returned backe vnto you And haue you done all this so Impudently so Facingly so extreme Braggingly without the Shame of the worlde Wihout Feare of God You a preacher of Gods holy worde you an instructer of the people you a Bishop and God will Teache you Truthe at home which haue printed openly so many notorious Lies so outragious Vntruthes so facing fashoods Are not your selfe now guilty of all these Vntruthes lege talionis which in so â—â—tle roome and so many you haue forged vpon D. Harding Harding By reporte of Chrysostom the Sacrifice in his time was daily offred that is to saie the Masse was celebrated But many times no body came to communicat Sacramentally with the priestes 45 as it is before proued Iewell The .45 Vntruthe This is not yet proued Stapleton Yes M. Iewell it is so proued that you shall neuer be able to auoide it I meane euen by this place of Chrysostom This is the syllogismus or brief argument of the whole VVhere the daily Sacrifice is made and none doth communicat with the Priest there is Masse without communicants But Chrisostom saieth the daily Sacrifice was made and no body did communicat Ergo by Chrysostoms saying there was a Masse without communicants Of this it foloweth A masse without communicants is priuat Masse Ergo there was priuat Masse Here M. Iewell to defeate this argument presseth and wringeth him selfe as many waies as arte or witt coulde helpe him And yet none will serue First he demaundeth Iewell Whether M. Harding wil rest vpon the bare wordes of Chrysostom or qualifie them somewhat and take his meaning Stapleton To the which his answer is He will rest vpon the wordes of Chrysostom not bare but taking also his meaning Which is to meane as he spake and not contrary to his speache M. Iewell disputeth on bothe sides First he saieth Iewell If he presse the wordes precisely then Chrâ—â—ostom him selfe did not Communicat For he was Some body And the plaine wordes be No body did Communicat Who euer thought M. Iewell had bene so very a foole as to be ignorant that in an vniuersall speache sâ—mper excipitur persona loquentis Euer the party that speaketh is excepted Namely in such thinges which signifie an Action not touching the Speaker him selfe As here Chrysostom saying that No body did communicat speaketh it of the communicating of Other with him not of his Owne communicating After this M. Iewell disputeth vpon Chrysostoms meaning by a Gheasse vtterly Vntrue as it shall now appeare He saieth It appeareth Chrisostoms purpose was to rebuke the negligence of the people for that of so poppulous a Citie they came to the Communion in so small compaines This Gheasse as it is vtterly vntrue so it is vtterly vnproued I will tell you Chrisostoms purpose and proue it to by his owne wordes His purpose was to persuade the people froÌ„ their vsuall ones receiuing at Easter and to come oftener to receiue the holy Sacrament These are his wordes euen next before the wordes last alleaged I see great inequalite of thinges amonge you At other times when as for most parte ye are in cleane life ye come not to receiue your rightes But at Easter though ye haue done some thinges amisse yet ye come O what a custome is this O what presumption is this The Daily Sacrifice is offred in vaine c Lo M. Iewell you heare what ChrisostoÌ„s purpose was by his own wordes not by a Vaine Gheasse contrary to his wordes For you saie vpoÌ„ your former Vaine and Vntrue Gheasse that he calleth those Compaines in a vehemency of speache cae No body Now he speaketh against the custome of ones receiuing of all the people at Easter as it is nowe and saieth that for all the Daily Sacrifice yet Not One receiued As for that you bringe exaÌ„ples of Scripture and of ChrysostoÌ„ that Nemo No Body Doth sometime signifie a fewe and small company you must remembre M. Iewell that examples serue to expresse and to make clere one matter by an other not to proue and conclude one thinge vpon an other You knowe the rule Exempla dilucidant non probant Examples doe open that which is darke they proue not If you had first proued that Chrysostom by the word No body had meant smal Compaines then for example of the like your allegations would haue serued well Nowe to proue this can not serue but only to exemplifie Thus your simple gheasse vpon Chrysostoms meaning is founde vtterly Vaine Fonde and Vntrue So bothe the wordes and the meaning of Chrysostom make directly against you and proue clerely that none did communicat ofteÌ„times in the daily Sacrifice which is priuat Masse Yeat M. Iewell hunteth after other shiftes and sacketh euery corner of his olde notes to ouerthrow and obscure this clere testimony of Chrysostom for priuat Masse And saieth Iewell And albeit this onely answer compared with the maner of Chrisostomes eloquence which commonly is hote and feruent and with the coÌ„mon practise of the Church then may suffice to a man more desirous of truthe then of contention yet I haue good hope c. StapletoÌ„ If you M. Iewell had bene more desirous of the truth which your forefathers beleued then of Contention to maintaine your late vpstert Faction the Lutheran Secte if you had minded in dede to yelde to the Lerned Fathers as you professed in your Sermon to doe if your whole intent and ende in this Replie had not bene to defende your ouer fonde and rashe Chalenge with the which your owne brethern are offended but to trie the Truthe of our faithe in Christ Iesus you woulde your self haue iudged that this your Answer to the place of Chrysostom had bene very Fonde Childish and Peuish For what Child but you would call the wordes of ChrysostoÌ„ in doubte saying There is no Body that Dothe Communicate Bicause he him selfe communicated which was some body For I pray you M. Iewel if these wordes caÌ„ not proue the Sole Receauing of the Priest which you call priuat Masse what wordes shall euer be able to proue it Did you Deuise your Chalenge vpon Certain Termes which you thought could neuer be founde in the Auncient Writers or did you seke after the Matter comprised in such termes If the first then you your selfe M. Iewell are the man that you speake of more desirous of CoÌ„tention then of Truthe If the last then you haue here a Priuat Masse You haue a daily Sacrifice which the Latin Church hath called the Masse eueÌ„ before ChrysostoÌ„s time without CoÌ„municaÌ„ts If this as I saied do proue no Priuat Masse I beseche you M. Iewel tel vs by what words wil you haue it proued Wil you denie we haue had Priuat Masse these later 900. yeres Wil you denie the Catholikes haue it at this howre in Italy FrauÌ„ce Germany Spayne Portugall and other Christened CouÌ„tres I dare say you wil not put vs to
expresse wordes of the Ecclesiasticall story but euen by the very confession of M. Iewell him selfe in his text For hauing in many and idle wordes farre from the purpose vsed a longe florish before the fight and as a streame blowen vp with winde and weather carieth with it muche frothe and filthe by the very rage and drift of the water so M. Iewel in this place fulowing and wandering ouer the bankes with Copia Verborum by the Violence and force of his talke carying a great deale off errour and Vntruthe alonge before him at the lenght cometh in with a But. And saieth Iewell But Master Hardinge will saye The wordes be playne that Iulius restored Athanasius It is true and not denyed StapletoÌ„ Loe what a good will is It is true saieth M. Iewell and not denyed If it be true that Iulius restored Athanasius the same Iulius being the Pope of Rome why haue you put it for an Vntruthe saying The Emperour restored Athanasius and not thâ— Pope If it be not denied why do you denie it youre selfe Can it be true and yet not true Do you denye it and yet is it not denyed Then with you true and not true denying and not denying yea and nay is all one Iewell But the meaning of these wordes is that Iulius pronounced him clere in that he was accused off and therefore worthy to be restored Loe ones againe howe M. Iewell striueth and winceth against the Truthe He saied euen nowe That it was true that Iulius the Pope restored Athanasius Nowe he sayeth that he pronounced him clere and therefore worthy to be restored The lyke impudent shifte these men doe vse in the expresse wordes off holy Scripture For where Christe saieth to his Ministers here in earthe VVhatsoeuer you forgeue in earthe it shall be forgeuen in heauen These men saye that Gods Minister the Prieste dothe not forgeue sinnes but declareth them to be forgeuen and pronounceth the party penitent to be clere and worthye to be forgeuen By whiche meaning Christe shoulde haue sayed VVhatsoeuer you forgeue in earthe it is allready forgeuen in heauen And not It shall be forgeauen in heauen But nowe The Sentence of Peter goeth before the Sentence of heauen saieth S. Ambrose And that whiche the Prieste assoileth in earthe shall be assoyled in heauen If the Priest did but declare him to be assoiled then should he be before allready assoiled In lyke maner M. Iewell here in this place Whereas the Ecclesiasticall Historye saieth expressely that Iulius the Pope restored Athanasius M. Iewell saieth he pronounced him worthy to be restored But how will M. Iewell proue that Iulius the Pope pronounced Athanasius worthy to bâ— restored Howe will he proue that to be the meaning of the Ecclesiastical history He saieth Iewell For it is certaine and M. Harding well knoweth that Athanasius vpon Pope Iulius letters was not restored Be bolde and blushe not Master Iewell You that are so impudent againste the expresse wordes of the Ecclesiasticall history you may be bolde vpon D. Hardinge and vpon his knowleadge But it is certaine and M. Iewell him selfe well knoweth that Athanasius vpon Pope Iulius letters was restored The wordes of the Ecclesiasticall History are these The Bishoppe of Rome Iulius hearing the Accusations and complaintes of Athanasius and Paulus and finding theÌ„ all to agree to the Nicene Councell receiued them into Communion as hauing charge of them all through the dignite and prerogatiue of his owne See and restored to euery one their Churches And a litle after Athanasius and Paulus sending the Popes letters to the Bishops of the East recouered eche one againe their Bishoprikes Lo the ecclesiasticall history saieth that the Pope restored to Athanasius and Paulus their Churches and that as hauing charge of them all through the dignite and prerogatiue of his owne See And againe the history saieth That Athanasius and Paulus recouered their bishoprikes by sending to their aduersaries the bishops of the East the Popes letters Thus it is certaine and thus M. Iewell him selfe knoweth that Athanasius was restored vpon Pope Iulius letters In like maner Theododoretus being depriued in the Ephesine Councell repentinge and appealing afterwarde was by Leo the Pope of Rome restored and in the Concâ—ll of Chalcedon was admitted by vertue of that restitution to sitt among the other bishops For the Iudges there saied Let the Reuerend B. Theodoret entre and be a part of the Synod bicause Leo the most holy B. of Rome hath restored vnto him his bishoprike and the Emperour hath decreed that he shal be present And so he was placed amoÌ„g the other bishops and allowed for a Catholike bishop by the acclamatioÌ„ of the East bishoppes and consent off the Councell notwitstandinge the cries and acclamations of the Aegyption bishopps cleauing to Dioscorus the Eutichian their Patriarche to the contrary Thus was Theodoretus thus was Athanasius and Paulus two Patriarches of the East the one of Constantinople the other of Alexandria restored by the letters of the Pope to their bishoprickes not only pronounced worthy to be restored Yet M. Iewell will proue it by a like He saieth Iewell The like is also writen of others Cassiodorus saieth Maximus also restored vnto Athanasius bothe his Communion and also his dignitie That is to saâ—e pronounced him worthy to be restored For Maximus was not the bishop of Rome Stapleton First you haue printed these wordes That is to saie c. in a distinct letter as if they were the wordes off Cassiodorus Now they are your glose beside the text of Cassiodorus And so you haue ones deceiued your Reader Againe Cassiodorus dothe not vse the worde Restituit restore but praebebat did geue Such an impossible thinge it is for M. Iewell to kepe truly the wordes of his Author Againe this restoring of dignite and Communion of Maximus to Athanasius was not like to the Restoring of Pope Iulius The Pope by his letters and by the prerogatiue of his owne See saiethe the History Restored Athanasius Athanasius being after expelled againe and by the Councel of Sardica restored before he came to his owne bishoprike of Alexandria passed by Hierusalem where this Maximus was bishop who also before had consented to his deposition This Maximus geuing his Consent to the determination of the Councell communicated with Athanasius and by that Communicating declared to all the prouince vnder him that Athanasius was restored This therefore was no like matter to the Restitution made by Pope Iulius Againe a similitude or likenesse proueth not but serueth only to declare to exemplifie to make more clere and open a matter off it selfe obscure and darke And thus the meaninge off M. Iewell contrary to the expresse wordes off the History remaineth vnproued Thus also the Vntruthe is clerely Iustified Which is That Pope Iulius Restored Athanasius and Paulus to their bishoprickes Nowe to touche somewhat that which M. Iewell discourseth to the contrary
Hypocrysy is there then to Charge Vntruthes 〈◊〉 Vntruly and to impugne the Truthe vvith the coulour of Truthe Maye you not vvorthely be thought to be one of them vvhom the Prophet describeth saying Posuimus mendacium spem nostram mâ—ndacio prâ—tecti sumus VVe haue put our Confidence in Lying and Lies haue bene oure Sauegarde â–ª Are you not truly like to those false prophets of the Ievves vvho as the prophet saieth Docueâ—â—â—â— lingâ—am suam loqui mendacium vt inique agerint laborauâ—â— aâ—t Framed their tounges to Vtter Lies and toke great paynes to Deale Falsely For so Manifolde and so Thicke are your Vntruthes that it maye seme you haue Laboured your selfe to Vtter them Yea maye vve not then thinke that S. Peter as it vvere pointed to you M. Ievvel vvhen he saied As there were false prophets amonge the people of Israël so there shall be lying Masters amonge you which shall bringe in wicked and damnable sectes Verely M. Ievvell vve maie saye al this and much more most truly of you and that therefore your excessiue lying and Vntrue dealing being so euident neither your doctrine is to be tolerated neither your Person euer more to be credited For vvhat kinde is there of Authors that you haue not Corrupted Misalleaged False Translated and by one meanes or other Abused VVhat Faulte in vvriting is there that you haue not in this your Replie committed I speake not off your VVhole Replie but of that Parte only vvhich I at this present haue taken in hande to examine that is the Effect and Principall Pointes of your foure first Articles As touching your Authors and Allegatyons vvhich you haue so Ambitiously Multiplyed through out your booke and vvhereby the simple are much abused beholding therein a CouÌ„tenaunce of Lerning but not able to descrie the Couered Falshood you haue Falsifyed and Misalleaged the Doctours and holy Fathers of Christes Church the Decrees of Councelles the lavves of Emperours the Ecclesiasticall Histories the Schoolemen and other good VVriters a numbre You haue falsifyed and mangled the very Text of holy Scripture namely of S. Paule ☞ * in one Chapter ix times as the Reader maye see in the thirde Article fol. 107. and in certaine leaues folovving You haue Altered the Text of D. Harding not vvhen you alleage his vvhole text alonge in the diuisions as you cal them for that you savve vvell vvere to much open a legerdemaine but in the Text of your Ovvne Replie vvhen you Repete his vvordes pecemele to coÌ„fute them For there lo sometime you adde a vvorde and then dispute against your ovvne Addition as Art 3. fol. 62. b. 63. a at other times you quite Alter his vvordes and meaning and so you Replie against that vvhiche he neuer saied This levvdenesse you haue committed in many and sondry places of this parte of your Replie especially in the .3 Article Namely fol. 117. fiue times in one place Other particularites of this your dealing are noted to the Reader in the Table of this booke But brefely to geue you a vevve thereof beholde M. Ievvell vvhat Authors and of hovve diuerse sortes you haue in so thicke Allegatyons Missealleaged and Abused I note you vvithall the leafe and page of this Booke vvhere you shall finde them eche one so declared and proued to the eye The holy Fathers by you thus vsed or rather misuded are S. Ciprian Articulo 3. fo 70. b. Art 4. fo 76. a. 127. a. b S. Basill Art 4. fol. 122. b S. Ambrose Art 3. fol. 95. a S. Hierom. Art 3. fol. 84. S. Chrysostom Art 1. fol. 39. Art 3. fol. 90. Art 4. fo 83. a S. Augustin Art 3. fol. 70. a. Art 4. fol. 57. a. Athanasius Art 4. fol. 27. Leo. Art 4. fol. 152. b. 163. b. 176. a. S. Gregory Art 4. fol. 3. a. fol. 141. a. S. Bernarde Art 4. fol. 80. b. The Historiographers with whom also you haue so dealed â— are Ruffinus Art 4. fol. 121. a Socrates Art 4. fol. 28. a Sozomenus Art 4. fol. 131. a. 153. b Theodoretus Art 3. fol. 124. b. Art 4. fol. 139. a. 160. b Cassiodorus Art 4. fol. 159. a Beda Art 3. fol. 133. a Galfridus Monemuth Art 3. fol. 130. b Other good Authors bothe olde and newe whom you haue in like maner and with the like Sincerite alleaged are Clemens Alexandrinus Art 3. fol. 90. a Liberatus Art 4. fol. 142. a. 155. a. Sulpitius Art 3. fol. 100. a Gelasius Art 4. fol. 175. a Gennadius Art 4. fol. 120. b Innocentius 3. Art 3. fol. 97. 98. a Eckius Art 3. fol. 87. a VVhat Councells you haue in like maner falsified and Misalleaged it maye be sene Art 1. fol. 28. b. 37. a. Art 4. fol. 37. a. 40. b. 71. b. 74. b. In alleaging your Ciuill Lavves and decrees of the Canon lavve hovve you haue partly to a vvronge vnderstanding dravven them either of your ovvne ignorance or of lavvyers misse information partly quite mangled them and falsified them you maye beholde M. Ievvell touching the first our Ansvver to your Replie coÌ„cerning Iustinians Constitution Art 3. fol· 77. seq and touching Appeales Art 4. fol. 103. 104. concerning the later point the lavves of IustiniaÌ„ Art 4. fo 51. a. 52. b. 53. b. of Honorious fo 79. a. b. and the decrees Artic. 4. fol. 115. and. 176. b. The Schoolemen likevvise Durandus Art 3. fo 87. b. Thomas Aquinas fol. 88. b. and Lyra. fo 103. b. you haue Alleaged for your purpose but falsely and Corruptely By such falshood and Sleighte you haue Multiplied your AllegatioÌ„s and furnished your booke vvith Quotations not caring hovve or vvhat you brought so that the Margyn vvere stuffed These Quotatyons you vsed as a Call for birdes VVith them you Tolled and Bayted your Reader VVho taketh in gladly the Bayte of Authorite but seeth not the Hooke of Falshood and Vntruthe vvherevvith you Choke him For this purpose you haue a knacke to macke sundry Allegations vvhich are but one As in the fourthe Article fol. 6. a. you doe most Ambitiously Also Artic. 1. fol. 27. and Art 3. fol. 105. b. By such shevve of lerning you thought to vvinne credit And vnder the Visarde of the Fathers and CouÌ„cels of Histories and Lavves of Authors bothe olde and nevve you thought to plaie the part of a Lerned VVriter and of a true Teacher But the visarde being novv plucked of your Vntrue Alleagatyons discouered your Bonovved Fethers pilled avvaye you vvil remaine not only for opinion of good lerning as pilde as AEsops davve but also for farder Credit off your VVorde you vvill stande I feare for yanckeroute Verely if Truthe maye preuaile as she euer hath and vvill preuaile you for your Vntruthes except you redresse them are no more to be acompted for a Teacher of Truthe but to be taken for as S. Peter termeth suche a Lying Master Of your other yehauyour and Dealing M. Ievvel
