Take ye Eate ye bynde them What moued you here to cite your Clement Ambrose Cyprian with others I knowe not except it were some meriment to ioyne with your similitude of singing for in good earnest you minde not by those places without matter in them to proue that the wordes of Christ Doe this in remembrance of me were onely saide to the Ministers touching Consecration and not to the people also for their participation In the twelfth Article the Iesuites are reported to say Traditions are of equall authoritie with the worde of God wee must beleeue them though they bee manifestly against the Scripture Here the reporte and the texte vouched to disproue their doctrine are both censured The first for adding we must beleeue them though they be manifestly against the Scripture for reporting the rest so generally and confusedly Touching y â— latter point if my report of your doctrine be in these wordes Traditions are of equall authoritie with the worde of God meaning it of some only for who would thinke it of all you hauing so many and so feeble why doe you charge mee as generally and confusedly saying al traditions are equal with y â— scriptures Was it I pray you to deserue your owne note of a sounde lye for a parting blowe which false mis 〈…〉 you haue doubled to make it the sounder For aunswere to the former poyut I doe not onely auow that I haue faythfully reported my authors wordes which is alwayes my iust defence against your vniust flaunder laying them vpon me but I say further that their practise compared with their wordes will â—ustifie the report as truely layde downe against them For proofe whereof not to goe further the Censurer rehearseth amongest these traditions which the Popish Church charge our faith withall the number of the bookes of Scripture the Lent fast Of al other traditions these two are taken out to stande for their owne credit and for the credit of the rest let vs therefore see what treasons there are against God in these your traditions First the Apocrypha bookes are not in the auncient Canon or language of Canaan the fathers haue disauowed them they are euidently repugnant to the doctrine of the holy scriptures and dis 〈…〉 eeing among them selues Yet your Trent conspirarie doeth adde them to the number of the Canonical bookes and bolde all men accursed that holde them not for canonicall scriptures Therefore this your tradition is manifestly against the word of God Further also what is more manifest against the woorde of God then the doctrine of deuils The Lent fast as you commaunde to keepe it for conscience sake forbidding meates created of God to bee taken with thankesgiuing is plainly called a doctrine of deuils Furthermore your opinion is playnely deliuered to be with this distinction Ecclesiasticall traditions are of no greater authoritie then the writings and other decrees of the Church and Apostles traditions are of no lesse authoritie then if they had bene written by them or then are the other thinges which they wrote This is confusedly taught and needeth yet more plainenesse for not all orders deliuered by the Apostles are to bee kept perpetually and vnchangeably of like authoritie with the doctrine of the Gospell which they preached The Apostolique doctrine is perpetuall subiect to no varietie of persons of times or places but some traditioÌ„s that is some orders are altered as that in the acts where they commaunde to absteine from strangled and from blood for it appeareth that the Apostles commanded not this for a perpetuall order alwayes inuiolably to be obserued but onely for a time to auoids offences which cause ceasing the order or tradition was no longer in force Againe some orders might be set downe by them for comlinesse which yet were not to be beleeued as necessary partes of saluation nor yet to remayne for euer in that forme or kynde and therefore can not be matched with the Apostolique doctrine of fayth which is euer al one and which whosoeuer beleeueth not cannot bee saued Nowe touching your pretensed Apostolicall traditions I vtterly denie that there are any such beside those which are euidently shewed or by iust consequence fitly gathered out of the written worde For what so euer is necessary to saluation is in this sort to be proued by the holy Scriptures Therefore your Censureshippe dyd well to adde If they be certaynly descended from Christ and his Apostles But how can this I pray you be certaynely knowen but by the holy writings can any other custome or testimonie assure your consciences what came vndoubtedly from Christ or what from his Apostles Is there any one of your traditions that you can vouch to descend from so sufficient authors otherwise then by report of insufficient witnesses What is it then for you to boast of inuincible arguments to proue diuers doctrines not written but left by woorde of mouth onely whereas you bryng nothing but counterfeyt Couneils erring Fathers fabulous stories and Apocrypha scriptures This is right the bragging Apostle and a shewe of the vaine chalenger Yf a man coulde be feared with the guilte of your armour or with your plume of feathers you woulde bee a worthie champion wounding more with a vayne feare then with the force of your shrinking arme In this encounter of al your profes you haue sorted out two the first is out of that excellent chapter to the Thessalonians conteining a prophecie and reuelation of Antichrist For an answere to which place it is first to be vnderstoode that the worde Tradition in the Apostles speach commeth as it doth in Latin of a verbe to deliuer so that whatsoeuer y â— Apostle deliuered to the Churches those were the traditions hee lefte with them Therefore I denie that Paule doth in any place by tradition signifie any vnwritten veritie but that as in other places he vnderstandeth the doctrine of the Gospel which in the sundrye partes thereof he deliuered This appeareth apparauntly by the place so cited for your purpose without regarde of any more then the worde Tradition For in the verses nexte before the Apostle maketh mention of the Thessalonians faith to the trueth saying God hath called you thereunto by our Gospell to obteyne the glory of our Lorde Iesus Christ and therupon inferreth this conclusion now therefore brethren stand fast holde the tradition which you haue learned eyther by worde or by our epistle Whereby it plainly appeareth that the traditions or thinges deliuered by him partly by word and partly by writing were the diuers partes of the Gospell which hee had taught them Wherefore the written woorde affordeth you no proofe for vnwritten verities The seconde is of doctrines which you say wee holde not by record of writing but by word of mouth from Christ and his Apostles as for example baptisme of infants celebratioÌ„ of Sunday y â— number of y â— bookes of scripture the fast of
