well erre in their generations before vs Phi. They kept the steppes of their fathers which if you doe you shall not erre Theo. This is the next way round about to come to the wood For how will you proue that euery generation which hath beene these 1500. yeares since Christ hath precisely kept the rules and limites of their forefathers Phi. You can not shew when or where they swarued Theo. If wee could not our ignorance in that point is no great securitie for your faith The defection of euerie age from their fathers might be either not marked or not recorded or since oblitered and therefore reason you proue your faith to haue descended from age to age without alteration before we beleeue it to be the faith of your fathers But what meaneth this that you prescribe that way to iudge of religion and the seruice of God which God himselfe prohibiteth Phi. Doth God forbid vs to follow our fathers Theo. In as plaine wordes as can be spoken with a tongue by the mouth of Ezechiel he saith Walke ye not in the preceptes of your fathers neither obserue their manners nor defile your selues with their idols I am the Lord your God walke in my statutes and keepe my iudgementes By Dauid he saith Let them not be as their fathers were a disobedient and rebellious generation a generation that set not their heart aright whose spirit was not faithful vnto God And dehorting them from their fathers steps To day saith Dauid if you wil heare Gods voice harden not your harts as in the day of coÌ„tention as in the day of temptation in the wildernes where your fathers tempted proued me though they had seen my workes Fourtie yeares did I contend with that generation and saide they are a people that erre in heart they haue not knowen my wayes By Zacharie he saith Be ye not as your fathers vnto whome the former Prophetes haue cried saying Thus saith the Lord of hostâ—â— turne you now from your euill waies and from your wicked workes but they would not heare nor harken vnto me saith the Lord. And what you count deuotion humilitie for the people to follow their fathers that God himself calleth defection conspiracie I haue protested vnto your fathers euer since I brought them out of the land of Aegypt to this day saying obey my voice Neuertheles they wold not obey nor incline their eare but euerie one walked in the stubbernesse of his wicked heart And of the children doing as their fathers did he saith A coÌ„spiracie is found among the men of Iudah and among the inhabitants of Ierusalem They are turned back to the iniquities of their forefathers that refused to heare my wordes With what face then can you deale so earnestly with the simple subiectes of this Land to regard neither God nor his word but only to runne the race of their Elders seeing God so straitly commaunded the children of Israel to beware the pathes and presidentes of their forefathers Phi. We must beware their wickednesse Theo. Then may they be wicked and so no paterns for vs or any others to follow Phi. The Iewes were wicked Theo. What charter can you shew that christians shall not be the like Phi. Hell gates shall not preuaile against the church of Christ. Theo. No more did they preuaile against the chosen and elect of Israel but the greatest number and gaiest men are not alwaies the church of God The foundation of God standeth sure and hath this zeale the Lord knoweth who are his Of his elect which are his true church our Sauiour hath pronounced it is not possible they should bee deceiued the rest haue no such priuilege yea rather the holy Ghost forewarneth that all besides the elect shall bee deceiued Our Sauiour our saith There shal arise false Christes and false Prophetes and shal shew great signes and wonders so that if it were possible they should deceiue the verie elect The rest then which are not elect they shall deceiue And so S. Paul speaking of the verie same deceiuers addeth whose comming is by the working of Satan with all power and in all deceiueablenesse of vnrighteousnesse among them that perish because they receiued not the law of the truth that they might be saued And therefore God shall sende them strong delusion that they should beleeue lies that al they might be damned which beleeued not the truth but had pleasure in vnrighteousnesse And S. Iohn speaking of the beast that made warre with the Saintes had power ouer euerie kindred and tongue and nation saith Therefore all that dwell vpon the earth shall worship him whose names are not written in the book of life So that the visible church consisting of good bad elect and reprobate hath no such promise but she may erre only the chosen of Christ which are the true members of his body properly called his church they shall not erre vnto perdition and those if you could point them out with your finger the people might safely follow otherwise if you set men to follow the rest of their fathers be they neuer so many neuer so graue neuer so godly to your seeming you bid them take the wide gate and broade way that leadeth to destruction because there were many that entered it before them Phi. Will you make vs beleeue that our fathers are perished Theo. Who are perished is not for vs to pronounce They were his seruants that iudgeth iustly neither haue we to medle with their doome but to looke to our owne yet this we can assure you that many be called and few chosen And therefore if you aduise the people to imitate the multitude of their fathers you teach them the right way to hell And though wee may not iudge of your fathers yet knowe you for a certainty that God is not afraide to iudge them and condemne them if they refused his truth as you do Neither is it any such daungerous doctrine to say that our forefathers haue sinned and displeased God as you woulde make it the godly haue alwaies confessed it of their fathers and not spared to tell the wicked so much to their fates Dauid slandered not his forefathers when he said We haue sinned with our fathers we haue done wickedly Our fathers vnderstood not thy wonders in Aegypt neither remembred they the multitude of thy mercies but rebelled at the Sea euen at the red Sea Daniell knewe what he pronounced when hee confessed O Lord to vs belongeth open shame to our kinges to our Princes and to our fathers because wee haue sinned against thee Ezechiah was not ashamed to say Our fathers haue trespassed and done euill in the eyes of the Lord our God and haue forsaken him and turned their backes And loe our fathers are fallen by the sword Iohn told the Pharisees to their faces their fathers were vipers and
the Princes or nayle vp cloth of Tissue where the Prince is not and say it is a chayre of state would you bee so foolish as to regard either of them or shoulde you not dishonour the king if you did reuerence them since they bee not such thinges as the Prince accepteth or vseth for his but other mens counterfaites Phi. I speake of that Chaire where the Prince did sit and of that Seale which the Prince did send Theo. I knowe you did and therefore I refused your similitude as vnlike the matter in question betwixt vs because images are neither places of Christes presence nor witnesses of his will as Seates and seales are vnto Princes no nor ordayned allowed or admitted by Christ to haue any credite or vse about his heauenly person or pleasure but only proposed by men of a naturall and kind affection as they thought towards Christ though cleane without warrant and so without thankes from him For hee of purpose tooke his bodily presence from the eyes of men that hee might dwell in their heartes by fayth and to teach vs to honour him not by that proportion of face which the painter would drawe but by that abundance of loue grace and mercie which hee hath extended on vs and layde in stoare for vs and which no corporall eyes can behold nor colours expresse but onely the hearing of his woorde and woorking of his spirite can lighten and perswade the heart of man to conceiue and beleeue Phi. Is it not thankes woorthie with God to haue alwayes the shape of his sonne before our eyes that wee may honour him with our hearts Theo. To honour him with your heartes and to haue him at all times in your mindes is religious and requisite but to make light of those meanes which hee hath prescribed to nourish your fayth and continue the memorie of him-selfe to seeke out others of your owne fit to please your senses not to resemble his greatnes or goodnes this is neither acceptable vnto God nor profitable for your selues Phi. To remember Christ cannot bee euill Theo. Not to remember him till you looke on a picture can not bee good Your heartes ought alwayes to bee lifted vp vnto him that whether you eate or drinke wake or sleepe or whatsoeuer you doe in woorde or deede you may doe all in the name of the Lord Iesu giuing thankes alwayes for all thinges vnto God the father in the name of our Lorde Iesus Christ. You must not tary for the execution of this precept till you see an Image But all your actions woordes and thoughtes must bee directed to the prayse of his glory and honour of his name This if you put in bre you shall neede no painted nor carued Image to bring you in mynde of his mercies The benefites and blessings within you without you and on euery side of you which GOD for Christes sake bestoweth on you are so many that you can hardly forget him vnlesse you also forget the earth that beareth you the heauen that couereth you the day that guydeth your feete the night that giueth you rest the meates that you feede on and the breath that you liue by yea your owne bodies which hee woonderfully made and soules which hee preciously bought All these thinges and all other thinges in heauen and earth you must drowne in vtter obliuion before you can inferre that Images bee needefull to put vs in mynde of our dueties to GOD. And since without Images you can and must remember the Father that created and the Holy Ghost that â—anctified you why shoulde you forget the sonne that redeemed you more than the other except you haue Images at your elbowes to kindle you appetites But this is nothing to the worshipping of Images which you should proue to bee Catholike Though there were an historicall vse in painting the shape of our Sauiour yet is it no pietie to worshippe the picture Graunt it might be vsed for remembrance for religion it may not and therefore you are all this while besides the marke Philand You denie both the hauing and woorshipping of Images to bee Catholique Wee prooue the hauing of them to bee necessarie by the fruite and profite that commeth from them namely the instruction of the ignorant in the storie of their saluation the putting vs in often remembraunce of our Sauiour and the stirring vp our deuotion with more feruencie The worshipping of them wee proue with more facilitie for if hee that honoureth the Image honour the person himselfe thereby represented as S. Athanasius S. Basil S. Chrysostome and S. Ambrose doe affirme then the worship which is done to the Image of Christ passeth vnto Christ himselfe and by consequent if it bee lawfull to adore and honour Christ it is not vnlawfull to doe the like to his Image Besides wee can prooue that adoration of Images is a tradition deliuered from the Apostles and obserued in all Churches and that the Scripture it selfe supporteth vs in this point as the learned epistle of Adrian the Bishoppe of Rome to Constantine and Irene doeth largely shewe and for the credite of the cause wee haue a general Councell eight hundreth yeres old to say as much in euery point as I affirme and more Theo. Wee maruell not to see you so deepely deceiued and strongly deluded as you bee such is the iust iudgement of God on all that admit not the loue of the trueth but haue pleasure in vnrighteousnes You rest on the vanities forgeries of such as were enclined to the same error before you not examining their proofes nor considering their reportes but presuming their euident follies to bee pregnant authorities for you whith is euer the next way to seduce others and to bee seduced your selues As touching the shew which you make of Scriptures Apostolike Tradition Churches Fathers Councels it is a childish and friuolous vaunt The fathers which you quote are abused the Apostles and their Churches belied the Scriptures depraued and wrested the Councell which you call generall reiected as wicked and diligently refuted in the same age by the West Bishoppes Of these emptie and vnluckie Maskes the more you bring the lesse you wynne Phi. Wee loose nothing so long as you lode vs onely with words Theo. If your proofes bee vaine my woordes be true Looke you therefore to the soundnesse of that which you alleage otherwise your owne burden will ouerpresse you Philand The collection which I made out of Saint Basill and others is very sure Saint Basill sayth Honos Imaginis in ipsum prototypum redit The honour doone to the Image redoundeth to the principall that is thereby represented S. Athanasius Qui Imaginem adorat in ipsa Imperatorem adorat He that reuerenceth the Image honoureth therein the Emperour And S. Chrysostome Knowest thou not that hee which hurteth the Emperours Image defaceth the Imperiall dignitie it selfe And so S. Ambrose Hee that
no tumults at home no despites abroade able to withdrawe the Princes hart from liking and louing the trueth but the godly reioyce to see so perfect a mirrour of faith and deuotion in a Christian Queene that shee rather chooseth to suffer your wrongs and abide your reproches with patience than to steppe one foote from that Lord which hath graciously blessed and mightily preserued her person Scepter and people from the iawes of his and her enemies Phil. And where no Iewe no Turke no Pagan can by the law of God nature or nations he forced from the manner and perswasion of his owne Sect and seruice to any other which by promise or profession he or his progenitors neuer receiued onely we that neither in our owne persons nor in our forefathers euer gaue consent to any other faith or worship of God but haue in precise termes by protestation and promise bounde our selues in Baptisme to the religion fayth and seruice Catholique alone are against diuine and humane Lawes and against the Protestants owne doctrine in other nations not onely bereaued of our Christian dew in this behalfe but are forced by manifold co-actions to these rites which we neuer knew nor gaue our consent vnto Theo. Fewe men without your cunning could huddle so many so manifest vntruthes in one sentence No Iew no Turke say you may be forced from his religion If that were so what maketh it for your defence which chalenge both the names and roomes of Christian men and are in respect thereof for iust cause required to performe that in deede which you pretend in woorde and by moderate correction driuen to keepe the Christian faith which in Baptisme you professed For heretikes of al sects and sortes may be compelled to followe truth though infidels might not and so your inference fayleth when you say no law forceth Iewes or Pagans from their perswasion therefore not Christians nay rather if we graunt Iewes and Turkes excusable for these two reasons lacke of knowledge and want of promise certainely Papists being neither void of the first nor free from the last may yea must bee compelled of Christian magistrates for dread of punishment tempered with good instruction to forsake their heresies and forbeare their idolatries wherewith Christ is dishonoured and his trueth defaced As the ioynts of your argument bee loose so bee the parts vntrue For king Darius seeing Daniel strangely deliuered from the Lions denne made this decree that all people nations and languages in the worlde should reuerence and feare the God of Daniel Likewise the king of Niniueth at the first denouncing of Gods wrath by Ionas immediatly with the consent of his Counsel caused this proclamation to be made through the Citie that man and beast shoulde put on sackcloth and cry mightily to God and euery man turne from his euill way Lo Sir two kings precisely commaunding their subiects and therefore readie to punish the refusers without delay to worship a strange and vnknowen God albeit the true God whome neither they nor their forefathers made promise to serue and yet I thinke you will not say they brake the Law of God nature or nations in so doing S. Austen will assure you that the King of Niniueh did God good seruice by compelling the whole Citie to please God A thirde instance for this matter is the calling of Paul first as a Iew and so within the limits of your assertion then strooken with blindnes amased with terror from heauen and therefore compelled to Christianitie by corporal violence y touched Paul neerer than impouerishments or imprisonments wherewith you find your selues greeued Behold saith that learned father in Paul Christ first compelling afterward teaching first striking then comforting and hee that entred into the Gospel constrained with bodyly punishment laboured more than all those that were called only by mouth I might refel your idle florish by the later examples of Polonia Russia Lithuania forced at the commaundement of their rulers to forsake their auncient Idoles and receiue baptisme By the long and sharpe warres which diuers good Princes maintained of purpose to compell the Saxons and Vandales to the faith By the sore vexations and afflictions of the Iewes in euery Christian common wealth Al which both old and new first last serue to conuince that Pagans Iewes haue bene forced by rigor of lawes and other meanes to yeeld to the truth without any former promise or farther knowledge which you stifly deny but as I said this is not our question You are no Iewes no Pagans but in shew Catholiques in deed heretikes you were baptized you chalēge an interest in the Church Sacraments by reason of this your first promise and next your outward profession of Christes name you stand in duetie bound and of right may be compelled to serue God not as your owne fansies perswade you nor as the Church of Rome leadeth you but according to the prescript of his word and that tenor of faith which the Prophets and Apostles did teach Phi. We bound our selues in precise termes by protestation in Baptisme to the religion fayth and seruice Catholique alone other faith and worship of God wee neuer consented vnto neither in our owne persons nor in our forefathers Theo. This is your common charme wherewith you bewitch many simple soules bearing them in hand that in Baptisme they vowed to professe your Italian religion which God knoweth is nothing so For in whose name were you baptized Philander In Pius the fift or Gregorie the thirteenth I thinke you were not I knowe you should not no not in Peters or Pauls but in Christes alone Then stande you bound by baptisme to yeelde faith and obedience to no person or place but onely to Christ the first author and ordayner of this sacrament Preach ye the Gospel saith Christ He that beleeueth and is baptized shal be saued What els must you preach what els must they beleeue that will be baptized but the Gospel ergo the preacher and the beleeuer that is the baptiser and the baptised are bound precisely to the Gospel All yee saith Paul that are baptised into Christ haue put on Christ and are the sonnes of God by faith in Christ Iesus hauing one Lord one faith one Baptisme Perceiue you not that in baptisme which no Protestation of yours can frustrate the beleeuers do put on Christ their Lorde not his pretended vicar and are made the sonnes of God not the vassals of Rome by faith which dependeth neither on man nor Angell but directly belongeth to God and his word If thou beleeue with al thine heart sayth Philip to the conuerted Eimuch thou mayest be baptized Now fayth commeth of hearing and that hearing of the worde of God as Paul witnesseth So that when you were Christned you made promise to beleeue nothing saue the word of God whereby faith is engendred and nourished My sheepe heare my voyce