Communion wa◠receiued in priuat houses Ergo in Fraunce so longe after in their priuat Chappelles there was also a Communion The lewdenesse of this argumēt wil better appeare by the like In Fraunce within these fifty yeres all Churches had priuat Masses Ergo now in England all Churches haue the same As true is the one as the other But now M. Iewell saieth He will geue a clere answer to M. Hardinges blinde gheasses What is that trow we Forsothe an other Canon of the selfe same Councell which biddeth the penitents to depart out of the Church with the Nouices that were not yet Christened Item a decretal epistle of Siricius Commaunding in like maner notorious offenders to departe out of the Church Ergo the rest that remained did communicat I answer All this was in Cities and Parish Churches vnto which the Nouices and open penitents resorted This was not in Chappels of priuat houses of which this decree of the Councelle of Agatha speaketh This is M. Iewelles clere answer They communicated in great cities and Parish Churches Ergo in Priuat houses An other like vnto that is this In the Church of Sarisbury the Minister at euery Communion weareth a Cope Ergo in all other Chappels at euery communion a cope is woren Let now euery indifferent Reader iudge whether any thinge hath ben brought by M. Iewell why by the decree aboue mentioned there should not appeare in those priuat Chappelles to haue ben priuat Masses Harding At that time 39 he saieth Masse in his Chappell hauing no other bodie with him but his seruaunt Iewell The .39 Vntruthe There was neuer Priuate Masse saide in Alexandria neither before this time nor at any time sythens Here it may be sene howe true it is that S. Paule saieth Scientia inflat Knowleadg puffeth vp For what a pride is this of M. Iewell so stoutely and peremptorely to pronounce that in Alexandria there was neuer priuat Masse neither before the time of Leontius nor sithens What Hath M. Iewell such a confidence in his Knowleadg that he is perfit of the Whole order of Gods Seruice that euer hath bene vsed or practised in Alexādria a Cyte as he saieth him selfe Iewell a thousande myles beyonde all Christendom and where the faithe of Christ hath continued so many hundred yeres before the time of Leontius and longe after also Is M. Iewell so sure that all that time in that great Cyte there was neuer priuat Masse that though Leōtius a writer of more then 900. yeres sithens do write so yet he is sure it was neuer so Hath M. Iewell sene all Hath he reade all And Dothe he remembre all thinges that were euer done in the Churche Seruice of that Cyte What is Impudency what is Puffing Pride what is Presumptuous Rashenesse if this be not As for the wordes which he noteth for an Vntruthe they are the wordes of Leontius alleaged by D. Harding they are not the wordes as auouched of D. Harding And then truly if there were neuer priuat Masse in Alexandria it was a greate Vntruthe on Leontius parte to write so Now whether M. Iewell be better to be beleued herein then is Leontius a knowen approued writer these many hundred yeres I leaue it to the Readers discretion Leontius saieth plainely of Ihon the holy bishop of Alexādria Facit Missas in oratorio suo Nullum habens secum nisi ministrum suum He saieth Masse in his Chappell hauing None other bodie with him but his seruāt Here is a clere witnesse of priuat Masse as M. Iewell termeth the receiuing of the priest without a company of communicants And that within the first 600. yeres For this Leontius as the Fathers of the seuenth generall Councel do saie floruit circa tempora Mauritij Imperatoris flourished aboute the time of Mauritius the Emperour Whose raigne begāne in the yere of our lord 585. The witnesse being so clere M. Iewel though good to out face the matter and stoutely to saie that neither before this Leontius nor euer sithens there was euer priuat Masse saied in Alexandria This shamelesse and impudent facing semeth wel to be resembled by the Gorgons head with the Anticke that M. Iewelles printer hath placed at the ende of euery Article Where spare roome was Frons perfricta Os impudens Whereas in the text M. Iewell woulde make vs beleue that Missae here should not signifie Masse but any other kinde of praier for he careth not what he make of it so it be not Masse he may as soone persuade any that is lerned that the Crow is white as that Missas facere in this place doth not signifie to say Masse For so he may tell vs that Missā facere caepi in S. Ambrose doth not signifie I begāne to say Masse but matins or euensong or some like thinge Any thinge M. Iewell so it be not Masse And when S. Gregory charged Maximus the intruded bishop of Salona that being excommunicated Missas facere praesumpsit it shall not signifie He presumed to saie Masse but he presumed to saye his matins or euen songe or any other kinde of praier which no person excommunicated is forbidden to saie In like maner when the Councell of Arels chargeth the bishops that for certain offenses Anno integro Missas facere non praesumant it shall not signifie that for the space of a whole yere they presume not to saie Masse but that they presume not to saye matins or euensong all the yere longe or some other kinde of prayer what ye wil so it be not Masse But what shifte is there so impudent that M. Iewell will not vse rather then to yelde and acknowleadge his vanite and errour An heretike saieth S. Paule is suo iudicio condemnatus cōdemned in his owne iudgement M. Iewell knoweth him selfe that in this place he hath kicked and striued against a manifest Truthe Yet he will not yelde What other shiftes he hath vsed to defeate this clere Testimony bicause it is in the Confutatiō of D. Harding particularly refelled I shall not nede presently farder to entermedle And this litle maye seme sufficient to iustifie the Vntruthe of Leontius iff it were an Vntruthe for his wordes they are not off D. Harding whose wordes they are not Againe M. Iewell denieth the Conclusion For whereas Leontius saieth that Iohn the bishop of Alexādria saied Masse in his Chappel hauing no other body with him but his seruāt and of this it is Concluded that in Alexandria there was priuat Masse M. Iewel denieth the Conclusion and saieth stoutely there was neuer priuate Masse in Alexandria neither before the time of Leontius nor at any time sithens and putteth that for an Vntruthe which is Concluded Wherein he fareth as a foole of Sanford by Oxforde was wonte to doe Who resorting to the vniuersite at Christmasse time and being by certaine sophismes made in the waye of pastime proued to be an Asse woulde
proue this But if you should I thinke verely we could neuer bringe better recorde out of any writer for any Countre then is Chrysostom in this place for Antioche For why Many thinges are so well knowen so certaine so common that therefore they are not put in writing What example can you bringe M. Iewell out of all the first 600. yeres that euer any man saied his Pater Noster Priuatly to him selfe alone out of the Churche or Congregation And yet who doubteth but Thousandes did so att that tyme And truly in lyke maner to proue by Recordes and writinges of lerned men that Priuat Masse was saied in Spaine for example fourty yeares agoe woulde be a thinge of as greate Difficulty as to proue it in the first 600. yeares if so plaine wordes as Chrysostomes are maye not be admitted For what can be more plaine then this We stande at the aultar we Offer the daily sacrifice and none doth Communicat Yet thus muche saied Chrisostome Therefore againste this Clere and Euident Assertion of Chrysostome we admitte not youre Pelting Exception off Chrysostomes owne person nor the bolde shifting off No body into small companies exemplified not proued This answer I saye we admitt not not for Contention sake which doe not defende herein any Priuate Particular Doctrine of our owne but the Faythe of oure forefathers and the Faithe of all Christened Countres beside you and a fewe others but we reiecte it M. Iewell for Truthes sake The Truthe I saye of that Faithe in the which bothe you and we were baptised bothe your parents and oures haue yelded their soules to God But nowe let vs see what is the hope that you haue conceiued although this Answer be reiected You saye Iewell I haue good hope it may be proued notwithstanding Master Hardinges Nemo that Chrysostome neither was alone nor coulde be alone at the holy Ministration and therefore coulde saye no priuate Masse Beholde good Readers howe M. Iewell deceiueth you He will proue that Chrysostome coulde not be alone at the holy Ministration and therfore coulde saye no Priuate Masse And howe many Thousandes of Priestes do daily saye Priuate Masse which yet be not alone at the holy Ministration But if M. Iewell will proue that Chrysostome coulde saye no priuate Masse he must proue that Chrysostom coulde not Receiue Alone For what is Priuat Masse as M. Iewel and his felowes take it but the Sole Receiuing of the Priest Proue then M. Iewel that Chrysostome could not Receiue alone Truly iff you can do so you shall proue that vpon Chrysostome whiche Chrysostom him selfe denieth For beholde Chrysostom saied He hath not one to Communicat M. Iewell will proue It is not possible but he shoulde haue some Body to Communicat And so M. Iewel wil proue that thinge to be done whiche yet Chrisostome saieth in plaine wordes was not done But because he woulde not seme to fight against Chrysostome and his wordes but against D. Harding and his wordes he protesteth to proue this Notwithstandinge M. Hardinges Nemo He shoulde haue sayed if he woulde speake truly Notwithstanding S. Chrysostomes Nullus Not one For that worde Nemo No body whiche M. Iewell sporteth him selfe so much with in this place is not founde either in Chrysostome or in D. Hardinge But is deuised of this Sir Iohn Hicke scorner to make sporte and passe time withall In dede the worde Nullus Not one which so graueleth M. Iewell is the worde of Chrysostome but not of D. Hardinges inuention Thus he altereth and iuggleth prouing and placing one thinge for an other so to steale awaye and beguile the Reader For you shal see M. Iewell with al his Allegations Shiftes and Euasions shall neuer be able to proue that Chrysostome coulde not Receiue Alone at the holy Ministration which is the only waye to proue that he coulde saye no priuat Masse You shall see his wordes Iewell For if the whole Companye of the laye people woulde haue forsaken him yet had he Companie sufficient of the Priestes and Deacōs and others of the Quiere And if the whole Quiere woulde haue forsaken him yet had he Companie sufficient ▪ of the people as it maye be clerely proued Stapleton Lo you see his proufes do tende not to proue that a companye Communicated with Chrysostome but to proue that a company was Present Now if the Presence of a company maye disproue Priuate Masse then is there at this daye no Priuate Masse nor neuer was in any Cathedrall or parish Churches vpon Sonday or holy day Yet let vs consider M. Iewelles proufes Iewell That there was then a greate numbre to Serue in the Ministery it may diuersely wel appeare Stapleton Lo againe He talketh of Wayters on not of such as doe Cōmunicat And yet all this that he bringeth hereafter of the clergy is Vtterly from the Purpose Iewell Ignatius calleth Presbyterium the sacred Colledge the Councel and Cōpanye of the Bishop Stapletō This proueth a companye to serue at the aultar with the Bishop But it proueth not that they communicated with the Bishop And thoughe it did yet it proueth not that euerye other Priest had Alwaies at his Masse a Companie to cōmunicate with him And Saint Chrysostome when he wrote these wordes of whiche we nowe treate was no Bishoppe as it shall anon appeare Therefore this is Vtterly from the Purpose Iewell Chrysostome him selfe in his Liturgie sayeth thus The Deacons bringe the dishes with the holy Breade vnto the holye Aultar the Rest carie the holye Cuppes By whiche wordes appeareth bothe a number of the Ministerie and also prouision for them that woulde Receiue Stapleton This then was the order when people did receiue It proueth not that people did at euery Masse receiue As well you might M. Iewell bringe the latine Manuall of some churches against Priuate Masse where also order is taken for such as will receiue Againe this was a solemnite in the Churche of Constantinople when S. Chrysostom was bishop there But the wordes of Chrysostom which we treate of nowe were spoken in Antioche when he was yet but a priest no bishop Iewell Cornelius writeth that in the Churche of Rome there were fourtie and sixe priestes seuen deacons seuen subdeacons forty and two Acoluthes Exorcistes Readers and other officers of the Churche fiftie and two VVydoues and other afflicted people that were there relieued a 1500. Nazianzen complaineth of the number of the clergie in his time that they semed to be moe then the rest of the people Therefore the Emperor Iustinian afterwarde thought nedefull to abridge the number and to make a lawe that in the great Churche at Constantinople where Chrysostome was bishop Stapleton But not when he wrote this homelie out of the which the wordes are taken to the which M. Iewel nowe maketh answer Iewell There shoulde not be aboue the number of 60. priestes one hundred deacons fourescore and tenne subdeacons one hundred and tenne Readers
