yet wolde I appose him for al that in one cause more why he did thus diuide al the other veritees of scripture from those .xii. of the Crede HE. Is there an other cause therof yet CA. ye that there is HE. I pray you what is that CA. In the last leafe of his boke his owne wordê doth well declare which are euen these There are many veritees he saieth which are no such articles of our feith HE. Is this all CA. Nay not so But first what articles meaneth he by these no such HE. No such as be of our Crede CATH Well saide And what vetitees dooth he meane here that maie be no suche articles HERE All the other veritees of scripture CATH Then here his woordes againe with those that foloweth and therin let them be iudge for There are he saith many veritees whiche yet maie bee no suche articles of our feithe It is trewe that I laie in yrons when I wrote this how be it I wolde not receiue this trewthe for an article of our feithe for you maie thinke the contrarie without all ieoperdie of damnacion Nowe consider all this well together and thou maiest soone perceiue that this same exaumple of his imprisonment dooth clerely shewe that he meaneth not here by these same veritees that he speaketh of any veritees of scripture but the veritees of all other thynges whiche veritees in general with the veritee of his imprisonment inspeciall he bryngeth for example how he wolde haue vs take all the veritees of scripture saue twelue For as the veritee of his imprisonment maie be no suche article of our feithe as those be of our Crede Euen so after the same sorte wolde he haue all those other veritees of scripture to be no such articles of our feithe nother But the veritee of his imprisonment and all other of that sorte beside are not onely no suche but vtterly no articles of our feithe in dede wherfore no more wolde he haue all the veritees of scripture scantly those twelue excepte of the Crede And yet before this he lefte those other veritees of scripture as articles indifferent But now he wil haue them other none articles of our feithe at all or els the veritees of all other thynges to bee articles of our feithe euen as well as the Therfore what wonder is it though he thus diuide all the other veritees of scripture as of an other kinde from the veritees of the Crede when thei be with him of no more estimacion then be all such other veritees as for example the steple of Paules is higher then the crosse in chepe And because the veritee therof is none article of our feithe for all it is a veritee in dede Therfore by his plaine exaumple no more wolde he haue all the veritees of scripture sauing onely those expressed in the Crede were not a man happie thinkest thou to mete with suche a doctour to teche him his feithe dooest thou not perceiue the mighty power and strengthe of this veritee whiche he wolde so faine ouerthrowe when it geueth him so shamefull faules in euery wicked wile that he dooth attempte against it It is trewe he saith that I laie in yrons when I wrote this how be it I wolde not receiue that trewthe for an article of our feithe And yet without faile when he said so he went more nere to make it one then he was ware of him selfe for he went so nere it that he brought it within one worde of it In so much that if he had put in as the trewth required but this same worde worthely more then he did said it is trew that I lay worthely in yrons wheÌ„ I wrot this without question it had ben then so nere an article of our feith in dede That who so euer wolde not beleue it knowing the matter thei could not be but in great ieoperdie of damnacion For doubtles those that thinke hym vnworthily prisoned knowing the cause why be of the same most damnable opinion that he was of him selfe god of his great mercy graunt them sone to amende it for how damnable that opinion is it maie well and sufficiently apere and it were but by these his reasons as to some thei seme which we haue discussed hitherto alredie how be it god willynge in the residewe yet to come it shall be no doubte to the most affectionate frendê that he hath onely those excepte whiche gate it by the same meane and holdeth it by the same tenour that he came by it and helde it him selfe HERE Well sir if there bee no better meanyng in Frithes woordes then ye haue declared hitherto I meruaile greatly that euer he wolde speake them as he dooth CATH Dooest thou mernaile at that HERE I can not choose CATH Then why doest thou not meruaile at an other thyng which is a thousande tymes more meruellous then that is HE. What is that CATH That euer suche a number wolde folowe him as there hath done and take him for so plaine beyng so deceitfull Take him so simple being so traftie Take him so wise being so foolish Take him so trewe beyng so false And of that numbre so many welthie as men dooth deme so many wise as them selfes dooth wene so many politike as thei seme and yet spie not his falshed in all this time what meruell maie be compared vnto it for where as the wisedom of one shuld ouerthrow y e foolishnes of many here the wisdome of many is clene ouerthrowen with the foolishnes of one And also where as the falshed of one shuld geue place to the trewth of many here hath the trewth of many cleane giuen place to the falshed of one who is able sufficiently to describe the wonderfulnes of this mattier Wherfore if thou fall to meruailynge meruaile at this whiche maie bee called a meruaile alone And therfore because in consideracion of our longe talke it is nowe time to drawe to an ende Remember that I haue declared vnto thee although not all nor halfe nother but yet enough and enough for thee to perceiue what maner of foundacion it is wherin Frith bosteth and glorieth so greatly that he is not ashamed in reproche of master Moore and auauncynge hym selfe to saie as I tolde thee before these woordes This am I right suer of he saith that he neuer touched the foundacion that my treatise was builded vpon And therfore sith my foundacion standeth so suer and inuincible for els I thinke verily he wolde sore haue laboured to haue vndermined it I wyll therupon builde a little more c. And againe This was the foundacion he saith of my firste treatise that he hath lefte vnshaken whiche is a great argument that it is very trewe For els his pregnant wit coulde not haue passed it so cleane ouer but wolde haue assailed it with some sophisticall rauellacion c. Howe false a riar he sheweth hym selfe herein I take none other but euen him selfe to witnesse in
