then the argument to be so sure and necessarie that is drawen from authoritie of a martyr will you graunt this reason to be inuincible A marttr hath saide it therefore it is true what say you then of Cyprian the martyr of Iustinus the martyr of Irenaeus the martyr who notwitstanding their blessed martyrdome are knowne to haue maintained opinions against the trueth If martyrs then may haue their errours how may the testimonie of martyrs be alwaies irrefragable you see good readers how pithie a disputer this man doth shewe him-selfe to be If his loose rhetorike helped him not a litle better then his logike he were in verie weake and miserable case Lastlie concerning wholl Churches reformed pag. 32. what can you Master Rainolds conclude against vs In matter of discipline greate difference heretofore hath bene amongst the Churches East and West Greeke and Latine If then some such be in our reformed Churches can you thereof truelie gather that therefore they are not the Churches of Christ Tell vs what you meane if you haue any trueth or certaintie in your meaning Next Master R. reckeneth vp sundrie Popes that are amongst the Protestants in stead of one true Pope pag. 33. which I know not whereto it serueth but onelie to shewe that the protestants haue so great detestation of the Pope and his tyrannie that they cannot endure in anie professour of the Gospell anie small shadowe of such Lordelines as the Pope vsurpeth ouer the Church Your true Pope whereof you speake is as much as a true Antichrist of whome the scriptures haue foretolde The name the person the authoritie all Protestants abhorre and accurse to the prince of darknes from whence it came Againe he is in hand with generall Councels and saith it is impossible pag. 34. that euer we should once imagine how anie Councell amongest vs should be gathered His methode is according to his matter confused and disordered leaping and iumping from one pointe to another like a wilde bucke vpon the mountaines Although we haue not a Pope as you haue yet by Gods grace generall Councels maie wee haue if Christian princes that professe the gospell will iointlie take vpon them the care thereof And generall Councels haue bene assembled and helde many hundred yeares before your Pope by such a name was euer knowne or heard of in the world and so may they againe both Christianlie and generallie be held allthough your Pope with all his proude cleargie were returned from whence they came That hitherto no such Christian Councels haue bene gathered it maie be imputed to the generall troubles in all Christian countries and to the aduersaries that haue bene raised vp by your Pope and his Cardinall satrapes to hinder as much as in them laie all meanes whereby a Christian generall Councell might be gathered Howbeit if a generall Councell cannot be procured to be celebrated with quietnes there is no doubt notwithstanding but that the Lordes cause maie without it daylie more and more preuaile as it hath done heretofore in times moste persecutions To the section that followeth containing onelie a recapitulation of these former discourses pag. 34. c. I haue no nede to make any further answere Your complainte against vs for refusing all grounds of disputation pag. 38. how vaine and vntrue it is hath bene shewed The onelie true and certaine grounde of religion and of all disputation about the same which is the authoritie of God reuealed vnto vs in his holie worde we imbrace we holde we rest vpon it which forsomuch as you haue fullie tried to be against you so that you cannot thereby approoue one article of your popish faith nor disprooue anie doctrine that we maintaine against you therfore desperation driueth you indeede to refuse this grounde as insufficient and to seeke other grounds of which we haue noe warrant in Gods worde And although it please you for this cause to raile at vs and saie we are worse then the heretikes of olde time yet we know that rhe auncient godlie fathers in confuting all heretikes vsed onelie arguments drawen out of the scriptures and plainelie taught that by no other weapons an heretike can be put to flight I knowe they charge them oftentimes with the iudgement of Churches successions of Bishops determination of Councels name of Catholikes not as though this were a necessarie conuiction of it selfe but thereby the rather to induce them to beleeue the doctrine to be true which they see from the first planting thereof in the Church to haue remained Your case is nothing like seeing you haue onely the bare title without the thing and as it were the emptie casket without the treasure But for so much as you accuse â—s for casting awaie the grounds of Diuinitie I desire euerie Christian man to weigh with himselfe what ground it is wheron al your religion and Church standeth First the scripture must not be scripture in any other sense then as the Pope will expound it so that the scripture being the meaning of the scripture and the meaning of the scripture being the Popes exposition hereof it followeth that the scripture is nothing els but the Popes interpretation So likewise in Traditions Doctors Councels Churches if any thing dissent from the Popes vnderstanding and determination it is reiected abolished condemned and finally all faith all religion all Diuinitie of Papists is onelie the Popes sacred will and pleasure Now then this being their owne certaine resolution I would gladlie be enformed how by the same a man may be assured of any faith it being further also agreed and confessed among themselues that the Pope maie fall into heresie Then who seeth not that their ground being shaken their staie failing all that is builded and vpholden thereon is clean ouerthrowne If they saie the Pope falling into heresy forthwith ceaseth to be a Pope I demaund whoe they are that must iudge the Popes cause and giue sentence against him And if the Pope be obstinate and teaching heresie and therewith infecting the world will notwithstanding stoutly stand in defense of his doctrine and will keepe his chaire what shift haue you then or what can you doe against him seing he is your Pope your head your author and founder of all your faith Thus a man going with you along and comming to the end of all findeth no staie but must wander still as in an endles Labyrinth wherein he shall at last languish and perish euerlastingly That you wish we would be content to yealde to the verie scriptures themselues pag. 40. doubt you not Master Rainolds thereof but we are most redie to yealde vnto them if ye would be as willing the controuersy might haue thereby and by other good meanes an end But your conscience telleth you scripture will not serue you and therfore in a word you deny the wholl bodie of the scriptures Thinke not good reader that herein I haue spoken rashly without reason I know what I
or protestants or Zuinglians or Sacramentaries whereof no dout there was great cause in this manner to aduertise the reader You call vs indeede at your pleasure by such names as your maliciouse and railing spirites can inuent sometime by one and sometime by another Christians and Catholikes you will not haue vs named reseruing that denomination to your selues to whome notwithstanding of al professors of Christian religion the same doth least appertaine For our partes soe long as we are sure that the doctrine which we follow is the eternall word of God and gospell of his sonne Christ as we are by Gods grace most sure seeing it is plainlie set downe in the holie scriptures of the olde and new Testament we care not what you thinke of vs or what you speake of vs or by what names you reproche vs. If you blaspheme the doctrine of Christ and call it heresie not fearing or sparing the Lord himselfe it is no wonder if you reuile vs with all opprobrious names that can possiblie be deuised We tell you notwithstanding that if a Christian be he that beleeueth in Christ according to his word if Catholikes be they that professe the vniuersall faith of Christ we are truelie Christians and Catholikes beleeuing soe and professing so Lutheranes we are not Zuinglianes we are not Caluinists we are not because we mantaine not anie priuate or proper doctrine of Luther or Zuinglius or Caluine no more then the faithfull ought in the primitiue Church to haue bene called Paulines or Petrines or Athanasians or by the name of anie other such minister of Christ Be ye called diuersly Franciscanes Benedictines Dominicanes Iesuites and whatsoeuer other title ye can take vp we are not greeued at the multitude and varietie of your names who being in truth almost anie thing rather then Christians delight in any name rather then in the name of Christians But to vs this one name is sufficient and such as are equiualent therewith we are content with it we desire no other As for the name of Protestants if you thinke it belongeth not to vs giue it them whose it is being not a name of Schisme or sect it may as well be vsed as the name of Catholikes and for distinction sake onelie being begon first at the diet of Argsburgh we are enforced to vse it Lastlie Master Rainolds protesteth his readines to submit himselfe to the trueth pag. 92. to defend a fault or to correct it This indeed is too great indifferencie and readines whereby it appeereth you are not resolued in your selfe but can be content to applie your iudgement and trauail in defense or reproofe of anie opinion good or bad true or false Correct your faults Master Rainolds but leaue of to maintaine them I haue in this booke made them plaine enough both to your selfe and to others you cannot but see them God giue you grace to acknowledge them to be ashamed of them and as you haue promised to correcte them You knowe that in this booke you haue wrangled without measure you haue railed without shame you haue committed as foule and notorious faults in reasoning as anie man could doe your Logike is naught your diuinitie is worse and your conscience as it maie seeme is worst of all If there yet remaine in you anie drop of that simplicitie which you professe then giue ouer defense of such vntrueth reforme your iudgement and returne by repentance from whence you are fallen If you continew in willful Apostasie your blood be vpon your owne head you haue bene warned and would not harken I referre you to the Lordes iudgement who shall get glorie either by your conuersion and saluation or els by your finall hardening and condemnation The Lord hath made all things for himself yea the wicked for the daie of euill M. RAINOLDS HATH DIVIDED HIS BOOKE INTO Chapters which diuision I haue orderlie followed in mine answere The argumens of his Chapters is set downe in the table following CHAP. 1. Concerning the Epistle of S. Iames. Pag. 1. CHAP. 2. Of the Canonicall Scriptures and English Cleaergie Pag. 20. CHAP. 3. Of Luther preferring his priuate iudgement before all auncient fathers Pag. 47. CHAP. 4. Of Priesthoode and of the sacrifice continued after Christ. Pag. 58. CHAP. 5. Of penance and the value of good workes touching iustification and life eternall Pag. 92. CHAP. 6. Of reproouing the auncient fathers for their doctrine touching good workes Pag. 133. CHAP. 7. Of Master Iewels chalenge Pag. 146. CHAP. 8. Of Bezaes translating a place of scripture Act. 3. and of the Reall presence Pag. 172. CHAP. 9. Of certaine places of Saint Chrysostome touching the Reall presence Pag. 193. CHAP. 10. Of the place in S. Lukes Gospell which Bezae is charged to haue corrupted Pag. 209. CHAP. 11. Concerning the translation of the English bibles Pag. 218. CHAP. 12. Concerning the latine bible which Master Rainolds maintaineth to be more sincere then the Hebrew now extant Pag. 227. CHAP. 13. Of the newe Testament in latine and a comparison of the vulgare translator with all other of this age Pag. 32â— CHAP. 14. Wherein Master Rainolds laboreth to prooue that it is the verie waie to Atheisme and infidelitie to leaue the ordinarie translation of the Bible and to appeale to the Hebrew Greeke and such new diuerse translations as the Protestants haue made Pag. 345. CHAP. 15. Of the New Testament set forth in the Colledge of Rhemes Pag. 364. CHAP. 16. Of the faultes found in the Annotations of the New Testament Pag. 377. CHAP. 17. Of certaine blasphemies contained in the Annotations Pag. 401. AN ANSWERE TO MASTER RAINOLDS REFVTATION CHAP. 1. Concerning the Epistle of S. Iames. ALThough our Aduersaries haue continuallie endeuored to abase and extenuat the authoritie of the holy Scriptures The Papistes are enemies of the scriptures in many respects by matching with them the credit of Traditions deuised by men by submitting them to the iudgement of Fathers and Councels and hanging them vpon their interpretations and moste notoriously by bringing them into captiuitie vnder the Pope so that his pleasure and determination must stand for their true sense meaning as it is confessed by them selues and knowne to the world yet will they seeme neuerthelesse to be very zealous in defense of the scriptures charge the Protestants with that impiety whereof them-seues are moste of all guiltie As this hath beene their common practise of long time thereby to make some beleeue that we contemne the Scriptures of God which of all Christians are to be had in moste high regard and reuerence and of vs alwaies haue beene esteemed no otherwise then their incomparable maiestie authority requireth being the word of the eternall God so of late Edmond Campian in his booke made this the first and principall cause of his Chalenge Camp ra 1. for that he sawe vs through dispaire as he sayeth compelled to laie hands and offer violence to the holie bookes of
