conscience of men to sanctifie them by their worke whome Christ by his onelie oblation hath made perfect for euer They that holde these points denie Christ to be a perfect Prophet King and Priest But these be deepe mysteries of puritanisme saith the answerer Christ is a Prophet alone a King alone a Priest alone the ouerthrow of all gouernment No sir no to acknowledge Christe to be our onelie Prophet king and priest ouerthroweth not but establisheth all power that is ordeined vnder him to teach gouerne and sanctifie The scripture in deede Eph. 4. Acts. 5. doth allowe Prophets and teachers in the Church but not authors of new doctrine no makers of new articles of faith no traditions beside the Gospell of Christ which is written that we might beleeue and beleeuing haue eternall life in his name The scripture alloweth Kinges and rulers 1. Pet. 2. Act. 2. but the scripture giueth no authoritie to any king or ruler to dispense against the lawes of God nor to any Prophet or priest to discharge subiects of their oth made to their lawfull Prince to binde the conscience of man with new constitutions as necessarie to saluation c. But whereas you aske whether Priests may not sanctifie by the word of god 2. Tim. 4. you are neare driuen for proofes For to omitte that the Chapter you quote hath neuer a word either of priests or sanctifying and to take your meaning to be of 1. Tim. 4. verse 5. the Apostle speaketh not of the Priest or ecclesiasticall ministers power of sanctifying but of euerie Christian man and woman to whome euerie creature of God in the right vse thereof is sanctified by the word of God and praier and against them that forbid thinges consecrated and allowed by God as matrimonie and meates sanctifyed by his worde that hath giuen them to be receiued with thankesgiuing and by the praier of the thankefull receiuer as a mean to obtaine sanctification from God whoe onelie is holie and therefore hath onelie power properlie to sanctifie and to inioyne as more holie by their owne making and not by Gods sanctification virginitie then matrimonie fish then flesh yca take vpon them to sanctifie Gods creatures in an other vse then God hath appointed them as water fire garments boughs flowers bread and such like for religion and sanctifying of Christian men Againe he asketh what doe the traditions of Christ and his Apostles for of those onelie they talke when they compare them with scripture impeach the teaching of Christ and his Apostles I answere there are no traditions of Christ and his Apostles pertaining to a Christian mans dutie to obtaine erernall life but those that be comprehended in the holie scriptures as the spirite of God in the scripture which cannot lie doth testifie And therefore they are the traditions of men and not of Christ and his Apostles that areso called vnder which title all heresies fansies may be brought in without testimonie of the written worde of God Wherefore such traditions doe greatlie impeach the office of Christes teaching reproouing his Apostles and Euangelists of imperfection if they haue not comprehended the summe of all that Christ taught and did for our saluation which Saint Luke in the beginning of his Gospell doth professe that he hath done and that verie exactlie And further it is false that our answerer saith they talke of the traditions of Christ and his Apostles onelie when they compare them with scripture For they compare the decrees of their Pope and of their generall councells allowed by him to be of equall authoritie with the holie scriptures as well as traditions Secondlie he asketh what doth the spiritual authorttie of the Pope vnder Christ diminish the Kinglie power and authoritie of Christ I answere the Pope hath no spirituall authoritie vnder Christ by anie graunt of Christ but he vsurpeth authoritie aboue Christ when he will controll the lawes and institutions of Christ as denying the cuppe of blessing vnto the laie people and in taking vpon him to make newe lawes and to inioyne men to obserue them in paine of damnation as be his lawes of abstinence from mariage and meates for religions sake which Christ hath left free for all men euen for Bishops Priests and Deacons of the Church and in an hundred matters beside Last of all he asketh How doth the priesthood of men as from Christ or the sacrifice of the altar instituted by Christ disgrace Christs priesthood or his sufficient sacrifice once for all offered on the crosse I answere the priesthood of reconciling by sacrifice doth not passe from Christ to anie man because he hath by one sacrifice made perfect for euer all that are sanctifyed and liueth for euer to make intercession for vs therefore hath as the Apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a priesthood that passeth not to any other in succession as Arons priesthood did whereby he is able to saue for euer those that come vnto God by hym Againe I denie that Christ did institute that sacrifice of the altar whereof there is no worde in all the scripture and therefore a new priesthood and a new sacrifice must needes be blaspemous against the eternal priesthood of Christ and that one sufficient sacrifice which he offered and therebie found eternall redemption The texts alledged by Master Charke Heb. 7. 9. he saith doe not impeach this dailie sacrifice of theirs because they graunt that sacrifice once offered c. in that manner as it was then done meaning bloodelie whereas they offer it vnbloodelie c. But the wholl discourse of the Aposile throughout the wholl epistle almoste excludeth all repetition of that sacrifice in any manner For therepetition of the same sacrifice should argue imperfection in it as it did in the Iewish sacrifices and without shedding of blood there is noremission of sinnes Is Christ shoulde be often offered he should often suffer All which being impossible it remaineth that as Christ offered himselfe but once and not often so no man hath authoritie or power to offer him anie more neither is there anie neede he should be more then once offered seing by that one oblation he hath made perfect for euer all that are sanctified and hath found eternall redemption for all that beleeue in him But for proofe that there must be such a daylie sacrifice in the Church vntill the end of the world he alledgeiu the prophecie of Daniell 12. Malachie 1. whereas Daniell speaketh of the dailie sacrifice of the Lawe which should cease in the persecution of Antiochus and be vtterly abolished by the death of Christ. And Malachic of the sacrifice of praise and thankesgeuing which by all nations is offered as a pure sacrifice and acceptable to him through Christ. The former exposition is allowed by S. Ierome to be verified of Antiochus in a type of Antichrist whoe shall forbid culium Dei the worship of God which doth not require any such
necessarie to saluation not expressed in so manie wordes and syllables yet in full sense contained and to be plainlie concluded out of the holie scriptures and these we receiue to be of as great credit as anie thing that is expresselie contained in the scriptures The other kinde of traditions was rites and cerimonies which are not necessary to saluation but are in the Churches power to alter as it maie stand best with edification Among which S. Basill rehearseth some that long since are abolished as the rite of standing in praier one the Lords daie and betweene Easter and Whitsontid which of it selfe is a thing indifferent as also that manner of glorifying in which they said with the holy ghost whereas al the Church long since hath said neither in the holie Ghost nor with the holie Ghost but to the holie Ghost To beleeue that the holie Ghost is to be glorified equallie with the Father and the sonne it is necessarie to saluation but in what forme of wordes that shal be song in the Church it is indifferent and the later Church hath vsed her libertie herein to alter that forme which Saint Basill saith was deliuered by the Apostles themselues without writing By this I hope it is manifest what kinde of traditions are of equall force or authoritie with the scripture euen they which haue their ground in the scriptures and none other For as the same Basill affirmeth Euerie word or deede ought to be confirmed by testimonie of the holie Scriptures Againe For if all that is not of faith is sinne as the Apostle saith and faith is of hearing and hearing by the word of God whatsoeuer is beside the holie Scripture being not of faith is sinne Thus Basill whatsoeuer he speaketh of vnwritten traditions he meaneth not against the insufficiencie of the holie scriptures except you will saie he is contrarie to him-selfe in manie places beside these that I haue noted Tr. de vera piafide Epist. 80. in Reg. Breu. Inter. 1. 65. 68. de ornatu Monachi Your next testimonie is out of Eusebius lib. 1. Eu. Demonst. cap. 8. whole wordes you mangle after your manner leauing out at your pleasure more then you rehearse Eusebius hauing shewed the excellencie of Christ aboue Moses declareth also that there are two manners ofliuing in Christianitie the one of them that are strong and perfect the other of them that are subiect to manie infirmites and that whereas Moses did write in tables without life Christ hath written the perfect preceptes of the new Testament in liuing mindes his disciples following their Masters minde considering what Doctrine is meete for both sortes haue committed the one to writing as that which is necessarie to be kept of all the other they deliuered without writing to those that were able to receiue it wich haue excelled the common manner of men in knowledge in strength in abstinence c. And this is the meaning of Eusebius in that place not of anie traditions necessarie to saluation of euerie man which are not taught in the holy scriptures but of certaine precepts tending to perfection not enioyned to all but written in the heartes of some The third man is Epiphanius who you saie is more earnest then Eusebius writing against certaine heretikes called Apostolici which denied traditions as our Protestantes do Which is but a tale for they were more like to Popish monkes and friers then Protestantes For they professed to abstaine from marryage to poslesse nothing and such other superstitions they obserued But what saith Epiphanius for traditions He saith that we must vse tradition For all thinges can not be taken out of the scripture wherefore the holie Apostles deliuered somethings in the scriptures and something in tradition Mine answer to Epiphanius is the same that it was to Basilius Namelie that such things as were not expressed in plaine wordes in the scripture were approoued by tradition being neuertheles such thinges as were to be concluded necessarilie out of the scripture As in the question for which he alledgeth tradition it is manifest Tradiderunt c. the holie Apostles of God saith he haue deliuered vnto vs that it is sinne after virginitie decreed to be turned vnto marriage This the Papistes doubt not but that they are hable to prooue out of the scripture except where the Pope dispenseth And we acknowledge that where the vow was made a duisedly to a Godlie purpose and abilitie in the partie to performe it that it is sinne to breake it neither can the Pope dispense with it In the other place where he rehearseth manie examples of traditions he speaketh of rites and ceremonies as is before declared wherof manie are not obserued in the Popish Church neither is there anie of them necessarie to saluation But Epiphanius you saie prooueth it out of scripture 1. Cor. 11. 14. 15. vhere Saint Paulsaith as I deliuered vnto you And againe so I teach and so I haue deliuered vnto the Churches and If you holde fast except you haue beleeued in vaine To the first I answer that it prooueth no traditions necessarie to saluation which are not contained in the scriptures as is more manifest by the second and third text for where Saint Paul saith so I teach in all the Churches of God 1. Cor. 14. 33. he saith immediatelie before that God is not the God of sedition but of peace 1. Cor. 15. 1. 2. 3. the Apostle speaketh manifestlie of the doctrine of the resurrection wherof he him-selfe in that place writeth plentifullie and in manie other places of scripture the same article is taught moste expresselie You see therefore how substantiallie Epiphanius prooueth tradition vnwritten out of the scripture to be necessarie to saluation which is our question But with Epiphanius saie you ioyneth fullie and earnestlie Saint Chrysostome writing vpon these wordes of Saint Paul to the purpose Stand fast and holde traditions out of which cleere wordes Saint Chrysostome maketh this illation Hinc patet c. Hereof it is euident that the Apostles deliuered not all by epistle but manie thinges also without writing and those are as worthie credit as these Therefore we think the tradition of the Church to be worthie of credit it is a tradition seeke no more The sense of these wordes is that the Apostles in their preaching did expresse manie things more perticularly then in their epistles not that they preached anie thing necessarie to saluation but that the same was contained either in their epistles or in other bookes of the holie scripture And so I saie of the tradition of the Church which is a doctrine contained in the scriptures though not expressed in the same or in so manie wordes as the three persons and one God in trinitie and trinitie in vnitie to be worshipped c. is of equall credit with that which is expressed in the scriptures because the ground of our faith standeth not vppon the sound of wordes but vppon
fastidia detergeret Nihil enim fere de illis obscuritatibus eruitur quod non planissimè dictum alibi reperiatur The holie ghost hath magnifically and wholsomlie so tempered the holy scriptures that with euident places he might satisfie hunger and with more darke places might wipe awaie disdainfulnes For nothing almoste is found out of those obscurities which is not found els where most plainlie vttered It were no hard matter to heape vp manie testimonies of the auncient fathers to this purpose but that the va nitie of this answerer appeereth sufficientlie in all our bookes written against the papists in which not onely by the manifest places of the scriptures but also by most euident testimonies of the doctors of the church we confute them in the most and greatest matters of controuersie that ate betweene vs. But what saith our gallant answerer that the councels fathers and anciters of theChurch haue from time to timedeclared the true sense of the scriptures vnto vs hath none of these at any time erred in expounding the scriptures may we safely beleeue them whatsoeuer they say He wil I warrant you deny it except the Pope of Rome do alow their interpretations And therfore this flying from the only scriptures to the interpretation of Coun cels fathers ancetors of the Church is nothing els but an impudent shift to reserue vnto the Pope liberty authority to make what meaning of scripture they please thereby to giue colour to euery fansie they list to father it vpon the authority of the holie scriptures The third cause he affirmeth to be that by chalenging of onely scripture they maie deliuer themselues from all ordinan ces or doctrines left vnto vs by the first pillers of Christs Church though not expressely set down in the scripture c. In deede to deliuer our selues from the burthen of mens traditions the ordinances or doctrines of men we affirme the holie scriptures to be hable and sufficient to make vs wise vnto saluation by faith in Iesus Christ as the Apostles and principall pillers of the Church haue taught vs who haue left no such ordinances or doctrines but they be either expressely set down in the holy scriptures or by plaine and necessarie collection to be gathered out of the same For how will our aduersaries prooue that anie thing is receaued from the Apostles which hath not testimonie out of the writings of the Apostles who can be a sufficient witnes of such de liuerie seeing manie things were of olde referred to the Apostles tradition which euen our aduersaries do not admit to be Apostolical seeing the most auncient and immediate successors of the Apostles as Polyearpus Anicetus can not agree about a ceremony receaued from the Apostles namelie the celebration of Easter what certentie can there be of anie other ordinances or doctines fathered vpon the Apostles without witnes of their writings yea and some times directlie contrarie and repugnant to their writings But hereof saith our aduersarie they assume authoritie of allowing or not allowing whatsoeuer liketh or serueth their turnes for the time and hereof he bringeth example First of the number of sacraments whereof some protestants haue written diuerslie because the name of sacrament is diuerslie taken sometimes largelie for euerie holie signe sometimes strictlie for such holie signes onely as being instituted of God are seales of the dispensation of his generall grace in the new teftament perteining to euerie member of the Church somtimes for al holy mysteries or secrets c. But what doth it serue anie protestants turne whether there be more or fewer signes in number that maie be called sacraments seeing all protestants agree about the things themselues that are set forth in the scriptures to be visible signes of grace inuisible and the name it selfe Sacrament in that sense we speake of when we saie there are 2. 3. 4. or 7. sacraments is not once vsed This diuersitie therefore is but of a terme and that not vsed in scripture therefore it ariseth not of anie interpretation or peruerse vnderstanding of the scripture as our answerer would haue it seeme to be But let vs heare his example Martin Luther saith he after he had denied all testimonie of man besides himselfe he beginneth thus about the number of sacraments Principiò neganda mihisunt septem sacramenta tantúm tria pro tempore ponenda First of all I must denie seauen sacraments and appoint three for the time Marie this time lasted not long for in the same place he saith that if he would speake according to the vse of onely scripture he hath but one sacrament for vs that is baptisme In this sentence how manie lies and slaunders be packed together First he saith Martin Luther denieth all testimonie of man which is false for he alloweth all testimonie of man that agreeth with the testimonie of God expressed in the scriptures and often citeth the testimonies of the auncient fathers for confirmation of the trueth which he taught indeede he alloweth man no authoritie to institute sacraments or to make articles of faith or lawes to binde the conscience of man and he would haue all mans testimonies to be examined and iudged according to the word of God but this is not to denie all testimonie of man but to distinguish true testimonies of man from false An other slaunder is where he saith that Luther in denying all mans testimonie excepteth him selfe which is altogether vntrue For he requireth none other credit to be giuen to his owne testimonie then he alloweth to the testimonie of other Neither doth he arrogate any authoritie to him selfe which he derogateth from other men And namelie in this booke of the captiuitie of Babilon he taketh not vpon him absolutelie to teach euerie point but so farr forth as he did for the present vnderstand of them promising after greater study more diligent inquirie to intreat of diuers of them more certenly euen in this verie place of the number of the sacraments he saith he will admit three onclie for the present time intending to be further a duised whether there be fewer or more to be entituled with that name Wherein our answerer offereth him the third iniurie in translating tria pro tempore ponenda I must appoint three for the time as though Luther had taken vpon him to appoint how manie sacraments the Church should haue or would challenge power to appoint more or Jesse at his pleasure where as his wordes if the answerer did not wilfullie corrupt them by false translation do import no such thing but onelie as farr as he did presentlie see there were no more but three of those that were commonlie called sacraments of the new testament which were rightlie to be called by that name The fourth slaunder is that Luther hath but one sacrament for vs which is Baptisme if he would speake according to the vse of onelie scripture yea this is a double slaunder for neither doth