written also nowe wee can not take the Apostles wordes as vttered of all because much scripture is now wanting as he doth imagine Should these be your plaine arguments if you could obteine disputation Should this be the shorter waye I know not your name but know I pray you and teach your fellowes to knowe that the scripture hath bene in all ages sufficient for the time wherein it was written of all that which hath by seuerall encreases bene written nothing was at any time superfluous and whatsoeuer hath bene written and not come to our handes nothing for all that is now missing that is necessary vnto saluation He that hath not giuen vs the bookes of Nathan Gad Achia the Shilonite and Iehdo if they wrote any other then partes of the two bookes of Samuel after his death of the first booke of the Kings also he that hath not giuen vs the rest of Salomons Prouerbes to passe by your ouersight concerning the epistle to the Laodiceans already noted therefore gaue them not because he knewe them not necessarie or expedient for the posteritie Iohn proueth this in the conclusion of his Gospell and Christ teacheth that they which had Moses and the Prophets euen then had sufficient without miracles and traditions And you haue no sound opinion of the wisdome and mercie of God if you thinke his maiestie to leaue any age since he chose a peculiar people voide of scripture profitable and sufficient to the saluation of his Church Thus the reader may see that I neither wrest the former place agaynst my selfe neither can you doe it that would so faine In the fifth article the Iesuites are reported to say The want of holy scriptures must be supplied by peecing it out by traditions For the report of this doctrine the Censurer bestoweth more of his vndeserued tauntes If the Censure of Colen hath no such wordes Gotuisus failed in citing their booke but failed not in charging them with their owne doctrine which all Iesuites and Papistes so vpholde as Peters chaire both to mainteine their false doctrines and to vnderset their Antichristiā tyraunie But although you would for the time dissemble the matter traditiōs are not of so smal force as to peece out the want of scripture For except the Presidēt of y e Trent council haue a forge to coyne lies traditions are a liuing Gospel and hee vttereth it as a question that can not be denied This is most true saith Hosius that if traditions be reiected the very Gospell also seemeth to be reiected for what els are traditions then a certaine liuing Gospell In deede traditions make a quicke court at the Vaticane Thus by your doctors opinion it is most true y ◠traditions are made not a supplie to any wants in y ◠Gospel but an other liuing Gospel after a sort to giue life to that which in y ◠true Gospell seemeth to be dead And may not a man w tout a lie call this doctrine vlasphemous My vttering of y e Cōmandemēt in the singular number is without additiō or alteration of sense For Moses in the same Chapter speaking of the same lawe and to the same men doth change the plurall number into the singular The selfe same Lawe also is recited in the singular number in the twelfth chapter of Deuteronomie by Salomon in the thirtieth chapter of his Prouerbes and euermore that which is said to al is also said to euery one and truly taken as vttered to euery one Surely I cannot guesse what you unagined at this change of the Lawgiuers wordes without change of the sense being done by the example of the same Lawgiuer in another place and without any breach of his Lawe and wherupon your vttermost malice could inferre none absurditie in sense none iniurie to the scripture nor aduantage to my cause but a stinging guesse insinuating some cause mouing mee to this change which whether you cōcealed as forbearing me or ashamed on your own behalfe to bewraye the indifferent reader iudgeth Againe what made you adde so haynous a slaunder as if all thinges were lawfull for me and to charge me as blaming the Apostles and Euangelistes for adding the Gospel Take heede you allowe not your selfe such scope in these suggestions manifestly agaynst the trueth and your owne conscience for you knowe what that sentence implieth Blessed is he that condemneth not himselfe in that thing which hee alloweth The Lorde that addeth grace to grace and light to light he also hath added to the lawe the fulnesse and satisfaction thereof in Christ Iesus which is published in his most holy and most perfect Gospell To expounde Moses wordes forbidding to adde or take away from the Lawe as spoken of the things he deliuered by word of mouth and not of the lawe written 〈◊〉 is a doubtfull speaking and may beare a harder conclusion then I will charge you with His cōmandement respected the law eyther pronounced or written by him 〈◊〉 afterwarde to bee preached and written by the holy Prophets and Apostles in the spirite of God I dare appeale to your conscience though it be deliuered from your pen you do not thinke in your heart that I woulde haue no scriptures beleeued besides that which Moses set downe Wherfore your proofe needed not in this matter To conclude it is a great iniquirie to adde traditions or your unwritten ve 〈…〉 to the written worde of God whereunto no man may adde because nothing is wanting from which no man can take because nothing is superfluous but to him that addeth shal the curses written in the booke be added for euer In the sixth place the Iesuites wordes are thus reported The holy Scripture is a nose of waxe At the true report of this blasphemous doctrine you fall into a storme perswading that I haue therein sinned agaynst God and abused the Iesuices with other most bitter woordes as if I tooke the way to ouermatch both learning and trueth But howe wrongfully all these woordes are cast out against me your owne wordes beare witnesse for presently after the sentence of condemnation you repeale it and acquite me of the fault graunting that as a nose of waxe may bee formed what way and to what forme one list so naughtie men may wrest the Scriptures Notwithstanding because you presse the wordes against me let them be examined First to proue that the Iesuites haue them more plainely then you will acknowledge I appeale from your Censure to Andradius playne confession Hee as you knowe defended the Iesuites in these poyntes agaynst Kemnitius which you defende against mee and hath lent you no small furniture for this seruice This Andradius as hauing more learning and in his kinde more true dealing then you in handling this article doth not at all cry out as you doe but acknowledgeth and defendeth the matter without such needelesse scoffes And for the words he confesseth saying The fathers
the â—â—uching of the places for â—ontrarie dâ—â—trine is â—ensured for vnlearned huddling vp and confounding hope and faith as one thing which note of the Censure I may truely say came from no deepe knowledge A litle iudgement might haue serued your Censureship to discerne that the two places were not alledged to proue or disproue any thing of faith the ful certeinâ—ie wherof is proued against you by the certeinâ—iâ— of hope but to ouerthrowe that which the Iesuites say in the latter parte of the sentence against which these places serue plainely and expressely For what may more cleareâ—y proue against the Iesuites doctrine that hope neuer faileth then the Apostles wordes calling 〈◊〉 The ancre of the soule Where by he nâ—â—eth our fâ—eedoâ—e from danger in all stormes of â—entations â—idding out the time of this life wi 〈…〉 any 〈◊〉 oâ— feare and without any 〈…〉 touching 〈◊〉 〈…〉 heauen To shewe the force of this assurance the Apostle vseth very significatiue words calling it a sure and stable ancre and yet to make it so full that no feare or doubt may remayne he addeth that it entreth into the inwarde of the Vaile whereunto Christ is entred meaning thereby the heauens Which importeth as much as if hee shoulde say we that haue cast this Ancre aboue in heauen are so much more safe then they whose Ancre is cast downe into the Sea as the holde wee haue taken in heauen by the Ancre of hope is surer Yea the very Rockes shal sooner faile theÌ„ our hold settling vpon the strength truth of gods promise which are al Yea AmeÌ„ in Christ Iesus This our shoote Ancre of hope hath taken holde of the mercy seate of God and of the throne of grace which except