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
Heir followeth the coppie of the ressoning which was betuix the Abbote of Crosraguell and Iohn Knox in Mayboill concerning the masse in the yeare of God a thousand fiue hundreth thre scoir and two yeares Apocalips xxij For I protest vnto euerie man that heareth the wordes of the prophecie of this boke If any maÌ„ shall adde vnto these thinges God shall adde vnto him the plagues that are written in this boke Imprinted at Edinburgh by Robert Lekpreuik and are to be solde at his hous at the nether bow Cum priuilegio 1563. Iohn Knox vnto the reader wisheth grace mercie and peace from God the Father and from our Lorde Iesus Christe with the spirit of righteous iudgement ⧠AFter that the Prophet Isayas in great vehemencie had rebuked the vanitie of Idolles and Idolaters as in the 40. Isa 40 and 41. and 41. chapters of his prophecie doeth appear at last he bursteth forth in these wordes Let them bring forth there Gods saeth he that they may shaw vnto vs thinges that are to come or let them declare vnto vs thinges that haue bene done before c. Shaw thinges that are to come that we may vnderstaÌ„d you to be Gods let you do ether good or euill that we may declare it By which wordes the Prophet doeth as it were in mockage prouoke Idolaters and the Idoles to produce for them selues some euident testimonies by the which meÌ„ might be assured that in them was power and that there religion had approbation of God which when they could not do he is bold to prononce this sentence Behold ye are of nothing Isa 41. and your making is of nothing abomination hath chosen you In which wordes the Prophet damneth bothe the Idoles the Idolaters The Idoles because they can declare nothing to proue any power or wertue to be in them why they should be worshipped as Gods And the Idolaters because from Gods month they could bring no assurance of there addulterat and vsurped religion If this reasoning of the Prophet had sufficient strength in his aige to shaw the vanitie of the Idoles and the phrenetick foolishnes of suche as worshipped them then may the godlie this day moste assuredly conclude against the great Idole presented by the Papistes to be worshipped in there masse and against the patrons of the same that it and they are vaine foolish odious and abominable before God It because it hath mo makers then euer had the Idoles amongest the Gentiles and yet hath no greater power then they had Albeit it hath bene worshipped as God him self And they because they worshipped there owne imagination and the workmanship of there own haÌ„des without any assuraÌ„ce of God or of his word If any think that I speak more liberally then I am able to proue let him consider what makers the Idoles of the Gentiles had and what makers the God of bread hath And then let the power of bothe be coÌ„pared and let me be rebuked if I speak not the treuth The Prophet in discription of there vanities maketh these gries The earth bringeth forth the tree it groweth by moistour and natural wacknes it is cutted doun by the hand of the hew â—t A parte thereof is burnt a parte spent in vses necessarie to man an other parte chosen to be made an Idole This is formed to the licknes of man or woman and then set vp and worshipped as a God All these and some mo shall we find to assist concurre in the making of this great God of bread The wheat is sowen and nourished in the earth rain dew and heat bring it to maturitie The reaper or scherer cutteth it doune the carte or fled drawen by hors or some other beast draweth it to the barne or to the barnÈaird The tasker or the foot of the ox tradeth it out The fan deliuereth it from the chaff The millar and the milstones by the help of wind or watter maketh it to be meall The smith maketh the yrnes that giues to that God his lenth and breaid licknes and form The fyne substance of that God is nether wood gold nor siluer but watter meal made iÌ„ maner of a draÌ„mock And then must the workmen take good hede to there hand For if the fyre be to hote that Gods skin must be burnt if the yrnes be euill dight his face wil be blecked if in making the roundnes the ring be broken then must an oher of his fellowes receaue that honor to be made a God and the crased or cracked miserable caik that ones was iÌ„ hope to be made a God must be giuen to a babby to play him withall And yet is not all the danger past for if there be not an anoynted preist to play his parte aright all the formar artificers haue lost there laboure for without him that God can not be made yea if he haue not intention to coÌ„secrate the fashioned God remaueth bread