THE FIRST CHAPTER.

Who would not thinke these Defenders were true men,Confuta­tion. that in the beginning of their Apologie speake so much of truth? Yet who knoweth not, that often times euill meaning is hidde vnder good wordes? Who hath not heard that filthy quenes in time and place vse the honest talke of chaste ma­trones? The these commendeth iust dealinges, and many times sheweth a stomake against false harlots no man more. Among all none pretend truth in wordes so much as hereti­kes. [Page] Whose guyle because it is more perilous, the more it ought to be taken heede of.2. Cor. 11. I feare me (sayeth S. Paul to the Corinthians) lest as the serpent begyled Eue by his sutteltie, so your wittes be corrupted and fallen awaye from that plainenes which is in Christ. The de­uil, the vvorld, the flesh, the here­tike, vvhe­reby doo they dece­yue vs. Matth. 7. The Apostle feared because of the crafty Iewes, who the rather to deceiue, mingled scripture with their owne traditions, and truth with falshed. The deuill leadeth man to euil by promise of good, the world by shewe of that which semeth faire, the flesh by sense of vaine pleasure. So bringeth the heretike his hearer to errour in faith by colour and pre­tence of truth. Not euery one that sayeth Lord Lord, shall enter into the kingdome of heauen, sayeth Christ, nor all they that had so often in their mouthes the temple of our Lord, Ierem. 7. the temple of our Lord, honoured our Lord like true seruauntes in the temple. So neither be these men fownd true in pointes of faith, that speake so much of truth, that boast so much of the gospell, that rattle nothing but scriptures. They are rather much like to the Maniches,De vtilit. credend. ad Honoratū, lib. 1. cap. 1. Confess. li. 5. cap. 6. who promised their hearers to discusse and set forth the truth most euidently vnto them, and to deliuer them from all maner of errour. By which fayre promises S. Augustin was allured to be a diligent scoler of theirs for the space of nyne yeres. Because it standeth vs much vpon to beware of them, neither that can we do, ex­cept we knowe them, forasmuch as they come vnto vs lap­ped in shepeskinnes, and be rauening wolues: their deceite be­ing secrete, Christ gaue vs a lesson how to discerne them. By their fruites ye shall knowe them, Matth. 7. sayeth he. What be the fruites of their actes and workes, the world seeth, feeleth and lamenteth. what is the fruit of their lerning, here is pro­pounded. which I trust so to discusse, as to any man of iud­gement, it shal appere no more to be beleued, then their wor­kes are to be praised. And nowe to you Syrs.

Euen in the beginning and as I maye saye in the forehead of your Apologie, whiles I examine it diligently,Tvvo vn­semely faultes founde in the be­ginning of the A­pologie. I finde two fowle faultes, the one in your rhetorike, the other in your lo­gike. By which two faultes both the vnskill of your secreta­rie, and the weakenes of your matter maye be espied, as the Asse I spake of right now was by his two eares staring out vnder the lions skynne. Of your diuinitie I saie litle nowe,The De­fenders d uinitie in grosse. more hereafter, which is nothing els in grosse, but a lumpe of lyes, errours, and heresies.

First touching your Rhetorike,Their fault in Rhetorike where as there be many sortes of faulty proemes or beginninges mencioned by the lerned authours treating of the preceptes and rules of Rhe­torike: one of the word is that, which is such as the aduersa­rie maye vse. Which by them is called Exordium commune. Exordium commune. That is to witte, such a beginning, as will serue the defendant nolesse then the plaintife, or contrarywise. Of that sorte is the beginning of your Apologie. For declaring at large that truth hath euer ben persecuted, what sayth it therein (the faultes a­mended) that we may not say the same? And so is it common to vs both. If I were one of your syde, I should wish, ye had not ben so farre ouersene in the beginnings, specially sith that a faultly proeme may be sene as a scarred face,Institut, orator. lib. 4. cap. 1. saieth Quintili­an, and that shipmaister is accōpted very bad, who at the set­ting out of the hauen dryueth the shippe on the rockes. Con­cerning the matter it selfe ye treate in your proeme, although we graunt theffect of it, and that truth is persecuted: yet we mislike in you, that alleaging Tertullian to helpe your cause,Tertulliā not truly alleaged. ye iniurie the Doctor by altering his wordes. which vn­true dealing though ye vse very much throuh your whole booke, as it shall appere: yet were ye not wise by falsefying the first sentence so much to impayer your credite. Tertulli­an sayeth not in the report of truthes complaint,In apolo­get. cap. 1. that truth [Page] readely findeth ennemies and slaunderers amongest those that know her not, but that truth sone findeth ennemies inter extra­neos, amongest aliants or strangers. Now the Christen catho­likes whom ye call Papistes, among whom by false surmise ye pretend the truth a be persecuted,Catholi­kes be not aliants in respect of the truth. be not in respect of the truth aliants or strangers. Which as to proue is easy, so nede­les, for asmuch as your selues in sundry places of your booke reproue them for resisting the truth which they knowe. If, by your owne confession, we knowe the truth, then are we not aliants to it. If we be not aliants to it, then perteineth the saying of Tertullian nothing to vs. Thus when ye sawe Ter­tullian would not serue your tourne with his owne wordes, ye forced him to serue you with your wordes, geuing him as it were a newe liuery with your owne badge, and made exchan­ge of extranoes, with ignotos. And so by your Ladyes interpre­tation, ye report truth to finde ennemies amongest those that knowe it not. But thereby ye falle into the same incon­uenience, as ye should, if ye had truly alleaged the place. For confessing vs to acknowledge the truth, how make ye this good in respect of vs the catholikes whom ye cal Papistes, that truth is persecuted among those that knowe it not?Tertulliās vvordes truly sen­sed. For the right sense of the place, where Tertullian sayeth truth to be a Pilgrime or stranger in the earth, and sone to finde ennemies among aliants: he meant by aliants no other then infidels and paynimes,Aliants. Tertulliās time. among whom Christen people then lyued, and were daily persecuted. Which time was within litle more then one hundred yeres after Christes death. But after that the gospel had ben sounded abrode by the Apostles and their successours through all the earth,Psal. 18. after that the Emperours them selues and all the people euery where had receiued the faith: then was the truth no more a wanderer, stranger, or pil­grime in the earth, then founde the truth (to speake truly) en­nemies [Page 6] no more among aliants. For then was the earth no more earth cōcerning the true beleuers, but in respect of their outward persons, but it was the kingdome of heauen, that is to saye, the church. Neither were the beleuing people then a­liants in respect of truth, but dere frendes and kinnesfolke, ac­cording to that Christ said in the gospel,Marc. 3. he that doth the wil of God, the same is my brother, my sister, and my mother. Wherefore ye if wil now vpbraid any sorte for persecuting the truth with Tertullians sentence, ye must go to Turkes, Saracenes, Iewes, and Paynimes, where these aliantes be. For among the catho­likes though ye call them papistes, they be not. If ye accompt the iourney to farre, keping your former will, ye maye go neare home, and tel your tale to heretikes, for among christen men heretikes be they, among whom the truthe touching faith findeth ennemies, and is persecuted, so should ye spare your labour, and not go farre from your selues. Now let vs see to what ende ye dryue this common place of the persecution of truth, which ye haue treated in your proeme with so many wordes vnnecessarely.

VVherfore vve ought to beare yt the more quyetlye, Apologie. vvhich haue taken vppon vs to professe the Gospell of Christ, yf vve for the sa­me cause be handled after the same sorte: and yf vve, as our fore­fathers vveare longe a go, bee lykevvyse at this day tormented and bayted vvith raylings, vvith spitefull dealinges and vvith lyes, and that for no desert of our ovvn, but onely bicause vve teache and ac­knovvledge the truthe.

THE SECOND CHAPTER.

O blessed folowers of the Patriarkes, Prophetes, Apostles,Confuta­tion. Martyrs, and Christ him selfe, that suffer so much persecu­tion in your innocencie, hauing deserued nothing at all, and only because ye teach and acknowledge the truth.Their fault in lo­gike. But Syrs by your leaue how foloweth this (vvherefor) of your former common place so largely treated? This is your other fowle fault, which ye make in your logike. How proue ye this argu­ment, [Page] The truth is persecuted, and the professours of the truth haue euer ben euill treated, wherefore we ought to beare it quietly being likewise handeled for the same cause? Thought ye with your long proeme of the persecution of truth so to steale away truth, and to dazell the iudgement of your readers, as ye might now foist in such a false conclu­sion?It is not truth for vvhich the gospellers be punis­hed, but sedi [...]ō and heresie. Make your reason so wittely as ye can, and peruse all the subtilitie of your logike: ye shall neuer be able to con­clude, that ye suffer persecution for truthes sake, or that ye haue the truth. If ye make this argument, (wich ye seme priuely to make leauing out the minor) the professours of truth be persecuted for truthes sake, we are the professours of truth,The argu­ment vvhich the Defenders make their chiefe gro­unde to stand on, cōcludeth, not for them, so their foun­dation is naught. therefore we suffer persecution for truthes sake, if ye saye thus: we imbarre you from your conclusion by denying your minor, wich ye can neuer proue. And if ye reason thus, (which waye also ye seme to vse) the professours of truth suffer persecution, we suffer persecution, ergo we are profes­sours of truth: we graunt your minor is true, but your argu­ment is naught. And by like reason theues might saie, True men be persecuted, (which many times we see) we are perse­cuted, ergo we are true men. So might all heretikes saye, and by that argument proue them selues right beleuers, wherfore vntill ye proue that ye succede the Patriarkes, Prophetes, A­postles, Martyrs and Christ him selfe in professing the truth, boast not (as ye do) of your forefathers. For not they whom ye name in your proeme, but Huss, Wicklef, Peter Bruse, Berengarius, Waldenses, Albingenses, Donatistes, Aerians, Manichees, and such the like heretikes iustly condemned of the church, were your forefathers. Forth ye go and saye.

Apologie They crye out vpon vs at this present euery vvheare, that vve are all heretiques, and haue forsaken the faith, and haue vvith nevve persvvasions and vvicked learninge vtterly dissolued the concorde of the Churche.

Thus we crye not out vpon you, as ye report,Confuta­tion. but the thinges which here ye speake, crye out vpon you. For all these thinges for the most part and many other as wicked as these, be true, and the same many godly catholike men saye of you with great sorowe of hart, much lamenting to see them so true. But that ye haue done all these thinges only v­pon a desire of contention and strife, as ye surmise vs to char­ge you, that they saye not, who haue well considered your procedinges. For they knowe many thinges by you and the companions of your sectes to haue ben done otherwise, some through pride and vaine glorie, some through rancour and malice, some through ambition and couetise, some through desire of fleshly pleasure. But to speake of these matters more particularly, If ye haue forsaken the faith ye were baptized in, if ye be gone from the faith which S. Eleutherius pope and martyr the first Apostle of Britaine preached in this land by Damianus and Fugatius within litle more then one hun­dred yeres after Christes death,Damia­nus and Fugatius first Apo­stles of the Britons, Augustin{us} and Meli­tus of the English. if ye refuse the faith which Gregorie the great that holy Pope caused to be preached to our auncestours the english nation by Augustinus, Melitus, and other holy priestes, and haue thereby dissolued the vni­tie of the catholike church, and leaue not to mainteine the doctrine whereby the same vnitie is dissolued: all this presup­posed, we see not but that this crye made vpon you is true, for then are ye heretikes in dede.

That vve renevv, and as it vveare, fetche againe from hell, Apologie. the ol­de and many a daie condempned heresyes: that vve sovv abroade nevve sects, and suche broyles as nevver yearst vveare hearde of al­so that vve are already deuided into contrarye partes and opinions, and coulde yet by no meanes agree vvell amonge our selues.

Sith that ye raise vp againe the heresie of Aerius in de­nying prayer for the dead,Confuta. That the­se Defen­ders be re­nevvers of olde here­sies. who was for the same accompted an heretike aboue eleuen hundred yeres past: sith that ye [Page] raise vp the heresie of Manichaeus that lyued before him, in taking awaye free will: sith that ye raise vp the heresie of Vi­gilantius in refusing to praye to Saintes, and to honour their holy reliques, and to kepe lightes in churches to the honour of God, and many other heresies besides of olde time con­demned: sith that ye raise vp the heresie of Berengarius in de­nying the presence of Christes very body in the blessed sa­crament of the aulter: and sith that ye adde to those mo here­sies of your owne, as thappointing of the supreme pastor­ship or regiment of the church in all thinges and causes spi­rituall to a laie magistrate, the denying of the externall sacri­fice of the church which we call the masse, the maintenance of the breach of vowes of pouertie, chastitie, and obedience: Againe sith that your diuision into sundry sectes can neither be dissembled nor defended, wherof we shall speake hereaf­ter more largely: all these thinges beside sundry other of like enormitie being true, as they be most true: this other crye made vpon you is true.

Apol. That vve be cursed creatures, and lyke the Gyauntes do vvarre againste God him selfe, and lyue cleane vvithout any regarde or vvorshippinge of God:

Confut.What ye be, God knoweth, and your owne conscience should know. Our Lord amend both you and vs. But to say somewhat to that your gilty mynde imagineth the world to report of you, If they which take awaye and abhorre the externall sacrifice,Lucae. 22. 1. Cor. 11. wherein Christ according to his owne in­stitution, is offered to his father, make no warre against God: if they which make Christ a minister of shadowes, signes, tokens, and figures: they which feare not to breake their so­lemne vowes made to God, and defend the same as well do­ne: they which assure them selues of their saluation, and the­refore liue dissolutly without due care and feare of God: If (I say) they be not cursed creatures and like Gyauntes that [Page 8] warre against God, then are ye cleare of this charge. Whether ye be such or no, I report me to your owne testimonies in this Apologie conteined.

That vve despise all good deedes: Apolo. that vve vse noe discipline of vertue, no lavves, no customes: that vve esteeme neither righte, nor order, nor equitie, nor iustice: that vve geue the brydell to al naugh­tines, and prouoke the people to all licenciousnes and lust.

Fasting was thought in olde time a good worke,Confut. and the better when it was kept for religious obedience.Faste for Policie. Fo. 2. Pa. 2. Ye teache men to fast for policie, not for religion. And by your statute of wednesdayes faste, who so euer shall write or saye that fo­rebearing of flesh is a seruice of God otherwise then as other polytike lawes are, they shall be punished as spreaders of false newes are and ought to be. When ye preache only faith not to remoue the merite of workes before baptisme as S. Paule meant it, but also after baptisme:Epist. ad Roma. Bridle g [...] ­uen to levvdnes by this ne­vve Go­spell. when ye take away the sa­crament of confession and absolution, geue ye not the bridle to all naughtines? Aske merchantes what bridle they haue for their prentises, maisters what staye they haue for the­ire seruauntes, fathers what discipline they haue for theire children. Do not some of your gospelling maides of Lon­don refuse to serue, except they may haue libertie to heare a sermon before noone, and a play at after noone?

That vve labour and seke to ouerthrovve the state of Monarchies and Kingdomes, Apolog. and to bringe all thinges vnder the rule of the rashe inconstante people and vnlearned multitude.

Can monarkes and princes seme to be mainteined by your sectes, who teach the people to rebell for pretensed religion?Confut. Allow ye the monarchie of the Romaine Empire, who so much complaine in your Apologie,Of this see hereafter, by vevv of the table. that the Pope made Charlemaigne Emperour of the West? hath the Quene of Scotland cause to praise the procedinges of your gospell, through occasion whereof she ruleth not her subiectes, but is rather ruled of her subiectes?

Apologie. That vve haue seditiously fallen from the Catholique Churche, and by a vvicked schisme and diuision haue shaken the vvhole vvorlde, and trobled the common peace and vniuersal quiet of the church: and that as Dathan and Abyron conspired in times past against Moises and Aaron, euen so vve at this day haue renounced the Bishop of Rome vvithout anye cause resonable.

Cōfutat.Before Luthers time al christen people came together pea­ceably into one church, vnder one head, as shepe into one folde vnder one shepeherd, and so lyued vnamines in domo in one accorde. But after that Satan who at the beginning begy­led Eue,Diuision and schis­me folo­vved vpō Luthers preaching 1. Ioan. 2. had persuaded some to tast of the poisoned apple of Luthers newe doctrine: they went out from vs, who were not of vs, (for if they had ben of vs, they had remained with vs) forsooke the catholike church of Christ, sorted them selues into syna­goges of Antichrist, withdrewe them selues from obedience toward their Pastor and iudge, and sundred them selues into diuerse sectes. This schisme, diuision, and conspiracie against the head shepeherd, is nolesse wicked, then that of Dathan and Abiron against Moyses and Aaron was.Nume. 16. For as God commaunded Moyses and Aaron to be obeyed of the children of Israel, so Christ commaunded all his shepe to obeye and he­are the voice of him,Ioan. 21. whom in Peter and succeding Peter, he made shepherd ouer his whole flocke. What trouble and bro­ile hath sithens that time through this diuision happened to Christendome, the smart thereof so kepeth it in fresh memo­rie, as I nede not to reherse, and as it were with a rough hand touch the wound that is yet rawe.

Apologie. That vve set nought by the aucthoritie of thauncient fathers and Councells of oulde time: that vvee haue rashly and presumptuous­ly disanulled the olde cerimonies, vvhich haue ben vvell alovved by oure fathers and forefathers manye hundreth yeare past, bothe by good customes and also in ages of more puritie: and that vvee haue by our ovvne priuate head vvithout the aucthoritie of any sacred and general Councell brought nevv traditions into the Church, and haue don all these thinges not for Religions sake, but only vppon a desire of contention and stryfe.

The auncient fathers are but men, if they please you not.Confuta­tion. But if ye finde any colour of aduauntage but in the newe scoole men, ye make much of it. So that your owne opinion is the rule to esteme them or despise them. CouncelsCouncels ye ad­mitte as your phansie and pleasure leadeth, sometimes three, sometimes foure, sometimes fiue or six. But all ye would ne­uer admitte, and yet so many as are generall and haue ben confirmed by the See Apostolike, they are all of like aucto­ritie. Concerning ceremonies,Cere­monies of the church a­bolished by the gospel­lers. if ye shewe vs not the vse of Chrisme in your churches, if the signe of the crosse be not borne before you in processiōs and otherwheres vsed, if holy water be abolished, if lightes at the gospell and cōmunion be not had, if peculiar vestimentes for deacons, priestes, bishops be taken awaye, and many such other the like: iudge ye whe­ther ye haue duly kept the olde ceremonies of the church.

As for your newe traditions, rites and ceremonies, I can not tell what to make of them, nor whether I maye so terme them. I trowe ye make none or fewe newe rites and ceremo­nies.The ne­vve cere­monies of the Defē­ders de­uise. Except a communion or masse without water mingled with the wine, without praier for the dead, without making the signe of the crosse ouer the bread and wine, pulling doune of aulters, and setting a borde in stede thereof, the ministers standing thereat with his face toward the south, hath euer ben heard of before ye framed these prety deuises. Vpon what respect ye haue done all these thinges, or rather vndone many other, both mo and better: it shall appere by the ende. For if ye will yelde in any one of them, when your errour is plai­nelye detected, as it is well knowen of your side who hath so promised: then maye one thinke, ye feare God. But if ye will stand in defence of all thinges, what so euer is brought to the contrary, it will thereby appeare, ye mainteine your strange opinions and deuises of selfe will and vnduly.

Apologie. But that they for their parte haue chaunged no maner of thinge, but haue helde and kepte still suche a nomber of yeares to this ve­ry day all thinges as they vvere deliuered from the Apostles, and vvell approued by the most auncient Fathers.

Confuta­tion.No manner of thing haue we changed, that is of necessi­tie either to be beleued, or to be obserued. What thinges ye burden vs with not being kept still, as they were deliuered from the Apostles and allowed by the fathers: thereto we shall answere you hereafter when we come to those places. Now let vs not staie here, because ye bring yet no speciall matter that greatly requireth answere. It foloweth in your Apologie.

Apologie. And that this matter shoulde not seeme to be don but vppon pri­uie slaunder, and to be tossed to and fro in a corner onely to spite vs, there haue ben besides vvylely procured by the Bisshop of Rome, certaine parsons of eloquence yenough, and not vnlearned neyther, vvhiche shoulde put theire helpe to this cause novv almost despai­red of, and should polishe and set furth the same, both in bookes and vvith long tales, to the end, that vvhen the matter vvas trimlye and eloquently handled, ignorant and vnskilful persons mighte sus­pecte there vvas som great thing in it. Indeede they perceiued that their ovvne cause did euerye vvhere go to vvrake, that their sleigh­tes vvere novve espied and lesse esteemed, and that their helpes did daily faile them, and that their matter stoode altogether in great neede of a conninge spokesman.

THE THIRD CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion.This cause (whereby ye meane the catholike religion) is not despayred of. Thereof if we despaired, we should offend in weacknes of faith, as ye offend in corruption of the faith. We can not despaire of this cause,The con­fidence of the catho­likes tou­chīg their cause. Luc. 21. onlesse we would forsake our faith as ye haue. For beleuing Christ, which our faith lea­deth vs vnto, we can not mistrust the continuance of this cause. Heauen and earth shall passe, but my wordes shall not passe, sayeth truth it selfe. And his wordes tell vs, that he will be with his church all dayes to the world [...]s ende. Mat. 28. and that he hath besought his father to geue to it the spirite of truth to remaine Ioan. 14. [Page 10] with it for euer. then be we most assured of this cause.The ca­tholike church as­suredly defended. We tell you therefore, it standeth, and shal stand by Christes presen­ce, and by the holy ghostes assistance, to the ende. Your cause yet standeth not, but wauereth and tottereth, as that which S. Paul termeth a puffe of doctrine, Ephes. 4. and doubtles shortly fall it shal, as all heresies haue fallen. The truth of the catholike faith shal preuaile, maugre the power of Antichrist and all his garde. All heresies that haue ben before our time, be con­demned, put to silence, and buried. Of which certaine ye goe about as it were to rake out of their graues againe. The au­ctours and professours of them be dead and rotten, and nowe euery of their sprites crieth peccaui, but to late, in hell fyre with weeping and grinting of teeth. The like iudgement looke ye and your folowers to haue, if ye repent not and re­uoke your heresies by time. And as ye shall haue your iust measure of tormentes for your heresies, so shall ye haue the same increaced for your false slaunders. Of wich this is one,A slaun­der. where ye saye the bishop of Rome hath subornat certaine elo­quent men to helpe this cause with their eloquence, as though either the catholike religion neded such helpe of a cunning spokesman, or he vsed any crafty and vniust shiftes for staie thereof, which in conscience he liked not him selfe. For somuch importeth your word subornate in Latine. And if ye had named those whom he hath wylely subornated, your tale had the lesse smelled of a slaunderous lye.

Novv as for those thinges vvhich by them haue been layed against vs, Apologie. in part they be manifestly false & condempned so by their ovvne iudgementes vvhiche spake them, partly again, though they be as false to in deede, yet beare they a certain shevv and colour of truth, so as the Reader (if he take not good hede) may easily be tripped and brougt into errour by them, specially vvhen their fine and cun­ninge tale is added thereunto: and part of them be of suche sor­te, as vvee oughte not to shunne them as crimes or faultes, but to acknovvledg and professe them as thinges vvell done, and vpon [Page] very good reason.

Confuta­tion.If ye had here vttered any particular and special pointes, ye should haue heard particular answere. Now that ye speake in general, take ye this for an answere generall. First what thinges the catholikes moued with very cōscience and loue of truth laye against you, they are true, as it shal be manifest­ly proued, when ye bring vs to your specialties. Neither bur­den they you with ought, wherein by their owne iudge­mentes they condemne them selues, as ye slaunder them not only here, but oftentimes in your booke. For if they iud­ged otherwise, they would not wittingly do against their iudgement. That is the speciall propertie of an heretike, whom.Tit. 3. S. Paul biddeth all men to auoyde, knowing that he that is such, is peruerted, an synneth euen condemned by his owne iudgement.

Secondly, Neither is there lesse truth in the writinges of certaine catholike men, wherein they shewe both your blas­phemous heresies and your wicked actes, because their vtte­rance is fine and cunning. For truth maye be tolde finely, and falsehed grossely. Luther ye knowe powred out his he­resies and villanies against king Henry the eight rudely, and a lerned catholike of England bearing the name of Rossaeus answered him cunningly.Rossaeus. Hereof (if nede were) we could re­cite other examples ynough.

Thirdly, whereas certaine thinges against your side obiected by the catholikes, ye do not onely not shunne as crimes and faultes, but also acknowledge and vpholde as well done: If ye meane your robbing of churches, persecuting of men for standing stedfastly in the faith of the holy forefathers, your incestuous mariagies of monkes, friers, and Nonnes, your breach of solemne vowes for fleshly pleasure, your propha­ning and abandoning of holy sacramentes, your contempt of [Page 11] auncient and godly ordinances and discipline of the church, and such other thinges of like estimation: then shewe ye your selues to be of that sorte against whom our Lord thundereth out his terrible Vae by the prophete Esaie.Esai. 5. O be to you (saith he) which say, euill is good, and good is euill, which put darkenes for light, and light for darkenes, which put bitter to be swete, and swete to be bitter.

For shortely to saie the truth, Apologie. these folke falsely accuse and slaun­der all oure doinges: yea the same thinges vvhiche they them sel­ues can not deny but to be rightly and orderly don, and for malice do so misconstre and depraue all our sayinges and doinges, as thou­ghe it vvere impossible, that any thinge could be rightly spoken or don by vs. They should more plainly and sincerely haue gone to vvorke if they vvould haue dealt truely, but novv they neither tru­lie nor sincerelye: nor yet Christianly, but darklye and craftely char­ge and batter vs vvith lies, and doe abuse the blindenes and fonde­nes of the people, together vvith the ignoraunce of Princes, to cause vs to be hated, and the truth to be suppressed.

Ye saye the truth so shortly,Confuta­tion. that ye haue all saied and do­ne, before ye saye euer a true word. How falsely the catholi­kes accuse and slaunder your doinges, hereafter ye go about to shewe. To those places we differre our answere.The first part of the Apolog [...]e is but a florish, as it vvere, an tu­ning of their in­strument. For al that ye saye yet, is but like a florish, as players of defence vse be­fore they come to sadde blowes, or like the prelude of a min­strell, or tuning of his instrument, before he beginne his songe. Briefly where ye charge vs (for gladly we professe our selues to be of that number whom ye impugne) with malice, slaunders, and lyes: I report me to the indifferent reader, when he shall haue perused this confutation, on whether syde that fowle spotte shall seeme to cleaue.

This, lo ye, is the povver of darkenes and of men, Apologie vvhich leane more to the amased vvondering of the rude multitude and to dar­kenes, then they doe to the truth and light: and as S. Hierome sai­eth, vvhich doe openly gainsay the truth, closing vp their eyes, and vvill not se for the nonce. But vve giue thankes to the most good and mighty God, that such is our cause, vvhere against (vvhen they vvoulde fainest) they vvere able to vtter no dispite, but the same [Page] vvhich might asvvell bee vvrested againste the holie Fathers, a­gainst the Prophetes, against the Apostles, against Peter, against Paule, and against Christ himselfe.

Confuta­tion.Yet ye ioyne not, but kepe your selues aloosse of. There­fore ye reach not home. These sore blowes do but stricke the ayer, and only cause a whizzing noyes. To all that ye saye here, if we said all were false: ye were truly answered. Truth standeth not in your wordes, but in thinges as they be. Ye were not best to vaunt your selues somuch, lest wise men thinke, your trumpet soundeth triumphe before the vi­ctorie. Lerned men of the catholike church haue truly char­ged you with haynous heresies, and great enormities of life, committed by the pretenced libertie of your gospell, which here is not their place to reherse. Of the same to saye, that they may as well be wrested against the fathers, Prophetes, Apostles,A long talke of a matter nedeles. A briefe recitall of thinges hitherto said in the Apo­logie. and Christ him selfe, were extreme blasphemie. Thus hitherto ye haue done nothing els, but vttered a long talke for proufe of that no man denieth. First, that truth is persecuted, next, that your selues are persecuted. Wherein ye neded not to bestow so many wordes. For in dede the ca­tholikes do persecute you, (if such deserued entreating of euill persons may be called persecution) and all good folke besides, we graunt, and shall so do, so long as they loue the truth, and kepe them in the vnitie of the church. Yet with no other minde do they persecute you,Gen. 16. then Sara did Agar, then Christ the Iewes,Ioan. 2. Aegesippus whom he whipt out of the temple, then Peter did Simon Magus. Humble your hartes, consider from whence ye are fallen, repent and returne, forsake your heresies, embrace the catholike faith, and come againe to the church: they will persecute you no more, but receiue you, loue you, and honour you like members of one bodie. After these you procede as folovveth.

Apologie. Novv therfore, if it be leefull for these folkes to be eloquent and [Page 12] fine tonged in speaking euil, surely it becommeth not vs in oure cause, being so very good, to be dumme in ansvvering truelie. For men to be carelesse vvhat is spoken by them and their ovvne mat­ter, bee it neuer so falselie and slaunderouselie spoken, (especiallie vvhen it is suche, that the Maiestie of God and the cause of religion may thereby be dammaged) is the part doubtles of dissolute and ret­cheles persons, and of them vvhich vvickedly vvinke at the iniuries done vnto the name of God. For although other vvronges, yea of­tentimes great, may be borne and dissembled of a milde and Chri­stian man, yet he that goeth smothelye avvaie and dissembleth the matter vvhen he is noted of heresie, Ruffinus vvas vvont to deny that man to be a Christian. VVe therfore vvill do the same thinge vvhich all lavves, vvhich natures ovvne voice doth commande to be don, and vvhiche Christe him selfe did in like case vvhen he vvas checked and reuiled, to the intent vve may put of from vs these mens slaunderous accusations, and may defend soberly and truly our ovvne cause and innocencie.

THE FOVRTH CHAPTER.

Ye inferre of your former talke,Confutation. that it becōmeth you thus to answer for your selues, as though hitherto ye had proued the truth to be of your side. Which ye haue not proued, nor euer shall be able to proue, mainteining the doctrine of the Lutherans, Zuinglians, and Caluinistes, as ye do. Now all dependeth of that point. And because ye haue not the truth, what so euer ye saie, it is sone confuted, and what so euer ye bring, it is to no purpose. By gay wordes ye may begyle the simple. The lerned loke for reason and proufe, whereof be­cause ye are destitute, ye do not only by any your rhetorike not persuade, but shewe the weakenes of your cause. Yet ye procede and speake as though it were graunted and confes­sed, your doctrine to be true. But to that ye saye in this place, we answer. If ye helde the truth, it should right well become you to speake for your selues, but forasmuch as ye haue for­saken the catholike church, to whom the spirite of truth is promised, and where the truth only is lerned: the more ye speake in your defence, the more obstinate ye shewe your [Page] selues, the more vengeance ye procure you at Gods hand, the greater heape of damnation ye accumulate to your selues. Neither proceding in this obstinacie, trust ye to finde defence in the lawes of men, in the voice of nature, in the example of Christ: but assure your selues, all lawes will impugne you, nature will crye out against you, Christ will condemne you.

Apologie. For Christ verelye vvhen the Pharysies charged him vvith sorce­ry as one that had some familiar Spirites, and vvrought many thin­ges by their helpe, I saide he, haue not the Diuell, b [...]t dooe glorifie my Father: but it is you, that haue dishonored me, and put me to re­buke and shame. And S. Paul vvhen Festus the Lieutenaunt scor­ned him as a mad man: I (saide he) moste deere Festus, am not mad­as thou thinkest, but I speake the vvordes of truth and sobrenes. And the auncient Christians vvhen they vver slaundered to the people for mankillers, for adulterors, for committers of incest, for disturbers of commō vveales, and did perceaue that by suche slaun­derous accusations the Religion vvhich they professed, might be brought in question, namely if they should seeme to hold their pe­ace, and in manner to confesse the fault; lest this might hinder the free course of the Gospell, they made Orations, they put vp suppli­cations, and made meanes to Emperors, and Princes, that they might defend them selues and their fellovves in open audience.

Confuta­tion.When ye proue that ye haue the truth, then may ye be ad­mitted in your defence to alleage the example of Christ, of S. Paul, and of the first Christians. But now we tell you be­ing as ye are, these examples serue you to no purpose. And for ought ye haue said hitherto, the Anabaptistes, Libertines, Zuenkfeldians, Nestorians, Eunomians, Arians, and all o­ther pestiferous heretikes might saye the same aswell as ye. Christ was charged of the Iewes with vsing the power of impure sprites blasfemously,Luke. 11. Paul was scorned of Festus as a mad man without cause,Act. 26. the auncient Christians were accu­sed by thinfidels of hainous crimes falsely.Tertulliā n apolog. But ye are accu­sed of heresies and sundry impieties by godly, wise, and faith­full men, vpon zeale, by good aduise, and truly. And as for those auncient Christians, when they made Apologies or [Page 13] orations in defence of the Christen faith,The Apo­logies of the olde fathers vvere lau­fully pu­blished. Eccles. Hist. li. 4. c. 26. Ecclesi. Hist. lib. 5. ca. 21. they did it so as became Christen men, plainely and openly. Either they of­fered them to the Emperours with their owne handes, or put to their names, and signified to whom they gaue the sa­me. As S. Hilary deliuered a booke in defence of the catholike faith against the Arians to Constantius. Melito and Apolli­naris wrote their Apologies to the Emperours. S. Iustine the philosopher and martyr gaue his first Apologie for the Chri­stians to the senate of the Romaines, the second to Antoni­nus Pius Emperour. Tertullian to the Romaines. S. Apollo­nius the Romaine senatour and martyr did read his booke openly in the senate house, which he had made in defense of the Christen faith.The Apologie of the church of England set forth suspiti­ously, and vvithout due or­der. But ye do your thinges that ought to be done openly, in hucker mucker. Ye set forth your Apologie in the name of the church of England, before any meane part of the church were priuey to it, and so as though either ye were ashamed of it, or afraid to abide by it. The inscrip­tion of it is directed neither to Pope nor Emperour, nor to any Prince, nor to the church, nor to the generall Councell then being when ye wrote it, as it was most conuenient. There is no mans name set to it, it is printed without priui­lege of the Prince contrary to lawe in that behalfe made: allowed neither by parlament, nor by proclamation, nor agreed vpon by the clergy in publike and laufull synode. This packing becommeth you, it becommeth not the vpright professours of the truth. Wherefore your vnlaufull booke,The Apologie a famous libell. as it is, so it maye be called an inuectiue or rather a famous libell and slaunderous write, as that which semeth to haue ben made in a corner, and cast abrode in the stretes, the authours whereof the ciuill lawe punisheth sharpely.

But vve trulye, Apologie seeing that so many thousandes of our brethren in these last tvventy yeares haue borne vvitnes vnto the truth, in the middest of most painfull torments that could be deuised: and [Page] vvhen Princes desirous to restraine the Gospel sought many vvayes but preuailed nothinge, and that novv almost the vvhole vvorld dothe beginne to open theire eyes to behold the light: vve take it that our cause hath already ben sufficiently declared and defended, and thinke it not needfull to make many vvordes, since the very matter saith inough for yt selfe.

THE FIFTH CHAPTER.

Cōfuta­tion.Your first common place which ye treate, is, that truth is alwaies persecuted. Next, that your selues are persecuted. Then, that it is laufull for you to defende your cause. The two former maye be graunted. This latter is denyed you. The reasons and examples ye bring for it, conclude nothing. Be­cause lacking truth ye buyld vpona false ground, what so euer ye set vp, eftsones it falleth, being staid by no iust proufe. Here ye go forth, and faine would ye proppe vp that matter, but your reasons be as weake as before.

There haue not so many thousandes of your brethren ben burnt for heresie in these last twenty yeres, as ye pretend. But when ye come to boasting, then haue ye a great grace in vsing the figure Hyperbole. Then scores be hundreds, hun­dreds be thousands, thousands be millions. Neither haue tho­se brethren of yours by their due punishment of burning borne witnes vnto the truth, but shewed their desperat ob­stinacie against the truth.The bur­ning of heretikes made an argument of truth by the de­fenders. But what wisedome or reason is it to make their burning an argument of the truth of your sy­de? were all they that haue ben burnt by commaundement of Christen Magistrates in those your late twenty yeres your brethren? Verely then haue ye a holy brotherhed. Was Mi­chael Seruetus the Arian,Seruetus burnt for heresie at Geneua. who was burnt at Geneua by pro­curement of Caluine, a brother of yours? Dauid GeorgeDauid George that tooke vpon him to be Christ, who was taken vp after he was buried and burnt at Basile, whas he your brother? to come neare home, Ioan of KentIoan of kent. that filth, who tooke forth a lesson further then ye taught her (I trowe) or yet preach, was [Page 14] she a syster of yours? So many Adamites, so many Zwenck­feldians, so many hundreds of Anabaptistes and libertines, as haue within your twenty yeres ben ridde out of their liues by fyre, sword, and water in sundry partes of christendome, were they all of your blessed brotherhed? If ye forswere their companie, and saye they were none of your congregation: why make ye the burning of brethren an argument of the truth of your gospell,The chief argument of the gospellers truth is burning of bro­thers. Actes and monu­mentes. whereof the professours of those other sectes haue as great aduantage as your owne sect? yet is this the greatest argument wherewith ye bleare the eyes of the ignorant people. And this is the chiefe argument ye make in in all that huge dongehill of your stinking martyrs, which ye haue intituled Actes and monumentes.) But we tell you. It is not death that iustifieth the cause of dying. But it is the cause of dying that iustifieth the death. He that dieth for maintenance of a good cause, is blessed. He that dieth for an euil dede, suffereth his deserued punishment. He that dieth in defence of your or any other heresies, beginneth his hell here, and from the smoke of temporall fyre leapeth into the flame of euerlasting fyre.

Princes (ye saye) were desirous, to restraine your gospell, and though they went about it by many waies, yet preuai­led they nothing. Therefore your doctrine must needes be the true gospel. As good an argument as this is,A vveake argument of truth. maye theues make in their defence. For princes be desiderous to kepe their dominions from robbing, and haue euer deuised straight lawes and punishmentes for restraint of theues: yet be theues euery where, and theft is daily committed. Then by your lo­gike what shall a man saye to it, but that theues are of such a vocation, as God is pleased withall, and which he will haue to continewe and prosper? Knowe ye not that many times weedes growe, though the grounde be weeded? Some [Page] grounde will be weedy, be it neuer so diligently weeded. But generally the more it is ridde of weedes, the cleaner it proueth. Catholike princes haue in some countries sought wayes to restraine your heresies. Yet were not those coun­tries thereby wholly purged, such is the infection of that euill. And where as your gospell,This car­nal go­spell sone taketh place a­mōg car­nal hea­rers. Heresies restrained by due punishe­ment. is a grosse gospell, a carnal gos­pell, a belly gospell: wonder it is not, if those peoples be not wholly withdrawen from assenting to the same who be not of the finest wittes, and be much geuen to the seruice of the belly and of the thinges beneath the belly. Yet where the princes haue vsed most diligence and best meanes to stoppe the course of your heresies, there the people remaine most catholike. As euery man maye iudge by vewe of Italy, Spai­ne, base Almaine, and Fraunce, before that weighty sceptre by Gods secrete prouidence for punishement of synne, was committed to feble handes, that for tender age were not able to beare it. To conclude, if princes of Germanie at the first had ben so ernestly bent to restraine your gospell, as more prouidently then godly they foresawe their permission of your procedinges should fill their cofers: ye had not at this daye had cause of so great boast.

An argu­ment of the defen­ders, ser­uing vvel for Anti­christ.Your other argument, whereby ye would persuade your gospel to be the truth, is, that now (as ye crake) almost the whole world doth beginne to open their eyes to beholde the light. This argument serueth maruelous wel for Antichrist. And truly if he be not already come, ye maye very wel seme to be his foreronners.Esai. 5. For at his comming, when euil shall beare the name of good, and darkenes the name of light, when the greater number shal folowe him, and fewe stand to the true faith of Christ: what better argument can his mi­nisters make to deceiue those fewe that remaine sounde and whole, then saying as ye saye, what doubt ye of our doctrine, [Page 15] seing that nowe almost the whole world foloweth this waye and beginneth to open their eyes to behold the light? If Anti­christes doctrine be false, though many shal beleue it, why shal we thinke your darkenes to be the light, because many be­ginne to open their eyes to grope in it?Multitude maketh not prouf of good­nes. Cap. 5. If multitude make proufe of goodnes, then let Esaye recant, who sayeth, O be to them that saye, euil is good, and good is euil. For then is euill good in dede, because almost the whole world foloweth euill. Nay Sirs, if it be true that ye saye, that almost the whole world lo­keth that waye, knowing that in the latter dayes and toward the ende of the world iniquitie shall abounde, Matt. 24. and the charitie of the more part shall wexe colde: we maye rather make a contrary argument, and iudge your gospell to be erroneous and false,Thargu­ment of multitude returned vpon the defenders to a con­trary con­clusion because the multitude is so ready to receiue it. Againe Christ hath not loued his church so litle, as that the world should now beginne to open their eyes to beholde the light. For the same presupposeth a former general darkenes. It standeth not with Christes promises made to the church, touching his being with the church all dayes to the worldes ende,Matt. 28. and the holy ghostes remaining with it the spirite of truth for euer,Iohan. 14. that he should suffer his church to continewe in darke­nes and lacke of truth these thousand yeres past, and now at the latter dayes to reuele the truth of his gospell by Aposta­tes, vowebreakers, churchrobbers, and such other most vnli­ke to the Apostles. Wherefore ye maye thinke Syrs, that ye haue nede to saye more and otherwise for yourselues, then ye haue hitherto said. For as ye see, what so euer ye saye, your ve­ry matter sayeth not ynough for it selfe.

For yf the Popes vvoulde, Apologie. or els if they could vveigh vvith their ovvn selues the vvhole matter, and also the beginning and procedin­ges of our Religion, hovv in a manner al their trauail hath com to nought, no body driuing it forvvarde, and vvithout any vvordely helpe: and hovve on the other side, our cause, againste the vvil of [Page] Emperoures, from the beginning against the vvilles of so many Kynges, in spite of the Popes, and almoste maugre the head of all men, hath taken encrease, and by little and little spredde ouer into all countries, and is com at length euen into Kings courtes and Palai­ces. These same thinges me thinketh might bee tokens greate ynough to them, that God him self doth strongly fight in our quar­rel, and doth from heauen laugh at their enterprises: and that the force of the truth is suche, as neither mans povver, nor yet hell gates are able to roote it oute.

Confuta­tion.It is well that ye vse the terme of the begynning and pro­cedinges of your religion.The De­fenders gospell acknovv­leged to haue ben of late be­gonne. Procedin­ges. 2. Tim. 3. For in dede of late yeres it began­ne, not at Ierusalem, but at Wittenberg. Neither was it first deliuered vnto you by an Apostle, but by an Apostata. Still it procedeth, and the farther of from the ende And wel maye ye name it your procedinges, for there is no staie in it. What liketh to daye, misliketh to morowe. The seely begyled sou­les that folow it, be as S. Paul sayeth, euer lerning, and neuer rea­ching to the knowledge of the truth. But why speake ye so, as ye might seme to make it a matter of difficultie for the Popes to weigh the whole matter, and to vnderstand the beginning and procedinges of your religion? For is not that matter plaine ynough? what mysteries haue ye therein that in man­ner al the world knoweth not?The first begynnīg of this nevve go­spel, and the occa­sion that first mo­ued Lu­ther to heresie. Did not your religion begin­ne first of couetise, and grewe it not afterward of rancour and malice, which Martin Luther conceiued against the Dominican friers in Saxonie, because Albert the Archebis­shop of Mentz and electour of the Empire, had admitted them to be preachers of the pardon of a croisade against the Turkes, contrary to an auncient custome wherby the Au­gustine friers of whom Luther was one, had of long ti­me ben in possession of that preferment? Is it not well knowen what a stirre frier Luther made against Iohn Tetzet the frier of S. Dominikes order, for that the said Tetzet was made chiefe preacher of a pardon wherein [Page 16] was great gaine, and thereby him selfe was bereft of that swete morsell, which in hope he had almost swallowed downe?

Now for the procedinges of your matter, knowe we not,Luthers proce­dings. how Luther proceded from euill to worse and worse, prea­ched openly his heresies, wrote hereticall bookes, and wrought all the spite he could against the church, against the clergy of all degrees, against the highest states and prin­ces of the world?Luthers villanie against Kyng Henry theight. among whom who knoweth not how vil­lainously he demeaned him selfe against king Henry the eight a prince of famous memorie? Where ye saye your re­ligion is spred abrode, and hath taken so much encrease a­gainst the willes of princes, and almost maugre the head of all men: that is as false as your religion is.Luther defended by the duke of Saxonie. For was not Luther alwaies defended and mainteined by Frederike the Duke of Saxonie? Came he euer out of that dukes dominion to be conuented any where, but by his meanes was garded and as­sured with false conduct, first of Maximilian the Emperour, and afterward of Charles the fifth?The nevv gospell set forth not vvith­out vvorl­dely help. Both before and since Luthers death, hath not your religion ben set vp and main­teined by the helpe of men? Did not the great slaughter of your hundred thousand Boures of Germanie signifie to the world, your cause to haue had the helpe of man? What maye we iudge of the great League of Germaine Princes made at the diete of Smalcald for defence of your Lutheran gospell?The diete of Smal­cald. When so many princes ioyned their forces together, when so great hostes did put them selues in armes, when so many free Cities leuied their powers, and all for the defence of Lu­thers newe reueled gospell: can ye saye, it was not aided by men, but that it proceded maugre the head of all men?The Hu­guenots of Fraūce. The troubles and tumultes of Fraunce raised by your brethren the Huguenots, and the lamentable outrages committed there for your gospels sake, be they not a witnes of fresh [Page] memorie, that your religion is maintained, set forth, and de­fended with power and help of men? As for other great prin­ces, forasmuch as God hath called them from the earth to his iudgement, how much they and their deputes haue trauailed by all meanes to further the course of your gospell, I say no­thing. It becommeth not me to vtter any thing, whereby to steine their noble memories. What men haue sene, that kno­we they, though it be not spoken. But verely saying that the procedinges of your religion haue not ben assisted with any worldly help or power of man,The cōming of Luthers gospell into prin­ces cour­tes is a vveake ar­gument for the truth. [...]. ye shal saye that thing where­by your credite must nedes be impaired. That it is now at length come euen into kinges courtes and palaises, it moueth wise men nolesse to suspect it then to praise it. Thus haue ye said nothing yet, why any wise man should be greatly moued with your tokens and coniectural argumēts, and thinke that God him selfe fighteth in your quarell, and from heauen laugheth at the stedfastnes of the catholikes. Nay he is moued to laugh (as God may therto be moued) rather at you his ene­mies, and at your weake reasons, and euery good man reioy­ceth that so wicked a cause is so faintly defended.

Apologie. For they be not all madde at this daie, so many free Cities, so ma­ny kinges, so many Princes vvhich haue fallen avvay from the seate of Rome, and haue rather ioyned them selues to the Gospell of Christ.

Confuta­tion.Lastly concerning your so many free Cities, so many kin­ges, so many princes, who haue withdrawen them selues from the faith of the holy Romaine church, by which we meane the whole west churth, the faith whereof is the catholike faith, and haue ioyned them selues to your newe founde gospell, which ye call the gospell of Christ: that they be mad­de, I saye not. The terme is odious, and offendeth ciuill eares.They that depart from the catholike church to the sectes of Lu­thers go­spell, be not mad­de: but ra­ther vvor­se then madde. But who so euer seuer them selues from Christes ca­tholike church. and come to your sectes, and there remaine, [Page 17] be they of free Cities, be they Kinges, Princes, or of what es­tate so euer they be: they offend God greuously by breaking thunitie, lose their part with Christ, who geueth the grace of his spirite to those only that be members of his body the church, who died for the church only, and procure to them selues damnation euerlasting. Now whether they that forsa­ke Christ, and the blessed companie of the kingdome of hea­uen, to beare you companie in this life, and after this life to be companions with deuils in euerlasting fyre, whether they be madde in making so euill a bargaine or no, or worse then madde: I report me to the due consideration of so many as beleue there is a heauen prepared for the godly, and a hell for the wicked.

And where ye saye so many free cities, so many kinges,Zuingliās and Caluinistes ab­horred almost through all Ger­manie. I praye you, how many free cities can ye name, (meaning by the name of free cities the Imperiall free cities of Germanie which properly are there called free cities) that haue recei­ued your sacramentarie religion? Nay the free cities of Ger­manie so many as haue forsaken the catholike church, and haue receiued Luthers gospell, do they not persecute you the sacramentaries, and abhorre your sacramentarie heresie? Bremen that of late is fallen from Luther,Bremen. and is reported to become Zuinglian, and one or two mo in the Palsgraue of Rhenes dominion, they be rather tottering betwen both, then firmly setled in your sacramentarie gospell. But (say ye) they be fallen from the seate of Rome. So be the Grekes also in a point or two, yet condemne they you for heretikes. So doth Luther him selfe with all his fowle sturdy eloquence, so do all the free Cities and all other that holde of him. Neither be all the free Cities and all the countrie of Germanie fallen from the see Apostolike. Of fyue partes of that great coun­trie, at least two remaine catholike.

Furthermore who readeth your booke, or heareth it readen, comming to this place, where ye saye so many kinges, not knowing the state of thinges may thinke, that a great num­ber of kinges are become professours of your gospell. But why do ye thus deceiue the world? When truth is knowen, what gaine ye by it,Neuer a king in Christen­dom cer­tainely knovven to profes­se the reli­gion of the De­fenders. but the estimation of lyers? Let vs see, how make ye vp the nūber of so many kinges ye speake of? And to deale plainely, let vs reckon vp not those that be of your sacramentarie syde, (for ye sacramentaries haue not so much as one king to crake of in all the world) but so many as be fallen from the seate of Rome, as ye terme it. First is Philip the king of Spaine, Naples, and Sicilie one? No. Is Charles the young French king one? No. Is Sebastian the king of Portugall one? No. Is Maximilian king of Hunga­rie and Bemeland, and now Emperour one? No. Is Sigis­mond king of Pole one? No. Though sectes growe pryue­ly in his realme through his lenitie and ouermuch clemen­cie as it is thought, yet his owne person and the body of the realme is catholike and falleth not from the see Aposto­like. The realmes of England and Scotland, because by Gods prouidence the gouernement of them is deuolued to wo­men, forasmuch as they be no kinges, of whom only ye make your vaunt, though they haue the full right of kin­ges, of them I speake not. Now only two christened kin­ges remaine, the king of Denmarke, and the king of Sweden. which (we confesse) as they be departed from the obedience of the Romaine church, so suffer they not all sortes of wee­des of your sacramentarie heresie freely to growe in their landes, specially the king of Denmarke. These be all ye can name, and the same ennemies to your religion. Gete ye now vp into your pulpettes, like bragging cockes on the rowst, slappe your winges, and crow out alowde, so many free [Page 18] Cities, so many kinges, so many Princes.

To conclude, we saye, if by your opinion,If a fevve vvere not mad, vvhat may be thought of all? they be not all mad at this daye, so many free Cities, so many kinges, so ma­ny princes, which be fallen awaye from the catholike faith professed in the see Apostolike, and haue ioyned them sel­ues to your late vpstart gospell, which be fewe in compari­son of all: what may we saye on thother side, or what can ye saye your selues to be lyked of any reasonable man, of all the world before this daye from the time the Christian faith was first spred abrode? Were all Cities free and other, all townes, boroughs, villages, and houses, were all prouinces, countries, realmes, Empires, Europe, Aphrike, Asia, all the whole world, where the sounde of the gospell came, were all laie men, all kinges, princes, clerkes, lerned men, pastours,Ephes. 4. Doctours, Euangelistes, Prophetes, Apostles, whom Christ placed in earth to thintent all thinges necessarie to the buil­ding vp of his mysticall body the church should be ministred vntill it come vnto perfection, that we might not be caried awaye with euery winde of doctrine by the falsehed of men: briefly all men from the Apostles time till frier Luther came, and with his Nonne tolde vs a newe doctrine, and controlled all the olde, were all these mad? I holde him worse them mad, that is so mad, as to iustifie your fewnes, and condemne the vniuersalitie, to accompt all that euer haue ben to this time begyled, and iudge only a fewe at this daye instructed in a newe trade of religion to walke safely. Thus we set all against your so many, which truly numbred amount but to a fewe, these thousand or rather fiften hundred yeres, to your this daye. The iudgement whereof we leaue, to eares that heare, to eyes that see, yea to handes that feele.

But where as ye will not haue them accompted mad,If the prote­stantes and Sa­cramen­taries be not mad, vvhat shal be said of the grace of god vvrought by the Iesuites in the nevve sounde landes, vvhere infinite numbers be con­uerted to the faith? so many free Cities, so many kinges, so many Princes, which [Page] haue fallen awaye from the see Apostolike these late yeres, whom ye haue made of catholikes heretikes, of right bele­uers forsakers of the faith, and so consequently infidels, or worse them infidels: what accompt make ye of the worke of the holy gost, which of late yeres he hath wrought by the vertuous men of the society of Iesus? Haue not they brought many countries, many kinges, many princes, many peo­ples to the faith of Christ by preaching the doctrine of the catholike church? Ye of right beleuers make infidels, they of infidels make right beleuers. We will not folowe your folishnes in boasting, but we will reioyce in our Lord for such witnes geuen to the truth. As we boast not with you, so we render prayse and glorie to God against you, for that he hath spred the knowledge of his name so far­re abrode in the farthest partes of the worlde, where the faith was not heard of before by those catholike preachers, in Peru, in the kingdome of Ignamban, which lyeth in the south coste of all Afrike beyond the dominions of Prester Iohn,countries of late cōuerted. in the kingdome of Monopotapa, in the great kingdome of Cam­baia which lyeth about Calicut, in the great Iland of Gia­pan, in the maine countries of Cina and Tartaio which lye farthest east, in the kingdom of Bisnaga about Ganges, in the famous Iland Taprobana, in the Iland Ormuz lying in Si­nu Persico. Neither praise we and glorifie God only for great countries in which he hath wrought this glorious worke by preaching of the faith professed in the holy Romaine church, which these men call papistrie: but also for sundry kynges by preaching of the same faith brought to beleue in Christ, namely the two kinges of Ceilon and Zimor, the good king of Ignamban who was christened in the yere of our Lord God 1559, as his owne lettres do witnes written to Don Constantino the king of Portugals vicegerent in Goa: Also [Page 19] for the king of the Iland Bacian, who whas Christened in the yere 1558. Lastly for the foure kinges baptized in the rich countrie of Macazar by the holy father Vincētius Viegas. For certaine knowledge of this and of much more the like ioyfull matter, we haue the true certificate made by the sayd holy fathers of the societie of Iesus translated out of the spanish into the Italian tonge with notice of all the circumstances set forth in print, which euery man that vnderstandeth that tong may read to his great comfort.

Least our aduersaries should charge vs with vntruth, spea­king of the aboue mencioned countries, we meane not that the whole said countries be conuerted to the faith as yet, for then were christendom by many partes more there, then it is here, but that in euery of them great numbers of people be christened. And how much the faith increaceth there yere­ly and daily, coniecture may be gathered by that is most cer­tainely knowen to haue ben done of late yeres in Goa a ci­tie placed in the east part of the world,Goa is novv vn­der the King of Portugal. not farre from Cali­cut. Where first in the yere of our Lord 1556, were christe­ned 42, persons: in the next yere 1557, of all sortes 1080: in the yere 1558, a thousand nine hundred and sixtene: in the yere folowing, 3260: and in the yere 1560, there were christened twelue thousand seuen hundred two and forty persons.

If ye dare saye, your so many free cities, so many kin­ges, be not mad, that haue forsaken the faith professed in the church of Rome, wherein ye saye not truly: how much more may we saye, blessed be the name of God, who hath called to the confession and knowledge of his holy name so great numbres of infidels by preaching of that doctrine which ye detest and abhorre? What so euer your scoffing sprite wil report of these peoples cōuerted to the faith at the same time as ye peruerted and tourned from the faith your [Page] so many free Cities, though ye call them mad, simple, or ig­norant: verely the miracles by those holy fathers which con­uerted them through Gods power wrought, and that speciall grace of the holy ghost, I trowe ye will not accompt to be madnes. Thus your vaine boast in wickednes wrought by the power of Sathan, is put to silence with our true ioye powred into our hartes for so great abundance of the grace of God wrought by the holy ghost in the conuersion of so many soules which had not heard of Christ before.

Apologie And although the Popes had neuer hetherunto leasour to consi­der diligently and earnestly of these matters, or thoughe some other c [...]res do novve let them and diuerse vvayes pull them, or though they coumpt these to be but common and trieflinge studies, and nothinge to appertain to the Popes vvorthines, this maketh not vvhy our matter ought to seeme the vvorse.

Confuta­tion.Certaine it is the Popes study ernestly to appease the troubles against the church by you raised, to extinguish your heresies, and to reforme thinges amisse, as it may appere by their great care and trauaile emploied about the late ge­nerall Councell. But whether they had due care hereof or no, yet can not your doinges seme in euery respect but naught.

Apologie. Or if they perchaunce vvill not see that vvhiche they see in dede, but rather vvill vvithstande the knovven truth, ought vve there­fore by and by to be coumpted heretikes bicause vve obey not their vvill and pleasure?

Confuta­tion. Ioan. 21.Sith Christ hath geuen to the Pope in Peter, whose lau­full successour he is, commission to fede his shepe: holesome feeding being thend of that commission, it is not to be doub­ted, but he that ordeined thend, hath also ordeined meanes belonging to thende. Therefore it is not the dutie of a good and humble shepe, to geue forth a malicious surmise, that the shepeherd will not see that he seeth in dede, but rather will withstand the knowen truth. And what so euer shepe be dis­obedient, [Page 20] and refuse to heare the voice of their shepeherd, whom Christ hath made ouer them, the same be not of Christes folde. And mainteining contrary doctrine to their she­peherdes true doctrine, iustly may they be accompted hereti­kes.

If so be that Pope Pius vvere the man (vve say not vvhich he vvould so gladly be called) but if he vvere in deede a man that ey­ther vvoulde accoumpte vs for his brethrene, Apologie. or at least vvoulde take vs to be men, he vvoulde firste diligently haue examined oure reasons, and vvoulde haue sene vvhat might be saied vvith vs, vvhat againste vs, and vvoulde not in his Bull vvhereby he lately preten­ded a Councell, so rashely haue condemned so great a part of the vvorlde, so many learned and godly men, so manye common vve­althes, so many kyngs, and so many Prynces, only vppon his ovvne blynd preiudices and foredeterminations, and that vvithout hea­ring of them speak, or vvithout shevving cause vvhye.

Speake of Pope Pius what ye will, and what ye can.Confuta­tion. Nei­ther your praise can aduaunce his estimation, nor your dis­praise abase it. His singular vertues be well knowen. God is highly to be praised, for that he hath prouided for his flocke so good a shepeherd. As for you, as he taketh you to be men, so not his brethren, because ye haue cut of your selues from the catholike church, which is the body of Christ. Whereof by charitie and vnitie of faith being ioined together, we are members one of an other, and brethren together in Christ the head of that bodye. Your reasons haue ben diligently and exactly examined already. In respect of your reasons, ler­ning and holy scriptures which ye bring,A compa­rison be­tvven the defenders and Balsasar king of Baby­lon. ye are found such as Balsasar king of Babylon was signified by the hand, that appered writing before him in the wall. As he in his banket abused the holy vessels of Gods temple, so abuse ye the scri­ptures of God in your writinges and preachinges. As DanielDaniel. told him, so we tell you, or rather the church telleth you which Christ commaunded to be heard. Your reasons be [Page] numbred, and be founde to lacke of their iuste tale. They be weighed, and proue to light. Wherefore both ye and your reasons be diuided, cut of, and put aside by iust excōmunica­tion, as being such, which are no more to be hearde, onlesse ye repent and reuoke your errours.No good vvrought by reaso­ning vvith heretikes. What it is heretikes to be admitted to reasoning, it is and hath ben euermore to well knowen. Be they neuer so throughly confuted, they yelde not. Ouercome they maye be, reformed they will not be. Therein no good lightly is done. Breath is spent, blasphe­mies be vttered, the spirite is irked. Yet if ye, or your so many lerned men, so many common weales, so many free cities, so many kinges, so many princes, would nedes haue your rea­sons heard and examined: why came ye not to the Councell at Trent, specially being by publike summon thither inuited, where ye were assured by all meanes of good assurance safe­ly and quietly to be heard, what ye could bring or saye for your doctrine?

Apologie But bycause he hath alredy so noted vs openlye, least by holdyng oure peace vve should seme to graunt a fault, and specially bycause vve can by no meane haue audience in the publik assembly of the generall Councel, vvherein he vvould no creature should haue po­vver to geue his voice or declare his opinion, excepte he vvere svvorne and straightly bounde to maintaine his aucthoritie.

For vve haue had good experience hereof in his last conference at the councell at Trident, vvhere the embassadours & diuines of the Princes of Germany and of the free Cities vvere quite shutte out from their company: nother can vve yet forget, hovv Iulius the third, aboue ten yeares past, prouided vvarely by his vvrite, that none of our sorte shoulde bee suffered to speake in the Councel (ex­cept there vveresom paraduenture that vvolde recante and chaunge his opinion). For this cause chieflye vve thoughte it good to yelde vp an accoumpte of oure faith in vvriting, & truely and openly to make aunsvvere to those things vvhervvith vve haue ben openly charged, to thende the vvorlde may see the partes and foundacions of that doctrine, in the behalfe vvhereof so many good men haue li­tle regarded their oune lyues. And that all men may vnderstand [Page 21] vvhat manner of people they be, and vvhat opinion they haue of God and of Religion, vvhome the Bishop of Rome before they vvere called to tell theire tale, hath condemned for heretikes, vvithout any good consideration, vvithout any exaumple and vtterly vvithout lavve or righte, onely bycause he hearde tell that they did dissente from him and his in som pointe of Religion.

THE SIXTH CHAPTER.

After the large discourses vpon your three common places,Confuta­tion. The scope of the A­pologie. that truth is alwaies persecuted, that your selues be persecu­ted, and that it is laufull for you to defend your cause: now ye come neare toward the scope of your Apologie, and spea­king more particularly ye saye, that ye haue thought good to yelde vp an accompt of your faith in writing, and to answere the thinges ye are charged with.Tvvo cau­ses of ma­king the Apologie. For doing the same ye alle­age two causes. The first is lest by holding your peace, ye shoud seme to graūt a fault. The second which ye make more special, is because by no meanes ye could haue audience in the late generall councell. Your second cause is false, as here­after it shall be shewed. Your first is naught, as that which sheweth your pride, vaine glorie, and pertinacie. For hauing mainteined sundry heresies (as hereafter it shall be proued) it had ben rather your dutie by speaking to confesse your fault, then so to speake, as whereby ye maye seme to graunt no fault. To haue acknouledged your fault, it had ben a vertue. Now thus to speake in defence of your fault, it is a doubling of your fault. Well, ye do but as heretikes before you haue euer done. It must not be looked for at your handes, that ye acknowledge any fault. For that were humilitie, which ver­tue all heretikes be farre from.

Ye seme to be offended with the custom of generall councels, because thereby ye be not admitted to geue your voice or declare your opinion.In coun­cels any man may shevve his opinion, but none may geue a voice, or suffrage, and sen­tence defi­nitiue, but only bishops. To declare his opi­nion in certaine cases at a generall councell any man may [Page] be admitted. But to geue a voice or suffrage, and to vtter sentence definitiue, it perteineth only to bishops, because to them specially belongeth iurisdiction, power to binde and loose, and the gouernement of churches. Now ye being no bishops, but some of you mere laie men, and most of you Apostates, ye must content your selues, if ye be iustly restrained from that, which is aboue the degree of your vocation.

Whether the Ambassadours and diuines of the Princes of Germanie and of the free Cities there, were at any time vpon any consideration of their misliked demeanour, or for any other iust cause restrained from the companie of the fathers in the late generall councell at Trent, and if any such restraint was at all, for what causes, and for how long time the same was made: againe whether Pope Iulius the third prouided by any write, that none of your sorte should be suffered to speake in the councell, the cause of recantation excepted: and if any such write was thither directed, vpon what aduise, and for what limitation of time it tooke place: the truth hereof shall plainely appere in the Actes of the councell,The Ac­tes of the Tridenti­ne Coun­cell. which shortly shall come forth in print for all men to read. I doubt not but those Actes shall either conuince you of vntrouth, or (if any such thing was done) shewe such causes thereof, as to any wise man shall seme iust and reasonable. What ye saye touching this matter, because ye saye it without proufe, we haue founde you in so many other pointes of greater importance so farre to steppe asyde from truth: that for this we can not beleue you. But that your selues by no meanes could haue audience in the coun­cell at Trent, and that the Ambassadours and diuines of the princes and free Cities of Germanie were from thence quite shutte out:Three safe con­ductes graunted for liber­tie of the protestā­tes to co­me to the late ge­nerall councell, and there to treate freely. how true that is, I report me to the three safe [Page 22] conductes, which the three Popes, vnder whom that coun­cell was holden, graunted forth, and confirmed in that behal­fe. They be to be sene in euery booke of the councell to your discredite for euer. Thabbridgement of which the reader shal finde hereafter toward the ende of this confutation, directed by the table, in the worde Safeconductes. Wherefore belye the councell nomore complaining that ye could not there haue audience and be heard.

Ye yeld vp an accompt of your faith in writing ye saye.An accōpt of faith by the de­fenders yelded vp in vvri­tīg vvith­out due order in all respec­tes. But to whom do ye yelde it vp? and by whom is it yelded? from vvhom commeth the same? Do ye acknowledge no laufull iudge, no laufull Consistorie in the vvhole vvorld? Committe ye your whole matter to the temeritie of the peo­ple? Why haue ye not set your names to the booke, that con­teineth the profession of your faith and of your whole con­science? Why was not the same made autenticall by the assent of a synod of bishops, and by the subscription of their names? ye would so haue done perhaps, if ye had bishops. Why toke ye not example of the booke conteining the institution of a christen man set forth in king Henry theightes tyme? Though the doctrine of it be not in certaine pointes sounde and catholike, yet the maner of the publication of it resem­bleth auctoritie and due order. The like example I wene hath not ben sene before these dayes. Had ye done orderly, ye should haue sent your booke, sith ye durst not appere there your selues, to the Councell with your oratours. Ye should haue offered your selues and your doctrine to be tryed and iudged. Now ye seme to haue done your thinges very slen­derly and lightly, without all grauitie, without all auctoritie, without all due order, much like as rebelles do their trouble­some affaires.The de­fenders not vvith­out cau­se likened to rebel­les. The cre­dite [...]f the Apo­logie. Who contriue all reformations among them selues being most of all to be reformed, do what them list, [Page] and will be iudged by none other, but them selues. All thin­ges considered your booke must nedes be of small credite, and appere to be not an apologie, but rather a railing inuecti­ue, or a famouse libell, such as might be made vnder a hedge, and cast abrode for any body to take vp. Of all thinges in it, that only is most orderly done, that it is set forth without the princes priuilege, though the same be vnlaufull. For great shame had it ben any such to be auctorized by publike pri­uilege.

The par­tes and founda­tions of the defen­ders doc­trine con­teined in their A­pologie.Ye yelde vp this booke (ye saye) to thend the world may see the partes and foundations of your doctrine, in the behalfe whereof so many good men haue litle regarded their owne lyues. Whether they were good men or no, that must be iud­ged not by their death, but by the cause of their dying. If the cause were naught, they could not be good. That they died for your doctrine, by such hote bloud it is sealed vp neuer a whit the surer, heretikes bloud is but a slipper matter to seale vp the doctrine which a christen man ought to stand in. The like seale maye be shewed and craked of by the Anaba­ptistes more then by your sect, and by the professours of sun­dry other heresies, as well as by your syde. By that argument euery heresie were true doctrine. For euery heresie hath her bold champions, who will not sticke to venter a ioint for de­fence of the same, specially where any hope is of vaine glorie. As the deuils hauing by our Lordes permission entred into the swyne,Marc. 5. which the gospell speaketh of, draue them into the sea and drowned them: so by like permission entring into the hartes of heretikes quite forsaken of the holy ghost for pride and other sinnes, they driue them vnto the fyre and other kindes of death, to be sure of them, and to enioye their com­panie afterward more familiarly.

But now ye promise to make answere to the thinges that [Page 23] be laid against you,The de­fenders promise. and to shewe the partes and foundations of your doctrine, and that to thende the world may see all. And this do ye promise to do truly and openly. Wherefore the world will looke that ye deale plainely and vprightly, and that ye halt not. Though now we can not let you to playe, yet we doubt not, but when your cardes shall be cast abrode, we shall shewe to the whole bord your false playe, and that ye be farre from the game. Only we require you for your part,A reaso­nable re­quest made to the defen­ders. to laye abrode your cardes plainely, and after the lawe of the game, without couching one card vnder an other, and that ye kepe backe none, but be content euery ase to be sene and tolde. If ye haue made any newe lawes within your selues contrary to those that haue ben and be vsed generally and euery where: it is not reason the same should bynde vs, we will stand to the olde lawe of the game. For the lookers on, we will not them to be busiest in pronouncing iudgement, that stand farthest of and see least: but to geue credite to those that stand nearer, and see euery carde, and vnderstand best what belongeth to the game.

And although S. Hierome vvould haue no bodie to be patient vvhen he is suspected of heresy, Apologie yet vve vvill deal herein nether bit­terly nor brablingly, nor yet be caried avvay vvith angre and heate, though he ought to be reckned neither bitter nor brabler that spea­keth the truth. VVe vvillingly leaue thys kynde of eloquence to our aduersaries, vvho vvhat so euer they say against vs, be it neuer so shrevvdly or dispitefully sayde; yet thinke it is sayd modestely and comely ynough, and care nothing vvhether it be trevv or false. VVee neede none of these shyftes vvhich do maintaine the truthe.

I see well, we must looke to your fingers.Confuta­tion. Ye speake of faire playe, and yet vse ye foule playe. Ye shewe vs bread in one hande, and holde a stone in the tother.They pro­mise svvetnes and performes bitternes. Ye will not deale bitterly with vs, neither with anger and heate, yet ye spitte forth your gaull and choler by and by at the first. As here ye promise swetnes, and offer vs bitternes: so through your [Page] whole booke i [...] word ye pretend truth, zeale, plainenes, and sober dealing, but in dede powre out litle other then lyes, spite, scoffes, and immoderat railing. This much ye saye of the maner of your dealing in this cause. Whether side vseth that kinde of eloquence which ye reproue, your demeanour doth the world sufficiently to vnderstand.

Apologie Further, yf vve do shevve it plaine that Gods holie Gospell, the aunciente Bishops and the primatiue churche do make on our syde, and that vve haue not vvithout iust cause left these men, and rather haue retourned to the Apostles and oulde catholique Fathers. And if vve shall be founde to doe the same not colourably or craftely, but in good faith, before God, truly, honestly, cleerely and plainly: and if they themselues vvhich flye our doctrine and vvoulde be called Ca­tholiks shall manifestly see hovve all those titles of antiquitie vvhe­reof they bos [...]e so much, ar quite shaken out of their hands, and that there is more pith in this oure cause then they thoughte for, vvee then hope and trust that none of them vvill be so negligent and ca­reles of his ovvn saluation, but he vvill at length studye and be­thinke him selfe, to vvhether parte hee vvere best to ioyne him. Vn­doubtedlye, excepte one vvill altogether harden his hearte and re­fuse to heare, he shall not repent him to geue good heede to this our defence and to mark vvell vvhat vve say, and hovv truly and iustly it agreeth vvith Christian Religion.

THE SEVENTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion.If we on thother side shewe plainely, that the holy scriptu­res, the auncient fathers, examples and witnesses of the pri­mitiue church do make directly against your sectes:A contra­ry condi­tion pro­poned to the De­fenders. and that ye haue without any iust cause forsaken the catholike church and ioined your selues to the synagog of Antichrist: If ye shall be founde to worke your feate, whereunto ye geue the name of the gospell colourably and craftely, not in good faith, not as before God, but to serue the stage ye haue be­gonne to playe your tragedie on, falsely, shamefully, darkely, and guilefully: if they them selues that haue embraced your gospell and would be called gospellers, shall clerely see, in case they haue eyes to see, how all your crakes of Gods holy [Page 24] gospell and high promises of truth be found vaine, and that there is not so much pith, substance, and grounded proufe in your matters, as your great bragges and promises haue cau­sed men to looke for at your handes: we then hope and trust that your selues, or at least many of you will not wholly cast away from you the care of your saluation, but will study by what honest and godly meanes ye may reuoke your errours and heresies, retourne to the catholike church againe, and auoid euerlasting damnation. But if the deuill haue you so fast bounde, as ye will not hereby be loosed out of his ban­des, yet we doubt not but many reading this confutation of your booke, through Gods grace shall take great benifite the­reby, the begyled to repent, the wauering to be stayd, the sownde and whole, to beware of your contagious poyson. Assuredly who so euer will not of purpose close their eyes, stoppe their eares, harden their hartes, and refuse to read or heare: it shall not repent them diligently to peruse this con­futation, and with good aduise to weigh and consider what here is said in defence of the catholike religion, how truly this newe clergys doctrine is disproued touching belefe, and how iustly their slaunders be refelled touching maners, or at lest reasonably answered.

For vvhere they call vs Heretikes, it is a crime so haynous, Apologie that onles it may be seene, vnles it may be felt, and in manner may be holden vvith handes and fingers, it ought not lightly to be iudged or beleued vvhen it is laide to the charge of any Christian. For he­resy is a forsaking of saluation, a renouncing of Gods grace, a de­parting from the body and spirite of Christe.

The definition ye seme to make of heresie, is not sufficient.Confuta­tion. The De­fenders definitio [...] of heres [...] foūd [...] in­sufficient. For as ye define it, so euery deadly sinne is heresie. For eue­ry deadly sinne is a forsaking of saluation, a renouncing of Gods grace, a departing from the body and spirite of Christ. Heresie is a false doctrine against the right belefe by him that [Page] professeth the faith stubbornly either auouched,The true definition of heresie. or called in doubt. In which definition this word stubbornly is added, because it is not errour only in those thinges that be of faith, but stubbornes in errour, that maketh an heretike, as S. Au­gustine teacheth.Lib. 18. de Ciuit. Dei. cap. 51. VVho (saieth he) in the church of Christ sauer any thing that is vnholesom and crooked, if being sharply admoni­shed to sauer that is hole and right, they resist stubbornly, and will not amend their venemous and deadly doctrines, but stand to de­fend them, The De­fenders iustly cal­led hereti­kes. they be heretikes. Now because we heare, see, and in maner feele with our fingers, that ye, the newe clergy of En­gland sauer sundry vnholesome and wrong thinges tou­ching faith, and auouch stubbornly false doctrines against the catholike faith, as hereafter we shall proue, and hauing ben admonished thereof will not amend, but persist to de­fend the same: We haue iust cause to call you heretikes, be the crime neuer so hainous. Would God ye gaue vs not oc­casion thus to do. But now the lawe of vpright dealing, spe­cially in Gods cause so requiring, ye must pardon vs, if, as a­mong husbandmē we call a rake, a rake, a spade, a spade, a mat­tocke, a mattocke: so among diuines, we call heresie, heresie, and likwise, falsehed, lying, slaundering, crafte, hypocrisie, a­postasie, malice, blasphemie, euerie such crime, by his proper name without all glosing. Which if we did not, we should do iniurie to the truth. Thus doing for iust causes sometimes, to wise men we ought not to seme to be moued with choler, nor to do beside christian modestie.

Apologie But this vvas euer an olde and solempne propretye vvith them and theire forefathers, yf any did complaine at their errours and faultes, and desired to haue true Religion restored, streighte vvaye to condemne such one for heretikes, as men nevv fangled and factious. Christe for no nother cause vvas called a Samaritan, but onely for that he vvas thoughte to haue fallen to a certaine nevv Religion, and to be the Aucthor of a nevve sect. And Paul thapostle of CHRISTE, vvas called before the Iudges to make aunsvvere to a matter of he­resy, [Page 25] and therfore he saied: According to this vvay vvhich they call Heresye, I doo vvoorshippe the God of my Fathers, Act. 24. beleeuinge all thinges vvhich be vvritten in the lavv and in the Prophets.

Ye should haue named them, or certaine of them,Cōfuta­tion. whom our forefathers condemned for heretikes, for newe fangled and factious men, which complained of faultes and errours, and faine would true religion to be restored.The De­fenders predeces­sours. If ye meane Huss, Hierome of Prague, Wicklef, Amalrike, Abailard, the Apostolikes, Peterbrusians, Berengarians. Waldenses, Albin­genses, Imagebreakers, or such the like, which euer founde faulte with the church in their time, and cryed for a restoring of religion as though it had ben quite lost, and would them selues haue the glorie of it by bringing in their heresie in place of the catholike doctrine vnder the name of Gods word, which hath alwaies ben the propertie of heretikes, if I saye, ye meane these, or any of these: we also call them here­tikes, and for such we condemne them.

But Sirs ye forgete your selues fowly.Cōtradi­ctiō foūd in the De­fenders. How agreeth this with that ye saye hereafter often times, that the light of the truth was quite put out, and that Luther and Zuinglius first brought the Gospell abrode into the world? By you if there were any in our forefathers dayes, which complained of er­rours, and desired true religion to be restored: then was there in your opinion some light pardy, the gospell then was not first preached by Luther and Zuinglius. Well, would God this ouersight were the worst point in your doctrine.

