Christians and Catholikes who could ether perceaue what I meant or who would not iudge that I did them great iniury in making them to write against Christians which none do but Iewes Turkes or against Catholikes vvhich none do but heretikes and Apostataes And marueil it is that the name of Protestātes is novv grovven into so great dislike vvhich hitherto hath bene so magnified in bookes pulpits and ordinarie phrase of talke and vvhich M. Fox in his huge volume of Actes and Monumentes alvvayes vseth as most proper to their gospel maketh it opposite sometimes to Papistes somtimes to Catholikes which he vseth for one But the truth is those that professe the English faith and religion ether haue no name at al to be knovven by but the common name of heretikes vvhich is to general and vvould be to odious or their most propre name is Zuinglians or Sacramentaries For to cal them Catholikes and Christians besides that it is false and ridiculous and may vvith like probabilitie be chalenged of euery other kind of secte Lutheran Brentian Arrian Puritan besides that their greatest vvriters mocke and scorne at the name Catholike as Popish and superstitious besides this I say it expresseth not that particular religion in vvhich they differre from the rest of the Christian vvorld for vvhich vve vvrite against them and for vvhich the Lutheranes oppose thē selues against them and vvhich by their name ought specially to be signified The name of Protestantes which commonly they vsurpe is wrongfully chalenged of them as which duely only belongeth to the Lutheranes who for opposing them selues against the decrees of the Empyre Emperour touching Catholike religion and protesting that they would stand in defence of their owne according to the Confession exhibited at Auspurg were first for their so doing and protesting named Protestantes as much to say as men that stood and protested against the Catholike faith for their priuate in such sort as hath bene noted From which Confession of theirs as likewise from al other communion those of the English religion vvere by the name of Zuinglians expresly excluded And briefly that no other name can be duely applied vnto them besides the name of Zuinglians by this reason it may playnely appeare When they brake from the rest of the Christian vvorld vvhich they say vvas couered vvith palpable darkenes and betooke them selues to that light of the gospel vvhereof novv they so much brag and boast vvho vvas their maister ringleader and Apostle therein but Huldericus Zuinglius So much they vvrite most euidently in the Apologie of their English church In the middest of that darknes say they those most excellent men Martin Luther and Hulderike Zuinglius sent from God to illuminate the vvhole vvorld first came to the Gospel Missi à Deo ad illustrandum terrarum orbem primū accesserunt ad Euangelium Now whereas them selues al other name those gospellers which folow Luthers sense and interpretation by the name of Lutherans they vvho prefer Zuinglius before Luther and professe them selues to haue receaued the light of the Gospel from him hovv should they be called but Zuinglians not only for like reason vvhich hath bene vsed in al times and ages from the first beginning of the primitiue Church vvhere the Secte-maisters haue geuen appellation to their after-commers as in Marcion Valentinus Carpocrates Nouatus the rest but much more and especially because them selues chalenge him for their maister in their particular faith and religion And therefore it can not be avoided but as Luthers scholers are called Lutherans so Zuinglius disciples ought of like right to be called Zuinglians And to end this quarel our aduersaries them selues who haue written of these matters shal serue to quite vs of al fault M. Fox in his storie when soeuer he speaketh of that sect vvhich him self best-liked ordinarily calleth them sometime Protestants sometime Hussites sometime at large men forward in promoting the proceedings of the gospel sometime more briefly Gospellers And writing precisely of the diuision betvvene Luther and Zuinglius he saith VVith Luther in the opinion of the Sacrament consented the Saxons vvith the other side of Zuinglius vvent the Heluetians and as time did grow so the diuision of these opinions increased in sides and spread in farther realmes and countries the one part being called of Luther Lutherans the other hauing the name of Sacramentaries So in Sleidan vve haue very common the name of Zuinglians and Sacramentaries as likewise he calleth the other part Lutherans and their religion Lutheranisme and euen so they termed them selues It were tedious to iustifie this out of Luther Zuinglius especially al historigraphers of our age And in truth it is much like as if a man should light a candle at noone-tide Wherefore in this we must desyre our aduersaries to beare with vs if we speake not only as al Catholikes but as al Protestants as Luther as Sleidan as M. Fox as generally al writers in their bookes and volumes are accustomed to speake and as the world of thē hath learned and as the aduersaries them selues by al reason induce vs to speake and as of necessitie we must speake if we wil speake and be vnderstoode Touching any other fault I shal be ready ether to defēd it or to correct it to correct it if it be noted against me iustly to defend it if it be obiected vndeseruedly this I protest not only in words as cōmonly do al Protestantes but in simplicitie of truth as meaning to performe the same And therefore willingly I submit what so euer I haue written to the iudgment of al Catholikes symply and with out exception to whom iudgment of these matters appertaineth to the iudgment of al Protestants euen of M. W. him selfe so far furth as he shal geue censure of it and refel it by the written word of God expounded according to the analogie of faith A TABLE OF THE CHAPTERS Chap. I. Of Luthers contemning S. Iames his Epistle and calling it stramineam Pag. 1. Chap. II. Of the Canonical scriptures and that the English cleargie in accepting some and refusing others are lead by no learning or diuinitie but by mere opinion fantasie Pa. 19. Chap. III. How M.W. defendeth Luther preferring his priuate iudgement before al auncient fathers and Doctors Pag. 42. Chap. IIII. Of priesthod and the sacrifice continued after Christ in the state of the new testament and that it derogateth nothing from Christ Pa. 56. Chap. V. Of Penance and the value of good workes touching iustificatiō and life eternal Pag. 82. Chap. VI. How vnreasonably M.W. behaueth him self in reprouing and approuing the auncient fathers for their doctrine touching good workes Pag. 114. Chap. VII Of M. Iewels challenge renewed by M. W. and the vanitie and falshod thereof Pag. 129. Chap. VIII Of Beza corruptly trāslating a place of scripture Act. 3. and of the real presence Pag. 169.
Stinckfâ—ldius and their scholer vvhether they be at Zuruke or in vvhat place else soeuer vnder the sâ—nne Thus Luther If you know this Maister Whitaker as you wil seeme to be ignorant of nothing what maketh you so busily to defend Luthers barbarous and proude vauntes as though he were such a piller without whom your church could not stande But belyke it is sufficient that he was an Apostata frier as were the founders of your gospel that he with you agreed in rayling at the Pope and Sea of Rome and so for his agreeing with you in these smaler toyes you care not for his disagreeing from you in those weightie matters Wel be it as you liste and perhaps you haue more reason then I perceaue otherwise you shall neuer be able to iustifie this demeanure in the sight of any man endued with common sence Let vs heare how conningly you cure this stinking sore for nothing stinketh more before the face of God and man then a poore contemptible wretch so Lucifer-lyke to prefer him selfe before inumerable excellent learned and glorious Saintes of God What distinction haue you to saue Luthers honestie Forsooth this In certaine cases Luther might more esteeme of his ovvne iudgement then of Austine Ciprian or a thousand Churches For if that vvhich Luther taught vvere agreable to Gods vvord then Luthers iudgment vvas to be preferred before the contrarie iudgment of al men and Churches Here M. VV. thinketh he hath spoken much to the purpose and therefore aduaunceth him selfe alofte Scripturam Lutherus protulit cuinullus mortalis resistit quaeque tandem Pontificiis decretis pesteÌ„ atque exitium afferet Luther brought vvith him scripture vvhich no mortall man can vvithstand and vvhich at length shall be the bane and distruction of the Popish decrees That I may the better conceaue this distinction and ether yelde to it if it stand with reason or discouer the vanitie of it if it fal out to be but a peeuish battologie of wordes as I trowe it will proue let me require a playner explication of that parte Luther might vvell prefer his iudgment before a thousand Austines Ciprianes and Churches if he spake vvith scripture Is this the meaning that in case and controuersie of religion if a thousand Ciprians that is all the Fathers teach vs one thing and bringe scriptures for them and one father Luther teach vs the contrarie and bringe scriptures for him may Luther in this case preferre his owne iudgement before al those Fathers if so as the speach it selfe is so monstrous execrable as the deuil him selfe can not open his mouth into more horrible pride so what heresie what Apostasie what Atheisme in the church can euer be coÌ„trouled if this rule be made currante why shoud Arrius yelde to the Councel of Nice Nestorius to the Councel of Ephesus Macedonius to the CouÌ„cel of Constantinople seinge they brought scriptures for them and by this rule ought to haue preferred their priuate iudgment before those byshops as Luther his offpringe doe theirs before the Councel of Trente or will he say that if perhaps a thousand Austines and Churches teache some doctrine without the writteÌ„ worde of God that is citing no text for it Luther against the same bring the written worde that is some texte of the scripture after his seÌ„se in this case he may better esteeme of himselfe then of al the rest But first he can neuer geue instance that ether the auncient fathers did so in their tymes or that we do so now for howsoeuer in the Councels of Nice of Ephesus of Chalcedon the byshops stoode much vppoÌ„ the traditioÌ„ of their elders ea que sunt patrum teneantur say they sic credere à sanctis patribus edocti sumus let vs hold fast the fayth and decrees of our fathers thus to beleeue vve haue bene taught by our holye fathers yet they waÌ„ted not scriptures as nether did the fathers in the Councel of Trent nor we at this day in our controuersies with the protestantes And if those auncient fathers had alleaged no direct euident place against Arrius Nestorius Eutyches yet notwithstanding the Christian people were bound to beleeue them grounding them selues only vpoÌ„ the Catholike vniuersal fayth of the churches which were before them as they did in the question of our B. Ladies perpetual virginitie And albeit the heretike brought some clauses of scripture for the coÌ„trary part yet ought al faithful men to yeld no more credit thereto theÌ„ to the deuil when he alleaged scripture against our sauiour because as the deuil so al heretikes may vse scripture against the true sense and meaning thereof the vniuersal church caÌ„ neuer teach or beleeue so as by Christ him self we are assured And this case in effect coÌ„meth to one issue with the former for geue this scope to an heretike that all the Bishops Churches Fathers may erre he alone if he can alleage a text may therefore rightly contemne al other in respecte of him selfe as euery Sectmaister doth and hath done where is the Churches quietnes what order is there for coÌ„tinuance of fayth to what ende was the comminge of Christ to what vse the sendinge of the holy Ghost Or perhaps M. W. wil say posito per impossibile that all the Churches fathers teach against scripture Luther alone teache with scripture then lo Luther maye thinke him selfe a better man then they all and this is true this I graunte as in like maner I confesse that if the heauen shoulde falle we knowe what woulde folow And yet of these two suppositions the Spirit of God putteth the later to be more possible that the course of heauen shal soner alter then the Catholike Churche of the new TestameÌ„te fal frome Christe to Apostasie But it may be M.VV. wil say I scanne his wordes to narrowlie his meaning is plaine that whereas Luther bringeth scriptures against vs that is against all the Austines and Ciprianes of the Catholike Church all the Byshops now liuinge he maye well truste his owne iudgmente if this be the meaning yet stil al commeth to one ende and whie may Luther so do more then Caluine whie Caluine more then Muncerus whie a ZwingliaÌ„ more then a Puritane Anabaptiste or Trinitarian Or what assurance hath he more then those other But if Luthers iudgment bringinge scriptures with him be so forcible against vs may not we trow you Lutherize a litle after your example and say the same against you As for example Luther hath made a booke entituled defensio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 verborum coenae accipite comedite hoc est corpus meum contra fanaticos SacramentarioruÌ„ spiritus In that booke not very longe or large yet contayninge more substaÌ„ce then some whole volumes of his do his principal conclusion risinge vpon this texte of scripture and grounded vpon many texts of scripture beside is that he and his vvill
no man geue any credit to the fair speaches and crakings of the Zuinglians For most certaine it is that they lye and lye agayne VVherefore Christian reader to leaue M.VV. and returne to thee and so make an ende if thou be in iudgement Catholike I know thou findest not nor euer shalt finde reason to make thee a Protestant of any sect and least of al after the English fashion And if thou feele in thy self any such temptation consider aduisedly but this only why thou shouldest encline to be of that side more then to be Lutheran a Puritan an Anabaptist a Trinitarian and so furth and thou shal neuer finde any probable cause why thou shouldest not as wel become any of these as a Caluinist or Zuinglian And vniuersally to make thee detest all Sectes if thou haue some feare of God and regard of the iudgement to come waygh only that which the very nature of our religion this treatise offereth to thy consideration and thou shalt easely find abundant reason why to reiect forsake them al. Consider the infinite difference betwene the Catholike pleading reasoning and disputing and their perpetual wrangling brawling and rayling VVe geue thee to stay thy selfe in our time vnitie of faith in al Christiā prouinces Churches wel gouerned and in due obedience florishing commō welthes quietly maintayning the doctrine which of their fathers they receaued They geue thee infinite varietie and difference of religions disordered cōgregations the sheepe controling their pastors and scholers presuming to teach their maisters And in the ciuil common-welth disobedience against the magistrate contempt of princely authoritie spoile ruine of churches of palaces of al things sacred and profane In the former ages we shewe thee consent and agreement in the religion which we professe Bishops Churches Princes Prouinces Peoples al realmes Christened ioyning in the same They tel thee of inuisible churches imagined congregations Mathematical deuises in the ayre as it were Minotautes and Hippocentaures sometimes chalenging to them selues the company of Berēgarius VVicleff Hus the like sometimes refusing them as heretikes and running per saltum vnto the Apostolical age or the first 3.4 or 5. hundred yeres after Christ condemning al the church folowing of superstition and Papistrie and sometimes yea commonly condemning those former ages no lesse then the later VVhen we treate of scriptures vve geue them vnto thee syncerely and perfitely vvithout any cutting or paring avvay of this or that booke or this and that peece of such a booke al expounded vniformely by excellent Saintes by most learned Doctors by general Councels by the most approued practise of the Catholike church in al antiquitie They geue thee scriptures so peecemele and patchedly that they cut of at the least the third part of them sometimes sentences sometimes peeces of chapters sometimes chapters commonly entier bookes And as for the exposition of them contemning al Saintes Doctors Councels of antiquitie al Doctors Fathers and Martyrs of their owne Congregations they reduce the final scope and determination of al to This is my opinion this is my iudgment and the Doctors may not take avvay from vs our liberty to iudge of them c. Consider this intolerable wilfulnes wherevnto they are now growen and the more they shew them selues to abhorre from al reason stay or moderation the more oughtest thou to obhorre from them Consider with thy selfe that neuer the founder of any common welth as Solon of Athenes or Minos of Creta was so brutish or voyd of common sense as to leaue his common welth so disordered that there should be no iudges to end controuersies no gouernours to keepe the people in peace and tranquillitie but that euery man should liue according to his lust and liking Then how much more abominable is it for vs to imagine that Christ Iesus the eternal wisedom of God should frame a larger common welth then euer was vnder the Sunne dispersed thorough al quarters corners of the world and yet for order quietnes should leaue the same worse policed then was euer the least citie or borough towne whereof we reade in any story For so much as he bound euery one of his subiectes not only to liue wel and in charitie one with an other but also vnder payne of eternal damnation he bound them al to beleeue a like and to haue the selfe same faith vnchangeably in al places times and ages touching a number of articles and yet leaft no order whereby to procure any such vnitie nay rather tooke order to driue thē into diuers innumerable faithes appointing so many supreme heads of churches as there vvere soueraine kinges princes dukes rulers in seueral kingdomes countryes prouinces and cities appointing a booke of the gospels vvhereby they should be gouerned but leauing the exposition of the same at randon in the discretion or rather fansie of euery preacher and minister Recal to memorie that which their owne principall writers and maisters teach thee who deny not but that they leade thee an other way then any of thy forefathers wēt for these thousand yeres Againe they deny not but they geue thee a faith far differing from the faith which the more auncient fathers folowed in the first fiue hūdred yeres Then whereas they praise vnto thee for most diuine and Apostolical men of later memorie those who within these 80 yeres haue restored as they cal it the gospel by those mē also thou art earnestly dehorted from the Sacramentarie faith as a faith wicked blasphemous and damnable Furthermore remember that a long time they vsed to reteyne at least the name and countenance of the written word of the Gospel of the scriptures that those were altogether for them whatsoeuer became of the Fathers Councels and Doctors But now that hold also haue they geuen ouer cōfessing thereby the scriptures to be as plainly against thē as the rest And with what conscience or reason can any man folow such blind guydes as these are who professe them selfes to folow none but to be at plaine defiance with all Fathers and Churches of this later thousand yeres with al Fathers and Churches of the other fiue hundred yeres and with the sacred scriptures and Gospel of Christ it self whom for these other reasons their owne doctors maisters and brethren condemne as heretikes most wicked and sacrilegious God indue thee with his spirite and send thee of his grace that thou maist take the right way and folow it that thou maist renounce al sectes heresies and become a true member of Christes Catholike Church without which there is no sanctification of the holy Ghost no remission of sinnes and consequently no hope of the fauour of God no hope of life eternal LAVS DEO A GENERAL TABLE OF THE PRINCIPAL THINGES conteyned in this booke A ACADEMIKES a sect of Protestants page 279. their beleefe pa. 280. Antinomi a secte
