Apostolical and Euāgelical traditiō the doctrine of fathers haue taught it The second point is the proceeding of the holy ghost from the father the sonne equallie For this M. Charke quoteth vvhen the holye ghost shall come vvhiche I vvill send you from my father the spirit of trueth vvhiche proceedeth from the father But this proueth not expresselie that the holie ghost proceedeth equallie from the father and the sonne together but rather seemeth to inclyne to the heresie of the Greekes that it proceedeth onelie from the father And therfore the heretiques which denyed this equallye buylded their heresie especiallie vpon this place as S. Cyrill noteth Agayne this place telleth not whether it proceedeth by generation or without generation from the father and yet we must beleeue it to be without generation The third poynt is the vnion of the vvoorde vnto the nature of man not vnto the persone For which M. Chark citeth And the vvorde vvas made fleshe But what is this to the point thys proueth that the woorde tooke our fleshe but whether he tooke the nature of man onelye or the persone onelye or bothe together it expresseth not And heere is to be noted by the waye M. Charks lacke of iudgemēt not onelie in the matter but euen in the verie termes of diuinitie For he reprehendinge my woords as vnsounde in that he vnderstoode thē not he chaungeth thē thus That the vvoorde dyd take the nature of man to be one persone and not the persone VVhiche are bothe fond and erroneous For the woorde tooke not the nature of man to be one persone seeing the woorde was one persone before he tooke that nature of man vnto it selfe Nether could the nature of mā be that one persone as M. Charke semeth to weene for so should nature persone be cōfounded in Christ. But I thinke M. Chark neuer studied yet these matters and therfore he myght haue bene lesse malepert in reprehendinge yf he wolde The fowerth doctrine is of baptizinge of infantes For which M Charke quoteth these woordes of Genesis The infant of eight years olde shalbe circumcised in mankynde This hathe nothyng expresselye as yow see for baptisme And yf we had nothing but this lawe for our warrant in baptizing of infantes how chaunceth it that wee baptize infantes before or after the eight daye also why baptize we infantes of woman kynde also whiche were not circumcysed in the lawe Beza was strycken quyte dumme in the disputation of poysie in fraunce withe this demaunde as the byshope Claudius de Saynctes reporteth whoe was present VVherfore I had rather folow S. Austen who contendeth and proueth that baptizinge of infantes is onelye a tradition of the Apostles and not left vs by anye written scripture li. 10. c. 23. super Gen. ad lit And the same teacheth Origen ho. 8. in leuit The fyueth doctrine whiche M. Charke auoweth to be in scripture is the chaunge of the Sabboth daye into Sundaye For which he citeth these woords owt of the reuelations I vvas in spirit in our Lordes daye But heere is no mention of Sundaye or Saturdaye muche lesse of celebratiō of ether of them leaste of all of the chaunge of the Sabbothe appointed by God into any other daye Is not this chaunge then of the Sabboth daye appointed by the law substantiallie proued from this place of scriprure trow yowe The sixt poynt is abowt the fower Gospels and epistle to the Romanes whiche he sayeth to be proued scripture owt of scriptute But yet he quoteth no place of scripture where they are proued to be scripture but onely sayeth they are proued ovvt of the vuoords by the inscription there expressing the names of the vvryters therof But what a mockerie is this is the bare names of the Apostles sufficient to proue that they were written in deed by the Apostles whoe can proue owt of scripture that these names were not counterfayted The fayned epistle to the Laodicenses hathe it not the name of S. Paul in it and begynneth it not with the verie same style as his other epistles doe and yet is it reiected as counterfaite and that onelye by tradition The fayned gospell of S. Bartholomew had it not his name in it and yet was it not reiected The fayned Gospell of S. Thomas had it not his name and yet Origen sayeth he reiected it onelie for that the tradition of the churche receyued it not The three counterfait Gospells among the hebrewes had they not as holy titles as the rest and yet they were reiected by tradition of the churche as Epiphanius sheweth VVhen Faustus the Manachie denyed the Gospell of S. Mathew sayeth not S. Austen Mathaei euangelium prolatū aduersus faustum Manachaeum per traditionem The Gospell of Mathew was alleaged against Faustus the Manachie by traditiō VVhat can be more euident than all this to proue our opinion of the necessitie of tradition and to confound the fond madnes of this poore minister that will haue the bare titles of bookes sufficient to proue their authoritie and so certainlie as the true scripture it selfe once knowen is to be beleeued The seuenth doctrine whiche he holdeth to be