Were it true that Christ was called a Samaritane for the cause ye assigne, thereof what conclude ye? we see where a­bout ye go. Ye would seme to ioine with Christ, with Paul, and with the first christians. But truly they refuse your compainie. Ye would faine make it appere to the world, that being charged with the crime of heresie, ye susteine iniurie vnde­seruedly, and with like innocencie, as Christ and Paul did, [Page] and those persecuted christians of the primitiue church. But we tell you, Christ was the true Samaritane in dede, that is to saye,Samaritā. the keper, as he that is keper of mankinde, and there­fore he shunned not the name. Yet was he not a Samaritane as the Iewes meant.Iohn. 8. Paul likewise, (who was not as ye saye to speake properly called before the iudges to make answere to a matter of heresie) being accused to Felix by Tertullus that he was of the secte or heresie of the Nazarens (so were the christians first called) did not only not denye,Act. 24. but openly confessed, that according to that waye or state of life, which the Iewes called a sect or heresie, he worsshipped God. For it is to be considered that in those times the name of heresieHeresie. was not so infamous, as it may be iudged by the place of the actes cap. 5, onlesse somewhat be added whereby it maye be vnderstanded to be taken in rate of a vice, as, 1. Cor. 11. Galat. 5. so the word was then indifferent, and might be taken in good part or euill part. Tertullian vseth it in good part, where speaking of the christians,Apologeti. cap. 21. Secta. he calleth thē sectam, asect, into which latine word the greke word haeresis is tourned. Now these examples of Christ, Paul, and the first christians, serue not to your defence. Christ was called of the Iewes a Samaritane vnworthely after the sense of their thought. Ye are called heretikes, worthely. Paul burdened with the name of heresie, for asmuch as thereby was signified the kinde of life of those that beleued in Christ, the word being indiffe­rent, was honoured rather then reuiled. And Tertullian cal­leth the Christian people a sect (as he might) without ble­mish or note of any euill.The im­puting of heresie to the De­fenders is no slaun­der, Your case is not like. For ye are charged with heresie, as it is taken in the worst part. For where as that greke word commeth of the verb that signifi­eth choosing, because ech man chooseth that he liketh best, and heretikes by choosing either make or receiue a doctrine [Page 26] and heresie: ye hauing receiued doctrines contrary to the faith of the catholike church,Sūdry de­uisers of the late heresies. of which Luther hath made and deuised some, Zuinglius some, Caluine some, Wiklef some, Berengarius some, and other auncienter heretikes some, and all by choise of their owne wittes and iudgemen­tes, not by the prompting and teaching of the holy ghost: it foloweth that ye are heretikes, and that being of the world so called, ye are called by your deserued name.

Complaine not therefore, when your seditious demea­nour against the catholike church, your blasphemies against God, and other your outrages are in the presence of chri­sten princes lamentably talked of: if their eares be filled with the sounde of the termes, of schismes, sectes and heresies. For such termes haue ye deserued to be sounded in the eares of all princes and of all christen men against you, to thend those might correct you, these beware of you.

But the more sore and outragious a crime heresie is, Apologie. the more it ought to be proued by plaine and strong argumentes, especially in this time, vvhen men begin to geue lesse credite to theire vvords, & to make more diligent searche of theyr doctrine then they vvere vvont to do. a For the people of God ar othervvyse instructed novv then they vvere in times past, vvhen all the Bysshopps of Romes b sayenges vvere allovved for Gospell, & vvhen all Reli­gion did depende only vpon their aucthoritie. Novve a daies the holie scripture is abroad, the vvritinges of the Apostles and Pro­phets ar in printe, vvhereby c all truth and Catholyke doctrine may be proued, and all heresie may be disproued and confuted.

THE EIGHT CHAPTER.

Where ye require your heresie,Confut. The de­fenders heresies sufficient­ly and ful­ly confu­ted alrea­dy by sun­dry great clerckes. for so much as it is so hai­nous a crime, by plaine and strong argumentes to be proued: it is not vnknowen how sufficiently and substantially that is performed already by men of excellent lerning as well of this age, as of times past. Was not Berengarius the first author of your sacramentarie heresie, by most plaine and strong argu­mentes confuted of Lanfrancus Lanfrācus. bisshop of Cantorbury, and Guimundus Guimundus bishop of Auersa? were not the Peterbrusians so, [Page] whose heresie ye holde against the blessed sacrifice of the masse,Pet. Clu­niacensis. Tho. VValden. B. F [...]sher. of the lerned Abbot Petrus Cluniacensis? was not Wickelf so of Thomas Walden a lerned mā of Engāld? Hath not Luther and Oecolampadius ben so confuted in our time of that holy and lerned father bishop Fisher? Briefly haue not all the heretikes of our dayes with all their monstrous opi­nions of many and sundry worthy clerkes in all christian regions by most euident and profound reasons, most plaine testimonies of the fathers and auncient councels, most sure groundes and authorities of the holy scriptures ben refelled, confuted, and put to confusion, though not to silence? But what shal I speake of particular men, were they neuer so excel­lent,The ne­vve dis­proufe of the here­sies of our time by our forefa­thers cō­demned is nede­les. by whom they haue ben confuted, sith by publike sen­tence of the church they haue ben condemned both in gene­ral and prouinciall coūcels? Therefore we thinke it not nede­full now againe to proue your doctrine so sufficiently con­demned, to be heresie. For so should we seme to derogat the lerning of so many excellent clerkes, the iudgement of our graue and holy forefathers, and thauctoritie of the church. Yet what we haue here performed, let it be iudged by those that can iudge.

^a That the people be now otherwise instructed, then they were in times past, we confesse. But whether better now, then in our forefathers dayes, they that can consider the liues of them now, and of them that were then, maye easely iud­ge. If the tree be knowen by the fruit it beareth, we must ne­des thinke the olde trees planted by our forefathers better then the young trees, which be of your planting.

^b The sayinges of the bishop of Rome were neuer allo­wed for the gospell. His priuate sayinges and common talke might be erroneous, nolesse then other mennes. But what he saied by waye of iudgement and sentence definitiue in doub­tefullIn vvhat case the Popes sayinges ar to be taken for truth. Luc. 22. [Page 27] pointes touching religion, such sainges of Peters succes­sour, for whom Christ prayed, that his faith might not faile, and who was commaunded by Christ to strengthen his bre­thren: we take for truth, and the same obediently receiue. So the fathers assembled in councell at Chalcedon receiued and agreed to the saying and writing of Pope Leo, nolesse then if Peter the Apostle and first bisshop of Rome him selfe had spoken. The Popes auctoritie we acknowledge supreme aboue all other auctoritie in earth touching the gouerne­ment of the church, yet was it neuer said ne thought by the catholikes, that all religion depended only thereon, as your slaunderous report beareth men in hande.

^c If it be as ye saye that all truth and catholike doctrine may be proued, and all heresie disproued and confuted by the holy scriptures that be now a dayes abrode: then doubt we not by gods grace, but to proue the doctrine of the catholike church by you in this Apologie in many points impugned, and all your heresies in the same vttered, plainely to disproue and confute. Wherin not withstanding we wil vse such hel­pes besides the expresse scriptures, as your selues do not ne can not denye vs. Which are the expositions of the scriptu­res, that the holy ghost hath taught the church, and the aun­cient fathers haue set forth in writing.

Sithens then they bring forth none of these for them selues, Apologie and call vs neuer the lesse heretikes, vvhich haue neither fallen from Christ nor from the Apostles, nor yet from the prophetes, this is an iniurious and a very spitefull dealing.

Nay Sirs ye shall not so carye away the conclusion with a lye.Confuta­tion. But contrarywise sithens we bring forth many scriptu­res for the truth which ye impugne, as your selues shall see, when we come to confute your doctrine, which here folo­weth, and sithens notwistanding that ye will not yelde to the scriptures, but peruert the true meaning of them with gloses [Page] and interpretations of your owne heades, frame newe opi­nions contrary to that ye haue receiued, and that the church hath euer taught: the catholikes will still call you heretikes, and the church will condemne you for heretikes, and so ac­compt you vntill ye recant and repent. And therein shal their dealing towardes you be neither iniurious, neither spitefull. Amend your fault, and your selues will iudge the same.

That the defenders be fallen from Christ.But ye haue not fallen from Christ, ye saye, nor from the Apostles, nor yet from the Prophetes. As though they that depart from the Romaine church, which is the catholike church, which diuers times in the Apologie ye confesse: fell not from Christ, and consequently from the Apostles and Prophetes.Matth. 18. Sayeth not Christ in the gospell, He that heareth not the church, let him be to thee as an hethen and a publican? Sayeth he not also,Luc. 10. he that despiseth you, despiseth me? Hethens and Publicans cleaue not to Christ, who so euer despiseth Christ, is fallen from Christ. Sithens then ye heare not the church, but persecute the church, sithens ye despise the church: how are ye not fallen from Christ? And if ye be fal­len from Christ, ye maye be sure, ye can not hang by the Apostles, nor by the Prophetes. For when ye are gonne from Christ, they will sone shake you of.

Apologie VVith this svvord did Christe put of the Dyuel vvhen he vvas tempted of him: vvyth these vveapons oughte all presumption vvhich doth auaunce it selfe against God, to be ouerthrovven and conquered. 2. Tim. 3. For al Scripture, sayeth S. Paule, that commeth by the inspiration of God, is profitable to teach, to confute, to instruct, and to reproue, that the man of God may be perfect and throughly framed to euery good vvork. Thus did the holy Fathers alvvay fight agaynst the heretikes vvith none other force then vvith the holy scriptures.

THE NYNTH CHAPTER.

Confu­tation.That Christ draue away the deuill alleaging scripture, that with scripture deuilish presumptions be to be vanqui­shed, [Page 28] that scripture is profitable to those thinges which S. Paul speaketh of to Timothe, we confesse.2. Tim. 3. But that the holy fathers did euermore fight against the heretikes with none other force, then with the holy scriptures, that we denye. And how reasonably, and vpon how good groundes we denye it, iudge your selues. Or if ye will not geue sentence against your owne selues, the matter being neuer so euident: let your frendes iudge. For what did the fathers in the first generall councell holden at Nice?That the fathers haue fought against heretikes vvith other for­ce, then vvith ho­ly scrip­tures on­ly. Homou­ [...] did they fight against Arius and the mainteiners of his heresie with no other force, then with the scriptures? When those heretikes refused the word Homou­sion, whereby is significed the sonne of God to be of one and the same substance with God the father, for that it was not to be found in the scriptures, besides which they stiffly denyed, as ye do, that any thing ought to be receiued: did not the ca­tholike byshops on thother syde flye to the auncient fathers? Did they not appeale to the iudgementes of those fathers, which had geuē sentence of the matter then being in contro­uersie before that Arius and those that held of his syde were borne? And thereupon was it not in that councell by those fathers pronounced, though the Arians cryed against it in vaine, that the sonne rightly and truly is named Homousios, that is consubstantiall, or of the same substance with the fa­ther? This matter is so euident, as no man with the opinion of meane lerning may seme to doubt of it.

In the second councell assembled at Constantinople, were not the heretikes of sundry sectes by a witty and a god­ly policie contriued betwen Nectarius the bishop and Theo­dosius the Emperour,Histor. tri­part. lib. 5. Cap. 10. through the suggestion of the great clerke Sisinnius, driuen to receiue the doctours, who lyued before their heresies were heard of, as witnesses of true chris­tian doctrine worthy of credite? Though sundry of those he­retikes [Page] did what they could, that the fathers auctoritie might take no place, but that all should be determined by ex­presse scriptures: yet did not the catholike bishops in that councell for conclusion of their greatest matter folow the doctrine of the fathers?Macedoni{us} Macedonius in that councell was condemned, who therefore denied the holy ghost to be God, because the scriptures geue not vnto him that name. But the bishops there assembled,In epist. ad Michae­lem Bulga­riae principē as Photius that lerned bishop wri­teth, declared out of the teaching of the fathers and diuines before their time, that the holy Ghost is to be adored, wor­shipped, and glorified, as being of one nature and substance together with the father and the sonne.

In the third Councell kept at Ephesus, NestoriusNestorius. was condemned, because he presumed to diuide Christ into two per­sons, saying one was bare mā, the other God only. For which cause he was content to name the blessed virgin Mary Chri­stiparam, the mother of Christ, as though she had brought forth Christ a bare man: but would not name her Deipa­ram, the mother of God, lest she should be thought to haue brought forth also God.Nestorius euer cal­led for scripture, as the he­retikes at this daye do, vvhat so euer sect they be of. This heretike Nestorius boasted, as ye do, of the scriptures, saying they were of his syde, and would neither speake, nor heare ought, but scriptures, scriptures. And alleaging a place or two out of the gospel, where Marye is called the mother of Iesus, stoutly, finde me in all scrip­ture, (quoth he) where Marye is called the mother of God. Hereto what said that holy and lerned bishop Cyrillus chiefe in that councell?Epist. 1. Tomi. 4. Deipara not found in scrip­ture, yet receiued and kept Hanc nobis fidem diuini tradidere discipuli, & licet nullam fecerint dictionis huius mentionem, itae tamen sentire à sanctis patribus edocti sumus. This faith (sayeth he) the disciples of God haue by tradition left vnto vs. And although they haue made no expresse mention of this word (Deipara) yet so to thinke we haue ben taught of the holy fathers. Lo this holy father figh­teth [Page 29] against the heretike Nestorius with the doctrine of the olde fathers, that is, with other force, then with the holy scri­ptures. VVhen they reasoned about rules touching faith to be made (sayeth Vincentius Lirinensis writing of that councell) to all the bishops there assembled to the number almost of two hundred, this semed most catholike, most faithfull, and best to be done, that the sentences of the holy fathers should be brought forth among them: to thend that by their consent and decree the religion of the olde do­ctrine should be confirmed, and the blasphemie of the prophane no­ueltie condemned. Behold sirs what weapons the fathers haue vsed against heresies, besides the holy scriptures.

In the fourth councell which was celebrated at Chalce­don, EutychesEutyches. was condemned, who denied two natures to be in Christ. This heretike Eutyches, as ye and all heretikes haue done, craked much of the scriptures, and required his matter to be discussed by scriptures,Eutyches claimed his opini­on to be tryed by the scrip­tures. tell me (quoth he moc­kingly to euery one that reasoned with him) in what scrip­ture lye the two natures? The scriptures haue not taught me the [...]e two natures, of the scriptures I haue lerned no such thing. So he claimed to be tried by the scriptures, and refused the iudgementes of the olde doctours. But let vs heare what the lerned bishops of that councell said thereto. We finde in the first action of the councell, that they cried out alowde,The tea­ching of the fa­thers to be kept. Action. 5. Ea quae sunt patrum têneātur. The thinges that the fathers haue taught, let them be kept. Againe when they come to the definitiue sentence, they saye. Sequentes igitur sanctos patres &c. Folowing the holy fathers we do all with one accorde teach men to confesse one and himselfe the sonne our Lord Iesus Christ, perfite him selfe in Godhed, and perfite him self in manhod. And for auctoritie of the fathers in high pointes of faith a bishop in that reuerent as­semblie named Eudoxius pronounced a notable sentēce say­ing thus.A notable saying of a lerned father for thexposi­tion of the fa­thers. Euery one that cōsenteth not to the exposition of the holy [Page] fathers, doth alienate him selfe from all priestely communion, and from the presence of Christ. Thus we haue alleaged the foure first generall councels, which S. Gregorie honoureth as the foure gospels, for proufe of that ye denye, that the fathers haue oftentimes fought against heretikes with other force, then with the holy scriptures only. It were not harde to proue the same by example of S. Ambrose, S. Hierome, and other doctours, and of other councels that were after the foure first: but the thing being so euident as it is, and so well knowen euen to your selues, if ye be lerned: the auctoritie of these chief councels maye suffise.

Apologie De vnitate Eccl. ca. 3. Et contra Maximinū Arrianorū Episcop. li. 3. Cap. 14. Confuta­tion. S Augu­stines place alleaged by the defenders discussed. S. Augustine vvhen he disputed against Petilian an heretike of the Donatistes: Let not these vvordes, quod he, be heard betvven vs: I saye, or, you saye: let vs rather speake in this vvise: thus saieth the Lord: there let vs seke the church, there let vs boult out the cause.

Concerning this place of S. Augustine, it ought not to be stretched to all matters in generall, that be in question, as though we might not vse the testimonies and aucthorities of the fathers against heretikes: but it perteineth only to the question in that booke de vnitate Ecclesiae treated of, which is, where the church is. Petilian the Donatist and the maintei­ners of that heresie contended the church to be only in Aphrike, or at the furthest in parte Donati, among them only that helde with Donatus. The same heresie went they about to proue by scriptures. But when S. Augustine sawe how weake their proufes were, which they brought out of the scriptures, he prouoked them, the better to euerthrow them, to come to the triall of the scriptures. And in dede where the scriptures be manifest for proufe of any matter, what nede is there of doctours?VVhere thexposi­tions of the fa­thers be necessary, Augu­stine alle­geth the fathers. But where the sense of the scriptures is obscure, and may be wrested by euill wittes to the maintenaunce of an heresie: there the expositions of the fathers by all olde writers haue ben taken of necessitie to [Page 30] supplie the scriptures obscuritie, and to declare the sense of the church, which the holy ghost hath prompted. And in such cases S. Augustine him selfe vseth the testimonies of the fathers not seldome, namelye against Iulian the Pelagian. Where beside scripture touching originall synne, he allea­geth against the Pelagians a great number of fathers, and at length in one place speaking of thauctoritie, reuerence, and credite he had them in, he sayeth thus. Quod credunt, credo: Conteà Iu­lianū Pe­lagian. li. 1. &c. what they beleue, I beleue: what they holde, I holde: what they teach, I teach: what they preach, I preach. In that worke before he na­meth the fathers, whose wordes he intended to alleage against the Pelagians, he commendeth their auctoritie,Libr. 1. cap. 2. as it were with a short preface. I will not (sayeth he) reherse the sayinges of all touching this matter, but I will put a fewe of a fewe, by which neuerthelesse our gainsayers shal be driuen to blush and yelde, if there be either any feare of God or shame of men in them, that may ouer­come so misheuous wilfulnes. Hovv much S. Augustin estemed the fa­thers. In the secōd booke against the same Iulian hauing alleaged the auncient Doctours for the truth, this haue we proued (sayeth he) by thauctoritie of the catholike saintes, etc. Then a litle after there. For they are such and so wor­thy men, which auouch these thinges to be true, that your brittle and shrill noueltie will shiuer in peeces by thonly auctoritie of them. And there eftsones he requireth Iulian in them to feare not them, but him, He fea­reth not god. by S. Augustin vvho contemneth the fa­thers. who hath made them profitable vessels for his owne vse. Whereby he doth vs tunderstand, that he feareth not God, who so euer despiseth thauctoritie of the holy fathers. VVhat (sayeth he in an other place of that booke) hath time so farre mingled the highest thinges with the lowest, shall we saye darkenes is so become light, and light darkenes, that Pelagius, Celestius, Iuli­anus haue eyes, and Hylary, Gregory, Ambrose be blind? Now to conclude touching the place alleaged out of S. Augu­stine, though to thintent the Donatistes might best be con­futed [Page] by prouoking them to stand to the scriptures, S. Augu­stine refused to heare, I saye thus, thow say [...]st thus, but requi­red rather to heare, thus saith our lord: yet for decision of other questions, he is not against that we should vse the testimonies of the fathers. From the speciall to the generall negatiuely, the argument holdeth not, ye knowe, if ye haue not forgoten your Logike. And besides that the place pertei­neth only to that particular question, where the church is, he speaketh no word against thalleaging of the fathers, but against that the matter then in question should be discussed by his owne sayinges and Petilians sayinges: and to that ende only said, l [...]t vs not heare, thus saye I, thus sayest thou.

Apologie Lykevvise S. Hierome: All those things (sayth he) vvhich vvithout the testimonie of the scriptures are holden as deliuered from the Apostles, In pri [...]m caput Ag­gai. Confut. The de­fenders vvould faine remoue vs from all hel e to be taken against them of the fa­thers. All au­ctoritie of the fa­thers re­moued, the triall of mat­ters by scriptur [...]s vvilbe doutfull, vncertain and con­tentious. b [...] chroughly smitten dovvn by the svvord of Gods vvorde.

Ye would faine remoue vs from a good holde I see well, which is the auctoritie of the holy fathers, of auncient tradi­tions, and of the vniuersall church. All these would ye to be of no force against heretikes. For ye know the fathers and the church to be against you, and that so long as they are be­leued, your doctrine shall not be receiued, as alwaies founde to be newe, and of priuate deuise. If we were driuen from these, ye doubt not but to match vs well ynough in the scrip­tures. And as ye would handle the matter, I thinke so my selfe verely. For when all auctoritie and iudgement of the fa­thers and of the church is shaken quite of, in any controuersie by whom shal we be tried? By the scriptures ye saye. But when both ye and we alleage scriptures to a contrary purpose, and when we varie about the sense of the scriptures, by whom then shal we be iudged? When ye saye, that is the mynde of the scriptures, and we saye, this is the mynde of the scriptu­res: who shal strike the stroke betwen vs? Is not in this case [Page 31] our yea, as good as your no, or contrarywise? Shall not thus our strife be endles? Perhaps ye will referre the iudgement of doubtfull matters to the holy ghost.The vm­piership of the holy ghost in all con­trouersies leadeth vs to the church, and con­sequently to the fa­thers. Ioan. 14. We refuse not tharbitre­ment and vmpiership of the holy ghost. For the same hath ben promised by Christ to the church, to remaine with the church for euer, to teach what thinges so euer he said, to lead men into all truth. Then is the truth to be founde in the church, and to be lerned of the church, of which church the holy fathers of all ages and places being the ministers, haue declared by their writinges and witnessed the same. And thus for iudgement and triall of truth, we shal be retourned to the church and to the fathers, by whom the holy ghost speaketh vnto vs, whose auctoritie and due estimation ye go about to remoue from vs.

But let vs see what force ye bring to driue vs from this holde. Making your batterie against it, what shoote ye of but winde and paper? Your artillerie maketh a noyes, but it ge­ueth no blowe. As in the last allegation ye falsefied the sense of S. Augustine, so in this ye falsefie both the sense and wor­des of S. Hierome. The wordes, as ye alleage them, seme to be spoken against what so euer traditions of the Apostles. Which wordes or any the like to such purpose, were neuer vttered by any catholike doctour of the church, much lesse by S. Hierome. Looke ye againe and vewe better the place, ye shal saye your selues, that I finde the fault of falsefying in you not without a cause.

S. Hierome in his commentaries vpon those wordes of the Prophete Aggaeus, Et vocaui siccitatem super terram, Aggaei. cap. 1. & su­per montes, I haue called the drouth to come vpon the earth, and v­pon the hilles, &c: first shewing the literall sense accordingly as the hebrew word there by him noted, signifieth siccitatem, [...] Siccitas. drouth, then treating mystically, as the seuenty interpreters [Page] haue turned that word into romphaeam, [...] Glad [...]us. that is, a sword, and vnderstanding by the sword, the word of God: thereof taketh occasion briefly to saye, what this sword doth, how it destro­yeth the negligēt soule, which is expounded to be drie earth, and how it plagueth montaines that lift vp them selues a­gainst the knowledge of God, whereby he meaneth hereti­kes. Of whō he telleth, how they flatter the deceiued peoples with their bread, wine, and oile, (by which he meaneth their heresies) as it were with meates, and drinke, and refection. Their bread (sayeth he) any man may very aptly call it, the bread of wayling, and their wine, the madnes of dragons, and the madnes of serpentes in curable. And their oile the promising of heauenly thin­ges, where with they do as it were anoint their disciples, and promise them rewardes of their labours, Psal. 10 4. S. Hie­rome falsefied by the De­fenders. which the prophete detesteth saying, the oile of the sinner shall not anoint my head. After this folow the wordes of S. Hierome which ye haue falsefied, to thintēt they might seme to serue your false meaning. Sed et alia quae absque authoritate et testimonijs scripturarum quasi traditione Apostolica sponte reperiunt atque confingunt, percutit gladius Dei. But the sword of God striketh also other thinges, which the heretikes (for of them he speaketh) deuise and faine of their owne heads without the authoritie and witnesses of the scriptures, as though they came by tradition frō the Apostles. He that compareth this place with your falsefied allegation, may sone espie great oddes betwen thē. For ye make S. Hierome to saye, that all those thinges which without the testimonies of the scriptures are holden (so your allo­wed interpreter tourneth asseruntur) as deliuered from the Apostles, be throughly smitten downe by the sword of Gods word. By this sword of your Gods word ye would quite smite downe al Apostolike traditions at a blowe. But thanked be God, that your sword is a forged sword, a paper sword, a sword that neither with edge cutteth, nor with weight beareth down. S. [Page 32] Hierome putteth not all thinges which we haue by tradition from the Apostles without the expresse scriptures to the sword of Gods word. He speaketh not generally.Hieromes place an­svvered. Hierome falsefied. His word is alia other thinges, and ye make it omnia al thinges. Againe he speaketh of such thinges as be deuised and fained by heretikes of their owne braine without authoritie and testimonies of the scriptures, vnto which they geue estimation as though they came by traditiō from the Apostles. These circumstan­ces and exaggerations do ye omitte, and saye, that S. Hiero­me putteth all Apostolike traditions to that dredfull sword of Gods word. Now what S. Hierome saieth, we holde with it and allow it well. But your saying we refuse as falsely fathe­red vpon S. Hierome. What he condemneth, we condemne. Neither can that place be iustly alleaged against vs. For we inuent not ne faine not any thinges of our owne accord or of our owne heads as though they were deliuered by the A­postles besides the scriptures, that is the part of heretikes spe­cially of the Tatians,Tatians. as in that place S. Hierome saieth. We find, deuise, and faine nothing in the catholike religion. We do but kepe and mainteine thinges deuised by the holy ghost, and left to the church by the Apostles, or by Apostolike mē, or by the generall councels,Hierome vseth the auctoritie of the fa­thers as of force a­gainst an heretike. whose auctoritie is in the church most helthfull sayeh S. Augustine. But concerning the force which the consent of the fathers had in the iudgement of S. Hierome, it appereth in his epistle to Euagrius. Where by the authoritie of the auncient doctours before his time he pro­ueth against an heretike, that Melchisedech was a man of the land of Chanaan, and not the holy ghost.

S. Ambrose also to Gratianus the Emperour: Apologie Let the scripture (sayeth he) bee asked the question, let the Apostles be asked, let the Prophetes be asked, and let Christ be asked. For at that time made the Catholick Fathers and Bisshops no doubt, but that our Religion mighte be proued out of the holy scriptures. Neither vvere they e­uer so hardy to take any for an heretike, vvhose errour they coulde [Page] not euidently and apparently reproue by the selfe same scriptures. And vve verely do make aunsvvere on this vvise as S. Paul did: Ac­cording to this vvay vvhich they call heresie, vve doo vvoorship God and the father of our Lord Iesus Christ, and do allovve al thin­ges vvhich haue ben vvritten either in the lavv or in the Prophetes, or in the Apostles vvorkes.

Confuta­tion.Gratian the Emperour addressing him selfe to go forth to warre, besought S. Ambrose to drawe him out a litle booke of faith, not concerning all the articles of our belefe, but only touching the Trinitie,The faith of the Trinitie by diuerse heretikes impugned diuersly before & in S. Am­brose ti­me. and specially the sonne of God. Which faith at those dayes was much impugned by heretikes of sun­dry sectes, but most of all other by Sabellius, Sabellius. who confoun­ded the Father and the Word, and auouched the Father and the sonne to be one and the same by Fotinus, Fotinus. who contended the beginning of the sonne to be of the Virgin: by Arius, Arius. who taught men to beleue mo and vnlike powers, and with hethenish errour made mo Gods. Hereof S. Ambrose wrote fiue short bookes. Of which in the beginning of the first, af­ter the prologue to the Emperour, he putteth the exposition of the catholike faith, folowing the agreable doctrine of the three hundred and eighten bishops assembled in Councell at Nice,S. Ambro­se place examined. and declareth that there is one God. Then he setteth forth the heretical opinions which Arius had of the sonne of God, that he is vnlike the Father, that he had beginning in ti­me, that he is created, &c.

Now buckling him self as it were to encounter with the he­retike, at the first he geueth warning to all to beware of him, for that he endeuoureth to proue his false doctrine, (name­ly for the first pointe that the sonne is vnlike the Father) Versutis disputationibus, with suttell and crafty reasoninges. He alleageth to that purpose S. Paul to the Colossians,Cap. 2. Cauete ne quis vos depraedetur per philosophiam. Beware that no man spoile you through philosophie and vaine deceit, &c. For (sayeth he) these [Page 33] heretikes put all the force of their poisons in logike, or dialecticall di­sputation, which by the opinion of Philosophers is defined not to haue power to proue, but an ernest desire to destroie and disproue. Hauing geuen this holesome warning, lest him selfe might seme to vse that, which he counselleth others to beware of: to withdrawe the Emperour and all other from the guyle­full logike of Arius, at his first entrie he sayeth.Ambros. de fide lib. 1. cap. 4. I will not that thou geue credite holy Emperour to argument and to oure disputation, (then folow the wordes whereof the Defen­ders take holde), scripturas interrogemus, &c. Let vs aske the scriptures, let vs aske the Apostles, let vs aske the Prophetes, let vs aske Christ, what nede many wordes? let vs aske the Father, &c. By which wordes S. Ambrose meaneth,The De­fenders place al­leaged out of S. Ambrose against thauctoritie of the fathers, ansvvered. that to haue a right belefe of the sonne of God, whether he be like the Father, or vnlike the Father, we should geue eare to the plaine testimo­nies of the scriptures, and not trouble our heads with the sophistrie and suttell argumentes of Arius. And to this point of our belefe which is very high and secrete, is that saying of S. Ambrose to be restrained. But that for confirmation of the truth in pointes which be nearer to common sense, and for confutation of those heresies which be of lesse subtilitie, of which sorte these Gospellers grosse errours be, to this ende that we ought not to vse the testimonies of the holy fathers against heretikes, (for which purpose they alleage this place): S. Ambrose neither in all that booke, neither in all his wor­kes speaketh so much as one worde.

But contrarywise in sundry places of that worke he allea­geth the aucthoritie of the Nicene councel,S. Ambrose allea­geth a­gainst heretikes the auctoritie of the fa­thers. as a testimonie of good force against the Arians, and declareth a diuine my­sterie to haue ben signified by such speciall number of the fathers there assembled. In the eight chapter of that workes first booke, he bringeth against the heretikes the fathers de­finitiue [Page] sentence of the faith in that point, which is, that the sonne is God of God, light of light, true God of true God, borne of the Father, not made, of one substance with the Father. For witnes and proufe of which doctrine he alleageth the auctoritie of the fathers, saying, sic nempe nostri secundum scripturas dixerunt patres, euen thus according to the scriptures, haue the fathers said, &c. In the next chapter he mencioneth the horrible curse a­nathema by the catholike and Apostolike church extended a­gainst the Arian heretikes.The in­uiolable auctoritie of the fa­thers af­ter the doctrine of S. Ambrose. In the third booke of that worke de fide ad Gratianum. cap. 7. contrary to that meaning these defenders pretend him to be of, he saith thus. Seruemus praecepta maiorum, &c. Let vs kepe the preceptes of our forefathers, neither with temeritie of rude boldnes let vs breake the heredita­rie seales, (he meaneth the doctrine sealed by the fathers and left to the posteritie as it were by heritage) which of vs will be so eardy, as to vnseale the priestly booke, sealed by the confessours, and now consecrated with the martyrdome of many a one? Lo heare ye not Sirs how much S. Ambrose is against you? And how saye ye? If by him it be not laufull to violate and gaine­saye the doctrine and tradition of the fathers, (for so much he meaneth by the seales and by the priestly booke) then the same geueth force of good argument against heretikes, which ye denye. In an other booke which he entituled de fide orthodoxa contrà Arianos, what estimation he had of the fa­thers, and what force their auctoritie hath against heretikes in his iudgement, he signifieth not obscurely, where he ioi­neth together the Euangelike and Apostolike faith,Cap. 1. and the tradition of the fathers, touching the name of substance in the matter of the Trinitie.The scri­ptures are to be as­ked con­cerning the mysterie of the Trinitie, ergo the fathers ar not at all to be confuted: a foolish argumēt. And though he saye touching this mysterie, let vs aske the scriptures, Apostles, Prophetes, and Christ: yet thereby doth he not quite exclude the fathers. He sayeth not let vs reiect the fathers. The scriptures and the fa­thers [Page 34] be not contrary, and therefore thallowing of them, is not the disalowing of these. Who so euer maketh this argu­ment, which in your worde is implyed, the scriptures are to be asked, ergo the holy fathers are not to be asked, maketh a foo­lish argument.

Thus haue we answered your three places alleaged out of the three holy doctours, Augustine, Hierome, and Ambrose: and haue declared the same to serue the purpose ye went about to proue, no whit at all. And though for exposition of the scriptures and testimonie of the truth, we vse the aucto­ritie of the fathers, yet do we not doubt, but our religion may be proued by the holy scriptures. As for the fathers whom ye alleage, they estemed not only them for heretikes who denyed the scriptures, but also all those, which went against the auncient traditions and the receiued sentence of the church, although by most manifest and expresse scriptu­res the same were not auouched. And because in sundry pointes ye contemne the sentence of the church, reiect all traditions, and wrest many places of the scripture it selfe to the maintenaunce of your newe doctrines: how so euer ye persuade your selues to worship the Father of Iesus Christ, and to allowe the lawe, the prophetes, and the Apostles: yet can ye not worthely seme to folow S. Paul as ye pretende.

VVherefore if vve be heretikes, Apologie. and they (as they vvould faine be called) be Catholikes, vvhy do they not, as they see the fathers, vvhich vvere catholike men, haue alvvaies done.

THE TENTH CHAPTER.

We do so.Confuta­tion. For they condemned those that went against the tradition of the fathers, and so do we.

VVhy do they not cōuince and maister vs by the diuine scriptures? Apologie Confuta­tion. Ioan. 14.

The scriptures consist not in yncke and paper, but in the sense. Which sense the holy gost by Christes promise hath taught the church. The church declareth it to beleuers by [Page] the preachinges and writinges of the fathers. Whom who beleueth not agreing generally in one, beleueth not the scrip­tures, nor the holy Ghost author of the scriptures. To an­swere your demaunde. We do conuince you by diuine scrip­tures. But as ye reiect the fathers, so ye refuse the sense of the scriptures, which the holy ghost hath taught, which the fa­thers haue declared, and which holy church holdeth, and deuise a newe of your owne imagination, such as whereby ye may seme to defend your heresies. And then ye crye out lustely, that the catholikes conuince you not, nor maister you by the diuine scriptures.

Apologie VVhy do they not call vs againe to be tried by them?

Confut. Haeresi. 61. Scripture nedeth specula­tion. Traditiō necessary, because scripture hath not all thin­ges. Recognit. lib. 10.Epiphanius refuting the heretikes which named them sel­ues Apostolikes, sayeth, that the scriptures haue nede of specula­tion (that is to witte, to be well studied and considered) to the ende the force and power of euery argument may be knowen. It behoueth vs also (sayeth he) to vse the tradition. For we can not haue all thinges of the holy scripture. Thus Epiphanius. By tradi­tion without doubt he meaneth the sense and vnderstanding receiued of the fathers. For that is the keye of the word of God, as S. Peter taught, by report of S. Clement. This sense and vnderstanding of the lawe had the ministers of the lawe to whom the traditions of Moses and of the elders came as it were by handes. Now we require you to admitte this tradi­tion, that is to saye the catholike sense and vnderstanding of the scriptures, which hath ben deliuered vnto vs by the holy fathers of all ages and of all countries where the faith hath ben receiued.Conten­tion end­les, vvhe­re tradi­tion is reiected. And then we will call you againe to be tried by the scriptures. Els if ye refuse the tradition that Epiphanius speaketh of, being without all balance to weigh our reasons and allegations with, what so euer we bring for the truth, ye will peruert it by your priuate interpretation. So for wordes [Page 35] we shal be answered with wordes, and no ende shal be made of contention.

VVhy do they not laye before vs, Apologie hovve vve haue gone avvaye from Christ, from the prophetes, from the Apostles, and from the holy fathers?

This haue the catholikes layd before you oftentimes,Confu­tation. Luc. 10. and this do we shewe you in this confutation. He that despiseth you, despiseth me, sayeth Ghrist of his church. Ye despise the catholike church, and therefore ye despise Christ. And if ye despise Christ, then are ye gone from Christ. If from Christ, then also from the Prophetes, from the Apostles, and from the fathers. And vntill ye retourne againe, ye ought not to be heard not to be reasoned with all. But now whereas ye haue auctoritie and may do what ye list, to saue some of the peo­ple from your dangerous poison, we do what we may. Otherwise it were better to folow S. Pauls counsell to Tite.Tit. 3. Flye from one that is an heretike after the first and the second admo­nition. Vpon which place S. Ambrose sayeth, that heretikes to thintent they may be inexcusable, are to be taken vp with sharp ad­monition once. For if they be oftentimes so taken vp, they will be made the redier to do euill. For he that oftentimes taketh them vp, semeth to compell them, to be warier and more carefull to destroie a number.

VVhy stick they to do it? vvhy are they afraide of it? Apologie It is Gods cause: vvhye are they doubtfull to commit it to the trial of Gods vvorde? yf vve be heretikes vvhich referre all our controuersies vnto the holy scriptures, and report vs to the selfe same vvords, vvich vvee knovve vvere sealed by God him self, and in comparison of them set little by all other thinges vvhatsoeuer may be deuised by men, hovve shall vvee say to these folke I pray you, vvhat manner of men be they, and hovve is it meete to call them, vvhich feare the iudge­ment of the holy scriptures, that is to say, the iudgement of God hym self, and do preferre before them theyr ovvne dreames, and full colde inuentions: and to maintaine their ovvne traditions, haue defaced and corrupted novv these many hundred yeares the ordi­nances of Christe and of the Apostles?

What nede so many questions Sirs?Confuta­tion. Your hote rhetorike [Page] sheweth more courage in word, then victorie in dede. Ye call vs forth to the scriptures, as it were to the fylde. Ye strike vs downe with woordes,Great bragges made by the de­fenders of thassu­rance of the scri­ptures. before ye come to encounter. To she­we your brauerie in the moustre ye referre your controuer­sies vnto the holy scriptures, ye report you to the wordes sealed by God him selfe: but we the catholikes as ye pretend, stick at it, we be afraid of it, we doubt of the matter, we feare the iudgement of holy scriptures, we preferre our owne dreames and colde inuentions. Well, now that ye haue tolde your lusty tale, heare our sober answere. We tell you. We sticke not at it. We be not afraid of it. But because it is Gods cause, we take aduise how to do it so, not as we may gete the maistery ouer you, but so as may be most to the glorie of God and safetie of the people, whose helth ought to be dere vnto vs. But forasmuch as the heretikes of all ages haue confident­ly appealed to the scriptures, and haue much abused the scrip­tures to the promoting of their false doctrines, and thereby deceiued many: as we refuse not the iudgement of the scrip­tures, so we require the true sense of the scriptures. Neither do the scriptures conteine all thinges whereof doubt may rise, nor by the scriptures are many doubtes discussed, if the letter be heard,Scriptu­res vvic­kedly made to serue to euill mea­ning. Ioan. 7. and the sense reiected. And oftentimes the true scriptures are stretched forth to serue euill and false purpo­ses. The Iewes went about by the scriptures to proue that Christ was not so much as a Prophete. For they sayd. Serche the scriptures, and see, that a prophete riseth not out of Gali­ley. By the scriptures they would nedes shewe him worthy to dye.Ioan. 19. We haue a lawe, quoth they, and by our lawe he ought to die, because he hath made him selfe the sonne of God. The deuill by al­leaging scripture would haue deceiued our sauiour him selfe, and sayd vnto him.Matt. 4. De fide. li. 8. cap. 1. Scriptum est, it is written. The Arians were full of the scriptures, and by the same, as S. Ambrose [Page 36] writeth, went about to proue, that Christ the author of all goodnes was not good, it is written, quoth they,Marc. 10. Nemo bonus nisi vnus Deus. None is good but one God. Likewise, the Mace­donians, the Nestorians, the Eutychians, and all other hereti­kes (as is before said called for the scriptures, offered to be tried by the scriptures, and made awise as though they had ben sure of the scriptures.

Now in this case your selues doing the like,Heretikes that cal so busely for the scrip­tures are to be confu­ted vvith the right sense of the scrip­tures de­clared by the fa­thers. Cap. vt su­pra. Lib. 2. de trinitate. what may we do better, then honour the scriptures, and seeke for their right sense and vnderstanding? Scriptum est, it is scripture (sayeth S. Ambrose to the allegation of the Arians) I acknowledge, but the letter hath not the errour, would God the Arians interpretatiō had not. A pices sine crimine sunt, sensus in crimine. The letters be without crime, the sense is in crime. From the vnderstanding com­meth heresie, not from the scripture, the sense not the word, becom­meth to be a crime, saieth S. Hilary. Sithens then all standeth in the sense, let vs agree first vpon the sense and interpre­tation of the scriptures, and then if we be not as ready as ye, come forth when ye list, vpbraide vs hardely, and saye lustely as here ye do, why sticke they to do it? why are they afraid of it?

As for the true sense and interpretation of the scriptures,The true sense of scriptures is to be founde in the catho­like chur­che. Matth. 28. I [...]an. 14. Esaia. 59. where shall we finde it, but as before we said, in the catho­like church? The church hauing Christ remaining with it all dayes to the ende of the world, hauing by promise of Christ the spirite of truth, remaining in it for euer, hauing by Gods owne auncient promise both the wordes which the Father hath put in the mouth of Christ, and the spirite which he putte in him, whereby it may vnderstand the meaning of Gods wordes: we may not now seke for the true sense, vnder­standing, and interpretation of the scriptures any where, but in the church. Your owne doctour Iohn Caluine him selfe,In epist. ad Hebraos. [Page] whom ye folow and esteme so much, admonisheth very wel, and sayeth,The sense of the scriptures vvhich the holy ghost hath taught the church being ad­mitted to the deci­sion of contro­uersies, the De­fenders and their fe­lovves vvill be founde the vvea­ker syde. Instit. c. 18 Act. 2. it is specially to be noted, that out of the church there is no light of the sounde vnderstanding of the scrip­tures. This ground being laid, on which ech part must stand and be tried in, crowe no more against vs, boast your sel­ues no more, we feare not the iudgement of the holy scri­ptures. Nay it is your selues that feare this iudgement. For your owne conscience telleth you, that on this grownde ye are the weaker syde. If ye stand with vs on this grown­de, ye shall neuer be able to defend your Maister Iohn Caluines doctrine touching baptisme, which he maketh to be of so litle force, against the manifest scripture, Let euery one of you (sayeth S. Peter) be baptized in the name of Ie­sus Christ, to remission of sinnes. Keping this grounde ye shall be borne from your doctrine touching absolution, denying the priest to haue power to absolue penitents by his priestly auctoritie, but by preaching the gospell to them, contrary to the plaine scripture, whose sinnes ye forgeue, they are forgeuen to them, Ioan. 20. whose ye reteine, they are reteined. If ye refuse not this grownde, ye shall be forced to restore the sacrament of ex­treme vnction,Extreme vnction. and the vse of holy oyle againe, which ye haue abandoned. For what haue ye to saye against the scri­pture,Iacob. 5. Is any sicke among you? Let him cause the priestes of the church to come in to him, anointing him with oyle, in the name of our Lord? Abyding in this grownde, ye shall be driuen to for­sake your Zuinglian doctrine which putteth signes and fi­gures only in the sacrament of the aulter for the the true and reall body of Christ there present, contrary to the cleare scri­pture,Matt. 26. this is my bodye. Being on this grownde ye shall sone geue ouer the maintenance of the doctrine of your speciall faith, and of your iustification by faith only, as being contra­ry to the plaine scripture,Iacob. 2. Man is iustified by workes, and not by [Page 37] faith only. To conclude, (for to shewe in how many pointes ye may be confuted by euident scriptures it were in maner infinite) if ye will admitte this for a good grownd, as ye must nedes admitte: then shall ye not mainteine the presumptuous doctrine of your certaintie of grace and saluation, contrary to that S. Paul counselleth,Philip. 1. with feare and trembling worke your saluation.

Men say that Sophocles the tragicall Poet, Apologie. vvhen in his oulde da­yes he vvas by his ovvn sonnes accused before the Iudges for a do­tinge and sottishe man, as one that fondelye vvasted hys ovvne sub­staunce, and seemed to neede a gouernour to see vnto him: to thintent he might cleere him selfe of the faulte, he came into the place of Iudgemente, and vvhen he had rehearsed before them his Tragedye called Oedipus Coloneus, vvhich he had vvritten at the verye tyme of his accusation, maruelous exactly and conningly, did of him selfe aske the Iudges, vvhether they thought any sottish or doting man could do the like peece of vvorke.

The comparison which ye make betwen your selues and Sophocles, gladly we admitte.Confuta­tion. Yet we acknowledge that as in many respectes ye are like, so in some vnlike.The De­fenders compare them sel­ues to Sophocles. Sophocles was a poet, that is to saye, a fainer, and deuiser of thinges that be not true, but fabulous. Ye also are fainers, and deuisers of nouelties, and folowers of newe deuises, that be false. Sopho­cles was a tragicall poet, ye are tragicall diuines. A tragedieA tragedie. setteth forth thouerthrowes of kingdomes, murder of noble personages, and other great troubles, and endeth in wofull lamentations.Theffect of the ne­vve go­spell. Your gospel inuadeth Christes heauenly king­dome the church, it murdereth soules bought with a most dere price, it causeth a hellish garboile in mennes conscien­ces, in the ende it bringeth to euerlasting weping and gnas­shing of teeth. Sophocles was accused of his vnkinde sonnes, ye are accused of your fathers, of your brethren, of your mo­ther, who loue you most tenderly and with vnspeakeable griefe of hart bemone your case. Sophocles in his olde dayes, [Page] ye in your young dayes.The nevv English church is not yet come to the yeres of discre­tion. For your english church hath not yet fulfilled the age, or number of those yeres, which we call the yeres of discretion. He for a doting and a sottish man, ye for making infinite numbers of men to dote and to be sottes. He for wasting his owne substance, ye both for spoiling of others outward substance, and robbing of their spirituall treasures. He rehersed his cunning tragedie for proufe that he doted not, before the laufull iudges of his countrie. Ye flye from al lauful iudgement, ye shewe not your faces where ye ought, and hauing written in a corner this inuectiue or fa­mous libell, geuing it name of an Apologie: without due or­der cast the same abrode, offering your cause to be examined and iudged by the temeritie of the common multitude.

Apologie In like manner, bycause these men take vs to be mad, and appea­che vs for heretikes, as men vvhich haue nothing to do neyther vvith CHRIST, nor vvith the Churche of GOD, vve haue iud­ged yt shoulde be to good purpose, and not vnprofitable, yf vve doe openlye and frankely set furth our faith vvherein vve stande, and shevv all that confidence vvhich vve haue in CHRISTE IHE­SV, to the intent all men may se vvhat is oure iudgement, of euery parte of Christian religion, and may resolue vvith them selues, vvhether the faith vvhich they shall see confirmed by the vvords of Christ, by the vvritinges of the Apostles, by the testimonies of the catholique Fathers, and by the exaumples of many ages, be but a certain rage of furious and mad men, and a conspiracie of heretikes. This therefore is oure belieffe.

Confu­tation.We take you not to be mad. Would God, ye were not wor­se then mad. Were ye mad, ye should be tyed vp. Els were ye suffered to go abrode, for feare, folke would flye from you. And then should ye do litle hurte. Now whiles ye offer vene­mous kisses with sugered lippes, whiles ye couer woluish crueltie vnder lābes skinnes, whiles ye hurte vnder pretence of benefite, woond vnder colour of a medecine, begyle vn­stable soules with resemblance of truth: neither stinte ye to worke mischiefe, nor others can beware of you. But because [Page 38] ye imagine your selues to be taken for mad, and dronken with the poisoned cuppe of heresie, ye haue thought good openly and franckly to set forth the faith ye professe.Euery part of Christen religion is not treated in the Apo­logie. Where ye saye this to haue ben your intent, that all men may see what is your iudgement of euery part of christian religion, that can not they see, because as your newe religion, shun­neth many partes of christian religion, so in this your newe Gospell booke they be not to be sene. If it were possible men might euidently see your peculiar faith confirmed by the wordes of Christ, by the writinges of the Apostles, by the testimonies of the catholike fathers, and by the example of many ages, as ye saye: they would not saye that it were a certaine rage of furious and mad men, nor a conspiracie of heresie. But if we shall proue and shewe that it is not so confirmed in dede, but con­trariwise that it is repugnant to the holy scriptu­res, to the tradition of the church, to the do­ctrine of the holy fathers, and to the exam­ples of the primitiue church, and of the church of these last thousand yeres: then we doubt not but the same shall appere to all men as it is, not faith but infidelitie, not truth, but lying, not the gospell, but here­sie, not religion, but confusion.

THE FIRST CHAPTER.

IN our fathers dayes before any change in re­ligion was thought vpon,Confuta­t [...]on. Vnitie of the church in our fa­thers da­yes. Act. 4. Christen people lyued together in perfite vnitie. Touching faith they had all nolesse then they of the A­postles time one hearte and one soule. As all wor­shipped one God, professed one baptisme, and rested in one church, so made they confession of one faith. And as in poin­tes of belefe their saying was one, their iudgement was one, their minde was one: right so would they be called by one generall name, all Christians, all catholikes, all children of the Catholike church. If accompt of belefe had ben de­maunded, none was ashamed of the cōmon Apostles Crede.Apostles crede. Euery one constantly confessed, I beleue in God the father all­mighty maker of heauē and earth, and in Iesus Christ, and so forth. But sithens Luther brought a newe gospell into the world,Diuersi­tie in reli­gion. we haue sene great diuersitie among men not only of cere­monies and administration of the sacramentes, but also of the publike confession of faith. For as sundry rulers, coun­tries, and common weales receiued that newe doctrine: so their preachers and ministers haue set forth sundry Credes and confessions of their faith. Which although in many thin­ges agree with the truth, yet in some weighty pointes they disagree and vary both from the faith of Christes catholike church, and within them selues one from an other.Diuerse Confes­sions of faith. Such are the confessions of Auspurg, of Zurich, of Wittenberg, of Osianders secte, of the Anabaptistes, of the Zuenckfeldians, of the pretensed reformed churches of Fraunce, of Scotland, and now this of the English church. This case semeth to [Page] godly and wise men perrilous and lamentable in our time,Lib. ad Constan­tiū Aug. as the like semed to S. Hilary in his time. Who complaining thereof, Now a dayes, there be (sayeth he) so many faithes, as there be willes, S. Hila­ries com­plaint of many faithes. so many doctrines, as there be maners: so many causes of blasphemies spring vp, as there be vices: whiles faithes either are so written as we list, or so vnderstanded as we list. And whereas there is but one God, one God, one faith. one lord, one baptisme, and according thereto one faith: we steppe asyde from that which is the only faith, and whiles mo faithes be made, they beginne to come to that point, that there be no faith at all.

But what fault finde ye in this confession of our faith, sa­yeth this defender. Sire the first part of your confession, wherein ye vtter your belefe touching the Trinitie, contei­neth true and catholike doctrine. Where the thing ye treate of is not in controuersie betwen you and vs, and where ye speake not with affection to ouercome, we graunt sometimes ye vt­ter truth.The ma­ner of vtterance of the de­fenders faith strā­ge to Christen eares. But the maner of the vtterance of your faith is strange to Christen eares, who haue ben accoustomed to hea­re, Credo in deum, Credo in Iesum Christum, Credo in Spiritum sanctum. I beleue in God, I beleue in Iesus Christ, I beleue in the holy ghost. That other forme of wordes which you vse, soun­deth not so Christianlike. I beleue there is a God, I beleue that Ie­sus Christ is the sonne of the father. I beleue that the holy ghost is God. Although this forme of wordes do expresse a right faith, yet being such as may be vttered by deuils, and hath alwayes ben vttered by heretikes their ministers:The olde forme of the Crede more cō­uenient then that of the de­fenders. Iacob. 2. the auncient and ho­ly fathers haue liked better the olde forme and maner, after which euery Christen man sayeth, I beleue in God, I beleue in Iesus Christ, I beleue in the holy ghost. For this importeth a signi­fication of faith with hope and charitie, that other of faith only, which the deuils haue and tremble, as S. Iames sayeth, wherein as in many other thinges these defenders resemble [Page 40] them. S. Augustine in sundry places putting a difference betwen these two formes of wordes, vpon S. Iohn alleaging S. Paules wordes,Rom. 3. In Ioan. tract. 20. To bele­ue in God, vvhat is it. To one that beleueth in him who iustifieth the wicked, his faith is imputed to rightuousnes, demaundeth, what is it to beleue in him? It is by his answere. Credendo amarc, cred [...]n­do diligere, credendo in eum ire, & eius membris incorporari, with beleuing to loue him, with beleuing to go into him, and to be in­corporate in his members, that is, to be made a member of his body. In an other place he sayeth speaking of Christ.De verb. domini. Serm. 61. To beleue in Christ, and to beleue that Christ is, betvven both is great dif­ference. It for­ceth much whether a man beleue that he is Christ, and whether he be­leue in Christ. For the deuils beleued that he was Christ, neither for all that beleued the deuils in Christ. For he beleueth in Christ, who both trusteth in Christ, and loueth Christ. For if he haue faith with­out hope and loue, he beleueth that Christ is, he beleueth not in Christ. So he that beleueth in Christ, with beleuing into him shall Christ co­me, and by some meane he is vnited vnto him, and is made a mēber in his body. VVhich can not be done, except there come also both hope and charitie. Thus S. Augustine. The same doctrine he vtte­reth writing vpon the 77. psalme.

As this defender procedeth in declaring the belefe of his newe English church,The arti­cle of Christes Ascension much gra­ted vpon by the de­fenders to euill pur­pose. he grateth much vpon the article of Christes ascension, as the maner is of all Zuinglians to do. For their minde geueth them thereby they shall be able to bring at lest many of the simpler forte to their sacramentarie heresie, and to thinke that the body of Christ, wherein he ascended into heauen and sitteth at the right hande of the Father, is so absent frō earth, as it may not be beleued to be here present in the sacrament of the aulter. Thereto he alleageth S. Augustine making him to say,In Ioan. tract. 30. Oportet for potest. that Christes body wherein he rose againe, must nedes be stil in one place. In which trea­tise that holy father hath not the word oportet, that is, must ne­des as this defender alleageth, but this word potest, that is, may, [Page] as the bookes haue that be not corrupted by the mainteiners of that heresie. And whereas he sayeth ad Dardanum alleaged by this defender, though Christ hath geuen maiestie vnto his body, yet he hath not taken away from it the nature of a body: this is not to be stretched to Christes body in the sacrament, where it is not after condition of nature, but by the almighty po­wer of his word. And although he hath not taken away from his body the nature of a very body, yet may it please him to do with his body, being God nolesse then man, that which is besides and aboue the nature of a body. So it pleased him to do,Matth. 26. when he said, This is my body. And so it pleaseth him it be done, when so euer the same body is offered in the daily sa­crifice of the church according to his commaundement and institution.Contra Eu­tychem. li 1 Hovve Christ hath left to be novv in earth. 1. Ioan. 1. That Vigilius sayeth, Christ hath left vs touching his humaine nature, but hath not left vs as touching his diuine nature: it is to be vnderstanded of his visible shape, in which he she­wed his humaine nature, when he walked here on earth, when he was so cōuersant with men sensibly, that as S. Iohn writeth they heard him with their eares, they sawe him with their eyes, they beheld him, and touched him vvith their handes. As tou­ching his humaine nature in this sensible wise, Christ hath left vs, after which S. Augustine saieth, I am nō inuenis Christū loqui in terra. Expositio­nis in epist. Ioan. tract. 10. Now thou findest not Christ to speake on the earth. This maner of Christes humaine nature being takē from vs withstandeth not, but that we may haue the substance of his naturall body and bloud present in the blessed sacrament in a mysterie by the almighty power of his word, which faith these defenders trauaill to impugne. And (as God would) the penneman of this apologie bringeth vnwares as it semeth, for confirmation of his sacramentarie doctrine that out of Fulgētius, Ad Thra­simundum regem. which ouerthroweth al that he went about to build against the reall presence. That father as he is by him allea­ged [Page 41] sayeth, Christum, cum absit à nobis per formā serui, tamē sem­per esse nobiscum per formam Dei. That where as Christ is absent from vs according to the forme of a seruaunt, yet he is euer present with vs according to the forme of God. Whereby he meaneth that Christ is nomore here among men, as he was before his de­ath, in forme and shape of man, in such wise as we see men liue on the earth.Fulgentius fovvly falsefied by thinter­preter. Which wordes because they seme to dash their whole purpose, the prelates of this newe English church haue altered the sense of them by shifting in this word (Man­hood) in stede of (the forme or shape of a seruaunt) which the la­tine hath, and this word (Godhed) in stede of (the forme of God). In the english translation this is to be sene allowed by the au­thor, and set forth in the name of a ladye named A.B. as appe­reth by the epistle of an other gentlewoman for knowledge of her name geuing out only these two letters M.C. For so I find in the booke, and more of them I knowe not. If my La­dy A.B. deuised this practise of her own head, as I commend her for a shrewed witte, so I require in her more truth. For it is a great falshed in an interpreter to make such exchange of any part of the booke, which is taken in hand to be inter­preted, much more of wordes of so weighty importance. I would saye for some colour of her excuse, that herein she fo­lowed Oecolampadius, Musculus, and others of that secte: but that I iudge verely she neuer conferred their falsefied translations with the originals. Whether I may without bre­ach of courtesie charge her with so hainous a crime or no, I doubt. Perhaps as she passeth the bondes of womanly state in presuming to meddle so fare in these perilous matters al­lowed now by a fewe of the newe english church, and disa­lowed alwaies by the whole auncient church of Christen­dome: (if the translation be hers and not an others set forth in her name): so may I seme to forgete courtesie, thus [Page] roughly to blame so soft a creature. Whether it be done by legier demaine of her part, or false iugling of the authours part, by whom the translation is allowed, as M.C. writeth in her epistle: God knoweth, not I. But such false playe among true folke will much impaire their credite, and disgrace the whole pastime.

Apologie VVe beleue that the holy Ghoste, vvho is the third person in the holie Trinitie, is very God: not made, not creat, not begotten, but proceding from both the Father and the Sonne, by a certain meane vnknovven vnto men & vnspeakable, and that it is his propretie to mollifie, and soften the hardnes of mans heart, vvhen he is once re­ceiued thereunto, eyther by the holsom preaching of the Gospell, or by any other vvay: that he dothe geue men light, and guide them vnto the knovvledge of God, to al vvaye of truth, to nevvnes of the vvhole liefe, and to euerlastinge hope of saluation.

Confut.As we acknowledge this article to be true and catholike, so we demaunde of these defenders,The De­fenders dryuen to confesse that, vvhich by expresse scripture they can not a­uouch, nor by the 4. first chiefe councels. All truth not ex­pressed in Scripture. Other la­ter Councels to be receiued beside the foure first how they can proue the same. Haue they either expresse scripture for it, or any of the first foure generall councels, which be estemed of most au­ctoritie? We are sure they haue not. Therefore we do them to vnderstand, and if they heare vs not, we aduertise the rea­ders that feare God, and loue his truth, that all truth necessa­rely to be beleued is not expressed in the scripture, and that other councels be to be receiued besides the foure first which are allowed in England by Parlament, as that wherein this point touching the proceding of the holy ghost hath ben de­fined. Concili. Lugdunen. & Concil. florentin. sub Eugenio 4. as also other definitions of the church, when vpon a newe doubt rising an olde truth is by later publications declared. Likewise those councels in which the doctrine hath ben de­fined by the church concerning the two willes and operati­ons of Christ, which who so euer beleueth not, or at least re­fuseth to beleue, is not to be taken for a christen men. If these councels be denyed,Processiō of the ho­ly ghost. all these thinges shall come in doubt a­gaine: and if these be receiued, then why should not all the [Page 42] rest that be vniuersal be also receiued, which the church hath allowed?

VVe beleue that there is one Church of God, Apologie and that the same is not shutte vp (as in times past amonge the Ievves) into some one corner or kyngdome, but that it is catholique and vniuersall, and dispersed throughout the vvhole vvorlde. So that there is novv no nation vvhich can truly complaine that they bee shutt furth, & may not be one of the Church & people of God: And that this Churche is the kingedome, the bodye and the spouse of Christe: and that Christ alone is the Prince of this Kingedom, that Christ alone is the heade of this bodye, and that Christ alone is the brydgrome of this spouse.

THE SECOND CHAPTER.

It is a world to see these Defenders.Confu­tation. Ephes. 4. They which haue not kept vnitie of the spirite in the band of charitie, which S. Paul re­quireth, but haue seuered them selues from the body of the church, tell vs now forsooth, they beleue, that there is one church of God.If therbe but one church, vvhich is it amōg so meny? The church quite fallen dovvne long a go after tho­pinion of the de­fenders and a ne­vve of la­te set vp by Lu­ther and Zuin­glius. Looke in the leafe H. 7. b. Leafe. e. 2. But what maye we thinke this one church to be? Cā they seme to meane any other (what so euer they pre­tend) then this newe church of late yeres set vp by Sathan through the ministerie of Martin Luther and those other A­postates his cōpanions, if it may be named a church, and not rather a Babylonical tower? For as touching that church wher­of al christen people hath euer takē the successour of Peter to be the head vnder Christ, which is the true catholike church, in their Apologie they sticke not to saye plainely, that it is cle­ne fallen dovvne long agone. And therefore the begynning of Luthers sedicious and hereticall preaching they cal herbam as much to saye as the grene grasse, or first spring (this inter­preter nameth it the very first appeering) of the gospel leafe. F. 7. And in the leaf F. 8. they saye that forty yeres agone and vpvvard, that is at the first setting forth of Luther and Zwinglius, the truth vvas vnknovven and vnheard of, and that they first came to the knovvledge and preaching of the Gospell. Likewise in an o­ther place they graūt that certaine and very strange sectes haue bē [Page] stirring in the world euer since the Gospell did spring, In Latine they ter­terme it exortum Euangelij. meaning the time when Luther first brinced to Germanie the poiso­ned cuppe of his heresies, blasphemies, and sathanismes. Thus hauing condemned the church of God which was be­fore Luthers time, and allowing that for the true church the Gospell whereof first sprang out of Luther: how can they auouche their belefe, and by what reason and lerning cā they make good that there is one church of God? We would faine knowe which and where it is. Is Luther and his congregation that one church of God, or Zwinglius and his rable, or Osi­ander and his sorte, or Zuenckfeldius and his sect, or Stanca­rus and his band, or Balthasar Pacimontane and his rancke? For all these and certaine other sectes haue Luther for their founder, and for their radix iesse as it were, from whence they spring. And in dede euery lerned mā easely seeth how the gut­ters of their doctrines runne out of Luthers sincke. Of all the­se there is none but stoutly claimeth the name of the church.

Then how saye ye Defenders, which church be ye? name the childe. If ye name one, we set the others against you. If ye,The Zuin­glians and Cal­uinistes condem­ned of Luther, and of all the Lu­therans. who for the more part are Zuinglians, would denie Lu­ther and his companions to be this one church, are ye not like to be euill treated by Mathias flacius Illyricus, by Ioachi­mus westphalus, by Nicolas Amsdorffius by Heshusius and other of that syde? But o lord how should ye be handled of Luther him selfe, were he aliue? How often doth he recken you Sa­cramentaries in the number of reprobates? How often in his bookes putteth he you and your capitaines in the rolle of those that he vtterly condemneth, naming roundly toge­ther, Infidels, Turkes, Epicures, Heretikes, Papistes, Sacramē­taries? And now if he should heare you chalenge the name of the one church of God to you, and denye him and his fo­lowers that claimed title: would he not (thinke ye) stāpe and [Page 43] rage, would he not whette his dogge eloquence vpon you, and call you worse then these abouerekened, yea and if he wist how, wrose then some of you be your selues? The like courtesie may ye looke for at those other sectes, of which euery one claimeth the name of this one church of God.

But ye saye, that this one church is not shutte vp into some one corner or kingdome, but that it is catholike and vniuersal, catholike Church and dispersed through out the vvhole vvorld. True it is that ye saye, what so euer ye thincke. For the church which is the one true church of God, is such. And so we protest in our Crede to beleue one holy Catholike church. But the holy lerned and auncient fathers, where they call and beleue the catholike church,Why is the church called Catholi­ke? Three­fold vni­uersalitie an infallible marke to knovv the chur­ch by. they meane (as vincentius Lirinensis declareth) the church to be catholike, that is to saye vniuersall, (for so the word signifieth) in respect of a threefold vniuersalitie, of pla­ces, which this defender here toucheth, of times, and of men, which he toucheth not. In the catholike church we must haue a great care (sayeth he,) that we holde that, which hath euery whe­re, euermore, and of all persons ben beleued. If these Defenders proue not the church they professe them selues to be of, to haue this threefold vniuersalitie: then is their congregation not this one church, nor of this one church of God, but the synagog of Antichrist. Whereas all heretikes haue chalenged to them selues the name and estimation of the church, ne­uer were there any yet that were able to bring for proufe of their doctrine this threefold vniuersalitie, not Arius, not No­uatus, nor Luther him selfe, whom these defenders make the restorer of the lost gospell, and the rocke whereon the church after the shipwracke of many ages is newe framed and set vp. As concerning the faith of Arius,Arius. although it en­fected in maner all the Greke and Latine churches, yet before the time of Alexander bishop of Alexandria, the church ne­uer [Page] heard of it. The heresie of NouatusNouatus. it was not receiued but in Aphrike, and that not in all, neither before the time of Fabianus the Pope. Luther and Zuinglius their wickednes and blasphemie hath ben knowen but of late yeres. Neither hath it taken roote, but in certaine places, nor is approued by all men, but by certaine, and those not accompted most worthy either for lerning, or for order of life. And although the auctours of this Apologie crake of the great increase and spredding abrode of their gospell, and now glorie in the number of kingdomes, Leaf. G. 1. dukedomes. Counties, common vveales and free Cities: Yet hath it not gone, so forre abrode as the Arians heresie did by three partes of foure. Which was at lēgth vtterly extinguished, as this shall be. Againe may it please them to call to remembrance, that this gospell they bragge so much of, within these fifty yeres, gaue not forth his sound out of Germanie,The be­gynning of the nevve Gospell. no not out of Saxonie, no not out of Wit­tenberg, no not out of the Augustine friers cloister there, no not out of frier Luthers celle, not out of his brest, where it was hidden only, powred in by the instinct of Sathan then­nemy of mankinde finding the friers harte wholly inflamed with couetise, ambition, disdaine against Iohn Tetzet and the order of the Dominicans, rancour and malice against the Pope and Albert Archebishop of Mentz, for that he was remoued from the preferment of his pardon preaching, whe­reby he found him selfe well cherished, and was mainteined in welth and pleasure. Wherefore in asmuch as the doctrine of these Defenders hath not this threefolde vniuersalitie, of times, places, and men: their church gownded vppon the same hauing thus ben shutte vp in a corner, can not seme by their confession to be the true vniuersall and catholike church.

Christ alo [...]e prince, head, brydegro­me, spou­se of the church. The being of a head consyde­red tvvo vvayes.That the catholike church is the kingdome, the bodie, and [Page 44] the spouse of Christ, we acknowledge. Of the same kingdo­me we confesse and beleue Christ to be the prince alone, so as he is head of this bodie alone, and so as he is bridegrome of this spouse alone. For head and spouse alone he is in one re­spect, not alone in an other respect. For a cleare declaration whereof it is to be vnderstanded, that being of a head may be considered after two wayes, either according to the inward influence, so as the vertue and power of mouing and of sense is deriued from the head vnto the other members: or accor­ding to outward gouernemēt, right so a as mā is directed in his outward actes according to the sight and other senses,Accordīg to invvard influence of grace Christ onely is head of the church which haue their roote in the head. Now the inward influence of grace is not of any other, but of Christ only. Because christes manhood only hath power to iustifie, for that the same only is ioyned personally to the Godhed. According to this inward influēce of grace, Christ properly and only is head of his my­stical body the church.In respect of out­vvard go­uerne­ment the name of head is at­tributed to others beside Christ. Amos. 6. 1. Reg. 15. Psal. 17. Headship in respect of gouer­nement diuerse in Christ and in mē But as touching the outward gouer­nement, the being of a head is commō to Christ with others. For in this respect certaine others may be called heads of the church, as in Amos the prophete the great states be called the heads of the people. So the scripture speaketh of king Saul, When thou were a litle one in thine own eyes, thou wast made head among the tribes of Israel. So Dauid sayeth of him selfe, he hath made me head of nations. In this sense the name of head is attributed to princes and gouernours. And yet not all together so as to Christ. First forasmuch as Christ is head of all those that perteine to the church, according to euery place, euery time, and euery state. But men are called heads in re­gard of certaine speciall places, as bisshops be called heades of their churches. Or in respect of a determinat time, as the Pope is head of the whole church, during the time of that calling. And according to a determinat state, euen [Page] so as men be in the state of this mortall life, for further stretcheth not this humaine headship. Againe the name of head is attributed to Christ an other waye, because Christ is head of the church by his owne power and auctori­tie. Men be called heads, in asmuch as they be in stede of Christ and vnder Christ, after which meaning S. Paul sayeth to the Corinthians,2. Cor. 2. for if I forgaue any thing, to whom I for­gaue it, for your sakes forgaue I it, in persona Christi, in the person of Christ, 2. Cor. 5. and in an other place, VVe are ambassadours in the stede of Christ, euen as though God did exhort you through vs. To conclude in fewe, according to inward influence of grace in­to euery faithfull member, Christ only is head of the church, according to outward gouerning, the Pope vnder Christ and in stede of Christ is head of the same.

Christ the true bridegrome the Pope vn­derbride­grome of the church Ioan. 3.As touching the bridegromeship, we saye and beleue, that if we would speake properly, Christ is the only bridegrome of the church his spouse, of whom it is said, he that hath a spouse, is a bridegrome, for from out of the church he begeteth children to him selfe. But others are called bridegromes wor­king together with Christ outwardly to the begeting of spi­rituall children, whom neuerthelesse they begete not to them selues, but to Christ. And such are called the ministers of the bridegrome, in asmuch as they do his stede. And therefore the Pope, who is in stede of Christ the bridegrome in the whole church, is called also the bridegrome of the vniuersall church, a man maye terme him the vicegerent bridegrome. And whereas S. Bernard writing to Eugenius sayeth, that the Pope is not the bridegrome of the church, but the bridegro­mes proctour and frende: he vnderstode principally and chiefly, for that a bishop in the charge of the church com­mitted vnto him despouseth virgins not to him selfe,2. Co [...]. 11. but as S. Paul sayeth, to Christ, and so doth the office of the bride­gromes [Page 45] proctour, factour and frende.

Furthermore (we beleue) that there be diuers degrees of mini­sters in the church, vvhereof some be deacons, some priestes, Apologie some bishops, to vvhom is committed the office to instruct the people, and the vvhole charge and setting forth of Religion.

THE THIRD CHAPTER.

Here it had ben your part to haue declared your faith touching the holy sacrament of order agreable to the faith of the catholike church.Confuta­tion. Sacramēt of Order. That there be seuen orders in the church, foure lesser, and three greater, for so by good reason they are called. And as for the institution, auctoritie, and esti­mation of the greater, specially of priesthod and deaconship, ye might haue alleaged the scriptures, so for the lesser the ex­ample of Christ, the tradition of the Apostles, and the testi­monies written of the Apostles scolers, of those that both next and sone after folowed them, namely Dionyse cap. 3. hie­rarch. Ecclesiast. Ignatius epist. 8. ad ecclesiam Antiochenam. Ter­tullian in praescrip. aduersus haereticos, Gaius Pope and martyr in Diocletians time, Sozimus in S. Augustines time, Isychius, Eusebius Caesariensis in his Ecclesiasticall historie, and Epi­phanius in the ende of his booke contra haereses.

Yet not vvithstanding vve say that there neither is nor can be any one man, Apologie vvhich may haue the vvhole superioritie in this vniuersall state, for that Christe is euer present to assist his Church, and nedeth not any man to supply his roome, as his onely heyre to all his sub­staunce: and that there can bee noe one mortall creature, vvhich is able to comprehend or conceaue in his minde the vniuersall Chur­che, that is to vvitte, all the partes of the vvorlde, muche les able to put them in order and to gouerne them rightly and duely.

Where any thing is in dede,Confut. That one is superi­our and chiefe ouer the vvhole church. there whether it may be or no to discusse, it is nedeles. For euery being presupposeth a po­wer to be. Therefore whether any one man can be superiour and chiefe ouer the whole church we leaue to speake, that so it is, thus we proue. 1First I demaunde of these Defen­ders, whether it be not necessarie that the people of euery [Page] parrish haue their curate, vicar or person, and the people of euery dioces their bishop? Denye this, and dissolue the whole state of the church. And then how long should whe loke for a better? This being graunted, as in euery speciall number of Christes people being aparte one pastor and one bishop is requisite to be the ruler of them all: so what reason is it there be not one chiefe Gouernour of the whole Christen people together? May not the partes be well conserued in their state without a speciall gouernour, and may the whole consist without a generall? 2Furthermore that vnitie of the church be kept whole, it behoueth that all agree in faith. Now touching matters of faith, it falleth out necessarely that questions be sometimes moued. But then through diuersities of iudgemē­tes the church should be diuided, onlesse by auctoritie of one it were kept in vnitie: Therefore that vnitie be conserued, it behoueth that one beare rule ouer the whole church. 3These Defenders denying any one man to haue superioritie ouer the whole church, seme to take from Christ both the glorie of his prouidence, and the praise of his great loue toward his church. For if he had not appointed one supreme iudge for decision of cōtrouersies that happen about faith and religiō, whereas it is said by our lord concerning the Iewes synagog, what more should I do, Esai. 4. that I haue not done for my vineyard? he might seme to haue failed the church in thinges necessarie, and to haue done lesse for the church, then he hath done for the synagog.1. Cor. 1. Which to saye or thinke of Christ who is the wisedome of his Father, and hath loued the church so tēderly, and shed his bloud for the same so abundantly, it were hai­nous and wicked blasphemie. 4Againe who doubreth, but that the regiment of the church is ordered in such wise, as better maye not be deuised, as that which is disposed by him, by whō kinges raigne and makers of lawes define matters according to iu­stice? Prouer. 8. [Page 46] Now in regiment of a multitude the ende is specially to be sought for, which is peace. And who seeth not peace to be more conueniently procured by rule of one, then of many? Hereof it foloweth the regiment of the church so to haue ben disposed by Gods prouidence, as one be made ruler ouer the whole church.

5Finally then is the church militant, whereof we speake in best order as touching gouernement, when it resembleth the church triumphāt. and in dede this warrefaring church is de­riued from that, which hauing past the dangers of their fight here in earth, triumpheth in heauen. Whereof S. Ihon in his reuelation sayeth,Apo [...]. 21. Exod. 25. Heb. 8. acto. 7. I sawe the holy Citie newe Ierusalem comming downe from heauen. And to Moses God saied, that he should make al thinges according to the sampler which was shewed to him in the hille. But in the triūphant church one is gouernour ouer the whole, that is God: therefore order requireth, that here on earth in the church militant one beare rule ouer all. And thereof the holy capitaine Iosue semeth to speake,Iosuae. 1. where he sayeth, The children of Iuda and the children of Israel shall assem­ble together, and they shall take to them selues one head. Ioan. 10. Christ is the prin­cipall head and of him selfe, the Pope is the mini­steriall head, and vnder Christ, and for Christ. Matth. 28. 1. Pet. 2. Thereof our Lord sayeth in S. Iohn. And there shall be one folde, and one shepeherd. Where these Defenders as others the aduersaries of this vnitie saye, that Christ is this one shepeherd, this one head, who is so wee denye not, shepeherd of his flocke, head of his bodye, bridegrome of his spouse, prince of his kingdome, as it is before declared: yet saye they therein no­thing to the disproufe of the catholike doctrine touching v­nitie of the head, which is in stede and ministerie of Christ. For whereas the Father hath geuen to Christ all power in heauen and earth, so as he only is the king, head, ruler, iudge of all, the pastour and bishop of our soules, and therefor they which we acknowledge to be kinges, heads, rulers, iudges, pa­stours, [Page] and bishops in earth, be his vicares, lieutenantes, vice­gerentes, and ministers: all this power by what name so euer it be called,A man is necessary to do Christes stede of outvvard gouerne­ment in the church. The ne­cessitie and insti­tution of the head of the church. Genes. 32. Num. 12. Luc. 1. Act. 10. 2. Cor. 12. being such as is exercised and administred by his word: nede it is that forasmuch as Christ now dwelleth not with vs in visible presence, his church haue one man to do his stede of outward ruling in earth, by his word to admi­nister all that is behooful, and to performe the dutie of the head in respect of the bodie.

Now that Christ is not conuersant with vs visibly, as he was with his disciples before his passion, and preacheth no more vnto vs with his owne mouth sensibly, to atteine the vnderstanding of his will we may not looke to haue God appere vnto vs as he dyd to the fathers of the olde Testa­mēt, to speake to vs, as he dyd to Moses face to face, mouth to mouth, as the scripture saith, to send vs his angell, as he dyd to the virgine Marie, to enstruct vs with visions from heauen, as he instructed Peter, to take vs vp into the third heauen, as he tooke Paul, there to heare the secrets of his will: but it be­houeth vs to be content for the working of that which re­maineth to be done touching our saluation, with such order as hath pleased him. For it is manifest that Christ perfiteth all the Sacramentes of the church. He it is that baptizeth, he it is that forgeueth synnes, he is the true priest that hath offered him selfe on the crosse, and by whose power his body is daily consecrated and offered on the aulter. Yet because he would not remaine in visible presence with all beleuers, he chose men to be his ministers, by whom the forsayd thinges shuld be done and ministred to them. By like reason forasmuch as he would take from the church his corporall and visible pre­sence, it behoued some one man to be put in commission for bearing the charge and taking care of the church in lieu and stede of him selfe. For this purpose before his Ascension he [Page 47] said to Peter, whose loue he had tryed and fownde to be most feruent aboue all others, Fede my shepe. Iohan. 21. And before his pas­sion, Thou being againe conuerted strengthen thy brethren. Luc. 2. Matth. 16. And to him specially he sayd by promyse, To thee will I geue the keies of the kingdom of heauen, thereby to shew, that the power of the keyes shuld be deriued to others by him for the better keping of the vnitie of the church.