Vrspergensis Sabelliâ—us and such like For as well might he saye that these later Writers had forged such bookes as S. Augustine S. Hierome S. Basill Chrysostome Ambrose and other lerned Fathers are saied to haue writen and all suche Councelles whiche in those yeares are saied to haue ben holden as to discredit other parcels off the Fathers or Canons of Councels whiche are reported by them though suche thinges in the Fathers and Councells are not to be founde And so may M. Iewell make a Religion off his owne beleue him selfe no man and yet require all men to beleue him But bicause M. Iewell speaketh so peremptorely that Nestorius neuer dreamed no suche thinge you shall see howe lykely he was not to dreame only but euen to Speake and teache suche an heresye or foly as M. Iewell termeth it as to saie that vnder the fourme of Breade in the Sacrament is contayned the Body of Christe without Bloude Whiche yet the Lutherans graunting the real presence of Christes body with the breade and teaching withall that the people receiuing vnder one kinde haue iniury and do receiue lesse then if they receiued bothâ— are not farre from For by their opinion it foloweth that lacking somewhat vnder the one kinde and hauing yet the Body of Christ they lacke the bloude whiche is vnder the other kinde only Nowe M. Iewell though he be a Sacramentary yet hathe he good cause to fauour the Lutherans for his olde Masters sake who at his first coming to Oxford was an vpright Lutheran and specially for Luthers sake who stroke the first sparckle of this greate glorious light that M. Iewell and his fellowes so vaunteth of As touching Nestorius his opinion was that we receaued the Flesh of Christe in the Sacrament without his diuinite These are the wordes of Nestorius him selfe as Cyrillus recordeth them Nâ—storius inquit Audite attendentes verba Qui manducat carâ—em meam memores estote quòd de carne est sermo quòd non a me adiectum est carnis nomen ne videar sinistre interpretari Qui manducat meam carnem bibit meum singuinem in me munet ego in eo Non ditit Qui manducat meam diuinitatem bibit meam dâ—uinitatem Qui manducat meam carnem inquit meum sanguinem bibit in me manet ego in eo Memores estote quod de carne dictum sit Nestorius saieth Heare and harken to the wordes He that eateth my Flesh. Remember that Flesh is here mentioned and that the name of Flesh is not added by me lest I seme to expounde amisse He that eateth my Flesh and drinketh my Bloude abideth in me and I in him He saieth not He that eateth my diuinite and drinketh my diuinite He that eateth my Flesh saieth he and drinketh my Bloud abideth in me and I him Remember that this is spoken of the Fleshe Thus farre Nestorius persuading his hearers that we receaued the bare Fleshe of Christe in the Sacrament without the diuinite or Godhead adioyned Againste the which damnahle Heresye Cyrillus disputing in the same place saieth Num hominis comestionem nostrum hoc Sacramentum pronuncias ad crassas cogitationes vrges eorum qui crediderunt mentes Doest thou speaking to Nestorius cal this our Sacrament the eating of mans Flesh and prouoke the Hartes of the faithefull to grosse cogitations This then being the Opinion of Nestorius as it is here euident that it was that in the Sacrament we did eate the Fleshe of Christe onely and drinke the Bloud only without the Diuinite adioyned it must consequently folowe that his opinion was that the bare Flesh was in the Sacrament a part by it self and the Bloud by it selfe For and marke well this reason the cause why the Catholike Church beleueth that vnder one part of the Sacrament whole Christ is contained and therefore the bloud with the body is bicause it beleueth that vnder that one part of the Sacraâ—ent Christ is as God and not as bare man or bare flesh Vpon this belefe also it is grouÌ„ded that whole Christ is at one time in many places by the way of this most mystical SacrameÌ„t as Chrysostom and Primasius vpon the 10. chapter to the Hebrewes do in expresse wordes declare Now Nestorius not beleuing any such diuinite to be ioyned with the body of Christ in the Sacrament but the bare flesh to be by it selfe and the Bloud in like maner by it selfe it is easy to iudge that he was of this opinioÌ„ that vnder the forme of Bread in the SacrameÌ„t was the Body of Christ without Bloud which is the thinge that D. Harding and those other lerned writers do reporte of him And the which M. Iewell peremptorely denieth without any proofe or Reason in the worlde to the contrary but only by his Negatiue Proofes Such and such mention no such thinge Ergo there was no such matter Thus whether D. Harding spake beside Truthe and lerning let the indifferent reader iudge Harding For whereas Christ commaunded the Apostles to baptise in the name of the Father and the Sonne and the Holy Ghoste they baptised in the name of Iesus Christ 54 only The .54 Vntruthe A foule deprauation of the Scriptures This deprauation M. Iewell laieth to D. Hardinges charge for putting the worde only in the last place Truthe it is that the Only baptim mencioned in the Actes of the Apostles is mencioned to haue ben geueÌ„ in the name of Iesus As in the second the tenth the eight and the seuententh chapters it may be sene And so it is no Vntruthe that by the letter of holy Scripture the Apostles baptised only in the name of Iesus Christ. The displacing of a worde which altereth not the sence vnlesse M. Iewel caÌ„ proue it was done of fraude or malice is no Vntruthe in any vpright iudgement The sence of holy scripture being kept the Scripture is not depraued though some worde be put out of order Now that the Scripture so saieth bothe the only mentioning of such forme of baptim in all the Actes of the Apostles bothe the letter it selfe I saie and the meaning also of the letter if we beleue the iudgemeÌ„t of S. Ambrose coÌ„uinceth S. Ambrose disputing of this baptim mencioned in the Actes of the Apostles hath these wordes Cum dicitur In nomine domini nostri Iesu Christi per vnitatem nominis impletum mysterium est When it is saied In the name of our lorde Iesus Christ by the vnite of the name the sacrament is complete For as S. Ambrose saieth also in that place he that is blessed in Christ is blessed in the name of the Father and the Sonne and the Holy Ghoste Thus by the letter and by the meaning of the letter if we beleue S. Ambrose baptim was geuen in the name of Christ Only without mencioning the Father and the Holy Ghoste and yet in dede in the name of all But beholde good Reader
first 600. yeres but longe after His question here is of that time and no other Againe he asketh of such practise allowed and taken for good Your answere vpon his graunte is of such as vsed it so in Schisme Thus hetherto it hath not appeared that any Countre had their Seruice Within the first .600 yeres in a vulgar Barbarous tongue Harding I say that if I can shewe that the people of some Countries of the Greke Church 69 which all had their CoÌ„mon praiers and Seruice in the Greke tounge for the more parte vnderstoode not the Greke toung more then Englishmen nowe the Latin tounge then I haue proued that I promised to proue c. Iewell The 69. Vntrueth For it is certaine that sundrie of the East nations had not their Seruice in the greke tongue as shall appeare Stapleton It shall appeare saieth M. Iewell But when and where Forsothe in the 15. Diuision of this Article In that place he repeateth this Vntruthe and laboureth to poue it at large In that place it shall appeare that he hath proued nothing But take heede good Reader in the meane while Vnlesse thou eye M. Iewell well he will steale from thee For in this point lyeth the whole pith of this Article D. Harding putteth it here for clere and vndoubted that all the Greke Church and namely all the lesser Asia being a great parte thereof had their Seruice in the Greke tongue This being so clere and true that no lerned maÌ„ would euer haue denied it for whereof is it called Greca Ecclesia the Greke Church or Congregation but bicause in al their assemblies and Churches the Greke tongue was vsed Scriptures were read in Greke homilies in Greke and so forthe as the writinges of S. Basill of Gregorie Nazianzen and Gregory of Nissa al bishops in Asia the lesse do clerely conuince this I say being in the iudgement of all lerned men so clere a matter D. Harding neither proued it neither thought it nede to proue No nor M. Iewell doth not then flatly denie it But saieth he Iewell if it be denied M. Harding with all his learning is not able to proue it Yet he will not graunte it neither bicause the graunting therof were a clere ouerthrowe of his assertion This therefore being put for truth of D. Harding he proueth that many couÌ„tres of Asia the lesse vnderstode not the Greke tongue Whereof it should folowe that many countres of Asia the lesse had their Seruice in a toungue which they vnderstoode not Bicause of this conclusion so directly folowing M. Iewell seing the Minor or second proposition to be directly and abundantly proued and the Maior or first proposition no whit proued to the Minor or second proposition he saieth Iewell M. Harding ouer much paineth him self to proue that thing that no wise man will denie him And then he bringeth some proufes him selfe to helpe forthe the matter To the Maior or first proposition bicause it stoode vnproued he toke his aduantage and nowe deâ—ied it vtterly though it were of it selfe most clere and euident Now bicause an vniuersall proposition being denied an instaÌ„ce in some particular must be geuen by order of reason therfore he taketh vpon him as you heare him to saie in this Vntrutruthe to proue afterwarde that sundry NatioÌ„s of the East Church had not their Seruice in the Greke toung Iewell Whereby the vniuersall proposition of D. Harding that all the East or Greke Church had their seruice in the greke tounge shall be ouerthrowen This as I saied he will proue afterwarde In the 78. Vntruthe I shall haue occasion to answer vnto the whole Looke gentle Reader in that place and marke how well he proueth it and remeÌ„bre that if his proufes faile him as I trust in God they shall euery one that then Some Countres are founde in the Greke Churche of the first 600. yeares which had their Seruice in a toungue that all the people vnderstoode not That so M. Iewelles Assertion will be ouerthrowen and he bounde to Subscribe if he stande to his offer Harding Strabo who trauailled ouer all the countres of Asia nere about the time of S. Paules peregrination there who also was borne in the same in his .14 booke of Geographie writeth that whereas within that Cherronesus that is the straight betwene sea and sea there were sixtiene Nations by reporte of Ephorus of them all onely three were grekes all the rest Barbarous Iewell The .70 Vntruthe Missereporting Straboes wordes Stapleton It greueth M. Iewell that D. Hardinge shoulde speake anye Truthe in his whole booke So ofte he noteth him of Vntruth not only where none is as he hath yet hitherto euer done but also in such matters which whether it be true or no nothing helpeth or furdereth the state of the question D. Harding will proue that in Asia the Lesse there were soundry Countres whiche vnderstoode not the Greke Toungue M. Iewell sayeth Iewell To what ende For neither is it denied by any of vs neither is it any part of our questioÌ„ And yet notwithstanding is not M. Harding 130. able to proue it with all his Gheasses Lo He will disproue D. Hardinges proufes thoughe they make nothing to the purpose yea though he denie not the thinge which is proued And why so Forsothe to encrease the quantite of his Replie to deface as he thinketh his aduersary and to leaue in the Reader some token of his learning and knowleadge though he leaue withall a greate blott of his honesty For marke good Reader I beseche thee the demeanour of M Iewell in this pointe Bicause by no reason nor truthe he could ouerthrow the report of D. Harding out of Strabo he in his text repeting the text of D. Harding hath put in one worde more then either D. Harding spake or Strabo wrote intending thereby to proue D. Hardinge to Missereporte Strabo What worde is that The worde is Then For whereas D. Harding out of Strabo reporteth that Harding whereas there were sixteene soundrye Nations in Asia the lesse by reporte of Ephorus off them all only three were Grekes all the reste were Barbarous M. Iewell repetinge these wordes repeteth them in this sorte Whereas there were Then Sixtene sundry Nations c. And then he crieth out I knowe not whether M. Harding be vn wittingly deceiued him selfe or wilfully go aboute to deceiue others But wel I knowe that this is no parte of Straboes meaning For Strabo speaketh not this of his owne time c. And a litle after For if Strabo had meant this of his owne time to what ende c. Lo you see his proufe is directed againste the worde Then whiche worde D. Hardinge wrote not He will proue it was not so in Straboes time which D. Harding saied not at all For euidence hereof I reporte me to all the copies extant as well in both the printes of D. Hardings Answer as
his Vulgar Seâ—uice Last of all this is not the meaning of S. Augustin as M. Iewell affirmeth And so in these fewe wordes of S. Augustin M. Iewell hath couched foure Vntruthes Stapleton To proue all this it shall suffice to recite the whole wordes of S. Augustin as they lie in the place alleaged If any of M. Iewelles frendes that is vnlerned mistrust my dealing herein let him aske the aduise of any his lerned frendes and trie my truth thereby I wil put the whole wordes first in latin and after geue you the true english therof S. Augustin writeth thus Vbi putas Sacrificium Iusticiae saâ—rifiâ—aâ—i nisi in tâ—mplo mentis in cubilibus cordis â—bi autâ—m sacâ—â—ficandum est ibi orandum Where thinkest thou the Sacrifice of righteousnâ—sse is sacrifiâ—ed but in the temple of our minde and in the seâ—rete chamber of our haâ—te But where we must Sacâ—ifice thâ—â—â— we â—ust praye And hereof he concludeth in these wordes Quare non opus est locutione cum oramus id â—st sonantibus verbis nisi â—orte sicut Sacerdotes faciunt significandae mentis suae causa non vt Dâ—us sed vt homines audiant consâ—nsione quadam per commemorationem suspeâ—datur in Dâ—um â—herefore we nede no Vtteraunce of wordes that is no sounde of voice when we praye vnlesse perhaps as Priestes doe to signifye their mynde not that God but that men maye heare them and with a certaine consent throughe putting in minde maye be lyfted vpp vnto God These are the true wordes of Saint Augustine Here is no question demaunded wherefore Priestes do lifte vp their voices in the Churche as M. Iewell alleageth But it is brought in of Saint Augustine as an exception against his generall proposition that in prayer we nede no vtteraunce of voyce Againe the reason why the Prieste so lifted vp his voice is not as M. Iewell sayeth that the people vnderstandinge his meaning maye be put in mynde c. Saincte Augustine hath no such wordes but he lifteth vp his voice Significandae mentis suae causa to signifie his owne minde And what minde of the Priest is that Noâ— that God maye heare him who seeth the harte and nedeth no vtteraunce of voice but that the people maye heare hym And howe To vnderstande what he saieth S. Augustin saieth no suche thinge But Vt consensione quadam per commemorationem suspendantur in Deum to the entent that the people wiâ—h a certaine consent not of vnderstanding the Priest but through putting in minde by the voice of the Priest maye be lifted vp vnto God This is the very meaning and minde of S. Augustin and as M. Iewell alleageth Iewell Agreing fully with these wordes of S. Cyprian The Prieste before Prayer prepareth the mindes off his Bâ—etherne sâ—yinge thus Lifte vpp youre hartes To the entente they maye be put in mynde they ought to thinke off nothinge els but off the Lord For not the sounde off voice but the minâ—e and vnderstanding must praye vnto the Lorde with pure Intention S. Augustine as M. Iewel saieth agreeth with these wordes of Saint Cyprian whiche shoulde the better haue appeared if he had not nipped quite in the middest these wordes Dum respondet plebs Habemus ad Dominum while the people answereth euen as they do nowe in the Masse to Sursum corda lifte vp your hartes Habemus ad DominuÌ„ We lifte them vp to oure Lorde For the priest saying Sursum corda and the people answering Habâ—mus ad dominum by answering those wordes Admonâ—ntur as S. Ciprian saieth nihil aliud quà m dominuÌ„ cogitare debere tâ—ey are put in minde they ought to thinke of nothing els but of God And so are the people put in minde at this daye where the Curat dothe his duty though they vnderstande not the vulgar sence of the wordes no more then the coÌ„moÌ„ vulgar people of Afrike where S. Ciprian spake these wordes did who had a punicall vulgar tounge beside the latin as it is in this Article at large proued and yet the seruice in latin But these wordes while the people answereth Habemus ad dominum M. Iewell thought good to nippe of quite in the middest of the Sentence knowing very well that his Newe Corrupt Doctrine can not stande without the manifest Corruption of the Olde Doctours Againe the later wordes of S. Cyprian which M. Iewell alleageth as one continuall text of the Author and as a reason of the wordes that weÌ„t before these wordes I saie For not the sounde of voyce c. are no partâ— of that sentence nor do pertaine therunto but doe close vp an other Principall Sentence folowing which is this Clandatur contra aduersarium pectus c. Let our breast be closed vp against the enemy and be opened to God only not suffring the enâ—mye of God at praier to haue accesse vnto vs. For he crepeth on oftentimes and perceth in and guilefully deceiuing vs calleth awaye our praiers from God making vs to saye one thinge and to thinke an other VVhereas not the sounde of voice but the minde and vnderstanding ought to praie to God with pure intention Here Loe these wordes are placed of S. Cyprian not to proue as M. Iewell woulde force them by wronge placing them that we ought of necessite to vnderstande the Priest but that when we praie we shoulde praie in harte and minde not in tounge or sound of voice only Which harte and minde of vs is stirred vp when the Priest lifteth vp his voice more at sometimes then at other as towarde the time of the Holy Consecration of the most Dreadfull mysteries when he crieth out allowde to the people Sursum Corda as the Graecians also cried out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though the common people neither in Afrike neither in Grece did allwaies customably and generally vnderstande the latin or the greke tounges Thus with two notorious Vntruthes committed in the allegation of S. Ciprian M. Iewell hath brought S. Augustin and S. Ciprian bothe agreing not with him but with the Constitution of Iustinian against him as it shall anon appeare Iewell All thiâ— saieth M. Hardinge perâ—eineâ—h to the sense and vnderstanding of the praier and nothing to the vulgare tounâ—e As M. Iewell hath corrupted S. Augustin and S. Ciprian so nowe he corrupteth the very text of D. Harding For the wordes which M. Iewell as and for the wordes of D. Hardinge alleageth are not to be founde in his text D. Hardinge saieth that this Constitution of Iustinian maketh not for the Seruice to be had in any vulgaâ— tonge but only that the Seruice be pronounced by the priest alowde that it be vocall not mentall speaking not whispering with the breathe only Which Custome agreeth to the maner also of the latin Churche as it is recorded by S. Augustin and S. Ciprian bothe Who doe testifie the custome of the latin Masse as we haue it nowe that the priest