you both to wil and to be hable to do for his owne good pleasure whereupon we conclude that though a man is willed to worke his owne saluation by walking in that waie which god hath appointed for them that shal be saued yet he can doe nothing by his owne strength but all that he doth is of the grace of god for by grace you are saued through faith that not of your selues it is the gift of God To be short we make not the grace of God an helper onelie but a wholl doer and bringer to passe in vs of our saluation and of all thinges tending thereto For we are not apt of our selues as of our selues to thinke anie thing belonging thereto but our aptnes is of God Nor I saith Saint Paul but the grace of God which is with me Againe we haue infinit places of scripture to prooue that a man ought not to dout of his saluatiō in respect of the truth of Gods promises although we ought to feare trem ble at Gods iudgements and although we cannot be alwaies voide of feare in respect of our own weakenes Furthermore they haue expresselie doe ye the worthie fruites of penance Luc. 3. we haue no where that faith onelie is sufficient without all satisfaction and all other workes of penance on our partes The fruites worthie of repentance we acknowledge to be necessaire to declare vnfained repentance but not for satisfaction of Gods iustice which is blasphemous against the satisfaction of Christes death But that a faith which is fruitles or voide of the workes of repentance should be sufficient to saluation or Iustification we doe vtterlie deny as a thing contrary to the scriptures Yet againe they haue expresselie that euerie man shal be saued according to his workes Apo. 20. we haue no where that men shal be iudged onelie according to their faith We confesse as the text is that euerie man shal be iudged according to his workes and so perhaps he would haue saide if the corrector had done his part neither doe we affirme that men shal be iudged onelie according to their faith for triall of their faith shal be made by their workes Once againe they haue expresselie that there remaineth aretribution stipend and paie to euery good worke in heauen Marc. 9. 1. Cor. 3. Apoc. 22. Ps. 118. we haue as he saith no where that good workes done in Christ do merite nothing In the 3. text quoted out of the new testament is all one word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth a rewarde whether it be freelie giuen or deserued by laboure To him that worketh saith Saint Paule 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rewarde is not accompted according to grace but according to debt But God is debter to no man Neither is there anie merit of good workes once named in the scriptures but against the merit of good workes Christ saith epxresselie when you haue done all thinges that are commaunded vnto you saie we are vnprofitable seruants and the paie wages stipend merite or desert of an vnprofitable seruant is shewed Matt. 25. 30. Cast out the vnprofitable seruant into vtter darkenesse there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth It is therfore the grace mercie and trueth of Gods promise whereby we claime rewarde and not the merites desert or debt of our good workes To that he saieth they haue expresselie praier and sacrifice for the dead in the second of the Maccaebees We answer that booke of Macabes to be no holie Scripture out of which he might haue expresselie a man commended for killing himselfe Whether Angels present good workes and almesdeedes before God and whether Saintes departed do praie for them that are aliue which he gathereth out of the Apocriphal bookes of Tobie and the Maccabes we make no question as of matters not reuealed in the canonicall scriptures But if they were graunted to be so yet it followeth not that men aliue must or may praie to Angels or Saintes departed Last of all out of the canonicall scripture he saieth they haue expresselie that the affliction which Daniell vsed vpon his bodie was acceptable in the sight of God Dan. 10. and we haue no where that such voluntarie corporall afflictions are in vaine But which of vs saith that such voluntarie corporall affliction as Daniell vsed and to such end as he did vse them are in vaine No man verilie You see therefore that while he boasteth of expresse words of scripture against vs he is driuen either to glose vpon the text or to faine some opinion vnto vs which we holde not at all and that all his bragges are but winde and wordes without matter as of one that-fcareth no shame because his heade is hidden The third waie of triall is necessarie collections made and inferred vpon the scriptures which we are willing to acknowledge and admitte to be of as great authoritie as the expresse words of the scripture But to discerne what is necessarie collection and what is not necessarie collection when there is no expresse wordes of scripture there is no certaine waie but the iudgement of Logicke for that onelie is necessarie collection which out of expresse words of scripture or articles of faith or other groundes confessed to be necessarilie gathered out of the holie scripture may be rightly concluded in a true and lawfull syllogisme whatsoeuer cannot be so concluded is no necessarie collection But our answerer saith we must referre our selues to the auncient primitiue Church for this meaning and his reason is For it is like they knew it best for that they liued nearer to the writers thereof then we doe who could well declare vnto them what was the meaning of the same we doe willinglie yeald to consult with the auncient primitiue Church to be holpen with their collections but to admit all their collections without examining them were to admit many errors that euen the Papists doe condemne for errors and which are reprooued by the scriptures them-selues Let one example serue in stead of manie S. Ierome collecteth out of this scripture It is good not to touch a woman that therefore it is euill to touch a woman Euerie man doth see that this is an vnnecessary collection and so are many other in the auncient fathers writings Wherefore we must vse the gift of knowledge of right gathering and concluding which God hath giuen not to be vnprofitable vnto his Church but to be both beneficiall and necessarie Againe marke the feeble reason vpon which our answerer groundeth his saying It is like they knew it best he cannot say it is necessarie that they knew it best then how prooueth he that it is like because they liued neerer to the writers then we doe who could well declare the meaning vnto them In deede if we had the writings of them that liued so neere vnto the Apostles that they might heare their meaning of their owne mouthes it were some likeliehood and yet no necessarie proofe
haue beene hither to frustrate and the strength of the Turke is increased by our warres The second is that vnder pretext of making warre against the Turke the Popehath vsed to rake mony to gether for their pardons And he concludeth that without repentance and the ouerthrow of the Popes tyrannie there is no hope to preuaile in warre against the Turkes because God is not on our side butiustlie incensed against vs. Quantòrectius saith he faceremus c. How much better should we do if first with our praiers yea rather by changeing the wholl course of our life we reconcile God vnto vs And then that the Emperours the princes would restraine that Idole of Roome from tyrannie deceit and destroying of souies For that I also maie once prophecie although I know I shall not be heard Except the Pope of Rome be brought vnder all Christendome is vndonne Let him flie as Christ hath taught into the mountaines he that can or with confidence let him offer his life to death vnto the Romish murtherers The Popedome can worke nothing but sinne and destruction what will you more But who shall subdue the Pope Christ by the brightnes of his comming and none other Lord who hath beleeued our preaching he that hath eares to heare let him heare and let him absteine from the Turgish warre while the name of the Pope preuaileth vnder heauen I haue said By this you maie see that Luther fauored not the empire of infidelitie but sheweth by what meanes it maie be resisted Againe he forbiddeth not defense against the Turke but inuasion of the Turke when we maie be at peace with him For that it is lawfull to fight against the Turke in our owne defense he sheweth his opinion in consut Rat. Latomianae where he derideth the follie of Latomus and the diuines of Louane which racked the decree of Pope Leo to this sense that it was needles to answer the aduersaties of religion which is as great wisedome of the schoole of Louane in proceeding against Luther as if when the Turke doth set vpon vs which is no waies lawfull for him and yet he will not be staid we should send the diuines of Louane embassadors vnto him which should saie vnto him It is not lawfull for thee to fight and if thou do we will condemne thee and so suffer him to raunge at his pleasure and yet boast that we haue gotten the victorie Nay saith he let vs laie aside praiers and all spirituall armour and cease to resist the deuill denouncing vnto him and saying It is not lauful for thee to trouble the Church of God So that Luther by these wordes declareth his iudgement that it is as lawfull for vs and as necessarie with bodelie armour to defend our selues against the Turke assailing vs as it is to fight against the deuill with spirituall armour and to confute enemies of the trueth by the word of God For a fourth example of impietie you adde when he reprehended the Pope for defining beside scripture that the soule is immortall and calleth it a monster of the dunghill of Rome what ground of impietie doth he not laie In deed if Luther should denie the immortalitie of the soule as Pope Iohn the 23. did and was therefore conuicted and condemned in the Counsell of Constance wee would accurse Luthers memorie as much as the Popes But if Luther reprehended the Pope for deliuering that vpon the creditte of his owne definition and authoritie which is manifestlie grounded vpon the authoritie of holie scriptures what a slaunderous penne haue you He was charged by the Collectors art 37. to haue saide thus Certum est in manu Ecclesiae c. It is certaine that it is not in the hand of the Church or of the Pope at all to decree articles of the faith nay nor yet lawes of manners and good workes To this article Luther answereth thus Probo hunc sic c. This article I prooue thus 1. Cor. 3. No man can lay any other foundation beside that which is alreadie laide which is Iesus Christ. Here thou hast the foundation laid by the Apostles but euerie article of faith is part of this foundation therefore none other article can be laid then is alreadie laid There may be builded vpon as the same Apostle saith And therefore the Pope ought to be laide and builded vpon the same foundation but not to lay any foundation for all things to be beleeued are fully set forth in the scriptures Yet I permit that the Pope may make articles of faith to them that beleeue in him such as these are That the bread and wine are transsubstantiated in the sacrament That the essence of god doth neither beget nor is begotton That the soul is the substantiall forme of the bodie That he him seife is the Emperour of the world King of heauen and an earthly God That the soull is immortall And all those infinite monsters in the Romish dunghill of decrees that such as his faith is such may be his Gospell such his beeleeuers such his Church and that like lippes may haue like lettice and the cup a couer meete for it But we which are Christians and not Papanes doe know that there is nothing pertaining either to faith or good manners which is not abundantlie set forth in the holie scriptures that there is neither authoritie nor place for men to decree any other thing These wordes declare that what doctrine is true and needefull to be knowne must be receiued from God by the holie scriptures not from the Popes decrees or from any mortall mans authoritie It is maruaile you doe not charge Luther with holding the pluralitie of Gods because here prehendeth the Pope for defining that the essence of god can neither beget nor be begotton as wel as with denying the immortality of the soul. both which articles are to be taken out of the holie scriptures not from the authoritie of the Popes definition For though the Pope define any thing which is true yet it must not be receiued vpon his creditte but vpon the authoritie of Gods worde And seeing the Popes decrees doe containe such a number of vntruethes the articles of faith from the Popes decrees may receiue discredit rather then authoritie But all thinges must be examined according to the worde of God writen which is the truth yea euen the scripture comming from the mouth of the deuill Againe I wish the reader to consider how truelie you saie that Luther calleth that opinion of the immortalitie of the soule a monster of the dunghill of Rome when he speaketh of the infinite monsters of falsehoode that are found in the dunghill of the Popes decrees where of he maketh no expresse mention in answere to this article The last example of impiety is when Luther affirmeth and mantaineth that neither man nor Angell on earth can laie any one lawe vpon any one Christian further then he will him-selfe What foundation say you
Secondlie he speaketh of the fourth daies or Wednesdaies fast to be appointed by the tradition of the Apostles which yet neuerthelesse the Romish Church doth not obserue Thirdlie that the Pente cosse or fiftie daies by the tradition of Apostles are exempted from the Fridaie fast which tradition is not kept in the Popes Church except you will saie that Pentecost is taken for whitson weeke and then the custome of the PopishChurch is directlie contrarie to the tradition of the Apostles for Wednesdaie and Fridaie that weeke are 〈◊〉 daies And as for the Wednesdaie fast as well as the Fridaie Epiphanius is so earnest that he addeth further Deinde verò st non de eodem argumento quartarum Prosabbatorum ijdem Apostoli in constitutione dixissent etiamaliter vndique demonstrare possemus Attamen de hoc exactè scribunt Assumpsit autem ecclesta in toto mundo assensus factus est c. And moreouer if the same Apostles in their constitutions had not spoken of the same argument of wednesdaies Fridaies we could otherwise throughly make proofe of it But they write exactly ofit and the Church hath taken it vp assent hath bin geuen in al the world You see he alledgeth not onely a decree of the Apostles but also the consent of all the world for the wednesdaie fast as well as the Fridaie fast So that if the Apostles tradition beside the scripture be necessarie for lent whie is it not also for wednesdaies fast And if wednesdaies faste is not necessarie no more is lent fast Further you affirme that Dionystus and Tertullian saie that praiers and oblations for the dead are traditions of the Apostles De Eccles. hier c. 7. de corona milit but Dionystus al beit we do not acknowledge him for a man of such antiquitie as the papists would obtrude him yet hath not any mention of traditions of the Apostles in that Chap ter touching praier for the dead but either of tradition in scripture orels at large endeuoring to prooue that he saith by scripture Tertullian in the place quoted speaketh onelie of oblations for the dead in that yearelie day which maie signifie thanksgiuing as pro nataliliis for their birth doth in in the verie same clause Not denying yet but Tertullian when he forsooke the Church and became a Montanist yealed to praier for the dead as a thing reuealed by the spirit aud new prophecie of Montanus Last of all you saie Saint Basill teacheth that the consecration of the fant before baptisme the exorcisme vpon those that are to be baptized their anointing with holie chrisme and diuerse like thinges are deliuered to vs by prescript of Christ and his Apostles lib. de spi. 5. cap. 27. Of consecration or blessing of the water to the holie vse of baptisme of those that are to be baptized there neede no tradition to be alledged the scripture is sufficient in the institution of baptisme whereby both the water and the perfon are dedicated to God aud his holie worke of regeneration The anointing with chrisme seemeth at the first to haue beene the signe of the giftes of the holie Ghost which were wont to be graunted with baptisme which though it had beene vfed by the Apostles in baptisme yet that particular grace being ceased which to signifie it was vsed it hath no longer anie profitable vse in the Church As for exorcisme vpon those that are to be baptized Is is your owne addition for Saint Basill hath it not But where you saie he hath diuers like thinges as deliuered by traditian it is verie true and among them this sor example that it is necessarie for the children of the Church to praie standing on the Lords daie But this necessitie euen in the popish Church is notacknowledged therefore whatsoeuer he saieth is a tradition of the Apostles is necessarieto be kept of all Christians although all the Church in his time beleeued it as that which Epiphanius reporteth of the wednesdaies fast before spoken of You demaund vpon what ground you shall discredit or reiect these traditions deliuered by such fathers cheife Doctors and pillers of the Church Euen by the same ground that you giue ouer other traditions deliuered by the same persones either because they are not true traditions or els because they are not necessarie for the Church albelt they were deliuered as no doubt some ceremoniall matters were euen by the Apostles them selues Your other reasons are friuolous That they were neerer the Apostles then we For the neerest and moste immediat successours to the Apostles Policarpus and Anicetus could not agree vpon the tradition of the Apostles one of them building vpon Iohn the other vpon Peter as is testified by Eusebius out of Irenaeus in the place before cited An other reason is that they were honest men and would not deceiue vs willinglie And so much we acknowledge yet might they be deceiued in ascribing the common practise of their time to Apostolike tradition and so deceiue vs vnwittinglie nor be controlled because the custome generall acceptation of that ceremonie restreined men Which things considered it is a great iniquitie as Master Charke saieth to adde traditions to the written word of God as if of it selfe it were not sufficient to instruct the Church in all thinges necessarie to saluation That which followeth of Doctor Fulkes handling the olde Fathers about traditions is answered by himselfe in his confutation of popish quarrells from pag. 55. to pag 61. After this you cite foure seuer all Doctors in defence of traditions vnwritten whereunto as some of auncient writers were too much inclined so haue you not so sure ground out of them for your popish traditions as you purpose And to beginne with Basill who by Apostolike traditiō defendeth the custome of the Church which was to sing Glorie be to the Father and to the sonne with the holie Ghost whereas the heretikes would haue it in the holie Ghost and cauilled that the other forme was not in the scriptures Saint Basil mainteineth it as agreeable to the scriptures by authoritie of auncient tradition although it were not expressed in so manie wordes in the scriptures as manie other thinges are which haue like force vnto pietie with those that are dilinered in expresse wordes as for example he alledgeth the confession of the faith in the 〈◊〉 which no man doubteth to be sufficientlie tanght in the scriptures although the verie wordes of our creed are not expressed in such for me As we rehearse our creede I omit 〈◊〉 things saieth he the verie confession of faith in which we beleeue in the father the sonne the holie Ghost in what scripture haue we it Againe And if they doe reiect the manner of glorifying of god as not written let them bring forth demonstration in writing of the confession of faith of other things that we rehearse By which it is manifest that the traditions he speaketh of are of two sortes the one