Thus we see these Defenders negatiue doctrine,The De­fenders argumēts made a­gainst vnitie auoided. that no one man may haue the superioritie ouer the whole state of the church, disproued as vtterly false. But now let vs see what weighty reasons they bring for the same. Their reasons be these. First because Christ is euer present to assist his church, secondly because he nedeth not any man to supply his rome as his only heire to all his substance, thirdly because no man is able to comprehend in his mynde the vniuersal church: therefor there is no man head of the church. I maruell that they who be so captious to finde fault and scoffe at other mens reasons, make so slēder reasons them selues. 1For answe­re to the first. Though Christ by maiestie of his godhed be present euery where, for so he filleth heauen and earth,Ierem. 23. and by speciall grace be present to assist his church,Mat. 28. as he doth assist euery faithfull man: yet because the church is a body politike, visible and sensible, and is gathered together, of men who lyuing in flesh, and fighting against the flesh,The go­uerne­mēt of the church requireth a sensible man. consist of body and soule, of flesh and spirite, and not of spirite only: it is to be gouerned by a sensible man, whom it may see and heare, whose visible ministerie it may perceiue and obeye in stede of Christ. The ministerie of which man Christ vseth to this purpose, and by the same doth his worke, as a craftesman to do his worke vseth his instrument. If men consisted of spirite only, they shuld nede none other gouernour then Christ alwayes by the grace of his holy spirite assisting them. Now [Page] being of body and spirite, it behoueth they be gouerned by a man like them selues. For els if it were laufull euery man for vpholding of all his doinges to pretend that he folowed the mocion of Christes spirite, what rule would be in the church, it is easy to conceiue.

2Touching their second reason, we graunt, Christ nedeth not any man to supply his rome that should succede in his whole substance, for so hath the Latin. For neither is man of capacitie of such succession, nor Christ geueth awaye all his substance,Esai. 24. as neither his glorie to an other. Neither hath e­uer any such fond saying ben vttered by the diuines where they treate of the vnitie of the churches regiment. But it se­meth this Defender here regarded more the prety elegancie of the law phrase, then the weight of the matter. But foras­much as he speaketh of nede, we saye, first, that Christ nee­deth not, but that men haue nede, so it be. Christ is able by him selfe to gouerne, but man is not able to receiue the bene­fite thereof.Nede, hovv it may be at tributed to Christ. The weaknes is of mans part, not of Christes. A­gaine we saye that nede is double, absolute and with condi­cion. Nede absoute neither is nor can be in Christ. For being God omnipotent he nedeth nothing so absolutely. Nede with condicion Christ may haue his honour not impaired. Be­cause it was forepurposed by God, and so forespoken by his Prophete Zacharie, that Chist the king of Iewes shuld come to them in meeknes and humilitie, sitting on an Asse and on the fole of an asse vsed to the yoke:Matth. 21. Zachar. 9. sending two of his disci­ples for the same to the place where they were tied, he cōma­unded them, if ought were sayd to them why they so did, to answer quia dominus his opus habet, that the Lord had nede of them. And therein he bad them not to lye. So because the wil and wisdom of God hath determined, that Christ hauing performed the whole oeconomie of his incarnation, that is, [Page 48] all that he came to do for mankinde in flesh: his church after taking his visible presence from earth shuld be gouerned by men, who shuld be ambassadours for him in the world, who shuld be interpreters and declarers of his secrete will, finally who shuld represent his person to the beleuers: to the perfor­mance of this he hath nede of men. And because he sawe the knotte of vnitie shuld most surely be kept knitte by gouer­nement of one, he committed the regiment of the whole church to one, whose visible ministerie he might vse in stede of him selfe.

3To their third reason we saye affirming that which they denie. That a man is not only able to comprehend in his mind and conceiue the vniuersall church, but also to put it in order and to gouerne it, so farre as is expedient. And hereto it sufficeth, that what the chiefe ruler can not do in his owne person, he do it by others hauing power and auctoritie vnder him. The Quene pardy ruleth not the whole Realme of En­gland, that is to saye euery part and parcell of it in her owne Maiesties person and by her self, but by others, who haue au­ctoritie vnder her. And yet is she Quene of England, and in all right of a king supreme gouernour of the same. And hard it is not thus to rule, when subiectes liue in obedience. Right so it fareth with the church, which is the one folde whereof by Christes appointment there is one head shepeherd,Ioan. 21. the successour of him, to whom Christ sayd, Fede my shepe. Who so euer will not be fedde nor ruled by this one shepeherd, and breaketh out of this one folde: he sheweth him selfe not to be a shepe, but a goat, not of this flocke of Christ, but of the herd of Antichrist.

For all the Apostles, as Cyprian sayeth, Apologie De simpli. praelat. Confut. Povver double, ordinary, and by priuilege. vvere of like povver a­mong themselues, and the rest vvere the same that Peter vvas.

Power is double, the one ordinary, the other by priuilege or extraordinary. Ordinary power is that which contineweth [Page] in one and the same course for euer. According to which po­wer Peter was head of the church, and his successours after him. Power by priuilege or extraordinary is that which is ge­uen besides the common course by waye of dispensation. As where the other Apostles should haue receiued ordinare­ly their power from Peter, as who had commission ouer all, both lambes and shepe, among whom the Apostles had their place: Christ by speciall grace preuenteth ordinary course, and maketh them for the time, and in their persons equall with Peter in the office of Apostleship. Thus concerning or­dinary power Peter is head of the Apostles, and by that rea­son they are subiect vnto him, as shepe vnto their shepeherd. But by priuilege true it is, as S. Cyprian sayeth, they were of like power among them selues. Now what oddes there is be­twixt an ordinary auctoritie of iudging geuen to any officer for him selfe and his successours in that office for euer, and a speciall commission for life time only: so much is betwixt Peter and the rest of the Apostles.

Apologie And that it vvas sayed indifferently to them all, Feed ye: indiffe­rentlye to them all, Goe into the vvhole vvorld: indifferently to them al, Teache ye the gospell:

Confuta­tion.We denye that it was said indifferently to them all, Fede ye. Yea or that it was said at all, Fede ye. To Peter and to none els was it said,Iohn. 21. fede my lambes, Fede my shepe. Which word of feding so singularly spoken to Peter in the presence of the o­ther Apostles, proueth, that it was not indifferently said to al, Fede ye. Marc. 16. That they were sent in to the whole world, and that they were commaunded to teach, and in that respect also to fede, we confesse vnder the distinction of ordinary and ex­traordinary power before mencioned.

Apologie And as Hierom saithe, all Byshoppes vvhere soeuer they be, h [...] they at Rome, be they at Eugubium, be they at Constantinople, be they at Rhegium, Ad Eua­grium. De Simpl. praelator. be all of like preeminence, and of like preesthood. And as Cyprian saith, there is but one Byshoprike, and that a peece therof is perfitely and vvholy holden of euery particular Byshop:

My lady the interpreter not without the will and aduise of this Defender, (for by him the interpretation was alowed as the gentle woman M. C. sayeth in her epistle) hath alte­red the sense of the latin, as the auctor of the latin hath alte­red the wordes of S. Hierom.Hierom falsefied by the de­fender, the defender false­fied by thinter preter. For neither speaketh S. Hie­rom of bishoppes in the plural number, neither sayeth the la­tin Apologie, that the bishops be all of like preeminence, which this ladys translation hath, but of the same merite and of the same priesthod. With the word preeminence guilefully shifted into the sentence in place of this word merite, these false players thought to wynne the game that is, that all bi­shops after the mynde of S. Hierom be of like preeminence, and so that all be of like power and auctoritie, and none a­boue other. Whereby they would confownd the most ordi­nate regiment of the church, and take awaye all order. which standing in force as it ought, their disordinat procedinges can not prosper. Thus many a one is by them deceiued, that either for negligēce looketh not to their fingers, or for igno­rāce can not examine their doctrine.Preemi­nence put falsely for Merite. The crafty cōueiaunce of preeminence in lieu of merite serueth thē to double purpo­se, both to make the vnlearned beleue that there ought no bi­shop to haue preeminēce ouer other bishops, and so them sel­ues would teach and rule as them list, as they do: and to esca­pe mention of neede or merite. Which they abhorre (I will not saye so much as the deuil doth holy water, but) so much as they take good heed that they be without all merite.

Concerning the place alleaged,Hiero­mes pla­ce discus­sed. S. Hierom in an epistle to Euagrius speaking against that a particular custome of the church of Rome shuld preiudicate the auctoritie of the who­le world in preferring deacons before priestes, compareth bishops of great Cities and litle townes together, and sayeth, that as touching the honour, dignitie, and power of bishoply [Page] order and office, and of priesthod, as good and as great a bi­shop in that respect is the one as the other: and that the bis­hops of Eugubium and Rhegium two litle townes in Italie, and of Thebes an other litle towne in Egypte, are bishops and priestes, and haue as great merite in regard of any their vertues, and as great power concerning the order of priest­hod, as the bishops of Rome, of Constantinople, of Alexan­dria. Yet as touching power and auctoritie of regiment, the patriarkes of Constantinople, Alexandria, and Antiochia be aboue bishops of other dioceses, and the bishop of Rome Peters successour is aboue all. As in the bodye of man we may see diuersitie tempered with vniformitie, in such wise as the body being one,Rom. 12. the membres many, the office of them all sundry: the same may we obserue in the body of Christ, which is the church.1. Cor. 12. For we being many are one body in Christ, and euery man among our selues one an others membres. This knotte requireth a mutuall consent of the whole bodye, but chiefly the con­corde of priestes among whom although dignitie be not common to them all, yet order is generall, as Leo writeth. For euen among the most blessed Apostles (sayeth he) in likenes of honour there was oddes of power, Epist. 84. Among bishops is difference of povver vvith li­kenes of honour. and whereas the election of them all was equall, yet to one was it geuen to be ouer the rest. Out of which platte rose the distinction also of bishops, and with great prouidence it hath ben disposed, that all shuld not take all vpon them, but that in euery prouince there shuld be one, who might first geue his sentence among his brethren: and againe that in the great Cities some shuld be ordei­ned for taking vpon them matters of greater care, through whom the charge of the vniuersall church shuld haue course to the one see of Peter, and that nothing shuld euer dissent frō the head. By which wordes we are taught, that God, who is not God of strife, but of peace and loue, hath appointed this order for keping peace and vnitie in the church, that not only the order of priestes [Page 50] shuld be distinct from the order of the laitie, but that among priestes also them selues and bishops, though order were ge­nerall, yet dignitie shuld not be a like. For the order of bishops and priestes is one but the dignitie of bishops is greater. And among bishops there is equalitie of honour, but oddes of power. How great and honorable so euer the rome is that any bishop is placed in, be he archbishop, metropolitan, primat, pa­triarke, or Pope him selfe: he is no more a bishop thē any other of those, who occupie the lowest rome.The di­uersitie betvven bishops vvherein it consi­steth. The diuersitie consi­steth in this, that they are called to part of charge in sundry proportiōs, as their bishoprikes are greater or lesser, the Pope hath committed vnto him the charge of the whole folde of Christ, and hath the fulnes of power. For if all were of like power, as these defenders teach, vnitie could not be mainetei­ned. Wherefor by very order of Christ him selfe it hath bē or­dined that matters touching faith and religion, at lest such as be weighty, be referred to that one prince of pastours, who sit­teth in the chayr of Peter, the highest bishop, which hath al­wayes ben done and obserued from the Apostles tyme to our dayes by catholikes, and not seldom also by heretikes. Whe­reof as of this whole matter I haue treated in my answere to M. Iuelles chalenge, in the fourth article, which is of the Popes primacie.

The sentence that this defender alleageth out of S. Cy­prian, it semeth he vnderstod it not. Let him bestowe some paine and studie about the right meaning of it, and he shall finde, that it maketh litle for his purpose, which here is to bring argument and authoritie against the vnitie of the ec­clesiastical gouernement. For vnitie of the churh, which he with his companions goeth about to breake, among all the fathers writinges that place and that whole treatie may seme to be the chiefe. And would God they were so willing to ad­mitte [Page] the holy doctrine of that blessed Martyr for maintei­nance of vnitie against all schismes and heresies, as they be diligent to prye and serch for wordes, that may seme to sownde after their wicked phantasie against vnitie. The wor­des of S. Cyprian report bishoprike to be one, and that the part which ech bishop hath thereof is holden in the whole.

Ye saye that a piece of that one bishoprike is perfitly and wholy holden of euery particular bishop. But what meane ye by that? If by this word in solidum, perfitly and wholy hol­den, ye meane that euery particular bishop is a bishop with­out depending of any other, then ye speake against the wor­des ye bring out of S. Cyprian.De simpli­citate prae­latorum. Who sayeth, that as there are many beames of one sunne, many boughes of one roote, ma­ny riuers of one fontaine: so there are many bishops of one bishoprike. Therefore this bishoprike is vnto particular bis­shops, as the sunne, as the roote, as the fontaine. What the fon­taine, roote, and sunne of this bishoprike is, S. Cyprian de­clareth a litle before shewing that it was sayd to Peter,Matt. 10. to thee I will geue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen. Ioan. 21. And, feede my she­pe. But if ye meane by your bishoprike perfitly and wholy holden, that ye will be bishops without depending of any roote or fontaine, how be ye part of the whole, who make your selues the whole? But we may conclude, because ye be not in any roote or fontaine within all Christendome, that therefore ye be no partes of that one bishoprike, the part whereof is holden in solidum.

Apologie And according to the iudgement of the Nicene Councel vve saye that the Bishop of Rome hath no more iurisdiction ouer the church of God, then the rest of the Patriarkes either of Alexandria or An­tiochia haue.

Confu­tation.If it be a shame to belye the deuill according to the olde pro­uerbe, what is it to belye the church of God represented in the Nicene Councell?Nicene Councell Naming the Nicene Councell, I meane [Page 51] the high Consistorie of the holy ghost in earth, then which among the generall Councels neuer was any sence the Apo­stles either for tyme more auncient, or for fathers assembled more holy and more learned, or for weight of the matter there treated, of more auctoritie. And syr Defender, where fynde you that iudgement in the whole Nicene Councell?

The syxth canon among all others of the Nicene Coun­cell is that you grownde your surmise vpon I know well.The sixth canon of the Nicen Councell declared to make against the De­fenders For that hath ben wrested to your purpose by certaine of your sy­de. And the same rightly constrewed maketh most against you. For it semeth to acknowledge the bishop of Rome his supremacie and soueraigntie of iudgement ouer other patri­arkes. These be the wordes of the canon rightly englished. Let the auncient custom continew in force which is in Egypte, Li­bya, and Pentapoli, so that the bishop of Alexandria haue power ouer them all. [...]. Quando quidem etiam episcopo Romano hoc consue­tum est. Forasmuch as the B. of Rome hath thus vsed. Likewise in Antiochia also and in other prouinces let the churches kepe their prerogatiue. What can be gathered of the wordes of this ca­non, but that for ratifying the iurisdiction of the patriarkes of Alexādria and Antiochia, the fathers of the Nicene Coun­cell thought good to alter nothing, but to folow the aun­cient custome of olde time vsed and alowed by the B. of Ro­me? for it is asmuch to saye as this. In asmuch as the B. of Rome hath ben wont from the beginning to graunt to the B. of Alexandria iurisdiction ouer Egypte, Libia and Penta­poli: the Nicene Councell folowing his auctoritie and rule, or at least his vsage, willeth and graūteth that the sayd bishop retaine and kepe his auncient right. For if the B. of Alexan­dria had not receiued such iurisdictiō by auctority and graūt of the B. of Rome of olde tyme, what reason should haue moued those fathers for confirmation thereof to alleage the [Page] custom of the B. of Rome? And in that case whereto per­teined the additiō of the cause, quia episcopus Romanus hoc cō­sueuit, because this was the B. of Rome his custome? If this had not ben their meaning, they would neuer so haue spoken. For what was his custome other, then to allotte those prouinces to the B. of Alexandria? If any other thing be alleaged to ha­ue ben his maner and custome, besides that the wordes of the canon beare it not, what had that ben to the purpose, what so euer it be, for cause and confirmation of the B, of Alexan­dria his iurisdiction ouer Egypte, Libia and Pentapoli? Al­leage you Defender for olde custome of the B. of Rome what elles you list, so that you make no violence to the ca­non, and thereupon make your argument inferring of your allegation the conclusion, (ergo the B. of Alexandria ought to haue iurisdiction ouer Egypte, Libya and Pentapoli): and you shall finde it to be such an argument as any sot would be ashamed to make.

Thus it is euident the olde custome of the B. of Rome in graunting to the B. of Aexandria iurisdisdictiō ouer Egypte, Libya, and Pentapoli, to be the cause why the fathers of the Nicene councell by their canon ratified the same, and would admitte no alteration nor chaunge therein. Whereby they shewe them selues to stand to the arbitrement and auctoritie of the B. of Rome in limiting and appointing to bishops the­ire iurisdictions, as the supreme iudge. Against this if it shall like you to replie, we warne you before, that neither ye take aduantage of a doubteful interpretatiō, as we know that ca­non to be fownde in diuerse bookes not so plainely trāslated, and therfore we require you to stand to the originall as it is in greke:Theo­dore Balsamō. neither that ye defend your lye with the wrested exposition of Theodore Balsamon, who hath written greke commentaries vpon the canons of the councels sithens the [Page 52] schisme of the Grekes, him selfe being a schismatike. For he being a Greke borne and prickt with the hatred of his nation against the latine church, and specially the See of Rome: in thexposition of that sixth canon of the Nicene councell swarueth both from learning and also from reason.

And as for the bishop of Rome, Apologie vvho novv calleth all matters before him selfe alone, except he do his dutie as he ought to do, ex­cept he minister the Sacramentes, except he instruct the people, ex­cept he vvarne them and teach them, vve saye that he ought not of right once to be called a bishop, or so much as an elder. For a bishop, as sayeth Augustine, is a name of labour and not of honour, because h [...] vvould haue that man to vnderstand him selfe to be no bis­shop, vvhich vvill seeke to haue preeminence, and not to profit o­thers.

Neither the bishop of Rome,Confuta­tion. An euill bishop loseth not the name of a bihop, though he lose the merite of a bis­hop. nor any other bishop is wor­thy of the name of a bishop, except he do the dutie of a bis­shop, all this we graunt. But that he ought not of right to be so called of those whom he hath charge ouer in case of omit­ting his dutie: thereto we saye, that although in respect of his demeanour he be not worthy to be called a bishop, yet in res­pect of the vocatiō, degree, and preeminence, though he leaue his dutie vndone, for which he incurreth danger of damna­tion, that title perteineth vnto him of good right,Vide Aug. lib. 2. cōtra epist. Par­men. cap. 13. com. 7. and so cōti­nually he is and ought to be acknowleed for a bishop, though an euill and an vnworthy bishop, likewise a priest, which this youthly Lady interpreter folowing the instinct of their new sprite, termeth an elder.1. Tim. 2. And whereas S. Augustine sayeth that a bishop is a name of labour and not of honour, he is to be vnderstanded so as the scripture is. Which in some places speaking of two thinges that are both in dede to be affirmed, the one being of more importance then the other, denyeth the one in comparison of the other.1. Cor. 1. So S. Paul sayeth to the Corinthians, that he was not sent of Christ to baptise, but to preach, where as for all that in dede he was sent to do both. [Page] Right so a bishop is a name of honour, but rather of labour. And though a man seeke to haue preeminence, and not to profite others: yet being once rightly consecrated bishop, no man may vnderstand the contrary, but that he is a bishop, but an euill bishop, and that he standeth answerable to God for that great charge taken vpon him. As for the order, during lyfe it is not taken from him. And in asmuch as he kepeth the same, why shuld he be bereft of the name? For what a man is, the same he is called. What if a iudge geue wrong iudgement? Is he not for all that a iudge? What if a king seduced by euill counsailours rule not his realme so as he ought to do? Is he therefore not a king? I wene these Defenders and their felo­wes will not be ouer hardy to set forth this doctrine in their sermons at the courtes of princes.A secret prepara­tion to­vvard the deposing of rulers. Yet it semeth to be a secret preparation toward a purpose against such time, as the prin­ces gouernement shall mislike their phantasies. For where they learned this opinion concerning bishops, there learned they also the like concerning ciuil magistrates. I meane Wic­lef. Among whose hereticall articles condemned by the church in the Councel of Constance, this is reckened for the fiftinth. Nullus est dominus Ciuilis, nullus est praelatus, nullus est episcopus, dum est in peccato mortali. that is to saye. None is a tē­poral Lord, none is a prelate, none is a bishop, so long as he is in de­adly sinne. By which doctrine a lusty king (other wise neuer so good) for looking on a fayer lady with lusting eyes, or for calling his groome fole, or for geuing a buffet to his page in anger, loseth the name of a king and forfeiteth his kingdom.

Apologie And that neither the Pope nor any other vvorldly creature can no more be head of the vvhole church, or a bishop ouer all, then he can be the bridegrome, the light, the saluation, and life of the church. For these priuileges and names belong onely to Christ, and be pro­perly, and onely fitte for him alone.

And that no bishop of Rome did euer suffer him selfe to be called by such a proude name and title before Phocas themperoures time, [Page 53] vho as vve knovv by killing his ovvne soueraine Morice the Em­perour, did by a traiterous villanie aspire to thempire, vvhich vvas about the sixt hundreth and thirtenth year after Christ vvas borne.

THE FOVRTH CHAPTER.

How the Pope is head of the church,Confuta­tion. ynough is said be­fore, the same here to saye againe, it is nedeles.Vniuersal bishop. The name of vniuersall bishop, which this interpreter meaneth, being taken in a right sense is no proude name in respect of him to whom it belongeth. Whether any bishop of Rome euer suffred him selfe to be called by that name or no, as you denye it and proue it not, so it forceth not whether any dyd so or no. If they refused it of humilitie, that proueth it not to be vnlauful. For if that name rightly vnderstanded belong vnto him,The Po­pes nei­ther cha­lenge to them, nor vse the name of vniuersal bi­h op. Apologie as it may be proued, why might it not be suffered? The fact of Phocas no man defending it, why you should so much ag­grauat, there is no cause. As no bishop of Rome tooke vpon him the name of vniuersall bishop before Phocas, so neither after him dyd the Popes chalenge and vse the same.

Also the councell of Charthage did circumspectly prouide, that no bishop shuld be called either the highest bishop or chiefe priest.

Here by your leaue Syr Defender you playe false,Confuta­tion. and are taken as it were with false dyse, and therefore ye ought iustly to lose all that ye haue vniustly wonne.Falsefy­ing of a councell. By your false playe and false dyse, I meane your shamefull falsefying of this councell by you alleaged. And for this and other your false­hed it is right you lose the credite which vniustly (because by false teaching) you haue wonne among the vnlearned. That your false playe might not sone be espyed, you do as like to maister Iuell, as though you were his fathers sonne. For that false sleight he vseth more then any that euer I read. For where as we haue seuen councelles of Carthage, neither shewe you which of them it is that you alleage, nor geue any notice of the number, where the canon may be founde. But [Page] contrarywise as the Lapwing with her busy crye leadeth a man from her nest, so you lead vs from the place where it is, by putting in the margent of your booke the number, 47. that not fynding it by your note, we shuld geue ouer further looking for it.Ioan. 3. Who doth euill, hateth light, sayeth Christ. So here falsefying and forging a canon of a councell, you would fayne walke in clowdes, that your lying might not be depre­hended. Your Lady interpreter hath done pretely also for her part in translating your latine word disertè into this english word circumspectly. Whereby she thought your lye might the better be soothed and auctorized. Which all together as it is done vntruly, so had it ben done more circumspectly for furtherance of your falshed, if the matter shuld neuer come to triall of learning.

Now who so euer examineth the place truly, must nedes crye out shame on you Defender, who are thauctour. The wordes, if you had lifted to haue alleaged them without fal­shed,The 26. canon of the third councell of Carthage discus­sed. be these. Which we fynde in the 26. canon of the third councell of Carthage, which councell was auctorized by the sixth generall councell holden at Constantinople in Trullo. Vt primae sedis episcopus non appelletur princeps Sacerdotum, aut summus sacerdos, aut aliquid huiusmodi, sed tantum primae sedis episcopus. And thus they are to be englished. It hath liked vs (saye the fathers of that councell) that a bishop of a first see be not called prince of priestes or highest priest, or any such other thing, but only bishop of a first see. Now commeth me this ioily De­fender, and sayeth the councell of Carthage hath by expresse wordes, (for so much his latine soundeth) or as the Lady trā­slateth, prouidenly prouided, that no bishop should be called ei­ther the highest bishop, or chiefe priest. By which canon thus by him vntruly vttered he thought to depriue the Pope of this auncient title, that all the world hath euer attributed vnto [Page 54] him, so as he be called no more summus Pontifex.

For the right vnderstanding of this canon two thinges are to be consydered.Vide epi­stolā Leo­nis. ix. ad Petrum & Ioan­nem A­phricae. Episcopos. Prouin­cial coū­cels byn­de not all in gene­ral, as the general councels do. How farre the auctoritie of this Coun­cell ought to be extended, and what is meant by a first See. The decrees of this Councell perteined but to the prouince of Aphrike. For prouinciall Councelles bynde only the pro­uinces in which and for order of which they be kepte. Only the generall Councelles are to be receiued of all. This appe­reth by the first canon of this councell, in which the fathers there assembled ordeine, that all bishops of the Aphricane pro­uince take their keping of Easter of the church of Carthage. And forasmuch as it is so, how so euer this canon be constre­wed, it taketh no place out of Aphrike, and therefore can not iustly be alleaged against the bishop of Rome his title of sum mus pontifex. Prima se­des, vvhat it mea­neth. Dist. 99. de Prima­tibus. A first See, or a Primate See. Dist. 80. c. in illis. By these two wordes prima sedes those fathers vn­derstode any Citie in which a patriarke or primate, who are of one office though of diuerse names, hath his See. I call it a first See, or rather (if it might be permitted) a primate See. In great Cities where the highest courtes for iustice were kept, and where the chiefe pagane priestes of the Latines na­med primi Flamines were resident before the comming of Christ, there after Christes cōming were Patriarkes or Pri­mates placed, by whom the weighty matters of bishops shuld be decided. Which order was taken first by commaundement of S. Peter, as Clement writeth, by the Apostles and Clement, Dist. 99. c. prouin­ciae. Dist. 80. c. vrbes. as Anacletus witnesseth, by the Apostles and their successours afterward, as Lucius the Pope sayeth. At the first such primate Sees were fewe in number, Alexandria, Antiochia, Ierusalem, and Rome. Albeit Rome for the primacie of Peter receiuing commission of our lord ouer all, had the preeminence aboue all other. And in consyderation that the church there was founded both by Peter and Paul the most glorius Apostles, Li. 3. ca. 3. as [Page] Irenaeus termeth them, who there preached, there gouerned, and there suffered their martyrdom, it hath more commonly ben called the Apostolike See, then a primate See. After these, other sees were ordeined by the Apostles successours to be of that dignitie,Patriark­ships or primate Sees. when as nations were conuerted to the faith, ouer whom for their multitude necessitie required Primates to be constituted,Dist. 99. c. nulli. as it appereth euidently by a decree of Ani­cetus the Pope. So Constantinople, so Cantorbury, so Aqui­leia, so Venis, and certaine other Cities were aduaunced to the honour of patriarkships, or which is one of primate Sees. And so there were certaine in Aphrike. For the Citie of Char­thage was a primate See, the prouince of Numidia had a pri­mate See, the prouince of Mauritania had an other, the pro­uince of Tripoli an other. In the second canon of this third Councell of Carthage, the fathers making a decree that eue­ry yere a Councell be kept for all Aphrike, appoint, that all the prouinces which haue first or primate Sees, send from their synodes to the councell ech one two bishops. But from Tripoli (saye they) for the small number of bishops there, let but one bishop come. Now the councell of Carthage by this Defender alleaged and likewise the Aphrican councel ordeined and wil­led, that a bishop of any of the primate Sees of Aphrike should not be called princeps sacerdotum aut summus sacerdos, prince or chiefe of the priestes, or highest priest, by which word a bishop is there signified: but onely a bishop of the primate See whereof he was primate. By which decree they willed only their pri­mates of Aphrike to kepe them selues within their limites, and not presumptuously to take vpon them more gloriouse titles and further iurisdiction, then to them perteined. lest surely they might seme to preiudicate the Popes supremacie. Thus it is euident thauctoritie of that Carthage councell being restrained to Aphrike onely, that by this canon the Po­pes [Page 55] primacie and title is no whit diminished or disproued. And so for all this Defender, he remaineth as he hath euer, hi­ghest bishop.

And therfore sithens the Bishop of Rome vvill novv a dayes so be called, Apologie and chalengeth vnto him selfe an auctoritie that is none of his: besides that he doth plainely contrary to the auncient Coun­celles and contrary to the olde fathers: VVe beleue that he doth geue to him self, as it is vvritten by his ovvn companion Gregorie, a pre­sumptuouse, a prophane, a Sacrilegious and Antichristian name: that he is also the king of pride, that he is Lucifer, vvhich praefer­reth him selfe before his brethern: that he hath forsaken the faith, and is the foreronner of Antichrist.

Here is much a doo about nought,Confuta­tion. and a number of bitter wordes pyked out of S. Gregories epistles pretended to be written against the bishop of Rome to no purpose.Vide epist. Leonis. ix. ad Michae­lem Constātinopolita­num archi­episcopum. The pope neuer cha­lenged to him selfe the title and name of vniuer­sall bis­hop vvhereof so much a doo is made by the De­fenders. For if we say as we may saye and truly, that he chalengeth to hym selfe no such name, then what hath this Defender to saye? Let him shewe vs how many bishops of that see euer too­ke the name of the vniuersall bishop vpon them, specially as Gregorie vnderstandeth it to signifie. If he can shewe none, why blotteth he so much paper with so impudent lyes? Now sithens it can not be proued that euer any bishop of Rome either before of after Gregorie would so be called, neither that in this respect he chalengeth any auctoritie to him selfe that is none of his: what shame is it herein this Defender to belye him in saying that he doth plainely cōtrary to the aun­cient councels, and contrary to the olde fathers. In dede the six hundred and thirty fathers of the general councel of Chalcedon gaue to Pope Leo that name, as Gregorie in three sun­dry epistles writeth,Actio. 3. and certaine other in their writinges haue attributed to the Pope the same. But that either Leo or any other his successour affected so to be called, Gregorie denyeth. And that any since Gregories time to our dayes e­uer called or wrote him selfe vniuersall bishop, we denie. Be­fore [Page] and in Gregories time that name was chalenged ambi­tiously by the bishop of Constantinople, but therein he was resisted and duly rebuked by Pelagius the 2. Gregorie, and Boniface the 3. his successour.

Whereas Pelagius and Gregorie writing against the pre­sumption of Iohn the B. of Constantinople for taking vpon him this name, are much alleaged by the ennemies of vnitie against the auctoritie of Peters successour ouer the whole church: we saye that they folowing the steppes of their pre­decessours refused the name of vniuersal bishop in such sense as Pelagius and specially Gregorie oftentimes declareth, that where one is called vniuersall bishop, he semeth to be called bishop alone, so as bishoprike should be taken awaye from all others. But they refused not so to be called after this mea­ning, as though by that refusall the auctoritie of the B. of Rome should be restrained and not extend ouer the whole church. They denie that any man might so be vniuersall bi­shop, as he should be also the peculiar ruler and gouernour of euery particular church. For so all other bishops had ben in vaine, and that is contrary to Christes institution, who or­deined al the Apostles to be bishops. They refused the proude name, in that sense as it semed to them to importe iniurie to other bishops, not the thing by the name in a right sense signified, which is apostolike auctoritie reaching ouer the whole church. To say all in fewe, they refused the name that might odiously be taken, they refused not the primacie which Christ to them had committed. Therefore Gregorie writing to Morice the Emperour alleaging the wordes that make for Peters auctoritie ouer the whole flocke of Christ, saieth of Peter, The charge of the whole church and principalitie is commit­ted to him, and yet is he not called vniuersall Apostle. Where it is plaine that Gregorie doth both affirme the charge of the [Page 56] whole, and denieth the name of vniuersall. For which cause the bishops of Rome that sithens haue succeded, keping the thing and embracing the humilitie of Gregorie,Ego N. episcopus ecclesiae catho­licae. vse to sub­scribe them selues to this daye thus. I. N. bishop of the catho­like (that is vniuersal) church. Let these Defenders graunt the thing, and we stryue not for the name.

Further vve saye, that the minister ought laufully, Apologie duely and or­derly to be preferred to that office of the church of God, and that no man hath povver to vvrest him selfe into the holy Ministerie at his ovvn pleasure and list. VVherefore these persons do vs the grea­ter vvrong, vvhich haue nothing so common in their mouth, as that vve do nothing orderly and comely, but all thinges trouble­somly and vvithout order: and that vve allovv euery man to be a priest, to be a teacher, and to be an interpretour of the scriptures.

THE FYFTH CHAPTER.

Saing and doing are two thinges.Confuta­tion. Ye saye well in outward apperance. Wold God your doing were accordingly. Albeit the maner of your saying had ben more commendable, if in so weighty a point you had spoken more particularly and di­stinctly, not so generally and confusely. Ye saye that the mini­ster ought laufully to be called (for so hath your Latine) and due­ly and orderly to be preferred to that office of the church of God. Why do ye not so? why is not this obserued among you Go­spellers? What so euer ye meane by your minister, and by that office, this are we assured of,No holy orders among the gos­pellers. that in this your new church bishops, priestes, deacons, subdeacons, or any other inferiour orders ye haue none. In saying thus we speake not of our Apostates, that be fledde from vs vnto your congregations. Who as they remaine in the order which they receiued in the catholike church: so being diuided and cut of from the church and excommunicate, laufully they may not minister the sacramētes. For where as after the doctrine of your newe Gospell like the foreronners of Antichrist ye haue abando­ned thexternall Sacrifice and priesthod of the newe testa­ment, [Page] and haue not in your secte cōsecrated bishops, and the­refor being without priestes made with laufull laying on of handes, as scripture requireth, all holy orders being geuen by bishops only: how can ye saye that any among you can lau­fully minister, or that ye haue any laufull ministers at all?

This then being so, let me haue leaue to oppose one of these Defenders consciences. And that for the better vnder­standing I may direct my wordes to a certaine person, let him be the author of this Apologie, or because his name to me is vnknowen, let him be M. Iuel. for with him gladly would I reason in this point the rather for acquaintance, and for that he beareth the name of a bishop in that church, where my selfe had a rome. How saye you Syr minister Bishop, ought the minister to be laufully called? ought he duely and orderly to be preferred to that office, or (as the Latine here hath) pro­moted or put in auctoritie ouer the church? in the Apologie this defender sayeth yea. Thē answer me directly. How proue you your selfe laufully called to the rome you take vpon you to occupie? First touching the ordinary successiō of bishops, from which as you knowe Irenaeus, Tertullian, Optatus and Augustine bring argument and testimonie of right and true religion: do you allow the same with those fathers or no? If not, then dissent you from the learned and most vncorrupt antiquitie. which is not reasonable, neither then are to be heard. If yea, then how can you recken vs vp your succes­sion, by which you may referre your imposition of handes and consecration to some of the Apostles or of their scolers, as the foresaid fathers dyd to repell the nouelties of here­sies,Succes­sion of doctrine ioyned vvith suc­cession of persons and defend their continuall possession of the church? Which if ye go about, how can ye but to the great hinde­rance of your cause bewraye your weake holde? For whe­reas succession of doctrine must be ioyned with the [Page 57] succession of persons, as Caluine in his institutions affir­meth, and Beza auouched at the assemble of Poyssi in Fra­unce, and we also graunt: how many bishops can you recken, whom in the churche of Salesbury you haue succeded as well in doctrine as in outward sitting in that chayre? How many can you tell vs of, that being your predecessours in order be­fore you, were of your opinion, and taught the faithfull peo­ple of that dioces the doctrine that you teach? Dyd bishop Capon teach your doctrine? did Shaxton? did Campegius? dyd bishop Audley?B. Shax­ton and, B. Capon repented. Briefly dyd euer any B. of that See before you teach your doctrine? It is most certaine they dyd not. How so euer those two first named only in some part of their life taught amisse, how afterward they repented, abhorred your heresies, and dyed catholikes, it is well knowen. Now besides these whom elles can you name?M. Iuell cā shevve no laufull succession in the bi­shoprike of Salis­bury. If you can not shewe your bishoply petigree, if you can proue no succession, then whereby holde you? Will you shew vs the letters patentes of the prince? Well may they stand you in some stede before men, before God, who shall call you to accompt for presu­ming to take the highest office in his church not duely called thereto, they shall serue you to no purpose.

Here if you alleage an interruption of this succession of doctrine, as it hath ben alleaged by some of your side: then must you tell vs when and where the same beganne, which you can neuer do.In praescri­ptionibus aduersus haereticos. You knowe what Tertullian sayeth of such as ye be. Edant origines ecclesiarum suarum, &c. We saye likewise to you M. Iuell, and that we saye to you, we saye to ech one of your companions.These be Tertulli­ans vvor­des. Tell vs the originall and first spring of your church. Shewe vs the register of your bishops conti­nually succeding one an other from the beginning, so as that first bi­shop haue some one of the Apostles or of the apostolike men for his au­thor and predecessour. For by this waye the Apostolike churches [Page] shewe what reputation they be of. As the church of Smyrna telleth vs of Polycarpe by Iohn the Apostle placed there. The church of the Romaines telleth vs of Clement ordeined by Peter. S. Augustine hauing reckened vp in order the bishops of Rome to Ana­stasius successour to Siricius, who was the eight and thirteth after Peter, sayeth that in all that number and rolle of bishops there is not fownde one that was a Donatiste,Epist. 165 and thereof he concludeth, ergo the Donatistes be not catholikes. So after that we haue reckened all the bishops of Salisburie from bi­shop Capon vpward, we shall come at length in respect of do­ctrine and orders to S. Augustine the Apostle of the English, who was made bishop by Gregorie, and from Gregorie vp­ward to S. Peter. And in al that rewe of bishops we shall fynde neuer a one that beleueth, as M. Iuell beleueth, ergo your Zuinglian and Caluinian belefe M. Iuell and of the rest of your felowes is not catholike. But what speake we of suc­cession to them, who haue no orderly succession, as no secte of heretikes euer had?

Therefore to go from your succession, which ye can not proue, and to come to your vocation, how saye you Syr? you beare your selfe as though you were bishop of Salisbury.Hard questions propo­ned to M. Iuell. But how can you proue your vocation? By what auctoritie vsurp you the administration of doctrine and sacramentes? What can you alleage for the right and proufe of your ministerie? Who hath called you? Who hath layd handes on you? By what example hath he done it? How and by whom are you cōsecrated? Who hath sent you? Who hath committed to you thoffice you take vpon you? Be you a priest, or be you not? If you be not, how dare you vsurp the name and office of a bis­shop? If you be, tell vs who gaue you orders? The institution of a priest, was neuer yet but in the power of a bishop. Bis­shops haue alwayes after the Apostles tyme according to the [Page 58] ecclesiasticall canons ben consecrated by three other bishops with the consent of the Metropolitane, and confirma­tion of the B. of Rome. Thus vnitie hath hytherto ben kepte, thus schismes haue ben stayd.Libro. 1. epist. 6. And this S. Cyprian calleth legitimam ordinationem. For lacke of which he denyed Noua­tian to be a bishop, or to haue any auctoritie or power in the church. Hereto neither you nor your felowes, who haue vn­laufully inuaded the administration of the sacramentes, can make any iust and right answer, I am sure.

What, do not you remember what iudgment Athanasius,Athanasius in apolo­gia 2. and the bishops of Egypte, Thebais, Libya, and Pentapoli were of concerning Ischyras the Arrian? And why may not all good catholike men iudge the like of you? Macarius a priest of Athanasius,Ischyras and M. Iuel com­pared to­gether. (as it was layd to his charge by his accu­sers) pulled Ischyras from the aulter as he was at Masse, ouer­threw the holy table, brake the chalice. The matter brought to iudgement, Athanasius and those bishops both denyed the fact, and also though it were graunted, yet defended the same as well done, because Ischyras was not a laufull minister of the church. And why so? Because he was not laufully made priest, nor with churchly laying on of handes cōsecrated. For proufe thereof they alleaged, that neither he was of the num­ber of those whom Alexander bishop of Alexandria before Athanasius receiued into the church made priestes by Mele­tius the heretike, neither that he was by the sayd Alexander created. Then how is Ischyras a priest, saye they? or of whom hath he receiued his orders?Colluthus. Hath he receiued them of Collu­thus? For this schift only remaineth. (Colluthus was an Ariā,Hūc praes­lyteri & Diaconi Mareoteci vocant non verum, sed imaginariū episcopum. Epist. ad Curi [...]sum & Phila­grium. Apolog. 2. who bare him selfe for a byshop and gaue orders being but a priest). Now Colluthus, saye they in their reply, could not make him a priest, for that he dyed in degree of priesthod him selfe, and neuer was consecrated bisshop, and that all impo­sition [Page] of handes or geuing of orders was compted of no for­ce, and that all they whom he had consecrated, were brought downe againe to the order of the laitie, and vnder the name and in order of lay men receiued the communion. Hereof they conclude that Ischyras could be no priest. And therefore it was denyed,VVhat may be iudged of the nevve commu­nion. that there was the mysterie of the body and bloude of our lord. By which example besydes other pointes we are taught, what to iudge of your pretensed commu­nion.

Againe what saye you to Epiphanius, who writeth against one Zacchaeus of his tyme,Contra baereses lib. 2. [...]. The doīg of a bis­hops of­fice by one that is not a bishop. for that being but a laye mā with wicked presumption tooke vpon him to handle the holy mysteries, and rashly to do thoffice of a priest? Likewise where he findeth great fault with two other, of which the one dwelt at a monasterie in the wildernes of Egypt, the other at Si­naeum: for that they feared not to execute the things that be­long to bishops not hauing receiued the impositiō of handes that perteineth to the consecration of a bishop. And will you vnderstand what Epiphanius iudged of that wicked disorder? he acknowledgeth it to be the part of men that of a certaine pre­sumption of mynde violently and besides all truth playe rash and dissolute wantons. vvhat E­piphani{us} iudgeth of it. For so the greke signifieth [...]. Thus they be neither priestes nor deacons, which be not consecrated laufully according to the order vsed in the church, that is to witte by bishops lau­fully consecrated, but either by the people or the lay magi­strate, as it is in some places where this doctrine is professed, or by monkes and friers Apostates, or by excommunicate priestes hauing no bishoply power.

In dialogo contra Lu­ciferianos.Hereof S. Hierom sayeth notably. Hilarius cum diaconus de ec­clesia recesserit, &c. Hilary forasmuch as he went from the church being a deacon, and is only (as he thinketh) the multitude of the [Page 59] world, can neither consecrate the sacrament of thaulter being with­out bishops and priestes, nor deliuer baptisme without the Eucharist. And where as now the man is dead, with the man also the sect is en­ded, because being a deacon he could not consecrate any clerke that should remaine after him. And church is there none, which hath not a priest. Sacerdotē. But letting go these fewe of litle regard that to them selues be both laye and bishops, listen what is to be thought of the church. Thus S. Hierom there. In whom leauing other thinges I no­te, that if there be no church where is no priest: where is your church like to become after that our Apostates that now be fled from vs to you, shalbe departed this life?By S. Hierome the english church shall be no church tall. And yet being with you as they be, your church is already in such state as S. Hierom reporteth, that is, no church at al, howe so euer ye set forth your new gospell vnder the name of the church of England. Bucer being once charged to geue accompt of his vo­cation, had no other shifte, but to acknowledge for defence of his ministerie, that he had taken orders of a bisshop after the rite and maner of the catholike church.

Sleidan recordeth that Luther himselfe wrote to the senate of Mulhusen concerning Muncer the preacher of the Ana­baptistes,Luthers adu [...]se touching Muncers vocation. who stirred the common people of Germanie to rise against their nobilitie, that the senate should do well to demaund of Muncer, who had committed to him the office of teaching, and who had called him thereto. And if he would name God for his aucthour, that thē they should require him to proue his vocation by some euident signe or miracle. If he could not do that, then he aduised them, to put him awaye. For this is the wont of God sayd he, when so euer he willeth the accustomed forme and ordinarie maner to be changed, to declare his will by some signe. Therefore this being true,Of vvhat maner is the voca­tion of our super intendēts it re­maineth M. Iuell, you tell vs, whether your vocation be ordi­narie or extraordinarie. If it be ordinarie, shewe vs the letters [Page] of your orders. At lest shew vs that you haue receiued po­wer to do the office you presume to exercise, by due order of laying on of handes and consecration. But order and con­secration you haue not. For who coulde geue that to you of all these newe ministers how so euer els you call them,The de­fenders haue no­thing to say for defence of their vocation, vvhich they take vpon them. which he hath not him selfe? If it be extraor­dinarie (as all that ye haue done hytherto is besydes all good order) shewe vs some signe or miracle, If you faile in all these, why ought not you to be put awaye? If you can shewe no signe or miracle, as your vertue promyseth vs none: bring vs forth some example of your extraordinarie vocation out of the stories of Christes church that hath fo­lowed the Apostles. If you be destitute also thereof, at lest shewe vs what prophete in the olde testament euer was heard extraordinarely whithout signe, or miracle, or testi­monie of God.

Finally what can you answer to that which may be obie­cted to you out of S. Cyprians epistle to Magnus touching Nouatian?Lib. 1. epist. 6. It was at those dayes a question, whether Noua­tian baptized and offered, specially where as he vseth the for me, maner and ceremonies of the church. Cyprian denyeth it. For he can not (sayeth he) be compted a bishop, Eusebius eccles. Hist. li. 6. cap. 43. in graec. who setting at nought the tradition of the Gospell and of the Apostles, nemini suc­cedens a seipso ordinatus est, succeding no man is ordeined bishop of him selfe. For by no meanes may one haue or holde a church, that is not ordeined in the church. M. Iuell and the rest of his compani­ons, be no bishops, but vser­pers of an vndue of­fice and ministe­rie. I leaue here to recite the rest of that epistle perteining to this point, and all against you, for that it were to long. Thus it is euident, foras much as you can neither proue your doctrine by continuall succession of prie­stes, nor referre your imposition of handes to any Apostle or Apostolike bishop, nor shew your vocation to be ordinarie for lacke of laufull ordination and consecration, nor extraor­dinarie [Page 60] for lacke of gods testimonie and approbation by sig­ne or miracle or example of the olde or new testament: that you are not laufully called to the administration of doctrine and sacramentes, that you are not duely and orderly prefer­red to the ministerie which you exercise, that you go, not being called, that you runne, not being sent. Therefore we may iustly saye,Ierem. 23. that ye haue thrust your selues into that mi­nisterie at your owne pleasure and lyst. For though the prin­ce haue thus promoted you, yet be ye presumers and thrusters in of your selues. Well, landes and manours the Prince may geue you, priesthod and bishoprike the Prince can not geue you. This being so, we do you no wrong as ye complaine, in telling you and declaring to the world, that touching the ex­ercise of your ministerie ye do nothing orderly, or comely, but all thinges troblesomly and without order. Onlesse ye meane such order and comelines as theeues obserue among them selues in the distribution of their robberies.

Lastly if ye allow not euery man yea and euery woman to be a priest, why dryue ye not some of your felowes to recant, that so haue preached? why allow ye the bookes of your ne­we Euangelistes, that so haue writen? And whether ye admit­te all sortes of the commō people to be your ministers of the word, to teach the people, and vnreuerently to hādle the holy scriptures, or no: our proufe is nedeles, the thing is manifest.

Moreouer vve say, Apoogie that Chrst hath geuen to his ministers povver to bind, to loose, to open, to shutt, and that office of loosing consi­steth in this point that the minister should either offer by the prea­ching of the gospell the merits of Christ and full pardon, to suche as haue lovvly and contrite hearts, and do vnfainedly repent them, pronuncing vnto the same a sure and vndoubted forgiuenes of their sins, and hope of euerlasting saluation. Or els that the minister, vvhē any haue offended their brothers mindes vvith a great offence, and vvith a notable and open fault, as vvherby they haue as it vvere bannyshed and made them selues as straungers from the cōmon fel­lovviship, and from the bodye of Christe, then after perfitte amen­dement [Page] of suche persons, doth reconcile them, and bringe them ho­me againe, and restore them to the cōpany and vnitie of the faithfull.

THE SIXT CHAPTER.

Lib. 1. de penitentia. Cap. 2. Povver of loosing and byn­ding is in the catholike chur­ch only.What ye meane by your ministres we recke not. The power of loosing and binding we acknowledge with S. Am­brose that it is graunted to priestes only, and that therfore the church duely chalengeth the same which hath true priestes. He­resie can not chalenge it, (sayeth he) which hath not the priestes of god. This power Christ gaue to his Apostles and to their successours priestes of the new testament, when he sayed to them after that he was rysen againe.Ioan. 20. Receiue ye the holy ghost, whosoeuers sinnes ye remitte, they are remitted vnto them. And whosoeuers sinnes ye reteine, they are reteined. Yet to thin­tent this doctrine may ryghtly be vnderstanded, we saye, that although priestes loose and remitte sinnes, yet princi­pally they do it not,1. Cor. 3. but as the ministers of God. For neither he that planteth is any thing, neither he that watereth, but God who geueth the encrease. For remission of synnes (sa­yeth S. Ciprian) whether it be geuen by baptisme or by other sa­cramentes, Sermone de Baptis. Christi. efficiētiae. properly is the holy ghostes, and to him alone remayneth the priuilege of this working: as for the solemnitie of the wordes, and the inuocation of the holy name, and signes done by the ministeries of priestes according to Apostolike institutions, they celebrate the visible sacrament. As for the thing it selfe, the holy gost for­meth and causeth it. ibi. And as the same S. Cyprian saieth, to the visible consecrations the auctour of all goodnes inuisibly putteth his hand and perfiteth the thing of the sacrament. Epist. 91. ad Theodorū. Episco­pum foro­iuliensem. Christ (as ho­ly Leo writeth) without ceassing, and allwayes, commeth to his worke whyle it is doing, neither is he at any tyme absent from those thinges which he hath committed to his ministers to be exe­cuted. Opening and shut­ting. As touching opening and shutting that it be well perceiued, we saye that god only shutteth hell and openeth [Page 61] heauen as cause efficient,Rom. 5. in as much as by his mercie he powreth his grace and charitie into our hartes by the holy ghost, whom he vouchesaueth to geue vnto vs: and that he openeth hell and shutteth heauen punishing for sinne by his iust iudgement, in asmuch as, he suffereth men accor­ding to their desertes to runne into sinnes, neither powreth his charitie into their hartes.

Now concerning the ministers of the church, we saye that they open and shut by dispensing the sacramentes, who haue their vertue of the merites of Christ. For where as the sacramentes haue issued and flowed out of the syde of our Sauiour Christ sleping on the crosse, (as by allusion we may vse the wordes of the olde figure) wherewith the church is buylded, therfore in the sacramentes of the church the effi­cacie of the passion remayneth. And for that cause to the ministers also of the church who be dispensours of the sacra­mentes, a certaine power is geuen to remoue the barre that excludeth vs from gods fauour, not through their owne, but throwgh gods vertue and power, and merite of Christes pas­sion.The keye of the church. And this power is called by a metaphore the keye of the church, which is the keye of ministerie, whereof we shall speake hereafter. This power, so much as concerneth releasse of sinnes,For vvhō serueth the sacra­ment of penaunce Noua [...]iaus denyed pe­naunce. is exercised in the sacrament of penaunce to the be­nefite of them that after baptisme be relapsed and fallen into sinne againe. Of which power no christen man doubteth, onlesse he hold the heresie of the Nouatians, who were con­demned for heretikes by the church, because they denyed that priestes in the church had auctoritie to remitte sinnes, and so denyed the sacrament of penaunce. For they bownd the penitentes and neuer loosed them, but remitted them to God to be assoyled. Against whom S. Ambrose wrote very learnedly his two bokes de paenitentia. Li. 2. cap. 2 Where shewing thin­ges [Page] impossible to be made to vs possible by gods grace, he sayeth thus. It semed impossible that water should wash away sin­nes. 4. Reg. 5. Naaman of Syria beleued not that his lepre could be made cleane by water. But what was impossible, God made it to be possible, which gaue to vs so great grace. Likewise it semed impossible sinnes to be forgeuen through penaunce. Christ graunted this to his Apo­stles, which is translated to the office of priestes. And so that is made possible which semed impossible.

Apologie. And (vve saye) that the office of loosing consisteth in this point, that the minister should either offer by the preaching of the gospell the merites of Christ and full pardon to suche as haue lovvly and contrite heartes, and do vnfaynedly repent them pronouncing vnto the same a sure and vndoubtid forgiuenes of their sinnes, and hope of euerlasting saluation, or els that the minister vvhen any haue of­fended their brothers myndes vvith a great offence and vvith a no­table and open fault, vvhereby they haue as it vvere bannished and made them selues straungers from the common fellovvship and from the body of Christ, then after perfite amendment of such per­sons doth reconcile them and bring them home againe, and restore them to the company and vnitie of the faythfull.

Confu­tation.The summe of all these gay wordes abbriged doth attribute loosing or absolutiō first to preaching, next to assoyling such as be excommunicate. As touching the first, these Defenders confound the offices of preaching and of absolution.Absoluti­on con­sisteth not in pronouncing the gospell. The preacher teacheth the hearers and reporteth the wordes of Christ, as out of the mouth of Christ, saying thus sayeth Christ &c? The priest which is the minister of absolution according to the auctoritie geuen to him by Christ, in his owne person assoyleth the penitent saying, I assoyle thee in the name of the father &c. The preacher in that he preacheth only, doth not assoyle sinners, neither geueth he the merites of Christ, nor full pardon by pronouncing vnto them the gospell. For if that great benefite consisted in pronouncing or denouncing of the gospell, then why might not euery lay man, yea women, yea yong boyes and gyrles assoyle synners? [Page 62] yea why might not euery man assoyle him selfe? And would ye Syrs appoint vnto vs such for iudges constituted by Chri­ste? For who knoweth not, that al these may be taught to pro­nounce that part of the gospell, where the doctrine of remit­ting of sinnes is cōteined?Luthers doctrine concer­ning ab­solution In dede this is Martin Luthers do­ctrine, who referreth al loosing and absolution to the faith of the hearer, by whom soeuer, and how soeuer, in sport or er­nest the wordes be pronounced, not to the power of the mi­nister. which is very absurd and farre from reason, from the iudgement of al the holy fathers and auncient coūcels, from the doctrine of the catholike church, and from the mynde of the scripture. For the wordes of Christ be so playne, as they can not be so violētly wrested. For Christ sayed not, to whō ye offer by preaching of the gospell my merites and pardon, or whose synnes ye pronounce by the gospell to be remitted, but quorumcunque remiseritis, who soeuers synnes ye remitte, Ioan. 20. The po­vver of priestes. Math. 9. they are remitted to them. For as the sonne of man remitted synnes to him that was sick of the palsye, and to Mary Maudelē that ye may know (sayeth he) that the sonne of man hath power to re­mitte synnes, &c: Euen so he hath transferred the same power vnto priestes, sayeth Chrysostome.Lib. 3. de dignitate sacerdotali. which priestes he hath sent, as the father sent him. And if absolution consist in pro­nouncing of the gospell, which profiteth so much as it is be­leued, then the power of the keyes which Christ hath geuen to the church, consisteth not so much in the minister, as in the synner that heareth and beleueth, and so is forgeuen by Luthers opinion. And by this meanes the priest hath no spe­ciall power. But we saye with the church that a sacrament hath his efficacie of the institution of Christ in him, to whom it is adhibited. Which efficacie dependeth not of the hearing or vnderstanding of that which is signified. The word which is the forme of a sacrament, is operatorious or [Page] working, as S. Ambrose termeth it that is to witte, hath po­wer to worke the determinat effect, yea without the vnder­standing of him to whom it is directed. Therefor absolution which pertineth to the sacrameent of penaunce being duely ministred by the priest, the penitent duely receiuing the sa­me, that is, after contrition and confession of his synnes and due satisfaction done or to be done, is acquitted and forge­uen. In this sense the catholike church of Christ hath euer taught, that god worketh our saluation by sacraments, and in this faith it hath alwayes baptized infants, that their synnes being remitted they might be made the children of god. Li­kewise by the keyes of the church it hath assoyled persons be­reft of the vse of speach and reason, as the learned and aun­cient holy father Leo teacheth in his epistle ad Theodorum episcopum Foroiuliensem,Epist. 91. and S. Augustine de adulterinis coniugijs Lib. 1. cap. 26. & vltimo.

Finally if the office of loosing that is absolution consisted in preaching the gospell, and offering the merites of Christ by pronouncing the wordes in which the remission of our synnes is expressed, as this Defender teacheth: then had not the catechumens of old tyme neither now should they be in any danger, if they shuld dye without baptisme and the grace of reconciliation, that is not being assoyled. For they lacked no preaching, as now they lacke not where any such bee. The cōtrary whereof the church hath euer taught, and for witnes of the same besides other fathers we haue the plaine doctrine of S. Augustine.Tract. in Ioan. 13. Who sayeth that a Catechumen how much so euer he profiteth, beareth styll the burthen of his iniquitie so lōg ab he is not baptized.cap. 28. And in his first boke de adulteri­nis coniugijs, he taketh it for one case a catechumē to dye not regenerat by baptisme, and a penitent to depart this lyfe not assoiled. The case of baptisme (sayeth he) and of reconciliation is [Page 63] one, if it fortune a penitēt to dye before he be assoiled. Epi. 180. And in his epistle ad Honoratū, declaring in what case ministers may flye in tyme of persecution, he sayeth, whereas some require baptis­me, some rconciliatiō, (by which word he meaneth absolation) some also the doing of penaūce it selfe, if there be no ministers (who this in case haue power) to serue them, what miserable ende folo­weth them, who depart out of this world, either not regenerat or boaunde, as much to saye, as without being assoiled?Catechu­men. Thus we learne by S. Augustine what danger it is a Catechumē (who is a learner of the Christen fayth before he be admitted to be Christened) to dye without baptisme, and a penitent with­out absolution. It is by him no lesse then exitium, which is vtter vndoing. And yet these two sortes of men though they lacke their ministers, may easely haue the doctrine of remission of synnes pronounced vnto them out of the gospell. Which preaching and pronouncing of the go­spell notwithstanding, the penitent dying without ab­solution, dyeth no lesse then a Catechumen without baptis­me, as S. Augustine teacheth, still bound,Aug. li. 4. de baptis. contrà Donatist. Cap. 22. and therefor char­ged with the burthen of his synnes. I denye not but cases of iust necessitie be excepted in the one and the other hauing right and firme willes and desyre in ech case. VVhen not the contempt of religion, but the point of necessitie excludeth the myste­rie of baptisme, as S. Augustine sayeth. Then how dangerous and pernicious is the doctrine of these Defenders our new mini­string prelates, who more with swete and holy wordes, then with truth, teach Christen people that the office of loosing consisteth in offering by preaching of the gospell (as they call it) the merites of Christ and ful pardon, and by pronouncing (I know not how) a sure and vndoubted forgeuenes of syn­nes and hope of euerlasting saluation to such forsooth as ha­ue lowly and contrite hartes and do vnfaynedly repent [Page] them? The cōtrition of harte they seme to speake of sufficeth not for loosing of synnes, onlesse it be contrition formed with charitie, as the diuines teach. Which charitie, seeketh and requireth the sacrament of penaunce and the grace of recon­ciliation, which can not be ministred but by a priest. Neither is it possible the priest to iudge truly who are lowly and contri­te of hart and repente them vnfaynedly, forasmuch as he can not serch the harte, onlesse the penitentes humble them sel­ues vnto him, and declare their repentaunce by simple and lowly confession of their synnes. Which confession these new gospellers haue abandoned out of their congregations. How much is more the catholike and holesom doctrine of S. Au­gustine to be imbraced and folowed, which he vttereth in these wordes?Li. 50. ho­miliarum homil. 49 Do ye penaunce such as is done in the church, that the church may pray for you. Let no man saye to him selfe, I do penaunce secretly, before god I do it. God who forgeueth me kno­weth, that I do it in my hart. But what sayeth S. Augu­stine herunto? why then (sayeth he) it was sayd in vayne, what thinges ye loose in earth, Mat. 18. they shalbe loosed in heauen. Then without cause the keyes be geuen to the church. VVe make voyde the gospell of God, we make frustrat the wordes of Christ. VVe promise to you (he meaneth absolution from synnes mi­nistred by the priestes) that which he denied, and then what, do we not deceiue you? Lo by S. Augustins doctrine it is not ynough, if we wil haue our synnes loosed and assoyled, to do penaunce secretly in our hart and before God only. And yet so to do it by these Defenders new gospell it is sufficient. For if I may haue one to offer me the merites and pardon of Christ by preaching of the gospell and pronouncing of for­geuenes of my synnes vnto me, in case this be ynough, what nede I to confesse my synnes to my ghostly father? what nede I to do penaunce? why shuld I care for the priestes ab­solution, [Page 64] trusting to Christes pardon and absolution? But S. Augustine sayeth, do ye penaunce, not such as liketh your selues, not such as newe fangled selfe pleasing preachers teach you, but such as is done in the church, which consisteth in contrition of hart, confession of mouth, and satisfaction of worke, that so ye may be assoiled and be perfitely reconciled. For if the doing of penaunce in such sort as it is done in the church be not necessary, then is the gospell to no purpose, then is Christes doctrine vaine and frustrat,Mat. 18. then is Christ a lyar, who said, what thinges so euer ye loose in earth, they shalbe loosed in heauen. Then be the keyes geuen to the church with­out cause, then do priestes deceiue the faythfull people, where as geuing absolution they saye to euery one, I absolue thee in the name of the father &c. But hereof we haue sayd ynough.

Touching the second point, wherein after your opinion the office of loosing consisteth, as we acknowledge,Loosing of them vvhich be excōmu­nicate. that the laufull power to excommunicat offenders is in the bishops who haue iurisdiction ecclesiasticall, or in such as that power is committed vnto by the prelates of the church: so the same haue power and auctoritie to assoil them and to loose them from all band of excommunication, and to reconcile them to the church againe, after that hauing done their penaunce enioyned they haue by some euident tokens declared them selues to be vnfaynedly amended. But we do not attribute the loosing of such as be excommunicate to the offering of Christes merites and pronouncing of the gospell vnto them as you do, but to the power of iurisdiction by Christ geuen to the church. And whereas you saye that they vvho haue of­fended their brothers myndes vvith a great offence and vvith a no­table and open fault, thereby haue as it vvere bannished and made them selues straungers from the common fellovvship and from the body of Christ: you seme to speake more confusely then this [Page] matter requireth. We saye according to scripture and doctrine of the catholike church, that all such persons (to speake right­ly) haue not bannished them selues as it were from the com­mon felowship, as you terme it, so as they may seme to haue departed from the church by their owne accord, for so pro­perly do schismatikes and heretikes: but according to the gre­atnes of the crimes committed be excommunicat either by sentence of man or by the lawe, and cutte awaye from the body as rotten members, and according to the power of byn­ding and loosing geuen to the Apostles and their succes­sours, be declared to be had and taken as hethens and publi­cans, as Christ cōmanded, Matt. 18. and consequently be reie­cted from the communion of the faithfull, whereof they are called excommunicated, for that they haue no common part with the rest of the children of the church, of the merites of Christ imparted vnto vs in the sacramentes. For which cause they be kept from the sacramentes, and all Christen folke be forbyddem their companie, specially in case that great ex­communication commonly called Anathema be extended vpon them.1. Cor. 5.

By the fathers excommunication in consideration of the necessitie of it,Excōmu­nication. is called neruus ecclesiasticae disciplinae, the sinnow of churchly discipline, by the canons, Mucro Epis­copi, 16. quaest. 2. ca. visis. 24. q. 3. c. corripiant. the sworde of a bishop, by S. Augustine, Episcopalis iudicij damnatio, qua paena nulla in ecclesia maior est. The condemnation of a mā by bishoply iudgement, then the which there is no greater pu­nishement in the church. And this is the vttermost that for pu­nishment of sinners the church by churchly auctoritie doth, ought, or can do. How much the more the malice of them that hate the church appereth, who besides all reasons and equitie, yea with outragious vpbraiding impute to the church as crueltie, the execution of iustice done by the ciuill magi­strate. [Page 65] But to speake fully either hereof, or of the great dan­ger of excommunication, of the kindes of it, what difference there is betwen the lesser and the greater, and that which is most greeuous of al in scripture called anathema, concerning the formes to be obserued in proceding to it, by waye of e­uangelicall denouncing, whereof Christ gaue commaunde­ment Matt. 18. or by waye of ordinary inquisition, which S. Paul speaketh of, 1. Cor. 5. from what benefites they be ex­cluded that incurre the sentence of the one and the other vn­till they be reconciled, in what cases the faithfull may com­panie with the excommunicated, in what cases they may not, how the sentence of excommunication is geuen someti­mes by man, sometimes by the law it selfe, briefly of the whole diuersitie of this censure according to the diuersitie of synnes done: hereof to treat particularly so much as the mat­ter requyreth, I thinke it neither necessary nor conuenient. And this treatise thereby should growe bigger, then my pour­pose hath ben it should.

We say also that the minister dothe execute the auctoritie of bin­ding and shutting, Apologie as often as he shutteth vp the gate of the kinge­dome of heauen against the vnbeleeuing and stubborne persons, de­nouncing vnto thē Gods vengeaunce and euerlastinge punishmēte. Or els when he doth quite shut them out from the bosome of the Churche by open excommunication.

Here againe you confounde the power of binding and the office of preaching,Confuta­tion. as you dyd before speaking of the power of loosing. Whereto we saye, as we sayd before of that other, that bynding and shutting consisteth not in denoun­cing of Gods vengeaunce, but in the exercise of the keye of iurisdiction committed to the church. The ministers whereof binde sinners, whom for iust cause they loose not, but know that they are not to be loosed. And to that keye perteineth excommunication, and by the same it is exercised.

Apologie Out of doubte, what sentence so euer the Minister of God shall geue in this sorte, God him selfe doth so well alovve it, that what soeuer here in yearth by their meanes is loosed and bownde, God him selfe will loose and binde, and confirme the same in heauen.

Confuta­tion.Out of doubt whom so euer priestes laufully made and duely vsing the keye of knowledge and discretion, (as the diuines call it) shall assoile and loose, they are assoiled and loosed. And whom so euer they assoile not [...]e loose not, they remaine bounde,The case of extre­me neces­sitie all­wayes ex­cepted. and beare the burthen of their sinnes.

What so euer by them is thus loosed or bounde in earth, God him selfe aloweth for loosed and bounde in heauen. Such priestes because ye haue not in your newe church, at lest after this wise vsing priestly auctoritie, and none will suf­fer to be made, nor such auctoritie to be exercised: ye de­fraude the faithfull people of the great benefit of the sacra­ment of penaunce, keping them fast bounde to their sinnes after baptisme committed. and so ye cause their euerlasting damnation, for whom Christ hath shed his bloud, the price of their redemption.

Apologie And touchinge the keyes wherewith they may either shutte or open the kyngdome of heauen, we with Chrysostom saye, they be the knowledge of the Scriptures: with Tertullian we say, they be the interpretation of the lawe: and vvith Eusebius we call them the word of God.

THE SEVENTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion.By the name of keyes the scripture meaneth a certaine high auctoritie, power, rule, and administration: as in ciuill matters the delyuering of keyes betokeneth a translation of dominion and possession.Of the keyes. For he that hath the keyes, hath libertie and power ouer the house, to enter, to lette in, to shut out at his lyst. Our Sauiour Christ the sonne of God and very God, promised to geue these keyes to Peter, when he sayd to him.Mat. 16. To thee I will geue the keyes of the kingdome of hea­uen. In which wordes he vsed a metaphore, meaning by the [Page 66] keyes a speciall power to take awaye, or also to put impedi­ment of entraunce in to the kingdome of heauen, right so as by a keye lette of entring into a house is either put or remoued. And because the kingdome of heauen is shut to a man by syn­ne, therefore the power whereby such stoppage is remoued, is called the keye of the kingdome of heauen. For by remo­uing such let it openeth, and by not remouing it shutteth, or which is more, for his synne byndeth him further by excōmu­nication. The lette whereby the whole nature of man is shut out of heauen by the synne of our first parent, is taken away by the passion of Christ. But because before that benefite be receiued, heauen yet remaineth shut both for synne originall contracted, and synne actuall committed: we haue nede of the sacramentes and keyes of the church.

The holy fathers for good considerations grownded vpon scripture, haue diuided the keyes in to the keye of order,Diuision of the keyes. and the keye of iurisdiction. And either of them into the keye of knowledge which they call also the keye of discretion, and into the keye of power.Keye of order. The keye of order is the power of priestly vocation, function or ministerie, which conteineth power and auctoritie to preach the gospell, to consecrat the body of Christ, to remitte and retaine synnes, to administer the sacramentes.Keye of Iurisdi­ction. The keye of iurisdiction is a spirituall po­wer of coercion, geuen to this vse, that people be kept from euill, and conteined in all good exercises, that they maye be worthy to be made partakers of the sacramentes and of all spirituall good thinges.

To these Defenders we saye, that they confounde the keyes, and seme not to knowe what the keyes are. Verely these be not only the knowledge of the scriptures, nor the interpreta­tiō of the lawe, nor the word of God, although these also do open or shut the kingdome of heauen in their kinde, as Chry­sostome, [Page] Tertullian and Eusebius maye well saye: and not only these, but also miracles, and plagues, and all other thinges which prepare the will or vnderstanding of man whereby he may receiue the benefite of those most principall keyes that now we speake of.

Apologie Moreouer that Christes disciples did receiue this aucthoritie, not that they shoulde heare priuate confessions of the people, and lysten to their whishperinges, as the common Massing priestes do euery where nowe a dayes, and do it so, as though in that one poinct laye all the vertue and vse of the keyes: but to thend they should goo, they should teache, they should publishe abrode the Gospell, and be vnto the beleuing a swete sauour of lyfe vnto life, and vnto the vnbeleuing and vnfaithfull, a sauour of death vnto death: and that the mindes of godly persons being brought low by the remorce of their former lyfe and errours, after they once begonne to looke vp vnto the light of the Gospel, and beleue in Christ, might be opened with the worde of God, euen as a dore is opened with a keye. Contrariewise, that the wicked and vvilfull folke, and suche as woulde not beleue nor retorne into the right waye, should be lefte still as fast locked and shut vp, and as S. Paul sayeth, waxe worse and worse. 2. Tim. 3. This take we to be the meaning of the keyes: and that after this fashion mens consciences eyther to be opened or shut.

Confuta­tion.Here ye harpe much vpon one stryng, which so iarreth in the eares of the hearers, as your confuse harmonie can like noman onlesse he be a minstrell of your owne secte. The auctoritie and power of the keyes consisteth not all together nor principally in preaching or pronouncing of the gospell, as all ready we haue proued. What may we iudge of you? pro­cedeth this of malice,The keyes confoun­ded by the do­ctrine of the De­fenders. or of ignorāce, that thus ye confounde the keyes, the powers, and the ministeries? What so euer floo­rish of wordes ye laye on the vpper cote of your matter, speaking of the going, teaching, and publishing abrode of the gospell, and of the being of a swete sauour of life vnto life, and a sauour of death vnto death, 2. Cor. 2. which be the effectes of the gospell: all your grownd is nothing els but preaching. And thereon ye place the keyes, as though in other thinges there were no for­ce, [Page 67] vertue or vse of them. We esteme true preaching of the gospell nolesse then ye do. And what is wrought therby,VVherein consisteth the po­wer of the keyes. Distincti­on of mi­nisteries. we acknowledge. But as the power of the keyes consisteth in that partly, which we denie not: so it consisteth also in other mini­steries. Preaching is one thing, to gouerne the church is an other, to remitte and reteine synnes is an other, to distribute the sacramentes is an other. Doth not S. Paul in cleare wordes speake seuerally and distinctly of ministeries, where he sayeth, that he was not sent of Christ to baptize, but to preach the gospel? 1. Cor. 1. This doctrine of yours, wherby ye confounde the keyes, powers, and ministeries, doth not only obscure the scriptures, and bring the people to great errours: but also vnder preten­ce of a loue toward preaching of the gospell, leadeth them into contempt of the sacramentes, and specially of the sacra­ment of penaunce, without which if after baptisme we haue synned, (not being letted by case of necessitie wherein will desire and vowe is accepted) we can not atteine to saluation. As you folow Caluine your maister in this and sundry other false and perilous doctrines, so it is to be feared, if your wic­ked temeritie be suffered to procede, that at lenght hauing brought all religion to bare preaching, ye will abandon all the sacramentes of the church, as thinges not necessarie. For so that wicked maister of yours teacheth. that,Caluines wicked doctrine against the sacra­ments. where Christes death may be remembred otherwise, there all the sacramentes be superfluous. And that I seme not to slaunder him, I remitte you to his commentaries vpon the first epistle of S. Paul to the Corinthians, where expounding these wor­des, Do this in my remembraunce, he saith thus.In. 1. Cor. 11. The supper is a to­ken of remembrance ordeined to lift vp or helpe our infirmitie, for if otherwise we were mindful ynough of Christes death, this helpe (he meaneth the blessed sacrament of the aulter) were super­fluous which is common to all the sacramentes, for they be helpes of our infirmitie. Lo by Caluines doctrine if we remember the [Page] death of Christ, both the Eucharist and al other holy sacra­mentes be void and superfluous. So that by him if a booke, picture, image, a woman, a boye, a girle, or any other thing put a man in mynde of Christes death, the sacramentes be nedeles. And then, because no other thing bringeth to our re­mēbrance the death of Christ more then preaching, to what purpose serue all the sacramentes?

Thus these Defenders with their Maister Caluine haue fownde a shorter waye to heauen then was knowen before. Thus they haue set S. Augustine to scoole againe, who in so many places declareth the cathechumens that lacked no put­ting in mynde of Christes death, as daily being instructed therein, and penitentes, which also might easely minde the passion of Christ, to be in danger of damnation, if they dyed, those without baptisme, these without the grace of recōcilia­tion, not being kept therefrom by necessitie. For in that case their vowe or desire of these sacramentes might stand thē in stede of acte and dede. But by Caluine they be but helpes to put vs in minde of Christes death, lacking other meanes to bring the same to our remembrance. In an other place he se­meth to derogate much of the necessitie of baptisme of Christen mens children.Contra In­terim. Caluines dange­rous doc­trine tou­ching baptisme. Where he sayeth, that by reason of Gods promise the issue which commeth of faithfull parents, is bor­ne holy, and is a holy progenie, and that the children of such being yet enclosed in the wombe before they drawe breath of life, be neuer the lesse chosen into the couenant of life euerla­sting.A prepa­ration to­ward the vtward subuersiō of Chris­ten reli- This doctrine when it shal take place, as by you Defen­ders it is set in a good furtherace, what shall we looke for but that the necessary sacramēt of baptisme (without which who is to be compted a Christen man?) and the most blessed and confortable sacrament of the aulter, and the holesome sacra­mēt of penance and absolution, and the rest of the sacramē­tes, [Page 68] shall be no more estemed and vsed, then now ye esteme and vse the masse, holy bread, and holy water? This being once brought to passe, shall not the people easely be induced either to receiue Mahometes religion, or some other as farre from God as that is, or to allowe the pleasant trade of life of the Epicureans, the most part being already thereto incli­ned, and no small number well entred?