shaken Alleage the auncient fathers not one or other but al together affirming one and the self same thing they answere If you argue from the vvitnesse of men be they neuer so learned and auncient vve yelde no more to their vvordes in cause of faith and religion then vve perceaue to be agreable to scripture Nether thinke you your self to haue proued any thing although you bring against vs the vvhole consent and svvarme of fathers except that vvhich they say be iustified not by the voice of men but of God himself And it is their common maner as to make smale accompt of any author that is against them so least of al of the old auncient fathers whom some of them are not ashamed in most despiteful sort to cal Pillorie doctors But this their behauiour towards the auncient fathers and Doctors that be of our Church may seeme in the iudgement of many to stand with reason For why may it be said should they be bound to our Austins HieroÌ„s and Cyprians more then we wil be bound to their Luthers Caluins and Melanchthons At the least then say we they ought to be ruled by doctors of their owne such as they cal and honour for Apostles Euaâ—geâ—istes of their new church and beleefe Yet when the authoritie of such is pressed against them it weigheth no deeper then of those other whom they cal pillorie doctors For how freely contemne they Martin Luther how freely reiect they Hulderike Zuinglius VVe receaue M. Caluin saith T.C. and vveigh of him as of the notablest instrument that the lord hath stâ—rred vp for the purging of his churches and restoring of the playne and sincere interpretation of the scriptures vvhich hath bene since the Apostles time And yet vve do not so reade his workes that vve beleeue any thing to be true because he saith it but so far as vve caÌ„ esteeme that that vvhich he saith doth agree vvith the Canonical scriptures The very self same answere geueth the contrary part wheÌ„ the same mans iudgement is obiected against him I reuerence M. Caluin saith D.W. as a singular man and a vvorthy instrument in Christes church But I am not so vvholy addicted vnto him that I vvil contemne other mens iudgmentes in diuers points not fully agreing vvith him c. vvhen as in my opinion they come neerer to the true meaning and sense of scripture then he doth And because the course of this new diuinitie is now brought to rest most of al on the credit of these reuereÌ„d fathers and doctors and in steede of the auncient forme of alleaging T. us saith S. Chrysostom thus S. Augustin thus S. Basil the fashion is now to alleage Thus saith M. Caâ—uin thus M. Bucer thus M. Bullinger therefore thorough varietie somewhat to avoyde tediousnes and not greue to much the eares of their auditors by flat denyal diuers wayes and reasons haue they to passe ouer when they please the authoritie of such their owne doctors and maisters One way and the same very playne is to refuse them because they were men As for example If you presse me vvith M. Martyrs and M. Bucers authoritie I first say they vvere men and therefore though othervvise very vvatchful yet such as slept somtymes A second way is because they had some other error as M. Bucer you say allovveth priuate baptisme and consequently the baptisme by vvomen It may be that as M. Bucer although othervvise very learned hath other grosse absurdities so he may haue that A third because some other doctor of as good credite and estimation is of a contratie opinion as M. Musculus a learned man is of your iudgement and M. Caluin as learned as he and diuers other are of that iudgment that I haue alleaged This is no great profe on your side nor reprofe of ours A fourth and the same most sure is to chalenge the libertie of the gospel and therefore not to admitte their verdict but at pleasure as Touching M. Bucers M. Bullingers Illyricus allovvance of holy daies if they allovv them in such sort as M. Doctor vrgeth then that good leaue vvhich they geue the Churches to dissent from theÌ„ in that point I do take it graunted vnto me being one of the same church Although as touching M. Bullinger it is to be obserued that since the time he wrote so there are aboue 35 yeres since vvhich time although he hold stal that the feastes dedicated vnto the lord as of the Natiuitie Easter and Pentecost may be kept yet he denieth flatly that it is lavvful to keepe holy the dayes of the Apostles If these serue not the turne a man would thinke their martyrs those who were so ful of the spirite that they willingly shead their bloud and suffered death by fier for confâ—irmation of their faith these mens testimonie should be irrefragable for iustifying of those pointes especially for which they lost their liues But nether want they their old ordinary meanes to shift of the authoritie of these martyrs were they neuer so glorious For although they vvere excellent personages say they yet their knovvledge vvas in part and although they brought many thinges to light yet they being sent out in the morning or euer the sunne of the gospel vvas risen so high might ouersee many thinges vvhich those that are not so sharpe of sight as they vvere may see c. And if they had died for this or that article yet the authoritie of their martyrdome could not take avvay from vs this libertye that vve haue to enquire of the cause of their death Martyrs may not be said to seale their errors vvith their bloud or vvith the glory of their martirdome preiudice those which vvrite or speake against their errors For this is to oppose the bloud of men to the bloud of the sonne of God What remayneth now for the last cast but the maiestie not of one or other doctor or of a few martyrs but of great and ample reformed churches as of France of Germany of Zurike or Geneuâ— yet euen these also passe with like maner of answere And they haue as general a rule to reiect such as they haue the poorest doctor that commeth in their way As for exaple when other reformed churches are brought to reforme the disorders of the English church To vvhich reformed church saith the ansvverer vvil you haue the church of England framed or vvhy should not other reformed churches as vvel frame them selues vnto vs For vve are as vvel assured of our doctrine and haue as good groundes reasons for our doing as they haue except you vvil bring in a nevv Rome appoint vs an other head church and create a nevv Pope by vvhom vve must be in al thinges directed And againe I haue told you and novv I tel you againe that there is no cause vvhy this church of England
no wiser then they who in so shorte space haue falleÌ„ out with your self altered your iudgmeÌ„te and now esteeme that for apocriphal which then was to yow canonical that is now iugde that to be the moone which then you thought to be the sunne Our lorde geue his people grace to thinke of you as you proue your selues that is so fantastical inconstant that you know not what to say and whyles you seeke to keepe your selfe aloofe from the Catholike churche the sure piller grouÌ„de of truâ—he you plunge your selues ouerhead and eares in such foule absurdities as neuer did heretikes before you For what is the reason of al this because besydes the written word or scripture yow wil not acknowledge any traditioÌ„ of the Church wherevnto by this question yow are enforced of necessitie For if we are bound to beleeue certaine bookes as for example the Gospel of S. Matthew S. Marke S. Iohn and S. Paules Epistles to be Canonical that is heaueÌ„ly and peÌ„ned by diuine inspiration and yet the same can not be proued by scripture theÌ„ cleare it is that we are bound to beleeue somewhat which by scripture caÌ„ not be proued and so the tradition of the Church is established And marueyle it is that yow perceaue not how grosly yow ouerthwart your self and plainly refel that which yow would seeme most earnestly to confirme For if yow march your beleefe of scripture with knowledg of the Sunne and Moone and such like as are knowen by only sense the light of nature then you deny it to be any article of your faith For these two are directly opposite and the apostle confirmeth this reason wheÌ„ he defineth faith to come by hearing and hearing by the vvord of God ergo fides ex auditu auditus per verbuÌ„ Dei And therefore if you beleeue not with humaine faith as yow beleeue Tusculanes questions to haue bene written by Cicero but with Christian diuine faith as yow beleeue Christ to be your sauiour if thus you beleeue the Gospel which beareth S. Matthews name as likewise that of S. Marke and S. Iohn to haue bene written by them then yow beleeue so because so yovv haue heard it preached and so yovv haue receaued and consequently by the Apostles authoritie that verie matter so preached vnto yow is the vvord of God which word of God whereas yow find not in the scriptures hereof it foloweth manifestly that somewhat is the vvord of God which is not scripture and therefore yow and your fellowes beleeuing only scripture beleeue not al the vvord of God but only a peece thereof and so did the worste heretikes that euer were yea so do at this day the verie Turkes and Mahometanes But to end this special matter with yow M. VV. touching your distinction betweene S. Iames and Tobias Iudith the Machabees c. where you make this to be the difference that S. Iames vvas refused but of a fevv and the other generally of the vvhole Churche tota Ecclesia repudiauit say you for declaration of your truth herein I referre you to the moste euident testimonies of the same auncient Churche S. Augustine setting downe the Canonicall scriptures as they were read and beleeued in his time placeth S. Iames I coÌ„fesse in order with the Gospels Pauls epistles yet not excludiÌ„g those other but in the selfe same place numbringe Tobie Iudith and the Machabees with the bookes of Moses and the Prophetes his saith he 44. libris veteris testameÌ„ti terminatur authoritas In these fourtie and foure bookes is concluded the authoritie of the old testament Likewise the Councel of Carthage approueth for Canonicall S. Iames but in the same CanoÌ„ it approueth as far the other forenamed and teacheth of them as directlie as of the other that they are Canonicall scriptures Somewhat before S. Augustines daies they were not by publike decree of the Church receaued as appeareth by S. Hierome and the Councel of Laodicea but then when there was as greate doubte of S. Iames epistle S. Paule to the Hebrewes and the Apocalyps touchinge the first it is manifest by that which hath bene said by you and your felowes Of the secoÌ„d there was more question then of the first and S. Hierome seldome citeth it but he geueth a note signifyinge that it was not in his time taken for Canonical In the Epistle to the Hebrevves vvhich the custome of the Latine Church receaueth not saith he it is thus vvritten Againe the blessed Apostle in his Epistle to the Hebrevves although the custome of the Latin Church receaueth it not amongst Canonicall scriptures Againe this authoritie the Apostle Paule vsed or vvhosoeuer he vvere that vvrote that Epistle In catalogo he saith that euen vnto his time it vvas not accounted the vvritinge of Paule and that Caius an auncient writer denyeth it to be his and in his epistle to Paulinus sette before the Bible he saith that a plaerisque extra numerum ponitur of the more part it is put out of the nuÌ„ber of Paules vvritinges The like might be declared by S. CipriaÌ„ Lactantius Tertullian Arnobius and S. Austine if it were needefull and the Apocalyps was yet more doubtful then ether of these two as wee see by the Councel of Laodicea leafte oute of the rolle of Canonicall writinges when both the other of S. Iames and S. Paule were put in Wherefore as false that is which M.VV. constantlie auoucheth of the auncient Church touchinge the seueringe of these sacred volumes so hath he not yet nor euer shalbe able with reason to satisfie M. Martins demaund why they of England haue coÌ„desceÌ„ded to admit the one rather then the other And here the reader may consider esteeme as it deserueth of that glorious 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in fine he singeth to him self settinge the crowne of triumphe vppon his owne head and his felowes Nothing saith he is novv more vulgar then the Papists arguments against vs. Quicquid afferri a quoquam potuit vidimus diluimus protriuimus vvhat so euer could be said of anie of them al vve haue seene it refelled it and trode it vnder foote he may consider I saie how like this man and his companions are to worke such maisteries who as yet knowe not what those weapons are which they should vse in atchiuing such conquests For whereas they vaunt to doe this by the written worde yet are not resolued amoÌ„gest them selues what that written word is and how farre it extendeth it is as fantastical a parte to bragge of victorie as if a mad man should ruÌ„ne into the field to slea his enemie and when he commeth there knoweth not with what weapon to begin the fight Wherefore wel may he and his felowes heare and see the Catholike doctrine as Esai speaketh of the Iewes concerninge the doctrine of Christ hearing shal you heare shall not vnderstand and seeing shal yovv
iustifie or be the merite cause efficient of iustice life and not vvhether they be in any respect necessarie to saluation which in deed is or was when you first began the verie point of the controuersie which he therefore defendeth vz that they are in no respect necessarie by 26. most firme and stronge demonstrations as he calleth them and reckeneth this your doctrine for a papisticall error and calleth you a nevv papist for putting the questiō as you doe These are his wordes Hetherto touching the papistes corruption of this doctrine novv I come to the doctrine of the nevv papistes vvhich is as pernicious as the old they say that the Apostle meant to exclude good vvorkes from iustification non simpliciter ratione debiti not simply and as due but only as meritorious causes efficient vvhere-vpon these doctors or rather seducers do diuers vvayes elude that proposition of S. Paule vve are iustified by faith gratis vvithout vvorkes eche one according to his ovvne head and as his priuate spirite suggesteth to him and most of thē couet diligently to mingle vvorkes as a certain harmefull leauen vvith iustification the lambe of God And there he reckneth twelue such corruptions the last where of is yours the very self same which here you defend against which he setteth downe the protestantes faith thus But the true sense of Paules vvordes is that vvithout al merite condition or necessitie of our vvorkes by only faith in Christ vve are iustified before Christ saued so as our saluation doth in no sort depend of our vvorkes nether be they any vvay necessarie to saluation c. Scripture Luther and al doctors of sound iudgment thinke thus of vvhich doctrine these be most firme demonstrations c. and in fine he saith Iste ipse error est omnino papistica corruptela articuli iustificationis This verie error is altogether a papistical corruptiō of the article of iustificatiō And if you can recal to memorie the common argumentes gathered to your hand by euery heretike that hath writtē vpon the epistle to the Romanes namely the fourth chapter you shall soone perceiue that your opinion and their commentaries can neuer match together out of the mayne heape I wil note one or two such as are most common to euery preacher and found in euery booke whereby you shal see how by this assertion you ouerthrow your whole doctrine S. Paule excludeth al our boastinge from iustice and saluation and that in Abraham a man most holie ergo vvorkes are by no meanes so much as causa sine qua non of saluation othervvise vve shoud haue some occasion of boasting Againe Paule him selfe separateth his vvorkes and iustices so far from his saluation that he accounteth them for trashe and hinderances of saluation If such an Apostle vvho for Christ and the Gospel laboured more then al the rest be constrained to cast avvay his innumerable most excellent vvorkes as trashe and hinderances to saluation hovv madly do vve say that our vvorkes are necessarie Againe all our iustices saith Esai ca. 64. are as foule stayned clothes hovv can a thinge so filthie and disallovved of God do any thinge or be necessary to iustice before God Out of which M.W. may of two cōclusions choose one which shal lyke him best ether that his principall doctors interprete S. Paule peruersly and wickedly when in S. Paules epistles they interprete the vvorkes of the lavv our iustice legal iustice I esteemed my vvorkes dunge durte that I might obteine the iustice of Christ when I say they stil expounde these places of the workes of Christian men done by the grace and spirite of God or els that his assertiō is against al sense and reason to make that necessarie to saluation which the Prophetes Apostles do so abase so condemne make so filthie in the sight of God of these two which he wil choose I know not but because I thinke he wil rather cōdemne them then deny him self for so long as he may be his owne iudge the word of God shal be cleare on his side I finallie oppose against him as in this self same question the zelous Lutherans opposed against the cold Melanchthonistes in the Councel of Altemburg after manifold argumentes brought for only faith against any necessitie of workes After al this say they vve conclude vvith that vvorthy sainge of Luther in his first tome printed at VVittemberge if vvorkes be necessary to saluation then saluation can not be had vvithout vvorkes and then vve are not saued by only faith And thus you see how wel you haue disproued M. Martins saing and approued your owne so wel that by verdite of your great writers in fine you haue marred the topp and crowne of your Kingdome your solifidian iustification and by them for your paines are iudged to be a Papist which I wish were true for your owne sake CHAP. VI. Hovv vnreasonably M. VV. behaueth him self in reprouing and approuing the auncient fathers for their doctrine touching good vvorkes NOw come I to the third part that is your accusatiō of the fathers wherein also M. Martine noteth you of contradiction to your self for with what reason could you call them most holy sanctissimos when in the self same place you defaced them as most iniurious to the bloud passion or Christ you answere smoothing so much as you may the matter and say that they erred a litle and yet within fiue lines before you say they erred greuously and diminished not a litle the force of Christes death passion and there error proceded rather of lacke of vvitte then of malice and though vve graunt that herein they erred a litle yet in respect of yours their errors seeme ether light or none at all Here of you conclude that vvel you might cal them most holy although they erred once or vvere not so vvise as they might haue bene This is that which in the beginninge I tolde you that you speake doubtfully and stammer falter in your tale know not wel what to say for to let passe that in one page you make it a greuous error and in the next ether none at all or a verie light one compare your cruel and bloudie wordes whereof riseth M. Martins reprofe with this second modification then let euery man iudge what a miserable defender you are you say there that the fathers thought by their external vvorkes of penance to pay the paines due for sinnes and to satisfie Gods iustice and to procure to thē selues assured impunitie remissiō iustice that thereby they derogated not a litle from Christes death attributed to much to their ovvne inuentions and finallie depraued repentance Here you say it vvas a litle error a smale ouersight they slipt a litle and that they vvere not vvithstanding most holymen You a Christian M.W. dare thus to write you
and it is no reason that any one should take to him selfe that vvhich by equal right agreeth to al. This being the true meaning of such places and this being verie often times geuen by S. Gregorie him selfe saepe et in multis epistolis you see how iustly we accuse both M. Iewel you of wilfulnes and blindnes how iustly we obiect vnto you a verbal and talkatiue diuinitie who could not or would not see that is which so commonly repeted againe and againe in so many epistles But maketh S. Gregorie ether in this word or in al his words or workes ought against the primacie of that church This writer proceedeth on thus Verumtamen ex aliis constat c. notvvithstanding by other places it is euident that Gregorie thought that the charge and principalitie of the vvhole church vvas committed to Peter by the voice of our Lord. And thus much he vvrote plainely almost vvord for vvord lib. 4. epistola 32. to the emperour Maurice and confirmed it by testimonie of scripture It is manifest saith Gregorie to al men that knovv the gospel that by the voice of our Lord the care of the vvhole church vvas cōmitted to holy S. Peter Prince of al the Apostles For to him it is said feede my sheepe Iohn 21. To him it is said I haue prayed for the that thy faith fayle not Luc. 22. To him it is said thou art Peter and vpon this rock I vvil build my church c. Mat. 16. Behold he receaueth the keys of the kingdom of heauen povver to bind and loose is geuen to him to him is committed the charge principalite of the vvhole church And yet for this cause Gregorie thought not that Peter vvas the forerunner of Antichrist Thus he prouing both by scripture by reason that S. Gregorie though he disliked and condemned that proude name of vniuersal bishop both in him selfe and others as doth also Pope Gregorie the 13. at this day yet he nether disliked nor condemned the supreme charge and gouernment of the church for Antichristian which him selfe exercised nether could he so do except he first cōdemned for Antichristian S. Peter the Apostle who receaued it and Christ our Sauiour who gaue it So tha◠M. Iew. hath hetherto shewed smal wit learning faith or honestie in making these mē S. Gregorie Leo Xistus Anacletus his maisters in that heresie against the supremacie who haue not only no one word or sillable against it but contrariwise haue whole and long epistles chapters discourses examples and factes arguments reasons scriptures to proue it And here the reader may gesse how like I were to cloy him with abundance and store if I would in like sort go thorough with the other articles which I might do as wel and with as great aduantage But I wil not cast more water into the sea and therefore nether wil prosequute in this order the other two questions but only touch them in a word and so proceede to other matter As here against the Pope so against the real presence for the zuinglian imagination M. Iewel likewise chalengeth al the fathers vnto him namely those aboue rehearsed S. Gregorie S. Leo c. and besides S. Austin S. Hierom and S. Chrisostome then which I thinke he could not haue picked out amongst al the fathers more heauy and deadly enemies to him touching any parte of his false faith and those two partes of the real presence and sacrifice especially For was there euer besides this wicked man any Luther or Bucer or who so euer was worse then other so desperate in lying that would say S. Gregorie was a minister and ministred the holy communion as now is the fashion in England when his bookes in so many places shew him to haue bene a prieste and a prieste to celebrate masse and not to minister communion vnto whom other protestants commonly attribute the framing of the masse because of two or three rites which he ordeined therein Whom for this cause Theodorus Bibliāder scornfully nameth patriarcham caeremoniarum the Patriarch of ceremonies Melanchthō that he horribly prophaned the Communiō allovving by publike authoritie the sacrifice of Christes body and bloud not only for the liuing but also for the dead Flacius Illyricus that by miracle he cōuerted a faithles vvoman vvho beleeued not that the body of Christ vvas substancially in tbe Sacrament ex Paulo Diacono lib. 2. cap. 41.42 and that euery vvhere be doth inculcate sacrifices and masse and by diuers miracles confirmeth the same against whom Petrus Paulus Vergerius for authoritie place and estimation as great a Protestant as any in our dayes hath written a whole booke entituled de nugis fabulis Papae Gregorii primi and finally to passe by many others when your owne English writers protest him to haue bene a perfite and absolute Papist that therefore your first Apostles and Euangelistes in bringing in this your Gospel did directly oppose them selues vnto him and rooted out that which he and his Legate our Apostle S. Austin had planted Gregorie the first saith your Chronicler Iohn Bale the yere of our lord 596. sent Austine the monke to plante in our churches his Romane religion But Latimer is much more vvorthie to be called our Apostle then Austine For Austine brought nothing but mans traditions masse Crosses litanies c. vvhereas Latimer vvith the hooke of truth cut of those superstitions vvhich he had planted and cast them out of the Lords vineyard And doth not M. Horne the late called bishop of Winchester in playne termes reuile this glorious Apostle and name him most ethnically a blinde bussard because he was ignorant of your Alcoran and knew nothing els and therefore induced our forefathers to no other Gospel then to the auncient Gospel of Christ and religion Catholike And doth the other S. Austin make more for you in this point of your vnbeleefe then doth this later S. Austin or S. Gregorie I know you alleage him much more but with what honestie I had rather you should heare of your owne father Luther then of me In my iudgement saith Luther after the Apostles the church hath not had a better doctor then vvas S. Austin And that holie man hovv filthilie hovv spitefullie is he mangled and disfigured by the Sacramentaries that he may become a defender patrone of their venemous blasphemous and erroneous heresie Verely as much as in me lieth so long as I haue breath in my body I vvil vvithstand them and protest that they do him iniury vvhich thing any man may do vvith an assured and confident mynde because the Sacramentaries only pul teare his vvords into their ovvne sense prouing their applicatiō by no reason but only by vayne boasting of their most certaine truth And concerning the rest of the fathers whereas M. Iewel affirmeth that they all taught as he did against the real presence Luther contrarywise