third of Iohn are not Canonicall scripture Cardinal Caietane denieth sunday bookes and partes of Canonical Scripture in the new Testament where fore Catharinus hath written against him that the Epist of Iude is Apocryphall that the last Chap. of S. Marke is not of sound authority that the history of the adulterous woman in S. Iohn is not authentical namely of S. Iames Ep. that the salutation is prophane hauing nothing of God nor of Iesus Christ But what speake I of Caietane disalowing certaine bookes and parcells of diuine scripture whereas Hosius another Cardinal and one chiefe founder of all your late sophistications hath written most dishonorably and vilely of the wholl scripture for thus he sayth Scriptura quomodo profertur á Catholicis est verbum Dei quomodo profertur ab haereticis Hofius contra Brent lib. 4. est verbum diaboli that is The scripture as it is brought forth by the Catholikes is the word of god as it is brought forth by the Heretikes is the word of the deuil So that by this notable Cardinals iudgement if a Protestant that is in their language and meaning an heretick shall alledge for proofe of Christes eternall diuinitie the beginning of the Gospel written by Saint Iohn this scripture shall now become of Gods word as it is and alwaies shal be the word of the deuil because it is vsed by such as they account and call heretikes O blasphemous hand and tongue And can you prooue this Maister Rainolds can the word of God be made the word of Sathan It will not stand with your honestie to maintaine it Gods word by whome-soeuer it be vttered though by the deuill him-selfe is not the worde of the deuill God is immutable so is his worde Then hath Hosius blasphemed in calling Gods word the deuills word which you ought to consider who thinke you haue found somewhat against the Protestants when you shewe what Luther hath written in some disgrace of Saint Iames Epistle I can further put you in remembrance what others of your syde haue taught and maintained to the great slaunder and derogation of the Scriptures and that not in one worde or two but in earnest and long discourses Pighius Hierarch li. 1. Cap. 2. What doth Pighius labour to perswade in one whole Chapter often in other places by occasion but onlie that the Scriptures haue al their credit authoritie from the Church as though they had not any of them selues from the lord by whose spirit they were written For thus he sayth All authoritie of Scripture among vs dependeth necessarily vpon the authoritie of the Church Neque enim aliter cis credere possemus nisi quia testimoniumillis perhibenti Ecclesiç credimus for we could not otherwise beleeue them but because we beleeue the Church giuing testimonie vnto them And againe The primitiue Church hath made certaine proofe vnto vs that the writings of all the Euangelists are of canonicall trueth and not the Euangelists themselues that were the writers And against SS Marke and Luke he disputeth at large and boldly auoucheth that they were not meete witnesses of the trueth of those gospells which they writ Marcum Lucam nonsuisse testes libneos veritatis scriptorum à se Euangeliorum Ecclesie therefore euen while they liued that credit was not giuen to their Gospels for them-selues no not of those that certainly knew they were written by them yea and farther also had their verie principall copies written with their ownehands but for the Apostolike Church Yea this presumptuos and arrogant spirit of Pighius proceedeth farther yet and sayth that the Gospells were written by the Euangelists not to the end that those wrytings should beare rule ouer our faith and religion Non quidem vt scripta illa praeessent fidei religionique nostrae sed subessent potiùs Hoc Euangeli um inquit vnicum solumque designans Eu◠gelium esse nō que nos Matthaei Marci Lucae Ioannis que dicimus Euangelia quat uor Hier. li. 3. ca. 3. Ceusur Colonien pag. 112. Cusan epist 2. 7. but rather be subiect thereunto And yet a litle more blasphemouslie That they are not the true Gospell which Christ ascending into heauen commanded his Apostles to preach to euery creature What should I rehearse his often reprochfull comparisons of scripture to a nose of wax and a rule of lead which may easelie be turned bowed and applied euerie way at our pleasure which also the Censure of Colen hath affirmed of them in like manner And to the same effect hath Cardinall Cusane long before set downe that the Scriptures must be expounded diuersly and framed to the time and practise of the Church so that one time they are to be vnderstood and interpreted one waie and an other time an other way Which is more vnreasonable and absurd by many degrees then if one should prescribe that the Ladie must conforme hir selfe to the fashion and manners of hir handmaide William Lindane hath bene and still is a stout Champion for the Pope Lindan Pan. Lib. 1. c. 17. in whose defence he hath vttered many bolde blasphemies against the Scriptures as namelie that the Euangelists tooke in hand to write the Gospels Non vt aliquam totius Euangelij methodum insormarent non vt Christianae fisdei summam consor berent Lib. 3. cap. 1. not to the intent to set downe any forme of the wholl Gospell or to write the sume of Christian faith And that the authoritie of the word not written is greater then of the word written which question he saieth maie easilie be determined howsoeuer to some it seemeth full of difficultie and perplexitie Lib. 3. cap. 6. De to to in vniuersum sacrae scripturae corpore accipiendum and that whereas Saint Peter hath affirmed of Saint Paules epistles that in them are somethings hard to be vnderstoode the same must be taken and ment generallie of the wholl bodie of the Scriptures soe that according to this mans doctrine there is not in all the scriptures one easie sentence and S. Peter was ouerseene to saie that but somethings in the epistles of Saint Paule were hard 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when he should rather haue said that all things were hard 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lib. 1. cap. 22. Furthermore that it is extreame madnes to thinke the wholl entire bodie of Euangelicall doctrine is to be fetched out of those sole Apostolike letters written with incke Dementissimae insaniae Ex pusillo noui testanmenti libello and that litle small booke of the new testament Thus scornefullie wirteth this proud Papist of the diuine scriptures and exemplifieth his meaning by a notable similitude that it is as greate a want of wit to esteeme iudge that al Euangelical doctrine is comprehended in the bookes of the newe Testament as if one should saie that the wholl frame of the world is contained in some one sensible creature
So that by his comparison the doctrine of the gospel doth infinitelie in largenes excel al the scriptures of the new testament Such mad wicked sentences hath he throughout his wholl booke manie Ambrose Catharine saith It is the Popes proper priuiledge to Canonize scriptures Catharin in epist ad Galat. cap. 2. Ipse canoniz at scripturas reprobat or to reprooue scriptures to Canonize true Saints and to reiecte false meaning thereby that the holynes authoritie and estimation of scriptures procedeth frō the Pope Wherein yet he seemeth to haue foulie forgotten that canonicall scriptures are a greate deale more auncient then the Pope and therefore could not receiue theire Canonization from him But thus they vtter their minde that scripture is no otherwise the word of God then as it is approoued authorized and Canonized by the Pope which is in effect to bring the holy ghost vnder the censure approbation of a man and such a man as he I omit because I will not be tedious a number of such sayings moe wherein the holie scriptures of God are shamefully intolerably dishonoured by these men in their writings and disputations and yet to procure a litle enuy to Luther they accuse him with out all measure continuallie for calling the epistle of Saint Iames a strawne epistle not absolutelie in it selfe but onelie in respect of S. Peter and Paules epistles Thus much now haue I thought good for satisfiing of the godlie to answere If you will not be satisfied you may write againe twise as much more whoe can let you this matter requireth no longer talke CHAP. 2. Of the canonicall Scriptures and English Cleargie FRom Saint Iames Epistle Master Rainolds proceedeth to entreat of other bookes refused by the Church of England which yet he saith were not further disprooued in times past then that epistle of Saint Iames whereupon he would haue his reader beleeue that in alowing some bookes and reiecting others we are ledde by opinion fansie not by learning or diuinitie Wherein Master Rainolds your selfe haue shewed that opinion not learning ruled you when you writ this For Saint Iames epistle was neuer disprooued by the wholl Church of God but onelie by some of the Church but those bookes that are refused by vs were by the wholl Church distinguished from the canonical scriptures had no greater credit then they are of with vs as shall appeere The reason therefore of our refusing them is not as you imagine because they containe some proofe of your Romish Religion which we cannot otherwise auoid but by denying the bookes to be of Canonicall authoritie but because they doe bewray themselues of what stampe they are by most euident markes and therefore haue bin generally of the wholl Church heeretofore sette in the same degree that they are left by vs. These Reasons you sawe comming against you and because you durst not openlie encounter with them you steale by an other way let them passe But I must call you back a litle though it be to your griefe and trouble and require of you a plaine and direct answere how those bookes of the olde testament which are commonly called Apocryphall written first in Greeke or some other forraine language can be Canonicall For all bookes of holie scripture in the olde Testament were written and deliuered to the Church by the holie prophets of God being approoued by certain Testimonies to be indeed the Lords Prophets Therefore Abraham answered the rich man Lue. 16.29 requiring to send Lazarus to his fathers house They haue Moses and the Prophets whereby it is plaine that the wholl doctrine of the church then was contained in the bookes of Moses and the other Prophets 2. Pet. 1.19 And Peter saith we haue a more sure word of the Prophets meaning the scriptures of the olde testament And so the Apostle to the Hebrewes writeth that God spake to our fathers by the Prophets Heb. 1.1 By which testimonies of Scripture it is prooued that none could write bookes to be receiued of the Church for the Canonicall word of God but onelie they whome God had declared to be his Prophets But the writers of those Apocriphal books were no Prophets as may easily appeere For then they would not haue written their bookes in Greeke as is confessed most of these were nor in any other tongue then that which was proper to the Church of God in that time as Moses and the Prophets after him writers of the holie scriptures had done The Church was then amongst the Iewes and the Prophets were the messengers ministers of God in that Church and vnto it they deliuered dedicated their bookes Wherefore the Greeke tongue being not the tongue of Canaan nor of the Church then was not chosen by the Prophets to write and set forth therein the doctrine and Religion of the Lord so that the verie tongue wherein these bookes were written being not the tongue of the Prophets doth plainlie conuince them to be no prophetical therefore no canonical bookes of the olde Testament And here I omitte particular arguments which might be brought against euery one of those bookes seuerallie whereby it may be prooued inuincibly that though you entitle them with the name of Canonical scriptures yet they had not the spirite of God for their father Agaynst this reason you bring Saint Augustines authoritie De doct Christ l. 2. 