be permitted yet that
mariages contracted in the case of a Simple Vowe and not of a Solemne Vowe Howsoeuer a man or a woman make a Vowe to liue the single life chaste and continent and do not solemnize the same either by entring into some Religion or by taking holy Orders if not withstanding the Vow they presume to marrie the marriage holdeth But if they marrie after they haue solemnized their Vowe by entring into Religion or by taking holy Orders the marriage is none at al M. Dorman defended against M. Ievvel Defence pag. 169. Dorman in his first booke fo 16. b. and therefore is to be dissolued bicause they haue made deliuerie of them selues before the Church into the handes of their Superiours and be not in state now to dispose of their personnes or bodies otherwise as being deliuered vp to custodie of perpetual chastitie Hereof it appeareth how litle cause you had M. Iewel to reproue M. Dorman for calling the mainteiners of marriage in this case the Deuils ministers In this case I say for he speaketh expressely of Priestes And therefore you may consider how wel it became you to say that by the iudgdment of our late Louanian Clergie S. Augustine is become the minister of the Deuil for these be the termes of your seemely eloquence Here therefore I returne vpon you M. Iewel those wordes which without cause you imagine S. Augustine to say vnto me Ye speake fondly and vnaduisedly and vnderstand not what ye speake Here to returne to M. Iewels order among other thinges M. Ievvel chargeth the holy Fathers vvith ouersight for zele and heat for answere vnto certaine places of the Fathers calling such kinde of marriage worse then Aduoutrie Inceste and Sacrilege he saith that such wordes haue proceded more of zele and heate of minde then of profound consideration and iudgement of the cause And so in effecte he reiecteth the holy and auncient Fathers as men vnworthy of credite But ô Lorde what Fathers Verely the chiefe and best learned S. Ambrose S. Hierome S. Basil S. Chrysostome S. Augustine Ah good Sir lacked these learned and holy Fathers consideration and iudgement and do you acknowledge it in your selfe and your companions O menne of deepe consideration and great iudgement that coulde so easily prouide them selues of wemen to geue the bridle vnto luste Among al other thinges that he bringeth in defence of his Companions vnlawful marriage this is the fardest from reason and hath least colour of learning that by his doctrine the vow of Chastitie is to be broken and that al Monckes Friers Priestes and Nonnes may lawfully marrie bicause il promises filthy Vowes and wicked Othes ought not to be kept For proufe that il Vowes are to be broken he allegeth Isidorus out of Gratian saying 22. quaest 4. In malis In malis promissis rescinde fidem in turpi vot◠muta decretum Quod incautè vouisti ne facias impia est promissio quae scelere impletur In an il promise breake thy faith In a filthy Vow change thy purpose What thou hast vnwarely vowed doo it not It is a wicked promise that is fulfilled with mischeefe Marc. 6. Act. 23. 22. quaest 4. Inter caetera Againe he saith It is not sufficient to say I haue vowed Herode vowed Iohn Baptistes head The Iewes vowed S. Paules death Hubaldus made a vowe that he would neuer helpe his owne mother or brethren were there neede neuer so great He allegeth also the 8. Councel of Toledo Where it was declared and decreed that wicked vowes ought not to be made and if they were made that in any wise they should not be perfourmed Where for example the vowe of Herode is mencioned Iudic. 11. and that of Iephte who through his vow thought him selfe bounde to sacrifice his daughter But what reliefe bringeth al this vnto his cause onlesse he be hable to proue that Chastitie is an il and a wicked thing as the murdering of S. Iohn Baptist and of S. Paul and as the sacrificing of Iephtes daughter was But how excellēt a thing chastitie is and how acceptable it is vnto God and of how much more merite it is then matrimonie both Christ him selfe in the Gospel and S. Paule in his Epistle to the Corinthians doo partly teache vs Mat. 19. 