expresselie in scripture is that God the father begatt his sonne onelie by vnderstanding hym selfe Marye he citeth no place fort it but reprehending the darkenes of the woordes which notwithstanding are most playne and vsuall to those whiche haue studyed any thing i◠diuinitie he flyeth to an other matter sayeing vve beleeue by testimonie of the vvoorde that Iesus Christ is the onelie begotten sonne of the father And for this he quoteth a place or two of scripture whiche needed not For we holde this to be expresselie in scripture more than in fortye places But the question is of the manner howe this generation may be whiche though it appertaine not to the simple to trouble them selues with all yet the Church must defend it agaynst aduersaryes whoe will obiect as often they haue done hovve can God beyng a spirit begett a sonne and yet the sonne not to be after his father in tyme or nature but equall vvith hym in them bothe vvhat mean you saye they to holde that the holye ghost proceedeth from the father that the sonne proceedeth not but is begotten vvhye is it heresie to saye that the sonne proceedet◠from the father or that the holye ghost is begotten vvhat difference is there betvveene theese speeches hovv doeth the father begett and the lyke All these are poyntes of diuinitie to be discussed And though M. Charke seemeth ignorāt in them all not to vnderstand so much as the verie termes them selues moste playnlie sett downe yet Catholique diuines kuowe what the Churche hath determined heerin against heretiques and infideles And albeit these thynges be not expresselye sett downe in scripture yet are they no lesse to be beleeued thā the other mysteries of the Trlnitie VVherof I
sayeth that albeit the hoost seme to vs of a rounde forme inseÌ„sible yet who soeuer beleeueth it not to be the verie true bodie of Christe seing he hathe sayd it is excidit a gratia salute Suche a one is fallen from grace and saluation And S. Chrisostom sayeth we must not beleeue sense and reason in this matter Sed quoniam ille dixit hoc est corpus meum credamus etiamsi sensui absurdum esse videatur But because Christ hathe sayed this is my bodye we must beleâ—ue it although it seme absurd to our sense Hoc idem corpus cruentatum lancea vulneratum quod in caelum extulit This is the very same bodie vvhose bloode vvas shed and vvhiche vvas vvounded vvith the speare and vvhiche he caried vpp vvith hym to heauen All whiche notwithstandinge oure aduersaries haue founde out a new exposition of these woordes thys is my bodye affirming that it must be construed this is onelie the signe of my bodie For the whiche construction as they haue neither scripture nor auncient father for theyr warraÌ„t or example so agree they not amongest them selues of this exposition For Luther in his tyme numbreth vpp eight dyuerse and contrarie expositions of Sacramentaries vppon these woordes coÌ„ming from eight diuerse spirits of the deuyll as he affirmeth And a learned byshop of our time hathe gathered 84. gyuen by diuerse sacramentaries vppon the same So that once goe oute of the highe waye and there is no ende of erringe And because I haue here made mention of Doctor Luther a man by M. Charks opinion illuminated singularlie by the holye ghost and compared to Elias by the common phrase of all protestants I will repeate here what he had reuealed to hym by hys holy spirit touchinge this interpretation of M. Charke and his felowes First he writteth thus to the protestants that is to the true Christians as he calleth them of Argentina Hoc diffiteri nec possum nec volo si Corolostadius c. This can I not nor vvill deny but yf Corolostadius or anie man els could for this fyue yeres haue persuaded me that there had bene nothinge in the sacrament but bread and vvine he should haue bound me to hym by a great good turne For I haue takeÌ„ great care and anxietie in discussinge this matter and haue endeuoured vvith all my povver sinovves stretched ovvte to rydde my selfe of the same For I dyd vvell see that by this thing I might hurt the pope more than in anie other matter But I do see my selfe captiue no vvay being left to escape For the text of the gospel is too plaine and stronge and suche as can not easelie be ouerthrovvne by any man and muche lesse by vvoordes and gloses deuised by a phaÌ„tasticall heade For I my selfe God forgyue me for it am too prone to that parâ—e so farre foorthe as I can perceyue the nature of my ovvne Adam Agayne the same prophet in an other place after many most detestable woords vttered against M. Chark and his parteners sayeth thus his spiritibus credat doceri veritatem si quem perire delectat c. Lett hym beleue that these spirites doe teache the trueth vvho deliteth to damne him selfe vvhereas in dede they began not theyr doctrine but by manifest lyes and novv doe defend the same onelye by lyes diuulging the same by corrupting other mens bookes not vouchsafing to heare the anguishes of our consciences vuhich crie saye the vvoordes of