The Scriptures commend Iosiah for compelling the people to serue God the seruant is charged to compell the guestes that were loth to come God hath ordained the sword which neuer entreateth or perswadeth but onlie commaundeth and compelleth to punish falshood and assist truth Now men that bee willing neede no forcing ergo Princes may compell their subiectes that is constraine them against their wils to keepe the faith and communion of Christs Church notwithstanding they pretend or in deede haue neuer so resolute and strong an opinion to the contrarie The Donatistes rather than they would bee forced from their fansies slew themselues yet this did nothing fraie the Church of God froÌ„ compelling them by the rigour of Princes lawes without any respect to their wilful desperation We graunt he that woundeth a weake conscience sinneth against Christ mary to be grieued with that which is good is no weakenesse but wickednesse and he that tendereth or regardeth a wicked conscience by your leaue is a fauorer and confirmer of his euill works To such saith Paul I gaue no place no not an hour for if I should so please meÌ„ I were not the seruant of Christ. We may not for thinges indifferent trouble the weake mindes of our brethren yet this rule bindeth no Magistrate to remit the punishment of error and infidelitie because God hath charged them to suffer no kinde of euill vnreuenged and this is the greatest whose voice they must heare whose will they must obeie though they were sure thereby to scandalize neuer so many both aliens subiectes Phi. Wo to that man by whom offences come Theo. True Sir but an offence fondly taken not iustly giuen entangleth no man besides the taker Blessed is he saith Christ that is not offended at me Where cursed is he that taketh an offence the giuer is blessed for euer We preach Christ crucified a stumbling blocke to the Iewes and wo to me saith Paul if I preach not the Gospell yet doth it bring the wicked to their destruction and is the sauour of death vnto death in them that perish Then as the minister must dispense the worde of truth be therewith offended and greiued who list so the Magistrate may drawe the sworde of iustice to compell and punish such as bee blindly led or maliciouslie bent to resist sound doctrine without any respect what afterward befalleth such ouerthwart creatures If vpon compulsion desperation ensue wo not to the compeller vsing those meanes which God hath appointed and discharging that duetie which God hath commaunded but wo rather and double wo to the despayrer who first framed his conscience to forsake truth and beleeue lies and nowe receiuing the iust reward of his error hath his heart hardened that when good discipline which healeth others is applied as a wholesome medicine to recouer him it causeth or sheweth him to be past cure without any sinister action or ill intention of the Magistrate Thus much for the making and exacting of that oth The contents whereof shall be fully discussed when we come to the place which I named We stand too long I feare about these foolish and impertinent quarels I will passe to your second Chapter as finding nothing left in your first but an action of vnkindnesse against such as call you Fugitiues which name you well deserue though you be loth to beare Phi. That is but your saying which wee little regard Theo. Much lesse neede wee regard your slaunderous and false reports published of purpose to deface this Realme they bee but your sayinges which no good man esteemeth Phi. You fall now to wordes Theo. What else haue you done since we began We be now come to the shutting vp of your first Chapter reuiew the same what one line what one letter haue you proued that hurteth vs or helpeth you Phi. You were not here to looke for many Scriptures or Fathers we giue you the reasons of our departure which bee matters of fact and admit no proofes Theo. If you can not proue them wee neede not disproue them and so let vs end with this and proceede to the next Phi. You answere not halfe that which we haue obiected Theo. You obiect much proue litle which forceth me to neglect the most part of that you haue obiected For when you heape vp idle words that are but winde and raigne ouer your aduersaries with Lordlike vauntes which are better despised than answered why should I follow your vaine humor or bring the cause of Christ to a meere brable or wordes as your Apologie doth Phi. Say your pleasure Theo. Your first Chapter we haue seene what doth your seconde containe Phi. The causes of our repairing sometime to the Citie and Court of Rome Theo. If this be all I will neuer open my mouth for the matter Your priuate actions and secret purposes we can not see wee neede not search Therein you may pretende what you please without any truth and wee beleeue what we list without any wrong Phi. In faith and truth they were none other but to make humble sâ—te for the establishment and perpetuall foundation of the College or Seminarie which his Holinesse had long before instituted in place of the hospitall of our nation there this was one thing Another was that the Gouernours of that College in Rome aboue and of this other now resident in Rhemes beneath might giue and take mutuall direction for correspondence in regiment discipline and education most agreeable to our Countrie mens natures and for preuention of all disorders that youth and companies of Scholers namely in banishment are subiect vnto Theo. It may be this you did but did you nothing else Phi. It was strongly surmised we know that our going to Rome was to procure some matter against the Prince but God is our witnesse it was no part of our meaning Theo. That intelligence was giuen by such as were daily conuersant with you and those articles of confederacie betweene the Pope and others to inuade this Realme were rife in your Seminaries there and closely sent to your friendes here but whether interprised followed by coÌ„mon consent amongst you or only deuised scattered by some of you to strike a feare in the peoples harts to make them the readier for your perswasions we can not exactly say this wee be sure such practises in subiects be lewd seditious Phi. If that informatioÌ„ were true Theo. What reasons haue you to proue it false Phi. Enow The second chapter of our Apologie doth refell it at large Theo. You refell it in deed as your maner is that is you say that you wil without any further proofe or paines Certain yong fellowes say you Fugitiues from their Masters depreheÌ„ded in diuerse cosinages counterfaiting of letters plaine thefts haue of malice hope of impunity and lucre traiterously slaundered you Thus as if you sate supreme Iudges ouer al the world you bring nothing to quite
the priest is Gods minister to reuēge male factors Peter himself was sharply rebuked by Christ for vsing the sword in Peter all Pastors Bishops are straitly charged not to meddle with it Al that take the sword shall perish with the sword And of al men a Bishop must be no striker For if he that should feede his masters houshold fal to striking he shall haue his portion with hypocrites The seruants of God must be gentle towards all instructing those that resist with mildnes not cōpelling any with sharpnes Their function is limited to the preaching of the word dispensing the sacraments which haue no kinde of cōpulsion in thē but inuite men only by sober perswasions to beleeue imbrace the promises of God To conclude pastors may teach exhort reproue not force cōmand or reuenge only princes be gouernors that is publik magistrates to prescribe by their lawes and punish with the sword such as resist them within their dominions which Bishops may not do speake we truth or no Phi. We grant Bishops be no magistrates neither haue they to do with the bodies or goods of mē which god hath permitted to the princes power but yet they be gouernors of soules which princes be not Theo. No better reason to warrāt our opinion The Bishops charge concerneth the souls of mē but the soule of mā can neither be forced nor punished by man ergo Bishops be no commanders nor punishers but only directors instructors of the flocke of Christ. Phi. That we know The. Thē since by gouernors we mean rulers such as God hath authorized to bear the sword why do you fondly cauil that the princes power to cōmand punish excludeth the Bishops vocation to teach exhort which is nothing so Phi. You say princes may command and punish as well Bishops as others Theo. If they bee subiectes no lesse than others why should they not obey the prince or abide the sword as wel as others Phi. Do you make them meere subiects Theo. Not I but he that said You must be subiect not only for feare of wrath but also for conscience sake Phi. Doth he speake that of clergymē Theo. He y◠speaketh of al exempteth none Let euery soule bee subiect to the higher powers c. In these words clergymen be not excepted ergo cōprised Out of this place Bernard reasoneth thus with an archbishop of Frāce Let euery soul be subiect If euery thē yours Who doth except you y◠be bishops frō this general speech He that bringeth an exceptiō vseth but a delusion For these things saith Chrysostom are commanded to all as well Priestes and Monks as secular men which appeareth by the first sentence Let euery soule bee subiect to the superiour powers yea though thou be an Apostle an Euangelist a Prophet or what soeuer thou be So Theodorete Whether he be Priest Bishop or Monk let them be subiect to Magistrates This doctrine dured in the Church a thousand yeares before your exemption of Clerkes from secular powers as you call them was knowen Paul teacheth euerie soule saith Theophilact whether he be Priest Monk or Apostle to be subiect and obey Princes He teacheth euery soule saith Oecumenius whether he be Priest Monk or Apostle to submit themselues to Magistrates Gregorie the first perceiued and yeelded this exposition to be true Power saith he ouer all men is giuen to my Lord the Emperour from heauen And least you should thinke priests exempted in the person of Christ he speaketh thus to Mauritius the Emperour Sacerdotes meos tuae manui commisi I haue put my Priestes into thy handes and dost thou withhold thy souldiers from my seruice And elsewhere writing of the same prince Christ hath granted him to be ruler not ouer souldiers only but ouer Priestes also This is euident by the whole course of the Scripture Whom did our Sauiour charge to giue to Caesar that which was Caesars Not Scribes and high Priests as well as others Christ himselfe was a priest and a prophet and yet he not onely submitted himselfe to the Romane Magistrate but confessed the presidēts power ouer him to be from heauen S. Paul appealed vnto Caesar appeared before Caesar as his lawful gouernor S. Iude detested thē for false prophetes that despised gouernment or spake euil of rulers It is no Religion it is rebellion against God his word for clergie men to exempt themselues from the princes power The commandement is general Let euery soule be subiect◠the punishment is eternall Whosoeuer resisteth power resisteth the ordināce of God and they that resist shall receiue to themselues damnation Phi. Yet reason the clergie be fauoured aboue the Laitie Theo. Tush we talke not what fauour princes may do well to shew but whether Clergie men by Gods law may chalenge an exemption from earthly powers or no Phi. Not except princes commaund against God And if they do so whom must lay men obey God or man Phi. No doubt God Theo. Then the prince cōmaunding against God all men are bound be they lay men or clerkes to prefer the will of God before the princes lawes but when the prince ioyneth with God and commaundeth for truth may the clergie resist the prince more than the people may Phi. They may not Theo. You say well Of the twaine they must rather obey that they may be teachers of obedience not in wordes onely but in deedes also For if they must admonish others to be subiect to principalities and obedient to Magistrates then must they not hinder their doctrine by their doings nor leade the rest by their example to contemn or resist powers which they should reuerence and obey Phi. By no meanes Theo. And in case the prince be repugnant to God may priestes or people be violent withstanders or must they rather be patient indurers of the sword Phi. They must not resist but in patience possesse their soules They that resist shal receiue iudgemēt Theo. Ergo whether princes be with God or against God Priests Bishops must with gladnes obey or with meekenes abide the sword Phi. They must Theo. And he that suffereth is a subiect as wel as he that obeyeth For if they be rulers that commaund punish certainely they be subiects that must obey the commandement or abide the punishment Phi. I think so Theo. Then monks Prists Bishops by Gods law be subiects as well as others and consequently Princes be Gouernours of all persons within their dominions bee they Prelates Prophetes Apostles or whatsoeuer they be Phi. In temporal things we graunt but not in spiritual Theo. Where Princes may lawfully commaund all subiects of dewtie must obey Phi. True but in Ecclesiastical causes Princes may not meddle Theo. So say you but if I proue that the Princes power and charge by Gods law reacheth as well vnto matters of religion as other things will you bethink your selues
Phi. It may Theo. Should corrupt false Religion be displaced banished and the spredders of it dispersed skattered Phi. In any case Theo. Ought malefactors against God as heretikes blasphemers sorcerers idolaters such other transgressours of the first table to be reuenged and punished as well as offenders against men and the breakers of the second table Phi. What else Theo. Can any man freely permit safely defend generally restrayne and externally punish within a realme but onely the Prince Phi. None Theo. Then if these things needfully must and lawfully may bee done for Christ and his Church none can doe them but Magistrates it is euident that the Princes power charge doth stretch vnto thinges causes that bee spirituall as well as temporall Or if S. Austens wordes do better please you that Princes may command that which is good and prohibite that which is euill within their kingdomes not in ciuile affaires onely but in matters also that concerne diuine Religion Phi. Did the Christian Princes in the primatiue Church since the cōming of Christ commaund punish in matters Ecclesiasticall Theo. If their examples do not concur with my former proofes good leaue haue you to beleeue neither if they do take heede you withstand not a manifest truth And here you shal choose whether you will haue a short report or a large rehearsal of their doings Socrates touching them all saith We therefore make mention of Emperors throughout this historie for that since they became Christians Ecclesiastical matters depend on them the greatest Synods haue been and are yet called by their appointment And Alciat a man of your own side Nemim dubiū est quin in primatiua ecclesia de rebus personis ecclesiast c. THERE CAN BE NO DOVBT saith he but in the primatiue Church Emperors had the iurisdiction that is the ruling and gouerning of persons and causes Ecclesiasticall Ius dicere referred to Princes is not to decide matters in question by law for so did Iudges not Princes but to make lawes and betweene lawmakers gouernors you can find litle difference for by publike lawes commāding good punishing euil princes do chiefly gouerne Then if christian Monarks in the primatiue church guided ecclesiastical matters persons by their imperiall lawes as this learned famous lawier putteth vs out of doubt they did you must shew when how they forfeited this power If it were thē lawful vsual how can it be now strange vsurped If there be no doubt of this with what cōscience do you not doubt but deny this Perhaps you disdaine the witnesse Alciat in euery respect was well learned in his faculty which was law deserueth more credit than the best of you yet least I should seeme to presse you with names not with proofes let vs view the proceedings of some Christiā Emperors and iudge you whether they be not both ancient and euident What power Constantine claimed vsed in causes ecclesiasticall the foure books of Eusebius other church stories describing the lawes letters acts of Cōstantine beare witnes sufficient First he gaue the christiās free liberty to professe their religion built them places of praier at his own charges entreated their bishops with all possible fauor honor Next he prohibited the gentiles their ancient vsual idolatries diuinatiōs oracles images sacrifices Heretiks he debarred not only churches secret conuents but excluded them also from the priuileges which him-selfe had prouided for Catholike persons If Constantines example deserue to be praised followed which no man except he be void of common sense wil gainsay then may christian Princes in the right of their scepter sword I meane their publike vocation charge without seeking any farther warrāt from Rome forbid wicked and idolatrous superstition admit and assist to the best of their power the preaching of the trueth sequester heretikes from the dignities and liberties graunted to good and religious subiectes for so did Constantine whose godly vertues and happie paines all nations then imbraced all ages since confessed all Princes now should imitate Besides this he did many thinges both for spredding the faith guiding the church of Christ worthy great cōmendation By my ministery saith this good Emperor mākind is brought to the keeping obseruing of the most sacred law by the seruice which I perform to God al things euery where directly speaking of things ecclesiasticall are setled in order yea the barbarous nations which til this time knew not the truth now praise the name of God sincerely whom they reuerēce for dread of vs. Towards the church of Christ he shewed an excellēt special care calling coūcels of bishops when any dissention sprang as a common bishop ouerseer appointed by God not disdaining to be present confer with them the rather to keep thē al in christian peace For his maner was in their synods not to sit idle but to marke aduisedly what euery man said to help their either side disputing to tēper such as kindled too fast to reason mildly with ech part vndertake iointly with thē to search out the truth confirming their decrees with his seal least other tēporal iudges rulers should infringe them When occasiō serued him not to gather a coūcel he did by writing aduertise the parties dissenting of his opiniō iudgemēt interposing himself as an arbiter in their cōtrouersies somtimes Prescribing the bishops what was profitable for the church of God somtimes the people to which end he wrot many letters emitting neither rebukes nor threats whē need so required Whē the coūcel of Tyrus was gathered by his edict he cōmāded thē first to discusse the truth of such crimes as were pretēded against Athan. who was loth to come before thē saue that he feared the thretning letters of Const. writtē to this effect If any which I think not in contēpt of our mādate fail to come before you we wil send a warrāt frō our roial autority that he shal be banished to teach him what it is for bishops clerks to withstād the precept of the chief ruler defending the truth Athan. the bishops of his part appeared but finding the coūcel very partial protested against thē appealed frō thē in these words Because we see many things spitefully cōtriued against vs much wrōg offred the catholik church vnder our names we be forced to request that the debating of our maters may be kept for the princes most excellēt person we can not bear the drifts iniuries of our enimies therfore require the cause to be referred to the most religious deuout emperor before whō we shal be sufferd to stād in our own defēces plead the right of the church Yet to preuēt the worst Athan. himself fled to Constant. beseeching him to send for the bishops examine their acts
