world denied or who could euer otherwise imagine but that men whosoeuer they be are visible and maie be discerned This therfore required not so manie proofes as you haue brought being liberall where no neede is neither in this respect do we meane that there is an inuisible Church by which we vnderstand the elect the faithfull the members of Christes mysticall bodie who although they maie be seene outwardlie in that they are men yet their election their faith their spirituall adoption and coniunction with Christ in which respect they are truelie his Church can not by outward sense be perceiued The number of professors is visible but the number of the elect is not visible that is can not by sight and sense be tried discerned and separated from all others This is the meaning of that distinction which you ought to haue knowen before you laboured to disprooue it But if taking vpon you to refute a thing whereof you are ignorant you faile shamefullie and make your selfe verie ridiculous to your reader it is no maruell and you can blame no other then your owne selfe For what conceite was this that you haue nourished in your braine Pag. 64. and vttered in this booke that we should make the Church of Christ to be inuisible in such sorte as you maintaine the bodie of Christ to be inuisiblie in the Sacrament and hereupon note a wonderfull contradiction in our doctrine I maie truelie saie your case is lamentable and so is theirs that depend vpon you to be thus absurdlie and wilfullie blinded in matters of faith and as it were to grope for light at noone daie which sheweth in you indeede a notable reprobation of vnderstanding as a iust punishment of your Apostasie The Church is not inuisible because the men of whom the Church consisteth are inuisible for the faithfull and elect in that they are men are no lesse visible then the rest but because the elect of God can not be perceaued and acknowledged by outwarde sight of our eies Of Christes bodie you teach most falslie that his verie true naturall humane bodie is in the Sacrament yet that no sense can perceaue it to be there which is to denie and ouerthrow the trueth of his humanitie Therfore you see if anie facultie of seeing remaine in you that betweene this doctrine The Church of Christ is inuisible that is not able by our eies to be discerned and this The bodie of Christ if it were present in the Sacrament bodelie as you teach should be visible that is seene with our eies is not so much as a shadow or fancie of anie contradiction After all this Master Rainolds maketh a long discourse of Dauid George and Sebastian Castalion pag. 66. of whome or for whome I haue for my parte noe neede to answere Dauid George was a damnable heretike and his heresies were by Protestantes not Papistes descried and refuted Castalion you slaunder moste shameleslie in saying he denied Christ to be the Messias as hereafter also in your booke you haue done His preface which he writ to King Edwarde before his translation of the Bible conteineth no such argument and leadeth whollie to another end if you had either witt to see it or good will to acknowledge it Therein he disputeth that some part of those promisses that are contained in the Prophets and namelie concerning the great knowledge that should be vnder Christ is not yet accomplished his opinion of which matters I leaue to himselfe but you haue not done well to charge him vntruelie with so foule a blasphemie pag. 70. As for the great straightes into which Caluine and Luther disputing with the Iewes haue beene driuen by reason of this supposition concerning the Churches fall I know not anie seing they neuer imagined anie such fall as you doe No the heauens shall sooner fall then the Church and therefore you mistake the matter whollie and like an ignorant sophister make impertinent discourses The promises of almightie God concerning the largenes and beautie of his Church vnder Christ haue beene accomplished The Gospell hath beene preached throughout the world the Church hath spread it selfe ouer all nations and neuer since hath it beene shut vp within the limites of one countrie and people as the Synagogue was But as the Prophets foretolde that the Church should be thus mightelie increased and multiplied so the Apostles haue prophecied that in the Church should be a defection that Antichrist should sit in the Temple of God and that the Princes and people of the earth should be drunken with the cuppe of his spirituall fornication and abhominations As we confesse those Prophecies to be fulfilled soe must we likewise acknowledge the truth of these and thereby we are hable to stop the mouthes not onelie of Iewes and Turkes but of all papists also in this controuersie of the churches outward increase and decaie Your monstrous railing in the next section I pretermit beseeching God to open the eies of all Christians and to giue them vnderstanding hartes that they maie discerne Antichrist from Christ falshood from trueth and heresie from pure religion But where you saie that there be many worse Antichristes then the Pope pag. 73. and compare certaine of your late Popes with some of our English Superintendents as you call them in respect of their behauiour and conuersation of life you still misconstrue the matter and speake beside the purpose Your Popes might haue vsed greater shew of honestie and godlines then they haue done yet be neuer the further of from their kingdome of Antichrist which although it be much furthered and maintained by their pride cruelty couetousnes and such other moste monstrous and outragious demeanour as they haue vsed these manie hundred yeares yet it consisteth principallie in that doctrine of Antichristianitie which they holde and by all possible meanes defend most contrarie to the holie and Catholike religion of Christ And yet if your comparison were admitted and the liues of those Antichrists throughlie examined it would appeere that there haue not liued euer in anie state from the beginning of the worlde more wicked vile and abominable men then haue bene the Popes of Rome for diuers hundred yeares together by testimonie of their owne histories They haue in tyrannie exceeded Nero in pride Nebuchadnezer or Alexander the great in other common vices them that for the same haue bene moste infamouslie renowmed in the world wherein if anie professour of the gospell should resemble them or come neare vnto them it were a iust shame vnto their person but yet no disproofe of their religion Now Master Rainolds proceedeth to another pointe pag. 75. namelie the want of religion and conscience which he saith I haue shewed in this answere A greauous accusation in matters of Religion to want religion where greatest conscience is required to haue no conscience at all But if you examine his proofe then shall you easilie perceiue the cauilling spirit of this accuser wherof
of his flesh is absent from vs. Which though it be contrary to your Reall presence yet you say you beleeue as your Creede your beliefe perhaps is according to some new Creede for of this beliefe one parte cannot stand in the same Creede with another First the true auncient and Catholike creede teacheth that Christ is ascended into heauen touching his humanitie whereunto Cyril agreeablie writeth The true Catholike Creed is contraie to the Popish Creed that he is absent in flesh your new-fangled Popish Creede would haue vs beleeue that Christ touching the presence of his flesh is in the sacrament If his flesh be in the sacrament then is not his flesh absent but the scriptures and fathers and al Catholicke Creeds doe set it downe as a ground of faith that Christs flesh is onelie in heauen and there remaineth vntill he come againe in carnall presence to iudge the world What haue you to answere now forsooth now must you fal into your former contradiction that Christs flesh is visible in heauen and inuisible in the sacrament which doctrine is repugnant to diuinitie to reason to sense to all principles of truth as you haue hearde already or els must you say that Christ hath two bodies one visible and an other inuisible which though it be heretical yet is it lesse absurde and vnreasonable then the other But answere what you list this is sufficient to ouerthrow your reall presence before God and all his saints that Christs flesh is absent from vs the sacrament is with vs and therefore Christs flesh is not in the sacrament Your assertions are to grosse your answeres are absurd your Reall presence is a reall contradiction Cyrill you say was no sacramentarie No verely for your sacramentary heresie was vnhathced in Cyrills time But did Cyrill euer teach your reall presence a place you bring that maketh nothing to this purpose Cyrill speaketh not a word of the sacrament Cyrill in Ioh. lib. 4. c. 13. but generally that Christ giueth vs his flesh which is true of those also that neuer receiued the sacrament Wherefore Cyrill meant not any reall presence as you full ignorantly alledge him He onely disputeth against the infidelity or curiosity of such as enquire A popish ignorant argument Christ geueth vs his fleshe to eate Ergo we eate Christs flesh Really in the sacrament How it is possible that Christ should giue vs his flesh to eate we know that Christ can giue and doth giue his flesh to all faithfull and make no doubt nor question