some storme be able to remoue wee are in most ioyfull and stedfast safetie The like is promised by y e other place out of y e fifth to the Romanes for if hope maketh not ashamed and shame commeth when a man faileth of that be hoped for then hope can not faile The Apostle maketh this more strong by that which foiloweth as a reason The loue of God is abouÌ„danly shead out into our hearts by the holy Ghost which is giueÌ„ vnto vs. By which reason it appeareth except the holy Ghost hath giuen vs a wrong testimonie of the loue of God the hope which we haue conceiued thereby cannot deceiue vs. Thus you see these places so truely and fitly alledged that al your falsely named learning will not be able truely to answere the allegation of them which notwithstanding it pleaseth you to call vnlearned But let vs see what you call learning forsooth the doctrine of Iesuites touching the doubtfulnes and feare which is in hope that is true learned and cleare This is as the prophet complaineth to call good badde and sweete sower whereunto you know what belongeth For aunswere to these two places of hope the Iesuiteâ— doctrine is declared at large the effect of all standing in two pointes the first concerning faith the other of hope Of faith they teach that no man may beleeue that he in particular shalbe saued without a particular reuelatioÌ„ from God A faithlesse doctrine of faith and therefore not to bee lightly passed ouer You seeme to proue it by reasons one drawen from y t obiect of faith which is the word written or tradition whereof neither as you say doeth testifie mens saluation in particular the seconde taken from the vncertaintie of the things beleeued which as the Censurer supposeth doe depende vpon such conditions as possibly may not be perfourmed Both these great points for want of scripture he setteth foorth by examples as minding rather to perswade then to proue The first is of the answerer the seconde of the possibilitie to be damned as did fall out in Iudas and may fall out a more fearefull case then I woulde put of him had bee not put it of him selfe in the Censurer him selfe Nowe let vs consider what great learning the Iesuices haue in this their opinioÌ„ of faith as the Censureâ— doth report them To iudge that without particular reuelation by name no man can be sure of his saluation is expressely against that the woorde of God â—eacheth in this great question Therefore howe leraneâ— soeuer the Iesuites make them selues yet in deede as the Apostle speaketh of the wise Gentiles they become starke fooles not knowing true wisedome out of the worde but bastard wisedome by their foolish distinctions The Censurers worde of Tradition must bee reserued for a fitter place Touching the promise of the Gospell it is general whosoeuer beleeueth shall be saued the Censurer confesseth it This generall promise hath place and is certainely verefied in euery particular y t beleeueth Euery sensible maÌ„ without further learning may easely iudge in this doctrine whatsoeuer is true in y e general must needes be true in euery particular Nowe if it be vndoubtedly true that euery beleeuer shalbe saued it must needes bee also that Simeon and Lazarus beleeuing in Christ shalbe saued Therefore what needeth any speciall reuelation in the worde for that which is sufficiently comprehended vnder the generall what neede is there by name to saye from maÌ„ to man by name Lazarus shalbe saued Citus shalbe saued and 〈…〉 we shall be saued and so infinitely Or shall we say that God in respect of persons doth particularly assure some of their certaine saluation leauing all the rest to be tossed and caried vp and downe with feare and hope as a ship in the sea caried hither and thither with contrary winds Moreouer the very place cited by the Censurer as a particular reuelation was not particular but generall to all the disciples that beleeued by vertue of a more generall couenant made to all that beleeue whatsoeuer For to examine that place neerer all the disciples and all the Apostles had not their names written in the booke of life for Iudas was excepted And here by the waye the Censurers ouersight must bee noted that draweth the place of Luke as speciall and particular to the Apostles being spoken of the seuentie disciples He wanted special knowledge herein when hee so boldly made it an argument of the Apostles speciall reuelation Of the most certayne and sure foundations of our particular fayth and hope the Apostle writeth in the eight to the Romanes saying that nothing was able to take from him the loue which God beareth to him in Christ Iesus which hee setteth out by naming such things as are most like and mightie to strike a feare and doubt into his heart as oppression anguish persecution famine nakednesse and finally death it selfe nay he addeth agayne that neyther lyfe nor death nor Angels nor things present nor thinges to come nor height nor depth that is what so euer is in heauen aboue or in the earth beneath or in the parâ—â— vnder the earth finally that no creature is able to
Lent If this be not hudling and confounding of things together of vnlike sort I knowe not what may be called confusion For what order is it to repeate vpoÌ„ the Censurers occasion y â— which was noted in the fourth article to match the baptisme of children with the fast of Lent The one being by plaine argument gathered out of the worde as namely out of the wordes of the conenant I will bee thy God and the God of thy seede and thy children after thee for euer This couenaunt dyd appertayne to both a like to Abraham and his seede whereunto the seale and practise was adioyned in circumcising infantes of eyght dayes as well as Abraham of great age and that by expresse commaundement of God Thus the doctrine is so prooued out of the written worde as that no doubt remayneth Nowe circumcision was the sacrament or seale of that righteousnesse which is by fayth as Saint Paul teacheth wherein it is equall our baptisme But this is your great learning when you are not able for your ignorance to prooue a doctrine out of the written worde to say we haue it by tradition and by worde of mouth from the Apostles Now your Lent fast as you vse it hath not onely no grounde out of the worde but is agaynst the worde as I prooued before If this bee your methode and discretion I maruell not if good order be huddling and confounding in your accompt For the number of the bookes and for the Lordes day I myght likewise make proofe out of the worde so that if you can bring vs nothing by worde of mouth from the Apostles but your Lent fast your letters of credence will not serue you to be deleeued The seconde Censure is that the place alleadged by me to confuce the aucthoritie of traditions should be impertinent This the Censurer woulde shewe by three differences betweene it and this purpose First of the diuers cause of those traditions which our Sauiour Christ inueyeth against whereof they had beene authors to them selues and of these which he affirmeth to descende from Christ and his Apostles But as in deede the difference woulde be great if this were true so being false and vntrue as it is it can make no difference at all Theirs were in deede such as they affirme and though you deny it so are yours also For which of all your traditions came eyther froÌ„ Christ or from his Apostles wheÌ„ you proue them froÌ„ either of them your difference shall be allowed Secondly you say Christ reprehendeth not al obseruation of meÌ„s traditioÌ„s but the naughtie obseruing of theÌ„ which was as you affirme in that y â— Pharises esteemed them more then