impossible reproueable by all diuine and humane learning which neuer king much lesse Queene Christian nor heathen Catholike nor heretike in this Realme or in all the worlde besides before our age did chalenge or accept You heape authorities and absurdities and terrifie the simple with woordes and crakes of the largest life as if the doctrine were so barbarous and monsterous that heathen and prophane men would abhorre it and when the bottom of your skil is seene and the pride of your tongues spent notwithstanding your often and ioyly profers you neuer so much as come neere the question Phi. Will you make vs beleeue that Theo. Marke the points that wee teach and see howe wide you bee from refuting that which wee defend Wee say Princes onely be Gouernours that is higher powers ordayned of God and bearing the sword with lawful and publike authoritie to command for trueth to prohibite and with the sword punish errors and al other ecclesiastical disorders as well as temporall within their Realmes This wee proue this you graunt to bee good and sound doctrine Of this then there is no question betwixt vs. Secondly wee teach that as all their subiects Bishoppes and others must obey them commanding that which is good in matters of religion and endure them with patience when they take part with error so they their Scepters and swordes bee not subiect to the Popes tribunall neither hath he by the lawe of God or by the Canons of the Church any power or preeminence to reuerse their doings and depose their persons but this is a wicked and arrogant vsurpation lately crept into the West partes of Europe since the Bishops of Rome exalted themselues aboue all that is called God and for this cause we confesse Princes within their owne regiments to bee SVPREME that is not vnder the Popes iurisdiction neither to bee commaunded nor displaced at his pleasure but to bee reserued to the righteous and Soueraigne iudgement of God who will syncerely iudge and seuerely punish both Popes and Princes if they bolster or suffer any kind of Impietie within their dominions This is the very point that is in question betwixt vs of which in your whole Apologie you speake not one woord but cunningly shift your handes of it knowing your selues not able to iustifie your wicked assertion And lest the reader should distrust your silence in that behalfe you followe the woorde supreme with huy and crie as if God were highly dishonoured and the Church of Christ robbed of her right and inheritance because the Pope may not set his feete in Princes neckes and be Lord Paramount of all earthly states and kingdomes Phi. Doe wee mistake your meaning or doe you rather pull in your hornes when you see your selues compassed round with so many grolie and sensible absurdities Theo. What one inconuenience can you fasten on vs for teaching this doctrine Phi. A thousand Theo. You bee better at craking than concluding Proue but one and spare the rest Phi. This Soueraigntie giueth power to the Queene to conferre that to others as to the Priestes and Bishops to preach minister Sacraments haue cure of soules and such like which shee neither hath nor can haue nor doe her selfe It giueth her that may neither preach nor speake in publike of matters of religion to do that which is much more euen to prescribe by her selfe or her deputies or Lawes authorised onely by her to the preachers what to preach which way to worship and serue God howe and in what forme to minister the Sacraments to punish and depriue teach and correct them and generally to prescribe and appoint which way shee will bee gouerned in soule It maketh the body aboue the soule the temporall regiment aboue the spiritual the earthly kingdom◠aboue Christs body mysticall It maketh the sheepe aboue the Pastor It giueth her power to command them whom and wherein she is bound to obey It giueth power to the subiect to be iudge of the Iudges yea and of God himselfe as S. Cyprian speaketh It maketh her free from Ecclesiasticall discipline from which no true child of Gods familie is exempted It derogateth from Christes Priesthoode which both in his owne person and in the Church is aboue his kingly dignitie It diuideth which is a matter of much importance the state of the Catholike Church and the holy communion or societie of all Christian men in the same into as many partes not communicant one with on other nor holding one of an other as there bee worldly kingdomes differing by customes Lawes and manners eche from other which is of most pernitious sequele and against the very natiue qualitie of the most perfect coniunction societie vnitie and entercourse of the whole Church and euery Prouince and person thereof together It openeth the gappe to all kinde of diuisions schismes sectes disorders It maketh all Christian Bishops Priestes and what other soeuer borne out of the Realme forainers and vsurpers in all iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall towardes vs there can bee no iurisdiction ouer English mens soules but prooceeding and depending of her soueraigne right therein Which is directly against Christes expresse commaundement and commission giuen to Peter first and then to all the Apostles of preaching baptizing remitting retayning binding and loosing ouer all the worlde without difference of temporall state or dependance of any mortall Prince therein It keepeth the Realme from obedience to generall Councels which haue beene or shal be gathered in forraine Countries It taketh away al conuenient meanes of gathering holding or executing any 〈◊〉 Councels and their decrees as appeared by refusing to come to the late Councell of Trent notwithstanding the Popes messengers letters of other great Princes which requested and inuited them to the same When a Realme or Prince is in error it taketh away all meanes of reducing them to the trueth againe no subiection being acknowledged to Councels or Tribunals abroad all other Bishoppes Patriarkes Apostles Christ and all because they were and bee forrainers not hauing iurisdiction nor sufficient authoritie to define against English Sectaries and errors Finally if this iurisdiction spirituall bee alwaies of right a sequele of the Crowne and scepter of all Kings assuredly Christ nor none of his Apostles could otherwise enter to conuert Countries preach and exercise iurisdiction spirituall without Caesars and others the Kinges of the Countries licence and delegation Theo. Upon what part of our doctrine inferre you these absurdities Phi. Upon the supremacie wherewith you flatter Princes For all these thinges be consequent to the princes ecclesiasticall soueraigntie Theo. You must tell vs howe Phi. See you not that Theo. Surely not I. There bee two partes of our assertion as I shewed you before the first auouching that Princes may commaunde for trueth and abolish errour the next that Princes bee supreme that is not subiect to the Popes iudiciall processe to bee cited suspended deposed at his becke
them all obedience with armed violence to take their swords from them but thereof more hereafter In the meane time your argument is very foolish Priestes must not deliuer the Sacramentes but on such conditions as God hath limited ergo Priests be superiour to Princes You might haue concluded ergo God is superiour to them both in that he prescribeth how the one shal deliuer the other take the Seales of his grace but for the Priest no such illation can be made For were you Porter in any Princes palace and commaunded that no man Noble nor other shoulde enter the Court with weapon woulde you thence conclude your selfe superiour to all the Nobles and counsellours of the Land because you might not suffer thē to come within the gates except they first lay their swords aside or would you rather excuse your selfe that the Princes precept being streit and you a seruaunt you could not choose but do your dutie and put them in minde of your Lord and masters pleasure Phi. Our case is not like The. You say truth You haue not so much reason to make Priestes superiour to Princes as this Officer hath to prefer himselfe before all other persons Princes haue soueraign power ouer the goods liues bodies of Priestes Nobles haue not ouer the meanest attendant in the Princes Court Princes must be obeyed or endured with meekenesse and reuerence offer they neuer so hard dealing to their Preachers and Pastours That submission no man oweth to any subiect be he neuer so Noble And therefore euerie seruant in the Princes house hath better cause to aduance himselfe before al the Nobles of the Realme than you haue to set the Priest aboue the Prince whom God himselfe hath pronounced superiour to the Priestes and to whom he will haue euerie soule bee they Monkes Priestes or Bishoppes to be subiect with al submission duetie Much lesse is this a warrant for you to depose Princes and to pursue them with armes against the preceptes of God against the generall and continuall obedience and order of Christs Church as you shal perceiue in place where for this present go on with your absurd lies I shoulde haue said absurdities Phi. It derogateth from Christes Priesthood which both in his owne person and in the Church is aboue his kingly dignitie Theo. Call you this a derogation from Christes Priesthood if the Pope may not tread Princes vnder his feet Your Seminaries must needes be famous that coine vs such conclusions Phi. Neuer mocke at our Seminaries you shall finde them too well furnished for your stoare Theo. So wee thinke your learning is so strange it passeth our intelligence Wee fooles conceiue not how these thinges hang togither For first what meane you by this The Priesthood of Christ in his owne person is aboue his kingly dignitie He is king of glorie in that he is the sonne of God can you name any thing in Christ that is aboue his diuine dignitie Your doctrine is verie curious if it be not dangerous The glorie of the sonne of God as hee is owner and ruler of all thinges in heauen and earth hath no title nor name aboue it As a Priest he purged our sinnes in humilitie as a king hee nowe doeth and euer shall raigne in the highest degree of celestiall and euerlasting glorie His Priesthood washed our vncleannesse in this life His kingdome placeth and preserueth men and Angels in perfect and eternall blisse If you speake this in respect of vs that the Priesthood of Christ which washeth our sinnes and saueth vs from the wrath to come is more comfortable and accceptable to our weake consciences by reason of our guiltinesse and daily transgressions than the power wherewith hee subdueth his enemies besides the straungenesse of your speach that his Priestood should bee aboue his kinglie dignitie in his owne person note the losenesse of your argument The Priesthood of Christ in fauour and mercie to vs ward is aboue his power ergo the Prince must be subiect to the Pope May not we much rather conclude Christ cōpelleth punisheth as a king not as a Priest ergo power to commaund punish belongeth to the kingdom not to the Priesthood that is to the Magistrate not to the minister Phi. It diuideth which is a matter of much importance the state of the Catholike Church and the holie communion or societie of all Christian men in the same into as manie partes not communicant one with an other nor holding one of an other as there be worldlie kingdoms differing by Customs Lawes manners ech from other which is of much pernicious sequele and against the verie natiue quality of the most perfect coniunction society vnitie and intercourse of the whole Church euery Prouince and Person thereof togither Theo. It is a most pernicious fansie to thinke the communion of Christes Church dependeth vpon the Popes person or regimēt and that diuerse nations and countries differing by customes lawes maners so they hold one the same rule of faith in the band of peace can not be parts of the Catholike Church communicant one with an other perfectly vnited in spirite and truth ech to other And fie on your follies that racke your Creede rob Christ of his honor and the Church of all her comfort and securitie whiles you make the vnitie and societie of Christes members to consist in obedience to the Bishop of Rome and not in coherence with the sonne of God The communion of Saintes and neere dependaunce of the Godly ech of other and all of their heade standeth not of externall rites customes and manners as you woulde fashion out a Church obseruing the Popes Canons and deseruing his pardones as his deuote and zealous children but in beleeuing the same trueth tasting of the same grace resting on the same hope calling on the same God reioycing in the same spirite whereby they bee sealed sanctified and preserued against the daie of redemption And why may not Christians in all kingdomes countries haue this communion and fellowshippe though they lacke your holy fathers beads blessinges and such like bables To what ende you alleadge S. Augustine in that place which you quote we cannot so much as coniecture you must speake plainly what you would haue we be not bounde to make search for your meaning As for the communion of the Catholike Church it is not broken by the varietie and diuersitie of rites customes Lawes and fashions which many places and Countries haue different ech from others except they be repugnant to faith or good manners as S. Augustine largely debateth in his epistle to Ianuarius and Irineus whē the bishop of Rome would haue cut the East Churches from the communion of the West for obseruing Easter after an other maner order than their brethrē did sharpely reproued him and shewed him that Polycarpus and Anicetus dissenting in the same case Communionem
Canons be not incident to the Princes vocation and therefore no maruell if Princes be raw in those thinges wherewith they be not acquainted And since the danger is great if they command for error their skil not so great but that they may soone misse the truth why should you bee loth that others of deeper iudgement exacter knowledge whom God hath placed to teach both priuate men Princes their duties in those cases should direct moderate the swordes of Princes for feare least they should be missed to the ruine of themselues and many thowsandes with them Theo. We be not loth they should be directed but rather exhort all Princes to take great care and spare no paines to come by faithfull and true direction in those thinges that pertaine to God For if in temporall matters where the losses are but temporal they do nothing without the mature and sound aduise of their graue trustie Counsellours how inexcusable is their negligence if in heauenly things where the bodies soules of them-selues their subiectes may be lost for euer they serue their affectiōs seek not his wil that set them in place gaue them power to maintain his truth safegard his Church Phi. We then agree on both sides that Princes must be directed Theo. We do Phi. If they must be directed ergo by Bishops Theo. Bishops for their calling and learning are the likeliest men to direct them right but yet your ergo doth not hold It is not enough for them to be Bishops they must also be teachers of truth before they may claime to be directours of Princes Phi. Who be more likely to teach truth than Bishops Theo. I said before they were likelie but your conclusion inforceth a necessitie which you can not proue Many Bishops haue taught lies and seduced Princes in the church of God and therefore not their dignitie but their doctrine is it that Princes must regarde for neither Prince nor people stand bound to the persons of men but vnto the truth of God and vnto their teachers so long as they swarue not from truth Phi. And who shall be iudge of truth Theo. Absolute iudge of truth neither Prince nor Priest may chalenge to bee Phi. Why so Theo. God is truth of God I trust no man may be iudge The son of God saith of himself I am truth S. Iohn giueth this record of the spirit of God The spirit is truth Ye can therfore be no iudges of truth vnles ye will be iudges of God Phi. Who shal then be iudge of truth The. Who but Christ Phi. He shal be iudge at the last daie Theo. Hee shall then giue generall and finall iudgement of all men but in the meane time hee onely is the soueraine and supreme iudge of truth The Father hath committed all iudgement to the sonne and my iudgement saith Christ is iust This strife saith Augustine requireth a iudge Iudicet ergo Christus Let Christ be therefore iudge In earth saith Optatus of this matter there can be no iudgement we must seeke for a iudge from heauen But why knocke wee at heauen when as we haue his will here in the Gospell Phi. They mean that Christ speaketh in his church at this day by his word so iudgeth Theo. And we meane that his word is truth and therefore your Bishops can not be iudges of the word of Christ but they must be iudges of Christ himselfe that speaketh by his word which is no small presumption Phi. Shall not the Church be iudge of the Scriptures Theo. My sheepe saith Christ heare my voice they be no iudges of his voice A iudge of the lawe is no obseruer of the law as S. Iames auoucheth and since the whole church is bound to obey the law of God they be no iudges of the law Inferius est nobis quicquid iudicamus It is inferior to vs whatsoeuer we be iudges of Eternam igitur legem mundis animis fas est cognoscere iudicare non fas est The eternall law of God therefore it is lawfull for cleane harts to know it is not lawfull for them to iudge Wee must not saith Augustine to God iudge of so high authoritie neither of the booke which is thine because we submit our vnderstanding to it And againe To the canons of the Scriptures pertaine certaine bookes of the Prophetes and Apostles quos omnino iudicare non audeamus the which in any case wee may not dare to iudge And this is the reason there may be no iudge of truth where no daunger of error is And of the Scriptures S. Austine saith Quod omni errore careant dubitare nefarium est It is a wickednes to make a doubt whether there be any error in them or no therefore there may be no iudges of them but the whole church must be subiect to them and with all humilitie beleeue them Phi. The Bishops be no iudges of the Scriptures whether they bee true or no that as you proue is no doubt and therefore needeth no iudge But in this they be iudges whether the Scriptures be mistaken of others or no. Theo. Then bee they no iudges of truth which is the thing that I first affirmed but of them selues and others which be subiect to errour and ignoraunce Phi. Yet they be iudges of errour though not of trueth Theo. If you take iudging for discerning as the worde doeth often signifie they can not bee teachers of trueth vnlesse they can discerne trueth from errour But onelie God is to limit and appoint by his word what shall stand for truth what for errour With that Bishops haue nothing to do they must heare and beleeue the voice of the great Sheepeheard Christ Iesus as well as the meanest sheepe in his fould Phi. Wee grant you that so you grant vs this that only Bishops bee discerners of truth Theo. A liberall offer You will graunt vs a knowen truth vpon condition that we shall grant you a manifest vntruth Make earth and ashes if you dare to bee iudges of their Lord and maister which is in heauen or deny Bishops when they be at the highest to be the seruants of Christ yea happie be they if they be so much In these things we neither stande at your almes nor aske your consents we be right sure and dare not deny them therefore our assertion is without contradiction yours is vtterly false that only Bishops be discerners of truth For as Bishops ought to discern which is truth before they teach so must the people discern who teacheth right before they beleeue Phi. Shal the people iudge their Pastors you be so new fangled that you say you know not what Theo. We haue the words and warrant of the holy Ghost for that which we say Beleeue not euery Spirit but trie the Spirits whether they be of god for many false prophets are
loue may abound yet more and more in knowledge in all iudgement that you may discerne the thinges which are best He that is spirituall discerneth all thinges You may haue a thowsand like both places proofes that the faithfull should looke and take heede that they be not seduced And except you will excuse the people before God if you misleade them why should you bar them al trial vnderstanding whether they folow faith vnto saluation or withdraw theÌ„selues vnto perdition WheÌ„ the blind leadeth the blind and they fall both into the pit of destruction is not hee that followeth as sure to perish as he that leadeth Phi. We be content they shall bee discerners but no iudges of their Pastors Theo. And Bishops themselues be no iudges but discerners of truth Phi. We be froÌ„ the matter that we began with we were speaking of Princes The. We bee right enough Princes haue the same charge to obey the trueth beware false Prophets that priuate men haue ergo they must haue the same freedome to discerne spirites and refuse straunge doctrines that all the faithfull haue Christ hath not appointed one way for Princes an other for their people to come by the knowledge of his wil but the same way for both Ergo the precepts which I last alleadged also the former pertaine to Magistrates as well as to subiects to make the rule more generall in discerning beleeuing and obeying the truth there is no distinctions of persons with God Phi. We receiue your rule infer vpon it that these words of S. Paul Obey your rulers bind as well Princes as priuate men to be subiect to Bishops The. Take with you this limitation which haue spoken to you the word of God which S. Paul giueth euen in the same chap. infer what you can To Bishops speaking the worde of God Princes as wel as others must yeeld obedieÌ„ce but if Bishops passe their commission and speake besides the worde of God what they list both Prince and people may despise them With this limitation our Sauiour sent his Apostles into the worlde Go teach all Nations but what To obserue all things whatsoeuer I haue commaunded you And this the Apostles them-selues do not conceale in doing their message The word of the Lord saith Peter indureth for euer and this is the word which is preached among you That which we haue seene saith Iohn heard that declare we to you that ye may haue felloship with vs. Let a man saith Paul so think of vs as of the ministers of Christ stewards of the mysteries of God And as for the rest it is requisite in stewardes that euery man be found faithful And to the Galat. Though we our selues or an Angel from heauen preach vnto you otherwise than that we haue preached vnto you let him be accursed Preach I now man or God I certifie you brethren that the Gospel which was preached of me was not after maÌ„ for I neither receiued it of man neither was I taught it by maÌ„ but by the reuelatioÌ„ of Iesus Christ. And this maketh him so diligeÌ„tly distinguish the precepts of Christ from his own counsels To the maried I command not I but the Lord to the rest I speake and not the Lord Yea hee requireth of them no more but that they follow him so far forth as he followeth Christ Be ye followers of me eueÌ„ as I am of Christ that is no longer nor farther than I â—ollow Christ. Chrysostom alleadging the words of S. Paul Obey your ouerseeers doth thus limit them Si quidem fidei dogma peruertat etiamsi Angelus sit obedire noli But if hee peruert any point of faith though hee be an Angell obey him not And streight after Ne Paulo quidem obedire oportet si quid dixerit proprium si quid hymanuÌ„ sed Apostolo ChristuÌ„ in se loquenteÌ„ circumferenti We must not obey Paul himself if he speak any thing of his own or as a maÌ„ but we must obey the Apostle bearing Christ about that speaketh in him Nobis nihil ex nostro arbitrio indulgere licet It is not lawful for vs saith TertulliaÌ„ to deuise any thing of our selues nor to follow that which others haue deuised We haue the Apostles of the Lord for our authors who deuised nothing of their own heads but deliuered faithfully to the nations the doctrine which they receiued of Christ. Therfore though an Angel froÌ„ heauen should preach otherwise we should couÌ„t him accursed Euery teacher is a seruant of the law because he may neither ad of his own sense vnto the law nor according to his own coÌ„ceit take any thing froÌ„ the law but preach that onely which is founde in the law If Apostles and Angels bee tied to this condition much more others our first