1. Cor. 7. and the holy Fathers in māner al haue most largely declared specially S. Basil S. Chrysostome S. Ambrose S. Augustine who haue written special Treaties of Virginitie Iouinians heresie and S. Hierom and S. Augustine disputing moste learnedly against Iouinian that helde opinion Marriage and Virginitie to be of equal merite to whose Heresie our fleshly Gospellers beare special fauour and maintenance As for the eight Councel of Toledo I maruel how he durst be so bolde Concil To letan 8. Cap. 7. in Epitom Married Priestes of olde times called Apostates as to allege it which maketh so litle for him touching the breache of a Godly Vowe and so much against him touching the marriage of them that haue taken holy Orders For the wordes of the Councel be these Si verò ad coniugia morésque seculi redire attentauerint omni Ecclesiastica dignitate priuentur Apostatae habeantur in monasterio donec vixerint sub poenitentia retrudantur In case they geue the attempte to returne vnto marriages and vnto the manners of the worlde let them be depriued of al Ecclesiastical dignitie and reputed for Apostates And let them be shut vp in a Monasterie to doo penaunce so long as they liue By this M. Iewel may see by what menne his married Brethren were called Apostates and by how many hundred yeres before he and I were borne I trust he wil beare the more with me if I happen to cal them by that their auncient name some times Concerning that you pretende to allege out of one Alphonsus de Castro Philippica 19. whom you say to be one of M. Hardinges greatest Doctours in good sooth he is no whit a greater Doctour of mine Alphonsus de Castro alleged by M. Ievvel in stede of Alphonsus Viruesius Episcopus Canariē then is the man in the Moone For in deede there is none of that name that euer wrote Philippicas It is one Alphonsus Viruesius M. Iewel a learned man of this present age Bishop of Canaria who writing against Philip Melanchthon called his Orations or Treaties Philippicas after the imitation of Demosthenes who so named those most eloquent Orations that he made against King Philip of Macedonia the great Alexanders Father A like errour to that you reproue me of so often and so bitterly by ouersight naming Iosue for the Prophete Osee Thus you see your selfe not cleare of the faulte you charge me so muche withal Neither is this your only ouersight of that sorte Howbeit that I alleged out of Osee vnder the name of Iosue maketh clearly with me and this you allege out of Bishop Viruesius vnder the name of the Obseruant Frier Alphonsus de
be sure to liue for ouer the whiche no euil man can eate For if it could so be that he who continueth euil stil should eate the worde made fleash whereas it is the woorde and liuing bread it should not haue ben written whosoeuer eateth this bread shal liue for euer Origen fovvly corrupted by M. Ievv These are the true wordes of Origen But M. Iewel hath so mangled them that the sense is cleane altered For in steede of verbuÌ„ caro factum the worde made flesh he hath placed the body of Christ referring it to the Sacrament And whereas in Origen it is edere verbum factum carnem to eate the word made flesh he hath made exchange thereof into edere corpus Domini to eate the body of our Lorde And so whereas Origen meant that euil men can not eate spiritually and effectually the Diuinitie of Christ so as it dwelleth corporally in his flesh M. Iewel hath taught him to say that an euil man can not in the Sacrament eate Christes bodie Iewel Pag. 210. VVe say vvith S. Augustine the Sacrament is not our Lorde In Iohan. Tract 5â— but the bread of our Lord. Harding S. Augustin denieth not the SacrameÌ„t to be our Lord he hath no such wordes Howbeit we our selues would denie it in some sense For some tyme the Sacrament is taken for the forme of bread and wine and that in deede is not our Lord. Iewel 212. M. Harding might accompt not only seuen but also seuenteen sundry Sacramentes Harding I accompt onely seuen in such sense as the Churche properly taketh a Sacrament And how that is I shewed before Iewel pag. 