Anthemius whereas being made Pope in dede he woulde not perfourme his promise nor contaminare that holy See with the approuing of any Heresy he was by a trayne brought to Constantinople and so banished And all this was done rather by the wicked Empresse then by IustiniaÌ„ who as Liberatus wâ—iâ—eth restored againe Siluerius though by the meanes of Belisarius he was caried awaye againe into banishmeÌ„t and Vigilius also as it appeareth in his life though he died by the waie in Sicilia But what wil M. Iewel conclude hereof Will he reason thus Iustinians wife being an heretike expelled two godly bishoppes of Rome by violence Eâ—go his Constitution of pronouÌ„cing the Seruice alowde was made for the Church of Rome This argument hangeth very loosely Euery childe maye see thourough it Iewell Touching this Constitution the lawe saieth Generaliter dictum generaliâ—er est accipiendum The thinge that is spoken generallly muste be taken generally And it is commonly saied Vbi leâ— non distinguit nos distingueâ—e non debemus Where the Lawe maketh no distinction theâ—e ought we to make no distinction These lawes M. Iewell are as good arguments for truantes and as fitte tooles for cauillers as can possibly be deuised And you knowe M. Iewell Dolosus veâ—satur in generalibus The Wrangler walketh in generalls And will you see howe manye exceptions this lawe generaliter dictum admitteth It must be restrained and vnderstanded first according to the matter whereof the lawe treateth Then accordinge to the Conditions and qualites of the persons of whom the lawe speaketh Thirdly the Circumstances of the place and time must be considered Againe the wordes which went before or which come after The Common maner of speache Some other lawe speaking more specially Last of all as the learned lawier Baldus teacheth you secundum rationem expressam vel subsequentem vel tacitè inhaerentem it must be vnderstanded according to the cause expressed or folowing after or secretly pertaining thereunto These many Conditions and twenty moe if a man would playe the Lawyer might be alleaged to restraine this generall rule of M. Iewell vnder the which he thinketh to cloke his erroure And to touche some of theÌ„ particularly the lawe saieth Verba generalia secundum sui naturaÌ„ generaliter intelligi debent General wordes must be meaned generally accordinge to their nature And so do the doctours expound the law alleaged by M. Iewel Againe the lawe saieth Verba generalia restringuntur secundum qualitateÌ„ personâ—ruÌ„ ad quas referuÌ„tur General wordes are restrained according to the qualitees of the persons vnto the whiche they are referred And so this lawe of Iustinian though the words runne generally yet it is to be restrained only to such of the Greke Churche as it was made for Farder the lawe saieth Verba generalia regulaÌ„tur a sua ratione General words are ruled by their reason or cause And so the reason or cause of IustiniaÌ„s Constitution being not the vnderstanding of the Priestes prayer but the stirring of the people to deuotion which may and hath longe tyme bene done thoughe the prayer be not vnderstanded vulgarly it maketh nothing for M. Iewels Vulgar Seruice Lex simpliciter indistincté loquens debet distingui secundum alias leges specialiter distincté loquentes The law speaking plainely and without any distinction muste yet be distinguished according to other lawes speaking specially and distinctly So certaine it is that M. Iewel hath alleaged Where the law doth not distinguish we must not distinguish And therefore yet againe the lawe saieth Lex generaliter indistincté loquens non refertur ad casus specialiter notatos The lawe that speaketh generally and indistinctly is not referred to cases specially noted And to shewe briefly what a fickle and feble grounde M. Iewell hath layed to builde his wronge construction of Iustinians Constitution vppon notwithstanding his generall rules the lawe expressely saieth Verba quantumcunque generalia ad consonum intâ—llectum restringuntur Wordes be they neuer so generall are restrained to a conuenient vnderstanding By all whiche lawes it appeareth that although generall wordes by their owne nature be generall as it is proued in M. Iewelles lawe yet circunstaunces doe quite alter order and dispose the sence thereof And thus the generall wordes of a lawe are not vnlike to a piece of clothe not yet cutt oute to make any garment Which by circunstances being framed to some speciall thinge doo then stande well and rightly for that speciall thinge Otherwise it woulde happen which the lawe saithe Plerumque dum proprietas vâ—rborum attenditur sensus veritatis amittitur Oftentimes while we sticke to the propriete of the wordes we lese the vnderstanding of the Truthe These rules therefore of M. Iewell make no argument to proue that Iustinians constitution is generall to all the Worlde but is only a smothering smoke to dasell the light of the Truthe bicause in dede as M. Iewell hathe saied him selfe Dolosus versatur in generalibus The deceitefull and wrangler walketh in generalles To come nowe more particularly to this Constitution off Iustinian the lawe geueth vs yet an other Circunstance to lighten this matter more and that is this The lawe saieth Verba intelligi debent secundum subiectam materiam Wordes are to be vnderstanded according to the matter proposed And in an other place it speaketh more expressely saying of wordes euen generally spoken Generalia verba non extenduntur ad non cogitata sed ad id tantum de quo agitur Generall wordes are not extended to that which was neuer intended but only to the matter whereof it is treated And so Iustinian making this Constitution for the greke Church though he spake generally yet his wordes are to be drawen only to that which was of him intended whiche was only the greke Churche as it shall anon appere As for example If a lawe were made Whosoeuer draweth blood with in the Courte gates shall be hanged These generall wordes generally taken according to the wisedom of M. Iewell wil hange the poticary of surgyan that letteth bloode by the Rules off his Arte to some Noble man lying sicke in the Courte In like maner a generall pardon geuen by the Clemency of the Prince shall acquitte traytours by the wisedome of M. Iewell thoughe yet the Prince intended not so But as in bothe these lawes the generall wordes are to be restrained to the intent of the lawe maker whiche is vnderstanded either by the Common maner of speache vsed in such lawes as in the Case of generall pardons or by the persons intended in the lawe as in the firste Caâ—e where poticaries and surgians were not meaned lettinge blood by their Arte euen so in the lawe of Iustinian thoughe his wordes runne generally yet they are not therefore generally to be taken Againe there is in the Constitution of Iustinian a Circunstaunce secretly included which declareth
vniuersa preces fundebat Beside all other giftes of prophecy of healing and of tounges there was also a gifte of praier whiche was called the gifte of the Spirit He that had this gifte praied for the whole multitude And he geueth hereof the reason shewing also the maner in these wordes For whereas not knowing what is good for vs we aske many thinges of God that are not profitable for vs this gifte of praier came vpon some one of them whiche then liued who for suche thinges as might be profitable for the whole congregation bothe stoode him selfe and praied for all the other and also taught the other The Apostle therefore here calleth by the name of Spirit bothe suche a gifte and also that soule which receiued such gifte and praied vnto God and mourned For he that was founde worthy of this gifte standing vpp withe great compunction off minde and also with much lamentation such lamentation I saie as from the harte lyeth prostrat before God and praieth for all suche thinges as are behoofull for the congregation Of the whiche maner the deacon at this daye is a token praying for all the people Thus farre Chrysostome This praying by the waie of a miraculous gifte was no sett ordinary and appointed Seruice to be readen out of the booke as nowe we haue it and as in Chrysostoms time it was but a maner of miraculous praying vpon the sooden so as the Spirit moued Againe he that had this gifte of praying did not onely praye him selfe but also alios edocebat he taught and instructed other To praie it was not requisit he should be vnderstanded For that was done gemitibus ijs qui ipsa quidem mente deo se prosternunt by sighynges suche as from the harte doo prostrat them selues before God But to teache other it was necessary that he shoulde be vnderstanded Therefore when anye man vsed that gifte of prayer withe the gifte of tounges together praying in a straunge tounge without prophetia the gifte of vnderstanding added thereunto he spake mysteries he prayed to God he edified him selfe he prayed in Spirit But he edified not the hearers he praied not mente in minde and vnderstanding When he so praied the lerned him selfe whiche supplied the roome of the ignorant did not vnderstande him nor coulde not answer Amen to his praier Why Bicause he praied in a straunge tounge bicause he vsed or rather abused touching the edifying of other the miraculous gifte of tounges And therefore the Apostle immediatly sayeth which wordes also M. Iewell hath quite in his text left out and so deceuied ones againe his Reader For thou geuest thankes well but the othâ—r is not edâ—fied that is as Chrisostom expoundeth spiritu concitatus sonas thou geuest out a sounde being stirred vp with the Spirite as Theodoretus expoundeth it Thou praisâ—st God being moued with that diuine gifte but he that heareth thee is no whit edified So Oecumenius saieth The Apostle referring worthy praise to the gifte of tounges saieth For thou geuest thankes well c. Thus by the minde of these lerned Fathers all this geuing of thankes and blessing in the Spirit or in a strange tounge is a geuing of thankes or blessing by the waie of that miraculous gifte of tounges not by vsing the sett and ordinary Seruice in any lerned or Common tounge knowen to the lerned that supplieth the roome of the Ignorant The Apostle in all this Chapter speaketh of no such Matter You see therefore good Readers howe fittely and truly M. Iewell and his felowes do alleage this place of S. Paule against the Seruice in a common lerned tounge suche as the Greke tounge is to the Greke Churche and the Latin to the Latin Churche But let vs graunte a while to M. Iewell that S. Paule hath all this while spoken of the Seruice in a lerned tounge vnknowen to the Common ignorant people let vs I saie for a while graunte it against the exposition of so many lerned Fathers and against the very euidence of S. Paules text Yet S. Paule saieth of such a one as so praieth Tu quidem bene gratias agis Thou geuest thankes well Nay saieth M. Iewell It is a maruailous miracle that any man will be so wicked as so to vse it These are your very wordes M. Iewell aboute the beginning of your text vpon this Vntruthe Nowe I aske you M. Iewell Did S. Paule speake in this place of praying in a straunge tounge by waie of the miraculous gifte which the speaker him selfe sometime vnderstode not and which was done by some one man moued thereunto vpon the soden Did he speake it of praying in a lerned tounge though vnderstanded of the speaker him selfe yet not vnderstanded of the Common people and ordinarely vsed for the Seruice of the Churche If the firste then what maketh this for your vulgar Seruice then why doe you bringe it here against the Seruice in a lerâ—ed tounge then why do you and your felowes all so stoutely applie this place to proue that the Seruice ought to be in the Vulgar tounge Last of all then howe do you bringe that miraculous praying of some one man moued thereunto by the Spirit against the Ordinary sett Seruice of Gods Churche If the seconde why do you call that wicked so to be vsed and those men impudent which wâ—lâ— defena â—â— which the Apostle in expresse wordes saieth was VVell done Answer to this dilemma M. Iewell with all the shiftes phrases gloses and euasions that you can possibly deuise I thinke the best answer that you can make is to prouide that our bookes be stayed at Grauesende and the worlde may neuer see your nakednesse wickednesse and abominations Before I come to the rest of the wordes which you haue alleaged oute of S. Paule I muste put the wordes whiche goe before left out by you againe fraudulently M. Iewell I saie Fraudulently bicause the concealing of them hathe hindered the truthe as it shall nowe appeare After that S. Paule had saied Thou geuest well thankes but the other is not edified it foloweth I thanke God that I speake my selfe also with the tounge of you all that is as Chrysostom expoundeth it Theodoretus also and Oecumenius I haue the gifte of tounges more then any of you all But I had leuer here beginneth M. Iewell leauing out also the worde But to speake fiue wordes with my minde so that I may instructe others then tenne thousand wordes with my tounge Then it foloweth after many sentences which M. Iewell straight adioyneth let all thinges be done to the edâ—fâ—ing of the people And yet the wordes of the people are not the wordes of S. Paule Now what meaneth the Apostle in these wordes Forsothe he prosecuteth the vsing of the miraculous gifte of tonges I my selfe saieth S. Paul can speake in as many straunge tounges as anye of you all or as the grekes do reade Magis quà m omnes vos linguis
is broken but bicause the externall Sacrifice is denied the true proper and due worshippe of Allmighty God as S. Augustin vehemently and at large proueth in his bookes de Ciuitate dei For the priest vnderstandeth it for the better part if he be lerned and 83 the people be not vtterly ignorant Bicause of often preaching longe custome solemne feastes and sundry Ceremonies Iewell The 83. Vntruthe For the simple people vnderstandeth not one worde or syllable of the latine tounge How hangeth this reason of youres M. Iewell The people vnderstandeth no one Syllable of the latine tounge Ergo neither by often preaching nor by longe custom nor by solemne festes nor by Ceremonies they vnderstande not the Seruice The fondnesse hererof wil easely appeare by the like The people vnderstandeth not one worde or syllable of the latin tounge Ergo by no preaching nor instruction they can vnderstande the doctrine of S. Augustin S. Hierom and other Fathers writen onely in the latin or greke tounge Or thus Ergo the people can not vnderstande a great parte of M. Iewelles Replie which hath so much latin in it Although the english be annexed straight and the whole expounded vnto them No doubt but the people bothe may and dothe vnderstande greâ—t parte of the Seruice where the Curat doth his duetie But if the Curats do not their dutye or rather bicause in dede off longe they haue not herein done their duties therefore God whippeth vs iustly with these your heresies and schismes M. Iewell Howbeit we trust of his mercy he will at lenght cast the rodde in the fire and restore vs to vnite Harding And when we shal appeare before Christe in that dreadfull daie of iudgement 84 we shall not be required to geue an accompt of our vnderstanding but faith presupposed of our Charite Iewell The 84. Vntâ—uthe For it is writen He that knoweth not shall not be knowen 1. Cor. .14 It appeareth hereby M. Iewell that either you haue smal diuinite or litle charite either you are a petite doctour or els a very malicious wrangler and a pelting hicke scorner For as touching this matter wherof you note here D. Harding as speking vntruly you maye take your penne Master Iewell and score it vpp also for vntruthe vpon holye Scripture whiche saieth that in the daye off iudgement God shall rewarde euery man according to his workes not according to his knoweledge And againe opera illorum sequuntur illos their workes do folowe them And in the ghospel where our Sauiour describeth vnto vs the forme of his iudgement he â—aieth to our charge the lacke of good workes as not visiting the sicke not clothing the naked not feeding the hungry and such like S. Paule also after he had declared that in the Churche were Apostles prophets teachers the giftes of miracles of healing the sicke of speaking with tounges of interpretation of tonges yet he saieth adhuc excellentiorem viam vobis demonstro I tell you yet of a more excellent waye And that is Charite M. Iewell which S. Paule in the next chapter folowing commendeth aboue all knowleadg all giftes all speaking withe tounges yea aboue faithe it selfe concluding at the ende of the chapter these wordes Now therefore remaine these three Faith â—ope Charite But the greater of these is Charite And is it nowe an Vntruthe M. Iewell to saye that we shall geue an accompt of our Charite faith presupposed and not of vnderstanding You knowe S. Paule againe saieth knowleadge puffeth vp but 〈◊〉 edifiâ—th And the inferiours are commaunden to obay their ouerseers which watche and warde for their soules But you alleage vs a text of S. Paule where he saieth He that knoweth not shall not be knowen What knowleadg is that M. Iewell Let S. Paule him selfe teache you He saieth I haue iudged my selfe to knowe nothinge amonge you but Iesus Christ and him crucified To knowe Christ is the sufficient knowleadg for saluation for euery Christian man not called to the charge of others And so according to the saying of S. Paule he that knoweth not Christ he that hath no faith shal not be knowen of God But faith presupposed not knowleadg but Charite