8. whoe reckoneth them amongst the Canonicall bookes of scripture and so you say did the Catholike Church of that age But that this is a moste manifest vntruth appeereth by S. Ierome Praesa in Pro. Solom whoe plainlie writeth that the Church readeth those bookes but receiueth them not amongst the Canonicall scriptures So although Saint Augustine had thought them to haue bene of equall authoritie with the writings of the Prophets which are called properlie Canonicall yet was not this the common iudgement of the Church in those dayes as Saint Ierome doth let vs vnderstand who liued in the Church of that age In what sense S. Augustine calleth these bookes canonicall Saint Augustine calleth them indeede Canonicall by a general and improper acception of that word because they are red in the Church and containe profitable and Godlie instruction but yet not so as though there were no difference betweene them and the other which are vndoubtedlie Canonicall For in that very place Saint Augustine opposeth Canonical scriptures to such bookes as by perilous lies and phantasies might abuse the reader Periculosis mendacus phantismatibus and bring preiudice to sound vnderstanding And then giueth a rule to preferre those bookes that are receiued of al Catholike Churches before them that some Churches receiue of those that are not receiued of all to preferre those that the moste of greatest authority do receiue wherby you may see the vanitie of that you said before that the catholike church then iudged them to be canonicall And
know not how I could haue written more plainelie more consonantlie to my selfe then I haue done But some are so froward that though it be beaten into them with hammer yet they will not seeme to vnderstand I saie Luther followed the iudgement of the auncient Church in refusing Saint Iames Epistle what maketh this against my selfe Can you deny but some of the ancient Churches refused it Doth not Eusebius prooue it when he saith it was receiued in moste Churches Then it followeth not in al Churches And would Eusebius haue called it a Bastard if some Churches had not so accounted of it But what if some refused it doth it follow therefore that the wholl Church did so you maie not thinke M. Rainolds to cast vpon vs such a miste but that we shal be hable to espie your walking along Saint Iames epistle was neuer refused of all Churches generally it was refused onelie by some Luther in refusing it agreed with the auncient Churches not with all but some as many as refused it But the greater number of Churches receiued it as Eusebius witnesseth and our Church is led by Gods spirit and true learning to follow them But for the Apochryphall bookes of the olde Testament I haue prooued sufficiently and can further declare if neede require that both the greatest part of the Church and the wholl Church hath reprooued them As for that Ierome sayth The Church readeth them it maketh litle for their credit S. Ierome a great enemy to those apocryphal bookes seeing he addeth immediatly it was to edifie the people not to confirme the authoritie ef Ecclesiasticall doctrine and that though the Church read them yet it receiueth them not among the canonicall scriptures wherein he hath plainely cast them downe from that height of authoritie and maiestie whereunto you would so faine lift them vp The Tower conference is here brought in to no purpose Pag. 25. Their scope was to shew that in the primitiue Church not onely some particuler persons but wholl congregations haue doubted of many bookes of Scripture and yet notwithstanding lost not their dignite of true Churches of Christ and therefore that Luther doubting or denying some of them cannot for that cause iustelie in any indifferent iudgement be condemned seeing whatsoeuer they obiect against Luther in this behalfe must light vpon the auncient Churches fathers that haue thought herein as Luther did Wherefore your conclusion that you set downe in the end of this your idle wandring talke is onelie deuised of your selfe and not maintained by vs. For you father vpon vs that we thinke we may refuse all such bookes as of olde haue bene doubted of pag. 28. which is as farre from our thinking as heauen is from earth and if any man haue euer vttered such a thing as I thinke none hath it is his owne priuat conceite not the approoued and constant iudgement of our Church The bookes in the olde Testament that we refuse besides that they carie in their foreheades euident notes of Apochryphall writings haue not onelie bene doubted of but clean cast awaie by the Church of God as hath bene prooued all the bookes in the newe Testament doe we whollie admit as canonical not refusing any parcell or word thereof because we acknowledge in them the spirit of God and see no reason to mooue vs otherwise For though they haue beene doubted of in former times yet it was vpon no certaine ground and by fewe in comparison of those that receiued them vndoubtedlie Pag. 29. Thus in a word the necke is broken of al your notes that follow where in you labour to saie as litle in manie words as possiblie maie be sayd That we rente from the bodie of the Scriptures in the old Testament Toby Iudith Hester Baruch Wisdome Ecclesiasticus Maccabees the praier of Manasses the song of the three children the storie of Bell herein we doe the canonical Scriptures no iniurie deuiding from them such bookes as are not of that absolute authoritie that they which are in truth canonical maie remaine intire and wholl together no more then the shepheard doth iniurie to the sheepe in sorting the goates and other cattel from them But which of our brethren are they that ioyne to these the two bookes of Cronicles and the song of Salomon If you can name any such in these daies it will soone appeare they are not brethren of ours You will not I suppose charge vs therewith and yet perhaps you will haue men suspect vs as guiltie thereof But your boldnesse is intolerable that knowing both the common consent and practize of our Church do notwithstanding both labour to caste wrong fullie vppon vs some suspicion for refusing these and furthermore also plainlie and most falsllie avouch that we denie sundrie bookes of the new Testament setting downe in a rowe Saint Lukes Gospell M. Rainold accufeth vs for denying some Canonical books of the olde Testament diuers of the new which all the world knoweth to be a great slaunder the epistle to the Hebrews the epistle of Saint Iames the second of Peter the second and third of Saint Iobn Saint Iude the Apocalyps a parte of Saint Iohns Gospell What ment you Master Rainold thus to say and thus impudentlie to lie Are you gone to Rheames and haue you left all conscience behinde you Care you not to publish in printe to the world so great so manie so manifest vntrueths before you vse to make your sacrifice at Masse do you not vse to confesse your lies as sins and yet will you print your lies without repentance Of these our Church denieth nor one doubteth not of one If you meane some Protestants in Germanie whatsoeuer they thinke of Saint Iames S. Iude the second of Saint Peter the second and third of S. Iohn yet the epistle to the Hebrews and the Apocalyps of Saint Iohn they do receiue as canonicall Saint Lukes gospell came neuer yet in doubt or question amongst vs and I muse what the occasion should be of this your so fowle vntrueth If because in the Tower conference of the fourth day one said that the Laodicean Councel omitteth S. Lukes gospel it is too friuolous seeing that was a slippe of memorie or ouersight in him And though the Councel had so done as it hath not yet how followeth it that we therefore doe so My distinction of the wholl Church some Churhes is as cleare as the day it is to be obserued that whereas in it resteth the summe of this your second Chapter and you are desirous to haue it remooued yet you bring nothing once to stirre it That S. Iames hath bene douted of in such sorte as Iudith Macchabees the counterfaite Hester for the right Hester we embrace is prooued alreadie false and that our owne doctours refuse it is an other vntrueth For were it as you saie of that conference yet is it but one single mans sentence and that by waie of arguing
acknowledge the bookes them-selues to be canonicall wherfore in that you saie we finde not this word in the scriptures vnles you thinke no word is found in them but such as is set downe in expresse tearmes you are abused For this word is found in them by necessarie collection so be not your vaine vnwritten Traditions and therfore are neither parte nor parcell of Gods diuine word But here is by the waie to be noted how this man seeking to disprooue my comparison of the sunne pag. 36. hath suddenlie ouerthrowen the principall staie of their religion which is the visiblenes of the Church That which is knowen by sense saith he is no article of faith for these two are directly opposite Then the Church is not knowne by sense and so visiblenes is not a marke of the Church For if it be then is it not an article of faith to beleeue the Church Thus sometime you can reason well but then it is against your selfe The similitude was brought not to match our beliefe of scripture with knowledge of the sunne that as we know the one by sense so the other but that we haue certaine and vndoubted beliefe of the canonicall scriptures by themselues as we know the sunne by it selfe Your beliefe in deede of the bookes of scripture is naturall and to vse your owne example such as when you beleeue Tusculans Questions to be written by Tullie For as you are ledde thus to beleeue of this booke because it hath bene so accounted in all times by constant tradition euer since so likewise you haue no better reason to discerne the canonicall scriptures from other bookes but onely this common receiued opinion of the Church which you call Tradition We haue this as well as you and we haue also an other better and surer then this which you haue not yea which you blasphemously deride the testimony of the spirit wherby the authoritie of the scriptures is sealed in our harts and we are throughly induced to receiue them as the most blessed Testament and trueth of God For example that there is a God who created heauen and earth both the Scriptures teache and the creatures them-selues confirme soe as no man ought to stand in doubt thereof Yet notwithstanding this persuasion cannot be faithfullie setled and rooted in mans hearte vnlesse it be approoued and as it were sealed vnto vs by the holie Ghost without the confirmation whereof great doubtfulnes and distrust will arise in our mindes continuallie through the greate corruptiō of our nature Euen so that these scriptures are in trueth the verie word of God not onelie them selues doe prooue by their subiecte matter argument but also the testimony iudgement of the Church which euer so esteemed them may inuinciblie argue the same And yet for all this that we faithfullie receiue them and submit our selues vnto them as to the word of God without wandring or suspicion Gods holie spirit must inwardlie perswade our heartes that this indeede is his word and therefore of vs by all meanes to be imbraced and beleeued Thus it appeereth how false it is that you haue noted in your margent that the Protestants refusing the Church beleeued not the scriptures We refuse not the Church but we knowe the Scriptures of God haue greater credit and assurance then the onelie approbation of the Church I haue allreadie answered whatsoeuer you bring out of Augustine the Councel of Carthage or any other pag. 38.39 both in what sense those bookes of the olde Testament are called canonicall by them alsoe how the other of the new Testament were refused or receiued in times past You shall neuer be able to prooue that you set down in your margent wherein the summe of your wholl speach is briefly comprised that S. Iames epistle and the epistle to the Hebrews haue beene as much doubted of as the bookes of the olde Apochryphall Testament which the Protestans reiect The moste you can alledge is that some Churches haue doubted of those epistles but I haue before shewed that the wholl Church reiected these of the olde Testament This was mine answere to M. Martines demaunde this is mine