to mock gain say and abhorr all religioÌ„ obtruded to the people without assurance of God his word hauing nether respect to antiquitie to multitude to authoritie nor estimatioÌ„ of them that mantean the same The Idoles of the Gentiles were more ancient then is the Idole in the masse There worshippers manteners and patrons were mo in multitude greater in authoritie and more excellent before the world then euer was any that bowed to that Idole Isa 4â— And yet feared not the Prophet Isayas to mock and iest them yea sharplie to rebuke them in these wordes They are dung backward with shame they shal be ashamed whosoeuer trusteth in a grauen ymage and that say to the molten ymage Isa 44. ye are our Gods All the makers of graueÌ„ ymages are vaine there pleasing thinges shall not proffet them For they themselues are witnesses to there Idoles that they nether se nor vnderstaÌ„d any thing and therefore they shal be ashamed who then sayeth he shall forge a God or a molten ymage that profiteth nothing behold all those that are of the fellowship thereof shal be confounded for the workmen them selues are men let them all be gathered together and stand vp yet they shall feare and be confouÌ„ded together And when he hath fully painted forth there vanitie he concludeth They haue not vnderstand for God hath shut vp there eyes Blindnes and induration is Gods iust punishmeÌ„t for Idolaters that they can not see and hartes that they can not vnderstand none considereth in his hart I haue brunt half of it euen in the fyre and haue baken bread also vpon the coalles thereof I haue rosted fleshe earen it and shall I make the residew thereof an abomination shall I bow to the stock of a tree c. Thus I say we see how that the Prophet doeth triumph against the Idolaters in mocking of there madnes and paintiÌ„g forth of there vanitie Who then can iustlie be offended against me or any other albeit by all meanes possible we let the blind world see the vanitie of that Idole considering that by it hath the glorie of God bene more obscured then euer it was by any Idole in the earth For to none was neuer absolutlie giuen Let the Papists consider the name nature power and honor of God but to that Idole allone If any think that the Scriptures of God giue vnto them patrocinie ether to beleue Christes naturall body to be there after the wordes of consecration as they cal them ether yet to beleue that Christ Iesus in his last Supper did offer vnto God his Father his body and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine he is miserablie deceaued for the Scripture maketh no mention of conuersion or transubstanciation of bread in Christes naturall bodie but witnesseth that bread remaneth bread yea eueÌ„ when the faithfull receaue the same 1. Cor 10 as the Apostle affirmeth in these wordes The bread that we break is it not the coÌ„munication of Christes bodie the cup of blissing which we blisse is it not the coÌ„munion of the blood of Christâ—â— we many are one bread and one body because we are all partakers of one bread And after he sayeth 1. Cor. 11. as ofâ— as ye shall eat of this bread and drink of this cup ye shew the Lordes death till he come Let therefore a man try himself and so let him eat of this bread and drink of this 〈◊〉 c. By these wordes we may clearlie vnderstand what iudgement the Apostle had of the substaÌ„ce of that Sacrament euen in the verie action of the same And as touching that foolish opinion that Christ Iesus did offer his body vnto God his Father vnder the formes of bread wine c. which the Papistes make the ground of there masse what suffrage that euer it hath by man of God nor of his word it hath none Ioh. 3. The Scripture dooth witnes that God the Father gaue his Sone vnto the world that the world might be saued by him and that Iesus Christ did offer him self ones vnto God Heb. 10 and 9. for the destructioÌ„ of sinne and for to take away the sinnes of many but that euer he did offer him self vnder the formes of bread and wine as the Papistes alledge the holy Goste doeth no where make mention And therefore the faithfull not onely may reiect it as the dreame and inuention of man but also are bouÌ„d to abhor detest it as a doctrine broght in by Satan to deceaue suche as delyte not in the veritie of God to whose 〈◊〉 and voice are the faithfull onely â—ouâ—â— M. Quintyne that great patron of the masse in this