213. Thus vve say it can not be proued that this number is so specially appointed As for the reasons of seuen seales seuen trumpettes seuen starres seuen golden Candelstikes and seuen eyes they are childish Harding We ground not our seuen Sacramentes vppon those similitudes Seuen Sacrametes August de Ciuit. Dei li. 11. c. 30. de doctrina Christiana lib. 2. cap. 16. Albeit if any man applie some of those matters to the seuen Sacramentes it is not childishely done seing S. Augustine confesseth that the Mysteries of numbers be great in the holy scriptures Iewel 213. Vnto euery Sacrament tvvo thinges are necessarie a sensible outvvard Element as in Baptisme VVater in our Lordes Supper Bread and VVine and the vvord of Institution Harding Thus farre we are agreed with you Iewel Matrimonie Order and penaunce haue the vvoorde of God but they haue no outvvard creature or Element Extrems Vnction and Confirmation haue neither vvoorde nor Element Harding To answere you herein M. Iewel I can not doo better Conci Florentin in vnione Armeniorum then to send you to the Councel of Florence and to the bookes wherein the order of our Sacramentes are conteined Where you shal finde that there lacketh neither the woorde of Institution nor conuenient Element It is yenough to vs that both by the woorde of God and by the perpetual doctrine of the Churche we are taught Act. 8. Iacob 5. Luc. 22. Ioan. 20. that these seuen are Sacramentes Confirmation is proued in the Actes of the Apostles Extreme Vnction in the Epistle of S. Iames Order in S. Luke and in S. Iohn Now baptisme and our Lordes supper your selfe graunt of penaunce and Matrimonie I haue said sufficiently already To be short we are in possession of seuen Sacramentes neither can you nor any man now aliue or that euer liued sith the Apostles shewe that euer the Church was without so many Sacramentes Impugne them when you list I doubt not but you shal be answered For that ye haue said hitherto is litle worthe and most thinges are lyes Iewel pag. 213. 214. De SacrameÌ„tâ— Eucharistia The auncient Fathers hauing occasion to intreate of purpose and specially hereof speake only of tvvo Sacramentes and so Bessarion namely saith Harding None of them al hath written purposely of al the Sacramentes of the Church but as occasion serued M. Ievvel belyeth the ancient Fathers touching the number of the SacrameÌ„tes Dionysius De Ecclesiast Hierarch TertulliaÌ„ lib. de resur carnis Cyprian lib. 2. Epist 1. ad StephanuÌ„ Bessarion de SacrameÌ„to Eucharistiae Bessarion belyed by M. Ievvel they now speake of two now of moe Of two they speake the more specially bicause the custome was to geue them both together to those that were of discretion Howbeit Dionysius Areopagita the most auncient of al intreateth of many moe as his booke de Ecclesiastica Hierarchia doth witnesse Tertullian besides Baptisme and the body of Christ nameth together with them Anointing and Signing and Imposition of handes And the Doctours which you bring affirme two but they denie not moe Yea S. Cyprian whom you cite in the first place can not be proued there to meane by both Sacramentes Baptisme and the supper of our Lorde Bessarion saith two were deliuered plainely in the Scriptures but he confesseth moe whiche are deliuered also in the Scriptures though not so plainely as the other two And he expressely nameth Chrismatis Sacramentum the Sacrament of Confirmation or of Bishopping Of the other Sacramentes in general he speaketh twise in the beginning of that Treatie Wherefore there is an impudâ—nt he included in your wordes where you saie that I haue in expresse wordes The onely two Sacraments of the Churche So that nowe we maie couple you with Beza â—â—o teacheth the same doctrine in his Confession and iuâ—â—ly cal you bothe false teachers Iewel 214. Al these thinges not vvithstanding the Tridentine Councel concludeth seuen Sacramentes Harding So it ought and maie easily doo M. Iewel any thing that you haue yet brought notwithstanding You proue in dede that there are two Sacramentes but that there are no moe you haue not brought so