answere still which you cannot with all your endeuour take away Something you write for a colour and fashion but you come alwaies behinde with your reckning It offendeth you that I saide we haue seene we haue confuted we haue troden vnder foote all the arguments of the Papistes and whatsoeuer they could saie Vnlesse you haue some new haruest growing which yet hath not bene reaped I might truely saie as I saide for you haue vttered all your store such as it was and we haue seene and confuted it long agoe and that by the written word of god against which no tradition no religion though neuer so auncient so vniuersall so glorious may preiudice anie thing What reasons moued you to departe from vs and become a feedes-man of the Pope I leaue to the Lord and your owne conscience for any thing that I could euer see and I haue laboured to see the trueth and what could be saide against it by the best of your side I doe with al my heart reioyce in the cause which we maintaine against you and I thinke it to be the iustest and honorablest defense that euer was vndertaken What you haue learned since you went and how substantiallie you confute my bragge as you call it shall hereafter further appeare as it hath in part alreadie done CHAP. 3. Of Luther preferring his priuate iudgement before all auncient fathers HEre againe is repeated an other quarrel about Luther to no purpose in the world but onely to discredite him a litle with the simple sorte For our aduersaries are so wasted and spent for good reasons that whatsoeuer they light vpon though neuer so vnfit to frame good arguments of they handle it with great earnestnes like seelie fletchers that hauing no store of steles left in theire shoppe are saine to make their blots of euerie crooked sticke What maketh it againest the trueth of our reliligion if Luther preferred his owne iudgement before the fathers is our doctrine therefore false and yours true either in wholl or in parte Others desire to reape great profit of a litle labour but you are content to take a great deale of paine for no commoditie at al. I would not herin vouchsafe you an answere but that I haue respect to the readers weaknesse whoe by such slaunders may be abused Your title sheweth plainlie there is in this Chapter no truth to be looked for at your hands pag. 42. you say Luther preferred his priuate iudgement before all auncient fathers and Doctors wherein you would haue men thinke he was vnmeasurablie arrogant and wilfull But Luthers spirit was farre from this insolent and immoderate presumption as maie by his owne wordes appeare which you haue noted For he saith not that he more setteth by his owne priuate iudgement then he doth by al the
the blood of the new testament and this blood is the new testament in my blood If it may be lawfull for you to alter and expound the words at your pleasure then can you help your selfes wel enough but your exposition must be squared according to the wordes not the words framed to your exposition Againe pag. 240. you say where Beza correcteth Saint Luke in the latter part of the sentence I raile at the first so that betweene Beza and me S. Luke hath neuer a word right wisely considered doubties The words are right your exposition is fond and wicked The cupp you make to be the blood of Christ whoe as yet was not crucified nor his blood shed If your doctrine be true Christes blood was shed alreadie and that reallie els it could not be in the cup reallie The papists teache that Christs blood was reallie in the cup before his passion But if Christs blood was shed sitting at the table whoe was he M.R. that shed it whoe made the wound whoe opened his side who thrust his weapon in his heart whoe pearced his hands and feete This must you tell if you maintaine that his blood was then reallie shed and powred forth into the cuppe But by the cuppe M.R. is ment the wine in the cuppe which is the newe testament that is a sacrament of the newe testament in Christs blood shed for vs on the crosse This is a true and plaine sense agreeable to all analogie of faith standing with the words themselues followed of the auncient fathers When at length will you make an end of this railing it is to vnseemelie to lothsome pag. 241. to odious Indeed M.R. it must needes appeare a great absurditie to all learned godly Christians whoe know rightlie esteeme the price of our redemption that to be shed for our sinnes which was in the cup. Christs blood was shed for our sinnes which neuer came in the cup but remained in his bodie vntil the time of his death And if Christs blood was in the cuppe when he gaue the cuppe to his Apostles then must it follow necessarilie that his bodie then was without blood it being shedde already and contained in the cup. In the cuppe was onelie wine a sacrament of his blood which he gaue in the same to his Apostles to drincke whereof he drancke him selfe and so the scriptures expressely call it wine If this were the thing that was shedde for your sinnes then was true and naturall wine the price of your redemption then are you saued by wine then haue you no part in Christs blood But the true Church beleeueth her sinnes to be washed away not by that which was really contained in the cuppe but by the true blood of Christ which issued out of his body nailed on the crosse and wounded with a speare Your absurditie therefore needeth not to be further discouered it is so openlie blasphemous against the blood of Iesus Christ which was shed once not in the cup but on the crosse for our redemption If you vrge S. Lukes words as they stand in grammaticall construction I answere that as the cup is called Christs blood Christs testament that is by a figure the sacrament of his blood and testament so is it also said to be shed for vs by a figure sacramentallie But all men of skill and iudgement maie soone see that in these wordes there is some change of grammaticall disposition vsuall in the writings of the Apostles and Euangelists Your discourse about Tautologies in the scriptures is altogether vaine and friuolous To S. Basils testimonie you aunswere much in words and nothing in matter pag. 244. For what cause haue you thus to reproch Beza for his translation of these words seing you cannot denie but S. Basil hath reported that text of S. Luke euen as Beza hath translated the same and you confesse that Saint Basil hath truelie deliuered the sense thereof so all that you haue said or can say spitefullie against Beza must appertaine to Saint Basil no lesse Basil in Ethic. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whome yet you will not seeme to touch But the thing truelie and indifferentlie considered Beza is no more to be accused then S. Basil you tell vs of heretikes a long tale which is no better then waste paper Vse it your selfe or bestowe it at your pleasure Of such badde stuffe base account is to be made Whereas I spake a fewe words concerning figuratiue speaches pag. 251. which the aduersaries cannot abide to heare of in the sacrament I haue as it were opened at vnawares a flood-gate to M. Rainolds flowing vtterance Quâ data porta ruit The streame is so strong and runneth so violentlie carying all manner of baggage with it that vaine it were to resist it Let it therefore passe downe and doe what mischiefe it can great harme I trust it shall not doe Thus much you must confesse that in the sacrament figures are found and yet when we oppose against your monster of reall presence a most true and euident answere that the wordes were figuratiuelie spoken and must figuratiuelie be expounded you rage aboue all measure But quiet your selfe Master Rainolds and somewhat staie your intemperate affection neuer shall you prooue while papistrie hath a man liuing to speake in defense of it either by scripture or auncient writer that these words must figuratiuelie be vnderstoode This is my blood this cuppe is the new Testament in my blood more then these This cup is shed for you Leaue your babling Figuratiue speaches in the verie words of the supper by the Aduersaries confession and speake to purpose prooue this if you can Wherefore finding in the Euangelistes wordes such manifest figures what reason haue you to condemne vs for vsing the same being a moste common and familiar kinde of speach Because it standeth not with your reall presence Let your reall presence hardlie shift for it selfe we are not bound for cause and respect thereof to wrest the scriptures to forge monstrous interpretations to change the sacrament into a reall sacrifice of Christ which heathenish kinde of doctrine neuer anie but Antichrist and his ministers maintained The scriptures the olde fathers the auncient Church of Christ taught and beleeued otherwise as hath bene shewed and prooued inuinciblie to your faces Your pages following filled with rouing testimonies I pretermitt your contumelies being no lawfull arguments require no answere CHAP. 11. Concerning the translation of the English Bibles MAster Martins boke of Discouerie is aunswered long since from head to foote in euerie part pag. 262. you haue the answere amongst you saie to it what you can with truth and learning To bragge of your fellowes booke which being throughlie and soundlie disprooued you cannot with all your skill maintaine is a childish vanitie to acknowledge no Replie which you cannot but knowe or to make light account of it whereunto you cannot truelie reioine is wilfulnes and
the scriptures wherein he doth not so much honour to them for placing them in the first roome as iniury and disgrace in ioyning with them anie other For as they are grounds of all true doctrine so are they onelie grounds and as in matter of faith arguments ought principallie to be drawne from them so such arguments onelie conclude necessarilie as euen your owne Thomas of Aquine doth directlie confesse Thom. 1. part 1. qu. artic 8. ad 2. Traditions of the Apostles are but deuised forged things which you make your second heade and therefore no staie for a man to settle his conscience vpon For tell me if you can which be the Apostles traditions how many and where they may be found If you cannot satisfie this demaunde as you cannot indeede how may you then make any reckoning of that whereof you haue no certaine knowledge how can you without falling builde your faith vpon fantasies such as they are The Apostles doctrine we haue in writing other traditions of the Apostles we receiue none for our beliefe Concerning the catholike Church which is your third head we reuerence and loue it as the spouse of Christ but we know that her duetie is to hearken onelie to the voice of Christ her husband and that she hath no authoritie to adde so much as one iotte to his worde or anie waies to dissent from it And further we know that your Romish synagogue is not that Catholike Church of Christ whereof we speake For generall councels and Doctors which are other twoe of your principall heades we esteeme and regarde them in their place we thanke God for them we reade allowe and commend them so far forth as they agree with Gods word If you thinke they neuer disagree from it your owne masters will correct you and tell you an other tale Are not these then goodly groundes and heads of faith that euen your selues are enforced oftentimes to disauow As for your supreme pastor of the Church we know him not by that name if you meane anie other but Iesus Christ alone For who so els taketh that honour and office vpon him to be the supreme pastor of the Church he is a theefe an Apostata an Antichrist make as great accompt of him as you list And where you saie we care for none of these groundes you speake vntruelie your selues indeede caring for none but onelie the last which is in stead of all the rest The determination of your supreme pastor that is your scripture your Apostolicall Tradition your Church your councels your Doctors your Faith your saluation your onelie staie in this world and in the world to come Scriptures you prooue we deny pag. 26. because we admitte not the authoritie of Tobias for inuocation and helpe of Angels nor of Ecclesiasticus for free will But you must first of all prooue which neuer shall you be hable to prooue that Tobias and Ecclesiasticus be canonicall scripture before you can inferre that we denie the scripture These bookes are not the holie Canonicall scriptures as we haue prooued against you by most inuincible and manifest demonstration by councels Fathers Doctors your owne Cardinals and schoolemen and we reioyce with all our harts that such popish doctrine hath no better scripture for proofe thereof then Apocryphall which because it hath a