Creede vppon the knowledge and conformitie of scriptures but vppon the doctrine receiued and approued of the people of God as the Auncient churche yea afore the wrytings of the newe Testament were written had a custome to propone to great and small the beléefe of the Créede afore they would commende to them the holy scriptures as appeareth by christian Antiquities And therfore the beleefe of a Christian dependes not of the woorde written by the Créede but of the woorde reuealed to the people and church of God. Aunswere Touching the firste Article it is moste necessary in teaching the Apostles Creede to a childe or other ignorante persone that therewith also he be instructed in the Doctrine of the Prophetes and Apostles seeing the Créede containes none other matter than this selfe same Doctrine and that they are things not onely conioyned but also like if not in termes at least in sense and substance For the second Article they denie that that which is alleaged before is any way contrary to the order established in the churche of Geneua or other church well directed wherin touching the reason taken of the fourme of Baptisme vsed in the saide churches it foloweth not by the woordes and speeches which haue bene alleaged that Caluine woulde shut oute the Créede and seperate it from the writings and Doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles a thing impossible but sheweth euidently that he ment to comprehende it therein when he added this woorde and generally which the Doctoures haue put in their Allegation to comprehende what mighte be ouer and aboue the holy Scriptures after the deduction which he made of the points of the Doctrine comprehended particularely in the saide Créede Touching the other reason that afore there were any Booke of the newe Testament written the Creede was proponed to such as were Catechised it is agréed vnto But it folowes not for al that that it is not founded vppon the woorde and Doctrine which the Apostles preached albeit at that time it was not set downe in wryting and likewise vppon the wrytings of the Prophetes vppon which the Doctrine of the Apostles is grounded For Conclusion the Ministers putte no difference betwéene Goddes woorde preached and written touching the sense Obiection It séemes the Ministers haue not well vnderstande the meaning of the Doctoures For there is no Question to knowe whether the Créede carie conformitie of hymselfe with the Apostolike writings but whether firste we muste vnderstande and beléeue that the Apostles and Prophetes haue set downe by wryting a Doctrine wherewith the sayd Créede dothe conforme and that other wayes a man can not beléeue the saide Créede But to vnfolde it more easily the Question is if it be not possible that a childe being come to the age of discretion or any other may by instructions of the Parentes or others beléeue the Articles contained in the Créede and be not firste instructed by them that there be certaine Apostolike writings whereunto the Articles of the Créede may be conformed And if it be necessary to moue him to beléeue it to knowe this conformitie And to these let the Ministers Aunswer absolutely Aunsvvere Faithe is by hearing and hearing by the woorde of God according to the consent of Iesus Christe who putting the hearing of the woorde afore the Faithe of the same saythe Who heares my woord and beléeues him that hath sent me c. Like as also he commaunded the Apostles to preache first the Gospell to the ende the hearers by the preaching might be disposed and led to Faithe By these reasones to knowe whether the Doctrine that is taughte be the woorde of God it is necessary to beléeue without the which also it is impossible that a man may either haue Faithe or beléeue in God onlesse he be assured that that which is taught him is Gods woorde And for the Question touching the instruction of children at the age of discretion or others whether it be necessary they knowe the woorde afore they beléeue the Aunswere is that it is néedefull And Thomas sayeth that the Faithe of the Articles of the Créede ought to be explicated that is declared which can not be done without knowledge of the woorde Obiection This Aunswere containes frothe of speache withoute any touche of the pointe proponed For there is no doubte that children and others muste not be Catechised and the Articles of the Faithe vnfolded to them by the woorde of God But the Question is to knowe if it be necessary they vnderstande that thys Woorde be wrytten in the Bookes of the Prophetes and Apostles so as wythoute the knowledge of the sayde wrytings they can not knowe nor beléeue the Articles of Faithe contained in the sayde Créede Whereunto the Doctoures pray the Ministers to Aunswere directly either yea or no. And after the aunswere to adde suche reason as they will which if they will not doe the Doctoures are of minde to procéede to an Article after they haue tolde them notwithstanding for conclusion of all that if this knowledge of the scriptures were necessary to the vnderstanding of the Articles of the Créede examining them according to the conformitie of the same Scriptures that it behoueth séeing the foundation is so necessary amōgst the Articles of the Créede to put this I beléeue there be holy scriptures and it is to note that in the said Simbole there is no mention made that there is holy Scripture so that a mā may be a true christian afore he vnderstand there is any christian Doctrine or woorde of God written therefore not necessary for the beléefe and vnderstanding of the Créede to know the woorde of God to be written in which respect the Doctors protest to speake no more of this Article Aunsvvere By collation and view of the Demaundes and Answers it is easie to iudge who offende moste in circumstaunce of woordes either the proponentes or respondentes Touching the second Article the Answere is as before that the knowledge of Gods woord is necessary to beléeue and to be a christian whether it be written or reuealed Touching the declaration that was made the Ministers Answere in their owne respecte not to approue in any sort that any thing be added to the pure woorde of God And they beléeue the Simbol of the Apostles to be no other thing than the pure woord of God which is proposed to vs by his spirite and therefore it should be a contrauention againste his commaundement to adde newe Articles to it mainteining also that if there had bene others necessary to saluation the spirite of God had not bene forgetful For cōclusion albeit there is no expresse mention of holy Scripture made in the Créede yet couertly it is vnderstande therein bicause the churche which can not subsist that it is not founded and builded vpon the grounds of the Prophets and Apostles is proponed there as an Article to beléeue Replie This Answere the Doctors say is impertinent and no more to purpose than
made and contained amongst Christians in Baptisme afore there were any Apostolicall wryting and in Baptisme it was proposed to beléeue the saide Créede afore there was entrie into the wrytings or speache therof in the primitiue Churche wrytings were examined whether they were to be receiued or not and the vnderstanding of the same together if a Doctrine were true or false by this Simboll and rule of Faithe and to imitate or confront it with it as Irenaeus Tertullian and others affirme And though it should happen that a man neuer heard but the Simboll without knowing whether there were holy Scriptures or not yet he might beleeue the said Créede and be a true Christian so that he were not infected with other particulare false opinions And of the contrarie if the beleefe of the Créede depended vppon the knoweledge of the Propheticall or Apostolicall wrytings as to vnderstand and be assured of the conformitie that therein is afore wée beleue it onely wise men and such as were wel studied in writinges who woulde assure them selues of the saide conformitie should be bounde to beleue the Symboll or at the leaste assured of the truthe of the same and so there shoulde be fewe Christians Therefore the beléefe of the Créede dependes not vpon the knowledge of the Scriptures By meane whereof the Doctoures holde by tradition of the Churche gouerned by the holy sprite that the Creede is of the Apostles and that there is no doubte thereof In like sorte by the same tradition we muste geue Faithe to it as a Doctrine of the Apostles not written and yet of equall authoritie with that whiche is in their writings notwithstanding we had no knowledge of other Scriptures The Doctoures are very sory that the other parte hath so muche declined to aunswere pertinently and absolutely to these twoo pointes why they proponed onely to shewe what Faithe and authoritie men oughte to attribute to this Symbol and all other Doctrine receiued by Tradition of the Apostles without Canonical writing whiche might haue bene lefte by them by the same meane and reason that is shewed that the Symboll was geuen to the Christians by the said Apostles without that they put it in writing For ende the Doctours persuade suche as shal reade this conference not to amaze or maruel at so many perplexities declining from the true ende of the said two pointes proponed with request to remember the conferences of S. Augustine with the Donatistes and Pelagians whose fashion resembles the presente manner of the Ministers with whom they conferre laying them selues notwithstanding vpon the iudgemente of suche as shal reade the matter of this disputation Resolution of the Ministers WHo affirme according to the former propositions alwaies mētioned by them also the better to confirme the faithe of the Duches that as S. Cyprian writeth it is incertaine whether the Symbol which beares the name of the Apostles was made composed suche one by them or els drawne and gathered of their Doctrine and also why it is called Symbolum whether it be by reason that euery one of them broughte his parte and portion to it or that it is a marke or certaine signe of Christian Religion as touching whiche Regardes it is a thing indifferente for Saluation as hauing alwayes one equall weighte and authoritie whether the Apostles write it or whether it was faithfully gathered of their writings as were also the Symbols aswel of Niceus as of Athanasius of whom the Church neuer doubted that they conteined not a pure Apostolicall Doctrine as shée hathe well and euidently declared in ordeining that the saide Symboll of Nyceus shoulde be openlye published to the people when they assembled for the Communion the same being in obseruation at this day in the Churche of Rome where this Symboll is readde and sunge euery Sonday in the Temples whiche if it conteined not Apostolicall Doctrine it shoulde impugne the 59. Articles of the Councell of Laodicene by whiche it is forbidden to reade in the Churche any thing of Priuate inuention but onely the Doctrine comprehended in the Canonicall Bookes of the Olde and Newe Testament whose number is there made The Ministers doo further affirme that the reason and principall cause of the Faithe which Christians adde to this