world denied or who could euer otherwise imagine but that men whosoeuer they be are visible and maie be discerned This therfore required not so manie proofes as you haue brought being liberall where no neede is neither in this respect do we meane that there is an inuisible Church by which we vnderstand the elect the faithfull the members of Christes mysticall bodie who although they maie be seene outwardlie in that they are men yet their election their faith their spirituall adoption and coniunction with Christ in which respect they are truelie his Church can not by outward sense be perceiued The number of professors is visible but the number of the elect is not visible that is can not by sight and sense be tried discerned and separated from all others This is the meaning of that distinction which you ought to haue knowen before you laboured to disprooue it But if taking vpon you to refute a thing whereof you are ignorant you faile shamefullie and make your selfe verie ridiculous to your reader it is no maruell and you can blame no other then your owne selfe For what conceite was this that you haue nourished in your braine Pag. 64. and vttered in this booke that we should make the Church of Christ to be inuisible in such sorte as you maintaine the bodie of Christ to be inuisiblie in the Sacrament and hereupon note a wonderfull contradiction in our doctrine I maie truelie saie your case is lamentable and so is theirs that depend vpon you to be thus absurdlie and wilfullie blinded in matters of faith and as it were to grope for light at noone daie which sheweth in you indeede a notable reprobation of vnderstanding as a iust punishment of your Apostasie The Church is not inuisible because the men of whom the Church consisteth are inuisible for the faithfull and elect in that they are men are no lesse visible then the rest but because the elect of God can not be perceaued and acknowledged by outwarde sight of our eies Of Christes bodie you teach most falslie that his verie true naturall humane bodie is in the Sacrament yet that no sense can perceaue it to be there which is to denie and ouerthrow the trueth of his humanitie Therfore you see if anie facultie of seeing remaine in you that betweene this doctrine The Church of Christ is inuisible that is not able by our eies to be discerned and this The bodie of Christ if it were present in the Sacrament bodelie as you teach should be visible that is seene with our eies is not so much as a shadow or fancie of anie contradiction After all this Master Rainolds maketh a long discourse of Dauid George and Sebastian Castalion pag. 66. of whome or for whome I haue for my parte noe neede to answere Dauid George was a damnable heretike and his heresies were by Protestantes not Papistes descried and refuted Castalion you slaunder moste shameleslie in saying he denied Christ to be the Messias as hereafter also in your booke you haue done His preface which he writ to King Edwarde before his translation of the Bible conteineth no such argument and leadeth whollie to another end if you had either witt to see it or good will to acknowledge it Therein he disputeth that some part of those promisses that are contained in the Prophets and namelie concerning the great knowledge that should be vnder Christ is not yet accomplished his opinion of which matters I leaue to himselfe but you haue not done well to charge him vntruelie with so foule a blasphemie pag. 70. As for the great straightes into which Caluine and Luther disputing with the Iewes haue beene driuen by reason of this supposition concerning the Churches fall I know not anie seing they neuer imagined anie such fall as you doe No the heauens shall sooner fall then the Church and therefore you mistake the matter whollie and like an ignorant sophister make impertinent discourses The promises of almightie God concerning the largenes and beautie of his Church vnder Christ haue beene accomplished The Gospell hath beene preached throughout the world the Church hath spread it selfe ouer all nations and neuer since hath it beene shut vp within the limites of one countrie and people as the Synagogue was But as the Prophets foretolde that the Church should be thus mightelie increased and multiplied so the Apostles haue prophecied that in the Church should be a defection that Antichrist should sit in the Temple of God and that the Princes and people of the earth should be drunken with the cuppe of his spirituall fornication and abhominations As we confesse those Prophecies to be fulfilled soe must we likewise acknowledge the truth of these and thereby we are hable to stop the mouthes not onelie of Iewes and Turkes but of all papists also in this controuersie of the churches outward increase and decaie Your monstrous railing in the next section I pretermit beseeching God to open the eies of all Christians and to giue them vnderstanding hartes that they maie discerne Antichrist from Christ falshood from trueth and heresie from pure religion But where you saie that there be many worse Antichristes then the Pope pag. 73. and compare certaine of your late Popes with some of our English Superintendents as you call them in respect of their behauiour and conuersation of life you still misconstrue the matter and speake beside the purpose Your Popes might haue vsed greater shew of honestie and godlines then they haue done yet be neuer the further of from their kingdome of Antichrist which although it be much furthered and maintained by their pride cruelty couetousnes and such other moste monstrous and outragious demeanour as they haue vsed these manie hundred yeares yet it consisteth principallie in that doctrine of Antichristianitie which they holde and by all possible meanes defend most contrarie to the holie and Catholike religion of Christ And yet if your comparison were admitted and the liues of those Antichrists throughlie examined it would appeere that there haue not liued euer in anie state from the beginning of the worlde more wicked vile and abominable men then haue bene the Popes of Rome for diuers hundred yeares together by testimonie of their owne histories They haue in tyrannie exceeded Nero in pride Nebuchadnezer or Alexander the great in other common vices them that for the same haue bene moste infamouslie renowmed in the world wherein if anie professour of the gospell should resemble them or come neare vnto them it were a iust shame vnto their person but yet no disproofe of their religion Now Master Rainolds proceedeth to another pointe pag. 75. namelie the want of religion and conscience which he saith I haue shewed in this answere A greauous accusation in matters of Religion to want religion where greatest conscience is required to haue no conscience at all But if you examine his proofe then shall you easilie perceiue the cauilling spirit of this accuser wherof
of his flesh is absent from vs. Which though it be contrary to your Reall presence yet you say you beleeue as your Creede your beliefe perhaps is according to some new Creede for of this beliefe one parte cannot stand in the same Creede with another First the true auncient and Catholike creede teacheth that Christ is ascended into heauen touching his humanitie whereunto Cyril agreeablie writeth The true Catholike Creed is contraie to the Popish Creed that he is absent in flesh your new-fangled Popish Creede would haue vs beleeue that Christ touching the presence of his flesh is in the sacrament If his flesh be in the sacrament then is not his flesh absent but the scriptures and fathers and al Catholicke Creeds doe set it downe as a ground of faith that Christs flesh is onelie in heauen and there remaineth vntill he come againe in carnall presence to iudge the world What haue you to answere now forsooth now must you fal into your former contradiction that Christs flesh is visible in heauen and inuisible in the sacrament which doctrine is repugnant to diuinitie to reason to sense to all principles of truth as you haue hearde already or els must you say that Christ hath two bodies one visible and an other inuisible which though it be heretical yet is it lesse absurde and vnreasonable then the other But answere what you list this is sufficient to ouerthrow your reall presence before God and all his saints that Christs flesh is absent from vs the sacrament is with vs and therefore Christs flesh is not in the sacrament Your assertions are to grosse your answeres are absurd your Reall presence is a reall contradiction Cyrill you say was no sacramentarie No verely for your sacramentary heresie was vnhathced in Cyrills time But did Cyrill euer teach your reall presence a place you bring that maketh nothing to this purpose Cyrill speaketh not a word of the sacrament Cyrill in Ioh. lib. 4. c. 13. but generally that Christ giueth vs his flesh which is true of those also that neuer receiued the sacrament Wherefore Cyrill meant not any reall presence as you full ignorantly alledge him He onely disputeth against the infidelity or curiosity of such as enquire A popish ignorant argument Christ geueth vs his fleshe to eate Ergo we eate Christs flesh Really in the sacrament How it is possible that Christ should giue vs his flesh to eate we know that Christ can giue and doth giue his flesh to all faithfull and make no doubt nor question thereof But thinke you all meanes of eating his flesh is remooued if reall presence be denied Consider this point a litle better M. Rainolds and I doubt not but you shall easilie espie your owne ouersight That you bring out of Peter Martyr is idle That which he saith if Cyril should auouch it were not to be graunted your selues will not maintaine namelie that Christ doth dwell in vs corporallie and mingleth his flesh with our flesh Then to what vse serueth your reall presence tell vs if you can but prooue by scripture that which you tell els we shall not greatly regard what you tell vs. Damascen you are content to handle as lightly Damasâ—le orthod fide lib. 3. cap. 3. He teacheth against your reall presence that the nature of Christs bodie remaineth circumscript and visible as it was So your fantasie of Christs body being present in the sacrament reallie but incircumscriptly and inuisiblie is prooued to be vainer then any dreame Al you alledge at large for the reall presence out of him in an other place Lib. 4. c. 14. may shortlie be dispatched That Christ can make the bread his body we graunt For Christ being god can doe whatsoeuer he wil. Onelie shew that Christ wil make of real bread his real flesh and then this controuersie is brought to an ende The Catholike faith teacheth that Christs body was made of the virgine once the Popish faith that it is made of bread daily Christ indeede maketh the breade his body not really but sacramentallie For Christ hath not a body made of bread his body was made once of the pure substance of his blessed mother and other body then this or oftner made then once hath he none Whereof all doctrine that teacheth Christs bodie is made of bread is impious and hereticall the popish doctrine of Reall presence teacheth that Christs body in the sacrament is made of breade by changing the bread into his bodie through force of consecration wherefore we may boldlie and trulie conclude that the popish doctrine of Reall presence which Master Rainolds holdeth but miserablie defendeth is both wicked and hereticall CHAP. 9. Of certeine places of S. Chrysostome touching the Reall presence Two places out of S Chrysostome were alledged by M. Martin pag. 20â— c. to prooue thereall presence The first out of his second homilie to the people of Antioch Chryst hom 2. ad pop Antio wherein by an excellent and fit allegorie he compareth our sauiour Christ to the Prophet Elias For as Elias ascending bodelie into heauen left his cloake with Elizeus his scholler so Christ the sonne of God asâ—ending vp left his flesh with vs. S. Chrysostomes meaning to anie that readeth the place is euident ynough M. R. though he multiplie wordes after his simple manner yet my former answere he cannot disprooue That Christ left vnto vs his flesh in the holie sacrament who euer doubted that therein we receiue his true and natural flesh we beleeue we teach and alwaies did But the Real presence of his flesh such as you maintaine S. Chrysostome neuer knew and we vtterlie denie Christ left vs his flesh therefore he left it Really A false popish argument For can you reason thus and reason trulie that if Christ left vs his flesh he left it in reall presence this is the point this prooue if you can els you talke to no purpose Christ left his flesh that is a sacrament of his flesh wherein is most truelie and effectuallie but spiritually offered vnto vs and of vs receiued the very flesh of Christ Hauing spent manie vnprofitable and superfluous speaches at length you force the comparison and shew a threefold difference betweene Elias leauing his mantel and Christ leauing his flesh And are you indeed in your right vnderstanding who I praie you M. R. denieth this you migh alledge not three onley but three and three points of difference betweene Elias and Christs leauing the one his mantel the other his flesh This then being wholy graunted what is your argument will you reason thus There is great difference between Elias leauing his cloake Christ leauing his flesh Straunge arguments that M.R. hath learned of late to make therefore Christ left his flesh vnto vs reallie If this be not your argument frame an other your selfe as you can The first difference is that Elias left his cloake Christ his flesh Flesh indeed differeth