But to retourne to the keyes, which seme to you to haue no force ne vse but in preaching. First as touching the scornefull scoffes vttered by you Syr Defender in latine, and by your in­terpreter in english against priuate cōfessions, and against the ministers of the church appointed by God for grace of re­cōciliation to be imparted to penitentes: your light mocking sprite delyteth your selues not so much, as it pittieth vs to see you both so fast bounde in Satans fetters.of Con­fession. Next concerning Confession necessarely required to the vse and power of the keyes, which you speake of at your pleasure, thus we saye according to the scriptures. Among sundry effectes for which Christ gaue the keyes to the Apostles and their successours, this is one, that by power of them they should remitte and reteine synnes, as him selfe said, Whose synnes ye remitte, they are remitted vnto them, and whose sinnes ye reteine, they are reteined. Mat. 16. &. 18. Ioan. 20. But synnes can not duly be remitted or reteined, onlesse they be knowen to him that hath auctoritie thereto: and know­ledge of synnes (specially such as are priuey) can not be had of man, who can not see into the harte of man, but by confes­sion of the synner:That outward cō­fession of all mor­tall syn­nes to a priest is necessary. wherefore consequently it followeth that they receiued this auctoritie to heare the confession of chri­sten people desirous to be assoiled and reconciled. And that outward confession of all mortall synnes which is made to the priest, is necessary to saluation by the institution of Christ, thus we proue it. Because priuey and secret synnes be [Page] not remitted except priestes remitte them, as it appereth ma­nifestly by the wordes of Christ to the Apostles,Ioan 20. whose synnes ye reteine, they are reteined, (where the Euangelist vnderstan­deth by reteining, not remitting, as though Christ had said, whose synnes ye reteine, that is to saye, ye remitte not, they be not remitted): but priestes knowe not when to remitte synnes and when to reteine, except they knowe them, neither can they knowe them, onlesse the synners confes­se them: Wherefore the confession yea of secrete synnes is necessarie to saluation by thinstitution of Christ. For in that he instituted the ende, he instituted also the mea­nes, which shuld be necessary to the obteining of the ende, onlesse we would make Christ our lawemaker to haue failed his church in thinges necessarie. That synnes can not either be remitted or reteined, except the priest knowe them, we are bolde so to saye with the fathers, and specially with S. Hierome,Mat. 16 Comment. in. Mat. 16 who so vnderstode the wordes of Christ, where he promised the keyes of the kingdome of heauen to Peter. Sa­cerdos pro officio suo cùm peccatorum audierit varietates, scit qui li gand us sit, quisoluēdus. The priest (sayeth he) when as according to his office he hath heard the diuersities of synnes, knoweth who is to be bounde, who is to be loosed. Right so as in the time of Moses la­we he pronoūced not who was cleane of lepre, who was not, before that he had vewed the colour, the bunches, and all other tokens of that desease. And thus it foloweth of the wor­des of Christ, that confession of all synnes, at least deadly, must be made to the priest, before they cā be remitted. Which priest is the minister of this sacrament and hath auctoritie to absolue, either ordinarie, or by commission of the superi­our.

Further proufe that con-Againe for proufe that confession is necessarie, we saye that to remitte and reteine synnes committed against God, [Page 69] as to binde and to loose, be iudiciall actes. And therefore by these wordes Christ ordeined a court, a consistorie,That pri­estes be iudges, and in the church is courte kept spiri­tually. a seate of iudgemēt in the church, and appointed the Apostles and their successours to be iudges. And that this may appere not to be a fantasie of our owne heads, S. Augustine so expoundeth those wordes of S. Iohn in his reuelatiō. Et vidi sedes, &c. And I sawe seates, and some sitting on them, and iudgement was geuen. De ciuit. dei. lib. 20 cap. 9. Cap. 20. VVe must not thinke (sayeth he) this to be spoken of the last iudge­ment, but we must vnderstād the seates of the rulers, and the rulers thēselues, by whom now the church is gouerned. And as for the iud­gement geuen, it semeth not to be taken for any other, then for that whereof it was said, what thinges ye binde in earth, Matt. 18. they shall be bounde also in heauen: and what thinges ye loose on earth, they shall be loosed also in heauen. Sundry other fathers haue vttered in their writinges the same doctrine. Hilarius vpon the sixtinth chapter of Mathew sayeth, Beatus coeli ianitor &c. In Matt. cap. 16. Blessed is the porter of heauen, whose earthly iudgement (that is to saye which is geuen here on earth) is a foreiudged auctoritie in hea­uen, that what thinges be bownd or loosed in earth, they haue the condition of the same statute also in heauen.Li. 1. epis. 2 De diguit. sacerd. li. 3. S. Cyprian hath the like saying in an epistle to Cornelius. Chrysostō sa­yeth that Christ hath translated al iudgement, which he receiued of the Father, vnto the Apostles and priestes. Gregorie Nazianzene in an oration to the Emperour and his princes, sayeth to the Emperour, Ouis meaes, & nos habemus tribunalia. Thou arte my shepe, and we haue our seates of iudgementhomil. 26 in euange. S. Gregorie the Pope compareth the sacramēt of penaunce with a courte of iustice, in which causes be first examined and tried, and afterward iudged. That the same is to be done by the priestSermone primo in dic apost. Petri & Pauli. S. Bernard sheweth. Who as allso the lerned fatherDe sacrament. lib. 2 parte. 14. ca. 8. Hugo de S. Victore, be not afrayed to saye after S. Cyprian, Hilarie, andde dignit. sacerdot. & homil. 5. de verbis esa. vidi domi­num. &c. Chrysostome, that the sentence of Peter remitting sin­nes, [Page] goeth before the sentence of heauen. This ordinance of Christ requireth that all trespasses, offences, disorders, trans­gressions, and synnes committed against him and his lawes, be referred to this Consistorie.

Whether these Defenders allowe publike confession or no, we knowe not, but whereas they inueigh against priuate confessiō, and saye in spiteful wordes, which they haue lerned in the scoole of Satan being loth the synnes of the people whereby he holdeth his kingdome, should be remitted, that Christes disciples receiued not the auctoritie of the keyes, that they should heare priuat confessions of the people, and listen to their whisperinges: we tell them, that confession of all deadly synnes is of the institution of God, not of man. But concerning the manner of confessing secretly to a priest alone,Priuate Cōfessiō. it is most agreable to naturall reason, that secrete syn­nes be confessed secretly. But in case any man in reuenge of his synnes, or for humbling him selfe, or for example of o­thers, or for edifying of the church which he hath offended, will confesse his secrete sinnes openly: it is not against the commaundement of God, so that alwaies synnes be confes­sed, and that to a priest. For proufe of this doctrine of con­fession, besides the foresaid scripture, we haue the testimo­nies of the most auncient and best lerned fathers.Testimo­nies of the fathers for priua­te or se­cret con­fession. Clement. Clement amongest those thinges that he acknowledgeth him selfe to haue receiued of Peter, this is one, as he writeth in his first epistle translated by Rufine the priest. That, if it fortune either enuie or infidelitie priuely to crepe into any mans hart, or any o­ther like euill: he which regardeth his soule, be not ashamed to con­fesse those thinges to him, that is in office ouer him, to the ende that by him through the word of God and holesome counsell he may be healed. So as by perfite faith and good workes he may escape the pai­nes of euerlasting fire, and come to the rewardes of life that endureth [Page 70] for euer. That he speaketh not of publike, nor of cōfuse, or ge­neral confessiō of synnes, which many can finde in their har­tes to make, and thereof be not ashamed, which their ghostly father knoweth no lesse then they before they come to con­fession, but of priuie and particular confession: these wordes there folowing do plainly declare. Intrinsecus latens amaritudo peccati abijcienda prorsus & euomenda est. The bitternes of synne that lieth hidde within, is vtterly to be cast forth and vomited out. Dionys. Epist. 8. Dionysius whō S. Paul conuerted to the faith, in his epistle ad Demophilum declaring the maner then vsed, which was that a synner cast him selfe downe at the feete of a priest and so made his confession: rebuketh him sharply, for kicking awaie of a wicked man that fell at the priestes feete, when as he made his confession shamefastly and demaunded remedies for his synnes. No man speaketh more plainely of secrete confession then Origen, and that in sundry places,Origen. to which for breuities sake I remitte the reader. In. 2. ca. Leuitici. homil. 2. De principijs, lib. 3. In psal. 37. homil. 2. Where he compa­reth the state of a synner to a man that hath euill and vndi­gested humours in his stomake. And sayeth that as by remai­ning of such euill matter the man feeleth himselfe very sicke, and by vomiting of it forth, he is eased: so the sinner by keping his sinnes se­cret, is the more greuously charged in his owne conscience, and stan­deth in danger to be choked with the fleme and humour of his sinnes. But if he accuse him selfe and confesse his faultes, he both vomiteth forth his synnes and digesteth the cause of the same. S. Cyprian as in many other places, so most plainely speaketh of secret confession, Sermone 5. de lapsis. Although (sayeth he of cer­taine deuout persons) they be entangled with no great sinne, Confessi­on of euil thought, yet because at least they thought of it, the same vnto the priestes of God confesse they sorowfully and simply. They make confession of their conscience, they laye forth the burthen of their minde. &c.

Who so euer is not satisfied with these fathers that be most auncient, but desyreth to see mo testimonies for priuate and secrete confession: may it please him to read S. Basile de regul. Monachor. quaest. 288. as one translation hath. S. Ambrose li. de paenitentia. Paulinus in the life of S. Ambrose. S. Hierome in ecclesiasten. cap. 10. Leo in two epistles. 57. ad Episcopos Campaniae, &c. and ad Theodorum episcopum. 69. Innocen­ce the first in his epistle ad Decentium. cap. 7. S. Augustine treating of the power of the keyes in many places, but spe­cially of confession in psal. 60. Where speaking much of the necessitie of confession, he sayeth thus. VVhy fearest thou to be confessed? If not being confessed thou remaine hidden, not being confessed thou shalt be damned. And afterwardes thus. To this en­de God requireth confession, to deliuer the humble, to this ende he damneth him that confesseth not, to punish the proude. Therefore be thou sory before thou be confessed, being confessed, reioyse, thou shalt be hole. The testimonies of the lerned doctours that haue most plainely written since foure hundred and eight hun­dred yeres, be in maner infinite. Euery studious man may ea­sely finde them. By these and many other holy fathers, of whom there is no doubt but they had the holy ghost for their teacher and prompter of all truth:Recitall of all syn­nes neces­sary. the catholike church hath ben persuaded, that the recitall and rehersing of all synnes be­fore the priest is necessary to saluation, onlesse necessitie for lacke of a priest or otherwise, exclude vs from it, and that a generall confession in no wise suffiseth. For confession is not necessary either only for instruction of the thinges that per­teine to our saluation, or for that the gospell may thereby be heard, as some of these newe Gospellers haue taught: but for that the merite and vertue of Christes passion may be im­parted vnto vs by the sacrament of penaunce and absolu­tion.

Thus we haue declared, that synnes which exclude vs from the kingdome of God committed after baptisme, though they be secrete and of the harte only, be by Christ reserued to the iudgement of the keyes of the church, and to the power of them to whom he said,Ioan 20. vvho so euers syn­nes ye remitte, they are remitted vnto them. &c. And that, forasmuch as this iudgement can not be exercised, without knowledge, neither knowledge of secrete synnes can be had without confession made by the doers of them, neither can they whom Christ hath put in auctoritie geue absolution to any, onlesse they see him prepared: true faith acknowledgeth that confession is to be made of all synnes, as cōmaunded by Christ and the Apostles, commended to vs by the fathers of the primitiue church, by all lerned doctours and generall vse of the whole church. And if the expresse terme of secrete or auricular confession be seldome mencioned in the auncient fathers, as that of publike confession is often times, as in the Nicene councell, and in sundry other places:cap. 9. that is nothing repugnant to the doctrine of the catholike church. For it is sufficiently shewed, not only by tradition of the fathers, but also by the testimonie of the Gospell, that confession of all and singular synnes is to be made to a priest, which thing is of the necessitie of the sacrament. But that it be publike or secrete, it hath ben left to naturall prudencie or deuotion ac­cording to the disposition of the church.

We saye that the priest in deede is Iudge in this case, Apologie De paenitētia di. 1. ca. V [...]rbū dei. but yet hath no maner of right to chalenge an auctoritie or power, as saith Am­brose.

Whereas ye make preaching of the Gospell to be the ke­yes, how call ye the priest iudge in this case?Confuta­tion. Preach ye neuer so much, the conscience of man being so secrete a thing as it is: how can ye iudge who inwardly and throughly repenteth, [Page] and who repenteth not? And though one repent and be sory and haue remorse of his former life, though he looke vnto the light of the Gospell, as ye saye, and beleue in Christ, what then? how can ye iudge of such a persone? Do ye knowe his hart by loking in his face? or must he not vtter vnto you his owne inward affection, the scripture saying, no man knoweth the thinges of a man but the spirite of man, 1. Cor. 2. which is in man? The priest can not be a iudge by only preaching the gos­pell. Sith then your doctrine admitteth not confession, whereby ye might come to knowlege of any mans state, how say ye the priest is a iudge in dede only by preaching the gospell, and by vttering the threatninges and confortinges thereof? The priest duly vsing the keye of knowledge and descretion doth the officie of a iudge, and as he seeth cause, either looseth or bindeth. As touching the priestes auctoritie or power, which to chalenge he hath no right, for so your interpreter maketh you to speake, and impute it to S. Am­brose:De peni­tent. dist. 1. c. verbū dei, De spū sancto lib. 3. cap. 19. Lib. 1. de penitent. Cap. 2. vendicat. we denie that S. Ambrose sayeth euē very so. But as we maye gather of his wordes, as he meaneth that a priest excer­ciseth not the right of any his owne proper power in remit­ting synnes: so in the very place by you alleaged he saith the contrarie to your doctrine. For the right of loosing and binding (sayeth he) is graunted to pristes only, and therefor the church cha­lengeth it rightly, which hath true priestes. Lo he vseth the worde of chalenge. Againe in the same place he auoucheth, that he which receiueth the holy ghost, (whom priestes receiue when they be consecrated in the sacrament of order) receiue also power to loose and binde synnes. For proufe thereof he alleageth the scripture.Ioan. 20. Take ye the holy ghost, whose synnes ye re­mitte, they are remitted, and whose synnes ye reteine, they are retei­ned. There he acknowledgeth as we also acknowledge, that the right in loosing and binding of synnes is the holy gostes. And yet he doth attribute the function thereof to the office [Page 72] of a priest.Vide Hie­ron. epist. ad Hedibi­am. quaest. 9. to. 3. And if you Defender were accustomed to make your humble confession and so to be assoiled, you should he­are some ghostly fathers saye to you after certaine other wor­des, auctoritate mihi commissa ego te absoluo, &c. Although we ac­knowlege the wordes vttered besides ego te absoluo not to be of necessitie, touching the forme of the sacrament, Yet thus the priestes confesse humbly the auctoritie which they exercise, to be by commission from Christ, not of them selues.

And therfore our Sauiour Iesu Christ to reproue the negligence of the Scribes and Phariseis in teaching, Apologie dyd with these wordes re­buke them saying: Wo vnto you Scribes and Phariseis, whiche haue taken awaye the keyes of knowledge, and haue shut vp the kyngdo­me of heauen before men. Seing then the keye whereby the waye and entery to the kingdom of God is opened vnto vs, is the worde of the Gospel and thexpounding of the lawe and Scriptures, we say plainely, where the same woorde is not, there is not the keye.

The Scribes and Pharises at Christes cōming into flesh had auctoritie to teach the people and to declare vnto them the lawe and Prophetes,Confu­tation. which spake plainly of the comming of Christ. But because the people were shutte out from the knowledge of Christ, wherin consisteth life euerlasting and heauenly blisse, by the obscuritie thereof as by a dore, and those Doctours according to the knouledge they had, would not by their interpretation declare the meaning of those scriptures, and as it were with a keye opening that dore lead them to Christ, (which they did not of negligene as you saye, but of couetise lest Christ being plainely knowen the sacrifices of the lawe shuld ceasse, whereby their gaines grewe, and sacrifices of rightuousnes come in place, whe­reby God should be better pleased, and they lesse enriched): therefor Christ rebuked them and charged them with taking awaie the keye of knowledge, for that they opened not the gate of truth with their keye,In mat. ca. 23. which after the minde of Chry­sostom is the knowledge of the scriptures, and so locked vp [Page] Messias the sonne of God, that is to saye the kingdome of God, from the people. By this we are induced to graunt, that the knowledge of the scripture is a keye,The knowled­ge of the scripture is a keye. whereby the gate to the truth is opened, the vse whereof consisteth in ex­pounding of the lawe and prophetes as they shewe Christ. But we saye, this not to be the speciall keyes which Christ gaue to the church, but one keye alone. And so Christ cal­leth it where he rebuked the Scribes and Pharises. Though you haue put it otherwise then the gospell hath in the plural number. And this keye is common to the lawe and to the gospel.Differen­ce betwen a keye, and the keyes. By the name of the keyes what is meant. The po­wer of the keyes. But the keyes which we speake of are an other thing. By the name of these keyes we vnderstand the whole spiritu­al power which Christ first promised to Peter and afterward gaue to the Apostles, and from them is transferred to all bis­hops and priestes. By which power priestes teach the gospell, consecrat the body and bloud of Christ, administer the sacra­mentes, through auctoritie of the word absolue penitentes, and excommunicate publike and hainous synners. The keye that you confusely speake of naming it to be the word of the gospell and expounding of the lawe and scriptures, is one part perteining to this spiritual power, it is not the whole po­wer. And where this word is not, that is to saye, where the scriptures be not taught and the gospell preached, there is not the keye saye ye, there is not the exercise of that keye saye we. Yet there is this spirituall power, that is to witte, there be the keyes. Yea we saye that a simple priest though he haue no great lerning, yet hath he the keyes, though he might do bet­ter and more worthely vse them, hauing lerning and know­ledge.

Apologie And seeing one maner of worde is geuen to al, and one only keye belongeth to al, we say there is but one only power of al ministers, as concerning opening and shutting.

As there is one gospell,Confuta­tion. so there is one right expounding of the same, which is not the keyes, though you call it the keye, but a ministerie belonging to the keyes. Neither herin consisteth the whole power of ministers as is before said, and therefore ye are much ouersene to terme it one onely keye.

And as touching the Byshop of Rome, Apologie for al his Parasites flaterin­glie singe in his eares those wordes, To the will I geue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen, (as though those keyes were fyt for hym alone and for no body els) except he go so to worke as mens consci­ences may be made pliaunte, and be subdued to the worde of God, we denye that he doth either open or shut, or hath the keyes at all.

Your ground being false,Confu­tation. what ye buyld thereon sone fai­leth. The whole power of the keyes pardy (how often times must we tell you one thing?) standeth not in preaching on­ly, but in sundry other excellent ministeries also, as we haue proued. If the bishop of Rome preach not, he doth neither open nor shut by preaching, we graunt. Yet mens consci­ences being made pliant and subdued by the word of God by others that preach at his appointmēt, he may by vertue of the keyes either open or shut, loose or binde, as by discretio he seeth cause. And whereas Christ said to Peter and there­fore to the bishop of Rome Peters successour,Mat. 16 to thee will I geue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen: will ye call them flat­tering parasites that yelde to him that which Christ gaue to him? Such vomite sheweth what humour your stomake is charged withall. Denying the B. of Rome, whom for all the spite ye beare toward him ye must acknowledge to be a bi­shop, to haue the keyes at all, onlesse he preach in his owne personne, ye declare your great ignorance, and fowle teme­ritie. Knowe ye not that a power annexed to an order and vocation is not taken away from one by not exercising the same in his owne person?

And although he taught and instructed the people (as woulde to Apologie [Page] God he might once truely do and perswade him selfe it were at the leaste somme peece of his duety) yet we thinke his keye to be neuer a whit better or of greater force then other mens. For who ha h seuered hym from the rest? who hath taught him more conningly to open, or better to absolue then his bretherne?

Confuta­tion.If the Bishop of Rome be negligent and preach not in his owne person or by others, he hath his iudge, to whom we leaue him and praie for him. But if he preach at any time, that office hath such measure of goodnes and force as Chr st geueth. Thereby one man maye do more good then an other. Where ye saye generally, who hath seuered him? we answere. Our sauiour Chirst, to whom all power is geuen in heauen and earth.Nat. 16. Who to him principally in Peter said, To thee will I geue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen: and what so euer thou byndest in earth, shall be bounde also in heauen: and what so euer thou loosest in earth, shall be loosed also in heauē. To whom only in Peter he said,Luc. 22. Ioan. 21. thou being conuerted strenghthen they bre­thren. To whom only he said, fede my shepe. Neither depen­deth his supreme power and auctoritie of cunning in ope­ning or betternes in absoluing, as your scoffing sprite vtte­reth, but of the special graunt and commission of Christ, to whom who dareth saye,Ecclesi. 8. why doest thou thus, or why doest thou so?

Apologie We say that matrimonie is holy and honorable in al sorts and sta­tes of persones, in the patriarches, in the Prophetes, in the apostles, in holy martyrs, in the ministers of the Churche, and in Byshop­pes, and that it is an honest and laufull thinge (as Chrystome saith) for a man liuing in matrimonie, to take vpon hym therewith the dignitie of a Byshop.

THE EIGHT CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion.Matrimonie is holy and honorable in all persons and an vnde­fyled bedde, [...]iebre. 13. as sayeth S. Paul. Yet is it not laufull for them to marye which either haue by deliberate vowe dedicated al­maner their chastitie vnto God,Of Matri­monie. or haue receiued holy order. For the vowed be forbidden mariage by expresse word of [Page 74] God. Those that haue taken holy orders, by tradition of the Apostles and auncient ordinaunce of the church.

Touching the first, the scripture is plaine,Psal. 75. because a vowe is to be performed, vouete & reddite domino deo vestro. Vowe ye and paye (or render that ye vowe) to your Lord God. Christ also sayeth in the gospell,Natt. 19. there be some eunuches that haue made them selues eunuches for the kingdome of heauens sake. Vowe-breakers in what danger they stād. 1. Tim. 5. He that can take, let him take. Againe S. Paul speaking of young widowes, which haue vowed and promised chastitie, sayeth, that when they waxe wanton against Christ, they will marye, hauing dam­nation, because they haue broken their first faith. Whether these scriptures perteine hereto and be thus to be vnderstanded, we referre vs to the primitiue church, and to all the holy fathers. Who soeuer haue thus vowed chastitie, or by receiuing holy orders haue bound them selues to the bond of continencie to the same by auncient constitution of the church annexed,Falling from vo­wed cha­stitie worse then ad­uoutrie. VVhat the fa­thers haue iudged of mariages after vo­we of chastitie. De bono viduitatis. lib. de vir­ginitate. if afterward presuming to marye excuse the satisfying of their carnall lust with the name of wedlocke, be they men, be they women: they liue in a damnable state, and be worse then ad­uoutrers. Such mariages or rather slydinges and falles from the ho­lier chastitie that is vowed to God, S. Augustine doubteth not but they be worse then aduowtries. S. Cyprian calleth this case plaine incest, S. Basile accompteth the mariages of vailed vir­gins to be void, of no force, and sacrilegious.

She that hath despoused her selfe to our lord (sayeth S. Basile) is not free. For her husband is not dead, that she may mary to whom she list. And whiles her immortall husband lyueth, she shall be cal­led an aduoutresse, which for lustes of the flesh hath brought a mor­tall man into our lordes chamber. The case is like in the man.

And whereas such persons with deliberate vowe purposed to consecrate them selues to our lord only, maides by virgini­tie, widowes by chastitie of widowhod, priestes by single life [Page] and continencie they may not with good conscience marye because the lust of the flesh foloweth not that former purpo­se, but draweth the soule to her vices from that whereto it is bounde. For what so euer is the worke (sayeth S. Basile) before which reason and lawe goeth not in the minde, the same is of the con­science noted for vnlaufull. Of all such after many wordes vtte­red in reproufe of their lewdnes, he concludeth, that they fo­low not wedlocke, but aduoutrie. But for proufe that vo­wed persons may not marye, it were not hard to alleage so much out of the fathers, as would fill a volume.

Clerke [...] bounde to conti­nencie.Touching the second, the Apostles forbidde those that come single to the clergie, to marye, except such as remaine in the inferiour orders, and procede not to the greater, as we finde in their canons.Li. 1. c. 11. Paphu­tius. Li. 1. ca. 23 Can. 25. Paphnutius as Socrates and Sozomenus record in their ecclesiasticall storie, said at the Nicene councell, that it was an olde tradition of the church, that such as come to the degree or order of priesthod single, should not marye wiues. And this is that holy bishop Paphnutius, whom these euangelicall vowebreakers pretend to be their proctour for their vnlaufull mariages.

Siritius and Innotentius were not the first ordei­ners of clerkes conti­nencie.Neither Pope Siritius and Innocentius the first, who liued long aboue a thousand yeres past, were the first makers of the lawe that forbiddeth priestes to marie, but declaring that the same was of olde time ordeined and vsed of the church, they condemne the disorders against the same committed. Reade who list the epistle of Siritius ad Hime­rium Tarraconensem. cap. 7. the second epistle of Innocen­tius to Victricius bishop of Roen. cap. 9, and his third epistle to Exuperius B. of Tolouse. cap. 1. and weighing well these places he shall perceiue, that these holy Popes forbad the ministers of the church the vse of wedlocke by the same reason, by which the priestes of Moses lawe were forbidden [Page 75] to come within their owne houses in the time when their course came to serue in the holy ministeries. By the same rea­son also by which S. Paul requireth maryed folke for a time to forbeare the vse of their wiues,1. Cor. 7. that they might attend praying.

The place of Chrysostome alleaged by this Defender wel considered,Answere to Chri­sostome place. disproueth no part of the catholike doctrine in this behalfe, but condemneth both the doctrine and com­mon practise of his companions these newe fleshly gospel­lers. His wordes be these vpō the saying of S. Paul, that a Bi­shop ought to be without crime, the husband of one wife. In. 1. cap. ad. Ti. ho­mil. 2. The Apo­stle (sayeth he) stoppeth the mouthes of heretikes which condemne mariage, shewing that it is not an vncleane thing, but so reuerent, that with the same a man maye ascend to the holy throne or seate (he meaneth the state of a bishop), and herewith he chastiseth and restraineth the vnchast persons, Twise maried may not be bi­shops, and why. not permitting them who haue twise maryed, to atteine such a rome. For whereas he kepeth no beneuolence toward his wife deceased, how can he be a good gouer­nour? yea what greuous accusations shall not he be subiect vnto dai­ly? For ye all knowe right well, Second mariages laufull, yet open to accusa­tions. that albeit by the lawes the second mariages be permitted, yet that matter lieth open to many accusa­tions. And therefore he would a bishop to geue no occasion (of euill) to those that be vnder him. Thus Chrysostome. Where with S. Paul first he putteth to silence the Cerdonistes, Marcioni­stes, Seuerians, Tatians, Maniches, and all other heretikes that condemned mariage, and said it was an impure thing. Secondly he alloweth matrimonie so farre, that he acknow­ledgeth a maried mā may ascend to a bishops seate.Bigamie laufull rather then cōmenda­ble. Thirdly he putteth bigamie, that is to witte, marying an other after the first or a widowe, to be laufull rather then commenda­ble. Now as we do not condemne mariage, neither denie but that maried men in the primitiue church and before the [Page] gospell was so generally receiued, as it was at length, were and might be called to the dignitie of bishoprike, when scar­cetie and lacke of single men worthy of that rome was foun­de: so we see the impure bigamie of our holy gospellers con­demned both by Chrysostome and S. Paul,The Bigamie of the gospellers condem­ned by Chrysostō and Paul. Strōpets. of whom many being priestes and (as they saye) bishops, at lest presuming to occupie that holy seate, for custodie of their chastitie after their former olde yokefellowes decease solace them selues with newe strompetes. By a better name I would call them, if I wist I should not offend. For what woman so euer cou­pleth her selfe in such damnable yoking, how can she appere either to be honest, or to haue care of her soule helth? As for the simple that be deceiued by the importunitie and craft of those lurdens, as they are not to be borne withall, so yet I thincke them to be pitied.

But if this Defender presse vs with Chrysostome, we ans­wer rhat though Chrysostome graunte, that a maryed man maye ascend to the holy seate, yet he sayeth not that a man may descend from that holy seate to the Bride bedde. For we denie vtterly, that any man after that he hath receiued holy orders,After holy orders re­ceiued maryage ne­uer cōp­ted lauful amonge catholi­kes. Priestes maryed in England in the ti­me of Anselmus. may marye. Neither can it be shewed that the mariage of such was euer accōpted lauful in the catholike church. In dede we knowe that in Germanie and in England and certai­ne other prouinces at dissolute times, when the discipline of the church was shaken of, priestes haue ben maried, as we rea­de of the time in which Anselmus was bishop of Cantorbury. But that disorder was alwayes by due correction of bishops punished and redressed. So that what soeuer Bale, Poinet, or any other of that filthy railing rable bring out of Huldrike of Auspurg, Huntingdonensis, Capgraue, Chronica Chronica­rum, or such other obscure and barbarous stories for witnes of priestes manages, seing the same were by good rulers of [Page 76] the church at al times controlled and resisted, as vnlaufull and wicked, it is of no force nor auctoritie. How, why, and when maried men were admitted to be priestes, and where the pro­fessiō of chastitie and absteining from companie of their wi­ues was required of them, and many other poinctes touching the vnlaufull manages of priestes, who so euer is desirous to be amply instructed: the same I referre to a large treatise writ­ten hereof by a lerned man in our owne tonge. I thinke not good here to recite the thinges, that be so wel treated already.

And as Sozomenus saith of Spiridion: Apologie and as Nazianzene saith of his owne father, that a good and diligent Bishop doth serue in the ministerie neuer the worse for that he is maried, but rather the bet­ter, and with more ablenes to do good.

Were it not that the weight of these matters required an vpright and plaine dealing,Confu­tation. for ciuilities sake I could be con­tente sometimes to spare you, and where ye make manifest lyes, to vse a softer word, and terme them fittens.Lying much v­sed of this defender. But now if I tell you that you vse your accustomed figure pseudologia which is lying in plaine english: I trust you will beare with my plainenes, amend your owne fault, and consider the po­wer of truth, that causeth me to be so bold with you. This I am sure of, that neither Sozomenus, nor Gregorie Nazianzene nor Eusebius lib. 10. cap. 5.Sozome­nus, Gre­gorie Nazianzene, Eusebiu [...] belyed by the auc­thour of the Apo­logie. as you haue caused your bookes both latine and english to be noted in the margent, where ye mistake Eusebius for Rufinus: Nor Nazianzene either in Monodia, as you note also in the margent, nor in the funerall oration that he made of his father, hath any such saying as ye report of them. For how could they say, that a bishop serueth in his ministerie neuer the worse, but rather the better, and with more ablenes to do good for that he is maried, the scrip­ture being so plaine to the contrary? What, wene ye they were either so ignorant, or so forgetfull, or so much inclined to promote your carnall doctrine of priestes mariages, as to [Page] saye so,A bishop is not a­ble to do his mini­sterie the bett [...]r for that he is maried to a wife. not withstanding that S. Paul writeth to the Corin­thians? Saith he not of them that be maried, that such shall haue tribulation of the flesh? Sayeth he not, he that is without a wife, careth for the thinges of our Lord, how he may please God? Of him that hath a wyfe sayeth he not, that he careth for the thin­ges that be the worldes, how he may please his wife, and is diuided? finally sayeth he not, I tell you this thing for your profite, not to tangle you in a snare, but for that which is honest, and comely vn­to you, and that which may geue you readines to praye to God with out lette? Wherefor recant for shame that fowle errour, that a bishop serueth the better in his ministerie, and is the more able to do good, for that he is maried. Verily here ye seme to be of the flesh rather then of the spirite. Neither are ye to be called any lenger, if ye mainteine this doctrine, spirituall men, as in tymes past they haue ben, whose romes ye occu­pie, but rather fleshly men. Such men, such doctrine, fleshly men,Fleshly men Fleshly doctrine. fleshly doctrine. Neither see I, what ye can saye for de­fence of this doctrine, onlesse ye bristle your selues against S. Paul, and maugre his auctoritie affirme impudently, that it is no lette for a bishop from the seruice of God, to haue the tri­bulation of the flesh, that he may serue in his vocation better, taking care for the thinges that be the worldes, and seeking how to please his wife, then if he studie for the thinges that be our lordes, and seeke how to please God: that a man may do more good, being by occasion of his wife diuided and dis­stract, then being whole and in him selfe vnited: finally that a bishop shall serue the church better being entangled and clogged with worldly affaires, then hauing power and opor­tunitie to praye to God without lette.

Now therefor see you not how great is your impudencie in that you lye your selfe, and father such a fowle lye vpon Sozomenus, and that light of the world in his time Gregorie [Page 77] Nazianzene?The pla­ce o [...] So­zomen [...] exami­ned. But for euen dealing let vs heare what Sozome­nus sayeth concerning Spiridion. For Rufine in the tenth booke added to Eusebius touching this matter, reporteth no­thing but that he had a daughter named Irene, Cap. 5. who died be­fore her father a virgin. The wordes of Sozomenus be these.lib. 1. Cap. 11. [...]. that is to saye. Spiridion was a husbandman, hauing wife and chil­dren, and yet for all that he was neuer the worse about Gods seruice. Of this place we graunt ye may saye with Sozomenus, that Spiridion serued God neuer the worse for that he was ma­ried. But how and whereof gather ye that he serued God the better, and was more able to do good because of his mari­age? Now SpiridionSpiridion was a man of passing holines, and in po­wer and vertue surmounted all other men of his time, as one that wrought greate miracles, and was taken for a pro­phete. For Rufine, where he compareth Paphnutius with the Apostles, semeth to preferre Spiridion before him.Ecclesiast. Histo. lib. 10. cap. 4. & 5. If this one sainct of so great excellencie being made bishop of a maried man serued God neuer the worse for that he was maried: will ye therefore make a generall doctrine, that bishops and pries­tes shall marye, and that thereby they shall be no whit hinde­red from Gods seruice? Spiridion obteined that priuiledge through especiall grace by his exceding vertue, which is gra­unted to fewe. And the priuileges of a fewe make not a lawe for all in generall ye knowe, as Nazianzene sayeth.

Furthermore if the wordes of Sozomenus that ye buyld your carnall doctrine vpon be well examined, ye shall finde,The pla­ce of So­zomenus alleaged by the defender maketh vtterly a­gainst them. that he maketh more against you then with you. For signi­fying that he had wife and children, he addeth, [...]. Yet for al that he was neuer the worse about Gods serui­ce. This reuocatiō or exception negatiue (yet for all that &c.) implieth a confession affirmitiue of the contrarie. As though [Page] by reason the sentence should beare this meaning. He had wife and children, and therefore was lesse apt and able to ser­ue God in bishoply ministerie. If there were no repugnance betwen the state of a bishop, and mariage, but the hauing of a wife were a better abling of a man to serue in that vocatiō, as ye saye: then Sozomenus neither would nor should haue vsed that maner of speach, [...], (as much to saye yet for all that) but rather thus he should haue spoken, [...], that this sence might rise of his wor­des, Spiridion was a husbandman, hauing wife and children, and therefore he was the better desposed and readier to serue God.

Nazian­zenes wordes retourned vpon the defen­der.Neither maketh the place of Gregorie Nazianzene any whit for you more, then this of Sozomenus doth: whose wordes be these after the translation of Raphael Voloterranus varying much from the greke. Hic Basilij pater Basilius item appellatus, etsi matrimonio se vinxit, ita tamen in eo vixit, vt nihil propterea ad perfectam virtutem ac philosophiam consequen­dam impediretur. Basiles father who was named also Basile, all­though he put him selfe in bondes of matrimonie, yet he lyued so he­rein, as he was letted no whit from the atteining of perfitte vertue and holy knowledge. Were not mariage a lette and hinderance to perfection requisite in a bishop, this lerned man could not rightly haue said, ita tamen in eo vixit, &c. yet for all that he lyued so, &c. because the hauing of a wife is a hinderance to perfection, therefore of good reason in the praise of that holy bishop, who was maried long before he tooke that degree, yet that not withstanding (sayeth this writer) he was not therefore letted from perfection. By which maner of speach he acknow­ledgeth mariage in others to be a lette to perfection. Who vnderstandeth not for what cause of these to speaches the one is reasonable, the other absurd: he is power, yet for all that [Page 78] liberall, and, he is power, yet for al that sparing? The like con­sideration duly conceiued, retourneth the auctoritie by this Defender alleaged against him selfe. For the like absurditie is in this saying, Basiles father was maried, yet for al that he was not thereby letted from perfection: if for hauing a wife a man be the better able and redier to serue in the holy ministerie of a bishop.

Right so it is easy to put him from the holde he taketh of Chrysostome, by Chrysostome him selfe. For least any man should thinke,Tit. 1. whereas S. Paul sayeth a bishop ought to be the husband of one wife, that the same order contineweth still in the church, thereto he sayeth in his second homilie de patiētia Iob: non ea ratione quod id nunc in ecclesia obseruetur. Oportet enim omni prorsus castitate sacerdotem ornatū esse. S. Paul (sayeth he) required this not in consideration that the same be nowe obserued in the church. For it behoueth a bishop to be garnished with all maner a chastitie.

Further we saye, Apologie that the same lawe which by constraint taketh awaye this libertie from men, and compelleth them against their willes to liue single, is the doctrine of Dyuelles, as Paule saith: and that euer since the tyme of this lawe, a wonderful vncleanes of lyfe and maners in goddes ministers, and sundrie horrible enormities haue folowed, as the Bysshop of Augusta, as Faber, as Abbas Panor­mitanus, as Latomus, as the Tripartite worke whiche is annexed to the seconde Tome of the Councelles, and other champions of the Popes band, yea and as the matter it selfe and all histories do con­fesse.

There is no lawe in the church that by constraint taketh awaye from men libertie to marie.Confuta­tion. 1. Cor. 7. For S. Paules wordes be plaine. If thou take a wife, thou synnest not. And likewise, If a virgin marie, she synneth not. But if any persons haue of their owne will and deuotion vowed to God chastitie,Volunta­rie vowe imbar­reth li­b [...]rtie of the con­trary. 1. Tim. 5 the same haue imbarred them selues of this generall libertie, and by their voluntarie promise haue bounde them selues neuer to [Page] marie. And in such not only mariage it selfe, but also a will to marie is damnable, as S. Paul sayeth of widowes which haue vowed to liue chaste, that they haue their damnation (not for that they marie, but) for that they will marie. If the Gospellers alleage against this doctrine the wordes of S. Paul, if a virgin marie, she synneth not: we answer with Chrysostome and other fathers, that a virgin by a vowe of chastitie dedicated to God, if she marie, doubtlesse she synneth much, for that beside Christ she hath surmaried an aduouterer.1. Cor. 7. Ad virgi­nē lapsam. Cap. 5. If they obiect, it is better to marie then to burne: Let S. Ambrose answere. Who sa­yeth, that this saying perteineth to her that hath not promi­sed, to her that is not yet vailed, (that is to saye not yet ente­red into religion) but as for her (sayeth he) which hath promised her selfe to Christ, and hath taken the holy vaile, she is already wed­ded, she is coupled to an immortall husband. And being in this case if she will wedde after the common lawe of wedloke, she committeth aduoutrie, she is made the handmaide of death. For this wedlocke is farre more excellent, then the corruptible wedlocke, sayeth Nazianzene.Oratione. 30. Therefore who soeuer after vowe of chastitie deliberatly made presume to marie, the same the church pu­nisheth by iust censures, by excommunication, open penaun­ce, and remouing them from their ecclesiasticall ministeries, not for their mariage, but for breach of their vowe.

As the church suffereth not a man to marie an other wo­man, whiles his laufull wife liueth, so it suffereth not those to marie, who promising to abstaine, and refusing to be coupled with any other, haue chosen Christ only for their spouse. And by restraining them from mariage, the church vseth no ty­rannie, nor if it teach that such ought to forbeare mariage, is that to be accompted the doctrine of deuils, but of the holy ghost,The do­ctrine of deuils what it is in this case. whereby men are kept from wilfull damnation. To forbidde mariage wholly, vniuersally, and altogether, that is [Page 79] the doctrine of deuils. But to iudge mariage for some state and order of lesse conuenience, then the single life, or after vowe of chastitie made to require perpetuall continencie, this is not the doctrine of deuils. For S. Paul him selfe did both. If these Defenders will not admitte this answer, and being loth to forsake their fleshly pleasure pretende to be moued with the auctoritie of S. Paul,1. Tim. 5. who calleth the forbidding of ma­riage the doctrine of deuils: I send them to S. Augustine for an answer in his thirtith booke and sixth chapter against Faustus the Maniche.VVho forbid­deth ma­riage. Where for a sufficient solution of their obiection, they shall finde these plaine wordes. Ille prohibet, qui hoc malum esse dicit, non qui huic bono aliud melius anteponit. That is to saye. He forbiddeth (mariage) which sayeth it is euill. not he which preferreth an other better thing before this good thing. Mariage and virginitie or single life, both be good. (we confesse). but abstaining frō all experience of carnal know­ledge is better and nearer to perfection, then the chamber-worke it selfe that is done laufully for begetting of chil­dren.

The church considering this according to the Apostles doctrine,Clerkes prohibi­ted to marye by the church for better oportuni­tie to serue God. Single li­fe of cler­kes. forasmuch as wedlockeworke is a hinderance to high and diuine seruices, hath thought good to restraine such as dedicate them selues to the holy ministeries, from the same, prohibiting them to marie, and requiring them to leade the single life. By single life I meane that, which obserueth the vowe of chastitie, not only the vnmaried state, in which many kepe them selues not very chaste, as of such a one it is said by waye of a common prouerbe in French, that he is nei­ther priest, nor husband, nor a dead man. And therefore none be admitted to the three holy orders, but such as pro­mise chastitie. Now that I may shewe in what time, and by what persons this lawe of single life was ordeined, for breui­ties [Page] sake I will content my selfe with witnes of one only councell. Which is the second councell of Carthage holden in the time of Valentinian and Theodosius the Emperours. Where we finde that this order was taken by the Apostles them selues, and that the antiquitie obserued and kept the same. The wordes of the Councell be these, canone. 2.

Single li­fe of cer­taine de­grees of ministres tauhgt by the Apostles and kept by than­tiquitie. Aurelius episcopus dixit, &c. Aurelius the bishop said. Whereas in the councell before this it was treated of the rule of con­tinencie and chastitie, these three degrees through their con­secrations be annexed to chastitie by a certaine decree writ­ten, to witte bishops, priestes, and deacons. Whom it is thought good, as it becommeth the holy prelates and priestes of God, and likewise Leuites, or such as attend vppon holy sacramentes, to be continent and chast in euery condicion, to thintent they may simply obteine that they pray to god for, that we kepe and obserue that which the Apostles haue taught, and the antiquitie hath kept. Lo syr Defender here you and all your companions that haue vowed chastitie, and yet can not lyue without their louing yokefelowes, haue right good and auncient wytnes, that the single lyfe of mi­nisters of the holy sacramentes was taught by the Apostles, and kept in vre by the antiquitie. Then how farre go ye from truth, right, and reason, in that ye call it the doctrine of de­uils?

And whereas you saye, that of this single lyfe, great vncle­anes and enormities haue folowed: so we saye that in Paules church at London commonly, and specially since the time it was first buylded, many idle and wicked tales haue ben tol­de, many othes and blasphemies haue ben vttered, many vniust bargaines haue ben made, many naughty frayes haue ben begonne, and sundry other enormities committed: yet is that church Gods house, appointed to be a place of praier, and [Page 80] to serue for holy vses. As we like not your railing against the lawe of chastitie and gods ministers, so we do not defend euil and sinfull lyfe. What if the bishop of Augusta fynd fault whith priestes lyues? (which Augusta, and which bishop there ye meane I knowe not, neither wel can I knowe except I sawe your notebooke) what if the Abbot Panormitane, what if one Faber, and one Latomus,Though priestes euill life be com­playned of by so­me, yet priestes mariage by them is not al­lowed. mē of our time (I trow) and that zelous mā which wrote the litle tripartite treatise an­nexed to the Laterane councell, what so euer he was: what if all these (I saye) moued with a zeale and being desyrous of the clergies reformation, lamentably complaine of their loose lyfe? what then? Many good men complaine of disor­der and abuses of thinges, yet will not they either the thinges to be taken awaye, or good ordinances to be chaunged. But this is your wisedom against God and his church. Ye had ra­ther finde fault with the church, then amend the church. Ye seeke the vtter ruine of it, ye loue not the good order of it. If ye had better authours to alleage against the single lyfe of the clergy then these be, we shuld haue ben tolde of them or this, and al the pulpites of England should haue ronge of thē. Now these be of small estimation. Neither can you fynde any plaine matter in them against that you go about to impugne. Gete you fayrer painted and better filled boxes then these be, or els shall ye all be taken for poore potticaries.

For it was rightly sayd by Pius the second a Bysshop of Rome, Apologie that he sawe many causes why wiues should be taken awaye from priestes, but that he sawe many moe, and more weightye causes whye they ought to be restored them againe.

Yea mary it standeth you vpon to allowe such swete say­ings wherein ye imagine a good word to be spoken for your wyues.Confu­tation. A man would thinke that readeth but your wordes and doth not examine them by the place alleaged, that by the mynde of Pope Pius, priestes haue ben put from their wyues, [Page] and that they might be admitted to haue wyues. The truth is. Such as were made priestes being maried men in the primi­tiue church, by no lawes could they euer be forced to leaue their wyues, and once being made priestes, it was neuer he­ard of that laufully afterward they maried. Then how could Pius saye as ye report of him?The say­ing of Pope Pius falsefied by the Defender, weighed. Verely neither Pius the second euer said so, nor Platina his wordes geue that sense. Platina in the ende of this good Popes lyfe, hauing declared his wor­thy actes, at lenght setteth forth also his notable sayinges. Which he was wonte to vtter in his dialy talke, in prouerbij modum, that is to saye, after the maner of a common sayd sawe, for with that preface he commendeth them. Wherein he folowed Plutarke, Diogenes Laertius, and other writers of lyues. In Platina ye shall fynde these wordes, for one of that Popes say­inges. Sacerdotibus magna raetione sublatas nuptias, maiori resti­tuendas videri. As much to say in english: that mariage was ta­ken from priestes with great reason, and that it semed it were to be restored againe with greater. This saying reporteth not that wyues were taken awaye from priestes as you report, neither that wyues ought to be restored to priestes agayne. It spea­keth only of mariage, which as before a man enter into holy orders no vowe being made is laufull: so by orders taken a vowe of chastitie being solemly made, is vtterly vnlaufull. If this saying had made so much for your pretensed mariage as ye would men to beleue, ye would neuer haue falsefyed it by such chaunge of wordes. Whether it be more expedient, such as come to the clergy to be required to leade the single lyfe, and to binde them selues therto by vowes, or to enioye the common lybertie of mariage, that we leaue to the church to discusse and order. By priuate auctoritie any man to breake the common ordinaunce of olde tyme constituted by the church, and yet standing in force, and rashly to breake his [Page 81] vowe it is damnable.

If Pius sawe many weightier causes for priestes to haue wyues, then for their single lyfe, as ye pretend he did: why did not he, or you in his stede shewe vs what and how substanci­all they be? If they be no better then you and your felowes haue vttered in your sermons and writinges hitherto, they are not worth a pipt nootte. This saying of Pius is well to be weighed and scanned. That priestes generally lyued a cleane lyfe, it is much to be wisshed. Whether that cleanes which is requisite to such high ministerie maye be procured by ha­uing wyues, it is doubted, verely the auncient fathers of the church thought the contrarie. Againe it is much to be con­sydered, whether it be expedient for the lightnes sake of cer­taine, to abrogate so holy an ordinance, and to chaunge so good a custome, or rather by seuere discipline to bring the lewd and disordered to good rule. What so euer shall or may be done the one waye or the other by auctoritie of holy chur­che, this are we assured of, that what so euer shall become of your lay ministers, such as heretofore haue vowed chastitie, and so haue receiued holy orders: must nedes put awaye their vnlaufull yokefelowes, continewe single, and performe their promise to God, if they looke to escape euerlasting damna­tion, which S. Paul in this case thretneth.1. Tim. 5. Neither is this insti­tution of single lyfe in the church deuillish, as you report, forasmuch as it is not to the preiudice of matrimonie, but to the profite of the gospell.

We receyue and embrace all the Canonicall Scriptures, Apologie both of the oulde and new Testament, geuing thankes to our God, who hath raised vp vnto vs that light whiche we might euer haue before our eyes, leaste eyther by the sutteltie of man, or by the snares of the Dyuel we shoulde be caried awaye to errours and lyes. Also that these be the heauenly voices, wherby God hath opened vnto vs his will, and that onely in them mans harte can haue settled reste: that in them be abundantly and fully comprehended al thinges what so­euer [Page] be nedefull for our saluation, as Origene, Augustine, Chryso­stom and Cyrillus haue taught: That they be the very might and strength of God to attaine to saluation: That they be the foundati­ons of the Prophetes and Apostles, whereupon is buylte the Chur­che of God: That they be the very sure and infallible rule, wherby may be tryed whether the Church doth stagger or erre, and wher­unto all ecclesiasticall Doctrine ought to be called to accompte: and that against these scriptures neyther lawe nor ordinaunce, nor any custom ought to be hard, no though Paule his owne selfe or an Aun­gell from heauen shoulde come and teache the contrarie.

THE NINTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion.But why do ye not here plainely declare which be the bo­kes of the scriptures that ye allowe, and which be they that ye reiect? In generall ye saye that ye embrace all the Canonicall scriptures,2. Maca. 12. yet if a man presse you with the place of the Ma­chabees for praier to be made for the dead, and with the wor­des of S. Iames epistle against your iustification of faith one­ly,Iacob. 2. and likewise with certaine other places of the scriptures, which be accompted in the Canon of the churche against certaine other your false doctrines: in this case your wonte is to denye those scriptures to be canonicall. Yet here ye beare the world in hand ye allowe al. Would God ther were in you either more truth, or lesse crafte. Wel, ye geue thankes to God for the scriptures, for that hauing them before your eyes ye are stayed in truth, assured that by suttelty of man or snares of the deuill, ye be not caried awaie into errours and lies. And is it so in dede? I praie you syrs of what secte be ye? or of which secte is ech one of you? For I dare boldely saye, and so the world seeth, that ye agree not all in one. If ye saye ye be Lutherans, then must I further demaunde of you, of which sorte of Lutherans. For that puddle runneth out by many synckes. Be ye Zuinglians, Arians, Osiandrines, Libertines, Adiaphoristes, Anabaptistes, Caluinistes, or Sathanistes? All these and other sectes of heretikes that either be now, or [Page 82] haue ben in tymes past, saye as ye saye, that by the scriptures and Gods holy word they haue ben kept from errours and lies, and that by them they proue their doctrines.All sectes of hereti­kes chalenge the scriptures for the war­rant of their opi­nions. But maye we beleue them? If they or any of those sectes whose do­ctrine fighteth against your doctrine (as all heresies fight one against an other and ioyne together against the church) saye truth, then is your saying false. For contradictories (your lo­gike telleth you pardy) can not together be true, If all they be deceiued, (for so must you answer in your defence) what proufe bring ye, that ye be not also deceiued? What pri­uiledge haue ye before your felowes? A matche being made betwen you (I meane that newe clergy of England) and the other sectes of our time, ye and they being set toge­ther as cockes in a cockefight, if in disputation with them ye would chalenge to your selues the light of the scriptures from all the rest, of which euery one craketh no lesse then your selues: Lorde howe should ye poore soules be handled? Were ye not like trowe ye to be driuen owt of the place whith cryes, spittes and scratches?Disagre­ing of heretikes among them sel­ues, is an argumēt they be not dire­cted by the light of the scriptures If ye haue this light of the scriptu­res before your eyes, how is it that ye agree not within your selues? Yea how is it that ech one of you oftentimes disa­greeth with him selfe? how is it that so many times ye haue chaunged your communion booke, the order of your seruice, your doctrine of the blessed sacrament, your homilies, &c? Who knoweth not how in the matter of the Sacrament your chiefe capitaines haue shewed them selues inconstant and mutable, and contrary to them selues, I meane Cranmare, Ridley, Latimer, and that great Rabbin Peter Martyr him selfe? As for the rest, they be not worthy to be named. But whether runneth my penne? I thinke it better to staye my selfe by time in this point, wherein any man may soner finde matter of talke, then end of talke.

But what, saye ye? be these the heauenly voices wherby God hath opened vnto vs his will? Then how dare ye to transgresse his will declared in these voices, where ye reade expressly, that he which heareth not the church, is to be taken for no better,Matt. 18. then a hethen and a publican? In what regard can good men haue you, which so vily and so contemptuou­sly demeane your selues toward the church Christes spouse, which he hath so willed to be heard and regarded? How heare ye God in these heauenly voices, which heare not the church, that these voices commaund you to heare?Luc. 10. What so euer ye saye, ye embrace the scriptures so farre as they serue your fan­sies and lustes. Many other the like obiections might here be made vnto you. But this one for all. As ye procede, ye saye, that only in the scriptures mās harte can haue setled reste, and that in them be abundātly and fully cōprehended all thinges what so euer be nedefull for our saluation, as Origen, Augu­stine, Chrysostome, and Cyrillus haue taught. Either you knowe not what you saye sir Defender, nor the thinges of which you make affirmation,1. Tim. 6. as S. Paul said of such as ye are, writing to Timothe, or you are fowly ouersene. If the harte of man haue setled rest in the scriptures only,Mās hart hath not setled rest in scri­ptures only. as you saye, then in nothing els but in the scriptures. By this you seme to trou­ble and disquiet many hartes. For if this be true, thē had good Abel no better rest in his harte, then wicked restles Cain. Then had the hart of Adam notwithstanding the swete and comfortable promise of God concerning the sede of the wooman that shuld bruse the serpentes head, no better rest, then had his miserable body by Gods sentence condem­ned to toyle and labour against brakes,Gen. 3. brambles, and bri­ers of the earth for his synne. Then had holy father Noe, who had his name of rest and quiet, as the skilfull in the Hebrew tonge do finde, nor his two godly sonnes, nor Abrahā, Isaac, [Page 83] and Iacob, the dere frendes of God, nor any of all Gods people any setled rest in their hartes: vntill the time that one had put his hand to the booke, to write parte of that we ac­knowledge to be holy scripture, were he Iob as some thincke, were he Moises, for before that time was no scripture writ­ten. And after that the scriptures were by prouidence of God set forth in writing both in the time of the lawe and of the gospell, all good and godly men could not haue their hartes setled in rest by your doctrine, to whose eyes and eares scrip­ture came not. When the holy booke of scripture was lost, which God restored by Esdras, were there none in all that time whose hartes had setled rest? What folish and absurd do­ctrine is this? What if it had pleased God there had neuer ben letter writen of the olde or newe testament? Shuld not Gods frendes haue founde his peace that passeth all sense,Philip. 4. as S. Paul sayeth? Had Paul, Antony, Hilarion, Pambus, and many other holy men lyuing in wildernes without letters no rest no quiet at their hartes? Nay who had the like?

And whereas you saye that all thinges nedefull for our saluation be abundantly and fully comprehended in the scri­ptures, this is also as false,That all thinges necessary to salua­tion be not con­teined in the scrip­tures. as sundry other partes of your doc­trine. For if all thinges necessary to saluation be conteined in the scriptures, then what so euer is not in them conteined, the same is not necessary, if not necessary, why should we be laden whith vnnecessary burdens? Then awaye with all tra­ditions at a clappe, be they neuer so apostolike, neuer so aunciēt, neuer so helthfull, neuer so longetime in the church continewed.Traditi­ons neces­sary Remember you not what the most renomed fa­thers haue written of the necessitie of traditions? Or if you remember them, what thought you when you wrote thus? Let lerned and holy Basill be heard in stede of many, if not to reuoke you from your errour, yet to discredite you, and stay [Page] others in the truth.Lib. de spi­ritu sacto cap. 27. His wordes be these. Of the doctrines which be preached in the church, certaine we haue out of the scripture written, certaine we haue receiued in secret mistery by tradition of the apostles, which both be of equall force to godlines. Neither con­cerning these any mā gaine sayeth, be he of neuer so small knowledge. For if we go about to reiect the customes that be not set forth in wri­ting, as being of litle regard: then shall we condemne those thinges also which we haue in the gospell necessary to saluation. Yea rather we shall bring the preaching of the faith but to a bare name. Lib. 3. Cap. 4. & li. 4. c. 43. Thus farre S. Basill. To whom a man maye well ioine. Irenaeus andLib. de corona mi­litis. Tertullian, who plainely do affirme that the ordinaunces of the churh not receiued in writing, be of no lesse force, then if they had ben written by the Apostles. Many other auncient fathers might for proufe hereof be recited, but we will not in a thing not doubtefull vse many witnesses. S. Paul him selfe for proufe of traditions is sufficient. Who writing to the Thessalonians,2. Thess. 2. sayeth: Kepe ye the traditions which ye haue re­ceiued either by epistle or by worde. Of this and many other pla­ces that might be alleaged, it is cleare, that such as haue con­demned traditions,Denyers of traditi­ons hol­den for heretikes. Faste of Lent. the church hath iustly and for good cause adiudged for heretikes. For so they were taken for heretikes, which regarded not the solemne faste of Lent receiued at the Apostles, as we reade in S. Augustine de haer. ad Quoduultdeū, cap. 53. and in the councell of Gangra in an epistle to the bis­shops of Armenia. Euen so they which denyed the distin­ction of a bishop and a priest, were cōdemned of heresy as we finde in S. Augustine in the booke and chapter aforesaid, and in Epiphanius lib. 3. Cap. 75. In the Councell of Constance the same is to be founde.

Againe if all thinges necessary to saluation be expressed in the scriptures,1. Cor. 11. to what purpose said S. Paul concerning order and maner to be vsed at the celebration of the holy sacra­ment: [Page 84] Caetera cum venero disponam, as for other thinges I wil take order for them, when I come? what meaneth S. Iohn to saye,Epist. [...]. ha­uing other thinges to write to you of, I would not (write them) in paper and ynke: for I trust to be with you and speake to you mouth to mouth. To conclude much that might be obiected in fewe wordes for breuities sake, what saye you sir Defender, shal we finde all thinges necessary to saluation in the scripture?By scrip­ture it sel­fe we knowe not the partes of the scripture to be scri­pture, but by traditi­on of the church. How thinke you of the scripture it selfe, how knowe you this to be the scripture, how knowe ye the gospell of Mathew, Marke, Luke, and Iohn, to be theirs, whose names they beare? This can you not finde in all the scripture, and yet is the same ne­cessary to be beleued. What scripture haue you to admit­te these, and to refuse the booke bearing name of Peter, the gospell of Thomas, of Barthelemew, of Nicodem? Why admitte you not the prophetes that Basilides would to be allowed, but only the foure great, and the twelue lesser? What auctoritie haue you to staye your selfe by concerning these: but only that of the church? for scripture haue you no­ne for proufe hereof. Then hath not scripture all thinges in it necessary for a christen man. Is it not necessary to beleue the sonne of God to be Homousion, that is to saye,Homou­sion. of the same substaunce with the Father? which if you denye, you restore the olde condemned heresy of the Arians.Great and neces­sary poin­tes to be beleued not ex­pressed in scripture. the same can you not finde in the scripture. Where in all the Bible finde you that god the Father is ingenitus? where finde you that the holy ghost procedeth from the Father and the sonne? that the blessed virgin Marye continewed in her virginitie? that such as be baptized of heretikes ought not to be bapti­zed againe, that infants ought to be baptized? that the foure bookes of the gospels were writen by Mathew, Marke, Luke, and Iohn, by what scripture can you proue it? To ende, where finde you expressely in all the scriptures [Page] three persons to be one god? No in them you finde not so much as the name of person, nor the name of Trinitie. What will you therfore stande in opinion that the belefe of those points is not necessary? I wene ye be not yet altogether come so farre. Then if this doctrine be necessary, and the same not conteined in the scriptures, you must nedes recant, and graunt that you denied: that many thinges of belefe neces­sary to our saluation be not expressed in the scriptures, but be receiued and holden by tradition of the church no lesse necessary, then the thinges written. To the empty names of Origen, Chrisostom, Augustin, and Cyrillus, I thinke it not nedefull to answer. When you shewe vs their woordes, an answer will soone be framed. That for this your doctrine ye haue no substantiall place or saying out of them to bring, it is well knowen.

Apologie Moreouer we allow the sacramentes of the church, that is to saie certaine holy signes and ceremonies which Christe would we shuld vse, that by them he might sett before our eyes the mysteries of our saluation, and might more strongly confirme our faith, which we haue in his bloud, and might seale his grace in our hartes. And those sacramentes together with Tertullian, Origen, Ambrose, Au­gustine, Hierome, Chrisostom, Basile, Dionisius, and other Catho­like fathers do we call figures, signes, markes, or badges, printes, co­pies, formes, seales, signettes, similitudes, patterns, representations, remembraunces, and memories. And we make no doubt togither with the same Doctours to say, that those be certaine visible wor­des, seales of righteousnes, tokens of grace.

THE TENTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion.With what face saye ye that ye allowe the Sacramentes of the church? Haue ye not abādoned almost all the sacramen­tes of the church? Retaine ye any mo by name of the sacra­mentes then two,The sa­cramen­tes aban­doned of the defenders saue two, bapt and their lordes supper. baptisme and your supper of the lord? Of which the one, after that doctrine as it is by you taught and ministred, auaileth nothing but to your further condemna­tion. The other, I meane baptisme, though ye varie from [Page 85] the auncient maner obserued in all christendom since the apostles time to these dayes, and omitte certaine holy rites vsed in the primitiue church at the administratiō of it: yet for the necessitie of it, is vaileable and of force, so that your mi­nisters kepe the due forme of wordes according to christes institution. Touching this point of doctrine, what so euer ye saye, forasmuch as the chiefe doctours whom ye folow, the Lutherans and Zuinglians disagree much within them sel­ues about it, and ye are enemies to the holy sacramentes, and by your teaching bring the people to a false opinion concer­ning the same, saying that ye saye, without scriptures, without any testimonies of the fathers, yea contrary to the manifest definitions of councels: who regardeth his owne saluation, so litle, that will geue you credite? And therfore I thinke it not good to weary the reader with tedious discussion and refelling of euery falshed by you in this matter vttered, and by your fellowes commonly taught.

The sounde and true doctrine which the catholike church holdeth and beleueth touching this point, is this.The soū­de and true do­ctrine of the sacra­mentes. Seuen sa­cramen­tes. That there be seuen sacramentes in which vnder coouer of visible thin­ges the power of god worketh mans helth. They be these. Baptisme, confirmation, the sacrament of the aulter, Pena­unce, extreme vnction, order, wedlocke. And these so we call sacramentes, as neuerthelesse we acknowledge the name of sacrament may be extended to many other thinges.Sacramēt what it signifieth. That it be knowen what a sacrament is, this word Sacrament signi­fieth sometime a holy thing, sometime the signe of a holy thing instituted by God. As it is takē for a signe only, so is it found generally not only in the newe lawe, but also in the olde lawe. But in the newe lawe those signes after a pe­culiar and speciall maner be called Sacramentes, which do not only signifie a holy thing, but also do sanctifie and make [Page] holy those, to whom they be adhibited, being such as by in­stitution of Christ conteine grace in them and power to sanctifie.Definitiō of a sacra­ment. Whereof a sacrament is by the best lerned diuines defined to be a visible signe of inuisible grace, so as it beare the image of it, and because of the same. For the plaine vn­derstanding of this definition, how a Sacrament beareth the forme, signe, or image of inuisible grace, it appereth euident­ly in baptisme, where wasshing of the body sheweth the clensing of the sowle. Also in the Sacrament of the aulter, where the formes of bread and wine outwardly represent the spirituall nourisshing of the soule. The like appereth in other Sacramentes.

The sacramentes of the newe lawe con­teine gra­ce in thē. Ioan. 5. Bethesda.Neither is it a newe and straunge doctrine to saye, that the sacramentes of the gospell conteine grace in them, for the fathers teach the same not seldom. Chrysostom expoun­ding the mysterie of the poole called Bethesda in Hebrew, that was in Ierusalem: sayeth that sicke folke were healed at the mouing of the water, to thintent men might be brought to vnderstand the vertue of baptisme. For then was it com­ming to passe (saith he) that baptisme shuld be full of po­wer and grace.Cap. 5. S. Ambrose in his booke de Sacramentis spea­king of baptisme, saith it is not euery water that healeth, but that water healeth, which hath the grace of Christ. Cyrillus vpon the forsaid chapter of Iohn saith, that in baptisme it is not water simply that worketh, but when as it hath receiued the grace of the holy ghoste. S. Augustin in a sermon sayeth, that water in baptisme is enriched with a more gift in maner,Sermone dominicae intra octa­uas epipha­niae. In sermone de baptis­me Christi. then was the virgin Mary. For she (sayeth he) deserued chasti­tie to her selfe, this hath geuen to vs sanctification. she deserued that she synned not, this that it might purge synnes, It is said vniuer­sally by S. Cyprian of all the sacramentes, that the fatte of Gods anoincting powreth fulnes of grace into the ministeriall san­ctifications, [Page 86] whereby he meaneth the sacramentes. And right well be the sacramentes reported to haue and conteine that, which with so great fulnes is powred into them.How sa­cramentes conteine grace and power to sanctifie. Yet we me­ane that they conteine grace and power to sanctifie, after such maner of speaking, as we saye of potions and drinkes, pre­pared for sicke persons, that they conteine health, to the working whereof they be effectuall. Or elles as Chryso­stome and Cyrillus do expounde, as the water of the poole Probatica troubled at the comming downe of the Angel, conteined power to heale all maner of infirmitie.Sacramē­tes do not only sig­nifie, but also wor­ke and cause that they sig­nifie, as an instru­mental cause. And as it is said of the sacramentes that they conteine grace, so is it like­wise said, that through their vertue which thei haue by Gods institution, they do not only signifie (as by these Defenders doctrine that semeth to be their speciall office) but also with signification worke and cause, as an instrumentall cause, the effect of that which they signifie.

The diuine power God him selfe, who is the principall cause of all grace, lyke as he vsed the bodyly touch of Christ as an instrumentall power to heale the leprouse man, the wi­dow of Naim her dead sonne,Matt. 8. Luc. 7. Matt. 9. the woomā that had the bloudy flixe, the princes daughter, the two blinde men, and sundry others: so in the church he vseth the sacramentes of the newe lawe, by which he dispenseth to the faithfull the benefite of his passion, as a meane or instrument to worke that which they signifie. And those sacramentes, which God vseth not as a meane or instrument to worke any effect by, but to signifie any effect only, be signes only,4. Reg. 4. of which sort is the touch of E­lisaeus the prophete, when he stretched him selfe ouer the dead body of the Sunamite womans sonne. For that touch had not any power to worke a miracle as the touch of Christ.Power geuen to sacramē­tes to worke that they signifie, by Gods ordināce. Ioan. 11. The de­fenders do attri­bute to the sacra­mentes no more but sig­nificatiō. Af­ter which maner, God hath geuen to the sacramentes of the newe testament, that they worke the thing signified through [Page] vertue geuen them by Gods ordinaunce to speciall effectes of grace. As to the voice of Christ he gaue power by calling to raise Lazarus. Now here do these Defenders acknowledge the signification of the sacramentes, which is lesser, and spea­ke not of their vertue and grace by them wrought, which is greater, and that they be markes, tokens, paternes &c. For that as foloweth how the blessed sacrament of the aulter hath of sundry fathers ben called a figure, a signe, an image, a paterne, a sampler &c: which also we acknowledge in the other sacra­mentes, and what their meaning is therein: I haue sufficient­ly declared in myne answer to M. Iuelles chalenge in the 12. Article. Would God our aduersaries had as good an opinion of the grace, power, and vertue of the sacramentes, as they be ready to declare, that they be signes, tokens, markes etc. Which as we denie not, so we require them to confesse the other, wherein they seme to folow the Arians, who confessing many high thinges of Christ, and speaking largely of his di­uine endoumentes, would neuer confesse him to be true God of true God.

Apologie And we do expresly pronounce, that in the Lords supper there is truelye geuen vnto the beleuing, the body and bloud of the Lord, the flesshe of the sonne of God, whiche quickeneth our soules, the meate that cometh from aboue, the foode of immortalitie, grace, truth, and lyfe. And the supper to be the communion of the body and bloud of Christ, by the partaking whereof wee be reuiued, wee be strengthened, and be fed vnto immortalitie, and wherby we are ioyned, vnited, and incorporate vnto Christ, that we may abide in him and he in vs.

THE ELEVENTH CHAPTER.

Confu­tation.What ye pronounce of this high sacrament, the wise and careful tenderers of their soules will be right ware thereof. Of you and such as ye be, because your doctrine is but of a corner of the world in respect of the vniuersall church, Christ hath geuē vs a watchword,Matt. 24. Nolite credere, beleue thē not. In your the [Page 87] Lordes supper,The sacramentaries Lordes supper. celebrated by the ministers of your owne cre­ation, there is not geuen the body and bloud of our Lord nei­ther to the beleuing, nor to the vnbeleuing. For at the cele­bration of your schismaticall supper, no consecration being done, nor faith of the church, nor right intention had, nor Christes institution obserued, what deliuer ye to your com­municantes but a piece of bread and a sippe of wine? Neither is it your will it be more or better. At the supper of our Lord ministred in the catholike church by priestes rightly conse­crated, and as it hath ben accustomed in Christes church: the­re is the true and whole body of our Lord and sauiour geuen and receiued, be the receiuers beleuing or not beleuing: albeit I see not how we may iustly cal christen people not beleuing. For the truth of the inward thing of this holy sacramēt, which is our Lordes bodye, is made present by the omnipotencie of his word, and dependeth not of the receiuers belefe. Neither is his precious body there present or absent according to the belefe or vnbelefe, worthines or vnworthines of the receiuers.Iudas re­ceiued Christes true body of Christ no lesse then tha­postles. Matth 26. Chrysost. homil. de proditione Iudae. Aug. in psal. 10. Theodorit. in 1. Cor. 11. Hereticall doctrine set forth with hy­pocritical eloquēce. The old practise of hereti­kes by fa­yre vtte­rance of truth to gete them entraunce to lying. De trinit. lib. 6. For when Christ gaue this sacrament to his disciples at his last supper after that he had consecrated the same, saying take ye, eate ye, this my body: Iudas the traitour as the fathers teach, receiued his true body nolesse then Peter, Andrew, Iohn, or Iames did, though they to their saluation, he to his damna­tion.

Now it is to be noted, how this Defender in this long sen­tence affecteth a certaine holy (as it were) and solemne elo­quence, and vseth a religious amplification of wordes to set forth the sacrament, as though he had a reuerent and a godly opinion of it: whereas in dede he taketh it but for a poore si­gne or token, as their doctor Zuinglius doth. But such is their crafte to purchase them credite among the people. Who of simplicitie deme all such to meane well, that make resembla­unce [Page] of good meaning by speaking good wordes, for lacke of vnderstanding not perceiuing fraude intended. Thus offer they to the vnlerned their fayer cuppes full of venym, anoin­ting the brimmes with honye of sweete and holy wordes, the rather to poison them. Such complaint maketh the graue fa­ther S. Hilary against the Arians of his time. Ingerunt nobis primum nomina veritatis, vt virus falsitatis introeat. Bonum in ore est, vt de corde malum subeat. First (saith he) they thrust me forth wordes of truth, that the venim of falsehed may enter in. Good is in their mouth, that out from the harte may euill procede. And a­mong all these wordes (he meaneth the Arians confession of their faith) I heare no where by them said, Deum Dei filium, God the sonne of God. Right so among all these fayer wordes con­cerning the sacrament, we heare neuer a whit said of the reall presence of Christes bodye.Contra Ari omanitas haeresi. 69. De gratia Christi cōt. Pelagiū & Celest. lib. 1. cap. 32. Matth. 13. Epiphanius noteth the like crafte in Arius, and so doth S. Augustine in the Pelagians. Nestorius likewise spake honorably in many places of Christ and his mother. But nowhere would he cal her [...], that is, the mo­ther of God. The Iewes also as we finde in the gospell, called our sauiour Iesus the Carpenters sonne, confessed Mary to be his mother, Iames, Ioseph, Simon, and Iude, his brothers, and that his sisters were among thē (by whō his kinnesfolke are to be vnderstanded) but the sonne of God they would not acknowledge him, nor in that degree honour him. Better then to those Iewes can I not compare these Defen­ders, who speake honorably of our Lordes body an bloud in their supper: but that his body is really, that it is verely in the sacrament of the aulter, that will not the deuill who raigneth in their hartes, suffer their mouthes to vtter.

Apologie Besides we acknowledge there be two sacramentes, which wee iudge proprely ought to be called by this name, that is to saye Bap­tisme, and the sacramente of thankes geuing. For thus many we see were deliuered and sanctified by Christ, and well allowed of the [Page 88] oulde fathers Ambrose and Augustine.

Why speake ye not plainely?Confu­tation. The de­fenders acknow­ledge but two sa­cramētes. In confess. Cap. 4. Sectione 36. Articles set forth by the new En­glish cler­gy. Diuersitie of iudge­ment in the gos­pellers a­bout the number of sacra­mentes. Melanch­thon dis­agreeth with him selfe. Be there no mo but two sa­cramentes? Though ye saye not so expressely, yet we iudge that so ye meane. For so your scoolefelow of Geneua Theo­dore Beza pronounceth in plaine termes in the confession of your Geneuian faith. And so your selues Defenders do af­firme in the articles which ye agreed vppon in your cōuoca­tion holden at London in the yere of our lord. 1562. which articles ye haue put forth in print by the Quenes auctoritie, as ye prentend. Now whereas ye acknowledge there be but two sacramentes, why shuld any man beleue you rather then the Germaines your first scoolemaisters, who in their con­fession exhibited to Charles the fifth then Emperour at Augspurg in the name of all the protestantes anno. 1530. ap­point three sacramentes, baptisme, the Eucharist, and pena­unce? The next yere after, Philip Melanchthon in his Apo­logie auouched those three sacramentes, but afterward in the yere. 1552. he founde out an other, and made vp the numbre of foure, by adding the sacrament of order to the forsaid three. In Lipsia they receiue three, in Wittenberg, which citie is not thēce farre of, they haue foure. At Magdeburg thereby also Flacius Illyricus and so many as folowe him, will haue but two, and the Zwenckfeldiās that spring out of the same stocke care for none at all. I thinke wise men, and they that haue care of their soule helth, will rather staye them selues by the catholike church,1. Tim. 3. which as S. Paul sayeth is the pillour and ground of truth, then by these renegates and apostates, that folowing their owne phantasies knowe not where to settle.

Forasmuch as ye alleage the names of the olde fathers for you, specially S. Ambrose and Augustine,That the­re be mo sacramē­tes then two by the do­ctrine of the fa­thers. Ca. 10 4. The sa­crament of confir­mation. that there be but two sacramentes, let vs see how much they make for main­tenance [Page] of your doctrine, and whether they teach vs not, that there be mo. S. Augustine in his second booke contra lite­ras Petiliani, speaking of the place of the psalme, Sicut vn­guentum in capite, which the heretike had alleaged, sayeth thus. In hoc vnguento, &c. In this oinctement his will is to inter­pret the sacrament of Chrisme (he meaneth the sacrament of confirmation) which in the kinde of visible signes is holy, as bap­tisme is. Lo. S. Augustine calleth cōfirmation a sacrament. S. Eusebius Pope nameth it a sacrament in his third epistle written to all the bishops of Tuscia and Campania. Manus impositionis Sacramentum, &c. The sacrament of imposition of handes (sayeth he) is to be kept with great reuerence, which can not be performed but by the high priestes, (he vnderstandeth bi­shoppes). Melchiades next to Syluester before the Nicene councell speaking much of confirmation, among other thin­ges sayeth thus. Duo haec Sacramenta, Baptismi & confirmatio­nis separanda non sunt. These two sacramentes of baptisme and con­firmation maye not be sundred. Though these two bishoppes were Popes, yet they deserue credite forasmuch as they liued before that corruption crept into the church after your ac­compt, and dyed holy Martyrs.

The sa­crament of pena­unce. Cap. 66. Homil. 20 in epist. ad Heb.That Penaunce is a sacrament and so accompted among the fathers, it is so euident, that who doubteth of it, may seme not to haue perused their writinges. S. Augustine in enchiridio ad Laurentium Speaking of baptisme and penaunce, calleth both salutaria sacramenta, helthfull sacramentes. Chrysosto­me nameth penaunce a sacrament. S. Ambrose signifieth him selfe to be of the same minde, in his first booke de paeni­tentia. cap. 6. & .7. and in the second booke, cap. 2. though without putting thexpresse name of sacrament. But in the third chapter of that booke he putteth the name of sacrament expressely.

Touching Order,The sacr. of Order. that is a sacrament also by verdite of S. Augustine, whom ye alleage for you. Let vs heare what he sayeth. In his second booke contra epist. Parmeniani cap. 13. these be his wordes, where he speaketh of baptisme and of the power to baptise, which is geuen in the sacrament of Order. Vtrunque enim Sacramentum est, & quadam cōsecratione vtrun­que homini datur, illud cum baptizatur, istud cum ordinatur. Ideo in Catholica non licet vtrunque iterari. Either of them is a sa­crament, and with a certaine consecration either is geuen to man, the one when he is baptized, the other when he taketh orders. Ther­fore in the Catholike church it is not laufull either of them to be ta­ken twise.

For the sacrament of wedlocke,The sacra­ment of wedlocke. besides other good and sufficient proufes that it is a sacrament, we haue sundry te­stimonies out of S. Augustine and other doctours. In the church (sayeth S. Augustine,) not only the band of mariage, Lib. de fide & operibus c. 7. but also the sacrament is so commended, that it is not laufull for the hus­band to deliuer his wife to an other. He calleth wedlocke a sa­crament in many places of his workes. de bono coniugali cap. 7. 18. and in the 24. chapter of that booke he sayeth. Haec omnia bona sunt, propter quae nuptiae bonae sunt, proles, fides, sacramentum. All these thinges be good, for which mariage is good, issue, faith, the sacrament.

Of extreme vnction who doubteth whether it be a sa­crament,The sacrament of extreme vnction. let him reade the epistle of Innocentius the first ad Decentium Eugubinum episcopum, cap. 8. Where most plai­nely treating of it, he nameth it a Sacrament.Iacob. 5 Lib. 3. de sacerdo. Chrysostom in­terpreteth the place of S. Iames epistle for this sacrament. And so doth Bede, alleaging the place of S. Iames, the sixth of Marke, the auctoritie of Innocentius, and the custome of the church. Seing then we haue founde the seuen sacramentes expressely mencioned in the fathers according to the tea­ching [Page] of the catholike church, whereas ye teach mē to beleue there be but two, and pretend that the fathers speake of no mo: I trust from henceforth they wil take better aduise how they beleue your bare word without all proufe, and with cer­taine danger of their soules forsake the doctrine of the chur­che,1. Tim. 3. which is the sure pillour and ground of truth, as saint Paul sayeth. In this great point Beza and ye of that syde be manifestly founde lyers.

