Caluyn in matter of the Queenes Supremacy which he denyeth Beza in the whole gouernment of their Churche Or why should I beleeue S. F. or his new masters of EnglaÌ„d rather theÌ„ these that were more learned then he or his or what reason rule or foundation haue any of these men to beleeue their owne opinion more then others but only self wil and fancy This then is the first and greatest spiritual benediction or malediction rather that I fynd to haue happened to our realme and nation by this wooful alteration of religion that wheras before we had a direct rule squyre pole-starre to follow which was the vniuersal Churche now euery man being set at liberty holdeth beleeueth and teacheth what he listeth Nor is there any way or meane left to restrayne him for straight way he appealeth bodlie and confidentlie to the Scriptures and there he wil be both maister and Pilot boteswayne him-self to gouerne the bark at his pâ—easure for he admitteth no iudge no interpreter no authoritie no antiquitie nor any other manner of tryal which is the greatest madnes and malediction that euer could happen among men of reason And the very same cause that moued the Warder to be so liberal then in setting downe this poynt hath moued me now to repeat the same againe in this place And what do yow think that the knight his champion haue replyed to all this playne and manifest demonstration would not yow think that both of them for their credits sake should haue buckled vp them-selues to ioyne in this yssue with the warder shewing what certainty they haue or which of the two wayes they wil take proposed by him seeing he sayth there are no other or that they should theÌ„-selues at least appoynt some other way but consider good reader the force of euident truth they are so blanked and their mouthes so shut vp with this interrogation of the warder as the K t. thought it best to passe it wholie ouer with silence as before hath byn touched The minister with more shame then the K t. hath tatled somwhat Idle tatling in a grauâ— question telling vs that our religion is not Catholyke that the vniuersal Church could not deliuer it vnto vs quia actiones sunt suppositorum as yow haue heard that StapletoÌ„ teacheth that the Churche hath power to proue taxe and consigne the books of holy Scripture And that vniuersal tradition is the most certayne interpreter therof And finally that the fayth of Papists is buylt vpon the Popes fancie and opinion and it is ful of nouelties and old heresies and the like as before yow haue heard All these tatlings he hath vpon this discourse before rehearsed of the warder and almost in as many words as I haue recyted theÌ„ but to the matter it selfe about certainty or vncertainty in religion ne griquidem he answereth no one word at all only to the later parte or appendix of the discourse where the warder sayth that to make the matter more playne how protestants haue no other rule of beleef he asketh S. F. not of any Catholyke Doctors nor auncient Fathers whome he esteemeth not but of their owne new Doctors Luther Caluyn Beza and the like authors of their owne sects why English Protestants at this day should preferre their owne iudgments before these also whom they graÌ„t to haue had great store of the holy ghost in all matters doctrines and interpretation of Scripture where they dissent from them To this I say all the other storme being past it seemed good to the minister to make his answere in these wordes But sayth this Noddy why should yow beleeue more your owne opinions then Caluyn concerning the Q. supremacy Luther concerning the Real presence and Beza in the Churche gouernment I answere first that these mennes priuate opinions concerne not fundamental poynts of fayth Pag. 21. A most foolish ansvvere of O. E. about Luther Caluyn c. and therfore they are not to be brought foorth for instance in this cause where we talk of the foundations and reasons of Christian fayth Marke wel his answere good reader iudge who is the noddy he sayth two things the one that the iudgments of Luther Caluin and Beza be but priuate opinions among them the other that the poynts wherin they differ from them to wit the real presence in the Sacrament her Ma ties Supremacy ecclesiastical and the whole gouernemeÌ„t of the Churche are no fundamental poynts of their faith For the first I would gladly know what authority is auayleable among them in teaching preaching and interpretation of Scriptures yf Luther Caluyn and Beza be reiected as priuate and particuler men where they differ from them our Doctors and Churche they do defy the ancient Fathers they look not willingly after them their owne parlament this maÌ„ sayth a litle before doth not appoynt but admit their religioÌ„ only who then is hee or who are they that must determine and defyne in this case For the second yf the difference with Luther about the real presence of Christs real body in the Sacrament be no fundamental poynt of fayth seing they accuse vs of the highest cryme vnder heauen about the same that is of idolatry and holding a creature to be the creator and we them againe of most heynous blasphemy highest wickednes vpon earth in discrediting Christ in his owne words that said it was his bodie his whole Church that euer so vnderstood him vnto this day yf the matter of supremacy be no fundamental poynt of fayth VVhat pointes are fundamental in protestants doctryne wherby all their ecclesiastical hierarchie standeth at this day in England as their Bishops Deanes Archdeacons and other prelates and parsons of the Spiritualty who otherwise must needs be playne intruders and meere lay men If their whole gouernmeÌ„t of their Churche be not fundamental wherof dependeth whether they haue any true ministers preachers and teachers lawfully allowed or no consequentlie whether their Sacraments be Sacraments and be administred by them that haue authoritie so to doe if all these poynts I say be not fundamental in O.E. opinion what are fundamental And what Atheisme doth this Martial minister diuels deane bring in vpon vs But beleeue me good reader these good fellowes do only eate of the ministerie and beleeue as please them and this being a compagnion of many occupations wil liue by that which wil yeild him most according to that also shal be his doctrine and beleef Of their great grand-father fryer Martyn Luther he sayth here in the words folowing his former answere Pag. â—1 O. E. his contemptious speach of Luther and Caluyn VVe suspend our opinion and giue no approbation to Luthers opinion concerning the carnal presence of Christs body in the Sacrament for that we see the doctrine to be newe and not taught by the Apostolyke Churche nay we find yt to be repugnant to the Apostles doctrine deliuered in Scriptures
substantially he must â—â—mayn conuinced of two great calumâ—â—tions For proof then of the first he alleadgeth â—â—ree reasons which are these First that Caâ—holyks do forbid vulgar translations not only of Protestants but also of their owne men 3. Reasons â—or S. F. his ansvvere and neuer a one concluding except the Bishop or Inquisitor giue special licence ergò we hold it for heresy Secondly that yt was obiected to Iohn Lambert for anâ— heretical opinion which he alleageth out of Fox though he name him not that he held Pag. 41. Fox act and monu Pag. 1006. col 1. num 65. That all heads and rulers are bound by necessitie of Saluation to giue the holy Scriptures to their people in theiâ— mother language His third argument is for thaâ— our Rhemists in their preface of the traÌ„slation of the new Testament say They do not publisâ— the Testament in English vpon any erronious opinioâ— of necessitie that the Scripture should alwayes be iâ— our mother tongue or that they ought or were ordaâ—neâ— by God to be read indifferently of all By which threâ— Reasons he thinketh it sufficiently proued that we hold the reading of Scriptures for heresy But who seeth not that no one of these reaâ—sons nor all together do conclude any thing to that effect The 3. reasons of S. F. examined For to the first though Catholyke do forbid men to vse their owne vulgar translations but with liceÌ„se yet do they not forbiâ— yt as heresy for then as I sayd they woulâ— graunt yt to none but they forbid it as a thinâ— wherof being abused heresy may follow as a Father should forbid his children that aâ—â— weak or indiscreet to drink strong wyne without water least they be dronckeÌ„ or catâ—â— an ague he sayth not that the drinking it seâ—â— is drunkennes or an ague but that being abuâ—sed it may cause the same And so to the second the reading of Scriâ—ptures was not obiected to Lambert as heresie but for that he was charged to hold it necessarie vnder payne of damnation to giue the said Scriptures in vulgar languages to all people which was an heretical and false assertion The Rhemists also which is the third obiection do cal the said opinion of Lambert about the necessitie of reading Scriptures in vulgar tongues by all sortes erronious and not the reading of Scriptures yt self Now then let vs heare and examine S. F. argument made vpon the words of our Rhemists before recited Pag. 47. The absurd vulearned manner of reasoning vsed by the Knight Now sayth he yf to think the Scriptures may be read indifferently of all he in your iudgement an heretical opinion then for men to read them is in your iudâ—ement an heretical action Mark good Reader â— F. manner of argument first he peruerteth the words alleaged by himself our of our Rhemists For they say It is erronious to put necessâ—tie for all to read But he sayth they affirme it heretical that all may read Now betweene must may erronious heretical there is much difference Then doth not this second proposition follow of his first for though it be erronious or heretical to hold necessitie of publishing the Scriptures in English to all as Lambert did hold yet followeth it not that â—he reading it self is heretical for a man may haue leaue to read and so auoyd all fault and â— Catholyke man vpon curiositie may chauÌ„ce â—o read without leaue and yet not beleeue heâ—etically that it is necessarie to permit them â—o be read of all And to the end good reader thou maist see the vanitie of his former consequeÌ„ce consider the same in an other exaÌ„ple It is an erronious and heretical opinion to say that all men and women may or must preach teach and administer Sacraments without ordination or licence ergo it is heresy or at least wayes an heretical action to teach preach administer SacrameÌ„ts who seeth not the folly of this consequence But now where-as the warder vpon this occasion entreth into the verie substance of the matter The cheefe substance of the matter omitted by Syr F. shewing at large how and in what sense reading of Scriptures in vulgar tongues is forbidden in the Catholyke Churche and vpon what causes and how farre and to what persons and to what end and with what limitations and how falsely heretykes do cauil and slaunder them in this behalf and confirmeth the same by many authorities arguments and euident reasons as also that the right vnderstanding of Scriptures is a peculiar gift of God and not common to all and that experience both of our and old tymes haue taught vs the great euils and daungers which had ensued by schismes heresies and varieties of opinions gathered out of Scriptures by euil interpretation alleaging also diuers examples for the same To all this I say being the pith and substance of the whole matter S. F. answereth not one word according to his shift of omission before mentioned when he hath nothing to answere and therfore vsing silence in this he passeth ouer to the second vntruth obiected that men are brandled to the slaughter for only reading vpon Gods book leauing the first sticking on his sleaue as yow see and much more confirmed then remoued by his answere For seing he affirmed it so stoutlie before that we held it heresy euen to think or desyre to read Scriptures in English why had he not alleaged some one playne text some Canon some one sentence some one Author of ours some book scrip or scrolle where we say so and where we do pronounce that first for heresie why runneth he to so blynd weake arguments and coniectures as yow haue heard Heerby yow may see what men of their wordâ— conscience and veritie they be and I may say of this K t. as Tertullian said of Marcion the heretyke Tertul. lib. 5. ad Marc. cap. 14â— num 231. quantas foueas fecit aufeâ—endo quae voluit how many great gappes hath he made in my book leauing out what he would or could not answer But now to the second vntruth whether men were put to death in deed for only reading scriptures About the second vntruth vvhether men vvere put to death for only reading scriptures VVastvvord Pag. 43. this dependeth of the first For yf it be euident that we hold not that the only reading of Scriptures is heresie as he affirmeth and we haue shewed the contrarie then followeth yt not to be likely that we brandle men to death with fyer for this fact which is a punishment due to heresie Let vs see then what the K â— sayth heere First of all he picketh a quarrel as though I had added somewhat to his wordes saying Pag. 43. Before I proced to the iustifying of my speach Pag. 43. geue me leaue to tel yow that this word onely by yow thrust into my words is one ly of your coyning though not the only one lye Heere
Linvvod lib. 5. de Magistris that there should be a true English traÌ„slation of the whole Byble permitted by approbation of the Bishop to all such common people as should be thought apt to profyt thereby which being considered and that heere only he ordayneth that no particular man of his owne authorytie should translate the scriptures into English or publish thesame to other mens reading without lycens I would know of O. E. why this constitution was alleaged by him seing it proueth nether the one nor the other of the forsaid poyntes both which he sayeth are proued thereby to wyt that reading of Scripture was accompted heresy The Archb. constitution is against O. E vvho alleageth it or punished by brandling nay both these assertions are refuted by this the first for that translation reading of scripture in the English tongue by lycens of the Bishop was permitted ergo it was not heresy for that noe Bishop can permit heresy secondly for that the punishment of excommunication is neyther death nor burning ergò for this they were not brandled Now then look yow in the forehead of this brandled and masked Minister O.E. who concludeth his former discourse in these woordes So it appeareth that the challenger our aduersary lyeth notoriously in both these poinâ—es Pag. 45. Thus he sayeth wherof let the Reader be iudge And a litle after disdayning that I should say this prudent ordinance about translating and reading of Scripture with difference and choice of men to be the ordinance of the Catholike churche he commeth into his accustomed vayn of scurrilytie saying Yf he meane by the Cathol Churche the conuenticle of Trent Pag 45. he is an absurd fellow to think that skum synke of priestes and fryars which theâ—e gathered a councel against Christ to be the Cathol Churche Let any man iudge of this vncleane and vncircumcised tongue About the Cath churche And for the thing it self I would aske him yf the Councel of Trent consisting of the chief Bishops and Prelates of Christendome represented not the knowen Cathol Churche at that day what other Catholike Churche can he shew vs to haue byn extaÌ„t at that tyme seing as he saith in his definition of Catholike afterward in his challenge out of Vâ—ncentius Lirinensis VVe are to hold that which alwayes hath byn beleued of all Christians O. E. chaleng 1. Pag 2. Vincent Lirinen aduers. haeteses ca. 3. for that is trulie and properly Catholike Which if it be true let hym shew vs that in the tyme of the councel of Trent there was any other Christian faith alwayes beleeued of all christians from Christ to that day but only the Romane and then we wil say that albeit for his scurrilytie of speech he be to be accompted of as he deserueth yet that in the rest he hath some reason But if he can not do this then sheweth he himself shamles in both And this might be sufficient for somuch as concerneth this point of reading scriptures wherein yow see how vaynly this vnlearned and ydleheaded Minister behaueth himself running in and out forth and back without rule or order sense or reason But yet I must follow him a litle further in certaine quarrels picked against me The first wherof is for that I do alleage these woords of S. Paule 2. Cor. 3. litera occidit Spiritus autem viuificat The