be a sacrament then is it an article of our feith as bothe the one and the other Frithe him selfe dooeth confesse and graunte Therfore if it be an article of our feith Then the trewth that is in it must needes be of Christe for what so euer hath not in it a trewth of Christ without faile can be no article or part of his feith Now because a thing can not be beleued or not beleued but that the trewth therof muste needes therin go withall Marke what foloweth This article he saieth we are not bound to beleue And the trewth of this article is the trewth of Christe Wherfore we are not bounde to beleue the trewth of Christe if we beleue Frithe For to beleue or not beleue this article without the trewth therof or the trewth therof without the article is not possible because they be inseperable and can not be beleued or not beleued but bothe together Beside this if there bee any one of the sacramentes more excellent then other doubtles this sacrament of the blessed bodie and bloud of our sauiour Christ must nedes be the cheefe And therfore if we be not bound to beleue this sacrament plaine it is that we are not bound to beleue any for bound to any and bounde to the chiefe of the other side not bounde to the cheife and bounde to none Therfore what muste folow but after this doctours mynde we maie bee bolde without any parill to shake hands with them al and bidde them cleane farre well As they but late went very nere it which reteined but euen bare two of them And that was perchance but euen for a while nother Wherfore thus thou hast now a sufficiente profe of the firste stone that this blynde builder hath layd in his foundacion whiche is so euell fauordly and vntrewly wrought that it can not couch or well lie of any side but so sotteringe and farre out of square that it can neuer be able to beare any good piece of worke as euen nowe it maie and here after shall muche more largely apere For if a stone well wrought and euill laide can not make but a shrwed peece of worke what doeth a stone euill lated and wors wrought but marre all together Therfore how Frithe laied this stone beside his wronge working therof thou maiest perceiue was after this sorte It is a sacrament he saieth and an article of our feith and yet we nede not beleue it would any man thinke that it coulde be laied any wors then so yet to see whether it will lie any better an other waie let vs turne it vpset downe HERE As how CATH Euen thus If we nede not beleue it it is none article of our feithe nor yet no sacramente nother And therfore how likest thou the leiynge of it nowe HERE It lieth wors this way then it did before CATH That is long of the workemanshipppe For Frithe wrought bothe that is to saie as well the one side as the other and of the two euill he laide the worste vnderneth out of sight wherby it might the more easly and sooner deceiue HERE How so euer Frithe laied it yet am I sure that he neuer so wrought it as you haue nowe laied it CATH How knowest thou that HERE Because he nother saieth we nede not beleue it nor that it is none article of our feith nor no sacrament as ye laie now all three to his charge but he dooeth saie the contrary and that in plaine wordes directly And therfore the laiyng of it as ye laie it now is of your owne head and not of his Cap. 5. CATH Because thou goest so farre in the matter doeth he not saie in plaine wordes that we are not bound to beleue it vnder peine of damnacion And of that haue I not proued vnto the that he meaneth vnder no peyne at all and therby consequently that we are not bound Therfore all this remembred what other thing is it to say that we are not bound to beleue it Then to saie we nede not beleue it for we nede not to dooe that we are not bound to and what other thing is it to saie that we nede not beleue it then to saie it is none article of our feith for if it be an article of our feith we are bounde to beleue it or els we are not bound to the beliefe of the whole feith when there is nothing els that maketh an heretike but the lacke of some part of it Wherfore if we be bound to the beliefe of the whole feith we must nedes be bound to the beliefe of this article whiche is a parte of it by Frithes owne saiynge Of the other side if we be not bound to the beliefe of this article as he dooeth saie we are not then it is none article of the feith at all If it be none article of the feith then it is no sacrament nother For all though euery article of our feith be not a sacrament yet for all that euery holy sacrament is an article Therfore why is it called an article of our feith but because our feith ought so to receiue it If our feith ought so to receiue it why dooth Frith saie we are not bound to beleue it if we be not bound to beleue it why dooeth he say that it is an article of our feith which he dooeth cleane cutte away againe in that he saieth we are not bound to beleue it Therfore say not as thou saidst that I lay this of mine owne head for I laie herein nothing els but onely the same that was in effecte wrought and conceiued in Frithes head as it is now proued by an ineuitable consequence of his owne woordê before recited wherin whether he dooe now apere more foolishe then false or more false then foolishe iudge thou if thou canst for crew it is that I can not Cap. 6. HERE Well sir yet I pray you here farder of his mynde and then will I tell you more of mine CATH With a good will HERE In the seconde leafe of his booke his wordes be these The foundacion he saieth of that little treatise was that it is none article of our feith necessary to be beleued vnder peine of damnacion that the sacrament shuld be the naturall body of Christ which thing is proued on this maner CATH Softe stay there awhile for it is mete and conueniente that before we entre into the profe of a matter we shulde first perpende weigh and consider the matter it selfe and be certaine therof lesse otherwise we should goe about to proue we can not tell what Therfore the matter as I take it is this that he saith it is none article of our feithe necessarie to bee beleued vnder peine of damnacion that the sacrament shulde be the naturall bodie of Christe HERE The same is it CATH And this he calleth his foundacion HERE All that is trewe CATH Then hath he leid two foundacions For this and the other before whiche