Apologie We saye that baptisme is a sacrament of the remission of sinnes, and of that washing which we haue in the blood of Christe, and that no person which will professe Christes name oughte to bee re­straigned or kepte backe therefrom: no not the very babes of Chri­stians, forsomuche as they be borne in sinne, and do pertaine vnto the people of God.

Confuta­tion. Baptisme very slen­derly spo­ken of by the Defenders.As ye acknowledge fewe sacramentes, so ye speake of them very slenderly. Baptisme (ye saye) is a sacrament of the remissiō of synnes, and of that washing which we haue in the bloud of Christ. Now whereas ye meane, as within fewe lines ye declare, by the name of a sacrament no more but a token or signe, specially sith ye teach in your articles that baptisme at the best,Baptisme taught by our newe clergy to be but a signe and seale of our newe birth. That in baptisme synnes be fully and truly for­geuen. is but a signe and seale of our newe birth: ye seme not to attribute to baptisme so much as the scripture doth. Nei­ther is baptisme only a signe or token that sinnes be remit­ted, but, we beleue as the Catholike church according to the scriptures teacheth, that in and by baptisme sinnes be ful­ly and truly remitted, and put awaye, and that not through the faith only of the geuer or receiuer, or of any other, though hereunto it be necessary in those that be come to age of discretion: but through the power and vertue of the sacra­ment and Gods promise. And therefore to whom it is ge­uen, of them it is rightly said, that they be baptized for remis­sion of their sinnes.Cap, 36. The scriptures be plaine. First Ezechiel speaking of this holy sacrament, sayeth in the person of God: [Page 90] I will shedde vpon you cleane water, and ye shall be made cleane from all your defilinges, and frō your idols will I clense you. Tit. 3. Next S. Paul sayeth. That God hath saued vs by the wasshing of rege­neration, and of the renewing of the holy ghost, whom he hath powred vpō vs aboundātly by Iesus Christ our Sauiour. That I may adde to these manifest scriptures the auctoritie of a lerned father, not whereby to strengthen the truth of them, but to witnesse our right vnderstanding of them: S. Augustine, lib. 3. contra duas epist. Pelagian. cap. 3. shewing the slaunder of the Pela­gians against the Catholikes, sayeth thus in their person. Againe they (that is after their meaning,Pelagians belyed the catholikes as the sa­cramenta­ries do al­so now. the Catholikes) auouch that baptisme maketh not in dede newe men againe, that is to witte, that it geueth not full remission of sinnes, &c. Thereto eftsones answering S. Augustine sayeth. Mentiuntur, insidian­tur, tergiuer santur. They lye, they studye how to deceiue, they seeke shiftes, we saye not this. And after certaine sentences re­tourning to baptisme, he concludeth thus. Wherefore baptisme wassheth awaye all synnes, vtterly all, of dedes, wordes, thoughtes, be they originall, or actuall, be they done ignorantly or wittingly. Concupiscence re­mayning after bap­tisme is infirmitie not sinne. But it taketh not awaye the infirmitie, which the regenerate resi­steth, &c. Which place doth not only set forth the vertue of baptisme, but also destroyeth the doctrine of our newe gos­pellers, that affirme cōcupiscence which remaineth after ba­ptisme, to be verely synne. Wherein they erre manifestly a­gainst the scripture and sense of the fathers.

We saye that Eucharistia, the supper of the lorde, is a sacramente, Apologie that is to wytte, an euident token of the body and blood of Christe: wherein is set as it were before our eyes, the death of Christ and his resurrection, and what act so euer he did whilest he was in his mortal body, to thende we may giue hym thankes for his deathe, and for our deliueraunce. And that by the often receauinge of this sacramē­te, wee may daily renewe the remembraunce of that matter, to thin­tent we being fedd with the body and blood of Christ, may be brought into the hope of the resurrection and of euerlasting life, [Page] and m [...]y moste assuredly beleue, that the bodye and blood of Chri­ste dothe in like manner feede our soules, as breade and wine doth feede our bodies.

THE TVVELFTH CHAPTER.

Confu­tation.Among all these gay wordes we heare not so much as one syllable vttered, whereby we may vnderstand, that ye beleue the very body of Christ to be in dede present in the blessed Sacrament of the aulter.The lor­des sup­per with the De­fenders is an eui­dent to­ken of the body and bloud of Christ. Ye confesse the Eucharistia, which cōmonly ye call, the supper of the lorde, to be a sacramēt and all that to be none other then an euident token of the body and bloud of Christ. As for that ye adde to make the matter seme somewhat, of the death of Christ and his resurrection, and his actes done in flesh: what reason or scripture haue ye that a piece of bread and a cuppe of wine (for in your belefe more make ye not of this sacrament) can set them as it were before our eyes? Doth not rather a fayer painted table set forth the actes of our Sauiour before our eyes more lyuely and more expressely? And be we not moued therewith to geue God thākes for his great benefites, as well as if we haue bread and wine on a table? But I pray you sithens all is but bread and wine after your teaching, how shall we by eating and drinking thereof be fedde with the body and bloud of Christ? Againe can we by bread and wine be brought into hope of the resurrection and euerlasting lyfe, as ye saye? And how shall we by eating of bread and drinking of wine be as­sured, that Christes body and bloud doth in like maner feede our soules, as bread and wine feedeth our bodyes? Though your imagination be neuer so strong, yet by eating of that which is bread only, and drinking of that which is wine only, we see not how your soules can be fedde with the true body and bloud of Christ, no more then ye be at your common meales.

Verely when all your tale is tolde, ye seme to saye nothing [Page 91] els touching the eating of our lordes body, but that the body of Christ remaineth in heauen, and that we must send vp our soules thither, to eate it there by a certaine imagination which ye call faith. For this is your maister Caluines doctrine.In the Defen­ders supper no­thing but bread and wi­ne, after their opi­nion. Faith doth all. So that which ye deliuer to the people in your supper of the Lord, the body of Christ being in dede absent after your opi­nion, is but bread and wine. By this doctrine all standeth vp­pon your faith, your faith doth all alone. And he that bele­ueth in Christ so as ye teach, eateth his body and drinketh his bloud. for by your gospell to eate the body is no thing els, but to beleue in Christ. If this be true, then is your supper super­fluous. For we may and do beleue without eating of bread and drinking of wine. Then what neded Christ to haue in­stituted this sacramēt? What nede haue we of bread and wine in churches, or of the whole ceremonie of the supper? Why driue ye men by compulsion to your communion? For who seeth not that a mans soule is more moued by hearing of a sermon to ascend into heauen, and to beleue in Christ, and to geue him thankes for our redemption wrought in his flesh, then by eating of bread and drinking of wine?

For declaration of the truth herein,The ca­tholike doctrine touching the sacra­ment of thaulter. Vide de consecrat. dist. 2. The sacrament and the thing of the sa­crament. it is to be considered that when we speake of this blessed sacrament, we meane spe­cially the thing receiued, to be the very reall body of Christ, not only a signe or token of his body. Yet we thinke it ne­cessary, the doctrine of the fathers be clerely taught, which is, that here is a sacrament, and the thing of the sacrament. The forme of bread and wine which is sene, is the sacrament, that is to saye a signe of the holy thing. For a sacrament besides the outward shape which it representeth to the senses, causeth an other thing to come into knowledge. The thing of this sacrament is of two sortes, the one in the same conte [...]ed and signified, the other signified, but not conteined. The first is [Page] the body of Christ borne of the virgin Mary, and his bloud shed for our redemption, the secōd is the vnitie of the church in those that be predestinate, called, iustified, and glorified. which church is Christes body mysticall.A three­fold di­stinction to be con­sidered in the do­ctrine of this sacra­ment. So that here are three distinct thinges vnderstanded. The one is a sacrament only, the other a sacrament and the thing, the third the thing and not a sacrament. The first is the visible shape or forme of bread and wine, the second is the propre and very fleshe and bloud of Christ, the third, his mysticall bodye.

Two wa­yes of ea­ting.And as there be two thinges of this sacrament, so be there also two meanes or wayes of eating. The one is sacramentall, after which both good and euill eate the true body of Christ, they to saluation, these to damnation. The other spirituall, af­ter which the good only do eate.Indistinct speaking of distinct thinges in the do­ctrine of the sacra­ment, causeth cōfusion. These Defenders as all o­ther the sacramentaries, speaking of these distinct things indi­stinctly, cause confusion, and deceiue the vnlerned readers. For they do attribute that which is spoken of the mysticall body of Christ only, (the same being to be receiued by spiri­tuall eating of the good only) to the true and naturall body, which is receiued by sacramentall eating, worthely of the good, vnworthely of the euill. For both good and euill eate Christes body in the sacrament, as is before declared. If they would confesse plainely the very bodye of Christ borne of the virgin Mary to be in dede in the blessed sacrament of the aulter, there made present (the substance of bread and wine being chaunged into the substance of his body and bloud) by the almighty power of the word of consecration, and the sa­me to be receiued to saluation of the good, to damnation of those that haue not worthely examined and prepared them selues thereto,1. Cor. 11. as S. Paul teacheth: touching the spirituall ea­ting and drinking, which is besides and without the sacra­ment, we should sone therein agree with them, and acknow­ledge [Page 92] many thinges by them vttered, in right sense to be true, and in that respect faith to be the chiefe instrument to eate and drinke withall,Faith the chief in­instrumēt to eate spiritually and so the flesh of Christ to be the foode of the soule, and to that kind of eating, the body not alwayes to exhibite his duty and seruice. In such a sense and meaning the place commonly alleaged out of S. Augustine;De consecr. dist. 2. vt quid. as also ma­ny other the like, maye well be vnderstanded without preiu­dice of the truth of Christes body in the sacrament. Vt quid paras dentem & ventrem? crede & manducasti. To what purpose makest ready teeth and bely? Beleue, and thou hast eaten. Now these Defenders harping only vppon this one stryng of spirituall eating, and shunning the faith of the catholike church tou­ching the true presence of the body, and violently wresting holy scripture and auncient fathers to a cōtrary sense, admit­ting figures for truth, tropes for the letter, shadowes for thin­ges: playe vs many a false lesson, and teach horrible lyes to the vtter subuersion of those that be lead by them.

To this banket we thinke the people of God ought to be ernestly bidden, that they maye all communicate among them selues, Apologie and openly declare and testifie both the godly societye which is among them, and also the hope which they haue in Christ Iesu. For this cause if there had ben any which would be but a looker on, and ab­staine from the holy Communion, him did the old fathers and Bis­shops of Rome in the primatiue church, before Priuate masse came vp, excommunicate as a wicked person and as a Pagan. Neither was there any Christiā at that time which did communicat alone whyles other looked on. For so did Calixtus in times past decree, that after the consecration was finished, all should communicate, excepte they had rather stande without the Church doores? bycause thus (saith he) did the Apostles a pointe, and the same the holy Church of Rome kepeth still.

Let this banket be dight as it ought to be,Confuta­tion. let the best dish be made ready in due sort, which is the very body of our Sa­uiour Christ, let the gestes be tolde what is set before them at that holy table, let them be taught to beleue rightly, to [Page] proue and prepare them selues as behoueth: then we thinke it most conuenient the people of God be bidden thereto, not thereby to cōmunicate among them selues only, but also and rather to cōmunicate with God, to be incorporate in Christ, and to be made partakers of al the benefites of God procured to man by the death of his sonne suffered in that body, which at this high feast they eate.Deuout lookers on do spiritually commu­nicate. This banket being thus set forth, if some deuout persons thinke them selues for good causes vnworthy to assaye thereof, and to receiue that hea­uenly foode sacramentally, finding them selues not so well prepared as S. Paul requireth in that behalfe, yet for loue of it desire to be present and behold that table, and spiritually to tast of that helthfull dish by faith, charitie, prayer, and fer­uent deuotion, wherein they do not wholy absteine from the holy communion: such are not to be condemned as idle lookers on, for so ye make them, nor to be driuen out of the church. Neither did euer the olde fathers and bishoppes of Rome in the primitiue church (saye what ye wil Defenders) excommunicate them, much lesse did they repute them for wicked persons and paganes. And not seldom the priest at the masse (which for this respect with vnreasonable noueltie ye terme priuate) when none other were disposed to receiue with him sacramentally but spiritually only, hath receiued alone the holy thinges which he hath offered.

Neither the decree of Anacletus, which ye being deceaued by Gratian vntruly father vppō Calixtus,Calixus alleaged for Ana­cletus. The de­fenders require more of the ca­tholikes, then they {per}forme them sel­ues. The place of Ana­cletus dis­cussed. requireth that all the people present should cōmunicate with the priest at the masse. Which thing ye should not haue obiected to the church, seing that it is not obserued by your owne newe or­der in your congregations. Read the epistle of Anacletus, frō whence this decree is taken, and your selues will confesse the same. That holy father and martyr prescribeth the order [Page 93] which he would to be kept, when bishoppes or priestes saye masse. Which was, that it be done in places consecrated to God, that a bishop at his masse haue witnesses with him mo then an other priest. In the solēne feastes he requireth seuen, fiue, or three deacons, likewise subdeacons and other mini­sters, all clothed in hallowed vestimentes to attend vppon him, to stand on euery syde of him with a contrite harte and humble spirite looking downeward, keping him from mali­cious men, geuing consent to his sacrifice. This much being declared in that epistle, it foloweth immediatly,This cō­maunde­ment of receiuing the com­munion geuen by Anacletus pertei­neth only to the ministers of the church in solemne feastes. Peracta au­tem consecratione, &cae. And when the consecration is ended, let them all communicate, that will not be kept without the church dores. For so the Apostles haue ordeined, and the holy church of Ro­me obserueth. Who seeth not this request of receiuing the communion to be referred to the priestes, deacons, subdea­cons, and other ministers in solemne feastes seruing the bishop at masse? For in that place Anacletus speaketh neuer a word expressely of the lay people. Therefore ye deceiue the vnlerned reader with alye, bearing him in hand the rather to induce him to mislyking of the holy sacrifice of the masse, that by an olde decree the people were required to com­municate, where it perteineth only to the ministers seruing at the aulter, and that not at all times, but in high and solem­ne feastes.

For the better vnderstanding of this decree, specially whereas Anacletus alleageth the Apostles ordinaunce for the same,See the 9. canon of thapo­stles. the nynth canon of the Apostles is to be conside­red. In which they require euery ecclesiasticall person to be partaker of the sacrifice that is offered, or to be excluded frō the communion, onlesse he shewe iust cause for the contra­ry. The reason whereof in that canon expressed is this. Lest clerkes abstaining from the communion should be occasion of offence [Page] to the people, and thereby raise an euill suspicion against him that sacrificed, as though he had not made the oblation as it ought to be.

Apologie Moreouer when the people commeth to the holy communion, the Sacrament ought to be giuen them in both kindes, for so both Christe hath commaunded, and the Apostles in euery place haue or­deyned, and all the auncient Fathers and Catholique Bysshops haue folowed the same. And who so doth contrary to this, he (as Gélasius sayth) committeth sacriledge. De consec. dist. 2. Cap. com­perimus. And therefore wee saye, that oure Ad­uersaries at this daye, who hauinge violentlye thruste out and quite forbidden the holye Communion, dooe without the woorde of God, without the authoritie of any auncient Councell, without any catholique Father, without any example of the primatiue Church, yea and without reason also, defend and maintaine their priuate Masses and the manglinge of the Sacramentes, and do this not onely against the plaine expresse commandement and bidding of Christe, but also against all antiquitie do wickedly therin, and are very Church robbers.

Confu­tation. Cōmu­nion vn­der both kindes not com­maunded expresse­ly by Christ, nor or­deined by the Apo­stles.Soft and fayer maisters. Ye shewe more heate then witte, more stomake then lerning, more anger then reason. Ye say much and proue litle. But saye ye and saye again what ye will, we tell you boldely that neither Christ euer commaunded, nor the Apostles ordeined, nor all the auncient fathers obser­ued, that the sacrament be geuen to the people none other­wise but vnder both kindes only. If Christ had expressely commaunded it, the church had not so longe time receiued and kept the vse of one kinde. The Apostles and sundry holy fathers ministred both kindes we confesse. That the one kinde was not also by them ministred, and that it is vtterly vnlaufull, we denye, and the same shall ye neuer be able to proue. Touching this whole point, and how litle that ye alleage out of Gelasius maketh for you, and concerning masse not to be omitted for lacke of companie to communi­cate sacramentally with the priest: I haue said ynough in my answere to your fellowe M. Iuell his chalenge. Bring ye o­ther stuffe and better then this, or els all the world will see [Page 94] your halting, and the feblenes of your syde.An vnsha­mefast and slaun­derouslye. That we haue violently thrust out and quite forbidden the holy commu­nion, onlesse ye meane your owne schismatical, mutable and polluted communion, if there were any sparke of shame or hatred of lying in you, ye would neuer impute it vnto vs. God doth knowe, and the world is not vnwitting, how much, how often, and how ernestly the Catholike church exhorteth her childrē to prepare them selues to receiue their maker. And though the people of England of late yeres re­sorted not commonly thereto, yet the deuotion of Christen folke in this countrie of base Almaigne, in Fraūce, in Italy, in Spaine, and in sundry other christen prouinces is so feruēt in frequenting the holy communion, as if ye sawe it, ye would be a shamed of your slaunderous reporte. Let wise men and good men iudge, whether we be church robbers, or ye vn­shamefast lyers.

We affirme that breade and wine are Apo­logie. holy and heauenly mysteries of the bodie and bloud of Christ, and that by them Christ himselfe being the true bread of eternal life, is so presently giuen vnto vs, as that by faith we verely receaue his body and his bloud. Yet say we not this so, as though we thought that the nature of bread and wine is clearlybchanged and goeth to nothing, as many haue dreamed in these later times, which yet could neuer agree among thē self of this their dreame. For that was not Christes meaning that the wheaten bread should laye apart his owne nature, and receaue a certain new diuinitie, but that he might rather chaūge vs (and to vse Iohan. ca. 6. Theophyla­ctus woordes) might transforme vs into his bodie. For what can be said more plainly thē that whiche De Sac. li. 4. ca. 4. Ambrose saith, Bread and wine re­main stil the same thei were before, and yet are changed into an o­ther thing: or that which e Gelasius saith, the substāce of the bread, or the nature of the wine, ceaseth not so to be: or that which In dia­logis 1. & 2. Theodore­te saith, After the consecratiō, the mysticall signes do not cast of their owne propre nature: for they remaine stil in their former substaūce, forme and kynde. Or that whiche In ser. ad infā­tes. Augustine saith, That whiche ye see is the bread and Cuppe, and so our eyes tell vs, but that which your faith requireth to be taught is this, The bread is the body of Christ, and the Cuppe ys his bloud. Or that whiche In Mat. hom. 15. Origene saith: [Page] Bread which is sanctified by the word of God, as touching the mate­riall substaunce therof, goeth into the belly and is cast out into the priuey. Or that whichiChrist him selfe said, not only after the bles­sing of the cup, but after he had ministred the Communion: I will drinke nomore of this frute of the vyne. It is well knowen that the fruit of the vyne ys wine, and not bloud.

THE THIRTINTH CHAPTER.

Confu­tation. VVhat is that we call holy and hea­uenly mysteriesAffirming and prouing are two thinges.a Bread and wine are but bread and wine. In this sacrament after consecration the substance of bread and wine being tourned into the sub­stance of the body and bloud of Christ, the outward formes of bread and wine which remaine, are the sacramētes of holy thinges, the body and bloud of Christ. And the whole sacra­ment as it is taken both for the outward formes or visible si­gnes, and also for the inuisible grace, that is the thing of the sacrament conteined vnder the shapes of bread and wine, which is the very body and bloud of our Lord: all this together in consideration that the holy thing of the sacrament is couered with the vaile of the outward for­mes, so as it appere not to the sight of mortall eyes, maye right well be called holy and heauenly mysteries. If ye ment playnenes and truth, ye would speake in plaine termes. This matter is so weighty, as it ought not to be handled colou­rably.

The De­fenders refuse to speake as the chur­ch spea­keth.Why be ye loth to speake as the church speaketh, that in this blessed sacrament we receiue the body of Christ? Why had ye rather saye after a straunge maner, that by Bread and wine Christ him selfe is so presently geuen vnto vs, as that by faith we verely receiue his body and his bloud? To the receiuing of Christes body in the sacrament faith is necessary we graunt, and without faith is it not worthely receiued. But what mea­ne ye? Is Christ him selfe by bread and wine so presently ge­uen vnto vs, as that by faith we verely receiue his body and [Page 95] bloud? If a man should presse you with your owne wordes,VVhat presence of Christ in the sa­crament do the defenders acknow­ledge. and demaund what maner of presence ye teach, affirming Christ him selfe presently to be geuen: I wene ye would be found halting. For how saye ye? If Christ be presently geuen vnto vs by bread and wine in the sacrament, then is Christ present. If he be present, which ye must nedes graunt, tell vs further, how is he present, according to the substaunce of his body, or by grace, or according to the maiestie of his godhed? The first, what shiftes so euer ye seeke, ye will not graunt. And therfor is your owne Apostle Martin Luther at fowle defiance with your maisters Zuinglius, Oecolampadius,Lutherās enemies to our Defenders and to all of their sect. Caluin and you, and so be his disciples Ioachimus Westphalus, Epinus, Pomeran, Heshusius, Brentius, Illyricus, and many others, as ye knowe. If ye will saye, he is present by his grace, so is he present with all good men, and that not only when the sacramēt is ministred, but also at al other times. If ye gra­unt the presence of his maiestie, who will thanke you for it? For so he is present euery where,Ierem. 23. as he that filleth heauen and earth. Nay you must graunt a more special presence in this sa­crament, or els ye make your banket of breade and wine litle worth. And your owne wordes import so much, where ye saye, Christ him selfe presently to be geuen vnto vs by bread and wine. Againe how can ye make good, that by faith we receiue his body and bloud? By faith we receiue grace and the merites of his death suffred in his body with shedding of his bloud. But the body and bloud it self, that is the very sub­stance of his body and bloud: tell vs how by faith (properly and truly to speake) as who should saie by faith made present, we receiue it. Furthermore what haue ye to answer to this question?The body of Christ is not re­ceiued by faith only If we receiue the body and bloud of Christ verely by faith (for so ye saye) we demaund whether we receiue the same by faith only without the body, or with the office of [Page] our body. If thoffice of our body be required to the recei­uing of Christes body in the sacrament, as Christ him selfe certainly meant (for els how obeyed the disciples his com­maundement to whō he sayd at his supper,Matth. 26. Take and eate, this is my body, likewise of the cuppe, take and drinke, which can not be done but by the seruice of the bodye) hereof then it foloweth that his body is verely present. For whatsoeuer is absent, that can not be receiued by office of the bodye. Well say we what we can, and though the presence of Christes bo­dy be neuer so wel proued, ye wil not graunt Christes body in dede present, but yet that we receiue it by faith: and so it re­maineth, that by faith only. Now that it is not receiued by faith only, thus we proue it by your own doctrine. It is so re­ceiued, as it is present, but it is present, by bread and wine (as ye saye), ergo it is receiued by bread and wine. To conclude, if by bread and wine, thē not by faith only. Wil ye geue me leaue to saye what I thinke of you? Verely it semeth by your vaine iangling,1. Timot. 1. that as S. Paul saith of such other like you, ye vn­derstand not what ye speake, nor whereof ye affirme.

bAs ye procede forth, ye geue warning to your readers not to take you so as though ye held with transubstantiatiō. And here ye speake thereof as best becommeth your scoffing spri­te, calling it a dreame of men of later times, whereof they could neuer yet agree within them selues. By which wordes your eloquence hath set forth your spite and lying at once. For albeit the terme of transubstātiationTransub­stantia­tion. be of no greater an­tiquitie then the Councell Laterane vnder Innocentius the third, where it was by the holy ghost and the fathers there deuised as very fitte for opening of the truth impugned by the Berengariās: yet is the doctrine thereof no lesse auncient then the gospell it selfe. For maugre the malice of the deuill and of all the Sacramentaries, the old truth shal preuaile, by which [Page 96] we are taught, that, which was bread, by the mysticall blessing to be made Christes body, and that which was wine, to be made his bloud, as I haue otherwheres sufficiently declared. And the church hath allwayes hereupon perfitely accorded touching the substance, though certaine scoolemen in their scolasticall disputations, where often times victorie is sought and faith not impugned, about discussiō of some scole point haue without preiudice of our belefe disagreed. Neither saye we as ye impute vnto vs,The bre­ad and wine go not to nothing. that the bread and wine goeth to nothing, but that they are by the almighty power of the word chaunged into a farre more excellent substance, to witte, of the body and bloud of our lord. Whereof ye can not gather, as ye do, our meaning to be such, as though the bread should receiue a certaine newe diuinitie. We knowe these elementes be not of such capacitie, how so euer it like you to iest. But lord what meant ye to alleagec Theophylacte andd S. Ambrose, whose doctrine is so cōtrary to yours, as light is to darkenes?Theophi­lact con­trary to the defen­ders. Iohan. 6. Theophylacte expounding these wordes of Christ in S. Iohn. As the lyuing father hath sent me, euen so lyue I by the father, and he that eateth me shal lyue by me, sayeth thus. Doest thou not heare a dredfull saying? We eate not pure God, for he is vntoucheable and vnbodily. Neither can he be comprehended with eyes nor teeth. Neither eate we the fleshe of a pure mā, for that can profite nothing at al. But now that God hath vnited vnto him selfe flesh after an vnspeakeable contēperamēt, the flesh is also become lifemaking. Not for that it passed awaye into the nature of God, [...] beware of that, but after the likenes of fyry yron, which abydeth yron, and sheweth the operation of fyre: euen so (quoth he) the flesh of our Lord abiding flesh, is life making, as being the flesh of God the word. Then as (sayeth he) I lyue by the father, who is lyfe, so he that eateth me shall lyue by me, being tempered with me, as also being transelemented into me, who haue power to viuificate or geue [Page] life. Which last wordes your owne doctor Oecolampadius hath thus turned, dū quodammodo miscetur & transelemētatur in me qui viuisicare potest, corrupting the soūde doctrine of the writer with his forged quodammodo, which he found not in the greke there placed, and breaking the congruitie of the la­tine speach by putting that in the third person, that ought to be in the first. What can be written more expressely against your sacramentary heresie, that denieth the reall presence, and faineth an imaginary eating by faith alone?Theophy­lact. ma­keth plai­nely for the truth of Christes flesh in the sacrament. Sayeth he not that we eate the flesh vnited to the word, which by vertue of the vnion is quickening or lifemaking? And why eate we not pure God or God alone without his flesh? Because (sayeth he) he is vntoucheable and incōprehensible to our senses. As who shuld saye, it is the flesh of the sonne of God that to our sal­uatiō is eatē, which may be eatē. If faith wrought al this mat­ter, thē after your meaning, might we eate God, which The­ophylacte denyeth. For by faith we beleue in God, and ap­prehend his benefites. And because by eating of Christes flesh, we haue a maruelous inward coniunction with him not only in soule, but also according to the bodye: he sa­yeth, he that eateth Christes flesh, is tempered together with him, and transelemented into him, so as he is made one body with him,Cap. 3. as Cyrillus expoundeth the place of S. Paul to the Ephesians, where he sayeth, that we be concorporales, that is to saye,Ephes. 5. of one body with Christ. And an other where, flesh of his flesh, and bone of his bones.

Againe we maruell with what face ye dare alleage The­ophylacte for you, who in most euident wordes ouerthro­weth your figuratiue,Not a figure, but the flesh it selfe of our lorde. tropicall, and energicall doctrine tou­ching this blessed sacrament. For he sayeth vppon this sixth chapter of S. Iohn. Marke well that the bread which is eaten of vs in the mysteries, is not only a certaine figure of our lordes flesh, but [Page 97] the flesh it selfe of our lord. For he sayd not, Transub­stantiatiō the bread that I shall geue is the figure of fleshe, but it is my flesh. For the bread is with secrete wordes through the mysticall blessing and comming vppon of the holy ghost, chaunged into the flesh of our lord. Much more there he sayeth to the confirmation of the catholike faith in this behalfe, that of al other ye should lest haue alleaged him.

Neither makethS. Amb. S. Ambrose, which also ye bring in, any better for you.d Would God ye would admitte him for vm­peere in this point. Verely in the booke and chapter that ye referre vs vnto, he disputeth as it were of purpose against you, as though he forsawe the time, when the church should be troubled with the heresie of sacramentaries. His wordes be otherwise then ye reherse them. Because the place is notable to proue that ye denie, and euery man either hath not or vn­derstandeth not S. Ambrose, though the same be somewhat long, I will not let here to recite it truly englished.De sacr. li. 4. Cap. 4. Tu forte dicis &c. Perhappes thou sayest. My bread is common, but this bread is bread before the wordes of the sacramentes, so sone as conse­cration commeth, De pane. of bread is made the flesh of Christ. Let vs then auouch this, how that which is bread, may be the body of Christ by consecration. Then with what wordes and speaches is consecration made? Euen with those of our Lord Iesus. For what so euer els is said (he meaneth at the masse) it is praise geuen to God, Conse­cration. and praying for the people, for kinges, for the rest. When the priest com­meth to the consecration of the honorable sacrament, there he vseth not his owne wordes, but the wordes of Christ. Therfor it is the word of Christ that maketh the sacrament. What word of Christ? Soothly that same wherby all thinges be made. Our Lord cōmaun­ded, and heauen was made. Our Lord commaunded, and earth was made. Our Lord commaunded, and the seas were made. Our Lord commaunded, euery creature was engendred. Seest thou then how Operato­rius. workefull is the word of Christ? Well then if there be so great po­wer [Page] in the word of our lord Iesus, that thinges beganne to be which were not, These be the wor­des allea­ged by the De­fender. how much more is it workefull, vt sint quae e­rant, & in aliud commutentur, that thinges be which were, and be chaunged into an other thing? Here sir Defender constrewe me these wordes, and what sense can you drawe forth of them, but this, if by the working power of our lordes word, thinges haue a being, which before were nothing, and had no being at all, as heauen, earth, and seas: how much more power hath it to worke, that thinges which were before, and had a being, now also be, or haue a being, but be chaunged into an other thing, in aliud, into a thing of an other substaunce, for by this phrase is signified a substanciall chaunging, which aptly is called transubstantiation? And I praye you good syr, who sayeth, that the elementes, I meane bread and wine, passe quite awaye and go to nothing? Though you so belye vs,The ele­mentes after cō­secration be, or haue a being. we saye not so, God forbid. We saye that after consecration they be, but what? Not the selfe same they were, whereby the former substance is excluded, but the body and bloud of our lord. Againe in that we saye with. S. Ambrose, in aliud commutantur, they be chaunged into an other thing: foloweth it not thereof by good logike, ergo they be? Will not this argument holde in scole the verbe passiue being resolued, Sunt commutata, ergo sunt? For that which ceasseth to be or goeth to nothing, ye can not properly saye of it that it is chaunged,S. Am­brose be­lyed by the De­fender. but rather that it is ended, or perisheth. Now syr I report me to euery man that hath any sense, whether I maye not laufully geue you the Menti, as for maners sake I maye vse the Italian terme, and chalenge you in plaine ter­mes of a lye, for vttering this vntruth, vppon that holy Do­ctor S. Ambrose, specially speaking as you do in your english translation by your selfe allowed thus: For what cā be said more plainely then that which Ambrose sayth, Bread and wine remaine [Page 98] still the same they were before, and yet are chaunged in to an other thinge? Zeale moueth me to saye beyonde the modestie of my natural disposition, what is iuggling, what is lying, what is falshed, what is falsefying, what is wickednes of falsaries, if this be not?

Neither is the saying wherewith this Defender belyeth S. Ambrose all only false and contrary to the catholike faith, but also absurd, vnreasonable, and folish. For if bread and wi­ne remaine still after cōsecration the same they were before, as the Lady interpreteth, how then are they chaunged into an other thing? Of that which is chaunged into an other thing, what reasonable man will saye it remaineth still the sa­me it was before? Remaining the same presupposeth no chaunge, at lest into an other thing. An accidentarie chaun­ge maye be, the thing remaining the same. But to saye of any thing that it is chaunged into an other thing, and yet remai­neth the same: it is as absurde, as to saye, a man is an ape, a stone is yron. For thinges different in substance can not be said the one of the other.

The places ofe Gelasius andf Theodorite in apparence se­me to make more for you, and more thē any other doctours.The pla­ce of Ge­lasius and Theodo­ritus an­swered. They be commonly alleaged of Luther, Oecolampadius, Bucer, Caluin, and all other that impugne the faith of the Catholike church, concerning this blessed sacrament, not without insultation, as though they had by them wonne the field. So are they wonte to do, that haue litle good matter for defence of a bad cause. And though these two doctours were all together of this opinion, that after consecration the substance of bread and wine remaineth, what reason is it, they only in so great a matter should preiudicate all other holy and lerned fathers, and which is more, the generall councels and the whole church of Christ? But for answer to both, [Page] whereas they vtter the truth, and right doctrine of the church in plaine termes, it is reason we accept the same, and for any sentence sounding to the contrary, that we seeke such construction, as falsehed may geue place to truth, noueltie to antiquitie, strangenes to the receiued opinion. The Catho­like faith we finde in them both within fewe lines after the wordes of this Defenders obiection, first by Gelasius thus expressed. Sacramenta corporis & sanguinis domini in diui­nam transeunt spiritu sancto perficiente substantiam, permanent tamen in suae proprietate naturae, The sacramentes (sayth he) of the body and bloud of our Lord passe ouer into diuine substance by the working of the holy ghost. Yet remaine they still in the proprietie of their owne nature: by diuine substance he mea­neth the flesh of our Lord assumpted of the word.The truth confessed by Theo­doritus. Dialog. 2. Now saith Theodoritus, the mysticall tokens, be vnderstanded to be the thinges which they be made, and are beleued, and adored, as being the thinges which they are beleued to be. But euery man knoweth they are beleued to be made the body and bloud of Christ, and therefore be duly adored and worshipped: so after the mynde of Theodorite they be the body and bloud in dede, not bread and wine, as before consecration.

Now that we haue the truth confessed by Gelasius and Theodoritus, your obiection must seme to be of litle force. And in dede the same rightly vnderstanded beareth no sub­stanciall witnes against the catholike assertion.The wordes of Gelasius ex­amined. The substance or nature of bread and wine ceasseth not to be, sayeth Gelasius (whereas your interpreter addeth of her owne head this word (so) we tell you and her,False in­terpreta­tion of Gelasius. in Theodorite it is not so. Er­go it remaineth saye ye. We graunt the substance or nature of bread and wine remaineth after consecration, so as Gelasius vnderstandeth by the name of substance, which is nothing elles but the very nature (as commonly we speake of nature) [Page 99] that is to saye, the naturall proprieties of bread and wine,Nature in Gela­sius, and substance in Theo­dorite is taken for naturall proper­tie. Dialog. 2. for so he expoundeth him selfe afterward, saying yet they remaine in the proprietie of their owne nature. They remaine (likewise sa­yeth Theodorite) in their former substance, figure, and forme, and be sene and felt as before. And therefore when Gelasius had na­med substance, considering how the same soundeth to lerned eares the inward being of a thing which the accidetēs be staid on, he reuoketh as it were that word backe againe by way of correcting him self, and sayeth, vel natura, as who should say,In cap. Matth. 26. cap. 64. or rather nature. We must not beholde (sayeth Euthymius a gre­ke Doctor) the nature of the thinges which be set before vs, but the vertue [...]r power of them. Where by nature he vnderstandeth not thinward substance of bread and wine, but their proper­tie or qualitie. Which we confesse to remaine after consecra­tion. Who is not satisfied herewith, may it please him to ac­cept this that here foloweth for a fuller aunswer as well concerning this obiection made out of Gelasius and Theodoritus, as for the whole doctrine of transubstantia­tion.

When it pleased our Sauiour Christ at his last supper to institute this blessed sacrament,The do­ctrine of transub­stantia­tion. at which he tooke bread and wine, and turned them into his body and bloud, he would in such wise aduaunce these creatures to a much excellenter condicion, as they should loose no whit of their former ver­tues. For the sonne of man came not to destroye, but to saue, and as S. Augustine sayeth,Lib. 83. quest. is not cause that any thing tend vnto not being. Now whereas euery creature first hath his substance whereby it consisteth, next his naturall effect ser­uing in the order which God hath appointed it vnto, thirdly his accidentary properties which by our fiue senses we may comprehend: it hath liked Christ to vse for his purpose not the accidentary properties of bread and wine, (where vppon [Page] pure men haue some power), but the inward substāce it selfe, which as God only made, so he only can at his pleasure chan­ge. This substance then of bread and wine: Christ at his sup­per hath in such sort changed, and now daily also in this sa­crament by the ministerie of priestes through his word doth change: as we may not truly saye the selfe same either to re­maine, or to become nought and perish. Not to remaine, be­cause they are changed, not to become nought and perish, because they are not annichilated or gone to nothing, and so haue still some maner of remaining, as a thing maye remaine which is tourned into an other thinge. After which maner they remaine, first in the flesh and bloud, as in the thi [...]ges in­to which they are conuerted, againe in their vertue and strenght which their accidentary properties haue in the stede of substances. For as in their substance there was nothing more excellent, then that they were of them selues not ha­uing their being in any other thing, so that vertue is kept still in their quantitie and qualities. Which nolesse con­sist by them selues, (and that by miracle), then if they were substances.

In logica. Cap. 23.And thereto may Damascenes definition of substance per­teine, who sayeth that substance is euery that what so euer by itselfe is being, and hath not being in an other. And therefore sith the accidentes haue their being by them selues in this sacrament, and be not stayd on any other thing: in this con­sideration substance of them may so be reported, as if them selues were substance. Which substanciall consisting of the accidentes lacking a propre name, because it is the mighty and extraordinary hand of God, is also extraordinarely cal­led of Gelasius and Theodoritus by the name which the thing had before, to witte, the substance of bread and wine. And no maruell if they spake not in most exact wise of this [Page 100] secrete point of doctrine at what time it was not as yet by the church so clerely and fully discussed. But sithens of the scoo­lemē it hath ben more distinctly named the existence of acci­dentes without their subiect, that is without an other thing whereupon they might staye.

Againe whereas bread and wine by their nature do nour­rish, this vertue also remaineth in the accidentes geuen to thē by the almighty word of God, who changeth creatures to their bettering, not to their impairing, This was the meaning of Gelasius, and Theodoritus where they saye, the bread and wine to remaine in their former substance or nature. Other­wise should they be contrary to them selues, as they which also do acknowledge the nature of bread and wine to be changed into a more excellent substance by the workefull word of Christ. Seing then there is a chāge by all cōsent, and most certaine it is that the chāge is not in the accidentes, be­cause we see them remaine as they were before, and God de­ceiueth not our senses in their true and propre obiect, which is colour, tast, smell, &c: it must nedes be,Change in sub­stance. that the change be in substance, which is to sense incomprehensible, that when Christ informeth our vnderstanding saying of that which semed bread, this is my body, he nolesse telleth vs that the being or essence of these thinges, is only his body and bloud, then he sheweth to our senses that the owtward formes are the formes of bread and wine in all vertue and strenght of substance and nature, which they had before.

Thus we haue answered your places obiected against the catholike doctrine of transubstantion out of Gela­sius and Theodoritus.Theodo­rite false­fied by the De­fender. And here we put you in minde of your falsefying of Theodorites wordes, in that ye make him to saye in your english the mysticall signes to remaine in their former substance forme and kinde, where he sayeth not so, but [Page] in their former substance figure and shape. ye knowe pardy there is great difference betwen the kynde of a thing and his sha­pe. The oftener ye vse that falsehed, as ye vse it very often: the more shall ye be espied to be false teachers, and growe out of credite where truth is loued.

The wordes which ye recite out ofg S. Augustines ser­mon ad infantes,Answere to the place allea­ged out of S. Au­gustine. we finde in Bede vpon the tenth chapter of the first epistle to the Corinthians. The whole place is this. This thing which ye see in the aulter of God, ye haue sene it also in the night past. But what it was, what it meaneth, the sacrament of how great a thing it conteined, as yet ye haue not heard. That then which ye sawe, is bread and chalice, which euen your eyes tell you. But that which your faith requireth to be instructed of, bread is the body of Chrst, the chalice his bloud. Now what cā ye pike out of all this, but that the late baptized were to be instru­cted concerning this sacrament, as they which neuer heard, what it was that they sawe on the aulter, nor vnderstode what it meant, but thought only thereof so as their senses enformed them? And if the substance of bread remained as before consecration, what nede had they to heare what it were? For of them selues they might knowe the thinges pro­poned to be bread and wine. But S. Augustine (ye saye) cal­leth that they sawe, bread and wine. Yea sir so it was, so farre as their eyes told them. But what their faith ought to tell them, he instructeth them saying. Bread, to witte which they sawe and their eyes told them of, is according to the instructiō of faith, the holy body of Christ. To this con­struction must we stand by S. Augustine him selfe so set forth. Neither hereof can you take any aduantage against vs. And is it any maruell if he spake to such younglinges in the faith of that mysterie, so as he might seme to haue respect of their small vnderstanding? Wherein he leadeth them from [Page 101] their eyes to faith, from bread appering, to a body beleued, and vnder the forme of bread conteined.

In alleagingOrigēs wordes examy­ned. Origen falsefied by the Defender. In Mat. Homil. 15. Origen Syr defender ye playe your accusto­med false playe, corrupting his sentence and falsefying his wordes. For they be not as you recite them, but thus. Illecibus qui sanctificatur per verbum dei pérque obsecrationem iuxtà id quod habet materiale, in ventrem abit, & in secessum eijcitur. That meate which is consecrated by the word of God and by prayer, ac­cording to that materiall which it hath, it goeth into the belly, and is voided forth into the priuey. Here neither nameth he bread, as you do (to cause the people to thinke it is but very bread) but meate. And that you haue in your latine, quod quidē ad materiā attinet, which is by your interpreter as touching the materiall substance thereof, it is not Origēs, but your owne forged stuffe to deceiue the ignorant with all, to thend they might be mo­ued by your false handling of that doctor to beleue the mat­ter and substance of very bread to remaine. He speaketh not of the matter of bread, but of that which is materiall in this sacrament, meaning the accidentes or qualities remaining af­ter consecration, which be materiall, but not the matter it selfe of bread (as matter is taken for the one part of a perfect substance) and the same accidents be voided forth, as Origen had good cause by occasiō of Christes wordes to declare, you had none to recorde to the same. But it liked your filthy spri­te with vile wordes to bring that holy mysterie and blessed sacrament into contempt. Wherein ye do the deuill authour of all heresies the greatest seruice that may be deuised. Now hauing plainely shewed these Defenders belying of the fathers, let vs see whether they haue so much grace or mode­stie, as to spare our sauiour Christ him selfe.

Lastly they alleage Christes wordes to proue that the sub­stance of wine remaineth in the sacrament of the aulter after [Page] consecration,The place alleaged out of the gospell cōsidered. which being proued should inferre the like reason also of the bread. Christ (saye they) him selfe sayd, not only after the blessing of the cuppe, but after he had ministred the communion, I will drinke nomore of this fruite of the wine. Hereunto they adde of their owne heads, It is well knowen that the fruite of the vine is wine, and not bloud, By this they would signifie, that in the chalice we haue not Christes bloud, as him selfe said, but mere wine, as against Christ they labour to perswade. This gere is so by them handeled, as though Ladies only should come to turne it into english and make much of it, and noman of witte or vnderstanding might haue the discussion of it. They presuppose for an vn­doubted ground (which is not vndoubted in dede) that Christ after his holy supper sayd,Matth. 26. he would not drinke from thence forth of that generation of the vine, for so be his wordes to be interpreted. Againe they presuppose a matter certai­nely false, that Christe added neuer a word more at that time, and in that same sentence, which might declare an other sense of his former saying, were it graunted he had spoken those wordes after communion. Vppon those two groundes, the one not knowen to be true, the other well knowen to be false, they build this conclusion, that the substance of wine remaineth in the Sacrament, and is not conuerted into the bloud of Christ.

For better declaration of this point, it is to be vnderstan­ded, that these wordes of Christ (wherein he denieth to drin­ke from thenceforth of that generation of the vine) are not after one sorte alleaged by the Euangelistes. For Mathew (whom Marke foloweth) doth so place them as spoken after consecration.Lu. ca. 22. Luke on the other side putteth them before the wordes of consecration. These Defenders without any fur­ther debating, flatly take them to be spoken for their most aduantage, making no mencion of the diuerse maner of re­hersall, [Page 102] which the Euangelistes vsed in that behalfe. But we saye, that those wordes (I will not drinke from henceforth of this generation of the vine) either were spoken only before the communion, or only after, or in both times. If they were spo­ken before cōmunion, (which opinion is the more probable it is very clerely proued by them, that wine remaineth not, as it shal hereafter be deduced. If they were spoken ei­ther only after communion, or in both times, then shall it be made euident, that they rather proue with vs, then make any thing against the conuersion of wine into Christes bloud. Now then we thinke rather those wordes to haue ben spoken before the communion, then after, and that for diuers causes. First Luke wrote after the other two Euangelistes, and there­fore maye be thought in writing the very same storie, and in vsing the same wordes, rather to haue put them in a more propre place and order, then in a more vnpropre, specially whereas in the beginning of his gospell he professeth vnto Theophilus, that he writeth [...]. q. d. co­haerenter, [...]. in order.Cap. 1. And by all reason the former sayinges be sooner drawen to be vnderstanded accor­ding to the latter sayinges, then contrarywise.

Seing then the Euangelistes reherse not all thinges alwa­yes in the very propre tyme and place they were said and done in, (as it may appere for example in the description of Iohn baptistes death),Matt. 14. Marc. 6. Luc. 9. and seing as euery of them wrote la­ter, his order is iudged more naturall and proper (for which cause we deduce the whole storie of Christes preaching out of S. Iohn): for these causes it may well be said, that we should rather folowe the order of Luke,Cap. 22. who witnesseth that Christ spake these wordes before his maundie, then Mathew and Marke, who tell it as spokē after. Secondly the order of Luke is confirmed by the circumstance of the thinges that he de­scribeth more then the other Euangelistes. For the other [Page] speake but of one chalice, but Luke mencioneth two, the one belonging to the ceremonie of the olde lawe in eating the Pascall Lambe (as Hierome, Bede and Theophilact haue ler­nedly declared), the other belonging to Christes holy sup­per. Now because in the chalice of the olde lawe there was certainly not bloud but wine, (whereas Christ teacheth that in his chalice his owne bloud is conteined) let the discrete reader iudge, whether we must not rather thinke that these wordes of Christ, I will not frō henceforth drinke of this genera­tion of the vine, do not rather perteine to the cuppe of the old lawe, (as Luke placeth thē) then to the chalice of Christ af­ter the consecration, whereof Mathew and Marke reherse thē. Thirdly Luke reporteth the like wordes to be spoken by Christ, when after the eating of the Pascall Lābe he said, I saie vnto you from henceforth I will not eate of that, vntill it be sulfil­led in the kingdom of God. And as he reciteth that same to be said of the Lābe, so forthwith he speaheth of a cuppe belon­ging to the custome of drinking at the supper of that lambe, likewise adding, that he would not from thenceforth drinke of that generation of the vine. And who seeth not how plai­ne it is, that Luke hath the very order of the storie, as the thing it selfe was done?

Fourthly and lastly when Matthew and Marke reherse that Christ said, he would not from thence forth drinke of that generation of the vine, they both in much like sorte of speaking adde thereunto these wordes, (which in the A­pologie were guilefully left out) Vntill that daye when I will drinke it newe with you in the kingdom of God my father. Mat. 26. Mark. 14. New drinking. If Christ speake of a new drinking which is to come, by likely­hod the drinking past is old. And therefore the wordes there­unto appertening do meane and describe a cuppe of the olde lawe, and not the cuppe of Christ, the which him selfe cal­leth [Page 103] the newe testament and bloud of the newe testament.

Now if that be so, when he sayeth after the drinking of a plaine cuppe of wine, I will not from hence forth drinke of this generation of the vine, vntill the kingdome of God co­me, or vntill I drinke it newe in the kingdome of my father, and yet fourth with drinketh of a newe cuppe, which was his owne bloud: doth it not necessarely folowe (whereunto they can neuer answer) that the newe cuppe is not that generation of the vine, that the other was which he pointed vnto, but as he named it, is newe, that is to saye, not olde wine, as it was vnder Moises, but his blessed bloud, as he made it by his al­mighty working at his last supper, in which he turned the wine into his bloud? What exclamation would be sufficient to expresse, that in this weighty point of saluation our english clergie are content to blinde the people, the right worshipful, yea the honourable of our countrie in so vile a sorte, that af­ter many fathers wordes misreported, and wrongfully wre­sted, they doubt not to attempt the same in Christes owne sayinges, and in those sayinges of his, which euidently proue the contrarie?

But now let vs graunt of our free liberalitie contrary to so many good and strong reasons, that Christ said after consecratiō. I will not from henceforth drinke of this generatiō of the vine, vntill the kingdome of God come. The king­dome of God ta­ken two wayes. Then it must be fur­ther vnderstāded, that the kingdome of God is taken in scripture sometime for the presēt state of the church after Christes resurrectiō in this world, according to that is said oftentimes in scripture, the kingdome of God draweth nigh, Matth. 3. sometimes also for the ioye of heauē, as when Christ saieth,Luc. 22. I d [...]spose for you a kingdome, as my father hath disposed for me, that ye may eate and drinke at my table, &c. Now if we take these wordes of Christ spoken before consecration, it is not vnconuenient, to vn­derstand [Page] them of either of both kingdomes, that is to saye, of the kingdom of resurrection, or of glorie, as Chrysostome and other do witnesse, because both were to come at that ti­me. But if we take them spoken after consecration, as we ra­ther vppon confidence of the truth, then for necessitie at this time do graunt: then these wordes (Vntill the kingdome of God come) are to be meant only of the kingdome of glorie. For these holy mysteries belong to the kingdome of Christes re­surrection and ascension. Neither were they practized by the Apostles in the church of Christ, vntill the holy ghost came downe vpon them. Christ then after the institution of the mysteries of the newe testament, speaking of a kingdome to come, doth signifie the kingdome of glorie, and not only the kingdome of his resurrection in this world, and then he sa­yeth, I will not drinke of this generation of the vine (he mea­neth together with you) vntill I drinke it newe with you in the kingdome of my father. And so the newnes of it there is fruition of it not vnder the formes of bread and wine, as we haue it nowe, but face to face without all figure and forme. Then it is to be noted that Christ sayd not, I will drinke no more of the fruite of the vine, But, I will not from hence­forth drinke of this generation of the vine: of this I saye, whereof now I haue dronken, which is vnder the forme of wine my bloud, which am the true vine. For whereas this Apolo­gie sayeth (it is well knowen that the fruit of the vine is wine, and not bloud) it semeth to declare, that the authors thereof are ignorant in the holy scriptures, where they might haue foun­de the fruit of some vine to be called bloud. For Iacob sayd to his sonne Iudas bearing the figure of Christ, He shall wash his robe in wine, Gen. 49. and his cl [...]ke in the bloud of a grape. Lo a grape hath his bloud, a grape is the fruit of the vine, and therefore it is not well knowen, that the fruit of the vine is not bloud. [Page 104] The holy ghost did in these wordes of Iacob prophecie, that Christ the true vine should geue the grape of his body to be pressed vppon the crosse, from whence the wine was shedde, which is in our chalice, as Chrysostom also noteth.In. 1. Co. 10 But be­cause it is there vnder an other forme, Christ sayeth, he will not from thenceforth drinke with his disciples of that gene­ration of the vine, vntill he drinke it newe, that is to saye, re­newed to immortalitie by resurrection, and shewed in his owne forme and glorie. Hereof Gregorie Nazianzē may be vewed, oratione .4. in sanctum pascha. But specially S. Au­gustine declaring how this word (newe) doth not so being taken, signifie a newe substance, but a renouation to immor­talitie. quaest. euangel. lib. 1. cap. 43. And now is it no wonder if we expound the word (vine) mystically. For if ye place the saying of it after mysteries, and marke that it is referred to them by a demonstration, to witte, (this generation of the vine) and referred againe to a time in heauen where no ma­teriall wine shall be: there is no euasion, but by this genera­tion of the vine must be meant that bloud, which was made before in the holy mysteries, and that bloud, which shalbe droncken newe in the kingdome of heauen. For the materi­all wine is not dronken in heauen, neither was it dronken in the mysteries, and therefore not spoken of in that saying, which so is put betwen the mysteries and the glorie of hea­uen, that it referreth it selfe to ech of them. O what strength truth hath, how plainely she dareth to shewe her face, nor nipping the scriptures, nor misenglishing them, nor dissem­bing any iote, that may seme to make against her!

And in speakyng thus, we meane not to abase the Lordes supper, Apologie or to teache that yt is but a could ceremonie onely, and nothing to be wrought therin: (as many falsely slaunder vs we teache) For wee affirme that Christ doth truely and presently giue his owne selfe in his Sacramentes: In baptisme, that wee may put him on: and in his [Page] supper, that we may eate him by faith and spirit, and may haue euer­lasting lyfe by his crosse and bloud. And we say not this is done slighty and couldely, but effectually and truely. For although we do not touche the body of Christ with teethe and mouth, yet wee hold him fast and eate him by faith, by vnderstanding, and by the spirit. And this is no vaine faith whiche doth comprehend Christ: and that is not receiued with colde deuotion, whiche is receiued with vnder­standing, with faith, and with spirit. For Christ him selfe altogither is so offered and giuen vs in these mysteries, that we may certainly know we be fleshe of his flesh, and bone of his bones: and that Christ continueth in vs, and wee in him.

THE FOVRTINTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion. By whō is our lor­des sup­per more abased, by the De­fenders, or by the catholi­kes.It is easy to be perceiued who abaseth more our lordes supper, whether ye, that teach it to be very bakers bread and wyne with the only figure of Christes body and bloud, or we who beleue it to be his true body and bloud with the on­ly formes of bread and wine. Whether ye, that will haue it a figure of Christes whole body absent, or we, who will haue Christes body present in dede, with a figure of his death which death is absent only. Whether ye, that cal it an idol whē it is worshipped, or we that do according to our dutie adore it,In. 1. Cor. c 10. Hom. 24. because that roiall body (as Chrysostom sayeth) which is set before vs to be sene now in earth, is vvorthy of the most high ho­nour. But whether of those two is the colder ceremonie and more simple supper, to haue bread and wine with a signe on­ly of flesh and bloud, or to haue reall flesh and bloud with such formes of bread and wine as by the power of God do nolesse bodily nourish vs, then the substance it selfe would haue done: we doubt not of wise mens iudgement. Ye haue your carnall bankettes fatte and full ynough of the best flesh, and it is with you superstitious to eate drye and Lenten mea­tes. But ye will haue your spirituall bankettes so leane and carreine, as a man may well discerne whether ye haue more phantasie to your flesh, or to your spirite.

Ye write that many falsely slaunder you,The sa­cramen­taries teach no­thīg to be wrought in their Lordes supper. saying that ye teach nothing to be wrought in the Lordes supper, whereas ye affirme, that Christ doth truly and presently geue his ow­ne selfe in his supper, that we may eate him by faith and spirite. And other worke in the Lordes supper ye shewe none. And this which ye shewe, a man may doubt whe­ther it be a thing wrought in the lordes supper or no. Well may ye saye that it is a thing wrought in them which come to the supper, but that it is wrought in the supper it selfe,1. Cor. 11. ye shewe it not, the supper being that which is called caena, to witte, the meate receiued, not caenatio, which is the act of supping. For sith that supper is nothing els but meate and drinke set vpon the table to be receiued by such as come vn­to it:VVhat is supper properly. that which is wrought in the Lordes supper, must be wrought in the meate and drinke, which our Lord hath at his table. And as the matter whereof our Lordes supper is made, is bread and wine: so the supper made thereof is our Lordes body and bloud, in to which the bread and wine by thalmighty power of the word is changed. So that if ye will shewe Christ himselfe to be made or wrought in our lordes supper, ye must shewe bread and wine to be chaunged into Christ him selfe, and so to be eaten of his faythfull at his ta­ble. But whereas there are three thinges, Christ that maketh the supper, the communicantes that receiue the supper, and the supper it selfe: ye saye that Christ for his parte geueth his owne selfe verely present, likewise that the communicantes for their part eate him by faith and spirite. And so ye shewe that the maker of the supper worketh, and that the commu­nicantes worke. But all this while ye shewe vs not what is wrought in the matter of the supper, that is to saye in the bread and wine, nor what is made of them. O great slaunder that ye were charged withall, which not so much as by your [Page] owne word ye are discharged of.

The pro­per wor­ke of our Lordes supper.How much sounder is the catholike doctrine, which tea­cheth the proper worke of our Lordes supper to be the tur­ning of the substance of bread and wine into his body and bloud? Which worke because ye will not confesse, ye haue deuysed a worke of your owne working, which is not propre to our Lordes supper. For if I can receiue Christ in my house at home by faith and spirite, how is that worke propre to his supper, which may be wrought without his supper? Or can I not beleue in Christ or lifte vp my spirite vnto him, except I come to supper? Or if I do call for Christ, doth he not geue him selfe by grace vnto me?

How make the Defenders Christ verely present in his supper.But (saye ye) at the lordes supper Christ geueth him selfe verely present. To what purpose I praye you? That we may eate him (saye ye) by faith and spirite. Well reasoned forsooth. Haue ye forgotē the geuing to eate, and eating that which is geuen, to be relatiues, one of them hauing relation to the other? If Christ do exhibite his owne selfe verely present, as your latine text hath, or geueth his owne selfe verely and pre­sently, as your gentlewoman telleth your tale for you: doth not he so exhibite or geue him selfe, as he will be receiued? Or doth he shewe in one hand a piece of bread, and with the other strike vs on the head with a stone? If he geue vs him selfe verely present, as ye saye, we take him verely present. And thē (onlesse ye meane by him selfe his grace which is of Christ and not Christ him selfe) we eate him verely present, not only by faith and spirite, but by taking him into our mouth and bodye. If it please him at any time to be eaten by faith and spirite alone, (after which sorte he is daily eaten by those that hūbly call vpon him) then he geueth not him selfe verely present, but by faith and spirite, otherwise named grace or some spiritual effect of his working. But in our lordes sup­per [Page 106] the scripture requireth a speciall and peculiar presence of Christ, to witte, of his flesh, so as it may be eaten. If then he geue him selfe verely present, as ye saye, he is present in his owne person, god and mā, with body, with bloud, with soule, with Godhed. If ye meane the very presence of his Godhed, that presence belongeth no more to Christ, then to the father and to the holy ghost. And so haue ye not declared any pe­culiar presence belonging to his supper. For by presence of his Godhed he is alwayes verely present, as well before supper, as at or after supper, because he filleth heauē and earth. It remai­neth that either ye vnderstand not your selues, or wilfully deceyue that infinite number of soules, for whose sake Christ hath shed his bloud.

Your errour in making the presence of Christ in baptis­me lyke to his presence in the supper, is to grosse.The pre­sence of Christ in baptisme and in the sup­per is di­stinct, which, the De­fenders make to be like. Iohan. 3. Iohan. 6. For al­though Christ worke both our regeneration and our nour­rishment by his diuine sacramentes, yet in baptisme our re­generation is by name attributed in the gospell to the holy ghost also, to shewe that Christes presence there is spirituall. But his supper consisteth of his body and bloud, which are so vnited to Christ, as they are peculiar to the second persone in Godhed. Againe for asmuch as they are receiued into vs as foo­de to nourrish our bodyes to resurrection, as the gospell sa­yeth, and nomās body is otherwise nourrished then by eating in dede that meate whereof he is nourrished, and the flesh of Christ, as himselfe sayeth, is meate indede,Iohan. 6. and his bloud drinke in dede: we are forced to beleue an other maner of presence in the sacrament of the aulter, then in baptisme. And therefor ye haue handeled this matter to sleightly and coldly.

Whereas ye saye,That we touch Christes body and eate it with our mouth, and how. wee do not touch the body of Christ with teeth and mouth, are ye so accustomed to swallowe downe whole morselles, as ye neuer touch them with your [Page] teeth? Or haue ye lerned to eate that which ye touch not with your mouth? If Christ said, take eate, this is my bodie, and the Apostles tooke and eate the same, neither could they take and eate without touching: it semeth ye handle eating to sleightly and coldly, when ye will haue it without touching. Ch ysostom a more substantiall handler of thinges then a­ny of you is,In. 1. Cor. Hom. 24. sayeth of Christes bodye, quod omnium maxi­mum est atque praecipium, in terra non conspicaris tantum, sed tan­gis, neque solum tangis, sed comedis, & eo accepto domum redis. Of all thinges that be in earth, what is the greatest and the chiefest, that doest thou not only see, but touchest, neither only doest thou touch it, but also eate it, and hauing receiued it, thou goest home againe. How we touch it we knowe, for it is not now a mortall and cor­ruptible body, wherein we may fasten our teeth, but glorious and immortall, and therefore we touch it by the reason of the accidentes of bread and wine, with whose formes (as S. Augustine speaketh) it is couered or vailed, In lib. Sen­tent. Pro­speri. The De­fenders imagina­rie hol­ding of Christ holdeth not Christ as he is in the sacra­ment. Matt. 26. and so commeth it to our teeth, and to our mouth, and nourisheth both our bodies and soules to life euerlasting. Nay but we (saye ye) hol­de him fast, and eate him by faith, by vnderstāding, and by the spirite. I praye you be not to hasty to holde him before ye haue him. How came ye by him? His grace he geueth diuerse wayes, but him selfe bodely and presently as man, he neuer promi­sed to geue otherwise, then when he said, take, eate, this is my bodye. And then Iudas (who had but a very meane faith) be­cause he receiued the sacrament, receiued him also. And our blessed Lady although she had a most perfite faith, receiued him not after that sort, because then she receiued not the sa­crament. How can ye assure your selues, that your faith ta­keth the body of Christ, which was neuer promised to your faith? If your faith take him not as he is in the sacrament, how can your faith holde him fast there?

As here before ye haue said much and proued litle against the reall presence, wresting and stretching certaine fathers sentences and the scripture it selfe to that purpose, not wholy and faithfully, but by piecemeale and patchedly alleaged, so as ye might best make them serue to the maintenance of your false doctrine: right so in the conclusion of that part of your Apologie, with a like grace ye heap a number of man­gled auctorities together, whereby to perswade, that foras­much as the fathers haue aduertised vs to lifte vp our mindes to heauenward, we should not thinke we eate the flesh of Christ as being here present with vs vnder the forme of bread. Therefore whereas ye laye to the catholikes charge, as though by their sacriledge the people were bereft of a great benefite in that they be taught to be content with the one kinde, vnder the same receiuing nolesse then if they had both: how much more worthely are ye to be charged with the cri­me of sacriledge, that robbe them of the greatest treasure that is in the church, so much as in you lyeth, the body and bloud of our Lord, and in stede thereof pretend to deliuer vnto them a piece of bakers bread and a cuppe of wine? But let vs see what good reason or auctoritie ye bring out of the fa­thers against the true presence of Christ in the blessed sacra­ment.

And therefore in celebrating these mysteries (saie ye) the peo­ple are to good purpose exhorted before they come to receiue the holy communion to lift vp their hartes and to direct their mindes to heauen ward, because he is there, Apologie. by whom we must be fulfed and liue.

I praye you which these mysteries meane ye?Confu­tation. The prie­stes saying of sursum corda, ma­keth no argument against the presence of Chri­stes body in the sa­crament. Those that ye haue in your newe communion, or those that we haue at the aulter of God in the catholike church of Christ? If ye meane your owne newe deuised toye, thereof ye can not bring any sufficient reason against the church pardy, which [Page] condemneth the same. If ye meane the holy mysteries of the catholike church, ye misreport the matter. For by that exhor­tation ye speake of, the people are not prepared to receiue the communion only nor chiefly, but to dispose them selues ac­cordingly and as it becommeth thē to praye, for to that ende be those wordes sursum corda, vp with your hartes, pronoun­ced by the priest in the preface before prayer. Read S. Cy­prian in Sermorne 6. de oratione dominica. And ye shall finde him to referre the whole to praier. But what if we admitte your wordes refusing your hereticall meaning? We graunt the people ar to good purpose so exhorted as ye saye, and that he is in heauen, whose flesh we feede on in this sacrament, thereby to attaine to life euerlasting, what conclude ye of this? ergo he is not here? For at that marke ye shoote, euery man maye see. Here we tell you that your rhetorike is bet­ter stuffe then your logike,A foolish argumēt. for your argument is foolish. With the one ye may leade the simple perhaps, with the other ye moue the lerned to laugh at you. For Christ is in heauen and also here,In epist. ad Heb. homil. 17. Christ is both in heauen and also here in the sacramēt. as Chrysostom saith, Et hic plenus existens, & illic plenus, vnum corpus. He is here fully, and there fully, one body. These two propositions, Christ is in heauen, and Christ is here, may well stand together, without iutting the one the other out of place. He is there at the right hāde of the Father visibly, he is here vnder the formes of bread and wine inuisi­bly, there in glorie, here in mysterie, yet as truly and as fully here as there, concerning his substance, as Chrysostom saith. Ye proced forth and saye.

Apologie. Cyrill saith, when we come to receiue these mysteries, all grosse imaginations must quite be banished.

Confuta­tion.Why do ye not by your quotation direct vs to the place where this saying of Cyrill may be founde? Knowe ye not that we haue good cause to suspect your dealing? Do we not [Page 108] almost euerywhere finde you in manifest lies?Cyrill gu [...]lefully alleaged. Ioa [...]. [...]. If ye meane plaine truth, why deale ye not plainely? Christes saying must nedes be true, who euill doth, hateth light. Because ye knewe the place maketh directly against you, and subuerteth your who­le sacramentary doctrine, ye thought it good policie to take a word or two for your purpose, and leaue the rest, trusting it shuld not be espied. Wherein ye do like the scorpion, that ca­steth forth his venim with the spirt of his taile, and forth­with creapeth away into a hole. Would god as ye abuse the name of Cyrill,The pla­ce of Cy­rill tour­ned vpon the De­fenders. so ye would stand to the truth by him euen in that place which ye alleage, substantially declared. Who listeth to see the place, let him reade Cyrilles answere to Theodorites reprehension of the eleuenth anathematisme against Nestorius. There he sheweth that Nestorius destro­yed the meane of the vniō of both natures in Christ, to thin­tent the body of Christ might be found but a common bo­dy as men haue, and not a body propre of the Word,Lib. ad Eu optinm. hauing power to viuificate or quicken all thinges. For Nestorius di­uided Christ, and taught the Word to be the sonne of God,The he­resie of Nestori{us}. not of Mary, and Christ mā the sonne of Mary only, as man, and dissolued the whole mysterie of the incarnation so, as Crist shuld be an other certaine sonne beside the Word. And because the nature of Godhed can not be eatē, thereof he tal­ked vainely and prophanely, that in the sacrament we eate flesh, and not Godhed. For confutation of this detestable he­resie, Cyrill bringeth him to the consideration of the blessed sacramēt, and opposeth him whether he thought, that in the sacramēt Christ being (by his doctrine) man besides God the Word, we eate a man, as one would saye, after such sorte, as the barbarous people of the newe foūd land America called Ca­nibales, eate one an other. But because that were absurd and beastly, Cyrill sayeth that we eate not a cōmon body, though [Page] the nature of Godhed properly be not eaten, but that body which is proprium verbi, the proper body of the Word, which quickeneth all thinges, by receiuing whereof we receiue whole Christ God and mā. And here Cyrill layeth to Nesto­rius charge, as though he draue men to grosse cogitatiōs tou­ching this sacrament. The wordes be these. Num hominis co­mestionem, The grosse imagi­nations that Cy­ril would to be eschewed in recei­uing the blessed sacramēt. &c. VVhat doest thou pronounce this our sacrament to be eating of a man (the greke is [...]) and driuest vnre­uerently the mynde of them as haue beleued vnto grosse imagina­tions, and attemptest with humaine imaginations to treate of those thinges, which are atteined by an only, pure, and exqui­site faith? These be the grosse imaginations which Cyrill would to be bannished at the receiuing of this sacrament, and that we eate the body of Christ, not as being a common bo­dy, as the body of euery mortall man. And though the na­ture of Godhed be not eaten, that yet we eate that body which is the proper body of the Word, that quickeneth all thinges. Now as we haue not that grosse imagination of ea­ting a common body, (which of the grekes by a terme plai­ner to the lerned is called [...]) when we receiue this Sacrament: so is it euident by Cyrill, that in the same we eate verely and in dede the body of Christ the word incar­nat. For otherwise his sayinges had not made ought against the heresie of Nestorius. And thus receiuing Christes body in the sacrament, we receiue it truly, and with faith, and without grosse imaginations. All this weighed, how proue ye now Christ to be so lodged in heauen, that not withstan­ding his owne word, we lacke him here in these holy myste­ries? But let vs consider your other authorities.

Apologie The Councell of Nice, as is alleaged by some in Greeke, plainely forbiddeth vs to be basely affectioned or bent toward the bread and wine which are set before vs.

Confuta­tion.As the former part of the sentence which ye bring out of [Page 109] the Nicene councell, soundeth nothing against the catholi­kes, (for they also teach the same): so the later part is directly contrary to your doctrine, which ye thought good to leaue out, lest thereby ye should haue marred your whole matter. Such nipping and rounding of sentences hath euer ben taken for a marke to knowe heretikes by.A marke to knowe heretikes by. Among wise men such practise worthely bringeth you into suspiciō of vntruth. The wordes of the councell truly reported be these.The wor­des of the Nicene Councell, which make plaine­ly for the catholike doctrine touching the sacra­ment of thaulter. Let vs not at the diuine table basely behold the bread and cuppe set before vs: but lifting vp our minde, let vs by faith vnderstand on that holy table to be laid the Lambe of God, that taketh away the sinnes of the world, of priestes sacrificed vnbloudely, and receiuing his precious body and bloud verely, let vs beleue these to be the pledges of our re­surrection. For in consideration hereof we take not much, but a litle, that we may knowe, we receiue not to filling (of the body) but to san­ctimonie. Take the ende with the beginning, and what maketh this decree of that holy councell for defence of your sacra­mentarie doctrine? And here who be more basely affectioned and bent toward the thinges set on that table, ye, that make them but bread and wine, or we, that after consecration be­leue vnder the formes of bread and wine verely to be made present the body and bloud of Christ? Whether is a baser ex­ercise, to feede on common bread and wine, and to dwell in the iudgement of the senses, or to eate the very fleshe of Christ, the bread of life, that came downe from heauen, to immortalitie of the body and soule, to forsake the senses and folow the vnderstanding of faith? Well we agree with you not to be ouer basely intent to the bread and cuppe. But why do not ye performe that as foloweth there after your owne allegation out of that councell? Why do ye not with those 318. holy fathers, and with the whole church of Christ vnderstand by faith on that holy table to be laid the Lambe [Page] of God, [...]hat taketh away the sinnes of the world? Why do ye not recant your wicked doctrine against the blessed sacri­fice of the masse? Reade the whole sentence ioyning thende to the beginning. Saye not all those holy and lerned fathers, the Lambe of God on this sacred table (they meane the aulter) to be sacrificed of the priestes vnbloudely? Teach we then any o­ther doctrine touching the sacrifice of the Masse, then was generally taught in the whole church three hundred yeares after Christ? For there about was that first generall councell holden.

Againe why bring ye the christen people from the body of Christ whereby they are redemed, to a bare piece of bread, teaching it to be but the figure of his bodie? Saieth not this councell that we receiue the precious body and bloud of our Lord [...],All tropes and figu­res of the sacramen­taries be excluded by verdite of the Ni­cene councell. Bread and wine are not recei­ued to holynes, but to repaire nature. that is verely and in dede, whereby in dede all your tropes and figures be quite excluded? Againe if these were but bread and wine, as ye teach, would the councell saye, that we take them not to sacietie, but to sanctimonie and holines? What holines can we haue of bread and wine? What holines obteine we not by eating of the body of Christ, being the proper body of the Word, or God the Wordes owne body, that hath power to viuificate and quic­ken all thinges? Thus we come within you Defenders, as it were, and clasping with you, wring your weapon out of your handes, and with the tother ende of it stricke you dow­ne. As it is not hard to vs by lerning to ouerthrowe you, so we besech God to strike downe the pryde and stubbornes of your hartes,Act. 9. as he did Paul, wherewith ye resist the manifest truth.

Apologie. And as Chrysostom very aptly writeth, We saye that the body of Christ is the dead Carcas, and we our selues must be the Egles, meaning thereby, that we must flye hye, if we will come to the body of Christ. For this table as Chrysostom saith, is a table of Egles, and [Page 110] not of Ieyes. Cyprian also. This bread saith he, is the foode of the soule and not the meate of the belly.

In dede Chrysostom sayeth as ye report.Confu­tation. But Syrs what meane ye? To eate the body of Christ, which is the dead Carcas in respect of his death (for onlesse he had fallen we had not risen againe) must we so be Egles, as we vse no office of mans body to this kinde of eating? Must we flye so hye, as we looke not to finde this body in earth? Can we not eate this body, except we flye vp to heauen? Can we not come by it, but there? can we not eate him but there? Yeas forsoth. We nede not go out of the earth for the matter. For Chryso­stom him selfe in the same homilie from whence ye fetch this, saieth, that whiles we be in this life, this mysterie is cause, In 1. Cor. cap. 10. homil. 24. VVhat Egles must we be, and how hye must we flye to co­me to theating of Chri­stes body. VVhat is meant by by the hye Egles slight. that the earth to vs is become heauen. He that desireth to knowe what Egles we must be, and how hye we must flie to come to the eating of this body worthely, let Chrysostom euen there ex­pound Chrysostom. He nameth Egles (saieth he) to shewe, that he must get him vp on high that commeth to this body, and that he must haue nothing to do with the earth, neither be drawen downe­ward to base thinges and creape, but alwayes flye vpward, and be­holde the sunne of rightuousnes, &c. Will ye yet heare him more plainely declare, what he meaneth by this high Egles flighte? VVype away (saieth he) al fylth from thy soule, prepare thy mind to receiue these mysteries. If the kinges childe arrayd in purple and diademe were deliuered vnto thee to beare, wouldest thou not cast downe on the ground all that thou holdest, and receiue him? But nowe when thou receiuest not the kinges childe, but the only begot­ten sonne of God, tell me I praye thee, art not afrayd? And doest not cast awaye all loue of wordly thinges, and gar­nish thy selfe with him only, but doest thou yet looke downe on the earth, art thou yet in loue of thy money? art thou yet geuen to the earth? If it be so, what forgeuenes, what excuse shalt thou finde? [Page] This [...]pirituall flying vp requireth Chrysostom, and yet in that homilie he declareth the body of Christ to be present here in earth,Chryso­me ac­knowle­geth Christes very and real bo­dye pre­sent in the sacra­ment. meaning in this holy sacrament, yea that very body which was nayled, beaten, which was not ouercōme by death, which the sunne seing crucified, tourned away his beames, for which the vaile of the temple was rent asunder, stones and all the earth quaked, the body that was made all bloudy, and being thrust in with a speare powred forth fountaines of bloud and water to all the world helthfull. Thus ye see how farre Chrysostom is from your strange doctrine concerning the very and reall presen­ce of Christes body in the sacrament of the aulter. Of which aulter, and of the sacrifice of that body made and offered by the priestes, and of the adoration due thereto, in that homi­lie he speaketh most plainely. That to proue your purpose, ye must seeke for an other homilie, which ye are neuer like to finde, for Chrysostome serueth not your tourne. As nei­ther Cypriā whom ye alleage; and against whom, God kno­weth. Verely we confesse with holy Cyprian and the fathers of the Nicene councell,Cyprian alleaged by the Defen­ders to no purpose. that the body of Christ, which we re­ceiue in the blessed sacrament, is the foode of the soule, and not common meate to fille the panch. And therefor of the outward formes we take but litle according to the Nicene decree, acknowleging that spirituall foode to serue to san­ctimonie, not to sacietie. Lastly ye bringe for you S. Augusti­ne in these wordes.

Apologie In Iohan. tract. 50. And Augustine, How shall I holde him, saith he, which is absent? How shal I reache my hand vp to heauen to laye holde vpon him that sitteth there? He aunswereth. Reache thyther thy faythe, and then thow hast layde holde on him.

Confu­tation. Iohan. 12.Vpon these wordes of S. Iohn, the bishoppes and Pharises gaue commaundement, that if any knewe, where Iesus were, he shuld shewe it, that they might apprehend him, S. Augustine expoun­ding the same, in a contrary sense sayeth. Let vs now shewe the [Page] Iewes where Christ is, S. Augu­stine spe­aketh not of re­ceriuing Christ in the sacra­ment, but by faith only. would God they would heare and lay [...] [...]d on him. Where he speaketh not of receiuing Christ, so as we receiue him in the sacrament, but of receiuing him by faith only. And there he wisheth and exhorteth the Iewes to come to the faith, and teacheth them how they may profita­bly laye holde on Christ, whom their forefathers laid hold on with violent handes to their damnation. Let them come to the church (saith he) let them heare where Christ is, and laie hold on him. After certaine wordes, he maketh this obiectiō to him selfe. VVell, the Iewe answereth me, whom shall I holde, him that is absent? How shall I reach vp my hand to heauen, that I may laie hold on him which fitteth there? Reach thither thy faith (saith Augustine) and then thou hast laid holde on him. Then folo­weth in the same line that which plainely declareth all this to be meant of laying holde on Christ by faith, not by recei­uing the communion. Parentes tui tenuerunt carne, tu tene cor­de. Thy forefathers thou Iewe tooke holde on Christ in flesh, take thou holde on him in thy hart. There he sheweth how Christ may be holden, though concerning the visible and sensible presence of his body, he be in heauen at the right hande of the father. All this and what so euer is said there vpon the text before recited, implyeth not so much as any colour of argument against the truth of Christes very body in this most blessed sacrament. And thus all your allegations and reasons concerning this matter be sufficiently answered.