conscience tolde you that if you opposed your selfe against this trueth therein should you offer iniurie to your Pope and Pope-catholike brethren whome the same so specially doth concerne You saie I know not what Antichrist is Contrae Sander pa. 6. in principio against whome I write and that sometime I make Antichrist to be the wholl Catholike and vniuersall Church wherof the Pope is head which to be a pregnant vntrueth he that looketh one the place may see Haue I saied the Pope is head of the Chatholike vniuersall Church or the Catholike vniuersall Church is Antichrist what will you be ashamed hereafter to write that in the first entrance write thus vntruelie without shame and yet hauing your selfe auouched so notorious an vntruth you dare make mention of Lucians true historie which booke as may seeme you haue not onelie read ouer with diligence and delight but also translated into English propounded vnto your selfe as worthie of your imitaion For to giue you that praise that of due belongeth vnto you Lucian if he liued could hardlie coyne more passing vntruthes or scoffe more kindelie at Christ and his gospell then you haue done A greater reason was he saith for that he abhorred to deale with heretiks pag. 5. who passe al other in pride and ignorance and of all heretikes he maketh vs of England to be the worst Indeede true it is that heretikes for the most part are obstinate past amendment therefore a great wearines vexation of minde is it to maintaine contentions and disputes with them whereof in the end small profit doth redound But this complaint of hereticall wilfulnes nothing toucheth vs who by Gods grace are far from al kinde of heresie and hold no other doctrine then that which the Prophets and Apostles and Iesus Christ him selfe haue taught vs which is plainly contained in the bookes of canonicall scripture from which if labouring to disswade vs you cannot preuaile no maruell is it And in defending the same we are content to be esteemed of you contentious proude ignorant and as you list We are not so much in loue of your society nor seeke your fauour and commendation so greatlie that we will ioine in vnitie with you against the Lord his trueth and Church If you thinke we are proud tell vs wherein our pride consisteth If in that we will not yeald vnto you nor giue ouer maintenance of the Gospell pardon vs Master Rainolds modestie in the Lord is an excellent vertue but the modestie that betraieth the trueth of God is accursed Other pride I doubt not we are as cleare from as your selfe or anie of your fellowes And for ignorance we may thinke it was some spice of pride in you to obiect it vnto vs who for anie thing that appeereth haue no cause to brag of such knowledge or to chalenge more to your selfe then you may safely graunt to an other For tell vs what learning is wherein it consisteth and howe it maie be gotten Vnles you haue some speciall meanes and as it were some secret waie to attaine vnto it which others haue not I see not why we should thinke that you haue gotten a greater measure of learning and wisdome then others who haue vsed as great indeauour as your selfe And what the matter should be I know not that you are sodenlie become so learned and that we haue lost all learning But were you as learned as euer anie was or could be your learning shall not be hable to hurte the cause that we defend your learning shall in the end deceiue you and you that now boaste of your knowledge shall then be ashamed of your ignorance To knowe Christ out of his worde is true knowledge sound learning and perfect wisdome Certaine examples you rehearse of our ignorant assertions onelie thereby to make our cause seeme odious to the simple but the reasons of our assertions you pretermit which is your common sleight continuallie to tell your readers that such and such opinions we holde and not to shew the maner nor to remember or answere our reasons Wherein I desire the reader to consider how vntruelie Master Rainolds hath charged me with a wicked heresie that in this man he maie beholde the conscience of a Papist He setteth downe for one of my sayings that Christ is not begotten of the substance of his father a slaunder moste manifest in a matter of greatest moment I haue not writen thus no I neuer thought thus I abhorre with my hart all such blasphemy against the Person of our sauiour Christ But in the meane time what hath this slaunderer deserued Let the reader equallie iudge betweene him and me and by triall hereof esteeme more indifferentlie of the rest of his malice Now the greatest cause of all that made him so loth pag. 7. was he saith because he found in our doctrine no staie or certentie which yet if it were true should haue ministred vnto him greater will and courage forsomuch as the doctrine that standeth vpon no certaine staie is easilie disprooued and ouerthrowen But in trueth Master Rainolds perceiuing our doctrine to be grounded vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles which maie not be remooued and knowing we will not yeald to mens doctrines and inuentions whatsoeuer differing from the holie scriptures but rest our selues whollie vpon the written word of God I thinke he was indeede somewhat discouraged as great cause was he should being sure his engines could not preuaile against the same And what greater steadfastnes in religion can be required then to holde Gods word which we professe to be the ground whereon we build our faith If you can shewe wherein we swarue from it we will not refuse your instruction But saie not nowe we are vnstaied when as you knowe we relie our selues whollie vpon the worde vnles you will denie Gods word to be a certaine rule and staie of doctrine We plant not our religion in mans iudgement vncertentie of Traditions in vaine ceremonies and deuises as you doe but in matters of faith and religion we depend vpon God whoe in the scriptures of the olde and new Testament hath deliuered to his Church one certaine vniforme and perfect doctrine to which we adde nothing from which we take nothing awaie in which we settle and ground our selues But let vs heare how Master Rainolds can prooue that the Protestants haue no certaine faith For this he hath propounded to himselfe to declare especiallie in this preface And I desire the godlie readers to marke his proofes which shall be I trust to their comfort and confirmation in the truth First he obiecteth diuersitie of iudgement amongst vs Pag. 9. concerning the Princes supremacie in matters Ecclesiasticall wherein is no such difference as he pretendeth if he listed rightlie to vnderstand the case The title of supreme head of the Church hath bene misliked by diuerse godlie and learned men and of right and properlie it onelie belongeth
these men Pag. 15. c. Taking of armes by some and standing in the field for maintenance of Gods holie religion safetie of their owne liues Master Rainolds vrgeth against vs grieuouslie which yet toucheth not the matter in hand concerning our vnsteadfastnes in doctrine but serueth onelie to procure enuie Sturres and tumults for matter of Religion he rehearseth that haue bene in Germanie in Fraunce in Bohemia as though it were sufficient for their condemnation that they once resisted and did not by and by admit whatsoeuer violence was offered either to Gods trueth or to themselues contrarie to promise to othe to publike edicts to lawe whereby they were warranted to doe as they did More of this matter will I not answere being of an other nature and cleered long since from crime of rebellion not onelie by iust defense of their doing but also by the proclamations and edicts of princes themselues The regiment of women as it was publikelie by writing oppugned by one or twoe pag. 18. so was it publikelie defended and the truth thereof since hath bene amongst vs generallie acknowledged Can you obiect the priuate iudgement of so fewe against the common consent of a wholl Church and thereof conclude that in our Religion we haue no certaine staie Then maie we in like manner and by as good reason argue against you for a thousand such maters wherein hath bene no smal dissension amongst your diuines that the Papists haue no cettaine ground of their faith A Cardinall of Rome hath openlie defended and taught that the Apostle permitteth one wife to priests and to others moe and that pluralitie of wiues is not forbidden either by the law of god or nature You know whome I meane euen Caiâ—tane your Popes legate and the great aduersarie of Luther Looke Katharine who hath noted this amongst his manifolde errors And another Popes legate writ and published in printe a treatise in commendation of a foule sinne for which he was greeuoslie punished by your Pope being preferred to a great Archbishoprik Pighius saith that Iustice in vs is a relation wherein he hath exceedinglie offended your friendes Maie we now by your example hereof conclude that this is the doctrine of your Church that thus you beleeue generallie or els that there is no staie in your religion For Copes and such like ornaments either approoued or reiected pag. 19. to gather an argument of our inconstancy in matters of faith is too childish and absurd Our religion is not like yours consisting in outward shewe of gestures garments and behauiour so that our externall ornaments maie be changed without anie alteration or change of our doctrine Lastlie Master R. omitting certaine small differences of feastes Pag. 19. c. c. wisheth the reader to consider the generall changes that haue bene in our Church and realme since this schisme as he calleth it first began And first he calleth to remembrance the Acte of six articles established in the latter daies of king Henrie the eight which in the beginning of his sonnes raigne was straightwaies disanulled and the Church reformed which reformation was ouerthrowne in Queene Maries raigne and after renewed by her Maiestie that now raigneth And of all this what can Master Rainolds conclude against the vnitie and certentie of our profession what alteration hath bene in the Church of God in times past we may reade not onelie in gods booke but in Ecclesiasticall histories Sometime religion prospered wel and florished especiallie the Prince being godlie and zealous to promote the same sometime againe superstition heresie idolatrie mightelie preuailed the Prince being an idolater or heretike Yet notwithstanding the truth of gods word Religion remained one and stedfast howsoeuer the outward state of the Church or common wealth was diuerslie changed And if at the first when the Lord began to worke some reformamation in this Church perfection in euerie point was not foorthwith attained and established no maruel is it considering both the greatnes of the worke and the malice of manifolde enemies that withstoode the same Yea if in our communion booke alteration hath bene according as to the Church seemed moste conuenient yet that was not in substance of Doctrine but in matters of ceremonie neither can you charge vs more for changing our communion booke then we can you for changing and reforming your Missales your Portasses your Breuiaries a number such other bookes euen of late yeares in dailie and publike vse of seruice amongst you As for Anabaptistes Atheistes Puritanes the familie of loue our Church and Religion vtterly condemneth to the pit of hell and if there be such amongst vs secretlie so haue there alwaies bene heretikes wicked persons in the Church and in respect of them our Religion is no more to be accused then the good corne may iustlie be condemned because together with it manie tares and weeds spring vp and cannot be auoided Further Master Rainolds saith pag. 22. if he should note the difference betweene our Protestants and those of other nations he should neuer make an end But let him note what him list and make an end when he please greater difference shal he not finde amongst the true professors of the Gospell and Churches reformed then may be amongst the children of God When such bitter dissension was betweene the East and west Churches about the daie of Passeouer and the same continued so manie yeares with great offense alienation among the faithfull yet they ceased not for all that to be still the Churches of Christ Neither is it euer to be hoped for that such perfect concord shall be among the professors of Christs religion that they shall all agree moste iointlie together in the trueth or in euerie particular point thereof Your vnity although it be not so intire and generall as you would haue it thought yet if it proceeded of knowledge of the trueth and faithfull submission with hartie obedience to the same it deserued great commendation but springing from such fountaines as it doth of brutish ignorance and feare in the moste of vaine ambition worldlie pleasures and filthie couetousnes in the chiefest though it be through corruption of mans nature mighty yet the causes being marked it appeereth to be but carnall tyrannicall and diuelish For this moste wicked persuasion being once imprinted in mens harts by the subteltie of Sathan that all men must obey the Pope whatsoeuer he teach and commaund without examination or resistance vpon paine of eternall damnation an easie matter is it vpon this foundation to raise vp and maintaine any vnitie whatsoeuer And although this worldlie prouision for keeping of vnitie be not amongst vs yet through Gods grace and blessing al Churches reformed agree soundlie in all articles of faith that are substantiall and necessarie to saluation and shall so doe vnto the ende pag. 25. The grounds and heads of disputation receiued among the Romish Catholikes Master Rainolds reckeneth many and first
then the argument to be so sure and necessarie that is drawen from authoritie of a martyr will you graunt this reason to be inuincible A marttr hath saide it therefore it is true what say you then of Cyprian the martyr of Iustinus the martyr of Irenaeus the martyr who notwitstanding their blessed martyrdome are knowne to haue maintained opinions against the trueth If martyrs then may haue their errours how may the testimonie of martyrs be alwaies irrefragable you see good readers how pithie a disputer this man doth shewe him-selfe to be If his loose rhetorike helped him not a litle better then his logike he were in verie weake and miserable case Lastlie concerning wholl Churches reformed pag. 32. what can you Master Rainolds conclude against vs In matter of discipline greate difference heretofore hath bene amongst the Churches East and West Greeke and Latine If then some such be in our reformed Churches can you thereof truelie gather that therefore they are not the Churches of Christ Tell vs what you meane if you haue any trueth or certaintie in your meaning Next Master R. reckeneth vp sundrie Popes that are amongst the Protestants in stead of one true Pope pag. 33. which I know not whereto it serueth but onelie to shewe that the protestants haue so great detestation of the Pope and his tyrannie that they cannot endure in anie professour of the Gospell anie small shadowe of such Lordelines as the Pope vsurpeth ouer the Church Your true Pope whereof you speake is as much as a true Antichrist of whome the scriptures haue foretolde The name the person the authoritie all Protestants abhorre and accurse to the prince of darknes from whence it came Againe he is in hand with generall Councels and saith it is impossible pag. 34. that euer we should once imagine how anie Councell amongest vs should be gathered His methode is according to his matter confused and disordered leaping and iumping from one pointe to another like a wilde bucke vpon the mountaines Although we haue not a Pope as you haue yet by Gods grace generall Councels maie wee haue if Christian princes that professe the gospell will iointlie take vpon them the care thereof And generall Councels haue bene assembled and helde many hundred yeares before your Pope by such a name was euer knowne or heard of in the world and so may they againe both Christianlie and generallie be held allthough your Pope with all his proude cleargie were returned from whence they came That hitherto no such Christian Councels haue bene gathered it maie be imputed