Gods word brake it for the keeping of them which you condemne This also if it were true were a sufficient difference but it is vntrue that our Sauiour Christ reproued onely the esteeming of them more then Gods commaundementes It can not bee denied but he reprooued this in them in the same chapter before but in the woordes alleadged You worshippe mee in vaine teaching doctrines that are but traditions of men which are no wordes of comparison our Sauiour simplie rebuketh them for esteeming the keeping of mens traditions to be any seruice of GOD to which â—ude the sentence had bene first vttered by the Prophet The thirde note is double first that these traditions were idle foolish of which sort are yours and whatsoeuer the idle brayne of man deuiseth to serue â—od withall the second that some of them were impious direct contrary to the word of God such as were certayne corrupt expositions of the lawe where you are as like to them as the sonne may be to the father For neuer were there more false gloses vpon the word of God violently thrust and by litle and litle secretly conueyed into the Church peruerting the true meaning of the Scriptures and corrupting the simple worshippe of GOD then haue beene brought in by your Rabbines that haue obtayned the highest seates and the most honourable names more then euer did any among the Iewes You speake of the Talmud as dyd bastarde Denis of the orders in heauen but this florish of your skill in those bookes because it hurteth not the cause let it serue you and your frendes for as much credit as it may Lastly the Iesuites are reported to teach that we must worship y e image of Christ with like honour that wee doe the holy bookes of the Gospell In this article the doctrine is graunted without any word of contradiction your Censure onely toucheth the second to the Corinthes the sixt chapter as not alledged to the purpose In deede if you list not to vnderstand to what end it is vouched you may well complaine against the alledging thereof as from the matter You take it as brought to proue that we may worship the image of Christ with greater honour then the bookes of the Gospell but you mistake the matter and wilfully as it shoulde seeme to haue some what against the cause for how could you think that he which detesteth al idols would alledge a place to prooue that the image of Christ is worthy honour more then Gospels Or howe may not any maâ— note you of open contradiction against the word of God that being deuoutly madde vpon idols would for their loue prophane the temple of God and therefore dare to say there is more agreemeÌ„t betweene them which yet the Apostle maketh most contrarie then there is betweene the place of Saint Paul the matter which the same place doth fitly disprooue But if you liâ—â— to vnderstand the place serueth to prooue that no image at all is to be worshipped for which the wordes are so pertinent and is strong as all the wisedome of your Censureship and of the rest will neuer bee able to answere them Therefore you lost your labour in framing arguments to prooue why the material booke of Gospels should be no lesse worshipped then the image of Christ for neither of bath are to bee worshipped nor any other creatures whatsoeuer according to that which was before alledged to this purpose Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serue You can not escape for saying you giue no diuine honour vnto them for this bowing downe before them which is one of the least deuotions you vse is chalenged as diuine honour and expressely forbidden in any respect of religion or deuotion to images or any other creature as hath beene often declared But here saying the honour done to the image of Christ and to the letter of the Bible is not done to them selues you dissemble your owne idolatrous doctrine which alloweth the same honour to the image that is due to the paterne and namely the same most honourable and diuine worship of Latria to the Crucifix which is due to the Lord Iesus Christ himself Your bookes that teach this are many and not vnknowen So
auoyding of sinne are counsailed to marrie all that haue the gift for them it is more profitable many wayes to abstayne This Luther teacheth out of Christ and Paules doctrine not to ouerthrowe virginitie but to condemne your vngodly vowe of chastitie without due examination whether you haue the continent gift 8. The eyght report is lyke the former making it as necessarie for euery man to haue a wife as it is to eat drinke or sleepe It is as necessarie for him that hath not the gift to marry for auoiding of sinne as it is to eate and drinke for auoyding of famine that is not so dangerous as sinne When you drewe so deepe as these matters you were desirous rather to bryng nothing in deede then nothing in shewe 9. Your last report is that M. Luther should make all Christias as holy as iust as 〈◊〉 mother of God as y â— Apostles were These wordes are true in respect of Christ in whome all the faythfull haue holinesse and honour equally notwithstanding there may bee inequallitie in their giftes and in the measure of their glorie I will not stande vpon the comparisons of these distinctions seruing litle to edification He that is but a doore keeper in the house of God the new Ierusalem hath infinite glorie Yet because you make the virgin Marie and Apostles to beare more rule with Christ in heauen then they dyd while they lyued vpon earth Martin Luther teacheth vs there is no such respect of persons with God but in Christ Iesus whether in heauen or on earth there is neyther Iewe nor Grecian bond nor free neither male nor female but we are all one in him They haue all the same glorious inheritance as they had al like precious faith For the diuersity of measures I haue not bene a coÌ„panion of your bastarde Denis in his iourney to heauen to describe the degrees and dignities there or to determine that which Christ referred to the determination of his Father who shall sit at his right hande in his kingdome who at his left Thus I haue answered these places of M. Luther faithfully without any of your bitternesse in scoffing and vassting at a vantage of nothing as if you had thereby gayned the whole cause By my answere it may appeare these nyne places contayne no straunge newe doctrine as you haue reported without that regarde of trueth or modestie which is pretended But what is that you dare not write to bryng the mans diuine and cleare doctrine into contempt with as many as will be caried away with your smooth stile and bold accusations For as not contented with these vntrueths you woulde make y â— reader beleeue y â— you leaue other infinite beastly doctrines of his inuented by much coÌ„ference with the deuil as you auouch the matter out of Lindan But touching the broken and insufficient credit of this Lindan other your authors I haue noted somewhat before and such as your witnesses are such are their testimonies also the witnesses not lawfull and the testimonies not true For Lindan that hath here filled one page of your Censure as a false witnesse writeth that the deuill hath bene seene talke bodily with Martin Luther by men of very great credit The men are not named nor the matter probable therefore we may beholde a conspiracie to leaue the matter and disgrace the man one beginneth a slaunder and the rest come in one after another to iustifie the same vpon that foremans credit If we had no better testimonies this practise woulde bee as plentifull and strong for vs as for you but we haue not so learned Christ neither doe we stande in neede of euill euidences to auow a good