We can not also away in our churches with the shewes and sales, Apologie and bying and selling of Masses, nor the carrieng about and worship­ping of bread, nor such other ydolatrous and blasphemous fondnes which none of them can proue that Christe or his Apostles did euer ordaine, or left vnto vs and we iustly blame the Bishops of Rome, who without the word of God, without the authoritie of the holy fathers, without any example of antiquitie, after a newe guise do not onely set before the people the sacramental bread to be worshiped as God, but doe also cary the same about vpō an ambling horse, In libro de Ceremonijs Romanae Ecclesiae. why­ther [Page] soeuer them selues iorney, as in old time the Persians fier and the reliquies of the goddesse Isis were solemly caried about in pro­cession, and haue brought the sacramentes of Christ to be vsed now as a stage play, and a solemne sight, to the end that mens eyes should be fedde with nothing els but with mad gasinges and foolishe gau­des, in the selfe same matter wherein the death of Christ ought dili­gently to be beaten into our heartes, and wherein also the mysteries of our redemption ought with all holines and reuerence to be ex­ecuted.

THE FIFTINTH CHAPTER.

Confu­tation.Your railing termes we are litle moued withall, which as they be very vile in your Latine, so be they much viler in your gentle womans translation, whom poore soule ye haue deceiued,Gen. 3. as the Serpent deceiued Eue. We looke for no bet­ter fruit of the bowghes graffed by such graffers. The thin­ges which it lyketh your Sathanicall sprite whith blasphe­mous wordes to dishonour, and bring in contempt, are such, as neither your praises can make more prayseworthy, nor your vpbraidinges any whit of lesse estimation. If any by the stynking breath of your vile wordes be puffed awaye in to your damned syde, who so euer they be, they shewe them selues to haue ben light chaffe,Mat. 3. Luc. 3. not sownde wheate. And though they remaine yet to owtward shewe in our Lordes floore, when the wynnower shall come with his fanne to sunder the chaffe from the wheate, then shall they be swipte awaye into the deepe pitte of owtward darkenes, where shall be weeping and knasshing of teeth for euer.Matt. 13. Yet for good fol­kes sake, that I may leaue your vile eloquence to your selues, and answer the matter by you railed at and belyed, and other­wise not disproued:A priest may iust­ly enioy his neces­sary ly­uing for seruing at haulter, and for saying masse. Matt. 10. I praie you good syrs, the masse being the highest and most honorable seruice that is done to God in his church (which otherwheres being already proued I treate not of in this place), why should not a priest, by whom only it is and may be done, being called to that vocation and state [Page] of lyfe, haue reward and liuing for it? Is euery wor [...] [...] [...]n by scripture worthy to haue his hier, and the priest only for doing this most diuine worke to be denied his dutie? If we may not by Gods commaundement mousell the oxe that treadeth out corne,Deut. 25. may we laufully imbarre a priest seruing at the aulter to haue necessary liuing for his seruice? If priestes by celebrating the holy sacrifice after Chri­stes commaundement,1. Cor. 9. and in the same praying for the people do sow vnto them spirituall thinges, (as they do no lesse then preachers though in an other degree and ma­ner) is it a great thing if they repe their temporall thinges for sustenance of their life? Do ye not vnderstand (sayeth S. Paul to the Corinthians) how they which minister about the sa­crifice, lyue of the sacrifice, and they which waite at the aulter, are partakers of the aulter? If it were so in the olde lawe,Deut. 18. why ought it not to be so likewise in the newe lawe, specially our priestes of the newe testament at their Masse offering the true sacrifice, by which we haue ben redemed? Raile against the masse and priestes seruing at the aulter of God vntill your tonges burne in your head in hell fyre: we tell you, pri­estes of the Catholike church sell not the fruit and merite of Christes bloud offered in the masse, but only for their ministerie and labour require necessary sustenance of life. Which sustenance what maner and how greate is neces­sarie, that is to be iudged by cyuill wisdome, rather then by determination of diuinitie. And this I meane of those that serue only in that ministerie. As for other which vnder bi­shops haue charge of soules, as their cure is greater, so their state ought the more to be honoured.

But for your defence ye confesse,we kno­we no worship­pers of bread. that ye can not awaye with the carying about and worshipping of bread. No more cannot we. To whose charge lay ye this? Be there any such [Page] idolaters now that worship bread? They would be knowen. God forbid we shuld suffer idolaters to lyue amongest vs. Soothly in the catholike church we knowe none. If ye can not away with the honour which al deuout Christen people do to the blessed sacrament, (we meane to Christes body and Christ him selfe present in substance vnder the forme of bread) then can not we take you for Christians, mocke, scoffe, iest, and rayle at vs with the Iewes, we dare not but honour our lord Christ, where so euer our faith findeth him verely and in substance present. And as the solemne feast of Corpus Christi,The feast of corpus Christs instituted against the De­fenders aunce­stours. was ordeined by Vrbanus the fourth to be kept of good catholike people, the rather because your fore­fathers the Berengarians and Petrobrusians had with their deuilish doctrine dishonoured that holy mysterie: so we the successours of those faithfull people folowe them, and like­wise exhibite all honour to Christ in the sacrament, and that with so much more deuotion, how much we feare Gods vengeance hanging ouer vs for your wicked contempt she­wed in that behalfe.

If through feruent zeale (as sometimes it happeneth) abu­ses in certaine places haue crept in, no good catholike man defendeth them. Mary we knowe all is not to be abrogated that mislyketh your corrupt taste. And much is right holy deuotiō pleasant in the sight of God, and therefore allowed in the church, which your hote sprite calleth idolatrous and blasphemous fondnes. And though the ceremonie and ma­ner whereby such deuotion is shewed, can not be proued by ordinance of Christ or of the Apostles expressed in scriptu­re, yet christen people doubt not but God accepteth their good hartes.God is not dis­pleased with workes of de­uotion that be not com­maunded by expres­se scriptu­re. And hereto they be induced by scripture it selfe. For they knowe, Christ was not displeased with the sweete and costly ointmentes, with which blessed Mary Maudelen [Page 113] anointed his feete. He was not offended with the Apostles for spredding their clothes vpon the Asse on which he rode into Ierusalem, nor with the people that strewed grene bow­ghes in the waye that he passed by. And yet neither she nor they had any expresse commaundement so to do either by the Patriarkes, or Moyses, or Prophetes, or Christ him selfe.The bi­shop of Rome ho­noureth Christ in the sacra­ment, not the sacra­mental bread, as the Defender slaun­dereth. In doing whereof he doth but his dutie. The am­bling hor­se ought to offend no more then the Asse that bare the same bo­dye.

The bishop of Rome ye blame vniustly, I might saye al­so proudly. For procuring honour and worship to Christ in the blessed sacrament, he hath the word of God, the authori­tie of all holy fathers, and the examples of antiquitie, as I haue at large proued in my answere to your companiō mai­ster Iuell his eight negatiue article. But the ambling horse offendeth you. Why be ye not also offended with the Asse and her fole, that bare the same body at Ierusalem, which the horse beareth at Rome? Then visible and weitghty, now in uisible and of no weight? That was done in pompe to the honour of Christ, and so is this. Ye saye this is done after a newe guise. So then was that. The Pope (saye ye) hath no scripture no fathers, no example of antiquitie for thus doing. He doubteth not but that Christ, who would his visible bo­dy to be borne on an Asse to furtherance of his glory, will also take in good part his inuisible body, (where to our sim­ple wittes in some cases a semelyer way appereth not) reue­rently and with all shewe of honour of our part to his glory to be caried in forme of bread vpon a palfrey thereto prepa­red. Neither is it true which ye saye, that the bishops of Rome do carye about with them the sacrament whither so euer they iourney. Ye might haue lerned in that booke, out of which ye alleage that matter to scoffe at, that such a so­lemnitie is vsed specially,Lib. Ce [...]e­moniaram ecclesiae. Ro. Sectione. when the Pope rideth in pontifica­libus. Then (as the booke telleth) a white palfrey trapped, gentill, and fayer, with a clere sounding bell hanging at his necke is [Page] lead [...]ich carieth the monstrance or pixe with the most holy body of [...]st, 12. cap. 1. ouer the which noble Citizens shall beare a Canopie. Baldachi­num. Thus the booke of ceremonies.

This solemne maner of carying the blessed sacrament is set forth by Paulus Iouius in the description of the pompe of Charles the fifth Empirours coronation at Bononia.Lib. 27. tomo. 2. And I praye you what euill is this, if it be good to cary about that most holy body, by which as Christ once redemed vs, so by the same deuoutly honoured of faithfull people, and caried abrode and brought to certaine places hath in olde times (as yet also doth continually) to the great comfort and help of sundry persons being in destresse, wrought miraculously helthfull remedies? Examples hereof I would gladly recite, were not they such, as shuld require a large and long descri­ption. If the Israelites founde helpe at Gods hande by brin­ging the arke into the field with them, as they marched fore­ward against the Philistians:1. Reg. 4. if the Philistians cried out for feare when they perceiued the arke to be in the Israelites ar­mie,1. Reg. 5. and said, Venit Deus in castra. Vae nobis. God is come into their tentes. Ibidem. Alas we are vndone: If they made outcryes at an other time, when the arke was among them, saying, O let not the arke of the God of Israell remaine with vs, because his hea­uy hand is vpon vs, and vpon our God Dagon, If by presence of the arke (I saye) which was but a shadowe of this blessed sacrament, in which was kept nothing els but the goldē potte of manna, Arons rodde, and the tables of the testament, God wrought such helpe and defence to his people of Israell, terrour ad destruction to their ennemies and their Idol Da­gon: what benefite maye christen people looke for at Gods fauour, hauing the very and true body of his sonne in sub­stance present in this sacrament honorably and deuoutly for the more stirring vp of their faith caried abrode among thē, [Page 114] and represented vnto them in solēne processions and statiōs?

And concerning the order of the ceremonie,In the or­der of this cere­monie, nothing appeareth to a Chri­sten man vnsemely or vnrea­sonable. whereas the people be desirous to beholde the body of their redemer with their faith by their carnall eye directed to the forme of bread, no man is able to holde vp on hye the sacrament, so as conuenient it were to be done both to satisfie their deuotion and to maintaine their faith: for the Pope him selfe cōmonly is an aged man, and therefore ouer weake for that seruice, spe­cially arrayd in pontificalibus, as in such solemnities he is. A­gaine the instrument that serueth for that purpose is so great and weighty (for so it apperteineth to the honour of Christ), the waye so long, the ayer for the more part there so hote: as no other man is well able for lacke of strength to beare it so as meete it is to be borne. In this case why may not a horse be put to that seruice, to supplie that which by naturall weaknes faileth in man? Wherein he serueth not as one that beareth a male, but as the asse that bare Christ, as the kine that drewe the arke.

Neither ought the custome of bearing the most holy body of Christ where the Pope goeth, to seme newe and strange.The cu­stome of carying the sacra­ment, where the Pope goeth, is neither newe nor strange. For we reade in the life of the blessed Martyr Steuen the first, who was Pope of Rome aboue thirtin hundred yeres past, that Tharsitius the deacon (who at length also suffred death for Christ) bare our Lordes body at what time he at­tended vpon the blessed man Pope Steuen, as he went to his martyrdome. Who desireth to see this described at large, the same may he finde in Simeon Metaphrastes a greeke writer, well approued and highly estemed in the greke church, in vita Stephani primi.

Neither is it maruell, if the Popes do this, forasmuch as in the olde times other Christen people were wont customably so to do. For witnes whereof we haue S. Ambrose, who de­scribeth [Page] how certaine faithfull persons caned this blessed sa­crament with them,In oratione funebri in Satyrum fratrem. when they went to the sea, of whom his brother Satyrus obteined the same in a shipwracke, and by help thereof hanging it in a stole about his necke, seeking for none other succour, cast him selfe in to the sea, and mira­culously escaped safe to land. Of this place of S. Ambrose it is euident that good folke caried sometimes about with them the blessed sacrament. But the Pope hath ben accustomed so to do the rather, that being Christes vicar in earth, he is the father, pastor, maister and gouernour of all Christen peo­ple. Neither is the same by him done without a speciall my­sterie,Innocēt. 3. De myste­rijs Missae. lib. 6. though vnknowen to the more part. Although saith a lerned Pope, a reason can not be geuen of all thinges, what so euer haue ben brought in vre by our forefathers: yet I thinke quoth he, that therein lye hydden profound my­steries.

I report me now to the secrete consciences of good Chri­sten people, whether the bishops of Rome vse not the bles­sed sacrament reuerently and honorably or no, but rather as the Persians fyre; and the reliques of the goddesse Isis, as a stage play,This De­fender foloweth Iulian, Lucian, Porphy­rius, Cel­sus, and such other wicked infidels. Contrà Celsum li. 6. De Mithra vide Suidā in dictione [...]. mad gasinges, and foolish gaudes, as it liketh this wicked Chams broode to rail. Wherein they folow the step­pes, which Iulian the Apostata, Lucian, Porphyrius, Celsus, and such other prophane hellhoundes haue trodden before them. For after the like manner they railed at the holy my­steries of Christen religion, namely Celsus, who as Origen writeth of him, obiected to the Christians the sacrifices of Mithra, (which was an idoll that the Persiās worshipped and called by the name of the sunne) from whence he said they had taken all their sacramentes, rites and ceremonies. And right so (as we finde in S. Augustine writing against the Ma­nichees) the paynimes founde fault with the Christen people [Page] for honour done to the body and bloud of Christ vnd [...] [...]or­mes of bread and wine, saying that they honoured Bacchus and Ceres.

Besides, where they say and sometime do perswade fooles, Apologie. that they are able by their Masses to distribute and applie vnto mens commoditie all the merites of Christes death, yea although many tymes the parties thinke nothing of the matter, and vnderstand full litle what is done, this is a mockery, a Hethenishe fansie, and a very toye. For it is our faith that applieth the death and crosse of Christe to our benefite, and not the Acte of the Massing priest. Faith had in the Sacramentes (saith Augustine) doth iustifie, and not the sacra­mentes. And Origen saith: Christe is the priest, the propitiation and sacrifice, Origen ad Rom. cap. 3. which propitiation commeth to euery one by meane of faith. So that by this rekoning we say, that the sacramentes of Christ without faith do not once profite those that be alyue, a greate deale lesse do they profite those that be dead.

Least any piece of your Apologie should be without a witnes for proufe that ye are his children,Confuta­tion. who is the father of lyes: ye make vs to affirme, that by our Masses we distri­bute and applie to men indifferently, how so euer they be di­sposed, for so ye meane, as it appereth partly by that ye saye here, and speciall by your doctrine otherwherers vttered, all the merites of Christes death. But tell vs, who euer taught this doctrine in the catholike church? We beleue and knowe the merites of Christes death to be of infinite valour. Which infinite valour as all the creatures of the world be not able by any their act or power to distribute all: so neither is any thing created being of power finite, able to receiue all the same being infinite. That faith applieth,Faith ap­ply [...]eth not the merites of Christes death, but maketh vs mee [...] to re [...]iue them. we can not concei­ue, how it may be properly spoken. But that it maketh a man appliable and fitte to obteine Christes merites to him selfe, we cōfesse. For whereas it is impossible to please God with­out faith, thereuppon it foloweth, that faith is that gifte, which maketh euery person worthy and meete, to receiue Gods frendship and grace. Which gifte a mans hart once [Page] being [...]ndewed with all, according to the measure thereof, he receiueth from God through the holy Sacramentes and by other wayes, a greater or lesser quantitie of his benefites. Yea God is so good and prone to bestowe his mercie, that not only when a man is through faith prepared for it, he ge­ueth it abundantly vnto him: but also though he of his ow­ne parte haue no faith presently, yet for others sake which are Gods derely beloued frendes, he fareth the better, and hath that gifte obteined to him. As when S. Steuen prayed at his death for those that persecuted him, for whom prayed he then, but for those, who had no faith at all in Christ? And when this grace was geuen vnto them, as that from their Ie­wishnes they came to the faith of Christ, who shall exclude that blessed Martyr from this worship and honour, that through his prayer as by one speciall meane, that grace was applied vnto them?

Theffect of S. Ste­uēs praier.What effect his prayer tooke, if any man thereof doubt, he may thinke it to haue wrought much for the benefite of others of lesse malice, seing that it did so much in Paul. Who as the scripture sayeth,Act. 9. yet breathing out threatnings and slaugh­ter against Christes disciples, was so chaunged and conuerted, that of a persecutour he became an Apostle.Serm. 1. de Sanctis. Contra duas epist. Pela­gian. ad Bonifacium. li. 1. ca. 19. For as S. Augu­stine writeth, Si Sanctus Stephanus sic non orasset, ecclesia Pau­lum non haberet. If S. Steuen had not prayed so, the church should not haue had Paule. Now if those that be no priestes without publike auctoritie of consecrating the body and bloud of Christ, yet by waye of prayer do obteine, that men be con­uerted to the faith, which is thapplying of one fruit of Chri­stes merites, much more the publike minister and bisshop. VVhich assumpted from among men is ordeined for men in matters belonging to God, Heb. 5. that he may offer vp giftes and sacrifices for sin­nes: much more he at the time of consecration and oblation [Page 116] may the rather by vertue of his office, and by offering [...]hat most blessed sacrifice, obteine mercie for the whole church, not only for them which are presently members of the church, but also for all men that hereafter shall be.

And now if ye list to lerne what kinde of applying we vse in our Masses, we do offer vp vnto God first, his sonne,VVhat kinde of Applying is in the sacrifice of the Masse. representing his passion, and celebrating the memorie of the same according to Christes institution. Then through him we offer vp also our selues and all men that be of his church, beseching that he vouchesaue to haue mercie vpon them for his sonnes sake, whose sacrifice once done on the crosse bloudely, is here the very selfe same in the celebration of our mysteries vnbloudely continewed, not to be a newe redemption, but that thus being done as Christ did it at his last supper, and ordeined alwaies to be done vntill his comming (in which we offer the selfe same body with sa­cramentall oblation, that was offered on the crosse with shedding of bloude) the helthfull vertue of it may by our de­uout intention be to other applied to remission of sinnes daily committed. Who doubtles take benefite thereby in such proportion, as by Gods iust and mercifull disposition is proportionably to be geuen forth for such actions accor­ding to the deuotion of them that offer, and of whom that most singular sacrifice the price of the world is offe­red.

Now if we make our deuout prayers, and apply our in­tention more for one then for an other, as by the commaun­dement of God we ought to honour our father and mo­ther, our bishops, our kinges and rulers, and to do good for those specially, that be of the household of faith,Galat. 6. for our be­nefactours, who desire vs to praye for them, and the rather to obteine that of vs, do geue succour to our necessitie, if I [Page] saye we praye for any of these more specally then for others: our prayer and that most holy sacrifice helpeth them so much the more, to thende Christes merites may by conue­nient meanes be applied to them, by how much greater the deuotion of our intention is toward God for the same per­sons. But what measure of good we procure them, to God only is that knowen.Lib. 1. de vocat. gen­tiū. Ca. 4. If (as the lerned bishop Prosper sayeth) the grace of our Sauiour passeouer some persons (as we see it to hap­pen) and if the prayer of the church (wherein the sacrifice is con­teined after S. Augustines mynde) be not admitted for them: it is to be referred to the secrete iudgementes of Gods iustice, and it is to be acknowleged, that the depth of this secrete may not be opened in this life.

And yet bolder maye we be to praye for the dead (such I meane as died in Christ to whom only among the dead our prayer doth good) thē for those that be alyue, of whom more doubt may be, whether they shall die in Christ or no. And among all that be lyuing we are bolder to praye for those that presently are in the catholike church (as whom only we vse to name at the aulter) then for heretikes, schis­matikes, Iewes, paynimes, or Turkes for whom not withstā­ding we praye also at a certaine time,Epist. 59. knowing as S. Augu­stine sayeth, membra Christi ex omni esse hominum genere col­ligenda, that the members of Christ are to be gathered toge­ther out of euery kinde of men.

Apologie And as for their bragges they are wont to make of their Purgatory, though we know it is not a thing so very late risen amongest them, yet is it no better then a blockyshe and an olde wyues deuise.

THE SIXTINTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion. Of pur­gatory.Purgatory semeth not to vs a thing that we should much bragge of, no more thē ye will bragge of hell. We tremble at the remēbrance of it rather thē bragge of it. What reason ye haue mouing you to impute this vnto vs, verely we see not. [Page 117] Perhaps ye meane our bolde and constant auouching of it, and call the same our bragges. Good and sufficient proufes of a doctrine to your iudgementes doubtefull are not to be called bragges. Well, how so euer it be, will ye nill ye (we see) ye be dryuen to confesse the same to be no newe thing,Purga­tory ac­knowle­ged by the De­fenders to be of antiqui­tie. for so is your latin, though it hath liked your gentill Lady of her good will to wrest it vnto vs that professe the catholike faith, naming it a thing not so very late risen amongest vs. In dede if she and you call them papistes, among whom the doctrine of praying for the dead whereof necessarely folo­weth the doctrine of purgatorie, is delyuered, taught and holden: then are the Apostles, who deliuered it by tradition, (as Chrysostom and Damascene report) their scolers, the best lerned and in maner all the fathers of all ages, and brie­fly all Christes church from Christes ascension to this time Papistes, among whom to beare the name of Papistes, we be not ashamed.Reasons for pur­gatory. Touching purgatorie it selfe whether any be or no, which ye denye and we affirme, this is to be conside­red. 1First forasmuch as nothing that is defyled commeth in­to the kingdome of heauen, and some depart out of this life though in the faith of Christ,Apoc. 21. and children of the euerla­sting kingdome, yet not thoroughly and perfitly cleane: it remaineth that such after this lyfe before they come to the place of euerlasting ioye, haue their purgation. That no defiled or vnclean thing entreth into heauen, it is witnessed by S. Ihon in his reuelation.Cap. 21. And that some hauing by faith the merites of Christes death, haue notwithstanding their vn­cleanes, yea when they depart this lyfe, thus it may be pro­ued. Though our outward man be corrupted (sayeth S. Paul) yet the inward man is renewed daye by daye. 2. Cor. 4. Now if he be rene­wed, then hath he some oldnes, and so consequently some synne, as S. Augustine argueth. And yet speaketh S. Paul the­reof [Page] [...] selfe being iustified. And if day by day, which signi­fieth a continuance of time so long as life endureth, then also in some, when death commeth and taketh vs out from this world. So there be some that dying in the faith of Christ, and thereby assured of saluation, carie with them some part of vncleanes, that kepeth them frō entring into the kingdo­me of heauen, vntill they be wholy purged. 2.Furthermore in the same epistle the Apostle saith.Cap. 7. Seing then we haue these pro­mises derely beloued, let vs cleanse our selues from all filthines of the flesh and spirite, making perfite our satisfaction in the feare of God. Who seeth not hereof to folowe, that to many which be iustified, somewhat of satisfaction and holynes lacketh? which, if they be taken from hence, before they attaine to the measure of holynes requisite, be they not then after this lyfe in state to be purged and cleansed? Onlesse perhaps so­me will saye, that death generally purgeth al such vncleanes. 3.Which being said without auctoritie of scripture or holy fa­thers, maye as easely be denyed, as it is affirmed. Againe what if the paine be not wholy payd and suffered, whereunto the synne being forgeuen it is euident that a man remaineth bounde,2. Reg. 12. as it appereth in Dauid? Shall we saye of such, that they go straight to heauen that due paine being vnpaid? But ere we procede further, let vs see how substantially ye dis­proue the doctrine of purgatorie. It foloweth in your Apo­logie.

Apologie. Aut in psal. 85. in Euchir. c. 67. de Ci­uitate. lib. 21. c. 26. Hypo­gnost. 5. Augustine in deed somtime saith there is suche a certaine place: sometime he denieth not but there maye be suche a one: sometime he doubteth, sometime againe he vttrely denieth it to be, and thin­keth that menne are therin deceiued by a certaine naturall good wil they beare their frendes departed. But yet of this one errour hath there growen vp suche a haruest of those Massemongers, the Masses being sould abrod commonly in euery corner, the temples of God became shoppes to get money, and sel [...]e soules were perswaded that nothing was more necessarie to be bought. In dede there was no­thyng [Page 118] more gainefull for these men to selle.

Well railed.Confu­tation. If your reasons or auctorities were so piththy as your mockes and scoffes be spitefull: ye were to be heard. But thanckes be to God, that such shrewed beastes haue short hornes. Now to S. Augustine.Answere to the ob­iections made out of S. Au­gustine. Although any thing which is agreed vpon by all the fathers, beleued and receiued generally in Christes church, ought not (as vincentius liri­nensis teacheth) to susteine preiudice by the contrary opi­nion of any one Doctor, we being well able to proue Pur­gatorie by the manifold testimonies of the fathers and con­sent of the church in all ages, might in this respect iustly reiect the auctoritie of S. Augustine: yet the rather to shewe how farre the world is deceiued by you (not only in this but in all other pointes wherin ye dissent from the catholike church) we are well content for this matter of Purgatorie ye make so light of, to be tried by the iudgement and doctrine of S. Augustine. And as Festus sayd to S. Paul,Act. 25. hast thou appealed to Caesar? to Caesar shalt thou go: So saye we to you though not hauing that auctoritie ouer you, which Festus had ouer S. Paul: To Augustine ye referre this matter, and by Augustine shall ye be iudged.

I would alleage vnto you sundry places of the scriptures which may sufficiently proue purgatorie to a Christen man that is not contentious, but that will we do hereafter as occa­sion serueth. Now to sainct Augustine. We saye plainely that S. Augustine affirmeth purgatorie,S. Augu­stine af­firmeth Purgato­ry in plai­ne and expresse wordes. 1. Cor. 3. and that it can not be shewed where he doubteth of it, much lesse where he vtter­ly denyeth any such to be. In sundry places of his workes he expoundeth the wordes of S. Paul to the Corinthians of Purgatorie, where the Apostle sayeth, that the workes which be buylded vpon the foundation (which is Christ) shalbe tryed by fyre. But vpon the 37. psalme he speaketh thereof in [Page] such [...], as no man can iudge him to doubte of it. Where he ma [...] [...] [...]is prayer to God.S. Augu­stine, prayer to God. Non sim inter illos, &c. O lord let not me [...]e among them, to whom thou shalt saye, Go ye into euerla­sting fyre which is prepared for the Deuill and his angels. Neither amend me in thyne anger, but purge me in this life, and make me such a one, as shall not haue nede of the Emenda­torio igne. amending fyre, which is for them that shalbe saued, yet so as by fyre. For what cause, but for that vpon the foundation they buyld tymber, haye, and stubble? But if they would buyld golde, syluer, and precious stones, then should they be safe from both fyres, not only from that euerlasting, which shall torment the wicked for euer: but also from that other, which shall amend them that shall be saued by fyre. For it is sayd. Hym selfe shalbe saued, yet so, as by fyre. And because it is sayd, he shalbe saued, that fyre is litle passed on, Yea plainely, although saued by fyre, yet that fyre shalbe more greuous, then all that a man is able to suffer in this world. Here haue ye a manifest testimonie of the amending fyre after this life, which we call purgatorie as the church doth.Cap. 13. In the 2 [...]. booke de ciuitate Dei, after that he hath declared his iudgement touching paines of diuerse sortes which men suffer for synnes committed, he saith thus. But paines temporall some suffer in this life only, some after their death, some both now and also then, yet before that most seuere and last iud­gement. What be those temporal paines which be suffered af­ter this life before the daye of the last iudgement, but those which we call the paines of purgatorie? In his second booke intituled de genesi contra Manichaeos, he geueth vs a plaine testimonie of purgatorie,Cap. 20. where he sayeth thus. He that tilleth not his grounde but suffereth it to be ouergrowen with thornes, hath the malediction of his grounde in his workes in this life, and after this life he shall haue either the fyre of purgation, Fyre of purgatiō. (that is to saye purgatorie) or payne euerlasting. In his booke of fifty homi­lies homilia 16. After a large and a holesome discourse made [Page 119] concerning the horrible state of hell and of those [...] be damned to euerlasting fyre, at length speaking of pur [...]rie, he calleth it a floud of fyre or a fyry floud, through which they shall passe that haue done thinges worthy to be punished with tem­porall paines. Where he alleageth the foremencioned place of S. Paul to the corinthians .3. chapter.

But what nede is it to recite places where S. Aug [...]ine maketh speciall mention of the thirde state into whic [...] [...] [...] ­taine do come after this life, commonly named purg [...], seing that so oftentimes he speaketh of charitie to be done by the lyuing to the dead? Which were vaine to treate of,Prayer for the dead presup­poseth purgato­ry. if there were no such state, wherein the dead might be holpen and releued by the charitable dedes of the lyuing. May it therefore please you syrs to read S. Augustine in some such places (for to read all that he hath written to that end were very much and a great lette to your domesticall cares) and thinke verely ye will secretly agree in iudgement with vs, though for shame and consyderation of the stage ye playe your part on, openly the same ye will not confesse. Read what he writeth in Enchiridio ad Laurentium cap. 10. Nei­ther is it to be denyed (sayth he) but that the soules of the departed be releeued by the carefull deuotion of their frendes that lyue, at what time the sacrifice of our mediatour for them is offered, or when doles be made for them, &c. Read his booke de cura pro mortilis agēda. ca. 1. 4. 8. the ninth booke of his confessions, cap. 11. 13. vltimo his 64. epistle ad Aurelium: and ye shall clerely see how seriou­sly he teacheth the quicke to pray, to offer sacrifice, to geue almose for the dead, shewing among the dead who haue good thereby, who haue not. And therefore in his booke de haeresibus ad Quoduultdeum, he condemneth Aerius of hae­resie (and so consequently all others that be of his opinion) because to the heresies of the Arians he had added this also, [Page] that none ought to praye or make oblation for the dead. This much concerning purgatorie after the minde of S. Augustine may suffise at this time, otherwise if so much should be vttered as we haue in the other fathers for prou­fe of the same, it would require a whole booke by it selfe alone.

Where ye make S. Augustine very vncertaine in this po [...], as though he said, sometime there is such a certaine pl [...], sometime there may be such a one, sometime he doub­ted of it, sometime plainly denied any such to be: either ye vnderstand not S. Augustine, or ye saye contrary to your owne knowledge. Verely ye be to bolde with him. First that he denieth purgatory, that is false. And where ye alleage hy­pognostica in the margent of your booke, read it once again at my request, and your selues will saye the place proueth not your purpose.Lib. 5. hy­pognosti­c [...]m. The author of that worke, whether he were S. Augustine, which Erasmus beleueth not, or who so euer he was, denyeth not Purgatory, but that after the daye of gene­rall iudgement there is any place of euerlasting rest or pai­ne, but the kingdome of heauen and hell, that he denyeth. Which we also denie. And there he speaketh against the Pe­lagians,Haeres. 88. who, as S. Augustine writeth of them ad Quoduult­deum, promised to infants dying without baptisme a cer­taine euerlasting and blessed life without and besides the kingdome of God. Which heresie in sundry places he repro­ueth. It semeth the word Purgatorium noted in the margent of that booke by thunlerned printer begiled you. Which she­weth how profoundely ye be sene in the doctours. Tou­ching that he doubted, how and whereof he doubted, this is the truth. Of Purgatory S. Augustine doubted not, that is to saye of temporall paines, which they suffer, that reteining the foundacion haue builded thereon timber, haye, and stubble. [Page 120] Neither doubted he but that the dead in such case w [...] rele­ued by the charitie of their liuing frēdes, as by sacrifices [...]f the aulter, almose, and prayer. The thing he doubted of touching this matter, is this.VVhat is that S. Augustine doubted of tou­ching purgatory. Whether those temporall paines do onely punish for the satisfaction of the iustice of God, or also do purge and corrrect the soules of the dead in such wise as tēpo­ral paines are wont to do in this life. With which they, that be punished, being restrayned and holden backe, as him selfe speaketh, be corrected. Which also he calleth, ignem secularia, Coerciti. De ciuit. d. li. 21. c. 13. & 26. in Enchirid. c. 68. 69. De side & oper. c. 16. hoc est, delitias amoresque terrenos & caetera huiusmodi concreman­tem atque exurentē, a fyre, that burneth and consumeth awaye wordly thinges, as the delites and earthly pleasures that we loue, and such other the like. Of those paines or of that fyre, or rather of that qualitie and effect of the fyre after this life, he doubted. As for example. There is some one who loueth Christ aboue all thinges, but therewith also he loueth wife, children, house, landes and goods, and that aboue the measu­re which he ought to kepe. For such a man in this present time, it is easely perceiued, how the fyre of tribulation may burne and trouble and withall heale and amend his soule, be­cause the sicknes of wife and children, or losse of his tempo­rall goods, wilbe such a griefe vnto him, that the smart the­reof maye teach him for euer after, to loue more soberly and moderatly those worldly giftes and commodities. But now whether the smart and sorow of thinges lefte behinde, which proceded in this life of carnall affection, remaine also to the soules after their departure from the body, whereof S. Augu­stine sheweth him selfe to stand in doubt in Enchiridio ad Lauren. cap. 68. & 69. and whether the fyre which soules feele in Purgatorie as it paineth them, so also do by degrees dimi­nish and correct those veniall and secular affections, which they caried with thē at their death, or whether death it self do [Page] so ende them, as there remaine not any correction of the mynde yet being vicious, but only the punisment of the syn­ne past: that is the thing whereof S. Augustine semeth to ha­ue doubted. In effect his questiō is, whether the fyre of pur­gatorie be not double. The one which punisheth the veni­all synne past, the other which diminisheth and taketh awaie thaffection of synne yet remaining. Of the first he doubteth not,De ciuit. d. li. 21. Cap. 26. Apologie Id Ianuar. Epist. 119. of the other he sayeth, non redarguo, quia forsitan verum est, I saye not against it, for peradventure it is true.

As touching the multitude of vaine and superfluous ceremo­nies, we know that Augustin did greuously complain of them in his owne time: and therfore haue wee cut of a great numbre of them, bycause we know that mens consciēces were cumbred about thē, and the Churches of God ouerladen with them. Neuerthelesse we kepe still and esteeme not onely those ceremonies whiche we are sure were deliuered vs from the Apostles, but some others too besi­des, whiche we though myght be suffred without hurt to the chur­che of God, because we had a desire that all thinges in the holy con­gregation might (as Paul commandeth) be don with comelines and in good order: but as for all those thinges whiche we sawe were ey­ther very superstitious or vnprofitable, or noysome, or mockeries, or contrarie to the holy Scriptures, or els vnsemelie for honest and discrete folkes, as there be an infinite numbre now adayes where Papistry is vsed, these I saye wee haue vtterly refused without all maner exception, bycause wee would not haue the right worship­ping of God any lenger defiled with suche folies.

THE SEVENTINTH CHAPTER.

Confu­tation. Of what maners and rites complay­ned S. Augustine [...]d Ianua­rium.S. Augustine, (whom ye alleage wrongfully against the ceremonies of the catholike church) speaketh only of the cutting awaie of such maners and rites, as be crept into some one particular countrie, neither conteined in holy scriptures, nor established by councells of bisshops, nor confirmed by custome of the whole church. But how proue ye by that place, that ye may pull downe aulters, by setttng vp of the which in honour of Christ Chrysostome shewed the faith to haue ben receiued as well in other places as in our natiue [Page 121] countrie of Britaine? How proue ye thereby that ImagesImages. of Christ and of his sainctes may be broken and throwen out of churches,3. reg. 1. 2. Paral 3. Breach of vowes. whereas God him selfe allowed certaine Images of Angells to be set in Salomons temple? Did that place ma­ke you dissalowe the vowe of pouertie and the performance thereof,Mat. 19. Mar. 10. to which thing Christ exhorted the rich young man in the gospell? Did it make you disproue their professiō who accordingly as Christ sayd,Mat. 19. made themselues eunuches for the kingdome of heauen? What shall I speake of a number of holy sacramentes, professions, and ceremonies, which being expressely conteined in scripture, allowed in councelles, and receiued in the whole church, ye haue cast awaie as voide and superfluous? Looke to that very epistle of S. Augustine from whence ye tooke that your authoritie.Oyle the matter of certaine sacramen­tes. Iacob. 5. There shall ye fynde oile named, as the matter of certaine holy sacramen­tes, no lesse then water, bread, and wine. And yet haue ye not the vse of oile in any sacrament, no not though S. Iames saye, it ought to be vsed with prayer to the benefite of the sicke. The fast of fourty dayes before Easter is in the same epistle commended by the example of Moses, of Elias, of Christ.Lent. And yet ye are afrayd lest it be a superstitious ceremonie to fast a certaine number of dayes for religions sake.Ceremo­nies can not be ta­kē awaye by priuate auctoritie. Last of all S. Augustine referreth the taking awaye of any custome or maner vnto due auctoritie, exhorting it to be done, Vbi facul­tas tribuitur. Where power is geuen to do it. Neither els may it be done laufully at all.

But with what auctoritie may one realme vndoo the custo­me of the whole church? If any one citie of the realme of En­gland should take vpō it to change the parlament lawe of the same realme, it should be forthwith punished as hauing com­mitted an act rebellious and traiterous. And thinke ye to esca­pe the terrible iudgemēt of God, who set lesse by his king­dome [Page] of the church, then by your owne tēporall dominion? Ye thinke we haue many ridiculous and fond thinges in our ceremonies. If we had (as in dede we haue not) would ye laugh at them,Gen. 9. as Cham did at the nakednes of his father Noe? Yet Sem and Iaphet would reuerently and shamefastly couer them. But seing the same our ceremonies be such, as either expresse Christes life and death, or prouoke vs to godlynes and deuotiō, laugh on ye accursed Cananees, but we will daunce before the Arke of God with king Dauid.2. Reg. 6. We will shere our head with Paul,Act. 18. and become idiculous in your sight, to thintent we may professe boldely the honour of God, who estemed Sem, more then Cham, Dauid more then Michol, Paul more then sedicious men, who would knowe a reason why women should be couered in the church rather then men,1. Cor. 11. whereas the church of God was not accustomed to such a contentious kinde of reaso­ning.

Apologie. VVe make our prayers in that tonge whiche all our people, as meete is, may vnderstand, to thend they may (as Paul counseleth vs) take common commoditie by common prayer: euen as all the holy Fathers and catholique Byshops bothe in the ould and new Testament did vse to pray them selues, and taught the people to praye to, leaste as Augustin saith, like Parottes and Ousells we should seme to speake that we vnderstand not.

Confu­tation.Concerning this whole matter and the obiection of Per­rottes and Owsels I haue treated sufficiently in my answere to M. Iuelles chalenge. article. 4.

Apologie Neither haue we any other Mediatour and intercessour, by whome wee may haue accesse to God the Father, then Iesu Christ in whose onely name all thinges are obteined at his Fathers hand. But it is a shamefull parte and full of infidelitie that we see euery where vsed in the Churches of our aduersaries, not onely in that they will haue innumerable sortes of mediatours, and that vterly without the auctoritie of Goddes word. Ierem. Ca. 2. &. 11. So that as Ieremie saith, the Saintes be nowe as many in numbre, or rather aboue the num­bre of the Cities; and poore men cannot tel to which Sainct it were [Page 122] best to turne them first. And though there be so many as they can­not be tolde, yet euery one of them hath peculiar duety and office assigned vnto him of these folkes, what thing they ought to aske, what to giue, and what to bring to passe: but besides this also, in that they do not only wickedly, but also shamelesly call vpon the bles­sed virgine Christes mother, Bernardus. to haue her remember that she is a mother, and to commaunde her sonne, and to vse a mothers aucto­ritie ouer him.

THE EIGHTINTH CHAPTER.

We haue but only one Mediatour to saluation Iesus Christ, by whose merites God is reconciled vnto vs.Confu­tation. But where ye say that besydes the same one Mediatour,There is but one Media­tour of saluation who is Christ only. Bu [...] the sainctes his fren­des be media­tours of interces­sion. 2. Cor. 1 ye haue none other that may pray or make intercession for you, that point of false belefe ye may kepe for your selues. We had rather holde with S. Paul, who as he prayed for all Christen men, so he doubted not to saye to the Corin­thians, that he hoped to escape danger, adiuuantibus vo­bis in oratione pro nobis, by the helpe of you in prayer for vs. If one good man may helpe an other in this life by prayer, whiles he hath yet somewhat of his owne to be carefull fore: much more the sainctes which are dissol­ued and raigne with Christ, can helpe vs with their per­fite prayer. Ye can tell (I trowe) that S. Hierome made this argument within litle of twelue hundred yeres past. Neither make we them Gods, as ye would seme to saye by the place (which being spoken by the prophete Ieremie of very Idols) ye applye to the frendes of Christ.Psal. 138. Whom Dauid saith to be vnto him most honorable, and their dominion to be most strong. There is no cause why ye should wonder,Sainctes be pecu­liar pa­tions of certaine places. Dan 10. &. 12. if diuerse Cities do gladly acknowledge some one holy Angell, Apostle, Martyr, or Confessor, as their chiefe patrone and frende? For if (as it is writtē) Michael the Archangell was on­ce prince of the Iewes, and stoode alwaies for the children of Gods people: it is not to be doubted but that Christen people [Page] haue now also their patrones. To this propose some apply that which is written,Sapien. 3. fulgebūt iusti & tanquā scintillae in arundi neto discurrent, iudicabunt nationes, & dominabuntur populis, & regnabit dominus illorum in perpetuum. The iustmen shall shy­ne, and like sparkes of fyre in (drye) kickes shall ronne abrode they shall iudge nations, and beare rule ouer peoples, and our Lord shall raigne ouer them for euer.In fine lib. 8. cōment. in Lucam. S. Ambrose is of that opinion plainely, where he sayeth writing vpon S. Lu­ke, sicut angeli praesunt, ita & ij qui vitam meruerint angelorum. As the Angels be ouer nations, so they also which deserue the life of Angels.

Concerning the offices that ye saye we appoint vnto the Sainctes, ye must vnderstand, that as God hath shewed by a­ny miracle, what good worke he hath wrought by this sainct rather then by that: so the people desire to obteine of God by the same sainctes prayer that thing, wherein they may coniecture,Interces­sion of the bles­sed virgin Marye. that God hath geuen him most grace. And be­cause our Lady the blessed Virgine Mary hath more grace geuen to her, then any other creature (except ye can name a greater grace then to be the mother of God): therefore all Christen nations are most bolde to desire in prayer to be re­leued by her intercession and the mediation of her prayer made to her sonne Iesus Christ, who (we doubt not) heareth her most gladly, as nolesse intending to do good by her continually to vs, then we are sure that by her he hath done for vs those great benefites, which continually we do receiue, for so much as he tooke flesh of her.Rom. 8. And seing that Christ is the first begotē among many brothers, we that are called into one heretage with him and by him,Marye mother to all that loue Christ. Iohan. 19. may take hart to accompt Christes mother for our mother, specially whereas he said vnto Iohn his disciple, and in him to all the children of grace, beholde thy mother.

If now any spirituall man such as S. Bernard was,Spirituall familiari­tie with the mo­ther of God, in excesse of mynde and soue­raine de­uotion. deeply consydering the great honour and dignitie of Christes mo­ther, do in excesse of mynde spiritually sporte and dally (as it were) with her, bidding her to remember, that she is a mother, and that thereby she hath a certaine right to commaunde her sonne, and require in a most sweete maner that she vse her right: is this either impiously or impudently spoken? Is not he rather most impious and impudēt that fyndeth fault the­rewith? If euer any of you had practised in contemplation a­ny of that sweetnes which is in canticis canticorum, ye should haue found, that there the spirituall soule is bolder with God her creator and spouse, then S. Bernard euer was with our Lady, being but a creature and a member of the same church with him.

We saye also, that euery person is borne in sinne, Apologie and leadeth his ly­fe in sinne: that no body is able truely to saye, his heart is cleane. That the most rightuous persone is but an vnprofitable seruaunte: That the law of God is perfite, and requireth of vs perfit and full obediēce: That we are able by no meanes to fulfil that law in this wordly lyfe: That there is no one mortall creature whiche can be iustified by his owne desertes in Goddes sight, and therefore that our only succour and refuge is to flye to the mercy of our Father by Iesu Christ, and assuredly to perswade our myndes, that he is the obtayner of forgi­uenes for our sinnes. And that by his bloud al our spottes of sinne be washed cleane: That he hath pacified and set at one all thinges by the bloud of his Crosse: That he by the same one onely Sacrifice whiche he once offered vppō the Crosse, hath brought to effect and fulfilled the thinges, and that for that cause he said when he gaue vp the Gho­ste, It is finished, as though he would signifie that the price and rāso­me was nowe full payde for the sinne of all mankind. Yf there be any that thinke this sacrifice not sufficient, let them go in Gods name and seke an other that is better. We verely, bicause we knowe this to be the onely sacrifice, are well contente with it alone, and loke for none other: and forasmuch as it was to be offered but once, we com­maund it not to be renewed againe. And bicause it was full and per­fite in all pointes and partes, we doo not ordaine in place thereof any continuall succession of offeringes.

THE NYNETINTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion.That a man is borne in synne we graunt, and likewise that he liueth in the same sinne and also in others of his owne doing, vntill he be regenerated in Christ. And from that daye he that is of laufull age can not lightly continewe so iust, but that he shall offende at lest in some of those smaller faultes, which our life by thought, word and dede is daily subiect vn­to. Likewise if we looke to that seuere and straight examina­tion of God, wherein he sitteth iudge, who knoweth vs bet­ter, then we knowe our selues: then no man is so iust, as may dare to saye, my hart is cleane. Although some iust man may well saye with S. Paul.1. Cor. 4. I am not gilty to my selfe of any thing: but before God who seeth farther in him, he is not thereby iustified.How are we vnprofitable seruaūtes, and how are we made profitable. Psalm. 15. Rom. 8. Ioan. 15. Ephes. 2. Iohn. 15. 2. Tim. 2. We are also vnprofitable seruauntes of our selues, both for that we can do nothing that is good, of our selues, and also for that we can geue nothing to God whereof he hath nede, as Dauid saieth to him. Bonorum meo­rum non eges. Thou hast no nede of my good thinges. Yet by his grace he maketh vs his sonnes by adoption, his frendes also, free and houshold seruauntes, not bond seruauntes who knowe not their maisters will, and so we be his profitable ser­uauntes as whom S. Paul calleth, Vessels sanctified and profitable to the maister, ready to euery good worke. Which he might haue lerned of Christ him selfe who saieth in S. Ihon,Iohn. 15. I haue chosen you and appointed you to go, and to bring forth fruit, that your fruit remaine. And as by his mercie and grace of bond and vnprofitable, he hath made vs free and profitable serua­untes, and hath taken vs vnto him selfe to be his sonnes by adoption, and named vs his frendes: so he hath promised vs life euerlasting, if we kepe his commaundementes. Which promise once made, we are bounde to beleue that God will performe. And so now through grace we deserue heauen by [Page 124] our obeing his commaundementes, because it hath pleased him to binde him selfe to that couenant. In respect whereof S. Iohn doubted not to make him saye of certaine chast men, Ambulabunt mecum in albis, quia digni sunt. Apoc [...]l. 3. They shall walke with me all in white, because they be worthy. Thus we then that should haue ben vnprofitable by nature, are by gra­ce made profitable and worthy to walke with God.

Where ye say that his lawe is perfite we confesse the same.How the lawe re­quireth of vs perfite obedien­ce. whē ye adde that it requireth of vs perfite and ful obedience, we answer, it doth so: but in such sort, as perfectiō may be ob­teined in this life. For as there is a perfection of childrē, a per­fection of mē, a perfection of angels, and a perfectiō of God, euery one a perfection in his kinde, and that a greater also in respect of a lesser perfectiō, but the perfectiō of God only ab­solute and in it selfe perfite: so is there one perfection of this life, an other of the life to come. Now the lawe of God requi­reth of vs in this life such ful and perfite obedience, as may be had in this life,Perfectio viatorum. which the fathers call the perfection of waye-faring men. and requireth such full obedience in heauen, as shalbe most perfite there. Ye therefore make a sophisticall ar­gument, when ye teach, because the lawe of God requireth of vs full obedience, that therefor it can not be satisfied in this life by any meanes. For when ye say it requireth of vs full o­bedience, if ye meane such full obedience, as is required only in this life, then conclude ye falsely, that we can by no meanes satisfie it. But if ye meane such full obedience, as is only performed in heauen, then ye conclude well, that we in this life can not fulfill such perfection, as is required in hea­uen. But then haue ye said nothing to the purpose. For we knowe what marke ye shoote at, by your doctrine vttered in other places. Your meaning is that no man in this life is able by the grace of God to fulfill the commaundementes. [Page] For your words, by no meanes, do euen so much import. So haue your Maisters taught before you. And therein ye folo­we their heresies, so as ye dare, vttering them in obscu­re wordes.God commaundeth not that which is im­po [...]sible to a man in grace. that if ye can not abyde by them, ye may saye ye mean [...] not so. We beleue God commaundeth vs nothing im­possible to vs. Otherwise how could he iustly punish for not doing that commaundement, which by no meanes we were able to fulfil? We are sure that God punisheth vs no man vn­iustly,2. Par. 19. for Non est apud dominum Deū nostrum iniquitas. There is no iniquitie in our Lord God. And yet he punisheth with euerlasting fyre couetous men, aduoutrers, fornicatours, sla­underers, murtherers, heretikes, and such other offenders. Therefore we beleue that they might haue auoyded those synnes by such grace as God would haue geuen them, if their iniquitie had not otherwise deserued.Deut. 30. Moises speaking of the fulfilling of the commaundementes of God, which also S. Paul repeteth,Rom. 10. saith, that they are not aboue vs in heauen, neither farre from vs beyond the sea. but hardly thee (saieth he) is his word in thy mouth and in thy harte, that thou mayst do it. And Christ sayeth,Matth. 11. 1. Iohn. 5. Iugum meum suaue est, & onus meum leue. My yoke is sweete and my burden light: and S. Iohn, his commaundementes be not heuye. How then are they such [...] by no meanes may be satisfied in this life? Can not God geue as great grace to ful­fill them, as he geueth great commaundementes? In dede no man is able by his owne strength to fulfill the lest of them, and much lesse is he able to be iustifyed by his own strength. But we speake of christen men, who are one bodye with Christ their head, from whom influence of grace commeth to all members, which is able to make, and in dede hath made of very stones the children to Abraham.Matth. 3. Rom. 5. Of whom S. Paul sayeth, that the charitie of God is powred abrode in our hartes by the holy ghost, which is geuen vnto vs. And S. Augustine saith in [Page 125] his booke de natura et gratia, both that God could not cōma­und impossible preceptes to be kept, because he is iust and good,Cap. 69. and also that (omnia fiunt facilia charitati) all thinges are made easy to charitie. He then that sayeth, we can by no mea­nes fulfill the lawe of God, maketh God vniust and euill or impotent, and not able to geue so much grace as may hel­pe to fulfill his lawe. Let the discrete reader iudge what blas­phemie your wordes conteine. Touching the sacrifice of Christ, we beleue that, whereas all the world was in state of damnation, as well for originall as actuall synne:Christ crucified our only sacrifice. Iesus Christ dyed on the crosse, and with his bloud hath payd a sufficient and full ransome for all the synnes of the world. And this only sacrifice we do acknowledge, neither do we admitte any other to succede the same.The same sacrifice alwayes contine­wed by an other ma­ner of offering. Psal. 109. But we also beleue that the same sacrifice, the same I saye in substance, but not in the maner of the offering once done bloudely, is now offe­red vp daily vnbloudely, because Christ as the scriptures saye, remaineth a priest for euer according to the order of Melchisedech. We do not therfore substitute as ye belye vs, the successiōs of many. But we saye that the same bodye which died once for vs, is continually geuen for vs,Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 11. this is my bodye (sayeth he) which is geuen for you, do this in my remembrance. Lo the selfe same body is geuen for vs in our lords supper, that was geuen for vs vpon the crosse, there, as the whole price of our redem­ption, here, both as a remembrance of the same to vs, and also as a meane to obteine the merite of our redemption on the crosse wrought and perfited. We then in our sacrifice, by the conti­newe the remembrance of that bloudy sacrifice, by the con­secration and offering of the selfesame bodye vnbloudely. Belye vs no more hereafter. This is our doctrine, better foun­ded in the word of God, and in the tradition of the Apostles, and in the custome of the whole church, then that ye shall [Page] euer be able to ouerthrowe it. Blaspheme and barke against it ye maye, ouercome ye can not.

Apologie Besides, though wee saye we haue no meede at all by oure owne woorkes and deedes, but apoint all the meanes of oure saluation to be in Christe alone, yet say we not that for this cause men ought to liue looslie and dissolutely: nor that it is ynough for a Christian to be Bapeized onely and to belieue, as though there were nothing els required at his hande, for true faith is liuely, and can in no wise be idell. Thus therefore teache wee the people, that God hath called vs not to folowe ryot and wantonnes, but as Paul saithe, vnto good woorkes, to walke in them. That God hath plucked vs oute from the power of darkenes to serue the liuinge God: to cutte away all the remnauntes of sinne, and to worke oure saluation in feare and trem­blinge, that it may appere how that the Spirit of sanctification is in oure bodies, and that Christ himselfe doth dwell in our heartes.

THE XX. CHAPTER.

Confu­tation. The De­fenders teach our good workes to helpe vs no­thing at all.With what face can these Defenders affirme, that they teach the people to walke in good workes, whereas begyn­ning the treatise of workes in this present Apologie, they sa­ye that we haue no helpe or ayde in our workes and dedes? For so their Latine word praesidium doth signifie, which in the english, is tourned into meede. What maisters is this the waye to make men worke well, to tell them before hand, that their workes be nothing worth, and that they helpe them neuer a whitte? Why then, let the labourers prouerbe take place, I had rather play for nothing then worke for nothing. Is there any labourer so mad, as to worke for nothing? First ye tell the labourers, that there is no helpe for them in theire workes, and then ye crie vnto them to labour, yea forsooth as hard as they list. Is not this to mocke God and the world? If ye spake to painymes and Iewes, to those that were with­out the faith of Christ, we would saye with you, that they had no helpe to saluation in their workes, because they had not the true foundation of faith, wherevpon workes must be buylded.Heb. 11. For without faith it is impossible to please God. But [Page 126] ye whereas ye speake to Christen men, to those that be baptized, to such as haue faith: yet ye tell thē, they may wor­ke as much as they will, but all in vaine. What other thing is this then to geue as it were a watch word to all persons, that they worke no goodnes at all? Nay but we teach (saye ye) that true faith is liuely, and can not be idle. If this be true, there is no true faith amongest you, where are so fewe good workes, so much false doctrine, so dissolute a life. True faith (say ye) can not be idle, but your faith is idle, as rather de­stroying all the good workes done in olde time, then making any newe of your owne: therefore say we your faith is not true. And this much to your persons.

But now let vs trye whether this proposition be true,The exa­mination of this proposi­tion, true faith is liuely. wherein ye saye true faith is liuely. We fynde these wordes (true faith) to be ambiguous, and that they may be takē two wayes. For as a man may be true of nature, hauing a true bo­dy and a true reasonable soule, and basides that may also be true in keping his promise: euen so faith may be true in his owne nature, (which is to beleue all thinges that God hath reueled) and it may be farther true in keping promise, that is to saye, in performyng that in dede, which was promysed at the font in word, where euery Christen man promyseth to renounce the deuill, the world, the flesh. And contrarywise faith may be true one waye, and not true the other waye. as a man may haue a true body and soule, and yet neither a true harte to God, neither a true performance of his word to his neighbour. For many theues and vsurers beleue all that God hath commaunded them to beleue, and knowe that they do naught, and yet will they not leaue their euill doinges. The which kinde of Christen men haue true faith in bele­uing, but not true faith in performing their obedience which they promised in dede. That faith which beleueth and [Page] doth not performe, is dead in comparison of bringing vs to heauen, and yet is it a true faith in the nature of faith. For faith is called liuely of an other vertue, which is without his owne proper nature, and that vertue is charitie. For neither circumcision (sayeth the Apostle) neither vncircumcision is any thinge worth but faith which worketh by charitie. Galat. 5. Lo if S. Paul require a faith that worketh by charitie, he doth vs thereby to vnderstand, that faith also may be without working by charitie, according to that the Apostle sayeth in another place,1. Cor. 13. that faith, hope, and charitie are three. And yet more plainely he sayeth. If I haue all faith so as I may remoue mountaines, and haue not charitie, I am nothing. Where, by all faith, he meaneth al that is faith in the proper nature of faith. For if I haue cha­ritie with my faith, I haue more thē faith, and then my faith is liuely.Iacob. 2. But faith without charitie, as S. Iames sayeth, is like a body without the spirite. Now as a dead body doth ceasse to be that it was, (for example, a beast, or a man) but it ceasseth not to be a body, euen so faith without charitie ceasseth to iustifie, to worke helthfully, to be liuely, but it ceasseth not to be true faith in that nature which peculiarly belongeth to faith. For as a christen man differeth from a man, so doth li­uely faith differre from faith. And as he that is no christen man, maye be a true man: so he that hath no liuely faith, may haue a true faith.

Thus ye see that not euery true faith is a liuely faith, and yet so ye would meane, as though it could in no sense be a true faith which is not a liuely faith. And yet to shew it more plainely, as he may be called a dead man in comparison of life to come, who is not Christened, but remaineth a hethen or a Iewe: so that faith is dead, which worketh not by chari­tie. But as the hethen or Iewe is a true man in his nature: so that faith which in respect of saluation is called dead, is a true [Page 127] faith in the nature of faith. Ergo then although a liuely faith can not be idle, and some true faith is liuely, yet in an other sense, there is a true faith which is not liuely, but idle. Which true faith shall become lyuely and haue great ayde in workes, if it will lerne to leaue idlenes, and practise that in will and harte, which it beleueth in vnderstanding.

But whereas these Defenders would no helpe or ayde to be in Christen mens workes, that heresie may not so escape.That good workes helpe vs. Matth. 19. Christ being demaunded of one what good he should do to obteine euerlasting life, said. If thou wilt enter into life, kepe the commaundementes. To kepe the commaundementes is a wor­ke, to enter into life is some helpe to a man, Therefor it is fal­sely spoken, that in our workes there is no helpe for vs. Aga­ine Christ sayeth. VVho soeuer forsaketh his house, or brothers, Ibid. or systers, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or landes for my sake, he shall receiue an hundredfold, and shall inherite life euerla­sting. S. Paul sayeth,Rom. 2. God will render to euery man according to his workes. To those that seeke for glorie and honour and incorru­ption, according to the sufferance of good workes, (he wil render) life euerlasting. All this is no helpe to our Defenders. and that they proue, because they put the whole accompt of their sal­uation in Christ. By which wordes they would signifie, as though those which saye there is a great helpe in workes, did not put also their whole accompt of their saluation in the same Christ. Yeas maisters they that saye great helpe of at­taining life euerlasting to be in faithfull mens workes, are better grounded vpon Christ alone,Ephes. 2. who both doth worke good workes in vs, and also rewardeth the same, then ye, who denye that reward vnto workes, which Christ hath promised. For what accompt of saluatiō can ye haue in Christ, who make him to saye false, and to geue no reward of life euerlasting vnto workes, whereas so plainely he promised [Page] for them (being done in faith) life euerlasting? For we make a great difference betwen the workes of Christē men and of infidels. The workes done without faith, can deserue no re­ward of eternall life, but the workes of Christen men be estemed with God meritorious; because they are done within that body whereof Christ is head, and done by the grace which came from heauen, and done for his sake who being dettour to nomā became dettour to him selfe promysing re­ward to them that labour in his vineyard,Matth. 20. and made couenāt with them for a penny, which penny by interpretation both of the grekes and latines doth signifie life euerlasting.

Apologie To conclude, we beleue that this our selfe same flesh wherein we liue, although it dye and come do dust, yet at the last day it shall retourne againe to lyfe by the meanes of Christes spirite which dweleth in vs, and that then verely whatsoeuer we suffer heere in the meane whyle for his sake, Christ will wipe from of our eies all teares and lamentation, and that we through him shall enioy euerlasting life, and shall for euer be with him in glory. So be it.

THE. XXI. CHAPTER.

Confu­tion.Last of all ye beleue (as ye saye) that this very flesh shall retourne to life, and that for the spirite of Christ which dwelleth in vs. There is no doubt but the spirite of Christ is sufficient ro raise vp their bodies in whom it dwelleth. But we saye that the raising of our flesh is also assigned in holy scripture, to the reall and substantial eating of Christes flesh, because it is writtē:Ioan. 6. he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud hath life euerlasting. And I will raise him againe in the last daye. Therefore the resurrection of the flesh is not only assig­ned in holy scripture to the spirite of Christ, but also to the worthy eating of his flesh. And thus we haue confuted the doctrine wherein ye declare your faith, and the chiefe groū­des, whereon ye buyld your newe gospel, we haue disproued.

THE FIRST CHAPTER.

THus at length I haue brought to an ende the confutationConfuta­tion. of your newe belefe. Whereabout I haue bē the lōger, because in that part ye shewe the chiefe groundes of your whole do­ctrine. Frō henceforth I minde to be so shorte, as the matters will conueniently beare: verely shorter then the due conside­ration of them requireth.

And first where ye saye in ieste these be horriblea heresies, we tell you in ernest, they be so in dede, as now we haue de­clared. [Page] Albeit some truth is by you mingled with falsehed,Truth mingled with fal­shed the rather to deceiue. 2. Cor. 11. the rather to deceiue. That haue ye lerned of the Deuill fa­ther of all heresies, who putteth on the shape of an Angell of light, when he goeth about to begyle men and bring them to the workes of darkenes. But what crake ye of a good part of the world? The greater is the number of those ye haue sedu­ced, the more greuous shal be your iudgement. There be not yet many yeres past, that ye boasted of your poore small flocke, alluding to the fewnes of the flocke that lyued with Christ in flesh, and made their fewnes an argument of the syncere truth, but now that through your euill teaching, the world groweth more to be dissolute and wicked, ye boast of your number. Neither are ye condemned by theb bishop of Rome only, whom by that report ye seke to charge with further hatred, but by the vniuersall church of Christ repre­sented of late in generall councell holden at Trent. But (ye saye) they werec neuer heard. They might haue ben heard if they would. Yea many times haue they ben required to ge­ue accompt of their doctrine, but for the more parte they re­fused, putting fault sometime in the iudges, sometime in the place they shuld repaire vnto, sometime in the parties they should haue conference withall.The pro­testantes inuited by all gentil­nes to co­me to the late gene­ral Coun­cel. In the booke of the late Tri­dentine councell euery man maye see, with what gentilnes, with what ernest request, with what libertie and safetie, with what prouision of thinges in that behalf nedefull, (I meane safe conductes to come and go, there to remaine, to propone and dispute freely) they were moued to come to that coun­cell, and there promised with all humanitie to be heard. Where not appering, they were duly condemned, and in ge­nerall pronounced accursed for maintenaunce of sundry great and detestable heresies. Againe who knoweth not how oftentimes they were heard to saye what they could saye for [Page 129] their doctrine, in sundry synodes and conferences, at Rei­genspurg, at Wormes, and other wheres? Where how farre be­syde truth and reason they demeaned them selues, how so­metimes they conueyed them selues priuely awaye, how vn­true reportes of thinges done they made, and what lyes after­ward they set abrode in their bookes: as it were ouer long here to declare, so they that reade the true stories of our time, may well remember. Therefore ye haue no cause to complaine of their condemnation without being heard.

As for thed thinges that proceded from Christ, and the Apostles, and were by them appointed, the churh to whome he promised to sende his holy spirite to lead them into all truth, with whom he promised to be to the worldes ende,Ioan. 14. is not nowe in this later time of the world to learne,Matt. 28. and to be instructed therein at your handes. This is certaine, touching groundes of truth, the church erreth not, as that which en­ioyeth Christes promise, and your congregation teaching the contrary must therefore be taken for children of the fa­ther of lies.Ioan. 8. Touching thee. communion to be diuided amon­gest the faithfull, who is not receiued thereto,1. Cor. 11. that hath so examined him self, as S. Paul requireth in that case?f Though tenne or twenty masses were not said in one daye by Christ, the Apostles, or fathers, as ye scoffe, when the faith was first preached, and fewe beleued, no churches (which here not without prophane malice ye name Temples) yet being built: this is no sufficient reason why we maye not nowe where the faith is generally receiued, haue sundry masses in one church in one daye. Ye make much a doo aboutg. both kindes, and to aggrauate the matter ye vse the odious terme of bannishing the people from the cuppe. We teach the peo­ple for good causes to be cōtent with one kinde, doing them to vnderstand, they receiue the whole body of Christ, flesh [Page] and bloud, no lesse then if they receiued both kindes. Your selues are they which bannish the people from thinestima­ble tresure both of the body and also bloud of Christ, foras­much as by your willes according to your sacramētarie here­sie in stede thereof ye deliuer thē nothing but bread and wi­ne.h The sacriledge which Gelasius speaketh of consisteth in diuiding Christ, and the same he imputeth to the Maniches, as I haue an other where declared.To M. Iuelles chalenge. article. 2. And therefor as that tou­cheth not vs, who do not diuide Christ, but in the sacra­ment geue to the people whole Christ, so it sheweth you to be either slaunderous or ignorant. The names ofi Ambrose, Augustine, Gelasius, Theodorite, Chrysostom, and Origen, ye reporte here againe to your further shame. For who rea­ding that which I haue now answered to their places here before, will not espie your crafte and falsehed? There the proufes and reasons which ye bring against transubstantia­tion and for the remaining of bread and wine in the sacra­ment after consecration, be plainly disproued and auoided. As here ye do but repete the same, so for answere I thinke it ynough to that place to referre the reader. As for the tongek of the church Seruice, how so euer Christ, the Apostles and holy fathers prayed, the vse of the Latine tonge vsed in the seruice of the Latine church is not by any reason or au­ctoritie ye can bring yet so farre disproued, that the church ought to condemne the order from the begynning receiued and hitherto cōtinewed. Cōcerning thel sacrifice of Christ on the crosse, it is perfite. That we haue in the aulter is the same, not an other, though it differ in the maner of offering, how often times must we tell it you?

Apologie All these thinges must they of necessitie say, onlesse perchance they had rather say thus, Dist. 36. lect. in glo­sa. that all lawe and right is locked vp in the treasurie of the Popes breaste, and that as once one of his southing pages and clawbackes did not sticke to saye, the Pope is able to dispē­ce [Page 130] against the Apostles, against a councell, and against the Canons and rules of the Apostles, Dist. 82. c. presby­ter. and that he is not bound to stand neither to the examples, nor to the ordinaunces, nor to the lawes of Christ.

To saye that all Lawe and right (your Latine terme is fas) is locked vp in the treasurie of the Popes breast,Confuta­tion. it were absurd and vnreasonable.It is no reason that diui­nes be re­quired to make good what so euer is written by the canoni­stes or schoole­men. Mary to saye that the lawes reste in the Popes breast, after a certaine meaning, as hereafter shalbe declared, it is not altogether beside truth and reason. But syrs what if some meane writer or gloser vpon the ca­non Lawe speake somewhere out of square, if all shuld be exactly tried by scripture, will ye laye that to our charge? Shall the faith of the catholike churche thereby be called in doub­te and question? We take not vppon vs to defend all that the Canonistes or scolemen saye or write. Yet we knowe ye can not charge them with any errour in matters of Christen faith. And what maketh that ye alleage here for your de­fence?

That which the glose noteth in c. lector. et c. presbyter, the author of it putteth it not affirmatiuely, but by way of mouing a doubt, and geueth occasion to seeke further, as the maner of those interpreters is. Who so euer weigheth well the text in c. lector, he can not rightly gather thereof, that the Pope dispenseth against the Apostle, because for ne­cessities sake it is graunted to bigamusbigamus. (that is one twise ma­ried or hauing a wife twise maried) to be made subdeacon.Thinges good of thēselues and of their ow­ne nature be indis­pensable. Panor. etc. in c. pro­posuit. De cōcess. prebend. exira. §. sed natu­ralia. In­stit. de iur. nat. Gent. & ciuili. For where hath the Apostle forbidden a bigamus to be made subdeacon? Touching the matter it selfe, occasion of serch whereof the glose there ministreth, thus thinke the lerned men of that profession. That certaine thinges be good by their selues and of their owne nature, in which this is a sure rule, that they be immutable, and that by no dispensation they can be taken away or chaunged. Such be all those thin­ges [Page] that perteine to christen faith in the lawe of God by their owne nature good, and by lawe of nature so firme, as no Pope be he neuer so much Gods vicar in earth, may the­rein dispense, no more then (if it be laufull to compare small thinges with great) a bishops chauncelour may consecrate priestes, which is in the power of a bishop only, and is not conteined in the function or commission of a depute or chauncelour.Thinges good by occasion be in cer­taine ca­ses dispē­sable. Axiomata fidei. Some thinges be good not of their owne na­ture, but by occasion. In this kinde or order be many thin­ges, which may rather be called rules of maners, then prin­ciples, or such as we terme axiomata of our faith. These although they be founde written in the scripture, forasmuch as they haue ben commaunded by an occasion and for some cause, they maye for cause and occasion, and as we finde in c. lector, for necessitie, by Gods depute and vicare be sup­plied, holpen, expounded. And if the case so require, he in the same for a certaine cause, with a certaine persone, for a certaine time, with certaine circumstances maye despense, by the same spirite they were first founded and instituted withall, and with the same intention, to witte, for some speciall good, and furtherance of godlines. And in this case dispensation made by laufull auctoritie is not to be grudged at, nor to be taken as iniurious to the lawe of God, sith that the lawe and the dispensation tend to one ende, and the lawe it self, if it could speake, in that case would saye, touching the thing to be dispensed, that prohibition should not haue place. The same because the lawe and dead letter can not vtter, the laufull magistrate being minister of the lawe, supplieth, as the liuely voice of the lawe. But the thinges that be good of their owne nature, so be they alwaies good, as occasion or cause can neuer come, where it be right they haue not place. Such administration of Gods lawe, and [Page 131] such dispensation thereof, as of a precious treasure, not free or at libertie and pleasure, but an euen, iust, and good dispensa­tion, they do attribute to Gods vicare, whom this Defender calleth the Popes parasites, pages, and clawbackes, him sefe a very page, slaue, and clawbacke to the Deuill.

We for our partes haue lerned these thinges of Christ: Apologie. of the Apo­stles, of the deuout fathers, and do sincerely with good faith teach the people of God the same. Which thing is the only cause why we at this day are called heretikes of the chief prelate (no doubt) of reli­gion. O immortal God hath Christ him self then, the Apostles and so many fathers, all at once gone a straye? Were then Origene, Ambro­se, Augustine, Chrysostom, Gelasius, Theodorit forsakers of the ca­tholike faith? Was so notable a consent of so many auncient bishop­pes and lerned mē no thing elles, but a conspiracy of heretikes? Or is that now condemned in vs, which was then commended in them? Or is the thinge now by alteration only of mēs affection sodenly be­come schismatique, which in them was compted, catholique? Or shall that which in times past was true, now by and by, because it li­keth not these mē, be iudged false? Let thē then bring fourth an other gospel, and let them shew the causes why these thinges which so long haue openly ben obserued, and well allowed in the church of God, ought now in the ende be called againe. We know well ynough, that the same woord which was opened by Christ, and spred abrode by the Apostles is sufficient, both our saluation and all truth to vphold and maintaine, and also to confound all maner of heresie. By that worde only do we condemne all sortes of the old heretikes, whom these men saie we haue called out of hell again. As for the Arians, Eutichians, the Marcionites, the Ebionites, the Valentinians, the Carpocratians, the Tatians, the Nouatians, and shortely all them which haue a wicked opinion either of God the Father or of Christ, or of the holy ghoste, or of any other point of Christian religion, for so much as they be confuted by the gospell of Christ, we plainely pronounce them for detestable and castaway personnes, and defie them euen vnto the deuill. Neither do we leaue them so, but we also seuerely and straightely hold them in by laufull and politike pou­nishements, if they fortune to breake owt anywhere and bewray them selues.

We for our part knowe as nowe we haue proued,Confuta­tion. that ye haue not lerned these thinges of Christ, nor of the Apostles, nor of the fathers, but of Luther, Zwinglius, Oecolampa­dius, [Page] Caluine, Peter Martyr, Bucer and such other Apostates, and that ye do most falsely and wickedly lead the people in to the pitte with you. And therfor ye are iustly condemned by the church and demed heretikes. O mercifull Christ how great is thy patience and longanimitie, that suffrest not only thine Apostles and the holy fathers thy dere frendes, but also thine owne selfe, who art the very truth it selfe, to be so wre­sted by these rebellious sonnes, and alleaged by them for vp­houlding and maintenaunce of their lyes and plasphemies? What impudencie is it to call Origen, Ambrose, Augustine, Chrysostom, Gelasius, Theodorite, to witnes against the truth, specially in those places, where they geue irrefragable testimonie of truth? Lord how would they triumphe if (which is not possible) they found the hundred part against the matters we defend, in respect of that we finde for defence of the truth? And could this maruelous and from God pro­ceding consent of such lerned and holy fathers be so man­gled by false gloses, and expositions, nippinges and cuttinges of their sentences, by other then heretikes, mockers of their mother, despisers of God? But who will heare these falsaries, and not cleaue rather to the sense of the holy ghost in these holy fathers writinges vttered? How can that now seme to serue heretikes, whereby they confuted and vanquished heresies? And yet they be not ashamed so to turne and tosse their workes, as they would make the people wene, they sto­de by them, and we were throwen downe by them. Seeing then this is so, let them not go about to set vp a newe reli­gion, but submit their neckes vnder the gospell of Christ preached by the Apostles, confirmed by miracles, increaced by the bloud and holy lyfe of so many martyrs and con­fessours, by holy doctours and obedience of christen people continewed to our times. For now in the ende of the worlde [Page 132] we can not be brought backe from that olde to beleue a ne­we gospell. Yet who crake more of the gospell then these peruerters of the gospell? Who speake so much of Gods word, as they whose heartes the Deuil hath made his shoppe, wherein to forge wicked lyes for the maintenaunce of his kingdome? Who would be seen more to condemne certaine olde here­sies, then these scowrers of olde, and forgers of newe heresies? They condēne forsooth the Arians, the Eutychians, the Mar­cionites, the Ebionites, the Valentinians, the Carpocratians, the Tatians, the Nouatians, and all other heretikes (for so they boste) and detest them (as they saye) vs{que} ad inferorum portas, that is, euen to hell gates.

Would God they would repent, and so obteine grace, that they might be saued. Els if they will not, but continewe incorrigible, rather then that they shuld bring so great mul­titudes of people, for whom Christ hath shed his bloud, to euerlasting damnation: it were good for Christen people, as they detest certaine those olde heresies euen to hell gates, that so with the authours of them (except it may please God to geue them grace to repent) they entred into hell with their heresies also, that the gates of hell being shut fast vpon them, they might come no more abrode in the world, and haue no more power to poison the people of God,The De­fenders haue not condēned all olde heresies. Maniches. Aug. de haeresib. c. 45. Epiphan. lib. 3. haeresi. 75. Vigilātius. as they do. But how saye ye Sirs, haue ye condemned all olde here­sies? and may we beleue you? How condemne ye the Mani­ches, seing with Manichaeus ye denie free will, and despise the holy fastes of certaine daies appointed by the church? How is Aērius by you condemned, seing ye robbe the dead of the blessed sacrifice of the aulter, prayers, and almose to be made for them, which both Epiphanius, and S. Augu­stine do recken for heresie? How is Vigilantius by you con­demned, seing ye suffer no tapers nor lightes to burne in [Page] your churches, seing ye can not abyde the sygne of the Cros­se, and the worshipping of sainctes, seing ye cast the holy reliques of Martyrs into the fyre or dongmixons? For such was his doctrine as S. Hierome writing against him witnes­seth.Ad exupe­rium. Iouinianus. How is Iouinian by you condemned, seing besydes other heresies which he helde common with other hereti­kes, ye put no difference of merite betwen the state of virgi­nitie and mariage,Ad Quod­nultdeum haeraes. 82. Dona­tistes. Contra Donatist. Lib. 6. whom both S. Hierome and Augustine condemne for an heretike? How condemne ye the Do­natistes, seing with them ye breake and throw dow­ne the holy aulters of God, on which (as Optatus wri­teth) the body and bloud of Christ was wont to be laid? Other heretikes might I here recite, whose peruerse and damnable doctrines ye folowe, but these are to many, and to prosecute all I haue not purposed. As for the wicked and deuilish dedes done be any the heretikes of olde time what so euer they were, if in comparison thereof your cousinage with them were declared, it would sone appere, that ye con­demne them not, but folowe them, and resemble them as children do their parentes, and be as like to them, as though ye were crept out of their mouthes and breastes.