maketh god a lier And therfore of an obstinate minde not to beleue his woorde maie bee an occasion of damnacion How saiest thou dost thou not see what a foolishe phantasticall obiection he hath here feigned of our behalfe as though we wold hold and obiecte that the absence out of the bread as he calleth it were a trewth when that is his parte not ours For he plaieth that parte him selfe so do not we but the contrarie And againe as though we wold obiect that we are bounde so to beleue it that by gods worde but where or which of gods wordes that is he telleth vs not Wherfore this propre obiectioÌ„ of his madde phantasticall feignyng I will passe ouer leste I shuld with more talke rather hied then disclose the foolishnes of it And therfore beholde it well thy selfe for I leue it vnto thee euen as it is because it appereth more foolish of it selfe then I can declare with all I can saie And yet because his solucion therof dooth answere it so well as though thobiectioÌ„ it selfe had neuer bene imagined thou shalt here it to thintent thou maiest perceiue what a colour he dooth caste vpon the matter vnder the onely pretence of an answere and nothyng els To this we maie answere he saith that we beleue gods woorde and knowlage that it is trewe but in this we dissent whether it be trewe in the sense that we take it in or in the sence that ye take it in and we saie agayne that though ye haue as it appereth vnto you the euident woordes of Christe And therfore consiste in the barke of the letter yet are we compelled by the conferryng of the scriptures to gether within the letter to serche out the minde of our sauiour which spake the woordes And we saie thirdly that we doe it not of an obstinate minde For he that defendeth a cause obstinately whether it be trew or false is euer to be reprehended But we doe it to satisfie our consciences whiche are compelled by other places of scripture reasons and doctours so to iudge of it And euen so ought you to iudge of your partie and to defende your sentence not of obstinacie but by the reason of scriptures whiche cause you so to take it and so oughte neither partie to dispise other For eche seketh the glorie of god and trewe vnderstandynge of the scripture I doubt not but here thou seest a wonderfull charitee in this man whiche swadeth so sore to suche a concorde to be had betwene trewth and falshed that he wolde haue neither partie despise other for eche he saith seketh the glorie of god the trew vnderstandyng of the scripture And therfore I woulde yet knowe of hym when or where that partie should finde the glorie of god and the trewe vnderstandyng of the scripture whiche seeketh it in falshed HERE what speake you of that when Frith meaneth no suche partie CATH Wilt thou saie so is not that one of the parties that Frith speaketh of which holdeth with Christê bodily presence in the sacrament and that to be beleued vnder peine of damnacion and the other which holdeth directly the contrarie And therfore if the one be trew the other must nedes be false yet eache he saieth seketh the glorie of god and the trew vnderstandynge of the scripture And I saie then the one in trewthe and the other in falshed speede as they can for so it is when they be in two directe contraries But where our sauiour Christ saieth vnto vs Querite inuenietis that is to saie seeke and ye shall find although he ment therin none other thing then apperteigneth to the glorie of god and the trew vnderstandynge of the scripture yet because he did not there apoynt vs dirâ—â—â—… with apert and speciall wordes wherin we shulde seeke it Frith perchaunte toke hym to meane it indifferently as well in falshead as in trewth And that maie well bee the cause why that he for his part sought the glory of god the trew vnderstandinge of the scripture in falshed And lefte vs to seeke it in trewth where withall he would not meddle how be it litle nede he had so to dooe for therin found we it longe before And that is the cause he liked vs so muche the wors And therfore yet marke the wilie Raynard wher about he goeth HERE where about CATH Euen to bring both the parties to suche an indifferencie that neither shuld despise other while his parte might haue a quiet leisure to creepe in and cleane thrust out the tother for well he wost for all his false dissimulation that thei coude not continew together Therfore as touthing all the rest of his answere beside weigh his obiection and that well together And as in folly and falshed thou shalt not fynd them a sonder Euen so in any point els thou shalt not bring them together wherfore now because we haue hitherto spent some more tyme then neded in an errour so plaine and yet not halfe so much as the foolishe falshed therof wold require if it shuld be fully declared looke if he haue ought els that semeth to the any thing more to mainteine or make for his euill purpose then this bringe it forth and thou shalt here what I will say to it Cap. 11. HERE Me thinke sir he hath for all this in a certeyne place such a strong reason for his purpose herein as all the world can not auoyde CATH what so euer it be thou maiest yet by this that is passe bee sure of one of these two that either it is not trew in dede or els although it be yet it maketh nothing for hym HE. By that reason it can make nothinge for him whether it by trew or false CATH That can be no lie for there is no trewth that can trewly make with falshed HERE Yet ye shall here what it is CATH With a good will HERE In the .iii. leafe of his boke euen these be his wordes And first that it is he saieth none article of our feith necessary to be beleued vnder peine of damnacion maie thus be farther confirmed The same feith shall saue vs which saued the olde fathers before Christes incarnacion But they were not bound vnder peine of damnacion to beleue this poynt Therfore it shall folow that we are not bound therto vnder peine of damnacion The first part of mine argument is proued by saint Austen ad DardanuÌ„ And I dare boldly say almost in an hundreth places For there is I thinke no proposicion whiche he dothmore often inculcat then this that the same feith shall saue vs which saued our fathers The second part is so manifest that it nedeth no probacion for how could they beleue that thing which was neuer said nor done and without the worde they could haue no feith vpon the treuth of these two partê must the conclusioÌ„ nedê folow Now sir how say ye to this gere CATH Countreiman as thou saiest