counterfayte stampe is no currant monie among the Lords people And for Traditions vnles you can approoue them by authoritie of Apostolicall scripture you haue our answere we regarde them nothing we know not from whence they came we will not giue ouer the certaine scriptures for such obscure and most vncertaine traditions For Councels true it is the argument holdeth not in this forme such a Councell decreed soe and therefore so must we beleeue Sett this principle downe for certaine and perpetuall in diuinitie and we shall haue strange beliefes enow yea scarsely shall we retaine any one true beliefe Two farâ—ous generall Councels haue beene held in Nice the first and the second In the first is condemned the Popes supremacie Can. â— in the second is established the Idolatrous worship of Images The first beliefe you will not alow the second we detest Let Councells therefore be esteemed as they deserue let their decrees be examined by Gods word and if they agree let them be receaued for that agreement if not let them be reiected for the contrarie The same iudgement haue we of auncient fathers pag. 27. Learned and Godlie men we graunt they were but yet men hauing their infirmities and imperfections Their learning their zeale their ages were noe priuiledge vnto them but that notwithstanding they might be deceiued in their writings and expositions of scripture And take you this Master Rainolds for a sure conclusion that in the sayings of those who are all of them subiect to errour there is no stable and steadie ground to build our faith vpon lest perhaps we build vpon error in steade of trueth vpon the sand and not vpon the rocke So that without tryall and examination no sentence of a father nor of all fathers may safelie be receiued Neither are we so addicted to the late writers pag. 28. as to beleeue whatsoeuer they haue saied we are no more partiall vnto them in this behalfe then we are vnto the auncient fathers our religion and faith hangeth not vpon the sayings of men be they olde or younge but onely vpon the canonicall scriptures of God And as for Augustine Ierome and Cyprian they are as much ours in the moste and weightiest controuersies as Luther Caluine or Melancthon And if they or any other be against vs so longe as scripture is for vs our cause is good and we will not be ashamed thereof And therefore moste false is it that you say our Diuinitie resteth vpon these fathers pag. 29. c. whome you so scornfullie compare with the olde fathers We vse not to alledge for proofe of any doctrine Thus saith Caluine Bucer or other but thus saith the Lord thus saith the Prophet thus saith the Apostle thus the Euangelist thus is it written in the scriptures thus we reade in some booke of the olde or new Testament Notwithstanding we vse also to reade the fathers both olde and new as much as your selues and oftentimes we rehearse their sentences and expositions not as proofes in doctrine of them selues but to stoppe your mouthes that crie so lowde in the eares of the simple that all the fathers are against vs it being moste true that they are notablie and generallie as I haue saide for vs You talke in this place as one that would saie something and telleth a long tale but in the end forgetteth of what he meant to speake Of all that you saie make your conclusion and then shall appeere how emptie and barren a declamor you are Now saith Master Rainolds if these serue not pag. 31. a man woulde thinke their martyrs testimonie should be irrefragable And thinke you
fathers and Doctors as you report Luth. cont Regem Angl. fol. 342. vnius maiestatis aeter nae verbum Euangelium Dei verbū est super omnia c. but that he setteth against the sayings of fathers of men of Angels of Diuells the word of the onely eternall maiesty the Gospell And againe immediatly he saith The word of God is aboue all the maiesty of God maketh with me that I care not though a thousand Augustines and Cyprians stood agaynst me Gods word is of more authoritie then all men or Angels Is this to set his priuate iudgement against all the fathers is this pride is this presumption must Gods word and maiestie and Gospell yeald to the iudgement of fathers be they neuer so manie This forsooth is your modestie that though the Lord hath spoken it yet if the fathers saie anie thing against it you will not prefere your iudgement grounded on the scriptures before the auncient fathers Accursed be such modestie that doth soe great iniurie and dishonour vnto god This ciuilitie towards men is treason and blasphemie towards the lord Remember what Elihu saith Iob. 32. v. 21.22 I will not now accept the person of man neither wil I give titles to man For I may not giue titles lest my maker should take me away suddenlie If this affection was in Luther as it was what fault can you finde therin You aske of me the reason why I so busilie defend Luther I aske of you the reason why you so continuallie accuse Luther If you seeke for some reasons to accuse him I cannot want better reasons to defend him your accusations being so vntrue That you say we aduance him into the place of Christe or at least among his Apostles belike you imagine that Luther is to vs as your Pope is to you whome you more esteeme and honour then Christe and all his Apostles For saie they what they will their saying hath litle force or authoritie if it like not your holie father but his saying must preuaile whatsoeuer they saie to the contrarie You thinke it good reason I should giue ouer all defense of Luther seing he bare extreame hatred as you say against the Sacramentaries here you bring in much to that purpose which yet you know is not the matter you tooke in hand But it is alwaies the propertie of such discreet and worthie writers whatsoeuer they finde though from the cause to hale it in by some meanes in one place or other I answere in a word Luther dissented bitterlie from Zuinglius and O Ecolampadius in the matter of the sacrament as it falleth out often times that sharpe contentions may arise amongst Godlie and learned men yet it is no cause why we should not answere in Luthers behalfe when he is wrongfullie charged by you Therefore you come to scanne my defense of Luther particularlie pag. 48. and finde your selfe occupied in deuising diuers senses of Luthers words and then disputing against them First if all the fathers teach one thing and bring scriptures for them Luther the contrarie bring scriptures for him whether in this case Luther may preferre his iudgement before all the fathers This is not the case M. R. that Luther ment you must therefore proceade further yet in your suppose Next then you put case If a thousand Augustines Churches teache some doctrine citing no text for it and Luther bring some text of scripture after his sense against the same the matter is not in citing textes but in deliuering the doctrine that is approoued by the text Then leaue your childish trifling and take Luther as he meant If Augustine or Cyprian or any other father maintaine any thing against Gods word Luther or any other minister of Christ may in such case preferre his iudgement warranted by the word of God before theirs If you denie this you are not worthie to be called a Christian and yet closelie you doe denie it in that you reprooue Luther and condemne him for saying the same And where you saie I can bring no instance that euer the auncient fathers did so haue you forgotten what fell out in the Councell of Nice Socrat. l. 1. c. 11. when the fathers agreeing to dissolue the marriage of ministers were withstood by Paphnutius One man maintaining the trueth of Gods word may lawfully dissent from others although neuer so many August cont petil l. 3. c. 6. and yealded in the ende Here one Paphnutius iudgment was preferred before al the other three hundred fathers And so often times the iudgement of many hath beene corrected by one S. Aug. saith whether of Christe or of his Church or of any other thing that appertayneth to our faith and life I will not say we not to be compared to him that sayd though we but as he added If an Angell from heauen shall preach any thing besides that ye haue receiued in the legall and Euangelicall scriptures lette him be accursed If we maie accurse them how many and whosoeuer they be that teach contrary to the Propheticall and Apostolicall scriptures then may we preferre our iudgement in such cases before them Saint Augustines words you see are very sharpe but he learned thus to speake of the Apostle him selfe August epi. 19. In an other place Saint Augustine saith For all these fathers yea aboue all these the Apostle Paul offereth himselfe I flee to him I appeale to him from all writers that thinke otherwise This was S. Augustine bolde to write euen to S. Ierome and feared not any suspicion either of arrogancie or heresie for the same such accoumpte then must be made of the trueth that we must stand with it against al the world and not for reuerence of mens persons giue it ouer or betraie it or be afraid to defend it If this be so as you will not I am sure for shame or feare denie openlie then haue you nothing to burthen Luther in this behalfe When you say Though the fathers in the Councells of Nice Ephesus Chalcedon had alleadged no direct and euident place against Arius Nestorius Eutyches yet the Christian people were bound to beleeue them grounding them selues onelie vpon the catholike and vniuersall faith of the Churches before them it is boldly and bluntlie spoken These godly and catholike fathers assembled in Councel against those heritikes confuted them by the authoritie of Gods word and as it were cut the throte of their heresies with the sworde of the spirit This was onelie the weapon then vsed and with this they preuayled The councels and fathers confuted all Heretikes by the scriptures as likwise haue all other godlie councels euer done against all heretikes and enemies of the trueth For in Religion there is no trueth but grounded vppon scriptures no errour or heresie but repugnant to scriptures no heretikes but refuted by scriptures They dealt not against the heretikes as you imagine omitting scriptures and grounding vpon the faith of Churches
and detestable in the eies of the God of heauen This therefore is a sure reason and shal stand against the gates of hell and force of all papistes that Christ is a Priest for euer and hath an euerlasting Priesthood Therefore he is the onely Priest of the new Testament and his Priesthood is not communicated to anie other and so your priestes are no priests your sacrifice is no sacrifice your Religion is no Religion your Christ is no Christ your God is no God Depart from them whosoeuer will not be partakers of their condemnation To shew this reason to be childish Pag. 76. you haue brought indeed a childish exception Christ is you saie a true man for euer a king for euer our doctor master and teacher for euer yet are there many men kings doctors teachers besides Christ. An obiection of M.R. answered This man is suddenlie so drowned in the dreggs of poperie that he hath lost all taste and sense of trueth for els he would haue bene ashamed of such an answere which nothing cōmeth neare the matter We speake of those offices which Christ was apointed to beare by the annointing of the holie ghost and special commission from God you bring instance of things that be of an other condition and nature as to be a true man an earthlie King an outward minister of the word such like Christ is our onelie king Prophet and Priest so that in this sense in which these are giuen to him none can be King Prophet or Priest but he For he onelie is our spiritual King he onely is our teacher and author of all heauenlie doctrine he onelie can offer the sacrifice propitiatorie for the sinnes of the world If you thinke anie can be a King or Prophet in this manner but onelie he you take his honour from him and giue it to an other to whome it doth not appertaine which you do indede most notably in sesing your selues vpon his Priesthood which doth as truelie belong to him alone as the other of his Kingdome and Prophecie do Now then weigh with your selfe what a witles obiection you haue made and if you can bring no better defense for your Priestes then your haue hetherto done you haue good cause to be sorie and ashamed that euer you changed your copie and of a minister of the Gospel became a priest of the popish order God giue you grace to repent that the fruite of Christes priesthood maie not be denied vnto you another daie That which followeth is but a supplie of superfluous wordes without wit without learning without trueth The comparison you make