letter killeth but the spirit giueth lyfe therby to proue that it is not sufficient to read only the woords of scripture except they be rightly also vnderstood and consequently that all standeth not in reading specially amongst the ignorant who oftentymes receaue more hurt then good thereby herevpon commeth in the Minister very hotly Pag. 47. saying He doth shameâ—ully abuse the woordes of S. Paule to the condemning of reading of Scriptures But soft Sir I neither abuse nor vse the woordes of the Apostle to the sense yow falsely say but to that sense which other holy Fathers before me haue vsed alleaged them S. Hier. Ep. ad Nepot in 3. Reg. c. 1. as namely S. Hierome and S. Augustine cyted by me in the Ward-woord and passed ouer craftely by this companioÌ„ Aug. de Spiritu littera c. 4 5. primo Retract c. 4. as though he had neuer heard of them And besides that which there I said I wil heere adioyne an other place of his lib. primo ad Simplician q. 1. where he saith Lex tantummodo lecta non intellecta vel non impleta vtique occidit tunc enim appellatur littera The law of God being read only and not vnderstood nor fulfilled doth kill for that it is called the letter by the Apostle Thus saith he and where as our Minister addeth Bellarmyne his companion may instruct him that none but the Swink feldians and Originists by the letter that killeth vnderstand Scriptures as this Noddy doth Examination of the vvoords of S. Paul littera occidit 2. Cor. 3. shewing himself therein a playne heretike anâ— enemy to the Scriptures This I say sheweth who is the Noddy who is the heretike and who is the enemy to Scriptures yf lying and cogging do put enemytie betwene the lyar and the Scriptures which are truthe it self Bellarm. lib. 1 de verbo Dei Cap. 3. For Cardinal Bellarmyne doth not ioynâ— Swinkfeldians and Originists together in denying scriptures as this man doth but cyting only an interpretation of Origen improueth thesame in one sense though in an other he admitteth it The Swinkfeldians indeed and Lybertines Children of the new Gospel of Martine Luther and consequently our Ministers brethren did deny the external letter of the Scripture founding themselues vpon this place of S. Paule litera occidit which Bellarmyne denyeth to serue to that purpose But this is nothing to our sense who deny not nor condemne as this Noddy slaundreth vs eyther the external letter of Scriptures themselues or the reading therof with discretion due reuerence and order but only rashe and presumptuous reading and interpreting the same according to their owne sense and vnderstanding different from the meaning and interpretation of the auncient Fathers Catholike Churche But yet let vs heare somewhat more how he goeth foreward in this matter Pag. 4â— He telleth vs further saith this Minister that the vnderstanding of scriptures is a particuler gift of God reserued espetialy vnto Christ and by him bestowed vpon the Churche which he proueth by this place Luc 24. Act. 8. Tunc aperuit eis sensum vt intelligerent scripturas then he opened to them the sense wherby they might vnderstand scriptures And againe by the example of the Eunuche that without Philip the Apostles help could not vnderstand the prophecie of Isay. Thus sayeth O. E. and how doth he answere think yow all these reasons of myne yow shal heare in few woords all he sayth Pag. 4â— If Christ be the best Interpâ—etor saith he where should we better vnderstand what his
tam quod ad Thessalonicenses vt ipsius solis radio putem scriptum Ibid c 47. ita clareâ— qualtter acciptant Luci fugae isti scripturarum Go to then how wil these scripture-bats the heretiks vnderstand this place of S. Paule to thâ— Thessalonians though it be so cleare as I may think it to be wrytten with the very beame of the Sunne it self Here then yow see that heretikes are noâ— noted or called night-battes by Tertullian foâ— flâ—ing the reading of Scriptures as this faiâ—â— lad would perswade his Reader but ratheâ— the quite contrarie that reading and bragginâ— of Scriptures more then others Hovv heretiks â—re scripture bats yet are theâ—â— so blynd in the true light therof througâ— their owne pryde and malice as they fly the true sense and interpretation heâ—d by the Catholike churche as night-bats do the cleere day light and shynâ—ng of the Sunne which Tertuâ—â—â—an in the forenamed book of praescription and els where doth largely declare and it is our complaint also against Sectaries of our tyme who swarmâ—ng ouer scriptures like blynd bats in the darcknesse of theyr owne passions and imaginations and flyeng the light of auncient doctors and Churches interpretations do break their owne heades and necks of entymes vpon scripture walles in respect wherof thesayd Tertullian in this very book by O.E. alleaged concludeth thus and therein giueth vs good counsel saying â—ecundum praetudicta tot authoritatum scripturas inâ—â—lligi oportebit Ibid. c. 18. non secundum ingenia haereâ—â—corum de â—â—la incredulitaâ—e vementiae Scriptures must be vnderstood according to the fore established iudgments of so many authorities as I haue now alleaged and not according to the wits or wrangling inclinations of heretiks which proceed coÌ„monly of only incredulitie which â—s asmuch to say as that the natures of heretikes being inclyned to incredulytie not to beleue what the authoritie of the Catholike Churche hathe set downe before them they seek to draw the interpretation of scriptures to their owne phansyes Thus wryteth he and his reason is for that heretiks reading scriptures with curiosytie for feeding their owne humors and being bound to no rule or prescriptioÌ„ of interpretations but to take and leaue or like at their pleasures commonly their wits guyded by humaine spirit inclyne to incredulitie calling in question what others haue held or beleued before them and shaking of the foundations of all former belief by their new quarrelling and whether the Sectaries of our tyme haue done this or no by their much reading and tossing of scriptures let experience teache vs. And this shal suffice for this place THE SECOND PART of this Encounter contayning foure absurd groundes of Catholike religion fayned by Sir frauncis and first whether ignorance be the mother of deuotion as also about the controuersy of fides explicita implicita CAP. VII WE haue byn occupied hitherto about so many other falshoodes and vntruthes of these our aduersaries vttered in their preambles as we haue not byn able to come to the principal subiect of this EncouÌ„ter which is a quadruple number of absurd grounds positions which the knight affirmeth vs to hold for general grounds and Maximes of our religion wherof the first and ring leader is that ignorance is the mother of deuotion which he vttereth in these woords VVatch. p. 17 The first forged position In these darck and clowdy dayes saith he least the Sunshine of knowlege should disperse the mystes of ignorance and giue light to the dymme of sight this position was set downe for their Maxime or rule infallible that ignorance is the mother of deuotion that the sacred woord of God which was giuen to be a Lanterne to all our feet and a light to our steps was forbidden to the lay sorte for so they called them as matter vnfit for them to looke into To which the warder beginneth his answere thus How manifest a falshood it is that reading of scriptures is forbâ—dden to all lay men is sufficiently shewed by that which goeth before VVard p. 17. for in any of the three learned tonges any lay man or woman may read them at their pleasure and in vulgar translations also suche as haue lycens and I thinke Sir Frauncis wil not deny that many of the laytie vnderstand Latin How then and with what face complayneth he so piteously or rather hypocritically that the sacred woord of God which was giuen to be a lanterne to our fâ—ete c was forbidden to the lay sort To this interrogatioÌ„ of the warder Sir FrauÌ„cis replieth now noe one syllable more then before is sayd VVhether ignorance be the mother of deuotion And further where as the warder chargeth him sorely with malepart ignorance for scoffing at the woord laymen and aâ— the distinction betwene Laytie and Cleargie and by this occasion sheweth the true meaning of those woords with the auncient begynning vse and practize of the primitiue Churche out of Origen Epiphanius Hierome and diuers other fathers doctors general CouÌ„cels the patient knight dissembleth all this according to the first shift discouered in the beginning Sir F. and O. E. do flie shamfully and saith nothing at all to it neither doth his Proctor O. E. helpe him out herein with any one woord though woords be very good cheape with him After this the warder cometh to the positioÌ„ it self saying But we deny this Maxime or infallible rule to be ours and do say that it is your calumniation only and not our position and that among vs it is neither Maxime noâ— Minime And for yow to proue it a Maxime yow must shew that all Catholykes or the most part do hold it and to proue it a Minime at least yow must shew that some one doth hold it neither of which yow can euer doe and so yow remayne disgraced Thus said he what answereth Sir F. Thus VVast pag. 47. A strange accusation and grieuous slaunder no doubt to charge those men with nourishing the people in ignorance whom all the world knoweth to haue vsed strange meanes to bring them to knowlege For what meant they by the costly setting vp of many faire and wel guylded Images in Churches was it not that they might be lay mennes bookes and by reading on them they might attaine knowlege To this I answere first that this proof is far of from shewing that it is a Maxime and infallible rule among vs that ignorance is the mother of deuotion why is not this proued especially seing S r. F. is required in honor to do it Is the running to the controuersy of Images a sufficient discharge for this Doe not all men see this kynd of shifting But let vs say somewhat to his instance of faire guilded Images as though they made to his purpose First then I say that those faire Images of Christ and his Saints against which he enueigheth if they be ioyned with other instruments of light instruction as are preaching teaching
it is affirmed by their owne wryters that so many men so many myndes and so many diuers interpretations among them-selues of the selfesame words of scripture are to be found as yow may see set downe at large in another book of the softer Caluinists set forth by the same publike authority as the former and intituled A suruey of the pretented holy Discipline imprinted at London An. 1593. especially in the 31. Chapter whose title is this How and with what disagreement they wrest and misconster the scriptures c. Where hauing shewed by many examples that fiue or six diuers interpretations are giuen sometymes vpon one and the selfe same sentence of scripture by these his puritane brethren He addeth further these wordes Suruey c. 31. Caterbraulis of ProtestaÌ„ts and PuritaÌ„s Vnto these Caterbraules and pitiful distractions which now I haue shewed I might ad a great heape of other confusions all proceeding from such intollerable presumption as is vsed by peruerting and false interpretation of the sacred Scriptures And agayne whosoeuer doth deale with the Scriptures in this sort as these fellowes do wel may he speake proud things exalt himselfe promise mountaynes brag of the Prophets Apostles but in the end all cometh to nothing c. Loe heere what this brother sayth of the rest of the caterbraules and pittiful distractions from them of their intollerable presumption in peruerting and false interpreting scriptures of their swelling pryde in bragging of hauing the prophets and Apostles on their syde when they haue nothing but vanitye yet these brags of scriptures prophets and Apostles must be good and currant proofe when they deale with vs against the authoritye of the vniuersal Churche as yow shal see by O.E. in the next Chapter and when we tel them of any diuision among themselues they wil deny it on all handes as Syr F. doth heere of the Puritanes and O. E. afterward though he hath written against them most spitefully and doggedly for he hath no other style as it seemeth and fynally let all men iudge but especially the reader whom it most importeth for his instruction with what truth and conscience Syr F. can say and wryte as he doth matters staÌ„ding as I haue shewed that not only the professors of their ghospel in England but all other Churches also in Christendome where the ghospel is imbraced are of one Iudgement and thervpon coÌ„clude with this hypocritical prayer to mock God withall And in this blessed vnitie grounded vpon veritie the Lord for euer keepe vs. Whervnto I say also amen so long as they remaine enemies to Gods Catholike Churche wherin only veritie and vnitie is to be found AN ANSVVERE TO three fond obiections or interrogations of Syr F. with an addition about O. E. who is called vp agayne to the stage to tell his opinion about this first blessing of vnitie in veritie CAP. VII AND this now might be sufficient for refutation of this first ridiculous blessing set downe by the knight were it not that I am forced to follow him yet a litle further into an other poynt which is that he forseing how albeit this first blessing of vnitie among them could be proued as it cannot yet might it not be alleaged for a peculiar blessing of his men except it could be shewed also that it were singular to them alone and not commoÌ„ also to Catholikes before they and their religion sprong vp for if we had vnitie also in fayth before them then cannot vnitie be accompted their blessing more then ours for which cause he endeauoureth to shewe that Catholikes had no vnitie of fayth before Luthers ghospel began which paradox he wil needs proue by three graue interrogations which I pray yow note and therby obserue the mans singular wit and learning Yow vaunt sayth he of a general vnitie before alteration of religion Pag. 13. but how worshipped yow one God when yow worshipped so many Idols To this I answere that if we worshipped Idols Three foâ—d interrogatioÌ„s â—f the K. and so were Idolators this error was so vniuersally receyued among vs as euen in this poynt also we had vnitie which protestants cannot shew in their errors and falsityes as before hath byn declared And so this question is both ydle and easy to answere for the consequent but for the antecedent it is most false for we deny that any Idols were among Catholikes August de vtilitate ieiunij tomo 9. â—ub finem S. Hier. in c. 6. Amos in c. â—2 Ose. S. Augustines and S. Hieroms sentence is cleare and sound as before hath ben noted that heretikes are the Idolaters of the new Testament for adoring their own fansies Secondly he asketh agayne how we could haue vnitye when as we were so miserably rent into innumerable sectes of fryers and monkes To which I answere that all these professed one fayth without any difference in any one article of beliefe And consequently this question is more simple then the former for that difference of habytes or particular manner of lyfe breaketh not vnity of religion Thirdly he asketh and vrgeth yet more sharpely how caÌ„ yow haue one head of your Churche vnles yow reiect Christ that is the onely head To this I wil answere out of his owne wordes that we can haue one external and ministerial head vnder Christ by the same reason that himselfe in the same place sayth that English Protestants haue one head of their Churche which is Christ the Lord and his substitute annoynted their Soueraigne Q. vnder him So that yf it do not exclude Christ among the Protestants to haue a womaÌ„ head of their Churche vnder Christ much lesse doth it exclude Christ among vs to haue a man head a Priest head of this reason I am content to make any man iudge And with this I wil end my treatise of the first benediction of vnitie in veritie which is as truly and fitly applyed to Protestants as if a man should assigne it for a special blessing of Greeks and Germanes aboue other nations neuer to exceed in drinking or of those of Guinea neuer to fal out or fight among themselues who neuer lightly are occupyed in other things And lastly I wil close vp all with the sentence and prophesy of no worse a man then Martyn Luther himselfe Luthers prophesye of Protestants coment in Psalm 5. who wryteth thus Certè non alia ratione confligit Deus cum haereticis quam vt inter illos existat factiosus quidam dissensionis spiritus ex â—llorum enim discordia interitus quoque perditio consequitur Trulie God doth not fight by any other meanes with heretikes then by permitting among them a certayne seditious spirite of dissentioÌ„ by which their ouerthrow also and perdition doth ensue Thus