the olde fathers neuer beleued it and yet did eate Christ in feith both before thei had the māna and more expresly through the manna And with no lesse fruite after the manna was ceased And albe it the manna was to them as the sacrament is to vs and they eate euen the same spirituall meate that we dooe yet were they neuer so madde as to beleue that the manna was chaunged into Christes owne natural bodie but vnderstode it spiritually that as the outward man did eate the material manna which comforted the bodie so did the inwarde man through feith eate the bodie of Christ beleuynge that as manna came downe from heauen and comforted their bodies so shulde their sauiour Christ which was promised them of god the father come downe from heauen and strength their soules in euerlasting life redemynge them from their synne by his death and resurrection And likewise dooe we eate Christe in feith both before we come to the sacrament and more expresly through the sacrament And with no lesse fruite after we haue receiued the sacramente and neede no more to make it his naturall body then the manna was but might muche better vnderstande it spiritually that as the outwarde man dooeth eate the natural breade whiche comforteth the bodie so dooeth the inwarde man through feith eate the bodie of Christ beleuing that as the bread is broken so was Christes bodie broken on the crosse for our synnes whiche comforteth our soules vnto life euerlastinge And as that feith did saue them without beleueing that manna was altered into his body euen so dooeth this feith saue vs although we beleue not that the substance of breadde is turned into his naturall bodie For the same feith shall saue vs whiche saued them And we are bound to beleue no more vnder peine of damnacion then they were bounde to beleue Now sir this is part of his minde CA. Thou saiest euen trewth And therfore if thou marke it well somewhat after his owne wordes thou maiest of this place plainly perceiue not onely by the presence of this worde not onely but also by the absence of this worde but also that he at the first intended to shewe vs two thinges The one of the whiche noted with this worde not onely he hath here as thou seest declared all redy But the other depending therupon and ought to be noted with this worde but also he dooth vtterly passe ouer and let it cleane goe For he renneth so wonderous faste and can not tell whither that he forgetteth the one ende of his tale while he telleth vs the other or els he doth purposely reserue and kepe it in store till he speake with vs hym selfe to shew vs that and more HERE Tushe sir ye doe but mocke him now CATH Why countreiman what woldest thou haue me do For to pitee him thou knowest wel it is to late To praise him there is in dede no cause To holde my peace in this matter were to farre ageinst conscience And what remayneth but alwaie to speake as he dooeth minister occasion Therfore where he saieth that the old fathers were neuer so madde as to beleue that the manna was changed into Christes owne naturall body for what purpose doth he tel vs that when euery man koweth it as wel as he CA. I shal tel you for what purpose he wold haue vs take the bread as the fathers tooke the manna And as they were neuer so madde as to beleue that the manna was changed in to Christes owne naturall bodie so he wold not haue vs so madde as to beleue that the substance of bread is changed into Christes naturall body nother For the same feith he saith shal saue vs which saued thē Cap. 22. CATH Thou saiest well for that is his purpose in dede And therfore as touching his principle of the same feith I haue told the enough before And as concerning this changeing he speaketh of thou and I will talke therof at large when we come to the place conuenient Therfore now to this that he doth here accompte all those which beleue that the substance of the bread by the operacion of the holy ghost in the holy consecracion is changed into the very body of Christ to be mad in so doing who be thei but al Englishmen Welshmen Irishmē Frenchmen Scottes Danes Douchmen Spaniardes Portingales Italiās with al other trew Christen nacions for doubtles al those dooe so beleue HERE Nay sir not all For all can not be said of Englishmen only nor yet of diuers other perticular nacions beside For some among them beleue otherwise CA. And pretely spoken For is it said amisse that such and such feldes are all corne because they are not eache of them without some and to much darnell in and amonge them what if there be founde such to many as Frith was among Englishmen and other trew Christen nacions beside doth that let the trewth of this that all those nacions beleue otherwise then he did that is to say that the very substance of the breade through the operacion of the holy ghoste in the holy consecracion is turned into the very blessed body of Christ al those multitudes Frith thou seest doth recken therin to be madde He dooeth not except al or any trew christen princes about whom there lacketh not men in wit grauitee and lernyng of the beste sorte that maie be had which seme not of al men to be lightly deceiued wherof in this matter specially thei are vtterly most lothe Therfore dooth the sadnes of Frithe shewe vs madnesse in all christen princes in all their prudent and wise councellours and in all their multitudes of peoples innumerable vnder them or els doth not the sadnesse of all those shewe vs the wonderfull madnesse of hym I require no answere of this but consider it well with thy selfe And therfore what is there more in all his woordes whiche thou hast here rehersed but onely his owne swasions and foolish continuall daunsing about this same woorde the same wherwith thou seest he wolde conclude confirme what so euer he babled before Neuerthelesse yet forthe he goeth shewing vs in the syxt lefe of his booke after his fantasie how the olde fathers did beleue saiyng There is no poynte in our Creede but thei beleued it as well as we dooe and those articles onely are necessarie vnto saluacion Who hath herde suche an other teacher For of this it must nedes folowe that it is not necessary vnto saluacion to beleue that Christe is equall with the father For whiche of the .xii. articles is that Those .xii. onely he saith are necessary vnto saluacion And this that Christe is equall with the father is none of the .xii. Wherfore the belefe therof is not necessarie vnto saluacion Also it is not necessarie vnto saluacion to beleue it a damnable thynge to peruerte and deprauate the harde saiynges of saint Paule and other scriptures although saint Peter doth saie the contrarie because it is none of