and so the blind people committ Idolatrie These are the artificers and workmen that trauell in making of this God I think as many in nomber as the Prophet reciteth to haue trauelled in making of the Idoles And if the power of bothe shal be compared I think they shal be found in all thinges equall except that the God of bread is subiect vnto mo dangers then were the Idoles of the Gentilles Men made them Men make it They were deaf and dum it can not speak hear nor see Brieflie in infirmitie they wholie aggre except that as I haue said the poore God of bread is moste miserable of all other Idoles For according to there matter whereof they are made they will remaine without corruptioÌ„ many yeares But within one year that God will putrifie then he must be burnt They can abyde the vehemencie of the wind frost rain or snow But the wind will blow that God to the sea the rain or the snow wil make it dagh again yea which is most of all to be feared that God is a pray if he be not wel kept to rattes and mise For they will desyre no better denner then white rounde Gods ynew But o then what becometh of Christes natural bodie by myrackle it flies to the heauen againe if the papists teach treulie for how sone soeuer the mouse takes hold so sone flieth Christ away letteth hir gnow the bread A bold and puissant mouse but a feble and miserable God Yet wold I ask a question whether hath the preist or the mouse greater power by his wordes it is made a God by hir teith it ceaseth to be a God Let them auise and then answer If any think that I oght not to mock that which the world so long hath holden and great Princes yet holde in so great veneration I answer that not onelie I but also all godlie oght not onelie to mock but also to curse and detest whatsoeuer is not God and yet vsurpeth the name power and honor of God And also that we oght bothe
the 14. of Genesis There is no mentioÌ„ made of any oblation of bread and wine made by Melchisedec vnto God but onelie that Melchisedec being King of Salem Gen. 14. broght forth bread and wine And that being Priest of the moste hie God he blessed Abraham as the text beareth witnes And therefore I say that the text preueth not that any oblation of bread and wine was made vnto God by Melchisedec M. Quintyne Èœe do affirm that Melchisedec brocht furth bread and wine I speir at Èow to what effect Iudge now if my lord shiftes Iohn Knox. Will ye deuolue vpon me now the persone of an answerer seing that ye refused your self of before the same M. Quintyne This quhilk he calles answering is mair ê“perlie to be called impungnation in this cace Marck what is confessed by my lord in that finding the text to serue nothing for my purpose is plaine impungnation to my pretence And swa are Èe cled rather with the personage of ane impungnar nor ane defendar Iohn Knox. Whether that I susteane the personage of an impungner or of an defender I am not bound to answer what wes done with the bread and wine after that it was broght forth It suffiseth to me for my formar purpose that there is no mention made in the text that bread and wine by Melchisedec was offered vnto God M. Quintyne It ryndes to Èow to preif Let the learned Iudge if this be trew that Melchisedec made no oblation of bread and wine vnto God Iohn Knox. It suffiseth to me that in the text there is no mention made that Melchisedec made any oblation of bread and wine vnto God as ye before alledged and hath laide for your ground M. Quintyne I say the wordes of the text ar plain that Melchisedec maid oblation of bread and wine vnto God Note if so be and desires Èow to impreue the same be the text Iohn Knox. My inprobation is alreadie ledd For in the text there is no meÌ„tion of oblation of bread and wine made vnto God And therefore I am content that the whole world iudge whether the ground be not sufficientlie inprouen or not M. Quintyne Melchisedec brocht furth bread and wine quhilk he did not without cause and Èe deny yat he brocht it furth CoÌ„sider in what straitnes my lord was now for the cause that I alledge ergo for some other cause Quhilk gif Èe wil not nor can not shaw presentlie I sall do deligence to cause the present auditor vnderstand cleirly that he brocht furth bread and wine for the cause alledged be me Prouiding that gif Èe will not shaw the cause presently that Èe sal haue no place to shaw it heirefter Iohn Knox. I answer that he broght forth bread wine the text plainly affirmeth and I haue alreadie granted But that he made oblatioÌ„ of the same because the text ê‘porteth it not I can not graÌ„t it As touching the cause wherefore he broght it forth if place shal be giuen to