shall be required of the people Harding For as muche as the Seruice consisteth in maner altogether of the Scriptures Iewell The 85. Vntruthe In the Romish Seruice there are infinit vanities besides the Scriptures This is but a slaunderous lie M. Iewell I haue pervsed your whole text in this place looking to haue founde some one of these infinit vanities noted by you But I finde not one worde thereof Therfore M. Iewel as it was soone saied so vntell you prouâ—iâ— it will be thought to be a lie as it is in dede and a very slaunderous lie against the Church of God Malice made you speake it But Truthe choked you not able to proue it Harding Though we vnderstande not the 86 wordes of the Scripture whiche we vtter with oure mouthe yet the heauenly powers and Angels saieth Origen vnderstand them and thereby be inuited and that with delite to helpe vs. Iewell The .86 Vntruthe For Origen speaketh of the ignorance of the Allegorie not of the wordes Stapleton That Origen speaketh of the wordes and not of the Allegorie it appeareth euidently by the similitude whiche he maketh in that place His similitude is thus As amonge the infidels saieth Origen the CoÌ„trary powers he meaneth diuels by such and such names in verses or enchantments do serue and attends and applie that vnto which they are called by such and such names perfoâ—rming at though it were their bounden dutie therein euen so and much more the heauenly powers and Angels of God which acâ—â—mpanie vs as our lorde in the gospell of the litle ones of the Church saieth that their Angels do allwaies assiste in the sight of God beholding his face do take it gratefully and gladly if we alwaies vtter out off our mouthe the wordes of holy Scripture and the sounde of thesâ— names like as certain verses and enchantments For though we vnderstand not that which we vtter with our mouthe yet those heauenly powers which assiste vs do vnderstande them and are delighted as inuited with a certain verse to helpe vs and succour vs. Thus farre Origen By this similitude it is euident he meant of wordes and not of the allegorie first bicause the similitude consisteth in enchantmeÌ„ts These enchantmeÌ„ts are done by bate wordes not by any allegorie and that when those wordes are not vnderstanded Then by Origens minde the Angels are also delighted to heare vs pronouÌ„ce the wordes of Scripture though we vnderstand them not Secondarely Origen speaketh of the ignorance of that whiche we vtter withe our mouthe But that are the wordes only not any allegorie Therefore he speaketh of the ignorance of the wordes not of the allegorie Iewell Nowe whereas Master Iewell saieth Origen his purpose was here to speke of reading the Scripturâ—â—
not of the church Seruice and noteth therefore bothe in the text and in the Margin very solemnely that D. Harding wresteth Origen hauing caste such a blott vpon him he saieth it only and proueth it nothinge But that Origen spake of the Scriptures read in the Seruice it appereth probably firste for that the Scriptures were at that time in Alexandria first read in the Seruice as lessons and after expounded by the waie of homilies and also that Origen him selfe was at that time the Common and ordinary maker of suche homilies and laste of all that these verye wordes of Origen are a parte of such an Homilie ordinarely made after the Seruice Let nowe the truthe speake whether D. Harding hathe wrested Origen or M. Iewell slaundered D. Harding Harding If all praiers made in an vnknowen tounge be a mocking of God as Beza saieth then were the praiers vttered by miracle in the primitiue Churche with tounges which the vtterers them selues vnderstode not after the minde of Chrisostome a mocking of God For I see nothinge whereby they are excluded from his 87 generall saying and vniuersall proposition Iewel The 87. Vntruthe This generall saying of Chrysostome is Vntruly reported Here M. Iewell for lacke of better game hunteth after letters and rippeth vpp syllables Vpon the terme His he woulde founde an Vntruthe him selfe construing vntruly the saying of D. Harding For D. Harding by these wordes his generall saying meant not any generall saying of Chrysostome but the generall saying of Beza whiche went but fewe lines before and is this VVhat Praiers so euer be made off any man in a tonge that he vnderstandeth not they be to be taken for a mockery of God From this generall saying off Beza M. Iewell they are not excluded saieth D. Harding which in the primitiue Church vttered the praiers with tounges which the vtterers them selues after the minde of Chrysostome vnderstoode not For euen these also by the generall saying of Beza were mockers of God This is no bishoplike demeanour M. Iewell but a childish behauiour no sadde writinge but a rascall wrangling no shewe of honesty but a mere scurrilite to fight vpon termes and quarell aboute sillables either contrary to your owne knowleadg and iudgegement or els without all iudgement with much ouersight lightnes and rashenes Harding As the Vulgar Seruice pulleth their mindes frō priuat deuotion to heare and not to praie to litle benefit of knowleadge for the obscurite of it so the Latine geuing them no such motion they occupie them selues whiles the priest praieth for all and in the person of all in their priuat prayers all for all and euery one for him selfe Iewell The 88. Vntruthe For the vulgar Seruice encreaseth deuotion as by sundrie Authorities it shall appeare Stapleton Whether vulgar Seruice encrease deuotion or plucke from deuotion it is not the Authorite of lerned men but the experience of the people that trieth it Verely in our countre the people it selfe confesseth they are much distracted from their deuotion by attending to the Minister reading the Seruice and not vnderstanding it Yea do not your owne doinges M. Iewell confesse it You haue taken order in certaine places of the realme as we certainely vnderstande that betwene your matins and the Communion there be a staye made of halfe an howre or so to thentent the people in that meane while may attende to their priuat praier and priuat deuotion Why is this order taken but bicause at Seruice time the people is distracted from priuat praier and priuat deuotion And truly herein whether the priuat deuotion of the people be not much more now distracted by harkening to there english Seruice which yet they vnderstande not alltogether then it was att the latin Seruice when they vnderstode nothing I dare to make the people itt selfe iudge thereof The reason M. Iewell why you esteme the english Seruice to encrease deuotion more then the latine is bicause you imagin for certain that the people vnderstandeth it As I will easely graunt they do sometimes vnderstande some part thereof so that they do allwaies vnderstande the whole though you would graunt yet no wise man wil graunte it and the people it selfe I dere wel say wil denie it Verely I haue hearde of a Gentleman which reading the Booke of the Statutes in english confessed he oftentimes vnderstoode not what the Statutes meaned And doubtlesse Holy Scripture iff it were not much harder then the english Statutes are so many lerned commentaries shoulde not haue ben made thereupon so many heresies had not ben grounded vpon the doubtefull interpretation thereof Brefely itt had not bene so many hundred yeares read only in the lerned tounges greke and latin The Scripture therefore being not allwaies vnderstanded though in the mother tounge no maruaill if the people be some times distracted For when the Minister readeth on still and the people Harkening thereunto knoweth not what it meaneth what shall they do Shall they harken It is to no profitt Shall they let the Seruice goe and fal to priuat praier Your order is against it whereby if any harken not to the Seruice he shall be taken for a papist Thus by your vulgar Seruice the people oftētimes either is forced to be idle or if he will be well occupied incurrech displeasure What is distraction from priuat deuotion if this be not Thoching your Authorites the saying of Chrisostom that praying together in the Church with our brethern auaileth more then when we praie alone c. maketh directly against your first protestanticall doctrine off praying vnder headges and in chambers when you should come to Churche but for common praier in a vulgar tounge itt maketh not so much as for the priuat praier of eche one praying in the Churche eche by him selue and all with the priest Lyra saying that the people answereth Amen to the priest withe more deuotion when he vnderstandeth the praier saieth truly touching the duty of answering But that according to the Doctrine of S. Paul stādeth not in the whole people but in him qui supplet locū idiotae that supplieth the roome of the ignorant which wordes M. Iewell in alleaging the whole place of S. Paul pag. 194. guilefully and fraudulently left out to make the reader beleue that the whole people was bound to answer Amen Iustinian speaketh of the lowde speaking of the prist not of the Seruice to be vnderstāded as we haue before at large declared The saying of S. Augustin how can he singe duly whiche knoweth not what he singeth pertaine euidently ad Psalmistas to such as were appointed by order of the priest to singe as we haue before declared out of the 4. Coūcel of Carthage not to al the people whose duty it was to praie in the Churche not to singe psalmes The particular application of the psalmes which are songe to our owne selues whereof S. Basill speaketh maye as well be done of deuoute people in the
sentence omitting all that went before I thinke the best answer that he coulde make would be to saie he folowed therein the precepts of his Rhetorike to bringe as muche as made for his purpose and to omitte the rest that made against him Well though his Rhetorike taught him that Arte yet his Diuinite taught him not that Deceite I will therfore note certaine sentences in the same epistle going before and then procede with the wordes of M. Iewell alleaged The Fathers of the Aphricane Councell declaring to Celestinus the Pope that though Apiarius by the meanes of his legat had bene restored to his order of priesthood from whence he had ben deposed yet now againe for other notorious crimes by him confessed he was iustly excommunicated do write thus vnto him Proefato itaque debitae salutationis officio c. Our due commendations being remembred we desire you earnestly that from hence for the you admitt not to your hearing ouer lightly such as come from hence neither that you râ—ceiue any more to your Communion such as are by vs excommunicated bicause your Reuerentnes shall easely see that this is not dâ—fined by the Nicene Councell For if it be there prouided for the infeâ—iour clergy or the laye howe much more woulde it prouide for the bishâ—ps that being suspended from the Communion in thâ—ir own provinâ—e they should not looke to be restored of your holynes either hastely or rashely or vniustly Also let your holynes repell the wicked refuges of priestes and the other clergy as it becometh you Bicause this priuilege is not denied to the Churche of Africa and Lo here beginneth the allegation of M. Iewell Iewell The decrees of the Nicene Councell haue committed bothe the inferiour clergie and also the bisshoppes vnto their Metropolitanes Stapleton Before I procede in the allegation of the Councell as it foloweth in M. Iewell I beseche thee gentle Reader to consider the pithe of all those wordes so farre omitted by M. Iewel as I haue before noted vnto thee First the whole maner of writing is not as to a Forger a Foyster or a Cogger as M. Iewell termeth here the Pope but in all humilite and reuerentnes as to a holy bishop and Reuâ—rent Father Secondarely that they do not vtterly repell his Authorite but only in the case of Appellation wherein it semeth bothe then and longe before in S. Ciprians time the prouince of Aphrike waâ— priuileged Last of all the appellation it selfe they do not vtterly denie but desire the Pope that he will cutt away Improba refugia wicked refuges of naughty men abusing the benefit of appellation and againe they require him not in no case to with such as they do excoÌ„municat but they desire him vt non facilius ad aures suas admittat not to admitt them to his hearing ouer lightly vt non praeproperé non indebité restituat that he restore them not rashely or vniustly before the cause be thouroughly examined And so in S. Ciprian it appeareth the excommunicated persons fled from Afrike to Rome quasi saieth S. Ciprian veritas post eos nauigare non posset quae mendaces linguas rei certae probatione conuinceret as though the truthe coulde not saile after them which by certain triall might conuince their lying tounges Wherein it is euident that appellation was made from Afrike to Rome though the bishops them selues of Afrike as S. Ciprian in that selfe epistle complaineth were troubled and offended therewith But all this M. Iewell as I saied folowing the precepts of his arte hathe thought good to omitte making the Reader to beleue that the Councell of Aphrica vtterly abandonned at that time the Pope and pronounced him guilty of manifest Forgerie Hitherto you see how litle they charge him withall Let vs procede with the wordes of the Councell euen as M. Iewell hathe alleaged them Iewell For it was discretely and rightly considered that all matters are to be determined in the plaâ—es where they beganne These very wordes and reason S. Cyprian longe before the Nicene Councell was assembled vseth and that as a Canon Statute or Ordonnaunce Whereby it semeth this determination of matters at home was an auncient priuilege of the Aphricane Churche beside other countres of the west Iewell And that no prouince can lacke the holy ghoste whereby the bisshoppes off Christe may be able bothe wisely to see and also constantly to mayntaine the right And specially for that it is lawfull for euery man that shall mislike the discretion of his Iudges to appeale either to a particular Councell within the same realme or to a generall Councell On lesse perchaunce some man will saie God is able to inspire the triall of Iustice into one man Alone bicause he is bisshop of Rome and will not inspire the same in to a great number of bisshoppes meeting togeather in Councell StapletoÌ„ This latter sentence M. Iewell hathe printed with mighty mayne letters as the whiche he would haue especially to be noted And no maruaile For they are his owne wordes a greate parte thereof not the wordes of the Councell And therefore also I haue printed the same sentence as the wordes of M. Iewell with a distincte letter from the wordes of the Councell The true wordes off the Councell are thus Firste in Latine Nisi forte quisquam est qui credat vni cuilibet posse Deum nostrum examinis inspirare iustitiam innumerabilibus in Concilium sacerdotibus denegare In English truly translated they are thus much Vnlesse there be anye man that will thinke that one God is able to inspire the triall of Iustice to any one and that he will denye it to a greate number of Bishoppes meeting together in Councell Let vs nowe consider the manifest Forgerye of M. Iewell His Forgerye is greate and standeth in these wordes Into one man alone bicause he is Bisâ—oppe off Rome First for vni cuilibet to any one he hath put into one man alone and then to declare what one man he addeth in a parenthesis Bicause he is bishop of Rome Which wordes are not at all in the Councell And therefore he chaunged the wordes before that they might seme to leade to such a sence As though the Councell had expressely and namely spoken againste the iudgement of the bishop of Rome being One man alone Whiche sence persuaded to the Reader vnder the glorious name of the Aphricane Councell he thought would make gaily against the One supreme gouuernemeÌ„t of Christes vicar on earthe By such manifest Forgerye M. Iewell will proue the Pope a Forger Let vs nowe procede with the wordes off the Councell Iewel And howe maye suche beyonde sea Iudgementes be thought good whereunto the personnes off the witnesses which in triall off truthe are thought Necessary either for that they be wemen or for the Infirmitye off their age or ffor many other incident lettes can not be brought For such like coÌ„siderations the triall