the next matter that you saie he prnoueth by tradition it is a question not so needefull to be decided although it may be prooued out of scripture that some of them which were Iohns disciples were baptized by him and so it is like were all the rest seeing Ierusalem and all Iurie and all the coast neere vnto Iordan were baptized by Iohn euen to the Pharisees and Saduces Publicans and souldiers it is not probable that the Apostles whoe before their calling by Christ were of honest and deuout conuersation did neglect that diuine institution which all men that would seeme to be religious made hast to receiue Furthermore you saie he prooueth by tradition the ceremonies of baptisme as deliuered by the Apostles lib. de fide Oper. cap. 9. The question is whether the Eunuch whome Philip baptized made such profession of his faith c. renouncing of the deuill as is required of them that are baptized when the scripture maketh mention onelie of a short confession that Iesus Christ is the sonne of God Where Saint Augustine sheweth that the holie ghost would haue vs to vnderstand that althinges were fulfilled in his baptisme which though they be not expressed in that scripture for breuities sake yet by order of the tradition we know that they are to be fulfilled Where tradition is not taken for that which is altogether beside the scripture but that which according to the scripture deliuereth what is to be obserued concerning the celebration of that sacrament which is the seale of mortification and regeneration That the Lordes supper should be receiued before other meates he thinketh of it as of other ceremontall matters that it came either from Apostolike tradition or from decrees of generall councell yet is it a thing not necessarie alwaies to be obserued for your selues doe housell sicke folkes at all times of the daie or night without respect whether they haue tasted any thing or no otherwise as a matter of order and decencie it is obserued of vs also to minister that sacrament before dinner and to them that be fasting if the case of necessity require not the contrarie Yet againe you saie he prooueth by tradition the exorcisme of such as should be baptized l. de nupt concu cap. 20. l. 6. cont Iulian. c. 2. But the truth is that by the ceremonie of exorcisme exsufflation and renunciation that is vsed in baptisme he goeth about to prooue that infantes before baptisme be in originall sinne and in the power of the deuill as is euident by both the places which prooue not exorcisme to haue beene receiued by tradition but by the end of that ceremonie vpon what beginning soeuer vsed in the Church at that time that infants are borne in originall sinne and subject to the power of Sathan before they be baptized The wordes of the former place are these In veritate itaque non in falsitate c. In truth therefore not in falsehoode the deuils power is exorcised in infants and they renounce him by the heartes and mouthes of their bearers because they cannot by their owne that beeing deliuered from the power of darke nes they may be translated into the kingdome of their Lorde Here is neuer a word of traditiō The second place hath these words Sedetsi nullaratione indagetur nullo sermone explicetur verum est tamen quòd antiquitas c. But although it originall sinne may be sought out by noe reason by no speach it may be expressed yet is it true that by true Catholike faith from auncient time is preached and beleeued thoroughout the wholl Church which would neither exorcise nor exsufflate the children of the faithfull if shee did not deliuer them from the power of darkenes and from the prince of death Here the auncient doctrine of original sinne is confirmed by the olde ceremonies of exorcisme and exsufflation which were vsed in baptisme to signifie that infants were by that sacrament deliuered from the guilt of originall sinne by which they were vnder the power of darkenes and death But that these ceremonies were Apostolike traditions he saith not or that they are of necessitie to 〈◊〉 vsed in baptisme when the one of them namelie 〈◊〉 is not vsed at this day for ought I know in the Popish forme of baptisme The Moscouites in place of it as it seemeth vse excreation For when the Godfathers and Godmothers answere that they renounce the deuil they spit out one the earth as it were in signe of detestation In Saint Augustines time they vsed to blow out In the last place you saie he prooueth by the same tradition that we must offer vp the sacrifice of the masse for the dead lib. de cura pro mort agenda cap. 1. 4. serm 32. de verbis Apostoli Of the sacrifice of the Masse Saint Augustine speaketh nothing but that praiers were offered for the dead at the celebration of the Lordes supper which he calleth sacrifice he saith it was by authoritie of the whol Church which was notable in that custome and that the wholl Church obserued it as deliuered from their fathers But seeing the elder Church for more then an hundred yeares after Christ had no such custome nor doctrine and especiallie seeing the same custome is against faith taught in the holie scriptures that the dead in the Lord are blessed that iudgement followeth immediatelie after death c. The authoritie of faith and trueth is to be preferred before the tradition and custome of men Neither is it to be thought to haue proceeded from the Apostles which is disprooued by the writings of the Apostles the onelie certaine witnes of the doctrine deliuered by them which is necessarie for vs to beeleeue and follow And therefore this new sir Censurer doth greatlie abuse the olde saints whome he would haue patrones of his vnwritten verities partely in charging them to referre vnto tradition many things that they doe not partlie in drawing to doctrine necessarie that which they speake of ceremonies mutable not the least in picking out one or two ouersightes to be pardoned vnder colour of them to maintaine all the grosse heresies of Poperie that are intollerable The fourteenth section Whether the Iesuites speake euil of scripture Art 6. intituled Nose of waxe IF you had ser downe Master Charkes replie betweene your Censure and your defense as reason would you should haue done for men to iudge indifferentlie betweene both you might haue spared more then two pages which you haue spent in charging him with a slaunder of the Iesuites where he reporteth that they saie the scripture is a nose of waxe when they saie it is as a nose of waxe For no reasonable man can make any other sense of those wordes the scripture is a nose of waxe but euen the same that you confesse to be the saying of the Iesuites the scripture is as a nose of waxe as Master Charke telleth you And moreouer that Paiua saith the fathers
of Colene in a moste apt similitude called the scripture a nose of waxe and Pighius the leaden rule of the Lesbian building But now concerning the matter it selfe You would shift it of by saying The Iesuites doe compare the hereticall wresting and detorting of scripture vnso the bowing of a nose of waxe vpon certaine circumstances which are these First not in respect of the scripture it selfe but in respect of heretikes and other that abuse it and that before the rude people that cannot iudge thirdlie to the ende to flatter Princes or the people in their vices Thus much was said before in the Censure But it was replied that Andradius confesseth the fathers of Colene doe saie that the holie scripture is as a nose of wax So doth Pighius and it is a thing more commonlie knowen then that it can be denied Therefore the wresting of the scripture is not compared by them to the bowing of a waxen nose but the scripture it selfe to a nose of wax as that which is as easie to be drawne into any sense as a nose of wax may be turned euerie waie The wordes of Pighius are plaine Sunt enim scripturae velut caereus quidam nasus qui sicut hor sum illor sumque facilè se trahi permittit quo traxeris haud inuitus sequitur ita illae se flecti duci atque etiam in diuer sam sententiam trahi accomodarique ad quid-uis patiuntur nist quis veram illam inflexibilemque earundem amussim nempe Ecclesiasticae traditionis authoritatem communemque sententiam ilsdem adhibeat For the holie scriptures are as it were a certaine nose of wax which as it easelie suffereth it selfe to be drawne this waie and that waie and whether soeuer you draw it is followeth not vnwillinglie so also they doe suffer them selues to be bowed to be led and also to be drawen into a contrarie meaning and to be applied vnto what you will except a man lay vnto them that true inflexible rule of them namelie the authoritie and common vnderstanding of the Churches tradition These wordes declare if the sense of all Papists be the same that the Iesuites do not onelie compare the scripture it selfe but also that they make this comparison in respect of the scripture it selfe which suffereth it selfe as easelie to be wrested and abused as a nose of wax abideth to be bowed nor before the rude and ignorant onelie nor to flatter Princes and people in their vices alone but before any persons or to any purpose whatsoeuer and that there is not in them a certaine and infallible sense to iudge of the Churches doctrine or to finde out the true Church from all false congregations by the trueth taught in the scriptures but that the authoritie and common vnderstanding of the Popish Churches tradition is the onelie true sense inflexible rule of the holy scriptures wherebie also it is manifest though you denie it neuer so stoutlie that you doe impute the wresting of the scriptures vnto the imperfection of Gods worde set forth in them and not onelie to the malice of the wrester For if the will of God be but as well expressed in them as the will of princes is in their written lawes and proclamations the one maie as well be found out by reading and weighing of the holie scriptures as the other may be out of prophane writings especially where the spirit of God graunted vnto the praiers of the elect openeth their vnderstanding not onelie to conceiue as the naturall man maie by studie and ordinarie helpes the true scope and purpose of God vttered in them but also to beleeue and embrace whatsoeuer the Lord their God hath propounded in them Therefore though the scripture may be wrested to the destruction of the vngodlie as Saint Peter sheweth yet Master Charke telleth you that it cannot so be wrested but that still it remaineth the light vnto our feet and the lanterne vnto our steppes and euerie parte thereof is like the arme of a great Oke which cannot be so wreste but that with great force it will returne into the right position to the shame and perill of the wrester which answere of his you doe so dissemble as though you had neuer seene it And you doe wiselie seeing otherwise then by silence you could not auoid it But howsoeuer Master Charke storme you will defend your blasphemie of the nose of waxe not onelie in a kingdome where the Ghospell is preached but also in the kingdome of vs ministers where the letter of the scripture is worsse wrested by vs to all errors and licentiousnes then euerie waxen nose was yet bended to diuerse fashions O ye senseles papists had you neuer a man of moderat iudgement to set forth against vs but this loosetongued Gentelman which so he maie raile with full mouth against vs hath no care how his slaunders maie be coloured Doe we peruert the scriptures to all errors then surelie we holde no trueth there neuer was anie heresie neither can there be anie heresie but that with manie errors it maintaineth and holdeth manie truethes Yea the Deuill him-selfe the father oflies beleeueth some truethes and for shame dare not professe the maintenance of all errors We thinke verie hardlie of Antichrist and his brood the papists yet we maie not saie that they wrest the scriptures to all errors and licentiousnes for if they so did they should not deceaue so manie by shew of trueth in errors except they did professe some articles of trueth in deede As for the wresting of the Scripture to all licentiousnes let God and all the world of reasonable and indifferent men iudge how iustlie we maie be charged therewith If we be licentious in our liues God will finde it out and let man where he findeth it punish vs. But if we wilfully peruert the scriptures to the maintenance of all licentiousnes the Lord reward vs according to our deedes and be not mercifull to them that sinne of malicious wickednes But it is no fault in the scriptures saie you that they may be abused For Christ him-selfe was called the rocke of offence and the stone of scandall not for anie faulte or imperfection in him but through the wickednes of such as abuse that benefit So if the Iesuites had said no more but that the scripture maie be abused no man could haue found fault with them And Christ is called a stone of offence or stumbling not altogether in respect of the wicked that abuse him for he is called a stone moste precious and necessarie to build vpon of stumbling to those that refuse to build vpon him which meeting with him must either stumble and fall or els if it fall vpon them they must be ground to pouder But the the scripture is compared to a nose os wax because it is in their imagination that vse the comparison as pliant to follow euerie waie and to yeald as probable a sence one waie as an other as
which is but a short section or Chap er doth not charge Luther with this opinion of heretikes not to be burned but the Donatists whose fansie is renewed againe in the Anabaptists and Libertines As for Luther Contra Latomum deincendiariis handleth not this controuersie at all but onelie expostulateth with the deuines of Louane which burned his bookes without examination or Conuiction of them out of the word of God Manie men haue complained and that moste iustlie of the crueltie of the Papists in burning as heretikes the true saints martyrs and members of the Church whose faith and religion they were neuer hable to conuince of heresie by the authoritie of gods word But that no blasphemer or obstinate heretike maintaining blasphemie against the expresse and manifest trueth of God is to be punished by death I am persuaded he can bring no booke or author of any accompt that so holdeth Fourthlie he addeth that Luther by onelie scripture found the sacramentaries to be heretikes D. Fulk by the same scripture findeth that both parties are good Catholikes But as Luther erred in his opinion of the sacrament so he was ouer rash in condemning those whome he calleth sacramentaries neuerthelesse seing he erred of ignorance and inconsiderate zeale he hath found mercie with God and is not to be adiudged as a blasphemous heretike For neither the error he maintained is blasphemie in it selfe neither did he hold it contrarie to his knowledge but as he was ignorantlie persuaded with zeale of trueth though deceiued with error How Doctor Fulke prooueth this not onelie by scripture but also by example of auncient fathers erring in like cases and yet not to be condemned for heretikes you maie reade in the place by this answerer quoted and in his confutation of Popish quarrels His last example is of manie things which Master Whitgift doth defend against Thomas Cartwright to be lawfull by scripture as Bishops Dcanes Archdeacons officialls holy daies and an hundreth more which in Geneua are holden to be flat conirarie to the scripture There are manie things lawfull by scripture which yet are not necessarie to be vsed The forme of external gouernment and discipline of the Church is not so expreslie set downe in holie scriptures but that euetie particulare Church hath libertie and must of necessitie appoint manie things for order decencie and gouernment which are not in expresse termes conteined in the scriptures euen as god shall giue them grace to see what is moste expedient according to the difference of times places and persons for the building vp of the Church in trueth and loue Wherefore although the Church of Geneua in the forme of outward regiment rites and discipline differing from the Church of England do not vse the same things that we do yet it followeth not that they holde them to be flat contrarie to the scripture neither is our answerer hable soundlie to prooue that he doth so boldlie asseuere To proceede he telleth vs what aduantage herctikes haue by onelie scripture they make them-selues therebie iudges of Doctors Councels histories presidentes cusiomes prescriptions yea of the bookes of scripture sense it selfe reseruing al interpretation to them-selues But this is nothing so for howsoeuerheretikes take vppon them to control al things according to their fantasie yet haue they noe aduantage by onelie scripture but therebie maie be are confounded when they come to examination tri all And as for the professors of the Gospell which acknowledge the scriprure to be sufficiente to teach all thinges needful to be knownevnto saluation although they are by god him selfe made Iudges of the spirits of al men by exacting them vnto the trial of the word of god which is the onelie certaine rule of truth yet doe they not by priuate authoritie iudge of Councells doctors fathers customs c. But by that charge which is laide vpon them to iudge cōdemne euen the Angels from heauen if they should bring anie other Gospell then that which the Apostles haue preached without al arrogancie or insolencie against the Angels Councels Doctors Fathers whatsoeuer but in giuing god the glorie to be onely true al men to be liers no Angel to be credited except they speake by the spirite of God of whose speach we haue no certaine demonstration but in the holie scriptures whatsoeuer is agreeable vnto them The discerning of the bookes of scripture of the true sense of them is also committed vnto the Church the faithful members thereof that doutful bookes be iudged by those that without doubt are indited by the holy ghost deliuered to the Church by faithfull witnesses instruments of the holy ghost to be of soueraigne and perpetual authority in the Church and so are knowne and taken of the true Church from time to time in such sorte that although the same truth maie be found in other bookes yet as Saint Augustine saith they are not of the same authoritie because there is not such certentie of trueth As for the sense and interpretation of the holie scriptures it must be taken out of the scriptures them-selues which are alwaies the best and surest interpretation of them-selues in all points necessarie to be knowne with the aide of the gift of tongues the gift of knowledge the gift of interpretation in them that haue labored in finding out the sense thereof according to the analogie of faith which is comprehended in the scriptures and that in places so plaine and euident as they neede no interpretation and therefore cannot be wrested by damnable heretikes without great impudencie and against their owne conscience for which cause Saint Paul willeth an heretike after the first second admonition to be auoided as one who though he will not acknowledge the truth yet he is condemned in his owne conscience and sinneth vnto eternall damnation Wherefore Councells Fathers Doctors customs examples are by vs admitted but not hand ouer head without distinction but such so farre forth as they be true and faithful interpreters of the scripture by matters and places plaine certenly knowne opening matters places obscure and vnknowne Which is the office of an expounder not to determine by his owne authority of anothers meaning whereof as among men euetie man is the best in terpreter of his owne so is the holy ghost of him-selfe in the scriptures by him inspired of whose meaning where they be hard to be vnderstood no man can be certaine but either by his own plaine wordes or by plaine necessary conclusion out of his plaine words Now touching the Papists whome our answerer saith to be restrained from chopping and changing affirming and denying at their pleasures because they binde them-selues to other things beside the scriptures to which they giue souereigne authoritie as to councells auncient fathers traditions of the Apostles and primatiue Church with the like the matter is farre otherwise For whatsoeuer they prate of the soueraigntie of