Créed is the knowledge they haue that it is the pure woord of God and he that teacheth it mainteines also that it is Gods woorde the same appearing by the testimony and writing of S. Paule who after he hath proponed to the Corinthians the Deathe Buriall and Resurrection of Iesus Christe whiche be the principall Articles of the Créede as vpon whiche also our iustification is chiefely founded Addeth this speache that he hathe geuen them that whiche he hathe receiued whiche is that Christe is deade for our sinnes according to the Scriptures and after that he was buried and is risen againe the thirde daye according to the Scriptures Christe him selfe also proposing in like sorte his Deathe and Resurrection to his twoo Disciples alleageth to them the Scriptures for their more assurance saying Oh fonde weake of hart to beleue all things that the Prophets haue pronounced was it not méete the Christ suffred these things and that he entred into his glorie then beginning at Moyses and the other Prophetes he declared to them in all the scriptures the things that were of him selfe In the same chapter appearing to them after his Resurrectiō yea afore the créede was made speaking to them of his death and resurrection for their better assuraunce he laies vnto them the scriptures saying It is so written and it was méete that Christ suffred and rise from death the third day by which wée maie inferre that for the grounde of Faithe and assurance of the Articles of the same there is no better meane than to propone the Scriptures And albeit in the tyme of the Natiuitie of the Churche the Créede was proponed to suche as were Catechised afore the Apostles or Euangelistes had sette downe any thing in writing yet it foloweth not for all that that there were not other scriptures vppon which mighte be founded euery Article of Faithe Whiche to decypher by péecemeale the Article of Creation hathe his fundation vppon the beginning of Genesis The Article of the Almightinesse of God hathe his grounde vppon the 40. of Esaie and many other places of scripture The Article of the Conception of Iesus Christe vppon the vij of Esay For the place of his Natiuitie vppon the v. of Micheas and for the Regarde of the Time vppon the xlix of Genesis and ix of Daniel The Article of his death the Crosse vpon the xxij Psalme xxxv of Esay and ix of Daniel The Article of Resurrection vppon the xvj Psalme the Article of Ascension vppon the xcviij Psalme the Article of the Iudgemente in Daniel xij the Article of his sending the holy ghost in Ioel ij the Article of the Church in Esay 2. and Micheas 4. the Article of Remission of
in writing in the two firste conferences where was continuall speache to examine the Articles of their confession without making mention of the Masse And where they pretende a seeming and meaning in the Doctours to examine the Catechisme and not the Articles of the Confession the Doctours are contente to proceede in the saide Articles conferring them with the Catechisme séeing they two oughte to accorde together And so they call all the assistantes to witnesse and iudge by whom it standes that the conference is not begonne Touching the change of order whiche the ministers demaund this day it is a late fashion and a new trouble seeing hitherunto they haue kept the place of respondentes deliuered the Articles of their confession to be examined where the Doctors were alwaies arguers of their side not proponed any thing to examination yet are they contente after the said confession be examined that the Ministers propound suche difficulties as they haue againste the Catholike Doctrine whereunto the doctors with Gods grace will make aunswere Demaunde Whether the Ministers beleue that the créede called the Symbole of the Apostles was made by the Apostles and whether they beleue al that is conteined therein Aunswere It is a thing different whether the Apostles them selues being together haue written it euery one bringing to it his sentence as somme hold whether it hathe bene gathered of diuers places of holy writings yet in the reformed Church we beleue euery point to be drawne out of the pure doctrine of the Prophetes Apostles conteined in their writings as if we should say by the importaunce contentes that it is a summe of the doctrine whiche the Apostles preached Demaunde Leauing a part to auoide tediusnes whether it be a thing indifferente to a christian to beleue that a doctrine hathe ben written by the Apostles or not so that it kéepe a conformitie with the matter of the holy writings the demaund is if al doctrine conformed to the said holy writings may take indifferently the title of the Apostles or other authours of the scripture Aunswere We cannot faile in calling it Apostolike doctrine but naming it the writing of the Apostles séemes to giue a sense that it was either written with their handes or spoken of them But be it what maye be wheresoeuer we acknowledge any doctrine taste sauer of the sprite wherwith the holy men of God haue bene moued we wil cal it Propheticall and Apopostolical doctrine Obiection The Demaunde stretcheth not whether the doctrine be Apostolicall in respecte of suche conformitie but whether by that reason it mighte be attributed to the Apostles and of equall authoritie with the writings wherewith it is conformed bicause it procéedes of a selfe same sprite as the aunswere saithe Aunsvvere The aunswere is already made whiche is that such writing conteines Apostolical doctrine in what sense it maye be termed to be of the Apostles Obiection The aunswere vnder correction apperteines nothing at al to the demaunde for the question is not whether for the conformitie it maie be accompted Apostolical But whether in regarde of this conformitie it maie be attributed to the Apostles and beare the title and name of the Apostles with equal authoritie to the proper writings of the Apostles Aunswere The first demaund was if the créede was made of the Apostles whereunto a sufficient aunswere was made After which it is lawfull to fashion a second demaund which differeth from that Obiection The seconde dependes vpon the first which also is made and whether it be satisfied in aunswere or not let the Readers discerne and iudge Aunswere To depende vpon it is not therefore the same Demaunde Whether they approue the said Créede only bicause they knowe it to be conformable to the writings of the Apostles or whether there be any other thing that induceth them to beleue it Aunswere That not only it is conformable but euen the doctrine it selfe for which cause they beleue and approue it Demaunde Whether a man be not bound to receiue it but in respect he knoweth it to be the selfe writing or haue conformitie with the writings of the Apostles as is saide Aunswere The chefe cause that may moue him that beleues it to beleue it in déede is the knowledge whiche we haue spoken of Demaunde Notwithstanding this be the principall cause yet wée require to be absolutely aunswered whether there be no other sufficient reason to induce beléefe so that this firste maye be necessarie Aunswere Aswel for the matter of the Créede as euery other thing which we beleue the principall cause is the knowledge wee haue that the same hath ben left vs written or gathered out of the writings of the Prophets Apostles And for our parts we search no other reason than that of our Faithe Obiection Yet vnder correction the Demaunde is not fully aunswered Whiche is to knowe whether to receiue the creede of the Apostles this cause be necessarye to vnderstande the writings of the Apostles and that withoute the same no man either can or oughte receiue it The Doctours praye to be absolutely aunswered either in the one or the other without circuit of woordes And the more simplye to vnfolde and explicate the Demaunde thus it is whether a personne oughte not receiue the Créede of the Apostles but vnder knowledge that it is conformed to the writings of the Apostles Aunsvvere Séeing with the doctrine of S. Paule there is no true faith without knowledge assurance of the woord to beleue it is necessary we know that it is the woorde of God. Demaunde To knowe whether they vnderstande this woorde to be written or not written Aunswere The woorde written and reuealed by the Prophetes and Apostles whiche is the fundation of Christian Faithe Obiection The ministers then mainteine that after the créede be beleued or proponed to beleue it is needefull to be taughte or to teache an other the wrytings of the Apostles and Prophets the same being againste all order euer holden in the Churche and against the contentes in the fourme to administer the Sacramentes in the Churche at Geneua made by Caluine and brought in amongst his woorkes The woordes are these Goe to them that haue charge of the childe that is Baptized séeing there is Question to receiue this childe into the companie of the Christian churche you promisse when he comes to age of discretion to instruct him in the Doctrine receiued and approued of the people of God And after these woordes they bring in the Creede according to the whiche they are willed to procéede in the instruction of the childe in all the Doctrine contained in the holy Scripture of the olde and newe Testament so that afore they propone to beléeue the Creede they persuade not to beleeue that there is any woord of God written nor what it is nor what is there contained as to knowe the conformitie of the Créede with the same They lay not also the foundation of the beléefe of the