Christ are cleare and manifest eate this is my bodye And againe in a certayne treatise intituled against the phanaticall Spirits of sacrameÌ„taries He sayeth talking of this interpretation of the woords This is my bodye Age ergo quando adeo sunt impudentes c. Goe to then seing they are so impudent therfore I vvill geue them a Lutheran exhortation accursed be their charitie and concorde for euer and euer And after coÌ„ming to the expositioÌ„ of the sayde woordes he sayeth thus Doctor Carolostad vvresteth miserablie this pronoune this Svvinglius maketh leane this verbe is Oecolampadius tormenteth this vvorde bodye other doe boucher the vvhole text and some doe crucifie but the halfe thereof so manifestlie doeth the deuyll holde vs by the noses And agayne in the same worke he hathe these wordes To expound the vvordes of Christ as the sacramentaries doe this is the signe of my bodie is as absurd an exposition as if a man shoulde interprete the scripture thus In the beginning God made heaueÌ„ earthe that is the Cuckovve dyd eate vp the Titling or hedge Sparrovv together vvith her bones Again in S. Iohn And the vvoorde vvas made fleshe that is a croked staffe vvas made a kyte This was the opinion of holy Luther towching our aduersaries interpretatioÌ„ or rather euasion and shift whiche I haue alleaged somewhat more at large against M. Chark for that he esteemeth and defendeth the man as a rare instrument of the holy ghoste VVhich yf it be true then woe to M Charke and his comparteners whose spirit is so contrarye to this mans holy illumination By this now it appeareth that the controuersie is not betwene vs whiche part prouoketh to scripture which doeth not but as it hathe allwayes bene betwixt heretiques and Catholiques which part alleageth true meaning of Scripture whiche thing accordinge to the councell of wise Sisinius to Theodosius the Emperour we desire to be tried by the Iudgement of auncient fathers indifferent in this matter for that they lyued before our coÌ„trouersies came in question But our aduersaries will allow no exposition but theyr owne whereby it is easie to defeate what soeuer is brought against them ether scripture or doctour For examples sake to proue that we may lawfullie make vowes are bouÌ„d also to perform the same being made we alleage the plaine woordes of the prophet vouete reddite domino vowe ye and reÌ„der your vowes to god how will the aduersarie auoyde this think you M. Fulke answereth this text belongeth onelye to the olde testament But what may not be wiped awaye from vs that lyue vnder the new testament by suche interpretations Again to proue that there is some state of lyfe of more perfectioÌ„ in Christianitie than other we alleage the cleare saying of Christe Si vis perfectus esse vade vende quae habes da pauperibus habebis thesaurum in caelo veni sequere me Yf thow wilt be perfect goe sell all thow hast and gyue to the poore and thow shalt haue a treasure in heauen and come folowe me VVhat answer haue they trow you to this M. Fulke answereth this vvas spoken onelie as a singular triall to that yong man alone and not to others beside hym VVhat a deuise is this May not he as well say also that the other woordes immediatelie going before were onlie spokeÌ„ to this yong man to witt Si vis ad vitam ingredi
Samosatenus Arrius Macedonius Nestorius Eutiches were tried and condeÌ„ned by the councells of Antioche Nice Constantinople and Chalcedon and other heretiques by other councelles since VVe are content to referre our selues to all the Christian councells that euer haue bene sence Christ dyed And all men knowe that the last moste learned godlie and generall councell of Trent was gathered for that purpose offered all safe-conduct to our aduersaries to come thither to triall but they refused it Besides this the auncient fathers haue vsed diuerse times diuerse other means of triall As first by referring the matter to the triall of olde doctors which lyued before the coÌ„trouersies begaÌ„ne This meane vsed S. Austen against Iulian the pelagian and produceth the consent of fathers bothe of the east and of the west Churche vntill his tyme and there asketh hym whoe he is that dareth to oppose hym selfe to the credit of these men to call them blynde to saye they were deceyued where as they were the verie lights of the citie of God The like waye dyd Theodosius the Emperour take by the counsaile of Sisinius and suggestion of Nectarius to bring the ArriaÌ„s heresie to some ende as Socrates writeth And Epiphanius I sayethe this is enough to say against all heresies Ecclesia Catholica haec non doeuit Sancti paâ—res haec minimè receperunt The Catholique Churche hathe not taught this the holie fathers haue not admitted this Now how our aduersaries doe flie this means of triall they are not ashamed to confesse it openlie An other waie is to consider whiche is the Catholique or vniuersall Church or great multitude of Christians out of whiche the one part first departed This way vsed