subsequent conference Maister Quintynes affirmatiue aâ—â—â—ieds for the probation of his affirmatiue Christ Iesus did offer sayeth he vnto God his Father in his last Supper his body and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine c. For the probation hereof I say he adduces the fact of Melchisedec that broght forth bread and wine Gen. 14. c. But how sone he is ashamed thereof and how vnable he is to proue that which he alledgeth to be moste easie to be prouen the diligent reader may esâ—y For perceauing him self unable euer to proue Luk the ressonig of the thrid day that ether Christe Iesus or yet Melchisedec did make any suche oblation as he the fond Papistes do imagine He riÌ„neth straight to his fortres shameles schift O sayeth M. Quintyne I haue hurt my own cause I was caried away with zeal c. It apperteaned not vnto me to proue any thing but to defend my artickles as they are written If M. O. and his collatâ—ralles will resolue me an dout then will I giue my iudgement whether he oght to proue or to defend onely My dout is this whether are M. Quintynes artickles necessarie to be beleued to SaluatioÌ„ or are they suche as without danger of damnation we may dout of them If we may dout of them and not offend God then assuredly I think that M. Quintyne may hold them for treuth til that the falshead of them be manifestly declared But if they be suche as we are bound to beleue as a treuth of God and an doctrine necessarie to Saluation then is M. Quintyne bound to shaw to vs that God hath prononced them and not man which if he be not able to do and that in plaine and expressed wordes then must we reiect them as deceauable Ioh. 10. fals accordiÌ„g as we be taucht by our maister Christ Iesus saying My sheip heare my voice but a stranger they will not heare If M. Q. will not be reputed an fals Prophet one that teacheth lies in the name of God and so expone him self to Gods here displeasure he may propone no doctrine to the Church of God the assurance whereof he bringeth not from the mouth of God If M. Q. were brawling in the scooles or bragging of
seruandes or subiectes at his command which I do now shortlie It is said in Scripture that Noie did all that God coÌ„manded him and plaine it is that God coÌ„manded him to make the Arck Gen. 6.7 which wes iÌ„ building the full space of a hundreth yeares God further coÌ„manded him to furnish the Arck with all kynde of victualles which the text affirmeth that he did Now if we shal conclude that Noie allone cutted euerie tree Noie allone did hew euerie tree and so forth it appeareth to me that we shal conclude a great absurditie The same is euideÌ„t in Dauid of whome mention is made that he being Prophet and King 2 Sam. â— deuided to the whole people yea vnto the whole multitude of Israel yea bothe to men and women an portion of bread an portion of flesh and an portion of wine If we shall think that Dauid did this with his own hand we shall conclude in my appearance the formar absurditie The same is manifest by many other phrases yea and by our daylie maner of speaking And therefore yet as of before I think my Lordes exposition coact in that he will admit none to haue broght forth the bread and wine but Melchisedec allone But howsoeuer it be it moueth me nothing for vnto suche tyme as that my Lorde in plaine wordes pronounced by the holy Goste proue that Melchisedec did offer vnto God bread and wine he hath prouen nothing of that which he took on hand to proue And therefore I greatlie feare that whill that The best ground culd find no ground within the word of God which his lordeship calleth the best is so long in finding an sure ground within the Scripture that the rest in the end be found altogether groundles at the least within the boke of God And therefore I desyre as of before to hear his lordshipes probation of the principal M. Quintyne I am sorie that we ar contrined on this maner to driue tyme ather parteis in iustification of his a win cause bot wisses quicklie to go to the markis point as I haue euer done conforme to my artickle and to my warrand and makis the haile warld to iudge quhither it is my deutie efter formall ressoning to defend the saides artickles or to proue or to impung Quhair Iohn Knox makis ane meine that I haue brocht my argumeÌ„ts or purposes in writ quhat I haue in worde or writ or vtherwayes I praise God Bot the trueth is