betwene an earthly prince and Christ doth nothing fit your purpose For if you haue as lawfull authoritie vnder Christ to exercise a priesthood as the ciuil gouernours haue vnder their prince to execute their office laid vpon them then shew your commission and we require no more For as no man dare presume in the affaires of the state to commaund or enterprise anie thing in the princes name without a sufficient warrant from the prince so maie no man take vpon him anie ecclesiasticall function in the Church vlnes he haue a commaundement from the Lord. But Christ neuer gaue you anie such commaundement he neuer laid vpon you any such office he neuer called you to this honour to be his fellow priestes els bring vs your Charter that we maie se it and shew vs your letters of orders that we may trie them And further you are to consider that although the prince bestow offices preferments vpon his subiects as pleaseth him yet his Regalities he keepeth to himselfe and no subiect wil presume to chalenge them Pharao gaue Ioseph as great authoritie as anie princes vse to giue anie of their seruants yet the chaire of estate he kept to himselfe therin he was aboue him But you moste rudelie and arrogantlie intrude your selues into Christs seate and will not onelie be his vicepriests but as good priests as he ioined in the same commission with him according to the same order of Melchisedech that he was of so you are not content with such offices as he hath appointed vnto you but you claime his chiefest principalities which is no lesse a fault then high treason against the hiest maiesty M. Rain maketh an end of this treatise with an other foolish cauil taken out of the communion booke wherein he saith commission is giuen in some cases to the minister to remitt sinnes whie saie you in some cases The Minister of God hath power to forgiue sinnes not in some cases onelie but in all whatsoeuer if the sinner repent beleeue the gospell This authoritie is giuen vnto him by Christ this the parlament communion booke confesse this the ministers daylie practise amongst vs. Neuertheles you are still as farre from your purpose as before For this maketh not our ministers to be priests but preachers of repentance which bring the glad tidings of the gospell to all those that be heauie laden and desire to be refreshed Neither haue they power themselues to forgiue sinnes Mar. 2.7 for God onelie forgiueth sinnes but hauing the word of reconciliation committed vnto them from God they offer pardon and in his name pronounce pardon to the sinner that turneth from his sinnes vnto the Lord. If you know this why striue you against a knowen confessed truth If you be ignorant what commission the ministers haue receiued of Christ then be content to learn it out of the word of god As for your priests you haue alleadged nothing to prooue their calling and authoritie lawfull and I haue shewed that the scriptures giuing all priesthood after Melchis order to Christ onelie haue wrung in sunder the necks of your popish sacrificers and therefore it is the duetie of all Christians whose saluation consisteth in the sacrifice priesthood of Christ to thinke of you as you are indeed enemies of Christ Baalites idolatrous Antichristian Priestes whose punishment shal be with the Beast in the lake that burneth with fire brimstone for euer The Lord open the eies of his people that they may see your wickednes and beware of you least they be in wrapped in the same condemnation with you CHAP. 5. Of penance and the value of good workes touching iustification and life eternall IN the beginning of this Chapter M. Rainolds chafeth and laieth about him on euery side Pag. 82. c. striking now at one man now at another sometime this waie sometime that as though he were suddenly fallen into some maladie great distemperature in his head The occasion riseth vpon my words in saying our aduersaries doctrine cannot stand vnlesse we will alow for good those thinges that in the writings of the fathers are moste faultie And whoe knoweth not if he haue read any thing in the fathers The Popish religion gathered of the corruptions of fathers former times but that the popish religion for the moste part is
meant onelie thereby to make himselfe a chiefe Bishop ouer all Bishops and to bring vnder his iurisdiction the wholl Church of Christ and therefore it is euident that S. Gregorie vtterlie misliked that anie Bishop whosoeuer should haue an vniuersall authority ouer the whol Church which is to bring the Church in subiection vnder him That this was the meaning of that title of vniuerssall Bishop S. Gregorie himselfe doth testifie in these words who by the name of vniuersall Lib. 4. epist 38. goeth about to make subiect to himselfe all the members of Christ. And doth not you Pope affirme professe defend proclaime by all meanes possible that all the members of Christ must be subiect to him and that no hope of saluation remaineth for anie but such as continue in his obedience Then denie if you can but that the selfe same authoritie which Saint Gregory reprooued in Iohn of Constantinople your popes haue approoued in themselues euen this last 13. Gregorie who latelie deceased and therefore by iudgement of S. Gregorie manie hundred yeares agoe they are Antichristian Bishops The popes of Rome with their vniuersall supremacie long since condemned by Saint Gregorie a Bishop of Rome and not Catholike pastors of Christes Church Wrangle all ye can S. Gregorie hath plainlie condemned your Popes for taking vpon them both the name and office of vniuersall Bishops Andreas Fricius whom here againe you alledge I haue not to deale with all what thing was meant by this name of vniuersall Bishop may better be learned of S. Gregorie himselfe whoe knewe best the meaning thereof If you require further proofe consider that S. Gregorie reporteth also that the councell of Chalcedon offered that name to Leo Lib. 4. cap. 32. but he would not accept of it Did the Councell meane to take from all other Bishops of the world yea themselues all bishoplie grace and power what madnes is it thus to thinke what impudencie to stand in maintenance thereof as you doe Futher when the Bishop of Alexandria Eulogius in a letter called Gregorie vniuersal Pope Lib. 7. epist 30. Indict 1. meant he to depriue him-selfe of all bishoplie authoritie Nothing lesse And yet Saint Gregorie reprooueth him for so writing and will not suffer himselfe to be so called The name then signifieth that vniuersall authoritie ouer all Bishops and Christians which Iohn claimed and your Popes obtained and long practized and will not yet giue ouer This was vnlawfull in Iohn this Gregorie condemned not onely in others but in the Bishops of Rome also therefore your Popes by witnes of S. Gregorie a Pope are clearely conuicted of vnlawful and Antichristian vsurpation If your Pope refuseth this name of vniuersal Bishop why doth Bellarmine his greatest diuine Couâ—reon 3. Quest 4. recken this for one of the Popes names of dignitie but chieflie why doth the Pope mislike the name and allowe the thing signified by the name Concerning the two other articles pag. 164. c. of Reall presence and sacrifice you are content to saie litle which in effect is nothing For what haue you brought to prooue either of these your opinions you tell vs Saint Gregorie was a Priest and said Masse according to your popish fashion but whe will beleeue your report you haue tolde vs so manie vntruthes That Bibliander calleth him the patriarch of ceremonies that Melancthon saieth he horriblie profaned the communion that Illyricus rehearseth out of a popish writer certaine of his miracles about the sacrament that Paulus Vergerius hath written a booke against his trifles fables that M. Bale preferreth Latimer before Austen the monke whome he sent into England that the Bishop of Winchester M. Horne calleth this Austen a bussard It is not Austen that he calleth so but Bonifacius whome they name the Apostle of Germanie what maketh all this I beseech you against Master Iewells chalenge how conclude you hereof your Real presence or your sacrifice of the Masse surely your masters that set you on worke and made you an instrument to publish these thinges abused you much that you might abuse others more To Luthers iudgement of Saint Augustine pag. 166. that after the Apostles the Church had not more excellent and worthy doctor then he I willinglie subscribe but Luther accuseth the sacramentaries as he calleth them for mangling and abusing him in the question of Reall presence herein I haue nothing to answere in Luthers defense Saint Augustine teacheth no otherwise of Christes presence in the sacrament then we do as by the large treatises that haue bene written of this matter doth appeare yea neither Zuinglius nor Caluin nor anie other of our side hath more fullie and directlie written a gainst the Real and corporal presence of Christ in the supper then S. Austen hath in sundrie places That Luther iudged otherwise it was his errour which he retained of his olde leauen wherewith in time of papistrie his iudgement was corrupted Hereof what argument can you frame against M. Iewell some thing would you faine saie but your words haue no pith of reason in them Saint Chrysostome you saie hath written six bookes of Priesthood pag. 168. and none of ministerhood verilie this is a verie poore argument for the sacrifice of your Masse If this reason holde from the authoritie of Chrysostome I trust the like will not be denied taken from the authority of the scriptures In the new Testament Ministers are named six and six times priests in your sense neuer therefore no Priesthood remaineth and so by consequence no sacrifice But concerning the name of Priest how it hath bene vsed of the auncient writers not in the proper and naturall sense but after the common custome of speach I haue alreadie before declared Thus haue you M. Rainolds vttered all your skill in confutation of the Bishop of Sarisburies chalenge Howbeit if D. Harding were aliue I suppose he would thinke you had deserued small thankes Medle no more M. Rainolds in this matter the more ye stirre the lesse ye preuaile your learning is not much your iudgement is lesse you are but a weake instrument to deale with him whom D. Harding could not match M. Iewells chalenge is prooued wise true learned to the praise of Gods trueth shame of papistrie and worthie commendation of that famous Bishop whose memorie is euerlasting and most honourable among the godlie CHAP. 8. Of Bezaes translating a place of scripture Act. 3. and of the Reall presence MAster Rainolds leaueth M. Iewell pag. 170. c. and proceedeth to maintaine a quarell of M. Martine against Bezaes traÌ„slation of certaine wordes vttered by the Apostle Saint Peter and recorded by S. Luke Act. 3. v. 21. It were a vanitie to spend manie words about so small a matter and therefore suffering this man that knoweth no measure either of speaking or holding his peace to talke his pleasure I will herein vse no more wordes then the thing requireth that is as few