the first that if this woodcock or any of his crew can shew any one noueltie as an article of fayth in our religion which was not beleeued in the Apostles tyme and in all ages since by the professors of the Catholike fayth eyther explicite or implicite as diuines terme it we shal yeild in all the rest for that we hold the foresaid rule of fayth deliuered by the Apostles to haue byn ful and perfect and that whatsoeuer poynt of fayth hath byn determined of since by general councels confirmed by Popes hath byn no new thing but explication only of that which was before deliuered by the Apostles albeit not so expreslie knowne to all In the second poynt also we hold that if O.E. or his mates can shewe any one heresie taken for an heresie by the general Churche since Christs tyme vnto Luthers or after to be holden by vs truely and in the same sense wherin it was condemned for an heresy and holden by those heretykes if this I say can be truly shewed and not as this vice cometh in with fustian-apes for veluet telling vs a tale of the Coliâ—ridians that offred Sacrifice to the Virgin Mary and other like from whom he cannot deny but that we differ most manifestly though his forehead be neuer so hard If this I say can be prooued that any one heresy is truely among vs and not the similitude only or shadow therof then wil we aske no further proof of any thing against vs for that we hold absolutely that eyther all or none is trew in our religion but on the contrary syde we shal shewe and demonstrate most clearely that they hold many old condemned heresies in the self same sense wordes and meaning wherin they were condemned by the vniuersal Churche held by those heretikes And this is the true difference betweene vs and them to wit that they obiect to vs shadowes and resemblances of heresyes but we conuince them of true heresy in deed IT IS FVRTHER shewed by diuers cleare examples that O. E. and his fellowes do playnly dispayre of all certayne meane or rule to try the truth among them-selues or with vs. CAP. XVII NOtwithstanding that sufficient hath byn said before in diuers chapters of this first encounter to shew that Protestants haue no sure rule or certayne meanes at all for agreement in matters of Religion Sup. cap 3.4 5.15 16. or for consent or assurance therin yet for so much as this is a most principal poynt to be wel vnderstood deeply pondered by euery man that loueth his eternal lyfe and saluation I haue thought good to treat one poynt more in this chapter which is the confession of our aduersaries them-selues in this behalfe though not in playne words yet in manifest deedes which are not nor ought to be of lesse authoritie then wordes And first of all I wil shewe this by their passing ouer without answere this whole matter being the most principal of all this first encounter when the warder vrgeth them most earnestlie in the poynt it selfe and both of them I meane both the K t. first the minister after him do answere directlie no one woord vnto the whole demonstration which is a playne confession that they cannot answere it but yet to shewe it more euidently and to conuince them in this place I wil repeate agayne what the warder said before I would aske S. F. sayth he or any such man as he is Pag. 4. that determineth so resolutely that his only religion among so many others as are extant at this day is true and all others false wheron doth he ground his certaintie Tvvo vvayes of tryal proposed Two onely meanes can S. F. haue to guyde himselfe in this case first that he hath receaued this doctrine of such or such persons preachers ministers or doctors whose learning and knowledge in this behalfe he trusteth absolutely and then is his whole fayth buylded vpon the credit of man as is euident and consequently is nothing worth nor no fayth at all The other way is that he beleeueth it for that it is founded in Scripture but this way to S. F. must needs be as vncertayne as the other yf not more for that to be sure that it is soundly grouÌ„ded vpon Scripture he must first read himselfe his whole beleefe expresly in Scriptures which is much for a man of S.F. occupation to do and then he must be able to iudge of many other poyntes belonging to the same as namely that the book is surely Scrâ—pture that he readeth And then that the translation which he vseth is trulie made out of the learned tongues Hebrew Greeke and Latâ—n And lastly he must be sure of the true sense and exposition which also are hard matters for a man of S. F. learning and much more for others that know lesse then he Yea and when all is done yf he had all these helpes needful for such a matter as he hath not yet were it but a priuate maÌ„nes opinioÌ„ consequently his fayth should be grounded but vpon his owne particuler iudgmeÌ„t which maketh no fayth at all but opinion only as often hath byn sayd for that fayth must haue Gods expresse authoritie for her foundation So that to conclude the first blessing which S. F. in particular thinketh to haue receaued by this change of his religion is in effect that whereas before when he beleeued the Catholyke and vniuersal fayth of Christendome deliuered vnto him by the vniuersal Churche as founded on Scripture which Churche Christ his Apostles gaue him expresse commission to credit his beleef was properly fayth founded vpon a rock that could not fayle now hauing left that fortresse cast him-self into the waues of new opinions he hath nothing certayne at all but so much as he list to chose of him-self or of other mennes opinions which choise is properly called heresie for that the word heresy in Greek as all learned men know signifieth nothing els but a certayne election and choise in matters of Religion to wit when a man leauing the commoÌ„ coÌ„sent of the general Churche â—â— ooseth only to follow that which his owne priuate iudgment induceth him vnto And to make this more playne how all these people haue no other rule of beleef A playne demonstration against sir F. but only what their owne fancy leadeth them vnto I aske S. F. not of any Catholyke Doctor nor of any ancient Father as S. Augustine S. Ierom or the rest whom easely he would coÌ„temne but rather of his owne Doctors Martyn Luther Iohn Caluin Theodore Bâ—za such others whom he supposeth to haue byn seruants of God and indued with his holy spirit all the world knoweth that they were more learned then S. F. yet why should he beleeue his owne iudgement more then theirs in pointes of fayth wherin they differ from him as Luther about the real presence and the number and forme of Sacraments and many other points
interpretations are then in holy Scriptures The ministers ridiculous circuling Here is one circle heare an other Is he hath bestowed the gifte of interpreting scriptures on the Churche how should the people be better assured of the excellency of the Churcâ—es interpretation then by seing the same confirmed by scriptures This is the second circle more foolish then the former And mark heere good people the assurance which these men doe teache yow for your safty in reading scriptures when yow vnderstand not the letter of the Scripture first saith he yow must goe to Christ the best interpreter and when yow vnderstand not Christs interpretation yow must returne to the letter of the Scriptures to know the excellency of Christs interpretation and yf yow vnderstand neither then must yow goe to the interpretation of the Churche and yf yow vnderstaÌ„d not that then must yow goe backe againe to the scriptures to assure your self as he saith of the excellency of the Churches interpretation Intricat dealing of hereticks about vnderstanding of scriptures But in all this going and comming turning and wynding I would aske our whirle-headed Minister who shal be iudge or where shal the stay be or how can symple people discerne of these things which he prescribeth One wil think he hath the letter with him anâ— other the sense and spirit a third the inspiracioÌ„ of Christ a fourth the interpretatioÌ„ of the Churche then wil all foure fall out where and what and which is the Churche and must returne to the Scriptures againe and to their owne fancies and interpretations about this and all the rest And this is the graue and sure direction which O. E. deliuereth vs. To my other instance and example of the Eunuch Apostle afterward of Ethiopia as S. Ireney and other fathers do cal hym to whom reading and not vnderstanding the Prophet Isay Iraeneus Christ by his Angel sent Philip to be his interpretor this fellow answereth nothing but that it was not Philip the Apostle but the Deacon who was sent But what of this yf it were so Doth this answere the argument The glosse vpon that place of the Acts saith Nie. de Lyre in cap. â— Act. that diuers learned men were of different opinion about that matter whether it were Philip the Apostle or Philip the Deacon that was sent to the Eunuche And Tertullian more neare to that tyme then our Minister by a thousand and foure hundred yeares Tertul. lib. de Bapt. c. 1â— and more learned then he by ten thousand and fyue hundred yardes doth call this Philip an Apostle twise within fiue lynes But what if it were Philip the Deacon what hurteth it my argument eyther of them is sufficient for our purpose to proue that this Eunuche being a principal cheef man and a Proselyt ore Iew by religion and not vnlearned in both their law and language as appeareth by his reading their scriptures yet had he need of an external interpreter to be sent to him by God Wherof is inferred that muche more vnlearned simple people reading scriptures traÌ„slated into vulgar tongues and for the most part corrupted by Sectaries to their hands haue need to be moderated and wel directed in this matter to the end they gayne and not leese therby whâ—ch poynt the Warder proueth by euident effects of infynit heresyes rysen by rash and vnreuerent reading of the Scriptures Luther in which respect Luther himself against other Sectaries ympugning hym by shew of Scriptures calleth it Librum haereticorum the proper book of heretikes whence all of them by euil interpretacion doe frame their heresyes Wee see also within the space of these fowre score late yeares since the Byble hath byn layd open to all sortes of people in all vulgar languages what a Sea of monstrous sects and diuisions haue flowed vpon vs wherof the Warder also giueth diuers particuler examples in England it self and those punished also by Protestants as of Ioane Burcher William Hacket William Ieffrey and others Vnto all which experience declaration this good fellow answereth breeflie thus It is not reading of Scriptures which he styleth rash reading vsed by lay people Pag 49. but neglect of scriptures bringeth forth errour and heresy So that say what yow wilâ— and proue what yow wil this fellow wipeth of all with a bare denial Yet whether neglect of Scriptures or rash or vnreuerent reading which he doth here bring in as opposit may not in some sense be the self same I leaue to discreet men to ponder and thereby the wit of this wryter And where as he saith that heretiks by Tertullian are called Lucifugae Scripturarum Ibideâ—â— the bars of scriptures for that they fly from the true light of scriptures I would pray the reader by this one place to ponder wel with himself of this the fraudulent cogging companion for he would haue it seme and to that end he brinâ—eth it in that Tertullian did assigne it for peculiar propertie of heretikes to fly reaâ—ing of scriptures wherof here we entreat which is so false as nothing can be more and â—â—at wel knoweth the seared conscience of his deceitful Minister A notable abusing Tertullian Tertul. lib. de praescrip aduers haeret cap. 15. seing that the whole â—earned discourse of Tertullian De praescriptioâ—us aduersus haereticos that is of prescriptions â—prescribing against heretikes is principally 〈◊〉 exclude them from tryal by scriptures â—herof they bragged and wherevnto they â—ould seme to runne as ours do now adayes 〈◊〉 this he doth from the 17. Chapter downewards and before he entreth into this demonâ—â—ration he vseth this Preamble Ipsi de Scriptuâ—agunt de scripturis suadent scripturas obtendunt â—c hac sua andacia statim quosdam mouent Heâ—â—tiks do treat of scriptureâ— do perswade out scripture doe pretend scriptures and with is their audacytie doe moue some peoâ—â—e c. And in the very book alleaged by our Miâ—â—â—ter out of Tertullian De resurrectione caruis sheweth that heretikes are great scripture â—n but to peruert and not to vnderstand them aright and that without scrâ—pture no heresyâ— can be founded Tertul. lib de carnts resurrect c. 40. Haereses saith he esse non possent si non perperam scripturae intelligi possent There could not be heresyes yâ— the scrâ—ptures could not be euil vnderstood And in the very particuler place and controuersy handled by him of the resurrection of the flesh and body against heretikes that denyed thesame vnder preâ—ence of scripture he saith to one of them Ibid. c. 10. Tenâ—s scripturas utbus caro infuscatur tene ettam quibus illustratur Thow dost alleage scriptures wherby the basenes and infirmytie of our flesh is set forth harcken aâ—so to those scrâ—ptures by whiâ—h thesame is exalted and gâ—orified And then passâ—ng ouer to an other poynt of proof he alleageth a place out of the Apostle 1. Thess 5. for resurrection of the flesh saying thus Age
Lutherans and one sect of Lutherans against the other as the ridged of Saxony against the soft of the lower parts of Germany or the Suinglians and Caluinists amongst themselues I do not thinke it expedient in this place to detayne the reader so long this being sufficient and more then sufficient though it be not the hundreth part of that which may be sayd to shew the impudency of Syr Francis his assertion where he auoucheth no lesse blyndly then boldly that all the churches of Christendome where his gospel is embraced are of the same iudgment and in blessed vnity of verytie For refutation of which mad paradox he that wil see more let him read first Luther and LutheraÌ„s bookes against Sacramentaries Haereticos seriò censemus saith Luther altenus ab Ecclesia Dei esse Zuinglianos sacramentarius omnes Luth. lib. contra Sacramentaries We do earnestly censure all Suinglians and Sacramentaries for heretikes and out of the church of God Luth. epist. ad â—lbert Marchion Prussiae And againe in another booke Haud aliter caueant omnes à Zuinglio quà m à Satanae veneno Let all men take heed of Zuinglius â—s of the poyson of Sathan Vid. Autiâ—ab Luth. tit de haeresi And againe Sacramentarij sunt perdiabolati superdiabolati transdiabolati haeretici Sacramentaryes are indiueled ouerdiueled and thoroughe diueled heretikes And to the end yow may not thinke that this was spoken by Luther in choler only without deliberacion or recalled before his death I wil cyte yow one sentence of his now when he was old CoÌ„fes Tigur tract 3. fol. 108. Ego saith he qui iam sepulchro vicinus obambulo hoc testimonium â—anc gloriam ad Christi saluatoris tribunal perferam c. I that now walke neere to my graue wil carry this testimony and this glory with me to the tribunal seat of Christ my Sauiour that I haue euer with all vehemeÌ„cy damned and fled those fanatical heretickes and enymies of the Sacrament Suinglius Oecolampadius Stinkefelâ—ius and their followers whether they liue at Zuricke or at what place els in the world And finally the same Luther in an epistle to a deare frend of his the same yeare he died wrote thus Luth. epist. ad Iacob presbyt Ecclesiâ—â— Brem Doct. 1546. Mihi satis est omnium infoelicissimo vna ista beatitudo Beatus vir qui non abijt in concilio Sacramentariorum nec stetit in via Zuinglianorum nec sedit in Cathedra Tygurinorum Habes quid sentiaÌ„ It is sufficient for me most vnhappy man to dy with this one blessing Blessed is the man that hath not gone in counsel of Sacramentaries nor stood in the way of Suinglians nor sitteÌ„ in the chaire of Tygurines by following their sacramentary doctrine and thus yow vnderstand what my iudgement is Thus much I thought good to cyte out of Luther himselfe concerning his iudgment of S r. FraÌ„cis his Churche for that he was the first Father of his new gospel Fox in his Calend. maketh Luther a saynct and Iohn Fox doth put him in his Calender for a saynt and holy coÌ„fessor vpon the 18. day of February Doctor whitakers also S r. F. great Doctor preferreth Luthers iudgment in diuers poynts expressely and precisely before Augustine VVhitaker gainst M. Martins discouery Pag. 