according to my custome I maid memorie efter my repose of sic heides as I thocht I was able to haue busines ado with all And that I did be the grace of God onely not that I am eschamed to be learned with ony man that wil teach me And as to the conclusioÌ„ of his partickle quhair he dois mak meine yat I haue na grouÌ„d of the Scripture for the messe as he beleuis will God sall frustrat his expectation in that When ye perform promes let men beleue you and all vthers And assures him will God sall iustifie the messe al 's sufficientlie conforme to my artickle as he and all the rest of his opinion in christendome salbe able to iustifie be expres Scripture or ony vther meine that Iesus Christe is ane substance with the Father Homonsion siue coÌ„substantialis And that it be not thocht that thir ar wantone wordes like as the mater sould not cum to pas bot that I wald trifle the mater I will desyre Iohn Knox maist humblie hartlie for Christes saike lat vs go schortlie without trifling to the purpose and lat wark beir witnes And swa requires to resume my argument and say thereto formalie as effeires Iohn Knox. Because that euerie man muste giue accomptes before God not onely of his workes but also of his wordes and thoghts I will make no further protestation whether that I haue defended hitherto my own opinion or a manifest treuth or whether that I haue impungned any treuth of God or a manifest lie let this be said with reuerence of all persones for the iustnes of the cause leauing I say the iudgement to God I say that I haue in plaine termes iustlie oppungned bothe the grouÌ„des broght forth by my Lord for defence of his artickle For in plaine wordes I haue denied that Iesus Christe into his latter Supper did make any Sacrifice of his bodie and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine vnto God his Father And lykewise I haue denyed that Melchisedec did offer vnto God bread and wine as of before which grouÌ„des because my Lorde hath not hitherto ê“uen I must hold them as impunged and oppuÌ„gned euer whill I hear the ground of Melchisedec plainly prouen by plaine Scripture to wit that the plaine Scripture say that Melchisedec offered vnto God bread and wine Let my lord answer when he pleases or that it be of any plaine and euident Scripture plainlie conuicted that so he did His lordship oght not to think it strange althogh I require to answer in writ to that argument which his Lordeship hath ê“ponded conceaued before and coÌ„mitted in writ for such I take to be the libertie of all fre disputations Whose lauboure it wes or is I nothing regard For so long as God doeth minister vnto me spirit life with iudgement and habilitie I intend by his grace til oppuÌ„g that which in my coÌ„science I hold to be damnable idolatrie And where his lordship sayeth that he is al 's able to affirme the masse which I impung to be the ordinance of God as that I or any of my opinion is able to proue Iesus Christe to be one substance with the Father Let the godlie iudge if the masse Christ Iesus his diuinitie oght to hing in one ballance with reuereÌ„ce of his lordshipes personage blood and honor and with the reuerence pacience of the whole auditor I say that the assercion is not onelie rashe but also moste dangerous yea and in a part blasphemous For for to compare the greatest mysterie yea the whole assurance of our redemptioÌ„ with that which as it hath bene vsed hath no approbation of Gods worde for that I haue impuÌ„gned and intendes to impung can not lack suspition of a lightlie esteaming of our redemptioÌ„ And to cut the matter short the formar question being decided to wit whither that Melchisedec did offer vnto God bread and wine I offer my self without further delay to proue that Iesus Christe is of one substance with the Father and that by the euident testimonies of Gods Scriptures And therefore yet as of before I humbly require his lordeship to prepare him for his probation of the formar to witt of the oblation of Melchisedec M. Quintyne Quhair Iohn Knox dois affirme that in plaine termis he hes iustlie impunged baith ye grouÌ„des brocht furth be me for defeÌ„ce of my artickles I answer I deny that he hes maid ony impuÌ„gnation And quhair he sayes that in