reason accuse me God is omnipotent and euer was and euer wil be But his omnipotency prooueth not your Reall presence For haue you learned to conclude that seing God is omnipotent and hath power to doe all things therefore he doth al things yea offereth violence to his owne body for maintenance of your absurd hereticall assertions must Gods omnipotency attend vpon your fansies Cannot god be omnipotent vnles your real presence be graunted No such matter thankes be to God so your accusation of infidelitie is vaine and childish Albeit I suppose you are not ignorant altogether of your owne scholastical doctrine concerning Gods omnipotency Your schoolemen teach that God cannot do any thing wherein a contradiction is implied Thom. 1. p. 25. q. 3. art that all other things he can doe and therefore is omnipotent The popish schoolemen confute the popish fantasie of Reall presence But herein a manifest contradiction is implied that Christs body should be visible and inuisible togeather that it is compassed and circumscribed in one certaine place and that also it is contained in an infinite number of sacraments without any circumscription of place And thus your owne schoolemen teaching and that trulie that god cannot doe any thing wherein is included a contradiction because he cannot lie haue in deede grounde to powder your conceit of Real presence which without moste cleare contradiction can neuer be maintained For if Christs body be visible how is it then inuisible If Christs body haue all properties of a natural body whereof this is one that moste necessary inseperable to be contained and circumscribed in one certaine place how can it then be true that his body is in infinite places without any circumscription at all Neuer deny for shame but if there be in the world anie contradiction this is one And yet here Master Rainolds taketh in hand to prooue contrary to the doctrine of their owne schooles M.R. goeth about to prooue that God can make two contradictorie propositions true that God worketh as flat contradictories as this then which none can be deuised more flat But these examples Master Rainolds which you bring are nothing like this whereof I speake For concerning the holie virgins birth therein is no contradiction There was a miracle indeed that a virgine should beare a sonne contrarie to the course of nature For to be a virgine yet to haue a childe are not contradictorie if she haue conceiued and brought forth by miracle as did the blessed virgine M.R. obiections nothing to the purpose but to be a virgine not a virgine at once this is the contradiction So for Christs bodie to be visible inuisible locall and not locall at once is in euerie respect the like contradiction and therefore impossible to be true Your other example of Christs entring in the dores being shut what shewe of contradiction hath it Can you prooue he entred through the dores and if he did then was there an alteration of qualities that by miracle either in Christs bodie or in the dores but no contradictiō in nature vnles you know not what is a contradiction Your third and last example of the fire in Nabucadnezars ouen which consumed the Ministers but hurt not those that were in the middest of it appeereth to be of no waight by that hath alreadie bene answered You imagine belike that in euerie miracle a contradiction is implied which is absurde If you can prooue that this fire was both hot and colde then you saie something to the purpose but that it burnt vp some and hurt not others is no cōtradiction because by miracle the force thereof was repressed Thus are you truly and fullie answered to your simple sophismes and your Real presence is disprooued by the eternall lawe of God in nature wherevnto he hath euen bound himselfe neuer to doe anie thing wherein there is a contradiction to be found as your owne Diuines haue wel and truelie taught Then may you see that my argument was not taken out of Aristotle and Euclide as you saie but is grounded vpon the eternall decree and moste vnchangeable trueth of God to which your Real presence must giue place being nothing els but an irreligious and cōtradictorius deuise of your owne braine Pag. 185. By this is answered that which followeth wherin are alledged certaine miracles vainly altogether from the purpose The question is not whether is more repugnant to nature to be borne of a virgine or a bodie to be incircumscript although herein you speake without reason or authoritie but whether it be either agreeable to nature or Gods wil that one the selfe same bodie be at once circumscript and incircumscript as you defend Christs bodie to be First you saie the bodie of our sauiour Christ was incircumscript in his natiuitie M. R. affirmeth heretical vntruthes of Christs body resurrection ascension Although this be moste false and hereticall destroying the trueth of Christs humanitie yet if it were graunted it argueth nothing vnlesse you will saie that when it was incircumscript it was also circumscript as now you affirme of the same bodie for you confesse his body is circumscript and yet you say the selfe same bodie is incircumscript and herein is an euident contradiction which when you labour to defend what do you els but with intollerable boldenes maintaine moste monstrous absurdities Likewise S. Peters bodie you saie was incircumscript by Paulinus authoritie who saieth S. Peter came out of the prison being shut And meant Paulinus that Saint Peter came through the walls or dores of the prison so saith not the scripture If the yron gate opened of it owne accord vnto him why also might not the dores of the prison open and giue place vnto him Secondlie you saie Christs bodie was inuisible when he passed through the midst of them that would haue cast him downe headlong from the hill This is more then you learned in the text Luc. 4.30 The scripture saith that he passed through the middest of thē But not that he passed inuisiblie Christ was able to escape their hands as wel being visible as inuisible Also Elizeus was inuisible you saie and I saie it is vntrue 2. King 6.18 For though the Syrians sawe him not yet remained he still visible but the Lord cast a mist before their eies and stroke them with blindnes that they could not see him and so the scripture plainly affirmeth The same may be said of Felix whome his enimies could not see being amongst them It was the Lord that shut their eies blinded them with giddines who hath as by this your reasoning may seeme taken frō you also all your light of vnderstanding Thirdlie you saie the first heauen according to the opinion of Philosophers being a perfect naturall body is notwithstanding in no place Be it euen so then I saie it is not in a place Saie you the same of Christes bodie
against murtherers that he whoe sheddeth the blood of man his blood shal be shedde by man these laste words by man establishing the Magistrats authoritie Baadam are not expressed in your traslation This to be a fault of great importance anie man may easilie vnderstand To proceede a litle further in this firste booke of holie scripture and to discouer some moe grosse corruptions of your latin translation therein committed for I may not stand to note euerie petie fault in the 36. Gen. 36.24 Chap. v. 24. the Prophet writeth that Ana the sonne of Zibeon found mules in the wildernes but your translator telleth vs he found warme waters Haijemim aquas calidas and so by his great cunning hath turned mules into water It maie be said there is great likenes between the wordes in Hebrew which I graunt to be so But this dischargeth not the translation from a faulte And howsoeuer those words are like yet from whence did your translator fetch his other worde Warme For though we suppose the word may signifie water yet to cal it warme water is more then can be warranted In the 41. Chap. v. 54. there passed in the former editions of your translation a notablefault Gen. 41.54 which yet of late for verie shame hath bene amended by Hentenius of Louaine For where the Prophet speaking of the generall famine that was ouer all countries saith that in all the land of Egypt was breade your bookes cleane contrarie to the text and storie reade that the famine also was in all Egypt And thus hath it gone maine hundred yeares in your Latine Bibles Nowe at length you haue bene content to acknowledge a fault in this place and whie not as well also in others wherein as euident faults may be found as this And seeing you can be brought to acknowledgement of some corruptions in your latine Bibles by like reason you maie be induced also to confesse moe faults where moe faults may be founde as there maie full many throughout your whole translation In the 49. of Genes v. 22. Gen. 49.22 Iacob compareth Ioseph his sonne to a fruitfull bough by the well side which wordes in your latine translation are otherwise set downe thus and he is comelie to beholde If you saie that in the sense is no difference yet you make no sufficient answere bhalei bhaijn Et decorus aspectu forasmuch as translating the text of scripture we must retaine the verie words as well as we may and not take libertie of leauing the wordes because we thinke we swarue not from the sense For the wordes may haue some other or farther meaning then we suppose euen in such places as seeme to be most easie And if you impute this as a fault to vs in translating why may not we likewise blame your translator for the same who hath so much offended therein But let vs go on In the 24. verse of this Chap. Iacob saith of Ioseph that his armes were strengthned in your translation it is as contrarie as may be that they were weakned or loosed Againe in the end of this Chapter a wholl verse together is omitted by your tranflators The purchase of the field and the caue that is therein of the children of Heth of which wordes not one is found in your translation and so where the Chapter contained 33. verses your translation hath 32. Tell vs by what reason it was lawful for the author of your translation to put so much our of the text or for you to allow him in so doing It were a worke of great labour and length to go through euerie book of scripture in this order and therfore it shal be for our purpose sufficient of infinite faultes that might be noted booke by booke Chapter by Chapter verse by verse to discouer onelie certaine as they come to my hand such as by reading and conference euerie one may obserue In Exodus the. 15 Chapter 19. verse your translator hath committed a double faulte first in translating a word second in pointing amisse The Prophet saith that Pharoes Horse went with his Charet and Horsemen into the Sea Sus Parbho And so is it in the Septuagintes translation truelie according to the Hebrew veritie But thus it standeth in your translation The Horseman went in Inâ—ressus est eques c. Pharoe with his Charets and Horsemen agreeing neither with Greeke nor Hebrew nor the right sense In the 21. of Exodus 3. verse Exod. 21.3 a law is set downe for hebrew seruants that they should be released of their seruice at the end of six yeares and then is further added in what sorte they should be sent awaie namelie that if the seruant bring with him nothing but his owne bodie Begappo that is if he come alone as the 70. haue interpreted the text hauing no wife then he should go out himselfe alone and not his wife with him as is in the verse following expressed Your translator hath misconstrued the law and marred the sense in turning the hebrew thus Cum quali veste intrauerit cum taliexeat with what manner of garment he entred with such let him go out And so also in the 10. verse following where God commaundeth that if one hath betrothed his maid to his sonne and after take him another wife he shall not diminish the foode of the former your translator hath made aother law for this that he shall prouide a mariage for the maide-seruant Prouidebit puellae nuptias which is vtterlie from the meaning of the law And in the seauenth verse of this Chapter before he hath also mistaken a plaine lawe concerning maide seruants wherein God forbiddeth to send them awaie after their yeares were out haehhabadim as the menseruants are sent away but your translator saith she shall not goe out as the maide seruants are accustomed to goe out Sicut ancillae exere consueuerunt then which nothing almoste can be deuised more contrarie to the Lawe in the. 24. Chapter 11. verse the Prophet speaking of the chosen men of Israel that went vp into the mount and sawe the Lord saith that God laid not his hand vpon them which thing he noteth for a speciall rememberaunce that althouh they sawe God yet because they presumed not but obeied the commaundement of God therefore â—o harme befel vnto them This in your translation is otherwise reported in these wordes Neither laid he his hand vpon them of the children of Isaell that had gone backe a farre of Qui procul recesserant Who seeeth not a manifest difference betweene the true text and this translation In Leuiticus Chap. 4. v. 8. Leuit. 4.8 Where is commaunded that the Priest shall take awaie all the fat of the bullocke that is offered for sinne your translator hath thus mistranslated the wordes and the fat of the calfe he shall offer for sinne Et adipem vituli offeret pro peccato and