cause But in this matter because you bryng in Luthers wordes against himself to proue some part of your reporte let vs see your misconstruing brought for a defence of your misreport It is well knowen M. Luther felt many tentations and endured great conflictes with the enemie which are very strange to the most of your religion Christ hath rendered the reason of your quiet and godly mens disquiet in this affliction of conscience when a strong armed man sayth he keepeth his Palace the things are in peace which he possesseth As long as SataÌ„ had Luther in possession kept in the chaynes of ignorance and superstition hee felt not the malice of his spirituall enemie Satan had no cause to disquiet a superstitious man whome hee had for the time in quiet holde but when the Lord opened his eyes to see and framed his heart to withstande the kingdome of Satan and Antichrist the the enemie assailed him greuously as himselfe complaineth in many places All which conflictes were not as you dreame in an outward or bodily conference with the deuill but in those inward battailes in those spirituall combates betweene the flesh and the spirite betweene the tentations of Satan and the desires of the Newe men such as the Apostle noteth in diuers places Though the Iesuites be not by experience acquainted with this greeuous whippe of God wherewith he scourgeth many of his deare children yet by reading they myght haue knowen what it meant For Christ endured such tentations 〈◊〉 Paul acknowledgeth 〈…〉 in y â— flesh giuen him and the angel of Satan to buffet him But to make all thin playne that Luther was not otherwise tempted then in the exercise of his conscience and with these inwarde conflictes of the flesh fyghting agaynst the Spirit and againe with the agonies of the spirit resisting the assaultes of the Deuill which as was noted other â—â—intes of God haue suffered and Christ himselfe it appeareth by his owne words in the farre places cited for your purpose I see â—yght well sayth Luther in Dauid and in the other Prophetes 〈…〉 greatly they dyd wraste and gro 〈…〉 in those battayles and the lyke agaynst Satan and his horrible assaultes Christ also him selfe thouth without sinne what teares what anguish and what agonies indured he for vs against Satan He doeth infinitely presse our heartes and ceaseth not but when hee is beaten backe with the worde of God Wherefore you doe not onely in this slaunder intollerablie reproche Martin Luther but you speake euill also of the wayes of GOD whereby hee worketh in the heartes of his children true mortification and strength in Iesus Christ to ouercome such sharpe and dangerous tentations The treatise of Luther de missa angulari so ofteÌ„ aledged by your felowes I coulde neuer see therefore it is as the allegation of his testimonie that is dead or can not bee founde to giue in euidence face to face when he is reuiued commeth forth to beare witnesse he shall bee ansered Touching Luthers death slaine as you think by y â— deuil going drunken to bedde ouernyght you shoulde neuer haue dis 〈…〉 ed your owne discretion in reporting so foule a lie from so
transgression of the law be it neuer so litle or done without either consent or knowledge or by a mad man or bruite beast should be properly a mortal sinne Here you playnely conclude that nâ—gaâ—â—uâ—ly which Saint Iohn him selfe layeth downe affirmatiuely saying afterwards in the 〈◊〉 Chapt. Euery iniquitie or transgression is sinne if sinne a mortall sinne as hath bene proued Thus the Câ—â—surer hath not added nor altered alone but playnely denyed that to conde 〈…〉 mee which Saint Iohn hath worde for worde to iustifie mee All my places that you so condemne being written and layde together haue I thanke God no cause to make mee blushe but this alone hath â—ause to moue you to the repentance reâ—antation of this speache so directly contrary to the wordes of the holy Ghost But the Lorde remooue all blindnesse from our eyes and haâ—dnesse from our heartes that wee may not struggle agaynst the trueth and so fall into these grosse denials of the manifest worde of God You that charge me in this place with transposition your selfe may be as worthily charged with alteration of the text putting one verbe for an other and two wordes for one both the Greeke and the vulgar translatioÌ„ hath Euery one that committeth sinne and you haue agaynst them both Euery one that sinneth This you woulde haue made a â—olde part in me but I am contented to gâ—aunt it is neither bouldnesse nor ignorance iâ— you 〈◊〉 though the first may stande better yet your translation is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 You 〈◊〉 perhappes to serue the Lorde in your 〈◊〉 and I knowe I serue the Lorde his cause is to be had in high estimation and the examination thereof must be without such disgracing quarrels otherwise he will punish euen him that shall not vse good meanes in the handling of a good cause But to conclude you graunt the question though as you say it commeth not to be so haynous a blasphemie For your vsual taunts of confounding and hudling you may worthily receiue them backe agayne with this vaâ—â—tage that you haue manifestly denyed that which the Apostle doth manifestly affirme and so stande vpon a contradiction not onely agaynst my wordes but against the holy and perfect word of God In the second poynt the Iesuiâ—es doctrine is thus reported Concupiscence remayning in the regenerate although it be against the lawe of God yet is it not sinne properly in it selfe or of his owne nature I am charged for mine authour that these wordes although it bee agaynst the lawe of God are not founde in the â—ensure oâ— Colen To what purpose 〈◊〉 the caâ—ill agaynst these wordes which if they had not beâ—e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 neuer 〈…〉 of necessitie 〈…〉 is of conâ—upiscense against the lawe and you so take it and so defend it Also by your owne graunt the Iesuites of Colen expresse those wordes in effect saying Albeit this concupiscense doe styrre or moue a man sometimes to doe things which are repugnant to the lawe of God yet if no consent of heart bee yeelded vnto it it reacheth not to the nature of a mortall sinne worthy of eternal damnation That concupiscense which doeth styrre or moue a man to doe thinges against the lawe of GOD is it not also it selfe agaynst the law As you thus graunt the words which before were denyed so vnderhande or at vnwares you graunt the matter wherwith you are charged For saying that concupiscense without consent reacheth not to the nature of a mortall sinne worthy of eternall damnation in some sorte you giue vs to vnderstande that it is neuerthelesse some kind of sinne which is to graunt the question or to loade and disguise the sentence with many waste woordes that you may in so doing hide the errour Moreouer you and the Iesuites confesse concupiscense to be sinne by Saint Paules manifest woordes who as you graunt sometimes calleth it sinne But as you wrangle with mee so you misconster the Apostle saying hee meaneth not that it is a sinne properly but by a figure Wherefore his large disputation is shortly to bee layde downe that thereby it may appeare howe corruptly you interprete his meaning The Apostle hauing declared that the Lawe doth thorow our corruption worke in vs the lustes passions of sinne to meete with a doubt that might bee made against the law as if it were sinne because through our rebellion it stirreth vs vp thereunto answereth saying The Lawe is holy and wee solde vnder sinne the Law spirituall and we carnall In which answere it is