the scriptures of the authoritie of councels auncient fathers traditions of the Apostles and primitiue Church they binde them selues to nothing but to the present Popes authoritie and determi nation in thinges which he may choppe and chaunge at his pleasure against which they admitte neither scripture Councell Fathers nor Church For example brieflie The scripture moste plainlie forbiddeh the worshipping of Images will they giue soueraigne authoritie to the scriptures All the primitiue Church for six hundred yeares after Christ condemned the worshipping of Images euen Pope Gregorie that allowed the vse of them shall the authoritie of the primatiue Church or of Pope Gregorie in this point ouerrule them No I warrant you they will set them al to schoole and learne them a new lesson Theodoretus Bishop of Cyrus and Gelasius Bishop of Rome doe in plaine wordes affirme that the substance of bread and wine doth remaine in the Lordes supper after consecration doth either the antiquitie of these fathers or the determination of the Bishop of Rome which otherwise they affirme neuer to erre in doctrine preuaile with them against their new here sie of transsubstantiation The councells of Constantiople the first and of Chalcedon decreed that the Bishop of Constantinople should haue equall authoritie and dignitie with the Bishop of Rome The councells of Constans and Basill determined that the Councell is aboue the Pope The councels of Constantinople the sixt and Nice the second condemned the Pope for an heretike will the Papists of these daies trow you stand to the determination of these Councells you maie be assured they will not But the traditions of the Apostles they holde fast and binde them-selues vnto yea verilie as long and as much as they list What beareth a greater shew of the Apostles traditions then the Canons of the Apostles which excommunicate a Bishop priest or deacon that putteth away his wiffe vnder pretence of religion which excommunicate anie of the cleargie that is present at the communion doth not communicate except he shewe a cause whie he doth not Which admmitted him that is maimed in his eie or other partes of his bodie being otherwise worthie vnto the office of a Bishop because the maime of the bodie doth not pollute a man but the filthines of the soules These such like traditions of the Apostles how are they regarded of our Traditioners euen as much as they list and that is neuer a whit at this time and yet these men binde them selues to Councells Fathers traditions primitiue Church you see how farre Yea you see that while they raile vpon vs for appealing to onelie scriptures they themselues relie vpon the present Popes authoritie onelie Let all indifferent men therefore iudge whether it be more safe for a Christian man to bind him-selfe to the authoritie of scriptures onelie or to the Popes authoritie onelie and whether claime a priuiledge of ease they that will admitte no testimonie irrefragable but onelie the scripture or they which chattering of many other things in the end conclude vpon the Church onelie which when it commeth to triall is nothing els but the Pope onelie for if all the Church saie it and the Pope denie it it is nothing worth with them and if the Pope affirme it thoughe all the Church denie it it must stand for paiment But seeing the sense and interpretation of scripture is the cheefe matter we haue to speake of let vs consider whether Master Charke be iustlie charged by our answerer to haue abused that scripture by interpretation which is the chiefe ground of his preface and which he saith is a full and plaine rule whereby to discerne and trie the spirites namelie the text of Saint Iohn 1. Iohn 4. Euerie spirite which confesseth Iesus Christ being come in the flesh is of God and euerie spirite which confesseth not Iesus Christ being come in the flesh is not of God and this is that spirit of Antichrist c. This text Master Charke doth so expound as that it conteineth a confession not onelie of the person of Christ but also of his office for which office sake that wonderfull person of God and man Iesus Christ was ordeined and sent into the world to be a Prophet alone to teach a King alone to rule a Priest alone to sanctifie vs and to reconcile vs to his father by the obedience of faith And if any spiritte shall teach that Christ is not our onelie teacher by his Gospell but that we must admitte vnwritten beleefe and traditions from we know not whome to be of like authoritie with the written worde Secondlie if any spirite make not Christ alone our King and head to rule vs by his holie spirite but teach that a mortal and sinfull man must sit in our consciences and for hatred or gaine which is his practise binde or loose at his pleasure lastlie if anie spirite impeach the all-sufficiencie and entire vertue of Christes sacrifice offered vp once for euer and teach that themselues must enforce it from day to day by the continuance of their daylie sacrifice of the Masse offered for the quick and the deade it appeareth manifestlie that such spirits are not of God c. This interpretation of Master Charke saith the answerer conteineth manie absurdities For first the auncient fathers did expound this place as of it selfe it is moste euident against the Iewes which denied Christ to haue taken flesh also against Ebion Cerinthus and other heretikes that denied the Godhead of Christ. Note here by the aduersaries confession that some places of scripture are of them selues moste euident whereof this is one against the Iewes other heretikes that deny the godhead of Christ. And I hope you shall see it shortly as euident against the Papists that denie his offices To this interpretation of the auncient fathers we agree that whosoeuer denieth the person of Christ or any thing proper to his person is of Antichrist But none of the auncient fathers doe affirme that this text is to be vnderstood against such enemies onelie as denie the Godhead or manhoode of Christ. For Augustine and Oecumenius do interpret it against all heretikes and schismatikes which although they confesse this matter in wordes yet denie it in deedes and Oecumenius against all wicked persons which haue not the spirite of Christ mortifying their vngodlie lustes which carie not the mortification of Christ in their bodie c. Augustine also expoundeth the place against all that breake charitie Omnes negant Iesum Christum in carne venisse qui violant charitatem All they denie Iesus Christe to haue come in the flesh which doe breake or violate charitie whie so because not onelie the person that came but the end whie he came must be considered in the interpretation of this place as Saint Augustine rightlie iudgeth or els all heretikes will after a manner in tongue and wordes confesse that Iesus Christ came in the flesh But Quaeramus saith
them peaceablie she was declared to be iust or iustified in the sight of men Therefore there are two kindes of iustification the one by faith before god the other by works before men therefore a man is not iustified by faith only but by works also which saying of S. Iamesis not repugnant to that we holde that a man is iustified before god sola fide by faith alone or by faith without the workes of the lawe as S. Paule saieth which is alone which comprehendeth al good works as also the examples of Abraham and Dauid in the 4. Chapter to the Romanes doc plainelie declare where the Apostle speaketh expreslely of circumcisiō which was a worke of obedience following the faith of Abraham And Dauid pronounceth the blessednes of a man to whome the Lord imputeth righteousnes without workes which must needes be vnderstood euen of workes following faith because Dauid speaketh of himselfe and of all men generallie that shall obtaine blessednes by the grace of god without merite of workes For to him that worketh reward is not imputed according to grace but according to debt Againe the Apostle writing to the Galathians which were faithful speaketh generally It is manifest that by the lawe no man is iustified before god for the iust shal liue by faith By which texts many more the conclusion is moste necessarie that before God workes following faith doe not iuslifie but faith alone without workes yet not a dead but a liuing faith which worketh by loue Further he saith they haue expresselie for absolution whose sinnes ye forgiue are forgiuen whose sinnes ye retaine are retained Iohn 20. but we haue no where that Priests cannot forgiue or retaine sinnes in earth But the controuersie is not whether the Ministers of God haue power to forgiue or retaine sinnes for we beleeue that they haue such power but whether absolute power properlie to forgiue sinnes and how the same is to be exercised is the question For we beleeue that God onelie hath power absolutelie properlie to remit sinnes according to the scripture man by declaring Gods will pleasure Yet againe they haue expresselie The doers of the lawe shall be iustified Rom. 2. And we saie euen as much but because none is found a doer of the lawe we saie with the same Apostle that it is manifest that no man is iustified before God by the lawe But our answerer inferreth moreouer that we haue no where that the law required at Christians hands is impossible or that the doing therof iustifieth not Christians yes we haue it expressely That which was impossible of the law in as much as it was weake by the flesh God sending his sonne in the similitude of sinfull flesh c. If there had beene a lawe giuen that had bene able to giue life righteousnes in deede had bene of the lawe but the scripture hath concluded all vnder sinne that the promis by the faith of Iesus Christ might be giuen to them that belecue Againe by the workes of the lawe no flesh shal be iustified before him therefore no Christians by the workes of the lawe shal be iustified before him Moreouer we are saued by grace through faith not of workes Ergo Christians for none els are saued are iustified through faith without workes Yet againe they haue expresselie Psal. 75. Vowe ye and render your vowes we haut no where vowe ye not or if you haue vowed breake your vowes we confesse the Prophet willeth the people to vowe yet he meaneth onelie thinges lawfull and in their power to performe we bid no man to breake his vowe if it be lawful and possible but if he haue vowed to goe a pilgrimage which is Idolatrie or to liue vnmaried which is not able to liue continentlie we exhort him to repent of his wicked or vnaduised vowe to serue God as he hath appointed or to vse the remedie that God hath prouided They haue againe expreslie Keepe the traditions which ye haue learned either by worde or epistle 2. Thess. 2. we haue no where the Apostles left noe traditions to the Church vnwritten Saint Paull willeth the Thessalonians to keepe the traditions or doctrine which he had deliuered vnto them either by word of mouth or by his epistle This prooueth not that the Apostles left any traditions which are no where written in the holie scripture because they were not all written in the epistle of Saint Paul to the Thessalonians But we haue expresselie that the holie scriptures are able to make vs wise to saluation to make the man of God perfect and prepared to all good works which things seing we haue fufficientlie in the holie scriptures we neither regard nor receiue any other doctrine vnder name of tradition of the Apo stles or of Angels from heauen Still they haue expresselie If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commaundements and when he said he did that already if thou wilt be perfect go sel all thou hast giue to the poore follow me And we haue no where that either the commaundements of God cannot be kept or that we are not bound vnto them or that there is no degree of life one perfecter then another We graunt that who so by good deeds will seeke to enter into life as that yong man did must doe the deedes of the commaundements which if he can doe he shal liue by them but albeit he boasted that he had kept the commaundements yet it followeth not that he did keepe them indeede and as god required but was a blinde hipocrite and sought to iustifie him-selfe according to the heresie of the Pharisies That we are not bound to keepe the commaundements as neere as God will giue vs grace is no article of ours but a slaunder of his Finallie we denie that anie mortall mans life is perfect yet we graunt that some mens liues come neerer to perfection then other some Neither doth our Sauiours words include perfection in selling his goodes nor in giuing them to the poore for if a man bestowe all his goodes to feede the poore and haue not loue he is nothing but he addeth that he must followe Christ and take vp his crosse and so by Christs grace he shal attaine vnto perfection which he falselie imagined that he he had obtained by a pharizaical obseruation of the lawe this fauoreth not Monkes and friers more then hipocrites and liers Beside this They haue expresselie worke your owne saluation with feare and tremhling Phil. 2. we haue no where either that a man can worke nothing toward his owne saluation being holpen with the grace of God or that a man should make it of his beliefe that he shall be saued without all doubt or feare The saying of Saint Paull we acknowledge that men should worke out their owne saluation with feare and trembling together with the next verse following for it is God that worketh in
of necessarie collection For Logicke would stil iudge whether such meaning could be necessarilie gathered out of such wordes Seeing we are not bound to creditte any writings since the diuine inspired scriptures but so farre as they agree with the scriptures and receiue the light of trueth from them But those auncient writers to whome he would haue vs to referre our selues liued so many hun dred yeares after the Apostles and Euangelists the writers of the new testament as they could no more declare to them then to vs their meaning in their writings and therefore those auncient fathers which ground purgatorie prayer to saintes sacrifice of the altar vse of the crosse c. beside tradition vpon the scriptures as the answerer saith must shew the necessarie collection of them by the iudgement of demonstration seeing they neuer sawe the writers neuer heard them speake nor possiblie could liuing so long after them or els they can carie no credit of necessarie collection outof the expresse wordes of holy scripture As for tradition without scripture since God hath giuen the holie scripture is as good as the credit of men may be without a warrant from God A fourth waie of triall of spirites with him is Councells by which olde heretikes haue beene tried and they are content to referre themselues to all the Christian Councells that euer haue beene since Christ died We acknowledge Christian councells to be a godlie meane to exa mine and trie the spirites but according to the scriptures onelie for matters of faith as in the example of the first Councell of Christendome Act. 15. where the question was determined by authoritie of the scriptures But that the Papists dare abide the triall by al Councells it is false for they admit none but by the Popes consent they admitte nothing in them but that the present Pope doth allow Many Councells in Aphrica forbad appellations to Rome the general Councell of Chalcedon made the Bishop of Constantinople of equal dignitie with the Bishop of Rome the Bishop of Constantinople condemned and accursed a Pope sor an heretike the Pope of that time confirmed it yet now it is not holden for Catholike But I will spare examples vntill this lustie gallant dare aduenture the triall whereof he maketh the challenge But seeing there are many points of controuersies betweene vs and the Papists which in no auncient councell came in question he bobs vs with the last most learned Godlie and generall Councell of Trent which was gathered of purpose for triall of hercticall spirites whereunto all safe conduct being offered we refused to come for triall As though the Catholikes would haue come to the Councell of Nice if nothing might haue beene therein determined but that which pleased Arius or to the Councell of Constantinople if nothing might haue beene concluded but that Macedonius would allow Or to the Councells of Ephesus and Chalcedon if when all had beene saide that which liked Nestorius and Eutiches must haue bene holden for Catholike Such is our case we accuse the Pope to be an heritike yea and to be Antichrist the Pope will admit no councell but where he him selfe is iudge nor any to haue any voice determinatiue but onely such as are sworne to maintaine his heresies and ambition It is great pitie but the Protestants must come to such a councell Such were many councells holden of olde time by heretikes but for the most part not frequented by the Catholikes Some of our profession were at Trent but what entertainement had they euen such as their