S. Austen against diuerse heretiques as namelie against the Manacheis wheÌ„ he sayeth Multa sunt quae in Catholicae ecclesiae gremio me iustissimè teneant tenet consensio populorum atque gentium tenet ipsum Catholicae nâ—men There are manie things which vpon good cause doe holde me in the lappe of the Catholique Churche for the verie coÌ„sent of people and nations doeth holde me Also the verie name of Catholique church holdeth me And Vincentius Lirinensis liuing about the same time writeth to the same effect against heresies In ipsa Catholica ecclesia magnoperè curandum est vt id teneamus quod vbique quod semper quod ab omnibus creditum c. Sed hoc ita demuÌ„ fiâ— sv sequamur vniuersitateÌ„ antiquitateÌ„ consensionem Sequemur autem vniuersitatem hoc modo si hanc vnaÌ„ fidem veram esse fateamur quam tota per orbem terrarum confiâ—etur ecâ—lesia Antiquitatem vero ita si ab hiis nullatenus sensibus recedamus quos sanctos maiores ac patres nostros celebrasse manifestum est Consensionem quoque itidem si in ipsa veâ—ustate omnium vel certè penè omnium sacerdotum magistrorum definitiones sententiasque sectemur VVe must greatlie take heede in the Catholique Churche to holdeâ— that whiche hathe bene beleued in euerie place allwayes of all ChristiaÌ„s c. And this we shall doe yf in oure beleefe we folow vniuersalitie antiquitie and coÌ„sent VVe shall folow vniuersalitie yf we confesse that onelie faith to be true whiche the Churche spred ouer all the worlde doeth coÌ„fesse we shall folowe antiquitie yf we depart not from that meaning and sense of scripture which is euident that our forefathers and auncestours haue held we shall folow consent yf we embrace the definitions and opinions eyther of all or of the moste parte of preestes and teachers in antiquitie The like way doeth S. Ierome take against the Luciferians and other fathers against other heretiques And howe quicquelie our aduersaries spirit were tried by this way of Antiquitie vniuersalitie and consent all men that haue vnderstanding may Iudge An other way there is also and muche vsed by the fathers against heretiques and that is to proue theyr religioÌ„ by the successioÌ„ of bishops in the See of Rome wherein the successour alwayes teaching the doctrine of his predecessour it must nedes be a strong argument to proue the descent and continuance of one and the same faithe from the Apostles time This argumeÌ„t vseth S. Austen in the place before alleaged Tenet ab ipsa sede Petri Apostoli cui pascendas oues post resurrectionem dominus commendauit vsque ad praesentem episcopaâ—um successio sacerdotum The succession of preests in the Churche of Rome eueÌ„ from the chair of Peter vnto whome our lorde after his resurrection commended his sheepe to be fedde vnto this byshoprik that now is doeth holde me in the Catholique Churche The same waye of triall he vseth and muche more at large in hys hundred three skore and fyueth epistle where he reckoneth vpp all the byshopps of Rome from Peter vnto Anastasius whiche was byshop in his tyme and thinketh this a good proofe against the donatists that none of those held or fauoured theyr opinion The lyke waye of triall vsed Optatus Mileuitanus against the same donatists before S. Austen reckoning vp all the byshopps of Rome vntill SIRICIVS that satte in his time The same waye of triall vsed holy Irenaeus before eyther of bothe these men against the heretiques of his time reckoninge vpp all the byshops of Rome vntill Eleutherius that held the See in his time addinge that by this succession he dyd confovvnd the pride of all heretiques that durst to teache othervvise than this See had held And after concluding thus est plenissima haec ostensio vnam eandem viuificatricem fidem esse quae in ecclesia ab Apostolis vsque nunc sit conseruata tradita in veritate This ys a moste full proofe that one the selfe same quickninge faithe hathe bene deliuered in truthe and commended from the Apostles vnto this day But now this way of triall I know oure aduersaries will not admitt An other waye of triall is to examine what parte doeth holde anye olde coÌ„demned heresie For as an heretique hauing once lost the habit of fayth gyuen hym in baptisme is easily moued to cope with anye heresie new or olde that commeth in his waye and serueth his turne so moste certaine it is that the true Catholique churche can neuer admitt or defend any heresie For otherwyse she coulde not be the pillar of trueth And we beleeue with holie Athanasius in his creed that he vvhich holdeth not the faythe vvholye in all points shall perish eternallie howe soeuer our aduersaries doe salue the matter in theyr prophets Berengarius Husse VVikliffe and Luther whome they say to haue bene holie men yet to haue erred in diuers points of faithe and to haue held theyr erreurs obstinatelie to the daye of theyr deathe But wee beleue the contrarye as I haue sayed And therefore who soeuer could shew but one coÌ„fessed heresie to be defended by our churche there neded no more disputation