Apologie In deede we graunt that certaine new and very straunge sectes, as the Anabaptistes, Libertines, Menonians, and Zwenefeldians haue ben stirring in the worlde euersence the Gospel did first spring. But the worlde seeth now right well, thankes be giuen to our God, that wee neyther haue bredd nor taught, nor kept vp these monstres. In good fellowship I pray the whosoeuer thou be, read our bokes, they are to be sould in euery place: What hath there euer ben written by any of our company, which might plainely beare with the madnes of any of those heretiques? Nay I say vnto you, there is no countrie at this daye so free from their pestilent infections, as they be wherein the gospel is freely and commonly taught. So that yf they wey the very matter with earnest and vpright aduisemēt, this thing is a great argument, that this same is the very truth of the Gospell whiche we do teache. For lightly neither is cockell wont to growe without the wheat, nor yet the chaffe without the corne. For from the very [Page 133] Apostles times, who knoweth not how many heresies did rise vp euen togeather, so soone as the Gospell was first spred abrode? Who euer had heard tel of Simon, Menander, Saturninus, Basilides, Car­pocrates, Cherinthus, Ebion, Valentinus, Secundus, Marcosius, Colorbasius, Heracleo, Lucianus, and Seuerus, before the Apostles were sent abrode? But whye stande wee reckening vp these? Epipha­nius rehearseth vp foure score sundrie heresies, and Augustine many moe, whiche did spring vp euen togeather with the Gospell. VVhat then? Was the Gospell therfore not the Gospell, bycause heresies sprang vp withall? Or was Christ therefore not Christ? And yet as we said, doth not this great crop and heape of heresies grow vp amongest vs, which do openly a broade and frankely teache the Gospell? These poysones take their begininges, their encreasin­ges, and strenght emongest our aduersaries, in blindenes and in darkenes, emongest whom trueth is with tyrannie and cruelty kept vnder, and cannot be hearde but in corners and secrete mee­tinges. But let them make a proofe, let them giue the Gospell free passage, let the truth of Iesu Christe giue his cleare light and stretche forth his bright beames into all partes, and then shall they furthwith see howe all these shadowes streight will vanishe and passe away at the light of the Gospel, euen as the thick myste of the night consumith at the sight of the sunne. For whilest these men sit still and make mery, and doe nothing, we continually represse and put backe all those heresies, whiche they falselye charge vs to nory­she and mainteyne.

THE SECOND CHAPTER.

Ye take witnes of al the world that ye neither brought forth,Confu­tation. nor taught, nor fostred the monsters which the world is now cumbred withall, the Anabaptistes, Libertines, Memnoniās, and Zuenkfeldians. First forasmuch as there are many other sectes now adayes, and the same nolesse knowen to you, and nolesse by others imputed to you, then these foure which here ye haue named: ye seme by refusing only these, to allowe al the other, to witte, Osiādrines, Adiaphoristes, Antinomiās,The crop of here­sies of our time. newe Maniches, Infernals, Image breakers, Trinitarians, and a number of other better knowen to you, then to vs, and yet more knowen to vs, then we would wish. Were it therefor graunted, that those foure first named monstres came not [Page] out of you: yet were it not euil ynough, that ye brought forth all these other bastard sectes?

But now we affirme that those foure also are your ac­cursed broode.The be­gynning of Marti­ne Lu­thers go­spell, and of the he­resies which thereof sprang. Zuingli{us} and Oe­colampa­dius. A meetīg of Luthe­rans and Zuin­glians at Marpurg. Anabap­tistes. When Luther had begonne his false gospel in the yere of our lord God. 1517. affirming that the substance of bread and wine remayned after consecratiō in the sacrament of the aulter with the true bodye and bloud of Christ: dyd not Zuinglius foure yeres after partly folowe that doctrine concerning the remaining of bread and wine, partly impug­ne it, concerning the presence of Christes bodye? Did not the sayd Zuinglius with Oecolampadius his felow refuse to be reconciled with Luther, Melanchthon, Iustus Ionas, Bu­cer, and Osiander, at a meeting which the Landgraue of Hes­se procured for them at Marpurg in the yere of our Lord 1529? Here then stand your two captaine gospellers at defian­ce in the chiefe point of that great sacrament, which Christ dyd institute. In the yere of our Lord. 1524. The Anabaptistes beganne to publish their wicked belefe, that it was not laufull to baptise infantes. And from whence drewe they that here­sie,Hosius cō­tra Brent. lib. 1. but partly out of Martine Luthers bookes, partly out of his example and doings? For when Luther thinking chil­dren to haue actuall faith, had sayd it were better to omitte their baptisme, then to baptise them without faith of their owne, seing it appered absurd vnto others, that infantes could haue actuall faith of their owne, they thought best to folow Luthers counsell, and clerely to let passe their baptisme. Vnto which opinion when they had ioyned stubbornesse, and ac­cording as they saw Luther do in other pointes, had brought scripture of their owne interpretation for the maintenance thereof: it became a bastard childe of Luthers, whether he would or no, as grounded vpon an errour of his, and fostred vp by his euill demeanour and example. In so much [Page 134] that MemnoMemno. the Phrisian feared not to saye of that heresie: I knowe assuredly that with this my doctrine (which is the word of God) I shall iudge in the day of right iudgement not only the Lor­des and princes, not only the world, but also the very angels. Thus haue ye the mōsters of Anabaptistes and Memnoniās wholy deriued from the sprite of Luther. Who notwith­standing in the other opinion of our Lordes supper do ag­gree with the Zuinglians rather then with the Lutherans.

Well Zuenkfeldius marking how this gere went fore­ward,Zuenck­feldius, and his heresie. and that as well the Lutherans as the Zuinglians and the Anabaptistes brought euery one the word of God for their part, although he conformed him selfe in the matter of our Lordes supper to ech syde, saying with the Lutherans that the true body was present, and with the Zuinglians that it was not present in substance of mans flesh (for that he thought the body of Christ after his ascension to be tourned into God) yet he went as shrewed scolers do, beyond them both, saying that who so will haue the truth, must gete it not by reading the scriptures, but by the inspiration and secret teaching of God from heauē, or by visions and dreames. But as Zuenkfeldius could not haue gone beyond you, if he had not first ouertaken you, so by helping him so farre foreward as your selues were, ye dyd vnwares helpe him to that mar­ke, whereunto him selfe ranne.

And as for Libertines,Libertines. what other substance hath your gospel besydes carnal libertie and licentious lyuing?The do­ctrine of the Li­bertines gospell. To bre­ake the vowe of chastitie solemly made to God, by whose grace and your endeuour it might well haue ben kept, and to breake it for wantonnesse and to satisfie lust: is not that proper to Libertines? To geue ouer fasting, watching in pra­yer, and confession of synnes which shoulde be made to a priest, by whom only (except in case of necessitie) God pro­myseth forgiuenes: to bydde men to looke for no ayde by [Page] working, but to let faith alone, (which if it be true can not as ye saye be idle) to make it laufull for your selues bearing the name of superintendētes against the expresse word of S. Paul, to haue many wiues one after an other, to quitte your selues from obedience to what so euer canon or rule any councell (were it neuer so generall) hath set forth, to regard no tradition, though it came from the Apostles, briefly to teach that all kinde of owtward godlines is superstitious and pharisaicall, and that euery man must without staggaring or doubting beleue that him selfe shalbe saued if he haue faith, do he what him liste,The re­ceiuers of the ne­we plea­sant gos­pell. is this no point of libertie? What made so many malepert prentises, pleasant courtiers, discoursing parlament machiauellistes, and all other what so euer flesh-wormes, Merchantes, idle artificers to imbrace your gospell, rather then the grauer and deuouter sort of men which be weaned from the pleasure of this life: but that it was plausi­ble to the world and pleasant to the flesh, from which that kinde of mē are most hardly drawē? And yet forsooth do not ye foster vp libertines? Who is cause of the horses running out, but he that leaueth the stable dore opē? Who spilleth the liquor, but he that looseth the hoopes of the vessell, or dra­weth out the tappe? All Christendome was safe and quiet in one house,whereof came th s ouerslow of m [...]s­chief. before ye beganne to open the dore, saying that men were not bounde to obey the bishop of Rome. After which bonde once dissolued, all the mischiefe came forth, which now we see flowe abrode ouer all. As the deuill is the cause of all synne, not that he only doth it, but because he procureth the first synne, whereby all other haue mul­tiplied: so without all controuersie Luther was the cause of all the heresies of our age, who first procured that men should acknowledge no one head and iudge,Lib. 1. epi. 3. ad cer­nelium. whom as S. Cy­prian sayeth, they might obey as the vicare of Christ. Therefore [Page 135] euen the Trinitarians and Arians that be in our time be fo­stred vp by you,Trinitari­ans, be he­retikes holding false do­ctrine a­gainst the most blessed Trinitie. who els would not once haue shewed their head in any part of Christendome. For if they had, forth­with the bishop of Rome would haue cut them of from the body of the church by iuste excōmunication, and the catho­like princes would not haue suffered them to lyue in their dominions. But now that ye haue torne the whole cote of Christ, and brought great multitudes to your damnable sy­de, both the Catholike king and the most Christian king, and other gouernours of states, lest dangerous tumultes and vprores of their seduced people should be raised, haue much slaked the accustomed seueritie of executing their auncient lawe vpon all sortes of heretikes.

Who can recken the sectes that be in Germany, being sixtin or moe professed in some one towne? BemelandBemeland. is all­most as full of heresies as of houses. SilesiaSilesia. is as bad, and MorauiaMorauia. a countrie there adioyning is neuer a whit better. And yet do not these sectes bud, where your gospell is freely and openly preached? What impudencie of yours is this, to make these monstres to be brought forth among the catho­likes, where they are with great diligence sought for and punished so farre as policie strecheth, not without cause mistrusting rebellion, which of the seede of your doctrine euery where is the heruest? For how can it be otherwise where ye tell the common people, that they must read the word of God and iudge of it them sel­ues, and folow it not as men haue taught, but as the lyuing God him selfe teacheth them by his spirite, and by their owne conference of one place with an other? As though they were not men to whom so ye speake, and might not cō­ferre places in a wrong sense, and both be deceiued and decei­ue others. We vnderstand the scriptures only as the church [Page] and holy fathers teach vs, and folowing them we be not de­ceiued. So that when ye saye these sectes spring not vp with you, but rather amongest your aduersaries: by like ye recken the Germaines for your aduersaries. For vndoubtedly there they swarme not now springing vp, but of long time growē, there they haue had to outward shewe semely blossomes, but haue brought forth many a foule fruite. And thinke ye not that our countrie of England shall long be free. It is but young dayes as yet. Ye are to much occupied with the Papi­stes, (as ye call vs and now your vilenes maketh that name to vs glorious) whom if ye could once wholy be ridde of, (as by Gods grace ye shall neuer be) then should the world see, what would rise vp among your selues. Infantes do not be­gete new children, but men of conuenient age. Ye were ne­uer so glad to cast awaye Luthers reall flesh, and the bare fi­gure of Zuinglius, as the next age wilbe ready (if God dis­pose not otherwise) to cast out and refell your pipe and con­ducte, by which your maister Iohn Caluine sayeth, men eate Christ from heauen.

Compare not your gospell with Christes, because as at the spredding abrode of it many heresies rose together vp with it, so many likewise rise at the vpspring of youres. For first yours can not be true, because as your selues confesse, now it is in the first spring,Diuision among the gospellers cau­seth them daily to lose their credite. whereas Christes gospell is with­in litle of sixtin hundred yeres olde. Againe Christes gospell had encreace by occasion of heresies, yours is in the wane, and yerely diminisheth through cause of the great diuision that is amongest you, were it not for the which moe had gonne with you, and your part had ben of more number. But God who maintaineth his church, will not suffer you to prosper.The Tri­nitarians of Pole were first Caluini­stes as the Defenders be. For when it is once certainly knowen, that the Tri­nitarians (which are now in Gracouia the chiefe citie of Po­le) [Page 136] were altogether Caluinistes, as ye are, and in publike writinges confesse, that out of his doctrine yea him selfe gai­nesaying them, they haue taken those principles by which they denie vtterly the blessed name of the Trinitie, as that which is not to be founde in all holy scriptures: when (I say) the world shall read the epistles and tables of Gregorius the founder and first teacher of that doctrine in Cracouia,Gregorius author of the sect of the Trinita­rians. and perceiue of what stocke that braunch springeth, (to witte of Iohn Caluine) they will vndoubtedly abhorre and deteste your scoole, and your damnable lessons, the ende whereof is to prepare the people of Christ, as meete vesselles to receiue Antichrist, whose time by likelyhod draweth nere, if the ca­lendes be not entred already. Leaue the vaine bragge of a new sprong gospell. The old is the best. Leaue comparing your selues with Christ, he hath once spred his gospell, and it is rooted in the hartes of men. If any gospell remaine vnspred, it is the seede of Antichrist, whose waye ye prepare, although all of you be not preuy of the wicked mystery, that is now in working. By calling to God for grace ye may lerne whereto all this tendeth, and so by repentaunce to retourne to the ca­tholike church of Christ.

Where they say that we haue fallen into sundrie sectes, Apologie and would be called some of vs Lutherās, some of vs Zuingliās, and cā not yet well agree among our selues touching the whole substance of do­ctrine, a what would these men haue said, if they had ben in the first times of the Apostles and holy fathers, when one saide: I hold of Paul, an other, I hold of Cephas, an other, I hold of Apollo? b when Paul did so sharpely rebuke Peter? when vpon a falling out c Barna­bas departed from Paul? when as d Origen mentioneth, the Chri­stians were diuided into so many factions, as that they kept no mo­re but the name of Christians in common among them, being in no maner of thinge elles like to Christians, when as e Socrates saith, for their dissensions and sundrye sectes they were laughed and iested at openly of the people in the common gameplayes, when as f Constantine the Emperour affirmeth: there were such a number of va­riaunces [Page] and braulinges in the church, that it might iustly seme a miserie farre passing all the former miseries? when also g Theophi­lus, Epiphanius, Chrysostome, Augustine, Rufine, Hierome, being all Christians, being all Fathers, being all catholiques, did striue one against an other, with most bitter and remediles contentions with­out ende? when as saith h. Nazianzene, the partes of one body were consumed and wasted one of an other? when the East part was diui­uided from the VVest, onely for i. leuened bread, and only for ke­ping of Easter day, which were in did no great matters to be striued for? And when in all Councells new k. Credes and new decrees continually were deuised?

THE THIRD CHAPTER.

Confu­tation.Here our maisters of the Apologie after that they haue made a full declaration of their gospell, and haue boldly but vntruly denied that any of the manifold heresies which the world is nowe infected withall, sprang of them, or grewe and tooke encrease among them (I meane the head of their secte and them of Germanie): at lenght come to that which is so obiected vnto them, as they can not denie, which is, their diuision into sundry sectes. That they be diuided within them selues, it is a matter so cleare, as by any deuise or crafte they can not shifte it from them. Who desireth to be fully in­structed thereof, may he read the Apologie of Frederike Sta­phylus. Now faine would they answer the matter honestly, if they wist how. And an answere must be deuised, els their whole gospell is disproued, defaced, and quite throwen dow­ne.VVhere is diuisiō, there is not the sp [...]rite of truth which is the spirite of vnitie. For where is diuision, there is not charitie, where cha­ritie is bannished, there the spirite of God dwelleth not. So it must nedes folowe, that if they agree not within them selues, their doctrine is not of God the authour of peace, but of the Deuill authour of dissension. Well in this case what haue they to saye? Whereas they can not denie it, they labour to make it seme a matter of small importance. 1.First by making the blame common as well to the Apostles, holy fathers, and [Page 137] christen men of old time, as to them selues. 2.Secondely by imputing the same to the catholikes. 3.Thirdly by pretending the question they disagree in, to be neither weighty nor great. 4.Well, let vs see how this sope scowreth out of their cote this fowle spotte.

Ye demaund of vs, what we would haue said,a if we had liued in S. Paules time, who complaineth of certaine among the Corinthians that said, I holde of Paul, I holde of Apollo, 1. Cor. 1. I holde of Cephas. We answer you. What we would the haue said, we knowe not. What we should haue said, we knowe right well. We should haue blamed them, as the Apostle Paul did, for that they diuided thēselues into sectes, and were parcially addicted to men, and not to Christ only, and craked of them, whom ech one had bē baptized of. And you for doing the sa­me, yea much worse, likewise we blame, as also S. Paul would, and condemne you for it, if he were now lyuing. Their small diuision is no excuse of your great dissension.

bOf Paules rebuking of Peter, ye can not gather an inuinci­ble argument of discord betwen them,Gal. 2. Though Paul rebuked Peter, yet was there no discord betwen them. which ye should haue done, before ye had set them at variaunce, contrary to the minde of S. Cyprian in epist. ad Quirinum, and many other fathers. Neither haue ye more scripture or reason for the opi­nion of S. Augustine, then for that of Hierome. How so euer it be, there was no breach of vnitie among those blessed Apostles, but either of them sought the saluation of their flockes, the one by winking at somewhat and yelding for a tyme, the other by plaine requiring of truth and going vp­right. Peter of the weake Iewes, that would haue forsaken the gospell altogether, rather then to geue ouer the cere­monies of the lawe wholly, Paul of those, whome by his preaching he had brought to a further perfection, and per­swaded, now that Christ the ende of the lawe was come, [Page] to depende no lenger of the outward obseruations of the lawe. So by Gods prouidence the euerlasting helth of both sortes was procured by different demeanour of the A­postles, their willes to one good ende most perfitly agre­ing. And thus should we haue said, if at that time we had lyued.

cNeither was Barnabas and Paules dissension of enemitie and hatred,Act. 15. The strife of Paul and Bar­nabas was to good purpose, not of e­nemitie. Num. 12. 4. Reg. 1. Exod. 32. but either of them stoode fast in that he thought best. And that was most profitable both for Iohn named Marke (for whom their strife was) and for the churches. For Paules seueritie made him the more wary, and the gētlenes of Barnabas caused that he was not all together destitute. We finde in the prophetes diuerse conditions, neither for all that reprehended. Moyses was meeke and gētill, Elias hard and se­uere. The like we read of God and Moyses. the one besecheth, the other is angry. The departing then of Barnabas from Paul, was not for euill will, as it appereth by the great praises that afterward Paul in his Epistles gaue Barnabas. What ser­ueth this to your purpose?

dThe complaint of Origen perteineth either to the diuer­sitie of heresies,The cō­plaint of Origen wherto it pertei­neth. which in his time raigned, or of the vngodly studies and trades of lyfe, the folowers whereof kept rather the name, then vertue of Christen men. Which we blame no lesse then either he or you. Neither can ye defend your euill by an other euill.Stri­fes and debates styrred by Arians. Histor. tri­part. lib. 1. Cap. 17. A storye falsely re­ported by the De­fenders.

eThe greatest strifes and debates that Socrates speaketh of were raised by the Arians, who were occasion of vnquiet­nes among Christen people at Nicomedia, as your felowes of late haue ben in Fraunce. And the Christians were not therefore laughed and iested at opēly as ye saye, but the mat­ter grewe to such a stirre, as Christianitie thereby susteined preiudice, for so saith Socrates.

fThe good and noble Emperour Constantine greuously complayned of the braulinges and quarelles that in his time the church was troubled and cumbred withall, partly by the sedition and faction of certaine bishops, but specially of the wicked Arians. If we had lyued then, we shuld haue said of them, as we saye now of you, and generally of all hereti­kes: that they set the church beside peace and rest, and chri­sten people beside the saluation of their soules, yet the good be good, though the euill play their part neuer so much. To what purpose ye recite all these thinges, we knowe not, on­lesse it be to shewe, that ye do no otherwise then heretikes haue done in times past.

For the dissension,The euill strifes of the Ariās can not be allea­ged in de­fence of the gospel­lers strifes of the world that was raised by the A­rians, can no more be alleaged for defence of your debate and strife within your selues, then one theefe can alleage for defence of his thefte, the robbery of an other theefe.

g.Now ye come to rippe vp olde sores, and bring forth to light certaine workes of darkenes, long age buried and for­gotten, done by those fathers, whom all good men neuerthe­lesse iudge well of, and trouble their blessed memories, whose spirites be at rest in the hand of God not touched with any torment of wicked malice.Sapient. 3. The trouble which witty Theo­philus and simple Epiphanius brought the holy and lerned bishop Iohn Chrysostom vnto, was not for heresie,Tripart. lib. 10. at large. how so euer he was charged with fauoring Origens workes,Tripart. li. 10. ca. 13. but for other worldly matters, and specially for that he refused to come to a pretensed synode holden by his aduersaries in the suburbes of Chalcedon ouer against Constantinople, but appealed from the same to a generall councell.The strife betwen Hierom and Au­gustine for a poīt of lernīg. The conten­tion betwen Hierom and Augustine was about a point of lerning concerning Paules rebuking of Peter for bearing with the Iewes. Wherein as they both shewe greate lerning, [Page] so the one a litle stomake, as a man, namely Hierome, no ene­mitie nor hatred at all. Neither was that euer called of any man a diuision, but such a lerned exercise or strife, as Hesiod meāt where he sayeth, [...]. That is to saye, This maner a strife amōg men is a good strife. In deede cōcerning Rufine and Hierome, their falling owt can not so well be excused.Strife betwen Hierome and Rufi­ne. It semeth by that they wrote the one against the o­ther, that sometimes they dipte their pennes in gaull and choler. but what then? Shall ye now take aduantage of that which afterward they misliked in them selues, and tourne it to defence of the dissensions in religion that now be betwen the Lutherans and Zuinglians? They agreed in the faith, va­riāce fell betwen them for other causes. And the coles of their strife was the rather set on fyre by euill tales and sinistre reportes caried to and fro by whisperers and euill tonged persons.

hNazianzene in sundry places, and also Basile, and other holy fathers of that age, lament the state of Christendome in their time, for that it was miserably vexed and troubled, and for a greate part consumed by diuerse sectes of haeretikes, specially the Arians hauing the Emperour of their syde. But neither Nazianzene nor any other father of the church did euer allowe any sectes that dissented from the catholike church and disagreed within them selues (as for example the Arians and Sabellians) so as ye do allowe both the Lutherans and Zwinglians. To what ende ye call him to witnes I mar­uell, onlesse it be thereby to declare, that heresies and sectes were in his time as well as nowe, which we confesse, and he condemned them, as the church condemneth you.

iTruth it is also that ye tell of the diuersitie of bread vsed at the aulter.Small de­bates be­twen the East and west churches. The Grekes of long time haue cōsecrated leue­ned bread, the Latines vnleuened. Likewise the East church for the time of Easter varied from the West. But these were [Page 139] no heresies, neither for these thinges were the churches diui­ded, as ye saie, nor the one condemned the other. And tou­ching Easter, vntill Pope Victor the blessed Martyr com­maunded it vnder paine of excommunication to be kept in all churches at one time according to the auncient custome of the Romaine church: the diuersitie of that obseruation was a thing indifferent.The stri­fe betwixt the Lutherans and zwingli­ans is a­bout a ne­cessary point of belefe. But the diuersitie which is stoutly mainteined betwen the Lutherans and Zwinglians, for the which they impute the horrible crime of haeresie the one to the other, consisteth in a necessary point of our belefe, and about a principle of truth vttered by Christes owne mouth. Which both here for a bad defence ye seme to iustifie, both being false and contrary to our Lordes expresse word. If we would graunt, (which in any wise we may not graunt) that the one of these two sectes mainteineth truth, their opinions being contradictorie the ones to thothers, it must nedes folowe, that the other mainteineth vntruth. Now whe­re ye claime frier Luther, and frier Oecolampadius, (which nolesse then Zuinglius is one chiefe head of the sacramen­tarie secte) to be your Apostles and founders of your church, and planters of your newe gospel,The foū­ders and Apostles of the ne­we gos­pelling church. teaching so contrary the one to the other: for good cause we saye, that ye are fallen into sundry sectes, and therefor is your manifest dissension to vs a sufficient witnes, that your do­ctrine is not of God. Whereof Bucer finding his minde trou­bled, sighingly said on a time to Peter Martyr in Oxford, O maledictam illam questionem sacramentariam. O that accursed question about the sacrament!

kNeither is it true that ye saye, that in all Councels newe Credes and newe decrees continually were deuised. Of ne­we decrees we accord with you,Councels neuer ma­de any Crede but that newe credes were continually deuised, we denie. All Credes that euer were set [Page] forth in any generall or prouinciall Councell allowed,Additions made to the Crede by Councels for plai­ner decla­ration of the truth, and for {pre}seruatiō against heresie. Newe Credes deuised by heretikes. Quatenus mater. were but an exposition of the first, which we call the Apostles Crede. Whereunto the church represented in councels, as heresies sprang, added somewhat for a plainer declaration of the truth, to be as a preseruatiue of the faithfull against here­sies. Newe Credes haue ben deuised only by heretikes, who in the same haue framed to them selues an other maner of faith concerning Christ, the holy ghost, the virgin Marie (as mother), the resurrection of flesh, and other great pointes, as the Arians, Eunomians, Nestorians, Origenistes, and other the like.

Apologie VVhat woulde these men (trow ye) haue said in those days? which side would they specially then haue taken, and whiche would they then haue forsaken? whiche Gospell woulde they haue beleued? whome woulde they haue accoumpted for heretiques, and whom for Catholiques? And yet what a stirre and reuell kepe they at this time vpon two poore names onely Luther and Zwinglius, bicause these two men do not yet fully agree vpon some one poinct, therfore woulde they nedes haue vs thinke, that both of them were deceiued, that neyther of them had the Gospell, and that neyther of them taught the trueth aright.

THE FOVRTH CHAPTER.

Confu­tation.After many thinges by these Defenders alleaged for proufe of dissension to haue ben among the Apostles, the faithfull people in S. Paules time, the bishops and holy fa­thers of the primitiue church, whereby they would perswade if they could, that their owne diuision into sectes and dissen­sion is not a marke of false doctrine: at lenght as though they had wonne the fylde, and tried them selues propre men, tri­umphing ouer vs as though we had nothing to saye, with a great courage demaunde this question of vs, which though it be but one in effect, yet with a kinde of brauerie they seme to diuide into sundry branches, and thus they saye. VVhat [Page 138] would these men (they meane the Papistes) then trow ye haue said in those dayes? 1 Which side would they specially then haue taken, and 2 Which would they then haue forsaken? 3 Which gos­pell would they haue beleued? 4 Whom would they haue ac­compted for heretikes, and whom for catholikes?

Touching these foure interrogatories,A foure­fold an­swere to the foure questiōs. if we had then ben alyue, being of the minde we be now of, we would haue re­quitted you with foure answeres of the holy and most lerned father S. Hierome, and would haue said, as in the like state of times in a lerned epistle he said to the lerned Pope Da­masus touching the heresies, which he founde in Syria at his first coming thither from Rome. First, Mihi cathedram Petri, Epistolarū tomo. 2. & fidem Apostolico ore laudatam censui consulendam, inde nunc meae animae postulans cibum, vnde olim Christi vestimenta suscepi. Which wordes taking vpon me the person of all faithfull and catholike folkes, thus I englishe. In these controuersies, I haue thought good for counsell (what I ought to beleue) to repaire to the chaire of Peter, The first answere. and to the faith of the Romaine churh praised by Paul the Apostles owne mouth. And from thence now require I the foode of my soule, from whence I receiued the garmentes of Christ. To speake the same more shortely, and more plaine­ly, in the catholike church I looke to haue the foode of my soule to euerlasting lyfe, in which I was first Christe­ned.

Secondely we would with him haue said one speaking for all, directing our wordes (as he did) to those that be of the catholike faith, whom ye call papistes. Vos estis lux mundi, vos sal terrae, vos aurea vasa & argentea, hic testacea vasa vel lignea, virgam ferream, & aeternum operiuntur incendium. The secōd answere. Ye are the light of the world, ye are the salt of the earth, ye are golden and sil­uern vessels, here (among the gospellers) are the earthen and woodden vessels, which must abyde the yron rodde and flame euer­lasting.

Thirdly with him (one likewise bearing the person of all) we would haue said to Pius the fourth that now sitteth in Peters chayre, as he then said to Damasus. Ego nullum primum nisi Christum sequens, beatitudini tuae, id est Cathedrae Petri, com­munione consocior. Super illam petram aedificatam ecclesiam scio. Quicunque extra hanc domum agnum comederit prophanus est. Si quis in arca Noe non fuerit, The third answere. peribit regnante dilu uio. Making no­ne but Christ first of all whom to folow, I ioyne in felowship of com­munion with thy holynes, that is to saye, with the see of Peter. Vpon that rocke I knowe the church is builded. VVho so euer eateth the lambe without the compasse of this house, he is prophane. If any re­maine without the Arke of Noe, he shal be lost when the floud raig­neth.

Fourthly touching the authours of this newe gospel, with the same Hierome we saye all vnder the person of one: Non noui Vitalem, Meletium respuo, ignoro Paulinum. Quicunque te­cum non colligit, spargit, hoc est, qui Christi non est, Antichristi est. Vitalis I knowe not, Meletius I refuse, Paulinus I wote not what he is (these were head heretikes in S. Hieromes time) who so e­uer gathereth not together with thee (holy Pastor) he scattereth a­brode, that is to witte, who is not of Christes side, he is of Antichristes syde. The fourth answere. To transferre this to our selues, the names changed, the case remaining like, for our answere to our newe gospel pre­lates, we say. Luther we know not, Zuinglius, Oecolāpadius, Bucer, Peter Martyr, Latimer, Ridely, Cramner, Hooper, we reiect and refuse, Caluine, Beza, Iuell, Pilkinton, Grindall, Horne, and their felowes, what they are we wote not. We see they are not gatherers with the supreme pastor of the catho­like church, but scatterers. Therfore they hold not of Christ, (what so euer they saye) but of Antichrist, our Lord kepe his people from their deceit.

This much adoo we make vpon these two names of Lu­ther [Page 141] and Zuinglius, and not only vpon them two, but also many moe, not only because both they and their folowers do not agree vpon some one necessary point of religion: but be­cause in sundry and many pointes they mainteine great and damnable heresies, and rent Christes whole and seamlesse cote, breake the vnitie of the church, lose all holesome order and discipline, geue occasion of vngodly maners and wicked life, briefly because they bring all that beleue and folow them, to euerlasting damnation.

And to thintent I seme not to slaunder them,VVhose strifes be of greater importāce those of the catho­likes, or those of the gos­pellers. Illyricus. In epist. Mat. Flac. Illyrici. and that it may appere, whether the dissensions of the gospellers be of greater and weightier pointes, or the strifes of the catholikes, which these Defenders in defence of their gospell obiect a­gainst vs: among a number particularly recited by Frederike Staphylus, I will reherse a fewe. That Matthias flacius Illyri­cus is a gospeller and a doctour of your newe church, ye will not denye I am suer. For so should ye do him great wrong. Doth not he denye, that [...] in the begynning of S. Iohns gospell is persona? I praye you how farre differreth this from the olde heresie of Arius and Paulus Samosatenus? I trowe ye will confesse this to be no litle point, but a matter of right great weight.

Who cā denye but that the Osiandrines be children of your progenitours, and gospellers of the fresshest?An heresie of Osian­ders secte. Do not they write and teach that the image of God, which S. Paul calleth virum, is the Worde of God incarnate, yea Christ him selfe, the sonne of God and of Marye, and that euery christen man is the same image, which is the sonne of God? And how Melanchthon writeth against him for it, ye be not ignorant I suppose. This is no small matter.

Concerning originall synne the Zuinglians in Suitzer­land vnderstand the gospell one waye,Dissensiō betwen the Lu­therās and Zuin­glians is not one­ly in the matter of the sacra­ment. the Lutherans in Sax­onie [Page] an other waye. For the Lutherans saye naturam esse ream, that nature is gilty, and can not wholy be taken away in this life. The Zuinglians on the other syde saye, that it is a certai­ne naturall sickenes, which may be taken awaye radicitus, that is euen from the roote. This controuersie is about the grounde of our faith.

Strife betwen Illyricus and Me­lanchthō.Illyricus and his fellowes of Saxonie saith, that the lawe is necessary neither before nor after iustification. Melanch­thon contrarywise that it is required before iustification, to the ende there be acknowleging of synne. Doth it not per­teine to the very foundation of our faith to knowe what is the perfite vse of Gods lawe?

Strife betwen Osiandri­nes and Stanca­rians.Who be greatter gospellers then the Osiandrines and the Stancarians? The Osiandrines teach that Christ iustifieth a man by his diuine nature only. The Stancarians (who be demed heretikes for other opinions more then for this) by his humaine nature only.Strife be­twen Ia­mes Smi­delin and Nicola{us} Gallus on the-one syde, and the gospel­lers of the sea townes in Saxo­nie on thother syde. Denyers of Hell. Graue put for hell. Psal. 15. Act. 2. Can any doctrines be more contra­ry the one to the other? And is not the same touching the chiefe part of our faith?

Iames Smidelin preacher in Sueuia, and Nicolaus Gallus at Ratispone famous gospellers and great writers, teach, that Christ suffered also in hell, and felt the torment of that euer­lasting fyre. The lerned gospellers of the sea townes in Sax­onie as famouse as they, teach quite contrary, that there is no hell at all, and that (forasmuch as euery mannes graue is cal­led in the Hebrewe by the same name as hell is) Christ des­cended in to the graue, and not in to hell. They translate the wordes of the psalme spoken in the person of Christ, non de­relinques animam meam in inferno: in their vulgar tonge in this sense. Thou shalt not leaue my soule in the graue, in steede of (in hel). How many be of this opinion in England our Lord knoweth. Were there none, the english newe testament prin­ted [Page 142] in Geneua anno Domini. 1557. per Conradum Badium, Strife be­twen the Lutherās and Cal­uine a­bout free­will. Illyricus disagre­eth from Melanch­thō and George Maior. Strife a­bout workes. as I finde it reported in a booke of doctor Smith de externo Christi sacerdotio (for my selfe neuer sawe it) should not be so common in England and Scotland, as I vnderstand it is. The matter wherein these gospellers disagree, is not light.

Touching free will, Melanchthon, Illyricus, and many o­ther of Germanie mainteine Luthers doctrine. Caluine im­pugneth it against Melanchthon. Illyricus holdeth that a mā is iustified by faith only. Melanchthon and Georgius Maior, by faith principally, but by charitie minus principaliter. Some of them denye workes to be necessary to saluation, nay they affirme them to be hurtfull in that behalfe,Strife a­bout the sacramēt of pe­naunce. Strife a­bout the number of the sa­cramētes. Some wil haue two sacramē­tes. Three sa­cramētes precisely. Foure sa­cramētes. One sa­crament. Strife a­bout the Church, whether it be visi­ble, or in visible. Melanch­thō stry­ueth with Melanch­thon. and therefore do no good workes at all. Georgius Maior is of the contrary opinion. Ye will not saye I trowe this is a small matter.

Illyricus reckeneth vp seuen very grosse errours concer­ning the sacrament of penaunce, of which penaunce some make two partes, some three. Touching the number of sacra­mentes, O Lord what discord is there amongest them? Illy­ricus at Gena and sundry other in Saxonie, admitte two. so doth Caluine at Geneua, and ye my maisters the bellwethers of the newe English church. The diuines of Lipsia will haue three, no mo, nor fewer. The folowers of Melanchthon will nedes haue foure. Some there be that admitte no mo but o­ne, the rest they refuse. To missense the doctrine of our Lor­des sacramentes is nolesse then heresie, to take them quite a­waye, what other is it then sacriledge? Some stoutly defend their opinion concerning the church, that it is inuisible, as Illyricus Contra Menium, and Melanchthon once in his A­pologie against the catholikes. Now of late yeres hauing chaunged that opinion, in the last edition of his com­mon places and other wheres, he affirmeth the church to be visible.

Bucer double, and con­trary to him selfe.What can ye saye for fryer Bucer, how mutable was he in his teachinges and writinges touching the sacrament of the aulter? Was he not after that he ranne owt of his cloistre and toke a yokefellowe vnto him for his spirituall comfort, first a Lutherane, then a Zuinglian, and againe a Lutheran, and after his comming into England, neither Lutheran, nor Zuinglian, nor yet good Christen man?

Melanch­thō most of all o­ther mu­table, in constant, and at variance with him selfe.How mutable was Melanchthon and disagreable within him selfe? Was he euer setled in any vniformitie of doctrine, whiles he lyued? In the matter of the blessed sacrament was he not many yeres (as a man maye saye) Luthers owne white sonne? Departed he not at length from that opinion, and be­fore he departed this life, became he not a Caluinist? Who knoweth not what he wrote to the Palsgraue of Rhene be­fore his death?

Luther past all in all repro­ueable condi­ciōs, and specially in the mutabili­tie of his doctri­nes. What shall I saye of Luther him selfe? To declare how oftentimes and in what great pointes he altered and chan­ged his opinion, it would require a whole booke. To she­we the variances of the Zuinglians and the Caluinistes, would require an other. As for Caluine him selfe, how he dissenteth from the church, from reason, from the rest whom we haue here named, and from him selfe: the no­ble valiant and lerned knight monsieur de Villagagnon hath discouered very much,Caluines debate with o­thers and with him selfe. and so hath Antony du val an other French writer, yet more remaineth vntouched. For cre­dite hereof, that I be not thought to saye more then I am able to auouch by good proufes and witnes, I referre these Defenders to the writinges of the Lutherans and Zuin­glians them selues, the catholikes to the reading of Frederi­ke Staphylus, who hath most exactly and truly set forth their great and manifold dissensions, proouing euery thing out of their owne bookes.

More such stuffe as this is could I here vtter a great deale to their further discredite,This bu­synes is not ma­de for two poo­re names only, as it is clear. but this much is ynough for prou­fe, that we haue good cause to say as we do, that these gospel­lers be fallen into diuerse sectes, and can not yet well agree among them selues touching the summe of their doctrine, and the highest pointes of christen religion. And therefore saye no more syrs that we make a busines with you for two poore names only of men not yet fully agreing vpon some one point, but for many and sundry great heresies and dis­sensions by many and sundry of your syde, that is to saye by your sectes brought forth, fostered and mainteined. Now let vs see, what ye haue to saye against vs, and what great dissen­sions ye can charge the catholikes withall. Thus it foloweth in your Apologie.

But good God, what maner of felowes be these, Apologie which blame vs for disagreing, and do all they them selues, weene you, agree well to­gether? Is euery one of them fully resolued what to folow? hath the­re ben no strifes, no debates amongest them at no time? VVhy then do the a Scotistes and Thomistes about that they call meritum congrui, & meritum condigni, no better agree togeather? Why agree they no better among them selues concerning b originall sin in the blessed virgin. Concerning c a solemne vowe, and a single vowe? why saye the Canonistes that d auricular confession is appointed by the positiue lawe of man, and the Scholemen contrarywise, that it is ap­pointed by the lawe of God? Why doth e. Albertus Pius dissen­te from Caietanus? VVhy dothe Thomas dissente from Lom­bardus, Scotus from Thomas, Occanus from Scotus, Alliensis from Occanus? And whye do the f Nominals disagree from the Realles? And yet saye I nothing of so many g. diuersities of fryers and monkes, howe some of them put a great holynes in eating of fyshe, and some in eating of hearbes: some in wearing of shewes, and some in wearing of Sandalles: some in going in a lynnen garment, and some in a wollen: some of them called white, some blacke: some being shauen broade, and some narowe: Stephanus Gard. in di­abolica So­phistica. Richardus Smith, some stalkinge abroade vp­pon patens, some barefooted: some [...]erte, and some vngert? They ought I wys to remembre howe there be some of their owne com­panie whiche say, that the body of Christ is in his supper h natural­lie: Contrarie other some of the selfe same companie denye it to be [Page] so: Againe that there be other of them which saye, the bodie of Christ in the holy communion is i rent and torne with our teathe, and some againe that denie the same. De cōsecra. Recāt. Bering. Scholae, & glosae Cui mundus. Thomas Aquinas. Some also of them there be, which write that the body of Christ is k quantum in Euchari­stia, that is to saye, hath his perfite quantitie in the Sacrament: Some other againe saye naye. That there be others of them whiche saye, Christ did l consecrate with a certain diuine power, some that he did the same with his blessing, some againe that say he didde it with vtteringe fiue solemne chosen wordes, and some with rehearsing the same woordes afterwarde againe. Some will haue it that when Christ did speake those fiue woordes, the materiall wheaten bread was pointed by this demonstratiue m Pronoune, hoc: Some had ra­ther haue that a certaine vagum indiuiduum, Stephanus Gar­diner. De conse. dist. Spe. Glosa. Magist. Sēt. & Schola. as they terme yt, was ment thereby. Againe, others there bee that saye, n dogges and myce maye truely and in very deede eate the body of Christe: and others againe there be that stedfastly denie it. There be others whiche saye, that the very accidentes of bread and wine maye nurishe: others againe there bee whiche saye, how that the substance of the breade doth retourne againe. VVhat nede I saye more? Yt were ouer longe and tedious to recken vp all thinges, so very vncertaine and full of controuersies is yet the whole forme of these mens religion and do­ctrine, euē amongest themselues, from whence it did first spring and beginne. For hardly at any time do they well agree betwene them­selues, except it be peraduenture as in times past the o Pharisies and Saducees: or as Herod and Pylate did accorde against Christ.

THE FIFTH CHAPTER.

Confu­tion. The dis­sensions with whi­che the Defenders charge the catholike church.What so euer ye bring for some shewe of diuersitie and dissension to be founde among the catholikes, it may be re­duced to two heads. The one conteineth a diuersitie in poin­tes of lerning, the other in trades of life. Concerning matters of lerning, thanked be our Lord, for that the very enemies of the catholike church, can not charge the catholikes with dis­sension in any of the groundes and articles of our faith. As for smal matters and questions disputable on both sides, they may therein dissent one lerned man from an other with­out blame, the faith remaining inuiolated. There be certaine thinges besides the principles and groundes of our faith (saith S. Au­gustine)Aduers. Iu­lianum. lib. 1. cap. 2. in which the most lerned men and the best defenders of the [Page 144] catholike rule keping the band of faith safe, sometimes agree not to­gether. And one man of some one thinge saith better and more truly then an other. Now if S. Augustine finde disagreinges among the best lerned and most catholike men, and blame them not for the same: we make small accompt our doctours for handeling of some subtile pointes, by those men to be repre­hended, of whom any good man would be loth to be com­mended.

What if the Lerned scoolemen that folowea Thomas, and some other that folowe Scote, whose name was Iohn Duns, agree not about meritū congrui? for about meritū cōdigni, which is a point of more weight, they agree, as al other catholike do­ctours do. Which ye should haue knowē before ye had repre­hēded. If Duns and certaine folowers of his way, whom scor­nefully ye terme Scotistes, haue in that point keping the band of faith safe and whole, neither diuiding them selues frō the rest of the church, dissented from Thomas, and swarued a litle toward the Pelagians deceiued by humaine philosophie, what can ye conclude thereof? Is therefore the catholike church diuided, as your selues be diuided? Is thereby the foundation of our faith shaken? The catholike church seeth the truth neuerthelesse for that one small ouersight of Duns. Would God your dissensions were no moe in num­ber, nor greater in weight.

What if some haue said of our blessedb Ladie the Virgine Marie, that she was conceiued in Originall synne, some the cōtrary? The matter not being determined and published by the church, what euil was it lerned men to pronounce diuer­sely, some according to deuotion which they bare to the mother of our Sauiour, some according to zeale, whereby they were moued to stand vnto such a sense of the scripture, as they had conceiued and thought to be the surest?

As forc solemne vowe and simple vowe, what talke ye of, sith that ye haue most wickedly broken al vowes, which they neuer did, whose disagreing about vowes ye would faine for lacke of better matter obiect vnto vs?

Touchingd Confession, neither the Canonistes, nor the scolasticall diuines, did euer condemne it and abrogate it, as ye haue done. For the maner of it, whether it ought to be secrete or otherwise, therein they varied without note of schisme or heresie. What haue ye wonne at our handes, if we graunted you, that in certaine chippes and paringes of some quidities,e Albert dissent from Galetan, Thomas from Lom­bardus, Scote from Thomas, Occham from Scote, Alliensis from Occham, the Nominals from the Reals, whereas they kept alwayes the vnitie of the church, no partie iudging the other in such problemes and doubtefull questions.

But good syr Defender, what meant you to name thef Nominals and the Reals? Vnderstand you what they be? If a man should vpon the suddeine demaund of you that que­stion, perhaps you would be to seeking of an answere. Syr if you be an Oxford mā, as I suppose you be, you may remem­ber, if euer you lerned your logike after that trade it was taught in when we resorted to the Paruis there, what adoo was made in daily disputations for exercise of young wittes, about genus and species, and the rest of the vniuersals: whether they were ter mini primae, or secundae intentionis, whether they were entia relia, or rationis. Which is a matter perteining to lo­gike, not to diuinitie. Now some scoolemen be of the opiniō, that the fiue vniuersals be termini or nomina secūdae intentionis. And they be called thereof Nominals. Some hold opinion they are entia realia, and thereof they be named Reals. And they that thus varied about the chippes of logike, in points of diuinitie agreed together, and conformed them selues [Page 145] to the teaching of the catholike church. What maketh this for your purpose? Would God the pointes ye dissent in from the whole church of Christ and among your selues, were of no greater importance. It had ben your part to she­we dissension among the catholike doctours in the groun­des of our faith, and then had ye said somewhat to the pur­pose. If any such dissension by you could euer haue ben fo­unde, we should haue heard of it longer this, and all your pulpites should haue rong of it. Now the rehersall of these trifles doth iustifie the catholike church the more, and brin­geth your owne part into suspicion. For how can it be other­wise, when men shall laye all aff [...]ction asyde, and iudge vp­rightly of vs both?

After this ye fetch a florish of Rhetorike,Marke what di­uision and dis­sension the Defenders can fynde in them of the catho­like church. where your diui­nitie faileth. And hauing said all and the worst ye could, ye saye, that yet Ye saye nothing of so many g diuersities of friers and monkes, how some of them put a greate holynes in eating of fish, and some in eating of hearbes, some in wearinge of shooes, & cae. I am loth to lose time in rehersing your filly follies, and very vaine, yet wicked toyes. Which as they be not very fitte for any hicke scorner (no though he haue his diserdes cote on and his bable in his hand), so do they very much discom­mend your persons.

Touching those holy religious men, though it stand with your profession to scoffe and raile at them, yet how standeth it with your gospell to belye them? If any be euill, God a­mend them. To his correction we leaue them. Here we spea­ke of the good religious men,The ca­tholike religious men put no holi­nes in outward ob­seruances. and of their profession and state of life. In whose behalfe we tell you, ye are to blame to belye them. For what discipline and order of life so euer they haue addicted them selues vnto for better oportunitie to ser­ue God: truth is truth, they put not great holines (as ye saye) [Page] in eating of fish, nor of hearbes: in shooes, nor in Sandals: in linnen, nor in wollen garmentes: in white, nor in blacke: in broad, nor in narrow crownes: in going on patens, nor on the bare grounde: in girding them selues, nor in being vngir­ded. They be not so ignorant as to put holines in such owt­ward thinges, though their obedience performed in the humble obseruation of these outward thinges according to their rule,To what end be those ob­seruances of the re­ligious. Elias. 4. Reg. 1. be an holy thing. These thinges they vse for re­straint of their will, and for discipline, according to the order and rule vnder which the better to serue God, they haue pro­mised obediently and humbly to liue. Neither put they more holynes in the thinges by you scoffed at, then Elias did in his mantell and lethern girdle, wherewith he girded his loi­nes,Iohn bap­tist. Matth. 3. then Iohn Baptist did in eating of locustes and wilde honye, in wearing a garment of camelles heare, and in gir­ding him self about the loines with a skinne: Then many ho­ly and lerned fathers did in the olde time, in that part of their harde diet and liuing, which the Grekes call [...], that is, eating of drie meates such as ingendre none or very litle iuyse in the body, and sleping on the grounde without beddes on mattes, with which austeritie of lyfe and hardnes S. Basile that great and famous bishop,S. Basile. very much ta­med and punished his body.

If ye were so much of the spirite, as ye talke of the spirite, and liue of the flesh, ye would not thus scoffe at such holy trades and obseruances of life. For the better estimation and regard whereof and of such what so euer straight discipline and austeritie of life,Great aus­teritie and hardnes of lyfe vsed in the olde time of holy men. we require you to read, what Epipha­nius hath written in the end of his third booke cont. haer. And your selues shal see that ye scoffe, not at a new deuise of papi­stes, but at a thing of olde time among holy and deuout per­sons vsed, and of lerned and blessed fathers much praised.

But I praye you Sirs, who be ye? If we would folowe your lightnes, haue we not like matter of diuersitie in out­ward thinges, to twite you withall, but that your diuersitie is with breach of due order and lawe, and that of religious men is according to order and rule? If ye thinke diuersitie in thinges of their owne nature indifferent, as meates, ap­parell, shauing, etc, worthy to be reprehended, and deduce from thence an argument of mutuall dissension:Diuersitie in thinges indifferēt found a­mong the ministers of our ne­we clergie. among your ministring clergie is not likewise diuersitie founde? Do not some among you weare square cappes, some rounde cappes, some butten cappes, some only hattes? Do not some weare syde gownes hauing large sleeues, with tippettes, which is not well liked of your secte, some of more perfe­ction Turkey gownes, gaberdeines, frockes, or night gow­nes of the most lay fashion for auoiding of superstition? And among you superintendentes, (what shall I call you, for bishops be ye not I am sure) do not some weare rochet­tes, some of religion forebeare so to do, lest ye should ouer much resemble the catholikes? Of other your diuersities, as of your trimme beardes, your polde heads, your handsom briches, your flemmish and english ruffes, and the like trim­me trammes, wherein your yokefellowes would faine haue you to be like propre gentlemen, and so farre vnlike to the catholike clergie, as ye might be, lest they should be called priestes concubines: of all these diuersities, I saye nothing. This I am sure of, in that (I saye not clerkly semelines but) protestant and euangelicall finenesse, as ye vary from the austeritie and sad homelines of the olde clergie, so ye va­ry much within your selues. Would God there were no worse varietie in you to be blamed, and yet this is not to be suffered?

But in these outward thinges saye ye, we put no holynes, [Page] as the Papistes do.The De­fenders in outward obseruā­ces put no holy­nes. That the Papistes do not, we haue sayd, and that ye do not, we also graunt. For we knowe not that thing bodyly or ghostly, wherein ye put any holynes. Whe­rein might we saye that ye put holynes, hauing none among you to put? For all true holynes is farre remoued from your profession. And fearing lest ye should seme superstitious, ye had rather in dede be impious. But whereas in your religious varietie of the fashiōs ye put no holynes, yet by your leaue in the same ye put the commendation of ministring handsom­nes, and the peoples praise of your constancie, that is to saye, of your stoutnes, of your stourdines, of your vpright and stif­fenecked disobedience.Much a­doo a­bout priestly apparell. What adoo was made in the late king Edwardes dayes to bring syr Iohn Hooper that worthy pre­late of yours to a Rochet? As for the square cappe, syde prie­stes gowne and tippet, I trowe, he would rather be brought to a stake, then to those dregges of popish superstition, and rag­ges of the Romish Antichrist. Of other your gospelling com­panions of that time I speake not. Of very late dayes and euen very now, what a styrre kepe ye, that ye be not compelled to weare that apparell, which is conuenient for honester men then the refusers be? The commons made not more adoo in king Edwardes time for inclosing of groun­des, then ye do after the rate of your power and number, for the prohibitiō of your rounde cappes and other your laye ap­parell thought vnsemely for ministers. And be not your bre­thren diuyded in that matter into sectes?Diuision in then­glish cler­gy for the Po­pes rag­ges, as they ter­me it. Do not they which would be loth to be remoued from the lyuinges which wrongfully they possesse, accompt those other fooles and farre ouersene, that sticke so much at so small a matter? And do not they of the other syde condemne them as colde and faint mainteiners of the gospell? The thing is indifferent, and may be yelded vnto, sayeth the one sect. They be the [Page 147] Popes ragges, and may not be worne, saith thother sect. And therfore they will rather be iustly put from that which iustly they can not kepe, then yelde one iote. Neither her Maiesties commaundement, nor their Metropolitans decree care they for. They had leuer seme to the people, whom they vse for their clawbackes, and to whose iudgement they stand or fall, stout champions of their owne gospell, then meeke folo­wers of Christes gospell. Such mighty Samsons, such con­stant Laurences, your ioyly gospell breedeth. They lacke but a multitude of companions that at their hysse would leappe out of their shoppes, and say, thus we will haue it, and who saith nay? Well to leaue these folies, in which your fond ob­iection hath caused me to dwell so long: for a conclusion and for thapprobation of the diuersitie of obseruations, that ye iest at in the religious persons, I referre you to S. Augustine, who of ceremonies and all such thinges pronounceth this notable sentence. VVhat thinges be not against the faith, Ad Iann. epist. 119. nor a­gainst good maners, but haue somewhat in them to stirre men to a better life, where so euer we see them to be ordeined, or know them already ordeined: let vs not only not disalowe them, but by praising and doing the like, let vs folow them.

As for the other diuersities which ye grate vpon concer­ning the body of our Lord in the sacrament of the aulter, though your vaine obiections be not worth the answering, yet to touch them in fewe and as it were by the waye:VVhat is meant by put­ting Christes bodye in the sa­crament naturally. They that saye, the bodie of Christ is in the sacramenth. naturally, meane that his very naturall body is present, but not after a naturall maner of presence. They which denye it, haue re­spect not to the truth of being, but to the maner of being, and meane it to be present, but not after such sorte and ma­ner, as naturall condicions of a body would require. What diuersitie is this?

Chri­stes body torne with teeth, how is it vnderstā­ded? Berēgarius recantatiō.Some saye the body of Christ in the cōmunion isi torne and crusshed with teeth, some denye it. Yea forsoth, and both meane right well. The hundred and thirten bishops assembled in Councell at Rome vnder Pope Nicolaus the second, prescribed such forme of recantation to Berenga­rius the first auctor of the sacramentarie heresie, openly there to pronoūce, acknowledge, and with subscription to ratifie, as he should confesse the very true body of Christ, not only the sacrament thereof, sensibly and in veritie to be handled with the handes of the priests, to be brokē and crusshed with teeth of the faithfull. By which wordes these fathers mynde was to expresse a veritie of reall presence, a true eating of Christes body in dede, and to exclude the only spirituall eating so as the old fathers did eate Christ in their manna. Neither is this doctrine dissonant from the fathers, specially from Chry­sostom, who hath the like wordes Homilia. 45. in Ioannem. Where he saith, that Christ for the great loue he beareth to­ward vs, permitteth him selfe not only to be sene of those that be desirours of him, but also tangi, & manducari, & dentes car­ni suae infigi, to be touched, and to be eaten, and teeth to be fastened on his flesh, and that all they be filled with their desire of him. This doctrine of that Romaine Councell, of Chrysostom, and of the whole church is so to be vnderstanded, that Christ in this blessed sacrament proponeth vnto vs his body not only figu­ratiuely or tropically, but so as we see and beholde the very selfe same euen sensibly, yet not in his owne shape, but vnder the forme and shape of bread, in which it is conteined. Nei­ther so as we do only beholde it, but also touch it really and crussh it with our teeth, to witte, because vnder the owtward formes, which are touched, brokē, and with the mouth recei­ued, we take the very body of Christ, yet in it selfe vndistract and whole, and inconsumptible. Now where some haue sayd [Page 148] that Christes body is not so torne and crusshed with teeth, they meane it of the true substance of his body, as it is consy­dered in it selfe without respect had of thoutward formes of bread and wine, vnder which it is. So that betwen these there is no diuersitie of opinion at all.

Likewise they that write, that the body of Christ, which is in the sacrament, isk quantum, that is, hath quantitie: they write truly,How the body of Christ is in the sa­crament. quantum, and how not quā­tum. for so hath the substance of his body which is in the sacramēt of thaulter. They which denye this, denye it also truly in their sense, because though that body being a true body, hath quantitie, (otherwise it were not a natural body) yet as it is in the sacrament, so the quantitie dimensiue of it is there after his proper manner, so as there be the whole in the whole, and ech part in ech part: but by manner and meane of the substāce, whose nature is to be whole in whole, and whole in euery part. To speake plainly to the lerned, the lerned scole­men saye, that Christes body though it be quantum in it selfe,Vile. Tho. in. 3. p. q. 76. yet it is not in the sacrament per modum quanti. Or rather that the substance of Christes body is in the sacrament ex visacra­menti, after which manner his quantitie dimensiue is not there. But because the substance of that bodye is not really diuided from his quantitie dimensiue, and from his other accidentes: therefore ex vi realis concomitantiae, such quan­titie of that body, is in this sacrament, as all other his acciden­tes.

Because both these and also your fewe other obiections which ye make against the vnitie of the catholike church, be such as no wise man will make any accompt of, and I feare me the reader is wearied with this much already, and faine would I bestowe the time better: how so euer our sauiour Christl cōsecrated, with a certaine diuine power, or with his almighty blessing, or with vtterāce of wordes,Consecratiō or with repe­ting [Page] the same wordes: what so euer them Pronoune (hoc) pointeth or signifieth in the wordes of consecration: what so euer yourn Dogges and Myse haue eaten, or your selues haue troden vnder your wicked feete: whether the accidentes do nourrish, or substance retourne: What narrow pointes so euer the scoolemen after tossing of argumentes too and fro, as their maner is, haue agreed or disagreed vpon: the matter is subtile and curious,Curious questions not defi­ned by holy church in any coun­cell. neither determined by definitiue senten­ce of the church in any councell. And therefore sith it con­teineth no article of our faith, let vs not be offended whith the whetting and sharpening of their subtile wittes in matters neither to the truth of Gods word preiudiciall, nor to the vnderstanding and iudgement of any man, hurtfull. If the Thomistes and Scotistes and the other scoolemen be founde some times to disagree,The disa­greing be­twē Tho­mas and Scotes folowers is about pointes mytaphy­sicall. it is about pointes metaphysicall ra­ther then groundes of the faith. As for exāple, vtrū ens & vnū differant ratione tantum, an etiam reipsa. As for pointes of diui­nitie, in the essentials they agree, in bye thinges, if they disa­gree, yet it is rather about the proufes of the conclusion, then the conclusion it selfe. If we saye not truth, controll vs with a truth. And tell vs what generall coūcell, or prouinciall syno­de, or what bishop of Rome the supreme iudge vnder Christ in the church, hath euer condēned any of al those scolasticall diuines, which cōmonly ben estemed for catholikes. This if ye can not performe, as we knowe well ye cā not, leaue to ex­cuse your condemned heresies, and your sundry great dissen­sions continewing amōg you, with false charging of the ca­tholikes with the mainteinaunce of the like diuersities, stri­fes, debates, controuersies in religiō, and disagreinges.o As for the agreeing of the Pharises and Saduces, or of Herode and Pilate, the commendation of it, we retourne ouer to you, as most worthy of it, for your wicked holding together against [Page 149] our Lord, and the church his most dere spouse.

They were best therfore to go and sette peace at home rather a­mong their owne selues. Apologie Of a truthe vnitie and concorde dothe best become Religion, yet is not vnitie the sure and certaine marke whereby to knowe the Church of God. For there was the greatest consente that might bee amongest them that worshipped the Gol­den calfe, and among them whiche with one voice ioyntly cryed a­gainst our Sauiour Iesu Christe, Crucifie him. Nother bicause the Corinthians were vnquieted with priuate dissensions, or bicause Paule did square with Peter, or Barnabas with Paule: or bicause the Christians vpon the very beginning of the Gospell were at mutual discorde, touchinge some one matter, may we therefore thinke the­re was no church of God amongest them? And as for those person­nes whom they vpon spite cal Zwinglians and Lutherians, in very deede they of bothe sydes be Christians, good friendes and brethern. They vary not betwixt them selues vpon the principles and foundacions of oure religion, nor as touching God nor Christ nor the holy Ghoste, nor of the meanes to iustification, nor yet euerla­sting life, but vpon one onely question, whiche is neither weightie nor great: neither mistrust we or make doubte at all, but they will shortely be agreed. And if there bee any of them whiche haue other opinion than is meete, we doubt not but or it bee longe, they will put apart all affections and names of parties, and that God will re­ueale it vnto them: so that by better considering and searching out of the matter, as once it cam to passe in the Councell of Calcedone, all causes and seedes of dissension shall bee throughly pluct vp by the roote, and be buried and quite forgotten for euer which God graunt.

THE SIXTH CHAPTER.

These Defenders be like in conditions to such honest wo­men, as commonly we call Scoldes. Whose propertie is,Confu­tation. The De­fenders likened to Scol­des. be­ing warned of a fault, not to enter into accompt with them selues, how to redresse that is amisse, but eftsones to powre out their accustomed most spitefull wordes against the par­tie, that moued them to amendement, and most commonly requitte a frendly warning with bitter twiting of the same vice, they were warned of. Euen so ye good sirs finding no meanes how to cleare your selues (as now we haue proued) of heresies bredde and fostred amongest you, of diuision in­to [Page] sundry sectes, of dissension and disagreing within your selues in many principall pointes of faith, by the catholikes seeking your amendement and conuersion iustly layd to your charge: ye do not only humbly and wisely not consy­der the thing that so much cōcerneth the euerlasting state of your soules, but very proudly, wickedly, and fondely obiect to them againe both certaine monstrous heresies, as risen and kept amongest them, and also strifes, debates and dissen­sions in religion. But what truth and substance your scol­ding tale reporteth, by that I haue thereto answered, it maye sone appere. Now after this, as though ye had shewed your clerkly prowes, ye bragge and boste, saying, according to your mans first translation, wherefore let them goe hardelye, and let them rather make peace at home amongest their own companie. No vari­aunce founde in the ca­tholike church. We tell you, amongest vs peace is made already. Touching all the articles of christen faith, and what so euer doubfull matter of any weight hath ben determined by the church, to that determination we agree, therein we rest. Neither can ye charge vs with variaunce among our selues about any such point. For we whom ye call papistes, are members of the ca­tholike church, and professe the catholike faith, that is to saye,Three­fold vni­uersalitie. that faith, which hath the threefold vniuersalitie, I spake of before, and is, and hath ben beleued, (as Vincentius Liri­nensis declareth) euerywhere, euermore, and of all persons.

Because vnitie pleaseth you not, as being that through lacke whereof your newe church is of al good mē detested, and of the meanest very much suspected, ye saye it is not a sure and a certaine marke whereby to knowe the church of God.Vnitie is one of the markes of the true chur­che. Vnitie in the holy ghost. Yeas Maistres, among other notes and markes of the true church, vnitie is one. Not euery vnitie, but vnitie in the holy ghost, which geueth life to that one body the church, whereof eue­ry faithfull is a member, and Christ the head, and powring [Page 150] charitie abroad in our hartes, so linketh all right beleuers to­gether in the bonde of peace, as they all saye one thing, thin­ke one thing, sauer one thing. The vnitie that is the note and marke of the true church, whereof we speake, is that,VVhat v­nitie is that whi­che is a marke of the true church. The De­fenders vnitie. for which the church is called one, and being gathered and knit­te together professeth vnitie of faith, of good wil and mutual loue together, and of sacramentes. The vnitie of them who worshipped the golden Calfe, and with one consent against our Sauiour cryed, crucifige, was farre distant from the vnitie which is a note of the church, and is the worke of the holy ghost. Such is the vnitie of the Deuils, who conspire against Christ and all his with one consent.The De­fenders and all o­ther here­tikes by S. Augu­stine compared to Samsons foxes. In psal. 80. Such vnitie is oftenty­mes in theues, such vnitie is found in you and all your sectes. For be ye neuer so diuerse and at variaunce within your sel­ues, yet ye ioyne together in wicked amitie and vnitie against the church of Christ. And therefore S. Augusti­ne compareth you, and all such as ye be, to Samsons foxes, that were sundred by the heads, and tyed together by tbe tayles.

Neither saye we that amōg them who vary in small poin­tes and thinges not perteining to the groundes of faith, there is no church.1. Cor. 1. For all that certaine of the Corinthians in the primitiue church were at square,Gal. 2. how so euer Paul told Peter that he thought good, though Barnabas and Paul agreed not about Ihon Marke, yet were they of Christes church,Act. 15. what els? But where ye bring this for excuse of the Lutherans and the Zwinglians, and other sectes sprōg out of them, the cause is not like pardye. For saye on what ye list, and lye so long as ye liste, their dissensions cā not be dessembled,The weighty matters wherein the catho­likes be at dissensiō amōg thē selues by the De­fenders iudge­ment. much lesse can they be accorded. Neither striue they about meritum congrui, whether auricular confession be of positiue or diuine lawe, a­bout eating of fish or hearbes, going in shooes or sandalles, [Page] wearing linnē or wollē, white or blacke, shauing so, or so, &c. Which ye recken for matters of the greatest weight that be in controuersie among the catholikes: but their deadly foode and endlesse contention is about many greate and weighty pointes, and principall groūdes of Christian faith, and speci­ally the body of Christ him selfe. Of which their disagreing and diuision partly I haue spoken before, and partly in my answere to M. Iuelles chalenge,Arti. 15. and more here could I saye, but I had rather referre the reader to Frederike Staphylus, who hath made a speciall treatise of the goodly concord that is amōg the foūders of your church, and the Apostles of your gospel.In thesibus & hypo­typosibus. fol. vlt. VVherein the gos­pellers be at va­riaunce among them sel­ues by a doctours opinion of their owne. The De­fenders make the Lutherās and zwingli­ans con­tention about the veri­tie of the bodye of Christ in the sac. to be of a­light and small matter. A lamen­table cō­plaint of a poore gospel­ler against his fel­low gos­pellers. Marke reader Zuingli{us} and Osiā­der might not be condem­ned, be­cause they were trimme men in the ton­ges. So it appereth their di­uinitie standeth most in tonges. If this be true, whē shall we looke for concord, which the De­fenders promise? The De­fenders conuin­ced of fowle lying by their ow­ne do­ctours and scoolefelo­wes. Yet lest they, whose fortune is not to see ought there­of writtē elswhere, should mistrust my report, as all do espie your lying: the wordes of Nicolaus Gallus your owne doctor of Luthers scoole, here I wil reherse. Non sunt leues inter nos cō certationes de rebus leuibus, sed de sublimibus doctrinae Christia­nae articulis, de lege, & euangelio, de iustificatione, & bonis operibus, de sacramētis. &c. The strifes (sayeth he) that be amōgest vs be not light, nor of light matters, but of the high articles of Christiā doctri­ne, namely of the lawe, and of the gospel, of iustification, and of good workes, of the sacrramentes, &c. Here as ye see, he rekeneth vp a great meany of the weightiest pointes of our religion, whe­reof they dissent among them selues.

But I doubt what I may call weighty and great, seing these good felowes call the controuersie which is betwixt the Lutherans and the Zwinglians concerning the bo­dy of our sauiour Christ, neither weighty nor great. But as they make a foule lye therein, so do they also in say­ing, they vary not betwixt them selues, but vpon one on­ly question. Of the dissension that is betwen the Lu­therans and Zwinglians, thus pittifully complaineth Nico­laus Amsdorffius in his booke entituled Publica confessio purae doctrinae, him selfe being an ernest Lutheran.

The world goeth with vs worse and worse daily. All thinges do pro­gnosticate the vtter ruine of the gospell, and that in place of the gos­pell, we shall haue nothing but mere errours, and the same very no­table, (then after a fewe wordes) now Brentius (saith he) and the Adiaphoristes (they be a speciall secte of the Lutherans) being at the communication or conference at Wormes, would not condemne Zuinglius and Osiander, because they were trimme men in the tonges, and well sene in humanitie. And as for vs and our sy­de, because we refused to agree vnto that communication onlesse they were condemned, they dressed vs vily with their scoffes and railinges, thrust vs out of the communication, and compelled vs to go awaye. &c. Item after a fewe.

There be that saye, they condemne Zuinglianisme, but the pre­face of Brentius to Maister Iames the minister of Goppingen his booke, witnesseth farre otherwise. For there they go about (a Gods name) to conciliat good father Luther and Zuinglius, and make them frendes one with an other. Quod plane impossibile est. Quis enim vnquam audiuit contradictoria posse redigi in con­cordiam? Which is impossible, for who euer heard, that contradi­ctions may be accorded? (But the maisters of the Apologie make no doubt at all, but they will shortly be aggreed.) Such childish and impossible thinges they sticke not to set forth, who would be compted the teachers of the world, as though we were but blockes and asses. But as for the heresies and errours of Zuinglius and Osiander, with a quiet conscience we can not embrace. Nei­ther can we subscribe and yelde to their departing away, and ne­we guegaw [...]s, which haue diuided them selues from Luther. Thus farre Amsdorffius, and much more there to the same purpose, which here I leaue to blot the paper withall. To conclude, thus all men may plainely see, how the maisters of this defence be conuinced of foule lying by their owne do­ctours and scoolefelowes, besyde the thing it selfe that geueth manifest euidence against them. But such stuffe in their writinges and preachinges is not geason. Leauing others, I report me to M. Iuelles late sermon made at Paules crosse on the sondaye before Ascension daye last, in which (if vni­forme reporte made by sundry there present be true) he abu­sed [Page] certaine honorable, and many worshipfull personages, and of common people a great multitude, with lyes worthy rather to be chastised by lawes, then to be confuted with wordes.Apoc. 22. M. Iuel­les sermō at Paules crosse 27. May. an. 1565. But be it as it is written, qui in sordibus est, sordescat ad­huc. To returne where we lefte. Now they beginne to answer an obiection they imagine to be made to them, touching their hainous impietie and wickednes. Let vs see for that al­so, whether they leaue their wont of lying.

Apologie. But this is the moste greuous and heuye case that they call vs wic­ked and vngodly men, and say we haue throwne awaye all ca­re of religion. Though this ought not to trouble vs muche, whiles they themselues that thus haue charged vs, knowe full well how spitefull and false a sayinge it is: Eusebi. libro 4. for Iustine the martyr is a witnes how that all Christians were called [...], that is Godlesse, assone as the Gospell firste beganne to bee published, and the name of Christe to be openly declared. And when Polycarpus stood to be iudged, the people stirred vp the President to sleye and murder all them whiche professed the Gospell, with these wordes, [...], That is to saye, Ridde out of the waye these wicked and Godles creatures. And this was not bicause it was true that the Christians were God­lesse, but bicause they woulde not worship stones and stockes, which were then honored as God. The whole worlde seeth plainelye ynough already, what we and ours haue endured at these mens han­des for religion and our onely Goddes cause. They haue thrown vs into prison, into water, into fyer, and haue embrued themselues in oure bloude, not bycause wee were eyther adulterers or robbers, or murtherers, but only for that we confessed the Gospell of Iesu Christ, and put oure confidence in the liuinge God. And for that wee complained to iustly and truely (Lorde thow knowest) that they did breake the lawe of God for theyr owne moste vaine traditions: And that our aduersaries were the very foes to the Gospell, and enne­mies to Christes crosse, who so wittingly and willingly did obstina­tely dispise Gods commaundementes.

THE SEVENTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion.Lo, a greuous and a heauy case it is, that the world calleth you wicked and vngodly men. Iwis they be to blame for it, and so be they that call them theeues which come to be pro­moted to Tyborne.The go­spellers had rather be wicked then be compted wicked. For God knoweth litle haue ye deser­ued [Page 152] so to be called. Your communaltie of Germanie that rose and tooke weapon against their lordes, and did incredi­ble outrages, after that Thomas Munzer Luthers scoler had preached vnto them the libertie of your gospell,Thomas Munzer preacher of libertie to the houres of Germa­nie. The Hu­guenots of Fraunce their good lyfe and holy wor­kes. we must saye because all of your side folow the gospell, they were not wicked and vngodly men. The Huguenotes of Fraunce, who haue murdered so many people of all states and de­grees, robbed so many churches, rauished so many professed virgins and maried matrones, burned and wasted so much of their owne so fayre a countrie, traiterousely kylled their kinges lieutenaunt and capitaine generall, put their prince in danger of his state, shewed without all colour manifest contempt of God and man: because they did all this for the gospels sake according to the aduise and will of Iohn Cal­uineCaluine Patriarke of Geneua that man of God, and by the lea­ding of that holy Capitaine BezaBeza. your scoolefellowe of Geneua: we must saye, all was well done, and that they were not wicked and vngodly men.The car­dinall of S. Andro­wes in Scotland stayne by the gos­pellers. The kylling of the Cardi­nall of S. Androwe in Scotland, and sundry other practises there, the withdrawing of their obedience which they owe to their prince, taking gouernement into their owne handes, throwing downe of churches, changing the whole state and order of religion by priuat auctoritie, putting of laufull bi­shops and gouernours out from the auctoritie of their chur­ches, and setting of mere laie men or apostates in their ro­mes: these and the like practises must be praised, for all is done to promote the gospell, and therefore we must not saye that the doers thereof are wicked and vngodly men. I saye nothing of your Capitaine WyatVVyat. and his bande, of your worthy actes attempted vpon the conclusion of your felow gospellers at the diete of SmalcaldThe Die­te of Smalcald. in Germanie, of the coup­ling together of your friers and monkes apostates with [Page] Nonnes vnder name of holy wedlocke,Pryers monkes and Non­nes coup­led toge­ther in the new go­spels holy wedlocke. specially of those that be the chief Apostles of your gospell, of many other thinges and actes to your great renome chronicled, I am content folowing your rhetorike, either to saye nothing, or to saye for your gospels sake, all is well, and the crowe is white. And if ye will haue it so, let Luther be Peter, Cal­uine Paul, and Zuinglius Iames: mary I doubt where Christ shall finde amongest you a Iohn, as whom he may recom­mend a virgin to the virgin his mother. And I thinke, nei­ther any of you greatly desireth to be recommended vnto her, nor will she receiue any such as ye be, to be mother vn­to,Iohn. 19. as she was to Iohn.

But though we would be so bold as to call you wicked men, yet that ought not (saye ye) very much to trouble you, forasmuch as we our selues do knowe that it is false and sla­underous.The De­fenders piththy argument to proue them sla­underers, who re­proue their wic­ked de­des. And how proue ye this? Forsooth with a sub­stantiall argument, if it be well considered. The Christians by witnes of Iustine the martyr at the first publishing of the gospell, were called godlesse by the paynimes, and when Po­licarp was arraigned in iudgement, the people cried to the president to destroye them: ergo in calling our newe Go­spellers wicked men, we knowe that we slaunder you and saye false. Forsooth if ye were such as they were, whom Iustine speaketh of, and such as the holy and blessed martyr Policarp was, then saying so of you, we knowe we shuld sla­under you. But who seeth not you to be of an other moulde? And as ye be not like those blessed sainctes, so neither be we paynimes and infidels. Complayning of your punishemen­tes ye charge your iudges with cruel tyrannie, because ye suf­fred only for that ye professed the gospell of Iesus Christ, and trusted in the liuing God: etc. Why said ye not further, for that ye builded churches, praid, and fasted, and professed [Page 153] chastitie?

Wherefore when these menne sawe they could not rightly finde faulte with oure doctrine, they woulde needes picke a quarell, and inuey and raile against our manners, surmisinge how that we do condemne all well doinges, how wee sette open the doore to all li­centiousnes and lust, and lead awaye the people from all loue of ver­tue. And in very deede the lyfe of all men, euen of the deuoutest and most Christian, both is & euermore hath been suche, as one maye al­wayes finde some lacke, euen in the very best and purest conuersa­tion. And such is the inclination of all creatures vnto euell, and the readines of all men to suspect, that the thinges which neither ha­ue been done, nor once ment to be done, yet maye bee easelye bo­the heard and credited for true. And like as a small spotte is soone spyed in the neatest and whytest garment, euen so the least staine of dishonestie is easelye founde out in the purest and sincerest lyfe. Nei­ther take we all them which haue at this day imbraced the doctrine of the Gospell to be Angels, and to liue clerely without any mote or wrinkle: nor yet think we these men either so blind, that if any thing may be noted in vs, they are not able to perceaue the same euen through the least creuie, nor so friendly that they wil construe ought to the best: nor yet so honest of nature nor curteous, that they will looke backe vpō themselues, and wey our fashions by their own. Yf so be we list to search this matter from the bottome: we know in the very Apostls times there were Christiās, through whom the name of the Lord was blasphemed and euell spoken of amonge the Gentiles. Constantius the Emperoure bewaileth, as it is written in Sosome­nus, how that many waxed worse after thei had fallē to the religiō of Christe. Cyprian de lapsis. And Cyprian in a lamentable oration setteth out the cor­rupt maners in his time: The holsome discipline, saith he, whiche the Apostles left vnto vs, hathe idlenesse and long rest now vtterly mar­red, euery one studied to encrease his liuelyhode, and cleane forget­tinge either what they had done before, whiles they were vnder the Apostles, or what they ought continually to doe hauing receaued the faith: they earnestly laboured to make greate their owne welth with an vnsatiable desire of couetousnes. There is no deuout reli­gion, saith hee, in Priestes, no sounde faith in ministers, no charitie shewed in good workes, no forme of Godlinesse in their conditions, men are become effeminate, and womens bewty is counterfeited. And before his daies, said Tertullian, O how wreatched be we which are called Christians at this time? For we liue as Heathens, vnder the name of Christe. And without reciting of manie mo writers, Gre­gory Nazianzene speaketh this of the pitifull state of his owne time: [Page] We, saith he, are in hatred among the Heathen for our own vices sa­ke, we are also becomme nowe a wonder not alone to Aungells and menne, but euen to all the vngodlye. In this case was the Churche of God when the Gospell first beganne to shyne, and when the fury of Tyrauntes was not as yet cooled, nor the sword takē of from the Christians neckes. Surelie it is no new thinge that menne bee butte menne, althoughe they bee called by the name of Christians.

Confuta­tion.To answer hereto particularly in fewe, whether any could iustly accuse your doctrine or no, partly it appereth by that is here said before: whether ye haue hindered the course of vertuous liuing, and opened the gates to licence and lust or no, our pennes maye staie, your dedes speake, the world seeth.VVhat li­tle some­what is that the world misliketh in the gos­pellers. That which foloweth in your Apologie for a number of lines, would serue to your purpose, if ye were so neare to the purenes of Angels, as your talke pretendeth you to be. Now in dede the better part of the world findeth not a litle somewhat in you to be blamed, neither do good men complaine of an inclination to euill in you, for they feele the same in them selues: neither espie they a litle spotte in your white garment, nor is it a litle blotte, blemish, wrinkle, or hole, they note in your liues, which ye seeme only to ac­knowledge: but they abhorre and vtterly detest the whole wicked lumpe of all your newe sectes quitte cut of from the church, and therefore voide of the holy ghost, albeit they vnderstand among the sectes, which all be euill, some to be worse, then other.