to the generall troubles in all Christian countries and to the aduersaries that haue bene raised vp by your Pope and his Cardinall satrapes to hinder as much as in them laie all meanes whereby a Christian generall Councell might be gathered Howbeit if a generall Councell cannot be procured to be celebrated with quietnes there is no doubt notwithstanding but that the Lordes cause maie without it daylie more and more preuaile as it hath done heretofore in times moste persecutions To the section that followeth containing onelie a recapitulation of these former discourses pag. 34. c. I haue no nede to make any further answere Your complainte against vs for refusing all grounds of disputation pag. 38. how vaine and vntrue it is hath bene shewed The onelie true and certaine grounde of religion and of all disputation about the same which is the authoritie of God reuealed vnto vs in his holie worde we imbrace we holde we rest vpon it which forsomuch as you haue fullie tried to be against you so that you cannot thereby approoue one article of your popish faith nor disprooue anie doctrine that we maintaine against you therfore desperation driueth you indeede to refuse this grounde as insufficient and to seeke other grounds of which we haue noe warrant in Gods worde And although it please you for this cause to raile at vs and saie we are worse then the heretikes of olde time yet we know that rhe auncient godlie fathers in confuting all heretikes vsed onelie arguments drawen out of the scriptures and plainelie taught that by no other weapons an heretike can be put to flight I knowe they charge them oftentimes with the iudgement of Churches successions of Bishops determination of Councels name of Catholikes not as though this were a necessarie conuiction of it selfe but thereby the rather to induce them to beleeue the doctrine to be true which they see from the first planting thereof in the Church to haue remained Your case is nothing like seeing you haue onely the bare title without the thing and as it were the emptie casket without the treasure But for so much as you accuse â—s for casting awaie the grounds of Diuinitie I desire euerie Christian man to weigh with himselfe what ground it is wheron al your religion and Church standeth First the scripture must not be scripture in any other sense then as the Pope will expound it so that the scripture being the meaning of the scripture and the meaning of the scripture being the Popes exposition hereof it followeth that the scripture is nothing els but the Popes interpretation So likewise in Traditions Doctors Councels Churches if any thing dissent from the Popes vnderstanding and determination it is reiected abolished condemned and finally all faith all religion all Diuinitie of Papists is onelie the Popes sacred will and pleasure Now then this being their owne certaine resolution I would gladlie be enformed how by the same a man may be assured of any faith it being further also agreed and confessed among themselues that the Pope maie fall into heresie Then who seeth not that their ground being shaken their staie failing all that is builded and vpholden thereon is clean ouerthrowne If they saie the Pope falling into heresy forthwith ceaseth to be a Pope I demaund whoe they are that must iudge the Popes cause and giue sentence against him And if the Pope be obstinate and teaching heresie and therewith infecting the world will notwithstanding stoutly stand in defense of his doctrine and will keepe his chaire what shift haue you then or what can you doe against him seing he is your Pope your head your author and founder of all your faith Thus a man going with you along and comming to the end of all findeth no staie but must wander still as in an endles Labyrinth wherein he shall at last languish and perish euerlastingly That you wish we would be content to yealde to the verie scriptures themselues pag. 40. doubt you not Master Rainolds thereof but we are most redie to yealde vnto them if ye would be as willing the controuersy might haue thereby and by other good meanes an end But your conscience telleth you scripture will not serue you and therfore in a word you deny the wholl bodie of the scriptures Thinke not good reader that herein I haue spoken rashly without reason I know what I
or protestants or Zuinglians or Sacramentaries whereof no dout there was great cause in this manner to aduertise the reader You call vs indeede at your pleasure by such names as your maliciouse and railing spirites can inuent sometime by one and sometime by another Christians and Catholikes you will not haue vs named reseruing that denomination to your selues to whome notwithstanding of al professors of Christian religion the same doth least appertaine For our partes soe long as we are sure that the doctrine which we follow is the eternall word of God and gospell of his sonne Christ as we are by Gods grace most sure seeing it is plainlie set downe in the holie scriptures of the olde and new Testament we care not what you thinke of vs or what you speake of vs or by what names you reproche vs. If you blaspheme the doctrine of Christ and call it heresie not fearing or sparing the Lord himselfe it is no wonder if you reuile vs with all opprobrious names that can possiblie be deuised We tell you notwithstanding that if a Christian be he that beleeueth in Christ according to his word if Catholikes be they that professe the vniuersall faith of Christ we are truelie Christians and Catholikes beleeuing soe and professing so Lutheranes we are not Zuinglianes we are not Caluinists we are not because we mantaine not anie priuate or proper doctrine of Luther or Zuinglius or Caluine no more then the faithfull ought in the primitiue Church to haue bene called Paulines or Petrines or Athanasians or by the name of anie other such minister of Christ Be ye called diuersly Franciscanes Benedictines Dominicanes Iesuites and whatsoeuer other title ye can take vp we are not greeued at the multitude and varietie of your names who being in truth almost anie thing rather then Christians delight in any name rather then in the name of Christians But to vs this one name is sufficient and such as are equiualent therewith we are content with it we desire no other As for the name of Protestants if you thinke it belongeth not to vs giue it them whose it is being not a name of Schisme or sect it may as well be vsed as the name of Catholikes and for distinction sake onelie being begon first at the diet of Argsburgh we are enforced to vse it Lastlie Master Rainolds protesteth his readines to submit himselfe to the trueth pag. 92. to defend a fault or to correct it This indeed is too great indifferencie and readines whereby it appeereth you are not resolued in your selfe but can be content to applie your iudgement and trauail in defense or reproofe of anie opinion good or bad true or false Correct your faults Master Rainolds but leaue of to maintaine them I haue in this booke made them plaine enough both to your selfe and to others you cannot but see them God giue you grace to acknowledge them to be ashamed of them and as you haue promised to correcte them You knowe that in this booke you haue wrangled without measure you haue railed without shame you haue committed as foule and notorious faults in reasoning as anie man could doe your Logike is naught your diuinitie is worse and your conscience as it maie seeme is worst of all If there yet remaine in you anie drop of that simplicitie which you professe then giue ouer defense of such vntrueth reforme your iudgement and returne by repentance from whence you are fallen If you continew in willful Apostasie your blood be vpon your owne head you haue bene warned and would not harken I referre you to the Lordes iudgement who shall get glorie either by your conuersion and saluation or els by your finall hardening and condemnation The Lord hath made all things for himself yea the wicked for the daie of euill M. RAINOLDS HATH DIVIDED HIS BOOKE INTO Chapters which diuision I haue orderlie followed in mine answere The argumens of his Chapters is set downe in the table following CHAP. 1. Concerning the Epistle of S. Iames. Pag. 1. CHAP. 2. Of the Canonicall Scriptures and English Cleaergie Pag. 20. CHAP. 3. Of Luther preferring his priuate iudgement before all auncient fathers Pag. 47. CHAP. 4. Of Priesthoode and of the sacrifice continued after Christ. Pag. 58. CHAP. 5. Of penance and the value of good workes touching iustification and life eternall Pag. 92. CHAP. 6. Of reproouing the auncient fathers for their doctrine touching good workes Pag. 133. CHAP. 7. Of Master Iewels chalenge Pag. 146. CHAP. 8. Of Bezaes translating a place of scripture Act. 3. and of the Reall presence Pag. 172. CHAP. 9. Of certaine places of Saint Chrysostome touching the Reall presence Pag. 193. CHAP. 10. Of the place in S. Lukes Gospell which Bezae is charged to haue corrupted Pag. 209. CHAP. 11. Concerning the translation of the English bibles Pag. 218. CHAP. 12. Concerning the latine bible which Master Rainolds maintaineth to be more sincere then the Hebrew now extant Pag. 227. CHAP. 13. Of the newe Testament in latine and a comparison of the vulgare translator with all other of this age Pag. 32â— CHAP. 14. Wherein Master Rainolds laboreth to prooue that it is the verie waie to Atheisme and infidelitie to leaue the ordinarie translation of the Bible and to appeale to the Hebrew Greeke and such new diuerse translations as the Protestants haue made Pag. 345. CHAP. 15. Of the New Testament set forth in the Colledge of Rhemes Pag. 364. CHAP. 16. Of the faultes found in the Annotations of the New Testament Pag. 377. CHAP. 17. Of certaine blasphemies contained in the Annotations Pag. 401. AN ANSWERE TO MASTER RAINOLDS REFVTATION CHAP. 1. Concerning the Epistle of S. Iames. ALThough our Aduersaries haue continuallie endeuored to abase and extenuat the authoritie of the holy Scriptures The Papistes are enemies of the scriptures in many respects by matching with them the credit of Traditions deuised by men by submitting them to the iudgement of Fathers and Councels and hanging them vpon their interpretations and moste notoriously by bringing them into captiuitie vnder the Pope so that his pleasure and determination must stand for their true sense meaning as it is confessed by them selues and knowne to the world yet will they seeme neuerthelesse to be very zealous in defense of the scriptures charge the Protestants with that impiety whereof them-seues are moste of all guiltie As this hath beene their common practise of long time thereby to make some beleeue that we contemne the Scriptures of God which of all Christians are to be had in moste high regard and reuerence and of vs alwaies haue beene esteemed no otherwise then their incomparable maiestie authority requireth being the word of the eternall God so of late Edmond Campian in his booke made this the first and principall cause of his Chalenge Camp ra 1. for that he sawe vs through dispaire as he sayeth compelled to laie hands and offer violence to the holie bookes of
third of Iohn are not Canonicall scripture Cardinal Caietane denieth sunday bookes and partes of Canonical Scripture in the new Testament where fore Catharinus hath written against him that the Epist of Iude is Apocryphall that the last Chap. of S. Marke is not of sound authority that the history of the adulterous woman in S. Iohn is not authentical namely of S. Iames Ep. that the salutation is prophane hauing nothing of God nor of Iesus Christ But what speake I of Caietane disalowing certaine bookes and parcells of diuine scripture whereas Hosius another Cardinal and one chiefe founder of all your late sophistications hath written most dishonorably and vilely of the wholl scripture for thus he sayth Scriptura quomodo profertur á Catholicis est verbum Dei quomodo profertur ab haereticis Hofius contra Brent lib. 4. est verbum diaboli that is The scripture as it is brought forth by the Catholikes is the word of god as it is brought forth by the Heretikes is the word of the deuil So that by this notable Cardinals iudgement if a Protestant that is in their language and meaning an heretick shall alledge for proofe of Christes eternall diuinitie the beginning of the Gospel written by Saint Iohn this scripture shall now become of Gods word as it is and alwaies shal be the word of the deuil because it is vsed by such as they account and call heretikes O blasphemous hand and tongue And can you prooue this Maister Rainolds can the word of God be made the word of Sathan It will not stand with your honestie to maintaine it Gods word by whome-soeuer it be vttered though by the deuill him-selfe is not the worde of the deuill God is immutable so is his worde Then hath Hosius blasphemed in calling Gods word the deuills word which you ought to consider who thinke you haue found somewhat against the Protestants when you shewe what Luther hath written in some disgrace of Saint Iames Epistle I can further put you in remembrance what others of your syde haue taught and maintained to the great slaunder and derogation of the Scriptures and that not in one worde or two but in earnest and long discourses Pighius Hierarch li. 1. Cap. 2. What doth Pighius labour to perswade in one whole Chapter often in other places by occasion but onlie that the Scriptures haue al their credit authoritie from the Church as though they had not any of them selues from the lord by whose spirit they were written For thus he sayth All authoritie of Scripture among vs dependeth necessarily vpon the authoritie of the Church Neque enim aliter cis credere possemus nisi quia testimoniumillis perhibenti Ecclesiç credimus for we could not otherwise beleeue them but because we beleeue the Church giuing testimonie vnto them And againe The primitiue Church hath made certaine proofe vnto vs that the writings of all the Euangelists are of canonicall trueth and not the Euangelists themselues that were the writers And against SS Marke and Luke he disputeth at large and boldly auoucheth that they were not meete witnesses of the trueth of those gospells which they writ Marcum Lucam nonsuisse testes libneos veritatis scriptorum à se Euangeliorum Ecclesie therefore euen while they liued that credit was not giuen to their Gospels for them-selues no not of those that certainly knew they were written by them yea and farther also had their verie principall copies written with their ownehands but for the Apostolike Church Yea this presumptuos and arrogant spirit of Pighius proceedeth farther yet and sayth that the Gospells were written by the Euangelists not to the end that those wrytings should beare rule ouer our faith and religion Non quidem vt scripta illa praeessent fidei religionique nostrae sed subessent potiùs Hoc Euangeli um inquit vnicum solumque designans Eu◠gelium esse nō que nos Matthaei Marci Lucae Ioannis que dicimus Euangelia quat uor Hier. li. 3. ca. 3. Ceusur Colonien pag. 112. Cusan epist 2. 