diligently to be considered by the waye that were it not holy and the commaundement holy and iust and good euen the Lawe should seeme to bee sinne for occasion of sinne that commeth thereby through our corruption But this occasion is not giuen by the Lawe but altogether taken by our corruption rebelling against the commandement So the Lawe being of it selfe holy altogether and giuen against sinne is not to be charged with our rebellion which is sinfull of it selfe and prouoked by such restraint If the Lawe which hath in it nosinne nor shadowe of sinne come notwithstanding to the question of sinne for the fruite of our corrupt 〈…〉 re prouoked and discouered thereby what shall wee saye of concupiscence that is it selfe vncleane and of it selfe maketh sinne exceedingly sinfull S. Paul following the question doth open the nature of concupiscence in his owne person comparing his estate before the knowledge of the tenth commandement with his state afterwarde Vpon which comparison hee declareth that hee knewe not sinne 〈◊〉 hee knewe the Lawe that saith Thou shalt not couet He knewe other sinnes before by the Lawe and light of nature but he knewe not concupiscence to be sinne So the very Gentiles in their Lawes condemned adulterie murder and other like sinnes but the iustice of God condemâ—ing concupiscence the Gentiles could not see the Philosophers could not finde it neither will the Papistes acknowledge it although they knowe with the Apostle the Lawe which saith Thou shalt not couer Therefore the Apostle hath set before vs by his owne example what wee may learne by that tenth commandement which sheweth most cleerely y t the Lord our God is a spirituall Lawgiuer binding our spirites our very thoughtes least desires to y â— obedience of his most holy most pure most perfect Law If any of these bee beside the Law it is against y â— holines wherein we were created which is required of vs by the Lawe and so plainely and properly a sinne howsoeuer the Iesuites distinguishe betweene sinne properly so called not properly called sinne Euery sinne is sinne these sinnes which by the Iesuites doctrine are so called figuratiuely except we finde mercie they will bring no figuratiue condemnation in y t day when y â— secretes of all heartes shall be layde open and wee called to giue an account of euery idle worde Your similitude of the Latine tongue taken out of Austen
is doubtfull for the tongue is the instrument of speache and not such a cause The naturall knowledge of the latin speach or the knowledge thereof by arte is the cause If the tongue were the proper cause whosoeuer had a tongue should speake latin because where the cause is the effect followeth By which reason your owne woordes againe make concupiscense to bee sinne saying it is the affect of originall s 〈…〉 because such as the proper cause is 〈…〉 is also the proper effect the â—ause sinne and sinneful the effect also sinne and sinful But you that make many demaundes to me let me aske you what you meant to bring in the example of Christ who is called sinne in thâ—â— chapter and â—epâ—stle to the Corâ—th forwhich you falsely quote the 8. â—o the Râ—man 〈◊〉 you make the example like Shall 〈◊〉 expâ—â—â—de the former speach of Saint Paul calling concupiscense sinne Surely hereby you proue that Paul calling concupiscense sinne meant notwithstanding that it was altogether no sinne for Christ is altogether no sinne Againe howe vnlike are these examples Christ is called sinne because hee was a sacrifice for sinne that is to take away sinne concupiscense is called sinne because it is the effect fruite of originall sinne not taking it away but increasing it continually If you made conscience of your speach you would neuer misconâ—â—er the plaine woâ—rdes of the Apostles bring nothing for your defeÌ„ce but such impertinent similitudes For I appeale to your conscience may you not as fitly by these similitudes proue that the Apostle calleth fornication sinne by a figure or any other sinne neuer so great Saint Austeâ—â— place making it no sinne in y e 〈…〉 rate without conâ—â—t is expounded by himselfe afterwarde saying Concupiscence is not so forgiuen in Baptisme that it is not sinne but that it is not imputed as sinne For a clearer proofe hereof in another booke hee saith plainely it is 〈◊〉 For when Iulian obiected that conâ—â—piscence is wortâ—y praise because it is a punishment of sinne Austen tooke that away by an example of the wicked deuils whâ— though they in respect of Gods hande doâ— iustly punish yet themselues are vniust and sinfull whereupon this similitude fol 〈…〉 eth to proue concupiscence sinne euen when there is no consent As the blyndnesse of the heart which God remoueth who alone doth illuminate is both sinne whereby we beleeue not in God and the punishment of sinne whereby a proude heart is punished with worthie punishment the cause of sinne when any euill is committed by the error of a blind heart so the concupiscense of the flesh agaynst which the good spirit â—usteth is both sinne because there is in it a disobedieÌ„ce against the regiment of the minde and a punishment of sin because it is rendred to y e merites of the disobedient the cause of sin through the defect of that y t consenteth or the conâ—agion of that that springeth You were deceiued in citing Austen twise as hauing written but one booke De Nup. et Concup Clement hath no such place but against you hee hath these woordes in the booke of his exhortation to the GeÌ„tiâ—â—s speaking of the seuenth commandement among others 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thou shalt not lust for by concupiscense alone thou hast committed adulterie Which sentence sheweth what a sinne bare concupiscense is that alone without consent commeth so neere a degree of actuall adulterie You were also deceiued in quoting Ambrose for he hath no such place where you cite him Nazianzen I thinke hath no such oration as you dreame of such is your cause and such are your testimonies Wherefore it is false that all those good fathers are partakers with the Iesuites of that doctrine which blasphemously maketh the breach of the tenth commandement no sinne And because you so often presse the worde blasphemie so seldome vsed by me you must vnderstande that such doctrines especially now after so great reuelation of the trueth are the doctrines of deuils blasphemoâ—s against God and his holy woorde which teacheth the contrary as hath and shall bee further declared But nowe followeth the place of Gotuisus brought to proue the contrary doctrine Whosoeuer shall see a woman to lust after her hee hath already committed adulterie with her in his heart The Censurer in this place to note my ignoraunce bewrayeth his owne confounding hudling the first last part of the proposition which in Scholes are called subiectu and praedicatum For the question sta 〈…〉 th in y â— former place where Christ vsetâ— a word of concupiscence affirming that 〈◊〉 a man see a woman to lust or in concupisâ—enâ—e to desyre her where the force of sinne worketh in the first degree it is with content of heart brought to a further degree and becommeth actuall adulterie before God though it bee not actuall before men Therefore if I had as you miâ—conâ—â—er alleaged this place of Matthewe altogether in respect of the effect and as it is a breach of the seuenth commandement it had not made against the doctrine of concupiscense without consent But I cite it for the former part of the propositioÌ„ which sufficiently proueth bare concupiscense to bee sinne For if the consent of the heart make concupisceÌ„se to