to the right institution of Iesus Christe in some cace which ones wes woid bothe of those ceremonies and that damnable opinion M. Quintyne I am not cumin heir to mantein the opiniones of meÌ„ but to defend the institution of Iesus Christ conform to my artickle Iohn Knox. It appeareh to me yet againe This is a dowble cannoÌ„ against the messe that my Lorde is willing to defend no thing but the werray institutioÌ„ of Christ Iesus And I haue alreadie affirmed that neither the name of the masse the ceremonies vsed in the same the opinion conceaued of it neither yet that power which the actor vsurneth hath either the institution or assurance of Iesus Christe M. Quintyne I am willing to defend my diffinition concerning the messe as I haue diffined it and takes Goddes word to my warrand My lord fled the Barras for the first and as to the ceremonies actor and all the rest fall defend God willing to be aggreable with Goddes word all throuch abundantlie as tyme and place sal serue beginning first at the substance and effect Iohn Knox. I answer that albeit in my iudgement the conscience of man oght first to haue bene sett at libertie yet hoping that my Lorde wil be coÌ„tent according to his promes that the name ceremonies and the rest of the accidents of the masse suffer the tryal by the worde of God I am content shortlie to enter in the bodie of the mater And desireth the difinition to be resumed M. Quintyne Let my Lord remember his promes I promes before this honorable auditor to defend that all coÌ„tened in the action of the messe to be aggreable with Goddes word prouiding alwayes we gang to the substance The difinition being resumed Iohn Knox answered Your lordship is not ignorant that in euerie difinition there oght to be Genus which I take your lordship here maketh this term Sacrificium but because the term is generall and in the Scriptures of God is diuersly taken therefore it must be broght to a certane kinde For in the Scriptures there be sacrifices called EVCHARISTICA that is of thankes giuing The mortification of our bodies and the obedience that we giue to God in the same is also called Sacrifice Prayer inuocation of the name of God hath also the same name within the Scriptures Liberalitie toward the poore is also so termed But there is one Sacrifice which is greatest and moste of all called Propiciatorium which is that Sacrifice whereby satisfaction is made to the iustice of God being offended at the sinnes of man c. Now I desire of my Lord that he appoint vnto the masse whiche of these Sacrifices best pleaseth him M. Quintyne Quhat Èe mein be the Sacrifice Propiciatorium presentlie I will not dispute But I tak the sacrifice vpon the croâ—â— to be the onelie Sacrifice of redemption and the Sacrifice of the masse to be the Sacrifice of coÌ„memoration of Christs death and passion Iohn Knox. So farre as I can conceaue of my Lordes answer he maketh no Sacrifice Propiciatorie Heir are mo cannons theÌ„ one in the messe which is the chiefhead which I intend to impung For as for the coÌ„memoration of Christes death and passion that I grant and publictlie do confesse to be celebrat in the right vse of the Lordes Sâ—â—pper which I denie the messe to be M. Quintyne It is Èour deutie according to formall proceiding to impung my warrand If this be shifting or not let men iudge quhilk I haue chosen to defend my diffinition be and artickle euen as it is writtin Iohn Knox. Protesting that this mekle is win that the Sacrifice of the masse being denied by me to be a Sacrifice Propiciatorie for the sinnes of the quick and the dead Let men now iudge whitther the messe gat a wond or not according to the opinion thereof before conceaued hath no patron at this preseÌ„t I am content to procede M. Quintyne I protest that he hes win nothing of me as Èit and referres it to black and quhite contened in our writing Iohn Knox. I haue openlie denied the masse to be an Sacrifice Propiciatorie for the quick Note c. and the defence thereof is denied And therefore I referre me vnto the same iudges that my Lorde hath clamed M. Quintyne Èœe may deny quhat Èe pleis for all that Èe deny I tak not presentlie to impung bot quhair I began thair wil I end Shift on that is to defend the messe conforme to my artickle Iohn Knox. Seing that neither the name the action the opinion nor the actor of the masse can be defended for this present I wold glaidly knowe what I should impung M. Quintyne All aboue rehearsed can be defended and salbe defended Godwilling I did nothing but as my lord commaÌ„ded