much as one apparent authoritie Sauing that of Bessarion who neuerthelesse is vtterly against you For he beleued and taught that there were seuen Sacramentes Bessarion De Sacramento Eucharistiae as by that Treatie it maye wel appeare But what should I do good reader should I now proue that there are seuen Sacramentes Certainely it were easy for me so to doo and to set out a booke of that Argument farre greater then M. Iewels is And that may wel appeare true by that Ruardus Tapper Cardinal Hosius and Petrus a Soto with diuers other learned menne haue done in this behalfe I am sure M. Iewel wil not denie but I were hable to english at the lest that which I should find in their Latin bookes And yet therein standeth his whole shewe For in deede he doth litle els but english that which the Germaines and Geneuians bookes haue The 7. SacrameÌ„tes proued out of S. Augustine Augustiniana CoÌ„fessio The vntruthes and scoffes that he addeth of his owne though they be many in number yet doo they not greatly increase the bulke of his volume Besides al other Catholique bookes there hath one benne set forth
happeth bicause we yeelde and consent vnto sinne and not bicause the concupiscence of it selfe is sinne before we haue consented vnto it Ievvel 217. S. Augustine saith in most plaine vvise Contra Iulianum lib. 5. c. 3. The concupiscnce of the flesh against vvhich the good spirite lusteth is both sinne and the paine of sinne and the cause of sinne Yet the late blessed Chapter of Trident in spite of S. Augustine hath published the contrarie Harding Thus ye speake in spite of the CouÌ„cel Verely the CouÌ„cel of Trent did determine that which it fouÌ„d in S. Augustin who teacheth most manifestly that the CoÌ„cupisceÌ„ce is not properly sin but is only called so And thereby you know how S. Augustine is to be vnderstaÌ„ded in the place by you alleged His most plaine words are these Augustin coÌ„t duas epist Pelagi li. 1. ca. 13. Dicimus Baptisma dare oiÌ„m indulgentiaÌ„ peccatoruÌ„ et auferre crimina noÌ„ radere Sed de ista coÌ„cupiscentia carnis falli eos credo vel fallere cuÌ„ qua necesse est vt etiaÌ„ baptizatus hoc si diligeÌ„tissimè proficit spiritu Dei agitur pia mente confligat Sed haec etiaÌ„si vocatur PeccatuÌ„ non vtique quia peccatuÌ„ est sed quia peccato facta est sic vocatur Sicut sciptura manus cuiusque dicitur quòd manus eaÌ„ fecerit We say that Baptisme geueth remissioÌ„ of al sinnes and that it taketh crimes quit away and doth not shaue them as who would saye it leaueth not the rootes behind But I suppose that as touching this ConcupisceÌ„ce of the flesh they be either deceiued them selues or that they deceiue others For of this ConcupisceÌ„ce he also who is baptized yea though he profit neuel so wel and be guided with the spirite of God must of necessitie suffer in his Godly mind some conflicte But this Concupiscence albeit it be called sinne yet verely it is not so called bicause it is sinne but bicause it is made by sinne As for example any writing is called the hand of him that wrote it bicause the hand made it If then S. Augustine say most distinctly that the Concupiscence in them that are baptized is not a sinne how spitefully yea how falsely also haue you said that the Councel of Trent defined the contrarie in spite of S. Augustine I pray you be not so angry with the Councel of Trent If your stomake wil not holde in that spiteful humour but you must nedes vtter it yet wil truth be truth Of the Real presence of Christes Bodie in the Sacrament of the Aulter The 5. Chapter The Apologie Pag. 218. VVe saie that Eucharistia that is to saie the Supper of the Lorde is a Sacrament that is an euident representation of the Bodie and Bloude of Christ vvherein is sette as it vvere before our eies the death of Christ and his Resurrâ—ction and vvhat so euer he did vvhilest he vvas in his mortal Body to the ende vve maie geue thankes for his deathe and for our deliuerance And that by the often receiuing of this Sacrament vve may daily renevve the remembrance thereof to thintent vve being fedde vvith the Bodie and bloude of Christe