thereof But thinke you all meanes of eating his flesh is remooued if reall presence be denied Consider this point a litle better M. Rainolds and I doubt not but you shall easilie espie your owne ouersight That you bring out of Peter Martyr is idle That which he saith if Cyril should auouch it were not to be graunted your selues will not maintaine namelie that Christ doth dwell in vs corporallie and mingleth his flesh with our flesh Then to what vse serueth your reall presence tell vs if you can but prooue by scripture that which you tell els we shall not greatly regard what you tell vs. Damascen you are content to handle as lightly Damasâ—le orthod fide lib. 3. cap. 3. He teacheth against your reall presence that the nature of Christs bodie remaineth circumscript and visible as it was So your fantasie of Christs body being present in the sacrament reallie but incircumscriptly and inuisiblie is prooued to be vainer then any dreame Al you alledge at large for the reall presence out of him in an other place Lib. 4. c. 14. may shortlie be dispatched That Christ can make the bread his body we graunt For Christ being god can doe whatsoeuer he wil. Onelie shew that Christ wil make of real bread his real flesh and then this controuersie is brought to an ende The Catholike faith teacheth that Christs body was made of the virgine once the Popish faith that it is made of bread daily Christ indeede maketh the breade his body not really but sacramentallie For Christ hath not a body made of bread his body was made once of the pure substance of his blessed mother and other body then this or oftner made then once hath he none Whereof all doctrine that teacheth Christs bodie is made of bread is impious and hereticall the popish doctrine of Reall presence teacheth that Christs body in the sacrament is made of breade by changing the bread into his bodie through force of consecration wherefore we may boldlie and trulie conclude that the popish doctrine of Reall presence which Master Rainolds holdeth but miserablie defendeth is both wicked and hereticall CHAP. 9. Of certeine places of S. Chrysostome touching the Reall presence Two places out of S Chrysostome were alledged by M. Martin pag. 20â— c. to prooue thereall presence The first out of his second homilie to the people of Antioch Chryst hom 2. ad pop Antio wherein by an excellent and fit allegorie he compareth our sauiour Christ to the Prophet Elias For as Elias ascending bodelie into heauen left his cloake with Elizeus his scholler so Christ the sonne of God asâ—ending vp left his flesh with vs. S. Chrysostomes meaning to anie that readeth the place is euident ynough M. R. though he multiplie wordes after his simple manner yet my former answere he cannot disprooue That Christ left vnto vs his flesh in the holie sacrament who euer doubted that therein we receiue his true and natural flesh we beleeue we teach and alwaies did But the Real presence of his flesh such as you maintaine S. Chrysostome neuer knew and we vtterlie denie Christ left vs his flesh therefore he left it Really A false popish argument For can you reason thus and reason trulie that if Christ left vs his flesh he left it in reall presence this is the point this prooue if you can els you talke to no purpose Christ left his flesh that is a sacrament of his flesh wherein is most truelie and effectuallie but spiritually offered vnto vs and of vs receiued the very flesh of Christ Hauing spent manie vnprofitable and superfluous speaches at length you force the comparison and shew a threefold difference betweene Elias leauing his mantel and Christ leauing his flesh And are you indeed in your right vnderstanding who I praie you M. R. denieth this you migh alledge not three onley but three and three points of difference betweene Elias and Christs leauing the one his mantel the other his flesh This then being wholy graunted what is your argument will you reason thus There is great difference between Elias leauing his cloake Christ leauing his flesh Straunge arguments that M.R. hath learned of late to make therefore Christ left his flesh vnto vs reallie If this be not your argument frame an other your selfe as you can The first difference is that Elias left his cloake Christ his flesh Flesh indeed differeth
then the argument to be so sure and necessarie that is drawen from authoritie of a martyr will you graunt this reason to be inuincible A marttr hath saide it therefore it is true what say you then of Cyprian the martyr of Iustinus the martyr of Irenaeus the martyr who notwitstanding their blessed martyrdome are knowne to haue maintained opinions against the trueth If martyrs then may haue their errours how may the testimonie of martyrs be alwaies irrefragable you see good readers how pithie a disputer this man doth shewe him-selfe to be If his loose rhetorike helped him not a litle better then his logike he were in verie weake and miserable case Lastlie concerning wholl Churches reformed pag. 32. what can you Master Rainolds conclude against vs In matter of discipline greate difference heretofore hath bene amongst the Churches East and West Greeke and Latine If then some such be in our reformed Churches can you thereof truelie gather that therefore they are not the Churches of Christ Tell vs what you meane if you haue any trueth or certaintie in your meaning Next Master R. reckeneth vp sundrie Popes that are amongst the Protestants in stead of one true Pope pag. 33. which I know not whereto it serueth but onelie to shewe that the protestants haue so great detestation of the Pope and his tyrannie that they cannot endure in anie professour of the Gospell anie small shadowe of such Lordelines as the Pope vsurpeth ouer the Church Your true Pope whereof you speake is as much as a true Antichrist of whome the scriptures haue foretolde The name the person the authoritie all Protestants abhorre and accurse to the prince of darknes from whence it came Againe he is in hand with generall Councels and saith it is impossible pag. 34. that euer we should once imagine how anie Councell amongest vs should be gathered His methode is according to his matter confused and disordered leaping and iumping from one pointe to another like a wilde bucke vpon the mountaines Although we haue not a Pope as you haue yet by Gods grace generall Councels maie wee haue if Christian princes that professe the gospell will iointlie take vpon them the care thereof And generall Councels haue bene assembled and helde many hundred yeares before your Pope by such a name was euer knowne or heard of in the world and so may they againe both Christianlie and generallie be held allthough your Pope with all his proude cleargie were returned from whence they came That hitherto no such Christian Councels haue bene gathered it maie be imputed to the generall troubles in all Christian countries and to the aduersaries that haue bene raised vp by your Pope and his Cardinall satrapes to hinder as much as in them laie all meanes whereby a Christian generall Councell might be gathered Howbeit if a generall Councell cannot be procured to be celebrated with quietnes there is no doubt notwithstanding but that the Lordes cause maie without it daylie more and more preuaile as it hath done heretofore in times moste persecutions To the section that followeth containing onelie a recapitulation of these former discourses pag. 34. c. I haue no nede to make any further answere Your complainte against vs for refusing all grounds of disputation pag. 38. how vaine and vntrue it is hath bene shewed The onelie true and certaine grounde of religion and of all disputation about the same which is the authoritie of God reuealed vnto vs in his holie worde we imbrace we holde we rest vpon it which forsomuch as you haue fullie tried to be against you so that you cannot thereby approoue one article of your popish faith nor disprooue anie doctrine that we maintaine against you therfore desperation driueth you indeede to refuse this grounde as insufficient and to seeke other grounds of which we haue noe warrant in Gods worde And although it please you for this cause to raile at vs and saie we are worse then the heretikes of olde time yet we know that rhe auncient godlie fathers in confuting all heretikes vsed onelie arguments drawen out of the scriptures and plainelie taught that by no other weapons an heretike can be put to flight I knowe they charge them oftentimes with the iudgement of Churches successions of Bishops determination of Councels name of Catholikes not as though this were a necessarie conuiction of it selfe but thereby the rather to induce them to beleeue the doctrine to be true which they see from the first planting thereof in the Church to haue remained Your case is nothing like seeing you haue onely the bare title without the thing and as it were the emptie casket without the treasure But for so much as you accuse â—s for casting awaie the grounds of Diuinitie I desire euerie Christian man to weigh with himselfe what ground it is wheron al your religion and Church standeth First the scripture must not be scripture in any other sense then as the Pope will expound it so that the scripture being the meaning of the scripture and the meaning of the scripture being the Popes exposition hereof it followeth that the scripture is nothing