and quhair Èe are glaid to knaw quhat Èe sould impung apperanlie that sould be na newinges to Èow for I certifie Èow Èe sould impung my warraÌ„d alledged for defence of my diffinition and artickle Iohn Knox. If be your warrand Haue at your ground ye vnderstand the oblation made in bread and wine by Melchisedec I plainly deny that Melchisedec made any oblation or Sacrifice of bread and wine vnto God and desires the text to be iudge M. Quintyne It is Èour pairt to impung and myne to defend for I am the defender and salbe Godwilling Iohn Knox. Can I impung more plane then when I denie your ground M. Quintyne I say the denying of the ground is na proper impugnation Iohn Knox. Your lordships ground is that Melchisedec is the figure of Christe in that Let men iudge now if my lords ground for the messe be not shaken that he did offer vnto God bread and wine and therefore that it behoued Iesus Christe to offer in his latter supper his bodie and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine I answer to your ground yet againe that Melchisedec offered neither bread nor wine vnto God And therefore it that ye wold thereupon conclude hath no assurance of your grouÌ„d M. Quintyne Preue that Iohn Knox. Whether that the probatioÌ„ of a negatiue should be deuolued vpon me especially when I haue denied your chief ground I am content the learned iudge M. Quintyne Moued throuch feruor of the tryall of the treuth of Goddes worde I refuse logik captious cauillationis for the present not perchance for ignorance bot that we tyne not tyme Gather what is spoken to finnish and establis our godlie pretence for the ease and quietnes of the conscience of the noble men heir present Iohn Knox. I haue els protested that I abhor all cauillationes and yet againe declares vnto your lordship that in my iudgement it is the way moste succinct that your lordship proue your own grouÌ„d that is that Melchisedec offered vnto God bread and wine which I denie M. Quintyne I tak the text to be my warrand and ground Iohn Knox. The text being red
nomber of the Kinges vainqueshed And that there remaned substance yea mekle more then was spent I do not deny But this wil not necessarlie conclude but that Melchisedec of his liberalitie broght forth bread and wine to the purpose forsaid as be coniecture is moste probable For men of godlines and ciuill honestie do not onely shaw them selues liberal in tyme of extreme necessitie but also wil declair there beneuolence without great neid yea and in greatest aboundance M. Quintyne Because Iohn Knox speakis of substance indifferentlie I will desire him to declair his opinion conforme to the text quhither Abraham and his company recouered of the nyne Kingis spolÈeis bread and wine and vther sustenance quhilk treulie albeit the text do not proport the same in plaine wordes Èit can na man of iudgement think vtherwise as I can gif many hundreth examples in the Scriptures and ane in speciall quhair Iesus Christ our Lorde speakis in his awin prayer called the Pater noster of daylie bread quhairinto is to be vnderstand all required vnto the sustentation of man albeit the text dois not expresly declair the samin Iohn Knox. I haue spoken of substance in generall so instructed by the plaine text which maketh mention neither of bread nor wine in expressed wordes other nor of that which Melchisedec broght forth And by all apperance there could not any great store of bread and wine be caried back againe by Abraham and his company after the victorie of his enimies For plaine it is that he broght nothing back which they before did not carie away him self and his company onely excepted we read that they toke the pray of Sodom and Gomorra and caried with them the substance Let this coÌ„iectur serue for answer to my lords argumemt yea the victual Loth his substaÌ„ce c. Now albeit that in the beginning there victualles had bene great yet being suche a company as we may iustlie suppose them to haue bene and also being arriued within there own costes it is not appeariÌ„g that great store wes reserued But howsoeuer it be this mater standing in coÌ„iecture we wil of necessitie conclud no thing seing that the holie Ghost hath not expressed it As touching my Lordes allegation of the daylie bread c. I acknowledge with his lordschip that to be the familiar phrase of the Scripture that vnder the name of bread is commonly