syllable then he had of vvhole bookes vvhereof he hath suffered many I say not to be depraued but to be vtterly lost This Iudaical superstition c. Hetherto Castalio And D. Humfrey in his first booke de ratione interpretandi sayth Iudaismus quot locos deprauauerit c. The Ievvish superstition hovv many places it hath corrupted the reader may easely find out and iudge And in the next booke I like not that men should to much folovve the Rabbins as many do Nam quae Christum verum Messiam promittunt et annuÌ„ciant abâ—istis turpissimè câ—nspurcata sunt for those places vvhich promise and declare Christ the true Messias are most filthely depraued by them And Conradus Pellicanus sometime professor of hebrew in Zuricke writing vpon the 8â— psalme and those wordes of our trâ—nslation Conuertuntur ad câ—r vvhere 〈◊〉 cor the protestants according â—o the hebrâ—vv prints novv haue 〈◊〉 gesseth vvel no doubt riâ—htly that the difference came through the great likenes of tvvo letters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and prefeâ—reth our reading before the hebrewes vvithal accuseth the Iewes of al times not only since Christ but also befoâ—e of nâ—gligâ—nce in coÌ„â—eâ—uing theiâ— holie boâ—kes Thus he vvriteth The old interpreter seemeth to haue read one vvay vvhereas the Ievves â—ovv reade an other vvhich I say because I vvould not haue men thinke this to haue proceeded from the â—gnorance or slâ—uthfulnes of the oâ—d interpreter Rather vve haue cause to finde fault for vvant of diligence in the Antiquaries and faith in the Ievves vvho both before Christs comming and fithence seeme to haue bene lesse carefull of the psalmes then of their ovvne Talmudicall songes And againe in the same volume vpon that verse of the psalme 108. Quis deducet me in ciuitatem munitam quis deducet me in Idumaeam vvho vvill bring me in to the sensed citie vvho vvill bring me in to Idumaea vvriteth thus The Syriake interpreter ether folovving or finding out or iâ—erâ—asing the fables of the Ievves translateth this verse after this sâ—r vvho vvil bring me in to that vvicked Rome vvho vvil bring me in to that Constantinople of the Idumeans sol centiously do the Rabbines of the Ievves abuse their authoritie not only in their commentaries but also in the translations of their lavv vvhich coÌ„monly are to be read vvhereby the miserable people reading so is easely seduced VVhere besides our principal purpose vve may learne vvithal that the Iewes haue one tricke of the ProtestaÌ„ts vz in to their bible coÌ„munioÌ„ bookes or such like vvherein is contâ—yned their maner of Seâ—uâ—ce to thrust besides the text glaunces against the Pope and Church of Rome as â—n deede the hatred of Christ Christianitie and that Church commonly runneth together The like testifieth Munster alleaging these vvordes of Abâ—n Ezra against the Christians Fâ—vv there vvere that beleeued in that man vvhoÌ„ these Christians haue made their Gâ—d and vvhen Rome did beleeue in the time of Constantine aâ—d altered the vvhole lavv and put in his banner the signe of the crucified man by the persvvasioÌ„ of that Monke of Idumaea that is the Romane bishop so Aben Ezra expoundeth it there vvere none through the vvorld that obserued that lavv besides a fevv Idumeans and here of it commeth that the kingdome of the Romanes is called the kingdome of Edom. Wherein a man may see and compare together the Iuâ—aical and Protestantical vayne in raylâ—ng at the Romane Church and those that liue in the vnitie of it To the Iâ—wes vve are Gentiles to the Protestantes vve are Idolaters In the Iewes speach and sense it is al one to say a Romane a Catholike or an Idumean that is a Gentile so is it in the speach and sense of the Protestantes saue that in steede of Catholike sometymes they vse the vvord Papist The Ievves peruert their diuine Seruice vvith the manifest abuse of scripture against the Romane faith and Church and do not our Ievvish Protestantes much more Cal to remembrance Christian reader their Geneua or rather Gehenna psalmes sung in their coÌ„gregations vvhere as they tel vs nothing souÌ„dâ—th but gods vvord the Canonical scripture see vvhether in any old Greeke Hebrew Latin or English psalters they find praying against the Pope to be deliuered froÌ„ al Papistrie That the Pope as wel as the Turke vvould thrust our of his throne our lord Iesus Christ Gods deare sonne vvhether in any old Creede ether Apostolike or made by Apostolike or honest men they are taught to beleeue release pardoÌ„ of their sinnes vvhich is in these mens diuinitie perfect entier iustification and that only by faith as in their rimâ—ng Creede vvithout rime or reason they sing Finally as the Ievvish Rabbines thrusting once in to their peoples eares that Rome is Edom and the Romane an Edomite mâ—ke that al scripâ—ure spoken against Edom soundeth against Rome euen so the Protestants telling their people that Rome is Babylon and the Pope Antichrist make them forthwith beleeue that vvhatsoeuer the scripture hath â—gainst Babylon Antichrist that maketh iust against the Romane Church the Pope and Catholikes But to returne to our original matter and to drawe to an end of this question touching the pure fountaines originals for plaine and euident demonstration how true that is I referre M.VV. to these two general experimeÌ„tes which at his leasure he may vew and consider of One is the great diuersitie of reading which in many places of the hebrew old testament we find For example whereof let him peruse Exod. ca. 2. losue 22 and 23. Iudic. 3. the first of Samuel ca. 10 17 22 28. 2 Samuel 7. Esa 14 33 54 c. and Munsters notes vpon those chapters where he shall find the reading and sense oftentymes as far disagreing as blacke and white And Munst in his preface forewarneth the reader thereof Sometymes sayth he euen amongst the hebrvves in one sentence I haue found diuers reading For sometymes dissensions are sound amongst theÌ„ some thinking this to be the true reading some thinking contrarie An other experiment is that the hebrew printes wante now somewhat which certainly was in the first originals Example whereof may be the Psalme 144. which being made according to the hebrew alphabete and hauing the verses in number answering to the hebrew letters the first beginning with Aleph the second with Beth the third with Gimel c. as doth the Psal 33. therefore should certainly haue 22. verses as hath that other this lacketh one verse in al hebrew copies so wanted it euen in S. Hieroms tâ—me and euident it is that the error is in the hebrew where lacketh the 14. verse which should beginne with Nan as it is very playne by the translation of the 70 and by our common Psalter Fidelis Dominus in omnibus verbis suis
Christs diuinitie 303. confessed by Luther 304. cōfessed by Lyra. 306. Item in Ieremie 307. confessed and proued by Lyra. 308.309 in Isai against Christs passion 310.311 confessed by Luther 312.313 item in the psalmes 355. folowed by the Tigurine Translators 358. and Bucer 357. item in Daniel 313. General reasons why the hebrue text can not be so sincere as the heretikes pretend 317.318 c. Many bookes of the Prophetes and histories of the old Testament lost pa. 317.318 Great difference in the hebrue by mistaking one letter for an other pa. 322.323.325 That the hebrue bibles are faultie confessed by Castalio pa. 326.327 by D. Humfrey 327. by Conradus Pellicanus 327. It is a Iewish opinion to thinke them altogether faultles 327. They haue great diuersitie of reading 331.332 somewhat wanteth in them 332.333 Although S. Hierom appealed from the latin to the hebrue yet the like reason is not now pa. 333.334 He confesseth and proueth the hebrue to be faultie 334.335.336 An argument commonly made for the puritie of the hebrue pa. 338.339 answered 339 340. c. S. Iustine proueth the Iewes to haue corrupted their bible pa. 341.342.343.344 Hebrue knowledge much aduaunced by Catholikes pa. 352.440 The hebrue tonge much subiect to cauilling pa. 431.432.433 See Rabbines A man must haue a setled faith before he confer greeke and hebrue textes pa. 441.442 best Hebritians are not best Christians pa. 441. our first Apostles planted perfite christianitie without hebrue pa. 345. Heretikes generally geuen to scorning pa. 511. S. Hierom condemned as ignorant of al diuinitie pa. 371. I S. Iames epistle refused by Luther Lutherans Zuinglians pa. 8.9.10.11.12 et 17.22.23 Caluin mangleth it 288.289 M. Ievvels challenge pa. 133.138 The true image thereof 133. vsque ad 138. It is grounded vpon no reason or learning 138.139.140.141 It cōtaineth in effect only three articles the primacie of the Sea Apostolike the real presence and the sacrifice 133.136.137.138 See of them in their seueral places M. Ievvels passing vanitie in bragging and lying pa. 460. his maner of ansvvering D. Harding pref 75.76 Reuerence done to the name of Iesus pa. 513.514.515 The Ievves corrupt the text of scripture pa. 304. in despite of Christians 314.329 negligent in conseruing their scriptures 328.329 their malice against the Sea of Rome 329.330 Very probable that Christ reprehended them for corrupting the scripture 339. See Hebrue S. Iohn Baptist liued a monastical life pa. 492. K That the vvise men vvhich came to worship Christ were kings pa. 485. vsque ad 489. that they vvere three 489. 490. their names 490.491 L S. Lukes gospel called in question pa. 27.28.29.32 Luthers vvorkes altered and corrupted by the Lutherans pa. 5 6.13 by the Caluinists 7. He denieth S. Iames epistle p. 11. his immoderate bragging 42. his extreme hatred of the Sacramentaries 43.44.45.46 his iudgment of their religion 52.53.483 he refuseth their bibles 45. singularly honoured by the English church 18.191 preferred by M. W. before al doctors 47. most absurdly 48.50 He derideth the Zuinglians fond arguments 258. Luther a shameful corrupter of scripture 377.378 Lucians true histories praef pa. 4.5 M Heretical martyrs damned pa. 117. S. Matthevv vvrote his gospel in hebrue pa. 290. the protestants hold the greeke translatiō more autentical 291. The protestants reason against the Machabees is as forcible against S. Luke S. Paul 506.507.508 Melchisedech did sacrifice pa. 57. graūted by M. W. denied by al other protestants pa. 58.59.60 acknovvleged by the auncient fathers 60. vvhy not expressed by the Apostle 61.537 c. Melanchthon for the real presence pa. 190. Merite of vvorkes See in Heauen and vvorkes N Noueltie of vvords daungerous in Christian religion pa. 266.267 exemplified 268.269 it induceth contempt of faith 270. and leadeth to paganisme 276.277.278 O Only faith See Faith P Penance what it is by the Protestants doctrine 86.90.91 It reiecteth external workes of fasting discipline ibid. which are required by the scripture 87.88.89 90. by S. Cypian and the primitiue church 124.125 the Catholike doctrine touching the value of them 92. the Protestantes contradictory argument against them 91. 93.94 S. Peters being at Roome denyed most absurdly pa. 130.131.132 his primacie 498.510 Pilgrimage to holy places pa. 502. 503.512.513 Primacie of the Romane Sea proued euidently by those fathers whom M. Iewel nameth his maisters to the contrary pa. 143. by Anacletus and Xystus 143.144 by S. Leo 146 147. S. Leo gouerneth in al partes of Christēdom 147.148.149 his authoritie ouer the bishop of Constantinople 148. he summoneth general Councels 152. he is head of them 153. no lawful Councel without his approbation 152. This primacie is grounded vpon Christes words and the Apostles ordinance 143.144.153 S. Gregorie accompteth the Romane Church head of al other pa. 156.158 his authoritie ouer the bishop of Constantinople 156. ouer the bishops of Europe Asia and Africa 156.157 158.162.163 The Protestants common obiection taken out of S. Gregorie answered pa. 159.160.161.162 the name vniuersal in what sort and sense disliked by S. Gregorie pa. 160.161.163 Priestes properly so called were appointed by Christ pa. 64. S. Austin such a priest 64.65.66 So was S. Leo and S. Hierom. 69. The church of Christ was neuer ruled but by such priests 67.68.69 Such were the orderers of our Ecclesiastical state and builders of our churches in England 68. S. Paules discourse of Christs eternall priesthod Hebr. 7. maketh nothing against the priesthod of the church pag. 74. vsque ad 79. The name of Protestants praef pa. 88.90 It agreeth not properly to our English gospellers ibi In their faith there is no stay or certaintie praef pa. 7.24.37 Exemplified by the Supremacie of princes ibid 9.10 by baptisme 11.12 Confirmation 13. Christs descending into hel 14. Christs diuinitie 14.15 Rebellion against princes 15.16 Regimēt of women 18. great difference in their Communion bookes 11.12.13 the diuers chaunges of religion in England since the time of schisme 20.21.22 In the Protestants vvriting and disputing there is no ground pref pa. 8. exemplified by their refusal of scriptures ibid. pa. 26. Apostolical Traditions and general Councels ibi Auncient fathers 27. Apostles Doctors of their owne 28.29.30 Martirs and whole Churches of their owne 30.31.32 They reduce al to priuate fansie 35.36.37.38 They passe the auncient heretikes in denial of al things pa. 38.39 their manifold Popes 33.34 The forefathers of the Protestants church pa. 349. of whom they must looke for the true scripture 348.351 a true confession of a principal protestant 407. their churches voyd of al truth and knowledge 407.408 they perswade Atheisme by scripture 408.409 al their preaching and writing tendeth therevnto 410.411.428 their vaunting of the cleare light of the gospel sensibly refuted 408. The Protestants maner of ansvvering the Catholikes pag. 412. They deny al Doctors 413. They deny sundry partes of scripture 413.414 They pretend the greeke 415. They falsely translate the greeke 416. They refuse the ordinary sense of the greeke
1â—5 Damaso quaest 2. Many greate Grecians and HebraiciaÌ„s are wicked and detestable Christians First we must be sure of our fayth a Timoth. 3. vers 15. b Ephes 5. vers 25. c Gal. 4. v. 26. d 1. Pet. 3. vers 20.21 e Mat. 13. saepe f See before chap. 6. pag. 117. Act. 8. v. 20. Aug confes lib. 8. ca. 8. pag. 14.15 M. W. inuectiue against the late Catholike traÌ„slation of the new Testament Affected hypocrisie Before pag. 372.373.374.383 Our English translation folowing so precysely the old latin can not be so corrupt as M.W. imagineth Pag. 15. Mat. 27. Ioan. 11. v. 48. The end of the new gospel carnal libertie The true grace of this amplifying figure In his sermon printed fo 14. see the Discouerie pa. 178. A most absurd false amplification To say God is author of synne is to say that god is a deuil Caluin in instructio contra Libertinos ca. 14. Deum in diabolum transformaÌ„t English translatioÌ„s leade men to that opinion 1. Pet. 2. v. 8. Illyr glos in 1. Pet. c. 2. vers 8. Castalio defensio suae translatio pag 153.154.155 Beza in â— Pet. 2. v. 8. God createth men to sinne Beza Bible of the yere 1577. the yere 1579. The yere 1580. The yere 1579. Printed at Geneua the yere 1561. Cast defens suae translacions p. 155. Al these translations by verdicte of Caluin make god an idol a deuel M.W. in his last short sentence 6. refelleth gain sayeth whatsoeuer he hath sayd before The protestants more desyrous of nouelty of words then euer were any heretikes Oecolam Esa c. 1. v. 1. A far greater alteration and nouelty in articles of fayth The authors and writers of sundry bookes of scripture mocked scorned by the protestants a The tower disputatioÌ„s the 4 day b Zuingl to 1 art 57. fol. 100. c Idem to 3 in rhrenos Iere. fo 384. d Magdeb. see before pag 414. e Lutheranes and Zuinglianes see before chap 1. The new preaching a very mockery of scripture 1. Cor. 7. v. 9. see the annotations vpon that chap. Ephe. 5. v. 29 The protestants vse scripture for a veyle 〈◊〉 coueral filthynes 1. Tim. 5. v. 8 Pet. Mar de votis cael Iewel defence of the Apolog. part 6. ca. 8. ¶ 1. Incredible impudency in bragging and lying The particular faultes of our English translation A terrible accusation How weakely the same is iustified Vbi supra Marke the greuousnes of these 2. faultes Defendere is wel translated to reueng Tertullian contra Martionem li. 2 Ambros in Rom. ca. 12. Beda in Rom. 12. Iudith 1. v. 12. 2. v. 1. ca. 9. v. 2. The yere 1579. 1577. 1562. Ecclesiastici 30. v. 6. Of the yeres 1562.1577.1579 Ecclesiaâ—â—ici 48. v. 7. Great difference oft-times in the sense of a word as it is vsed by ecclesiastical writers prophane Iacob 3. v. 4. Rom. 4. v. 20. Mat. 11. v. 10.24 Rom. 12. v. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Defendentes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mihi vindicta A great and monstruous fault to traÌ„slate a thing more truly The vnconscionable demeanure of our aduersaries Esa 9. v. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beza Illyricus Castalio Parturiuâ—â— montea Iuuenal Pag. 21. The incredible lying falsifications vsed by the English writers of our time are a great motiue to the Catholike fayth Pag. 22. Mat. 2. v. 11. mat 3. v. 12. Act. 7. v. 58. The summe of M W accusation The protestants maner of disputing Tower disputation Tiburne disputation See M. Fox martirologe in King Henries time Luc. 12. v. 48 English writers The Catholike Church built vpon a rocke Christ and therefore in al times constant vnmoueable The English church buâ—lt vpon the fauour of Lords Ladies gentlemen and gentlewemen and therefore euer tottering and variable Fox act and monumentes pag. 512 Desyre of reuenge Ibid. p. 592. Couetousnes Fox acts monumeÌ„ts in Henri 8. pa. 1295. postremae aeditionis Fox actes monumeÌ„ts in the end of king Henryes lyfe pag. 682. Continual chaunge of the English fayth Luthers iudgement of the Sacramentarie religion Luther tom 7. defensio verborum coenae fol. 381. Trepida coÌ„scientia Faultes historical Note In the preface fol. b. ii In Mat. 2. v. 11. Psal 71. Esa 60. Chrysost Theophil Cic. de diuinat Plin. lib. 20. Esther 1.13.14 Tob. 2.15 Ambro. 1. offic ca. 12. That the wise men were kingâ— Tertullian contra Marcionem l. 3. Ciprian ser de Bapt. numer 1. Chrys hom 1. ex variis in Mat. locis Hier. in psa 71. Tertull. coÌ„tra Iudaeos probatio natiuit Christi Aug. ser 43. ad fatres in Ere Claudian in EpigraÌ„a Isidorus Remigius apud D. Tho. in catena in Mat. 2. Theophi in Mat. 2. Ansel in Mat. ca. 2. Gesnerus in PaÌ„dectis Vniuersa lib. vltimo tit 2. fol. 29. Zuing. to 4. in Mat. ca. 2. That the wise men were three August ser 1 de epipha Leo sermo 2.3.4.5.6.8 Their names 2. Tim. 3. v. 8. Mat. 3. v. 1. Monastical life Magd. cent 5. c. 6. pag. 711. Cent. 1. li. 1. cap. 10. Cythraeus in 3. ca. Mat. â—ucerus ibi Bee Canis de verbi Dei corruptelis lib. 5. c. 2.3.4 An easy kind of answering Act. 7. v. 58. Relikes miracles in the honor of Martyrs Hebrew 9. vers 4. Mat. 17. v. 11 Apoc. c. 11. vers 3. Aug. de ciuit li. 20. cap. 29. Intolerable boldnes and arrogancie Faultes in making arguments Whit. pa. 22 ArgumeÌ„t 1. Mat. 14. v. 26 Real presence Mat. 14. v. 29 Ioan. 3. v. 14 cal 4. d Scripture made ridiculous wheÌ„ it commeth to the handling of prophane men Peters primacy Luc. 10. v. 35. Maâ— 17. v. 2. Mat. 22. v. 30 Scripture falsified CommunioÌ„ booke in the collect of Michelmas day The Saints heare our prayers Mat. 27. v. 59 S. Hiero. in hunc locum To. 1. Conc. Mat. 28. v. 1. Pilgrimage to holy places In epist 17. Paul Eusâ— ad Marcel tom 1. Esa 11. Mar. 16. v. 12 Christ body vnder diuers formes Mar. 7. v. 34. Mat. 27. v. 46 Aug. de Ecclesiasticis dogma c. 31 Idem de nuptâ—is concupis eÌ„â—â—a lib. 2 ca. 18. 29. Exorcismes and other ceremonies in baptisme Luc. 1. v. 3. Pag. 3. In the 4. daies conference The protestants reason against the Machabees is as forcible against S. Lukes gospel More arguments of humane spirit in S. Paules epistles theÌ„ in the booke of Machabees Rom. 25. v. 15. 1. Cor. 2. v. 3 Ibi. c. 11. v. 1.17 Ib. c. 12. v. 11 Rom. 15. v. 30. 2. Cor. 6.11 Ephe. 6. 19. Colos 4.3 Thes 5.25 Sacred writers and holy CouÌ„cels The second booke of the Machabees 1. Mach. 2. 15. Luc. 2. v. 14. This is M. W. glose added to the text Free wil. Luc. 5. v. 3. The Catholike Church Peters ship Gregor in Iob. li. 17. c. 14. See S Amb. in Luc lib. 4 cap. 5. Aug. quaest euaÌ„g l. 2.