be adulterie theÌ„ must concupiscense it selfe be also sinne because otherwise the consent of the heart cannot make any lawful desire to be adulterie but the fruite and the tree must be of the same nature Saint Iames doeth moreouer proue this who wil not that a man should say God tempteth him and so charge the Lord with sinne but he turneth vpon man the whole worke and al the blame of sinne froÌ„ the first sinne of tempting to the ripe ful birth thereof The Apostles wordes in this place are full to make this proofe calling it a mans owne lust or lusting adding moreouer that a man is tempted therwith drawen away and as with a baite intited which thinges can not bee in bare concupisâ—ense except it were sinne and a sinful cause of sinne from the which Iames doth carefully quite the Lorde Also this concupifcense because it hath â—entation violence and a baite to sinne before câ—nsent of heart be giuen and before the secret adulterie of the heart be coÌ„mitted it cannot be of faith and therefore the Apostle giueth sentence that it is sin for whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne be it before or after the consent of heart Therefore out of these woordes of Christ it is truely proued by the nature and effect of concupiscense that it is sinne of it selfe seeing presently with consent it is made a sinne in so high a degree as is adulterie Also herein my alleadging of Scripture is founde to be according to the matter and argument without any error of doctrine alteration of sense or appiying it otherwise then it may be truely and profitably applied wherefore you gaue to much
Censurer hath brought his cole to set his markes vpon my translation which is neuer thelesse so faithfull that no one of y â— fiue words by him so marked as wickedly added can wel be wanting without some iniury to the text or to the propertie of our language in expressing the same In translating the propertie of euery tongue is to be obserued for as tongues differ in language so they differ in their peculiar forme order of words That which may be well vnderstoode in one tongue must needes be supplied in an other And to translate word for worde is to haue the wordes English or Frenche when yet the phrase shall remaine Greeke or Hebrewe and be as litle vnderstoode Yet this is that obscure and fruitelesse translation which the Censurer exacteth at my hand But let vs see how iustly All scripture is not so plaine as All y â— scripture and the Censurer afteÌ„ saith the scripture The verbe is must be supplied whether you regard the English tongue or Lâ—gicke for the copulatiue coniunction following in y â— Greeke doth make the whole proposition compound and not simple Otherwise what sense or sentence were it to say all scripture giuen by inspiration of God profitable to teach c. The addition of this verbe was so necessarie that the vulgar translation addeth it in the seconde place but by no better reason then why it should be added in both The first and was childishly and vnlearnedly noted as superfluous being expressed in the Greeke text and corruptly left out by the olde translation which deceiued you The wordes and throughly were added the one to ioyne the sentence and the other to expresse the force of the compound word which Paule vseth signifying throughly or perfectly perfect In this signification is the compound vseâ— in many other places also Thus you see I misuse not the Scriptures in this place for my translation is sufficiently approoued and some faultes be wraied in the old translation and ignorance in your Censure Neuerthelesse I must remember you that it was your ouersight to leaue out y â— note of a third and which might aswell haue bene set vpon your score with the rest and raised the number vp to site Also you that so exact a strayght translation of worde for word why did you not Censure me for adding v. wordes at one clap in this sentence to expresse one Greeke worde Paul hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is word for worde Godinspired I haue to expresse it vsed v. wordes giuen by inspiration of God But your Censurers eye may without blame passe ouer the sight of such small matters I craue pardon of my Reader that I haue bene drawen on into so trifeling poyntes But he hath beene exercised in sifting and shifting to finde somwhat y â— may serue his turne and yet greatly misseth of his purpose if he were so searched perhaps hee would not easely answere it Now against my translation he vseth words that should be by a new worde called raileciue speache in me saying If I had vsed such audacitie in translating Acsopes fables it woulde haue bene tollerable but in translating the Scripture it is impious Surely if the Censurer had bene well censured and exercised in translating Acsopes fables when 〈◊〉 went to the Grammer schoole hee woulde haue bene better acquainted with Greeks phrases and the translation of the new Testament But it may be he hateth the kingdome and skill of Grammarians Thus much to answere my translation which you haue so vnlearnedly marked and so vniustly coÌ„demned Now it foloweth to consider what you bring agaynst the alleadging of that place to reproue the Iesuites doctrine and your vnwritten verities Your first reason y â— this place is not full ynough to proue y â— sufficiencie of y â— Scripture for which it is alleaged standeth vpon and word in y â— text where the Apostle saith the Scripture is profitable and hath not the worde sufficient But you say these are two diuers thinges to bee sufficient for a purpose and to be profitable for it as may appeare in meate which is profitable for our lyfe yet wee cannot saye it is sufficient because it alone without naturall heate clothes and other meanes sufficeth not Whereupon you leaue the reader to conclude that this place is too slender for my purpose The force of which your reason is of the difference of these two words affirming that profitable is not so much as sufficient Whereunto I answere that as sometimes it is true which you affirme and as it appeareth in your example so of the other part it is true that many times a thing may be saide profitable for a purpose where profitable shal import sufficient and not barely profitable as for example when some reason is adioyned why it shoulde be profitable and nothing else applyed or seruing to that effect For proofe hereof when the Apostle writeth that Godlines is profitable to all things hauing the promises of this life of the life to come it can not be denyed but by profitable here he meaneth it is sufficient for all things that is for the obteyning of all good thinges which sense of this worde is prooued by that which followeth of the effect hauing the promises of both lyues For if godlinesse bryng all good things of this lyfe and of the lyfe to come it must needes folowe that the Apostle saying it is profitable to all things vnderstoode it was so fully sufficient that hee which hath it needeth not the supplie of any thing else For like reason in this place I say the Apostle speaking of the Scripture as profitable for doctrine for confutation for correction and reformation by profitable vnderstandeth sufficient If your example were of the like it woulde proue the same If as meate and drinke are profitable to nourish so they were profitable also to cloth to giue rest and to make a man perfectly healthie and strong to euery good action I woulde also conclude vpon such causes that it were both profitable and sufficient to mayntaine life But you stande in neede of an other Censurer to Censure your comparisons and examples so often brought in easily to dereyue the reader that doth not see howe vnequallie they are yoked as like thinges to make like proofe being in deede vnlike and of vnlike effectes To returne vnto the text the sufficiencie of scripture is moreouer prooued by the wordes which got before and followe Before the Apostle had sayde that all the Scripture is inspired of God whereupon he inferreth and is profitable to teach for doctrine and confutation as if he had sayde it is profitable to teache the trueth and reproue errour The strength of which reason lyeth in this that the light of knowledge which sometime was in man by his creation is damped and gone out so that nowe wee haue no meanes except God by his holy Spirite doeth inspire vs to discerne betweene trueth and vntrueth or