aduersaries could afforde them they were not permitted to haue any speach but as pleased their enemies wherefore when they saw noe equitie vsed as they could looke for no better before they came they left the heretikes to consult among them-selues by example of auncient fathers in like Chapters of heretikes The sift waie of triall is to referre the matter to the olde Doctors which liued before the controuersies began of which we haue spoken latelie and this we haue often vsed and still vse against the Papists in most controuersies although the authoritie of man is no certaine rule to trie which is the truth of God Augustine against Iulian vsed this waie rightlie first confuting the Pelagians by the authoritie of the holie scripture and then by the testimonie of the auncient fathers also Theodosius also in a case determined by the holie scripture did politikelie circumuent the heretikes after the aduise of Sisinius the Nouatian by the suggestion of Nectarius the Catholike to put them to a foile which had good successe because the others cause was naught But Epiphanius hath a hard saying against vs as our answerer thinketh It is enough to say against all heresies the catholike church hath not taught this the holy fathers haue not admitted this But I wene Epiphanius doth not meane that it is enough to saie so except men can prooue it to be so For els it is aseasy for heretikes to saie so against Catholikes as for Catholikes against heretikes And here out answerer voucheth Epiphanius quoting onelie lib. 2. contra haere but no Chapter of so long a booke wherebie knowing him to be a common foyster we maie well suspect his honestie in this voucher vntill he shew vs in what Chapter we shall finde it The sixtwaie of triall with him is to consider which is the Catholike or vniuersall Church or great multitude of Christians out of which the other part first departed But to consider which is the Catholike or vniuersal Church is no waie of triall but the matter to be tried And the description that he maketh of the Church is as vncerten the great multitud of Christians out of which the other part first departed For the Catholike Church is not alwaies the greatest multitude When the East Church was deuided from the West the one was as great a multitude as the other yea considering the number of prouinces of the East and the largenesse of them it was the greater And one heresie some times departeth out of another as the Rogatians from the Donatists the Eunomians from the Arrians the Iacobites from the Eutichians c. Neither doth Saint Augustine against the Manichecs make the consent of people and the name of Catholike of them-selues to be a sufficient waie of trial but among many thinges which altogether held him beside the authoritie of the holie scriptures he accounteth these which with the truth are a good confirmation but can be no preiudice against the manifest truth as he confesseth in the same place To the iudgement of Vincentius we will subscribe to holde that which euerie where which alwaies which of all hath beene beleeued so hath no point of Poperie Hoc est etenim verè proprièque Catholicum quòd ipsa vis nominis ratioque declarat quod omnia verè vniuersaliter comprehendit For that is truelie and properlie Catholike saith Vincentius which thing the verie force and reason of the name declareth
will so that she was among them baptized and tooke vpon her the forme of a Nunne whome her father would by force and stripes haue compelled to returne to the Catholike Church but he was forbidden by S. Augustine to vse such force if she would not come with a good will This maie touch Papistes also which haue and do professe nunnes monkes and Priestes yong vndiscret persons against the consent of their parentes but how it should be applied against vs I cannot see But here the notebooke was to blame to quote these places for such purposes the answerer I hope is not so impudent that if he had read the places him-selfe he would for shame haue noted them against vs or els haue added as he doth Finally he noteth it as heretical in the Arrians to appeall from traditions to onelie scripture lib. 1. Contra Maximinum In all which booke there is no such matter for neither doth Maximinus appeale from traditions neither is he noted for so doing by Saint Augustine In deede he often times boasteth of the authoritie of holie scriptures and in that conference he manie times calleth for testimonies of holie-scripture and professeth that he is wil be a disciple of the holie scriptures But for this he is not reproued of Saint Augustine but still pressed with the authoritie of holie scriptures whereof he falselie boasted and when he doth but once call to witnes the councell of Ariminum Saint Augustine in his answer telleth him plainlie that he ought not to alleadge with anie preiudice that Councell against him as neither him selfe the Councell of Nice against the Arrians but requireth that the matter be decyded by authority of the scriptures which are common to bothe partes But Irenaeus in deede doth note it as hereticall in the Valentinians to appeale from the holie scripture to traditions without the which they affirmed that the trueth could not be found in the scriptures which they accused to be diuerselie or doubtfullie written as the Papists do in comparing them to a nose of wax or a leaden rule So the contrarie to that he falselie saith was noted as hereticall by S. Augustine is in trueth noted as hereticall by S. Irenaee But Optatus before Saint Augustine saith he noted it as hereticall in the Donatistes to breake altars whereupon the bodie and blood of Christ were kept as the wordes of Optatus are You must vnderstand that these altars were communion tables made of wood and remooueable couered with a linnen cloth in the time of celebration of which in spite of Catholike Religion some they brake and some they seraped onelie for which follie they are derided by Optatus So plaied the Papistes with the communion tables in the beginning of Queene Maries raigne calling them in despite oister bordes and breaking them with as great furie and without lawfull authoritie as the Donatistes did The like parts they plaied with the communion cups of which he also complaineth as also challenging to them-selues the Church yeardes that the bodies of the Catholikes might not be buried in them So did the Papists in Queene Maries time But the wordes of Optatus are saith our answerer that the bodie and blood of Christ were kept vpon those altars He would haue vs thinke that the sacrament of the altar was kept in a pixe as among the Papistes But the wordes of Optatus are not so For albeit he calleth the communion table an altar as it was commonlie called at that time yet he saith not that the bodie and blood of Christ was kept vpon it his wordes are quid est enim altare nisi sedes corporis sanguinis Christi For what is the altar but the seat both of the bodie and blood of Christ And lest you should thinke that it was a permanent seat wherein the sacrament was kept as it is among the Papistes he saith further speaking of the breaking and scraping of these wooden altars Quid vos offenderat Christus cuius illic per certa momenta corpus sanguis habitabat what had Christ offended you whose bodie and blood at certaine moments of time did dwell there By which wordes he sheweth that the sacrament of the bodie and blood of Christ taried no longer there then vntil the time of the distribution of the same vnto the communicants As for breaking downe of Idolatrous altars and prophaning of all instrumentes belonging to them we haue the word of God as a sufficient warrant so that we cannot iustlie be likened to the Vandales that were Arrians or to Iulian the Apostata which defaced the Religion of the Christians so long as our Religion by the scriptures can not be conuinced of heresie or Apostasie For as heretikes and ethnikes destroied the Religion of Christ with the places and instruments vsed in the exercise thereof so did the Christians serue the Tempells of Idolls and all other monuments of gentilitie and heresie The Papists do no more spare our holie Bibles then we do their prophane bables They breake our tables and cuppes as we do their altars and challices they burne our bodies as we doe their Idolls Finallie it is the Religion that must iustifie or condemne these actions the actions are no sufficient trial of the trueth of Religon Here againe he appealeth to publike disputation or to any other indifferent waie of triall that we dare afford him As for publike disputation we dare if the Magistrates thinke it conuenient but a most in different waie of triall by writing their arguments in syllogismes Doctor Fulke offered for certaine yeares agoe before Campian crept forth with his seditious challenge the offer still remaineth take vp his gloue you Papists if ye dare As for the seditious commendation of Campian and Sherewyn condemned and executed for high treason where with he hath neuer done I will omitte That all heresie is beggerrie which he laboureth to prooue out of Saint Augustine and that the Maiestie of the Catholike cause is greater then heresie can oppresse we doe willinglie graunt Onely let not the maiestie of Christian religion be esteemed by the multitude or wordlie pow er of them which professe it wherein yet the Protestantes are not much inferiour to the Papists at this time but by the riches and glorie of Gods truth reuealed in his holie word wherein Poperie whensoeuer triall is made sheweth it selfe like a moste filthie roge and miserable beggar though she seeke cloakes of eloquence learning authoritie of men or any such like things to couer her And among all that in these times haue taken vpon them to defend her there is not a more beggerlie marchant then this proud answerer who hauing no reading of his owne nor any other good quality of a defender but a brasen face an heape of scornefull words is faine to scrape all his patches of learning out of some other mens notes or suggestions in which he is as voyde of knowledge as a beggar is of honor or riches The
the workes of nature or will which are in vs but by the he lie ghoste which is geuen vnto vs which both helpeth our infirmitie and worketh with our health for that is the grace of God by Iesus Christ our Lord. to whome with the father and the holie ghoste be ascribed eternitie and goodnes for euer In this discourse of S. Augustine is declared that the commaundements of God are made possible and not heauie to be fulfilled by the grace of God nor by the strength of man either of nature or will and that by two meanes faith and loue Faith by which we craue obtaine forgiuenes of our imperfection and loue by which we cherefully endeuour to accomplish in work so much as we can which we can not do perfectly in this life in as much asno mans heart is pure in this life no mans loue is perfect in this world yet faith purifying our harts that by themselues are vnclean obtaineth as the same 's Augustine saith that which the law commaundeth But how far is this from the popish assertion to wit The law is not abooue our abtlitie to keepe it The cursse that you cite out of Augustine Serm. 191. and Ierorme explan Symb. ad Damasum is but a crack of a broken bladder in stead of a thunderbolte For both the sermon and the explanation are counterfeit stuffe being all one word forword except a litle 〈◊〉 flue in the beginning and the end and yet are most impudentlieascribed both to Augustine and Ierome But that ne ther of both is author of that sentence I wil prooue by 〈◊〉 of Saint Ierome who expresselie affirm ah that which the sermon and explanation accurseet We cursse the blasphemie of them saie the counterfeiters which saie that anie thing impossible is commaunded by God to man and that the commaundements of God cannot be kept of euerie one but of all in common Saint lerome dialog aduers. Pelag. lib. 1. saith Possibilia praecepit 〈◊〉 ego fateer Sed haec possibilia cuncta singuli habere non possumus non imbeciliitate naturae ne calumniam facias deo sed animilassitudine quae 〈◊〉 simul semper non potest habere virtutes God commaunded things possible and that I confesse But all these possible thinges euerie one of vs can not haue through weakenes of nature lest thou shouldest slaunder God but through wearines of minde which can not haue all vertues together and alwaies And his whole discourse in that dialogue is to prooue that no man can be without sinne the contrarie whereof is flat Pelagianisine He expoundeth also at large how the commaundements of God are possible and how vnpossible which maie be seene of anie man that will read his writings against the Pelagians and therfore it is very iniurious vnto him to make him a patrone of that sentence which he put posedlie and plentifullie impugneth To conclude Chrysostome and Basile meane not that a perfect obseruation of Gods law is possible in this life but that God geueth grace in some measure to keepe them to those that are borne 〈◊〉 in Christ in whome onelie is performed that which was impossible by the law as the A postle saith These fathers and diuerse other whose authority the Pelagians abused as you do to vpholde their heresie by such speeches meant to accuse the negligence and slothfulnes of men in keepeing Gods commaundements not to extoll the power and abilitie of mans free will to keepe them as Saint Augustine prooueth by manie testimonies taken out of their writinges in his treatises against the Pelagians The eleuenth section of de facing the scriptures and doctrines by tradition THe Iesuites you saie do not vse these termes of defacing that the scripture is imperfect maimed or lame and thereof I will not contend but the same in effect they holde as Master Charke saith when they affirme that all things necessarte to saluation are not contained in the scripture Your similitude of a marchant leauing his commaundements partelie in writings and partelie by word of mouth and referring the resolution of doubtes vnto his wife is not sufficient in this case For our Sauiour Christ liueth for euer whereas his seruants and the men of whome his Church which is his spouse consisteth are changed in euerie generation So that there can be no certaintie of his commaundements but onelie by his writings which if they containe not all thinges necessarie to saluation they are imperfect lame and maimed And where you saie that Saint Augustine prooueth the contrarie at large lib. 1. cont Cresc c. 32. it is vtterlie vntrue For he saith expresselie concerning the question of rebaptising them that were baptized by heretikes Sequimur sanè nos in hac re etiam Canonicarum authoritatem certissimam scripturarum We truelie doe follow in this matter also the most certaine authoritie of the Canonicall scriptures whereunto he adioineth the consent of the Catholike Church after some disceptation about the matter whose counsell agreeable to the holie scripture no man doubteth bur it is to be followed Theverie same doctrine you saie teacheth the said father lib. de side operibus cap. 9. and also ep 66. ad Don. In the former is no worde to the purpose he speaketh of the Eunuch whome Philip baptized whose confession of Christ being verie shorte some thought to be sufficient for anie man that should receaue baptisme whereas there is a more distinct knowledge and particuler explication of this faith in other places of scripture set downe that is to be required of them that are catechised and come to baptisme In the last quotation I thinke there is a faulte either in your Printer or in your notebooke which setteth downe ep 66. for ep 166. which is directed to the Donatistes whereas the other is to Maximus But in this epistle to the Donatistes there is nothing that prooueth this matter that the scriptures containe not all things necessarie to saluation Onelie he exhorteth the Donatistes to vnitie shewing that out of the same scriptures which teach Christ to be the head his bodie the Church is to be discerned and learned Touching the twelue pointes of doctrine set downe by the Censure as not conteined expresselie in the scripture and yet to be beleeued Master Charke answereth that seuen of them are in scripture the rest not necessarie to be beleeued But here you saie the question is of expresse scripture and not of any farre fet place that by interpretation may be applied to a controuersie If you meane by expresse scripture that which is expressed in so many wordes as the thing in cōtrouersy we deny that we haue anysuch question with you For we holde that any thing which by necessary demonstration can be concluded out of the scripture is as true as necessary to be beleeued as that which is expressed in plaine wordes And so we meane when we saie all thinges necessarie to saluation are conteined in the holie scriptures And as for your