coniectors and that not grouÌ„ded without great probabilitie and also with sufrage of some of the ancients to wit Iosephus Chrysostom It may be said that Melchisedec being an King broght forth bread and wine to refresh Abraham and his werie souldiors And this for your satisfaction of the cause why he broght forth bread and wine euer still sticking vpon the principal grouÌ„d That because no mention is made that Melchisedec made oblation of bread and wine vnto God I deny it as of before The pennult of September 1562. M. Quintyne Of Iohn Knox saying is aboue reheirsed I conceaue twa heides in special the ane is This was the beginning of the second dayes trauell after that my lord had sleaped that Melchisedec maid na oblation vnto God dot he did bring furth the bread and wine to refresh Abraham and his companie I will answer vnto the saides heides formally and on this maner First I wil mak impugnatioÌ„ vnto ye last heid quhair it is thocht that he did refresh Abraham and his companie In that the text is manifest in ye contrar in sa far as the text testifies that Abraham and his company war refreshed be the spolÈe of the enimies and was not refreshed Let my Lordes argumeÌ„t be noted nor mistered na refreshing of Melchisedec quhairfore it is manifest that Melchisedec brocht furth bread and wine vnto ane vther effect nor to refresh Abraham and his companie Iohn Knox. My formar proue that Melchisedec did not offer bread and wine vnto God standeth vpon this ground that the text maketh mention of no maner oblation made there vnto God of bread and wine And therefore in a mater of so great importance darre not I affirme oblation to be made whill that the holy Ghost kepeth silence And now vnto my Lordes argument Answer to the formar argumeÌ„t first I answer that there is no contradiction betuix these two Abraham and his company were refreshed of the spoolies of there enimies and Abraham and his company were refreshed of the liberalitie of Melchisedec And first because in the tyme when Abraham and his company receaued there nourishement of the substance of there enimies they were out of the presence of Melchisedec and not returned vnto there couÌ„trie But albeit that they had bene euen in the presence of Melchisedec yet they might haue bene nourished partlie be his liberalitie and partlie be there owne prouision And thridly because the text doeth not affirme that Abraham and his wer nourished onely of the spoile I can not admit my Lordes argument M. Quintyne For satisfaction of the auditoure and to cum quicklie to the point without drifting of tyme I will refuse reasoning after scoolmaner and will go Èit to the text and depend thairupon And on this maner sayaud Saif onely that quhilk the Èong men hes eatin I inferr of this text that it dois appeir Èe and is manifest that thair remaned mair nor was eitin be Abraham and his company for the present Iohn Knox. I do not deny but there remaned substance which wes neither eatin nor consumed by Abraham and his company but what shal be hereof concluded M. Quintyne I infer yat not onely thair remaned substance bot thair remaned mekle mair substance nor Abraham and his company was able to consume Èea and to gif ane great deale away for quhy Abraham was victor of foure Kingis quhairthrouch he obtened ane great spolÈe not onely of foure bot also he gat the spolÈe of vther fyue and gat all thair viuers and meat quhairthrouch it is manifest be ye verray plaine text that Abraham and his company had mekle mair meat nor they war able to consume and swa mistered he nor his company na refresching of Melchisedec considering he and his company was bot ane meine nomber as I wold say thre hundreth auchtene Iohn Knox. The victorie of Abraham is in the text specified as also the
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
the meat sal not include bread and wine asweil as his phrase concerning the bread be his opinion without expres Scripture sall include all kinde of vther meatis Iohn Knox. I purge me first that I neither burden my Lorde with informalitie neither yet that his lordship trauelleth by naturall reason onelie to persuade to man But because the whole state of the cause as I vnderstand standeth in this whether that Abraham and his souldiors broght back againe superfluitie of bread wine or not I haue desired the same to be prouen by the expressed worde The phrase is not mine onely but I did aggre with my Lorde Let all men iudge if this reason be not fufficient bringing in the same first And now why I think that Abraham and his broght no superfluitie of bread and wine back againe the reason is because the text doeth