may be brought into the hope of the Resurrection and of euerlasting life and maie most assuredly beleeue that as our bodies be fedde vvith bread and vvine so our soules be fedde vvith the Bodie and Bloude of Christe Confutation fol. 90. b. Among al these gay wordes we heare not so much as one syllable vttered whereby we may vnderstande that yee beleeue the very Bodie of Christe to be in deede present in the blessed Sacrament of the Aulter Ye confesse the Eucharistia whiche commonly ye cal the Supper of the Lorde to be a Sacrament and al that to be none other then an euident token of the Bodie and Bloude of Christe c. Iewel Defence Pag. 220. Here is no mention saith M. Harding of Real presence and thereupon he plaieth vs many a proper lesson Notvvithstanding here is as muche mention made of Real presence as either Christe or his Apostles euer made or in the Primitiue Catholique Church vvas euer beleeued Harding COnsidering how ofte this matter hath ben handled and how few men are ignorant what ech side saith I wil be the shorter in this place First I graunt the eating of Christes body by faith to be necessarie Againe I graunt the Sacrament to be a mystical figure of Christes death and of his visible body But I say farther that besides eating by Faith our flesh and body receiueth Christes body and that really Matt. 26. That these vvordes this is my body this is my Bloude are meant properly TertulliaÌ„ de resurr Carnis Which conclusion is proued bicause the wordes of Christ this is my body are meant properly and without any figure of speach albeit the manner of the presence be figuratiue My reason to proue that Christes wordes are meant properly is the perpetual interpretation of the auncient Fathers the sense and custome of the Churche To beginne with Tertullian he saith in this wise Caro abluitur vt anima emaculetur Caro vngitur vt anima consecretur Caro signatur vt anima muniatur Caro manus impositione adumbratur vt anima spiritu illuminetur Caro corpore sanguine Christi vescitur vt anima de Deo saginetur The flesh is washed that the soule may be made without spot The flesh is annointed that the soule may be consecrated The flesh is signified that the soule may be fenced The flesh is shadowed with the laying on of handes The flesh is the meane vvhereby the grace of God passeth vnto the soule that the soule also may be lightened with the holy Ghost The flesh is fed with the body and bloude of Christe that the soule also may be made fat of God In these wordes as diuers Sacramentes are ioyned together so herein they agree al that the flesh is the meane by which the grace of God passeth to the soule As therfore in Baptisme the flesh is washed that the soule may be cleansed so in the Sacrament of the Aulter the flesh is fed with the body and bloude of Christ that the soule may be nourished with the godhead which dwelleth in that fleshe It is then to be noted that the fleshe eateth not material bread and wine but the body and bloud of Christ For as the thing wherewith we are washed is water and that wherewith we are anointed is oile euen so that wherewith the flesh is fed is the body and bloud of Christ The instrument therefore of Gods grace is none other in the Supper beside that flesh wherein the fulnesse of the Godhed dwelleth It is wel knowen that our flesh hath no faith to eate Christes body withal Therefore when our flesh is said to be fed with Christes body it is clearly meant that our flesh is also really fed with Christes owne substance as it is washed with