the Lordes daie Here you cauill that there is no mention of Saturdaie or sondaie much lesse of celebration of either and least of all of the changeing of the Sabbath into an other daie But if it please your Censurship are you ignorant what day of the weeke is called dies Dominicus the Lordsday whether saturdaie or sondaie if it be sondaie as al professors of Christes name confesse here is as much mention thereof as is needfull for the daie into which the change is made Or if that be not sufficient you maie haue further Act. 20. 7. 1. Cor. 16. 2. And whie is the first of the Sabbath called the Lordes daie but in respect of the celebration there of in honour of the redemption of the world by Christ For otherwise all daies of the weeke are the Lordes daies in respect of their creation Thirdlie seeing the Lordes daie was one daie in the weeke vsed for the assemblie of the Church for their spirituall exercises of Religion it is certaine that the change of the Iewish Sabbath was made into that daie except you would be so waywatd to saie there were two daies in euerie weeke appointed by God to be celebrated whereas the lawe of God requireth but one and giueth libertie of bodelie exercise in sixe daies So that the change of the Sabbath daie is sufficientlie prooued out of the Scripture into the Lordes daie The sixt point is about foure Gospells and the Epistle to the Romanes which Master Charke saith to be prooued out of the scripture but yet he quoteth no place of scripture where onelie he saith the inscription expresseth the names of the writers But what a mocker is this you saie Are the bare names of the Apostles sufficient to prooue that they were written by them who can prooue by scripture that these names are not counterfet as in the Epistle to the Laodiceans in the Gospells of Bartholomew and Thomas c. But abide you sir your question hath two branches the one that the 4. Go spells are true Gospells the other that the epistle to the Romanes was written by Saint Paul and not that to the Laodiceans To the former it is answered that they are prooued by other vndoubted bookes of the scripture both of the olde testament and the new secing they declare that to be fullfilled of Christ which was spoken in the lawe in the Prophetes and in the Psalmes To the other it is answered that admitting the Epistle to the Romanes to be scripture the inscription of his name is sufficient to prooue that it was written by Saint Paull And so of therest Although the name of the writer is not materiall vnto saluation when the booke is receiued to be Canonicall as diuers bookes of scripture are receiued whose writer is vnknowne That Epistle which is called to the Laodicians is not receiued and therefore the inscription is vnsufficient as the Gospelles of Bartholomew and Thomas and such like which are knowne to be countefet by the dissent they haue from the other canonicall scriptures Whereas you require one place of Scripture to prooue all the foure Gospelles to be canonicall you declare your wrangling and wayward spirit But name you anie one point of Doctrine writen in anie of those foure Gospells and the same shall be aduouched by other textes of scripture and so maie eucrie point conteined in them if neede were But you affirme that Origen saith he reiecteth the Gospell of Saint Thomas onelie for that the tradition of the Church receiued it not Which is false He saith he hath read the Gospell after Thomas after Mathias and manie other Sed in his omnibus nihil aliud probamus niss quod Ecclesia idest quatuor tantùm euangelia recipienda But in all these we allowe nothing els but that which the Church alloweth that is that onelie foure Gospells are to be receiued In these wordes he affirmeth that he approoueth the iudgment of the Church he saith not that the iudgement or traditions of the Church was the onelie cause whie he reiected those Gospells for he said before they were receiued of heretikes and wherefore but in maintenance of their heresie which is contrarie to the holie scriptures That all counterfet Go spells were reiected by the Church it is confessed but the Church had this iudgement of discretion confirmed by the canonical scriptures against which Epiphanius saith nothing But when Faustus the Manichie denied the Gospell of Saint Mathew saie you saith not S. Augustine Mathaei Euangelium probatum aduersus Faustum Manichaeum per traditionem The Gospell of Mathew was alleged against Faustus the Manichie by tradition August lib. 28. Cont. Faust. c. 2. If you aske me I saie no he hath no such wordes Yet doth he auouch the Gospell of Saint Mathew in that Chapter by testimonie of the Church from the Apostles by continuall succession euen vnto his time against the Maniches but in far other words then you haue set downe in steed of Saint Augustines wordes by which the reader maie once against perceiue how impudentlie and ignorantlie you ailedge whatsoeuer the note booke which was neuer of your own gatheriug because you vnderstood it not did minister vnto you For these are the wordes of the collector of your notes not of S. Augustine Maie not the papists haue great ioie of such a Cenfure defender Yet you triumph like a Iustie champion and aske what can be more euident then all this to prooue our opinion of the necessitie of tradition to confound the fonde madnes of this poore Minister Alas poore defender what waightie euidencethou hast brought to prooue the necessity of tradition which prooueth thee to be a blind beggerlie yet a bolde brocher of other mens notes which thou vnderstandest not thy selfe The seuenth doctrine which is required to be prooued out of the scripture is that God the father begat his sonne onelie by vnderstanding him-selfe Here Master Charke in steede of these darke wordes out of Thomas how the father begat the sonne wisheth cleare and perfect wordes in so high a mysterie which you saie are plaine and vsuall to those which haue studied any thing in diuinitie As though there were no diuinitie in the holie scriptures and so many of the auncient fathers which haue neither this question nor these wordes but that al diuinity were included in the brest of Thomas Aquinas and such doctors as he was That he quoteth a place or two of the scripture to prooue that Christ was the onelie begotten sonne of God you make smal account of seeing the question is of the māner how this generation maybe which the Church de fendeth against the aduersaries And here you insult against M. chark as ignorant in those high points of diuinitie whereas Catholiks know what the Church hath determined herein against heretikes and infidels as though either of both cared for the Churches determination if the one were not vanquished by scripture the other by right reason
third question you haue what difference is betweene these speaches namelie of proceeding and begotten which question you saie with the rest though Master Charke seeme ignorant in them all and not to vnderstand so much as the verie 〈◊〉 themselues yet Catholike diuines know what the Church hath determined herein But concerning this question Saint Augustine shall answere for our ignorance Cont. Maximin lib. 3. cap. 14. Quid autem inter nasci procedere incersit de illa excellentissima natura loquens explicare quis potest Non omne quod procedit nascitur quamuis omne procedar quod nascitur 〈◊〉 omne quod bipes est homo est quam nis bipes sit omnis qui homo est haec scio Distinguere autem inter illam generationem hanc processionem nescio non valeo non sufficio Ac per hoc quia illa ista est ineffabilis stcut Propheta de filio loquens alt Generationem eius quis enarrabit ita de spiritu sancto verissimè dicitur processionem eius quis enarrabit c. What difference is betweene begotten proceeding speaking of that moste excellent nature whoe is able to expresse Not all that proceedeth is begotten although al proceedeth that is begotten As not euerie two legged thing is a man although euerie one is two legged that is a man Those thinges I know But to distinguish betweene that generation and this procession I know not I am not able I am not sufficient And for this reason because both that and this is vnspeakeable as the Prophet speaking of the sonne saith whoe shall declare his generation so of the holie ghost it is saide moste trulie whoe shall declare his procession This is Saint Augustines iudgement of this question Yea this is the Master of the sentences iudgement also as well of this question as of the proceeding of the sonne from the father against you Yet you saie of these as wel of as the other they are no lesse to be beleeued then other mysteries of the trinitie wherewith your conclusion is that you would not haue troubled Master Charke if you had supposed him so grosse therein as by examination you finde him Alacke poore Sir William A lacke for pitie what high points of learning you haue shewed which in the Master of the sentences whome soeuer he wil of an hundred schoolemen that wrote vpon him euerie sophister may finde mooued debated and defined in lesse then one daies studie no meruaill then if Master Charke be so grosse in them as you by examination finde him But while you in your owne imagination are so subtile in them that you thinke your crest perceth the clowdes you haue bewraied more shamefull proude ignorance then any of vs would haue suspected that it might be found in such a great Champion of the Papistes such a Lorde he censuter such a doughtie defender When in some of the questions propounded by your selfe you neither know the doctrine of the scripture the iudgement of the auncient fathers the determination of your Church nor the conclusion of your owne schoole doctors in whole mysteries neuertheles you would seeme to be an other Mercurie For the rest of the handes that you draw against Doctor Fulke you are answered in this consutation of popish quarrelles from pag. 48. vntill pag. 55. And where you saie that euerie litle gesse at our pleasure is sufficient to prooue what we will whereas no testimonies of your part will serue except they be so plaine and euident as by no waits they maie be auoyded and thereupon charge vs to be Lordes of the scriptures it is as manie other of yours a detestable slaunder For as I haue shewed before in matters necessarie to saluation we admit no gesses but either manifest wordes of scripture or els that which is necessarilie concluded out of manifest wordes and principles confessed and such if you haue anie bring them forth and we will hearken vnto them Ouer against the article of punishing heretiks by death which you saie was a long time denied by our selues to be allowable by scripture you note in the margent Luther against Latomus de incendiariis of burners For what purpose I maruell seeing in that booke he complaineth of the Louanistes not for burning heretikes but for burning of his bookes For the mention which Saint Paull is thought of some to make of an Epistle written to the Laodicenses you are not a litle netled that Master Chark condemneth both you and Saint Ieromes translation of ignorance You saie he should not obiect ignorance so peremptorilie to you you ought not so rigorously to haue beene reprehended and you name a great manie auncient writers which may be sufficient to wipe awaie Master Charkes bitter reproch against you But let vs see howrigorously and bitterly he hath delt with you yea how peremtorilie he obiecteth ignorance to you by his own wordes The Episile to the Laodiceans although manie make mention of it Paull maketh none so that either you ignorantlie passed ouer the greeke or willfullie addicted your selfe to the olde translation being in this place plainlie corrupted For by the originall Paull speaketh of an Epistle from Laodicea and not writen to the Laodicenses as you vntrulie assirme Here is all that he saieth you are a daintie Parnell that count your selfe so rigorouflie reprehended and so bitterlie reproched in those wordes where ignorance is not peremptorilie obiected as you saie but either that or willful addiction to the olde translation which I know not vpon what ground you doe so peremtorilie call S. Ieromes translation Master Charke hath more cause to complaine of you for that you affirme that he saith the greeke text hath of an Epistle written by S. Paull from Laodicea For he saith not an Epistle written by Saint Paull but from Laodicea by whome soeuer it was written Where you cite manie that thought mention to be made of one written by Saint Paull to the Laodiceans he confesseth as much But it is more against Master Charke that you haue two Greeke editions the one of Pagnine the other of Plantine which make for you as you affirme But what if you be deceiued in them as great a clarke as you would seeme to be that maie not be touched with the least suspicion of ignorance The most of the copies both printed and written haue 〈◊〉 the Epistle from Laodicea Your two editions leaue out the preposition and then it must be translated that Epistle of Laodicea which it seemeth your vulgar interpreter followed in sense though not in wordes which saith eam quae Laodicensiumest that which is of the Laodiceans Where is there now in anie of these that which maketh for you that Saint Paull speaketh of an Epstle written by him to the Laodicenses For the Epistle of Laodicea which your two greeke editions haue and the Epistle of the Laodicenses which your vulgar translation hath cannot signifie an Epistle written to the Laodicenses but from
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which are able to make thee wise you harpe onelie vpon the word of instructing which the vulgar interpreter vseth not sufficient to answere the greeke verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and yet if it be rightlie vnderstood as perhappes he meant it signifieth to furnish and not to teach properlie so the sense might be that the scripture is able to furnish thee with knowledge to saluation and that 〈◊〉 a sufficiencie Now to your pelting cauilles You aske if the Scriptures which can shew Timothie the waie to saluation and bring him also to it if he will follow them be sufficient for the wholl Church so that all Doctrine by tradition is superfluous I answere yea For there is but one waie to saluation for all the Church But you obiect that euerie Epistle of Saint Paull enstructeth a man to saluation yet it not sufficient for the wholl Church I answere that euerie Epistle of Saint Paull is not sufficient to instruct a man to saluation or to make him wise vnto saluation But that which Saint Paull spaketh is of the wholl scripture not of euery epistle For you might as well obiect that euery chapter and verse instructeth a man toward saluation rather then to saluation but not sufficientlie yet the wholl is able to make a man wise vnto saluation Your second obiection is that the Apostle speaketh principallie of the olde Testament and will Master Charke saie that the olde Testament is sufficient to Christian men for their saluation without anie other writt Yea I warrant you for there is no Doctrine in the new but it was taught in the olde Saint Paull affirmeth that he said nothing but that which the Prophetes and Moses had spoken of thinges to be performed The new Testament hath no other Doctrine then the olde onelie it testifieth the performance of those thinges in Christ which the olde Testament foreshewed to be performed Againe because you grate so much vpon the exclusion of other writt Saint Paull addeth by faith in Iesus Christ which containeth all that is written in the new Testament concerning the storie of performancet and seales of this faith And if the olde were sufficient how much more is the olde the new together a rich aboundant Doctrine The 〈◊〉 that you make against his translation of the wholl Scripture which you would referre to euerie Scripture is answered before the translation must be according to the circumstance of the place Euerie Scripture which is euerie seuerall booke or euerie seuerall Chapter or euerie seuerall verse is not able to make the man of God perfect and perfectlie prepared to euerie good worke but the wholl is therefore the translation must be the whole scriptures and not euerie scripture But now to your tow reasons In the first you saie that Saint Paull could not meane to Timothie of all the scriptures together which we now vse for that all was not then written To this you confesse that he answereth there was inough written then for the susficient saluation of men of that time and therest is not superfluous But this you saie is from the purpose Yea is how so I praie you you answere it was sufficient with the supplie by worde of 〈◊〉 vnwritten but that is contrarie to the purpose for Master Charke telleth you that from the time that any 〈◊〉 was written that scripture contanied sufficient 〈◊〉 to saluation without anie supply of anie other Doctrine that was not in that Scripture comprehended although preaching and other meanes were necessarie to reach men which is beside the purpose Before the scripture was written the same doctrine in substance was deliuered by reuelation that afterwarde was written The continuance thereof was not onelie by bare tradition but also in euerie age renewed by reuelation Againe the age of men was lo long that there remained alwaies faithfull and ceratine witnesses of the doctrine aliue so that it could not be corrúpted but it was easie by those witnesses to be refuted But when the age of man was drawne into the streights of 70. yeares or litle more as Moses sheweth the Doctrine of the Church was committed to writing euen as much at the first as was sufficient for the instruction of the people vnto saluation without anie supplie of traditions The 〈◊〉 of the Prophetes and Apostles writinges is a more full and plentifull declaration of thesame Doctrine of saluation not anie addition of anie new Doctrine or waie to saluation Your second reason is that 〈◊〉 partes of scripture be wanting now which were in Saint Pauls time But that you are not able to prooue For although there is mention in the olde testament of diuerse bookes written by Prophets which are not now extant yet it followeth not that those were extant in Saint Pauls time And if any were yet were they but explications and interpretations of the bookes of Moses which are extant euerie syllable and pricke and shall be to the ende of the world But Epiphanius affirmeth that all thinges cannot be taken from the scripture wherefore the Aposties 〈◊〉 somethings in writing and somethings in tradition To this I answere first that Saint Paul is greater then Epiphanius Secondlie that Epiphanius saith not that anie thing necessarie to saluation cannot be taken out of the scripture For he speaketh onelie of this opinion that it is sinne to marrie after virginitie decreed which neuertheles maie be taken out of the scripture if the vow were aduisedlie taken and no necessitie of incontinencie requiring mariage But of tradition we shall haue further to consider in the next section The thirteenth section intituled Of teaching traditions besides the scripture Art 5. GOtuisus reporteth the Iesuits to saic that the want of holie scriptures muste be supplied by peecing it out by traditions Cens. f. 220. Here you repeat your olde friuolous quarrel that the Iesuites haue no such vnreuerent words Master Chark chargeth you out of Hosius with a farre worseisaying that if traditions be reiected the verie Gospell it selfe seemeth to be reiected For what els are traditions then a certaine liuing Gospell But thereto you answere not one worde and the meaning of those words reported by Gotuisus you mainteine egerlie thorouhout this section as you did in parte in the 12. section that the scriptures are not sufficient and that there must be traditions receiued beside the scripture To what ende but to supplie the want and insufficiencie of the holie scriptures Nay saie you Though both parts of Gods worde that is both written and vnwritten be necessarie vnto Gods Church yet both of them do stand in their full perfection assigned them by God neither is the one a maime or impeachment to the other You meane they are as perfect as God made them not that the written word is sufficient to teach all trueth vnto the perfection of the man of God And so for all your vaine compasse of wordes the sense is all one The scripture is but a part or a