7. but rather be subiect thereunto And yet a litle more blasphemouslie That they are not the true Gospell which Christ ascending into heauen commanded his Apostles to preach to euery creature What should I rehearse his often reprochfull comparisons of scripture to a nose of wax and a rule of lead which may easelie be turned bowed and applied euerie way at our pleasure which also the Censure of Colen hath affirmed of them in like manner And to the same effect hath Cardinall Cusane long before set downe that the Scriptures must be expounded diuersly and framed to the time and practise of the Church so that one time they are to be vnderstood and interpreted one waie and an other time an other way Which is more vnreasonable and absurd by many degrees then if one should prescribe that the Ladie must conforme hir selfe to the fashion and manners of hir handmaide William Lindane hath bene and still is a stout Champion for the Pope Lindan Pan. Lib. 1. c. 17. in whose defence he hath vttered many bolde blasphemies against the Scriptures as namelie that the Euangelists tooke in hand to write the Gospels Non vt aliquam totius Euangelij methodum insormarent non vt Christianae fisdei summam consor berent Lib. 3. cap. 1. not to the intent to set downe any forme of the wholl Gospell or to write the sume of Christian faith And that the authoritie of the word not written is greater then of the word written which question he saieth maie easilie be determined howsoeuer to some it seemeth full of difficultie and perplexitie Lib. 3. cap. 6. De to to in vniuersum sacrae scripturae corpore accipiendum and that whereas Saint Peter hath affirmed of Saint Paules epistles that in them are somethings hard to be vnderstoode the same must be taken and ment generallie of the wholl bodie of the Scriptures soe that according to this mans doctrine there is not in all the scriptures one easie sentence and S. Peter was ouerseene to saie that but somethings in the epistles of Saint Paule were hard 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when he should rather haue said that all things were hard 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lib. 1. cap. 22. Furthermore that it is extreame madnes to thinke the wholl entire bodie of Euangelicall doctrine is to be fetched out of those sole Apostolike letters written with incke Dementissimae insaniae Ex pusillo noui testanmenti libello and that litle small booke of the new testament Thus scornefullie wirteth this proud Papist of the diuine scriptures and exemplifieth his meaning by a notable similitude that it is as greate a want of wit to esteeme iudge that al Euangelical doctrine is comprehended in the bookes of the newe Testament as if one should saie that the wholl frame of the world is contained in some one sensible creature
Thirdlie you descant vpon Bene habet It is well pa. 30. but so simplie and fondlie that euerie one may see you are a trifler It is well I said that Campian could not charge Luther for denying a booke which neuer anie Church denied but for denying such a one as had beene heretofore by some Churches denied And although I seeke not herein to defende either Luther or those auncient Churches that refused the same yet is Luthers offence not so hainous as it should haue bene if this had first proceeded of him-selfe without example of other Churches If you will burthen vs with refusall of S. Luke his Gospell the knowne trueth wil easilie acquit vs of that accusation But nothing can be so falslie surmized that you will not finde in your heartes to burthen vs withall As for Atheisme I doubte not but your owne conscience doth tell you our doctrine is farre from it which when you forsooke I wil not saie how neere you approched to Atheisme in yealding to the strawne opinions at Rome but I am assured you went from Christ to followe Antichrist and of a minister of the Gospel became an open enemie of the Gospel If you repent not it had bin better for you neuer to haue bene borne Those forefathers of whome I spake haue giuen such a blowe to your great fathers of Rome pag. 13.32 as you and your companions shall not be hable to heale his wound And though he liue still and breath yet is he scarse hable to stand on his feete and carieth vpon him that marke that shall dailie more and more discouer him to the Saints of God Aerius Vigilantius Iouinianus if they taught anie thing against the trueth of Gods word let them be esteemed as they deserue We laie the grounds of our religion not vpon the writings or opinions of men be they good or badde learned or vnlearned Catholikes or Heretikes but vpon the written word of the eternall God and therefore we praie not as you doe nor offer sacrifice for the dead we worship not nor inuocate Saints we thinke the honourable estate of mariage is pleasing to the Lord as well as single life For thus haue the Prophets the Apostles the Lord him-selfe taught vs As for Marcion Cerdon the rest we abhorre them with all their damnable herisies because the word of God condemneth them the more is your fault in saying they are our fathers But you haue drawen since your departure so hard a skin ouer your conscience Foule vntrueths affirmed of vs by M. R. as you feare not to vtter anie vntrueth be it neuer so desperate You say we matche S. Luke and the Apocalyps with the booke of Iudith and that we saie most plainlie we are not bound to admit those and all the forenamed bookes but may refuse them which for shame of the world you would neuer haue written but that like an Atheist your pen is a readie instrument to publish anie vntrueth The booke of Iudith in dede admit we not and that is no blasphemie prooue it if you can But what should I require you M. Rainolds to prooue anie thing that haue taken vppon you to saie al things and prooue nothing You reason as if you had made a fraie with reason Pag. 33.34 that we are like those olde brutish heretikes called Alogi who denied the Apocalyps of Saint Iohn because we saie we know as certainelie the scriptures to be scriptures and euerie booke thereof as we know the sunne to be the sunne which is as contrarie to those Alogi as the light is to darkenes But who euer doubted of the sunne you saie that it is the sunne of Saint Iames epistle Luther doubteth and the Lutherans wherfore you saie I condemne them for the veriest sottes that euer liued Not so Master Rainolds if you could see For though we are as fullie persuaded of the one as of the other yet doth it not follow that the clearnes of this truth appeereth alike vnto all We must be persuaded assurede of many things that are not seene no lesse then of those things that we see with our eies but to such onelie as it is reueiled vnto Know you not as vndoubtedly there is a God as you know there is a sunne If not to you yet to all Godlie the knowledge of the one is no lesse certaine then of the other though we cannot beholde god with our eies as we may seethe sunne Wil you then conclude that al are stocks and stones which cannot perceiue this so cleare and euident a trueth Doe not your selues thinke all those bookes for which you contend with vs to be as truelie canonicall as that the sunne shineth you will not I am sure say otherwise Doe you then besides an infinite number of auncient writers condemne those of your side for stockes and sottes that denied them To omit the rest of whome I spake before Sixt. biblioth lib. l. Driedo de Catal serip li. 1. c. 4. ad difficult 11. was Sixtus Senensis a sotte for denying your bookes of Hester was Dryedo a sotte for denying Baruch Thus must it be or els your argument is too childish I will not saie sottish Here is brought an argument for Traditions such a one as M. R. diuinitie could afford Pag. 35. It cannot he saith be prooued by scriptures that S. Mat. S. Marke S. Luke S. Iohn his gospell S. Paules Ep. are Canonical scripture that is penned by diuine inspiration then we must beleeue some what which by scripture cannot be prooued so tradition is established I would your other traditions were of this sorte then should we sooner agree But betweene this and the rest of your infinite traditions there is no likenes For this is grounded vpon the word written the rest haue no footing on that ground Although it is not expreslie set downe in thus many words S. Matthewes gospell is Canonicall How we knowe the gospell of S. Matthew S. Marke c. to be canonicall scriptures so likewise of the rest yet that we cannot otherwise come to the certain knowledge beliefe thereof but by reporte is a vaine foolish phantasie For the historie it selfe and doctrine therein contained doe plainlie shewe conuince the booke to be Canonical that is written by diuine inspiration so as although the Churches commendation and testimonie of it may confirme our iudgement in beleeuing the same yet our faith is builded vpon the written word it selfe And so your other argument falleth of faith by hearing and hearing by the word of God Rom. 10.17 For when we heare the doctrine of these bookes preached vnto vs we beleeue the same in euerie point whereof it must needs follow that the bookes are Canonicall containing so heauenlie and spirituall doctrine as the like can not be written of anie but the spirit of God onelie so being enforced to alowe and imbrace by faith the doctrine of those bookes how can we but
but they prooued their faith to be grounded vppon the scriptures So Cyprian a wise and Catholike Bishop writeth that in controuersies of Religion we must haue recourse to the origine of trueth Cypria de vnit Eccles in Epist ad Pompei whereby he meaneth the scriptures and that the cause of heresie is for that the head is not sought which he declareth further adding that the doctrine of the heauenlie Master is not kept And therefore if those fathers had obiected nothing but the common beliefe of the Churches against those heretikes they had taken a wrong course and should neuer thus haue stopped their mouthes But they had a surer waie to conuince heretikes then you haue whoe being of all heretikes the greatest would take awaie all means of confuting heretikes that so your selues might not be espied or not controlled As for Heluidius Ambrose Epist 81. 79. Hieron cont Heluid who denied the blessed virgine to haue remained a virgine afterward the fathers Ierome and Ambrose alleadged against him not tradition onely but the scriptures especiallie although what Saint Basill hath written of this wholl matter you maie reade in his sermon of the Natiuitie wherein he is not affraied plainlie to affirme that after she had borne our sauiour Christ Basil de Christi â—tiuit whither she married againe or remained a virgine still belongeth longeth nothing to the mysterie of faith Againe you imagine a third sense of Luthers wordes Pag. 51. by supposing a thing impossible that if all Churches and fathers teach against Scripture Luther with Scripture then Luther maie thinke him-selfe a better man then they al. What Luthers meaning was you haue heard and therefore it skilleth not what you suppose further Indeed M. R. as you saie the Church falleth not from Christ to Apostasie but this is true as well of the Church in the olde Testament as in the newe yet as the visible Churches of the Iewes fell awaie from God and became open enemies vnto our sauiour Christ so it might come to passe since Christ that the particular Churches and congregations did corrupte the doctrine of the Gosepll and slid into that Apostasie which the Scriptures foresaid should ouerspread the Churches afterward 1. Tim. 4.1 2. Thes 2.3 But the Catholike Church which is the number of Gods elect can no more fall awaie from Christe into Apostasie then the course of heauen can be chaunged For it standeth vpon Christ the rocke and hell gates shall not be hable to cast it downe Here againe you come in with Luthers opinion of the sacrament pag. 52. wherein as he dissented from vs the truth verie much so your popish Transsubstantiation then which was neuer a more impious and absurd heresie maintained in the Church he vtterlie abhorred And what though herein Luther somthing swarued from the truth might he not therefore being in other causes assured thereof out of the word of God reiect the opinions of such as dissented from the same By this reason no man in defense of Gods trueth may chalenge or bid defiance to the aduersaries thereof seeing they haue no priuiledge or Charter graunted to them but that them selues maie also be deceiued Luther was an excellent man and a worthie seruante of Christ whose Ministerie especiallie it pleased the Lord to vse in reuealing to these times that sonne of perdition whoe sitteth in the Temple of God and aduaunceth him selfe aboue God yet was Luther a man and therefore no maruaile if he were not exempted altogether from ignorance and infirmitie And what miserable peruersnes is it in you that being not able to maintaine your owne heresies against Luther will thinke to escape in the iudgement of men from beeing condemned because Luther him selfe in one pointe of doctrine erred Maie no man conuince error but such a one as is free from erring at all him selfe the scriptures are left vnto vs to be our rule of trueth by them must all doctrine be squared and directed they sit in the hiest seate of indgement to giue sentence in euerie cause With them did Luther cut downe your errours of them haue we learned to thinke of the sacrament otherwise then Luther did to them doe we submit our selues in euerie thing we teach and are contented that our wholl Religion be tried by them so that if you or anie other can shewe wherein we disagree from them we are readie and willing to be reformed But one error of Luther cannot serue to excuse infinite errors in the popish Church Thus haue you my answere as plainlie as I could deuise in this matter which though you haue handled at large as became a man of your learning leasure and discretion yet in the end you cast it awaie from you as not worthy to haue any time bestowed about it Now therfore I trust herafter you wil be better occupied CHAPTER 4. Of Priesthod and of the sacrifice continued after Christ SEeing you will needes be called accounted Priests that in the proper sense pag. 56. and signification of this word I require no pardon at your hands for terming you as I did For if Christ be the onelie Priest of the new Testament and his sacrifice neuer to be repeated as we are plainlie taught by the word of God what Priests can you be but Baalites and what sacrificers but Antichristian shewe your order your Author your institution otherwise we must esteeme and speake of you Heb. 5.4 The Popish priest hoode was not ordainied by Christ but is contrarie to the Priesthood of Christ and therefore worthie to be contemned detested of al faithfull Christians as such a generation deserueth It is not lawfull for any to take honour to him-selfe but he that is called of God as Aaron If you can prooue that God hath called you it is meet you be receiued reuerenced as the ordinaunce of God in all functions deserueth but this can you neuer doe and therefore both your name your profession is of al the godly to be detested as a venemous plant neuer planted by the heauenlie father Mat. 15.13 Two waies you haue chosen by which you will prooue your selues lawfull priests principally you say by mine owne words secondarily by deduction out of the scriptures Let vs consider of both these arguments in order and so it shall appeare in the end that your Priesthood was hatched of an ill egge pag. 57. And here you declare euidentlie to the world in the verie begininng your pitifull ignorance M. R. affirmeth that we denie Melchisedech to haue bene a Priest how vntruelie all the world caÌ„ witnes Gen. 14.18 Psal 110.4 Heb. 7.1 not knowing against whom you fight For was it euer of vs doubted that Melchisedech was a Priest and offered sacrifice doth not the scripture teach the same moste expreslie and that in manie places yet you saie you could neuer obtaine so much of our brethren which argueth that God