ether for truth of doctrine sinceritie of publike diuine seruice and other policie should geue place to any church in Christendome England is not bound to the example of ether France or Scotland I say truely that vve are not bound to their examples These be al the places and corners of argumentes vvhich â—n their diuinitie by any search vve can find out For although they haue amongst them Popes I meane such ministers as affect and vsurpe Papal and more then Papal authoritie as the Tigurines against Luther and other Zuinglians against the Lutherans commonly inueigh for such arrogant behauiour and the gouernours of Berna being them selues Sacrâ—mentaries vsed to cal Caluin Pope of Geneua for his lordlynâ—s and sway which there he bare and Caluin writeth of Ioachim Westphalus that in sending forth condemnations and excommunications against the churches of his sect he passed al the Popes officers Omnes Papae scribas et datarâ—os superat and the Germane Lutheranes of one fashion accuse their felow Lutherans of an other fashion that they play the Popes and practise ouer them a nevv dominion of Antichrist and that al their doings sauour of a very Papacie and the Puritanes commonly name the Archbishop of Canterbury the perie Pope of England and D. Whitgift sheweth wel that euery Puritane minister laboureth to haue in and ouer his owne parish more then Papal iurisdiction yea that they seeke to transfer the authoritie both of Pope Prince Archbishop and Bishop to them selues bring the prince and nobilitie into a very seruitude so as the Protestant churches want no Popes but haue them after an other sort and in far more abundance then haue the Catholikes yet because these Popes of theirs differ nothing from the doctors of whom before I haue spoken no seueral or distinct kind of argument can be drawen from their primacie And as for general Councels so far are they from euer hauing any that I verely suppose they can not so much as in their fansie and imagination conceaue how any one should be euer gathered For hauing no one head amoÌ„gst them who should take order for any such assembly hauing no consent and vnitie among the members who should labour to the helping forward of such a coÌ„pany being diuided into so many churches sectes and congregations they can neuer resolue ether who should be the President in such a CouÌ„cel or who should be the actors or disputers or of what strength the Canons should be or who should haue the execution of them And when al coÌ„meth to al the libertie of the gospel which maketh euery man iudge of other fathers doctors and auncient Councels wil geue like freedom to euery particular man to take like iudgement and controle ouer the fathers of such a Councel Wherefore these being al the meanes and waies which we haue to reason or write against them and these being their fashions of answering as we find in euery Germane Zuitzer or French Protestant albeit for the readers ease and more facility of iudgement I haue exemplified the same by two or three of our English writers such as I take to be common in most mens hands if now a man list to draw these their answeres into a certaine methode we shal find that they containe for euery vnlearned bold â—angler an vniuersal forme and art of reiecting whatsoeuer Theological argument he may be pressed withal and of reducing the supreme conclusion and resolution to his owne singular fansie and wilfulnes Against many bookes of Scripture he is taught to say that they are superstitious and therefore he vvil not beleeue vvhat they teach though it be affirmed in them a hundred times Against CouÌ„cels that they are not to be admitted because by them the principal groundes of his faith are shaken Nether yet the auncient doctors vnto whom he yeldeth no more in cause of faith and religion then him self perceaueth to be agreable to scripture And touching the late doctors and writers of his owne church and gospel although in courtly and honorable termes he magnifie them far aboue the other yet nether to their iudgment wil he stand farther then he can esteeme that which they teach to agree with the canonical scripture when as in his opinion they geue the true sense and meaning thereof And vvhereas to refuse any it is sufficient to say that he vvas a man or he had some other error or some other is of a contrary iudgement which neuer wanteth amongst doctors guided by so contrary spirites or they geue the churches leaue to dissent from them vvhich I take graunted vnto me being one of the same church vvho can be so simple as to be tyed to one or other doctor hauing so manifold reasons to refuse them al And as for their martyrs whose names should be most reuerend and iudgement most weighty they also are reduced in to the same order and obedience with the rest For their martyrdom may not take avvay from the Protestant this libertie that he hath to enquire of the cause of their death or preiudice him in speaking against their errors for this is to oppose the bloud of men to the bloud of the sonne of God And those martyrs being sent out in the morning before the sunne of the Gospel vvas risen so high ouersaw many thinges which these men see now which liue as it were at noonetide in the most cleare beames light of the same gospel Which comparison expressing most apâ—ly their continual proceeding and running forward to new pointes and articles of faith alâ—o before hand instructeth their after coÌ„mers to keepe on the like course which they see these their predecessors to haue begoÌ„ne For as those Protestants who liued twenty yeres since and bragged then of the cleare light of the gospel are now cast backe by these men in to a darksome kynd of twylight vnto whoÌ„ the sunne was not yet risen so the posteritie who shal liue ten or tweÌ„ty yeres after these are by like example informed to turne ouer this present age vnto that obscuritie of the day dawning and chalenge vnto them selues the brightsomnes of the noone light And the same may euery age and sect say as it marcheth farther farther on in newnes of heresie last of al the authoritie of whole Churches and prouinces is as lightly shaken of as any of the rest for so much as England is not bound to folovv France or Germany more then France or Germany is bound to folovv England ech Sect of Protestants is as vvel assured of his doctrine and hath as good groundes and reasons for it as hath any other to chaleÌ„ge such authoritie to the church of any prouince is to bring in plaine papistry and make that Church Romish and Antichistian Iudge thou now Christian reader what hold or stay we haue in disputing with these felowes whom thou seest to cast away and refuse al
groundes of disputation such as are vsed ether in our church or in their owne and how far these men be groweÌ„ to a headstroÌ„g desperatnes beyond the maner of al the auÌ„cient heretikes For when S. Austin and the old fathers had to dispute with such as Donatistes ArriaÌ„s Manichees Pelagians and others they vrged them with the authoritie of Gods Church with the iudgement of the Sea Apostolike the Succession of bishops in the same with the determination of general Councels finally with the name Catholike and that which was so called of al men and the heretikes seemed to be moued therewith and acknowledge such maner of argument But the heretikes of our time conteÌ„ning impudently al these Church Sea Apostolike Succession of bishops general Councels and whatsoeuer els may be inuented are come so far that they now despise and treade vnder foote the name Catholike which the Apostles by diuine wisdome found out and by their Creede sanctified appropriated to true ChristiaÌ„s members of Christs only Catholike and Apostolike Church in so much that in the sinode holdeÌ„ at Altemburg betwene the Diuines of the Palsgraue of Rhene and the Duke of VVirtemberg when one part brought forth a text of Luther against the aduersaries they perusing the place at large and finding there the word Catholike streightwaies reiect the whole as corrupt and counterfaite because Luther was neuer vvont to vse that vvord Ista verba catholicè intellecta non sapiunt phrasin Lutheri say they and vpon this only reason conclude that booke not to haue bene made by him And yet would to God our aduersaries could be content to yelde to the very scriptures them selues such peeces I meane and bookes as they leaue vnto vs and hetherto with vs acknowledge for Canonical VVouâ—d to Gâ—d they could frame them selues humbly to admitte such scriptures when of theÌ„ selues they are playne for vs against them For so surely buâ—ldâ—d is the Catholike cause that by such helpe she is able sufficiently to defend her selfe and confound the aduersaries But whereas besides the reâ—usal of al the forenamed witnesses both of our church and of their owne as though none euer besydes them selues in particular no Saint or man ether in heaueÌ„ or earth had wit learning or grace whereas I say besides al this they expound the same scriptures by plaine partialitie fantasie frensye whereas they make them selues the only arbiters both what bookes are Canonical what Apocriphal and which is the true sense of them whereas in examining the sense they runne sometime from greeke to latin sometime from lâ—tin to greeke sometimes vrge one or other greeke example against innumerable latin sometimes prosse one or other fathers reading against al greeke commonly corrupt the sense both of latin and greeke sticke only to certaine heretical versions made by their maisters in fauour of their seueral heresies whereas they are groweÌ„ to such extreme folly hardnes impudency it may seeme nothing els but wast of vvords to deale vvith men whom contention pride ignorance malice and obstinacie against the Church and her pastors hath so pitifully blinded Novv if I may vvith the readers patience descend from this vvhich I speake generally of the English protestants to apply the same more specially vnto the party vvhose booke I haue to examine it shal both iustifie more clearly that which hetherto hath bene said touching their irreligion want of faith and withal set forth the practise of those proud and arrogant rules of answering which I before haue noted and besides shew what stuffe is contained in his booke of Antichrist wherein he so vainely and insolently triumpheth It hath bene an old disease of auncient heretikes first of al to inuade the cheefe pastors of the church that they being remoued from the gouernment them selues might more freely spoyle the flocke as witnesseth S. Cyprian And for like reason their maner hath bene more malitiously to barke at the Sea Apostolike as saith S. Austin In this as in many other mad partes the heretikes of our age haue not only matched but also far surmounted the heretikes of auncient time For when as vpon their first breach from the church spreading of this new heresie they were reproued by their cheefe pastor and gouernor vpon malice and spite and desire of reuenge they brast forth into this rayling to cal him Antichrist not meaning for al that to cal him Antichrist in such a seÌ„se as the church and faith of Christian men vnderstandeth vvhen vve speake of Antichrist vvhich shal come in the end of the vvorld and of vvhom S. Paule to the Thessalonians and the scriptures in some other places specially do meane but in such a general sense as S. Iohn intendeth wheÌ„ he saith that novv there are many Antichristes and vvho so denieth Christ to haue come in flesh he is Antichrist But the later Protestants going beyond their maisters as commonly it fareth in euery heresie to make their cause more plausible and iustifie their schismatical departure from the church more assuredly haue taken vp the proposition in the more extreme and desperate sense and now hold the Pope of Rome to be that singular Antichrist of whom S. Paule and some other of the Apostles fore-prophecied This wicked and shameles assertion being refuted at sundry times and of sundry men namely of D. Sanders not only as false vnprobable but also as heathenish vnpossible M. Whitaker hath now taken vpon him to make a reply against his argumentes and maintaine that former assertion of his brethren but after such a sort as partly argueth in him want of al religioÌ„ and conscience partly declareth him to haue deepely impressed in his harte a vvonderful pride and coÌ„tempt of al others a principal note and marke of Antichrist And to beginne vvith the later I vvil shortly runne ouer one or tvvo of the first demonstrations and M. W. ansvveres framed there vnto First of al D. Sanders disputeth that the succession of the Romane bishops can not be Antichrist because Antichrist is one man vvhich he confirmeth by sundrie good testmonies of scripture vvherevnto he ioyneth the vniuersal consent of al the auncient fathers His vvordes are Denique omnes sancti patres Graeci Latini Syri quiper tot saecula vel in Oriente vel in Occidente vel in Aquilone vel in Meridie vixerunt secundùm fidem traditionem ab Apostolâ—s acceptaÌ„ de Antichristo locuti sunt velut de homâ—ne vno Briefly al the holy fathers Greeke Latin Syrian vvho for so many ages liued ether in the East or VVest or North or South according to the faith and tradition receaued from the Apostles haue spoken of Antichrist as of one man VVhat is M. VV. answere to this After certaine cauils made to the places of scripture thus at a clappe he dischargeth the fathers writing according to the faith
which they receaued of Apostles VVe repose no such confidence in the fathers vvritings that vve take any certaine profe of our religion from them because vve place all our faith and religion not in humane but in diuine authoritie If therefore thou bring vs vvhat some one father hath thought or vvhat the fathers vniuersally al together haue deliuered the same except it be approued by testimonies of scriptures it auaileth nothing it gaineth nothing it conuinceth nothing For the fathers are such vvitnesses as they also haue neede of the scriptures to be their vvitnesses If deceaued by error they geue forth their testimonie disagreing from scriptures albeit they may be pardoned erring for vvant of vvisedome vve can not be pardoned if because they erred vve also vvil erre vvith them The fathers for the most part thought that Antichrist should be but one man but in that as in many other things they erred ether because they yelded to much to the common opinion concerning Antichrist ether because they vveighed not the scriptures so diligently as they ought c. In these his vvordes Christian reader thou maist see the very image principal part of Antichrist For preferring him self before the vniuersal primitiue Church of al the fathers then vvriting and expounding the scriptures teaching Antichrist to be one man According to the faith receaued of the Apostles he manifestly preferreth him self before the holy Ghost the ruler and dirâ—ctor of the Apostles and that Apostolical Church according to Christes most assured infallible promise vvhat is this els but to extolle him selfe aboue God Super omne quod dicitur Deus vvhich is one of the special markes of Antichrist And yet this Antichristian arrogancy in treading vnder his feete al fathers al churches al antiquitie is the very maine grouÌ„de of al the rest of his answeres As for example M.D. Sanders second demonstration is this The Church of Rome can not possibly be the Seate of Antichrist because it is that Seate vvhich hath most faithfully kept diligently enlarged the faith of Christ against al Antichristes This he proueth by S Ignatius S. Policarpus S. Ireneus Tertullian Origen SS Cyprian Athanasius Ambrose Hierom Optatus Austin Ciril Prosper Gregory c. by al good and learned vvriters that florished vvithin the first six hundred yeres That it coÌ„tinued the same faith and departed not from it in any point the last nyne hundred yeres he proueth by S. Isidorus by Theodorus by S. Beda Regino S. Lanfrancus Rupertus S. Bernard the general Councels of Laterane of Lions of Vienna of Constance of Florence the most sufficient authoritie that caÌ„ be alleaged in the vvorld Now vvhat is M.VV. ansvvere to this The fathers of the first six hundred yeres he graunteth to haue spoken truely for so much as al this vvhile that Church was very pure excellent and maintained inuiolably the faith deliuered by the Apostles S. Peter and S. Paule and briefly vvas of al other Churches most notable and florishing omnium ecclesiarum praestantissima florentissimaquè But touching the later nyne hundred yeres he maketh so great a difference as betvvene the hovvse of God and a den of theeues betvvene a liue man and a dead carcas Thus he speaketh Although the auncient Romane Church receaued Christ most of al and those that vvere in the societie of the Romane Church defended the Christian faith most valiantly yet these prayses appertaine nothing to the present Romane Church vvhich refuseth Christ him selfe furiously assaulteth the Christian faith I am vides Sandere tuae demeÌ„strationi securim esse inflictam quando a prima ecclesia Romana quae fuit optima et purissima tuam hanc distinguo c. Novv thou seest M. Sanders thy demonstration knocked on the head vvith a hatchet vvhereas from the first Romane church vvhich vvas best and purest I distinguish this thy Romane church vvhich a man may truly caâ— the synagoge of Satan Now this being in deede the very hatchet of his ansvvere as he calleth it and vvhereby he choppeth of the necke of D. Sanders demonstration and vvhich therefore it principally standeth him in hand to proue let the reader consider if he bring any probabilitie any argument storie father Councel authoritie any kind of reason other then his ovvne naked and peeuish asseueration Only he varieth as boyes in grammar scholes that his assertion by many pretie phrases as that Rome is degenerated into a bastard faith that our Popes are altogether vnlike to the auncient Popes that novv there is an other forme of faith in Rome an other religion that our Popes possesse the same place vvith those auncient but haue lost their faith many hundred yeres since that in the Romane church novv nothing remayneth of old Rome besides the name that of old soueraine vvas the authoritie of the Romane Sea amongst al people both for the goodlynes of the citie and puritie of religion and constancie of the men but novv none of these thinges remayneth c. Thus in euery page welnye he affirmeth sayth telleth vs againe againe that thus it is departed and thus it is degenerated and thus it hath altered the faith and is become the synagoge of Antichrist Against vvhich ridiculous and childish babling vvhen his aduersary obiecteth those Confessors Martirs Historiographers Sayntes that liued since S. Gregories time together vvith the general Councels the very flovver of Christianitie he vvith one railing blast turneth them al a side sayng he admitteth them not because they al more or lesse receaued the marke of the beast Aske him a reason why he so rayleth consider what authoritie he opposeth against these reason thou findest none authoritie thou findest none Only as kings and princes ratifie their edictes and Proclamations with their owne only name Teste meipso so this man confirmeth his answeres with the sole authoritie of Guilielmus VVhitakerus which being put in the fronte of euery answere is in deede the very pith and effect of al the answeres folowing And therefore whereas he saith If vve shal receaue for vvitnesses al those men 〈◊〉 to Antichrist vve shal neuer haue end of contending I say if it may be lawful for euery heretike thus to deare with such wodden or leaâ—en hatchers to cut of the synewes of such strong and forcible demonstrations thus so answeare reason with rayling and graue authoritie with Luciferlike arrogancy if the Trinâ—tariaÌ„s Lutherans Anabaptistes or ArriaÌ„s may haue like libertie to auoyde the whole army of Christes Catholike Church Arrianisme wil neuer be rooted out Lutheranisme wil neuer haue end the Anabaptistes and Trinitarians can not possibly be maystred the worst of these being able to say for him selfe at the least as much as doth the Zuinglian in defence of his Zuinglianisme And this is the verie forme fashion maner and substance of his
into the right way as is the dutie of Christians but only to keepe mens heads in musing expectation of new bookes to make them mispend their time to keepe the printers occupied and as it were to walke and talke on a stage for no other purpose but to passe away the time This is truly to be Carnifex papiri A murderer of paper as Illyricus cōmonly calleth the Zuinglians this is in deede to be Miserabilis librifex A miserable bookevvright as Luther malapertly nameth king Henry a learned prince and of famous memory This is thoroughly to approue and iustifie that which Luther in the beginning sentenced against Zuinglius and Oecolampadius the fathers of the Sacramentarie Gospel vvhich frō thē as it may seeme hath descended to their posteritie Isti boni spiritus saith he si parū admodū rethoricantur c. These good sacramētarie sprites if they can a litle play the Rhetocians though they touch not any one argument yet thinke they of them selues that they haue ansvvered the matter passing vvel sayd much to the purpose et putant causam suam consistere in scriptione multorum librorū et in cōmaculatione pap ri and they suppose that their cause stādeth in vvriting of many bookes blotting of much paper And no doubt it proceeded of some like crafte that M.W. against vs our English translation of the Testament wrote his reprehension in latin to the end pardy that nether our common countrimen vnderstanding only the English should know those faultes which he reproueth in latin nor straūgers vnderstāding only his latin know how iustly he refelleth that which was written in English Whereby notwithstanding he might obtayne thus much that both sortes should heare tel of some errors noted and refuted but what they were and how wel how truly and substantially the refutation was made nether the one nor the other should be able to examine much lesse to iudge the rest that vnderstand both tonges vvho only may espie his vniust accusations defaultes and ignorances being not so many nor alwaies so diligent nor at any time so free as to compare his latin pretensed reprofe vvith the truth set dovvne in English For so much as the aduersaries novv against their old pretense of honoring and allovving holy scriptures cruelly punish the readers and keepers of them spoile men of the nevv Testament it self the translation and notes vvhereof they shal neuer be able to reproue as vve inuincibly to the eternal shame of heresie haue reproued theirs And yet these men that vvil not suffer our translation to be read of such as vnderstand it with fayned hypocrisie protest that it nothing harmeth their cause and wish that straungers could reade it also These Christian reader are the false fleightes of lying of dissembling of bragging of remouing groundes of disputation of denying sundry principal partes of faith of continual altering their faith of preferring thē selues before al men of taking to them selues in particular the supreme iudgement both of al scriptures the true sense thereof these be the difficulties which may dissuade and withdraw any man from writing or disputing against such sophistical wranglers yet because we may not vpō any loth somnes in our owne behalfe or lost labour in respect of thē omit to do good to others whō we may any waye profite here thou hast so much as appertaineth to the defence of the Discouerie of the Translation and Annotations of the new testament The rest shal folow hereafter if those who haue the regiment of my life studies shal thinke the tyme not euil spent in refelling so vnseemely so vnprobable and vnchristian an argument AN ADVERTISMENT TO THE READER WHEREAS of late in the Tower disputations we haue seene that learned and holy man F. Campian so much disgraced both in priuate speach and publike writing because in citing a place of Luther touching S. Iames epistle he missed the print wherin the place was to be founde the later editions of his workes differing notably from the former which chopping chaunging is cōmon to the most heretical writers of our time for feare of like inconuenience I haue thought it good amongst many to note the print of certaine bookes which in this treatise are oftē times alleaged Know thou therefore Christiā reader that in citing Luther I alwaies meane the print of Wittēberg set forth by Melanch in diuers yeres the second Tome the yere 1551. the fift 1554. the seuenth 1557. In citing Zuinglius I meane his workes as they were set forth after his death by his sonne in law Rodolphus without name of place or printer M. Foxes Actes and Monumentes I vnderstād as they were printed the yere 1563 by Iohn Day Bezaes notes vpon the new testament I meane as they were printed at Geneua the yere 1556. Sleidan I cite after the printe of Strasburg the yere 1566. Castalios bible after the printe of Basile the yere 1556. Caluins Institutions as he last of al digested them into bookes and chapters and printed them at Geneua Thus generally except I note otherwise in the margent Other bookes which haue not so much varietie although some be in more prints then one be they latin or english I commonly note not only according to the chapter but also according to the page or leafe as I do also the forenamed that thou maist with so much the more facilitie finde out the places quoted and so better iudge of the matter rreated Next whereas some are offended with vs for that in writing or speaking of them we vse the names of Sacramentaries Zuinglians or Caluinistes Puritanes and Parlament Protestantes which they say are odious nicknames found out of vs and therefore one of their writers of late chargeth vs in speaking of them to vse no other names then Christians and Catholikes for our discharge herein thus much I must signifie vnto thee that if ether truth learning would beare vs vsing such termes as they require or any reader ether Catholike or Protestant vnderstand vs we would most gladly for loue of the truth and their contentation so speake and write But now consider thou how intolerably such speaches would soūd in the eares of any indifferent reader I haue occasion sometimes to produce Luther writing Contra fanaticos Sacramētariorū spiritus against the fanatical spirites of the Sacramentaries sometimes Contra Zuinglium et discipulos eius against Zuinglius his disciples sometime D. Whitgift against the Puritanes for so he calleth them sometimes the Puritanes against him and such as maintaine the Cōmunion booke and religion of England in such sort and so far forth as is approued by Acte of parlament Now citing these writers how can we cite them without a lie if we cited them in other wordes then themselues vse If I said Luther in his booke against the fanatical spirites of the Christians Catholikes or D. VVhitg in his Defense against the