peece of Gods worde and traditions are an other peece and this peece must be added to that or els it is not a perfect or sufficient instruction of itselfe for Gods Church The comparison you make of ioyning S. Lukes Gospell to that of Saint Matthew or Saint Paules epistles to them both to resemble your patching of traditions to the written word of God is both odious and vnlike and without begging the wholl matter in question gaineth nothing For the adding of the writings of one Euangelist to another or of an Apostle to the Euangelistes is but the heaping of heauenlie treasure to the further inriching of the Church in all light of spirituall knowledge so the accession of the bookes of the new testament is as it were the vnfolding or laying open of the same diuine riches that was perfectlie contayned in the olde testament for the saluation of all Gods elect that liued vnder that discipline But your traditions as you maintaine them argue an insufficiencie of the holie scriptures which allso you confesse your selfe and are not a more plaine or plentifull application of the mysteries comprehended in them Therefore though you can for manners sake otherwhile forbeare odious speeches aginst the dignitie of holie scriptures yet euen that odious conclusion gathered by Gotuisus must needes follow of your doctrine concerning the insufficiencie of scriptures and the necessitie of traditions That your traditions are Gods word and of equall authoritie with the scriptures you promise to shew more largelie in the twelft article together with certaine meanes how to know and discerne the same Sed haec in dicm minitave Parmeno You haue taken a pretie pause of three yeares long since you were interrupted as you 〈◊〉 in the end by a writte de remouendo But the daie will come that shall paie for all Whether anie cause or matter hath beene ministred by you of odious speeches against the dignitie of holie scriptures Mastet Charke declareth by one example out of Hosius which with all the rest that he saith you omit to answer as trifling speech to litle purpose So whatsoeuer by anie colour of reason you can not auoid by your censorious authoritie you maie contemne and passe ouer But his conclusion seemeth worthie the answer which he maketh in these wordes To conclude it is a great iniquitie to adde traditions or your vnwritten verities to the written word of God whereunto no man maie adde because nothing is wanting from which no man maie take because nothing is superfluous But to him that addeth shall the curses written in the booke be added for euer Against this conclusiō you note in the margent great iniquitie to adde one veritie to another or to beleeue two verities together A fine ieste but a grosse begging of the wholl cause For who shal graunt that your vnwritten vereties be truth and not falsehood falselie by you termed verities vnwritten There is no veritie of matters necessarie to be knowne vnto saluation which is not written in the holie scriptures that are hable to make vs wise vnto saluation But good Lord what a sturre you keepe because M. Chatk noteth in the margent Apoc. 22. ask how this place is alledged against you c. As though that which is true of one booke yea of euery booke of the scripture maie not iustlie be verefied of the wholl bodie and boke of the the Bible Because adding to the word of god argueth imperfection in the word of god Your stale obiection of Saint Iohns Gospell written after the Reuelation is alreadie answered For al bookes of scripture that haue beene written since the fiue bookes of Moses are no addition to the word of God but a more cleere explication of the 〈◊〉 first com mitted to writing by inspiration of God Neither do they teach an other waie of saluation then Moses did but set forth the same more plainlie by demonstration by examples of Gods iustice and his mercie by threatenings by exhortations by explication of his promises by shewing the accomplishment and the manner of perfourmance of them in Christ and his Church And this they do moste absolutelie sufficiently and plentifully to the saluation of Gods people These things saith S. Iohn are written that you should beleeue that Iesus is Christ the sonne of God and that beleeuing you maie haue euerlasting life in his name Here you maie as well cauill that not onelie the Gospell of Saint Iohn or the miracles written in the same is necessarie to be beleeued vnto saluation but all the rest of the scripture also foolishlie opposing thinges that are no waie repugnant but the one including the other For the beleeuing of Saint Iohns Gospell doth not exclude but include all other bookes and partes of holie scripture which teach the same meane of saluation or any thing thereto pertaining But how holdeth this argument saie you no man maie adde to the booke of Apocalips ergo no man maie beleeue a tradition of Christ or his Apostles Maie we not as well saie ergo we maie not beleeue the actes of the Apostles No sir for we make our argument in this man ner No man maie adde to the booke of the Apocalips much lesse may anie man adde to the wholl Bible of the olde and new testament And consequentlie there are no traditions of Christ and his Apostles to be credited as needefull to saluation which are not contained in the holy scriptures Thus we alledge scriptures and thus we argue vppon them not as it pleaseth you to deseant vpon our allegations and to dissigure our arguments But it is lamentable you saie to see the 〈◊〉 dealings of these men in matters of such importance It is verie true vnderstanding you and your complices to be the men that vse such fleightes in 〈◊〉 waightie causes As for our doctrine is plaine without any seame that the scriptures are sufficient to saluation therfore al tradition besides them are 〈◊〉 to that purpose But let vs see who 〈◊〉 sleightes by your iudgement First you aske Master Charke what he 〈◊〉 by adding Who doth adde Or in what sense as though his meaning and sense of adding were not manifest as also his accusation that the I suites the Papistes do adde to the word of God their traditions a necessarie to saluation yet not expressed or contained in the word of God But if God saie you left anie doctrine by tradition vnto the Church and our ancetours haue deliuered the same vuto vs especiallie those of the 〈◊〉 Church what shall we do in this case Shall we refuse it It seemeth dangerous and I see no reason The question is not whether we should refuse anie thing that God hath left but whether God hath left anie such tradition to be beleeued vnto salua tion which is not contained in the holie scriptures But if our ancetours of the primitiue Church haue deliuered anie such tradition vnwritten as left by Christ what shall we doe you
see no reason to refuse it But if you will learne reason when it is shewed you maie see more then you do now Are your ancetors of the primitiue Church greater then Saint Paull Is there anie testimonié of man greater then the witnes of an Angell from heauen yet if Saint Paull him selfe or an Angell from heauen should preach an other Gospell then Saint Paull had preached and is contained in the holi scriptures that false Gospell were to be resused and the author thereof to be accursed Now that Saint Paull preached nothing beside the doctrine conteined in the scriptures he is a sufficient witnes himselfe Act. 26. 22. But why see you no reason to refuse such traditions so obtruded Forsooth because the same men that deliuered vnto you the scriptures and saide this is Gods writen worde and saide of other forged scriptures this is not Gods written worde the same deliuered to you these doctrines saying this is Gods wordes vnwritten So that by this reason you haue no other foundation of your faith but the testimonie of men who as they may speake the truth in one matter so they may lie or be deceiued in an other As euen by your owne reason the Grecians the Armenians the Georgians the Moscouites and all other sectaries are bound to beleeue all that to be the word of God vnwritten which the same men affirme to be such that deliuered the canonicall scriptures to them and said it was the word of God written But in steade of this vnsure and sandie ground the children of God haue a more firme rocke to builde their faith vpon namelie the spirit of trueth sealing in their heartes the testimonie of men concerning the truth of Gods worde written In which the same spirit also testifieth of the sufficiencie of the word written vnto saluation in such sort as if we receiue the word written for truth we must needs condemne for false what word soeuer speaketh either the contrarie or addeth any thing as wanting and not set forth in the word written And this I say not as though the primitiue Church or the godlie fathers of the same haue brought in any thing vnder the name of tradition of Christ or his Apostles as necessarie to saluation although some of them in matters of rites ceremonies haue alledged tradition beside the scriptures yet in such things as are now for the most part abolished either because they were not deliuered by the Apostles as it was pretended or els because such matters are mutable and not perpetuall though they were receiued from the Apostles But let vs examine the examples that you ioyne to your reason First Saint Augustine and Origen doe teach vs that baptizing of infantes is to be practized in the Church onelie by tradition of the Apostles For which you quote August lib. 10. ad gen lit cap. 23. Origen in cap. 6. Epist. ad Rom. What Saint Augustine saieth and how the baptisme of infantes is practized by authoritie of the scripture I haue shewed before sect 11. As for Origen in the place quoted hath neuer a word to any such matter But of these impudent allegations we haue had too many examples alreadie The second example is Saint Hierome and Epiphanius tell vs that the faste of the lent and oher the like is a tradition of the Apostles Hierom. Epist. 54. ad Marcella Epiphann Haer. 7. 5. Hieromes wordes are these against the Montanistes Nos vnam quadragesimam secundùm traditionem Apostolorum toto anno tempore nobis congruo ieiunamus 〈◊〉 tres in anno faciunt quadragesimas quasi tres passi sunt saluatores non quòd per totum annum excepta pentecoste ieiunare non liceat sed quòd aliud sit necessitate aliud voluntate munus offerre We fast one lent or fourtie daies according to the tradition of the Apostles in the wholl yeare in a time conuenient for vs they make three lentes or fourtie daies fast in a yeare as though three sauiours had sussered not but that it is lawfull all the yeare long except in the pentecostor fiftie daies but that it is one thing to offer a gift of necessitie an other thing to doe it of free will Here Hierome saith that one fourtie daies fast is of the tradition of the Apostles but other writers say otherwise For Damasus in his Pontificall saieth that Telesphorus Bishope of Roome did institute this seauen weekes faste before Easter Telesphorus him-selfe in his decretall Epistle saith that he and his fellow Bishoppes gathered in a Councell at Roome did ordeine this fourtie daies faste onelie for clerkes and contendeth in manie wordes that there must be a difference betweene clerkes and laie men as well in faste as in other thinges If you saie these authorities are counterfet 〈◊〉 as I thin 〈◊〉 you may truelie though you will not willinglie yet what saie you to 〈◊〉 an elder witnes then Hierome whoe testifieth out of yeares that two hundered 〈◊〉 before his time there was great controuersie betweene the next successours of the Apostles concerning the daie of the celebration of Easter and that the coutrouersie was not onelie of the daie but also of the fast some fasting one daie some two dates some more So that of the Apostles tradition we haue no certaintie in any monument of antiquitie Againe it is to be noted that Hierome holdeth it vnlawfull to faste betweene Easter and Whitesontyde which he calleth Peatecoste by the same tradition of the Apostles which yet in the Popish Church is not obserued at this daie for beside the fridaie fast they haue also the gang weeke fast in that time which in Saint Hieromes age was accounted vnlawfull to fast in Your other witnes Epiphanius speaketh not of your fourtie daies lent but of a shorter and yet a streighter For these are his wordes Aquo verò non assensum est in omnibus orbis terrarum regionibus quòd quarta prosabbato ieiunium est in Ecclesia ordinatum Siverò etiam oportet constitutionem Apostolorum proferre quomodo illic decreuerunt quarta prosabbato ieiunium per omnia excepta pentecoste de sex dieb paschatis quomodo praecipiunt nihil omnino accipere quà m panem salem aquam qualemque diem agere quomodo dimittere in illucescentem dominicam manifestum est And of whome is it not agreed in all regions of the world that one wednesdaie and fridaie fast is ordeined in the Church But if we must also bring forth the constitution of the Apostles how they haue there decreed one the wednesdaie and fridaie a fast thoroughout all except pentecost and of the six daies of Easter how they commaund to take nothing at all but bread and salte and water and how to spend the daie and how to giue ouer against the dawning of the Lords daie it is manifest Here he speaketh but ofsixe daies before Easter daie and of an other manner of diet then the Popish Church holdeth to be necessarie
the sense and true meaning of thinges them-selues And this is Chrisostomes meaning not of traditions altogether without the compasse of the scriptures and yet held necessarie to saluation For of the sufficiencie of the scri ptures he speaketh in diuers places and namelie vppon that cleere text 2. Tim. 3. Hom 9. of the scripiure he saith Siquid vel diseere velignorare opus sit illic addiscemus If anie thing be needefisli to know or not to know in the scriptures we shall learne But because you saie those wordes of Saint Paulare cleere 2. Thess. 2. for vnwritten tradititions I praie you what argument can you conclude out of them Saint Paul deliuered to the Thessalonians something by preaching and something by writing ergo he deliuered something that is not contained in the holie scriptures written either by himselfe or anie other of the holie men of God appointed for that purpose Who is so childish thinke you to graunt you this consequence therefore for anie thing you haue brought or can bring or anie thing that the fathers haue said or can saie the word of God writ ten is perfect and hable to make a man wise to saluation by faith in Iesus Christ which is to be had sufficientlie in the holie scriptures as Christ him-selfe doth witnes Iohn 5. 39. And so the former conclusion doth still stand It is great iniquitie to receiue traditions altogether beside the holie scripture as necessarie to saluation which must needes argue the holie scriptures of imperfection and vnsufficiencie Neither doth the consent of Antiquitie refute this assertion of Master Charke seeing the auncients as it is said spake either of doctrine not expressed in word but contained in deede in the scriptures or els of rites and ceremonies the perpetuall obseruation where of is not necessatie to eternall life as is prooued by the discussing of manie of them which the elder fathers do father vpon the tradition of the Apostles as much as anie other that they name And if you saie they were deceiued in such as are abolished how shall we know that 〈◊〉 not in such as are retained For in their 〈◊〉 they were all generallie receiued as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well such as are discontinued as those 〈◊〉 remaine 〈◊〉 if any man will aske you what be these Apostolicall 〈◊〉 in particuler you could alleadge him testimonies 〈◊〉 auncient fathers for a great number But you referr 〈◊〉 Saint Cyprian Serm. de ablut pedum Tertullian 〈◊〉 milit and Saint Hieron dialog contra Luciferianos 〈◊〉 say he shall finde store Belike your note booke 〈◊〉 you thither although you listed not to take so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your selfe but turne it ouer to your 〈◊〉 Howbert he that is disposed to read the sermon 〈◊〉 Cyprian shall finde no store at all but of the necessitie of washing offcete which ceremonie was taken by the example of Christ yet is not thought necessarie in the Popish Church at this daie Tertullian in deede hath some prety store yet not to mantaine popish traditions so much as to ouerthrow them For he 〈◊〉 some things that are taken out of the scripture as to renounce the deuill in Baptisme c. some that are growne out of vse manie hundred yeares agoe as that the baptized should taste of milke and honie that they should abstaine from washing seauen daies after That men should signe their forheade at euerie steppe and proceeding going forth and comming home at putting on of apparell and at pulling on of shooes at washings at table at lighting of candells at beddes at stooles at all times and places Saint Hierome also in the person of the heretike rehearseth traditiones and among them such as Papistes do not obserue namelie the mixture of milke and honie geuen to them that are newlie baptized On the Lords daie and during the wholl time of Pentecoste neither to kneele in praiers nor to fast These are parte of those Apostolical traditions in particular which if they had beene necessary to saluation must haue beene perpetuallie continued If they were vntruelie ascribed to the Apostles what wartant can we haue of any other seeing the most auncient writers commend these as much as anie other for Apostolicall traditions Yet a few other examples you wil adde out of Saint Augustine whoe prooueth baptisme you sare by tradition of the Church lib. 10. de gen ad lit cap. 23. to this answere hath beene made sufficientlie in the 11. section that Saint Augustine doth not defend baptisme of infants onelie by the custome of the Church but also by the scriptures Likewise you saie he prooueth by the same tradions that we must not rebaptize those which are baptized of heretikes lib. 2. de bapt capt 7. lib. 1. cap. 23. lib. 4. cap. 6 It is true that he perwsadeth him selfe that this custome of not rebaptizing came from the Apostles tradition yet doth he by many arguments out of scripture prooue that such are not to be baptized againe which haue beene once baptized although by heretikes and therefore he saith of the same matter Hoc planè verum est quia ratio veritas consuetudini praeponenda est Sed cùm consuetudini veritas suffragatur nihil oportet firmius retineri This is plainlie true that reason and truth is to be preferred before custome but when truth consenteth with custome nothing ought more steadefastlie to be 〈◊〉 You see therefore that he buildeth not onelie vppon custome or tradition which is the matter in question but vppon trueth and reason which is founded by the holie scriptuers Your middle quotation de bap lib. 1. cap. 23. you may correct against your nextreplie for there are but 19. Chapters in that booke Againe you saie He prooueth by tradition the celebration of the Pentecost commonlie called Whitsontide ep 11 c. 1. If it were as you saie it is but a matter of ceremony not necessarie to saluation but in the power of the Church to alter as many like which are abrogated But in trueth he prooueth it not as you say by tradition For these are his wordes Illa autem quae non scripta c. But those thinges which are kept beeing not written but deliuered which are obserued thoroughout all the worlde it is giuen to be vnderstoode that they are retained as commended and decreed either by the Apostles them-selues or by generall Councells the authoritie of which is moste whollesome in the Church as that the passion of our Lord and his resurrection ascension into heauen and the comming of the holie ghoste from heauen are celebrated with yearelie solemnitie You see by his owne wordes that he is not certaine whether he should laie this ceremoniall celebration vpon deliuery of the Apostles or vpon decrees of general coun cells And whencesoeuer they came the matter is not great in such thinges as of their owne nature are indifferent and therefore alterable by discretion of the Church in all times Whether the Apostles were baptized which is