the former And albeit the Prophetes and Apostles had not written at al the church notwithstanding had bene grounded vpon their foundation as it was in the time of Abraham and afore there were any Scripture which if it had bene necessary to saluation it had bene put among the Articles of Faithe Aunsvvere The Ministers holde this Replie muche more impertinent and touching the reason that is added that Faithe was in the time of Abraham albeit there was no woorde written they accorde to it But this is euil inferred there is no woorde written then there is no woorde at all And it is a fallax in argument which the Dialecticians name a Dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter from a saying modified to that is simplie saide The fourth day of disputation being Friday the tvvelfth of Julie THe Ministers aduouche to cleane alwaies to their former request obseruing the Protestations aforesaide made by the Doctoures who haue twise declared that they assembled not but to satisfie the Lord of Montpensier and the Ladie Buillon according also to whose request publikely made in the company to be instructed vpon the point of the Supper and not in other matters wherein shée accompts her selfe sufficiently taught and hath no neede of more ample instruction and therefore the saide Ministers require as afore that the first pointe which they should conferre vpon might be the supper and the masse the rather for that they vnderstoode by people woorthy of faith and credite that the Doctoures meant nothing lesse than to enter disputation vpon that grounde Héereupon the Doctoures say they are ashamed to heare so often Protestacions and that the Ministers séeme to féede with suche fashions of purpose to eschue conference in the Articles of their Confession which notwithstanding they haue oftentimes offered to be examined And where they alleage that the Ladie of Buillon for whose instruction the companie is assembled hathe openly required to be instructed vppon the Article of the Masse and not otherwayes They Aunswere that shée put out a motion to procure conference of the Masse but they neuer heard that shée helde hir selfe sufficiently instructed touching the other Articles If the Duchesse will confesse that shee beléeues all the other Articles proponed by the Ministers and their likes against the doctrine of the Catholike church to be erronious they are ready from the present to enter into conference of the Masse But of the contrary if shee be imbrued with the erroures impugning the doctrine of the Catholike church in respect to vse order appertaining to instructoures and to lay the foundations of the Masse the Doctours are determined according to the good and holy desire of the Lorde of Montpensier to Catechise and teache the Lady his Daughter euery Article and by order They say further that the Ministers are infected with the custome of those of their Church which is that to eschue alwayes conference with the Catholikes afore the decision of the poynt proponed they thrust an other into disputation according to the example of Beza and other ministers that were with him at Poyssi who séeing the matter of the Supper was argued against them in the Priours chamber at Poissi in the presence of the Quéene Princes of the bloud and other Lordes of the Councell made Request many times to let fall that point indecided and enter vppon others more euident and manifest againste the Catholikes as of Images and other like And of the contrary the Ministers this day to auoide the great erroures in their interpretation of the Créede will foiste in the pointe of the Supper onely the Doctoures beséeche as before that confusion auoided Religion may be examined by order And leaste it be thought that the Doctoures refuse to enter conference of the Masse and Supper according to their constante meaning as in déede vnder generall correction they neuer denied to dispute of them the better to instructe the Duchesse and with more spéede they are readie to dispute with open voice and euident Declaration by the expresse woorde of God that Iesus Christe hath instituted and saide the Masse and his Apostles also They offer also that what so euer shall be deliuered by voice and spéeche touching this matter to be sette downe in wryting the next dayes after and put in order as the instruction of the Duchesse requires it Referring themselues for the day to the oportunitie of the Ladie Héere the Ministers made Aunswere that all these offers were superfluous and vnprofitable because suche conferences are but debates and alterations offending and slaundering more than they edifie Resolution of the Doctoures THe Doctors according to the order already begon and their charge which is to conferre with the Ministers and then yéelde Resolution for the instruction of the Duchesse of Buillon Touching the two pointes proponed yesterday whether the Apostles be Authoures of the Créede and why we ought to giue Faithe thereunto say it ought not to be estéemed a thing indifferent to knowe if the Apostles made and erected the Créede no more than to know if the Apostles be the Authors of their wrytings For as their Authoritie is farre greater in the assuraunce that they procéede certainely from the Apostles euen so of the contrary it should be lesse by many degrées ▪ if we either doubted of it or vsed it as indifferent They say further it is no sufficient reason to cal this Créede Apostolicall and to Christen it by the name of the Apostles in respecte of the conformitie it hath with their writings seeing that by the same reason other Simbols as that of Niceus Athanasius suche other like writings may beare also the name of the apostles Creede as containing a doctrine agréeing with the writings of the Apostles and therfore the Doctors say we must beleeue that the Apostles haue made deliuered to Christians this Créede and applie faith to it as being a wryting composed by the Apostles for proofe whereof they haue the aucthoritie of all times since the Apostles till now that this Creede hath bene proponed in Baptisme and Catechisme as appeareth by the Authors which haue bene from the Apostles til our time neither can we name or note any Author or Councell which hathe made this Créede that afore the same Author or Councel euen vntill we come immediatly to the Apostles this Simboll hath not bene proponed in Baptisme and Catechisme and called amongste Christians the rule of Faithe which our such argument S Augustine in many places against the Donatistes estéemes inuincible to proue that something there is of the Apostles Omitting willingly for wearinesse sake other Auncientes who acknowledged this Créede to be made and receyued namely of the saide Apostles as S. Ambrose S. Ierome and others Touching the second pointe the Doctoures say that the bonde and necessitie to beléeue this Simboll dependes not of the knowledge of the Apostolicall or Propheticall wrytings nor of the knowledge of their conformitie with them for it was
the shut doores by the Omnipotencie of God. S. Ierome in the place noted by the Doctors writes manifestly that the body pierced the shut doores euen as the Poetes persuade that the sight of Lynceus pierced the wals without opening to sée through The said S. Ierome at that time did argue vpon the nature of the body which the Bishop of Ierusalem infected with the Heresie of Origen helde was not true in Iesus Christ after his Resurrection bicause he had passed through the shut doores coÌ„trary to the nature of a body to whoÌ„ S. Ierome as also other ancients persuades that that actâ— nothing derogates the nature of the body as procéeding of a supernaturall vertue affirming no lesse in his first Booke against Iouinian in this phrase Iesus entred the doores being shut quod humanoruÌ„ corporum natura non patitur And so with others he puttes the myracle in the body of Iesus Christ It is moste true that S. Augustine in thrée Bookes at the leaste vseth expresse opinion that this bodye passed throughe the shut doores and that as the same was wrought by Gods power aboue the nature of Bodyes so the Heretikes for all that ought not to denie the true Body of Iesus Christe this he speakes in his Booke de Câ—uitate Dei besides his place de Agone Christiano and the Epistle ad Volusianum already alleaged Epiphanius in his first Booke in the Heresie 20. and in the second Booke 64. againste the Origenistes declares that it is but a spirituall bodye meaning that he loseth nothing of his corporall substance but changeth and draweth to him newe qualities and spiritual perfections conuenient to Sprites as to passe throughe the walles without opening giuing example of the bodye of Iesus Christe after his Resurrection who pearced and passed throughe the doores being shutte And so iudgeth with others that the myracle was done in the body of Iesus Christe as pearcing the shutte doores as a Sprite albeit he was a true Body Cyrillus Alexandrinus determines also with others that this myracle happened in the body of our Lorde who by the same woonder marched aboue the waters contrary to the nature of a body by the power of God reprehending al such as stoode in any ielous suspition that Christes body was not Naturall By al these authorities the foure fundations afore proponed are true and therefore it is too greate an impudencie to séeke to corrupt the intente and faithe of so many Aunciente and Learned Christians to introduce a confusion of new interpretations For besides the diuersitie of Caluin and Beza the Ministers auouche twoo others as firste that the Angell opened the doore as if Iesus had not had the power to open it himselfe or had needed other opening The other is that he made his opening where he woulde by which diuersities the Ministers giue open declaration that they knowe not whereupon to reste And whiche woorse is they coulde not alleage one onely Aunciente as Authoure of their fiction or that is contrary to all the other since the Primitiue Church it serues them to nothing to alleage that the iron doore in the Actes of the Apostles opened to S. Peter of himselfe for the Doctors did neuer denie it only we said that the Scripture spake not of the doore of the prisone And if at the entrie of Iesus Christe the doores had bene so opened the Euangelist had as easily graunted it as he said they were shutte and as S. Luke said that this doore of iron opened of himselfe There is no difficultie that the firste that doubted of the body of Iesus Christ in this world did not agrée of the place touching the doores with the other Christians And all be it they thoughte to serue and aide themselues with it in the mainteining of their heristes as with all the other miracles hapned in the body of Christe aboue nature yet the Auncients neuer denied this facte nor the other like to it for feare to giue occasion of erroure to the Heretikes but they declared and distinguished what was the nature of the said body and that which hapned to him by the omnipotencie of God The Christians for any herisie did neuer abandon truthe albeit the Heritikes haue sometimes abused it But now seeing Christes body passed thorowe the doores without opening it is certaine that two bodies haue bene in one place and that they may be so by which we haue well proued our proposition which without either scripture or auncient testimonie the Ministers denie Touching the birth of Iesus Christe without breaking of the Virgine we say that a great part of the Auncientes produced for the place of the doores holde that this miracle also was done in the body of our Lord and not in the body of the Virgine sauing in that shée remained in hir integritie without breaking or opening And for their reason the Auncients haue alleaged the scripture Ecce virgo concipiet pariet and Ezechiel porta haec clausa erit as also S. Ambrose recites in his Epistle .80 wherin is contained a councel which S. Ambrose did assist determining againste Iouinian and other heritikes that virginitie and integritie remained in the mother of God in hir deliuerie S. Augustine repeating the same in the place alleaged by the Doctoures in his first Booke against Iulian Chap. 2. And where the ministers say that the virgin should not haue loste hir virginitie though our Lord had issued out as other men doe in this they are condemned of heresie by the Auncients who note Iouinian to derogate the virginitie as holding opinion with the ministers to whom the Doctors make this question what miracle they would acknowledge in the birthe of our Lord as touching his body and the virginitie of his mother if he came from hir as other men do from their mothers as the Ministers write And touching that which they alleage of Tertullian Origen S. Ambrose S. Ierome the Doctors say that Tertullian and Origen held suche heresie and many others which were reproued afore Iouinian of this they haue bin coÌ„demned with him his consorts But for the respecte of S. Ambrose it is apparant that he beléeued the contrary as wel by the Councel which he assisted as by that which he writes in his Booke de institutione Virginis wherin we haue to interprete his woordes that Christus vuluam aperuerit not that it was by breaking but by effecte of generation and production of his true body out of the bellie of his mother by miracle and vertue supernaturall in suche sorte that euen as his Conception was miraculous so also was his birthe And aperire vuluam is a phrase and manner of spéeche in the Scripture as to say and name the firste borne in what sort he might haue bene borne And touching S. Ierome he saithe nothing of the breaking but only that the body came out bloudie as he was in the wombe of his mother to be bloudy is not required breaking of the mother