6. Cyprian and a thousand Churches to wit saith he when he bringeth scripture for his proofe which is a very foolish and childish exception for that the importance standeth in the interpretation of the scriptures alleaged seeing that Luther as wel as other heretikes alleaged commonly euery where scriptures for euery purpose but then especially when he writeth against SacrameÌ„taryes that is to say against Whitakers himselfe and his people wherby the said Doctors foolish censure is easely discouered to be no lesse voyd of wit and reason then of shame fastnes but such men they are Now if any be desirous to heare on further what the Zuinglians Zvvinglians against Lutherans and Caluenists haue returned home agayne to Luther and Lutherans or on the other syde what Lutherans amongst themselues and Caluinists amongst themselues haue written one against another let them read the Apologie of the Tygurynes together with the coÌ„fession of their Churche set foorth anno 1545. where they shew the malignity of Luthers spirit his pryde and insolency and other such vertues Let them read the admonitions of Ihon Caluin to Ioachimus Westphalus Caluiâ— vit admon con VVestph in harmonia Euang. where he calleth Lutherans Temulentoâ— cyclopes gygantes latratores phreneticos c. Dronken cyclops gyants mad barkers and the like Let them read also the answere of Westphalus VVestph lib. coÌ„tr Caluin what he sayth of the Caluinists exhorting the men of Frankford to dryue them out as hypocrites and pestilent doctors infecting the people with venemous heresy Ochin lib. contr sect teor ter Let them read the dialogue of Bernardinus Ochinus once a preacher of heresy in K. Edwards dayes in England contra sectam tâ—rrenorum Deorum against the secte of earthely Gods meaning by the earthly Gods his old maisters Caluin Pharellus and other teachers of Geneua whom he calleth heretikes and prophane Gods of Geneua and Tygurine of whom he sayth amongst other things Quod noctu somniarunt id chartis mandant excudique curant suaque scripta verba pro oraculis haberi volunt That which they dreame of in the night they wryte by day and do cause it to be printed and wil haue their wrytings to be holden for oracles And yet these be the reuerent ringleaderes of our new Religion in England Stankarius a famous new Protestant sectarie in Polonia Stank lib. de Trin. Mediator wryting against not only Caluin but Peter Martyr also and Bullinger two principal Zwinglians and the one our principal Oxford professor of new diuinitie in K. Edwards dayes calleth them deploratissimos haereticos most desperate heretikes and addeth that they are farre worse then papists and that one Peter Lombard maister of the sentences though he were a sworne Papist yet is he more to be esteemed for wit honestie and learning then a hundred Luthers 200. Melanchtons 300. Bâ—llengers 400. Peter Martyrs 500. Caluins all which saith he if they were ponded in a morter there could not be gotten out of them one ounce of true diuinitie This is his iudgement of our best Zuinglian and Caluinian teachers Hessusius a famous Lutheran wryting also against Caluyn and Beza affirmeth the first to be a very sycophant and delicate Epicure of Geneua Hessus in defens contr Caluinum the second a very beast and lasciuious Cyclops and his Doctrine to be more filthy His iudgmeÌ„t of Caluyn Beza and venemous then the poesie of Martial and Catullus fitter for the stewes then for honest men or women to read And this of Caluinists What should I go forward heere to cyte the book of Flaccus Illyricus VVarre
we must obay kings whether they be good or bad Knokes appel fol. 26. they answere it is blasphemy so to say Againe when these obiect That God placed euil kinges and TyraÌ„ts sometymes to punish the people The others answere So he doth sometymes priuate men also to kill them Moreouer when they alleage S. Paule That he comandeth vs we should pray for princes â—uch de iure reg pag. â—7 1. Tim. 2. The other do answere we may punish theeues and pray for them also And when these reply that the same Apostle commaundeth expresly to be obedient to such a prince 1. Tim. 3. They answere Buch. Ibid. Pag. 50. That Paul wrote this in the infancy of the Churche but if he liued now he would say otherwise except he would dissent from himselfe Ibid. fol. 56.57 I leaue much more that might be alleaged to this effect And all this and much more is testified also by a brother of their owne of the softer sort in a book printed at London by publike authority in the yeare 1593. by Iohn wolfe the title wherof was Dangerous positions c. with this posy adioyned vnto it out of the epistle of S. Iude They despise gouernment and speake euil of them that are in authority And hauing geuen testimony to this which I haue cyted much more he giueth his censure of others also of the same profession beyond the sea Lib. 1. Pa. 12. This new diuinity sayth he of dealing thus with Princes is not only held by Knockes and Bucchanan alone that are Scots but generally for ought I can learne by most of the cheefe consistorians beyond the seas being of the Geneuian humor as Caluyn Beza Hotâ—maÌ„ c. And the same wryter in his second booke afterward doth shew at large how that M â— Goodman M r. Whittingham and other English Protestants that fled to Geneua in Q. Maries dayes haue left wrytten the same farre worse positions against the authority of princes as in their bookes and in the foresaid collection of this author may be read Here then these matters being so and of so great waight and the contradiction being open and notorious concerning princely authority and obedience thervnto belonging what wil our knight say here or how wil he defend vnity in verity to be amoÌ„g his brethreÌ„ in this so principal capital a poynt or how wil he satisfie her Maiestie herâ—n after all his faire speech for he doth not deny the PuritaÌ„s to be his brethren as O. E. doth afterward but rather defendeth them with main and might as after yow shal heare But if we leaue the Prince and come to Bishops which is the second principal member of their churche and body their disagreement is much more notorious then in the former For as the protestant speaketh honorably of them so doth the Puritan quite contrary calling them Dangerous posit lib. 20. cap. 12. the greatest and most pestilent enimyes that the state of England hath vnlawful false bastardly gouernours of the churche thrust in by ordenance of the diuel petty antechrists cogging cosening knaues profane paltery pernicious pestilent Prelates in respect of their places enymyes of God their calling meere Antichristian c. And this for their bishops and cheefe pastors whome they ought to presume according to S. Paules speech to be put ouer them yf any be by the holy Ghost Caluinian contradictioÌ„ about the Bish. cheefe Pastors Act. 20. But yf they be enymies of God cogging knaues petty Antichrists and ordayned by the diuel himselfe as these their owne children and brethren say and sweare then are English protestants wel directed by them and to a good end wil they come But let vs heare what they say of their immediate pastors and teachers I meane their ministers and present cleargie Our supposed ministers say they are a multitude of desperate and forlorne Atheists Ibid cap. 13. Of their ministers Ibid. cap. 11. accursed vncircumcised and murthering generation The cleargy is endighted as the followers of Antichrist they are wolues it is a Sinagoge of Sathan their only endeauour how to preueÌ„t Christ they are knowne to be enimyes vnto all syncerity Posir ibid. li. 2. cap. 4. c. And in another place Right puissant poysoned persecuting and terrible priests The holy league of subscripsion the crue of monstrous and vngodly wretches horned masters of the conspiration house Antichristian swynish rabble the conuocation of diuels vnder Belzabub of Canterbury cheeâ—e of diuels c. Thus of them And concerning the whole gouernment face Ibid. cap. 4. and corps of the Churche of England they say Antichrist raigneth amongst vs the established gouernment of the Churche is treaterous against the Maiestie of Iesus Christ it giueth leaue to a man to be any thing but a sound Christian c. And this of their whole Churche parts and pastors therof But I let passe what these fellowes say wryte of her Maiestie About the Q councel and parlament head of their Churche denying wholy her ecclesiastical authority and subiecting her to their pryuate excommunications when they please Dang posiâ— lib. â— c. Of the Lords of her priuy Counsel also charging them not to deale in matters ecclesiastical Of the Parlament in like maner and lawes made therby which in EnglaÌ„d is the highest court saying in particular therof Ibid. lib. 2. cap. 1. that as great indignity is offred vnto Iesus Christ in committing his English Churche vnto the gouernment of the common lawes as for hirâ—lings vnder any great king to commit his beloued spouse vnto the direction of the mistresse of the stewes c. Finally of their common book of seruice and administration of Sacraments established by Parlament The commâ—Ì„ book of Protestants wherin by name Sir F. in this reply braggeth so confidently VVast Pag. 12. that their is so great vnity amongst them these his brethren wryte thus Dang posit lib. 2. cap. 9. There prescript forme of seruice is ful of corruption in all the order of their seruice there is no edification but confusion The Sacraments are wickedly mangled and prophaned they eate not the Lords supper but play a pagent of their owne to blynd the people their publike baptisme is ful of childish and superstitious toâ—es c. All these fights warres and dissentions in most principal points of their religion are at this day in England betwene ridged or strayt Caluinists commonly called Puritans and the softer â—ort of the same Caluinian sect who are distinguished from the others by the name of moderate Protestants that do follow for their rule of faith and religion the prescript of Parlament and her Ma ties proceedings But now besides this contrariety of positions there is yet another dissention among these brethren more important then all the rest which is their disagreing and capital enimity about the interpretation of Scriptures VVarre in expounding scriptures wherunto all matters being by both their iudgments to be referred and all other iudges and trials left a side as they require they come to fal out presently about the sense and interpretation wherin
te prolatam in qua non author esse debes sed custos non institutor sed sectator non ducens sed sequens c. This pawne or pledge is a thing geuen yow in credit and not inuented by yow a thing which yow haue receyued and not deuised a matter not of wit but of doctrine not of pryuate vsurpation but of publyke tradition a thing brought downe vnto yow not brought forth first by yow a thing wherof yow must not be author but keep only not the fownder but a follower not a leader but one that is led Thus sayth he of the rule of faith in his tyme which rule also serueth vs no lesse at this day against all sorte of protestants then it did them at that tyme against their aduersaryes but rather much more for that our prescription of this rule is by many hundred yeares elder then theirs was and so this shal suffise about this matter of the Ecclesiastical rule of fayth what yt was and what the auncient Fathers did thinke and esteeme therof and now we wil examine a litle what styrre the minister maketh about his goodly rule of the present particular Churche of England OF THE ENGLISH rule of beliefe set downe by O. E. And what substaÌ„ce or certaintie it hath how they doo vse it for excluding Puritanes other Protostantes and of diuers shameful shifts of O. E. CAP. XVI NOTHING is more true in that kynd then the saying of the philosopher A â—ift lib. 1. Phis. Contraria iuxta se posita clarius elucescunt That contraryes being layd togeather do make each other better seene and vnderstood as a ragged garment layd by another that is fayre and pretious maketh the ragges and patches more euident and contemtible and euen so this ridiculous new deuised rule of O. E. if we compare it with the former auncient rule commended vnto vs by the old holie fathers we shal see more perspicuously the vanitie therof for that he sayth Pag. 19. As for our selues that is the Protestants of England all of vs professe the doctrine of Iesus Christ according to that rule that was established by the common consent of England and whosoeuer doth digresse from this is not of our societie c. But here I would aske him what rule this is and in what yeare it was established by whom and how many and what authoritie they had to establish or to make any new rule from the old receyued before in matters of religion See the statutis anno Henr. 8.25 c. 14. an 26. cap. 1. an 27. c. 15 19. an 31. ca. 14. an 34. 35. cap 1. for yf he speake of K. Henry the 8. his dayes when the first chaunges beganne and when diuers new rules were set downe in parlament with this expresse commendation that they were taken out of the pure and syncere only woord of God I doo not think that O. E. wil admit them or stand vnto them though Iohn Fox do hold all that tyme of K. Henrie his mutations after his breach with the Churche of Rome for the tyme of the ghospel and so doth terme it euery where In K. Edward dayes also he being head of the Churche An 1. Ed c. 1.2 11. an 2. 3. cap. 1.21.23 though but 9. yeares old there was two or three new rules made and altered about matters of religion and their communion book all pretended out of the word of God with reuocation of that which K. Henry the Father and his Parlaments out of the same woord had appoynted before which rule also vnder K. Edward I do not know whether our ProtestaÌ„ts wil allow in all poyntes now but sure I am our Puritanes do not nor wil not as appeareth by theire owne bookes what assurance then is there in this mutable and controuerted rule of so fewe yeares in age But the most important question is who and what men and by what authoritie they made this rule The Warder knew no other when he writ but the Lords of the ParlameÌ„t and so called it parlament religion wherwith O. E. is very angry Pag. 19. and sayth where he calleth our religion parlament religion he speaketh like himselfe that is falsly and slaunderously for albeit the same be receyued by authoritie of the Prince state yet is it Christs reâ—igion and not the Princes Soone spoken but how doth he proue it here is styl that old shifte of petiâ—io principij hissed out by learned men which consisteth in setting downe that for a principle which most needeth proof as heere where our minister wil needs haue his religion to be Christs religion whether we wil or no and that it was but receyued and promulgated only by the parlament but then must I aske him agayne what authoritie besydes the parlament hath determyned it to be Christs religion as also that the Puritans religion is not Christs religion notwithstanding they pretend Christ and his Apostles no lesse then doth the protestant and then if we fynd that the only authoritie that defyneth this matter is the Parlament allowing the one and condemning the other for that scriptures of themselues can not do it quia actiones sunt suppositorum as a litle after he vrgeth and then must needs the credit truth of English religion depend of the parlament and therof worthelie be called Parlament religion But harken good reader what an example he hath found to auoyd An example making against himself that his religion may not be called Parlament religion The Emperors Gratian Valentinian and Theodâ—sius decreed sayth he that all people of their gouernment should hold the doctryne of Peter the Apostle Pag. 19. taught by Damasus bishop of Rome and Peter bishop of â—lexandria that they should beleeue one God and three persons yet I hope this Noddy wil not cal the fayth of the Trinitie an imperial fayth See this haÌ„dled more largely before in the annâ—t vpon the letter of O. â— to the reader c. Yes surelie Syr Noddy-maker I would cal and proue it so if the case were like that is if these three Emperors had determined this fayth as of theÌ„selues and by their imperial authoritie and that it had byn a different beliefe from the rule of fayth receyued before throughout Christendome as your parlament religioÌ„ was and is hauing no other ecclesiastical Authoritie â—or her establishment but only the authoritie of your Prince and parlament which defyned it to be trew religion and coÌ„forme to the word of God and determined that the other which was there before in vse to wit the Catholike to be opposite and contrarie to thesaid word and therfore to be abolished so as the allowance of the one and reprobation of the other proceeded from the parlament But the proceeding of the foresaid three Emperors in this their alleaged decree was farre otherwise which O.E. if he had had any more wit then a Noddy would neuer