taken all thinges necessar for the vse of maÌ„nes bodie like as these Frange efurienti panem tuum c. M. Quintyne Hauand consideration that Iohn Knox wald cast in ane suspicion in the hartes of the honorable auditor saifand his pardone be continual repeticion of this word coniecture we wil do as God will giue vs grace to tak this policie out of the hartes of the auditor and that by proper discription of argumentes of inferrence or coniecture quhairfore the auditor sall consider that thair is sum conietures and argumentes of inferreÌ„ce quhilk necessarlie concludes and followes vpon Let the learned consider this proper discription of coniectural argumeÌ„ts whiche do necessarly coÌ„clude And arcalled nottheles argumentes of coniecture or inferrence because the ane worde is not the other nor dois not expresly conclud the other as for ane familiar example Spirat ergo viuit as I wald say he aindes ergo he liues Quhairfore I infer that this conference of phrase or maner of speach quhair it is said in the text al thair victuallis necessarly inferris breid wine and all vther thingis expedient to be eatin coÌ„sidering thair was great aboundance in the citeis quhilk war spolÈeit as do this phrase break vnto the hungrie thy bread and swa quhatsumeuer may be inferred of the ane phrase necessarlie may be inferred of the vther Iohn Knox. Hitherto I haue trauelled to make difference betuix that that man of necessitie is bouÌ„d to beleue and that which man may either beleue or not beleue without any hurt of conscience What God in expressed wordes and sentences hath committed to vs within the Scriptures coÌ„manded the same to be beleued he requireth of vs that necessarlie we beleue the same But where the spirit of God hath keped silence and hath not in plaine sentences declared vnto vs the will of God our Father there may a man suspend his iudgement without hurt of conscience yea and more sure it is not bouldlie to affirme that which is keped close by the wisdome of God then that we should rashelie affirme any thing without the warrand of Gods worde as we are taught by the admonition of Augustine As touching the diuersitie of arguments I know bothe the strength of them that are called Necessario Concludentia and of those whiche stand in probabilitie The grouÌ„d of fayth is the word of God reuealed which bothe I grant to haue the strength in persuasion but the faith of man requireth a surer ground then any argument that can be deduced from nature to wit it requireth hearing and that hearing of the worde of God according to the doctrine of the Apostle Now to my Lordes argument I say it doeth not necessarlie conclude that Abraham and his souldiors broght more reddie meat suche as bread and wine back from there victorie then they were able to spend albeit that they caried with them the whole substance yea That is the Kings vicust by Abraham the whole victualles of Sodom and Gomorra c. Because that in the iorney some might haue bene lossed in the iorney no dout but muche wes spent and in the victorie the rest might haue bene dispersed or lost For by all apperance Abraham had smal respect to bread wine Let the reader aduert more then to that which might reasonablie susteane him and his company vnto there returne And thus from coniecture we shal coÌ„tinually pas to coÌ„iecture onles that my Lord be able to proue that the text affirmeth in plane wordes that suche superflouous aboundance of bread and wine wes broght back vnto the time that Melchisedec met him althogh his Lordship be able so to do as I am assured no man is able yet shal alwayes Melchisedec and his libiralitie stand still vnconuicted M. Quintyne To meit all the heides coÌ„tened in Iohn Knox partickle aboue rehearsed notwithstandinge appearanlie I am constrained to the same Èœit alwayes in fauoris of the auditure Let the indiffireÌ„t iudge I will go schortlie to sum speciall heides And first quhair he makes ane meine that I go by naturall ressonis to persuade to take the suspicion of men iustly of me in this heid I say and do affirme that I haue done not in that cause as Èit bot coÌ„forme to the Scriptures althrouch And quhair Iohn Knox speakis in general of meat our contention was for bread and wine quhilk I inferred necessarlie of the text And desires him to giue me ane resson schortlie grounded vpon the Scripture quhairfore the phrase alledged be me concerning