the loose life of some whom the people nameth good and godly menne You haue fasly turned his wordes for he saith not as you make him to speake that they recken Fornication to be but a litle petite faulte He saith vt leue commissum neutiquam refugiunt they flee it not as if it were but a light offence Iacobus de Valentia Iacobus de Valentia whom also you allege maketh quite against you For naming Iewes and Saracenes and il Christian menne expressely he semeth not to meane the Popes Canonistes whom here you burthen with mainetenance of Fornication whiche sortâ—… of menne he would not haue letted to name had the matter ben so cleare as you sclaunder them Touching that you tel vs out of Antoninus and Alexander de Hales It is not worth the answering Mary aâ— for that you bring vs S. Augustine bicause worthily he is of great auctoritie it is wel to be weighed what he saith Thus you make him to tel his tale or rather your owne tale For his it is not as you set it forthe Iewel Pag. 361. And likevvise S. Augustine Illa Fornicatio quam faciunt August in quaest in Exod. quaestion 20. qui vxores non habent cum foeminis quae viros non habent an prohibita inueniri possit ignoro That kinde of fornication vvhiche Single menne committe vvith Single vvomenne vvhetber it be forbidden or no I can not tel Thus you haue M. Harding not onely vvhat your Canonistes but also vvhat your Schoole Doctors haue taught and thought of Simple Fornication Harding What M. Iewel M. Ievv maketh S. Augustin to be ignorant vvhether Simple Fornication be forbidden or no. are you so farre become the Deuils slaue that now he maie vse your seruice not onely to persuade menne to beleeue false Doctrine but also to leade a wicked life And the rather to perfourme this make you S. Augustine to say that he can not tel whether Simple Fornication be forbidden or no Who is to be beleeued if S. Augustine be not And if he being so great a learned man as euer Christes Churche had could not tel whether Simple Fornication be forbidden or no who is he that can tel And if there be no man that can tel vs it is forbidden the same once persuaded the inclination to the fulfilling of fleshly luste being in mankinde so general what a window yea what a wide gate shal be opened to menne to rush in and without al conscienceâ— to follow filthy pleasure But where hath S. Augustine this saying Your cotation hath thus August in quaest in Exod. quaest 20. Certainely in that shorte Chapter he saith no such thing What maie we thinke that of purpose you haue lâ—ad your Reader awaie from the place leaste your falshed should be espied and least you should be taken as they saie with the manner Truly it is not vnlike O M. Iewel though we beare with you in your common custome of falsifying the places ye allege yet thinke not that we maie wincke at you when by the vse of that sleight you open a way vnto so great wickednes and edifie vnto hel The place from whence you tooke these wordes is in S. Augustine Quaestoinum super Exodum lib. 2. quaest 71. To open and set forth the circumstance of the pointes whereof he disputeth there it were very long The learned maie reade him Hauing said that the woman committeth Aduouterie which hath carnal companie with a man that is not her husband though he haue no wife and that the man likewise committeth Aduouterie by sinning with her that is not his wife though she haue no husband Hovv fornicatioÌ„ is forbiddeÌ„ in the Decalogus He addeth further Sed vtrum si faciat c But if one doo this who hath no wife with a woman that hath no husband whether in this case bothe be holden for transgressours of the precepte he meaneth this precepte Thou shalt not committe Aduouterie The Question is for good cause moued For if they be not giltye of transgression Moechia Aduouterie called Fornication in the Scriptures then is not Fornication forbidden in the Decalogus that is to saie in the ten Commaundementes but onely Moechia that is Aduouterie howbeit al Aduouterie is vnderstaÌ„ded to be FornicatioÌ„ as the Scriptures speake For our Lord saith in the Gospel whosoeuer putteth away his wife Scriptures the cause of Fornication excepte causeth her Moechari to commit Aduouterie This he calleth Fornication if she sinne with an other man that hath a husbande whiche thing is Moechia that is Adulterium Aduouterie And so al Moechia Aduouterie in the Scriptures is called also Fornication But on the other side whether al Fornication maie be called Moechia Aduouterie vvhether fornication be called aduouterie in the Scritures in the same Scriptures I can not yet cal to my minde the example of suche a speache Now folow the wordes that M Iewel would