defacing of our doctryn and doings he sheweth first of all the smal reason the K t. had or hath to contemne so proudlie as he doth the Clergie of Q. Maries tyme and of former ages for darknesse ignorance and blyndnes declaring by diuers particulers that they were farre more learned then those that since haue stepped vp in their places and possessed their roomes And from this he passeth to shew that the foresaid two preaÌ„bles about reading scriptures and the punishment of death ther-vnto said to be assigned are no wayes true in any playne meaning sense or interpretation but feigned by the K t. him-selfe and consequentlie can not euer be proued or defended and by occasion of these preambles About reading of scriptures the warder entereth into examination of the things theÌ„-selues declaring how farre the reading of holy Scriptures in vulgar languages is permitted to all men among Catholykes and what restraynt is made therof towards some for what causes and reasons and vpon what necessitie and what is the true state of this controuersie betweene vs and Protestants as also what hurt profit damages or commodities haue or do insue therof with alleaging both reasons authorities and experiences in that behalf To all which discourse of reasons and experiences set downe at good length by the warder and conteyning in deed the principal substance of the controuersie the K â— answereth no one worde nor so much as mentyoneth the same in this his reply but passeth to other matters as by the combat of this insuing Encounter yow wil manifestlie see and behold and pittie the poore K t. for this weaknes The second parte of the vvatchmans impugnation and vvarders defence After this cometh the warder to handle the second parte of this Encounter to wit about the foresaid foure absurd positions grounds and maximes set downe by the K t. for ours which the warder prooueth to be neyther Maximes nor minimes of Catholyke Doctryne for that to proue them Maximes all Catholyke wryters must hold them and to proue them minimes some one at least must hold theÌ„ but that neyther of these can be prooued And consequentlie that they are no positions or principles of Catholyke religion but fictions rather of heretykes and false impositions of the K t. And for the first that ignorance is held by vs to be the mother of deuotion The first forged position for that the watchman bringeth no other proof but only that reading of Scriptures was forbidden to the lay sorte at which distinction also of laytie cleargie he seemeth to iest hervpon the Warder taketh occasion first to proue by many old testimonies the vse and antiquitie of this distinction wher-vnto the K t. in this last reply returneth not any one word of answere and after this agayne the warder declareth largely that this position is neyther Maxime nor minime among Catholykes and that ignorance is neyther held for the mother daughter or kinse-woman of deuotion which he proueth both by the definition of deuotion it self out S. Augustine S. Thomas and others as also by the effects shewing that deuotion is grounded vpon knowledge not vpon ignorance though vpon perticular causes the learnedest men are not alwayes the most deuoute All which discourse the K t. thought good to passe ouer with silence as wel as the former without taking any notice therof in this his last reply and therby yow may see whether yt be more and more substantial that he leaueth vnanswered then that which he answereth About the second position imposed vpon Catholykes The second position that lay men must not medle with matters of religion as the vntruth therof is more apparant then any of the rest so was there lesse written in the refutation but that necessitie inforced the warder to defend S. Thomas of CaÌ„terburie dishonored and slaundered intollerably by the K t. wher-vnto what he answereth in this Wast-woord now and how for defence of his former falshoods he intangleth him-self in diuers new difficulties and inextricable absurdityes shal be seene afterward in the particular discussion of matters that ensue In the third position that the Pope or meanest Priest coming from him is to be obeyed vnder payne of damnation though he command blasphemie The third faygned position c. The warder is more briefe in lyke manner for that the euident falshood therof is apparant to all yet writeth he so much as is needful for a manifest briefe confutation and how litle the K t. hath to answere for deuising of this position and laying it so falsely to Catholykes charge yow shal afterwards see discussed And finally about the fourth and last forged ground of Catholyke religion The fourth false ground to wit that our chiefe remedy for sinne though it were committed immediatly against God him-selfe is to vse the watchmans words A pardon from his Hol. and absolution from his holie Priests but yf the decrees or ordinances of their Romish Synagoue were transgressed hardly any mercy was to be had c. About this I say the warder obserueth only the apparant cauils ignorances and falshoods of the watchmaÌ„ as first that the greatest sinner immediatly committed against God him-selfe are to be remitted among vs by pardons which is a malitious cauil for that we hold such pardons to be auaylable only for the payne due to venial sinnes or for remitting the temporal punishment remayning after mortal synne forgeuen before Secondlie that he conioyneth together Popes pardons and the absolution of Priests in the Sacrament of pennance as though they were both one which is ignoraÌ„ce for that the later remitteth all sinne and the first not And thirdly that the transgressors of the decrees and ordinances of the Churche can hardlie euer obtayne mercie and that they are more hardly pardoned then the grossest sinnes committed against God himseâ—f the warder sheweth to be a most malitious fiction without any grounde or colour of truth To all which obseruations and deductions of the warder the K t. answereth nothing at all in this last replie but filleth vp paper with tales eyther deuised by himself or taken out of Ihon Fox as for example of one â—esselius a merchant of Pardons and of the absolution of one Symon a Monke that is forged to haue poysoned K. Ihon and other such stuffe which yow shal heare discussed and refuted afterward and therby see and perceyue how iustlie this last replie of S â— Francis is called a Wast-word And so we shal passe on to the particular examination of matters point by point ABOVT THE GENERAL charge of false dealing layd to sir Francis in this Encounter and how euil he auoydeth thesame by committing new falshoodes treacheries CAP. II. FIRST then the general charge layd to our K t. throughout this whole second Encounter concerneth two poyntes to wit falsitie and falsifying the later wherof hath this differeÌ„ce from the first that it is both witting and willingly committed and
deceyts day and night geuing them-selues ouer to lustes of the flesh being spotted with adulteries and besydes all this most of them did hault in the articles of their fayth And after this he cometh to talk of religious orders in lyke sorte Religious men also corrupted and principally of those that hauing no possessions liued by almes and were most corrupted and set on by wicliffe against those that had possessions of whome WalsinghaÌ„ sayth suae professionis immemâ—res c. possessionatis inuidentes c. being vnmyndful of their profession and enuying such of other religious orders as had possessions in tantum illam veritatis professionem suam maculabant vt in dâ—ebus illis c. They did spot so farre foorth their profession of truth as in those dayes yt was in euery mÌ„anes mouth that this is a Fryar ergo a lyar This is the discourse of WalsinghaÌ„ wherin yow see first that he speaketh not of all fryars nor against the profession it selfe of fryars which he sayth was the profession of truthe but against such as being forgetful therof and brought â—o maligne and enuie other orders that had possessions which was the art and doctrine of Wicliffe became lyars so as these were S r. F. his fryars and not of S. Francis as before I noted and when he telleth their faults he vttereth the shame of his new ghospel Fox in Calend 2. lan which begane in England by VVicliffe as Fox doth testifie who maketh this first prophet of theirs a Saynt and kalender Martyr Fox monumeÌ„t Pag. 421. though he died in his bed at his benefice in Lincolneshire as Fox denyeth not yet such was his talent in making martyrs And besydes this he discouereth to the Reader to much false dealing in that amoÌ„g all the faultes of Bishops nobilitie comonaltie and religious orders touched seuerally as yow haue heard by his author walsingham he culled out only the lying of Fryars Syr F. taken in false dealing and those not of ours but of his fryars who were made lyars not by their owne institution or by our religion but by the principles of Wiclifs Doctrine which S.F. acknowledgeth I think for his Consider then the mannes wit in alleaging this exaÌ„ple and his truth in handling the same And by this one iudge of the rest though there wil not want other occasions after to coÌ„template also the same much more And hitherto now we haue talked of the general charge of lying and falshood layd to S r. Francis and how he hath sought to auoyd the same by recharging vs and some of ours againe with like fault which as if they were true and could be verified they deliuer not him of his fault so being found also to be false they double his former error and make him more culpable to which effect and for iustifying more the charge layd vpon him of bould false assertions we are now to examine some other particulars of lyke qualitie For more clearer performance wherof I shal set downe some lynes of the Warder which conteyne the first controuersie or charge Thus then he wrote at that tyme. But before S.F. cometh to the matter that is VVardvvord Pag. 1â— to set downe those absurd principles of ours he maketh for his preface a certayne poetical descrâ—ption of the darke cloudy and mistie state of things in Queene Maries tyme in these words It is not vnknown sayth he to many yet liuing neyther can it be altogether hidden from the yonger sort that lyâ—ed with them what a darke mistie cloude of ignorance which brought in popish Idolatrie Deuised darknes and all manner of superstition did ouer shade the whole land c. And againe after In these darke cloudy dayes least the sunshine of knowledge should disperse the mistes of ignorance and geue light to the dimme of sight c. Doth it not seeme that this graue geÌ„tleman describeth the lake of Auernus in Italie or some foggie marsh in England or some smokie kitchen or woodhouse of his owne without a window when he speaketh of our famons country in sormer tymes for aboue a thousand yeares the state of England and the Princes people nobilitie and learned men therof had continued in that Egyptian or rather Cymerian darknes which this gentleman describeth vnder clouds mistes and shadowes vntil his new sunneshine doctors came to inlighten the same And it was accompted then as wyse learned holy valiant noble and florishing a kingdome aswel for religion as otherwise as France Italie Spayne and other reading the scriptures in English could not iudge whether matters of doctrine and religion taught them by their Prelats were true or no as though now they could do it by english reading and that for this cause and for lack of Scriptures in English a number of lving miracles were beleeued and in steed of Christs blood the blood of a duck was worshipped as the blood of Hales was playnly proued to be Syr Francis posed in dicerning a duckes blood from other and openly shewed at Paules crosse in K. Hen. dayes which yet I would aske our Kâ— how a ducks blood could be discerned froÌ„ other blood after so many yeares All this I say and many other such manifest vanities See aftervvard cap. 6. vvhat O. E vvryteth also of this matter and knowne vntruthes as that Bishops in Q. Maries tyme did not preach nor others for them except certayne strawbery sermons of â—â—otting fryars and the lyke These bold assertions I say and contumelious irrisions being knowne to be false aswel by aâ—l that are yet liuing and sawe those tymes as by the books of Homelies and sermons yet extant I meane not to stand vpon the answering in this place but to passe ouer to matter of more substance and to consider of an example or two of ignorance in Q Maries tyme and before For this Kâ— for a ful and irrefragable proof that all was ignorance among Catholykes before the light oâ— Luthers Gospel began to shine VVastvvord Pag. 32. The storie of D Bassinet a â— frenche Apostata Fryar he bringeth vs the only examplâ— as he sayth of D. Bassinet â— man of great learning and autâ—oritie in France whâ— confessed his owne ignoraÌ„ce vntil he fel to read the Scriptures though he had byn a Iudge vpon heretiks beforeâ— Look heere gentle reader the important proof that he alleageth for his purpose cyting only Iohn Fox his Acts and Monuments in the Margent Fox edit ver Pag. 862. but neyther he nor Fox do alleage any one Author where we may read the storie for this is also Fox his shift among others wheÌ„ he meaneth notorious treacherie and yf the whole narration of this Bassinet confessing himself to be ignorant before he fel into the new ghospel were true what authoritie or credit may the saying of an Apostata Fryar fallen into heresy haue against his former state and condition is it maruaile yf he say that he was in ignorance
tyrant may lawfully and meritoriouslie yea ought to be slayne by any vassal or subiect of his whether yt be by force or flatterie or secret traynes notwithstanding any â—ormer othe of fidelitie or confederation made with him and this without expecting any sentence giuen against him or the commandement of any Iudge whatsoeuer This was one article of Ihon Husse condemned by a special decree of the said councel in the end therof Pag. 326â— as is to be seene and the reason why the councel condemned it so solemnly was both the falsitie of the doctrine Desperate dangerous doctryne of Husâ—e and the scandal which the Emperor other Princes there present took of yt And finally for that he reserued to his owne censure and to those of his sect who was a Tyrant and who was not to wit any Prince that should be contrarie to them Enc. 1. cap. 6. as before I haue shewed of our Puritan Caluenists And this being so what gayneth S. F. by vaunting of the learning of Ihon Husse yf all were true that he alleadgeth for him and being false as I haue shewed what booteth him to ly so shamefully for his sake and how doth he alleage Ihon Husse who teacheth so many things contrarie to him and to Caluins doctrine and from whome Luther in his disputation with Ecchius at Lipsia in Saxony in the yeare 1519. Io. Cochl de act Luth. an 1519. Pag. 16. did openlie disclayme together with all his Sect in Bohemia saying Numque mihi placuit nec in aeternum placebit It neuer pleased me nor euer shal yt please me By this then a man may see what vnion ground or certainty these meÌ„ haue in religion that gather such members as these into their Churche nay what conscience also they haue in treating these matters wherof take an example not only in this K t. but also in Ihon Fox the Saint-maker who hauing layd out to the reader an infinite rable of things about this Ihon Husse good aud bad Iohn Fox his mad treatise of Io. Husse true and false but all to his prayse for 80. columnes or pages together of his vaste book but with such confusion as no man can tel what to say or iudge of yt at length he commeth to repeat the absurd propositions before mencioned namely about Prelats and Princes that they leese their authoritie when they fal into mortal sinne which Fox is so farre of from misliking or denying as he wryteth that Husse defended the same and sayd he would proue yt not only out of Scriptures by example forsooth of Saul that was deposed and slayne but by the authorities also of all old auncient doctors Fox Pag. 564. 