other and say if you can otherwise That you aske whether he amplifie a lie or truth I answere his amplification is true as he meant it and as it must of necessitie be expounded Of Priests and sacrifice enoughe hath bene spoken before Such priests as Chrysostome after the common manner of speach speaketh of we acknowledged which were the Bishops and Pastours of the Church And concerning the amplification which you say it is impossible to interprete of our communion if you had wil this thing is possible and easie enough We say therefore with Saint Chrysostome we see Christ that is we see a sacrament of Christ For Christ him selfe I thinke you wil not say is seene We see Christ sacrificed that is we see the sacrament of Christs sacrifice administred wherein Christs sacrifice is recorded according to his coÌ„maundement The Priest is bent to the sacrifice that is the minister of Christ ministreth the sacrament of the sacrifice offereth the sacrifice of prayers and thanks giuing The people receiue the precious blood nay M.R.S. Chrysostomes words are more vehement then so he saith the people are sprinckled imbrued with his blood belike S. Chrysostome was here somewhat too vehement in your iudgement The exposition I leaue to your selfe tell vs withal how the people are thus sprinckled in your Church that come not once neere the cuppe Holy water sprinckling you haue enough amongst you but this sprinckling of blood whereof S. Chrisost speaketh you must needes confesse cannot belong to the people amongst you Christ sitting in heauen is receiued in the Church who seeth not the meaning that Christ sitting in heauen as touching his bodilie presence is in the sacrament spirituallie receiued This Doctrine is the Doctrine of our Church and for this no man amongst vs needeth to feare the controlement of anie coÌ„missioner so his meaning be sound as Chrysostomes was to declare a true spirituall presence and communication of Christ in the sacrament not to â—â—siâ—â—ate a caâ—nal being and receiuing of Christ therein which Saint Chrysostome in manie places moste plainly confuteth and which he neuer thought anie man once so fond to imagine That Chrysostome compareth this sacrifice with the Leuiticall sacrifices 〈◊〉 â—29 and that of Elias prooueth not yet a Reall sacrifice of Christ in the sacrament Anâ—ther 〈◊〉 argument of M.R. Let your reason thus be framed according to your minde Chrysostome compareth and preferreth the sacrament of Christs supper wherein the sacrament of Christs death is represented and reâ—orded to the sacrifices of the Lâ—uiticall Priests and of Elias therefore as they offered some Real sacrifice of a beast so the Priest nowe offereth a Reall sacrifice of Christ This conclusion holdeth not Master Rainolds it is too weake Were you not at Rhemes you might see the force of Saint Chrysostomes comparison to lie herein that the olde Priests were appointed to sacrifice onelie a lambe or goate or kowe or some other brute beast but now the sonne of God himselfe is moste liuely yet spirituallie not reallie sacrificed in the Church when the sacrament of this sacrifice according to his institution is receiued Your eloquence in the end is nothing els but childish rayling necessarie for such a cause as you haue taken in hand to maintaine which cannot otherwise be vpholden or continue in anie reasonable account CHAP. 10. Of the place in S. Lukes Gospell which Beza is charged to haue corrupted BEfore you come to the matter pag. 23â— it pleaseth you a litle to whet your eloquence in rayling at Beza a man though much hated of Papists who loue none that loueth not their Pope be he neuer so learned or godly yet knowen to all men euen his enemies to be indued with excellent graces of Gods spirit which haue shined in him notablie to the glorie of God and profit of the Church Your spitefull reproches cast against him others are now of all esteemed as they are in truth fained slaunderous vnworthie of anie regard or credit His skill in the bible hath sufficiently appeered to your griefe and if you Master Rainolds would herein compare your selfe with him it were a token of your singular boldnes and arrogancie His skill in murthering men you saie was better which argueth you haue no conscience to deuise to speake to write moste vntrulie But say your pleasure your reward with God and men is certaine Many I knowe haue written against him much you may knowe that he hath fully answered them al. But of your Remish or Romish colledge of English students I knowe not anie that hath written ought against him in that tongue which he could read and vnderstand The words are in Luke 22. v. 20. which in the Greeke that Beza translated by construction indeed require tha the cuppe which is called the new Testament should be shed for vs. In which respect Beza translateth them otherwise For further knowledge hereof you referre your reader to M. Martin and so doe I for answere to M.D. Fulke And here you might as well haue cut of this long taile of your treatise which hath not in it one drop of learning or profit you rayle at me you raile at Beza you rayle at the holie communion pag. 235. which you cal profane bakerlie but reason scripture or proofe you bring not anie for your sayings I see you are a resolute man continew thus a while and I nothing doubt but he whose ordinance and sacrament you haue thus boldelie and wickedly blasphemed wil be auenged vpon that profane heart and tongue of yours But let vs heare what you saie First pag. 239. whereas I said if they vnderstand by the cuppe the bloode in the cuppe as they doe then is there mention made of double bloode you tell me I lie groslie and intollerablie such curteous speaches I haue no cause to thanke you for but let all men of wisdome be iudges whether I haue not saied the truth Thus you make S. Luke to speake this cup that is this bloode is the new Testament in my blood which is shed for you Is not here by your construction mentioned first one blood then an other your reply is pitifull M. R. For to say This Christ is Christ the sonne of God this God is God of heauen and earth as it signifieth not a double Christ or God so is it nothing like this saying of yours concerning the blood in the sacrament For you cannot make the construction as you pretend this blood is the blood of the new Testament the wordsstand otherwise vnles you wil commit a greater fault then that wherewith you charge Beza so hainously S. Luke speaketh not as you make him this blood is the blood of the new testament but this cup is the new testament in my blood If by cup he meant blood as you affirme then our sauiour Christ his blood was the new Testament in his blood And is it all one to say This blood is
these men that modestie of minde that was in Augustine He was readie to be taught of all they will neuer learne but alwaies teach that they know not Thus hath Viues wtitten of you Master R. and such absurd and sensles fellowes as you that against reason and truth will defend your translations although differing neuer so much from the originall tongues because you are too stout and want modestie And for the Iewes thus much may be answered that howsoeuer they mislike and hate our religion yet the text of holy scripture they haue euermore and yet still doe keepe most religiouslie and carefullie Which may appeare for that there be Ioan. Isaac Contra Lindan lib. 2. pa. 77. as Ioannes Isaac a learned Iewe writeth aboue two hundred arguments against the Iewish opinions more euident and expresse in the Hebrew text of the old testament then they be in the latine translation And so likewise saith Andradius Andrad lib. 4. Defens Trident that they which holylie and religiouslie handle the Hebrew text finde therein farre more not able testimonies of Christ then in the Latine and Greeke copies which also Saint Ierome long since hath witnessed Hier. epist 74. ad Marcell saying that when he of purpose compared the Hebrew text with a Greeke translation to see whether the Iewes had not chaunged some thing in the Hebrew bookes through enuie that they bare to Christ he found therein much more for confirmation of Christian faith which could not haue beene so if the Iewes had of malice to Christ corrupted their Bibles as now is by our aduersaries vntruly surmised What madnes then should driue them to corrupt the text to no hindrance of our religion to no furtherance of theirs who doubteth but if they had meant such a thing they would haue practised their skill in those places especiallie that doe moste directlie concerne the Gospell of Christ which being otherwise your coniecture of the Iewes dealing about the Hebrew text is foolish and false You declame against the ignorance and reprobate minde of the Iewes you set forth the promises made to the Church of hauing alwaies the truth And thinke you that this maketh anie thing for you Do these promises of gods spirit and truth made to the Church belong onely to the latine Church are they included onelie in the latine translation What shall become then in your iudgement of so manie Churches in Greece in Armenie in Arabie in all places of the world that haue no skill of your latine Bibles Haue they no spirit no scripture no truth doth your Tridentine decree appertaine vnto them also of vsing onelie the latine text in sermons in lectures in expositions in disputations what meane you to talke in this manner You say God hath promised the Church that she shall be a faithfull and perpetuall obseruer of his word and testament that is according to your new commentarie that the Church shal lose the pure fountains of the Hebrew text but shal keepe a pure translation for euer And see you not the vanity of this deuise Confessed you not euen now that in Damasus daies all the latine translations were corrupt wherupon S. Ierome was intreated to take vpon him a labour of correcting them all Was not the promise whereof you speake made to the Church M.R. dreams hang not handsomelie together before S. Hierome set forth his correction and yet the Churches latine translations were as your selfe confesse in his time full of diuersities and corruptions Then if the Bibles in latine were so much corrupted before S. Hierome by your own confession notwithstanding the promise that God made the Church of keeping his word and testament can you by this argument prooue that by force of this promise the latine Bibles haue not bene corrupted since Saint Ieromes time and the Hebrew haue August epist 58. ad quaest 2. S. Augustine saith it came to passe by Gods special prouidence that the Iewes being so continuallie tossed to and fro and still continuing their hatred against our sauiour Christ yet kept the holy scriptures that the truth of Christs Gospel might so much the more be approoued amongst all men because it receiued so sure weightie testimonies of the most malitious enemies And to this purpose he applieth the verse of the Psalme Lord kil them not lest they forget thy lawe but scatter them Furthermore al that you can say against the malice falshoode and ignorance of the Iewes nothing toucheth the new testament for corruption whereof in the originall Greeke I maruaile what you can deuise seeing it was kept not in the custody of Iewes or paganes but of moste Godly and learned Christians Yet doe you reprooue it also as well as the Hebrew of the olde testament what reason haue you M. Rainolds so to doe was it also corrupted since S. Ieromes time as you said of the other The commentaries and writings of the Greeke fathers wil easily conuince you if so you say For the text that we haue is the same which they followed expounded and set downe in their writings except there be in some fewe places some small difference of reading If the latine Church had any promise to keepe Gods truth and testament in a latine translation will you denie that the Greeke Church had not the same promis to keepe it in the originall text while you seeme to auouch the truth of gods promis toward the latine Church as though you cared nothing how the Lord dealt with others so he kept touch and couenant with yourselues you make him by your argument to be vnfaithful toward the Church of Greece and all other Churches els in the world Thus are you driuen into absurdities and contradictions as needes you must when you mainetaine willfullie such false assertions as these That Caluine affirmeth the Romane Church to haue bene more constant Pag. 300. and lesse giuen to nouelties then the East Churches whereby she obtained greater fame and credit then the rest nothing concerneth this matter For though it be graunted the Grecians were more factious for the most part and wauering then the Romanes yet might they retaine the original text of scripture as faithfullie as they No people so froward so malitious so presumptuous so contentious so hard to be brought vnder the obedience of gods lawes as the Iewes and yet for all this peruerse disposition in them it is moste certaine that they had euermore and haue still the bookes of scripture in highest reuerence The Iewes alwaies most dilingent in keeping their Bibles from corruption and keepe them with greatest diligence so as they would not alter one letter in them for all the world And notwithstanding the Romanes greater constancie and staiednes then the Grecians yet were the latine Bibles in S. Hieromes time more corrupt for the new testament then the Greeke fountaines were Which maie be vnderstood vndoubtedlie thereof for that in anie controuersie about the latine translation they alwaies