But he woulde haue saied we be bound not to beleue it CATH Therfore what is this to the purpose of our bond of beliefe If he counde haue proued that suche as dooe not beleue it were in no dainger therfore it had bene then an other matter But to say seeing many beleue it and as who say therfore we maie laufully chose what noddy wolde so saie or suppose but he HERE Sir it is not that nother which Frith intendeth to shew it by CATH What then HERE That they receiue it to their damnacion CATH Doth that shew that we be not bounde to beleue it HERE Cleerly me thinke CATH Euen as though the bonde of beleuing were enough to put away the danger of vnworthy receiuing but yet I pray thee looke better vpon it And tell me in good ernest whether it dooeth not seeme rather to shew that we be not bound to receiue it then not bounde to beleue it HERE Receiue it what we be bounde therto by the plaine wordes of the gospel CATH That I graunt to be trew And therfore tell me whether of them both dooe Frithes wordes seeme rather to shew for although bare wordes of shewing bee farre from the strength of dew prouing yet if there bee any thing in his shewing that might sound herein ageinst our dewtie of beleuing dowtles it dooeth sound ten times more ageinst our dewtie of receiuing then ageinst that And yet betwene the dutie of receiuing and the deutie of beleuing herein the difference is such that vnworthinesse of maners may and ought for the time exclude the dewtie of receiuinge But so it can neuer doe the deutie of beleuinge at any time Wherfore in this much hitherto we haue found vnder the onely pretence of a great worthy prouinge nothinge els in deede but his onely bare leane and naked saiyng without reason trewth wit or learning Cap. 10. HERE Ye but yet ye muste take that foloweth with all and then iudge as ye see cause For ye know he addeth vnto it this It is not his presence he saieth in the bread that can saue me but his presence in my hert through feithe in his bloud which hath washed out my sinnes and pacified the fathers wrath towarde me Now sir weigh this and the other together CATH Nay the other we haue weighed well enough alredie And therfore what shall we weigh in this but that it is none article of our feith which we are bounde to beleue vnder paine of damnacion that the very bodie of our sauiour Christ is presently in heauen HERE I meruaile that ye will so say For Frith hath here no such wordes CATH No it is enough for him so to teach although it bee in other wordes For when he doth saie it is not his presence in the bread that can saue hym what dooeth he els intende but therby to proue that we are not bound to beleue it HERE That I graunt CATH And dooeth it not euen as muche against our beliefe of his very bodily presence in heauen HERE I thinke not CATH Then harken well what I shall say for the selfe same wordes that he speaketh here of Christes bodely presence in the sacrament I will speake of his bodily presence in heauen and then tell me thy selfe whether it be as I say or not HERE With a good will CATH Then this It is not his presence in heauen that can saue me But his presence in my herte through feith in his bloude whiche hath wasshed out my sinnes and pacified the fathers wrath toward me Wherfore it is none article of our feith which we are bound to beleue vnder peine of damnacion How saiest thou to it now HERE I saie the plaine wordê of the scripture dooe binde vs therin to the contrary CATH And therfore I saie the plaine wordes of the scripture is ageinst this which Frith dooeth teache And for a more clere vnderstandinge therof when he saieth it is not his presence in the breade that can saue me but his presence in my heart thorow feyth in his bloud and therof wold haue it folow that it is none article of our feith which we are bounde to beleue vnder peine of damnacion I aske no more of him but what of his preseece vpon the Crosse what of his presence in the Sepulcre what of his presence among his disciples what of his presence now in heauen with his presence in many cases moe doest thou not clerely see that this lesson of his doth renne directly euen as wel ageinst the beliefe of al these as ageinst the belife of his presens in this holie sacrament Therfore if his seiyng make any thing against this it maketh as much ageinst al the rest If it make nothing against al the rest then it maketh nothing against this HERE Sir the presence of these thingê that ye speake of are all gone and paste sauyng his presence in heauen CATH Ye but the feithe and belefe of them all amonge vs is nother gone nor paste for we stande bownde to that neuerthelesse And that is it whiche Frithe attempteth to oppugne and ouerthrowe And therfore what so euer he doothe as I saide against the belefe of one of theim without faile he dooth against the belefe of them all HERE Sir ye maie make of euery mans tale what he luste if ye bee so disposed CATH Why saiest thou so Thou maiest easely perceiue that I make none other of his tale then therof must I nedes folowe And therfore where he goeth farder and saieth of the contrarie parte If I dooe not beleue his bodily presence in the breade and wyne that shall not damne me but the abcence out of my herte through vnbelefe Looke nowe thy selfe if he might not as well haue said If I dooe not beleue his bodily presence in heauen that shall not damne me but the absence out of my herte through vnbelefe How saiest thou Is it not well proued of hym that Christes bodily presence in the sacrament is none article of our feith whiche we are bounde to beleue vnder peine of damnacion when he proueth vtterly by the same reason as he did before euen as muche and no lesse of his bodily presence in heauen But where he saithe If he dooe not beleue it that shall not damne hym how will he proue that or why dooth he not so muche as pretende or seme to goe aboute it But without faile because his heretical lie therin is so great that it will with no maner of thyng be couered but onely with his fals feith whiche hideth it from hym and suche other as he is and from no man els And therfore I praie thee marke well what he saith immediately folowyng in the same lefe for his woordes be these Now if they wold here obiecte he saith that though it be trewth that the abcence out of the bread could not damne vs yet are we bound to beleue it because of gods worde which who beleueth not as muche as in hym lieth