addition which speake vnto you the worde of God is euerywhere intended in the Bishops function though it be not expressed Phi. If Bishops then speake the word of God Princes must obey them The. If princes resist the word of truth in the Preachers mouth they resist not the messenger but the master that sent him Phi. Hence we conclude that Bishops be superiour to Princes Theo. By what Logicke Phi. Princes must obey Bishops speaking the word of God ergo Bishops be superiour to Princes Theo. If Bishops spake to Princes in their owne names your argument were somwhat but since they speak to them as seruants in their masters name which is Lord of all and ouer all your consequent is very foolish For let any Prince send his seruaÌ„t in a message to the Nobles of his Realm wil you reason thus The seruant speaking in the princes name that which is coÌ„manded him must be obeied of the Nobles ergo the seruaÌ„t is superiour to the Nobles I thinke you will not or if you do you reason very loosely Phi. If the seruant haue commission from the Prince though he be neuer so meane and the Nobles haue none well they may excell him in Nobilitie but sure he excelleth them in authoritie Theo. He doth in those thinges which his Commission reacheth vnto Phi. But Bishops haue commission from God to rule yâ— church ergo they be superior to princes in the regiment of the church Our assumptioÌ„ we proue by S. Paul Take heed to your selues to the whol flock wherin the holy Ghost hath placed you Bishops to rule the church of God Theo. Your lucke is euil to light on such vnperfect proofes I told you before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did signifie to feed the church or flocke of Christ not to rule You now catch hold of the same corruption againe make it the ground of your conclusion If you trust not vs your selues in your Rhemish Testament haue so translated the word in S. Peter Feed the flock of God which is amoÌ„g you which is in the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The very children knowe that these three wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A sheepeheard his flocke and to feede haue one and the same deriuation and therefore one and the same signification The holy Ghost himselfe vseth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Synonima that is words of the same power force For when Christ repeated this charge feed my sheep thriseâ— to Peter in the Gospel of S. Iohn his words are the secoÌ„d time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the third time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now draw your assumptioÌ„ from S. Pauls wordes rightly translated what conclude you Bishops haue commission from God to feede the Church or flocke of Christ which Princes haue not ergo Bishops by their calling may preach and Princes may not This is al you can infer and this is nothing against vs. Phi. They be superiors to Princes in feeding the flock of Christ ergo they be their superiors Theo. That sequele is not good In building Masons be superiour to Princes in sayling Mariners in fighting Souldiers be these men ergo simplie superiour to Princes I trow not Phi. Preaching the word dispensing the Sacraments pardoning the sinnes or men which are the Bishops charge be things far greater higher than any that Princes haue Theo. The perfection operation of these things which you name depend not on the wils of men but on the power of God therefore the honor estimation of them must serue for the praise of Gods glorie not for the increase of mans pride The Ghostly worke is Gods the bodilie seruice is the Priests wherein Iudas the thiefe Simon the sorcerer and Demas the renegate may chalenge as much as Iames the iust Peter the zealous and Iohn the faithfull the three pillers of Christs church Per ministros dispares Dei munuâ— equale est quia non illorum sed eius est By ministers far vnlike the gift of God saith Augustine is the same because it is not theirs but his Christ sent him that betraied him with the rest of his Disciples to preach the kingdom of heaueÌ„ to shew that the gifts graces of God are bestowed on theÌ„ which receiue the same with faith though he that deliuereth them be as bad as Iudas The things which God giueth saith Chrysostom caÌ„ not be made perfect by the holines of the Priest for all is done by his heauenly grace Only the Priests office is to open his mouth but it is God that worketh all the Priest doth only accomplish the external signe or act Men saith Ambrose in the remission of sinnes ministerium suum exhibeÌ„t non ius alicuius potestatis exercent do their seruice but exercise no right of authority They pray God giueth the seruice is by man the gift is froÌ„ the heauenly power Preaching the word is a worthier part of Apostolike dignity thaÌ„ ministring the sacraments by the witnes of S. Paul himself saying Christ sent me not to baptise but to preach the gospel And yet of preachers the scripture saith Neither he that planteth is any thing nor he that watereth but God that giueth the increase So that neither in the word nor sacraments you may chalenge any thing to man but only the corporal seruice which is common to the godly with heretiks hypocrits the rest is proper to God may not be ascribed to men without iniurie to him that is the true author of them mighty worker in theÌ„ And therefore the reason which you draw from the perfection of Gods graces in the Church to the preferring aduauncing of the Bishops person before the Princes is very vitious because the subiection reueÌ„ge due to the sword is imparted to the Princes person the dignitie vertue of the word sacraments is not to the Bishops Phi. The Priests commission is higher than the Princes why should not the priests person be aboue the Princes The. The priest hath his coÌ„mission as a seruant to cal for subiection obedience not vnto himself but vnto his Lord Master that sent him And this subiection because it is giuen to God infinitely exceedeth that which Princes may looke for But what is this to the Priests person who must preach himself to be The seruant of meaner men thaÌ„ Princes make himself The seruant of al men if he note wel the words of his commission and not striue with Princes for superioritie Phi. For their persons I wil not greatly staÌ„d with you but certainly their power is aboue the princes The. You â—un so fast that you forget where you should be We were debating who should direct princes in matters of faith you be slipt from that entring a new questioÌ„ who shal correct theÌ„ where the former is yet vnfinished Phi. You did coÌ„fesse that princes must obey Bishops so long as they speak truth The. And you would not deny but princes might refuse bishops if they swarued froÌ„ faith Phi. But who shal be iudge whether they swarue froÌ„ faith or no Theo. That is the question which I said was not yet resolued If Bishops teach truth surely princes must obey theÌ„ I mean the word of truth in their mouthes If they go froÌ„ truth theÌ„ princes must auoide theÌ„ To this we both consent but the doubt is whether trueth bee tyed to some certaine Persons or places where Princes may find it whence Princes must fet it or else whether Princes as all others must vse the best meanes they can to discerne true Preachers from false and so be directed by such as they thinke to be sent from God Phi. You would haue Princes and others leane to their owne iudgements and follow their owne fansies We would haue them sticke to the Church and looke to those Pastours whose faith can not faile Theo. Such Pastours bee worth the following if you can point vs to them Phi. Peters fayth can not fayle follow that faith and you can not misse the trueth Theo. He that keepeth Peters fayth in deede can not want the trueth because Peter beleeued the truth but we bee nothing the nearer for this Pauls fayth was likewise trueth and so was the faith of Matthew Iames Iohn Iude and others but who must be credited what fayth Peter and the rest preached Shall we take that at your hands by report or at their owne mouthes by writing Phi. If their writings were not darke or might not bee wrested the Scriptures were the best witnesses of their doctrine but now their successours must rather be trusted than euery man suffered to take what fayth he list out of their writings Theo. Rather so than worse doth not answere my question but must we trust their successours in matters of faith against or besides their writings Phi. Against their writings we must not besides their writings we must For many things are beleeued which are not expressed in the scriptures The.
With you but not with the Church of God Phi. The church we say beleeueth many things which shee receiued by tradition and not by writing Theo. Your Church I know doth but the Church of Christ I say neuer did not doth Phi. Had the Church of Christ no traditions that were not written Theo. Rites and ceremonies she had but no points of fayth that were not written Phi. This is the ground of all your errors vppon this pretence you reiect the vnwritten verities of the church Theo. If this bee an error S. Paul himselfe was the first author of it and all the fathers of Christes Church with one consent auouch the same Phi. Neuer tell vs that tale Theo. Yeas we will tell it and proue it to you Phi. You can not Theo. We can and will S. Paul is short but sure Faith is by hearing and hearing by the word of God Whence wee collect ergo faith is by the word of God and not without it nor besâ—des it You heard S. Basils opinion before It is an euident slyding from the faith a point of the greatest pride that may be either to depart from that which is written or to receiue that which is not written To that you may ioyne this conclusion of his If euery thing that is not of fayth be sinne as S. Paul affirmeth and fayth come by hearing and hearing by the woorde of God ergo whatsoeuer is without or besides the diuine Scriptures because it is not of fayth it is sinne Seekest thou for faith Emperour sayth Hilarie to Constantius Heare it not out of the late scroles but out of Gods bookes Heare I beseech thee that which is written of Christ lest vnder preteÌ„ce therof of things not written bee preached And in an other place pressing his aduersarie Thou sayth he which denyest things written what remaineth but that thou beleeue things vnwritten counting that for a passing absurditie which you now would establish as the surest way to discerne the trueth Euen so doth Hierom against Heluidius As wee denie not those thinges that are written so wee reiect vtterly those thinges which are not written For Our Lord sauiour speaketh to vs in the Scriptures of his Princes that is of his Apostles and Euangelists which were not which are in the church to this end that his Apostles excepted whatsoeuer thing besides should afterward bee sayd might bee cut off and not haue authoritie Tertullian speaking in the person of all christians We neede no farther search after the Gospel When once we beleeue wee desire nothing else to beleeue for this wee first beleeue that there is nothing besides the Gospel which wee ought to beleeue And refelling the heretike Hermogenes I adore saith he the fulnes of the scriptures Let Hermogenes shew me where this that he teacheth is written If it be not writteÌ„ let him feare the curse prouided for adders diminishers Yea saith Ambrose We iustly coÌ„demn al new things which Christ did not teach because to the faithful Christ is the way So then if Christ did not teach that which we teach eueÌ„ we our selues do iudge it to be detestable The rest are of the same mind The disposition of our saluation sayth Irineus we knew by none other than by those by whom the Gospel came vnto vs the which at first they preached by mouth but afterward by Gods appointmeÌ„t they did deliuer it to vs in writing that it should be the foundatioÌ„ and pillour of our faith It is necessary for vs saith Cyril to folow the diuine Scriptures in nothing to go from their prescription The mountaines of Israel whereon God promised to feede his flocke are saith Augustine the writers of the diuine Scriptures Feeding there you feede safely whatsoeuer you learne thence count it sauorie whatsoeuer is besides theÌ„ refuse it Therefore whether it be touching Christ or his Church or any matters els which concerneth our faith life I say not if we but as followeth in Paul if an angel from heauen teach any thing besides that which you haue receiued in the Scriptures of the Law and the Gospel hold him accursed Isidorus as your owne Lawe produceth him saith A Prelate if he teach or bid any thing besides that which is euidently commaunded in the holy scriptures let him be taken for a false witnes to God a coÌ„mitter of sacrilege Neither Prelate Pope Councel nor Angel may be receiued or trusted in matters of fayth I say not against the Scriptures but not without or besides the scriptures If therefore you seeke to leade Princes vnto trueth you must guyde them thereto by the word of trueth otherwise you doe but deceiue them you doe not direct them King Dauid will teach you by what meanes himself was and all other godly Princes ought to be directed Thy word is a lanterne to my feete a light vnto my paths I haue sworne and wil performe it that I wil keepe thy righteous iudgements And God by Moses appointing his law to be the directioÌ„ of Princes coÌ„maundeth a copie thereof to be deliuered vnto the king sitting on his throne that he should reade therein all the daies of his life and learne to feare the Lord his God to keepe al the words of that lawe This charge which God giueth bindeth princes as well as others Whatsoeuer I commaund that shal you do thou shalt put nothing thereto nor take ought there from And Esay speaketh not of priuate persons only but of common-wealths also when he saith Shoulde not a people consult their God And shewing immediatly which way they might consult and aske counsell of God from the liuing sayth he to the dead to the law rather and the testimonie if they speak not according to this word it is because there is no light in them They haue Moses and the Prophets let them heare them is the surest way to saue Prince people froÌ„ the place of torment consequently the best direction for theÌ„ both Phi. The word of God is we doubt not the best direction for Princes priuate men if it be rightly vnderstood but Al heresies patch thence the pillowes which they lay vnder the elbowes of all flesh as S. Hierom sayth and They talke of scriptures perswade by Scriptures as Tertullian noteth And therefore the Scriptures being but dumble recordes that may be diuersly construed and easily wrested there must needes bee some iudge on earth that may bee personally pronounce which is the true meaning and right sense of the Scriptures before Princes may trust that direction Otherwise men may brech what blasphemies they will and pretend Scripture when they haue done as the Arrians Sabellians Macedonians and al other heretikes did and do Theo. That heretikes couet a shew of scriptures is a case so cleare that it needeth no words For howe coulde they treate of matters of faith
their eyes which all the godly beleeue with their heartes If oyle bee wanting they bee perfect Magistrates notwithstanding and Gods annointed as well as if they were inoyled And so for the person of the Bishoppe that doeth annoynt them It is fittest it be done by the highest but yet if they can not or will not any Bishoppe may perfourme it Authoritie to condition with Princes at the tyme of their coronation the Bishoppe hath none hee is faythfully to declare what GOD requireth at the handes of Princes not in religion onely but in rewarding vertue reuenging sinne relieuing the poore and innocent repressing the violent procuring peace and doing iustice throughout their Realmes and that if they faile in any of these God will not faile seuerely to visite the breach of his Lawe and contempt of their callings but yet hee hath no commission to denounce them depriued if they misse in some or all of these dueties much lesse to drawe Indentures betweene God and Princes conteyning the forfeiture of their crownes with a clause for the Pope and no man else to reenter if they keepe not couenants Phi. You graunt they bee bounde to God to defend the Church and true Religion Theo. Euen so bee they bound to doe those other thinges which I before rehearsed The couenaunt which God made with the Prince of his people was to feare the Lorde his God and to keepe not some but all the wordes of his Law The othe which the Kinges of Englande take hath many thinges besides the defence of the fayth and the Church The King shall feare God and loue him aboue all things and keepe gods precepts through his whole kingdome Hee shall aduance good Lawes and approoued customes and banish all euill Lawes from his kingdome Hee shal doe right iudgement in his realme and maintaine iustice by the counsell of his Nobles with many other points there specified All these thinges the King in his owne person shall sweare beholding and touching the holy Gospel in the presence of the people the Priestes and the Clergie before hee bee crowned by the Archbishoppes and Bishoppes of his Realme Shal a king bee deposed if hee reuolt as you call it from his promise and othe in any of these points Phi. Heresie and infidelitie tend directly to the perdition of the common-wealth and the soules of their subiects and notoriously to the annoyance of the Church true Religion Theoph. Wee compare not vices but discusse the vitiousnes of your conclusion Kinges you say couenant with GOD at their annointing That othe and promise if they breake with God the people you adde may and by order of Christs supreme minister their chiefe Pastor in earth must needes breake with them If by BREAKING you ment not obeying them in those particular cases which tend to the defacing of Gods trueth your illation were not much amisse for in all things wee must obey God rather than man but by BREAKING you vnderstand an vtter refusing of obedience in all other cases and a violent remoouing them from their crownes which we say is not lawfull for Pastor nor people to atteÌ„pt against princes though they answere not their duties to God in euerie point They couenant at the same time and with the same oth the keeping and obseruing of the whole lawe of God and yet was there neuer any man so brainsicke as to defend that Princes for euerie neglect and offence against the Law should be deposed Phi. Heresie is one of the greatest breaches of Gods Law Theo. To hold the truth of God in manifest and knowen vnrighteousnes without repentance is a greater impietie than ignorantly to be deceiued in some points of religion but we stand not on the degrees of sinnes which God will reuenge from the greatest to the smallest as much as on the person which may do it and the warrant whereby it must be done We deny that Princes haue any superiour and ordinarie Iudge to heare and determine the right of their Crownes Wee deny that God hath licenced any man to depose them and pronounce them no Princes The sonne cannot desherit his father nor the seruant countermaund his master by the lawes of God and nature be the father and master neuer so wicked Princes haue farre greater honour and power ouer subiects than any man can haue ouer sonnes and seruantes They haue power ouer goods lands bodies and liues which no priuat man may chalenge They be fathers of our Countries to the which we be nearer bound by the very confession of Ethnikes than to the fathers of our flesh Howe then by Gods law should subiects depose their Princes to whom in most euident woords they must bee subiect for conscience sake though they bee tyrauntes and Infidels And if the subiects them-selues haue no such power what haue strangers to meddle or make with their Crownes Phi. Doe you count the Pope a straunger to Christian Princes Theo. Would God he were not woorse euen a mortall and cruell enimie to al that bee Godlie He was a subiect vnder them eight hundreth yeares and vpwarde he after by sedition and vsurpation grewe to bee a sâ—ate amongest them a Superiour ouer them in causes concerning their Crownes and states you shall neuer prooue him to bee For a thousand yeares he durst offer no such thing these last fiue hundreth hee often assayed it and was as often repelled from it by factions conspiracies excommunications and rebellions hee molested and grieued some of them as I haue shewed but from the ascention of our Lorde and Sauiour to this present day neuer Prince Christian did yeeld and acknowledge any such power in the Pope and those that seemed in their neighbours harmes somewhat to regard his doings for an aduauntage when the case concerned them-selues most boldlie reiected his iudgements Phi. By the fall of the King from the faith the danger is so euident and ineuitable that GOD had not sufficientlie prouided for our saluation and the preseruation of his Church and holie Lawes if there were no way to depriue or restraine Apostata Princes Theo. You make vs many worthy reasons for the depriuation of Princes but of all others this is the cheifest If there were no way to depriue Princes God hath not say you sufficiently prouided for our saluation and the preseruation of his Church Euen so one of your owne fellowes saide before you of the verie same poinâ—e Non viderâ—tur Dominus discretus fuisse vt cum reuerentia â—ius loquar c. The Lorde by his leaue should haue seemed scant discreete except hee had left one such Vicar behind him as might doe all things to witte depose Emperours and all other Princes Unlesse your rebellious humours may take place you stick not to charge the sonne of God with lack of discretion negligence but looke better about you ye blasphemous mouths you shall see that the Church of God is purest when