the presence of Christes Body in the Sacramente bicause they saie that the faitheful receiue no more in the time of the Gospel than the Ancientes before the Lawe and vnder the Lawe And it is certaine the Ancients receiued not Really the body of Iesus Christ which was not then formed so that we muste conclude that vnder the Gospell is not receiued Really the Body of Iesus Christe in the Sacrament which the Ministers cal the Sacrament of the Supper To the 31. Article they aunswere not as in déede they coulde neuer answere And necessarily they must confesse that in vertue of theire Faithe they doo that whiche implies contradiction for they mainteine a thing in one instant one place to be present and not present neither doth their spirituall or rather fantasticall presence any thing seeing according to their Doctrine the body cannot be present but with his dimensions Locally Diffinitiuely and Corporally otherwayes it were to take cleane away or corrupte the body And the manner to be there spiritually cannot make that the body be not there otherwayes they saye falsely that it is present in the Supper and abuse the worlde wherefore it is necessary that if the body be there yea spiritually if their Doctrine be true of the nature of a body that the body of Iesus Christe be Corporally Diffinitiuely and Locally in the Supper Besides séeing he is absent according to their confession it folowes that he is not there present And as to conclude the Ministers saie he is there and that he is not there so for an absolute solution without entring into the principall of the argument they thinke to escape with obiecting to vs certaine woordes of briefe which wee haue not yet seene which wée thinke they haue found in certaine Breuiaries of Monkes as that thei remember wheÌ„ they were in the Couent they vsed so to chaunt and say But albeit such things were found in the Breuiaries vsed in the Romish Church yet such manner of speach might be defended in the sense which the Auncients haue giuen when they said the Apostles Conficiunt Corpus Christi Like as also the scripture saith that they baptize they forgiue sinnes saue those whom thei conuert which is vnderstand as Ministers of God who of his authority and as Maister baptiseth forgiueth sinnes and iustifieth the faithful persons Where the Ministers maruel that the Doctors cal faith humaine vertue considering the great woonderfull effects it woorketh the Doctours replie that they haue no great occasion of woonder séeing that all woorke so long as it is in man that it woorkes there with God is reputed humaine as also the scripture cals the Faith of man the woorke of man The Doctours delare to the Ministers that according to their custome resting alwayes vpon smal things they folow not that which is the principal in the mater not vnderstanding or faining not to vnderstand where lies the difficultie of that which is handled as they doo in their aunswer vppon the Argument proponed by the Doctours by which they obiect that the Ministers by their faith whether it may be called Diuine or Humaine may doo more than God can to whiche Obiection the Ministers without entring to the pointe aunswere with songs In the 32 Article thei passe ouer very lightly many obiections made by the doctors wherin whether ther be superfluity or repetition or whether they be impertineÌ„t the iudgment remaines to the Reader notwithstaÌ„ding al the the doctors wil not forbeare once againe to require theÌ„ to bring foorth some place of scripture to ground that God cannot bring to passe that one body be in twoo places séeing this coÌ„sequence is too foolish vaine God cannot lye he cannot then bring to passe that a body be in twoo places for so must thei subsume Wel God hath said ordeined that one body cannot be in two places then he cannot make that it be so but they shall neuer teach the truth of the assumption or Mâ—nor propositioÌ„ the contrary wherof hath bene verified sufficiently by many testimonies of the Scripture We demaund also that the Ministers produce some Ancient yea a man euer reputed Catholike that durst pronouÌ„ce that God could not bring to passe that one body be in twoo places But in all their answeres they coulde not bring foorthe any of that opinion excepte S. Augustine albeit falsely alleaged bothe in respecte of the Letter and for the sense of the Letter neither will wée cease to vrge aswell the Ministers as al others that there is founde neither place of Scripture nor Booke of any Auncient that God cannot bring to passe that one body be in twoo places Touching the laste Article wée are fully determined to shewe by the pure and expresse Woorde of God interpreted by the common consent of all Antiquitie that our Lord hath instituted the Sacramente and Sacrifice of the Aultare And wée wil teache the effecte and vertue of the Masse according to the Institution and Ordinaunce of Iesus Christe making also to vnderstande that the Ministers haue polluted and defiled the Sacramentes instituted by Iesus Christe And lastely that the Supper mainteined by the Ministers is no Sacramente in any sorte but a prophanation of Holy things conteining execrable Blasphemies which al the worlde ought to abhorre Sondaye the xxij of Iuly the yeere aforesaide The Aunswere of the Ministers to the writing of the Doctours sente to them by the Duke de Neuers xxij of Iuly aboute fiue of the clocke in the Euening 1566. THe Ministers afore they enter into particulare Answere to the Obiections and Reproches of the Doctours séeing in all their speaches withoute any occasion they laie vppon them imputation of blasphemie thinke good in their beginning to tel them that albeit thei haue heaped iniuries vpon them yet they holde themselues neuer the more wronged and muche lesse to be guiltie in blasphemie bicause they repute them for such no more than our Lorde Iesus Christe in the iudgemente and opinion of Caiphas the soueraigne Sacrificator and S. Stephen vppon whom the saide crime was vrged by the enimies of truthe and also Naboth notwithstanding he was innocent for it is a custome common to suche as hate the truthe and the light to blaspheme that which they vnderstande not and so yeelde to their proper and naturall furie as S. Peter Iude write that impudently they denie things moste apparante without shame confesse others that are straunge and obscure the same being offered of the Doctoures to the Ministers of whom they will heare nothing with iudgemente nor iudge their Doctrine vprightly but séeme in all the course of this Disputation either to confront them generally without respecte or at least to giue sentence without examination that what so euer they produce is either lyes or matter of blasphemie And albeit the Ministers handling the Omnipotencie of God according as they haue learned by the consent and contentes of the Scriptures agrée alwayes that he is
conteined comparison of two Reuelations of the spirite the one made to the body and the other to the members which they maintaine to be of equal value touching the certaintie and in the confession is mention made of the Reuelation of Gods spirite which causeth the consent of the Churche which foloweth thereof as the effecte And if it be so that the cause being preferred afore his effect there is greate reason that the Reuelation of the spirite of God compared with the consent of the Churche should be preferred afore it as the cause to the effect which it produceth And touching the cōtrarietie which they pretend in Confessions Printed in diuers seasons and by sundrie Printers they shall be Aunswered when their pleasure is to debate the Articles particularly Question Where they made a doubt of the true Church euen the like may be said of the Reuelations pretēded of Gods spirit to particular men whom also we may dout whether they be members of the Church or not Touching the other point where they denie to impugne the fourthe Article of their Confession there séemes no small contradiction as comparing the particular Reuelation with the consent of the church as appeareth by their Aunswere it séemes also to serue to small purpose where they alledge the Reuelation to be the cause of the consent preferring it afore the same as the cause afore the effecte the same séeming as who should say the Reuelation is to be preferred afore the word of God and holy scripture for it is moste certaine that the Reuelation goeth before the woorde and scripture And as it appeares in the texte of the Confession which may be easily iudged the Authors of the same speake of the certaintie and infallibilitie of two Reuelations as holding themselues more assured of that they haue in their spirite than that which is of the iudgemēt of the churche Touching the other pointe that particulare men may sometimes faile when Gods spirite leaues them we may conclude by that we ought not to rest infallibly vpon the inspirations pretended of particulare men bicause it may be douted whether they be forsaken of Gods spirite or not which we can not do of the Church therefore it is more assured to stay vpon the Churche infallibly gouerned by the holy spirite than vpon the priuate pretended inspirations which the Catholikes do not folowing their priuate iudgement and therfore can not be estéemed fantastike but rather such are guiltie of that name who prefer their proper iudgement which they couer with the title of particulare inspiration The Doctors require a texte of the Scripture by the which the holy spirite is promised to euery particulare person as to the vniuersal church therby to know how to iudge and discerne what be the scriptures Aunsvvere Touching the first pointe as in déede we do not approue all churches to be true which are so said euen so we allowe not for faithfull suche as vaunt them selues to be so For the second the comparison of the Doctoures is improper in this pointe as who should say the Reuelation is to be preferred afore the woorde of god c. Bicause Gods worde and all the writings aswel of the Prophetes as Apostles are as so many Reuelations of Gods spirite and that betweene the one and the other