happened in the East Church Those troubles aboue mentioned happened al in the reigne of Constantius the Arrian Emperour and towarde the ende of his Empire Chrysostom liued vnder Arcadius and Honorius Theodoretus vnder Theodosius the second sonne to Arcadius Nowe betwene Constātius the Arriā and Arcadius were Emperours Iulian Iouinian Valens and Theodosius the first the time almost of a hundred and fifty yeres Vnder Arcadius those troubles of the East Churche mentioned by M. Iewel vtterly ceased Now to alleage those troubles so longe before passed and appaised to be the cause of Chrysostoms and of Thedorets Appeales to Rome which so longe after folowed who seeth not that it was impertinently and impudētly alleaged Touching the troubles in the East in Chrysostomes time we haue saied somwhat before but shal saie more anō when we come to M. Iewelles cōclusion vpon this place It remaineth therefore that al this must serue to beare out the Appeale of Athanasius who liued in the time of those troubles or els M. Iewell as I saied before shall be founde to haue proued nothing but vtterly to haue dased the Reader with empty wordes Touching the Appeale of Athanasius though it be not our principall matter hauing now in hande chefely the Appeale of Chrysostom yet bicause M. Iewell hath so confounded all these three diuers Appeales and of diuers ages all together trusting by one general answer to defeate them al for Truthes sake which nowe I defende I will shewe also that al this proueth nothinge against the Appeale of Athanasius to the Pope brought in by D. Harding for a clere example of the Popes Primacy then at that time and of so lerned a man acknowledged and confessed It is to be knowen therefore that all those troubles of the East Churche mentioned before by M. Iewel happened after the Appeale of Athanasius to Rome and therefore coulde not be the cause of that which before was passed This to be so I will euidently proue God willing by the orderly course and drifte of the ecclesiasticall History The Ecclesiasticall History reporteth that at the beginning of the reigne of Constantius the Emperour vnder whose reigne and towarde the ende of whose raigne the aboue mētioned troubles happened as it shall anon appeare many bishops of the East which in the life of Constantinus father to this Constantius a good Catholike Emperour had dissembled and appeared for Catholikes begāne then openly to professe the Arrian heresy and to condēne the great general Coūcell of Nice holden not longe before At that time Athanasius being banished before by Constātinus through the deceite of Arrius and his felowes returned to his bishoprike by the meanes of Constantinus brother to Constantius Emperour of the west The Arrian bishoppes Eusebius Theogonius Theodorus Perinthius and other intending then as I saied to publish the Arrian heresy hauing all ready corrupted the Prince as the history declareth seing this Athanasius the Patriarche off Alexandria to be a great blocke in their waye as being a right lerned Father and a most stoute defender of the Nicene Coūcel laboured by al meanes to remoue him frō that place and to depriue him of his bishoprike For this purpose they accused him to the Emperour as one that had by vniust meanes returned to his bishopricke Athanasius hauing intelligence of their doing and of the Princes minde bent against him fledd in to the west partes of Christendom But Eusebius and his felowes the Arrian bishopps nott contented herewith thinking to worke sure in the matter wrote also to Iulius the Bishopp off Rome accused him to the Pope and hoped by that meanes to haue him vtterly depriued The Pope as the history saieth ecclesiasticam sequens legem etiam ipsos Romam venire praecepit venerabilem Athanasium ad iudicium regulariter euocauit folowing the lawe of the Churche commaunded them also to come to Rome and called forthe the Reuerent Athanasius to Iudgement after the order of the Canons Here woulde I by the waie lerne of M. Iewell what lawe of the Churche it was that the Pope folowed when he commaūded the bishops of the East to appeare at Rome and cited also Athanasius the Patriarche of Alexādria to iudgemēt at Rome and that Regulariter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by order of the Canōs What lawe what Canōs cā he name but the lawes and Canōs of the Nicene Coūcel the only Councel General holden before that time and confirmed afterwarde by the great Councel of Sardica holden somewhat after that time Well Forthe with the History Athanasius obeying the Summoning came But his Accusers came not scientes facile suum capi posse mendacium knowing that their lying tale should sone be discouered What did they then Forsothe the history saieth seing the shepeheard away from his flocke they thruste in a wolfe in his place Gregorius by name an Arriā bishop Vnder this Arrian Gregorius began the troubles which M. Iewell before mentioned As the besetting of the Churche of Alexandria with souldyars the murder and spoyle of the people For whereas Athanasius after he had appeared at Rome by the meanes of the Emperours letters of the west Constans brother to Constantius had recouered againe his bishoprike the Arrians persuaded the other Emperour Constantius the Arrian to intrude this Arrian Gregoririus by force and violence Vpon which Athanasius fled the second time to Rome and Eusebius the Archearrian sent after him a legacy to the Pope to accuse Athanasius At this second coming to Rome Athanasius founde there Paulus the bishop of Constantinople Marcellus bishop of Ancyra Asclepas bishop of Gaza Lucianus bishop of Adrianopolis all complaining in like maner to the Pope for iniuries done vnto them by the Arrians Nowe first let vs consider that the first flight of Athanasius to Rome was before the troubles mentioned by M. Iewel and that therein as I saied he hath deceiued his Reader making that to be the cause of Athanasius flight which happened after his flight Secondarely that he bringeth of Paulus the bishop of Constantinople that he was hanged you perceiue I trust already that therein also he hath brought that for a cause which happened after the effect Vnlesse M. Iewel wil saie that Paulus was hāged of the Arriās before he came to Rome to cōplaine of the Arrians Likewise that he telleth vs of Lucius otherwise Lucianus bishop of Adrianopolis that he died in preson it must nedes be after the first coming of Athanasius to Rome seing that in his secōd coming he foūde the same Lucius or Lucianus at Rome Marcellus also of Ancyra whō he founde at Rome at the same second coming could not be the cause of Athanasius first coming to Rome Now that which foloweth in M. Iewelles allegations of Theodulus and Olympius commaunded to be murthered and of the Emperours fury against Athanasius commaunding him to be brought aliue or dead all this happened after the third flight of Athanasius
being read the Emperour answered in a great chafe in the which awnswer also he betraied their request saying You aske Iudgement of me here in this worlde whiche doe looke for the Iudgement of Christe my selfe Yet he appoynted them Iudges It appeareth by this Donatus with his felowes were receiued as M. Iewell saieth but with what contentation of the Emperour they were receiued and howe wel he liked their dealing therein it appeareth by his Answer Iewell S. Augustin saieth Parmenianus willingly suffred his felowes to goe vnto the Emperour Constantinus Againe he saieth Here I bringe in the wordes off Constantine out of his own letters wherein he confesseth that he hearde the parties and founde Coecilianus to be innocent This was done of Constantin as S. Augustine immediatly after declareth quum ad iudicium eius post episcopalia iudicia partes perductae fuerant when the partes were brought to his Iudgement after the bishopps Iudgement had passed vpon them But howe well he toke that and howe he repented him after thereof it shall anon appeare Iewell Likewise he saieth VVhat is it not lawfull for the Emperour or such as shall be sent by the Emperour to pronounce Sentence of Religion VVherefore then came your Embassadours to the Emperour And so Likewise againe Iff Emperours haue nothinge to commaunde in these cases or if this matter nothinge touche a Christian Emperours charge who then forced your predecessours to remoue Caecilianus matter vnto the Emperour Stapleton All this S. Augustin spake against those stubborne Donatistes of whom Parmenianus was one which complained quod eos Constantinus ad campum id est ad supplicium duei iussit that Constantin called them forth to the caÌ„pe that is to punishmeÌ„t He reasoned I saie against the Donatist by his owne doinge Not as allowing the Donatiste in appealing to the Emperour but as prouing him vnreasonable which for their vauntage woulde appeale to him and then when he pronounced against them and badde them be punished woulde striue and repine at his commaundement and say he dyd them wronge and ought not being a temporall prince to punishe bishoops For in like maner when a Donatiste obiected to S. Augustin of one Felix a Catholike bishop saying Non debuit Episcopus proconsulari iudicio purgari A bishop ought not to make his purgation before a temporall Magistrat S. Augustine in like maner answered as he did here to Parmenianus Si culpandus est quem Iudex terâ—enus absoluit cum ipse sibi hoc non poscisset quanto magis culpandi sunt qui terrenuÌ„ regem suae causae Iudicem esse voluerunt If that bishop Felix be to be blamed bicause he was absolued of a temporall Iudge whereas he him selfe sought not so to be absolued or examined howe muche more are they to be blamed whiche desired them selues the temporall Prince to be Iudge in their Cause In bothe these places S. Augustin confuteth the Donatistes by their own doinges which is a kinde of answer quoad hominem sufficient But howe in dede bothe the Emperour liked that Appealing of the Donatistes to him and what S. Augustine him selfe hathe iudged thereof it shall nowe shortly appere That the Donatistes Appealed M. Iewell hathe proued And it is not denied But how well they did in it he saieth nothinge Beholde therefore gentle Reader howe well it was liked and Iudge thereby what a grounded example M. Iewell hathe brought to builde this Principle vpon that Appeales in ecclesiasticall causes were made to Emperours and Ciuil Princes Optatus writeth thereof thus Donatus appellandum esse ab Episcopis credidit reliqua Ad quam Appellationem Constantinus Imperator sic respondit O rabida furoris audacia Sicut in causis gentilium fieri solet appellationem interposuerunt Donatus thought good to Appeale from the bishops and so forthe Vnto the which Appeale the Emperour answered thus O desperat rage and fury As in the suites of heathen and Pagans so these men put vpp their Appeale So well the Emperour liked their doing therein howe well S. Augustin liked it and howe well the Emperour receiued the Appeale of those vnruly and furious Donatistes it shall nowe appeare by his owne wordes whiche I beseche thee gentle Reader diligently to consider and beare awaye These are his wordes Dedit ille aliud Arelatense iudicium aliorum scilicet episcoporum non quia iam necesse erat sed eorum peruâ—rsitatibus cedens omnimodo cupiens tantam impudentiam cohibere Neque enim ausus est Christianus Imperator sic eorum tumultuosas fallaces querelas suscipere vt de iudicio Episcoporum qui Romae sedâ—rant ipse iudicaret sed alios vt dixi Episcoposdedit a quibus tamen illi ad ipsum ruâ—sum Imperatorem prouocare maluerunt Qua in re illos quemadmodum detestetur audistis Atque vtinam saltem ipsius iudicio insanissimis animositatibus suis finem posuissent atque vt eis ipse cessit vt de illa causa post episcopos iudicaret a sanctis Antistibus postea veniam petiturus tamen illi quod vlterius dicerent non haberent si eius sententiae non obtemperarent ad quem ipsi prouocauerunt sic illi aliquando cederent veritati Constantin the Emperour saieth S. Augustine gaue to the Donatistes after they had bene ones cast by Meltiades the Pope with other bishops an other Iudgement at Arles in Fraunce of other bishops Not bicause it was nowe nedefull but bicause he yelded to their stubbornesse and desired by all meanes possible to ouercome their outragyousnesse For that Christian Emperour durst not so to admitte their seditious and fayned complaintes that he woulde him selfe sit Iudge vpon the Sentence of those bishops whiche had decided and determined the matter at Rome but he appointed them as I saied other bishops From whome yet ones againe these felowes Appealed to the Emperour him selfe Wherein howe he detested them you haue hearde And woulde God that vpon Iudgement and determination they had ones ended their most outragious stubbornesse and as he yelded vnto them so farre that he toke vpon him to Iudge of that Matter after the Bishops minding yet to aske pardon thereof of the holy bishops so that at length yet they might haue no more to saie if they would not yelde to his Sentence to whoÌ„ they had theÌ„selues Appealed as he I saie yelded to them so they woulde ones to the Truthe Thus farre that holy and lerned Father S. Augustin In whose wordes I answer to you and to your whole Argument M. Iewell thus Woulde God M. Iewell and from the bottom of my harte I wish it that as that good and vertuous Emperour Constantin the greate yelded so farre to those outragyous vnruly and furious Donatistes that being condemned in their owne Countre by three score ad tenne bishops he gaue them yet appealing to him beside all lawe and order of the Churche two other Iudgements
lye The Bishoppe of Rome saieth no suche thinge They are not the wordes of the Pope M. Iewell thinketh what so euer is writen in the lying libell of one of his bretherne intituled The Protestation off the Pope That it is cocke sure and vndoubtedly true But if M. Iewell had loued the truthe and tendred his readers Instruction he woulde haue looked to the originall and haue seene the wordes bothe whose they were and what they were The wordes that M. Iewell alleageth are in the decrees and in the place by him noted But they are there reported to be the wordes not of anye Bishop of Rome but of Bonifacius the Martyr And the wordes do not saye as M. Iewell reporteth them Lett no mortall man once dare to reproue him but huius culpas istic redarguere praesumit mortalium nullus No mortall men dothe presume to â—eproue his faultes here declaring thereby rather the obedience of Christen people towarde their Superiour then commaunding all Christen people to holde their peace And the reason foloweth Bicause he must Iudge all men but he is not to be iudged off any Which saying of that holy Martyr if it seme to M. Iewel ouer proude or vniuste he maye remembre that the whole Councell of 3000. bishoppes in Sinuessa in the yeare of our Lorde .300 presumed not to condemne Marcellius the pope hauing sacrificed to Idolles and being conuicted thereof by the Testimony of .72 witnesses but after he had condemned him selfe before them all they confirmed it and saied I ustè ore suo condemnatus est Nemo enim vnquam iudicauit Pontificem nec Praesul Sacerdotem suum quoniam prima sedes non iudicabitur à quoquam He is condemned iustly by his owne mouthe For no man at any time iudged the bishoppe nor the bishoppe his high priest For the chiefe See shall be iudged of no man Nowe where Bonifacius saieth that he may not be reproued onlesse he be founde to straye from the faith that dothe importe that a case may happen when the Pope may erre but not that the Pope may decree any errour or establish any thing contrary to the faithe Iewell To conclude Nicolaus Lyra is driuen to saie VVe finde that many Popes haue forsaken the faithe Stapleton This was a very simple Conclusion that hath no better Authour then Lyras a frier of late yeares Let it be true that many Popes haue forsaken the faithe yea and Christe to because of their wicked liues and hainous dedes Be it true that some of them haue had wrounge opinions Yet M. Iewell hath shewed none that euer decreed any errour or heresy This is that is auouched by Catholikes This the Reader looked for And this M. Iewell shoulde haue proued Gods name be blissed M. Iewell hath snott his poison against that holy See and in the succession of fiftene hundred yeares and vpwarde amoÌ„ge the number of two hundred and thirty Popes he hathe not founde one for all his prying and searching that euer decreed any errour or heresy or that euer deliuered to the Church any doctrine contrarye to the Faithe Thus we see Christes prayer hathe had his effecte notwithstandinge all the malyce of M. Iewell and of all other his masters and teachers against S. Peters chaire Harding That the Bishoppe of Rome had allwaies cure and rule ouer all other Bishoppes 109. specially them of the Easte for touching them of the VVest Churche it is generally confessed beside a hundred other euident Argumentes this is one verye suffieient that he had in the Easte to doo his stede three delegates or vicaires nowe commonly they be namâ—d Legates The one was the Bishoppe off Constantinople as we finde it mentioned In Epistola Simplicij ad Achatium Constantinopolitanum The seconde was the Bishoppe of Alexandria as the Epistle of Bonifacius the seconde to Eulalius recordeth The thirde was the Bishoppe off Thessalonica as it is at large declared in the 82. epistle of Leo Ad Anastasium Thessalonicensem By perusing these Epistles euerye man maye see that all the Bisshoppes off Grece Asia Syria Aegypte and to be shorte off all the Orient rendred obedience to the Bishoppe of Rome caet Iewell The .109 Vntruthe For the bishoppes of the East neuer yelded suche subiection to the Pope Stapleton What saie you then M. Iewell to three legates of the Pope placed in the Easte mencioned by D. Hardinge Did not they yelde subiection to the pope Are not the Authorityes true and good The Epistles or Simplicius to the Bishoppe of Constantinople of Bonifacius the seconde to Eulalius of Alexandria of Leo that lerned Father to Anastasius of Thessalonica are they not true Epistles Are they not incorporated to the volumes of the Councels Are they not all within the compasse of your first 600. yeares What saye you to them Why answere you not Will you euer plaie Aristoteles Asse Will you euer denie more then Aristotle can proue Good Reader looke vpon M. Iewelles text vpon this place Thou shalt see he answereth nothing to the places But like an impudeÌ„t asse of the countre standeth vpon his deniall and saieth It is not only vntrue but also vtterly without any shadow or colour of the truthe Iewell This is boldely auouched But if M. Iewel bringe any one worde to pâ—oâ—e these allegations vntrue that lett him be Aristotle and not the Asse For you shall see what foloweth These Authorites of Leo Symmachus and Bonifacius for as much as they are alleaged without wordes may likewise be past ouer without answer If they be vntrue why proue you it not If they be true why passe you them ouer without answer All that you answer is this that foloweth Iewell Howbeit this Bonifacius the seconde in defence of this quarel is forced to saye that .437 S. Augustin that godly Father and all other the bishoppes of Aphrica Numidia Pentapolis and other countres adioyning that withstoode the .438 proude attempt of the bishops off Rome and founde .439 out their open forgerie and falsifying the Nicene Councell were .440 altogether inflamed and lead by the diuell Stapleton Let vs suppose all this were true Yet is all this nothinge to the Popes legat in Alexandria the bishop thereof as in the epistle of Bonifacius it is mencioned Vnlesse M. Iewell will reason thus Bonifacius condemned the Bishops of Carthage wrongfully Ergo the Bishop of Alexandria was not his legate But now let vs see how many Vntruthes are couched in the former fewe wordes of M. Iewell First S. Augustin was none of them which wrote the last epistle of the Aphricane Councell to Celestinus vpon which M. Iewel groundeth the discouering of the Popes forgerie His name and subscription is not there Though in the other epistle to Bonifacius it be Neither should his name haue bene left out being the legat for the whole prouince of Numidia if he had bene there present Againe there was no proude attempt of the bishop of