followeth after sheweth in what sense he tooke the word supreme At this day sayth he where Poperie continueth howe many are there which lode the king with all the right and power they can that there should be no disputing of religion but this authoritie should rest in the king alone to appoint at his pleasure what hee list and that to stande good without contradiction They that first so highly aduanced king Henry of England were inconsiderate they gaue him supreme power of all thinges and that was it which alway wounded me Then succeede your wordes and withall a particular exemplication howe Steuen Gardiner alleaged and constred the Kings stile in Germanie That Iuggler which after was Chauncelour I meane the Bishop of Winchester when hee was at Rentzburge neither would stande to reason the matter nor greatly cared for any testimonies of the scriptures but said it was at the kinges discretion to abrogate that which was in vse appoint new He said the king might forbid priests mariage the king might barre the people from the cup in the Lordes supper the king might determine this or that in his kingdome And why Forsooth the king had supreme power This sacrilege hath taken hold on vs in Germanie whiles Princes think they cannot raign except they abolish al the authoritie of the church be thēselues supreme Iudges as wel in doctrin as in al spirituall regiment This was the sense which Caluin affirmed to bee sacrilegious and blasphemous for Princes to professe them-selues supreme Iudges of Doctrine and discipline and in deede it is the blasphemie which all godly heartes reiect and abomine in the Bishoppe of Rome Neither did King Henry take any such thing on him for ought that wee can learne But this was Gardiners Stratageme to conuey the reproche and shame of the sixe articles from himselfe and his fellowes that were the authors of them and to cast it on the kings supreme power Had Caluin been told that supreme was first receiued to declare the Prince to be superior to the Prelats which exempted themselues from the Kings authoritie by their Church liberties and immunities as well as to the Lay men of this realme and not to bee subiect to the Pope who claymed a iurisdiction ouer all Princes and Countries the woorde woulde neuer haue offended him but as this wylye foxe framed his answere when the Germanes communed with him about the matter wee blame not Caluin for mistaking but the Bishop of Winchester for peruerting the kings stile wresting it to that sense which all good men abhorre Phi. Do not you at this day make the Queene supreme Gouernour of al ecclesiasticall doctrine and discipline And what discrepance I pray you between Iudge and Gouernour Theo. You may be Steuen Gardiners scholer you bee so wel trained in his methode and maximes Wee told you long since and often enough if that will serue the prince by her stile doth not chalenge neither do we by our othe giue her highnes power to debate decide or determine any point of fayth or matter of religion much lesse to bee supreme iudge or gouernour of all doctrine and discipline But if in her realme you will haue the assistance of the magistrates swoord to settle the trueth and prohibite error and by wholesome punishments to preuent the disorders of all degrees that authoritie lieth neither in Prelate nor Pope but onely in the Prince and therefore in her Dominions you can neither establish doctrine nor discipline by publike Lawes without her consent This neither Caluin nor the compilers of the Centuries nor any other of sound religion euer did or iustly can mislike onely Iesuites their adherents would faine reserue this power to the Pope in al Christian realmes because they be sure he will allowe and suffer no religion but his owne and so long their profession shall not miscarie Phi. The Centurists say Princes may not bee heads of the Church that primacie is not fit for them Theo. That word if they mislike wee stand not for it The holy Ghost hath inuested the sonne of God with it and therefore reason princes euen for reuerence to him should forbeare the stile which hee first vsed most esteemeth And though some defence might be brought for the word as that which Samuel said to Saul When thou wast litle in thine own sight wast thou not made HEAD of the tribes of Israel For the Lorde annoynted thee king ouer Israel and that which Dauid sayth of himself Thou hast made me HEAD of the heathen and that which Esai saith of the king of Syria THE HEAD of Aram is Damascus and the HEAD of Damascus is Rezni and again the honorable mā he is the HEAD as also S. Paul the man is the womans HEAD Chrysostom not sticking to call certaine women that laboured in the Gospel HEAD OF THE CHVRCH at Philippi and saying of Theodosius the Emperor Summitas caput omnium super terram hominum SVPREME AND HEAD of all mortall men Though these and many like places might bee brought to auouche the worde HEAD yet because that title HEAD OF THE CHVRCH rightly and properly belongeth onely to Christ not to Princes without many mitigations and cautions and head as it is applied to Princes is al one with Supreme for it importeth but the chiefest or highest person of the Church on earth and with the regiment of the Church whereof Christ is head I meane his mysticall bodie Princes haue nothing to doe yea many times they be scant members of it and the Church in each countrie may stand without Princes as in persecution it doth and yet they not headlesse we thinke not good to contend with our brethren for wordes and to greeue their eares with titles first abused by the pope and first reproued in him so long as in matter and meaning there is no discord betwixt vs. Phi. Will you make vs beleeue they mislike nothing but the wordes head of the Church Theo. Yeas they mislike that Princes should mingle trueth with falsehood and temper religion with corruption as their priuate fancies lead them which we mislike no lesse than they This is the scope of our speach say they that it is not lawful for ciuill Magistrates to deuise formes of religion in destruction of the truth and so to reconcile truth and error that they may both be lulled asleepe They may not prescribe religions alone they must not ingender new articles of the faith they must not strangle the trueth with errors and shackle it when it is reueiled that they may let loose the bridle to corruption These be the points which they dislike and we be as farre from approuing any such thing in Princes as you or they Phi. If the Prince establish any religion whatsoeuer it be you must by your oth obey it Theo. We must not rebel and take armes against the prince
them-selues venemous in saying ' Ye vipers brood and Steuen ful of the holy Ghost rated the Iewes on this wise Ye stifnecked and of vncircumcised harts and eares yee haue alwaies resisted the holy Ghost as your fathers did so doe you It is therefore a straunge course that you take to make the people disobey God to follow their fathers and a stranger that you freely permit all kinde of Infidelity and tyranny to your selues vnder the names of your fathers as if the men that were before you could neither erre nor shed innocent blood Phi. What they could we dispute not wee say they did not Theo. That must be proued before you may propose their actes for your imitation Their doings may bee doubted disliked as well as yours so the labor is all one to iustifie theirs and yours Times and persons do not preiudice the truth of God It is permanent in all ages eminent aboue all things If your fathers disdained and pursued the truth as you doe they were enimies to God as you are notwithstaÌ„ding their earthly dignities and other excellencies which may seem precious in your eies but are abominable in the sight of God when men are voide of truth Phi. We are not Theo. Leaue then your fathers and other idle fansies go directly to that question For if her Maiestie receiued established nothing but the truth of Christ in her Parliament in vaine do you barke against God and the Magistrate for lacke of competent Courts ecclesiasticall iudges and legal meanes to debate and decide matters of religion When God commaundeth all humane barres and Lawes do cease If they ioyne with God they may bee vsed if they impugne the trueth they must be despised And yet in our case the scepter vnited and adioyned it selfe to the worde of God and therefore if Princes may commaund for truth in their owne dominions as I haue largely proued they may why should not the Prince hauing the full consent of her Nobles and Commons restoare and settle the truth of God within her Realme Phi. Lay men may not pronounce of faith Theo. But lay men may choose what faith they will professe and Princes may dispose of their kingdoms though Priests and Bishops would say nay Phi. Religion they may not dispose without a Councell Theo. Not if God commaund Phi. Howe shall they know what God commaundeth vnlesse they haue a councell Theo. This is childish wrangling I aske if God command whether the Prince shall refuse to obey till the clergie confirme the same Phi. You may be sure a wise and sober Clergie wil not dissent from Gods precepts Theo. What they will doe is out of our matter but in case they doe to which shall the Prince hearken to God or those that beare themselues for Priestes Phi. In case they do so you neede not doubt but God must be regarded and not men Theo. And hath the Prince sufficient authoritie to put that in â—â—e which God commaundeth though the Priests continue their wilfulnes Phi. There is no councell nor consent of men good against God Theo. Holde you there Then when christian Princes are instructed and resolued by learned and faithfull teachers what God requireth at their hands what neede they care for the backward dispositioÌ„ of such false Prophets as are turned from the truth and preach lies Phi. In England when her Maiestie came to the Crowne it was not so The Bishops that dissented were graue vertuous and honorable Pastours standing in defence of the catholike and auncient faith of their fathers Theo. You say so we say no. Phi. Those be but wordes Theo. You say very right and therefore the more to blame you that in both your bookes do plaie on that string with your Rhetoricall and Thrasonicall fluence and neuer enter any point or prooâ—e that may profit your Reader You presume your selues to haue such apparent right and rule ouer the faith ouer the church ouer christian Princes Realmes that without your consent they shall neither conclude nor consult what religion they will professe Their actes shall be disorders their lawes iniuries their correction tyranny if you mislike them This dominion and iurisdiction ouer all kingdoms and countries if your holy father and you may haue for the speaking you were not wise if you would not claime it but before we beleeue you you must bring some better ground of your title than such magnifical and maiesticall florishes The Prince and the Parliament you say had no power to determine or deliberate of those matters And why so You did dissent May not the Prince commaund for truth within her Realme except your consentes be first required and had May not her highnesse serue Christ in making Lawes for Christ without your liking Claime you that interest and prerogatiue that without you nothing shal be done in matters of religioÌ„ by the lawes of God or by the liberties of this realm By the lawes of the Land you haue no such priuilege Parliamentes haue bin kept by the king and his Barons the clergie wholy excluded and yet their actes and statutes good And when the Bishops were present their voices froÌ„ the conquest to this day were neuer negatiue By Gody law you haue nothing to do with making lawes for kingdoms and commonwealthes You may teach you may not command Perswasion is your part compulsion is the Princes If Princes imbrace the truth you must obey them If they pursue truth you must abide them By what authority then claime you this dominion ouer Princes that their lawes for religion shal be voide vnlesse you consent Phi. They be no iudges of faith Theo. No more are you It is lawfull for any Christian to reiect your doctrine if he perceiue it to be false though you teach it in your churches and pronounce it in your councels to be neuer so true Phi. That proueth not euery priuat mans opinion to be true The. Nor yet to be false the greater number is not euer a sure warrant for truth And Iudges of faith though Princes be not yet are they maintainers establishers and vpholders of faith with publike power positiue lawes which is the pointe you now withstand Phi. That they may doe when a councell is precedent to guide them Theo. What councell had Asa the king of Iudah when hee commaunded his people to doe according to the law and the commaundement and made a couenant that whosoeuer would not seeke the Lord God of Israell should be â—laine Phi. He had Azariah the Prophet Theo. One man is no Councel and he did but encourage and commend the King and that long after he had established religion in his realme What Councel had Ezechiah to lead him when he restored the true worship of God throughout his land and was faine to send for the Priestes and Leuites and to put them in minde of their duties What councell had Iosiah
vt Deorum vestrorum partes forsitan adoratis Crosses wee neyther worship nor wish for you that dedicate woodden Gods you happily adore woodden crosses as partes of your Gods But what neede I farther refell that councell as not catholike which was presently reiected and pithily confuted by the Bishoppes and churches of the West whose labours are extant at this day brought to light by men of your owne religion and saued from the moothes which you ment should consume them Thither wee sende you there you shall finde both your adoration of images disclaimed as vncatholike and the reasons and authorities of your second Nicene councell throughly skanned and scattered almost 800. yeares before our time Phi. That booke we receiue not as thinking it to be rather some late forgerie of yours than a monument of that antiquitie Theo. If you receiue not the books that were safe in your own keeping and published by your neerest friends howe should we trust the corruptions that are framed to your purposes and no where fouÌ„d but in your own libraries Phi. Since you distrust our writteÌ„ records why do you not beleeue the faithful report of the church which is the pillour of truth can not be corrupted The. Nay since forgeries be so rise that no father is free from them so grosse that euery child may discerne theÌ„ why do not you beleeue the report of God himselfe the founder and builder of the church and that witnessed in his word of which there is no suspition and against the which there is no exception Phi. As though we did not Theo. Then for adoration of images which you defend shew what presideÌ„t you haue in the word of God Phi. We neede not Theo. We know you cannot Phi. And I reply that we neede not The. Doth it concerne the christian faith and Catholike religion which the godly must professe or no Phi. It doeth Theo. Then must you shew some authority for it in the sacred scriptures or else they must repel it as impious Phi. We haue it by tradition from the Apostles Theo. You would haue wrested so much out of S. Basill but that your cunning failed you Phi. From them we had it Theo. Wee say you had no such thing from them and further we adde that if it be a matter of doctrine beliefe as you make it you must haue it testified in their writinges and not concealed among their traditions Phi. No Sir we beleeue many thinges whereof this is one that are not written but were deliuered vs by secrete succession Theo. The greater is your sinne and the vnsounder is your Creede In matters of faith you should beleeue nothing but that which is expressely warranted by the scriptures And therefore in this and other points of your Romish deuotion now brought to triall if you want the foundation of true faith and religion in vaine do you seeke to make a shew of catholicisme with such patches pamslets as Monks Friers haue forged colored with the names of fathers The catholike church of Christ neuer receiued nor beleeued any point of faith vppon tradition without the Scriptures Phi. We haue to the contrary plaine Scriptures al the fathers most euident reasons that we must either beleeue traditions or nothing at all Theo. Wee knowe you can bragge but you haue neither Scripture father nor reason to impugne that which we affirme Phi. For traditions we haue Theo. Tradition is any thing that hath beene deliuered or taught by word or mouth or by writing touching the groundes of faith or circumstances and ceremonies of christian Religion And therefore when you muster the fathers to disproue the scriptures and to establish an vnwritten faith vnder the credit of traditions you corrupt the writers and abuse the readers Phi. How can we doe that when wee bring you the very words of the Authors themselues Theo. Hâ—w can you choose but doe it when you force the fathers to speake against themselues Phi. Do wee Theo. Your Rhemish translators perceiuing the weight of their whole cause to lie on this haue marshalled nine fathers in a ranke namely S. Chrysostom S. Basill S. Hierom S. Augustine S. Epiphanius S. Ireneus S. Tertullian S. Cyprian and Origen but to what purpose can you tell Phi. To proue that we must either beleeue traditions or nothing Theo. Beleeue them as articles of our faith or exercises of our profession Phi. Why make you that distinction Theo. Because the very same fathers that say traditions must bee receiued besides the Scriptures auouch likewise as I before haue shewed that no matter of faith or of any moment to saluation must be receiued or beleeued without scriptures Now choose whether you will graunt a flat contradiction in them or conclude with vs ergo the traditions which they meane bee no partes nor pointes of the christian faith And so these nine fathers on whose credits you thought to plant your late found faith hold nothing with you but rather against you Phi. How make you that appeare Theo. Uiew them once more Wee haue their plaine confession that all things necessary to saluation are comprised in the scriptures You produce them to witnes that your traditions bee not comprised in the scriptures Ergo by your own deponents we conclude that your traditioÌ„s be neither necessary to saluation nor points of the catholik faith without which we can not be saued Looke well to this issue they must either dissent from your religion or from themselues Phi. Your maior is not yet proued Theo. Yes with firm surer authorities than those be which you bring let the places be skanned which I before rehearsed the matter left to the iudgement of the reader Or if you be loath to looke so far back examine shortly thâ—se that follow The holy Scriptures inspired from heauen are sufficient for all instruction of truth sayth Athanasius The Gospell saith Chrysostom containeth al things whatsoeuer is requisite for saluation al that is fully laid downe in the Scriptures In the two Testaments sayth Cyril euery word or thing that pertaineth to God may be required discussed SufficieÌ„t to vs for saluatioÌ„ is the truth of Gods precepts saith Ambrose And Augustin There were chosen to be written such things as seemed to the holy ghost sufficient for the saluation of the faithfull Vincentius Lirinensis whoÌ„ you greatly boast of but without all cause agreeth with the rest that The Canon of the Scripture is perfect sufficient more thaÌ„ sufficient to al things And againe Not that saith he The canon alone is not sufficient for al things as it were taking great heed least he should seeme to deny the fulnes of the scriptures which you purposely impugne vnder a colour of catholicisme by his writings Now cite not only nine but nines kore fathers if you wil for traditions the more you stirre the worse you