plainlie affirme that victualles besydes the other substance wes caried away by the enimies But that any victualles besydes the substaÌ„ce were broght back againe there is no specification M. Quintyne Because I perceaue Iohn Knox dois not meit the heid of my partickle quhair I do mark the conferrence betuix the phrases of the Scriptures alledged be vs baith quhairin efter my iudgement consistes the marckis point of the purpose I will trauell na further thairin notwithstanding that I haue ground of ye Scripture abundantlie And swa I wil go to ane vther heid to assure the reader that Melchisedec brocht not furth bread wine to refresch Abraham and his company I wil ground me properlie vpon the text and on this maner The text sayis Protulit or proferens quhilk is in the singular nomber as ane person bringand furth bread and wine quhairfore necessarlie it concludes he brocht not furth bread and wine to refresch ane multitude as Abraham and his company was quhllk was not possible to ane person to do but onelie to mak Sacrifice conforme to my beginning Iohn Knox. What I haue answered the beneuolent reader shall after iudge to the present coniecture of my Lorde I answer that if Melchisedec allone without al coÌ„pany had broght onely furth so muche bread wine as he wes able goodly to carie yet shal it not be necessarlie concluded that therefore he broght it not forth to gratifie Abraham for an small portion may oftentymes be thankfull to many but my Lorde appeareth to shoote at that ground whiche I haue not laid for my principal And therefore albeit his lordship shuld win it yet my formar strength were litle deminished in my iudgement for onles his lordship be able to proue by the ê‘taine wordes of the text that the bread and wine wer broght forth to be offered vnto God my principall ground doeth alwayes abyde But the phrase of the Scripture and al 's the ordinarie manere of speaking doeth often tymes attribute to the principall man that which at his coÌ„mandement or wil is done by his seruandes or subiectes whereof I offer my self to shaw in Scriptures mo testimonies then one with tyme. And yet this is not my chief ground but this I speak for explaning of the text M. Quintyne Of the formar pertickle I mark twa heides in speciall quhilk dois not onely giue apperance for my pretence bot plainlie dois conuict as the godlie and ineffectionat reader may cleirly perceaue The first heid is quhair Iohn Knox dois allege that Melchisedec brocht furth bread and wine CoÌ„sider what shifts my lord sought to refresch Abraham and his werie companie quhilk plainly differis fra his speaking present say and that it was to gratifie Abraham and his company quhairinto thair is sic manifest diffirence as it giues plaine persuasion his ground in this heid to be nochtis Secondly it is against the ordur of nature to think that ony ane man lat be ane King and ane Preist sould bring furth that might gratifie lat be to refresch sic ane multitude as thre hundreth and auchtene werie personis Iohn Knox. What my Lordes iudgement doeth moue in the harts of the auditure I remitt to there own iudgement but I plainly affirme that neither in my worde nor in my dytment is there any such repugnance or diffirence as iustlie may conuict me to haue an euil ground For in my formar sayinges my wordes were that by probable coniecture the bread wine were broght forth by Melchisedec to refresh Abraham and his werie company I did not affirme Note that he and his whole coÌ„panie were thereof wholylie refreshed And in my latter wordes I say that albeit there had bene no more bread and wine then Melchisedec onely broght forth yet doeth it not thereof necessarlie conclude that the same were not broght forth to gratifie Abraham In which maner of speach this terme gratifie doeth nether repung nor yet differ from the terme refresh otherwise commonlie doeth in maner of speach Benus and Species that is to say the more generall and the inferior For in sofar as Abraham and his company were refreshed by the bread wine were it neuer so litle in sofar doeth he bring it forth to gratifie him Protesting plainly that vnwillinglie I am compelled thus to answer And thus endeth the second dayes trauell all whole spent to answer my Lordes shifting Whereto he wes moued because he wes not able to proue that Melchisedec offered bread and wine vnto God as willinglie ones he tooke to proue M. Quintyne As dois Iohn Knox sa do I with all my hart remit me to the iudgemente of the auditor in this heid and will not report the heides of his formar pertickle for auoiding of prolixtnes But now will I conclude with ane argument And thus