els but the Popes interpretation So likewise in Traditions Doctors Councels Churches if any thing dissent from the Popes vnderstanding and determination it is reiected abolished condemned and finally all faith all religion all Diuinitie of Papists is onelie the Popes sacred will and pleasure Now then this being their owne certaine resolution I would gladlie be enformed how by the same a man may be assured of any faith it being further also agreed and confessed among themselues that the Pope maie fall into heresie Then who seeth not that their ground being shaken their staie failing all that is builded and vpholden thereon is clean ouerthrowne If they saie the Pope falling into heresy forthwith ceaseth to be a Pope I demaund whoe they are that must iudge the Popes cause and giue sentence against him And if the Pope be obstinate and teaching heresie and therewith infecting the world will notwithstanding stoutly stand in defense of his doctrine and will keepe his chaire what shift haue you then or what can you doe against him seing he is your Pope your head your author and founder of all your faith Thus a man going with you along and comming to the end of all findeth no staie but must wander still as in an endles Labyrinth wherein he shall at last languish and perish euerlastingly That you wish we would be content to yealde to the verie scriptures themselues pag. 40. doubt you not Master Rainolds thereof but we are most redie to yealde vnto them if ye would be as willing the controuersy might haue thereby and by other good meanes an end But your conscience telleth you scripture will not serue you and therfore in a word you deny the wholl bodie of the scriptures Thinke not good reader that herein I haue spoken rashly without reason I know what I
of the Church For outwarde succession is no more certaine in that Church then in others and it hath bene diuerse times broken of and discontinued by vacations and schismes for manie yeares together If then the Church had bene builded vpon this tottering rocke of externall succession at Rome it had oftentimes bene dashed and ouerthrowen but thankes be to God the Church is builded vpon a surer rocke then is the personall succession of your Popes or els of anie estate of men in the worlde and therefore whatsoeuer becommeth of your Pope or of his chaire and succession the Church falleth not but abideth and remaineth for euer Your stories written in time of Antichristes tyrannie what cause is there whie we should anie whit regarde them the authors thereof being infected with the errors of the Pope and daring not write for the moste parte otherwise then might well stand with his humor And to all histories that since the defection haue commended the faith of that Church we oppose the worde of God which plainelie conuinceth it of manifold and damnable heresies besides we could alledge sundrie writers in all ages that openlie haue reprooued the same The former distinction concerning the Romane Church pag. 25. here Master Rainolds taketh in hand to disprooue and to shewe that my paradox as he calleth it is impossible First he saith I graunted the Church of Rome to haue bene pure godlie Christian for sixe hundred yeares after Christ which forsooth I neuer graunted as he meaneth that simply and absolutelie no manner of corruption in anie parte of doctrine had taken place therin but onelie according to the state of those times and comparison of that general apostasie which afterward ensued So your conceit M. R. that this alteration should whollie be wrought within the space often or twelue years is so vaine childish that nothing can be deuised more foolish and farther of from the purpose No M. Rainolds notwithstanding Antichrist was not openlie aduanced in the Romane Church before Bonifacius the third yet was there in it no small preparation for entertayning of him before that time through corruption of doctrine and manners in that Church though it was in manie things corrupted before yet had it also great sinceritie which by little and little decaied more and more till Antichrist came and was reuealed and after Antichrist was seated there yet was not therefore all puritie lost by and by but in continuance of time it fainted and languished hauing receiued deadlie poison and no remedie being prouided Wherefore this roye of yours was indeed a vanitie of vanities fitte for such a vaine sophister as you are But now because Doctor Saunders and M. Rainolds boldelie affirme that by testimonies of stories no heresie was brought into the Romane Church or anie chaunge of doctrine euer made in the same let me put them in minde briefelie Sigisbâ—rt Gemblacensis in Chronico Ann. 1088. that Sigisberius the moncke an Historiographer mentioned by them both expresselie chargeh Gregorie the seauenth and his successours for maintaining and practizing not onely an error but an heresie also in taking vpon them authoritie to excommunicate the Emperour and other ciuill Princes This heresie hath euer since continued in that See and is at this daie by the Pope and his Popelings auouched and therefore by confession of their owne Historiographers Pag. 55. some heresie hath taken place in the Church of Rome contrarie to Doctor Saunders and Master Rainolds proude assertion That the Romane Church of later time hath not chaunged the faith which the auncient Romane Church professed Master Rainolds promiseth now to prooue by such testimonies as I must needes alowe for vpright and sufficient My selfe is the first then Caluine Luther Martyr Illyricus none of which euer dreamed of such a matter as he taketh in hand to prooue by their confession That I haue said the first Romane Church helde the purity of faith nothing concerneth the later Church in what sense I haue so saide is before declared not thereby to iustifie that Church in euerie particular doctrine custome or ceremonie but onelie that the principall and substantiall articles of Christian religion were in it maintained against the heretikes of those times Then that Caluine Luâ—â—â— c. do graunt that the primitiue Romane Church maintained and beleeued the Popes supremacie the sacrifice of the Masse reall presence and Priesthoode is moste vntrue as further in discourse of this booke shall appeere And therefore the conclusion that of these premises should ensue is like the vntimelie fruite that ere it be ripe falleth downe to the ground And as for the common place that followeth concerning the continuance of Christs vniuersall Church pag. 57. to what purpose doth it serue or what argument maie it afforde you we beleeue and confesse to the comforte of our soules that Christs Church hath continued and neuer shall faile so long as the worlde endureth and we account it a profane heresie to teach that Christs Catholike vniuersal Church hath perished from the earth at anie time For this assertion as you truelie prooue shaketh the foundations of all faith and religion But as you haue effectuallie and inuinciblie by manifolde scriptures euinced that Christs Church can neuer be rooted out and no man in the world can open his mouth against you herein so if you had also proued by like euidence of scripture that the Catholike vniuersall Church of Christ is nothing els but the outwarde succession of the Romane see then had you prooued your matters soundlie and confuted our opinion truelie and proceeded orderlie But hauing spoken much concerning the perpetuitie of Christs Church which no Christian can denie or doubt of you bring vs no text not reason to shew that Christs Church either is the Popes succession or els dependeth vpon the same For as touching externall shew and succession of Churches the scriptures haue foretolde that Antichrist shall seduce great and small Apoc. 12.61 13.16 rich and poore free and bonde and that the Church shall flie into the wildernes and there remaine of al which no word could be true if the Catholike Church were tied to the Popes Chaire and the Popes Chaire were the rocke that can not be remooued And yet notwithstanding this generall dispersion and flight of the Church vnder Antichrist the Catholike Church shall for all that continue although not in that outwarde strength and glorie in which sometimes it hath appeered and florished Now this long discourse following is visible Pag. 59. c. and the Testimonies of Melancthon Oecolampadius Caluine and Illyricus at large rehearsed to that purpose all this argueth nothing els but pitifull and grosse ignorance in this man who not knowing what he auoucheth or what he refelleth yet laieth on such loade as though with euerie blow he felled his aduersarie to the ground The militant Church of Christ to be a visihle companie who hath from the beginning of the