had recourse to the Greeke copies and haue prescribed the same rule to be followed continuallie and Saint Hierome himselfe reformed the latin translations according to the Greeke then extant read in the Greeke Churches Thus then you maie perceaue that to be constant in the profession of Gods trueth and to be carefull to keepe the text of scripture from corruption are two diuerse things which you might haue soone considered if you had but looked backe to that your selfe haue written before For these are euen the same Grecians whose exemplars Saint Ierome followed in correcting the Euangelists and which he calleth waters of the moste pure fountaine and sundrie wise commendeth Hieron Marcellae For proofe that the Hebrew fountaines are by the Iewes corrupted pag. 303. c. you bring vs forth a place out of the prophet Esaie Chap. 9. First in that I say the Iewes haue not corrupted the hebrew text I say no other thing then that which the moste learned Papists of all times haue affirmed M.R. in this controuersie hath his master papists aduersaries to him namelie Isaac Clarius Valla Andradius Montanus Lucas Bellarmine and manie moe and that by the same argument which my selfe vsed that then this corruption moste certainelie would haue appeared in those places that directlie concerne our Sauiour Christ amongst the which this that you mention here is notable And although I wil not deny but that the Iewes might haue some purpose to wrest it from the sense that it might be aplied to any rather then to Christ yet the corruption is not so greate as you would haue it seeme consisting not in change of any letter but only of the pointes The letters remaining without alteration whatsoeuer is amisse in the pointes may easilie be corrected Furthermore if we reade the word with the same pointes which now it commonly hath in the Hebrew Bibles whereby the verbópassiue is turned into an actiue yet the place notwithstanding prooueth inuinciblie the Diuinitie of our Sauiour Christ For as well doth it confirme this doctrine if we read Vajikrae vocabit that is God the father shall call his name wonderfull c as if we read Vajikkare vocabitur his name shall be called wonderfull Although you that take vpon you such profound knowledge and cunning in the Hebrew language should not haue beene ignorant that this is the phrase of that tongue That the Iewes refer the last name onely which is the Prince of peace Sar-shaelom to the Childe borne all the rest going before to God him selfe this I graunt to be a malitious construction of the wordes but no corruption of the text One thing is it to expound the wordes in a wronge sense an other to falsifie the wordes You hoped no doubte to haue gained much more by this place then will any waies be yelded vnto you for that you adde of the Churches authoritie which you call the supreame grounde and stay is nothing worth being an olde worne and wasted sentence brought in rashelie without credite or countenaunce The wordes are plaine of them-selues and haue in them authoritie and stay sufficient to prooue the trueth of Christs diuinitie and to confute the enemies thereof An other such place you obiecte out of the Prophet Ieremie pag. 306. Chap. 23. v. 6. wherein that some corruption hath bene committed either in letter or poynt may be imagined but cannot by euident demonstration be prooued ijcro What mooued S. Ierome to translate thus vocabunt eum They shall call him I will not dispute The reason might be in the variety and incertentie of poynts or in the ambiguous acception of the word But because M. Rainolds chargeth the Iewes with so foule a corruption of this place only to discredite the diuinitie of our Sauiour Christ he must remember that the Seuentie interpreters translated it in the singular number according to the Hebrewe now extant In comment ad Hier. ca. 23. as S. Ierom also maketh mention yet were they neuer chalenged for partial interpretation of the scriptures being as many write wonderfullie assisted gouerned in that work and not smallie had of auncient time in regard And this was long before our sauiour Christ was come in the flesh and therefore vndoubtedlie the place was not corrupted by the Iewes for such a cause as you imagine vnlesse you will saie the Iewes in hatred of Christ corrupted the Bible diuerse hundred yeares before Christ was borne and before they had cause to conceiue any malice or displeasure against our sauiour Christ And so your Lyranes surmise is plainelie disprooued in which you rest your selfe as in a certaine veritie and vpon his worde are boulde to pronounce sentence against the poore Iewes for committing a crime which by cleare euidence of greater authoritie they are not guilty of Neither maketh it lesse for Christs diuinitie to read it vocabit He shall cal him that is God the father or euerie faithful man shal call him The Lord our righteousnes then if we reade vocabunt They shall call him the Lord our righteousnes And Saint Hierome as you might haue seene had you looked on the place your selfe translateth the text after this manner Et hoc est nomen quo vocabunt eum sine vocabit eum Dominus iustus noster wherein he sheweth plainelie there is no substance of matter more in the one then the other If this be so shameful so notable a corruption as you in countenaunce and shew pretende S. Hierome was greatly ouerseene that not onelie gaue no warning thereof in his Commentarie but vsed the same also in the text it selfe But what wil you say to those learned men whoe hauing more skill in the Hebrew tongue then you Master Rainolds or els your Lyra thoug a Iewe borne haue translated the word as it is now read in the hebrew Bibles no otherwise then your selues would haue it to be translated I meane Arias Montanus and Vatablus as in their translations you may finde whoe if they haue rightelie and well translated the worde then may you see that no such wickednesse hath bene practized in this place as you haue fathered vpō the Iewes And furthermore compare an other like place in the same Prophet Chap. 33. v. 15. Where this worde is vsed in the singular number without controuersie the Prophet speaking againe of the same matter and almoste whollie in the same wordes Thus you may vnderstand that the integritie of this place may be auouched and the Iewes deliuered from your vniust accusation many waies One example more you giue mean an other kinde Pag. 310. wherein no kinde of corruption appeereth at all In the Prophet Esay chap. 53. vers 8. the old latine translation standeth thus propter scelus populi mei percussi eum For the sinne of my people haue I smitten him The Hebrew text is something otherwise Miphshahh 〈◊〉 mi negahh lamo propter defectionem populi
imagined presence of Christs bodie in the sacrament which being graunted according to your doctrine of transsubstantiation inferreth moste necessarilie that Christs bodie at once is both compassed in a litle bread which is contrarie to the nature of a mans true bodie and also is not compassed therein as sitting in heauen and hauing the naturall properties of a true bodie which cannot be brought within so narrowe a compasse as is your wafer cake This is repugnant to scripture to reason to Gods ordinaunce and therefore a moste absurde and impossible thing is it that Christs bodie should remaine a true naturall bodie and yet at once be contained in so small a compasse as you teach In that Christ and Peter walked on the water no such inconuenience nor absurditie can be found whether the waters were made by miracle firme as the ground or the bodies were sustained by Gods power that they suncke not Christ might beare vp him-selfe and Peter from sincking downe by his diuine power and chaunge no naturall propertie of his or Peters bodie but Christs bodie can not be brought into that slender compasse of your mathematicall cake without destruction of all properties incident vnto a natural body So then betweene these two is no likenes at all as any man not blinded with Popish folly and not wilfullie shutting his eyes against the cleare light may manifestlie perceiue Wherefore distrusting this argument you protest that your note consisteth not so much thereupon as in the authoritie of Epiphanius whoe hath not anie worde at all to this purpose For tell vs Master Rainolds doth Epiphanius drawe an argumente from Christs walking on the water to prooue his bodie reallie present in the sacramentall bread No such matter can you finde in Epiphanius or any auncient father of Christs Church That which Christ hath said he that beleeueth not to be true is fallen from grace and saluation as Epiphanius writeth but Christ hath neuer said that his bodie should be in the compasse of a litle bread Howbeit what talke you of a litle bread when you teach no bread at all remaineth but onelie signes and shadowes of bread False is your doctrine and foolish is your argument but bad reasons are good enoughe for such a bad religion Of Peters walking on the water pag. 498 is gathered an other argument of like qualitie to prooue the Popes supreme authoritie which argument was first inuented and deuised by Saint Bernarde in his second booke and eight Chapter to Eugenius a Pope Manie waters are many people Peter walked on the waters therefore Peter and his successors are rulers ouer manie people saith good Saint Bernarde to whome your Pope is greatlie bound for deuising such a fine argument which no auncient Doctor was able to finde But must we now receiue Bernards phantasies for substantiall proofes of the papall supremacie No Master Rainolds Saint Bernarde hath no warrant to make allegories at his pleasure for confirmation of that Antichristian tiranny which in those daies was established Your comparison of this argument with that of Christs about the brasen serpent and of Pauls concerning Isaac and Ismael is no better then blasphemous Might Saint Bernarde with like authoritie reason thus Peter walked on the waters therefore he and his successors are supreme gouernours of the vniuersall Church as Christ did shew the manner of his death by the lifting vp of the brasen serpent in the desert or as Saint Paul did prooue the haued and persecution of false brethren against the true Christians by example of Ismael and Isaac Had Bernard the fullnes of wisdome and trueth that was in Christ was Bernard alwaies directed with that spirit wherewith Saint Paul expounded the scriptures of God Here we may see how baselie you thinke of Gods word to match therewith mens seelie expositions and applications such as Saint Bernards often times were and this moste notablie is An argument is gathered for workes of supererogation pag. 499. out of the Samaritanes wordes whatsoeuer thou shalt bestow more or as it is by them translated Luc. 10.35 whatsoeuer thou shalt supererogate This argument saith Master Rainolds followeth wel enough and is Saint Augustins conclusion to prooue that Saint Paul did supererogate when he might haue receiued all duties for preaching the Gospell but would not That men may remit some part of their due and doe more towardes men outwardlie then they can of necessitie be vrged to doe no man will denie and thus may one man be said to supererogate towards another but what maketh this for workes of supererogation towards God whoe requireth both inward and outward obedience of vs in moste absolute manner For reall presence a like argument to the first is gathered of Christs transfiguration Pag. 499. whereof yet Master Rainolds being ashamed saith it is not their argument Matt. 17. â— but onelie a deduction that Christ maie giue vs his bodie in forme of bread and wine A proper deduction no doubt of a glorious bodie to prooue no bodie That Saints can heare and helpe vs euerie where pag. 500. because they are like to Angels is a verie bad argument Mat. 22.30 considering that neither Angels can so do for then were they of equall power with God and though Saints are like to Angels as in other things so in this that they marrie not yet it followeth not that therefore they are equall to Angels You are glad of such arguments hauing no other but if ye had better ye would not esteeme such Ioseph wrapped Christs bodie in sindon pag. 501. Therefore Christs bodie on the altar must be laid in pure linnen Mat. 27.59 In this argument Master Rainolds cannot tell what I mislike whether the reall presence or the linnen vsed at the altar as it was in the sepulcher or the relation from one to the other I answere in a worde I mislike all there being no trueth in anie of all The women came to beholde the sepulcher pag. 502. Ergo we must goe to the holie sepulcher in pilgrimage Matt 28.1 This argument Master Rainolds confesseth cannot indeede prooue that we must but that we maie goe in pilgrimage by example of those godlie and zealous women which yet is a false and fond deduction seing there is no such like cause for vs to goe as was for them That Christ appeered to the twoe disciples in another forme pag. 504. cannot prooue that he is in the sacrament in forme of bread Mark 16.12 for somuch as in Christs bodie noe alteration at this time was wrought but onelie the disciples eies were helde that they know him not as Saint Luke expreslie noteth Luk. 34.16 For your exorcisme in baptisme argument you saie you made none of Christes saying to the dombe and dease Ephpheta Mat. 7.34 If no argument no proofe if no proofe then no cause to vse by example of Christ such exorcisme in you baptismes pag. 505. Luk. 1.3