a counceller to an emperour Raskall Staphylus It is vnsitting and argueth excesse of fond and foolishe malice For yf an enemie of mean conditioÌ„ should call an Englishe counceller raskall should he not discouer therby his owne raskalitie and lacke of witt But of all other Martin Luther as the first father of all these new imppes had primitias spiritus the first fruites of this spirit in full measure euen as the Apostles had of the holie spirit to the end he might imparte due portions to his children and successors I could alleage infinite examples in this kynde but that I desire to be shorte and shall haue occasion to touche some part of the same in other places after Onelie as it were for a taste I will cite some fewe owt of his booâ—e writen against oure most noble and famouse king Henrie the eight the moste learned and wittiest prince that euer England had But yet heare what the fuâ—ious spirit of this our new prophet vttered against hym then consider whether he could be of God or no. The booke is extant to be solde in England and I will note the leafe to the ende I may not be imagined to feygne or aggrauate any thing First then in his preface of that to Sebastian Scâ—ike Earle of passune he defaceth his Maiestye intolerablie sayeing that he is an enuious madde foole babling vvith much spettle in his mouthe Then at length comming to the booke it selfe he sayeth that the king is more furious than madnesse it selfe more doltish than folie it selfe endewed with a blasphemouse and rayling mouthe with an impudent and whorishe face full of dastardie without anie one vaine of princelie blood in his bodie a lyeing Sophist compounded onelie of ygnorance and poysoned malice a damnable rotten worme whoe when he could not auoyde the venemouse poyson and Sneuell of his enuie by his lower partes sought occasion to vomyt it vp by his fylthie mouthe it were a shame for anie beastlie whoore to lye as he doeth a basilisk and progenie of an adder to whome I doe denounce sayeth he the sentence of daÌ„nation this madde buggish Thomist miserable book-maker a God latelie borne in England I saye plainlie this HARRYE lyeth manifestelye sheweth hym selfe a moste light scurrill Of this crime doe I luther accuse this poysoned Thomist I talke with a lyeing scurrill couered with the tytles of a king a Thomisticall brayne a clownish witt a doltishe head a bugge and hipocrite of the Thomists moste wicked folish and impudent HARRYE this gloriouse king lyeth stoutelie lyke a king heere now must I deale not with ignorance blockishenesse onelie but with obstinate and impudent wickednesse of this HARRYE for he doeth not onelie lye like a moste vaine scurre but passeth a most wicked KNAVE in detorting of scripture see whether there be any sparke in hym of an honest man surely he is a chosen vessell of the deuyll I would to God pigges could speak to iudge betwene this HARRYE and me But I will take asses that can speake Iudge you yee Sophists of the vniuersities of Paris Louan and Coolen what this HARRIESâ— logike is woorthe I am ashamed HARRYE of thy impudeÌ„t forhead which art no more a king now but a Sacrilegiouse thyefe against Christs owne woordes I will faygne heere certaine kindes of fooles and madde men to the ende I may sett out my king in his coulours and shew that my bedleme king doeth passe all bedlemnesse it selfe VVhat nede had I of suche pigges to dispute withall thow lyest in thy throte foolish and sacrilegiouse kinge this block my Lord Maister HARRYE hathe taughte together with his asses and pygges now he is madde and crieth foemeth at the mouthe neyther could I with all my strengthe make this miserable kinge so filthie and abominable a spectacle to the worlde as he by furie maketh hym selfe what harlot euer durst bragge of her shame as this moste impudent mouthe of his doeth this foole must haue a dictionarye to learne what a sacrifice is Oh vnhappie that I am to be enforced to leese tyme with suche monsters of folie and can not gett a learned man to contend with me I leaue infinite despitefull slaunderouse and scurrile woordes whiche this impudent apostata vseth against his Maiestie and some are so dishonest as I am ashamed to englishe them as vvhere he sayeth Ius mihi erit Maiestatem Angelicam stercore conspergere And againe Sit ergo mea haec generalis responsio ad omnes sentinas insulsissimae huius laruae Againe Haec sunt robora nostra aduersus quae obmutescere coguntur Henrici Thomistae Papistae quicquid est fecis sentinae latrinae impiorum sacrilegorum eiusmodi Sordes istae labes hominum Thomistae Henrici sacrilegus Henricorum asinorum cultus furor insulsissimorum asinorum Thomisticorum porcorum os vestrae dominationis impurum sacrilegum And a hundred moe sentences like VVhereof yf euer good or honest man and muche lesse a prophet vsed the like I am content to be of the protestantes religion but yf neuer ether ruffian or rakehell vsed suche speeche to a prince before then may we be sure that this man was no