So that by his comparison the doctrine of the gospel doth infinitelie in largenes excel al the scriptures of the new testament Such mad wicked sentences hath he throughout his wholl booke manie Ambrose Catharine saith It is the Popes proper priuiledge to Canonize scriptures Catharin in epist ad Galat. cap. 2. Ipse canoniz at scripturas reprobat or to reprooue scriptures to Canonize true Saints and to reiecte false meaning thereby that the holynes authoritie and estimation of scriptures procedeth frō the Pope Wherein yet he seemeth to haue foulie forgotten that canonicall scriptures are a greate deale more auncient then the Pope and therefore could not receiue theire Canonization from him But thus they vtter their minde that scripture is no otherwise the word of God then as it is approoued authorized and Canonized by the Pope which is in effect to bring the holy ghost vnder the censure approbation of a man and such a man as he I omit because I will not be tedious a number of such sayings moe wherein the holie scriptures of God are shamefully intolerably dishonoured by these men in their writings and disputations and yet to procure a litle enuy to Luther they accuse him with out all measure continuallie for calling the epistle of Saint Iames a strawne epistle not absolutelie in it selfe but onelie in respect of S. Peter and Paules epistles Thus much now haue I thought good for satisfiing of the godlie to answere If you will not be satisfied you may write againe twise as much more whoe can let you this matter requireth no longer talke CHAP. 2. Of the canonicall Scriptures and English Cleargie FRom Saint Iames Epistle Master Rainolds proceedeth to entreat of other bookes refused by the Church of England which yet he saith were not further disprooued in times past then that epistle of Saint Iames whereupon he would haue his reader beleeue that in alowing some bookes and reiecting others we are ledde by opinion fansie not by learning or diuinitie Wherein Master Rainolds your selfe haue shewed that opinion not learning ruled you when you writ this For Saint Iames epistle was neuer disprooued by the wholl Church of God but onelie by some of the Church but those bookes that are refused by vs were by the wholl Church distinguished from the canonical scriptures had no greater credit then they are of with vs as shall appeere The reason therefore of our refusing them is not as you imagine because they containe some proofe of your Romish Religion which we cannot otherwise auoid but by denying the bookes to be of Canonicall authoritie but because they doe bewray themselues of what stampe they are by most euident markes and therefore haue bin generally of the wholl Church heeretofore sette in the same degree that they are left by vs. These Reasons you sawe comming against you and because you durst not openlie encounter with them you steale by an other way let them passe But I must call you back a litle though it be to your griefe and trouble and require of you a plaine and direct answere how those bookes of the olde testament which are commonly called Apocryphall written first in Greeke or some other forraine language can be Canonicall For all bookes of holie scripture in the olde Testament were written and deliuered to the Church by the holie prophets of God being approoued by certain Testimonies to be indeed the Lords Prophets Therefore Abraham answered the rich man Lue. 16.29 requiring to send Lazarus to his fathers house They haue Moses and the Prophets whereby it is plaine that the wholl doctrine of the church then was contained in the bookes of Moses and the other Prophets 2. Pet. 1.19 And Peter saith we haue a more sure word of the Prophets meaning the scriptures of the olde testament And so the Apostle to the Hebrewes writeth that God spake to our fathers by the Prophets Heb. 1.1 By which testimonies of Scripture it is prooued that none could write bookes to be receiued of the Church for the Canonicall word of God but onelie they whome God had declared to be his Prophets But the writers of those Apocriphal books were no Prophets as may easily appeere For then they would not haue written their bookes in Greeke as is confessed most of these were nor in any other tongue then that which was proper to the Church of God in that time as Moses and the Prophets after him writers of the holie scriptures had done The Church was then amongst the Iewes and the Prophets were the messengers ministers of God in that Church and vnto it they deliuered dedicated their bookes Wherefore the Greeke tongue being not the tongue of Canaan nor of the Church then was not chosen by the Prophets to write and set forth therein the doctrine and Religion of the Lord so that the verie tongue wherein these bookes were written being not the tongue of the Prophets doth plainlie conuince them to be no prophetical therefore no canonical bookes of the olde Testament And here I omitte particular arguments which might be brought against euery one of those bookes seuerallie whereby it may be prooued inuincibly that though you entitle them with the name of Canonical scriptures yet they had not the spirite of God for their father Agaynst this reason you bring Saint Augustines authoritie De doct Christ l. 2. 8. whoe reckoneth them amongst the Canonicall bookes of scripture and so you say did the Catholike Church of that age But that this is a moste manifest vntruth appeereth by S. Ierome Praesa in Pro. Solom whoe plainlie writeth that the Church readeth those bookes but receiueth them not amongst the Canonicall scriptures So although Saint Augustine had thought them to haue bene of equall authoritie with the writings of the Prophets which are called properlie Canonicall yet was not this the common iudgement of the Church in those dayes as Saint Ierome doth let vs vnderstand who liued in the Church of that age In what sense S. Augustine calleth these bookes canonicall Saint Augustine calleth them indeede Canonicall by a general and improper acception of that word because they are red in the Church and containe profitable and Godlie instruction but yet not so as though there were no difference betweene them and the other which are vndoubtedlie Canonicall For in that very place Saint Augustine opposeth Canonical scriptures to such bookes as by perilous lies and phantasies might abuse the reader Periculosis mendacus phantismatibus and bring preiudice to sound vnderstanding And then giueth a rule to preferre those bookes that are receiued of al Catholike Churches before them that some Churches receiue of those that are not receiued of all to preferre those that the moste of greatest authority do receiue wherby you may see the vanitie of that you said before that the catholike church then iudged them to be canonicall And
acknowledge the bookes them-selues to be canonicall wherfore in that you saie we finde not this word in the scriptures vnles you thinke no word is found in them but such as is set downe in expresse tearmes you are abused For this word is found in them by necessarie collection so be not your vaine vnwritten Traditions and therfore are neither parte nor parcell of Gods diuine word But here is by the waie to be noted how this man seeking to disprooue my comparison of the sunne pag. 36. hath suddenlie ouerthrowen the principall staie of their religion which is the visiblenes of the Church That which is knowen by sense saith he is no article of faith for these two are directly opposite Then the Church is not knowne by sense and so visiblenes is not a marke of the Church For if it be then is it not an article of faith to beleeue the Church Thus sometime you can reason well but then it is against your selfe The similitude was brought not to match our beliefe of scripture with knowledge of the sunne that as we know the one by sense so the other but that we haue certaine and vndoubted beliefe of the canonicall scriptures by themselues as we know the sunne by it selfe Your beliefe in deede of the bookes of scripture is naturall and to vse your owne example such as when you beleeue Tusculans Questions to be written by Tullie For as you are ledde thus to beleeue of this booke because it hath bene so accounted in all times by constant tradition euer since so likewise you haue no better reason to discerne the canonicall scriptures from other bookes but onely this common receiued opinion of the Church which you call Tradition We haue this as well as you and we haue also an other better and surer then this which you haue not yea which you blasphemously deride the testimony of the spirit wherby the authoritie of the scriptures is sealed in our harts and we are throughly induced to receiue them as the most blessed Testament and trueth of God For example that there is a God who created heauen and earth both the Scriptures teache and the creatures them-selues confirme soe as no man ought to stand in doubt thereof Yet notwithstanding this persuasion cannot be faithfullie setled and rooted in mans hearte vnlesse it be approoued and as it were sealed vnto vs by the holie Ghost without the confirmation whereof great doubtfulnes and distrust will arise in our mindes continuallie through the greate corruptiō of our nature Euen so that these scriptures are in trueth the verie word of God not onelie them selues doe prooue by their subiecte matter argument but also the testimony iudgement of the Church which euer so esteemed them may inuinciblie argue the same And yet for all this that we faithfullie receiue them and submit our selues vnto them as to the word of God without wandring or suspicion Gods holie spirit must inwardlie perswade our heartes that this indeede is his word and therefore of vs by all meanes to be imbraced and beleeued Thus it appeereth how false it is that you haue noted in your margent that the Protestants refusing the Church beleeued not the scriptures We refuse not the Church but we knowe the