if we bee not bownde to beleue it because the same feithe shall saue vs whiche saued theim and thei were not bownde to beleue it because thei neuer herde of it it muste also by the same reason folowe that thei were not bownd to beleue any of those thynges whiche our sauiour Christe and all his disciples did preache and teache more then was saide before their commynge in those fathers daies so that in all the gospels and the epistles that is to saie in all the newe testament there is nothyng saide necessarie for our saluacion more then was saide herde and vnderstande before the incarnacion of Christe in the fathers tyme or els if there be seeynge after this doctours mynde the fathers were neuer bownde to beleue it because it was neuer saide in their tyme and without the woorde he saith thei coulde haue no feithe we nede not beleue it nother because the same feithe shall saue vs whiche saued theim is not this a goodly reason Farder more how dooth this doctrine agree with the woordes of our sauiour Christe him selfe where to his disciples he saith Blessed are your eares because thei dooe heare those thynges whiche many prophettes and iuste men greatly desyred to heare and yet herde them not Therfore what were those thynges that made the eares of the apostles so happie and blessed in the hearyng of them but the saiynges of Christe And why were those prophettes and iuste men desyrous to here them and herde them not but because thei were neuer saide in their tyme Therfore thei were not bownde to beleue them and consequently no more are we nother because the same feithe shall saue vs whiche saued them Take good hede for this doctour will make thee a good christen man if thou marke and herken well to him For if our sauiour Christe spake any thynges of more worthinesse and profite then other doubtles those prophettes and iuste men were moste desyrous to here them and yet herde them not But the cause why was this that thei were neuer saide in their time Wherfore thei were not bounde to beleue the moste worthie and profitable thynges that euer Christe spake and no more are we nother because the same feithe shall saue vs whiche saued them Also the chiefe thynges that euer Christe taught are the chiefe thynges that apperteine to the helth of mans sowle But those thynges were thei that made the eares of his apostles blessed in their herynge of them And those thynges were thei that many prophets and iuste men desyred to here and herde them not Wherfore those prophets and iuste men were not bownde to beleue the chiefe thynges that euer Christe taught for the helthe of mans sowle Because thei were neuer said in their time And therfore no more are we bownde to beleue them nother because the same feith shall saue vs whiche saued them Cap. 17. HERE Syr ye make me thinke more adoe of the matter then nedeth CA. Naie then tell me how much tyme shuld I speÌ„de if I shuld not refrain til I had shewed thee all suche abhominable inconueniences as muste nedes folowe of these firste two partes of his sophisticall argumente Wherfore of the thirde parte whiche is the conclusion thou nedest not doubte what it is And therfore because thou hast sufficiently herde how well he hath proued the partes therof Beholde nowe the whole together after the same forme and maner as he doth put it And see how it will appere in an other article or two ¶ The same feithe he saith shall saue vs whiche saued the olde fathers before Christes incarnacion But thei were not bownde vnder peine of damnacion to beleue that the sacrament of baptisme is a sacrament Therfore it shall folowe that we are not bownde therto vnder the peine of damnacion The first parte of myne argument is proued by saint Austen after Frithes vnderstandyng Ad dardanum c. The seconde parte is so manifeste that it nedeth no probacion For how coulde thei beleue that thyng whiche was neuer saide nor doone And without the woorde thei could haue no feithe Vpon the trewth of these two partê muste the conclusion needes folow whiche is this That we are not bounde to beleue that the sacramente of baptisme is a sacrament And euen by the same argument that the blessed sacrament of y e aulter is not so much as a sacrameÌ„t nother as of his own wordê I proued vnto thee before so that although we are as euery man knoweth bownde all vnder peine of damnacion to receiue the sacrament of baptism yet we be not bouÌ„de to beleue it that is to saie we are not bounde to beleue the same thynge whiche we are bounde to receiue when the iuste rule is this y t loke of what necessitee the thing is to be had of the same necessitee it is to be beleued But thou maist see what a feith this mans argument techeth vs so new and strange as I dare wel saie neuer trew christeÌ„ man was aqueinted withal or the lyke And yet let vs beholde the patterne therof once againe in an other case and so blisse vs cleane from it for euer The same feith shall saue vs whiche saued the olde fathers before Christê incarnation But the Iewes dispersed now in Christendom as in Roome Venice and in other places haue the same feithe whiche the olde fathers had before Christes incarnacion Therfore it shall folowe that the same feithe shall saue vs whiche the Iewes hath nowe The firste parte of myne argument after Frithes vnderstandynge is proued by saint Austen ad dardanuÌ„ c. The seconde parte is so manifeste that it nedeth no probacion for the credence of so many no light persons but of sobre wittes and good lernyng bothe as hath come from Roome Venice and other places where many of the Iewes be nowe abidyng and hath made reporte here amonge vs not onely of their feith to be of the olde testament whiche was the olde fathers feith but also of their excedyng diligence wherwith thei cesse not to kepe and obserue the same and the ceremonies therof so muche as thei maie instructyng teachyng and bringynge vp their children in such maner therin that thei be thought more prompte readie and perfecte in the letter of the olde testament at .xvi. or .xviii. yeres of age then the moste parte of our studentes be at thirtie The credence I saie of those so many graue and sad persons commyng from where those Iewes bee and reportyng these thynges of them with muche and many other moe concernyng the same dooth shew an argument ineuitable that thei haue nowe the same feithe whiche the olde fathers had before Christes incarnation specially when in their faste holdynge and kepynge therof dooth consiste all their great hope and whole truste of pleasynge god to their saluacion Wherfore vpon the trewthe of these two partes muste the conclusion nedes folowe whiche is euen this that the same feith which the Iewes hath now shall