seeme to allege and hath alleged falsely Sed si non omnis Fornicatio etiam Moechia dici potest vbi sit in Decalogo prohibita illa Fornicatio quam faciunt viri qui vxores non habent cum foeminis quae maritos non habent vtrum inueniri possit ignoro but if it be so that al Fornication can not be called also Moechia aduouterie where that Fornication which men commit that haue no wiues with women that haue no husbandes is forbidden in the table of the ten commaundementes whether it can be found or no I can not tel This is that M. Iewel S. Augustine coÌ„fessed he could not tel whether Simple Fornication were forbidden vvhat is that properly that S. Augustine here coÌ„fesseth he knevv not or no as you tel vs for he knew right wel it was forbidden but whether if al fornicatioÌ„ be not coÌ„teined in the name of Moechia aduouterie which word is expressed in the teÌ„ coÌ„maundementes that kinde of Fornication which men hauing no wiues coÌ„mit with womenne hauing no husbandes can be found forbidden he saith not al but in decalago in the table of the ten commaundementes This is that and none other thing whereof S. Augustine in that place confesseth him selfe to be ignorant Ibidem Fornication forbiddeÌ„ vnder the name of aduouterie Robberie forbiddeÌ„ vnder the name of Theafte Now that such kinde of Fornication is to be thought to be forbidden vnder the name of Moechia aduouteriâ— with these wordes he declareth there immediatly his determinate sentence and iudgement Sed si furti nomis ne benè intelligitur omnis illicita vsurpatio rei aliena non enim rapinam permisit qui furtum prohibuit sed vtique à parte totum intelligi voluit quicquid illicitè rerum proximi aufertur profectò nomine Moechiae omnis illicitus concubitus atque illorum membrorum non legitimus vsus prohibitus debet intelligi But if al vnlawful vsurpation of a thing that is an other mannes be meant by the name of Theafte for he
of Popes at the first succeding one an other fol. 219. b. Ordination and Confirmation diuers fol. 227. b. Origen falsified by M. Iewel fol. 286. a. 333. b. Orders Ecclesiastical fol. 134. b. 135. a. P. Papistrie can not be shewed when it beganne fol. 106. b Patriarkes fol. 180. Peter Martyr in Strasbourg a Lutheran in England a Zuinglian fol. 34. b. Peter Martyr and dame Catherine his wife fol. 36. b. Peter Martyr at variance vvith Brentius fol. 117. b. Peters authoritie and prerogatiue fol. 174. a. 175. 176. Peter ouer the Christian Gentiles at Rome fol. 221. 〈…〉 Peter when he came to Rome fol. 221. b. Peter the feeder of al sortes in the flocke fol. 148. b. c. Peters humilitie fol. 153. Peter offended twise fol. 157. Peter foloweth the rest yet head of al by S. Augustine fol. 158. Peter receiued into indiuisible vnitie with Christ fol. 174. a. Peter ioyned with fol. Leo. 176. a. Pelagius heresie mainteined by the Caluinistes fol. 367. a. Perfection double one of Pilgrimes the other of heauen fol. 368. b Petitio principij muche vsed by M. Iewel fol. 89. a. Platina no flatterer of the Pope fol. 257. b. Pope the Heade of the Churche fol. 130. b. The Popes Supremacie proued fol. 146. 147. 148. 149. 159. b. 179. 186. a. b. The Pope Prince of Pastours fol. 177. b 178. a. The Pope leaft the Vicare of Christes loue towardes vs. fol. 148. a. The Popes confirming of Bishops fol. 223. b. 224. seq Popes charged with heresie and other enormites defended fol. 248. 249. 250. 251. 252. 253. 254. 255. 256. 257. 258. The Pope Peters Successour fol. 273. a. The Pope laufully called the Princâ—… of Pastours fol. 177. b. Possibilitie of keping Gods Commaundementes fol. 366. b. Priesthood double fol. 239. a. Priest aboue a Deacon fol. 164. b. Priestes of England are Votaries fol. 290. b. Priestes of Greece in what sence they are Votaries fol. 298. a. Priestes and religious menne whether they maie be dispensed to marrie fol. 300. b. Priestes only Iudges ouer Priestes fol. 377. a. Praying for the dead taught by S. Paule fol. 326. b. Protestantes dissent not onely one from an other but also from them selues fol. 34. a. Protestantes varie from the Primitiue Churche fol. 