elect vessell of God whiche hathe no part of his spirit in hym I might heere repeate the like spirit of his in writing against the Caluinists and the Caluinists against hym but that I haue occasion to speake somewhat of it afterward But yet one place I will cite in stead of all the rest and that is of the churche of Tigurine against Luther whose woordes are these Nos condemnatam execrabilem vocat sectam c. Luther calleth vs a damnable and exeâ—rable sect But let hym looke that he doe not declare hym selfe an archeheretique seeing he vvill not nor can not haue anie societie vvith those that confesse Christ. But hovv maruailouslie doeth Luther heere bevvraye hym selfe vvith his deuils vvhat filthie vvoordes doeth he vse and suche as are replenished vvith all the deuills in hell for he sayeth that the deuill dvvelleth bothe novv euer in the ZuynglyaÌ„s and that they haue a blasphemouse breast insathanized supersathanised and persathanized and that they haue besides a moste vayne mouthe ouer vvhich Sathan beareth rule being infused persused and transfused to the same dyd euer man heare suche speeche passe from a furiouse deuill hym selfe Hitherto are the woordes of the Tigurine Caluinistes whiche may easilie refute M. Charks shamelesse lyes in defence of Luther as after shall be shewed And heere would I haue the reader to consider withe what conscience Charke dothe call Luther a holy and deuyne man a litle after and whittaker in his booke against M. Campian callethe hym a man of holy memorye seinge the Tigurine Caluinistes whoe saye their maisters doe call hym an archeheretique and a furious deuyll is not this open disimulation and
therefore M. Hanmer vvith fryer Bale vvhome he cyteth in the margent may be ashamed of so false a slaunder bothe tovvardes the man and also the religion THE DEFENCE Litle defence needeth heere for that the replyer hathe nothing in effect to say beside a rayling sentence or two against the Iesuits saieing that they eate the sinnes of the people Whereas these meÌ„ nether taking any charge of soules vpon theÌ„ nor receauing any tithes or other coÌ„modities for the same bothe which things M. Chark doth the reader may easilie Iudge whether her or they stand more in daunger of that sentence His error of taking Paulus quartus for Paulus tertius he excuseth by sayeing that kemnitius writeth so But this rather accuseth thaÌ„ excuseth the fact adioyning also wilfull malice to the error whiche might haue seemed before of ignorance onelie For he had read keÌ„nitius reproued for the same by Andradiê° as he coÌ„fesseth which was sufficieÌ„t beyng in so manifest a matter as all christendome can beare witnesse of the same And he easilye discouereth his conscience of kemnitius his false and absurde writing of the Iesuits in that he passeth ouer as vnanswerable the lye obiected to M. Hanmer taken owt of keÌ„nitius also about the sayd Paulus quartus whome he calleth Theatinus But M. Hanmer for sauing his honestye answereth it mary with such successe as men that take in hand to amende olde tubbes by knockinge wherein often in steade of stoppinge one hole they make manye For first he sayeth that in denyeinge Paulus quarâ—us to be a Iesuit I confesse hym to be an hypocrit Beholde a new crack For my answere in the Censure sheweth the contrarie Secondlie he sayeth that I vvill haue onelie Andradius payua a Iesuit and a partiall vvriter to be of more credit in this matter than many other learned men Beholde an other breache that a great one For payua was no Iesuit nor coulde write partiallie in this matter being a matter onelie of fact and that publike to all the worlde For it is as euident and well knowne that Paulus quartus was neuer Iesuit as it is that the king of Fraunce was neuer franciscan frier And although diuerse Lutherans of germanie foloweing kemnitius his error and theyr owne blynde hatred against Popes haue writen the contrarie yet the matter being so apparent it litle importeth seing there may be alleaged tenne sor one to the coÌ„trarie yf the thing were doubtfull or woorthie dicussing THE CENSVRE But because M. Charke obiecteth against the Iesuits their fyrst father Loyolas vvhome contemptuouslie he calleth a souldier And M. Hanmer a cryppled souldier vvhiche lyued in the same tyme vvith fryer Luther progenitor of the protestants Let vs coÌ„sider in tvvo or thre vvoordes the differeÌ„ce betvvene these tvvo men vvhereby it may appeare vvhich of them had the better spirit and vvhether of them may more iustlie gyue credit and commendation to their folovvers The lyues of them bothe are extaÌ„t vvriten by men of their ovvne times vvhiche knevv them and lyued vvith them and therfore I shall easilie discharge my credit for that vvhich I shall out of these vvriters reporte of them IGNATIVS DE LOYOLA vvas a gentlemaÌ„ of a noble house in spayne vvhich yet remayneth vvho being cheefe captaine of PoÌ„peiopolis dâ—fending it against â—he frenshmen in the yere 1536 vvas hurt taken â—risâ—ner by the