betweene good and euill Nowe this heaueÌ„ly knowledge which as Saint Peter sayeth was vttered by the holy men of God inspired with the holy Ghost is recorded in the bookes of holie Scripture Whereupon it foloweth that these bookes of the holy worde and no other being the authenticall words of the heauenly knowledge which God inspired the holy Prophets and Apostles withall are so sayde to be profitable to teache the trueth as it noteth this to bee proper to the holy Scripture and not to agree to any other whatsoeuer Therefore if these bee the writings which contayne the wisedome wherewith God hath inspired his holy men for such vse of the Church as is here spoken of it must needes followe the knowledge which God hath reuealed being sufficient for vs that these holy Scriptures conteining the same knowledge is lykewise sufficient Whereby it appeareth that this cause here noted to witte of inspiration from God being the proper cause of the holy Scriptures and not common to any other writings whatsoeuer doeth implie the effect also folowing in this place of teaching disprouing and making perfecte the man of God to be likewise proper vnto them and which I vndertoke to proue profitable in this place to signifie as much as sufficient To this I adde an other reason out of the wordes which followe wherein because not some things onely which may in parte make a man perfect are attributed to the scriptures and some other thinges left to bee supplied by other meanes but all things whatsoeuer may bee needefull for vs are sayde to be perfected by the Scriptures it must needes follow that the scripture alone is sufficient For that which is profitable to al the partes which may be required to perfection cannot be but sufficieÌ„t for the perfection of the whole but that the Scripture is profitable in such maner the Apostle doth fully declare both in rehearsing all the particular partes which are necessarie and adding also after generally that the man of God may be perfect To this purpose the Apostle hath so set his wordes as hee could not more effectually by any other speach For he teacheth that it is profitable to make perfect which yet is made more full by the compound worde adioined the grace and force of which composition as was noted before is to note perfection added to perfection and to signifie throughly or perfectly perfect and that as hee addeth for all good workes This is yet made more full and more waightie by that hee speaketh not here of the coÌ„mon perfection of all men but of the perfection of the man of God that is of the Minister If the scripture conteine knowledge to make the Minister throughly perfect for euery part of his office both in doctrine soundly to teach the trueth and to confute and remoue error and in life to reforme and correct that which is amisse and to instruct in that which is righteous and holy how much more is it sufficient for the coÌ„mon knowledge of other men in whom like perfection of vnderstanding is not so much required To these two reasons because the question is of importance I will yet adde one other out of the verse next going before There the Apostle vseth an argument to perswade Timothy to abide in y â— doctrine of the holy Scriptures for proofe of which argument this seueÌ„teenth verse is immediatly adioyned His argument is takeÌ„ from the effect of these holy writings wherein Timothie had been brought vp froÌ„ a child Which effect is this that through faith in Christ Iesus they are of abilitie or of power or of sufficiencie to make him wise to saluation For the Apostle sayeth expressely that the Scriptures are able or of power or sufficiencie for all these speaches I take to bee of one signification whereunto to make him wise how farre euen to saluation that is to teache him all wisedome needeful to saluation Whereupon as I sayd the Apostle immediatly bringeth in this sentence that All the Scripture is giuen by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine c. Which must either be sayde to bee impertinent to the former matter of the power or sufficiencie of the Scripture to saluation which I thinke no man of any reason will affirme or els it must be confessed that the Apostle added it for greater plainnes or for an other proofe For whether of both it be brought in it is absurde to bring the lesse to set out or proue the more And seeing the Apostle had spoken in the former verse of the sufficiencie of Scripture to saye nowe it bringeth but some profite to that purpose were to saye lesse then he had said before Wherefore he saying it is profitable setteth it out as alone and sufficiently profitable being inspired of God and sanctified by his promise and ordinance to make perfect the man of God to al heauenly wisedome Finally the Apostle hauing put into Tiniothies hande al compleat necessarie and sufficient furniture speaketh neuer a whit of your churchreuealed verities but onely of the scripture inspired of God Therefore either he teacheth and concludeth insufficiently or els the Scripture is sufficiently wholly powerfully and in trueth onely profitable For your second reason I denie that the newe Testament is therefore super fluous because the olde was sufficient For this bountifull addition or accesse of scripture by the Newe Testament is not to impeach the perfection and profitable sufficiencie or sufficient profitablenes of the olde Testament seeing the Fathers were aswell faued as we are now vnder the Gospell but for a more full euident and cleare reueâ—ation of that which though to saluation it was sufficient before yet could not shewe the infinite riches of Gods goodnesse toward vs so plainely so fully as these doe Iob had sufficient in his greatest want and no superfluitie in his greatest aboundance A morning light is sufficient for a man to doe his worke by yet the brightnesse of the sunne is not therefore needelesse and superfluous for it serueth to giue a clearer a more certaine and more comfortable direction then the other For your by matter that the wordes omnis and tota differ in Greeke and Latine for proofe wherof you appeale to all Logicioners I dare warrant you they will all condemne your opinion For omnis homo signifieth euery man but omnis populus which is the Vulgar translation doth not signifie euery people neyther can you translate the woordes of Saint Luke concerning the taxing that euery earth or euery worlde should bee taxed in which places the Euangelist vseth the same worde the vse wherof in y â— greeke you did not vnderstand Therefore if you can salue this matter of manifest errour I will acknowledge my selfe to deale deceitfully as you charge me An other point followeth like the rest already answered But the Censurer thus repeateth Saint Paul must vnderstand part of the scripture and not the whole because all was not then