Scriptures of God haue greater credit and assurance then the onelie approbation of the Church I haue allreadie answered whatsoeuer you bring out of Augustine the Councel of Carthage or any other pag. 38.39 both in what sense those bookes of the olde Testament are called canonicall by them alsoe how the other of the new Testament were refused or receiued in times past You shall neuer be able to prooue that you set down in your margent wherein the summe of your wholl speach is briefly comprised that S. Iames epistle and the epistle to the Hebrews haue beene as much doubted of as the bookes of the olde Apochryphall Testament which the Protestans reiect The moste you can alledge is that some Churches haue doubted of those epistles but I haue before shewed that the wholl Church reiected these of the olde Testament This was mine answere to M. Martines demaunde this is mine answere still which you cannot with all your endeuour take away Something you write for a colour and fashion but you come alwaies behinde with your reckning It offendeth you that I saide we haue seene we haue confuted we haue troden vnder foote all the arguments of the Papistes and whatsoeuer they could saie Vnlesse you haue some new haruest growing which yet hath not bene reaped I might truely saie as I saide for you haue vttered all your store such as it was and we haue seene and confuted it long agoe and that by the written word of god against which no tradition no religion though neuer so auncient so vniuersall so glorious may preiudice anie thing What reasons moued you to departe from vs and become a feedes-man of the Pope I leaue to the Lord and your owne conscience for any thing that I could euer see and I haue laboured to see the trueth and what could be saide against it by the best of your side I doe with al my heart reioyce in the cause which we maintaine against you and I thinke it to be the iustest and honorablest defense that euer was vndertaken What you haue learned since you went and how substantiallie you confute my bragge as you call it shall hereafter further appeare as it hath in part alreadie done CHAP. 3. Of Luther preferring his priuate iudgement before all auncient fathers HEre againe is repeated an other quarrel about Luther to no purpose in the world but onely to discredite him a litle with the simple sorte For our aduersaries are so wasted and spent for good reasons that whatsoeuer they light vpon though neuer so vnfit to frame good arguments of they handle it with great earnestnes like seelie fletchers that hauing no store of steles left in theire shoppe are saine to make their blots of euerie crooked sticke What maketh it againest the trueth of our reliligion if Luther preferred his owne iudgement before the fathers is our doctrine therefore false and yours true either in wholl or in parte Others desire to reape great profit of a litle labour but you are content to take a great deale of paine for no commoditie at al. I would not herin vouchsafe you an answere but that I haue respect to the readers weaknesse whoe by such slaunders may be abused Your title sheweth plainlie there is in this Chapter no truth to be looked for at your hands pag. 42. you say Luther preferred his priuate iudgement before all auncient fathers and Doctors wherein you would haue men thinke he was vnmeasurablie arrogant and wilfull But Luthers spirit was farre from this insolent and immoderate presumption as maie by his owne wordes appeare which you haue noted For he saith not that he more setteth by his owne priuate iudgement then he doth by al the
fathers and Doctors as you report Luth. cont Regem Angl. fol. 342. vnius maiestatis aeter nae verbum Euangelium Dei verbū est super omnia c. but that he setteth against the sayings of fathers of men of Angels of Diuells the word of the onely eternall maiesty the Gospell And againe immediatly he saith The word of God is aboue all the maiesty of God maketh with me that I care not though a thousand Augustines and Cyprians stood agaynst me Gods word is of more authoritie then all men or Angels Is this to set his priuate iudgement against all the fathers is this pride is this presumption must Gods word and maiestie and Gospell yeald to the iudgement of fathers be they neuer so manie This forsooth is your modestie that though the Lord hath spoken it yet if the fathers saie anie thing against it you will not prefere your iudgement grounded on the scriptures before the auncient fathers Accursed be such modestie that doth soe great iniurie and dishonour vnto god This ciuilitie towards men is treason and blasphemie towards the lord Remember what Elihu saith Iob. 32. v. 21.22 I will not now accept the person of man neither wil I give titles to man For I may not giue titles lest my maker should take me away suddenlie If this affection was in Luther as it was what fault can you finde therin You aske of me the reason why I so busilie defend Luther I aske of you the reason why you so continuallie accuse Luther If you seeke for some reasons to accuse him I cannot want better reasons to defend him your accusations being so vntrue That you say we aduance him into the place of Christe or at least among his Apostles belike you imagine that Luther is to vs as your Pope is to you whome you more esteeme and honour then Christe and all his Apostles For saie they what they will their saying hath litle force or authoritie if it like not your holie father but his saying must preuaile whatsoeuer they saie to the contrarie You thinke it good reason I should giue ouer all defense of Luther seing he bare extreame hatred as you say against the Sacramentaries here you bring in much to that purpose which yet you know is not the matter you tooke in hand But it is alwaies the propertie of such discreet and worthie writers whatsoeuer they finde though from the cause to hale it in by some meanes in one place or other I answere in a word Luther dissented bitterlie from Zuinglius and O Ecolampadius in the matter of the sacrament as it falleth out often times that sharpe contentions may arise amongst Godlie and learned men yet it is no cause why we should not answere in Luthers behalfe when he is wrongfullie charged by you Therefore you come to scanne my defense of Luther particularlie pag. 48. and finde your selfe occupied in deuising diuers senses of Luthers words and then disputing against them First if all the fathers teach one thing and bring scriptures for them Luther the contrarie bring scriptures for him whether in this case Luther may preferre his iudgement before all the fathers This is not the case M. R. that Luther ment you must therefore proceade further yet in your suppose Next then you put case If a thousand Augustines Churches teache some doctrine citing no text for it and Luther bring some text of scripture after his sense against the same the matter is not in citing textes but in deliuering the doctrine that is approoued by the text Then leaue your childish trifling and take Luther as he meant If Augustine or Cyprian or any other father maintaine any thing against Gods word Luther or any other minister of Christ may in such case preferre his iudgement warranted by the word of God before theirs If you denie this you are not worthie to be called a Christian and yet closelie you doe denie it in that you reprooue Luther and condemne him for saying the same And where you saie I can bring no instance that euer the auncient fathers did so haue you forgotten what fell out in the Councell of Nice Socrat. l. 1. c. 11. when the fathers agreeing to dissolue the marriage of ministers were withstood by Paphnutius One man maintaining the trueth of Gods word may lawfully dissent from others although neuer so many August cont petil l. 3. c. 6. and yealded in the ende Here one Paphnutius iudgment was preferred before al the other three hundred fathers And so often times the iudgement of many hath beene corrected by one S. Aug. saith whether of Christe or of his Church or of any other thing that appertayneth to our faith and life I will not say we not to be compared to him that sayd though we but as he added If an Angell from heauen shall preach any thing besides that ye haue receiued in the legall and Euangelicall scriptures lette him be accursed If we maie accurse them how many and whosoeuer they be that teach contrary to the Propheticall and Apostolicall scriptures then may we preferre our iudgement in such cases before them Saint Augustines words you see are very sharpe but he learned thus to speake of the Apostle him selfe August epi. 19. In an other place Saint Augustine saith For all these fathers yea aboue all these the Apostle Paul offereth himselfe I flee to him I appeale to him from all writers that thinke otherwise This was S. Augustine bolde to write euen to S. Ierome and feared not any suspicion either of arrogancie or heresie for the same such accoumpte then must be made of the trueth that we must stand with it against al the world and not for reuerence of mens persons giue it ouer or betraie it or be afraid to defend it If this be so as you will not I am sure for shame or feare denie openlie then haue you nothing to burthen Luther in this behalfe When you say Though the fathers in the Councells of Nice Ephesus Chalcedon had alleadged no direct and euident place against Arius Nestorius Eutyches yet the Christian people were bound to beleeue them grounding them selues onelie vpon the catholike and vniuersall faith of the Churches before them it is boldly and bluntlie spoken These godly and catholike fathers assembled in Councel against those heritikes confuted them by the authoritie of Gods word and as it were cut the throte of their heresies with the sworde of the spirit This was onelie the weapon then vsed and with this they preuayled The councels and fathers confuted all Heretikes by the scriptures as likwise haue all other godlie councels euer done against all heretikes and enemies of the trueth For in Religion there is no trueth but grounded vppon scriptures no errour or heresie but repugnant to scriptures no heretikes but refuted by scriptures They dealt not against the heretikes as you imagine omitting scriptures and grounding vpon the faith of Churches