there is no more difference than betweene genus and species Touching the Article that the Reuelation goeth before the scripture we muste distinguishe betwéene the Reuelations made to the Prophets before they committed them to writing and those which are made to them that read their writings to vnderstande them For the first we confesse they goe before the scripture and for the seconde we say they folowe it Touching the third Article the ministers Aunswere that it is easie to iudge whether Gods spirite assist a particulare man or whether he be drawne from him by the matters he propoundes when they be conferred with Gods woorde and censured by the rules of the same as is saide Touching their demaunde it were a long and weary encomber to alleage all the places where it is written that Gods spirite is communicated to the chosen the better to knowe and discerne the things that are of God in Esay 5◠the Lord promiseth to poure his spirite vppon the faithfull as water vpon the earthe Likewise in Ioel. 2 Ieremie 34. in the first Catholike of S. Iohn 2. vnder the name of vnction and many other places Obiection These places make no proofe at all that the spirite was promised to all to iudge of the Doctrine Other wayes euen women and all artificers that were faithfull mighte iudge of the Doctrine as the Prophetes and Apostles of the contrary S. Paule saithe Numquid omnes Propheta c. He saithe expressely that discretion of Spirites is to haue vnderstanding of the scriptures and be giftes not common to all the faithfull but particulare to some Aunswere The consequence which the Doctors make is nothing woorthe bicause Gods spirite oftentimes is communicated more aboundantly to some than to others and that also some be better exercised in the scriptures than others Touching the place of S. Paule 1. Corinth 12. the ministers say it makes nothing against them bicause the spirite of Prophecie and the spirite of discretion be giftes differing as appeares by the discourse of the Apostle in the same Chapter The second day of disputation being VVednesday the tenth of Iuly THe Doctors required that their Protestation made the day before might be Inregistred which was this that they would not enter into disputation of things receiued into the vniuersall Churche since the Apostles till our time decided and already determined by the holy Councels Ecumenike and general holding them most certaine and vndouted and that all Doctrine to the contrary was false Onely they were ready according to the holy desire of the Lorde Montpensier and the Ladie of Buillon his daughter to make knowne by the expresse woorde of God interpreted by the saide vniuersall Churche and Councels that their Doctrine is holy and conducible to saluation in which Doctrine as the saide Ladie had bene first instructed so all instruction ministred to her in the contrary is hurtful and damnable And lastly that this conference might be in manner of instruction and not a Disputation In like sorte the Ministers protested that they did not ioyne in assemblie with the Doctoures for any doubte they had that all that was centained in their Confession of faith was not certaine and true and grounded vpon Gods woord as appeareth by the places of Scripture noted in the Margent of the sayde Confession beléeuing that what so euer is contrary is damnable and to be reiected thoughe euen an Aungell of heauen would propone it And touching themselues they came not thither to be instructed in other Doctrine than that which they folowe and which they haue learned of Iesus Christe whome they acknowledge as the only maister and teacher of the churche Héere the Lorde of
Neuers made request that after their Obiections and Aunsweres they would procéede to Resolution on both sides touching the conference the day before According to which motion the Doctors say that to iudge of a Booke whether it be written of the holy scripture or not and likewise to discerne a Canonicall Booke from an Apocriphal or Ecclesiastical we must not rest vpon a priuate or particulare inspiration because a singulare persone can not haue any ordinarie certaintie that it is a true Reuelation of the holy spirite but stay vpon the common consent and accorde of the vniuersal churche And also that God notwithstanding he might haue reuealed to euery one the true knowledge necessary to saluation yet he hathe ordained a certaine meane to attaine to faithe which is a truthe reuealed meaning by the hearing of Gods woord preached by lawfull ministers sent by the pastors of the true churche as appeareth by the â—exte of S. Paule to the Romaines .10 and Ephes 4. So that if they meane to haue faithe and inwarde Reuelation of the knowledge of saluation come by the hearing of Gods woorde lawfully preached by the ministers of the same according to the ordinarie meane of assurance that we haue the inwarde Reuelation it must necessarily be assured that the woorde by which faithe is gotten hath bene preached by the lawfull ministers of the true church so by consequence be assured of the church afore the inward Reuelation obseruing the meane which Iesus Christe folowed They say further that the true and certaine marke of a true inwarde Reuelation is when it is referred to the common consente of the church And that of the contrary euery preteÌ„ded inward inspiration particulare or priuate is a false persuasion if it differ from the common accorde of the churche for Gods spirite is not particulare but common They say also that to take a false Doctrine we must examine it to know whether it be priuate or common like as our Lord in S. Iohn 8. hathe giuen a true marke saying Qui de se loquitur mendatium loquitur he that saith any thing of himselfe and his proper inspiration is a lier In like sorte it is written in Ezechiel Sonne of man Prophecie against the Prophetes of Israel which Prophecie say to suche as Prophecie in their heart heare the woorde of the Lorde So saithe the Lord cursse be vpon the false Prophets who follow their spirite and haue seene nothing And a little after they sée vaine things and a Diuination ful of dreames saying the Lord saythe and the Lord sent them not and yet they haue giuen assuraunce to confirme the woorde of their Prophesie which false Prophets said they had 〈◊〉 inwarde Reuelation and the woorde of God. They woulde also that it be well wayed and considered that the stay of religion grounded and assured vppon an inwarde inspiration is the foundation of many sectes of our time as Anabaptistes and Swinfeldiens who lay their Doctrines vpon priuate â—â—â—elations alleaging proper places to serue them as a grounde of their Doctrine which the ministers inferred yesterday as Ieremie in the .3 Chap. Ioel. 2. and S. Paule 1. Cor. 2. The which being considered by Brentius and Bucer they haue confessed that by the only tradition of the church we were ascertained of the Bookes of the holy scripture according to the Doctrine of the auncientes as S. Ierome who confesseth to haue receiued by tradition of the churche and by the same to haue knowne that there be foure gospels Origen also saithe asmuch who reciting the Canonical Bookes of the newe Testament saith I haue learned by tradition that there be foure gospels neither is there fouÌ„d any auncient catholike that hath stayed his faith to discerne and iudge of Bookes vpon his only priuate and particulare inspiration And S. August lib. confess ca. 25 â—seth these woordes Veritas tua Domine non mea nec illius aut illius sed omnium nostrum quos ad communionem aduocas terribiliter admouensne priuatam veritatem habeamus ne priuemur ca. And touching the Bookes of the olde Testament whiche the Ministers will not receiue as Canonical by the iudgement of their inwarde Reuelation the Doctors auouche that before S. Augustines time or at the least in his time in the vniuersall churche all the Bookes contained in the holy Bible without distinction were holden and receiued as Canonicall according to the testimonie of the Councel of Carthage where S Augustine was present and also the Councell Laodicene the Doctors also saie that if by inwarde inspiration we must iudge of Bookes the Fathers that assisted those Councels had it or at leaste might persuade them selues to haue it with more assurance than many others But where the Ministers saie that by theire inwarde Reuelation they iudge that they are not Canonicall 〈◊〉 Doctors referre to iudgemente who oughte soonest to bâ—â—â—â—eued either the inspiration of the Auncientes receiued by the Churche by so many hundred yeres vntil this time or the priuate and particulare inspiration of the newe Ministers They saie further that they offer to proue that the Aunciente Fathers euen suche as wâ—â—e neare the Apostles time as Irenaeus S. Cyprian Origen S. Ierome S. Augustine and others vse testimonies of Bookes reiected by the Ministers euen in the proofe of the Doctrine against Heretikes yea S. Augustine him selfe in the seconde Booke of Christian Doctrine Chap. 2. puttes all those Bookes amongeste the Canonicalles as also Damascene in the fourthe Booke De Orthodoxa Fide Chap. 18. So that to knowe if a man haue the spirite of God to discerne and iudge of the Bookes of the Scripture it behooues to reste vpon the common consente and accorde of the Churche as being the ordinarie meane of God lefte for that effecte experience also whiche maie be made is a sufficiente Argumente to conuince that the Faithfull by the inwarde inspiration cannot discerne the Canonicall Bookes from the pretended Apocryphall which mighte be easily verefied if there were here at this presente euen somme of the Religion pretended reformed to whom not hauing bene as yet instructed in the diuision of Bookes if those Bookes were presented whiche the Ministers holde for Apocryphal they would not distinguish them in any sort from the other Bookes of the holy Bible And vpon all they conclude that if a man haue Goddes sprite c. vt supra Aunswere Touching the firste Article the Ministers were neuer of opinion as appeares in their former aunsweres that their Religion was grounded vppon theire particulare Reuelations but vpon the woorde of God according as it is sette foorthe in the Writinges of the Prophetes and Apostles the truthe of whiche they saide was moste principally assured by the testimonie and Reuelation of the holy Sprite They saie also that Faithe is not the Truthe in proper speache but the persuasion of the Truthe whiche is taughte vs in the Scripture Like as also this Faithe is not of our owne getting but a pure