prooued For as the Apostle reasoneth if Christes person be perpetuall as it is and if he make for vs perpetuall intercession as he doth and if by his one sacrifice offered once he hath wrought a full and perfect redemption as he hath then is it hereof in proper signification prooued that Christs priesthood also is perpetuall and then haue these malapert papists blasphemed in denying the Apostles arguments to be good in proper signification which is in effect to take from them all credit and authoritie Let Master Rainolds deuise what cunning shift he can yet in truth neuer shall he be hable to wipe out this blot of blasphemie when the Apostle hath of purpose laboured to prooue Christs eternall priesthood and prooued it indeede most inuinciblie for these Collegiates of Rhemes to come in with their censure vpon the Apostle and to set downe in plaine termes that all this prooueth not the matter in proper signification and that the Apostle hath omitted the chiefe and proper proofe thereof This is a blasphemie against Christ and against the holy spirit of God by which the Apostle in writing was directed But what can Master Rainolds saie in excuse of this so manifest blasphemie pag. 534. He asketh first Where saie we that of all those things proposed by the Apostle it followeth not that Christs priesthood is eternall Must you againe be put in minde of your owne Annotation which your selfe haue at large rehearsed Haue you not therein expreslie in writing published All this prooueth not that in proper signification his priesthood is perpetuall And what differeth this from that which I haue affirmed of you Hath the Apostle propounded any thing concerning your pretended sacrifice If he hath shew vs where in what words after what sort If any thing at all can be shewed to this purpose as nothing indeed can and without this be shewed in your opinion the eternitie of Christs priesthood is no wais sufficientlie prooued doe you not plainlie declare your iudgement to be that it followeth not of al those thinges which the Apostle hath said that Christes priesthood is eternall yea but M.R. saith that they haue auouched the cleane contrary in saying that all the fathers gather of this deepe and diuine discourse the eternitie of his Priesthood The fathers indeed haue gathered of this discourse most truelie the eternitie of Christs Priesthood and therein they confute your wicked dannotation that saith all this prooueth not Christes Priesthood to be perpetuall They vnderstood the Apostle rightlie and they expounded his meaning faithfully Shew me now one ancient father if you can M. R. that euer saide as you saie that all this alledged by the Apostle prooueth not in proper signification that Christes priesthoode is perpetuall or els that he taught as you teach that Christ must continuallie be sacrificed in forme of bread and wine This is the point this shew vs if you can For in your Annotation no such thing is shewed and all the fathers confesse with one consent that the Apostle hath prooued soundly the eternitie of Christs Priesthood and that no other sacrifice remaineth to be offered but onelie a remembrance and sacrament of that one euerlasting sacrifice to be continued in the Church to the end of the world Secondlie it is confessed by Master Rainolds that the Apostle maketh not anie expresse mention of that oblation of bread and wine pag. 536. But what reason was there why the Apostle entreating of Christes eternall preisthood omitted the principall part thereof Consider good reader into what miserable straites these men are driuen and what absurde deuises they are enforced to forge For their best excuse is that because the Iewes beleeued not the first singular and soueraigne sacrifice of the crosse therefore he would not vrge them with this secondarie and dependente sacrifice of the Church Which in trueth is nothing els but a seelie shift to salue a desperate sore For first it is euident the Apostle writ to those that were not ignorant of Christian religion seeing they had learned alreadie the principles thereof and are exhorted by the Apostle to proceed to perfection therin Hebr. 6.1 Secondlie whereas the Apostle hath discoursed so plentifullie of the principal and soueraigne sacrifice what reason was there to keepe silence of the secondarie sacrifice as you call it Might they heare of the greater and not of the lesse Might the Apostle vrge so earnestlie vnto them the sacrifice of the crosse and might he not in a word mention the sacrifice of the Altar Coulde the one be more offensiue vnto them then the other Let all men iudge what trueth there is in this deuise Of that which followeth concerning this matter nothing deserueth answere pag. 540. saue onelie that Master Rainolds asketh of me whether Melchisedech did not sacrifice I saie no doubt Melchisedech did sacrifice for otherwise he had not bene a priest But Saint Paul saith he maketh no expresse mention thereof What then I praie you Forsooth by Master Whittakers iudgement Saint Paul omitteth some principall part of Melchisedechs priesthood Whoe euer heard a more foolish collection it was sufficient for the Apostle that Melchisedech was a priest which is confirmed by plaine testimonie of scripture to rehearse anie speciall kinde of sacrifice by him offered was nothing necessarie to the purpose in hand And therefore the Apostle hath not omitted any principall part of Melchisedechs priesthood vnles you will say it cannot be prooued necessarilie that one hath bene a priest except euerie particular sacrifice that euer was offered by him be recorded and auouched This being moste absurd see how vaine a conceite of yours this was that the Apostle hath omitted some principall parte of Melchisedechs priesthood because he hath not declared expresselie what speciall sacrifice Melchisedech offered An other example I noted out of the sixt Chapter to the Romanes pag. 543. c. in that notable place where the Apostle writeth that the stipend of sin is death but life euerlasting is the gift of God Rom. 6.23 Vpon these words our Rhemists haue noted that the sequell of speach required that as he saide death or damnation is the stipend of sinne so life euerlasting is the stipend of iustice and so it is Wherein euerie man may behould their intollerable saucines and presumption in setting the holie Apostle to schoole in controling his speach in corrupting his meaning For if the case had stood so clearlie and roundlie as these men teach that euen as condemnation is the stipend of finne so is eternall life the stipend of iustice it had bene as casie for the Apostle to haue so written as to alter his wordes and hauing saide that death is the wages of sinne to affirme after an other manner of speach that life euerlasting is not the wages of iustice but the gift and free gift of God And doutles according to the doctrine of S. Paul and the holie ghost it is no other
but proude blaspemie to saie as the Rhemists saie that as death is the stipend of sinne so life euerlasting is the stipend of iustice seing the one stipend is of meere due and desert the other onelie of grace and mercie so that if God would enter into iudgement with vs according to the rigour of his iustice we could not chalenge euerlasting life for any iustice that we had wrought as all the scriptures doe moste aboundantlie and plainelie teach Their onelie excuse hangeth vpon Saint Augustine whoe in a certaine epistle writeth Epist 105. 〈◊〉 Sixtura that euerlasting life is repayed to our merites going before and yet may it well be called grace because our merites are wrought in vs by grace not gotten by our owne habilitie to like effecte he writeth in diuerse other places of his workes and treatises as euerie one knoweth that hath bene conuersant in reading his bookes What then shal we graunt Saint Augustine to be an author of this Popish and Sorbonicall doctrine of iustification by merite of workes Nothing lesse The answere is easie and no more easie then true that by merites Saint Augustine vnderstandeth good workes after the manner of speach in latine and by stipend or reward he meaneth that benefite or gifte which God repaieth to good workes to the workers of iustice What difference then is there betweene our Sorbonists and Saint Augustine with whome we also consent In wordes may seeme no difference at all in substance and truth of doctrine as great difference as is betweene heauen and earth life and death God and man We know and confesse with Saint Augustine according to the doctrine of holie scripture that life eternall is a reward of iustice and good workes but not as death is a stipend of sinne according to the Sorbonists and Rhemists religion And howsoeuer Saint Augustine pleaseth them in his exposition of this place the which notwithstanding being rightlie vnderstood maketh nothing for them yet other fathers haue obserued of the Apostles wordes set downe in this manner that eternall life is onelie a gift not deserued but freelie bestowed and that this was the cause whie the Apostle applied not the name of stipend to life euerlasting as he had done before to death Looke vpon Origen in his commentaries vpon the fourth of the Romans and the latter end of the sixt And this as it is sound and sincere doctrine so must it also of all Christians necessarilie be confessed For he that sinneth hath deserued death worthilie in respect of the sinne committed which is a transgression of Gods will and commaundement and for which without remission there is no hope to escape eternall condemnation But can he that worketh well for one or two or moe good workes claime vnto himself as a due debt the kingdome of heauen for the same For what if the Lord will examine our workes straitlie according to his lawe in euerie circumstance our inward zeale loue intention desire of Gods glorie continuance and perseuerance in well doing conformitie of our will with the rule of Gods word and shall finde in the worke and in the worker great infirmitie manie wants much imperfection manifold sins in the meane time both in thought in worde and deed shall the good workes notwithstanding being thus tried found in them-selues insufficient vnanswerable to gods iustice and also hauing manie sinnes inherent together with them in the same person stand vp before the Lorde and chalenge of right the reward of life euerlasting in his kingdome Neuer durste yet anie childe of God vpon trust and confidence of his owne iustice chalenge such debt at the handes of God or yet appeare at all in his presence The Prophet Dauid although he were a holie man and had not onelie repented hartelie for his wicked deedes but also brought forth manifold fruites of repentance and regeneration yet desireth moste humblie of the Lord that he would not enter into iudgement with him psal 143.2 for so much as if he woulde so doe neither he nor anie man liuing could escape condemnation And againe If thou saith he wilt marke our iniquities O Lorde whoe can stand before thee psal 130. â— Wherein he plainlie teacheth that for a man to trust in his workes how good or glorious soeuer they are or seeme to be and vpon this confidence of his merites to looke for heauen as a due reward at gods handes is not onelie to deceiue himselfe but to incurre that iudgemente and condemnation which the Lord for his sinnes and vnworthines that by examination he findeth in him might iustlie cast vpon him Therefore he saith in another Psalme that they are happie not which haue good workes wherein to trust psal 32. â— but whose sinnes are forgiuen and whose iniquities are couered And this haue also all the godlie fathers of Christes Church euermore confessed that their workes of due and debt deserued nothing of the Lord but punishment and therefore disclaiming all their merites and acknowledging their owne manifolde transgressions and imperfections they flie to the Lordes mercie onlie and trust to be saued by grace and remission of their sins not by desert or merite of their righteousnes that they haue wrought Yea the Romane Church it selfe which moste of all magnifieth the merites of workes yet being secretlie and as it were vnwittingly caried away with sway of this trueth hath sometimes made open confession thereof and taught all hir children to sing an other song then that which now so commonly is heard amongst them of iustification and saluation through merite of their workes For in the seruice that is prescribed for the dead this praier is set forth to be vsed of all and is oftentimes repeated Domine quando veneris iudicare terram vbi me abscondam á vultu irae tuae Quia peccaui nimis in vita mea In officis defunctoruns Commissa mea pauesco ante te erubesco dum veneris iudicare noli me condemnare Quia peccaui nimis in vitamea that is O Lord when thou shalt come to iudge the earth where shal I hide my selfe from the presence of thy wrath Because I haue siâ—ned exceading lie in my life My misdedes I am afraid of and I blush before thee when thou shalt come to iudge condemne me not For I haue sinned exceadingly in my life Thus is euerie one taught to praie and this you confesse to be a good praier and necessarie for all to vse as at other times so especially when death approcheth And verelie howsoeuer it is now for a fashion with great countenaunce and vehement disputation auouched by some that we merite heauen by our good workes yet I am perswaded that no aduersarie of conscience can otherwise thinke or dare in perill of death otherwise saie but that he hath deserued for his sinnes punishment and death euerlasting and cannot auoide the same if God will render to his workes the reward that of due belongeth vnto them and therefore casting awaie all trust in his workes will aske pardon and mercy not claime any debt or due reward of the Lord. So though in their life time many of them be obstinatlie bent and haue in their mouth nothing so much as good workes merite rewarde due debt recompense for their wel doing yet the time drawing neer when they must holde vp their handes at the barâ—e of the Lords iudgement seat and there must make answere for themselues and their workes must be tried by the lawe of God they giue ouer their former confidence they haue no ioie in them-selues yea they distrust their owne workes they tremble and quake inwardly they are in fearfull heauines and perplexitie of minde they knowe not whither to turne them-selues and if God giue such grace vnto them then they see and forsake their error of deseruing heauen then they confesse they are sinners and therfore guiltie of death and then learne that lesson in their end which afore in their life time they would not vnderstand Yet doth euerie faithfull Christian keeping as much as in him lieth the commandements of God hope for the kingdome of heauen aske eternall life yea and also in some sorte promise to his workes the crowne of glorie not for merite and worthines of his works but in respect of Gods meere mercy whoe hath promised to bestowe vpon vs and our workes greater reward then we can possiblie deserue This is the difference betweene the doctrine of Christ of the Prophets of the Apostles and of the fathers which we follow and the doctrine of the Sorbonistes and Rhemists and all Papists which whoe so holdeth shall be sure neuer to be saued Thus appeereth how vaine and childish it is that you intitle your schoole of Sorbone with the names of Salomon Dauid Esaie Ieremy Peter Paule Augustine as though they had euer bene entred into that Colledge and taken degree in your schoole whereas whosoeuer marketh the point of difference betweene their doctrine and that of Sorbone shall plainlie perceiue they were no Sorbonists nor euer alowed the Sorbonicall and pharisaicall iustice of merites How ignorantlie you obiect shamefull ignorance to me maie appeere by that which now and before hath bene aunswered it being indeed manifest that your selfe either know not the true state of the controuersie or els haue replied neuer a word aptlie to purpose Soli Deo sit gloria ERRATA Pa 37. lin 17. strange p. 86 15 there p. 143.1 meaning p. 144.17 renegates P 294 21 as well p 334.5 is as corrupt pag. 351 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in certaine copies p. 159. the last line and pag. 160. the first line read it thus before Valentinian to haue a Councell that a Councell by the Emperour c. Other errors perhaps haue escaped but the reader I trust will easilie espie correct and pardon them Imprinted by THOMAS THOMAS Printer to the Vniuersitie of Cambridge 1585.