Christ the truth You cannot pul in sunder these two offices but if you wil needs be priests that properly according to this order of Melchis then seeing that order of priesthood hath a kingdome inseparablie annexed to it it must necessarilie followe that you are also kinges and that properlie which were a verie proper thing indeede and greatlie to be accounted of Popish priests if they be according to Melchisedechs order must not be priests onelie but also kings If you deuide these offices in sunder it is blasphemy making a Priest according to the order of Melchisedech whoeis not also a king If you take both iointlie to your selues then will euerie hedge Priest be a gentleman a lord a King As this is most absurd monstrous so is that also that you should be priests according to Melchisedechs order For then further ought you to be eternall without beginning or ending of daies without father or mother as Melchisedech is described vnto vs in the scriptures and as Christ is in trueth and onely Christ So taking vpon you this priesthood of Melchisedech you commit horrible sacriledge and treason against the person of Christ our sauiour who will in time tread such vermine vnder his feete that creeping on the earth do presumptuously chalenge to themselues his speciall prerogatiues and royalties S. Augustine calling the ministers of the Gospell Priests speaketh improperlie Pag. 65. August de eiuit dei Lib. 20 cap. 10. as hath bene answered For although he saieth that all Christians are vnproperly called Preists and others in the Church are so called properly yet he meaneth not that there are anie such preists in the Church as Melchisedech or Aaron or Christ was but onelie that they are so termed by an vsuall and peculiar name which is not in custome of speach giuen generallie to all Christians This to haue bene S. Augustines meaning and the iudgement of the Church heretofore we may learne of Peter Lumbard How the fathers cal the ministers of the Gospell Priests Sent. lib. 4. Dist 12. â— to let the auncient writers passe For Peter first asketh this question whether that which the Preist doth may properly be called a sacrifice oblation His answere he maketh thus To this may be said briefly that which is offered and consecrated of the Priest is called a sacrifice and oblation because it is the remembrance and representation of the true sacrifice and holy oblation that was made vppon the altar of the crosse Yf then there remaine in the Church no sacrifice in proper and natural sense of the word as your owne doctour and Master of sentences confesseth there can not be remaining any Priests that maie so be called properlie For such as the kinde of sacrifice is such is also the kinde of priesthood if the sacrifice be not a sacrifice properly the priesthood cannot be a Priesthood properly but onely by a figuratiue and vnproper maner of speach That Augustine was a priest him-selfe Pag. 66. August Cofes Lib. 9. cap. 11.12.13 you labour to prooue out of his booke of Confessions in which place though he speak of an altar and sacrifice yet he meaneth not such altares and sacrifices as you haue erected and offered in all places This sacrifice that he speaketh of is the sacrament of Christes death the altar is the Lords table the remembrance of his mother in offering this sacrifice on the altar is giuing of thankes to God for her in celebrating the Lords supper Although I denie not but the superstition of praying for the dead was then crept into the Church so that if you will needes vrge that Monica desired to haue praiers made for her I will not greatly stand with you herein But that anie real sacrifice of Christ as you meane was offered for quick or dead in those daies that I denie and you can not prooue it by this or anâ— other testimonie of S. Augustine Where I saie that Christ hath committed his Church to be ruled by Pastors and Doctors for euer and not to Priestes pag. 67. you demaund whether this appointment had effect or no giue me warning to beware as though some danger were at hand what I answere But we shall easilie I trust driue awaie this craking Annibal from the gates of our Citie who commeth only to make a shew and hath no force to hurt Ephi 4.11 Ministers of the Gospell are ueuer called priests in the new Testament That Christ ordained Pastors and Doctors to rule his Church the scripture is plaine so that you may not forshame deny it now if these were priests trulie and properlie then should they haue bene so called and by this name commended vnto vs in the scriptures But wheras their office is declared diuerslie in great varietie of names yâ—t is this name neuer once giuen vnto them in no Gospell in no epistle in no booke of the new testament And maie we thinke that if the ministers of Christ in the new Testament were by Gods institution verie Priestes as these men beare vs in hand and had commission to offer so excellent a sacrifice as no Priest euer the like saue Christ himselfe may we thinke I saie or is it likelie that this name should neuer haue bene found in all the new Testament in this sense where are so manifold titles giuen vnto them as of Elders Ouerseers Rulers Shepheards Watchmen Ministers Stewards Seruants and such like Of all which names none pleaseth their humor but Priests they wil be called accounted as though Gods spirite which appointeth offices in the Church could not haue giuen fit names vnto them but would rather giue them anie name then that which is their proper name Anie man then that hath but halfe an eie maie soone see that the holie ghost in auoiding this name so carefullie hath giuen our Popish Priests a cleane wipe and both left them out of the dore and shut the dore against them though they striue neuer so much to creepe in yet are they to be driuen awaie by lawfull authoritie and kept forth as they that haue nothing at all to do in Gods howse But here M. Rainolds hath gotten a doughtie argument which I thinke because he knew not how to bring it in fitly in some other place hath halde it in here out of place He bids me shew where this Church for many hundred yeares was gogouerned thus which is as common an argument with them to vse his owne words as Dunstable hiewaie For this reason is euen their common pack-horse to beare the wholl burthen when all other faile where was your Church where were your ministers before Luther Whereunto that you may perceiue how farre we disagree from the Donatistes of whome you speake I answere that our Church was neuer so straited but that it might be found in all countreis christened and our ministers had the chiefest roomes till Antichrist by litle and litle had driuen them out and then afterwards
no more then the moone in the wane giueth light to passengers at midnight And doubtles vnles the Lord had in his displeasure towards you bereaued you of common iudgement and reason you could not yeald your vnderstanding captiue to such loose and light perswasion The question in controuersie is whether the Pope were acknowledged for head of the vniuersall Church within six hundred yeares after Christ Cent. 5. p. 781.782 This you say appeareth by the confession of the Centurye writers and so you translate out of them many authorities which being all put in one conclude nothing to this purpose in the end They shew how the Popes haue laboured to get superioritie to themselues especially in the example of Leo who as he was learned and eloquent and stoutlie mainteined the Catholike faith against Eutyches so is he trulie noted of ambition more then beseemed the minister of Christ But admitting the Popes testimonie for the Popes primacie what haue you found in the Centuries against Master Iewell that they warned Bishops of other prouinces to come to generall councels this is not the thing we require Let them write to whome and whither they list this officious writing prooueth not vniuersalitie and supremacie of power as any man maie easilie vnderstand That Leo could not appoint a Councell that he sued to the Emperour to call a Councel that the Councell was gathered by the Emperours not by the Popes authoritie I haue alreadie shewed What maketh then the writing of a fewe letters to prooue the Popes power in summoning councells that they were presidents in generall councels And can you or dare you auouch that this was so in all generall councells And though it were what matter maketh it for your purpose A generall councell must