beginnes M. Quintyne the thrid day hauing this argument written in paper which he caused to be red M. Quintyne QuhatsuÌ„euer opinion is conceaued of the Sciptures of almichtie God hauand na expres testimonie nor apperance of the same is alluterlie to be refused as sayis Iohn Knox him self Bot swa it is that Iohn Knox a win opinion conceaued or contracted of the Scripture coÌ„cerning the bringing forth of bread and wine by Melchisedec to refresche or gratifie Abraham and his werie company is not expresly contened in the Scripture nor hes na apperance of the samin therefore it followis weill that it is alluterlie be his awin iudgement to be refused Moued on godlie zeill honorable auditor that in this dangerous tyme the treuth sould cum to tryall in sic maner as the conscience of sic as ar perturbed safar as lies in oure sober possibilitie sould be establesed and at quietnes we set furth certane artickles as plesed God to gif vs grace vnto the quhilkis Iohn Knox tuik on hand to mak impungnation specially to the artickle concerning the messe Day houre place beand appointed and obserued I come to defeÌ„d my artickles and in speciall my artickle concerning the messe Let the blindest amongs the Papistes iudge
And according to the samin tuik me properlie to my warrand grounded vpone Goddes word vnto the quhilk warrand Iohn Knox as Èit hes maid na impungnation bot desyred me to sustene and defend the name the actor the ceremonies the opinion of men coÌ„ceaued of the messe and gif it wes ane Sacrifice Propiciatorie I beand willed that we schortlie sould go to the ground and effect and substance of the purpose quhairfore we come I stude be my artickle and warrand as they ar written not refusand to defend the heides aboue reheirsed as tyme and place sould serue And notwithstaÌ„ding that I was sufficientlie grounded vpon Gods worde quhilk I tuik to be my warrand Note that my Lorde confesses that he wes persewer that he hes hurt his own cause and tuik lykewise vpon me farr aboue my habilitie the place and personage of ane defender nottheles throuch occasion that serued as work will beir witnes I was coÌ„strained to tak vpon me the personage of ane persewer farre by my appetit Èea and the weill of my cause and al 's by the opinion of all sic as wald the weill of the samin moued on godlie zeill as God be iudge that the trueth sould cum to a tryal Sed sero sapiunt Poriges to the pleasure of God and satisfaction of the honorable auditor I beand cled with the personage of ane impungnar expres contrar to my mynd for sic causes as ar abone reheirsed I maid impuÌ„gnation not be manlie imaginationis bot be the manifest worde of God And that thre maner of wayes Let your freinds yet iudge first to tak away Iohn Knox conceaued opinion that Melchisedec brocht furth bread wine to refresche or gratifie Abraham and his werie company I called to remembrance how that the spulÈeis of nyne Kingis and of certain citeis to was recouered be Abraham quhairthrouch he and his company was sufficientlie refresched and had yneuch to be refresched on swa that they mistered not to be refreshed with breid and wine of Melchisedec Secondlie quhair Io. Knox maid question that they had not bread wine I returned againe to the text to werifie the samin Quhilk sayes and all thingis pertenand vnto meat Inferrand that in this phrase was contened bread and wine conforme to the phrase of the Scripture quhair mention is maid onelie of bread contenand all thingis necessar for maÌ„nis sustentacion he find and this not sufficient satisfaction Èœit Èeid I not to maÌ„nis imagination bot to the plaine text and grounded me vpon the wordes of the text sayand Melchisedec brocht furth bread and wine Inferrand in that it was spokeÌ„ in the thrid person singular How shal that be prouen it was against the ordoure of nature to think that ane maÌ„ sould bring furth especially he that was ane King and ane preist to tak that paines to bring furth bread and wine that micht gratifie lat be to refresch thre huÌ„dreth and auchtene men Seand that inuinsible persuations properlie gathered vpon the text But did nor does not so appeir to others could na wise bring Iohn Knox to confesse that thing quhilk appered vnto me conforme to the Scriptures of almichtie God and all gude resson he sould haue confessed Then concluded I with the Scriptures Nor yet will do to hurt a iust cause as I did begin as my conclusion wil beir witnes that he wald haue iustified his opinion conceiued of the Scripture coÌ„form to his awin sayingis be the expres word of God And of my liberalitie wil grant him Èit gif he hes any maner of apperance of the samin