sinnes in the Psalme 32. and 37. of Ezechiel and the Article of the Resurrection of the fleshe and eternall life in Daniel 12. It maie appeare to euery one by the places here inferred that there were cleare and euidente Scriptures to grounde all the Articles of Faithe afore the Créede was bestowed in writing whiche might and oughte to be exhibited to suche as were Catechised for their assurance in that which was proposed them to beleue Neither is it possible that a man may beleue if first he haue not vnderstand and hearde the woord and that he assure hime self of it and hold it as certaine and more if it were possible than the matters conceiued and comprehended by Mathematicall demonstrations as appeareth by the definition of the Faith when the Apostles calles it Hypostasin and Eleuchon whiche is subsistance of things whiche we sée not The Ministers also saie that to call the Créede a Doctrine not written and in the meane while affirme that the Apostles wrote it is to implie contradiction Neither can it be shewed howe longe it hath bene a doctrine not written nor since when it hath begonne to be written And greatly doo the Ministers greue that they who conferre with them doo not more laboure in the edifying aswell of such as assiste the conference as others to whose viewe and reading the actes may come For where they might handle and decide pointes tending to edifie the ignorante they staie vpon the question of others wherein is no doubt at al The same being no more than to proue a thing already confessed and resolued and lighte a Candle at noone dayes They assure them selues that suche as shall reade the actes of this cōference wil not maruel to sée them decline from the point wherein they haue bene so much required bicause as Christ saithe He that doothe euil fleeth the lighte For conclusion the Ministers proteste to confesse and beleue that the Symbol of the Apostles in euery Article is the pure woorde of God and that in the faithe of the same it behoueth euery faithefull man to stande and perseuer vntill the ende So that for their partes they will in no sorte receiue or approue in their Churches any that denieth or is doubtful of the saide Articles Replie The Doctours wil proue that the Doctrine of the Ministers conteineth pointes contrary to the principall Articles of the Creede As firste against the Article of Goddes Omnipotencie when they say and teach that God cannot make that one Body be in twoo places The seconde againste the Article of Creation wherein they saie that not onely God suffereth that euill and sinne be committed but also dothe it him selfe The thirde sometimes they denie and earst confesse for an Article of Faithe that the Virgyn Mary should remaine a Virgyn after her deliuery The fourthe that Iesus Christe is not descended into Hell but by imagination and not Really Yea moreouer againste the saide Article they saie that Iesus Christe dispaired of his saluation vpon the trée of the Crosse as being troubled in his conscience with feare to be damned with many other errours conteined in this Article Vpon whiche obiections they aduertise the Ministers that they stande ready to aunswere them The fifthe day of disputation being the fiuetenth of Iuly and Munday THe Ministers haue required their requeste before made and now eftsoones reiterated for the spéedie entry of the Doctoures into conference touching the pointes of the Masse to be inregistred to the ende the occasion may be knowne why the Doctours delaie and refuse the saide conference The Doctours not willing to leese time and mindefull withal to folowe the accorde made in the last day of disputation according to the whiche the Ministers oughte to aunswere touching the errors conteined in the doctrine preached by them againste the Articles of the creede as the Doctours haue noted and proposed them to enter immediately into the matter they affirme that the Ministers haue euill alleaged S. Cyprian as to denie that the Créede was of the Apostles For S. Cyprian doubtes not at all neither puttes in doubte as indifferente whether it be of the Apostles or not but saithe expressely that afore they departed from together they made the saide Créede as appeareth in the Preface of his Exposition Further the Doctoures demaund vpon the Article of the Omnipotencie whiche is the fundation of the Supper and the Sacramente why in a confession proponed at Poissie before the King by Beza and after him other Ministers and bestowed in diuerse Bookes is not conteined the article of the Omnipotencie which is the firste and principall Article of Faithe and why they haue made so many different confessions of Faithe taking awaye that they haue putte in the one and of the contrarye adding what they haue omitted in the others And howe this Article of the Trinitie is not expressely in the firste confession 1564. which they confesse albeit moste darkely Aunsvvere It appeares by the actes of the laste dayes conference that the demaunde of the Ministers was in nature the selfe Requeste they presently make whiche is that the pointe of the Masse mighte be firste decided as being the chiefe occasion of the conference And for that they propone touching the Symboll the Ministers neuer doubted nor yet suspecte but that it is a pure Apostolicall Doctrine whiche lies to all mennes view in reading the actes of the saide dayes Disputation where in halfe a dosen places at the leaste they haue alwayes confessed repeated the same The only thing they mainteined to be in dout is whether the Creede was written by the Apostles or not wherein thei can nothing be verefied nor appeare by the Doctors and S. Cyprian him selfe whom the doctours produce giues aduertismente to the Readers in his Preface of the greate varietie that is in the saide Creede bicause diuerse Churches haue added thereunto sundrie Articles He aduertiseth besides that in his Explication he foloweth the order of the Churche of Aquila and expounding also the Article of Descension into Hel whereof the doctors make so great brute he saithe expressely that it is not in the Symboll of the Romaine Churche nor of the Churches of the Easte whereof may be gathered the incertaintie of that whiche is touched before and that there is no Article wherein we maye reasonably doubte if it be of those whiche the Apostles haue written or added by somme Churches or els wée muste saie the Apostles haue written diuerse Créedes Touching the differences whiche the Doctours pretende to be in the confessions of the refourmed Churches imprinted and published in diuerse Temples the Ministers denie to differ one from an other in respect of the sense albeit perhaps some tearmes maie be changed for a more large declaration and where they allege that in some of them the article of Gods almightinesse hathe bene omitted the Ministers denie it requiring the Doctours to produce the exemplarye of the confession wherein they saie it is omitted
shoulde remaine a Virgine and that a thing done shuld not be done that being vnderstand as the Theologians say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 u câ—â—posito which is the things being suche and so done it is true and the reason is that otherwise it woulde implie contradiction But in the Question proposed there is nothing like which only Demaundes if God by his power can alter and chaunge the Nature and qualitie of things created as if he could bring to passe that a heauie thing abiding in his qualitie of heauinesse waighte which naturally weighes downewarde shoulde remaine by the onely vertue of God hanging on high as we reade in the holy Scripture that the fire which naturally ascendes and stretches on heigthe discendes downewarde by the vertue of God and also that fire of his proper nature ardente and burning makes cold his owne qualitie that is the heat reasting in the substance as also that two bodyes may be in one place as appeareth when our Lord entred where the Apostles were the doores being shut or that a great and large bodie remaining in his grosenesse and bignesse passeth thorow a place inequall to his greatnesse and largenesse as the Camell thorow the eie of a needell All which Examples as they are taken of the scripture so if it muste be that God can not bring to passe that one body be in two places he can no more doe the things aforesaide by the reasons which shall be deduced héereafter to that ende And as it wil neuer be found to enter into the brain of an interpreter to denie such power so the first that hath denied it openly was Peter Martyr and after him Beza The Doctoures say further that the fourme of arguing which the Ministers vse impugnes and reuerseth that which God obserueth in the holy scripture and the Angel speaking to the virgin for God ordinarily when he assureth any thing impossible to nature that men cannot coÌ„prehend alleageth generally his power like as also the Angel laying a fouÌ„dation of the Incarnation of our Lord saith generally there is nothing impossible to God as touching his creatures But is it so that the generalitie of an argument is deserued by particular exceptions and made vnprofitable and without force by that meane When God then alleageth generally that his power can doe it it may be doubted of and thought that the things proponed of God may be of those that are impossible to him aswel as the exceptions alleaged of the ministers And that also should be false which the Aungell saithe that there is nothing impossible to god by that that many things are alleaged and proponed to the contrarie So that to the ende God and his Aungelles be mainteined true in their woordes we muste not doubte that he can not chaunge and transforme his creatures and al their qualities muche more easily than a potter is able to worke his clay and fourme at his pleasure any vessell thereof Further if we limite the power of God towards his creatures there is daunger that we fal not to deny him his Empire and dominion ouer them for to be Lord ouer a creature is no other thing than to haue power to chaunge and alter him and giue him suche a nature and qualitie as he thinkes good as hauing him altogether in his power And therefore God in Ieremie to shewe that he had power to reuerse and destroy Ierusalem according to his pleasure begins to say I am Lorde ouer all fleshe is there any thing impossible to me and therfore the Doctoures conclude that there is daunger if this question be mainteined as impossible to God that euery one will doe as muche alleaging the selfe examples that the ministers do to exempt from Gods power al things that displease him And when suche matter shall be produced out of Scripture he may interprete the Scripture in other sense saying that suche a thing shal be impossible to God in the naturall sense of the woordes of the Scripture euen as the ministers chaunge the Scripture which saithe that the body of Iesus Christe is in two places that is the woorde of the Supper compared with the woorde of the Ascention and they say that that spéeche of the Supper oughte not to be vnderstanded literally bicause it is impossible to God that one Body be in twoo places And so the Doctours saie that euery one woulde corrupte the Literall sense of the Scripture holding that the thing is impossible to God and therefore the Scripture muste be otherwayes vnderstande and yet it maye so happen that it is only bicause it doth displease him producing notwithstanding the same reasons and allegations whiche the Ministers doo to declare that all things are not impossible to God. The Doctors conclude eftsoones that it is better to mainteine the Scripture in his truthe albeit shée propose things incomprehensible and