neither mans speach nor witte can comprehende howe it was done And againe Virgo cum parturit virgo post partum Vacuatur vterus infans excipitur nec tamen virginitas violatur Shee was a virgin when shee was deliuered and a virgin after She was deliuered her child borne and shee for all that a virgin The like we find in sundry other of those sermons Phi. But Heluidius was noted as an heretike by S. Augustine and others for saying that our Lady was knowen of Ioseph her husband after the birth of our Sauiour Theo. The Fathers might reiect him as an heretike for his impudent abusing the Scriptures to build a falshoode vpon them which was not contained in them and if they detested it as a rash and wicked slaunder for him against manifest trueth to blemish that chosen vessell which the holy Ghost had ouershadowed and the son of God sanctified with his presence we neither blame them nor mislike their doings But yet they neuer charged the Scriptures with imperfection as you doe S. Hierome purposely writing against Heluidius vseth the fulnes of the Scriptures as his best argument to defend her virginitie Vt haec quae scripta sunt non negamus ita ea quae non sunt scripta renuimus Natum esse Deum de Virgine credimus quia legimus Mariam Nupsisse post partum non credimus quia non legimus As we deny not those things which are written so we reiect those things which are not written That God was borne of a Virgine wee beleeue because we read That the same virgine Mary became a wife after the birth of her son we beleeue it not because we read it not S. Augustine alleageth Scripture for it with what successe I will not iudge If neither of these quiet your contentious spirits our answer shal be that when you make iust proofe that this is a poinct not of trueth which we graunt but of faith which you vrge then will wee not faile to shewe it consequent to that which is written You were wont to obiect other pointes of Religion as proued by tradition and not by Scripture amongest which you set the Godhead of the holy Ghost and his proceeding from the Father and the Sonne But I trust by this time you be either stilled in them or ashamed of them Phi. Not so neither For As we acknowledge this article to be most true so we are sure you haue no expresse Scripture for it Theo. Are you well aduised when to spite vs you teach the people that the highest mysteries of their faith cannot be warranted by the Scriptures Perceaue you not what a wrong it is to the spirite of GOD to holde his Diuinitie by Tradition and not by the word of God What ignorance is this if it be no worse to say that Athanasius Dydimus Basil Nazianzen Ambrose Cyril and Augustine in their special Treaties of this very point haue alleaged no Scriptures to confirme the Godhead of the Holy Ghost Phi. We speake not of them but of you Theo. As if in a common case of faith the Scriptures were not common to vs with them If they had Scriptures for it we haue if we haue none than had they none Phi. Expresse Scripture they had none Theo. Doe you plaie with idle wordes in so weightie matters of Christian faith Euident and plaine scriptures they had where the holy Ghost was called God what is expresse Scripture if that be not Phi. They had no such scripture Theo. Had they not Turne your booke a little better you shall find they had Glorificate Deum portate in corpore vestro Quem Deum nisi spiritum sanctum cuius corpora nostra dixerat esse Templum Glorifie God saith the Apostle and beare him in your bodie What God but the Holy ghost whose Temple before he called our bodies And againe When Peter had said durst thou make a lie to the holy Ghost Ananias thinking he had lied vnto men Peter sheweth the Holy Ghost to be God by and by adding thou hast not lied vnto men but vnto God These two places the same father vrgeth against the Arrians as very plain scriptures Glorificate ergo Deum in corpore vestro Vbi dilucidè ostendit Deum esse spiritum sanctum glorificandum scilicet in corpore nostro Et quod Ananiae dixit Petrus Apostolus Ausus es mentiri spiritui sancto Atque ostendens Deum esse spiritum sanctum non es inquit hominibus mentitus sed Deo Glorifie therefore God in your body saieth Paul Where very manifestly hee sheweth the holy Ghost to bee God which must be glorified in our body as in his Temple And that which Peter the Apostle saide to Ananias Durst thou lie vnto the holy Ghost And declaring the holy Ghost to be God thou hast not lied vnto men saith he but vnto God Ambrose taketh them for euident scriptures Quod praemiserit Spiritum addiderit non es mentitus hominibus sed Deo necesse est in spiritu sancto vt vnitatem diuinitatis esse intelligas Nec solum in hoc loco euidenter sancti spiritus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est diuinitatem Scriptura testatur sed etiam ipse Dominus dixit in Euangelio quod Deus spiritus est In that Peter first named the Spirite and presently saide thou hast lied not vnto men but vnto God wee can not choose but vnderstand the holy Ghost to be God Neither in this place only doth the Scripture euidently witnesse the Godhead of the holy Ghost but also in the Gospel the Lord himselfe saith that the spirite is God Nazianzen saith these and such like be expresse scriptures and that if you doubt thereof you be very grosse headed They which knewe the only blasphemie which is vttered against the Spirite to be irremissible and gaue Ananias and Saphira that horrible reproche for lying vnto the holy Ghost what doe they seeme to thee openly to professe the Spirite to be God or no How dull headed art thou and without al sense of the spirite if thou doubt thereof or needest farther teaching By so many names so forcible and expresly recorded in the Scriptures the holy Ghost is called Amongst those expresse names numbring this for one of the chiefest and clearest that the holy Ghost was called God as the words before directly witnesse Phi. His proceeding from the Father and the sonne cannot bee proued by scripture though his Godhead may Theo. How then came it first to be beleeued by Tradition or by scripture Phi. Certeinly not by scripture Theo. Your tongues be so vsed to vntruthes that your certainties be litle worth the Church of Christ receiued her faith concerning the proceeding of the Holy Ghost from the father and the sonne not by Tradition but by scripture Saint Augustine saith Firmely beleeue and no whit doubt the same holy Ghost which is one Spirit of the
Your later allegation is grouÌ„ded on the former conuinceth your author to be but a yong father in respect of S. Basil. For where S. Basil died before Meletius your bastard Basil rehearseth Meletius as a Bishop of ancient memorie dead long before his time In super MeletiuÌ„ illuÌ„ admiranduÌ„ in eadeÌ„ fuisse sententia narrant qui cuÌ„ illo vixerunt Sed quid opus est vetera coÌ„memorare Immo nuÌ„c qui sunt Orientales Moreouer Meletius that admirable Bishop was of the same opinion as they that liued with him report But what neede I repeate auncient times The East Bishops which are at this day c. Now the true S. Basill not onely liued at the same time with Meletius but was made Deacon by him and wrate many letters to him and departed this life before him as the church storie witnesseth affirming that Helladius S. Basils successour and Meletius were both present at the second general councell at Constantinople vnder Theodosius and that must needes be when S. Basill was dead Phi. You did wel to discredit the place it were otherwise able to ouerthrowe all your new doctrine Theo. Then you do not well to build the antiquitie of your religion on this and such other apparent forgeries but were the places not forged they could do you no such seruice as you spake of in the question which we now handle yea rather they confirme that which we affirme that Things necessary to saluation are comprised in the Gospell Phi. Many traditions were receiued from the Apostles without writing which are not in the Gospel Theo. You must also proue those traditions to be necessary to saluation before you can conclude out of this place any thing against our assertioÌ„ Phi. As though the Apostles deliuered thinges which were not necessary to saluation Theo. The christian faith they deliuered in writing the rest they left vnwritten because those things which were no parts of faith were deliuered to the church of Christ for decency not for necessity Phi. For decency what a cauill that is Theo. The Traditions which your counterfet Basill here rehearseth as descending from the Apostles are no such deepe mysteries of religion as he pretendeth That the people should euery sunday and likewise betweene Easter and Whitsuntide pray standing is that any point of faith or help to saue their soules The words of inuocatioÌ„ at the Lords supper the praiers before after which the Greeke church vsed haue you not long since left them or to say the trueth did you euer accept them for catholike Singing with the crosse turning to the East thrise dipping him that is baptized and annointing him after with oyle bee these essentiall parts of Baptisme or rather externall Rites declaring the power and vertue of that Sacrament Your author himselfe will tell you they be not within the compasse of that faith which is common to all ChristiaÌ„s and must be rightly beleeued of all that will be saued For shewing the cause why they might not be written What things saith he such as were not baptized might not behold how could it be fit they should be publikely caried about in writing And againe The Apostles and fathers which prescribed certaine rites in the first beginning of the church reserued to these mysteries their dignitie by silence and secrecie For it is no mysterie which is open to the eares of the people and vulgar sort Now things necessary to saluatioÌ„ must openly be preached to the people and be fully conceiued of them and stedfastly proâ—essed by theÌ„ before they can be saued These things therefore be not of that sort but are rather excluded from necessitie because they were deliuered vnder secrecie Phi. But S. Basil or whosoeuer he be that wrote that booke saith vtraque parem vim habent ad pietatem Things vnwritten haue equal force to godlines with things written Theo. He saith not that all things vnwritten but vtraque both sortes haue like force to godlines not that dumbe ceremonies or outward gestures haue equall force with the word of God to lighten the minde conuert the soule and clense the heart it were arrogant blasphemie so to say but amongst things vnwritten he numbreth the praiers of the church proportioned by the word and hauing in them the very contents of the worde and also the Creede and profession of the faith it selfe whereby wee beleeue in the Father the Sonne and the holy ghost in truth godlinesse equiualent with the scriptures and in substaunce the very same that is witnessed by the scriptures Both these your Author in that place counteth for things vnwritten and these wee graunt haue equall force to godlinesse with those things that are written Phi. In effect they be all one with those things that are writteâ— Theo. That maketh his speâ—ch the truer which otherwise were absurd and vngodly Phi. Is it not a wâ—lie shift that sometimes you will admit no traditions and at other times when you bee hardly pressed fayth scriptures and all shall bee traditions with you Theo. Is it not a wilier that hauing framed to your selues a religion without the scriptures you woulde nowe fortifie the same by tradition against the scriptures But you may not so preuaile Wee haue the warrant of Saint Paul and the catholike consent of Christes Church that our faith shoulde depende on the word of God and since God speaketh not now but in his scriptures it is euident that our fayth in all pointes must bee directed and ruled by the scriptures Stand not brabling with vs about the worde Tradition which is very doubtfull and diuersely taken amongest the fathers Bring some faire and true demonstration for that which you holde as reason is you should to counterpâ—iâ—e so many proofes in a matter of such importance or else admit our assertion to be true Philand That wee can doe and yet not hurte our cause Theophil Wee knowe you can doe much You can bouldly call your selues catholikes though you bee vnshamefast heretikes and tell the people you teach nothing but antiquitie when the chiefest pointes of your religion bee meere nouelties and barbarous absurdityes Philand You can exemplifie a lye the best that euer I hearde Theophil Keepe that praise as proper to your selfe I will not disturbe your profession Touching the matter in question whether I speake ought that is vntrue let the reader iudge You will haue your religion and doctrine to bee Catholike that is confirmed by the Scriptures and professed in all places of all persons at all tymes euen from the first beginning wheresoeuer the Church of Christ hath beene receiued And when wee come to see the specialities wee finde you to swarue not onely from the sacred Scriptures and auncient Fathers but euen from those later ages and Churches which you woulde seeme to followe and to haue gotten you a religion of your owne without Councell Canon antiquitie or
name than the body and blood of Christ not that in earthly matter or essence they be really conuerted into those diuine things as you falsely gather but for that remaining in their former vsual both nature and substance they haue in them cary with them the fruite effect and force of Christs flesh wounded blood shed for the remission of our sinnes And because the people shoulde regarde not the creatures which they see but the graces which they beleeue therefore the Fathers euery where without exception call the elements by the names of the inwarde and heauenly vertues that are annexed to them and conferred with them by the trueth of his word power of his spirit This is the first rule which you should haue obserued The next is that whensoeuer they teach and propose the dignitie proprietie or efficacie of the Sacrament they meane not the creatures which our eies and tasts doe better iudge of than their tongues or wittes can teach vs but that other diuine lyfe-giuing and soule-sauing part of the sacrament which our heartes by fayth take holde on and possesse more really and effectually than if it were chammed in our mouthes or buried in our stomackes as you grossely conceiue of those thinges which bee most high and heauenly These two Rules remembred a very meane scholer may soone discharge the burden of all your allegations For either you mistake the one part for the other supposing that to bee corporall which in deede is spirituall or else you vrge the name which the signe beareth for similitude as â—arnâ—stily to all intents as 〈◊〉 were were the thing it selfe which causeth you to 〈◊〉 so many texâ—es and to straie so farre from trueth that no sound can recall you Phi. Away with your new found obseruations The catholike church hath the spirit of trueth promised for her direction and therefore the wil none of your wise inuentions to qualifie the fathers speeches Learne you rather at her handes to beleeue the wordes of Christ who first appointed this Sacrament and pronounced it to be himselfe without signe or figure when he saide this is my body and this is my blood not spirituall or metaphoricall but the same body which was broken and the same blood which was shed for remissioâ— of sinnes and that I trust you will confesse was his naturall and locall hath body and blood Theo. The question is not whether that were his naturall body which suffered on the crosse but when hee saide of the bread this is my bodie whether he substantially changed the dead element into himselfe made the creature become the creator or whether he annexed his trueth to the signe and grace to the Sacrament which required both the word of Christ to make the promise and his power to perfourme the speech And therefore we beleeue and acknowledge the wordes of our Sauiour to bee very needeful in ordaining this Sacrament euen in such manner and order as they were spoken that the signes might haue the fruites and effectes of his body and blood But that hee chaunged substances with the bread and wine or deified the creatures that his speech doth not inferre and that as yet we doe not beleeue except you can shewe vs howe the fleshe of Christ which was first made of a woman is nowe become to be made of bread and a dead and senslesse creature exalted to bee the son of God Phi. We do not say the bread is substantially conuerted into Christ or made the sonne of God but the bread is abolished in the place thereof commeth the glorious flesh of our Lord and Sauiour who is the Sonne of God And in that sense we hold the creator is now where the creature was but the dead element is not made the Sonne of God you woulde faine catch vs at such an aduantage Theo. How you can auoide it I yet perceiue not for if the bread bee nowe Christ which before it was not ergo the bread is made Christ and by consequent a dead element is nowe become or made the Sonne of God which I thinke will hardly stand with the very first groundes of Christian religion Phi. You presse the letter against both reason and trueth For the one is sayd to be conuerted or chaunged into the other because the one displaceth and succeedeth the other so is it a chaunge rather of the one for the other than a conuersion of the one into the other if you take conuersion properly as the Philosophers do Theo. Christ dâ—eth not say where the bread was there is nowe my body but this bread is my body And since before consecration it was not his body and now by repeating the wordes is become his body the conclusion is euident that by your opinion the bread is made Christ and so become the sonne of God Phi. You thinke to snare vs with schoole-trickes but setting your sophismes aside we plainly beleeue the Sacrament is Christ. Theo. You must beleeue the bread is Christ which as yet the Articles of our Creede will not suffer vs to doe I meane not to thinke that a dead and dumbe creature may bee God Phi. Do we say the bread is God Theo. You must auerre it if you stick to the letter of Christs words for he said of the bread as you inforce it this is my selfe now he was God Phi. I thought I should be euen with you at Landes end Christ did not say this bread is my bodie but this is my bodie where now is the force of your argument Theo. Euen where it was Phi. Why Christ sayd this is not meaning bread or any other creature Theo. That this must be somwhat else nothing was the body of Christ so you loose not only the bread but also the body Phi. Nay he said this is and that must needs be somwhat it can not be nothing Theo. It is well you haue found it I said so before you Then this is my body What this Was it bread that he spake of or somthing else Phi. He spake of that which he had in his hands Theo. You meane not long before Phi. In deede you say he had at that present when he spake the wordes nothing in his handes and so you would haue nothing to be his body Theo. Hinder not our course with matter impertinent to this place The demonstratiue THIS noteth that which Christ then gaue to his Disciples as wel as that which you thinke he then held in his hands Choose whether you wil of force the thing must be all one For that which hee helde that he gaue and of that which he first helde and after gaue hee saide this is my body Phi. He did so Theo. What was it Phi. Somwhat it was whatsoeuer it was Theo. What somwhat do you say it was Phi. What if I cannot tell Theo. Then must you seeke farther for your chaunging of substances The words of