notwithstanding he said to me he wald not gif me ane hair of his heid gif I sould stand thir seuen Èeires Iohn Knox. Protesting first that I may answer in writ vnto the formar argument because as I perceiue it wes before conceiued in writ I enter in shortlie vnto the long discourse made by my Lorde not willing to answer euerie part thereof but onely so muche as may appear to infirme the iust cause And first where that my Lorde affirmeth that I haue made no impungnation vnto his lordships artickle concerning the masse I am content that not onelie this honorable audience but also the whole earth be iudge in that point For I haue plainly denied Note that ether the masse hath approbation of the plaine worde of God ether in name action opinion to witt written of the masse taucht of the masse and in the conscience of men conceiued of the masse finally that the actor therof for his vsurped power hath no greater assurance of Gods worde Which whole heades being denyed to be disputed at the present against my Lordrs artickle and ground I did thus reason that his lordeship wes not able to proue that Christ Iesus in his latter Supper did offer his bodie and blood vnto God his Father vnder the formes of bread and wine His lordeship taking for his proue the alledged Sacrifice of Melchisedec in bread and wine offered vnto God I did lykewise deny that Melchisedec did at that tyme to wit in the presence of Abraham offer ether bread or wine vnto God which hath bene these two dayes by-past in controuersie betuix his lordeship and me I haue alwayes denied that the holy Spirit in any notable or euident place of Scripture doeth affirme suche an sacrifice to haue bene made by Melchisedec vnto God whil the I did hear no place of Scripture adduced for the approbation thereof my Lorde demandand of me what then I thoght wes done with the bread wine I answered that albeit I wes not bound to giue my iudgement because that he wes bound to proue his affirmatiue as yet I say he is bouÌ„d and thereof I wil be content Considder what iudges I admit that his lordshipes moste fauorable freindes of best iudgemeÌ„t yea euen if his Lordeship please the Lordes of the Session be iudges in that point I answered I say that be coniecture the bread and wine were broght furth by Melchisedec to refreshe Abraham and his werie company Vpon which occasion his lordship how iustlie let all meÌ„ iudge did cleith him self againe Contrar the obiectioÌ„ made of impossibilitie that it was against nature that Melchisedec allone should briÌ„g forth bread c. without my procurement with the personage of ane impungnar And did adduce suche thinges as best pleased his lordship whereto I did answer as the whole conference will report and as I suppose sufficientlie to euerie thing obiected except that because my Lord did not touche the exposition alledgede by me vpon the wordes Melchisedec allone did bring forth bread and wine as my Lorde alledgeth I differed to bring in the conference of Scriptures to proue that it is an thing in Scripture verrie commone that the thing that is done at the coÌ„mand of any notable persone is attributed vnto him self althogh it be done be
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
and yet hath no testimonie of Gods expressed worde therefore it is to be reiected Yf on this maner ye had reasoned my Lord as of necessitie ye must do if ye conclude any thing against me I wold haue immediatlie denied the second part of your argument and haue said that to know or define what wes done with the bread and wine broght out by Melchisedec is no artickle of our beleue nether yet is it a doctrine necessarie to the Saluation of man For nether did Adam Abel Seth Enos Henoch Mathusalem nor Noie beleue any suche thing nether yet is there since the dayes of Abraham any coÌ„mandement giuen by God to beleue suche an artickle yea further in the whole Scriptures there is no mention made what wes done with that bread and wine and therefore it can be no artickle of our beleue nor yet no doctrine concerning our Saluation and so hath your argument broken the owne neck Yf I list my Lord to sport a lytill with you I might find some occasion in the second part of your argument For where ye affirme that my opinion coÌ„cerning the bringing forth of the bread and wine by Melchisedec to refresh Abraham and his companie is nether expresly conteined in the word of God nether yet hath appearance of the same and therefore vtterlie it is to be reiected Now my Lorde giue me leaue to turne this part of your argument in your owne bosome if I can and that so I may do thus I reason The opinion conceaued by my Lorde