therin as God shall instill in euery mans mynde HERE So he sayth but what of that CATH Soest thou not see it plaine in those wordes that he imputeth to God the instilling of that into euery mans mynde whiche he meaneth by this worde therin And againe that he meaneth by this worde therin none other but to gether each part both his and ours wherof he speaketh and those partes of his and ours are so contrary that the one must nedes be trew and the other false wherfore he doth I say impute vnto god thinstilling of these two partes in euery mans minde as well the one as the other so that he will haue God thinstillar as well of falshed as of trewth HERE Tushe sir this is to farre wyde CATH Wherfore HERE Because it nother doth nor yet can folow so for the sence of his wordes is this I leue it he saieth as a thing indifferent to thinke therin that is to say in eache parte as god shall instill in euery mans mynde that is to say as God shall reuele vnto them which parte hath the trewth and which hath not CATH Thou saiest much for hym and as much as may be saide But yet it will not holde for with his indifferencie he hath prouided to muche to the contrary As it maie somewhat apere by these wordes that he saith As god shall instill in euery mans minde ' He saith not in some mens mindes But he saieth ineuery mans minde And the trewth of this matter as he holdeth him selfe God dooth not instill in euery mans minde wherfore his meaning must nedes be of that instilling which dooth reach and extende farder then trewth or els it muste nedes come short of euery mans minde wherfore he doth here impute vnto god the instilling of more then trewth whiche can be none other but falshed HERE Sir I dooe meruaile to here you speake for Frith doth not here meane euery man generally as ye take him but he meaneth euery man specially as in whom god shall instill the trewth of this matter and no farther CATH He is much behoulding vnto the for he could say no better for him selfe But yet it will not helpe for the very same that he calleth here indifferent is nother more nor lesse but euen the same that he leaueth to gods instilling in euery mans minde And that is plaine to be both the partê of his beliefe and ours in this article of the holy sacramente wherof the one is trew and the other false And those two partê doth he so glew together with indifferencie to the intent they shuld so go and be taken together inseperably that he wold not say I leue them as thinges indifferent but saith I leaue it as a thing indifferent putting them both together in the singular numore as one And so referreth it to gods instilling in euery mans minde not the one or the other disiunctiuely but euen ioyntly both together according to his owne saiyng indifferently Wherfore why may I not say as I said that he doth referre vnto God thinstillinge as well of falshed as of trewth in euery mans minde when therin he doth so knit and wrappe â–ª them both together with his indifferencie and that in the singular numbre that we can not by his owne wordes deuide or plucke them asonder HERE I daresay for all this ye do not thinke your selfe that euer he ment god to be thinstiller of any falshed in any mans mind CATH How shulde we know his meaning but by his saiyng his saiyng doth shew and leade vs to this meaninge And therfore what woldest thou haue more HERE Yet I will not beleue that he ment to referre thinstilling of trewth and falshed both vnto god with any suche indifferencie as ye speake of CATH Then thou muste needes graunt that he ment it rather of the one then of the other or els onely of the one and not of the other HERE What els CATH If we vnderstande him to referre vnto god thinstilling rather of the one then of the other or onely of the one and not of the other Then because the one parte is his and the other is ours We must therfore nedê vnderstand him to referre vnto god the instillinge rather of his parte then of ours or els onely of his parte and not of ours because he leaning to his owne parte and not to ours wolde nedes preferre his owne before ours Wherfore because his parte hath the falshed and so hath not ours whiche hath the trewth and so hath not his it must needes folowe that he referreth vnto god thinstilling rather of falshed then of trewth or els only of the falshed and not of the trewth Therfore he leaueth and referreth vnto god thinstilling other of both partes according to his owne saiyng indifferently or els rather of the one parte then of the other leaning not euen eaqually or els only of his owne parte and not of the other euen wholl percially for one of the three it must nedê be yet take of them which thou wilt this hast thou sene what foloweth therof HE. Sir I see that folowe therof which is to badde to be gathered of any mans meaning CATH Whether it be or no yet it doth and must nedes procede of his saiyng And therfore thou maiest well perceiue that it is not so badde but he was as madde to take vpon him to play the parte of suche an indifferent stickler betwene trewth and falshed as wolde nedes perswade suche a brotherly loue to be had betwene them as neither of them shulde condemne other but reserue he saith each others infirmitee to god wherin also it appereth plaine that he wold haue here the infirmitee of falshed which is of thone side reserued to god Therfore what he meaneth by that or how it soundeth in thine eare I say no more but this is he which vnder pretence of his dewtie to beleue the .xii. veritees of the Crede doth denie his dewty of belefe in al the veritees of the whole scripture beside Also this is he that pretendeth to beare with vs in the trewth of our belefe to thintent he wolde haue vs beare as much with him in the falshed of his belefe moreouer this is he which doth say we may beleue that whiche he him selfe doth say is false and yet he him selfe wil not beleue that which both he we do say is trew for we say it is an article of our feith and euen so saith he how be it he holdeth it indifferent to beleue or not beleue but so do not we And therfore he wil not beleue it one whit till we do both agree which he hath brought so nere the point that now it wil neuer be Cap. 29. HERE Well sir ye do but dally with me now how be it if he were liuyng as he is not and might answere for him selfe he wold perchance answere ye otherwise and farre better then I can CA. He wolde if he could but