doubt arise not touching the creatures of breade and wine but touching the fleshe and blood of Christ which are the Principall partes of this mystery the solution and explication of euery such doubt must be fet from the place where the Lord first reuealed this secret rebuked the Capernites for the misconstruction of his words and taught his Disciples how they should be both fruitfull partakers of his flesh rightful interpreters of his speech Phi. You woulde faine haue it so but wee meane to barre you that chaâ—ce Theo. You cannot bar vs but you must bar Chrysostom Cyprian Cyrill Austen and others that confesse the same trueth before vs. How chanced saieth Chrysostome the Disciples were not troubled when they heard this take eate this is my body Because their master had debated the same matter largely and profoundly before For at first when he spake of these thinges many were offended at the very words So Cyprian To the sonnes of Abraham doing the workes of Abraham the high Priest bringeth foorth bread and wine saying this is my body There arose before this as we reade in the Gospell of Iohn a question touching the nouelty of this speech and at the doctrine of this mysterie the hearers were amazed So Cyrill The Capernites before they beleeue question busily with him Therefore the Lord did not tell them how that might be but exhorteth them to seeke for it with faith mary to the beleeuing disciples he gaue peeces of breade saying take yee eate ye this is my body Likewise the cuppe hee deliuered round saying drinke yee all of this Thou seest that to those which asked without faith hee did not open the maner of this mysterie but to those which beleeued yea when they did not aske hee declared the same And Augustine When Christ spake of the Sacrament of his body and bloode they saide this speech is hard Who can heare it You see by the constant opinion of these Fathers that our Sauiour in the sixt of Iohn taught his Disciples what manner of eating his flesh and drinking his blood they should expect at his last Supper and that they therefore started not at these words this is my body because they learned of him before what to looke for and well remembred his interpretation of himselfe when the Capernites staggered at the like speech Then perforce what sense the wordes of Christ in the sixt of Iohn doe beare the same must the wordes of the supper retaine but there Christ teacheth the spirituall eating of his fleshe by faith his wordes bee figuratiue ergo the Lordes supper doeth not import any corporal eating of his flesh nor literall exposition of his wordes And why The performance may no way differ from the promise The promise made by Christ in the sixt of Iohn the bread which I will giue is my flesh was figuratiue The wordes then of the Supper THIS which I now giue is my body perfourming the same must likewise be figuratiue For Seales doe not alter or infringe but strengthen and confirme that which was promised The creatures of bread and wine Christ ordained at his last Supper to bee Sacramentes and Seales of his former promises vttered in the sixth of Iohn ergo they change not his meaning expressed before That was spiritual figuratiue therefore the wordes of the Supper can not be corporall nor literall And the wordes of Origen expounding the sixt of Iohn are a iust proofe that if in the wordes of the Supper you follow the letter that letter killeth Phi. This can not be Christ in the sixth of Iohn you say teacheth a spirituall and figuratiue kinde of eating his fleshe and in deliuering the Sacrament we be sure he spake of a corporall not of a spirituall eating his body For when our Lord saide take eate this is my body did hee not meane they should take it with their handes and eate it with their mouthes And therefore either the one place doth not serue to expound the other or else in both places is prescribed a reall and corporall eating the flesh of Christ drinking his blood which we rather imbrace as the likeliest Theo. In those wordes take and eate spoken at the last Supper hee ment no doubt the corporall taking and eating of that creature which hee gaue them and when hee added this is my body which hee tolde them before they must eate if they would haue any life in them he recalled to their mindes as Chrysostom noteth the doctrine hee had taught them of eating his flesh and drinking his blood in which because they were wel instructed by the Capernites error and their masters declaration of himselfe that the wordes which he spake were spirite and life they neither started nor stumbled at his speech but presently perceiued the Lord was ordayning a Sacrament to confirme their faith and not hiding his fleshe vnder accidentes or any other couerts to enter their mouthes for which grossenes the Capernits were before reproued Christes exposition therefore in the sixt of Iohn was purposely made to confute the carnal Iewes who when they heard of eating mans flesh and drinking blood dreampt of no kind of eating and drinking but with their bodily iawes lips and for that cause murmured as if they had beene inuited to some barbarous brutish act next to teach the disciples that indured his words in what sort they should looke for a diuiner purer kind of eating the flesh of Christ and drinking his blood by beleeuing hoping and reioycing in his fleshe that was wounded and blood that was shed for their sinnes This he assured and ratified vnto them by ordaining afterward a Sacrament which they shoulde visibly see but inuisibly vnderstand corporally receiue but spiritually interprete in beleeuing the same by the power of his worde and spirit to haue in it cary with it the fulnes of his trueth mercy openly sealed with those pledges of his promises instruments of his grace lest their faith should faint by reason of his departure absence from theÌ„ or their harts faile them as if they were destitute of his protection fauor amidst so many troubles as should inclose them Phi. If you will needes haue the sixt of S. Iohn to pertaine to the Sacrament then is there say we a reall corporall kind of eating established in that chapter For Christ in plaine speech saith my flesh is meate in deede and my blood is drinke in deede Theo. It is well that you bethinke your selfe at last you were about to dissent both froÌ„ the fathers from your own felowes For the fathers as I haue shewed you confesse that the Disciples were by the words of Christ in this place instructed how they should eate his flesh drinke his blood euen in the sacrament that made theÌ„ vnderstand him when he said take eate this is my body drink ye al
example without warrant of God or man Phi. Theodoret hath set you vppe in your Ruffe but I would you knew it in this case we care neither for Theodoret nor you if that were his opinion as it is yours Theo. And who hath put you into your ruffe that you not only despise that learned and auncient Bishoppe but the whole Church in him which then so beleeued and you cannot auoide at this day except you will bee Eutichians Phi. The Maior is not altogether so sâ—und as you thinke it Theo. Yet did Gelasius and Theodoret confound that error with that comparison and S. Augustine long before thâ—m did vrge the same This is it that wee say this is it that by all meanes we labour to confirme to witte that the Sacrifice of the Church consisteth of two things the visible kinde of elementes and the inuisible flesh and bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ the Sacrament and the thing of the SACRAMENT euen as the person of Christ consisteth of God and man for so much as euery thing containeth the nature and trueth of those things of which it consisteth By which rule it is certaine there musâ— be in the sacrament the nature truâ—th and substance of bread and wine euen as in Christes person either nature hath his trueth and substance without confusion or distraction Phi. We haue fathers to the contrary if the time did serue to produce them as anon I will In the meane while what is this to Leo Theophil Leo in few words abbridgeth the sumâ— of this reason and saith the followers of Eutiches doe in vaine with their mouthes receâ—ne the Sacrament since with their hartes they doe not beleeue the tâ—ueth of Christs humane nature and answer AmeÌ„ to no purpose so long as they dispute against that which they would seâ—m to enioye by receiuing the seale and pledge thereof in the church with others Phi. This is your Commentarie besâ—des the text his wordes are The selfe same bodie which wee beleeue with faith is receiued with mouth Which you cannot interprete to be mâ—ant of the bread For the breade is not beleeued with hart and against the trueth of Christs bodie not against the bread did the followers of Eutiches dispute Theo. Doth Leo â—aie the selâ— same bodie Phi. He saith Hoc ore sumitur quod fide creditur that is receiued with the mouth which with our faith is beleeued and that cannot be the bread The. Much lesse maie it be the natural bodie of Christ. For then Leo had mightilie confirmed not confuted Eutiches opinion His error was that the humanitie of christ after his ascension was swallowed vp of his diuinitie and so changed that it was now no naturall bodie Against this if Leo should haue opposâ—d your reall presence in the Sacrament where Christs body is without quantity shape circumscription distinction of partes and all other conditions of a naturall body he had beene a Proctour â—or Eutiches impiety not a confuter of it Neither could Eutiches himsâ—lfe haue wished a better defence for his heresie than the confessâ—on â—f such a bodâ—e as you imagine in the sacrament and therfore you haâ—k that HOC ilfauouredly when you make Leo rather a consenter with Eutiches than a disprouer of him with your fantasticall presence which is an approbation and no refutation of Eutiches error Phil. What a slander this is that the reall presence should be a refuge for Eutichâ—s error Theoph. Such a slaunder as with all your cunning you shall neuer wipe awaie Phi. Doe we not affirme the substance of Chrisâ—es humane flesh to be in the Sacrament The. Such a substance as Eutiches him selfe imagined hauing neither proportion of shape nor position of parts nor repletion of place nor anie condition incident to a naturall bodie but the godly fathers were farre from vrging such a substance against Eutiches They pressed him with the bodilie shape circumscription extension and perfeâ—â—ion of Christes flesh as well in all other requisites as in substance and to prooue this amongst other arguments they brought as I haue shewed the Sacrament for a resemblance and demonstrance of both natures in Chrisâ— that as the bread after consecration keepeth his quantity quality shape and substance notwithstanding it be vnited and annexed to the heauenly grace that worketh in the sacrament so the bodie of Christ after his assumption retaineth his former perfection proportion figure and substance loosing no poinâ—â— nor part of his humane nature but only replenished with immortall glorie This must be Leoes Hoc if he will do any good with alleaging the Sacrament against Eutiches as I haue proued by Austen Gelasius and Theodoret Otherwise if he do but mention your real presence he openeth the gappe and leuelleth the way to Eutiches furie and runneth headlong against the rest of his fellow seruants and successours that vsed the same argument to confute Euâ—iches with a manifest contradiction of your reall presence Phi. I bring you Leoes wordes Theo. Leoes wordes haue nothing in them to crosse that sense which I establish Hoc signifieth any thing and hath no relation to Christes flesh in the sacrament but to the proportion rather betweene Christ the sacrament in that they beleeued no other thing of Christ than they saw with their eyes receiued with their mouths in the Sacrament to wit the perfect shape substance of bread after Consecration consequently they must holde the same opinion of Christs humanitie after his ascension Phi. If you vse this trade you may peruert all the fathers writings and make what sense you list to their sayings Theo. Peruert them no more than we doe and you shall neuer euert the maine doctrine as you haue doone We measure â—heir wordes by their owne warrant and suffer nâ—t a phrase here and there which may bee well reuoked to their rules to vndermine the chiefe grouâ—des of their faith Phi. No more doe we Theo. Why then rage you to heare vâ— say that these few places which you haue brought for eating christs bodie with your mouthes and iawes may be referred to the signes called by those names as well as to the things themselues Phi. You take vpon you to bee Iudges and to pronounce at your pleasures when the wordâ—s shall belong to the one and when to the other so that no father shall say any thing against your heresie but yet will by and by turne it and wind it I knowe not whither Theo. Nothing more hindereth the search for trueth than a desire to lye We shew you the general admonition of the fathers themselues that after consecration they call the visible signes no longer by their woonted names but by the names of those things whose signes they are and whose vertues they haue This Rule we say is then to take place when the speach which we find in a father if it should be referred to the things themselues would be both absurd and repugnant to
forme of a seruaunt Doubtlesse the perfection of mans nature The forme of a seruaunt is out of question the nature of a seruaunt sayeth Chrysostome Therefore Augustine him-selfe addeth this reason why Christ must not bee thought to bee euerie where present ne veritatem corporis auferamus Least wee take from him the trueth of his bodie concluding that Christ is euerie where per id quod Deus est by that nature which is God in coelo autem per id quod homo in heauen by that nature which is man Where these wordes that which is man interprete what he meane by the former speech wheÌ„ hee saide according to this forme Christ is not euerie where present But let the worde bee taken in your sense yet doth it fully confirme our assertion For humane forme and shape is inseparably ioyned to the substaunce of Christes bodie and Christes humane forme by your confession can not bee present in many places at one time ergo neither his humane substance These â—waine shape and substaunce can not bee seuered hee is no man that hath not the shape of man Now choose whether that bodie which as you say your hosts containe shall keepe the forme and shape of man or loose the nature and substaunce of Christ. For the Lord Iesus as man must haue not onely the substaunce but also the shape of a man So shall hee come as you haue seene him go to heauen that is saith Austen in the very same shape and substance of his flesh Our vile bodie saith Paul shall he change to bee fashioned like to his glorious bodie but our bodies shall then haue distinction of partes proportion of shape circumscription of place ergo the glorified body of Christ hath and must haue these very proprieties of our nature So that if his bodily shape can be but in one place his bodily substance can be in no moe Therefore saith Fulgentius Quod siverum est corpus Christi loco potest vtique contineri if Christ haue a true bodie that no doubt may be concluded in a place And Theodoret Illud enim corpus habet priorem formam figuram circumscriptionem vt semel dicam corporis substantiam that bodie which Christ caried to heauen with him hath the same forme figure circumscription at one word the same substance of a bodie which it had before Phi. S. Chrysostome and S. Ambrose affirme the contrary Theo. What affirme they Phi. That one and the some bodie of Christ is euerie where present Their words are Quoniâ—m multis in locis offertur multi Christi sunt â—equaquaÌ„ sed vnus vbique est Christus hic plenus existens illic plenus vnum corpus Because we offer in many places are there many Christs no by no meanes but one Christ is euery where here whole and there whole one body And S. Chrysostom exceedingly wondring at so miraculous a presence crieth out O the strangenes of the thing O the goodnes of our God! He that sitteth aboue with his Father in heauen at the verie moment of time is handled with the fingers of all men Theo. Make you Chrysostom and Ambrose the disciples of Eutyches Phi. Make you no worse reckoning of them than I do and they shall haue their due honor Theo. I thinke them to be farre from Eutyches errour Phi. And so doe I. The. Why then alleadge you their words for that erronious position which was condemned in Eutyches Phi. I alleadge them for the reall presence of Christ in the Sacrament Theo. Your reall presence and vbiquitie if you will haue Christs humane substance dispersed in many places without shape or circumscription are the verie bowels and inwardes of Eutyches heresie Phi. No Sir S. Chrysostom and S. Ambrose were no heretikes Theo. In deede they were not and therefore you doe them the more wrong to wrest their speeches to make for his madnes Philand We produce them to confirme a trueth Theophil The very same trueth that the church of Christ abhorred in Eutyches Phi. What did the church abhorre Theo. Euen this which you would proue by the words of Ambrose Chrysostom â—hat the flesh of Christ after his ascension was not locall nor circumscribed within any certaine place Phi. We grant the manhood of Christ in heauen is locall and circumscribed with place that setteth vs free from Eutyches errour Theo. It doeth if you constantly keepe that point of faith and contradict it not by an other deuise Phi. We verilie beleeue and publikely professe that Christes humane nature in heauen hath quantity shape distinction of parts circumscription and all other conditions of a naturall and true body what would you more Theo. We would no more but if you fall from that are you not within the compasse of Eutyches furie Phi. We fal not from it The. Then how can Christs body in the sacrament waÌ„t all these which christiaÌ„ religion affirmeth to bee permanent perpetual in the maÌ„hood of Christ or why would you collect out of Amb. or Chry. against the very principles of faith that Christes humane fleshe is vncircumscribed and euerie where diffused Philand Wee meane that of Christes fleshe in the Sacrament not of his manhood in heauen Theophil Bee there many Christes Philand Who sayth there are you heard that euen now reproued by S. Chrysostom and S. Ambrose as a wicked absurditie to say that there were many Christes And therefore they concluded there was but one Christ euerie where Theo. That one Christ hath hee many naturall and substantiall bodies Philand Why aske you those questions of vs we bee not infected with any such frensie Theo. You may the sooner answere Hath Christ two reall and naturall bodies the one in heauen the other in the Sacrament Phi. No this is all one with that Theo. That by the rules of your creede is locall and circumscribed if this bee the same howe can this bee without quantitie shape and circumscription Phi. Beleeue you not Christ when hee sayde this is my bodie Theop. Yeas veryly but you so expound his words that you subuert the whole frame of his truth and our common faith with your reall and locall presence Phi. Do we subuert the common faith with our opinion Theo. Our Christian faith is this Wee must beleeue sayeth Augustine the Sonne of God according to the substance of his Deitie to be inuisible incorporall and vncircumscribed but according to his humane nature to be visible corporall and locall You heard Vigilius the martyr say For so much as the word is euery where and the fleshe of Christ not euery where it is cleare that one and the same Christ is of two natures eueriwhere according to the nature of his Diuinity and contained in a place according to the nature of his humanitie and this sayeth hee is the catholike fayth confession which the Apostles deliuered the Martyrs confirmed
specie visibili they dranke one thing we drink an other thing but in visible kinde Ibi Petra Christus nobis Christus quod in altari Dei ponitur Si speciem visibilem intendas aliud est To them the Rock was Christ to vs that is Christ which is set on the altar of God If you looke to the visible kinde it is an other thing than that they dranke In these places you can not interprete species a shewe without substance vnlesse you wil transubstantiate Manna which the children of Israel did eate the rocke which they dranke of the hatchet which Elizeus made swâ—m the bread that is in common vse without before consecration for these things Austen and Ambrose comparing them with this Sacrament do call visibiles species visibles kindes as they do the bread and wine proposed to the faithfull at the Lordes table And were you so peruerse that against the meaning of the Fatherâ— â—nd signification of the word you would needes haue species to bee taken for your miraculous and mysticall accidences I can tell you they are like to shrinke in this change as well as the substaunce For Ambrose saith Sermo Christi mutat species elementorum the word of Christ changeth by your interpretation the shewes of the elementes which is so apparantly false that your selues dare not abide it And therefore species must stand not for the outward formes and shewes but for the thinges themselues As Sainct Augustine speaking of the Sacramentall bread sayth vt sit visibilis species panis multa grana in vnum consperguntur Manie cornes are kneaded togither to make not the shew but the visible kinde or creature of bread By which it is euident that species with auncient writers in their discourses of this Sacrament is not a shewe without a substaunce as you vainly suppose but a kinde or creature which is far from accidentes hanging in the ayre you know not how by miraculous geometrie Philand Wee ground not our selues so much on the bare name of species as on the change of the bread and wine made by vertue of consecration as all the Fathers witnesse Theo. It is a verie simple foundation to builde on a bare word which hath many significations besides that and any signification rather than that which you conceiue and yet that is one of the best foundations you haue for your newe founde shewes without substaunce and as for the chaunge of the sacred elementes made by the wordes of Christ and mentioned in the Fathers if you did not vrge your fansies on their phrases but examine their doctrine you should soone spie your error which nowe you will not you bee so wedded to the preiudice of your owne opinion Phi. Doe not all the Fathers with one voice confesse a change to bee made in the elementes by the words of Consecration Theo. Doe not we acknowledge the same How could vsuall bread taken of the fruites of the earth and seruing only to feede the bodie become a Sacrament instrument of heauenly grace and life to quicken and strengthen the soule of man but by some great and maruelous chaunge Phi. Such as none coulde perfourme but the mighty finger of God himselfe For so S. Ambrose and others to perswade this chaunge haue recourse to Christes eternall power and trueth Theo. Yea verily Phi. That confession is suffâ—cient to confute the doctrine which you defend Theo. I see not how Phi. If the bread were not changed from his former substance it could neither bee miraculous nor neede the omnipotent power of Christ. For figures similitudes men may make but this mutation is wrought by the mightie power of the holy Ghost and the manner is vnsearchable Theo. Greater power truth are required for the finishing of one Sacrament than for the working of many miracles Miracles not only the godly but also the wicked haue diuerse times wrought The Sorcerers of Egypt did some wonders Antichrist hath his miracles and those not a few But Sacramentes no Sainct no not the chosen and elect Angels of heauen can institute For who dare promise who can performe the spirituall and celestiall graces of God to bee annexed to the visible signes but only God How could water regenerate the soule if the worde were not God How could bread and wine norish to life euerlasting vnlesse the same God had likewise spoken the word We must in al sacraments be fully persuaded of Christs infallible truth alsufficient power before we can either beleeue or inioy the promises If his word might lack truth or want power then should our faith vanish these outward elements perish without profiting vs but with him is no changing neither can any thing defeate his wil therefore when wee bee taught to looke not on the weaknes of the creatures which be corruptible but on the perfection of his heauenly word which is puissant predominaÌ„t ouer al things what doth this helpe your real corporal coÌ„uersion of bread into Christ What maketh this for TraÌ„substantiation God is wonderfull in this and all other his sacramentes not by casting away substances and leauing accidences but by working that in our hearts by the mightie power of his spirit aboue nature which the visible signes import to our senses and this is more maruelous in any wise mans eye than your accidentall shewes without a subiect Phi. God is maruelous in all his workes but in this more than in any other because the substance of the bread wine is changed where the qualities are not Theo. That change you dreame of but who auoucheth it besides your selues or what ancient father euer mentioned any such Phi. They all confesse the change which we speake of Theo. You bee so deepe in your empty shewes that wee take your all to bee as much as none Phi. Thinke you as you list wee knowe what wee haue Theo. If your stoare bee so great why make you such curtsie to name vs one Phi. You will quarell with him when I bring him Theo. Your selfe mistrust him before you offer him Phi. I mistrust your carping not his writing Theo. If mine answere bee not sound wherefore serue you but to refute it Phi. Wel then Eusebius Emissenus hath an euident testimony for this matter Recedat omne infidelitatis ambiguum quandoquidem qui author est muneris ipse est etiam testis veritatis Nam inuisibilis sacerdos visibiles creaturas in substantiam corporis sanguinis sui verbo secreta potestate conuertit ita dicens Accipite comedite hoc est corpus meuÌ„ Et sanctificatione repetita accipite bibite ait Hic est sanguis meus Ergo sicut ad nutum praecipientis Domini repente ex nihilo substiterunt excelsa caelorum profunda fluctuum vasta terrarum ita pari potestate in spiritualibus Sacramentis vbi praecipit virtus seruit effectus Let all doubt of infidelitie