270. b. Protestantes be Apostates fol. 336. b. Protestantes are proued by an inuincible Argument to be no part of Christes Churche fol. 90. a. b. 92. Puritanes fol. 139. a. 332. a. R. RAymeris made king of Arragon of a Monke and married by dispensation fol. 301. a. Real presence cleerely witnessed fol. 79. a. proued 339. sequentib Rebellion against Princes mainteined by M. Iewel fol. 86. a. Religious menne married the first fouÌ„ders of this new Gospel fol. 36. b Reseruation of the Sacramente fol. 331. b. Righteousnes competent for this life fol. 368. a. Rounde capped Ministers fol. 86. b. Ruffianrie of M. Iewel detected fol. 120. b. Ruffinus belied by M. Iew. fol. 285. b. S. SAbellicus falsified by M. Iewel fol. 139. b. Sacramentes meanes to receiue grace fol. 330. a. Sacramentes seuen fol. 334 a. Sacrament of the Aulter called our maker and Lorde by S. Augustine fol. 346. a. Sacramentaries persecuted by the Lutheranes fol. 95. b. 96. a. Sacramentaries condemned by the Lutheranes fol. 104. b. Seruus seruuorum Dei the Popes stile fol. 187. b. Seuerus a blinde man by touche of a Martyrs garment recouered sight fol. 364. a. Shaxton Bishoppe no Protestant fol. 241. b. Shaxton and Capon Bishoppes of Sarisburie repented fol. 194. a. Shaxton B. not of M. Iewele side fol. 242. b. Sharpe vvordes founde in the Scriptures fol. 27. b. Sheepe of three sortes fol. 149. a. Siritius and Innocentius vvere not the first ordeiners of Clerkes coÌ„tinencie fol. 279. a. Sozomenus Gregorie Nazianzen and Eusebius belied by the Apologie fol. 309. a. Sophistrie of M. Ievvels shifting from the Scriptures to Goddes vvorde fol. 323. a. Spiridion made Bishop of a married laie man fol. 285. a Syluester 2. Pope fol. 249. a. Succession of Bishoppes treated of at large Lib. fol. 4. Succession of Bishoppes a certaine rule to knovve the Churche by fol. 198. b. 199. sequent Succession can not lacke the Truth fol. 199. 200. Succession lavvful can not be taken avvaie by man fol. 211. T. TErtulliaÌ„ of a married man made a Prieste fol. 285. a. Tertullians errour fol. 239. 240. Three vvaies of vvriting against an aduersarie fol. 42. b. Tradition fol. 270. a. Traditions belonging to SacrameÌ„ts maie not be changed Ceremonies maie fol. 326. a. Traditores what they were in the primitiue Churche fol. 91. a. Transubstantiation fol. 110. b. treated of 346. b. This is my Bodie meant properly fol. 339. a. Turkes inuasion brideled fol. 266. a. V. VAriance of opinion betwen two Ministers of Valencenes in the time of the Siege fol. 84. b. Victor the Pope his death fol. 58. a Virgilius Pope his CoÌ„stancie fol. 200. a Vnitie can not be without a supreme head fol. 140. b. 141. a. 152. 153. a. Vniuersal Bishop truly attributed to the Pope fol. 185. b. 186. 187. 188. sequent Votaries maie not conueniently marrie by M. Iewel fol. 289. a. Vow breakers in what danger they stande fol. 278. a. Vow of Chastitie annexed to holy Orders fol. 291. a. Vow of Chastitie made in facte though no vvordes be spoken fol. 292. b. Vovve made in vvhat case marriage holdeth or holdeth not by the determination of the Churche fol. 294. b Vrspergensis set out by Melanchthon onely fol. 57. b. VV VVAldenses heresies fol. 102. b. VVedlockes il thing is inordinate luste fol. 283. b. VVickleff his heresies fol. 82. b. 63. a. VViues that couerted their vnfaithful husbandes fol. 61. b. 350. a. VVordes of God not written fol. 270. a. VVorkes hovv meritorious of infinite revvarde fol. 371. b. Faultes escaped in the printing Faulte leafe line Correction my 27. a. 27. may sor 38. a. 12. sory Golfridus 83. b. 25. Galfridus lustly 135. b. 23. lusty famofum 170. b. 9. fumosum to 179. b. 28. lut it out least 180. b. 28. leaft S. of 198. a. 19. of S. In the margent 202. a.  a note superfluous Liber hic D.M.N. Thomae Hardingi lectus approbatus est à viris Anglici idiomatis Theologiae peritissimis vt sine periculo imprimi publicari possit Quanquam alioqui ipse D. Hardingus mihi tà m probè notus est vt de eius cruditione fide prudentia nihil sit dubitandum Cunerus Petri Pastor S. Petri Louanij 21. Maij. An. 1568.