1. col num 5. to wit S. Augustine Ierome Chrysostome Gregory Cyprian Bernard a most impudent brag of a shamels heretyke and when Ihon Fox hath told all this and much more and made a long Catalogue or treÌ„tal of his worst articles he putteth downe his Iudgment of him in those words These hrings sayth he thus declared Fox Pag. 569. col 1. nu 5â—â— a man may easely vndestand that Ihon Husse was not accused for holding any opinion coÌ„trary to the Articles of our fayth but because he did stowtly teach and preach against the Kingdome of Antichrist for the glory of Christ and restoring of the Churche Lo heere the truth of IhoÌ„ Fox that Husse was not so much as accused much lesse condemned for holding any one opinion against any article of our Christian fayth But let the reader see the articles in the councel and then wil he cry shame of Ihon Fox and all his crooked cubbes though they haue no shame especially in that they obiect to vs so often the doctrine of our schoole deuines for allowing the punishing of TyraÌ„ts in some cases with so many limitations conditions and restrictions as by vs are set downe therin And yet these meÌ„ approue the wicked opinion of Husse in this place as also of the Puritans before recited that permitteth euery one of their Sect to attempt it at their owne pleasure and iudgment which all Catholykes do condemne as doth also this councel of Constance that condemneth Iohn Husse nominatim of the same But let vs passe on to the other famous Champions of their Religion before mencioned For of Ihon Husse this is sufficient yf not ouer much he being so contemptible an heretyke as by this storie appeareth Yet Ihon Fox sanctifieth canonizeth him in his Calender as before hath byn sayd the Hussites in Prage do keep for an honorable relyke of his sanctitie an old payre of leather breches in their publyke Churche and do shew and kisse the same with great reuerence at certayne tymes which yet I thinke both Ihon Fox and S. F. would take scorne to do and so do Catholykes also and thus much of Husse which in the Bohemiam tongue signifieth a goose the K t. sheweth himself but litle better for bringing him in and giuing him place in the forefrunt of his champions OF THE LEARNING glorious disputatioÌ„s of Martyn Luther Symon Grinaeus Peter Martyr Beza and other protestants boasted of by our K t. CAP. IIII. I Must now come downe lower to other more fresh champions of Protestant Religion to wit from Io. Husse to Martyn Luther and other by him named And as for the first that is Luther I wil be much shorter detecting only some notorious false points affirmed by S.F. partly as I take it of ignoraÌ„ce partly perhaps of worse meaning the ignorance appeareth in that he sayth Martyn Luther first to haue gone to Wormes there by disputation to defend his doctrine before the Emperour and States and after agayne to haue gone to Augusta to the same before Cardinal Caëtan the Popes Legat Cochl Sursleid in their histories an 1518. 1521. wheras in deed his going to Augusta was three yeares before his going â—o Wormes to wit 1518. where the other was 1521. as both by Cochleus Surius and Sleidan others both Catholyke and heretical writers is manifest Secondly the whole narration of S.F. is false touching the stout behauiour of Luther to the Cardinal legat to wit that he stood to iustifie his assertions and offered there or els where to defend them VVast Pag. 3â— sending a wryting in defence to the Card to iustifie his opinion by the Scriptures and that the Card. would heare no Scriptures but willeth him to come no more to his presence vnlesse he would recant In all these words I say though somwhat be true yet are there many falshoods and diuers vntruthes ioyned therwith For first it is set downe both by Cochleus that was present and Surius that lyued soone after yf not at that same tyme had authentical relation of that which passed that Maximilian the Emperor being yet aliue called this yeare a diet at Augusta partly for warre against the Turks partly for troubles raysed vp by Luthers new doctrine
more like indeed to a wel tippled head then extatical spirit neyther can any methode set downe in the wardword hold him to any as it doth oftentymes the K t. but that he wil rush vpon that first which I handle almost last and consequently trouble order in euery point And as for the learned meÌ„ of his order alleaged by S r. F. to wit Ihon Husse Martyn Luther Symon Grynaeus Peter Martyr Beza Bassanet and others before treated of this fellow doth not so much as name them esteeming himself as aequal with the best and a principal pillar of his poor churche He falleth then vpon the controuersie before handled by me against S r. F. whether Catholykes do hold reading of Scriptures to be heresie S r. F. as yow haue heard weÌ„t so farre in that matter as he said that though it were but only a desyre to read vpon the holy book of God eyther the old or new Testament then heretike was his name and heresie was his fault c. Cap. 5. nu 1. But seing him to to farre ouer the shuwes in that exaggeratioÌ„ of speach VVhether â—atholiks hold reading of Scriptures in vulgar languages to 〈◊〉 heresy I dealt more mildly with him to recal his wordes from desire to deed and fact of reading shewing against him that not only the inward desire but neyther the external reading it self was held by vs for heresy confirming thesame with diuers reasons Ser. sup ca. 5. most euident and manifest as that it can neuer be found in catalogue of heresies written by any of our syde neyther that it can be conteyned in the definition of heresie geuen by vs. And finally for that we do permit reading of Scriptures in all languages yea vulgar translations also with discretion and choyce and with licence of the superior which we would not or could not permit if it were heresie But on the coÌ„trarie syde as yow haue heard the proofes which the K t. alleageth to proue that we hold reading of Scriptures for heresie are so chyldish as they need no other answere but only to relate them as namely for that we forbid some vulgar translations and diuers of the common people to read them that some haue â—yn apprehended and put in prison for reading Scriptures Cap 5 nu 4.5.6 c. and the like which yow may see discussed more largely in the foresaid chapter But now after all this said and doÌ„ne and the same both seene and read by O. E. doth this wise noddle that euery where calleth his aduersarie noddy eyther hold his peace in this controuersie or bring matter of more moment no truly for he can do neyther pryde and lack of wit forcing him to the former and truth learning sayâ—ng him in the second But let vs heare his owne words yf yow please and mark that when I cyte his wordes in a different letter it iâ— euer with all sinceritie exactnes of truthe but he contrariwise maketh me speak oftentymes afâ—â—r his phrase and therby altereth the whole sense Pag. 4â— For the first saith he it is very eâ—idâ—ntly dâ—sprâ—ued to wit that we accompt not râ—adâ—ng of the byble to be heresie by diuers examinations in K Henry the eyght and Q. Maries dayes where it is obâ—ected to lay men that they read the Scriptures in Englisâ— which should not haue byn done vnles by that article they should haue byn conâ—â—â—nced of herâ—sie Lo heere his whole argument and all that hevseth in this behalf so as where Sir F. had alleaged 3. arguments such as they were and published thesame in print before this poore compagnion comming after him and seing what he had done would needs be tampering also and make a new shew The ministers fond behauiour by alleaging one of the three and the worst of all adding vnto it a childish consequeÌ„ce that some men being examined in Catholike tymes vpon suspition of heresy for that contrarie to their bishops and Princes commandment they were found reading of pohibited vulgar translations of Scripture Ergo the verie reading of scriptures it self is accompted by vs for heresy The ridiculous fondnes of which inference is examined * Sup. Enc. 1. cap. 8. 9. Eâ—c 2. cap. 5. before by diuers examples as yf playing at dice for examples sake should be tearmed theft for that sometymes it may induce suspicion of theft and the like And this for the first poynt whether reading of Scriptures be heresy in it self As for the second wherin Sir F. also was conuinced of falshood affirming that we did braÌ„ale men to death for only reading Scriptures This copesmate is no lesse therin rash and ridiculous then in the former for thus he proueth it Pag. 44. In the bâ—ginning of King Henrie the eight his raigne saith he certayne were condemned for reading the Epistle of S. Paule in English as appeareth by the register of Lincolne Dioces Wel what if it were soâ— condemning and burning are two things a man may be condemned in other punishmeÌ„ts then burning and yet here is â—o author cyted for this at all except Ihon Fox tel vs this tale as he doth many other as fond and false as this But it followeth in this good fellowes narration And B. Longland preaching at the burningâ— said Pag. Ibid. that they were damned that moued their lippes in reading those chapters of Scriptures c. Yeaâ— and who testifyeth this for heere is no author cited and the tale is so improbable to them that knew how graue and learned a man B. Longland was as without an author they wil not beleeue it though this compagnion do wearie his lippes neuer so long in telling it Wherfoâ—e at last the minister commeth to proue both these points with one authoritie of much lesse force and with much more impudency then the other Both these points saith he are proued by the prouincial constitution of Thomas Arundel Archbishop of Caunterberie who saith in a prouincial constitution Const. Prou. C cap. PraetereaÌ„ de haereticis statuinâ—us vt nemo textum aliquem sacrae scripturae authoritate sua in Linguam Anglicanam seu aliam transerat â—â—c legatur aliquis huiusmodi liber vel publicè velocculte sub paena maioris excoÌ„municationis Qui verò contra hoc fecerit vt fautor haeresis erâ—â—â—s similiter punâ—atur We do ordayne that no man vpon his owne head and authoritie do translate into the English or other tongue any part of the holy Scripture nor that any such book if it should be translated be read eyther publikely or priuately vnder the payne of the greater excommunication And he that shal do contrarie to this ordination of ours let him be punished as a fauourer of error and heresie This ordayned that Archbishop almost three hundred yeares agoe And yet yf yow remember I haue shewed * Cap. 3. Enc. 2. num 6. before how the sayd Archbishop in his Synod holden at Oxford dyd appoint
quas haereses inferunt Tertul. de praescript cap. 14. quae hareticos faciunt This rule of faith instituted by Christ and deliuered to his Churche hath no doubt or questioÌ„ among vs Catholykes but such as either heresyes do bring in or do make heretikes And then after a sharp reprehension against curious men Tertullians reprehension of curious heretikes that brag of skil and suche as vnder pretence of seeking knowlege are alwayes disputing in matters of faith he concludeth thus Nouissimè ignorare melius est Tertul. Ibid. ne quod non debeas noris quia quod debeas nosti c. Finally it is better to be ignorant in many things least yow should know that yow ought not to know seing yow know already by the rule of faith receiued so muche as yow should know And then further Ibid. Cedat curiositas fidei cedat gloria saluti certe aut non obstrepant aut quiescant aduersus regulam nihil vltra scire omnia scire est c. Let curiositie of searching yeild vnto faith and beleuing let the vayne glorie of disputing yeild vnto the studie of our saluation and at leastwise either let them not brabble at all or let them be sylent against this rule of faith receued for to know nothing besydes this is to know all thinges Now let the sober reader iudge what honestie wit or shame this Minister may haue in him Illations against O. E. that citeth these places owt of Hosius to proue his purpose that we hold Ignorance to be the mother of deuotion for first they are not the sentences of Hosius as now we haue shewed but of S. Hillary and Tertullian and secondly they doe make nothing to proue that we hold ignorance to be the mother of deuotion but rather that these fathers do hold it if any suche things be in their sentences or tending that way which is muche against our Minister if yow mark it But thirdly I say that all this is nothing to his purpose but altogether to ours for that these sayings of the fathers and many other that might be alleaged to thesame effect doe tend principally to reproue the curious searching disputing wrangling of heretikes that brag of singular knowlege and do obiect ignorance and simplicity to Catholikes which ignorance notwithstanding and simplicitie with promptnes of obeying and beleuing what is left vnto them by the Churche their mother is preferred by the foresaid fathers before all the curiositie knowlege vawnted of by heretikes â— Cor. 8. which is truly called Scientia inflans puffing science by the Apostle And thus now as yow see hath the K t. with his Minister struggled hard hitherto for deliuering himself froÌ„ the forged position fayned against vs The Conclusion of this chapter that we hold Ignoraâ—ce for the mother of deuotion albeit to the very force and substance of the Warders replie he hath answered scarse any one point at all to the purpose For the Warder meaning to haue the truthe tried indeed substantially and reallie whither ignorance or scieÌ„ce were holden by Catholykes to be needful to deuotion he took a sownd way went roundly to the matter setting downe the true definition of deuotion out of Catholyke Doctors namely out of S. Thomas in name of all the rest which definition being the true touchstone of the nature of each thing seing it excludeth ignorance expresly and requireth knowlege doth coÌ„uince Sir F. his fiction of forgery and deliuereth all Catholykes from that fond imputation Moreouer the Warder againe shewed at large out of the said Author S. Thomas that albeit knowlege and contemplation of Gods benefits vnto vs be the true mother of deuotioÌ„ indeed yet may it fal out oftentymes that the most learned be not the most dedout the cause wherof is for that deuotion dependeth more of the affection then of the vnderstanding and then he concludeth in these woords Thus yow see S â— F. that we hold not ignorance for the mother nor daughter nor kinswoman of deuotion but rather to the coÌ„trary we hold that deuotion is fownded and proceedeth of knowlege wherof Catholyks haue byn euer and in all ages more studious and greater enemies to ignorance then Protestants can with any reason presume to haue byn for the litle tyme they haue byn in the world And by this meanes the said Warder taketh an occasion to make a third discourse Principal points of the VVarders discourse vntouched by the knight Minister and to shew by many profes and examples that Catholyks haue byn euer more greater furtherers of all kynd of learning scieÌ„ce and knowlege belonging to piety then Protestants and namely of that wherof euery Sectarie of our tyme dothe brag to wit of holy scriptures which is euident by conseruing the same vncorrupt so many ages wherby Sectaries of our tyme are come to haue theÌ„ which otherwise they should not and they are forced to take them vpon our credit And more then this the Bybles set forth in our tymes in Hebrew Greek Chaldy Syriak and other learned tonges was done by our men infinit commentaries also published vpon them Vniuersities and Lectures erected by them for their study Schoole degrees and preferments appointed for those that profit most in that study all which Catholyks would neuer haue done if they had byn enemies of knowlege and specially of Scriptures And as for Christian knowlege and perpetual remembraÌ„ce of the misteries of our Sauiour especially in the lay people that can not read nor vnderstand the Scriptures no man can in reason denie but that Catholyks haue do vse many meanes more then Protestants doe More meanes to Christian knovvleg in vse amongst Catholyks then amongst Protestants as the frequent vse of festiual and holie dayes wherein the Acts of Christ and his Saincts are recownted repeated and imprinted to the peoples myndes The vse of Images representations and many exterial ceremonies belonging to the same end all which do contayne renew and keep in memory the misteries of Christian faith amongst vnlearned people which can not read or study bookes more then any thing els especially the Cath. expositions of their Pastors and teachers being adioyned therevnto as before hath byn shewed to be ordeyned by our Churche So as if all these things do tend to knowlege yea a more certayn sure and holsome knowlege conteyning the sense and true meaning of their mother the vniuersal Cath. Churche then euery priuate man can pyke out of scriptures by his owne study or reading though euery man and woman could read as they can not or then they can take by the interpretation of any particuler Minister following lykewise his owne head or of any particuler countrey or Prouince following their owne deuise different from the whole body of Christendome This I say being so and so many wayes to knowlege vsed by vs let euery indifferent man iudge who may best brag of knowlege or more obiect