same But aftervvard being perfectly â—ealed and curteously restored to libertie agayne and â—ovv in great possibilitie of honour and preferment in â—is countrie resolued hym selfe to serue God onelie for the tyme to come and to take paynes for the gayning of heauen VVhereupon leauing all his frendes distributing all that he had to the poore stole avvay from the Court and be tooke hymsâ—lfe to a maruailous straite lyfe and after he had vvith continuall labour of many yeres gotten learnyng gayned many soules from synne vnto vertue and from the deuill vnto allmightie God by his example of austere life godlie persuasions there adioyned them selues vnto hym nyne others of diuerse nations in the vniuersitie of Paris to the like trauelsome lyfe for gayning of soules VVhiche kinde of lyfe vvas aftervvard after diuerse examinations and probations of their spirit purpose alovved and confirmed by pope Paulus terâ—ius and soe consequentlie diuerse vvhorthie men leauing the vvorlde and taking vpon them that order of lyfe vvas made a distinct order of religious men in the vvhiche this Ignatius bothe liued and dyed vvith singuler example of all humilitie vertue holynesse but especiallie in zeale of gayning of soules and recalling men from synne his posteritie after hym hath by imitation of the same vertues brought furth infinit fruite into the vvorld MARTIN LVTHER vvalking in his youth in a certain medovve vvas stroken vvith a thunder boolt therupon sodaynlie for verie feare made hym selfe an Austen fryer vvhere after in the Abbay of Erford seruing in the churche vpon the third sonday in lent vvhen the gospell vvas read of the deafe and dumme deuyll throvven ovvt by Christ he sodenly felâ— doune on the pauement and the deuill cryed horriblie out of his mouthe sayeing I am not I am not dumme I will speake yet vnto the world After this vpon a certaine emulation and contention betvvene hym the fryers of S. Dominiks order he left his religion cast avvay his habit broke his vovves maried a Nonne and by litle and litle began to preache straunge nevv doctrines especiallie tending to all libertie and carnalitie as for example sayeing There is no sinne but incredulitie nether can a man daÌ„ne hym selfe doe what mischeefe he can except he will refuse to beleeue In his booke de capt babil ca. de bapt The ten coÌ„maundements appertaine nothing to vs. Serm. de Moys It is a false opinion and to be abolished that there are fower gospells For the gospell of Iohn is the onelie fayre true principall gospell In prefat ad nouuÌ„ testaÌ„ And this he sayd because the other three gospells spake too muche of good vvoorkes If any woman can not or will not proue by order of lawe the insufficiencie of her husband let her request at his haÌ„ds a diuorse or else by his consent let her lye priuilye with his brother or with some other man lib. de matrim in epithal super 1. cor 7. If the wyfe will not come let the mayde come Serm. de matrim Matrimonie is much more excelleÌ„t than virginitie lib. de vot euang Christe and S. Paul dyd not counsaile but dissuade virginitie vnto Christians lib de vot Monast. It is as necessarie for euery man to haue a wyfe as it is to eate drynke or sleepe lib. de vot coniug in assert art 16. All Christians are as holy and as iust as the mother of God and as the Apostles were Serm. de Tri. de B. Maria com ep 1. pet THE DEFENCE M. Charke as wantinge matter of iust replie iâ—
wolde they haue sayd yf they had heard the base scurrill impiouse woordes of M. Luther de natura statuum in sese as his owne explication ys that is of the verie nature of these tvvo states in them selues with out respect of abuse or good vse to affirme I saye matrimonium esse velut aurum the state of matrimonie to be as golde and the other state of virginitie and continencie to be vti Stercus ad impietatem promouens Like stinkinge dung promoting to impietie Can any thing be spoken more abiect or more coÌ„tradictorie to the scriptures fathers than this can hell be more opposit to heaueÌ„ thaÌ„ the carnalitie of this apostata to the spirit of all saincts Againe in your second doctrine where you affirme that Christ S. Paul dyd not counsayle but dissuade virginitie to Christians can any thing be more contrary to Christ and S. Paules sayeinges or the auncient fathers interpretation of their woordes I haue no precept from Christ but I geue counsaile sayeth S. Paul he that marieth his virgin doeth vvell but he that marieth her not doeth better Is this to dissuade or to counsail M. Chark There be Eunuches vvhiche haue gelded them selues for the kyngdome of heauen he that can take yt Lett hym take yt sayeth Christ doeth this dissuade or rather prouoke to virginitie coÌ„tinencie Quasi hortantis vox domini est sayeth S. Ierom milites suos ad pudicitiae praemium concitantis qui potest capere capiat qui potest pugnare pugnet superet ac triumphet It is the voyce of our lorde as exhortinge and styrring vpp his soldiours to the rewarde of chastitie he that can