to proue that the Emperour restored Athanasius and not the Pope it shall appeare he deceiueth and abuseth the vnlerned Reader shamefully in the whole matter For Athanasius as he was diuers times driuen from his bishopricke so was he by diuerse meanes restored First he was banished by Constantin the great beinge falsely accused off the Arrians and was by the decree of the same Constantin in his deathe bedde restored to his bishopricke againe The seconde cause off his banishement was thus The Arrian bishopps off the East accused Athanasius to Iulius the Pope of Rome Iulius cited Athanasius And he vpon the Citation appeared The Arrians in the meane while placed an Arrian bishop in his roome And calling a Conuenticle at Antioche depriued Athanasius and diuers other Catholike Bishops After which depriuation they sent to Pope Iulius to haue him Confirme their doinges Iulius the Pope examining the matter and finding Athanasius Paulus and the other bishops innocent restored them all to their bishoprickes againe by his letters Being thus restored first Paulus of Constantinople was banished againe by the Arrian Emperour Constantius Soone after also the Arrians peeking a newe quarell to Athanasius and accusinge him to Constantius the Arrian Emperour about the Distribution of certain corne in in Alexandria Athanasius fearing the Emperours displeasure flede of his owne accorde And with Paulus the bishop of constantinople came to Constans the Catholike Emperour of the Weste and brother to Constantius the Arrian Emperour in the East By whose letters to his brother they were at that time restored and brought in fauour againe withe the Emperour Constantius by whose displeasure they had bene before banished And thus Athanasius was restored three soundry times vpon three soundre occasyons First of the Emperour him felfe which had vpon misse information banished him Secondarely being accused to the Pope and by pretense of a Synod deposed was of the Pope by a superiour order restored Thirdly fleing vpon displeasure of the prince was by getting againe his princes fauour restored Thus if it had liked M. Iewell to deale vprightly if it had pleased him rather to instruct his Reader then to deceiue him if he had loued the truth and not sought escapes against the truthe he would haue opened the matter as it lyeth in the story and not blase out one truthe to conceale an other truthe For nowe you see gentle Readers that as Athanasius being banished twise by displeasure of the Emperours was by the Emperours restored so being also depriued of bishops he was by the chifest bishop of Christes Churche the Bishop of Rome in like maner restored And thus bothe are true in diuers cases One truthe must not ouerthrowe an other Nowe that it maye more particularly appeare what a deale of errour and Vntruthe M. Iewel carieth a longe before him by the violence and force of his talke in this matter let vs consider his owne wordes After he had with many idle wordes proued that the Emperour restored Athanasius which you see being true dothe nothinge empaire the other truthe that the Pope also restored him he alleageth Theodoretus for to amplifie the matter more and saieth Iewell And Theodoretus touching the same writeth thus Procerum Senatorumque coniuges c. The lordes and Counsellers wiues besought their husbandes to intreat the Emperours Maiesty that he woulde restore Athanasius to his sâ—oâ—ke and saied further onlesse they woulde so doe they woulde forsake them and goe to him It is a worlde to see the Impudencye of M. Iewell It semeth he neuer cared what lerned men iudged of his doinges but that he hath laboured only to heape vp Authorites without discretion This place of Theodoretus is not of Athanasius but of Liberius the bishop of Rome whom the Arrian Emperour Constantius had banished for mayntayning the Catholike religion And those Lordes and Councellers wiues were the Matrones of Rome requesting their husbandes to saie to the Emperour for the returne of their bishop Liberius the Pope of Rome not of Athanasius the bishop of Alexandria The lerned do knowe this well And M. Iewell him selfe can not be ignorant thereof The story may be reade bothe in Theodoretus as M. Iewell hath noted it and in the tripartite history of Cassidorus Now M. Iewel not only applieth this to Athanasius which yet neither can by any meanes truly be done but also putteth in the text of Theodoretus the very name of Athanasius in stede of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the pastour Liberius Thus he alleageth he careth not what nor howe to make a shewe of lerning If foloweth in him Iewell So likewise the bishops that the Arrians had deposed with Flauianus were restored againe by the Emperour and not by the Pope Here is an other grosse errour of M. Iewell They were no ArriaÌ„s but Eutichians which deposed Flauianus and of whom Leo writeth Trust not your note bookes to much M. Iewell Take some paynes to looke to the Originalles Touching the matter howe proue you they were restored by the Emperour and not by the Pope You saie Iewell For Pope Leo him selfe writeth thus vnto the Emperesse Pulcheria Your Maiestie haue restored hâ—me againe the Câ—tholike bishops which by wronâ—efull sentence were thrust from their Churches Stapleton This proueth in dede that the Emperouâ—â— restored them But this proueth not that the Pope restored them not Will you neuer leaue M. Iewell to disproue one truthe by an other truthe Vnder Theodosius the second the Eutychians bearing rule had expelled many Catholike bishops Martianus a good Catholike Emperour succeding to this Theodosius remoued the heretikes and restored the Catholikes For this he is praised of Leo the Pope Dothe this dyminish the Popes Authorite No more truly M. Iewell then the late doinges of Quene Marye in restoring the Catholike emprisoined bishops to their roomes and bishoprickes did make against the Supremacie of the Pope But that Pope Leo bare a stroke in this matter more then the Emperour it appeareth well in the very same epistle of Leo which your selfe alleage M. Iewell Thus Leo writeth in the same Epistle Quosdam saene Episcopos c. VVe vnderstande by the relation of our legates and of our brother and felowebishop Anatholius of whom you haue vouchesafed to make a good reporte that certain of those bishops which haue geuen their consent to the wiched dedes of the Eytychians do require a Reconciliation and do desire the communion of Catholikes VVhose desires we minde so farre to accomplishe that such as are amended and by their owne subscriptions do condemne their wicked attempâ—â— be admitted in to fauour the charge thereof beinge committed to our legates and to the foresaid bishop Anatholius Thus we see as the Emperour restored the Catholikes so the Pope reconciled the schismatikes And as the Emperour by his secular powre restored the bishops to their liuelyhood so the Pope by his spirituall iurisdiction restored the penitent offenders to the
a holy and lerned Father and wrongefully deposed of the Aegyptians What they in their wicked and iniurious attempt alleaged for them selues it is no president to them which meane to deale vprightly or which will defende the truthe M. Iewell bicause he defendeth a schisme against Christes vicaire no maruail if he be forced to vse such proufes The plea of these Aegyptians against S. Chrysostome was so good that they were for their labour excommunicated off Innocentius thebishopp of Rome As it hath before bene declared in examyning the Appeale of Chrisostom Iewell And therefore Flauianus being wrongefully put from his bishopricke offred vp his bille of Appeale not vnto the bishop of Rome alone but vnto him other bishoppes Loe here is an expresse Appeale confessed by M. Iewell of the Patriarche of Constantinople to the Bishop of Rome Yet he saieth it was not to the bishop of Rome alone but to him with other bishops Let vs see howe he will proue it Stapleton The truthe hereof may wel appeare by these wordes of Leo bishop of Rome vnto the Emperour Theodosius Omnes parâ—â—um nostrarum Eâ—clesiae omnes mansuetiâ—ini vestrae â—um Gâ—mutibus lachâ—imes supplicant Sacerdotes vt quia eisdem Lâ—bellum appellationis Flâ—uianus Episâ—opus dedit generalem Syâ—â—dum iâ—beatis intra Italiam celebrari Al the Churches of these our countres and all the priestes withe sighes and teares beseeche your highneâ—â— that for as muchâ— as Flauianus hath offred vp his bille of Appeale vnto them it may please you to commaunde a Generall Concell to be kept in Italy What shall I saie to M. Iewell I am forced to saie he is one of them of whom the Prophet speaketh Posuimaiâ— mendacium spem nostram mendacio protecti sumus We haue put out hope in lyeing and by lyeing we haue ben defended For had M. Iewell geuen vs here the whole wordes of Leo had he not in the very middest nipped of one whole sentence then the truthe should haue appeared and the contrary to his assertion euidently bene proued He hath put the wordes in Latin He hathe englished them truly He hath in the Margin quoted the place rightly And would a man suppose any Vntruthe herein to be committed Truly but that I had herein to doe with M. Iewell whose nature I am nowe some what acquaynted withall I should haue trusted his allegation without serching the originall The whole wordes of Leo are these Omnes partium nostrarum ecclesiae omnes mansuetudini vestrae cum gemitibus lachrymis supplicant sacerdotes vt quia Et nostri fideliter reclamarunt eisâ—â—m libellum appellaâ—â—nis Flauianuâ— Episcopus dedit generalem Synodum iubâ—â—ris intra Italiam celebrari All the Churches of these our Countres and al the priestes with sighes and teares beseche your highnes that forasmuche as Boâ—he our men he meaneth his legates in the Ephesine conueÌ„ticle haue faithefully resisted to the condemnation of Flauianus and to them Flauianus the bishop hath bishop offred vp his bille of Appeale it mâ—y please you to coÌ„mauÌ„de a general Councel to be kept in Italy These are the whole wordes of Leo in the same epistle By these wordes it appeareth euideÌ„tly that the bille of Appeale was offred vp not to al the Churche an priestes in Italy but to the Popes legates present at the Ephesine Synod in the which and where Flauianus was deposed and did appeale as the wordes which M. Iewel for that purpose nipped quite of doe geue vs to vnderstaÌ„d As also in a letter of ValeÌ„tiniaÌ„ the Emperour to Theodosius it appeareth where it is writeÌ„ that the Bishop of ConstaÌ„tinople sent his libels of Appeale to Leo the Pope But be it nowe that the Pope with his lerned Councell do restore bishoppes and not alone What can M. Iewell gather therof He saieth Iewell In suche Councelles the Bishop of Rome being sometimes the chiefe prononced the party worthy either to be restored or to be deposed The Pope was allwaies chiefe in such Councelles And not only pronounced the party worthy but did by his owne Authorite restore bishops Tanquam curam omnium gerens propter propriae Sedis dignitatem As hauing charge of thâ—m all through the prerogatiue of his owne See as the Ecclesiasticall history speaketh But saieth M. Iewell that Sentence was not allwaies putt in execution Stapleton Shewe M. Iewell when the Popes sentence was not put in execution You saie for proufe hereof Iewell The Councell of Antioche deposed Pope Iulius yet was not Iulius therefore deposed Stapl. Thâ—s was not a Sentence geuen by the Pope But a sentence geuen against the Pope And those which gaue such a sentence were Arians No maruaile therefore if it preuailed not What meaneth M. Iewell thus to reason The Arrians could not depose the Pope Ergo the Pope can not depose Arrians and such other scâ—usmatikes Was he wel in his wittes when he thus reasoned Iewell The Councell of Basill deposed Pope Eugenius Yet Eugenius continued Pope still Stapleton This proueth well that the Pope is aboue a Councell And that no Sentence can be geeuen against the Pope But that the Popes Sentence is not allwaies put in execution no man that hath his fiue wittes can gather thereof This kinde of reasoning passeth not only all truthe and honesty but euen all wit and common sence Iewell The decree of bishoppes in such cases without the Emperours Authorite was then of small force Stapleton In dede for any bishops to depose a Pope by any decree it was euer of small force The Emperour by violence haue done much But by right no Emperour can either make a bishop or depose a bishop And therefore the Fathers in the Millenitaine Councel decreed vt quicunque ab imperatore c. That whosoeuer sued to themperour to haue him heare and determine publike Iudgementes that he be depriued therefore of his dignite Iewell And therefore Athanasius him selfe reporteth that the Emperour gaue his consent to the Determination of the Councel of Sardica and so commaunded him to be sent for home Stapleton God forbidde but that Emperours bothe maye and ought to geue their Consent to Councells and also to commaunde the executioÌ„ of Councels And when heretikes can not otherwise be brought to obedience as it was in that time of the Councel of Sardica it is necessary that the secular sworde do helpe the spirituall Iurisdiction Thus farre hath M. Iewell ranged and roued labouring to bringe somewhat against the Authorite of the Bishop of Rome But he hath only multiplied his Vntruthes declared his owne weakenesse and fortified more the Truthe touching the Popes Supreme Authorite For being so muche impugned and so litle empaired so of assaulted and nothinge battered it remaineth as a Rocke vnuincible against the which hell gates shall neuer preuaile Harding Concerninge the Reconciliation of the Prelates of the Churche bothe bishoppes and Patriarkes to the bishopp off Rome 114
the Councell he calleth it quorundam consensum the consent of certain and againe quoruÌ„dam episcoporum consensum the Agreement of certaine bishops and in an other epistle quorundam surreptionem the guile and fraude of certaine And as we haue before declared to this priuilege of the bishopp of Constantinople there subscribed only .212 bishops as the Actes declare whereas the whole CouÌ„cell consisted of .630 bishops So in the Ephesine Councell Inuenalis bishop of Hierusalem attempted to gett by consent of certaine bishops the Iurisdiction ouer Palestine from the patriarche of Antioche as Cyrillus the bishop of Alexandria in his letters to Pope Leo complained but it was by the See Apostolike resisted and ouerthrowen As that attempt of Iuuenalis dothe not disproue that lerned Councell of Ephesus the first no more dothe this attempt of Anatholius any thing empaire the Authorite of the Councel of Chalcedon Iewell And S. Hierom in the case of Matrimonie Inter raptorem raptam is receiued against all those .630 bishoppes and against the determination of the whole Councell I wote not verely whether this false dealing of M. Iewell procede of wilfull malice or of mere ignorance The question moued of Gratian is this An raptori rapta nubere possit patre assensum praebente Whether a mayde taken awaye by violence maye be maried to the party that vseth suche violence by the consent of the Father First he proueth by the Councell off Chalcedon and diuers other authorites that two suche parties oughte not to be coupled together in matrimonye But then he saieth Raptor rapta nomina sunt vitiorum non personarum Vitia autem cum per poenitentiam purgata fuerint nomina eorum abolentur A vser of vilence and a party so vsed are the names of the faultes not of the persons But faultes being purged by penaunce do lese their names For so the aduouterer that repenteth is no more an aduonterer Vpon this distinction he alleageth Authorites that such parties after satisfaction maye marie and amonge the rest S. Hierom. Who speaking of three kindes of lawfull mariages putteth for the seconde this Virgo in ciuitate c. Amayde in some cyte taken of a man and coupled to him by violence if the Father of the mayde will the man shall geue her a dowry as muche as the Father shall thinke good and shal geue the price of her virginite By this satisfactioÌ„ of the dowry to be made by the man that hath done the violeÌ„ce in recompence of that iniury whiche dowry otherwise the Father shoulde haue geuen with the daughter the faulte is taken awaye by S. Hieroms iudgement and so they may marye Not as Raptor rapta coâ—trary to the Councell of Chalcedon but as man and wife the other trespasse of violence vsed being by satisfaction of a dowry