Berraea had great reason to searche diligently â—hose places of scriptures to see whether they were so as the Apostles alleaged and interpreted or no and for that the controuersy was not so muche about the woords as the sense and interpretation it is euident that they were of their learned men that took this searche in hand not vulgar people wherof our controuersy is and so muche do the precedent woords of the text cleerly shew if S. F. after his fraudulent manner had not cut them of and dissembled them for thus saith the text of S. Luke Fratres autem confestim c. The brethren out of hand conuayed by night Paul and Silas from the persecution of Thessalonica vnto the towne of Beâ—â—â— Act 17. where being ariued they entred into the Synagog of the Iewes and these were the most noble of them tâ—at dâ—e in Thessalonia who receiued the woord with all gâ—â—â—dines searching dayly the Scriptures if these things alleaged out of the Prophets about Christ by Paul and Siâ—as were so or noe This is the placeâ— Now let the discreet reader waigh prudently whether S.F. haue behaued himself knightlikâ— heer or no first in cutting of these woord which most cleered the doubt to wit thaâ— these were no vnlearned Iewes but no bilioâ—es â— saith the text that is the most principal amoÌ„g them and then in making so impertinent â—illation that for so much as these principâ—â— learned Iewes did in that particuler occasâ—â—â— searche some places of Scriptures therâ—â—â—â— must all our lay peeple read of necessity 〈◊〉 make themselues iudges of their ordinaâ—â— teachers and Pastors To the second place of trying spirits whether they be of God or no I would aske the K t. whether there be no other way or meanes of trying spirits but by remitting all sorts of people to the scriptures and those in vulgar languages About trâ—eng af spiâ—its for if there be any other meanes then it is absurd to tie the Apostles counsel of trying spirits to euery mans reading of scriptures where the trial being remitted to eache maÌ„nes owne interpretation wil â—al out so difficultas no end can be expected For I would aske our K t. for examples sake when wil two women accusing one the other of a scolding spirit try out the truth of eache ones spirit by their owne readâ—ng scriptures especially if there he no Iudge nor the coocking stoole at hand Or to take some greater example when â—il any two Sectaries as Brownistes and any other of our tyme contending about heretical spirits try thesame by scriptures yea though â—hey be of the learneder sorte doth not this â—ppeare by experience dayly and how much â—esse then caÌ„ vnlearned people trie their owne â—r other mens spirits by reading scriptures in â—ulgar languages And with this I would leaue the K t. in this â—oint but that he abuseth so egregiously a â—â—ace of S. Chrisostome to wrest him to some â—ew of his purpose S. Chrysostome notably abused the Kt. as I can not omit to disâ—â—uer it to the reader wherby he may see â—ith what consciences these men treat matâ—â—rs of religion vsing legerdemain in euery â—ing and this not of error or ignorance but of knowne and set malice to deceaue which trick whensoeuer good reader thow doest discouer plainly in any wryter though it were but once yet oughtest thow neuer to trust him againe but much more here in this our controuersy where so often I haue shewed thesame most euidently both in the K t. and his Minister O. E. and the rest But now to the place it self He wil needs make S. Chrisostome to be of his opinion for permitting scriptures in vulgar languages to all sortes of people and that they both learned and vnlearned must examine and discusse all their controuersies thereby Heare his woords S. Chrisostome saith he thinketh it an absurd thing that all men should not thus medle with religion Pag. 53. Quomodo absurdum non est c. VVhat an absurdity is that for money we trust not other men but count it and tel it after them Chris. in 2. Cor. hom 13. but for more excellent things simply to follow other mens sayings especially fith we haue the exactest rule and ballance of all the testimony of the Law of God therfore I pray and beseech yow that yow wil leaue what this and that man thinketh enquire all things of the Scriptures Thus relateth he S. Chrisostome wherein truly there are so many fraudes and shifteâ— vsed to make S. Chrisostome seme of his opinion as is strange in a man of any honor or shamfastnes and the greatest fraud oâ— all is to peruert S. Chrisostoms whole meaning and discourse who handling this argumeÌ„t in the later part of his 13. Homely which he calleth the Moralitie of that he had said before S. ChrisostoÌ„s vvhole argument peâ—uerted to wit pauperem meliori esse conditione quam diuitem that the poor man is in better stare then the riche and he prefixeth these woords for the title of the Chapter which being a Christian Paradox as yow see he prosecuteth thesame most earnestly and piously through out the whole Chapter shewing the perils of the riche security of the poor with many other differences and that we must not in this point follow the common opinion of wordly men that esteme riches for great felicity but attend rather what the lawes and rules of Christ do teache vs and finally he concludeth Ibidem Quae cum ita fint vulgi opiniones ne circumferamus Sed res ipsas expeÌ„â—amus An non enim absurdum praeposterum fuerit nos cum de pecunijs agitar alijs fidem non habere Sed numero calâ—ulo id coâ—â—attere cum autem de rebus iudicandum est in alâ—oâ—um opiniones temere ac velut obtorto collo trahi â—â—que cum exactam rerum omnium lancem amussim baâ—eamus nempe deuinarum legum Sententiam Quoâ—â—â—avos omnes rogo atque obsecâ—o vt quid hic auâ— ille deâ—â—â—â— rebus sential nihil morantes Scripturas sacras â—de en consulatis ac quae verae sint opes cognâ—scatis which woords truly englished do sound thus Which things concerning trueâ—riches and pouertie seing they are so as I haue before declared let vs not carry about with vs the opinions of vulgar men The true interpretation of S. Chrisostomes vvoords but let vs examine thinges as they be in themselues for were it not an â—bsurd preposterous thing when we deale in money matters not to trust other men but to tel and compt it and when we are to iudge of thinges themselues to suffer vs rashly and as it were with a wry neck to be drawe into other meÌ„nes opinions especially where as we haue that exact ballance rule square of all thinges which is the sentence or determination of Gods lawes Wherâ—ore I do pray beseech yow all that in these things yow wil not stand vpon
For pag. 204. col 2. nu 70. that eyther they were not wrought at all but deuised and forged by fryars and monks or yf they were wrought in deed it was not by the power of God but of the â—iuel and his deceauing spirit Which later way he taketh from the Iewes who as yow wel remember not being able to deny the miracles wrought by Christ obiected vnto him that he did them by the power of Satan and cast out diuels by the hands not of God but of Belsebub Math 24. Marc. 22. And to these two wayes of euasion Syr F. as a good scholler hath added a third which is that many of these miracles might be done by natural power and meanes though hidden to the ignorant And now tel me gentle Reader what miracles of Christ and his Apostles may not be brought in question and made doubtful by some of these 3. means And consider I beseech thee whether the spirit of heretyks doth lead a sensual mannes vnderstanding Is it not to doubt of all For what more certainty haue I or can any man haue of the auncient miracles of the primatiue Churche then that diuers vertuous and learned authors do wryte them who lyued in the same tymes when the things were done and when they would haue byn contradicted no doubt by all the world yf they had byn false or forged as none euer of S. Tho. were called in question by any author of ancient tyme so farre as we vnderstand Againe I would haue thee consider good reader attentiuely with thy self VVhich is the better spirit to beleeue or discredit miracles which is the better spirit more pious and more secure eyther to scoff at miracles and extraordinary workâ— done by God and to seek reasons to discredit them as Protestants do or to enclyne rather to beleeue them or at least wayes quietly to let them passe with pious humility thinking that God can do these and greater matters to his glory and hath done for and by his seruants And consequently whether they be true or false the matter not being apparent to praise God for that which is reported of his workes rather then to scoff therat which is the true spirit of Catholike men who do not make euery one of these miracles matter of their beleef nor yet on the contrary side do runne to the proud or contentious spirit of condemning all or calling euery thing in controuersy with contempt wheras in temporal matters also they beleeue many things vpon lesse authority and witnesses And surely yf we coÌ„sider the whole course of scripture we shal fynd pious credulity to be much more secure and comended Credulity commended in scriptures then diffidence distrust or incredulity and that also about miracles Mar. 16. Ioan. 12. For why was S. Mary Magdalen so much commended before others but for that she was more prone then the rest to beleeue the miracle of Christs resurrectioÌ„ when it was told her And why was S. Thomas so much reprehended by Chryst when he said noli esse incredulus Ioan. 20. sed fidelis Be not thou incredulous but faithful but for that he would not beleeue the miracle of Christs apparition and entrance when the dores were shut related vnto him by others And why was S. Peter reprehended by Christ when he said Math. 14. modicae fidâ—i quare dubitasti but for that he doubted in his miracle vpon the going 〈…〉 why did Christ generally 〈…〉 to all the Apostles togeather 〈…〉 took his leaue of them but for that as tâ—â— Euangelist specifieth they had not giuen credit so easily to such as had reported the straÌ„ge miracle of his resurrection to them Finally it is said of charity omnia credit and of incredulous people 1. Cor. 1â— Non fecit ibi virtutes multas propter incredulitatem corum Math. 1â— Christ did not many miracles there because of the peoples incredulity And againe Collos. â— Venit ira Dei super filios incredulitatis The wrath of God commeth downe vpon the children of incredulity and many other suche places to this purpos which for breuitie wee pretermit Now whether ProtestaÌ„ts or Catholiks be giuen more to this quality of incredulity in matters of miracles all the world seeth It is reported that some yeares since a certayne learned man comming among a crue of Protestants that did scoffe merily at miracles A Story of lesting at miracles he told them pleasantly that he had fallen of late vpon a certayne book of ancient monkes in the primatiue Churche wherin were many strange miracles wrought which he said he was in great doubt whether he might beleeue or no and desyred to haue there opinion and they prayed him to recount some of them Strange â—â—racles and so he did saying That the first was of a certayne poor man cutting downe wood the head or iron of whose hatcher falling into a great deep water he cryed to a 〈…〉 was neere and he 〈…〉 though it were of 〈…〉 from the bottome and swymne to â—â—m againe At this story all began to laugh hartily And then he told another that a certayne man being dead and buryed by chaunce in a place where a certaine holy monke or friar had byn buried before as soone as the dead body touched the monks bones he turned to lyfe againe Then he told them further that a certayne poor woman which was wont to giue milk to monks one day had but a litle panne ful of milk left and the monks would needs eat it but she said that she had no more for herselfe Then they told her she should haue the more for their eating of that and so they did eat it after the womman found more milk in her daitry then euer before This being heard increased the pastime After this he told yet more incredible tales as that one monkes mule talked to him vpon the way And that diuers monks coming to a great ryuer when they could not passe one of them made a bridge with his cloak or cool And that one of them falling into the water was deuoured by a fish but shortly after gotten out againe of the fishes belly And that one of these monks hearing that one of his frends was sick took of his girdle and sent it to him which touching the sick presently he was wel And that other sick people of incurable diseases commâ—g 〈…〉 monks and putting them 〈…〉 shaddowes were presently 〈…〉 diseases When all these things were told much iesting their was and some said they were prety tales and some other of a more hoat and zealous protestant spirit entred into indignation saying that this was abhominable superstition and folly to beleeue these tales or suffer them in wryting Wherat the man that had told them was forced for his owne defence to shew that all he had recounted was wrytten in the holy scripture changing a litle the names of persons Explication of the former miracles which
lay men must not medle with matters of religion and that the Pope or any Priest comming from him is to be obayed though he teach blasphemies and finally that our cheef remedy against all sinnes consisteth in buying of pardons c. In defence of which obtruded positions how yow behaue your self and what your carriage is both by flying euery where from the true state of the question cogging dissembling and bringing in other odde matters litle or nothing concerning the controuersy it self and by other such sleights and fhifts See cap. 7.9.12.14 c. I may not heer stand to repeat agayne but do remit the Reader to that which is written in euery chapter of this affayre yet cannot I but put yow in mynd the Reader also that all defaults may better be borne and digested then wilful corruptions and falsifications of authors whome yow alleadge I meane eyther in words yow cite or in sense when yow alleadg them quite contrary to their owne meaning purpose and drift as yow are often shewed to haue done in sundry places and vpon fundry occasions wherof some we shal take the payne to repeat breefly in this place for better establishing the readers memory about your manner of proceeding Diuers authoâ—s abused First then yow are shewed in the second Chapter of this Encounter to haue greatly abused the story of Thâ— VValsingham Cap. 2. nu 7.8 c. in alleading him fraudulently about the lying of corrupted fryars in K. Richard the 2. his tyme concealing craftily both the tyme occasion of his wryting and the men corrupted by VVicliffe Cap. 3. nâ— 3.4 5. c. of whome he wrote And then immediatly in the very next chapter yow are proued to offer no lesse iniury to the authority of S. Bede as though he should allow and testifie the promiscuous reading of holy scriptures in vulgar laÌ„guages in his dayes the truth being nothing so but rather the quite contrary appearing by his wordes and no lesse violeÌ„ce are yow declared to vse in thesame place to Arnobius an anciÌ„ent author Ibid. 9. nu 7. as though he had reproued the pious vse of Christian Images wheras indeed he speaketh only and expressely of idols made Gods among Gentils the title also of his book concealed by yow being Aduersus gentes S. Chrisostome also is prooued to haue byn egregiously misused by yow in the 9. chapter Cap. 9. nu 1â— not only by peruerting his whole sense and meaning in the matter for which yow alleadge him but by cutting of also and mangling his very words and sentences alleadged about which point the Warder noteth no fewer then 8. seueral abuses and falsifications in that place and not vnlyke iniury is shewed to be offered also to Index expurgatorius Hispanicus in thesame place concerning the note obiected by yow in your answere Cap. 9. nu 15. deleatur dictio solumodò in Gregory Nissen his sentence where yow both conceale the reason alleadged by the Index of that deletion or putting out to wit for that it was an error in the coppy and wholy from the authors argument drift and meaning in that place as also for that yow father that sentence vpon Gregory Nissene