Abbote concerning bread and wine broght forth by Melchisedec to be offered vnto God is not expresly conteined in Gods Scriptures therefore it is vtterlie to be reiected Bewarre my Lorde that ye be not beaten with your own batton Let my lord degest this for then must the masse yea the best part of the same stand vpon an vnsure ground that is to say vpon the opinion of man and hauing no assurance of Gods expressed worde But now my Lorde meryues set asyde I humblie require you by my pen as I did by mouth that depelie ye consider with what coÌ„science before God ye daâ— affirme the doctrine to be holsome yea necessary to be beleued ye are able to bring no prufe out of the manifest word of God The second day of our conference and disputation when I wes coÌ„strained to answer your treuole coÌ„iectures and vanities your bragges and boste ofter blowen out then ones were that your probation should be so euident that the stones should heare your probation and the dead walles should se the iustnes of your cause I paciently did abyde althogh perchance with the greif of some brethren these your wantone wordes and thoght with my self Parturiunt montes c. But what is now produced and broght forth the world may se It may appeare that ye were hard beset when for to auoide the prufe of your owne affirmatiue ye fled to impugne that which apperteaneth nothing to the purpose For as I wes not bound to haue shewen vnto you what I thoght wes done with the bread and wine broght forth by Melchisedec so wes I not bound to haue defended my interpretation and iudgement of that place but vnto you it alwayes aperteineth and if euer we meit againe vpon that head it wil be yet iudged to aperteine to you to proue that Melchisedec did at that time offer bread and wine vnto God which I am well assured that ye are neuer able to do by any testimonie of Gods worde Note And therefore must I say the masse standeth groundles And the greatest paâ—râ—â—â— thereof for all his sicker riding hath ones loste his stirropes yea is altogether set besydes his sadil And yet the common brute goeth that ye my Lorde your flatterers and collateralles brag greatlie of your victorie obteined in disputation against Iohn Knox but I will not beleue you to be so vaine onles I shall knowe the certantie by your owen hand writ Let all men now iudge vpon what ground the Sacrifice of the masse standeth The heauenly Father hath not planted within his Scriptures suche a doctrine It followeth therefore that it oght to be rooted out of all godlie meÌ„nes hartes the end Imprinted at Edinburgh by Robert â—ekpreuk Cum priuilegio 1563.
counsell deulie indicted and conuened But where that he compareth the doctrine of the forenamed with the damnable heresie of Arrius I wold lykewise haue wished vnto his lordship greater foresight in so graue a mater For howsoeuer the Arrians appeared to abouÌ„d in testimonies of Scriptures without all ground indistinctlie coÌ„gested and that because they made no diffreence betuix the two natures in Iesus Christe Let my lorde accuse before he coÌ„paiâ— but did foolishlie appropriat to the Godhead that which did onelie aperteane to the manlie nature yet think I that my lord shall neuer be able by plaine Scripture to impung any chief head ether affirmed or denyed in doctrine of saluatioÌ„ by the foresaides persons lyke as did the godly and learned in there ages the foresaid damnable herisie To the last I haue alreadie promised to answer to my Lordes argumeÌ„t in writ and therefore oght not to be burdened with it now especiallie because it is without our formar ground and doeth not properlie aperteane to the cause And yet therefore now last for conclusion that we shal not be compelled continually to repeat on thing I desyre my lord according to his deutie and reason of disputation Heir my lord stayed for answer offerred to me a book to bring forth his probation of his two formar groundes be me plainly denyed This conference being ended for this tyme my Lorde presentlie did rise for trouble of body and then Iohn Knox did shortlie resume the principall groundes And because the noblemen heir assembled were altogether destitute of all ê“uision bothe for hors and man the said Iohn humblie required the foresaid Lord that it wold please him to go to Air where that better easiment migh be had for all estates Which because my Lord vtterlie refused the said Iohn desired when that the said conference should be ended My Lorde did promes that vpon licence purchased Whither I haue so done or nor mo then them selues can witnes of the Quenes maiestie and her honorable counsell that he wold coÌ„peir in Edinburgh