taken to binde a contentious heretike Thus it appeereth that although we had the verie same Autographall and authenticall copies which Moses and the other Prophets did write with their owne handes yet would this Seminary papist and his fellowes make lesse account of them then of their translation as being lesse hable to binde heretikes then it The reason is first the diuerse significations of euerie worde almoste which may seeme perhapes to some simple bodie to make for their translation against the Hebrew Whereunto I answere first that although the Hebrew were so vncertaine in respect of the manifold and diuerse significations of wordes as they would haue it yet were there noe cause whie the latine translation should more be allowed for the vndoubted word of God then the Greek or any other in the world They are all noe better then translations and what warrrant is there for one more then an oother but onelie in commendation of greater sinceritie and that in respecte of faithfully expressing the Hebrew Secondlie this variety of significations is not latelie begonne but was alwaies from the beginning which notwithstanding the Hebrewes could speake and write their mindes as plainlie and certainlie as anie other people and the scriptures were read and expounded in that language manie hundred yeares before anie parte of them was translated into Latine So that this reason maketh them now no lesse hable to binde heretikes then they haue euermore bene from the beginning And what tongue I praie you were the scriptures written in which the Apostle exhorteth Timothie to read that he might stoppe the mouthes of heretikes and which he saith are profitable to conuince the Aduersaries but in the Hebrewe and Greeke your latine translator was then vnborne when yet the scriptures in their original tongues were able to binde and confute all heretikes Your example out of the Psalme 55. ver 21. sheweth a plaine corruption in your translation For that Hebrew worde with these letters and prickes cannot signifie to reward as your translation hath but vpon those that haue peace with him as our translations for the moste haue according to the Hebrewe The second reason is pag. 433. that manie substantiues maie haue diuerse deriuations from diuerse verbes and one example is brought out of the 60. Psalme v. 6. To this maie be answered as to the former that if this diuersitie of deriuation cause a diuersitie of expositions it maketh no more against the Hebrew text now then euer since the hebrew was first written Thirdlie pag. 434. touching the literal sense of the hebrew words you demaund what masters we shall followe If a controuersie be about the signification of a word whome should we followe rather then the moste learned masters of that tongue they can best resolue vs that know the tongue best and as this for wordes in all other languages is the onelie waie so likewise if we doubt of some worde in hebrewe what meanes maie we vse to be instructed and satisfied but to learne of those that are moste skilful in the tongue and best know the naturall force of the words Who can denie that this is much better then as your translator oftentimes doth to call blacke white and to giue a signification of a worde which all Hebricians can tell is cleane amisse Examples hereof are in your translation plentifull as if before you knew not now by that which I haue alreadie alledged you maie vnderstand That which followeth of Caluine Beza and the rest hath nothing but a poore bragge not worth the mentioning To your question pag. 437. whether I thinke it flat Atheisme and Turkery to denie that Christ was borne of a virgine I answere no Christian can thinke otherwise but that it is indeed plaine Atheisme to denie this so principall an article of our faith Then you require what scripture I haue to prooue this veritie I answere I prooue this veritie by a plaine text of scripture in Matt. 1. v. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beholde a virgine shall conceaue c. But this you saie prooueth nothing by mine owne rule by Bezaes common kinde of scanning such citations and by the protestants interpretation of this place What rule what scanning what interpretation of ours can you alledge against this moste sufficient and euident proofe Did euer Beza or I or anie other protestant speake anie thing against this trueth If you can charge anie of vs we desire no fauour at your hands But what cause or reason haue you thus to saie Because this texte is not according to the Hebrewe but the seauentie as you affirme Which to be a foule vntrueth and tending to Atheisme and Turcisme whoe seeth not For if the Angels wordes rehearsed in Saint Matthew be not agreeable to the veritie of the Prophets wordes then may Turkes Iewes Atheists and wicked heretikes indede at their pleasure not onelie dispute against this article of our faith but also condemne it and we shall not be hable to conuince them This aduantage giueth M. Rainolds vnto them when he saieth Saint Matthewes text is not framed according to the Hebrwe but the Greeke translation M. R. denieth the text of S. Matthewe touching Christ borne of a virgine to be according to the Hebrewe Thus while you labour to prooue that we in cleauing to the Hebrewe text doe open a gappe to Atheisme your selfe in denying S. Matthewes text to be fully agreeable to the Hebrewe haue opened a broade gate to all Atheists and Turkes in the world God forbidde that we should euer vtter word so much seruing for defense of Atheisme as you haue here done or els set downe in word or writing that S. Matthewes place is not according to the Hebrew If you take part with the Iewes and openlie maintaine that the Hebrew worde signifieth not a virgine but a young wench then will I answere you as the godlie fathers haue answered those wicked enemies of Christ that 〈◊〉 signifieth a young wench indeed but one that is a virgine being deriued of the roote that signifieth to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So Saint Ieâ—â—â—â— writeth that this worde not onelie signifieth a young maide or virgine but more also a virgine kept hidâ— and secret by greate diligence of hee parents and further also a young virginus of tender age not an olde virgine as some be And although the word in Hebrew had signified onelie a wench yet the Angell and Euangelists expounding it of such a wench as was a virgine also this maie suffice all Christians to beleeue and holde that our sauiour Christ was borne of a true virgine let Iewes Turkes Atheists and heretikes say what they can to the contrarie Master R. is affraid lest men should thinke he studied to disgrace the Greeke Hebrew tongues pag. 435. c. which he confesseth to be great helps to the attaining of the true sense in sundrie places of scripture and sheweth what paines the Catholikes haue taken in
no dout accompanied in some princelie sorte they muste needs haue bene discried Thirdlie if they had bene as you imagine kings yea and Monarches as great as the king of France and Spayne or the great Sophie of Persia which you suppose might be then would they not haue left our sauiour Christ and his Mother in that poore estate that she was able to offer no more but a paire of doues according to the oblation of the poorest amongst the people If you can remooue the ground of these reasons I will confesse your opinion hath in it more probability then I thought although to beleeue it as you do for a certaine truth I cannot because thereof I know no sure reason can be alleadged The fathers I graunt some of them speake of these wise men as of kings taking that word in a larger sense for great and honorable personages such as may be thought that they were but the ground of their opinion is a place of scripture misunderstoode in the 72. Psalme concerning the kings of Tharsis Arabia and Sheba that should bring giftes which cannot be applied to these for so much as those countries are not Eastward from Iudea and the scripture plainly saith that these wise men came out of the East Therefore whatsoeuer any father hath written to this purpose is lightlie to be regarded hauing no better ground then a manifest wresting of scripture and turning South into East Now that they were also three pag. 489. how may it be prooued forsooth here is a mysterie of the blessed Trinitie whereunto Saint Augustine most sweetlâ—e alludeth At this most heauenlie mysterie Master Rainolds none will be grieued saue onelie most wicked and detestable heretikes indeed But how appeareth it that these wise men did represent and signifie that mysterie Saint Augustine and Leo saie so and therefore we must beleeue it is so Which argument I will admit if because their oblations were of three thinges therefore it follow necessarilie that them-selues whoe offered were three Yet Master Rainolds hath a better reason then this if it will be accepted The Euangelist saith he speaketh of them in the duall number and therefore they were moe then two but we neede not to beleeue that they were moe then three Neither need we to beleeue that they were iuste three for the Euangelist speaking of them indefinitlie as he doth we may as well thinke they were moe then three as well as three and so also indeede some fathers haue thought So that this hangeth vpon a slender threede of mans coniecture which cannot be warranted by mysticall expositions And if herein were conteined so sweete and excellent mysteries much maie we maruell why the Euangelistes would not plainelie write for better vnderstanding of this mysterie that they were neither fewer nor moe then iust three Lastlie touching their names pag 490. Master R. asketh seeing they were not nameles why their names were not Gaspar Melchior Baltasar rather then William Iohn and Thomas I graunt as well maie we thinke the one as the other but reason is there none to thinke either That their names might haue bene continued in the Church I denie not as well as those forcerers names were of whome S. Paule maketh mention And so standeth your argument Their names might be such therefore they were such they might be three therefore they were three they might be Kings therefore they were Kings And thus in Popish traditions the argument holdeth well a posse ad esse contrarie to the rules of all Logique in the world But enough of these three counterfaite Kinges of Colen That Iohn the Baptist was an Eremite pag. 482. and patrone of Eremiticall life is as likelie as the other First scripture haue you none for this Tradition of yours for then it were not a right tradition if you could bring something out of scripture for confirmation thereof The Euangelists saie not that he liued alone from companie of men in the wildernes as your Eremites did but that he liued in that countrie of Iudea which in respect of other parts therof more populous Hierâ—â— in vis a Paâ—li was called the desert of Iudea Then whatsoeuer you alledge out of fathers may in a worde by another father be disprooued who denieth that Elias and Iohn were Monckes and saith that Antonius and Paulus were thought to be the first fathers of Eremites Concerning the stone that hitt S. Pag. 493. Stephen on the elbowe and nowe is kept at Ancona in Italie Master Rainolds will not stand greatlie in maintenance of this fable but referreth vs to Saint Augustine in a counterfaite sermon Yet that such a thing might be he prooueth by example of Aharons rod and the Manna which were by Gods speciall commaundement preserued in the Arke But was there anie like commandement or cause to keepe the stone that rebounded from Saint Stephens body shew vs some and then we say no more For Elias comming before the last iudgement are alledged sundrie Doctors pag. 494 So then belike all is safe on their side if they can approoue their opinions and expositions by Testimonies of some Doctors But this will not serue vnles the Doctors saying be warranted by Gods worde as we haue a thousande times tolde them Now this imagination of Elias comming is by the wordes of our sauiour Christ plainlie confuted whoe teacheth that Elias Mat. 17.13 according to the prophecie of Melachie was come alreadie and the Apostles vnderstood that he meant of Iohn the Baptist whoe was Elias not in person but in spirite and power Then the prophecie of Elias comming being fulfilled in Iohn Baptist as our sauiour himselfe hath taught vaine is it to dreame of an other comming then that wherof no worde can be found in all the scriptures of God Wherefore as you compare the fathers with vs to make your cause seeme the more probable so will I compare the scriptures with the fathers whose authoritie is much more incomparablie aboue theirs then theirs is aboue ours by how much God is more aboue man then one man is aboue another Your faults in framing arguments out of the text of scripture pag. 497. are most incredible monstrous such as I gathered some out of your Annotations vpon the new testament as your selues had deliuered them vnto vs. You cannot otherwise doe but take vpon you some seelie defense of your fellowes Collections whether with greater ignorance or boldnes I can not tell Christ and Peter walked on the waters Matt. 14.26 therefore it is euident that Christs bodie may be in compasse of a litle bread This to be a most false argument not onelie in true Diuinitie but also in naturall reason is manifest For had Christ or Peter a bodie that both walked on the water and walked not on the water at one time Doe the scriptures so teach or is there no such thing to be found in them If not then is not this like to you