which is none of his as there is shewed But of all other your dishonorable dealing Syr Francis in this kynd of abusing authors Cap. 10. that doth most exceed which yow do vse in the 10. Chapter against that holy renowned man S. Tho. of CaÌ„terbury FalsificatioÌ„s against S. Tho. of Canterbury where yow ioyne perfidiously with Iohn Fox your maister the most shamlesse corrupter of authors that euer perhaps took pen in hand to disgrace that worthy Saint and Prelate both in his person and cause with the king and for that yow are ofteÌ„ taken attaynted of this trick throughout the whole said tenth chapter and in the other that ensueth especially where yow are shewed to falsifie most egregiously Caesarius Heislerbacius about S. Thom. his miracles I shal not need to set downe heer more particulars Cap. 11. nu 12.13 c. but rather wil end putting yow in mynd only therby to mooue you a scruple yf it might be of these many and notorious corruptions and falsifications vsed by yow and your said scholmaister Iohn Fox concerning the faigned poysoning of king Iohn by a monk and the absolution for the fact before hand in which narration there are so many shamelesse impostures vsed by yow two combyned companions in lying About the poysoning of K. Iohn sup Cap. 15. as I persuade my self the reuewing therof wil make yow blush or at leastwayes your modest reader for yow yf he loue his soule he wil take heed of yow and yours for the tyme to come Aud so for breuities sake I wil passe no further in this recitall but only vse a word or two of aduise to your procter O.E. and so an end Neyther yet wil I enter into any more particulars with him at this tyme About the minister O. E. for that this admonition would grow ouerlong and I am ful wearied already with repeating so much drosse of corrupted myndes that haue no conscience what they say or affirme but yet assure your self that this minister is farre worse then the knight in shamelesse manner of proceeding though somwhat more wary in citations and he that wil know him or take a scantling of his turbulent spirit in wryting let him read the sixt eight and thirteene Chapters of this encounter where he is dealt withall alone and singled into his Ierkin to vse his owne phrase and many of his tricks discouered and layd open and yf by this examen and by the rest of the former Encounter and the Epistles going before the man come not to be sufficiently knowne A nevv match for O. E. in hand then shal I remit me to that which after also is to ensue especially in the seueral answere to his new chalenges which I vnderstand some frend of myne seeing my present lettes occupations is like inough to take in hand and to buccle with him alone singulari certamine which yf my frend do performe as O.E. himself desyreth and craueth I dare fortel hauing considered wel the subiect which they are to discusse that O. E. wil be left in a very poor pickle and made a ridiculous companion as one that vnderstandeth neyther himself nor his aduersary nor the true state of the questioÌ„ he handleth and yf this proue not soo the match going forward then let me be condemned both of temerity and vanity for making that prophesy so long before hand And so to the proof I remit me beseeching in the meane space the moderate and indifferent reader which hath care of his saluation and readeth not so much for curiosity contention or loue to partes and faction as sincerely to be instructed in matter of truth concerning religion that he weigh seriously with himself what good meaning or
before or is it strange that he should pretend to come to this new light by reading Scriptures what other pretence did euer auncient heretyke or new take vpon him or what other excuse could this man make of running out of his Cloister or taking a sister to his Compagnion or from a Iudge of heretykes while he was a Dominican fryar to become an heretyke himselfe as appeareth plainly by Fox his whole discourse though S. F. so telleth the tale as he could be content we thought him to be a great learned Catholyke and for that cause betweene Ihon Fox and him they haue â—octored the poor fryar without euer heaâ—ing him dispute much lesse do his act only â—o geue him more reputation and reuerence with the reader And on the other syde they do bring in the â—rch-bishop of Aix who was against him and calleth him wicked Apostata to speak most absurdly though he were knowne to be a most reuerend and learned man and among other wordes they make him say thus This doctrine is contrarie to our holy Mother the Churche and to oâ—r holy Father the Pope a most vndoubted and true God in earth And did not those haynous woords deserue I pray yow some quotation where they might be found but neyther the K t. nor the Fox vouchsafeth vs so muche but as though the matter were most certaine the K t. braueth in a marginal note with these woordes O blyndnes O blasphemy But a man might more iustly say O cogging O cosenage that dare auouche so horrible a slaunder against so honorable a personage without cyting the place or Author for the iustification But we must passe ouer many of these absurdities with patience so go on to other matter HOVV LONG THE CAtholyke Romayn Religion hath florished in England of the authoritie of S t. Bede Arnobius abused by Sir F. togither with a comparison examined betwene our learned men and those of the Protestants and first of Ihon Husse bragged of by Syr Francis CAP. III. AFTER this the K t. before he come to answere in particuler to the vntruthes obiected against him wil needs say somewhat to those woords of myne that aboue a thowsand yeares the State of Enâ—land and the Princes peoplâ— nobilitie and learned men therof had contâ—nued in that Egyptian or rather Chimerian darcknes VVast-vvord Pag. 34. which he describeth vnder Clowdes Mystes and Shadowes vntil his new Sunshine Doctors came in c. Which woords of myne he hauing corruptly alleaged as often his fassion is sayth two things first that my bold assertioÌ„ of a thowsaÌ„d yeares is vayne for that yt is euident by Bedes playne testimonie that in his tyme this Iland had the Scriptures in their owne language as though this only were sufâ—icient to make that age to be oâ— Protestants Religion though it had byn so and the second that we do secretly yeild the first 600. yeres after Christs to Protestants seing we challenge commonly but a thowsand for our selues But by this last point to answere this first yow may see how wise an Answerer this is seing that when we name a thowsand yeares we vnderstand from the first conuersion of our English nation vnder Gregory the first Protestants religion in no age which no man can doubt of but yf syr F. wil goe higher vnder the Britans we shal easely also shew the lyke in that tyme. But in the meane space yt is but a hungry trick of this needy knight to snatch that which is not giueÌ„ him to wit 600. yeres together of the primitiue Churche wherof our meaning is to giue him no one yeare nor half one wherin his Religion was extant or had any one that professed the same in those daies as he doth now Enc. 7. c. 4 5.6.7.8-9 this I shal largely proue declare afterward and this to the second point But now to the first point of proof alleaged out of S t. Beede yf it were true as Syr. F. citeth thesame surely knights should haue truth in their allegations to wit that Scriptures were in those dayes read by some people in their vulgar languages and tongues which Bede nameth yet were yt nothing against vs who do vse thesame libertie and haue done in all ages to permit some vulgar translations for suche as are thought meet to profit Enc 1.8 infra cap. 5. and not to take hurt therby as before hath byn declared and after shal be shewed more at large But now yow must vnderstand that this playne and euident testimony of S. Bede which Syr F. braggeth of but quoteth yt not as commonly his shift is when he would not haue matters examâ—ned or his fraud found out this place I say of Bede which he alleageth is quite contrary to him for this sayth Bede Beda lib. 1. hist Angl. cap. 1. Haec in praesenti â—uxta numerum librorum quibus lex diuina scripta est quinque gentium linguis vnam eandemque summae veritatis verae sublimitatis scientiam seruatur confitetur Anglorum vz Britonum Scotorum Pictorum Latinorum quae in meditatione Scripturarum caeteris omnibus est facta communis c. This Iland at this present according to the number of the fyue Bookes wherin the law was written by Moyses doth in fyue tonges search owt and confesse one and the self same knowlege of the highest truth A notable abusing of S. Bedes authoritie and of the true highnes which is the Religion of Christ Iesus to wit the tongue of the Angles or Englishmen of the Britans of the Scots of the Pictes and of the Latines or relykes of the Romanes which Latyn tougue ys now made common to all the rest in meditation of the Scriptures Thus sayth Bede wherin 3. things are to be obserued first that all thâ—se fyue nations lyuing together in one Iland and in continual enmitie and warres in other pointes yet in Religion and profession of one truthe they all agreed which sheweth notably the vnitie of Catholyke doctrine euen among enemies and ouerthroweth that fond fiction of protestaÌ„ts who in all their bookes giue out and auow especially Fox and Hollinshed that the religion of the Britans was different from that which S. Augustine the Monke brought in from Rome to the English nation Fox monu pag 107.108 Hoâ—â—nâ—h des crip Angl. Cap. 9. Secondly yt is â—o be noted that since the new Religion of Protestants came vp though all the â—â—and aâ—most be of one tonge throughly frends in othâ—r matterâ— yet in points or Religion they agree not as in Bedes tyme when they were enemies which is the vertue of their vnitie And thirdly may be noted the euil dealing of Syr F. himself aâ—so who in this place sticketh not to auowche to the Reader that by these woords of Bede it is euident and plaine that the Scriptures were now in all these fyue tonges where as S. Bede sayth the quite contrary to wit that the
ignorance to others notwithstanding the K t. and Ministers babble to the contrarie And with this we end our speeche of this first forged position obiected vnto vs. OF THE SECOND forged principle that laymen must not medle in matters of religion wherein is handled againe the matter of reading scriptures in English and why the Catholyke Churche doth forbid some bookes purge others CAP. IX THE second ground or position attributed by Sir F. to Catholykes is set downe by him thus VVatch-vvoord Pag. 20. VVhen they had saith he thus setled this blynd course to keep the people from knowlege c. Then they offer an other position that it was not for Laymen to medle with matters of religion The second fayued position for that beloÌ„ged onely and wholy as a priuilege to Priestes thereby making them secure and carelesse of God and all godlynes This is the position wherevnto the Warder answereth in these woords In setting downe of this forged position by the knight there is some subteltie ioyned with impudency VVachvvord pag. 20. For first in the former parte where he saith we hold that it is not for laymen to medle with religion he subtelly leaueth doubtful this woord medle eyther to signifie that laymen must not determyne or defyne matters of religion or els not to medle or care for them at all In the former sense we graunt that in Synods and councels where controuersies of faith are to be treated Bishops and cleargie men haue only authoritie to defyne and determyne For that S. Paul saith Act. 20. that they are appointed by the holie Ghost to gouerne the Churche though before they do come to determyne they do help themselues also in the searche of truth by the labors learning of laymen and take their iudgment when they may giue light as in all Councels is seene But in the second sense it is most impudent that he inferreth that hereby we would make laymen secure and carelesse of God and all godlines This is the charge How doth Sir F. defend himself now stoutly no doubt for he saith it may be iustified in eyther sense Wel then let vs examine it a litle in the second sense for in the first we striue not muche how with what face caÌ„ the K â— auerre againe that laymen are so barred by vs from medling in matters of religion as therby we make them secure and carelesse of God and all godlines what proofes doth he bring now think yow for answering so notorious a charge Yow shal heare his owne woords Pag. 52. In the later sense saith he I need not labor any more for proof then that before is set downe touching your breeding of Gods children in blyndnes and ignorance and with-holding the key of knowlege from them Very fond reasoning of the Kâ— Doe yow see what he bringeth If the K t. had talked of breeding yong geese he could speak no more fondly then here he doth And what I pray yow is his key of knowlege with-holden from the lay sorte forsooth the reading of the English Byble from such as understand yt not And how many apprentices and good wiues of London with others of other places haue opened so many dores of later yeares to disorders with this key as neither their husbands nor Maisters nor Magistrate could or caÌ„ wel remedy let puritanes brownists louing-families and other like be witnesses And yet as though all stood in this point of reading English Bybles he asketh vs very earnestly in the next woordes following Pag. 52. And how wil yow haue them lay people medle with crâ—are for that they know not And then againe How doe yow permit laymen thus to medle with matters of Religion when as yow take from them the vse of scriptures Did yow euer heare such demands or did euer man deale with suche aduersaries is there no care of piety God or godlines for this is our question but in suche only as read scriptures in English What wil yow say to all those Protestants among yow who can not read nor haue tyme to heare them red wil yow say there is no godlines or care of God in them if yow do I say and yow can not deny it that they are the greatest part of your English protestant people But from this he leapeth to two places of scriptures the first out of the Acts of the Apostles of the men of Berraea who are much commended saith he for searching the Scriptures whether things were so as the Apostles had deliuered The second out of S. Iohns Epistle saying Dearly beloued beleue not euery spirit 1 Ioan. 4. Examination of tvvo places of Scripture for vulgar reading therof but tâ—ie spirits whether they be of God or not Out of both which two places he would haue vs take it for proued that all kynd of lay people men and women learned and vnlearned must searche scriptures dayly in the vulgar tonges to examine and iudge whither their Pastors and teachers say truly or noe And thereby also trie spirits and that without this there is no care of God or godlines in the lay sorte euery man woman and damozel must haue their key of knowlege to open scriptures and trie spirits But first what a common wealth this would make if it were wel executed all men can see secondly the places of scriptures are as fitly alleaged as these men are wont to doe as yow shal see by examination For to the first of the men of Berraea which euery where is alleaged and vrged by Protestants most impertinently to this effect I would aske our K t. how he can proue their case to be lyke ours to wit first that they were vnlearned and vulgar Iewes that searched those scriptures in Berraea to see whether the places of the Prophets alleaged by Paul and Silas about Christ were so or no and secondly that those scriptures which they searched were in the vulgar Syriak tonge and not in the Hebrew which the common people for the most part vnderstood not and thirdly that this searching was a general promiscuous reading of all scriptures translated into vulgar languages for all sortes â—f people to read and examine therby their Priests Pastors doctrine and to iudge therof which three points the K t. and his Minister wil neuer be able to proue so indeed do proue nothing in alleaging this place most impertinent to their purpose For as for the case of the men of Berraea it was a very particular and different yea extraordinary case for that S. Paul and Silas were not the ordinary teachers Pastors of those Iewes of Berraea but taught rather a new and strange doctrine different in many substantial points as appered froÌ„ the auncient Religion of the Iewes and yet they alleaged the sayings and testimonies of the old Prophets and Patriarches for the same Hovv the Ievves of Berraea did search the Scriptures so as the learned sort of Iewes of