impossible to our iudgement than to giue way to euery one to depraue Goddes woorde applying it to his owne will and fansie vnder shadowe to saie that it is impossible to God and so to alleage other examples Lastely they will not omitte that the Ministers who haue so déepely protested to rest stay vpon the pure woord of God allege not against Gods power but the ancient doctours aiding themselues with their authorities against the expresse woord of God which beares that nothing is impossible to him generally without some exception Aunsvvere The Ministers aunswere that the Doctoures proue not their consequence but leaue it as in a distruste not to be able to confirme it as is moste likely They make no mention but of the Antecedent of their consequence to the confession of whiche it will neuer be possible to them to bring the Ministers by the reasons and authorities by them alleadged so strengthen theire saide consequence bicause of a Particulare they inferre a Generall whiche is againste the Rules of Dialectice where they saye that the authorities alleaged by the Ministers apperteine nothing to reproue their consequence and to shewe that God forbeares not to be almighty notwithstanding that he cannot doo any thing which derogates his nature They referre themselues for that to the ancient authours aforesaid who for the same and reason of the ministers alleage the saide exceptions Where they pretende that the Authorities and Sentences alleaged of the Auncientes doo nothing apperteine to the presente question as denying that they oughte to be vnderstand of other things excepte suche as conteine in themselues contradiction The Ministers aunswere that euen so doothe that whiche they propone of a Body that in one instante he maye he in diuerse places the same being asmuch as if they had saide that a Bodye is and is not at one time and that a Body is one and not one And lastely that a Creature maye be incircumscript and not enclosed in certaine limittes whiche if it were so he shoulde be no more a Creature but a God as maye be gathered of the saying of S. Basile in his
as the Woorde is euery where of which Woorde the Flesh was taken to constitute a person and Hypostâ—se For when it was vpon the earth it was not in heauen and now that it is in heauen sure it can not be vpon earth And much lesse that it is there séeing we exspect that Iesus Christ come according to the Fleshe whom notwithstanding wee beleeue is with vs on earth according as he is the woorde By these Authorities and such like which are often found in the writings of the Auncients the world may perceiue that Peter Martyr and Theodore de Beza be not the first Authoures of this Doctrine but that it is falsly laide vppon them bicause they haue but drawne and as it were written it woorde for woord out of the Bookes of the Auncients Where the Doctoures pretend that the fourme of Argument which the Ministers vse affirming that to say any thing is impossible to God dothe not derogate his omnipotencie destroyeth the fourme of argument vsed by the Angell speaking to the virgine for the confirmation of his message that nothing was impossible to God the ministers Answer that that is nothing to purpose bicause the question doth neither importe a thing containing in it selfe any contradiction nor that is contrary to the truthe of god Touching the opinion of the Doctors that God can chaunge the nature and qualitie of things there is none that doubtes thereof But when that is done it must also be aduowed that things being changed remaine no more in their first nature and the Ministers say that it is not all one touching the thing héere proponed bicause the Doctoures would haue a thing dwell in his essence and nature notwithstanding his essentiall partes be chaunged yea and wholly extincte and abolished Touching the limitation of the power of God on the behalfe of his creatures there is no man so sencelesse as to enterprise to limite in all respectes that which he will and that confesseth not that he may ordeine and dispose of all his Creatures in general as it pleseth him and as a potter doth of his mould wherein their opinion runnes that the authoritie of Ieremie ought to be referred thither as appeareth clearely by these Hebrue woordes lo gippale mimiuecha col-dauar which is Lord nothing shall be harde to thée Touching the perill which the Doctoures pretende may rise of the Ministers saide Aunsweres they say that people of good and sounde iudgement can not frame any euill consequence of it considering that all this Doctrine is true and containes no obscuritie but if perhappes any cull oute an euill profite of it it is to be imputed to themselues and their euill vnderstanding by which not only any Doctrine but also the woorde of God it selfe may sometimes be peruerted and corrupted To be short all things as sayeth the Apostle are cleane to those that be cleane and filthie to such as are so and haue a wicked Conscience Where the Doctoures alleage that there may be occasion taken by the Doctrine aforesaide to interpreate the Scriptures according to a selfe sense and fansie the Ministers denie it and say That if the worlde enterprise it it is casie inough to reiecte his interpretation as not correspondente to the Rules and Analogie of Faithe wherewith the sayde Doctrine and interpretation of the Ministers dothe agrée and consent And where they say that the Ministers chaunge and alter the Scripture they Aunswere that it is a reproche and slaunder not to be verified againste them neither touching their writings their woordes nor any thing by them deliuered either by speeche or thought Where they say that the Scripture is of opinion that the bodie of Iesus Christe is in two places the Ministers denie it and say that on the contrary the Scripture establisheth him in heauen and not elsewhere And Heauen muste containe hym vntill the time of restauration of all that hathe béene forespoken by the mouthe of his holy Prophets from the beginning of the worlde And where they alleage that the Scripture ought not to be interpreted according to the sense and fansie of euery one The Ministers confesse it with this Addition that all interpretations ought to be examined as S. Paule saithe and that suche examination be made by the collation and conference of the Scriptures And lastly where the Doctoures accuse the Ministers to haue alleaged no place of the Scripture before they produced the Auncientes to confirme their sayde Doctrine the Ministers say they are falsely imposed for that if they well remember they alleaged to the same ende in the beginning of their discourse the opinion of S. Paule written in the seconde Epistle to Timothe and the second Chapter where it is saide that God can not denie himselfe and also that is written in the sixthe Chapiter to the Hebrues that it is impossible for God to lie Which places togither with the opinions of the Auncients were not alleaged as to diminishe the omnipotencie of God but rather to establishe it and cut of the way to many impieties and blasphemies which they would falsly exhibite and couer them vnder the couler of Gods almightinesse without hauing regard to the will declared to which we must referre the power The sixth day of disputation being Tewsday the sixtenth of Julie THe Doctoures Obiecte that they haue made this Argumente God can not bring to passe that one body be in two places then God is not Almightie which consequence how necessary it is is fully manifest without other proofe by the lawe of contradiction for according to the rule holden in all Schooles of Philosophers two contradictions can not be true To be able to doe all things and not able to do certaine particulare things be contradictions séeing this particulare thing is one part of the whole So that it must néedes be that if the antecedent be true the consequent must be false according to the lawe of contradiction for both can not be true together as things of contradiction And albeit by the knowledge of the very termes the consequeÌ„ce may be iudged to be good yet it may easily be knowne by the handling of the Obiection against the Answere of the Ministers that the Doctours haue proued the consequence This was the reason of the Ministers God can not lie nor sinne and can not bring to passe that things done should not be done bicause that either it impugnes his nature or there is repugnancie of the parte of the creatures bicause there is contradiction entangled But the Doctors affirmed in their Obiection that there is no suche thing in the Question proponed which is if one body may be in two places whereof they make this kinde of Arguing taken of their Obiection God can doe all things that impugne not his nature either when there is no resistance of the parte of the creatures and that there is implied no contradiction to affirme that a body may be in two places at one instant is a thing not repugnaÌ„t
firste place they alleage that God can not do a thing to derogate the order which he hath established in the world in the seconde that it were to establishe mutabilitie and chaunge in Gods councels to confesse that he is able to doe any thing contrary to the said order established in the world in the third that if it were so there should be contradiction in his will whereof should folow that he were a lier And for the fourth blasphemie that the power of God is his will and likewise his not power his not wil And for the fifth they pretende that God would haue a body which in one instant might haue bene in many places afore they beleue that God could haue made it otherwayes they meane to infer that he neither hath could nor can make it by which the Ministers will acknowledge nothing of Gods power but so muche as he shewes by effect for which matter they alleage Tertullian All these blasphemies are drawne out of the propre woordes of the first Article of the Ministers Touching the firste that God can not doe a thing to derogate the order he hath established in the worlde it is proued an apparant blasphemie by the Scripture who in infinite places makes mention of Gods works aboue nature which the Ministers call order established in the world the Scripture teacheth in proper termes the God can do infinite things aboue the order established in the world As the wife of Lot which was conuerted into a piller of Salte that a barraine woman in hir last age hauing an olde husband had a childe That a Vine all drie hathe flourished A shée Asse hath spoken that the Sunne stayed and went backe againe with other innumerable Examples contained in the olde Testament And for the new Testament that a virgin brought forth a childe That a body hath walked vpon the Sea and mounted to heauen and generally all the miracles done by Christ and his Apostles aboue nature the same being contrary to the order established in the worlde From this blasphemie growes an other that God séeing he hathe established his order in the world hath not done nor coulde nor can doe any miracle But to proue by the Authoritie of the scripture that God can do against the order established in the world it is