a nose of wax is easie to be turned and shaped on euerie side or sort which if it were so must needes be a great fault in the scripture it selfe A hundred positiue lawes and statutes in England are so well penned as all the sophistical heads in christendome cannot finde a starting hole in them by anie peruerse interpretations but thatall they which haue but a meane skill in the lawes will laugh them to scorne And tha I we think so vnreuerently of the holy scriptures giuen by inspiration of god that euerie foolish heretike maie turne them about like a nose of wax but rather that in his said attempt of turning his folly shal be made manifest to al men Pighius saith expressely the scriptures are dumbe iudges as though Godspake not in them and by them vnto vs whose prophane comparison of the holie scriptures with prophane lawes which require Magistrates and iudges to punish the offenders of them euerie Christian man may perceiue to tende to the derogation of the maiesty of them As also euerie childe that hath studied logike but halfe a yeare maie vnderstand his beggerlie petition of the principle when appealing from the iudgement of the scriptures he will be iudged by none but by papists in controuersies and questions that we haue against the papists As for the blacke Gospell and Inkie diuinitie babled by Eccius against the written Gospell If Iesuits can maintaine as Catholike surelie Christians can not heare it without horror of blasphemie If there be no fault or imperfection in the scriptures how saith Pighius that euery man may euidently know without the scriptures in what order the Church is appointed by her author Againe of what moment is the holy scripture if it be not necessarie to decide all doubtes and controuersies in the Church for thus saith Pighius If we receaue the authoritie of the Churches tradition quam si recipimus omnis facilè etiam sine scriptur is inter nos componetur concertatio controuersia cùm de singulis nonfuerit admodum operosum inuenire quid Catholica ab initio Ecclesia senserit Which if we receiue all strife and controuersie betweene vs may easilie be compounded euen without the scriptures Seeing it is no very hard worke to finde out what the Ca tholike Church from the beginning hath thought of euerie question Thus the Ecclesiasticall tradition is set a loft and the holie scriptures excluded as superfluous and vnnecessarie seeing all questions may easilie be decided without them But to giue a better colour to your nose of waxe you saie Saint Ierome doth call the scriptures alledged corruptlie by Marcion and Basilides the diuells Gospell because the Gospell consisteth not in the words of scripture but in the sense But so doth not Christ call the scripture when it was alledged by the deuill neither doth Saint Ierome so call the scripture but the false sense feined by heretikes His wordes are these Grande periculum est in Ecclesia loqui ne fortè interpretatione peruersa de Euangelio Christi hominis fiat Euangelium aut quod peius est Diaboli It is great perill to speake in the Church least perhappes by peruerse interpretation of the Gospell of Christ be made the Gospell of man or that which is worse of the deuill And it is true which he saith The Gospell is not in the wordes but in the sense of the scriptures Yet it is also true that the sense of the scriptures is expressed in those wordes of the scriptures and not included in the Popes breast as the Papists would haue vs thinke that al labour bestowed in seeking the sense of the scriptures is in vaine except we take the interpretation of the Popish Church which sthe iudgement of the Pope as the sure rule to guide vs by But Saint Augustine you saie calleth the scripture the bowe of heretikes Which is not so for he compareth their wresting of the scriptures to the bending of a bowe Ecce inquiunt peccatores tetenderunt arcum credo scriptur as quas illi carnaliter interpretando venenatas inde sententias emittunt Beholde say they the sinners haue bent the bowe the scriptures I beleeue which while they interpret carnallie they send forth poysoned meaninges from them Further you saie Irenaeus compareth it abused by heretikes to a Iewel stamped with the forme of a Dogge or Fox Irenaeus speaketh not of the bodie of the scriptures but of wordes sentences and parables of scripture rent not onelie from their sense but also from their place and patched together with olde wiues fables to make a shew for heresie which is all one as he saith as if a man should breake an excellent Image of a king and when he hath fashioned the peeces beeing pearles or precious stones into the shape of a Fox or Dogge he would yet be so impudent to saie this is that excellent Image of the king which was made by a not able workman This soundeth nothing like the nose of waxe Likewise you saie Gregorie Nazianzen compareth the scripture to a siluer scabberd with a leaden sworde in it The comparison you speake of is in his poemes which I verelie am perswaded that you neuer read but were mocked by your notebooke as many times before For Gregorie compareth not the scriptures as you slaunder him but an hipocrite a man that hath nothing but an externall shew of religion to a leaden sworde in a siluer scabberde his verses are these if you could haue construed them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To these that you might seeme bountifull though you be a verie begger of your owne reading you adde Tertullian and Vincentius Lirinensis of which the former you saie compareth the scripture to the deceitfull ornaments of harlottes the other to poysoned hearbs couered in the Apothecaries shops with faire titles Wherein you slaun der them both for they compare not the wholl scripture as you doe in your nose of waxe but the hereticall bragges of scripture which as they may abuse a peece for a shew so are they confounded by the wholl when the same is rightlie weighed Therefore the comparisons of these auncient Doctors are no more like to your nose of waxe then your nose of waxe is like to the holie scriptures Neither doth the example of Luther calling the scriptures the booke of heretikes expounding him selfe why he so calleth it namely because it is depraued by heretikes defend the Iesuites which to the deprauation of the scriptures vse that similitude as Luther did not in his albeit he might as well haue forborne that title as his rash iudgement against those whome you call sacramentaries for as the one was vnprofitable so the other was vniust But if the Iesuites saie you had reiected any one booke of the scripture as the Protestantes doe many we might iustlie accuse them It is as great a fault to adde to the worde of God as to take from it The Protestantes reiect no booke
of Christ and his spouse the Church which you saie in no sauce we can abide as though wheresoeuer any mysterie is confessed to be there muste needes follow a Sacrament of the new testament ALLEN These fellowes therefore that dare be so bolde to disturbe all the orders and sacramentes of Gods Church and to mainteine their phantasies dare brust the sacred bandes of expresse scriptures in such pointes as doe directlie touch the wholl policie of our Christian common wealth and ordered waics of our saluation euen in those which Christ moste carefullie left to be practized for the vse of his louing slocke by the warrant of wordes moste plaine what shall we saie to such bold and impudent faces that thus dare doe and yet which I more mernaile at in this their vncurtesie and most vnhonest dealing will not sticke to crie and call vpon Gods worde as though they did that by scripture the contrarie whereof they expresslie finde in scripture And truelie where they be not holpen by the verte wordes vaine it shall be for them to stand with vs and with all our Fathers and with the practize of all nations and with the very expresse iudgement of the Church of God it shal not boote them I saie in their darke ignorance infinite pride to stand with vs hauing so many helpes for the true meaning and the expresse text of the worde for our selues and side FVLKE He must needes haue an impudent face and a wicked conscience that so shamefullie slaundereth vs to bereake the sacred bandes of the expresse scriptures wherunto we seeme to attribute al credit as though we denie any one word of expresse scripture do not affirme whatsoeuer the scripture doth affirme in expresse words or denie whatsoeuer the holy scripture in expresse words doth deny according to such sense and meaning as the scripture must haue as it is agreable to it selfe in all places The expresse wordes of scripture touching the Lords supper are these that it is the body blood of Christ we confesse and beleeue as much The expresse wordes of scripture concerning the Apostles authoritie in pardoning or reteining sinnes are as they haue beene often alledged we beleeue they and their successours of whome there is no expresse word haue power to remit or reteine sins The expresse words of scripture concerning the Lords supper are also The rocke was Christ we beleeue that the rocke was Christ. The cup is the new testament we beleeue that the cup is the new testament Also by expresse words to the Apostles there is graunted power to binde and to loose We confesse and beleeue that they haue power to binde and to loose And yet I trust we may be bolde to saie without breaking the sacred bondes of expresse scriptures The rocke was not Christ in nature of his humanitie and diuinitie but a sacrament of Christ. The cup is not the new couenant it selfe but that which is in the cup is an holie signe or seale thereof The Apostles had no power giuen them to binde men with chaines or coardes nor to loose the chaines coards of them that be bound by other but a spirituall authoritie to binde and loose spirituallie In like manner we doe not breake the sacred bandes of expresse scripture when we affirme that the Sacramentall bread and wine are not by transsbustantiation turned into the naturall bodie and bloode of Christ or the bodie and blood of Christ in the sacrament are not corporallie receiued but spirituallie For the contrarie of these we finde not expresselie in the scripture So when we saie the Apostles had not power to remit sinnes properlie which is peculiar onelie to God but to aslure men in Christes name whose embassadours they were of the forgiuenes of their sinnes by Christ we breake no bandes of expresse scriptures For we confesle the wordes according to their true meaning agreeable with other places of scripture that teach it to be peculiar to God to remit sinnes properlie An embassadour is said to make peace or warre when he declareth according to his commission his Princes determination of peace or warre The Kinges Liuetenant hauing such commission offereth or graun teth pardon to rebells or other offenders where he doth onelie declare the kinges pleasure in pardoning or releasing their offences As for the Popish bragge of all our fathers with the practize of all nations and the verie expresse iudgement of the Church of God to be for your assertion how vaine it is will easilie appeare when you come to cite fathers shew forth the practize of all nations declare the iudgement of Gods Church and when the contradictorie shall be manifestlie prooued and brough forth against you ALLEN Sometimes where it may appeare that the wordes and outwarde face of scripture serue not our assertions so plainlie as the holie traditions of Christes Church doe there they call vpon vs with infinite clamours to abide the iudgement of the word which they would be thought to esteeme aboue all mans meaning But whether would they now runne thinke you where all our sacraments stand vpon euident words more then words vpon the verie expresse notorious action of Christ him selfe al instituted sincerelie to be practized of the Church after his de parture hence all commended in knowne termes of greatest moste efficacie that could be not by way of preaching in which he vsed sometimes figures not at such time as he vsed other then common knowne speach but after his resurrection when he now vttered no more parables as he did before that such as faw should not see and such as were of vnderstanding might not vnderstand but did open vnto his dearest their senses that they might vnderstand scriptures and more carefullie expressed his meaning for the instruction of his holie Disciples to the better bearing of that charge which he meant to leaue them in after his departure whither will these men I saie where they see all thinges so enuironed with trueth whither will they flie The scriptures be plainlie ours the Doctors they dare not claime reason is against them there is then no waie to beare it out but with boldnes and exercised audacitie Yet here we wil assay by the notorious euidence of this one cause that we now haue in hand to breake their stonie heartes to the obedience of Christs Church word for whose faith if they haue seene great light force of argument allready shal yet see much more I trust they wil not stil with stand the knowen truth FVLKE We will runne no further for the vnderstanding of Christes wordes concerning the institution and practize of his holie sacramentes although we haue the consent of the moste auncient and approoued doctors of the primitiue Church as witnesses of the same That the sacraments are commended in knowne terms of greatest and most efficacie that could be we cofesse but therof it followeth not that they were not in some part commended by figuratiue speeches
from the paine and from the fault some plenarie of al their sinnes some partial of part of their sins some for a number of daies some for many thousands of yeares which euery one that paieth mony for them shall haue the benefit of them or which he giueth to such an hospitall gylde or brotherhoode or to him which saith such a praier or goeth on such a pilgri mage such like wherunto may be added his dispensations absolutiós exemptions lycenses these are the popes pardons of which the controuersy is between vs of which he cānot prooue that there was either vse or approbation no not in the Church of Rome for a wholl 1000. yeares after Christ. And these when he hath saied as much as he hath learned to saie for them out of the decretalls Clementines and Extrauagants you shall finde to be by his their owne determination nothing ells but as they are called in Latine Bullae Bubles great in appeerance but altogether emptie and voide of profit The attention of the gentle reader I do likewise require beccause he may see what good occasion Luther had to seperate himselfe from the Popish Church as from the whore of Babylon which so obstinately defended such abhominable blasphemies which all wise and reasonable men haue either abhorred or as he confesseth beene offended at them And yet let the reader marke how boldlie he calleth this article of the popes pardons an article of Christian faith whereof the Church of god neuer heard for a thousand yeares more since Christs assension before the loosing of Satā out of the bottomles pit when Antichrist was bolde to set abroad al his impieties and to sit not in a mysterie of iniquitie but openlie in the sight of al men in the temple of God and to exalt him-selfe aboue all that is called God or worshiped ALLEN And to be plaine in the matter where sinceritie is moste required two causes mooued me to beleeue like and allow of the power of pardons and indulgencies long before I either knew the commodities of them or had sought out the ground and meaning of them The first was the Churches authoritie which I credited in all other articles before I knew any of them or could by reason or scripture mainteine them Whose iudgement to follow by my Christian profession in all other pointes and to forsake in this one of Popes pardons had beene meere follie and a signe of phantasticall choise of things indifferent which is the proper passion of heresie Neither did I then know that the Church of Christ had allowed such thinges because I had read the determination of any generall Councells or decrees of some chiefe gouernours of the saide Church touching such pardons or because I had by histories and note of diuerse ages seene the practize of the faithfull people herein by which waies her meaning of doubtfull things is most assuredlie knowne but onelie I deemed that the Church allowed them and misliked the contrarie because such as bare the name of Christian folke and Catholike did approoue them and sometimes lamented the lacke of them And surelie for an vnlearned man I count it the briefest rule in the worlde to keepe him selfe both in faith and conuersation euer with that companie which by the generall and common calling of the people be named Catholikes For that name kept Saint Augustine himselfe in the trueth and true Church much more it may doe the simple sorte who is not hable to stande with an heretike that will challenge the Church to himselfe by Sophisticall reasons from the Christians that for lacke of learning can not answere him Well this companie of Catholikes brought me to know the Church and my creede caused me to beleeue the Church no lesse concerning the Popes Pardons then any other article of our Christian profession which though it were not of like weight yet it was to me of like trueth and all in like vnknowne at that time FVLKE Your pretence of plainnes sinceritie is but craft and sub tiltie to deceiue the simple and ignorant that they might please themselues in their blindenes and by your example thinke themselues at ease in their ignorance For what reasonable man will be perswaded that you could beleeue like and allow that thing whereof you know no vse nor whence it came or what it meaned But here you shew what faith is accounted among the Papists a fond perswasion of any thing that is tolde them by their teachers although they neither knowe what commoditie it bringeth nor what ground of trueth it hath nor finallie what it meaneth But howsoeuer it was two causes mooued you whereof you professe that hearing of the worde of God was neither The first was the Churches authoritie which you credited in all other articles before you knew any of them or could by reason or scripture mainteine them So by your owne confession you did as many papists doe beleeue you knew not what which faith would neuer bring you to eternall life which consisteth in knowledge of God and Iesus Christ according to that which is writen that wee might beleeue and be saued But seeing you could neither by reason nor by scripture mainteine those articles to be true which you beleeued how could you be perswaded that this companie was the Church of Christ the piller of trueth rather then the Church of Antichrist the mother of heresies and errors For all swarmes of heretikes challenge vnto themselues the name of the Church and require credit to be giuen vnto them and the more heretikes the lesse care they haue to make any triall of their doctrine to be trueth what had you more to perswade your conscience that you were in the right waie then a lew or a Turke hath which crediteth the companie amongst whome he is bred and borne without examining by reason or the scripture whether those thinges which they teach them be the trueth or no But it had beene a signe of phantasticall choyce of thinges indifferent you saie which is the proper passion of heresie to follow the Churches iudgement in all other points and to forsake it in this one of Popes Pardons Where you saie the phantasticall choice of things indifferent is the proper passion of heresie I know not what you meane except you thinke that heretikes are deceiued onelie in the choise of thinges indifferent or that whosoeuer maketh some phantastical choise of thinges indifferent is an heretike neither of which opinions I trowe you are able to mainteine For though some heretikes make a phantasticall choise of thinges indifferent I suppose it is not proper onelie to heretikes for some schismatikes that be not heretikes make such a phantasticall choise and the phantastical choise of heretikes is most occupied about principall groundes and articles of faith not about thinges indifferent onelie Moreouer I would know whether you account the Popes pardons to be things indifferent or necessarie for the Church for if