take it lett hym take yt he that can fight let hym fight conquer and triumphe VVith S. Ierome do agree all the holy fathers in this exposition And william Charck can not bringe me one in this case to the contrarye that is to speake for preferment of hym and his wyfe before virgins The thyrd doctrine touching the necessitie of a vvoman to euerie man to be as greaâ— as the necessitie of eating drinking or sleeping whiche also importeth that he may not well misse her fower and twenty houres to gether I maruaile you were not a shamed to maintaine especialie yf you add that other sentence of Luther to it verum est profectò eum lenonem esse oportere qui matrimonium fugiat postque marem faeminam coÌ„mixtionis multiplicationis causa deus condidit It is true verilie that he must nedes be a bawde that flyeth matrimony seing God hath created man and woman for copulation and multiplications sake A wyse reason of a lecherouse apostata for by this euery man must eyther couple and multiplie or else be a bawde How say you then of your present superintendeÌ„tes of Canterburie Salesburie will you saye they are bawdes Nay how saye you to all those true holye byshops named before of the primatiue churche as Athanasius Cyprian Ambrose Chrisostom Basil and Austen whoe bothe lyued without womeÌ„ them selues and wrote seuerall bookes in the prayse and commendation of that lyfe were they all bawdes without exception For your last doctrine wherby you holde your selues and all Christians to be as holie and iust as the mother of God and the Apostâ—es vvere I maruaile not For yf you had not this badge of intolerable pride you should not be knowne to be as you are And albeit you wold seeme to mollifie the matter by sayeing all are aequall in respect of Christ notvvithstanding there may be inequalitie in their guysts Yet Luthers woordes are plaine omnes Christiani aeque sancti sunt ac mater dei all Christians are as holie as the mother of God And to exclude your glose of inequalitie of guyfts he addeth pares sumus Petro Paulo deiparae virgini bonaque omnia habemus taÌ„ largiter quam illi vve are equall to Peter and Paul to the mother of God and we haue all goodnesse as plentifully as they had Yf all M. Charke then was there no inequalitie in measure as vnder hand for a mollifycation you would seeme to graunt but yet in deede you may not in this our case For we talke of the measure of those thinges onelie whiche make men more iust and holie that is of grace and merit The whiche yf you graunt to be more in measure in the saincts than in your selues then graunt you them to be more holie and so flatt against your owne position here defended Yf you denie yt make them no more holy theÌ„ your selues or any other Christians as in deed you doe then besides the apparent absurditie of the thinge haue you against you S. Ciprian de disciplina virg S. Ierom. li. 2. cont Iouin S. Augustin de S. virg cap. 26. And Theodoret in c. 15. ep 1. ad cor whiche proue of purpose bothe by scriptures examples and theological reasons that the merites of men and revvardes are vnequal Also S. Ambrose in ca. 6. Luc. S. Chrisostom hom 22. in ep ad hebr S. Augustin l. 22. de ciuit ca 30. And S. Gregorie hom 15. in Ezech whiche proue expresselie the in equalitie of grace geuen to men in this lyfe and different glorie correspondent to the same grace in the next Also you haue against you all the primatiue churche whiche condemned your opinion for a flatt heresie in Iouinian as S. Augustin testifieth in heresi 82. and S. Ierom. l. 2. coÌ„tra Iouin which church also condeÌ„ned the same heresie in a Councell of Aphrica called Thelense almoste twelue hundred yeres gone approued by S. Ambrose in an epistle of his to Siricius the pope where also he addeth agrestis vlulatus est diuersoruÌ„ gradus abrogare meritorum yt is a barbarouse howling to abrogate the degrees of diuersitie of merits And the same Ambrose answereth your friuolouse obiection that God is no acceptour of persons thus Acceptor deus personarum non est sed meritorum atque virtutum God is no acceptor of persones but yet an acceptor of merites and vertues Finallie albeit you rayle at Dionysius Areopagita for this matter calling hym bastard Denice whose legitimation besides infinite other testimonies was acknowleged in two generall councels not muche lesse than a thousand yeres gone yet the matter is playne by experieÌ„ce yf not otherwise For yf he be iust and holie according to S. Iohns definition qui iustitiam facit that workethe rightuousnes which comprehendeth all maner of vertues and iust lyfe then your neighbours I wene will beare witnesse that you ministers are somewhat behinde S. Peter and S. Paul and the mother of God in holynesse and rigtuousnesse of lyfe what soeuer you say in your owne commendation to the contrarye And thus now haue you seene these nyene points alleaged for examples sake owt of martyne Luthers doctrine which M. Charke calleth diuine and cleare doctrine defended by hym faithefully as