writteÌ„ in Esay 50. My hand which is my power is it abridged that I can not redéeme buy againe is there no more power in me to deliuer Behold by threates I wil make dry the sea wil put the fluddes into the deserte so that the fishes shal perishe for wante of water and shal die of thirste I apparel the heauens with darkenesse and putte a sacke for their couer But more expressely in the newe Testamente where it is saide by S. Iohn that God can raise children to Abraham of the stones Which place albeit may be expounded Allegorically yet by the literall sense S. Iohn declares it was possible to God the Deuil knewe and hath confessed that if Christe were the true sonne of God he might transeforme stones into breade The same notwithstanding contrary to the order established in the worlde And we haue to note that there is no lesse impossibilitie that bread be turned into Flesh by Gods omnipotencie than a stone transnatured into bread Wherin for such as denie this last done by the power of God they declare that they beleeue lesse of the almightinesse than Deuilles The confuting of the seconde blasphemie dependes vpon the disproofe of the first for albeit God contrary to the order established in the world hath done many miracles as hathe bene recited héere before yet there is no mutabilitie or chaÌ„ge in his Councell Touching the third blasphemie that if God did any thing contrary to the order established in the worlde there shoulde be contradiction in his will and therfore he should be a lier The Doctoures Obiecte that it would folowe that suche should be the will of God neuer to doe any thing against the order established in the world and that he wold haue stayed and declared that to be his will by his woorde For otherwayes it coulde not haue bene knowne what was Gods will. And as the ministers neither haue nor can make appeare by Gods woorde that suche is Gods wil as not to do any thing against the order established in the world so they must firste teache and instructe that suche is Gods will afore they conclude that if God made one body to be in two places or other thing against the order of Nature established in the world he should be a lier Touching the fourth blasphemie that Gods power is his will and that his impower is his vnwill According to the sense which the ministers giue it if God can not doe but what he will to be an Heresie of the Heretikes called Monarchians in the primitiue Church against whom Tertullian writes in his Booke aduersus praxeam and since renued by one Petrus Abaillardus and continued by one VVickleffe they in déede measured Gods power according to his will the same contrary to the expresse woord of God which oftentimes declars many things to be possible to God which notwithstanding he wil not doe as appeareth in Sap. 2 where it is recited that God could sende many sortes of afflictions to the children of Israell to chastise them but he would not doe it hauing disposed all things by measure number and ballance and that he might destroy suche as had offended him but he would not but vsed mercy to them In the gospel our Lorde saide to S. Peter Thinkest not thou that I can pray to my Father and he will sende me more than twelue legions of Aungels and yet as he would not pray to him so his Father did not send them although he was able to haue done it in the persone of his sonne Christe might haue let his enimies to haue taken away his life but he would not And the Father might haue saued him from corporall Deathe saithe S. Paule by his power but neither the one nor other would doe it which albeit the ministers might say was foreordained yet the Scripture holdes expressely that he might haue done it notwithstanding it was foreordained And touching the authoritie of Tertullian the Doctoures are glad they produce it as making altogither for the truthe againste their blasphemies and yet they haue omitted many of his woordes and sentences to confute their erroure as the text it selfe heere witnesseth Nihil Deo difficile Quis hoc nesciat in possibilia apud seculum possibilia apud deum qâ—is ignorat Et stulta mundi elegit Deus vt confundat sapientia Ergo inquiunt heretici monarchiani scilicet difficile non fuit Deo ipsum se patrem filium facere aduersus traditam formam rebus humanis Nam sterilem parere contra naturam difficile Deo non fuit sicut nec virginem planè nihil Deo difficile sed si tam abruptè in
only he could do it but also he would do it and so consequently are determined to refute all the blasphemies heresies of the supposed reformed side which are contained in the supper to the ende also we be not thought to eschue the combate of the supper the Masse as the ministers haue reproched to vs protesting notwithstanding to kéepe in meaning that after we haue concluded resolued vpon this matter to returne to the examination of the moÌ„strous errors of the ministers which containe great numbers against the other Articles of the Créede which the ministers feare by all likelihoode in that they are not willing we pursue the order begon as foreseeing that in the next conference we wold open vnto them an other blasphemie maintained by the reformed church against the bountie of God according to Caluines doctrine which is that God works in the reprobate the euill sinne which they coÌ„mit which is an execrable atheisme no lesse than the denial of gods omnipoteÌ„cie and in like sort as such as shal read these coÌ„ferences if they continue to the end discussing of the ministers errors their religion against al the articles of the Créede shall maruel to vnderstand the absurdities blasphemies discending from them so yet there is an other point the drawes the ministers to demaund the disputation of the supper which is that they haue al their matter redily prepared by many of their sect which haue written therof as especially they will not want the great Booke of Peter Martir by which they are furnished with sundrie infamous obiections certaine texts of the Ancients either cut of depraued or euil applied to impugne in shew the truth of the body in the sacrament but to the defense of all their other errors they are very slenderly prouided wherin their coÌ„science is a sufficient witnesse that by the scripture iudgmeÌ„t of general councels coÌ„mon consent of the authorities of the ancients they are coÌ„uinced condeÌ„ned of their errors against the said Créede But to enter into the supper of the ministers we say it is a prophane eating drinking not differing from the coÌ„mon eating drinking sauing that it is so much the worse as they abuse the holy institution of the supper of Iesus and pollute and defile such their banket withal impietie blasphemie we maintaine also that they do great wrong to the sacrament of Iesus Christe to attribute falsly to suche their banker so prophane and defiled the name of sacrament And to the ende to proue it more cleare we aske them if they receiue a common doctrine allowed not only in the catholike church but also of all the sects which are separated froÌ„ it the same is that in the confection of sacramentes there be two things essentiall and necessary the matter or the element and the woorde Secondly what word is necessary with the element to coÌ„stitute a sacrament namely that which they cal the sacrament of the supper and whether they must vse certain woords or not Thirdly if the woorde haue any vertue or efficacie in this sacrament and what And if it worke any thing in the matter of bread and wine Fourthly whether by the same woord the consecration be made of the matter of the sacrament or not In the fifth place if by the woord there be not made consecration of the matter that is howe the same consecration is made and by what vertue the sacrament is made For the sixth if bisides the bread wine and the spirituall graces benefites of Iesus Christ is receiued in the supper really the true body bloud of Iesus Christe in his propre substance not only in spirituall effect vpon this Article we require of the ministers an open confession of faithe We ask further if in receiuing the bread afore they take the wine they receiue by the eating of the bred the body bluâ— of Iesus Christ or only the body to beâ—â—â—rt if they admit that which the diuines cal a concomitance of the body bloud of Iesus Christ We aske also if the supper bisides the assurance it giues them of participation in the flesh of Iesus Christ in their redemption do woorke in them reâ—ission of sinne We aske lastly if by the supper there is receiued any thing which can not be receiued oute of the Supper or if withoute taking of breade to goe to the Supper or to assist it may be receiued as muche of the body and graces of Iesus Christ as if they did assist the supper We will debate afterwards the other Articles contained in the laste pamphelet of the ministers bicause the former demaundes are to be first examined as grounds of the other Articles proponed by the ministers For the rest after the supper of the ministers is confuted and the Real presence of the body and bloud of Iesus Christ in the sacrament confirmed we will procéede by order and withoute confusion to teache clearely by the pure and moste expresse woorde of God that the Masse was instituted said by Iesus Christe and that also he commaunded his Apostles to say it which they did according to the ordinaunce of their Maister That the Masse is a true sacrifice of the Euangelical law That suche as reiecte the Masse and admit no outwarde sacrifice in the Church nor priesthoode are without true law and without true Religion and therefore worse than Idolatrers That the Masse is of value to obtaine remission of sinnes fauoure and grace of God and that it is of value bothe for the quicke and the dead That it is no abuse in the Church if the Priest communicate alone in the Masse when the assistantes will not communicate with him That suche commit horrible blasphemie which call the woorshipping of the body of Iesus Christ in the Sacrament the worshipping of breade and wine and falsly doe they call such veneration of the body of Iesus Christ idolatrie To be short there is nothing in the masse as it is celebrated in the Church at this day which is not good and holy in it selfe and conformable to the woorde of God. We require the ministers to Aunswere to the demaunds héere before written pertinently clearly and by order Sunday .28 of Iulie the years aforesaide The Aunswere of the Ministers to the vvryting of the Doctors sent to them by the Duke of Nyuernois the .28 of Julie .1566 about .7 of the clocke in the Euening THe Doctors in the beginning of their writing reproche vs as that in our complainte against them we imitate the Donatistes wherin they iustifie oure former iudgement and opinion of them that the moste parte of their wrytings swarmed more with matters of repeticion iniuries scoffes and inuectiues than with argumentes and good reasons like as also the example of the Donatistes becomes them farre better than vs bicause the Donatistes soughte to restraine the name of the Churche who comprehendes vniuersally all the chosen and Faithfull that eyther