Diuines of the Prince Elector do most filthely and beyonde all measure depraue Luthers vvrytings so as since Luthers death there haue not bene more foule corrupters of Luthers bookes In the same Councel many times they fal into this argumēt and each side in most spitefull termes obiecte to others this faulte as may be seene if you liste to peruse the pages here noted in the margent And in fine there is promise made as a matter of great importance and one of Hercules labours that the Duke of Saxonie will cause Luthers workes to be printed without corruption Illustrissimus Dux Saxoniae curabit tomos Lutheri sine deprauatione typis excudi which notwithstāding is perhaps a harder thing thē the Duke of Saxonie can perfourme though his power were much greater then it is What speake I of the Lutherans with whom Luthers wordes be autenticall and litle inferior to scripture whereas the very Caluinists and that in Geneua where Caluin is all in all yet notwithstanding haue in their prints corrupted Luthers works whereof Ioachim VVestphalus a Lutheran thus wryteth in his Apologie against the slanders of Caluin I Marueil much sayeth he that Caluin keeping such a doe about this one vvord could not see the most filthy mutations and corruptions of the diuine commentarie of D. Luther vpon the epistle to the Galatians and translated into French and printed at Geneua In one place some vvordes are taken avvay in an other many mo some vvhere vvhole paragraphs are lopte of in the exposition of the sixte chapter tvvo pages and an halfe are lefte out vvhere Luther doth reproue the Sacramentaries there especially those falsifiers tooke to them selues libertie to mutilate to take avvay to blotte out and change some vvhere they remoue the name of Sacramentaries at other tymes they haue put in vvordes such as pleased them and that this vvas done at Geneua vvithout Caluins knovvledge it is not very lykely And touching this very place wherof we treate when Coclaeus obiected it to Bullinger as now M. Martin did to M. W. he answered not denyinge that which was so publyke and notorious but Guperem Lutherum sobrié magis modestaus circumspectius c. I vvoulde to God Luther had iudged and geuen his sentence more soberlye discreetelye and circumspectly of Sainte Iames his Epistle and the Apocalips of Sainte Iohn and certayne other Add we herevnto M. W. owne confession set downe in this preface I confesse sayth he that Luther hath vvritten in a certen place that Iames his Epistle is not to be compared vvith the Epistles of Peter and Paule and that in comparison of them it may be iudged an epistle made of stravv Which a man would thinke were sufficiente to cleare M. Martin and M. Campian and to condemne Luther and M. Whitaker For how or in what comparison coulde Luther so speake but onely to disgrace that epistle in respect of other scripture to make it light and contemptible that is not to make it scripture at all For if he thought it to proceede from the holy Ghost as did the bookes of the Prophets the Gospels and Epistles of Sainte Paule how coulde he without intollerable iniurye done to the holy Ghost so debase that wryting which he beleeued to proceede from his diuine inspiration But M. Whitaker replyeth That vvorde albeit I defende not yet iustly may I say that Luther is iniuried vvhen he is accused to haue reiected as made of stravv that epistle and playnely and simply to haue named it so vvhereas he called it so in comparison especially vvhereas these vvordes are not founde in the bookes of later printes and excepte I by chaunce had happened vpon a most auncient edition I might haue sought long inough in the later Confesse you then that there hath bene such choppinge and changinge in Luthers workes that the one differ so far from the other namely in this very point How standeth this now with your former bold asseueration It is certaine there vvas neuer any one vvorde changed therein And what reason haue you better to credit these later printes sett furth by Luthers scholers then the auncient set furth by the maister and author Luther him selfe But to end this matter may it please you to reade Father Duraeus there shall you be informed in what print and edition of Luther these wordes are to be reade to wit not in the later of VVittēberg corrected and corrupted by the ciuill Lutherans but in the more auncient of Iena a Citie in religion lutherish to but yet after a more exacte and precise order then are those other There may you finde that Pomerane a greate Euangelist among the lutherans touchinge S. Iames Epistle wryteth thus Fayth vvas reputed to Abraham for iustice by this place thou mayest note the error of the epistle of Iames vvherein thou feest a vvicked argument besides that he concludeth ridiculously he citeth scripture against scripture vvhich thing the holy Ghost can not abyde vvherefore that epistle may not be numbred amongest other bookes vvhich set foorth the iustice of fayth There may you finde Vitus Theodorus preacher of Norimberg in hye Germanie wryting thus The epistle of Iames and Apocalips of Iohn vve haue of set purpose lefte out because the epistle of Iames is not onely in certayne places reprouable vvhere be to much aduaunceth vvorkes agaynst fayth but also his doctrine through out is patched together of dyuers peeces vvhereof no one agreeth vvith an other Vnto these you may add for your better satisfaction the iudgement of the Centuries noted by F. Campian though not touched by you They say that the epistle of Iames much svvarueth from the analogie of the Apostolicall doctrine vvhereas it ascribeth iustification not to onely fayth but to vvorks and calleth the lavv a lavv of libertie And in the next booke Against Paule and against all scriptures the epistle of Iames attributeth iustice to vvorkes and peruerteth as it vvere of set purpose that vvhich Paule disputeth Rom. 4. out of Genes 15. that Abraham vvas iustified by onely fayth vvithout vvorkes and affirmeth that Abraham obteyned iustice by vvorkes You may add Luther him selfe in his commentarie vpon S. Peter ep 1. ca. 1. fol. 439.440 in the common edition of Wittemberg where after he hath geuen many rules taken from his owne licentious doctrine wherby to discerne the true and canonicall scriptures from false and Apocriphal of them al thus he concludeth pa. 442. Atque inde etiam facile discitur epistolam D. Iacobi nomine inscriptam handquaquam Apostolicam esse epistolam nullum enim prope elementum in ea de his rebus legis Hereby vve easely learne that it is no Apostolical Epistle vvhich goeth in S. Iames his name for there is in it no letter or title of these matters that is of onely fayth confidence resurrection c. whereby we must esteeme of true
and maye retaine external peace and ciuil concord vvith the Zuinglians in matters temporal but quoad spiritum eos ad extremum vsque halitum deuitabimus arguemus damnabimus pro idololatris verbi Dei corruptoribus blasphemis deceptoribus c. touchinge the soule and matters spiritual vve vvil auoide thē as long as vve haue a day to liue vve vvil reproue and condemne them for idolaters corrupters of Gods vvorde blasphemers and deceauers and of them as enemies of the Gospel vve vvill sustaine persecution and spoile of our goods vvhat-soeuer they shal do vnto vs so lōge as God vvill permitte And in the same leafe it foloweth immediatelye aptlye may vve say to these men offeringe vs peace as Christe saide to Iudas in the garden Iudas vvith a kysse betrayest thou the sonne of man So this is the very peace and kisse of Iudas for offeringe vs their friendship they vvoulde vvithal obtaine of vs to holde our peace and in silence beholde the fyers and slaughters vvhereby they thrust headlong infinite thousandes of soules dovvne to hell Here is Luthers iudgmente and that with scripture for againste al communion with the Zuinglians he in this place vrgeth the wordes of our sauiour Math. 10. vers 34. Luk. 14. v. 26.2 Cor. 6. v. 14. Eph. 4. v. 5. May Luther now prefer his iudgmente thus qualified before a thousande Caluines a thousand Peter Martyrs or who-soeuer els be the greatest doctors of your congregatiōs before all Zuinglian churches Or if Luther may so do may not we do the like and thinke of you as he doth and that by vvarrante geuen vs from your ovvne mouthe Maye vve not saye to you vpon like grounde Scripturam Lutherus protulit cui nullus mortalis resistit c. Luther hath brought scripture vvhich no man can vvithstand and vvhich at lenght shal be the bane and ouerthrovve of all the Zuinglian and Caluinistical opinions Now if which is the extreme refuge you wil say that Luthers iudgmēt against you is not agreable to scripture and therfore not so deepely to be accompted of then see I beseeche you how finely and suttely you haue fet this matter about for now the sense of your distinctiō is that whē Luther affirmeth any thing agreable to the scriptures by iudgment of your selfe he ought to esteeme more of it thē of a thousand Austines a thousād Ciprianes an innumerable cōpany of catholike churches And thus whiles you first geue Luther power to iudge ouer al Fathers Doctors and Councels and then make your self iudge ouer Luther to approue reproue him as you please who seeth not that in fine you make your self supreme iudge of altas before of scriptures so now of Fathers and Councels old and new Catholike and heretike no lesse of your owne doctors then the auncient fathers and doctors of Christes church which is in deede the verie last refuge and extreme resolution of all your new diuinitie Finally because it greeueth me to spēde time in such vnreasonable pelfe may it please you at your better leysure to consider the sense of this parcel to put it downe somewhat more intelligiblie and if you can so do and saue your selfe from the note of much foly for from beinge an heretike by Luthers iudgment what soeuer the answere be you shall neuer saue your selfe you shal performe a matter of more difficultie then perhaps you are aware of In the meane season as it standeth it carieth with it grosse faultes as manie welnie as it hath lines whether you oppose Luther to the auncient primitiue Churche as it seemeth and as doubtlesse he meante or to the catholike churche of our time whiche you woulde inferre or to your owne deuided Zuinglian congregation which by like sequele doth folow or whether you consider Luther in this case only as one principal author of your Gospel so make this priuiledge common to him with other or rather consider him singularly by himselfe because he was the first that brake the yse and opened the waye to this soule Apostasie which is now so far spread or finally whether you thus aduaūce Luther but euer holdinge the raynes in your owne handes which I weene must be your laste refuge and final determination CHAP. IIII. Of priesthode end the sacrifice continued after Christ in the state of the nevv testament and that it derogateth nothing from Christ THE difference betwene you M. Martin aboute priestes is no priuate but a general controuersie betweene all Catholiks and Protestants your minister like termes of Baalites and Antichristian sacrificers I cōtemne am cōtente to dissemble many breaths more stronge and ranke then this we muste gladly abide or els we are not such as by Goddes mercy we hope professe our selues Comfortably saith our sauiour the disciple is not aboue his maister nor the seruante aboue his lorde if they haue called the goodman of the house Beelzebub hovv much more them of his housholde therefore feare ye them not For to comforte our selues withal if we be Baalites and Antichristians in respecte of oure priesthode then certainly Christe is the capitaine Baal Antichriste from whom our priesthode descendeth And that will I proue in few principally and first by your owne wordes secondarilye by manifeste deduction out of the scriptures A priest you define thus Sacerdotes ii verè propriè sunt qui sacrificia faciunt qualis fuit Aaron Aaronis filii Melchisedechus quem illi adumbrabant Christus Priestes truly and properly are they that offer sacrifices such as vvas Aaron and the sonnes of Aaron Melchisedech and Christe vvhom they prefigured Those that offer sacrifice you acknowledge to be priestes truly and properly not onlye by abuse of speeche as in this place againste S. Austine you falsly cauille In the number of such priestes that offered sacrifice you reckē Melchisedec after him Christe of vvhom Melchisedec vvas a figure This you woulde neuer haue said had you bene skilful ether in your owne diuinitie or in the faith of the Catholike Church for although hetherto we haue many wayes laboured and vsed all possible meanes of proufe that Melchisedec offered sacrifice yet we could neuer obtaine so much of your brethren because they wel saw that therein was included the manifest confirmatiō of the Catholike faithe touching priesthod the vtter ruine of your Geneuiā Ministerye For if Melchisedec sacrificed then was it in bread and wine for other sacrifice of his neuer man imagined and the scripture proueth it inuincibly which mencioneth that no other nor by worde sillable or title geueth the leste insinuation of any besides Then how necessarilie it muste folow that Christe sacrificed in like maner and how from him power to do the same is deriued vnto priestes of the new testament this shal be shewed hereafter First of all that of Melchisedecs sacrifice beinge most certaine of you graunted and of vs beleeued
downe in forme by M.W. the Minor is the conclusion of the last argumēt and so proued sufficiently alreadie then I hope the Conclusion will stand wherefore leauinge this matter for M. W. to scanne and to recorde with him selfe who is that Baal founder of the priesthode of the new testament now may we vew with better iudgment how substantially he answereth S. Austines place de Ciuitate dei where S. Austine doth distinguishe betweene all Christians vvho are vnproperly called priestes because of their mistical Chrisme and vnitie vvith Christe others qui proprie iam vocantur in ecclesia sacerdotes episcopi that properlie are novv called in the Church priestes and byshops and properlie such are they by M. W. definition which properly offer sacrifice M.W. āswereth that the name priest vvas of olde tyme after a more peculiar sorte applied to the pastors and ministers that handled the vvorde and sacramentes but there vvas an abuse in so speakinge then you agree not with S. Austine who teacheth that propriè in proprietie of speach they were so called who if they had then to execute no other priestly function then haue now the Englishe ministers as M. W. supposeth or wolde pretend I graunte the worde prieste could not be applied to them but as abusiuely as if one woulde cal a ciuil magistrate by that name or one of the Quenes Readers in the Vniuersities For preachinge of the worde ministringe of some one or other sacramente although in the Catholike Church it be done by priestes yet properlie that is not the reason why they are called by that name but the true reason is that which M.W. rendereth quia propriè offerunt sacrificia because properly they offer sacrifice Now that S. Austine meante of priestes in this sort that himselfe was such a prieste to passe ouer many pregnante and euidente places in him for breuities sake I refer you to the knowen story of his mothers death Where she firste of al in her death-bed requesteth that her sonne vvould remember her at the altar of God When after her death the corps beinge brought into the Churche and placed beside the graue before the tyme of burial prayers were sayd the sacrifice of our price and redemption offered for her when afterwarde S. Austine in his moste deuoute zelous praier made to God for her reckneth this to her singuler commendacion that at her departure she tooke no care for costlie maner of burial or sumptuous monumente but only desired to be remembred at thy altar ô Lorde from vvhence she knew vvas dispensed that holy sacrifice vvhereby vvas blotted out the handvvrittinge vvhich vvas againste vs vvhereby triumphe vvas obtained against Satan our eternal enemie straight waies inspire saith he ô Lorde my God inspire to thy seruants my brethren that vvho-soeuer of them shal reade this may haue remembrance at thy altar of Patricius and Monica my father and mother But againste this M.W. hath an obiection as common plaine to them that know oughte in diuinitie as Dunstable hye way answered before hāde abundantlie in the annotacions of the the new testamente Heb. ca. 7. v. 12. 17.23 his argument is I say there are no priestes of the new testamēt that offer sacrifice after Christ who is the eternal priest according to the order of Melchisedec obtaineth sacerdotiū 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an eternal priesthod he hath made an end of al sacrifices takē away the succession of priestes cōmitted his church to be ruled by pastors and doctors for euer To beginne with the laste where you ende if Christ abolished all priesthod and left his Church to be gouerned for euer by pastors and doctors which were no priestes had this appointemēt and ordinance of his effect yea or no if no beware what yow say for litle differ you from a Iew a man of Mahomets religion and weake is your faith in Christes godhead if you thinke that in so manie places of scripture he appointed such a regimente for his Church which after his departure neuer tooke effect if yea then shew vs where or when was his Church so gouerned was it a hūdred yeares ago before Frier Luther first of all in our memorie induced this kinde of gouernment you must needes say no. Ascend we then 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 and ten ages vntil S. Gregories time was it al this while gouerned by such pastors as you describe I wene as yet you wil say sure I am you should say no. For those pastors were styll priestes and that in proper sense as appeareth by al stories Suche were our first Apostles the conuerters of our nation those excellent men SS Augustine Paulinus Laurentius Melitus Iustus c. sacred by the Pope of Rome or other lawfull Bishops in obediēce of the Sea of Rome offering sacrifice liuing and dying as priestes as by the goodlie storie of Venerable Bede our coūtryman you may euerie where learne Such pastors and priests they were by whom and vnder whose regiment our Churches were first builded and the ecclesiastical state of our realme ordered as now vnder the regiment of them that cal thē selues pastors no priestes and are in deede no more the one then the other all is pulled downe and ouerthrowen And if in anie other countrie of Christendome the churches had any other regiment such as you pretēd now in England of pastors no priestes shew vs your bookes and we wil beleeue you But you wil say from S. Gregorie vpward all was smooth and iumpe as it is now in the English congregation Suppose that to be true how in the meane seasō can you iustifie your owne saing that Christ delyuered his Church to be gouerned for euer by suche maner of pastors Cā Christes decree be made frustrate for so many ages Can mans iniquitye as you in your Apologie commonlie but most bluntlie obiect stoppe the course of Christes omnipotent and eternal prouidence know you not how copiouslie S. Augustine hath confuted this self same slaūderous obiectiō in your forefathers the Donatistes But passe we on come we to the first fathers of the primitiue Churche were they lay ministers after the maner of the English congregation that is pastors no priestes how dare or can you say so seing in S. Austine manifestlie you see a sacrificing priesthod seing your self acknowledge Sainte Hierome to haue bene a priest of the Romane Church which neuer yet approued any such ministery as you haue inuented seing your greate Rabbine and synke of iniquitie Iohn Bale calleth S. Leo the great and first of that name in plaine termes an idolater for this cause seing your chiefe capitayne Apostle Caluine and after him P. Martir and before him Huldericke Zuinglius affirme in generall of the fathers in the primitiue Church that for maintenāce of the vnbloudy sacrifice they forced abused the
common experiment in the course of the world list to heape together al depending of one principle vvhether one body may be in dyuers places or vvhether Christ be bound to the rules and conditions of nature many thinges I learne First how much you can make of a litle and vaunte so lustely of such beggerly argumentes which being found out first and inuented by prentises and artisans in their shops thence admitted by ministers into their pulpits and at length receaued by such as you are in to the scholes for want of better store yet rather as rhetorical theÌ„ theological rather coniectural then necessary haue so oft tymes bene refuted by Catholikes coÌ„demned by Lutherans refused of Caluinistes are withall as coÌ„mon as are the Postilions bootes Secondarily which before I noted I learne how careful a Christian man ought to be in dealing with you whose fashion is of molehils to make mountaines and if of curtesie one graunt you an inch straight waies you borow a spanne and forthwith by force and violence you snatch an ell For when you so demurely made it to be a trifle whether a man translated the wordes quem oportet coelum capere vvhom the heauens must receaue or vvho must be receaued in heauen and so caried away the later against the former who would haue thought that to haue bene such a cokatrice egge as where of should proceede such a pestiferous serpent that would corrupt the vniuersal church of Christ and destroy the faith that hath bene since Christes tyme. If Christes bodie be conteined in heauen as S. Peter saith then is it not in the sacrament which collection when a man perceaueth who before of simplicitie found no fault wiâ—h your translation and made no conscience whether he said heauen receaued Christ or Christ vvas receaued in to heauen he can not now forbeare but needes he must say that your argument is false and you belye S. Peter And this being your sense you haue corrupted the word of god thrusting in your owne word haue made of it the word of the deuil Great dauÌ„ger it is saith S. Hierom to speake in the church leste perhaps through peruerse interpretation of the gospel of Christ be made the gospel of maÌ„ or vvhich is vvorse the gospel of the Deuill And plaine it is that by this corruption shuffling in conteyned for receaued and running sophistically and wickedly as you please from one to the other you abuse the scriptures falsifie them intolerably make them youre owne word not the word of god For S. Peter in sayng that heauen must receaue the body of Christ affirmeth Christes body to be conteyned in heauen no more then S. Luke writing that Samaria receaued the vvord of God affirmeth rhat the word of God vvas then conteyned in Samaria which was most false Our Sauiour saith in this selfe same maner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The like whereof he speaketh in S. Matthew of receauing his Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He that receaueth a child Apostle or prophete in my name receaueth me and he that receaueth me receaueth him that hath sent me Here who seeth not what impietie would folow if we should take to our selues M. W. libertie and say he that receaueth a child in Christes name he receaueth Christ he receaueth God that is of him Christ is conteyned God is conteyned And albeit here in the thinges compared together there be some difference yet in the worde vsed by our Sauiour S. Peter and the Euangeliste there is no difference and this indifferency should the interpreter haue expressed and so would Beza haue done had it not bene for his heresie against the B. sacra ment Thirdly I note the proceeding of your Gospel and learne how it goeth on according to S. Paules prophecie a malo in peius from badd to worse from heresie to apostasie running continually forward the verie hye way to infidelitie When this gospel began in England in the ende of King Henryes daies those that in other pointes were starke heretikes and the ringleaders vnto others Tindale Frith Barnes Cranmer leaft it as a thing indiffereÌ„t to beleeue the real presence And namely Frith that glorious martyr permitted euery man to iudge vvhat they listed of the sacrament if so be the adoration thereof were taken away His reason was because then there remained no more any poyson that any man ought or might be afraid of So that the real presence to this great martyr seemed no way harmful or against Christian faith which now to M. Whitaker is a matter so monstruous that it is against scripture against faith against S. Peter and in steede of one Christ multiplieth many And how then calleth he the Lutherans his brethren in Christ who by this reason haue an other Christ froÌ„ him nay a plain contradictorie Christ against him But to answere his argument and in this al other drawen from like principles I demaund of M.W. whether he vrge this argument so that Christs body by course of nature can not be in diuers places and receaue those other contradictory qualities as he falslie imagineth or that by Gods power and omnipoteÌ„cie this can not be wrought If the first then we are agreed and then may al these blotted papers serue for some other purpose For against vs and the doctrine of the church they make nothing And then M. VV. hath done wickedly to moue these scruples to idle heads whereas he should rather haue sought what Christs wil is If he say the later that it is aboue the reach of Gods power where vnto his arguments tende I replie that he is an infidell and beleeueth not the first article of his Crede he beleeueth not other thinges expresly sette downe in the scripture of the same qualitie as that our Lady was a Virgin wheÌ„ she deliuered Christ that he entred in to his disciples ianuis clausis that in the burning fornace one and the selfe same fier was so hotte and violente that it slew those that stode a farre of the ministers of the Kinge and yet to those that were in the middest of it Sidrach Misach and Abdenago it was so cold and temperate that it resembled ventum roris flantem a moyst gale of vvinde and harmed them nothing which is as flat a contradiction as any he bringeth and therefore belike without the compasse of his beleefe I saie againe that he is proceeded farther in infidelitie then his maisters who notwithstanding were gone far inough and a man needed not to ouerrun them For they hitherto were woÌ„t to protest that they neuer doubted but Christ could do it mary they supposed and beleeued that he neuer meant it and so made the question to consist in that vvhether Christ vvould not vvhether he could as may be seene in M. Iewel in the very end of his 10. article against M. Harding and in many other