haue a president which presidencie if it were graunted to the Bishop of Rome in respecte of his place which was the first amongst Bishops will you of your wisdome hereof gather that he was Vniuersall Bishop and head of the Church A senslesse and franticke conclusion That he confirmed generall Councells This is like the rest a worthy reason forsooth All Bishops were bound to maintaine and approoue the godly decrees of councells that so heresies might be repressed and the puritie of religion preserued Is it then a great maruell if the Bishop of Rome that was accounted first and chiefe confirmed good councels and disanulled wicked whoe is he that hath the reason of a man that will hereof conclude in sadnes and sobriety the popes supremacy If M.R. be blinded it is no wonder All this and ten times as much can not prooue that the Pope is the head of Christs Church or that he was so esteemed in the primitiue age and therefore that you alleadge out of Luther that before Bonifacius the third in the daies of wicked Phocas the Emperour the Bishops of Rome had no greater authoritie then other Bishops is true For albeit they had gotten greater priuiledges of honour and other preferments partlie through the reuerent opinion which the Emperours Bishops had of them partlie by their owne seeking as appeareth in stories moste euidentlie yet soueraintie of power and iurisdiction ouer the wholl Church had they none vntill Phocas the tyrant bestowed it vpon Boniface the Pope a worthy founder of the Popes Antichristian supremacie How Leo behaued himselfe in magnifiing his owne dignitie aboue measure pag. 154. c. is to plaine by his writings so as although he thought nothing lesse then of that pontificall supremacie and authoritie which afterward in that seat of Antichrist was erected yet hath his pride bene iustlie and worthelie reprooued for claiming more honour then belonged vnto him But you must remember that all authoritie and honour is not that vniuersall supremacie of power which your Pope chalengeth and vsurpeth the which neither Leo desired nor yet Gregorie the great who succeeded him in that sea almost two hundred yeares after did exercise for anie thing that you haue alledged in proofe thereof The Centurie Collectours declare indeed how that mystery of iniquity wrought and encreased then in the Romane sea Centur. 6. p. 425. in that the Bishops thereof tooke vpon them more rule and authoritie ouer their brethren then they ought and namelie this Gregorie in whome the vertue godlines of Romane Bishops died But haue you found in the Centuries such plaine proofes ot the Popes supremacie as you affirme First you bring nothing but the speaches or practises of Gregorie Gregorie the great was no Pope such as the lâ—tter popes haue bene Regist lib. 11. â—p 54. who was a Bishop of Rome secondly you can not thereof gather that he was vniuersall Bishop or head of the Church For that he calleth the Apostolicall sea head of all Churches he meaneth nothing else but that it was the chiefe Churhc Lib. 7. ep 62. which is confessed That he saith the Church of Constantinople is subiect to the Apostolicall sea whoe denieth this but what subiection meane you M. R that the Romane Church had power ouer the Church of Constantinople to commaund ordaine disanull at her pleasure that is vtterlie false and disprooued by all stories that haue written testifiing that the Church of Constantinople accounted her selfe equall in all priuiledges too the Romane saue only that the Roman in order was the first That he intermedled in the doings of certaine Bishops of diuerse prouinces it is euident but not in all Churches of all prouinces ouer the world For the Church of Christendome was then deuided into partes the same were assigned to the gouernment of Patriarches The Romane prouince was greatest containing the Churches of the west wherein Gregorie had authoritie not by Gods worde but by appointment of man and yet his authoritie was no other but the same that the other Patriarchs practised in their prouinces namelie S. Chrysostome long before Gregorie ouer Thrace al Asia and Pontus as Theodoretus writeth Theod. lib. 5. cap. 28. What can you alledge more for Gregorie then I can for Chrysostome Gregory reprooued corrected Bishops of Cicilie Africke Spaine Chrysostome punished and deposed Bishops of Thrace of Pontus of Asia Hereof is concluded no lesse the supremacie of ChrysostoÌ„me then of Gregorie such notable demonstrations can you make Yea how much S. Gregorie alwaies abhorred that tyrannicall supremacie Pag. 159. c. which your Pope of long time hath vsurped ouer the Church S. Gregorie was not onelie himselfe no vniuersall pope but hath also in plaine words condemned both that office title vniuersallie is manifest in that he so often so bitterlie inueicth against the name of vniuersall Bishop which he would not haue done condemning it whollie as most wicked vnlawfull ambitious profane Antichristian if he had thought his owne episcopall gouernment and iurisdiction had extended ouer all Churches For as Iohn of Constaninople chalenged that name in the same sense meaning doth Gregorie reiect it but Iohn
to leaue the ordinarie translation of the Bible and to appeale to the Hebrew Greeke and such new diuerse translations as the Protestans haue made THis absurd Chapter M. R. pag. 406. c. beginneth with Castalion translating long sentences out of the preface of his Bible to King Edwarde the Sixt wherein how vntrulie it is obiected vnto him that he thinketh the Messias promised in the law not to be come as yet and that he would haue euery man left to his owne priuate iudgement I will not loose time to declare Let Castalion say and write what he list and let M. R. alledge at his pleasure store of testimonies out of such authors whoe can denie him libertie so to do or who can thinke him worthie answere therein when he hath so done As Saint Ierome being vrged with Tertullians opinion answered De Tertulliano nihilamplius dico quà m Ecclesia hominem non fuisse That he was not a man of the Church so will answere no more about Castalion but that he was a man not sound in some points of the Catholike faith and religion of Christ as by his dealings and writings hath appeered and therefore we make no greate account of him nor haue regard what assertions he held what counsell he gaue what can be rehearsed out of his workes Al this was vainely brought in and no lesse vaine is it that you talke of neglecting all antiquity suspending our religion vpon the onelie testament translated after the new guise where you saie is found more varietie then there are conlours in the rainebowe Doe we neglect antiquitie or you rather For which is more auncient Master Rainolds the Hebrewe and Greeke or the Latine and doe not you suspend your religion vpon the testament translated that haue noe scripture in your Church but onelie a translation of which I maie trulie saie that greater imperfections and moe corruptions are found therein then in all our English translations together can be espied we depend not vpon anie translation English or Latine or of other language no otherwise then the same agreeth with the originall text but your wholl Church indeed is hanged vpon the latine translation onelie which how bad it is hath partlie bene shewed alreadie and if need require shall much more be discouered That you aske which Hebrewe which Greeke I meane are you so ignorant not to knowe the Hebrewe Bible and greeke testament How manie Hebrews how manie greeks haue you vnles you meane certaine editions of the greeke testament wherein is found small varietie of anie moment pag. 411. To prooue that the departing from the latine translation is the verie introduction to Apostasie you propound one example of the heretikes in Germanie called Antinomi whoe holde M. Rai chargeth vs with the heresie of the Antinomies most vntruelie as Sleidan writeth that how wickedlie soeuer a man liueth yet if he beleeue the gospell he shall be iustified and this you saie is the verie conclusion of the Protestants common doctrine of iustification by faith What need you M. Rainolds in this place thus falselie and malitiouslie to slaunder vs Doe we teach any such doctrine as this in our Church doe we giue libertie of licentious life to the professors of the gospel doth iustification by faith inferre this wicked and detestable conclusion your conscience can tell you that you speake vntrulie If hope of repentance be left for such slaunderers and blaspehmers God giue you repentance otherwise I doubt not the Lord will auenge in time such reproches against his holie religion Let vs now consider your proceeding against these men First pag 411. fathers and councells are by them you saie not regarded which I graunt may well be that such wicked men will regard neither fathers nor Councells but this can not be vnderstood of vs who haue the fathers and the Councells in such reuerence and regard as meet is we should Then Saint Iames is also by them reiected as contrarie to Saint Paull They that reiecte Saint Iames be they Antinomi or whoesoeuer let them answere for it them selues this appertaineth not vnto vs but hereof hath bene saide enough before Thirdelie the epistle to the Hebrews is denyed by Beza and Caluine to be Saint Paule What then is it denyed therefore to be holy scripture And