and there in there presence finish the said conference The said Iohn did promes to trauel with the secret counsel that the said licence might be obteined And desired the foresaid Lorde to do the lyke with the Quenes maiestie whereupon the said Iohn Knox took instruments and documents M. Quintyne At the conclusion of our ressoning The answer wes giuen before so that it apperteaned not to me to proue my interpretatioÌ„ but it appertened to my lord to proue that melchisedec offerred c. But that can not my lord vnderstand I gaif Iohn Knox ane argument in writ desiring him that he wald iustifie his opinion be expres testimonie of Scripture or ony apperance thereof Quhairto the said Iohn required tyme to gif answer and the tyme micht nawise serue of farder ressoning for sic causes as ar comprehended in the said Iohn Knox writing And as toward his desyre of me to Air treulie it was the thing that I micht not presentlie coÌ„modiously do Bot alwayes I will copeir before ye Quenes grace and sic as hit grace plesis to take to be auditors to defend the saides artickles and in special the artickle concerning the messe as thay ar written quâ—en and quhair it be hir grace plesure swa that the habilitie of my bodie will serue ony wise as I hope to God it sall to quhom be praise glorie and honor for euer Crosraguell The answer to my Lordes last argument proponed by him in writ the last day of disputation The argument is this M. Quintyne WHatsumeuer opinion is conceaued of the Scriptures of almichty God hauand na expres testimonie nor apperance of the samin is vtterlie to be refused as sayes Iohn Knox him self Bot swa it is that Iohn Knox a win opinion coÌ„ceaued or contracted of the Scripture concerning the bringing furth of bread and wine be Melchisedec to refresh or gratifie Abraham and his werie company is not expresly conteined in the Scripture nor hes na apperance of the samin thairfore it falâ—â— wis weiâ— that it is allâ—terlie be his awin iudgement to be refused Iohn Knox. Yf I should grant vnto you my Lorde your whole argument I should but declare my self ignorant of the art and â—â—â—lyndful of my owne affirmation but yet had ye prouen nothing of your intent The chief question and controuersie betuix you and me is not whether that my interpretation of that place which 〈◊〉 your instance and 〈…〉 not but whether that Melchisedec the figure of Christe did offer vnto God bread wine whiche ye haue affirmed and haue laid it to be the ground and cause why it behoued Christe Iesus to haue made oblation of his bodie and blood vnder the formes of bread and wine in his latter Supper Which bothe I denyed So that it rests to you to proue that Melchisedec the figure of Christ did offer vnto God bread and wine c. And apperteines not vnto me to proue my opinion nor interpretation For supposing that my opinion coÌ„ceaued of that place were to be reiected as ye are neuer able to proue it to â—e yet is your affirmatiue neuer the better prouen for if ye will conclude it wes not broght forth to refresh Abraham which yet is not prouen ergo it wes broght forth to be offered vnto God babes will mock you and send you againe to your logick But yet my Lord with your leaue I must come nerar you and say that the maior or first part of your argument is fals and that ye falsly alledge vpon me that which I neuer spak nor ment Read the whole conference betuix you and me and ye shall not find that I haue simple affirmed that all opinion of man conceaued of the Scriptures is vtterlie to be reiected onles the same be prouen by the manifest worde of God For I am not ignorant that some interpretatioÌ„s ar tollerable yea and may be to the edification of the Church althogh they do not fully expres the minde of the holie Goste in that place But I haue affirmed and yet affirmes that nether the authoritie of the Church the determination of the counsell nor the opinion of the doctor is to be receaued in matters of faith in the doctrine concerning our saluation onles the same be prouen by the expres word of God And therfore my Lord with your leaue I must say that ether wilfully or els by some ouersight ye haue omitted bothe in the maior in the minor of your argument that which should haue bene the cause and assurance of your conclusion For thus ye oght to haue reasoned Whatsoeuer opinion is conceaued of the Scripture of almightie God concerning faith and the doctrine of Saluation hauing no expres testimonie of the same is to be reiected But so it is that Iohn Knox owne opinion concerning the bringing forth of bread and wine by Melchisedec is a matter concerning faith and the doctrine of our Saluation