bloud of the holy virgin framed him selfe flesh vvithout the seede of man can not he in the sacrament make of bread his ovvne body and of vvine vvater his bloud No mary can he not saith M.W. for that is against reason and so he should haue tvvo bodies one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. But S. Damascene conteÌ„ning such ethnical ioyes proceedeth coÌ„cludeth that as god in the beginning said let the earth bring forth greene hearbes and hetherto being holpen and strengthened by that precept it so doth so god said this is my body and this is my bloud and doe this in commemoration of me and by his omnipotent coÌ„maundement it is vvrought vvhich thing onely faith can conceaue Hovv shal this be done saith the B. Virgin the Archangel Gabriel ansvvered the holy Ghost shal come vpon thee and the povver of the most high shal ouershadovv thee And novv demauÌ„dest thou hovv bread is made the body of Christ and vvine and vvater his bloud I ansvvere in like maner that the holy Ghost commeth vpon it vvorketh that vvhich passeth the capacitie of reason and reach of vnderstanding Whereby you see that hovv soeuer circumscript remained circumscript and visible visible S. Damascene neuer intended by such visible folies so to circumscribe our fâ—â—th or subiecte our religion to humaine reason that Christes presence should be excluded out of the sacrament or the sacrameÌ„t should be esteemed a Zuinglian figure vvhich to induce you take much paine but to very smale effect CHAP. IX VVherein is refelled M. VV. ansvvere to certaine places of S. Chrysostome touching the real presence and sacrifice IN the last chapter vve had an example hovv sufficiently you are vvont to coÌ„firme your ovvne faith by scripture reason fathers here you geue vs an example hovv substantially you ansvvere the fathers vvhich vve vse for confirmation of our faith Tvvo places M. Martin obiected out of S. Chrysostom against your geometrical opinion of Christes body in one place you auoyde them so as you geue out plaine demonstration that you neuer coÌ„sidered them in the author him selfe but only tooke the answere at deliuery from M. Iewel without any farther search Thus you write To Chrysostom teaching that Christ both leaft his flesh vvith vs and ascended hauing the same vvith him I ansvvere that Christ placed his flesh in heauen and neuerthelesse leaft vs a sacrament of that flesh And our fayth enioyeth the same euermore present For the verie substance of his flesh Christ no more leaft in earth then Elias leaft his body vvhen he ascended in to heauen For so Chrisostom vvrote a litle before that Elias vvas aftervvardes double there vvas an Elias aboue and there vvas an Elias beneath Tell me I pray you M. Martyn vvas that Elias body in earth vvhen he leaft his cloke to Elizeus you vvill not say so So true it is vvhich Chrisostome vvriteth that Christ hath left his flesh vnto vs symbolically and yet hath caried the same in to heauen corporally This is your answere which I say you rather allow vs as may be thought because Maister Iewell applieth the same to the selfe same place albeit in my opinion els-where he geueth you a better For labouring to answere the place of S. Ciprian de caena Domini Panis iste quem dominus c. This bread vvhich our lord gaue to his disciples being changed not in shape but in nature by the almightie povver of the vvord of Christ is made flesh after a number of phrases alleaged against the other partes of this senteÌ„ce coÌ„ming to the last is made flesh he sheweth that nether this proueth the real preseÌ„ce that hystore of lyke phrases For S. Aust saith nos Christi facti sumus vve are made Christes Leo saith Corpus regenerati fit caro crucifixi the body of the man that is regenerate is made the flesh of Christ that vvas crucified Beda saith nos ipsi corpus Christi effecti sumus vve our selues are made the body of Christ Origen saith in like maner of speach spiritus sanctus non in turturem vertitur sed coluÌ„ba fit the holy ghost is not changed into a turtell but is made a doue Thus if you had answered that Christ departing tooke his flesh with him really leaft his flesh behinde him allegorically that is the Christian people his church which S. Paul many times calleth his bodye that had bene more probable more to S. Chrisostoms discourse you see what doctors you might alleage for it theÌ„ to say that Christ tooke away with him his flesh really leaft the same with vs symbolically that is bread and wyne which when we receaue at the supper we remember perhaps that Christe had flesh But because it was ether your chaunce or choise to geue vs the other let vs see how handsomly you frame it vnto S. Chrisostoms text The summe of your answere is that as Helias ascendinge leaft his cloke which for certeine reasons was called Elias so our Sauiour ascending leaft vs bread wyne which is a signe of his body for some reasoÌ„s is likewise called by the name of his body but was no more his body theÌ„ the cloke was Elias And are ye not ashamed thus to dally abuse the reader Or can your ignoraÌ„ce be so grosse as to thinke that this is S. Chrisost meaning Or caÌ„ your reader otherwise deeme of you then as of a man altogether rechlesse what you say if euer he reade the place in S. Chrisostome him self For so far of is it that S. Chrisostome hath any such thing that contrarywise he ouerthroweth most stroÌ„gly this your folly and vehemently vrgeth the cleane contrary First touching Elias he hath some of those wordes which you alleage As a great inheretance saith he Elizeus receaued the cloke and truly it vvas a verie great inheritance And aftervvardes that Elias vvas double There vvas an Elias aboue and there vvas an Elias beneath meaning as it is plaine that he was taken vp in body soule and remained beneath in power and operation for so much as by the cloke Elizeus wrought strange myracles such as Elias him selfe did before And so S. Chrisostome saith expresly propterea in coelum ascendens nihil aliud quaÌ„ melotem discipulo reliquit Therefore Elias ascending in to heaueÌ„ leaft to his disciple nothing els but his cloke And would he make a like comparison and say the same of our Sauiour Let vs heare his wordes Thus he coÌ„meth to speake of Christ quid igitur si vobis demonstrauero quid aliud quod illo multo maius c. vvhat then vvil you say if I shevv you an other maner of thing much greater theÌ„ that vvhâ—ch al vve haue receaued vvho so euer haue bene made partakers of the holy misteryes Elias in deed leaft his cloke
him self and his brethren more then against vs. For vvhereas they pretend to translate after the greeke and hebrue as vve do not and yet in sundrie places svvarue from the greeke hebrue this his long idle talke conuinceth vs of no faulte but it condemneth him and his brethren of greate and inexcusable corruption vvho pretending reuerence to the greeke and hebrevv yet at their pleasure depart frō both And this is that vvhereof M. Mar. reproueth them in a great part of his Discouerie Example vvhereof see thou in his preface Num. 16.17.18.23.43.44.45.46.47.48.49.50 51. and after in euerie chapter of the booke vvelnie and so much M. Mar. protested to them in the beginning in plaine termes sayng And if they folovv sincerely their greeke and hebrevv text vvhich they professe to folovv and vvhich they esteeme the only autentical text so far vve accuse them not of heretical corruption but if it shal be euidently proued that they shrinke from that also and translate an other thing and that vvilfully and of intention to countenance their false religion and vvicked opinions making the scriptures speake as they list then vve trust c. And of this first riseth a second note which I wish likewise to be remembred that their deflecting from the greeke is alwaies in matter of controuersie and so discrieth their malicious wilfulnes If there be any in the latin it is no such thing but in matters for any cōtrouersie mere indifferent and so quiteth the translatour of malice and euil meaning and iustifieth his vpright and plaine sinceritie And hereof ensueth the third touching our simple and plaine dealing in folowing the latin that we decline not from the greeke or hebrue because it more harmeth our cause then the latin as the aduersaries gladly pretend and M. W. verie confidently auoucheth but only in respect of the truth it self And thus much also was he told in the preface of the new testament to wit that as for other causes vve prefer the latin so in this respect of making for vs or against vs vve allovv the greeke as much as the latin yea in sundrie places more then the latin being assured that they haue not one and that vve haue many aduantages in the greeke more then in the latin And this is there manifested by sundrie and verie euident examples touching traditions priesthode iustification by workes the real presence fasting freewil the mystical sacrifice and against their only faith and assurance of saluation wherein the greeke is more pregnant for vs then the latin Contrarywise let M. VV. frame against the Catholike religion or any part thereof one argument out of the scriptures which we refuse to stand vnto vpon this pretence because it is in the greeke and not in the latin and I am content to excuse him here of a lye Otherwise he can neuer saue him self from a lye and a lye in sight to obiect that vnto vs which nether he nor any of his can proue and we before hand haue in precise termes warned him of it and professed and proued the contrarie And therefore although in truth reader whatsoeuer he saith a great deale more is answered verie sufficiently and abundantly alreadie in the preface of the Testament as thow wilt confesse if it shal please thee with diligence to pervse it and I accompt it a peece of our miserie in this time to be matched with such blunt aduersaries whose maner of writing is now to cloy vs with crābe recocta cole vvorts tvvise yea tē times sodden nether thē selues can bring any new stuffe nor scoure more brightlie or otherwise mend vp their old nor refel our answeres confutations made to them but dissembling any such matter as though it had neuer bene treated of before vse to runne idelly and ministerlike vpon a cōmon place as M. VV. doth here which is more against them selues then against vs yet because it is my lotte to deale with him now the first time and therefore am loth to pretermit any thing wherein him self seemeth to put any force I wil take his argumētes as new and suppose that he neuer read the preface of the Testament against which he writeth and therefore will likewise hereafter borow some part of my answere thence Two argumentes he maketh against our latin translation and consequently against vs for folowing the same in our English The first is that the fountaines vz the greeke and hebrew are more pure thē the latin which he proueth by certaine sentences of S. Hierō S. Austin and S. Ambrose The other is one particular fault wherein as he sayth the vulgar translation is vniuersallie false the greeke contrarie is true Before his arguments he premitteth certaine interrogatories wherein he seemeth to auouch if I vnderstand him that only to be the word of god which is written in the lāguage wherein first the holy Ghost by the Prophets and Apostles vttered it That I misreporte him not I will set downe his wordes Thus he opposeth vs. Quid interpretandum suscepistis nonne scripturas Quaenam vero sunt scripturae quis nescit dei verbum scriptum illud esse c. VVhat tooke you in hand to interprete not the scriptures and vvhat are the scriptures vvho is ignorant but that is the vvritten vvord of god vvhich the lord committed to his church in bookes and letters and those oracles of god vvere they vttered by the holy Ghost in latin or can they better or more diuinely be declared in any tonge then that vvhich the holy Ghost vvould vse where vnto I answere that if his questions haue such meaning sense as the wordes beare and may stand ful wel with his skil and knowledge then are they not so much fantastical as phrenetical For accounteth he nothing the vvritten vvord of god but that vvhich is in hebrevv and greeke and vvas vvritten by the prophetes and Apostles in that language Then vvhat meaneth he and the rest of his Euāgelical confraternitie so perpetuallie to brag that they haue geuen vs nothing but the pure vvord of the lord vvho haue geuen vs nothing but their ovvne contaminated translations in English French Flēmish Dutch and such vulgar languages Is this the word of God M. W vttered the holy Ghost his oracles euer in Flēmish or English why inscribe yow your English testamente The testamente of our Lord Iesus Christ if nothing but the greeke or hebrue be the written word and testament of god But let this passe for an example of his singular foolishnes speaking he knoweth not what See we herein an other example of his notable impietie Our Sauiour Christ the Euangelistes and Apostles when they cited places of the old testament not according to the fountaines hebrue but according to the Septuaginta cited they not scripture In omnem terram saith the apostle Paule exiuit sonus eorum Their sound is gone forth in to al the vvorld whereas in the hebrew
hebrue nor yet the hebrue bible true by which she might once againe mende and correct the latin And here let the reader waigh whether we thinking of the Church as we doe thinking of Christes promise and the assistance of the holy Ghost as christian faith teacheth vs whereby we are most assuredly perswaded that she neuer erreth nor euer can erre damnably whether we I say haue not great reason to support our opinion which here we defend Caluin in his Institutions recounting certaine causes why the auncient writers speake so reuerently and yeld so much to the Romane church amongst other putteth this for one That vvhereas the churches of the East part and of Greece as also of Africa vvereful of tumultes and dissensions amonge them selues the Romane church vvas more quits then other and lesse troublesome For as the vvesterne people are lesse sharp quick of vvit then they of Asia and Africa so much lesse desyrous are they of nouelties This therefore added very much authoritie to the Romane church that in those doubtful times she vvas not so vnquiet as vvere the other and the doctrine once deliuered to her she held and retayned more fast then did all the rest This grace of constancy in the faith and truth once receaued when as the aduersaries yeld to the Romane church and reproue the Oriental and greeke church for lightnes inconstancie mutabilitie in the same kind we who beleeue the same grace of god to haue stil remained haue iust occasion to thinke that she was as tenax as constant in preseruing the truth of the bibles as of other parts of religiō wherein by Caluines verdite she excelled al churches vnder the sunne And if the greeke churches then in that prime flower were so mutable and incōstant and so far inferior to the latin in this respect especiallie of holding fast matters of religion once deliuered vnto them with what iudgement or conscience can we magnifie the later ages of those Greekes who much more haue deflected from the Catholike Apostolike faith haue more decayed in learning vertue and al good qualities haue degenerated almost in to a barbarisme and are now fallen in to such miserie ignorance and slauery as euerie man seeth much lesse can we mention in this comparison the Iewes Synagog who hauing the maledictiō of god vpō them as many times our Sauiour foretold in the gospel are not only quite destitute of the graces of god but also for the most part seeme altogether void of the giftes of nature of vvit iudgement policie and ordinarie humane discourse But al this vvil M.W. say is but coniecture and as probablie he disputeth against it for the contrarie part that in the hebrue and greeke there is no corruption For if it be so that the Ievves and heretikes haue laboured so much herein vvho can doubt but they haue attempted this especially in these places and sentences of scriptures vvhich the Church of Christ most vsed for confirmation of her faith and religion There are most euident testimonies of scriptures by vvhich the Ievves and all heretikes are refuted tel vs vvhat in them haue those men peruerted but that they remaine vnto vs safe and sound Neuer vvould other Ievv or heretike corrupt the scriptures except he thought that might be to him some vvaie commodious for the mainteining of his monstruous opinions VVherefore seing those places are safe by vvhich the Ievves are refelled and the heretikes of al times are killed this must needes seeme a fained tale vncredible and false vvhich you bring that the fountaines are corrupted To satisfie M.W. longing who would so faine know wherein the Iewes or heretikes haue falsified the bibles I wil seuerally geue him examples some sithence S. Hieroms tyme and some before and acknovvledged by S. Hierom him self from whom M. W. taketh most in commendation of the hebrue fountaines And that those fountaines are somewhat infected and degenerated from that puritie which they had in S. Hieroms time and before I proue by euident reason manifest experimentes plaine confessions of our more learned aduersaries First touching the hebrue S. Hierom read and translated according to the ordinarie reading and pointing of his time Esaie 9. Puer datus est nobis et filius natus est nobis et vocabitur nomen eius admirabilis consiliarius Deus fortis pater futuri saeculi princeps pacis A child is geuen to vs and a Sonne is borne to vs and he shalbe called Admirable a Counseller God Strong Father of the vvorld to come Prince of peace And in his commentarie expressing euerie word he maketh no doubt of any other reading Forsake the latin and go to your Iewes and their hebrue fountaines now and what find you pro thesaur◠carbones Thus. Puer datus est nobis et filius natus est nobis et vocabit nomen eius qui est admirabilis consiliarius deus fortis et pater aeternitatis vel futuri seculi principem pacis VVhereby is taken from Christ as principal a testimonie of his diuinitie as any we find in the old testament And whence cōmeth this alteratiō but from the iniquitie of the Iewes who haue altered the passiue vocabitur into the actiue vocabit geuē other pointes then were vsed or read in S. Hieromes time And this Luther confesseth manifestly Totus hic textus miserè sceleratè saith he a Iudaeis est crucifixus c. This vvhole text is miserably and vilanouslly crucified depraued and corrupted by the Ievves For as the child him self vvas crucified of them so by the same men both this place and his scripture or scripture appertayning to him is daily crucified The prophete attributeth six names to the child and sonne the Ievves reade the first fiue in the nominatiue case the sixt in the accusatiue and they al expound it of Ezechias vnder whom God gaue that great victorie against Sēnacherib And in the same place The text seemeth to haue bene corrupted by those that put to the points The letters vvhether ye reade them vvith pointes or vvithout pointes are alone and the grammer doth beare it vvel but the Ievves most pestilent men oft tymes corrupte sentences of the prophetes by their pointes distinctions But let it suffice vs that the Chaldee interpreter and the 70. thinke as vve do Thus Luther condemning of vile corruption on your pure originals geuing withal this general rule that the Iewes most pestilent men haue no conscience in that foule abusing and altering and crucifying the scriptures no more then they had in crucifying Christ and that therefore he preferreth the Septuaginta and Chaldee interpreter before al the hebrew copies VVhich reason touching Luther and the Protestantes is nothing at al. For the Chaldee interpreter is no more the hebrevv original then is Luthers translation And the translatiō of the 70. which is now extant besides that it is ful of diuersitie