himself is neither of a diuine substance only nor of an humane only There is then as wel in the high Priest as in the sacrifice an heauenly substance there is also an earthly substanceâ— The earthly substance in theÌ„ both is that which may corporally locally be seen The heauenly in them both is the inuisile word which in the beginning was God with God The Church of England euen to the conquest held the same Doctrine and taught it to the people of this Land in their publike homilies which are yet to be seene of good record in the Saxon tongue The sermon then read on Easter day throughout their Churches is a manifest declaration of that which I say where amongst others these words are occurrent The holy font water that is called the welspring of life is like in shape to other waters and is subiect to corruption but the holy Ghosts might commeth to the corruptible water through the Priests blessing and it can after wash the bodie and soul from all sinne through Ghostly might Beholde now we see two things in this one creature After true nature that water is corruptible water and after Ghostly mystery hath hallowing might So also if we behold that holie housell after bodily vnderstanding then see we that it is a creature corruptible mutable if we acknowledge therein ghostly might theÌ„ vnderstaÌ„d we that life is therein and that it giueth immortalitie to them that eate it with beliefe Much is betwixt the inuisible might of the holy housel the visible shape of his proper nature It is naturally corruptible bread and corruptible wine and is by might of Gods word truly Christes bodie and his bloud not so notwithstanding bodily but Ghostly Much is betwixt the bodie Christ suffered in and the body that is hallowed to housell The body truely that Christ suffered in was borne of the flesh of Mary with bloud with bone with skinne and with sinewes in humane limmes with a reasonable soul liuing and his Ghostly body which wee call the housell is gathered of many cornes without bloud and bone without limme without soul. And therefore nothing is to be vnderstood therein bodily but al is Ghostly to be vnderstood Phi. What care we for your Saxon recordes Theo. Lesse care we for your Romish Monckish recordes so lately and grossely forged as we haue proued yet this to your inward grief you may now see shal an other day to your vtter confusion feele that your nouelties touching the Sacrament were neuer hard of in the Church of England nor in the Church of Christ til Lancfrancus Anselmus other Italians a thowsand yeres after christ came in with their AntichristiaÌ„ deuises and inuentions expounding Species and forma panis for the qualities accidents of bread without any subiect or substance which once taking place you fel amaine both to sacrilegious sophismes against trueth and rebellious practises against Princes ceased not til you brought them to their hight in your late Laterane Councell vnder Innocentius the third 1215 yeares after Christ. This is your Catholicisme that you so much vaunt of which the Christian world was vtterly ignorant of for almost a thousand yeares and to the which you would now reduce the simple with a shew of holines pretending greate grauitie and admirable antiquitie with bolde faces and eger speaches though you be void of both if you were well examined Phi. Were the doctrine of elder ages in some doubt which we knowe to be fully for vs yet you confesse these last fiue hundreth yeares are cleare on our side Theo. The miter and Scepter were yours the mysterie of iniquiiie working as was foretold and infecting the West Church with hypocrisie and heresie as fast as the Turke oppressed the East with rage tyrannie Yet in euerie of these last most corrupted ages God raised a number of innocent and simple men with the confession of their mouthes and expence of their liues to witnesse his trueth against the pride and fury of their aduersaries whome your holie father hanged burned and otherwise murdered for repining at his proceedings that whome with honour and ease he could not allure at lest he might quaile with terror and torment Phi. Shoulde wee leaue the fellowship of holie Popes famous Prelates mighty Princes learned and Religious Moncks and Friers yea Saints and ioyne our selues to a fewe condemned and infamous heretikes as you doe Theo. That which is pretious and admirable before men may be odious detestable before God The dignities of men cannot deface the truth of Christ the higher their states the greater their falles if they did oppose themselues against the highest Phi. You say they did Theo. I doe not but this I say that if the respect of their externall and temporall glorie be the ground of your conscience you haue a wicked affection as well as Religion To follow men against God is to magnifie them afore God Phi. You condemne them for cast-awaies Theo. I am not their iudge He that made them might be mercifull to them amiddest the defects and dangers of those daies as he hath been to some in all ages and places yet that is no safetie for you to defend their open errors and wilfully to continue their wickednes Phi. Were not our fathers religious and holy men Theo. Iustifie not your fathers against God lest their mouthes condemne you for a pernicious ofsprng God will be glorified when he iudgeth say you and your fattherâ— what you can to the contrary Reprooue not the sharpnes of his iustice which he neuer sheweth but for great and vrgent cause submit your selues rather and acknowledge it is his vndeserued and yet not vnwoonted mercie that you be not consumed as your fathers were before you but haue yet time and warning to repâ—nt Phi. And are you such Saints that you â—eede no repentance Theo. Wee desire to liue no longer than we confâ—sse before heauen and earth that as God hath beene righteous in reuenging the sinnes and iniquities of our fathers by taking his trueth from them and leauing them to the power of darkenes and kingdome of Antichrist so he might most iustly for our vngodlines vnthankfulnes haue wrapped vs in the same confusion and destruction saue that of his infinite and vnspeakeable mercy he woulde haue his Gospell preached afresh for a witnes to all Nations before he come to iudgement to make all men inexcusable that haue either not beleeued or not obeyed the truth And this causeth vs not onely with all that is within vs to giue glorie to his name for so great a blessing but to beseech him that though we be lighted on the ends of the world when charitie waxeth cold and faith is skant found on the face of the earth we may not be caried away with the error of the wicked to perdition especially not to followe the way of Cain that
carnis t August in Euang Iohan. tract 50. What means we haue to take hold of Christ now absent in heauen u Ibidem How Christ is prâ—sent with vs and howe he is absent from vs. * There not here x Cyril in Ioan. lib. 6. cap. 14. Christ absent in flesh a Lib. 9. cap. 21. b Lib. 9. cap. 22. c Lib. 11. cap. 3. d Lib. 11. ca. 21. e Lib. 11. ca. 22. f Orig. tract in Matth. 33. His bodie absent from vs. His manhood is neither in all places nor at all times with vs. g Ambr. li. 10. super â—ucae cap. 24. de hora Dominicae resurrectionis christ is not to besought neither on earth nor in earth h Gregor in Euang homil 2â— i Ibidem homil 30. k Ibidem hom 29. The fathers themselues teach both partes of this consequentâ— Christ is in heauen ergo not in earth l August epist. 57. ad Dardanum That the substaunce of Christs bodie maie be in manie places at one time is a condemned heresie m August epist. ad Daâ—danum 57. * Nec aliunde quam inde * In eadem carnis forma atque substantia * If Christes manhood be in euerie place he looseth the truth of his bodie n In eadem epi. ad finem * In aliquâ— loco coeli o August in Iohan tract 30. He speaketh of the trueth of the gospel not of the truth of the bodie of Christ. * β Vno loco esse poâ—est p Vigilius contra Eutych lib. â— cap. 4. * That the flesh of Christ should be euery where was a sequâ—lâ— of Eutyches heresie * Christ maÌ„hood conâ—ained in a place * From this the Iesuits be vtterly fallen q Fulgent ad Thrasimundum Regem lib. 2. cap. 5. * Christs humane substance is not both in heauen earth at one time * If Christ be not locall he is no true man The body of Christ contained in one 〈◊〉 place not diffunded in manie * This without question is the Christian faith and not the Iesuits vbiquitie or multilocitie This is a bare shift of the Iesuits yet this is all the refuge they haue r Aug. epist. 57. s Vigil contra Eutych li. 4. cap. 4. t Fulgent lib. 2. cap. 5. ad Thrasimundum regeÌ„ u Ibidem Fourme is all one with truth and perfection a Ambros. lib. 7. epist. 47. b Leo epist 97. c Chryso in cap. 2. epist. ad Phil. sermâ— 6. d Aug. epist. 57. e Ibidem Per id quod homo is substaÌ„ce as well as shape Christ can haue no humane substance without humane shape f Aug. epist. 57. g Phili. cap. 3. h Fulgent ad Thrasimundâ—â— regâ—m lib. 2. cap. 5. i Theod. dial 2. It is no humane bodie that hath not shape as well as substance k Ambro. in 10. cap. ad Heb. Chrys. hom 17. in eadem epist. l Chrysost. de Sacerdotio li. 3. Chrysostome and Ambrose could not gainesay the rest and be Catholikes The Iesuites would drawe Chrysostome and Ambrose to be of Eutyches opinion These conditions of a true bodie the manhead of Christ maie haue wheresoeuer it be There is but one Christ that one Christ hath but one body which is not euery where m Aug. de essentia diuinitatis n Vigil contra Eutych lib. 4. cap. 4. The words of Ambrose and Chrysostome as the Iesuites conster them are against the verie grounds of our common faith How Chrysostome Ambrose must be vnderstood o Chrys. de Sacerdot lib. 3. Chrysostoms figuratiue vehement â—peaches much abused by the Iesuits p Ambros. lib. 10. in 24. Luc. q August epist. Iohan tract 1. Chrysostome himselfe excludeth the corporall vnderstanding of his words r Chryso de Sacerdot lib. 3. s Ibidem t Chrys. Ibidem The power of God must neuer be alleadged against his wil nor our faith which he hath commaunded vs to beleeue u Tertul. aduers Praxeam Gods omnipotencie a common refuge with heretikes When wee produce gods power for our fansies against his trueth wee make him a lyar and in subiection to our willes The Iesuits pretend god-power against the christian faith * Or if you do not see your selues condeÌ„ned in the great councel of ChalcedoÌ„ Act. 5. definitio 2. as heâ—eâ—iâ—s for not beleeuing it * A very witty excâ—ption Then you beleeue the Christian faith to be true euerie where sauing in the Sacrament and what is that but wilfullie and openlie to denie the faith where you list Whatsoeuer he can doe you bee heretikes in the meane time for contradicting the christian faith * Tertul. aduer Praeâ—eam The Iesuites incurre not onelie Impieties but impossibilities a August conâ—ra â—austum li. 20. cap. 11. b Cyril in Ioan. lib. 15. cap. 3. These fathers were not afraide to saie Christ coulde not be in manie places at one time The Iesuits whiles they would shunne Eutyches error runne headlong into contradictions yet stick in the same mire that Eutyches did c 2. Tim. 2. d Hebr. 6. e Aug. de ciuit Dei lib. 5. c. 10. f Ambr. lib. 6. epist. 37. g Ibidem What thingâ— are impossible to God and why Of contradictions one part is euer false and all falshood impossible to God A lie in worke is as bad as a lie in word as contrarie to the nature of God This is right Iesuitical skill to saie the bodie of Christ is and is not contained in a place * These bee worse than the Poets chimers The best gâ—ounds you haue for these thinges are dreames and miracles of your owne making * For none of these pointes haue the Iesuits so much as one auncient father * For none of these pointes haue the Iesuits so much as one auncient father * For none of these pointes haue the Iesuits so much as one auncient father * For none of these pointes haue the Iesuits so much as one auncient father * For none of these pointes haue the Iesuits so much as one auncient father * You be good at vndertaking but naught at perfourming It is enough for the Iesuâ—â—s to call themselues Catholiâ—es though they cannot shâ—w one writer for a thousand yeares that taught theâ—r transubstantiation * Which will say neuer a word for your purpose This is cited out of S. Austen by frier Walden tomo 2. de Sacramentis cap. 83 a diuine worke in D. Allens iudgement lib. 1. de Euch. sacâ— pa. 34â— This forgery with others was iudicially allowed by Pope Martin the fifth and his Cardinals in their Consistorie * This young Austen lacked not onely learning and trueth but Latine and witte * Had you not beene ashamed of your occupation you would haue printed iâ— The woordes did so plainly betray thâ—mselues that they haue since suppressed the booke for verâ—e shame Bede likewise forged by Walden * Citatura The. Walden tomo 2. vt supra cap. 82. * He neuer wrate anie such booke The credite of both these places lieth onely on frier Walden who
Father and the Sonne to proceede both from the Father and the Sonne For the Sonne saith when the spirit of trueth coÌ„meth which proceedeth from the father Where he teacheth vs the spirit to be his also because himselfe is trueth And that the holy ghost proceedeth likewise from the sonne the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles doeth deliuer vnto vs. For Esay sayth of the sonne Hee shall strike the earth with the rod of his mouth and with the spirit of his lippes he shal slea the wicked Of whom the Apostle also sayth Whom the Lord Iesus shall slea with the spirit of his mouth Whome the onely Sonne of God declaring to bee the Spirite of his mouth breathing on his Disciples after his resurrection sayth receiue ye the holy Ghost And Iohn in his Reuelation sayth that out of the mouth of the Lorde Iesu him-selfe there proceeded a sharpe two edged swoorde Hee therefore is the Spirit of his mouth hee is the sword which proceedeth out of his mouth And againe By many testimonies of the diuine Scriptures it is prooued that he is the spirite of the father and the sonne which is properly called in the Trinitie the holy ghost And that he proceedeth from both it is thus proued because the sonne himselfe saith the spirit of trueth proceedeth from the father And when he was risen from death and appeared to his disciples he breathed on them and sayd Receiue ye the holy ghost to shewe that the spirit proceeded from him also And that spirit is the vertue which came from him as we read in the gospel and healed all men What you thinke of these places we know not but sure we are S. Augustine himselfe sayth of these the like Cum per Scripturarum sanctarum testimonia docuissem de vtroque procedere Spiritum sanctum When I had shewed by the testimonies of the Holy scriptures that the holy ghost proceedeth froÌ„ both the father the sonne And if it bee the naturall and distinct proprietie of the Spirite to proceede as it is of the sonne to bee begotten which I winne you will not denie then is it as euident by the Scriptures that the holy Ghost proceedeth from the Father and the sonne as it is that the sonne was begotten of the father For as the second person in Trinitie was begotten of him whose sonne hee is so the thirde Person proceeded from them whose spirite hee is but hee is the Spirite of them both as the Scriptures expressely witnes Ergo hee proceeded from them both Phi. The doctrine is true but the scripture is not expresse Theo. What meane you by your expresse scripture Phi. Those very woordes He proceedeth from them both are not found in the scriptures Theo. Alas good Sirs is that your quarrell Doe the scriptures I pray you consist in spelling or in vnderstanding Neuer read you what S. Hierom sayth Nec putemus in verbis ScripturaruÌ„ Euangelium esse sed in sensu non in superficie sed in medulla non in sermonum folijs sed in radice rationis Let vs not thinke the Gospell to lie in the words of the scriptures but in the sense not in the rind but in the pith not in the leaues of speech but in the ground of reason truth If by expresse scripture you meane the plaine 〈◊〉 sense of the word of God we haue euident infallible proofes thence for the proceeding of the holy ghost from the father the sonne But if you sticke on the syllables letters which we speake you doe but wrangle with vs as the Arias did with the Nicene fathers Expostulating why the Bishops that met at Nice vsed these words substance consubstaÌ„tial which were nowhere found in the Scriptures our answere to you shal be the same that theirs was to them These words though they be not found in the Scriptures yet haue they the same meaning and sense which the Scriptures containe And that we count to be expresse scripture For otherwise as Hilarie saith Al heretiks speake Scriptures without sense the diuell himself as Hierom noâ—eth hath spoken some things out of the scriptures but that as they both witnes in the very next words The scriptures coÌ„sist not in reading but in vnderstanding And yet I see no cause why this point should be denied to be expresse Scripture for so much as S. Iohn describing the son of God with a sharpe two edged â—word proceeding out of his mouth which is the rod of his mouth wherewith he shal smite the earth the spirit of his lips wherewith hee shall slea the wicked as Esay prophesied hee should and Paul declareth hee would vseth the very same word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 twise which our Sauior before spake of his father 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the spirit which proceedeth froÌ„ the father So that you were fouly ouerseene when you obiected this point of our christian faith as wanting expresse scripture Phi. If you take not only the words but also the sense â—or scripture we will not greatly gainesay but all points of faith may be deriued out of these words or out of the sense of that which is written The. Deriued as you do pardoÌ„s pilgrimages penaÌ„ces purgatory But we say that al points of faith must be plainly concluded or necessarily collected by that which is writteÌ„ And for our so saying we haue not only the scriptures fathers but also your selues which being so often required vrged to shewe what one point of faith the primatiue church of Christ beleeued wtout the scriptures could neuer shew any Phi. We could shew many if that needed we wer disposed The. I know not what accoÌ„pt you make of it but to our simple conceiuing it is the groundwork of al religioÌ„ crazeth the very heart of your vnwritten verities And if to satisfie the people of God disburden your selues of an errour you be not all this while disposed to doe what you can we must leaue you for curious and daintie men and thinke you can not Phi. Tertullian was of that minde that we are when he willed the christians not to appeale to the scriptures for the triall of their faith His words are Ergo non est ad scripturas prouocandum nec in ijs constituendum certamen in quibus aut nulla aut incerta victoria est We must therefore not appeale to the Scriptures nor place the trial of our cause in those writings in which the victorie is either none or not sure Theo. You do both the truth and Tertullian wrong TertulliaÌ„ doth not say that in matters of faith some things should be beleeued wtout the Scriptures no man is flatter against that than Tertullian in this very booke which you bring but he would not haue the heretikes of his time chalenged nor brought to the Scriptures because they receiued not the books as