for Illyricus he is fo far from denying this Epistle to be Canonicall scripture that he thinketh the same to be written by Saint Paul himselfe and to be amonst excellent and necessarie part of the Scripture as you maie reade in his preface vpon that epistle Fourthlie Saint Peters place is brought in which helpeth litle 2. pet 1.20 whether we read the wordes by good workes according to the latine translation or leaue them out according to the greeke veritie That our calling election is confirmed by good workes maketh nothing against iustification by faith Will you saie we are elected and called by our workes that is grosse herefie worsse then Pelagianisme But Saint Peter biddeth vs to make our vocation and election sure by good workes and yet you know your selues and graunt that our vocation and election is wrought without anie meanes of good workes because we are elected before the world and before our vocation our workes were onelie wicked what maketh all this then for merite of good workes that they are testimonies and arguments of our election and effectuall vocation 1 Pet. 1 2◠Fiftlie an other pregnant place is brought out of the first of Saint Peter against which no exception can be made whereby you say is prooued first that we haue free wil which I graunt we haue after we are regenerate Secondlie that we purifie our selues from sinne as though we denied that after grace receaued we ought and in some measure might labour against the sinnes and corruptions of our soule Thirdlie that good workes are necessarily required of Christian men this indede confuteth those heretikes of whome you speake but maketh nothing against vs who thinke teach and continuallie preach that good workes are necessarie for al Christians otherwise they shall neuer see the kingdome of god so that we are as far from that damnable heresie of the Anabaptists and Antinomies as heauen is from earth Further you proceede to a place of Saint Paul Phil. 1. v. 28 where anie man of knowledge maie soone perceaue that your translator was deceaued fouly when he translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cause the word signifying not a cause but a plaine declaration or proofe And this is the manifest meaning of Saint Paul in that place that as the malice and rage of the wicked enemies of the Church is an argument of their condemnation so the patience of the godly in suffering such afflictions is an euident proofe that they are the children of god and therefore shal inherit eternal life Not Beza therfore but you and your translator haue altered the text and peruerted the sense of this scripture As for
setting forth the Bible in Hebrew and other languages I graunt you haue not disgraced the tongues but the scriptures written in those tongues you haue indeauoured as much as in you laie to disgrace although doe what you can you shall neuer be able to disgrace them truly And herein may you firlie be compared to the Iewes for as they keepe the Hebrew text moste carefullie but yet haue lost the true meaning thereof soe you haue indeed printed the old and new testament in Hebrew and Greeke with diligence and great cost but in the meane time you deny them to be the authenticall word of God This treatise you conclude ful discreetly that first we must be sure of our faith That is a verie good thing but how this should be wrought you tell vs not The latine translation is for this purpose no fitter then the Hebrew and Greeke fountaines but rather manie waies more vnfitte being onelie a translation and that an vnperfecte a corrupt an obscure translation though it were as excellent as euer any translation could be which God knoweth is far otherwise yet might it not attaine to the diuine perfection of the originall text that was written and published by the wisdome of Gods holie spirit and ministery of the Prophets Apostles and Euangelistes But saie you let vs holde the Church then our Greeke and Hebrew may do vs some good let vs departe from her our Greeke and Hebrew will turne to our perdition And I graunt M. R. that to talke of the Greeke and Hebrew vnles we hold the right faith in the true Church helpeth vs nothing but rather increaseth our condemnation But this is true no lesse I am sure of your latine then of the Greeke and Hebrew vnles there be some secrete vertue in that which is not in the other that to talke of it though a man hold not either faith or Church may be a profitable thing If this be not your meaning then haue your words no sense nor force of reason in them a meete conclusion for such a discourse CHAP. 15. Of the new testament set forth in the Colledge of Rhemes AS Master Rainolds hath heâ—herto defended with great indeuour pag. 443. c. and smal successe their latine vulgare translation so now is he come to maintaine in like manner their Rhemish late English translation of the new Testament whereof himselfe may seeme to haue bene a principall author or at least some speciall dealer in the worke First he rehearseth my words at large written in my preface concerning that translation and setteth vpon them six markes whereof he intendeth in order and seuerallie to speake But before he come to the particulare scannig of my wordes he breaketh out into immoderate and immodest railing wherein is nothing worthie answere and therefore suffering him to plaie his parte with Aiax or Hercules of whome he speaketh let vs procead to the seuerall points and so shall it appeere whether I haue vttered any thing but a certaine trueth or whether he had cause thus strangelie to behaue himselfe First I saide that since the world was made neuer was there set forth such a translation pag. 445. whereupon this man taketh occasion to talke of newe Testaments and translations hereof set forth 5000. yeares agoe And haue we not iust cause to admire his wisdome and granitie that could deuise and handle in this sorte such a simple fantasie of his owne braine since the world was created neuer was found such a translation as the Rhemish is therefore saith Master Rainolds there haue bene translations of the newe Testament euer from the creation of the world If anie man els can so vnderstand it I am content to let it be so taken To me it seemeth straunge that anie man of reason should thinke and write thus absurdlie thus peeuishlie thus falsely vnles it were to make him selfe ridiculous and odious to all the worlde But of this so foolish a conceit of his we neede not to speake moe words Now will Master Rainolds prooue indeed that worse translations of the newe Testament haue bene by vs set forth of late then theirs is and therefore that I haue saide vntruelie that theirs is worst of all His argument is thus framed pag. 450. c. a translation that transformeth God into a deuill must needs be worse then theirs But seuen of our translations whereof some haue bene set forth within these fiue yeares transforme God into a deuill Therefore these are worse then theirs His assumption he prooueth by a place translated in the first of S. Peter Chap. 2. ver 8. And here is made a great sturre with long sentences out of Illyricus Beza Castalion The indifferent reader wil be content with a short replie when a longer is not requisite Now then what is this hainous fault of our translations Because they haue translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vnto the which thing they were ordained A greeuous accusation but a faint proose the translation is right and no more transformeth God into a deuil then doe S. Peters words themselues which were written by direction of Gods moste holie spirit Here is no place to make discourse of this question whether God be author of sinne which as it is a most impious assertion so haue you moste falselie obiected it vnto vs sundrie times and neuer could prooue it once This place of S. Peter we cannot otherwise translate vnles we would willinglie translate amisse S. Peters owne text being sound our translation agreeing fullie therewith cannot lead men into any such damnable opinion as that is whereof you speake Yet saith M. R. verie confidentlie finde you anie so wilfull and horrible an Atheisme in ours and hardlie set a fire on them all Take heede what you speake Is this wilfull and horrible Atheisme are all your bookes worthie to be burnt if anie such can be found in them will you stand to this How then haue you translated the place your selues Let vs looke now on your translation thus it is wherein also they are put This cannot be true following your latine which hath quo for quod and therefore in your margent you mend it thus whereto also they are orderned And how differeth this from ours what Atheisme is in ours more then in this or why deserueth ours to be burnt rather then this Burne your owne if you list Master Rainolds and if you speake as you thinke you haue pronounced them in your iudgement worthie to be cast into a fire and so perhaps you could be content so that ours might burne withall for companie The three points following pag. 455. c. 2.3.4 are hudled vp and answered together concerning vnaccustomed and monstrous nouelties of wordes whereof their translation hath such examples as the like in no other can be found so as a man may iustlie call it a new fangled and ridiculous translation deuised rather to amaze the readers and make the worde of God a laughing stocke