steede of because she doth loue much And plaine it is that Christ spake not greeke or latin but hebrevv Therefore vvhereas Christ said Many sinnes haue bene forgeuen her he proueth it by that which folovveth because she loueth much as if he had said That she loueth me much it is no maruel she hath good occasion so to do For many sinnes haue bene forgeuen her So vve say that he hath obtained that vvhich he desired because he is mery laugheth he is verie hūgrie because he eateth much c. I wil not bestow time in examining this answere who told him that Christ vsed the preterperfect-tense for the present whereas S. Luke so flatly affirmeth the contrarie or that S. Luke in this phrase so strāgely affected the Dorical lāguage with the rest of his bold assertion but wanting al reason of reasonable coniecture to support them this only I wish thee to consider whether thou didst euer see a litle sentence so racked and torne as this is For cōparing this sentēce as it is novv fashioned by them with the same sentence as it was first pronounced by our Sauiour not one word of any momēt remaineth in such sort as Christ vttered them Christ said Many sinnes are forgeuen her because she hath loued much now with their correction thus it is Many sinnes haue bene forgeuen her For she loueth much Where first they rent in sonder make that two which Christ ioyned and spake as one Then they wrest one of Christs words bringe it to a Dorical phrase of speach And by and by backe againe they make the next which signifieth a thing past in greeke to signifie a thing present by the hebrewe maner of speach which hath no present tenses the cleane contrarie whereof is auouched in the other Dorical word going immediatly before Afterwards they enforce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to signifie a cause antecedent but a signe or effect consequent And finally in al and euery of these tricks S. Lukes authoritie is vnder foote and lieth dead For nether Beza nor Musculus in this tossing and turning euer consider what S. Luke wrote what sense the Apostolical Church gaue and the holy Ghost in the same hath alwaies continued what the very letter of the greeke requireth as now it standeth but how it may possibly be wrested if a man wil folow the spirit of contention if he will fetch the pointing of the sentence from Geneua the meaning of one word from Dorica in one corner of the world of an other frō Hierusalem of a third from Swytzerlād the entier summe of al from the deepe pit of hell For excepte the deuil him self stoode by thē suggested to them such construction I thinke the nature of man hauing some regarde of honestie of learning of modestie of Christ his Euāgelists could neuer breake forth into so much monstruous absurditie Of al which this I conclude that allowing men this libertie vnto which now by this libertine-gospel they are driuen I say there is no possibilitie to conteine men in faith or to reduce men to faith or to proue any parcel of Christiā faith For setting aside church Doctors Custome Councels and resting in the only Scriptures priuate exposition of the same this one example geueth vs a paterne to care nothing for al scriptures For it is a maruelous flat text which a man of meane learning by one of these shiftes may not auoide ether by refusing it as not Canonical because it is reiected novv of Protestants in these daies or hath bene doubted of by Catholikes in old time vvhich cutteth of a number of bookes or by obiecting some one or other greeke example in vvhich the vvords vvant vvhich is easie to finde heretiks of diuers sects hauing novv the printing of most greeke testamēts and euery one being content to fauour his proper gospel and heresie or by producing some false translation and sticking to that vvith store of vvhich euerie prouince is pestered or by hunting out diuers significations of the greeke vvord and taking that vvhich maketh most for his aduantage or if that serue not then by corrupting one word by conferring an other with the greeke of this or that dialect a third with the Iewes or Chaldees or Suitzers maner of speaking and so patching vp a sense partly Christian partly Germane partly Ethnical and partly Iudaicall and finally which is al in al reseruing euer to him selfe supreme iudgement of al senses interpretations scriptures and languages As in this verie place whereof I speake Zuinglius folowing nether the words of the Euāgelist nor sense of the Church nor Cōmentarie of the auncient fathers nor inuention of Beza nor any of those manyfold shiftes of Musculus willeth vs rather for dilexit to put credidit for charitie faith and then geueth vs the meaning of Christs words thus Quoniā dilexit multum Ego puto dilectionem hic pro fide accipi quòd tantum mihi fidit tantum peccatorū ei remittitur Nam poste a dicit sides tua te saluam sec it Because she loued much I suppose that loue is here put for faith because she hath so great affiāce in me so many sinnes are forgeuē her for he saith afterwards thy faith hath saued thee that is hath deliuered and absolued the from thy sinnes which one distinction answereth al the places that in this controuersie vve bring out of the scriptures to refel their only faith By these fevv heretical sleights M. Whitaker knovveth his brethren haue many other as bad as these vsed in one particular controuersie any man may gesse hovv likely it is to tye an heretike hauing some vvitt and learning and sight in tonges vvith any text that gainsaith his opinion Hovv true vve finde by experience that vvhich Tertullian so many ages agoe spake of the heretikes of his time and prophecied as it may seeme of the heretikes of our time Ista haeresis non recipit quasdam scripturas c. These Zuinglian Lutheran Puritan Anabaptist Trinitarian c. heretikes admitt not some bookes of scriptures and those vvhich they doe admit by adding to taking from they peruerte to serue their purpose And if they receaue some bookes yet they receaue thē not intierly or if they receaue thē entierly after some sort neuerthelesse they marre them by deuising diuers interpretatiōs In this case vvhat vvil you do that thinke your selfe most skilful in the scriptures vvhē as that which you defend the aduersarie denieth that vvhich you deny the aduersarie defendeth Et tu quidem nihil perdes nisi vocem de contentione nihil consequeris nisi bilem de blasphematione And thou truely shalt leese nothing but thy vvordes in so contentious a brauling thou shalt gaine nothinge but greefe and anger in seinge an heretike so to blasphene And novv if I should shevv the like in the hebrevv and by examples manifest the same I should trouble my selfe
vvorthely through his owne vvilfulnes be deceaued Now vvhether part fayleth in perfourmance of that vvhich it vndertaketh vvhether vve geue not The sense of holy scriptures according to the Apostolike tradition the expositions of holy fathers or vvhether he conuince vs of Desperatnes and importunitie and such contamination as he threatneth this is that vvhich the reader concerning ether side hath ro note and consider Of the vvise men thus vve say These three sages being principal men of their countrie represent the vvhole state of Princes Kinges and Emperours that vvere according to the prophecies of Dauid and Esay to beleeue in Christ to humble them selues to his crosse to foster enrich adorne and defend his church vvhere vpon it is also a very conuenient and agreable tradition of antiquitie and a receiued opinion among the faithful not lacking testimonies of auncient vvriters and much for the honor of our Sauiour that these three also vvere Kings to vvit ether according to the state of those countries vvhere the princes vvere Magi Magi the greatest about the prince or as vve reade in the scriptures of Melchisedech King of Salem many other Kings that dvvelt vvithin a smal compasse or as Iobes three frendes are called Kings These are commonly called the three Kings of Colen because their bodies are there translated thither from the East countrie Their names are said to haue bene Gaspar Melchior Baltasar In these wordes thou seest reader vpon what ground and with what moderation we speake of that matter not precisely auouching them to be Kinges in such sort as we commoÌ„ly esteeme of that name but after an other sort and some inferiour degree Albeit if we affirmed them to be as great monarkes as the Kinges of Fraunce or Spaine or the great Sophie of Persia we might so affirme for ought he bringeth to the contrarie But because M. W. maketh his first entrance with this matter as though it were so absurd let vs search out wherein lieth the great absurditie and fault committed in this note Is it trowe you in that we cal them Kinges or in that we saie they were three or in that by our reporte their names are sayd to haue bene such If because of the first let him shew his reason why that can be so harmeful what it maketh against the honor of Christ what against the veritie of the scriptures the faith of the church tradition ecclesiastical the maners of meÌ„ or any title point or dependence of Christianitie and Christian profession The like I affirme of the second the like of the thirde the like of al three ioyned together VVe cal them kinges and why not seyng the scripture wel beareth with that appellation and the auncient fathers haue so called them many hundred yeres before vve vvere borne So Tertullian in his 3. booke against Marcion calleth them so S. Cyprian calleth them in his sermon De baptismo et manifestatione Christi And S. Chrysostom proueth by scripture that they vvere kinges thus he writeth The vvisemen offered giftes to this child Christ according as the holy Ghost had testified before of them saing Esai 60. They shal come from Saba offering gold and frankencense pretious stone VVe acknovvledge that the vvise men euidently fulfilled this prophecy Dauid quoque de his ita testatur psal 71. Reges Thaersis et Insulae munera offerent Reges Arabum et Saba dona adducent Dauid also vvitnesseth of these psal 71. The kinges of Thaersis and the Isles shal offer gifts The kinges of the Arabians and Saba shal bring presents And S. Hierom applieth that text of the psalme to them in like maner And Tertullian against the Ievves vvho seemed vvith M. W. to enuie al this honor of Christ vvriteth thus Dauid also spake of this offring of gold vvhen he sayd ps 71. there shal be geuen to him of the gold of Arabia and againe the kinges of Arabia and Saba shal bring him gifts Nam et magos reges serè habuit Oriens For the East part had commonly such vvise men for their kinges S. Augustin plainely nameth them kinges so doth Claudianus so doth S. Isidorus so doth S. Remigius so doth Theopâ—ilactus so do generally the writers that haue liued in the church this later 500 yeres as we learne by S. Anselme who speaketh De istis tribus regibus Of these three kinges as of a thing most vsual vulgar And Conradus Gesnerus directeth you to certaine writers who haue made treatises De tribus Magis De tribus sanctis regibus Of these three vvise men Of these three holy kinges And among these auncient and Catholike fathers to alleage one new Zuinglius holdeth it as very probable that they were kinges Thus he speaketh of them writing vpon the 2 chapter of S. Matthew Magi saith he sunt sapientes et astrorum et omnium rerum peritissimi huiusmodi homines ferè administrationi rerum publicarum adhibuerunt gentiles Magi are vvisemen skilful in astronomy and al other matters The gentiles made such men commonly gouerners of their common vvelthes After al which for vs to cal them kings how can it in any sort be hurtful or preiudicial to any truth of Christian religioÌ„ Nay on the contrarie side whosoeuer carpeth at this certainely he maligneth the glorie of our Sauiour he secretly detracteth from his honor and malitiously pincheth and snarleth at the auncient and Apostolike church which in this sorte witnessed such prophecies to haue bene fulfilled But perhaps M. W. is offended at the number of three vvhere vpon S. Augustine so sweetely alludeth vnto the mystery of the Blessed Trinitie and that Christe was King God and yet should dye as a mortal man This is that great corruption which so greueth him But who would be greued here at except some detestable Arian Trinitarian Libertine or Anabaptist against whose religion only for ought I know that note maketh And touching the story that they were three S. Austin plainely affirmeth it Tres erant So saith S. Leo the Great and first of that name aboue a dozen times in his sermons vpon the feast of the Epiphanie And whereas the EuaÌ„gelist speaketh of them not in the dual but in the plural number 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fewer they could not well be and more we neede not to beleeue except we see more reason theÌ„ yet appeareth And touching the last part vz Their names are said to haue bene such how could vve haue spoken more moderatly For who hath heard them called by any other names And I suppose they were not namelesse And if they had names why not Gaspar Melchior Baltazar rather then William Iohn and Thomas or any other that M. W. list to imagine whereas the common opinion of our forefathers maketh for the first no probabilitie or reason can be brought for the second And if M. VV. beleeue that the Ievvish Sinagoge erred not in continuing by
418. They leaue corrupte the greeke 420. vsq ad 427. They interprete at pleasure greeke latin and euerie tong els 429.430 their straunge interpretations of scripture pa. 324.382.429.430.424 of fathers 217. Their maner of arguing 225. of one figuratiue speach they conclude as many as they list ibi et 226. The foly thereof 226.251.252 The agrement betwene the Protestants of our time and old heretikes pa. 430.431 they are most desyrous of noueltie 455.456.457 they mocke at the Prophetes and sundry writers of scripture 458. their preaching a verie mockery of scripture 458.459 they proceede to infidelitie pa. 2.3 559.560 et pref pa. 21.22 they make thēselues supreme iudges of scripture al other authoritie pa. 54 pref p. 19 20. c. they are obstinate in what soeuer absurditie they once take 237. they honour the Iewes more thē S. Paul 325 326. or the Church of Christ 353. like to the Iewes in malice against the Sea of Rome 329.330.331 they vse more reuerence to the images of beastes thē of Christ 514.515 Be they neuer so cōtrarie they are all assured of the truth pref 32. The Protestants allow all Sectes to rebelle for their seueral heresies pref pag. 16.17 R The Rabbines of the Ievves not to be folowed in the sense of the hebrue wordes pa. 434. the Protestants translating after them translate wickedly 434.435 They corrupt the text of scripture by mispoynting it 314.315 Power to Remitte sinnes geuen to the English ministers by act of Parlament pa. 79.80 M. Iewels chalenge touching the real presence artic 5. answered pa. 182. vsque ad 196 the Zuinglians most vsual and popular argument against it 178. answered at large 179. c. the first heretikes of the English church approued it 182. Many things in scripture as vncredible as that 183.184.186 the Zuinglians argument against the sacrament is the roote of Paganisme 184.185.193.199 It ioynerh them to the Anabaptistes Ebionites Nestorians 185.187 It is reiected by the auncient Fathers 188.198.199 Condemned by the Lutherans 189.190 answered at large by Luther 191.192 he supposeth it to proceede rather from Turkes then Christians 194.195 In the sacramēt al humane philosophical reason must yelde to faith p. 188.189.190.192.198.199.201.202 Scriptures and fathers for the real presence S. Luke 235.236 Ieremie 342.343 S. Chrisostom S. Leo. 238. S. Ciril 200. Heretikes for the real presence Melanchthon 190. Westphalus 190.191 Luther 221. Caluin 223. The ground of the Sacramentarie diuinitie p. 191. The Sacramentaries infidels 193. Infidels their forefathers in mocking Christians for their beleefe in the sacrament 222. how they deale with the fathers 193.194 no one father euer was of their religiō 167. See more in Supper The sacrament a figure ioyned with the veritie pa. 223.224 The Romane Church constant in holding fast the doctrine once deliuered pa. 300.301 pure for six hundred yeres after Christ in pref pa. 47. It can not be proued that she euer changed her faith ibid. 47.48.49.55.56 S Christ sacrificed at his last supper pa. 62. the sacrifice of the Church deduced thence 62.63 sacrifice offered by S. Austin for the dead 66. sacrifice for the dead and in the honour of Saints was vsual in the primitiue church 70.71 Christ a priest in respect of the churches sacrifice 530.531.532 In the church we see Christ sacrificed 217 218.219.220 True sacrifice in the church 214.215.229.230 Melchisedechs sacrifice See Melchisedech M. Ievvels chalenge touching the sacrifice artic 17. ansvvered by the chiefe protestants pa. 70.71.72 Saintes heare our praiers pa. 500.501 Sundry bookes partes of scripture denied by the protestants pa. 26. vsque ad 32. et 401.402 they refusing the authoritie of the church beleeue not the scripture 33.34.35.36 they open the vvay for euery man to deny vvhat he listeth 402.403 A part of S. Iohns gospel doubted of 364. S. Peters second epistle 441.415 the epistle to the Hebrues denied ibidem See S. Iames. S. Luke scripture made ridiculous vvhē it commeth to profane handeling 498. somevvhat is the vvord of God besides scripture 36.37 Scripture corrupted by heretikes in fauour of their heresies 176.177 in Genes against the sacrifice pag. 59.60 in S. Peter against freevvil and good vvorkes 416 417. Christs vvordes in S. Luke notably corrupted for the same purpose 420.421.422 Esai translated detestably agaistn Christs incarnation 439. S. Peter corrupted to make God the author of sinne 451.452.453.455 S. Paul against Christs diuinitie 315. Act. 3. against the real presence 174.179.180 against the immortalitie of the soule 273.274 scripture falsly interpreted by heretikes is the vvord of the Deuil 180.50 The protestāts by their exāple make the text of scripture very vncertaine pa. 241.242.243 one yere canonical the next yere not 366. It is not to be altered vpon one doctors reading 244.245 the partialitie of heretikes choosing precisely one or other reading because it best serueth their heresie 246.247.248.249 they apply scripture to proue any thing be it neuer so vnreasonable 255. to proue Atheisme 408.409 Bookes of scripture faithfully kept by the church though the hebrue text be false 346.347 heretikes may not prescribe the church in what tonge to keepe them 347.348 Stancarus iudgement of the principal Protestant writers pa. 96.97 The Septuaginta interpreters condemned by Luther pa. 305. The Zuinglians true opinion of their Supper p. 209. it differeth nothing from common breakfasts 209.210.211.213 it is no more the body of Christ then a paynted scutchion is king of France 210. only bread 210.214.222 the Supper of the Sacramentaries hath no vse of Christs wordes 257. their arguments against the words of Christ in S. Luke foretold answered by Luther 258.259 T Tradition of the Church necessary pa. 36. S. Hierom author of the common Translation of the nevv Testament vsed in the Church p. 294.295 by appointemēt of Pope Damasus 294. it is approued by the Councel of Trent 281.389 It agreeth with the auncient greeke 372.373 commended for synceritie by the Protestant writers 374.375 defended by them preferred before al nevv 383.387.388.389 preferred before the greeke 393. not to be corrected by the reading of some doctor 394.395 M.W. argument against the same 391.392 the answere 392.393 c. English translations of the nevv Testament al approued by M.W. pa. 262. his wickednes therein 263.264 Such translations leade men to Atheisme 271. are condemned by the learned Protestants 271.272.273.274.275.436 for Hel they trāslate Graue most wickedly 272. thereby mouing men to thinke that the soule is mortal 273.274 A briefe sūme of damnable faultes cōmitted by those translators 278.279 English Translations made in schisme al naught 385. English Translations leaue the hebrue 312. differ notably one from an other 321. Protestante Translations of the new Testament all partial in fauour of their peculiar heresies pag. 365. Luthers condemned by Zuinglius 376.377.378 Al Zuinglian translations condemned by Luther 378.379 that of Basile condemned by Beza 379. item Castalios 380. Caluins corrupteth the text 381. Bezaes most variable and
vvorst of al other 381.382.383.384 he then most busily corrupteth scripture vvhen it is most to the dishonour of Christ 384.385 M. W. inuectiue against the late Catholike translation of the new Testament 444. it is mere histrionical 445.446.448 in condemning it he reproueth himself 447.454.455 the hypocrisie of his accusation 449.450 Notable bragging and lying 459.460.461 how weakely he iustifieth his inuectiue 462.463 he obiecteth only two faults 263.264 both false and if they were true of no importance 464.470.472.473 What they are in particular 464. his vnconscionable dealing 472.473 What is principally requisite in a Translator of scripture pa. 371.372.375 Translations more autentical then the original pa. 290.291.306 V Of the name Vniuersaliâ— See Primacie W Arguments that Good vvorkes are not the cause of saluation pa. 95. refuted at large 99.100.101 c. Good vvorkes in Christians are cause of saluation pa. 99.100 vsque ad 106. 418.421.422.423 as euil workes are cause of damnation 104.105.106.107 See Heauen Good vvorkes are in no respect necessary to saluation by the Protestants doctrine pa. 110.111.113 their argumentes prouing the same 112.113 The fathers doctrine touching good vvorkes set downe by M. W. pa. 115. the wickednes thereof 116.118.119 they are therefore condemned by Luther as verie Iewes 120.121.122 M.W. notable wrangling pa. 14.15 his manifold ouersights 97.98 he vnderstandeth not the Protestants doctrine of only faith 109. he commonly contradicteth him self 23.25.114.115.123.126.319 he proueth the English ministers to be Antichrists for sayng Communion 127.128 how fondly he answereth a place of S. Chrysost 204.206.211.212 his straunge assertion that only the hebrue text is scripture 286.287 Refuted 287.288.289 he calleth S. Austin a Sorbonist for his doctrine touching the value of good workes p. 543.545.546 and by like reason al the Apostles and Prophetes pag. 545.546 his arrogancie in condemning al doctors 495.496 et praef pag. 44.45 The summe of his answering D. Sanders consisteth partly in preferring him self before al other pref pa. 42. ad 51. partly in leauing out the substance of D.S. arguments ibid. pa. 75. vsque ad 81. Z Zuinglius the Apostle of the English church pref pa. 89.90 Zuinglians notable lyers pag. 525.526.555 and braggers 554. their maner of writing pref pa. 81.82 The faultes correct thus Pa. 4 linea 13. for charged reade charging Ibidem in many copies wanteth a marginal note Contra Campian pag. 11. Pa. 41 li. 26. Estaticus reade Ecstaticus Pa. 85. lin 6. Christ reade Christes Pa. 145. lin 18. forth reade forth Pa. 195. l. 17. argumenr reade argument Pa. 328. li. 8. for the two hebrew letters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where also in some few examples the later hebrue word is diuided which should be ioyned Some other faultes there are of like qualitie especially of one letter for an other as s for f and r for t and in one place of some copies is vvhich for vvhich is al which considering the ordinarie difficulties of printing where straungers are the workers coÌ„positors correctors besides other extraordinarie mishaps I trust the Reader of his curtesie wil easely pardon Whom I request if by reading hereof he fynde ought for the encrease of his faith towardes Christ and his Church Catholike euen for loue of the same Christ and Church to help me with his prayer FINIS Contra Sand. pa. 5. in fine Ib. pa. 6. in principio M.W. knoweth not wel what that Antichrist is against whom he writeth Lucian de vera historia lib. 1. Cyclades Lucians historical verities the Protestants Euangelical verities are of like nature and probabilitie Much good time spent in reading or refuting heretical bookes 1. Tim. 6. Tertul. de praescript Heretikes are generally proude and ignoraÌ„t 2. Timoth. 6. v. 4. W. contra Sand. pag. 250. See after chap. 7. pag. 130.131 Whit. contra Camp pag. 154. Ibi pag. 153. Fulke con Mart. pag. 64 65. in sine Supra pa. 4. A strange proposition to say the church is Antichrist In the Protestants faith there is no cercertaintie In their writing and disputing there is no ground That the Protestantes haue no certaine fayth The Prince supreme head of the church The Prince not supreme head of the church A declaration of the iust c. Printed by special commaundement and licence â—no â—532 a pag. 411. Cart. in his second reply b 412. c 413. d 414. Ibi. 419 Communion booke in the forme of publike baptisme Baptisme remitteth sinnes Baptisme remitteth not sinnes Tower disputatioÌ„ the second day Priuate baptisme allowed Priuate baptisme disallowed M. W. contra Sander pag. 276.278 Ficta quaedam necessitas Great difference and coÌ„trarietie in the Communion bookes The sacrameÌ„t of confirmation admitted Refused T.C. pa. 174 apud Whitg pag. 785. Christ descended into hel Christ descended not into hel Carlile Caluin Instit aedit anno 1553. ca. 7 ¶ 28. et in postre aeditione l. 2. c 16. ¶ 9. Christs diuinitie graunted Christs diuinitie denyed M. Whit. contra Campian pag. 25.2.153.154 Sleid. Coâ—â— 17. an 1546. Rebellion against princes iustified and commended Ibidem lib. 8. an 1531. fol. 124. Ibid. lib. 22. an 1550. fol. 411. Sleid. li. 18 anno 1546 fol. 320. Beza ad D. Elizabeth Angl. Regi in praefat noui testament aedit 1565. Fox Actes and monumentes pa. 250.255.257 Ibi. pa. 251.252 a pa. 250. ad 260. Vbi supra pag. 250. Ibi. pag. 260 Gilbie Goodman c. WomeÌ„ may beare no rule ouer men in matters temporal The boâ—kes were pâ—inted at Geneua the yere 1558. yere 1559. Women may beare rule ouer men in al matters temporal and spiritual The Communion booke in the beginning before morning praier Copes and such like ornaments approued CoÌ„demned General chaunges and contrarieties in faith Foâ— actes monumeÌ„tes pag. 586. Real presence CommunioÌ„ in one kynd Mariage of priests vnlawful Vowes of chastitie Priuate masse Auricular confession These articles were according to the law of God in king Henries time Ibi. pag 587 The same articles were contrarie to the law of God in king Edwards time Fox vbi su in historia Cranmeri pag. 1473. A realme pitifully ordered where a chyld of 9 yeres old may by order of law ouerthrow al religion Chaunge vpoÌ„ chauÌ„ge D. Whitg Defensâ—a pa. 31. vsque ad 51. Ibi. pag. 178 Infinite difference betwene our English protestants and those of other nations Whit. Def. Tract 1. p. 74 A rule most assured Groundes or heads of disputation In the protestants writing or disputing there is no grouÌ„d Scripture denyed Whit. contra Camp pag. 17. Traditions of the Apostles denyed General Councels denyed T.C. pag. 16. apud D. Wh. Tract 2. p. 95 Of this see more chap. 3.5.7.17 after in the praeface Auncient doctors of the Catholike Church denyed Whit. coÌ„tra Sand. pa. 92. then we perceaue to be agreable to scripture Si vel intogrum patruÌ„ Senatum in nos commoueris D.