whiche he dooth vtterly denie saiyng ther is none suche And any other peines after this lyfe beside any of those two there is to our knowlage vtterly none Therfore what so euer he saith none other he meaneth but that it is none article of our faithe necessarie to be beleued vnder any peine at all HER. Naie sir not so for he wolde not speake it as he doothe excepte he mente vnder some peine CA. Vnder what peine is that HE Vnder the peine of suche lawes as be made ordeined for it here in this life CA. And wel said for if he ment not that plaine it is that he mente as I saide none at all But how cowld he meane that when he accompteth al those lawes nothyng els but euen the very cruell tyrannie of men whom he calleth prowde prelates and furious tyrannes of malicious mindes and vengeable hertes as it appereth in the .xiii. and .xv. lefe of his booke And therfore he wolde that men shulde in no wise folowe them but rather die then obeie them HERE How knowe you that CATH By nothyng better then his owne acte For euen so did he hym selfe HERE Yet his death dooeth shew that he was bownde vnder that peine For els he had not died CATH Take hede what thou saiest for although his death dooth shewe that he was bounde at the least vnder that peine yet it dooth not shewe that he so tooke it for all that But it dooth shew clerely the contrarie For if he had thought hym selfe bounde to beleue it he wold neuer haue chosen rather to die then to graunt it for he was not so madde although he were madde enough and to madde in dede as to chose his owne death rather then to stande to that whiche he thought hym selfe he was bound to Therfore that he chose rather to suffer death then to graunt hym selfe or any man els bounde to beleue it doth moste clerely proue and shewe that he ment it no article of our feith to bet beleued vnder any maner of peyne But to be so free at so great libertee that he thought it better to die as he did in dede then to graunt it or to be in any wise bounde vnto it Capitulo 3. HERE Then if he ment vnder no peynes at all why did he saie vnder the peine of damnacion secludynge no mo peines but onely that CATH He did it either because he could not tell therin how to expresse his mynde but foolyshely or els because he durst not russhe it euen all out plainly And yet thought to wrappe it in his wordes so craftily that his aduersaries should not take hym with the open faute directly nor his frendes belefte ignorant of his meanyng if thei weighed the sequele of his wordes throughly Wherfore sith it is clere that he wolde haue this sacrament none article of our feithe to bee beleued vnder any peine at all what followeth or what other thinge is it but that he wolde haue no man bounde to beleue it For vnder no peyne and then vnder no bonde And vnder no bonde then at our free libertee And there he wolde haue it as it dooeth well and plainly apere Therfore now let vs see the depe lernyng of this wise man wherby he hath drawen so many disciples after hym as he hath done first if we be not bounde to beleue it why is it an article of our feithe for an article of our feith he dooth confesse it as it apereth in the .xxvi. lefe of his booke where his owne wordes be these Though it be he saith an article of our feith it is none of our crede in the .xii. articles whiche are sufficient for our saluacion Capitulo 4. HERE Marry sir this dooeth open all the matter CATH How so HE. He saith it is an article of our feith but yet it is none of our Creede in the xii articles CATH A very well and therfore we are not bounde to beleeue it a blessed doctrine It is likewise none article of our Creede in the .xii. articles nother as he dothe take them that euer Christe preached or taught a monges the Iewes Therfore we are not bounde to beleue it It is none article of our Creede in the .xii. articles nother that Christe had .xii. Apostles or that there was any suche Peter or Paule as we speake of or that our Lady liued after the death of Christe And therfore we are not bounde to beleue it HERE Yes syr for all those thynges apere playne in the gospell and therfore we are bounde to beleue them CATH I tell thee the gospell it selfe is none article of our Creede in the .xii. articles nother And therfore we are not bounde to beleue any more of that then dooth apere in the .xii. articles of the Crede if we beleue Frith as to many dooe wherfore is not this a gaie teacher that wold so shut locke vp our feithe within the .xii. articles of our Crede that we nede not beleue any of these thinges nor many mo besyde as great as these be And furder more If this sacrameÌ„t be an article of our feith and we not bounde to beleue it why is it a sacrament HERE Because Christe hym selfe did so institute it CA. Then by Frithes doctrine we are not bounde to beleue Christê own institucioÌ„ when that which our sauiour Christ did institute is left at our libertee to choose whether we wil beleue it or no as Frith doth holde it is And therfore is ther any maÌ„ but only Frith his adherentê that wolde thinke our sauiour Christe to institute any article of our feith so that we might chose without parill wâ—â—â—her we will alowe it or no we dooe not alowe it if we dooe not beleue it and we neede not beleue it if we be not bound to it and we are not bounde to it if it be vnder no peine it is vnder no peine saieth Frithe HERE Vnder no peine of damnacion he saith CATH Vnder no peine at all he meaneth But neuerthelesse let it so be as thou saiest in his most fauour And yet that waie because there is no bond as he saith vnder that peine we may at that gappe as close as thou kepest it without any parill of damnacion after his minde cleane thrust out the credence and alowance of this holy sacrament notwithstandinge that it is of the very ordinaunce and institution of our sauiour Christe him selfe Therfore how dooeth Frithe handle this mater but euen as though our sauiour Christe at his institucion hereof had saide Here I leaue it amonge you those whether ye will beleue it or no if he had so said what might Frithe dooe more to the fortifiyng therof then he dooeth wherfore sith it is plaine that our sauiour Christe neuer saide so Nor yet as all trewe christen hertes dooe know neuer ment so what a thinge is this of Frithe that he wolde yet make vs beleue so Farther more if it