of his confutation inserted the same as anie occasion woulde serue to make his readers acquainted therewith that seeing such earnest contention among the chiefest professors of the Gospell they may be further withdrawn in alienation of minde from the loue and liking thereof VVherein also to helpe his purpose he hath vsed two kindes especially of vnlawfull sleightes One is to report among others the testimonies also of open Aduersaries to the doctrine of the Gospel as namely of Gabriel Fabritius against Beza and of Castalion and such others as eyther being professed papistes or doubtful protestantes ought not in this case to be regarded Another is to falsifie the iudgementes and sentences of our writers and so to make moste vntrue reports of them As for example in his 12. cha pa. 356. he affirmeth that we begin secretlie to disprooue the Churches faith touching the manner of Christs crucifying namely that his handes and feet were pearsed with nailes and for proofe hereof alledgeth testimonies out of Marlorate Musculus and Bucer in whom no such thing is in anie place to be found And that euery man maie perceiue what pleasure he hath what libertie he taketh to himself of speaking and reporting any thing vntruly he accuseth Castalion to haue made a discourse in the Preface written to K. Edward the sixt before his translation of the Bible in proofe that Christ is not the true Messias which verilie is a foule slander as any man maie iudge that readeth the same so be chargeth vs with the abhominable heresies of the Trinitarians Libertines Anabaptists Antinomi Dauid George and such like whom we detest as much as they against whom both wee haue written more then they and our Magistrates both ecclesiasticall and ciuil haue also seriouslie proceded VVith such allegations of al sorts out of al writers for al purposes hath he fraughted and stuffed his book other substance and waight of matter is there none therin so that of it self it might be thought moste vnworthie of answer Yet because such bookes doe harm abroad and it is expedient to haue the aduersaries folly and weaknes detected I haue vndertaken this labour of answering M. Rainolds and that in english for the same consideration that caused him to leaue the latin and write in the english tongue which I thinke he hath not done so much for want of skil therin as that his writings might commonlie be read and vnderstoode of englishmen This my labour I offer to your Honors good acceptation humblie beseeching you that I may publish it vnder the safegard of your honourable protection And as you haue bene alwayes a zealous louer of Christes Gospell and by your godly wisdome haue done your endeuour to aduaunce greatly the Lordes cause from time to time and to hinder the practises of the enemy so I beseech the Lord to encrease in you all those Christian vertues to the benefit of Christes Church and the common wealth of this Realm Thus I commend your Lordship to Gods moste mercifull and gratious preseruation beseeching him to prolong your dayes vpon earth with multiplication of all graces necessarie for this life and for the life to come Your Lordships to commaund William Whitaker AN ANSVVER TO MASTER RAINOLDS PREFACE WHether Master Rainolds were appointed by his gouernours to make this answere pag 3. as he saith or els of his owne accord tooke the matter in hande without commission of any superior authoritie I take it to be a thing of small regard both in respect of himselfe and of his worke and also of those his superiours to whose direction he professeth to haue committed himselfe and all the giftes he hath Onelie this thing I cannot beleeue although it be no more materiall then the other that he was so loth to take vpon him this buisines as he pretendeth For if we consider not onelie the manner of his writing wherein appeereth as great malice against the trueth of God as shameles railing at Christs gospell and professors thereof as notable pride presumption and hardnes of hart as euer hath done in anie enemie heretofore but further also how necessarie it was for him being a Renegate and of a Minister and Pastor of a Church become sodenlie a seminarie Priest therefore liuing in great suspicion mongst his fellowes to approoue by some publike testimony his vnfeigned conuersion to their synagogue we shall not easilie be persuaded to thinke there was in the man such vnwillingnes in this matter at the first as he would haue vs to suppose But as vaine declamors are commonlie wont to excuse themselues with pretense of being loth to attempt so waightie a matter that they maie seeme somewhat vnwilling to doe the thing which in truth they doe moste willinglie and studiouslie so Master Rainolds could not deuise a more commodious beginning of his declamatorie preface then a protestation of lothnes to write that which anie man maie casilie iudge he went about with all his will industrie and habilitie And that you maie the rather imagine he was forsooth verie lothe to take this matter in hand he can shew you diuerse reasons that made him so loth and yet the true reason that ought indeede to haue hindred his course he toucheth not that herein he was to set himselfe against the knowen truth to write against his conscience in open maintenance of wicked heresies to fight for Antichrist against the Lord and finallie to commit the sinne that either in propertie of nature is the greatest of all or commeth neerest vnto it One reason was he saith because he sawe manie in that societie as willing and more hable to vndertake and dispatch a greater matter then that As willing Master Rainolds whie then haue you dissembled before in telling vs you were vnwilling now by your owne confession you were willing enough but there were manie also in your Colledge as willing as you Whereof surelie we haue no doubt that you are all moste wilfullie bent and earnestlie disposed to doe what harme anie of you possiblie can to the Church of England As for your knowledge and habilitie to performe against vs anie notable enterprise we haue no care we stand in no feare of you we knowe what pith is in the strongest of you And for your selfe Master Rainolds I am of opinion that you maie truelie take the garland from your owne head and giue it rather to manie others of your fellowes Another reason he faineth to be Pag. 4. for that he thought it some iniurie to Catholikes to dispute against that sauage and barbarous paradoxe namelie that the Pope is Antichrist What iniurie could this be thought done to your Catholikes Master Rainolds to write in defense of your Pope and prooue him not to be that Antichrist then which a greater pleasure can no man doe for him and for his Church it being apparant and so of manie Christians beleeued that he is indeed no other then the verie Antichrist himselfe In which respect perhaps your
fathers and Doctors as you report Luth. cont Regem Angl. fol. 342. vnius maiestatis aeter nae verbum Euangelium Dei verbū est super omnia c. but that he setteth against the sayings of fathers of men of Angels of Diuells the word of the onely eternall maiesty the Gospell And againe immediatly he saith The word of God is aboue all the maiesty of God maketh with me that I care not though a thousand Augustines and Cyprians stood agaynst me Gods word is of more authoritie then all men or Angels Is this to set his priuate iudgement against all the fathers is this pride is this presumption must Gods word and maiestie and Gospell yeald to the iudgement of fathers be they neuer so manie This forsooth is your modestie that though the Lord hath spoken it yet if the fathers saie anie thing against it you will not prefere your iudgement grounded on the scriptures before the auncient fathers Accursed be such modestie that doth soe great iniurie and dishonour vnto god This ciuilitie towards men is treason and blasphemie towards the lord Remember what Elihu saith Iob. 32. v. 21.22 I will not now accept the person of man neither wil I give titles to man For I may not giue titles lest my maker should take me away suddenlie If this affection was in Luther as it was what fault can you finde therin You aske of me the reason why I so busilie defend Luther I aske of you the reason why you so continuallie accuse Luther If you seeke for some reasons to accuse him I cannot want better reasons to defend him your accusations being so vntrue That you say we aduance him into the place of Christe or at least among his Apostles belike you imagine that Luther is to vs as your Pope is to you whome you more esteeme and honour then Christe and all his Apostles For saie they what they will their saying hath litle force or authoritie if it like not your holie father but his saying must preuaile whatsoeuer they saie to the contrarie You thinke it good reason I should giue ouer all defense of Luther seing he bare extreame hatred as you say against the Sacramentaries here you bring in much to that purpose which yet you know is not the matter you tooke in hand But it is alwaies the propertie of such discreet and worthie writers whatsoeuer they finde though from the cause to hale it in by some meanes in one place or other I answere in a word Luther dissented bitterlie from Zuinglius and O Ecolampadius in the matter of the sacrament as it falleth out often times that sharpe contentions may arise amongst Godlie and learned men yet it is no cause why we should not answere in Luthers behalfe when he is wrongfullie charged by you Therefore you come to scanne my defense of Luther particularlie pag. 48. and finde your selfe occupied in deuising diuers senses of Luthers words and then disputing against them First if all the fathers teach one thing and bring scriptures for them Luther the contrarie bring scriptures for him whether in this case Luther may preferre his iudgement before all the fathers This is not the case M. R. that Luther ment you must therefore proceade further yet in your suppose Next then you put case If a thousand Augustines Churches teache some doctrine citing no text for it and Luther bring some text of scripture after his sense against the same the matter is not in citing textes but in deliuering the doctrine that is approoued by the text Then leaue your childish trifling and take Luther as he meant If Augustine or Cyprian or any other father maintaine any thing against Gods word Luther or any other minister of Christ may in such case preferre his iudgement warranted by the word of God before theirs If you denie this you are not worthie to be called a Christian and yet closelie you doe denie it in that you reprooue Luther and condemne him for saying the same And where you saie I can bring no instance that euer the auncient fathers did so haue you forgotten what fell out in the Councell of Nice Socrat. l. 1. c. 11. when the fathers agreeing to dissolue the marriage of ministers were withstood by Paphnutius One man maintaining the trueth of Gods word may lawfully dissent from others although neuer so many August cont petil l. 3. c. 6. and yealded in the ende Here one Paphnutius iudgment was preferred before al the other three hundred fathers And so often times the iudgement of many hath beene corrected by one S. Aug. saith whether of Christe or of his Church or of any other thing that appertayneth to our faith and life I will not say we not to be compared to him that sayd though we but as he added If an Angell from heauen shall preach any thing besides that ye haue receiued in the legall and Euangelicall scriptures lette him be accursed If we maie accurse them how many and whosoeuer they be that teach contrary to the Propheticall and Apostolicall scriptures then may we preferre our iudgement in such cases before them Saint Augustines words you see are very sharpe but he learned thus to speake of the Apostle him selfe August epi. 19. In an other place Saint Augustine saith For all these fathers yea aboue all these the Apostle Paul offereth himselfe I flee to him I appeale to him from all writers that thinke otherwise This was S. Augustine bolde to write euen to S. Ierome and feared not any suspicion either of arrogancie or heresie for the same such accoumpte then must be made of the trueth that we must stand with it against al the world and not for reuerence of mens persons giue it ouer or betraie it or be afraid to defend it If this be so as you will not I am sure for shame or feare denie openlie then haue you nothing to burthen Luther in this behalfe When you say Though the fathers in the Councells of Nice Ephesus Chalcedon had alleadged no direct and euident place against Arius Nestorius Eutyches yet the Christian people were bound to beleeue them grounding them selues onelie vpon the catholike and vniuersall faith of the Churches before them it is boldly and bluntlie spoken These godly and catholike fathers assembled in Councel against those heritikes confuted them by the authoritie of Gods word and as it were cut the throte of their heresies with the sworde of the spirit This was onelie the weapon then vsed and with this they preuayled The councels and fathers confuted all Heretikes by the scriptures as likwise haue all other godlie councels euer done against all heretikes and enemies of the trueth For in Religion there is no trueth but grounded vppon scriptures no errour or heresie but repugnant to scriptures no heretikes but refuted by scriptures They dealt not against the heretikes as you imagine omitting scriptures and grounding vpon the faith of Churches