the Sacramentaries diuinitie Iew. defeÌ„ce of the Apolog parte 4 cap. 4. ¶ â— M. W. argument answered at large by Luther Luth. To. 7. defens verboruÌ„ coenae fol 388. Ibid. fo 390. The Sacramentarie heresie the hye way to infidelity denyal of al fayth 1 bid fo 391. The vnequal dealiÌ„g of the Sacramentaries in alleaging the fathers Ibid. fo 397 Note how deepely M. W. argumeÌ„t wayghed with Luther Histrio aut erro Macho metanus Frigidae nugae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 M. Iew. challeng touching the real preseÌ„ce artic 5. refuted by martyrs Confessors doctors of his owne religion 2. Tim. 4. pag. 11. Mat. 26. v. 11 Ciril in Ioan. lib. 4. cap. 13. To search by reason how Christ is present in the B. Sacrament is to deny al scripture Ciril in Ioan. lib. 10. cap 13. Iew. art ◠¶ 10. In M.W. translation fo 414.415 Martir defens ad obiect Gard. parte 4. pa. 724. pag. 11. Damascene Damascene lib 4. de orthodoxa fide c. 14. Few of the auncient fathers argue more vehemently and directly against M. W. heresie argument prouing the same then S. Ciril and Damascene whom he citeth pag. 11. Iewel art 6. ¶ 4.5 Ibid. art 10. ¶ 2. 1. Cor. 12. v. 27. Ephes 5. v. 23. A commentarie cleane against the text Chrisost homil 2. ad pop Antio in fine The great difference betwene Elias leauing his maÌ„tel to Elizeus and Christ leauing his flesh to vs. Chrisost in 1. Cor. ca. 10. hom 24. The true opinioÌ„ of the Zuinglians touching their Supper or Communion Zuing. tom 2. lib. de vera falsa relig c. de Eucharist fol. 212. Ibid. in exegesi ad Lutherum fol. 362.363 Symbola taÌ„tum esse the Sacrament only a figure Ibi. ad Luth. Confes responsio duae fo 435. ad Matth. Rutling fo 155 ad Theob Billica 261. The Sacrament nothing out bread Ibi. respons duae ad Lutherum fol. 477. Signa The Sacrament is no more the body of Christ then a painted scutchion is the Quene of England or kinge of Fraunce Beza in epi. theologicis epist 1. How aptly M. W. answere and S. Christ text matche together M. W. quite peruerteth S. Chrisost sense and sentence Chrisost in hoc loco zuing to 2. li. de peccato origin fo 121. et ibid. respon ad D. Baltazarem fo 105. 4. Regum 2. v. 14. Chrisos lib. 3. de sacerdotio paulò post initium The excellency of the priesthode of the new Testament aboue that of the old 2. Cor. 3. Intingi rubefieri Pag. 12. A bad way to make theÌ„ afrayde if they vniuersally knew beleeued the coÌ„trary We see Christ offered in the church Chrysost in 1. Cor 10. hom 24. Genes 32. ver 30. Exod. 24. ver 9. 3. Reg. 22. ver 19. Esa 6. v. 1. Ioan 9. v. 38 Ioan. 1. v. 18. 1 Tim. 6. v. 16. Exod. 33. vers 20. 2. Cor. 11. Luth. Tom. 7 serm de Eucharistia fo 337. Ibid. fo 335. the zuingliaÌ„ CommunioÌ„ plaine bakers bread Infidels and Apostataes forefathers of the Protestants in mocking scorning the Sacrament Kemnit in exam conc Trident. coÌ„tra canones de Eucharistia Calu. de â—oena Domini inter opuscula Ioan. 1. v. 32. The Sacrament in what sort a figure The ProtestaÌ„ts by their analogie of faith of euery place of scripture or doctor conclude what they lyst Ioan. 3. Exod. 12. Luther to 7. defens verborum coenae fo 386. Impossible to interpret S. Chrysost of the English Communion supra pa. â—7 M. Iewels 17. article The 5. artie The 6. artie True sacrifice in the church Chryso vbi supra Pag. 12. insutos in culcum allideret Vide orat Pet. Frar coÌ„tra sectarios item epist Bezae 41. Writers against Beza 1. Tim. 4. v. 2. The point of this controuersy wel to be marked 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beza in Mat. 26. ver 28. Mar. 14. v. 24 Rom. 9. Discou ca. 1 numb 38. c. 17. num 10. See before cap. 2. The real presence manifestly proued by S. Luke Beza in Luc. 22. v. 10. Luc. 19. v. 40 M.W. arguing against the text of S. Luke Pag. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The real presence Chris in 1. Cor. 10. hom 24. Leo serm 11 de pass The iust bloud is the cup which S. Luke meÌ„tioneth Many faultes committed by M.W. in his defence of Beza Esa 19. v. 14. The Protestants by their example practise make the scripture more vncertaine and mutable then any wethercock Iohn 1. v. 29 Chriso to 3. serm de â—rinâ—tate Gen. 19. v. 24. Victor de persequutione Vandalic li. 2. in sine Psal 66. Ephes 4. 7.5 â— 2. Co. 10. v. â— If other heretikes should do as Beza geueth them example within a short tyme we should haue a straÌ„ge Bible Actor 2. Brentius the Vbiquitaries haue written many bookes against the artiâ—le of Chrâ—sts Ascension One or other fatherâ— reading is no warrant for vs to alter the text of scripture Discou pag. 261. nu 1â— Whit. pa. 13. Luc. 22. v. 20 Great difference betwene a Catholike reading indifferently one way or other and an heretike choosing precisely one only way most seruing his herefie Tit. 3. ver 5. In this sort S. Peter 1. epist c. 2. v. 6 citeth a place out of Esai 28. v. 16 Whit. cont Cam. pa. 135 Luke 1. v. 35 Bezaes corruption inexcusable for ought M. W. ether hath said or can say Genes 3. Wh. pag. 23. M.W. argument The vanitie thereof Gal. 2. v. 19. Rom. 6. v. 13 See before pag. 220. Infinite difference betwene the figure of the Catholikes and that of the heretikes Carolost exposition of Christes words hoc est corpus meum Apol. Angl part 4. ca. 4. ¶ 2. Zuing. tom 2. in epist ad Matth. Rutlin de coena fol. 255. Scripture applied by heretikes to proue any thing be it neuer so absurd Luther tom 7. defensio verboruÌ„ coen fo 411. Luth. sage counsel to the Sacramentaries in this case Beza in Luc. 2â— vers 20. Luther vbi supra fo 411 Luther thought it vnpossible that the SacrameÌ„taries would euer grow to such absurditie as now they defend A good rule Ibid. Basil in ethic reg â—1 cap. 4. Gabrielis Fabricii responsio ad Bezam Vezeliam Eceboliam fol. 17. Bezaes maner in correcting the testament Whit. pa. 14. Ibid. L. Humfred in vita Iuelli pag. 145.146 c. The Protestants idolaters Examples wherein the Protestants may consider their owne fault in prophaning ecclesiastical word◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 supra videre to suruey 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The abuse of ecclesiastical words the ruine of al religion Mat. 23. v. 24 Pag. 15. Esa 48. v. 4. To approue the English translations is to approue plain Atheisme deny God Discou ca. â— nu 1.2.3.4 Protestantâ—diuines against the English traÌ„slations Castal defens contra Bezam pag. 189. Illyric in Clau. part 1. in verbo infernus
pag. 598.603.604.605 See D. Hum. iudgement after in the 14. chap. Carlile in his booke that Christ went not downe to hel fol. 144. The English translations draw men to thinke that Christs soule perished Ibid. fo 117. O singular puritie of the English Bibles Against the immortalitie of the soule Ibid. fo 120. So translateth the Bible of the yere 1579. The English translations leade men to detestable errors Ibid fo 116. Bezaes true iudgment what harme is like to ensue by abusing ecclesiastical words Beza in Act. c. 10. ver 46. edit anno 1556. He or the printer hath altered some part of these words in the later editioÌ„ an 1565. Chaunge of words induceth chauÌ„ge of fayth The summe of such foule and ethnical corruptions as by reason are proued and by confession of the aduersaries are grauÌ„ted to be in the â—nglish translatioÌ„s The sect of Libertines far spread Beza de haereticis a ciuili magistratu punieÌ„dis pa 41. Right Gospellers These shew vs what is the true meaning of only faith iustifying Concil Trident sessio 4. 3. thinges to be noted in this question M.W. discourse most against him self Discou in prefat nu 39. The greeke and hebrew more aduantageable to the Catholike cause then the latin Pag. 15. In prefa noui testamen M.W. reasons for preferring the hebrew and greeke before the latin Pag. 15. If the latin testament be not the word of god whose word are their vulgar translations An assertioÌ„ both foolish and impious The Apostles and Euangelists cited scripture not according to the hebrew Rom. 10. v. 18. Linea coruÌ„ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Anno 1575. Act. 13. v. 41. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. in gentibus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iac. 4. v. 6. Prouerb ca. 3. ver 34. Caluin in Iacob ca. 4. Caluin maÌ„gleth S. Iames epistle 1. Pet. ca. 2.3 5. Beza in Ioh. c. 19. v. 37. Ireneus l. 3. cap. 25. Hier. prefat in Tobiam Iudith li. Regum S. Mat. wrote the Gospel in Hebrew a Apud Euseb l 3. c. 33 Irene li. 3. ca. 1. Euseb lib. 2. ca. 18. b li. 5. c. 19. c l. 6. c. 19. d in argumeÌ„t in Mat c. in catal e Mt. gospel in hebrew set forth by Munster and Quinquarboreus Pag. 15. It had bene valiantly done of M. W. by one example to haue made this conquest ouer vs. S. Hierom author of our commoÌ„ edition of the new testament and that by the Popes appointement In catal in fine praef in nouum testamentum The old testament Aug. de doctrina Christian li. 2. ca. 13. epi. 10 ad Hieron 4. things haÌ„deled in this questioÌ„ That M. W. speaketh neuer a word to the purpose More probable that the hebrew is corrupt theÌ„ the latin The church warranted that she should euer keepe the word of God Esaie 59. Ioan. 14. 16. Praise of the Romaine Church for holding fast the true doctrine once deliuered Caluin inst l. 4. c. 6. ¶ 26. a Vnto this reason drawen from humane wisedome set the ChristiaÌ„ reader adde Christes prayer Luc. 22. v. 32 I haue prayed c. that thy fayth faile not Doctrinae semel traditae suit aliis omnibus tenacior The Greeke church not comparable to the Romane Math. â—5 Pag. 20. That the hebrew bibles are in some places corrupted Esa 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luth. tom 4. enarration Esa cap. 9. The Iewes corrupters and crucifieis of such places of scripture as appertaine to Christ a Scriptura eius 4. Reg. 19. Luth. in Esa ca. 53. v. 11. fol. 282. Lyra. proba diuinitatis humanitatis Christi contra Iudaeos in fine glos noui testamenti 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 TranslatioÌ„s truer then the original text Ierem. 23. v. 5.6 Hier. in Ier. ca. 23. v. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lyra vbi supra The Iewes corrupt the letter of the scripture Al bibles corrupt in this place Esa 53. v. 8. Hierom. in Esa ca. 53. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bib. 1577. 1579. Bib. 1562. The English translations adde to the text Luther to 4. in Esa c. 53. The Iewes corrupt the scripture in despite of Christians â— maners of corruption Rom. 9. v. 5. Sixtus Senensis in bibliotheca sancta lib. 8. pag. 646. General reasons why the hebrue text can not be so sincere as the aduersarie would pretend Deut. 52. v. 9 Exod. 19. v. 6 Act. 14. v· 15. a Num. 21. v. 14. b Iosue 10. ver 13. 2. Reg. 1. v. 18. c 2. Paral. 20 v. 34. d ibid. 12. ver 15. e 1. Reg. 10. vers 25. f 2. Paral. 9. vers 29. The Iewes haue lost many whole volumes of their Prophetes much more may they leese or alter points letters and syllables Most vnreasonable absurditie and contradiction Whit. pag. 9. Whit. pa. 15. Similitude of letters Hieron in Osee c. 2. Psal 109. v. 3 Marlorate in Psal 110. Of the yere 1579. Of the yere 1577. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hebr. 1. v. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psal 58. v. 10 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Genes 3. v. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. Cor. 2. v. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pretie aÌ„sweeres interpretations Luther in Esa ca. 64. Illyric in 1. Cor. ca. 2. v. 9 Martyr in 1. Cor. ca. 2 fo 46. S. Paule missed in reading Hebrue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beza in 1. Cor. ca 2. v. 9. The Protestantes attribute more to the Iewish scribes then to S. Paule the Apostle Act. 22. Castalio defens suae traÌ„slatio pag. 227. M.W. opinion touching the Hebrew vncorrupt is luysh Humfre lib. 1. de rat interpre pag. 178. Lib. 2. pag. 219. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pellican to 4. in psal 85. vers 9. The Iewes at al tymes negligeÌ„t in conseruing the scriptures Idem ibideÌ„ in psal 108. vers 11. In vulgo legend is legis suae translationibus The Protestants Iewes resemble one the other in many pointes both of fayth and maners Munster in Gen. ca. 27. Where is now becom the canon of Carthage Counsel 4. cap. 47. so much vrged by M. Iewel that nothing should be read or sung in the church beside Canonical scripture Bad time worse reasoÌ„ Great varietie in the Hebrew bibles Munster in praefat bib â—omi primi ps 144. ps 33. The Hebrew bibles vnperfit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The protestants opinioÌ„ iniurious to the holy Ghost Although S. Hierom appealed from the latin to the Hebrew yet the like reason is not for vs now August de doctr Christiana lib 2. ca. 11. S. Hierom thought the hebrew bibles to be in some places corrupt and faultie Gal. â— v. 1â— Deuter. 21. v. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hiero. in â—al c. 3. Gal. â— v. 10. Deutron 27. v. 26. Hier. in Gal. cap. 3. The Iewes conuicted by S.
then our auncieÌ„t Note this Few faultes are fouÌ„d by any protestants in our old translation which by other Protestants are not iustsied Bulling decad 5. serm 5. Bez. in praefatio noui testamenti an 1556. Supra Our old translation better then any of the protestants Beza The Councel of TreÌ„t The later translatioÌ„s of heretiks as likewise al other their procedings are worse then the former according to S. Pauls prophecie proficieÌ„tes in peius 2. Timo. c. 3. v. 13. In approuing our old translation we are warranted by the Protestants theÌ„ selues Pa. 17.18 M. W argumeÌ„t against the old traÌ„slation The answere 1. Cor. 15. v. 53.54 Beza in Luc. ca. 20. v. 28. Beza praeferreth our latin translation before al greeke examples Ibi. c. 7. v. 31 Testament of the yere 1577 1579. and 1580. the Scottish great bible of the yere 1579. S. Hieroms translatioÌ„s more auteÌ„tical then the reading of many docâ—ora Beza in praefat nouâ— testamen an 1565. S. Chrys iustifieth our latin reading Chrysost in 1. Cor. ho. 15 S. Ambrose vntruly cited Ambros in 1. Cor. 15. Beda in 1. Cor. ca 15. pag. 18. pag. 20. Benedictus Arâ—as Montanus a Catholike priest Bible-beaters Neuer since Christes tyme were there such manglers defacers corrupters of the bible as are the protestaÌ„tes of our age See example before pag. 288 The protestaÌ„ts lay the way open for any man to deny the scripture at his pleasure Hier. prefat in Iudith M. Charke hath a deeper insight in scripture then al the bishops fathers of the great Nicene Councel Whit. coÌ„tra Camp pa. 17 Light reasoÌ„s to disauthorize receaued parts of scripture Before pag. 364. S. Hier. ad Edibiam quaest 3. Beza in IoaÌ„ ca. 6.18 19 Luc. 22. The protestates bible is no more a bible then a headles maÌ„ is a man Castalio in praefat ad Edouardum sextum Angliae regem A true confession of a principal protestant The protestate church drowned in grosse ignorance A sure proofe thereof The protestaÌ„ts voyde of the spirite of God and al truth Their light of the gospel is the night of the gospel The end of their religion is Atheisme eeuery maÌ„ to beleeue what he listeth Vbi supra Marke this plaine confession approued by so manifest reason against their common vaunting of the cleare light of the gospel Scripture applied to proue Atheisme 1. Mach. 4. Num. 15. Act. 5. Rom. 14. Mat. 7. D. Whitg defen tract 3. c. 6. pa. 178 The protestants maner of preaching the right way to Atheisme See the preface Impossible to do good with any kind of heretike so long as he may haue libertie to flee to diuers translations and interpretations Antinomi a sect of protestants Sleid. li. 12. anno 1538. fol. 199. The true coÌ„clusion of only faith iustifying The protestaÌ„ts maner of aÌ„swering the Catholikes Al fathers Councels contemned Concil Trident sess 6. cap. 9. See before chap. 3. in the praeface S. Iames refused Before c. 1. Caluin Beza in coÌ„mentar ad Hebr. in argumento ca. 2. v. 3. Cent. 1. li. 2. c. 4. col 328. S. Paules epistle to the hebrewes reiected Iew. defeÌ„ce of the Apolog par 4. c. 19.20 ¶ 1. 2. Pet. 1. v. 10 S. Peters second epistle may be denyed The fourth dayes conference see before cha 2. A place of S. Peter refused â—â—cause it waÌ„teth in many greeke priâ—â—es Luth tom 5. in 2 Pet. ca. 1. fol. 487. Testamentâ— of the yeres 1577.1570.1580 the Scottish bible Vergerius dialog 1. de Ofio â—0 27 1. Pet. ca. 1. v. 22. Ibid. v. 17. Luther tom 5. in 1. Petri ca. 1. fo 451. Illyricus Tâ—gurine translation Yere 1561. S. Peter notably corrupted in the later protestants translations against freewil good workes Testament of the yere 1556 1565 yere 1579. yere 1561. yere 1579. S. Peters words cleane inuerted Cone Trid. sess 6. ca. 4. â—hisi 1. v. 28 Sophistical quarelling Beza annot in illum locum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Testament of the yeres 1577. 1579. 1580. 1561. â—ood works the cause of our saluatioÌ„ Theod. in Philip. ca. 1. Before ca. 5. pa. 98 in sequentib Luc. 7. v. 47. Beza transl anno 1565. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quoniaÌ„ because The yeres 1579. 1580. a 1553. b 1547. c 1536. 1540 1543. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christs words clean inuerted Beza in Luc. 7. vers 47. Intolerable pride malice in abusing the scripture to helpe only only fayth The sense of Christs words according to the auncieÌ„t fathers Chrys hom 6. in Mat. Sinnes purged by workes of penance claritie Greg. hom 33. in EuaÌ„g Ambros in Luc. lib. 6. c. 7. de mulicre peccatrice Aug. hom 23. inter 50. An example of singular notorious wrangling Good grouÌ„des to expound and correct scripture vpon Musculus in locis coÌ„munibus ca. de Iustificat num 5. Luc. 7. v. 47. Yet S. Luke tooke it otherwise dilexit Note the wonderful tearing and renting of this short sentence No spirite but the spirite of SataÌ„ could teach the protestants this desperate maner of interpretation Protestant shiftes to auoide scripture when it is plaine against theÌ„ Zuing. to 4. in Luc. 7. Propre expositions dilexit id est credidit works that is faith the sunne that is the moone vertul de praescripti num 5. The agreement betwene the protestants of our time and auncieÌ„t heretikes touching their behauiour about scriptures Not possible to do good with an heretike hauing this liberty to discourse The hebrew tonge open to infinite cauillinge and so vnfie to bind a coÌ„tentious heretike Hebrew words haue great diuersitie of significations Psal 54. v. 21. Marlorate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whence coÌ„meth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psal 59. v. 6. The yere 1577. 1579. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A hard difficulty what masters we must folow touching the true signification of the hebrew words Humf. lib. 2. de rat int pa. 219.320 The protestaÌ„ts folowing the Iewish Rabbines translate wickedly Dictionariâ— Munsteri printed at Basile the yere 1564. Munster in praef bibli tom 1. Humf. vbi sup pa. 225. Before chap. 12. Bez. in praef Test noui ann 1565. principi Cond dicaâ—i Molinae in a. Luc. Christs incarnation of the virgin can not be proued by scripture according to the protestantes maner of expounding it Mat. 1. v. 23. Before pag. 286.287 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See Munst in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Oecolamp in Esa ca. 7. Translation Iudaical Antichristian Luth. tom 2 ad Amsdorf de Eras fol. 485. Iren. lib. 3. cap. 24. vide Euseb li. 5. ca. 8 Epiph. haer 30. Iustin in dialog eum Triphoâ—e The hebrew and greeke knowledge much aduaunced by Catholikes A man must haue a setled faith before he come to coÌ„ferre greeke and hebrew els shal he neuer haue any faith Vide Aug. de Gen. ad lit lib. 1. ca. 21. tract 18. in Ioan. Hier. ep 138 Marcellae
canonical scriptures And that this fault lye not altogether vpon Luther and the lutheraÌ„s VVolfg Musculus a famous wryter amongst the Zuinglians vpon lyke reason pronounceth lyke sentence They obiect vnto vs sayeth he the place of Iames. but he vvhatsoeuer he vvere though he speake othervvise then S. Paule yet may he not preiudice the truth And after he hath at large shewed the disagreemente betweene those two Apostles thus he breaketh forth into the open reproch of S. Iames. VVherefore he S. Iames alleageth the example of Abraham nothinge to the purpose vvhere he sayeth vvilte thou knovv ô vayne man that fayth vvithout vvorkes is dead Abraham our Father vvas he not iustified by vvorkes vvhen he offred his sonne Isaak He confoundeth the vvord fayth hovv much better had it bene for him diligently and playnely to haue distinguished the true and properlye Christian fayth vvhich the Apostle euer preacheth from that vvhich is common to Ievves and Christians Turks and Diuels then to confound them both and set dovvne his sentence so different from the Apostolicall doctrine vvhereby as concluding he sayth you see that a man is iustified by vvorkes and not by fayth alone vvhereas the Apostle out of the same place disputeth thus c. And after he hath made S. Paule speake as he thinketh best he inferreth Thus sayeth the Apostle of vvhose doctrine vve doubt not Compare me novv vvith this argument of the Apostle the conclusion of this Iames A man therfore is iustified by vvorks and not by fayth only and see hovv much it differeth vvhereas he should more rightly haue coÌ„cluded thus c. In which discourse the Reader may see that he not onely contemptuously refuseth to call him an Apostle and euer nameth him as opposite to the Apostle but also that he refuteth him as making false arguments and taketh vpon him to be his maister and as it were calling him ad ferulam checketh and controwleth him for a corrupter of scripture misapplying the word of God and wickedly pullinge downe that which S. Paule had so wel built vp All which beinge so plaine euident and manifest and the worde straminea found out at length acknowleged by M. VV. a man wold thinke all this matter ended and that egregious lye fathered vpon M. Campian turned vpon M. VV. head withall M. Campians first reason iustified wherein he burdened the Protestantes with denial of the holy scriptures And yet M. VV. yeldeth not but like a valiant soldiar is so farre from geuinge ouer that he pursueth his aduersarie still as though he had the better of him and whâ—e so or how can he possiblie defend him self forsoothe because Luther non plane 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 stramineam appellauit Luther sayed not playnlye and simplye that it vvas stravven or made of stravve but in comparison of Sainte Peter and Sainte Paules Epistles I beleeue in deede Nether did F. Campian or M. Martine saye so or any wise man els for although he were as madde and shamelesse in his assertions as euer was heretike yet to haue termed that epistle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 stramineam simplye made of stravve or any otherwise then to haue signified the vnworthynes of the same in respect of holie scriptures and in that sort it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a worde of blasphemous contempt had bene as wonderful as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to haue affirmed that is was made of woode or morter And here in the verie fronte and beginning let the reader note in M.VV. the liuely paterne of a perfecte wrangler maintaininge a continuall bablinge vppon wordes and neuer drawing nigh to the pointe Father Campians and M. Martins charge vppon them beinge euidente that they contemne the written worde as is proued by Luther M.VV. knowinge not wel what to say runneth he knoweth not whether vp and downe and aboute forwarde and backward now grauntinge and by and by recalling so that in the compasse of one leafe in one plaine matter he hath more contrary windinges and turnings then a graue and sober man could be driuen vnto in the wryting of a large volume First there is no suche thinge and F. Campian lyeth egregiously nowe him selfe hath founde it out then there was neuer a worde chaunged in Luthers preface now the later editions differ much from the former againe Luther calleth it not simpliciter stramineam but in respect of S. Paules epistles and S. Peters If this serue not the turne then I require you saith he to bring forth the other wordes that folow arida tumida contentiosa or els this of straminea is no great matter yet one fetche more Although I vvil not defend this of Luthers yet you haue iniuried him in saying that he called it omnino stramineam altogether made of stravv looke saith M. Martin in Illyricus and there you shall finde the matter graunted I haue so done saith M.VV. let me be counted impudent yf you finde this vvord there Thus muche I graunt Illyricus saith that Luther rehearseth graue causes vvhy this epistle ought not to be esteemed for a vvriting of Apostolicall authoritye But vvhat is this to the purpose as though he that denieth the epistle to be apostolical termeth yt stramineam made of stravv This is a copie of M.VV. vayne in wryting first to deny the matter be it neuer so euident and wheÌ„ the matter is coÌ„fessed theÌ„ to cauil vpon syllables and when matter and forme the verie syllables are founde yet to yelde to nothing but to keepe the pen or tounge walking as though in this point lyke verball grammarians and ridiculous sophisters we principallie hunted after these syllables stra mi ne am which neuerthelesse are found and not as students searchers of truth in diuinitye soughte out first and cheeflie whether by these and the lyke contemptible speeches the aduersarie laboured to disgrace deface that Apostolical writing and so impiouslie to auoyde suche authoritie when he should be pressed therewith Wherefore to draw to some issue howsoeuer Luther 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 called it stramineam or called it not or whether he spake so in respect of the matter of the epistle or the forme or by way of comparison with S. Paule or whatsoeuer other quidditie M.W. ether now hath or hereafter shall deuise if Luther did yt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to deface the epistle which M.VV. denieth not and to dispossesse it of Canonicall authoritie as the thing it self speaketh if by his example the Germane Diuines churches altogether contemne it if vppon Luthers sentence Illyricus pronounce that Luther in his praeface rendereth great causes vvhy this epistle oughte in no case to be accounted for a vvriting of Apostolicall authoritie vnto vvhich reasons I thinke euerie godlie man and not geuen to contention ought to yeld if Pomerane say the vvriter thereof maketh a vvicked argument concludeth ridiculouslie if Vitus Theodorus thrust it cleane out of the booke if the Centuries affirme