payed abolished And this â—s S. Hierom defended and the Councell of Chalcedon bothe Vnderstande your lawes better M. Iewell before yow alleage them Abuse not your Reader whiche desireth to lerne and looketh not to be mocked at your handes M. Iewell with the quotations in your margin out of Popes decrees making nothinge for your purpose Vse no more false marginall notes like a Cal for birdes tolling therewith your Readers consent to falsehood and Vntruthe The more you deceiue the greater is your damnation In such regarde they haue the Councelles when they liste Like as a Shrewe hauing well bett her husband cryeth out to her neighbours as if her husband had bett her so here M. Iewell hauing spett all his poyson against the holy Councell of Chalcedon hauing missereported Gelasius flatly belied Leo and ignorantly alleaged the decrees nowe he crieth oute against the Catholikes and saieth that they haue no regarde of Councels but when they list This therefore to be but a mere Slaunderous Vntruthe it appeareth by that which hath before bene saied Let vs procede Iewell But the lawe saieth It is against reason that one man shoulde in parte allowe the will of the dead so farre forthe as it maketh for him and in parte ouerthrowe it where it semeth to make against him Stapleton M. Iewell did very well to put his glose to the lawe For hereby it is euident that the lawe maketh nothing for hym That parte of the Councell of Chalcedon touching the vnlawfull prerogatiue of the bishop of Constantinople before the bishops of Alexandria and Antioche which Leo and Gelasius after him disproued made nothinge for the bishop off Romes Primacy or against his Primacy but only it made against the Nicene Councell which the bishops of Rome most godly and rightfully defended For notwithstandinge that Priuilege of the bishop of Constantinople graunted by the Emperours Commissioners through the consent of certaine bishops yet the same Commissioners pronouncing that Sentence saied expressely these wordes Ex his quae gesta sunt vel ab vnoquoque deposita perpendimus omneÌ„ quidem Primatum honorem praecipuum secundum Canones antiquae Romae deo amantissimo Archiepiscopo confirmari By these Actes and depositions of eche one we vnderstande that all the Primacy and chiefe honour is reserued according to the Canons to the welbeloued of God the Archebishop of Olde Rome After which wordes foloweth the priuilege of Constantinople ouer Asia Pontus and Thracia In all these wordes therefore Master Iewell hath declared his good will that he beareth to the generall Councells of Christendom But gods name be blessed though he hathe spett his poyson the Truthe remaineth sounde Remembre the saying of the wise man M. Iewell Quid stulti proprium Non posse velle nocere Remembre that of late yeres in the very time of your schisme the foure first generall Councelles of the whiche this Councell off Chalcedon is one were allowed by open Parliament Verely in the very first beginning of the Christen faithe among vs englishmeÌ„ our Countre being in a maner all and throughout conuerted to the faithe our godly auncetours thought it necessary by a full Synod and Councell of our owne countre to establishe the Authorite of the v. generall Councelles off Christes Churche holden before their dayes of the which this Councell of Chalcedon is the fourthe And Seuerus a schismaticall bishop of Antioche had his tounge cut oute by the commaundement of the Catholike Emperour Iustinus for the blasphemies that he vttered against this holy Councell of Chalcedon Such examples you folowe and suche you forsake in defending your moste impudent Chalenge Let vs heare you procede Iewell But M. Harding will saye Of what credit so euer this Councell ought to be it gaue Leo the name of vniuersall bishop No. No. M. Iewell D. Harding will put no such doubtes of the credit of the Councell of Chalcedon He neither hathe saied neither will saie any such thinge And yet you haue printed those wordes in a distinct letter as if not only D. Harding woulde so saye but also had already so saied
affected VVho so euer trauaileth in the reading of the Auncient Fathers findeth that name he meaneth Head of the Churche allmost euery where attributed to Peter the first bisshop of Rome and consequently to the successour of Peter that name I saye either in termes aequiualent or expressely Iewell The 121. Vntruthe For Peter only is so called yet was not Peter then Bishop of Rome Stapleton What Will. M. Iewell defende nowe that Peter was not bisshop of Rome and renewe the olde doting opinion of his Father Luther holding that Peter was neuer at Rome M. Iewell saieth Peter was not then bishop of Rome What meaneth he trowe we by this Doth he meane Then that is when those fathers wrote and called him so he was not Bishopp of Rome Who is so very a dolte as to saie that If he meane by Then the time that he liued here in earthe by howe many Authorites might he be confounded S. Hierom saieth plainelye Petrus Romae vigintiquinque annis Cathedram sacerdotalem tenuit Peter occupied the priestly Chaire at Rome xxv yeres Ireneus Optatus and Augustin reakoning vp the Bishops of Rome vntell their time do reaken Peter for the first bishopp of Rome Egesippus Eusebius and Epiphanius do testifie that S. Peter suffred at Rome And will M. Iewell forsake and gainesaie all these lerned Fathers of Christes Churche the lowest of them wel nere twelue hundred yeres olde Iosephus a right approued historiographer saieth Illud veritatis certè signum esse si de eisdem rebus eadem omnes conscribāt That is an vndoubted token of truthe when all euen of one matter do pronounce after one sorte Let therefore M. Iewell bringe any one writer before the age of that fonde frier Martin Luther that euer wrote the contrary It is maruail that M. Iewell auouching this matter so stoutely and building his Vntruthe thereuppon would yet in all his text bringe no proofe no reason no argument at al to confirme it I wisse he could haue tolde vs muche out of the story of his brethern of Meydeburge had he thought their lies worthe the telling Therefore he thought better to auouche it by his owne Soueraine Authorite stoutely then to proue his most Impudent Vntruth fondely Nowe bicause M. Iewell auoucheth that only Peter was called Head of the Churche and yet his assertion nothinge weakened there by let vs shortly See a reason or two that may be Framed thereof S. Peter by M. Iewelles confession was called Head of the Churche of the Fathers S. Peter was Bishopp off Rome within the first .600 yeres Ergo the Bisshopp off Rome was Called Head of the Churche within the first .600 yeres Nowe bicause M. Iewell saieth that only S. Peter was so called let vs proue the like of Damasus an other bishop of Rome .400 yeres after Christe by the argument that D. Harding made and the which M. Iewell in his Replie reproueth bicause it was not solennelye made in mode and figure as thoughe for lacke of that it coulde not be made otherwise The wordes first of S. Ambrose are these Where as the whole worlde is Gods yet the Churche is called his House the Ruler whereof at these daies is Damasus Of these wordes I frame this argument in good mode and figure Whosoeuer ruleth the howse of God which S. Paule speaketh of to Timothe ruleth the Vniuersall Churche But Damasus the Pope by the verdit of S. Ambrose ruled the howse of God mencioned in S. Paule Ergo Damasus the Pope by the Verdit of S. Ambrose ruled the Vniuersall Churche The Minor or second proposition is euident by the wordes of S. Ambrose alleaged The Maior or first proposition is euident by S. Paules very wordes whiche are these These thinges I write vnto thee o Timothee hoping to come shortlye vnto thee But if I slacke to come I haue thus writen to thentent thow mayest knowe howe to behaue thy selfe in the house of God whiche is the Churche of the liuing God the Piller and grounde of truthe Loe this howse of God which S. Paule here speaketh of is that Church which is the Piller and Grounde of truthe Suche is no particular Churche but only the Vniuersall Churche For Particular Churches may and haue erred many but the Vniuersall Churche can not possibly erre and hathe neuer erred She is the Piller She is the Grounde of Truthe Against her Hell gates shall not preuaile Thus the former Propositions being bothe euident and true the one out of S. Paule the other out of Holye and Lerned Saincte Ambrose commenting vpon S. Paule the Conclusion must nedes folowe which is that Damasus the Pope Ruled the Vniuersall Churche not only his owne dyocese or patriarkeshipp of Rome Nowe if the Ruler be not the Heade I would M. Iewel should instructe vs what the Head of a companye or common welthe signifieth other then the Ruler of that company or common welthe Thus M. Iewell hath in termes equiualent the Head of the Vniuersall Churche And a bisshopp of Rome so called farre within his first 600. yeres If therefore M. Iewell made his Challenge at Paules Crosse for the honour of God for boulting out of the Truthe and for the matter it selfe whiche is in controuersy he must according to his promise yelde and Subscribe to this Olde holy Father S. Ambrose If he did but dally and to ye about certaine termes and phrases then the worlde may knowe and See what trifling Sermons prelats and Preachers of this newe clergy not only doe make and pronounce before their honourable and worshipfull audience but also do print and set forthe to be Readen and preserued of their posterite Leo in the letters of the whole Generall Councel of Chalcedor was called their Head as hath before bene alleaged But a generall Councell representeth the Vniuersall Churche and is the Chiefe Bodye of the same Ergo by a good Consequent Leo was Called off no lesse then of a whole Councell the Head of the Vniuersall Churche Ergo not only S. Peter but Damasus and Leo two other Popes haue bene so Called Ergo M. Iewell must Subscribe Harding Theodoretus in an Epistle to Leo calleth the same in consideration of the bishop of that See his primacie Orbi terrarum praesidentem praesident or bearing rule ouer the whole worlde Iewell The 122. Vntruthe Standing in vntrue translation I turne to your rext and finde you to proue this Vntruthe in these wordes Iewell Yet Replie will be made that Theodoretus calleth the Churche of Rome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 VVhich wordes M. Harding 547 vntruly translateth President or bearing rule ouer the worlde For he knoweth that the greke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth Sitting in the first place and forceth not of necessite any rule or gouernement ouer others Stapleton You proue your selfe but a vaine trifler and a mere grammarian M. Iewell when you Replie after this sorte We
the Arrian kinge of the Vandales called the Churche of Rome meaning thereby the Bishop of Rome Caput omnium Ecclâ—siarum The Head of all Churches He saieth not The Head Churthe of all others But The Head off al other Churches Betwene these two sayinges is greate difference As for example The Churche of Caunterbury is the Head Churche of all others respect had to England For no Churche in Englande hathe so Ample and Large a Iurisdiction as that hathe Yet is not the Churche of Caunterbury the Head of all Churches in Englande For beside diuers Peculiars exempted from the Iurisdiction of Caunterbury euen within the Prouince of that Archebishoprike the Archebishop of Yorke and all of his Prouince are not subiect to any Iurisdiction of the Churche of Caunterbury Thus Master Iewell for a Iuste Replie to Sufficient Authorites weakoneth the Authors Credit Altereth his wordes Missereporteth the time of his Writinges and so by Multyplying Vntruthes thinketh to ouerthrowe the Truthe to abuse his Reader desirous to lerne and to deceiue Gods People gladde to be instructed God graunte you M. Iewell the loue of Truthe and grace to reforme these your Vnâ—â—uthes The Conclusion HITHERTO I haue good Christen Reader For the loue of the Truth and for the Zele of Gods honour and of his Church Iustified the Vntruthes whiche M. Iewell in the former halfe of his Replie the foure first Articles hath Charged D. Harding with all to the number of one hundred and xxv whiche is the halfe of the whole number through out the Replie two excepted and haue Returned them euery one One onelye excepted vpon Master Iewell for Vntruthes on his parte and that Slaunderous Nowe howe thouroughly I haue answered M. Iewel in this fourth Article it shal appeare by the Conclusion whiche him selfe maketh at â—he ende thereof Thus he Concludeth Iewel Nowe brefely to laie abrode the whole Contentes of this Article First M. Hardinge hath wittingly alleaged suche testimonies vnder the Names of Anacletus Athanasius and other holy Fathers as he .555 him selfe knoweth vndoubtedly to be forged and with manifest Absurdities and Contradictions do betraye them selues and haue no maner colour or sâ—ewe of truthe Stapleton To the absurdities and Contradictions withe whiche M. Iewell chargeth the epistle of Athanasius vnto Marcus we haue Answered and proued them none The Authorite off Anacletus is defended by D. Hardinge in the Confutation of M. Iewelles first Article M. Iewelles other Fathers haue no names Iewell He hath made his claime by certaine Canons of the Councell of Nice and of the .556 Councell of Chalcedon And yet he knoweth that neither there are nor neuer were any suche CanoÌ„s to be founde The Canons of the Nicene Councell alleaged by D. Hardinge were alleaged by Iulius and Zosimus aboue a thousand yeres agoe and their Authorite is defended against all M. Iewelles proufes and reasons wherein he laboureth to proue the Pope a Forger His whole Replie in that behalfe is awnswered As for Canons of the Chalcedon Councell D. Harding alleaged none M. Iewell flatly belyeth him Iewell He hath dismembred .557 and mangled S. Gregories wordes part contrary to his owne knowleadge he hathe cutte them of .558 in the middest the better to beguile his Reader It hath bene at large declared that D. Harding hath in no part mangled S. Gregory but alleaged his full Sentence that which folowed and was omitted not appertayning any thing to his purpose that then he had in hande And the Sentence which is presumed by M. Iewell to haue bene guilefully cut of by D. Harding folowed immediatly his Allegation was not in the middest thereof as M. Iewel bothe there and here most Impudently and Vntruly auoucheth Iewel He hath violently and perforce drawen and rackte the Olde godly Fathers Ireneus Cyprian Ambrose Cyrillus Augustine Theodoretuâ— Hierons and others contrary to their owne sense and meaning Stapleton Of all these Fathers M. Iewell hath noted Vntruthes only vpon certaine places of Cyprian of Augustine and of Theodoret D. Hardinges Dealing in all those places hath bene proued vpright If the other Fathers haue bene so Rackte and violently drawen as M. Iewell here pleadeth why made he not before his Accusation why noted he not there Vntruthes Thinke we that Master Iewell hauing noted so many vntruthes and all well nere vntruly hathe yet left other in store whiche of Courtesy he omitted Then what lucke had M. Iewell hauing choyse and of so many to proue so fewe and to spede so il Shall we not rather thinke to commende M. Iewelles discretion that he hath in dede chosen the best and most likely and that if he had noted more he would haue spedde the worse These multiplying therefore of Fathers decked auoughed but vnproued I leaue it as it is for a Slaunderous burthen of Vntruthes Iewell Touching Appeales to Rome the gouuernement of the East parte of the world ExcoÌ„munications Approbations of Orders allowance of Councelles RestitutioÌ„s and Reconciliations he hath openly 560 missereported the whole Vniuersal Order and Practise of the Church Stapleton That Appeales were made to Rome from the chiefest Patriarches in Christendom that the Bishops of the East were subiect to the Bishop of Rome that the Pope Approued the Ordering of bishops Confirmed Councelles and had the Patriarkes and Bishops of the East Reconciled to him it hath at large bene proued and M. Iewelles whole Replie in these matters hath bene at longe and stitche by stitche confuted As for Excommunications and Restitutions if M. Iewell had noted there any matter of Vntruthe those questions also had in like maner bene debated But the Discourse of D. Harding in that behalfe was so true that M. Iewell therein coulde finde no matter of Vntruthe to note though here for a bragge he saie that he openly missereported the practise of the Churche It is maruaill that M. Iewel keping so good an Audyt of D. Hardinges vntruthes in suche Open missereporting coulde not score vp one Iewell All this notwitstanding he hath as yet founde neither of these two glorious Titles that he hath so narrowlye sought for notwithstanding greate paynes taken and greate promises and VauÌ„tes made touching the same D. Harding hath founde them bothe the one in the Chalcedon Councell bothe foure times in foure seuerall supplications expressed and also conffessed by S. Gregorye the other in Victor a writer of thinges passed within the 5â—0 yeres in Iustinian in Prosper in Athanasius and in the ChalcedoÌ„ Councell also But M. Iewell must denie all this bicause he will in no wise Subscribe For thus nowe he Concludeth and endeth this Article Iewell Therefore to Conclude I must Subscribe and rescribe euen as before That albeit M Harding haue trauaiied painefully herein bothe by him selfe and also with coÌ„ference of his frendes yet 562 caÌ„not he hitherto finde neither in the Scriptures nor in the olde Councelles nor in any one of all the auncient Catholike Fathers that