Euill ly­uing of the Apo­stles time excuseth not the e­uill liuing of our ti­me.O, saye ye, some lyued euill in the Apostles time, and of such Constantius (what meane ye to alleage an Arian?) the Emperour complained, Cyprian, Tertullian, Gregorie Na­zianzene and many other holy fathers, which ye name not, greuously lamented and bewailed the euill lyfe of Christian people in their times. What then? What cōclude ye of this? If we graūt you this much, as we do graūt, what winne ye ther­by? [Page 154] Vices were euer found in mē, and euer shal be to the worl­des ende, and good men cease not thereof to complaine. And therefore we go not about so diligently to excuse the fraile members of Christes church, as ye do busely to accuse them. There is euil liuing among you, so there is among vs. In ma­king comparison I abstaine from parcialitie.The od­des betwē the catho­likes and the gos­pellers e­uill life being fo­unde in both. The oddes is this betwene vs both. For lacke of grace ye are fallen into errours, schismes, and heresies, as it is proued. By grace we are stayd in the catholike faith of Christes church. Ye being cut from the church, be destitute of the benifites and remedies which Christ hath left to his church. We remaining in the church, may enioye the sacramentes of the church, and by the sacrament of penaunce may ryse from the danger of sinne to the state of grace, and by other sacramentes be preserued and strengthened in the same. So can not ye do continewing in the false doctrine of your newe gospell.Answere to the Defen­ders alle­gatiōs tou­ching syn­nefull lyfe cōmon to all times and de­grees of man. The fathers complaintes whom ye allea­ge, be to be referred to the common synnes, not to heresies raigning in their times. So soun­de their wordes, if ye marke them. And the­refore all is to be vnderstanded of Chri­sten people, not of heretikes, whom they repute not for members of the church, and therefor neither for Chri­sten men.

THE FIRST CHAPTER.

NOW come the reuerent fathers of our newe clergie of England to one of the chiefest pointes,Confu­tation. they pur­posed to treate of in their Apologie, which is the charging of the Catholike Christians, as well the laie as the clerkes, with greate and heinous crimes. But as hereby their owne crimes be not discharged, and we presume not to cha­lenge vnto vs the estimation of innocencie: so we are right well content to heare of our faultes, that truly, though neuer so bitterly may be obiected. Wherin if we vse the buckler of truth, to breake the blowes of lying, being laufull by the la­we of nature euery one to defend him selfe: we trust to seme to do no otherwise, then becommeth.It is not reason the church of this age be bur­thened with the defaultes of all ti­mes past. And albeit we answer for others of sundry times past, yet we doubt not, but the e­quitie of wise men is such, as it shall not be thought reasona­ble the catholike church of this age be burthened with what so euer hath by any fortune, or person, ben done amisse in all ages past. How so euer it be, though faultes be founde in vs, as no maruell, we being men: we require our whole cause to se­me no further to be iustified or fauoured, then truth shalbe founde in these Defenders syde.

First who seeth not what a notorius lye they make in the preface and entrie to the matter? Saye they not,The De­fenders saye they will not do that, which chiefly and al­most on­ly they do. And saye, they saye not that, which of purpose they saye. they take not vpon them at this time to bring to light and to the she­we of the world those doinges, which ought rather together with the auctours of them to be buried? And that so to do, their religion, their shamefastnes, their blusshing doth not beare it? What is a lie, if this be not? Do they not in dede, that they denye in word? Yea, saye they not that thing, which they affirme they saye not? How may a true man deale with these felowes? And good Sirs, if the thinges ye tell be such, as ought rather to be buried together with the autours of [Page] them, why tell ye them? Why contrary to your owne word and conscience bring ye them to light and to the shewe of the worlde?Beholde the reli­gion, the shame­fastnes, the blus­shing of the De­fenders. O saye ye, our religion, our shamefastnes, our blusshing doth not beare it. But sith ye do it, and yet saye ye do it not, what truth haue ye? What religion? What shamefast­nes? What blushing? I can not compare you better then to a theefe, who meeting an honest man by the high waie, geueth him a great woonde in the head, bindeth him hande and foote, tombleth him into a dyche, taketh all that he hath from him, and then telleth him: Syr, I meddle not with you, I touch you not, my cōscience serueth me not to take ought from you. What figure of Rhetorike call ye this? What figure so euer ye also here pretended to vse, be it pseudologia, be it hy­pocrisis, or what els soeuer it be, the same is very grosse. Make of it what ye can, a lye is a lye.

But let vs come to the very point, and see, what haynous matters they lay to the catholikes charge, and first to the Popes. They be the Popesa Canonistes (saye they) that ha­ue taught the people,Crimes layd to the Popes charge by the Defen­ders. that simple fornication is no synne. A greuous offence and worthy to be punished. And verely if a­ny Pope euer knewe that his lerned men in the Canon lawe haue taught the people such hethenish and deuillish doctri­ne, though no man in earth be his iudge, yet he may be thought vnworthy the rome of so great charge. But if the Pope neuer knewe such doctrine preached by the Canoni­stes, and if at no time there haue ben any such: then is he clear, and ye are proued slaunderers and false backebyters. We denye it vtterly, how proue ye it? Mary Sir saye ye, looke in the margent of our Apologie, and there shall ye finde one Iohn de Magistris noted for an offender in that behalfe. Wel, if it were so, he was but one man. Ye speake of Canoni­stes, which word signifieth a number. And how proue [Page 156] ye that he the said Iohn de Magistris (for now I will spare you and will not saye they) taught the people that simple fornication was no sinne? The note of your booke is, de temperantia. What meane ye by that? Made he a booke de temperantia, and commendeth he that singular vertue with defence of so great vncleanes? It can not seme likely. The matter being so hainous, and so contrary to scripture, and profession of christianitie, it had ben your secretaries part to haue named the booke, the place, and the chapter, for dis­charge of his credit. But this is not the first lie he hath made in write, talke, and preaching. Haue an eye to him syrs, when he shall haue the penning of any matter of yours. For if ye haue not, ye may happen to heare of molies, then glad­ly ye would be charged with.

Now we tell you,Ioannes de Magi­stris bla­med by the Defenders for Martinus de Magi­stris. that we can not finde where euer Io­hannes de Magistris wrote so impiously, as ye report. Is it not Martinus de Magistris, that ye meane? It is a great rash­nes, if ye haue not read it your selues, to beleue such pelting writers that be of your sectes, as ye do, by whom ye seme to be most shamefully and most dangerously deceiued. Well, perhappes ye saye, it is a small matter to misse the right name of a man. In a light matter, it were an ouer sight. But in so weighty a case as this is, the crime imputed being so hai­nous, if ye charge one man therewith for an other: I can not see, what I may call it, nor how I may excuse it. But let vs wincke at you for this, and leauing the name, let vs speake of thinges. What will be thought and said of you, if we shewe plainely, that ye haue forged a fowle lie, and a most false sla­under vpon Martinus de Magistris? For so will we call him, vntill ye proue it of Iohannes?

This Martinus de Magistris was no Canonist, as ye saye,A fowle slaunde­rous lye made by the De­fenders. but a doctor of diuinitie, well lerned for his time and order [Page] of studie, as a scooleman. In a treatise that he made De tem­perantia & de luxuria, he disputeth after such maner as the scolasticall doctours commonly vse. Wherefore he that sa­yeth that he taught the people, fought by vntruth how to make the matter more detestable. For disputing in scooles, and teaching the people, be farre asunder. Saith this doctor Martin after the guise of scooles, Quaeritur vtrum simplex fornicatio sit peccatū mortale, that is to saye, it is a question, whe­ther simple fornication be mortall sinne. This defender knewe what he did, when he left out the word mortall. For being disposed to lye,The man­ner of the scoole d [...] ­ctours. he thought best, to lye for a vantage. Now this is to be vnderstanded, how the maner of the scolasticall doctours is, first to propound a question. Next to argue, obiect, and reason against the truth of the question. Then to auouch and proue the truth. After that to soile the obiecti­ons brought against the truth. Lastly to bring conclusions for confirmation of the truth. Then in prosecuting his question, arguitur quod non, I reason against it, saith he, and argue it is not so. And there after the scoole maner he ma­keth an argument against the truth. Which argument who so euer taketh for his purpose and alloweth it, admitteth that the doctor goeth against and disproueth.Martinus de Magi­stris clea­red of the crime by the Defenders ob­iected. After this he commeth to proue the truth. And there it foloweth. In oppositum, simplex fornicatio excludit &c. To the contrary (saith he). Simple fornication excludeth frō the kingdome of God, ergo it is mortall sinne. Then he saith further. It is to be noted that the opinion of Thomas is, that simple fornication vn­doubtedly is mortall sinne. Who so euer readeth further in Martinus, he shall finde after he hath well disputed pro and con, as they terme it in scooles, that is to saye for, and against the truth, that he putteth six cōclusions, of which the fourth beginneth thus, ideo &c. Therefore simple fornication is mortall [Page 158] sinne, because it is forbidden by gods lawe, &c. And in the ende of the sixth, he saith. Hereof the falsehed of their opinion is made euident, who saye that simple fornicatiō is not mortall sinne. Which opinion is condēned in the articles of thē of Paris, errore. CLXXXVj. Then he saith further. Guido the Carmelite saith in a chapter contra errores Graecorum, that the errour of the Grekes, saying simple fornication betwen a single man and a single woman not to be mor­tall sinne, openly conteineth heresie against the holy scripture, and that he proueth by foure reasons. &c.

By this and much more there expressed, it is sufficiently proued, that Martinus de Magistris in his scolasticall dispu­tations in the said treatise, saith not that simple fornication is no sinne, much lesse can it be reasonably, or with any co­lour of honestie said, that so he taught the people. And there­fore it is falsely and slaunderously imputed vnto him.

That grosse errour the Pope him selfe Clemens Quin­tus in a generall councell holden at Lions hath condemned.C. ad nostrū Clement. de haereticis er­rore. 7. Touching the question it selfe, if the deuill go about to snare any person with doubte whether simple fornication be mor­tall sinne or no:Ephes. 5. Let him remember what S. Paul writeth to the Ephesians. This knowe ye, that no fornicatour or who­remonger, either vncleane person, or couetouse person, which is an idolater, hath any inheretāce in the kingdome of Christ, and of God. And to warne euery one against the vngodly talke of some godlesse persons in defence of that and other vices, he saith moreouer. Let no man deceiue you with vaine wordes. For through such thinges commeth the wrath of God vpon the Childrē of vnbelefe.

After this fowle lye foloweth an other. Let hym remember (say these Defenders) that they be his men that haue decreed, Lye vpon lye. that a priest for fornication b ought not to be remoued from his cure. To this we may saye, that although he be not depriued of [Page] his cure, yet he may be punished otherwise. But let vs see, how they would proue that they saye. By their note in their margent they send vs for proufe to the canon lawe.False alle­gation. 3. quest. 7. lata. extra. de begamis. Quia circa. As touching the chapter lata, in the decrees we finde none such. And in causa. 3. quest. 7. there is nothing to this purpose. The pa­ragraphe Quia circa. extra. is vnderstanded of them, who being in the state of bigamie, are not to be promoted to ho­ly orders, and not of one who is already made priest, that he be not for fornication remoued.The pu­nishment of forni­cation in bishop, priest, and deacon by the Canō lawe. C Si quis epūs. dist. 81. Dist. 82. c. presbyter. But to vnderstand what was done to a priest that had committed fornication, by or­der of lawe, in case any bishop, or priest, or deacon after de­gree of deaconship taken, had ben conuict of fornication or aduoutrie. he was deposed, and cast out of the church, and enioined to do penaunce among the laitie. Which thing S. Syluester at length mercifully changed, enioining ten yeares penaunce after a prescript forme, which to our newe clergie would seme very hard and straight. Which penaunce if they refused to do, and had rather to continewe in their synne: then no body might be so hardy as to heare their seruice. So they of their owne accorde for fornications sake forsaking their seruice,Dist. 81. c. Siqui sunt. for their offence were compelled against their will also to forsake their benefices. And thus euermore they that preferred their pleasure before their seruice, in any wise were remoued.

Yea further the lawe of the church in this case so litle beareth with the synnefull life of Clerkes, that, if any bis­shop in his dioces had consented and borne with the forni­cation of priestes, or deacons, or with the crime of incest for money or prayer, or had not by auctoritie of his bishoply office, duly punished such faultes committed: the same should be suspended from his office. And that hath force [Page 158] at this daye, as of late in this our age it hath concerning this matter ben disputed, decreed, and determined, that it be not laufull for any man to bring in priestes that be notorious ke­pers of concubines to exhibite the sacramentes, nor to geue or minister vnto them putting them selues forth to cele­brate, necessary ornamentes.Iacobus Hochstras­sen in ab­soluta de­termina­tione sua de presby­teris publi­ca fornica­tione nota­tis. For doing otherwise they should communicate with their synnes, whose blessing is tourned into curse, and praier into synne, whiles by the frendshippes of the laitie being made more negligent, they continewe in vices, and brought to be as men quite alienated from amendement, scantly thinke of the purpose to reforme their life. And this much we haue shewed touching the re­mouing of a priest not only from his benefice, but also from his office for cause of fornication, wherein these men most falsely haue slaundered the church, as now to any man it may appere.

The third lye is, that Cardinallc Campegius,A very false slaū­der. Albertus Pighius, and certaine others haue taught, that a priest lyueth more holyly and more chastly that kepeth a Concubine, then he that hath taken a wife in matrimonie. Why do ye not tell vs where they haue taught so? Will ye that we be­leue your bare word? How can we hauing taken you tardy in so many and so manifest lyes?The gai­ne of a common lyer by Aristotel. Aristotel once asked what a common lyer gained by his lying, that (quoth he) when he telleth truth, no man will beleue him. Wisedom would syrs ye tooke good heede, that ye proue not such gayners. Now we require you to bring forth proufe of that ye charge these lerned men withall. We are sure ye can not. For we haue diligently reade their workes, specially where such argument is treated, and we finde no such vnreasonable doctrine by them auouched. Mary this we finde namely in Pighius, which ye meane doubtles, and which bewrayeth your false­hed, [Page] that it is a lesse synne in a priest being ouercome with humaine frailtie to fall into fornication,In what sense said Pighius to be a lesse sinne a priest to fall into fornicatiō th [...]n to marye. then to marye. The wordes of Pighius be these. But put the case (saith he) they which haue vowed chastitie, all do not that they may and ought to do to atteine the grace of cōtinencie: and therfore they be not only tempted, but also ouercome with temptation for the more part. VVhat then? Shall it be a lesse euill for them to marye? For to say it is better, 1. Tim. 5. thou mayest not, which the Apostle imputeth to damnation, if they breake their first faith. For these (I saye) shall it be lesse euill, and lesse damnable to mary, then to be ouercome with lustes? See thou who is worse seruaunt, he that being weary with seruice, or perhaps vsing him selfe negligently and vnwarely falleth downe vnder his burthen, or he that casteth away the yoke alltogether? VVhich is worse scholer, he that lerneth that is put to him, not all (which peraduenture he could haue done had he not ouereaten and ouerslept him selfe) yet a part: or he that forsa­keth the scoole vtterly? Therefore we must resist temptation by such remedies as we haue spoken of. In which if at any time being remisse through infirmitie we fall, this is a more tollerable synne, then if we shake of our yoke altogether, yea and binde our selues with vo­we against vowe made to God, and do not only not sustaine temp­tation nor tarye for it, but rather preuent it. Neither saye we thus, for that we allowe fornication. But we compare the falling by infir­mitie, to the deliberate, yea and the continuall incest, which these maried vowebreakers lyue in, all shame quite cast away. This far­re Albertus Pighius.

Pighius shameles­ly belyed by the Defen­ders.Where (as ye see) he speaketh neuer a word of keping a concubine, much lesse teacheth he, that a priest which ke­peth a concubine liueth more holily and more chastly, then he that hath taken a wife in matrimonie. Of such as marye contrary to their vowe, he demaundeth whether they do a lesse euill, then others, that by negligence and infirmitie fall [Page 160] sometimes, and marye not. For, that they do better (saith he) we can not saye, for as much as S. Paul condemneth, who so­euer breaketh his former promise. That such persons do much worse, he proueth by certain similitudes, cōparing the offen­ders by frailtie to a negligent seruant that falleth vnder his burthen, and to a scoler that for lacke of taking heede doth not canne al his lesson, but part: the other which do marye, to a seruant that breaketh awaye stubbornly from his maister, and shaketh of the yoke of seruice altogether, and to a scoler that runneth away and quite forsaketh the scole. Againe he calleth the fall of infirmitie tolerabilius peccatū, a more tolera­bile sinne then mariage, where vowe maketh it vtterly vnlau­full. Finally,In priestes that haue vowed chastitie, fornicatiō and mari­age being both vn­laufull, to marye is the grea­ter offen­ce. we saye not this (saith he) for that we allowe for­nication, but that in comparison of the other, that is farre more greuous. Thus it is easely sene, where, of two euils this lerned man calleth the one a lesse euill then the other, and of two sinnes the one a more tolerable sinne thē the other, that he would not either of them to be taken for good. Therefore where ye impute vnto him that he maketh the keping of a concubine to be a more holy and a more chast life in a priest, then taking of a wife in matrimonie, it is a fowle lye and a false slaunder. Neither is there in that doctrine any filthines at al, which Philip Melanchthon, whom here ye folow, char­geth him withall.

Touching that point of doctrine it selfe, S. Paul confir­meth it, to whom the mariage of those that be bounde to vo­we of continencie, semed so wicked and hainous a sinne,1. Tim. 5. that he pronounceth the will to marie to be damnable. Now your coniunctions with your yokefellowes (we meane only so many of you as haue vowed chastitie) are not in dede wedlockes, but incestuous aduoutries. And right so we finde them named by Cyprian, Basil, Chrysostom, Ambrose, [Page] Hierome, Photius, and other holy and lerned fathers. Who so desireth to see the places,In confes­sione Polo­nica. in Cardinal Hosius may he finde them, where he treateth de Sacramento matrimonij. He­reof no father writeth more holyly and more ernestly, then S. Basil in his booke de vera virginitate. Where he sayeth the forsaking of virginitie and wedlocke contracted, to be a grea­ter wickednes,Epist. 6. ad Theodorū monachū. thē the fall of a virgine. I confesse (saith Chry­sostom) that matrimonie is good, and that wedlocke is honorable and an vndefiled bed, and that God iudgeth fornicatours and ad­uouterers. But nowe is it not conuenient for thee (he speaketh to Theodorus a monke) to kepe the priuileges of wedlocke. For now that thou arte once ioyned in felowship with angels, to leaue that state, VVhat it is for a monke to mary, af­ter the iudgemēt of Chry­sostom. and to be lapped within the snares of a wife, it is running into the crime of aduoutrie. Although often times thou callest this state matrimonie, yet I affirme it to be so much worse then aduoutrie, how much greater and better is an angel, then mor­tal men. Neither let any man persuade thee saying that our Lord commaunded nothing of not talking a wife. And I graunt my selfe not to be vnwitting, that he hath forbiddē aduoutrie, not wedlocke. But in thee it shall take the name of aduoutrie, if thou haue a will at any tyme (which God forbidde) to thinke of mariage. Where S. Augustine saith of womē that falle from the better purpose of virginitie,De bono viduitatis cap. 11. VVhat iudgeth s. Augu­stine of mariage after vo­we of chastitie. That Pi­ghius said truly and reasona­bly. and marying, that such their falles and ruines frō chastitie vowed to God, although they may be called maria­ges, yet are worse then aduoutries: he cōfirmeth euidently the misliked saying of Pighius. For the case is like in mē and wo­men, wheresoeuer a vowe hath ben made to God for keping chastitie. Now whereas your pretēsed wedlocke is aduoutrie, and worse then aduoutrie (as the fathers teach) and the fal by infirmitie but fornication, that being a greater crime thē this: Pighius may seme to haue spoken reasonably and truly.

But perhaps ye saye, both are aduoutries, whether a vowed [Page 160] person marie, or committe fornication. Let it be so.Other causes why he that ma­ryeth in this case, is to be thought to do worse, then the fornica­tour by infirmi­tie. Ezech. 18. Yet is not that synne more greuous which a man committeth of set and determined purpose, then that which he falleth into by humaine frailtie? And that euill which contineweth, is it not much worse, then that which hath intermission? Againe he that falleth by infirmitie of the flesh, oftentimes acknow­ledgeth his synne, and repenteth it, whereby he obteineth mercy at God the soner, who desireth not the death of a syn­ner, but rather that he should be conuerted and lyue. But they of your sort maisters, do not only not confesse them selues therein to offende, or take thereof any remorse at all: but also defend it and glorie in it, and colour that with the name of honorable wedlocke, and of an vndefiled bed, which the auncient and best lerned fathers of Christes church haue called not only aduoutrie, but also incest and sacriledge.Spirituall synnes be more hai­nous in Gods sight, thē fleshly synnes. Homi. 36. in Iohannē. If spirituall synnes be in the sight of God more hainous then fleshly synnes, though in the estimation of the world the­se be more infamous, and therefor Chrysostom writeth that an enuious man hath lesse to say for him selfe, then a whore­monger, a thefe, a murderer: Why shuld any man doubt to say, the mariages of these vowed persons to be of more blame for wickednes, then fornication? For here is only the vice of the flesh (right greuous and damnable we graunt) but there beside the vice of the flesh, is thereto ioyned also that, which of all the vices of the spirite is most hainous, we meane, ar­rogancie, pride, and deuilish stoutnes of hart, which God ab­horreth. For what can be a greater pride then this, for a man to take vpon him to vnderstand more, then all holy and lerned men sence Christes conuersation in earth, which all with one consent haue thought it vnlaufull for priestes to marie, and that for incontinencie there be other godly re­medies to be had beside mariage? They therefor that affirme [Page] the mariage of priestes or other vowed persons,A greater heape of synnes is laid toge­ther in a priestes or any vo­wed per­sons ma­riage, then in fornica­tion com­mitted through infirmitie. Prouer. 16. Num. 16. 1. Tim. 5. to be a more hainous and greuous sinne then fornication committed by humaine frailtie, meane, that the same deserueth more bla­me, as (beside the equalitie of the filthy seruing of fleshly lust on either side) being ioyned and linked with pride and arro­gancie of hart, that God so much detesteth with contempt of the church, which Christ taketh as done against his owne person, with heresie and schisme, which God sheweth him selfe to be so much offended with in the example of Core, Dathan and Abyron, with open breach of a solemne vowe where vnto S. Paul imputeth damnation, with iniurie done to the holy sacrament of matrimonie, the one partie being such as may not laufully marye, with a more offence of the weake the thing being openly professed, with open defence of sinne, with continuance in euill, with impenitencie. Which heap of greuous euils is not to be founde in fornication that priestes fall into by common frailtie. Now the world may iudge how vntruly and iniuriously ye haue in this point slaundered Campegius, Pighius, and other lerned catholike men.

Where ye saie there be manyd thousandes of common harlotes in Rome,Of the courtesa­nes of Rome. we thinke there be many there in dede. Whether there be many thousandes, we doubt. What num­ber soeuer there is, they be to many. Our Lord geue them grace and the mainteiners of them to amend. If there be a great number of lewd woomen there, it is not much to be wondered at. If there were none, it were a great wonder, that citie being alwayes so much haunted of people of all Chri­sten nations, and of many strangers inhabited, who being farre from their kinnered and nearest frendes, are the lesse stayd by shame and fear of rebuke from the vice of the bo­die. But what shall we saye? That euill raigneth not [Page 161] only in Rome, but also in other Cities, as also once among gods people the Iewes. For if such euill women had not ben, our Lord would not haue said,Matt. 21. Publicans and harlotes shal go before you in the kingdome of God. And in the gospell we reade, that there was a synnefully woman in the Citie. Luc. 7. As there be euill women in Rome, so most true it is,Many good and vertuous womē in Rome. there be al­so many of the old goodnes and chastitie euen at these da­yes, and be so feruent in religion, as a man shall see nowhere els women resort to the sepulchres of martyrs with so great deuotion and feruentnes, as at Rome.In. 2. pro­aem. cōmet ad galat. Which S. Hie­rome also witnesseth to haue ben so in his time. This will they report (I am sure) who haue ben there, onlesse phantasie of contrary religion make them parciall, or except otherwise they had no leisure at their being there to beholde such examples of vertue, for hauing their myndes and eyes occupied in beholding courtisanes and other vanities. Those courtisanes the church of Rome doth tolerate, not nourrish, trusting and looking that by sermons, exhortations, and o­ther conuenient meanes, they may be called backe to repen­tance, and to the way of saluation.Monaste­ries buil­ded in Rome for thamen­ded wo­men. And that many be conuerted to the better waie, it may sone be vnderstanded by the two Monasteries, in which women of old time lyued chastly and honestly tourned from their vncleane lyuing, who were called repentite as at this time in the vulgar ton­gue they are named le conuertite.

That the Pope gathereth about a thirty thousande du­cates yerely of these Courtisanes by waye or an annuall pen­sion, which these Defenders affirme, it is vtterly false. Cornelius Agrippa, who fauored not the see of Rome, and was imbrued with heresies that sprang vp in his time, was the first authour of this slaunder. If they pay the com­mon taxes which be leuied to the Pope, who only hath [Page] ciuill dominion ouer that Citie: they pay not for that they may be suffered to continewe that synnefull trade of life, but so as the whole citie payeth by polles, for that there they haue their abode and habitation. But to speake hereof more amply, (beseching the discrete Reader to interprete that I saye with equitie, not as spoken in defence of vice, but of him that is besyde reason and equitie charged with ma­intenaunce of vice) for asmuch as it is not without slaun­der much obiected by them that faine would seme to haue a iust cause why they be departed from the catholike churche, thus we saye.

A true answer to the sla­under of the De­fenders touching the cour­tisanes of Rome.If Rome alone of all the Cities of Christendome suffe­red and permitted harlots, if the Pope inuited them thither with immunities and rewardes, if he allowed them of all o­ther to sitte rent free, to paie no tribute, no forfaites, no or­dinary burdens: it were a iust thing to complaine of, and to saye that the chiefe bishop and headsheperd should not she­we any such euill example to other cities and common wea­les. But now we must consider the state of the citie of Rome laying all enuy and malice apart, as if we had to do with Venis, Millan, Florence, Naples, Paris, or any other like place where great resort is of diuerse nations: and then shall we finde Rome to be in no worse but rather in better case,Harlots not dri­uen away for auoi­ding of a greater euill. then any other citie of lyke greatnes and situation is. First it is common to all the great cities in those hote coun­tries, not to bannish from among them that filthy genera­tion of harlots, not by waye of suffering as a thing commen­dable in it selfe, but for the auoiding of a greater mischefe. As God suffered the hard necked Iewes toMatt. 5. hate their enemies, and to pinche them withDeu. 23. vsuries. Likewise Moi­ses permitted aDeut. 24. Mat. 19. libell of diuorce, not that these thinges were honest, but to thintent by that meanes yet they might the ra­ther [Page 162] loue their brethern, and lend them monney freely, and absteine from murdering their wiues. Euen so men now adayes so litle applie their endeuour to restraine the pro­nesse which is in their flesh to all riot and carnall concupis­cence, that if some waie were not (at the lest concerning outward and ciuill punishment wincked at, whereby the fleshly men might obteine some part of their vnruly desire: it were more then likely, that in this great decaye of vertue in generall, the furious rage of that vice would leaue nei­ther wedlocke vndefiled, nor virginitie vnassaulted, nor a worse enterprise which nature abhorreth, vnattempted. Would God experience had not taught many countries this to be to true an obseruation.Lib. 2. de ordine. Then had not S. Augustine with his companions disputed in such sorte as he did, of the necessarie place, which filthy and vncleane thinges haue in the gouernement of the whole world. Who hauing she­wed the hangman of his owne part perchaunce delighting in murder, yet to the right administration of the common weale to be requisite and necessarie, commeth straight to the case of harlots, whereof nowe we treate. His wordes are these. Quid sordidius &c. VVhat can be said more vncleane, more void of comelines, more full of turpitude, then harltos, baudes, and such other like pestilences? Take harlots from among men, ye shall disturbe all thinges with lecherous lustes. Put the same in the stede of matrones, ye shall dishonest (all thinges) with spotte and shame. Let therefore this kinde of men which by their owne maners is most impure of life, be most vile in condicion by lawes of order. Are there not in the bodies of liuing and sensible crea­tures certaine members, which if a man beholde alone, he can not abide to see, which notwithstanding the order of nature neither would to faile, because they are necessarie, neither to stand highest, because they are vnsemely? And yet those deforme thinges by keping [Page] their owne place haue yelded a better place to better thinges. Hither­to S. Augustine. By whose iudgement harlots do ser­ue the order of the whole, whiles some certaine being by them selues placed in that vile seruice, in the meane time honest women liue the more void of temptation, and maintaine not vnder the pretence of matrones the filthy life of open quenes. Which for asmuch as it is so, I leaue to the due consideration of wise men, whether harlots may be wincked at for the eschewing of greater inconuenience, to haue their place with as litle slaunder in the citie of Ro­me, as in any other of the like condition and qualitie: And why the bisshop of Rome is to be blamed for that they be in Rome, more then the French king, the king of Spaine, or any other Prince, for suffering them in their do­minions.

It remaineth we seeke whether they haue also the lowest and vilest place in that Citie or no:How courtisa­nes be placed and estemed in Rome. lest perhaps although they be a necessarie euill, yet being promoted aboue their degree, they make an euill shewe in the bodie where they rest. Their place may be considered two wayes, in respect of the temporall, or of the ecclesiasticall order or lawe. For temporall order thus they stand.Courtisa­nes dwel­ling pla­ces. Not to haue free libertie of dwelling in the most haunted stretes and palaises where them list, but only to be in such corners and bylanes and small outehouses, as are most fitte shoppes for the vile marchandize of such occupiers. Againe they can not with­out a very great forfeit ryde in coches or chariots as matro­nes there do, but are constrained either to kepe their homely homes, or to walke a foote in the stretes. And then also by order they must be in such apparell, that, as Iewes by their red cappes, so they by their short vailes (a note of dishonestie) be knowen to all, and be subiect to all shrewdnes of the [Page 163] boies of the stretes, who vse commonly to mocke and reuile them.

Concerning monye matters,VVhat fauour they finde in mon­ney mat­ters. they paye all kinde of wa­yes with the most, not so much to the prince (of whom they deserue no fauour) as to the Lord of the houses wherein they dwell, and to all others at whose handes they receiue thinges necessary. Who when they sell any their labours or wares to thē, make accompt to take so much the more of thē, by how much their good name commeth in hazard to be impaired for any though neuer so honest dealing with them.The ma­lice of the defenders towardes the Pope. And here I can not but mislike with that malice which appereth besides all reason to be in the makers of this Apologie. For whereas it is a vertue in the prince to set greate burdens and paimentes vpon so filthy a profession, to the ende he may feare women from it, and make them the soner weary of it: they now (interpreting that he doth permitte harlots for lukers sake) seme to finde fault with the punishment of them, which if it were omitted, surely the prince were in very great fault. For as they are not dryuen awaye for the imperfectiō of naughty men, to saue other partes of the Citie whole: so must they be kept with lest fauour and in the vilest cōdition that may be, least their lewd order of life seme to be allowed. And yet these Defenders finde fault not so much with the hauing, as with the punishing of them. As who should saye, if ye must nedes tolerate them for ciuill policie, yet let them haue īmunities, priuileges, and honour ynough, that euen honest women may be entised with luker to folowe the like trade of life. In good sooth maisters ye are to yonge to controll the citie of Rome in her doinges.

But let vs come to the ecclesiasticall condition wherein these harlots do stand.The ec­clesiasti­call con­dition wherein courtisa­nes stand at Rome. First it is most cer­taine, that who so euer comme to this deforme and synnefull [Page] order of life, be they men or women, it is not vnknowen to them, that they are in the state of mortall synne, whose re­ward is damnation. For the case is not in Italie, as it is in Germanie, where fewe preachers crie out against the dead­ly synne of dronkennes, either because they can not, as the more part of them being thereof giltye them selues, or dare not, because the people semeth incorrigible. It is farre other­wise in Italie. The preachers feare not to denounce to the kepers of concubines, to fornicatours, baudes and har­lots, what horrible case they stand in. Verely nothing is there more common, then freely to warne them of the paines that belong to that kinde of synne, as they may wit­nesse,Much preachīg in Rome against synne. who list daily in the Lent there and on holydaies at o­ther times, to heare the preachinges and lessons openly read in mo then a dousen churches at once against the kingdome of darkenes and iniquitie.

Neither is that thought sufficient. The Pope also vseth commonly both at the begynning of Lent and toward Easter, to denounce so much by proclamation set vp in di­uers places of the Citie, forbidding them to communicate or to haue the rightes of holy church, except they will repent and amend and forsake that vnhonest and wicked profes­sion. Besides all this, if in that synnefull state they con­tinewe to their ende without repentance, it is not laufull for them to make any testament or last will for bestowing of their goodes, but as condemned and infamous persons they must leaue all to be confiscated and disposed at the Princes pleasure.Monaste­ries of the con­uertites in Rome. But on thother side, if they turne and repent, there are houses called the monasteries of the conuertites, and speciall prouision and discipline for them, where they are taught how to bewaile their vnchast life so synnefully past ouer. And if they who report the worst, would see [Page 164] or knowe all, or would be as glad to heare the clearing of the slaunder by them inuented, as they are ready to vtter it: I thinke they should finde this question of not bannishing harlots for to auoide a farther mischefe, to haue ben decided rather by the long experience of mans euill and synnefull behauour, then by any allowance for gaines to be made the­reof. It is not only Rome they haue to do with, it is all the rest of Christendome, yea of all the world, more is the pi­tie. Which mischefe we may soner bewaile, then reme­dye. But now hereof ynough. Let vs procede.

That ye tell of a woman namedf Ioane, bearing the world in hand she was Pope of Rome,The vai­ne fable of Pope Ioan the pretensed woman Pope cō­futed. it is a fond and a vai­nefable. Were ye so wise as ye be malicious, ye would neuer haue brought your credite in hazard by reporting such vanitie. This I accompt for one of your accustomed lyes. By this men may iudge, what litle store of true thin­ges ye haue to obiect against vs. Who listeth to see a lerned discourse written hereof, him may it please to read the annotations of Onuphrius Panuinius vpon Platina, In vita Ioannis. 8. de vitis pontificum, printed in Venis. And he shall easely be­leue the whole matter to be fabulous. Many argumen­tes there be, by which this vanitie is confuted, of which here I will reherse a fewe. First this fable is disproued by the accompt of the time. They that haue written of the Pope­dome of Ioane the woman, make it to haue endured two ye­res fyue monethes and three dayes, beside the vacation of one moneth. And they put the same betwen the time of Leo the fourth, and Benedictus the third.Anastasi­us biblio­thecarius. Now at that very time liued one Anastasius maister of the Romaine churches librarie, who wrote the lines of the Popes vnto Nicolaus the first, that succeded Benedictus the third, and was present, as him self sayeth, at the creations of Sergius the third, Leo the fourth, [Page] Benedictus the third, Nicolaus the first, Adrianus the second, and Ioannes the eight, which folowed in order one after an other. This lerned man Anastasius whose booke is to be sene, doth not only make no mention at all of Ioane the womans two yeres Popedome, but also writeth, that after the death of Leo the fourth, the Romaine see was vacant fiftin dayes only, and placeth after Leo the fourth, not one Iohn, but Benedict the third, as immediatly chosen to that see after the said Leo. Who listeth to see Anastasius his owne wordes, in Onuphrius shall he finde them. Thus is the fable wyped awaye of Pope Ioane by testimonie of the chiefe writer of that time. Onuphrius otherwise proueth by thaccompt of yeres and times, which is a sure waye of proufe, that none such nor any other besides these that be mēcioned, could haue bē two yeres in that see. Neither is that woman Pope spoken of by those that after Anastasius wro­te most diligently the histories, cronicles, and actes of times.

After Anastasius they that in their writinges recite an exact rewe and order of Popes, as Ademarus and Annonius of Paris, Regino, Hermanus Schafnaburgensis, Otho Fri­singensis, Abbas Vrspergensis, Leo bishop of Hostia, Iohan­nes of Cremona, and Godfridus Viterbiensis, of which so­me wrote three hundred, some foure hundred yeres past, all these make no mention at all of this woman Pope Ioane. Againe there be in bibliotheca Palatina, at Rome six or seuen tables of the Popes names written in sundry bo­kes before the time of Innocentius the fourth. Among them all there is no Ioane woman Pope. Neither in the fiue olde bokes of Damasus the maister of the libra­rie and of Pandulphus of Pisa, which treate of the Po­pes liues, is there any word written of Iohane the wo­man Pope. Mary in the margent of Pandulphus this fable [Page 165] is put in betwen Leo the fourth and Benedict the third, written in a hande farre different from the olde characters of that auncient booke, added by some man of later time. Which maketh the matter to be the more suspected, and ta­ken for a fable.

Furthermore Leo the nynth who liued two hundred yeres after Leo the fourth,The fable of Pope Ioane proued to be vaine by good rea­sons. obiecteth to the Emperour Mi­chael and to the clergie of Constantinople, that sometime they had promoted Eunuches or gelded men to that Patriar­keship. He meant Nicetas and Ignatius. Which verely he would neuer haue obiected, had he knowen, that a wo­man had once ben promoted to the see of Rome, and that in so fewe yeres before.

An other reason against the opinion of this fable, may be this. There was none made Pope laufully by the space of nyne hundred yeres after Peter the Apostle or there a­bout, vntill Formosus the Pope, but from his youth he was brought vp in the church of Rome, and by the ecclesiasticall degrees of orders came to priesthod or deaconship at the left, as the same is manifest to those that marke the order of their succession, to haue ben obserued inuiolably. Then how could an vnknowen woman, of an vncertaine stocke and countrie, without holy order, and without any testimo­nie of former life, so vnaduisedly be made Pope? Though men had at that time ben so farre bewitched, and distract of their fiue wittes, as they could not haue knowen a woman from a man, (which no wise man I wene beleueth): yet it is not to be thought that God him selfe, who appointed and ordained the seate of Peter, whereof he would the whole church to be directed, would depart so farre from his merci­full prouidence toward the church, as to suffer the same to be polluted by a woman, which is not of capacitie for holy [Page] orders.

One Mar­tinus Po­lonus the first au­thor of the fabu­lous Po­pedome of Ioane the wo­man.The first author of this fable was one Martinus Polo­nus, a monke of the order of Cisterce. Who wrote long after the time that Pope Ioane is fayned to haue lyued in. Whose maner of writing if we consider, we shall finde it vaine, and nothing like to be true. It begynneth thus. Iohannes Anglicus natione, Maguntinus, sedit annos duos, men­sem vnum & dies quatuor, &c. Iohn an English man by nation, of Maguntia, sate (in the Romaine see) two yeres, one mo­neth, and foure dayes, alias, fiue monethes and three dayes. What a foolish speach is this, an English mā Maguntine or of Ma­gutia? As a man would saye, an English man borne, and a Douch man of Maguntia? For Maguntia is a Citie not in England, but of high Douchland. Platina hauing espied that absurditie, helpeth it of his owne head. It foloweth in the fable, as the said Martine telleth. This (as it is said) was a woman, and in the young age of a girle, she was brought to Athines by one that was her louer in a mans apparell, and there profited somuch in diuerse sciences, as none was found to be compa­red with her. To Athenes was she brought, saith the fable. And why?Athenes destroyed. For lerning. Very well. whereas at that time neither any Athenes stoode, neither was there any place of lerning there any lenger, but all the countrie of Attica be­came barbarous and vtterly voyde of lerning, as we vnder­stand by the writers of that time. The author reporteth, that from thence she came to Rome, and there professed ler­ning openly, and had great doctours to her scolers, and for o­pinion of lerning and good life, by one consent of all was made Pope. Which is sone confuted as false, for neither was any lerning at those dayes openly professed at Rome, as the stories declare, nor could she come to that honour by consent of all, where none knewe her before for such a per­son, [Page 166] as had passed through holy orders of the church. For then none were admitted to that see, but priestes or deacons that tooke orders and were brought vp in the church of Rome, as is aforesaid.

It foloweth in the fable. Bring in the Popedome she is be­gotten with childe of her seruaunt. And not knowing the time of her delyueraunce, as she went from S. Peters to Laterane, strei­ned with paines betwen Colosseo and S. Clementes church, she brought forth and died, and was (as they saye) there buried. He­re is to be marked how the deuiser of this fable bewrayeth him selfe, and thinketh the matter hard to be beleued. And therefore in the beginning saith, she was a woman (vt as­seritur) as folkes saye, and now he saith, she was buried, vt dici­tur, as it is said. So he doth not affirme it to be true, but referreth all to hearesaye. By which testimonie lyes com­monly be soothed.

But why was she not with childe before her Popedome? And being so nigh her time, why kept she not in, lest her gre­ate belly should bewraye that she would to be secret? Was there none of her seruauntes, none of so great a courte, that had eyes to espie so euident a thinge? But some will saye, she kept her selfe in her secret places. Nay, sith that a litle before her time of deliueraunce she stickt not to go from S. Peters to Laterane, which is more then two english my­les; it is not likely that she kept her selfe very secrete befo­re. I thinke it is hard to make a wise man beleue, that all men there at that time became so voyd of sense, that none could discerne a woman from a man, by visage, voice, ge­stures, and actes, yea a woman going nyne monethes with childe, susteining so many, pangues and griefes, as women in that case be subiect vnto. I leaue to aggrauate the cir­cumstances, that were likely to haue brought this matter [Page] to light. Verely the fable is such, as might well become Martin the monke to deuise it, or at the lest to tell it. For a man of grauitie and wisedome would neuer haue told it.

Martine of Pole a vaine and fabulous writer.The like fables and fond lyes he stuffed an other booke withall, which he wrote, entituled mirabilium vrbis Romoe. The consideration of which should sone bring a wiseman from geuing any credite to the fable of Pope Ioane. Onu­phrius reherseth certaine of them, if any man be desirous to knowe what they be. Now I doubt not all these thinges being weighed, but such as loue the truth; will rather beleue the storie of the time that Pope Ioane is fayned to haue ly­ued in, reported by Anastasius a lerned and a graue man who then lyued at Rome, and was present at the creations of sundry Popes that were before and after the pretensed time of the false surmised Ioane: then the vaine hearsayes and folish tales tolde by this simple and vnlerned monke (otherwise a good man I iudge) Martinus Polonus, who ly­ued many yeres after Leo the fourth, (to whom he ma­keth this Ioane successour) in the time of Innocentius the fourth, vnder whom he was in office of a penitentiarie at Rome. If any other be alleaged as affirming that fable for a true storie, (except SigebertusSigebertus. in Chronicis, in whose bookes of the most auncient and true copies the same is not to be founde, and where els it is found, the report stan­deth vppon hearsayes also, for fama est, is his worde, and chiefe auctoritie) all they deserue no more credite then Martin him selfe, for all haue drawen their lyes out of his fountaine.

Iohannes de ColumnaIohānes de Columna. a good writer of Cronicles long before Onuphrius, hath likewise vtterly reiected the vani­tie of this fable. And as it is false that euer there was any [Page 167] such Pope, so is it not true, that ye note in the margent of your booke touching the image,There is no such Image in Rome of Pope Io­ane the woman, as the De­fenders report. which ye saye is to be sene yet in Rome, resembling that woman Pope lying in trauell. The image which ye meane I haue sene my selfe at Rome, grauen in a stone after the maner of a toumbe stone, pitched vpright not farre from the Colos­seo. It resembleth no such thing ye speake of. What olde women and simple people talke of that and sundry other monumentes of antiquitie there, it is of no more truth, then that which by such the like persons is talked in England of the stones at Stonedge on the plaine of Salisbury by Ames­bury,Olde wy­ues tales. of the stones likewise by Rollewright not farre from Long Compton in the edge of Oxford shiere, of Ooky hole by Welles, and of the Brason head that spake to frier Bacon, whereof at my first coming to Oxford (I remember) I heard many gaye tales.

Neither is it of any more truth, which some haue igno­rantly written of the Popes refraining to go that waye, when he goeth thereby in solemne processions, nor that which I haue read in some of your scoolefelowes peuish bookes of the stoole of easement,The vaine surmise of the porphyry stoole that is at Late­rane. that is at Laterane made of fayre por­phyry stone, which they haue reported to be kept there for an vnsemely vse at the creation of the Popes, for proufe of their humanitie. Thus we trust we haue brought your great matter of Pope Ioane to nought. If ye haue no o­ther thing of better weight to charge the churche withall, then these fyue (of which we haue now treated) ye may with lesse blame and more honestie holde your peace.

But what neede one rehearse Concubines and Bawds, Apologie as for that is now an ordinarie, and a gainefull sinne at Rome. For harlot­tes syt there now a days, not as they did in times past without the Citie walles, and with their faces hid and couered, Gen. 38. but they dwel in palaces and fayre houses: they strey about in Courte and market, [Page] and that wyth bare and open face: In concilie delect. Card. Tomo. 3. De consid. ad Eugeni. as who saye, they may not one­ly laufully do it, but ought also to be praysed for so doing. What should we say any more of this? Their vitious and abhomina­ble lyfe is now thoroughlye knowen to the whole world. Ber­narde writeth roundely and truely of the Byshop of Romes house, yea and of the Byshop of Rome him selfe. Thy Palaice sayethe he, taketh in good men, but it maketh none: naughtye persones thriue there, and the good appayre and decaye. And who so euer he were which wrote the Tripartitie worke annexed to the Councell Late­ranense, saith thus, So excessiue at this daye is the ryote aswell in the Prelates and Byshoppes, as in the Clerkes and Priestes, that it is hor­rible to be told. But these thinges be not onely growen in vre and so by custome and continuall tyme well alowed, as all the rest of their doinges in maner bee, but they are now waxen old and rot­ten ripe. For who hath not hearde what a haynous act Peter A­loisius, Pope Paul the thirdes sonne committed against Cosmus Cherius the Byshop of Fanense: what Iohn Casus Archebishop of Beneuentanus the Popes Legate at Venyce wrote in the commen­dation of a moste abhominable fylthynes, and how he set furth with most lothesom words and wicked eloquēce, the mater which ought not once to procede out of any bodys mouth. To whose eares hath it not come, that N. Diasius a Spaniard, being purposely sent from Rome into Germanie, did shamefulie and diuilishlie murther his own brother Iohn Diasius, a most innocent and a most Godly man, onely bycause he had embraced the Gospell of Iesu Christ, and wolde not retorne againe to Rome?

But it may chaunce, to this they will say: These thinges may som­time happen in the best gouerned common welth, yea and against the Magistrates willes: and besides, there be good lawes made to pu­nyshe suche. I graunt it be so: but by what good lawes (I would know) haue these great myscheues benne punyshed emongest them? Petrus Aloisius after he hadde don that notorious Acte that I spake of, was alwayes cherished in his fathers bosome Pope Paule the third, and made his very derling. Diasius after he had murthered his owne brother, was deliuered by the Popes meanes, to thend he might not be punyshed by good lawes. Iohn Casus Archiepiscopus Beneuentanus is yet alyue, yea and lyueth at Rome, euen in the eyes and syght of the most holye Father. They haue putte to death infi­nite numbres of our bretherne, only bycause they beleued truely and sincerelie in Iesu Christ.

THE SECOND CHAPTER.

In all ages good men haue complayned of synne and dis­order.Confuta­tion. Pope Paul the third his desyre to refor­me the church. To. 3. con­ciliorum. in Sugge­stione dele­ctorū Car­dinalium. Pope Paul the third being desirours to reforme the church, of his owne good motion appointed certaine Car­dinals and others, men of great fame for vertue and lerning, to sit together in councell, and deliberate, what abuses there were, how they might be taken away, and how a good refor­mation might be procured. Among other abuses they re­herse this for one, and require it to be reformed, that in the Citie of Rome, which ought to be the spectacle of the world, courtisanes went abrode, so as the matrones do, that some rode on mules, some dwelled in goodly houses. Which particular disorders, as there they continewed not many yeres, so in these dayes they haue ben reformed.De consi­deratione ad Euge­nium. To. 2. con­ciliorum.

Saint Bernard complaineth of the disorder of the Popes court. so might he complaine of all courtes. The good zelous man that wrote tripartitum opusculum, which is an­nexed to the councell of Laterane sub Innocentio tertio, cōplaineth also (though not so euill as ye make him to spea­ke) of the ryot and wantonnes of some persons of the cler­gy. With all these we also for our part, and all good ca­tholike men complaine of thinges that be amisse, and desire they may be reformed. Now ye for your part do not hereof complaine, nor desire a reformation for charities sake, but ye accuse the church for malice, and laye forth to the face of the world the worst ye can saye, and much worse then truly ye can saye, not to thende the church may be reformed, but defaced, not admonished, but despised, not erected againe to the olde purenes, but vtterly throwen downe. Wherein ye folowe the father of your haeresies, and scoolemaister of your malice the deuill,Apoca. 12. who in scripture is called accusator fra­trum nostrorum, the accuser of our brethren.

But syrs how leape ye from Rome, to Placentia, from [Page] the clergy to a temporall duke, whom ye call the Popes son­ne, though he was not his sonne being Pope, but by laufull matrimonie before holy orders taken?Petrus Aloisius duke of Placentia Paule the thirds sonne in true wedloc­ke. Io [...]nnes Casa. For such a one was Peter Aloisius of whom ye speake. Be it, that he was an euill man. What make that against the church? What for defence of your newe gospell? As we defend him not, so we leaue him to Gods iudgement, and commend him to his mercie. If Iohannes Casa being yet a young springall, be­fore he came to be a clerke, and long before he was either bi­shop or legate, made certaine amorous sonettes in Italian ryme, folowing the Italian poete Petracha, to which kinde of exercise the good wittes of Italy in youth are much ge­uen, and without naming any person flatteringly smoothed that heinous fact, rather then praised, wherein neuerthelesse he did euill, we confesse, and for the same ouersight of his youth was notwithstanding his other excellēt qualities kept backe from the dignitie of cardinalship during his life: all this being graunted and cōsidered, what hindereth it the estima­tiō of Christes Church?Fylthy poetries set forth in latine by Beza of Gene­ua. And what furthereth it your false do­ctrine, your schismes, and your heresies? How much more iu­stly might we, (if we would folow you) obiect to you the abominable and filthy poetries, which Beza the chiefe pillour of your gospel of all that now lyue, hath set forth in latine for al the world to read? Which him selfe can not denye but were made wantonly rather at the imitation of vnchast Catullus and Naso,In epistola ad Melio­rem Vol­marium Rufum praeposita Conf [...]ss [...]o­ni. then so as became an honest Christian. Ye should haue caused Beza, whom ye esteme so much, to cleare him selfe of his vncleane writinges, before ye had blamed the catholikes for a fewe Italian rymes of Iohannes Casa, which ye neuer sawe, neither whatsoeuer your bawdy Bale writeth, be they suffered to be sene in print.

Touching the death of Iohn Diazius the Spaniard, ye [Page 169] tell many lyes at once. Alphonsus Diazius was not of purpose sent from Rome into Germanie to kill his brother Iohn. If any had borne him so much malice, it is likely he would haue committed that wicked seruice to an other, ra­ther then to his owne naturall brother. That is one lye. That Alphonsus Diazius killed Iohn Diazius, that is an o­ther lye. That Iohn Diazius was slayne only because he had embraced the gospell of Iesus Christ, and would not re­tourne againe to Rome: this is the third lye. And how could he returne to Rome where he was not before? That the said Alphonsus, after he had murthered his owne brother, was deliuered by the Popes meanes,The truth touching Iohn Di­azius de­ath. to thend he might not be pu­nished by good lawes: this is the fourth lye. The truth he­reof is this, as it is knowen by the confession of the person, that playd the worst part of this tragedie, who of late was alyue. Alphonsus Diazius a Spanyard, a lerned man in the lawes, came from Rome into Germanie for no other pur­pose for that is knowen, but to see his brother Iohn Diazius then mainteining his poore state by attending vpon a print. He had to accompanie him in that iourney, an other Spani­ard named Iohannes Niger, a man of warre. After that all being done for which he came, he had taken leaue of his brother, they were not farre gone from the place, but this Iohn Niger bearing deadly hatred to Iohn Diazius, for his opinion as it is thought, which was not all together the gos­pell of Iesus Christ: rode backe againe to the house where he remained, and geting the said Iohn Diazius to a secret place, killed him. That done he sped him selfe to Alphonsus, and they both rode awaye. Now whether Alphonsus cōsented to this murther or no, that neither ye, nor any man besyde them two knoweth. That he killed him not him selfe, though ye saye so, it is well knowen. The murther being knowen, [Page] horsemen made out after them, by whom they were taken, and brought to prison. Forthwith great sute being made for them both to Ferdinando of famous memorie then king of Romaines, late Emperour, in whose dominion they were apprehended: Alphonsus Diazius by meanes of the Cardi­nall of Trent hauing his palais therby, was deliuered. Io­hannes Niger, after he was condemned to dye, his pardon was procured by the ernest sute of certaine Spanyardes. Now as we detest the fact, so can not ye iustifie your vniust charging of others with the gylt of it. Neither haue ye any reason why this fact shuld derogate the catholike faith, a­gainst which ye bring all that ye can. How so euer it was, among the catholikes, as well as among the Huguenots, some alwayes be founde, whom good mē holde not for sain­ctes. Notwithstāding whose wickednes, the catholike faith re­maineth clere, and professours of the same be without blame.

Apologie But of that great and foule number of harlottes, fornicatours, adulterers, what one haue they at any time (I say not killed) but ei­ther excommunicate, or once attached? Why? volupteousnesse, ad­ulterie, rybaudrie, whoredome, murthering of kinne, incest, and o­thers more abhominable partes, are not these coumpted sinne at Rome? Or if they be sinne, ought Christes vicar, Peters successour, the most holye Father so lightly and slitely beare them as though they were no sinne, and that in the Citie of Rome, and in that pincipall tower of all holines? O holy Scribes and Pharises, which knew not this kind of holines. O what holines, what a Catholike faith is this▪ Peter did not this teach at Rome, Paul did not so liue at Rome: they did not practise brothelry which these do openly: they made not a yearely reuenewe and profite of harlottes: they suffered no common Adulterours and wicked Murtherers to go vnpunished. They did not receiue them into their intier fami­liaritie, into their Councell, into their househoulde, nor yet into the company of Christen men. These menne ought not therefore so vn­reasonablie to triumphe against our liuing. It had ben more wise­dom for them, either firste to haue proued good their owne life be­fore the worlde, or at the leaste to haue cloked it a litle more con­ningly. For we do vse still the old and auncient lawes (and asmuch as [Page 170] men maye do in the maners v [...]ed at these dayes, when all thinges are so wholy corrupte) we diligently and earnestly put in execution the ecclesiasticall discipline: wee haue not common brothell houses of strumpettes, nor yet flockes of Concubines, nor heardes of harlot haunters. Neither do we preferre adulterie before matrimony, nei­ther do we exercise beastly sensualitie. Neither do we gather ordina­rie rentes and stipendes of stewes, nor do suffer to escape vnpunished incest and abhominable naughtines, nor yet such manquellers as the Aloisians, Casians, and Diasians were. For if these thinges woulde haue pleased vs, wee neded not to haue departed from these mennes felowship, amongest whom suche enormities be in their chiefe pride and price. Nother neded we for leauing them to ronne into the ha­tred of menne, and into most wilfull daungers.

THE THIRD CHAPTER.

Where ye denie that of so great and soule number of har­lottes, fornicatours, adulterers,Confuta­tation. no one hath at any time ben excommunicat nor attached at Rome: this ye denie as im­pudently, as ye affirmed the other matter of Diazius false­ly. For it is well knowen,Kepers of concubi­nes be and euer haue ben puni­shed at Rome. that kepers of Concubines haue by diuerse Popes oftentimes ben punished. And what Petrus Damiani that godly and lerned man writeth, con­cerning that harlottes, specially Concubines were sharply chastised of Leo the nynth, of Steuen the tenth, of Nico­laus the second, and of Gregory the seuenth: the same we reade to haue ben done after Petrus Damiani his time, by Honorius the third, by Gregory the nynth, by Alexander the fourth, by Nicolas the fourth, by Iohn the two and twentith, by Gregory the eleuenth. And in our dayes we haue good intelligence the same to haue ben most di­ligently obserued, that harlottes and concubines haue ben punished by Paulus the fourth, and Pius the fourth that nowe is Pope. This is so cleare a matter, as it nedeth no probation of witnes. For both they that haue ben at Ro­me, can not be ignoraunt thereof, and they that be out of Rome, might easelye haue knowen it. Wherefore what [Page] punishment is due to slaunderers, that ought this defender to haue for this false slaunder.

Here all that foloweth in your Apologie for the com­passe of many sentences, conteineth nothinge but ray­ling at Christes vicar and them at Rome, and an excla­mation of foolish rhetorike, with telling what Peter and Paul did not at Rome, which I compt not worth the answering. Then commeth me your secretary, and prayseth him selfe, and all you his holye companions, besides all witte and modestie. And sayth much in commen­datiō of your ministershippes goodnes, for that ye kepe and vse still the olde and auncient lawes forsooth and discipli­ne of the church,The new clergy of England pretēdeth to kepe the olde lawes and discipline of the church. where as ye breake all olde lawes, and if they stoode in force, all your wicked vsurped state were sone ouerthrowen. And (for that in this behalfe ye saye) what discipline I praye you, is that ye haue put in such diligent and ernest execution? The case being so, as for cause of your former vowe solemly and aduisedly made to God, ye maye not mary, as I haue before proued: lyuing as ye do, in aduoutrie, in inceste, in sacrilege, worse then aduoutrers (for so the olde and holy fathers report of you) how becommeth it you to reproue the church of Rome, and consequently the whole church of Christ? What speake ye of common brothell houses? Be not your priuate houses and cham­bers shoppes of so much more hainous abomination, how much aduoutrie, incest, and sacriledge, is more hainous then fornication? What speake ye of strumpettes and concubi­nes? Be not your abominable yokefellowes and maried Nonnes in respect of your vowes many degrees worse,Priuate brothell houses. how much worse it is to defile the bed of Christ, then the bed of a man? What speake ye of harlotte haunters? Do ye not your selues lyue altogether or rather continually wallow in sacri­legius [Page 171] and incestuous lechery? [...]ayned holy­nes, dou­ble iniquitie. If fayned holines be double iniquitie, as is commonly and truly said, how do ye not wor­se then common fornicatours, by that ye excuse your synne, and cloke it with the name of matrimonie? Consider ye not how therein ye do great iniurie and villanie to that holye sacrament? For shame, for conscience, for regard of the world, for feare of Gods wrath, for auoiding euerlasting fyre, retourne to the catholike church, from whence ye are broken out like the fatte bulles of Basan, put away your most vnlaufull yokefellowes, forsake your wicked and sacrilegi­ous embracinges, purge the abominable stinch of your ow­ne chambers: and then with vs reprehende the sufferance of brothel houses abrode, blame lewde life in all, chastise strumpettes and concubines, punish all aduoutrie, redresse what in you lieth, all vncleanes. As for such as ye meane by Aloisiās, Casians, and Diaziās, if ye finde any of that sort, cleanse the world of them by due rigour of the Lawe. So may ye come into Gods fauour againe, so may ye be mēbers of his catholike church againe, from whence ye confesse your wicked departure. For doing whereof, our enormi­ties that ye rayle at, what so euer they be, shall not serue you in Gods iudgement for any part of your excuse. Neither by Christes word shall ye ceasse to be accompted hypocrites, for taking a mote out of our eyes,Mat. 7. vntil ye take the beame out that is in your owne eyes. Leaue your selues to be abomina­ble, before with such spitefull railing ye reprehende our in­firmitie.

Paule the fourthe not many monethes since, Apologie hadde at Rome in prison certaine Augustine fryers, manye Byshops, and a greate numbre of other deuout men, for Religion sake, hee racked them and tormented them: to make them confesse, hee lefte no meanes vnas­sayed. But in thend how many brothels, how many whoremōgers, how many adulterers, how many incestuous persons could he find [Page] of all those?

Confu­tation.As for your Augustine friers and other deuout men that Paul the fourth had in prison at Rome for religions sake, as ye saye, truth it is (as I vnderstand from thence) he comma­unded to prison certaine heretikes and apostates, who had gone out of their religion. And there he kept them, to thintent vexation might geue them vnderstanding,Apostates by empri­sonment and other vexations brought to amen­dement vnder Po­pe Paul the fourth. and that by compulsion they might lerne to do well, which medicine S. Augustine aloweth in those, who of their owne accorde refuse to do their dutie. He caused those apostates to be ap­prehended all in one day and within fewe houres, and to be put in prison. Whereas many dayes before that he had caused a publike edict openly to be proclamed, that all such as were gone out of their religion, should retour­ne home againe. That many obeied that proclama­tion, not only Rome is witnes, but also all Italy. whe­reas many that had continewed forth of their religions ma­ny yeres, being stroken with repentance, willingly retour­ned out of diuerse prouinces to their monasticall habite and rule, which they had professed, and at this daye lyue in their monasteries well and regiously. Many others persisting in their malice, shewed them selues so stubborne, that the Po­pe thought it necessary to put vnto them the discipline of imprisonment. Racking and tormentes vsed he none, what so euer ye saye.

At length the prison did that, which gentlenes could not do. And so by this remedie many were saued, that other wise should haue perished, retourned to their monasteries from whence they ranne away, in the which they remaine and lyue as becommeth religious men.A medi­cine for Aposta­tes. If the like medicine were mercifully ministred vnto you syrs and your compa­nions, of which some be broken out of their cloister, and all [Page 172] gone out of Christes church: I doubt not but many of you shuld be reduced to a better mynde, repent, retourne home againe, and proue saued soules. Our Lord graunt that it ma­ye so be.

Our God be thanked, Apologie although we be not the men we ought and professe to be, yet whosoeuer we be, compare vs with these men, and euen our owne life and innocencie will sone proue vn­true, and condemne their maliciouse surmises. For we exhorte the people to all vertue and well doing, not only by bookes and prea­chinges, but also with our examples and behauiour. VVe also teach that the Gospell is not a boasting or bragging of knowledge, but that it is the lawe of lyfe, In Ap [...]l. cap. 45. and that a Christian man (as Tertullian saith) ought not to speake honorably, but ought to lyue honora­bly: nor that they be the heares of lawe, but the doers of the lawe, which are iustified before God.

Nay nay Syrs for that thing ye crake so much of,Confu­tation. be not to hastie to thanke your God, what peculiar God ye meane we knowe not, that phrase your secretary much vseth as though ye had an other God besyde him that is God of all. Compare your selues with whom ye list, your owne life and innocencie is so well knowen, as by reprouing your vices and horrible synnes, no man lightly shall seme a slaunderer. In dede if your continuall aduoutrie and incest were laufull matrimonie,The new english clergy ha­ue no iust cause to crake of their in­nocencie and holy life. if your filthy yokefellowes were your true wed­ded wiues, if your robbing and throwing downe of chur­ches were almose and bulding of places for prayer to the en­crease of Gods honour, if ignorant rashenes were godly dis­cretion, if your word of the Lord, were Gods word, if your pretensed gospell, were Christes true gospell, if your bible­bable and rayling were holsome preaching, if the sprite of Satan that is in you, the same also being a lying sprite in your mouthes, could be meeke, humble, obedient, and would tell truth, finally if euill were good, if darkenes were light, if sower were swete, if the fruites of your so noughty a tree [Page] were good: we would also sooth you, and vpholde your im­moderate crakes, we would saye as much for you, as ye saye for your selues. But you being as ye be, and we knowing you, as we do, how so euer ye deceiue the simple, for whom your damnation shall be the more greuous: we saye plainely of you at one word, which we will to be a watchword for al Christen people to be ware of you, your doctrine is heresie, your life is iniquitie, your endeuour tendeth to the subuer­sion of soules.

Apologie Besides all these matters wherewith they charge vs, they are wont also to add this one thing, which they enlarge with all kinde of spi­tefulnes: that is, that we be men of trouble, that we plucke the swor­de and scepter out of kinges handes: that we arme the people, that we ouerthrow iudgement places, destroie the lawes, make hauoke of possessions, seke to make the people Princes, tourne all thinges vpside downe: and to be short, that we would haue nothinge in good frame in a common welth. Good Lorde, how often haue they set on fier princes heartes with these wordes, to thend they might quenche the light of the gospell in the very first appering of it, Tertull. in Apollo. ca. 1.2.3. and might begin to hate the same or euer they were able to kno­we it, and to thend that euery magistrate might thinke he sawe his deadly ennemy, as often as he sawe any of vs. Surely it should excedingly greue vs to be so malitiously accused of most hainous treason, onlesse we knewe that Christ him selfe, the Apostles and a number of good christian men were in time past blamed and en­uyed in maner for the same faults. For although Christ taught, they shuld geue vnto Cesar that which was Cesars, yet was he char­ged with sedition in that he was accused to deuise some conspiracie and to couete the kingdome. And thereupon they cried out with open mouth against him in the place of iudgement sayeng: Yf thou let this man scape, thou arte not Cesars friend.

And though the Apostles did likewise euermore and stedfastly teach, that Magistrats ought to be obeyed, that euery soule ought to be subiect to the higher powers, not onely for feare of wrath and pu­nishement, but euen for conscience sake, yet beare they the name to disquiet the people, and to stirre vp the multitude to rebell. After this sorte did Haman specially bring the nation of the Iewes into the hatred of kinge Assuerus, In the booke of Hester. 3. Reg. 18. bicause, saide he, they were a rebellious and stubborne people, and dispised the ordinaunces and comma­undementes of Princes. Wicked king Achab saide to Elie the Pro­phet [Page 173] of God, It is thou that troublest Israell. Amasias the priest at Bethell laid a conspiracie to the prophete Amos charge before kinge Ieroboam sayeng, See, Amos. 7. In Apolog. cap. 37. Amos hath made a conspiracie against thee in the middest of the house of Israell. To bee breefe: Tertul­lian saithe, this was the generall accusation of all Christians whils he lyued, that they were traitours, they were rebelles, and the enne­mies of mankinde. Wherefore if now adayes the truthe be li­kewise euell spoken of, and beinge the same truth it was then, if it be now like dispitefully vsed as it was in times past, though it be a greuous and vnkind dealinge, yet can it not seeme vnto vs a new or an vnwonted matter.

THE FOVRTH CHAPTER.

This odious matter which ye are charged withall,Confu­tation. To speake particu­larly of the trou­blesom attemptes of the gos­pellers it is nedeles, the world so well knowing them. as ye saye, we will not aggrauate nor enlarge. How farre ye haue attempted (I meane the sectes of your brotherhed) in sundry countries to wrest the sworde out of princes handes, to transpose their sceptres at your pleasure, and to alter states and signories: though we holde our peace, the world iud­geth, the bloud of so many thousandes slaine speake, En­gland repēteth, Scotland morneth, Germanie roreth, Fraun­ce bewayleth, Sauoye weepeth, all Christendome lamen­teth. Were the hundered thousand boures of Germanie consumed by the sword of the nobilitie there for ther obedi­ence? The Duke of Saxonie and Lantgraue of Hesse,Roma. 12. The stirre of hugue­hots in Fraunce for the gospell. The Suit­zers of Berna wrong­fully in­uaded the possesnē [...] of tholde Duke of Sauoye. were they ouerthrowen in fylde and taken captiue, for standing in defence of their soueraigne? Were so great multitudes of people destroyed at Munster for their loyaltie? Let e­uery soule be subiect to the higher powers, saith S. Paul, and he that resisteth the power resisteth the ordinance of God. Your good bre­thern of Fraunce that of late were in armes, and committed those Turkish outrages, did they all that for maintenance of their liege prince, and of the powers that vnder him had commission? Your sacramentarie Suitzers of Berna, who robbed the quiet olde Duke of Sauoye of his townes and [Page] coūtries from the farther side of the lake of Geneua vnto the Alpes, did they this for maintenance of his right, and to set him at rest with litle? What meant ye when ye layde your heads together being at Geneua in Quene Maries dayes,Traite­rous boo­kes na­med the first and second blastes of the trūpet made by the Gene­uian bro­thered a­gainst the regiment of womē. the faithfull brothers of England and Scotland, and deuised a most seditious and traiterous booke against the monstrous regiment of women? Mynded ye to blowe peace, tranquil­litie, and good order to the realmes of England and Scot­land, when ye sent abroade greate numbers of those bookes printed in Geneua amongest the people, bearing name and title of the first and second blast of the trumpet? Mo of your blastes I haue not sene, but mo did ye promise, or ra­ther threaten, I am sure. Was not your intent and purpose openly professed with those traiterous blastes of your trum­pet, to blowe two iust crownes from the heads of two most noble and laufull Quenes at once? Well, mo examples do­mestical and other could I here reherse of this sorte, but I am content to spare you.

For answer to all this, ye ioyne your selues with Christ and his Apostles, as though ye were gilty herein no more then they. Presumptuously sayd. But the matter is not so answered. And yet ye ronne at large in that common place, and very vainely or rather Lucifer like,Hester. 3.3. Reg. 18. Amos. 7. The De­fenders cōparison of thē sel­ues with Prophets, Apostles, sainctes of the pri­mitiue church confuted. compare your selues with the Apostles, with the innocent Iewes against whom Aman stirred king Assuerus, with Elias the Prophete, whom wicked king Achab persecuted, with the Prophete Amos accused to king Ieroboam by Amasias the idolater priest of Bethel, brieflly with those most holye Christians of the pri­mitiue church. But Syrs stay here, ronne no farther. Ye are sone stopped. The case is not like pardy. These be but your wordes. In the Apostles was the truth in dede, so was it in the holy Prophets, and those first blessed men of the [Page 174] church. The truth ye boast and crake so much of, is not that truth. It is the truth of heretikes,Heretikes pretensed truth. which all they saie they haue, be they neuer so repugnant to Gods truth reueled to his spouse the church by the holy ghost, and contrarye with­in them selues. This ground taken from you,The buil­ding of the Defenders stan­deth vpon a false ground, which is manifest vntruth. all the building of your gaye rhetorike falleth down flatte. And yet ye besto­we much talke, as though truth were of your side. Talke lesse like Rhetoricians, and proue vs that ye haue truth, like honest men. And then talke on, but that can ye neuer do, so long as ye remaine out of the church, and ennemies to the church. But what spend I wordes in vaine? Your hartes be hardened, your eyes be blinded, your eares be stopped. Because so ye kicke against the pricke who is Christ, and hate his church, and will not receiue the loue of the truth:2. Thess. 2. God hath suffe­red you to be amazed with a strong delusion, that ye should beleue lies. Our Lord geue you grace to repent, that as by your false doctrine and wicked example thousandes ha­ue ben euerlastingly lost, so by your happy retourne the number that is going and streyeth, maye be reuoked and saued.

Forty yeares agone and vpward, Apologie was it an easy thing for them to deuise against vs these accursed speaches and other sorer then these, when in the middest of the darkenesse of that age firste began­ne to springe and to giue shine, some one glimmeringe beame of truthe vnknowen at that time and vnheared of, when also Martin Luther and Hulderike Zwinglius beinge moste excellent menne, euen sent of God to giue light to the whole world, firste came vnto the knowledge and preachinge of the Gospell, whereas yet the thin­ge was but newe, and the successe thereof vncertain: and when mens mindes stoode doubtfull and amased, and their eares open to all slaunderous tales: and when there could bee imagined against vs no fact so detestable, but the people then woulde soone beleue it for the nouelty and strangenes of the matter. For so did Symmachus, so did Celsus, so did Iulianus, so did Porphirius the olde foes to the Gospell attempt in times past to accuse all Christians of sedition and treason, before that eyther Prynce or people were able to know [Page] who those Christians were, what they professed, what they beleued, or what was their meaning.

Confuta­tion.As ye runne forth your race, and with lying amplifica­tion boast and bragge of the truth of your doctrine, and of the innocencie of your demeanour: ye fall in­to a great inconuenience and ouersight. Which as it is contrary to Gods infallible truth, so neither is it agreable with your doctours positions, nor with your owne writinges and preachinges. Ye saye, that aboue forty ye­res past, a glimmering beame of truth vnknowen at that ti­me and vnheard of, first beganne to spring and shine. Then (saye ye) Martin Luther and Hulderike Zwinglius being most excellent men,An other new first begyn­ning of the gos­pell, The lost gospell lately re­stored by Luther and Zwingli­us. euen sent of God to geue light to the whole world, first came vnto the knowledge and preaching of the gospell. Why maisters was the sunne, the Moone, and all the sterres quite put out, till the time came, that le­cherous friers maried wanton Nonnes? Was the light ex­tinguished in all Israell, till that lewde frier came, and Zwin­glius the swart rutter? Shall we now change the olde song of Micheas the prophete, out of Sion shall come the lawe, and the word of our lord from Ierusalem, Miche. 4. and sing a newe song, out of Wittenberg is come the gospell, and the worde of the Lorde from Zurich and Geneua? Hath Christ suffered the candell of his gospell,Mat. 5. which him selfe would to be set in the cādelsticke to geue light to al them of his house, which is his church disparsed abrode through out the whole worlde, to be put vnder a busshell, or rather to be put out, till Lu­ther the Apostata came? What were is merites that he shuld obteine such prerogatiue? What were his miracles, that we shuld be moued to forsake our olde faith, and beleue his newe preaching? If Luther and Zwinglius first came to the knowledge and preaching of the gospell, what meant [Page 175] Christ to breake his promise, who said,Mat. 28. I will be with you all dayes till the ende of the world? Againe was he not able to obteine that he prayd to his father for? Or if he obteined his request, as he was neuer ne could be denied any, pro sua uerentia, how commeth it to passe, that his word was not performed, where he said, I will besech my father, Heb. 5. Ihon. 5. and he wil geue you an other comforter, the spirite of truth, whom the world it not able to take, to remaine with you for euer?

Againe how forgate ye the olde prouerbe, a lyer it beho­ueth to be mindefull?The De­fenders vnmyn­defully shewe them sel­ues con­trary to them sel­ues, and to their other best lerned brethren. The gos­pelling Apostles before lu­thers da­yes. The auc­tor of the harbo­rough cō­trary to the Defenders. The wri­ters of Magde­burg con­trary to the defenders, bre­thren a­gainst brethren. Remember ye not how this is contrary to al your owne doctrine? For saye ye not otherwheres, that God had allwayes his number of the elect, and his inuisible church? Preach ye and write ye not, that before Luther was borne, the pure word of God was knowen and vttered by Huss, and Ierome of Prague, Wicklef and their folowers, by Peterbrusians in S. Bernardes time, by S. Bernarde him selfe where he findeth fault with abuses and disorders of the Popes courte, by Berengarius the founder of your sacra­mentarie gospell, by Bertram, by Waldenses, by Albingen­sies, and many others? How agree ye with the author of the Harborough, who toward thende of that booke, maketh Englād thus to speake? I am thy countrie England, who brought forth that blessed man Ihon Wiclef, who begate Huss, who begate Luther, who begate truth. Where in the margēt is written, this is the secōd byrth of Christ. What do your felowes of Germanie, Illyricus and his cōpanions, who be so busy about the clow­ting and patching together of their euill purposed Centu­rias, what do they els I saye, but by cartlodes of lyes and mis­sensed allegations go about to proue, that in all ages the gos­pell was knowen and preached, and that the light of the lor­des word spred abroad bright beames ouer the world in all ages, that is to saye, that alwayes some professed hatred [Page] against the Catholike church, founde faulte with the bis­shops of Rome, impugned the catholike faith, laboured to deface holy ceremonies, to subuert all good order and disci­pline? Therefore this must ye recant and call backe againe, or els shall ye pull all the rable of sundry your owne sectes vpon your shulders, whose filthy railinges and vile vpbrai­dinges poore soules ye shall neuer be able to abyde.

Apologie But now sithens our very ennemies do see and cannot deny, but we euer in all our wordes and writinges haue diligentlie put the people in mynde of their dewtie, to obey their Princes and Magistra­tes, ye though they be wicked: For this doth very triall and expe­rience sufficientlie teache, and all mennes eyes, who soeuer and whe­resoeuer they be, do well ynough see and wytnes for vs, yt was a foule parte of them to charge vs with these thinges: and seing they could fynde no new and late faultes, therfore to seke to procure vs enuye only with stale and outworne lyes. We geue our Lorde God thanks, whose only cause this is, there hath yet at no tyme been any suche example in all the Realmes, Dominions and com­mon weales whiche haue receiued the Gospell. For we haue ouer­throwen no kingedome, we haue decayed no mans power or right, we haue disordered no common welth. There continue in their owne accustomed state and auncient dignitie the kinges of oure countrie of Englande, the kinges of Denmarke, the kinges of Sue­tia, the Dukes of Saxonie, the Counties Palatine, the Marquesies of Brandeburgh, the Lansgraues of Hessia, the common wealthes of the Heluetians and Rhetians, and the free cities, as Argentine, Basil, Franckforde, Vlme, August and Norrenberge, doe all I saye abide in the same authoritie and estate wherein they haue beene heeretofo­re, or rather in a muche better, for that by meanes of the Gospell they haue their people more obedient vnto them. Lette them go I praye you into those places where at this presente through God­des goodnes the Gospell is taught. VVhere is there more maiestie? Where is there lesse arrogancie and tirrannye? VVhere is the Prince more honoured? Where be the people lesse vnrulye? Where hathe there at anye time the common wealthe or the Church beene in more quyet? Perhappes ye will saye, from the firste beginninge of this doctrine, the common sorte euerye wheare beganne to rage and to ryse throughout Germany. A lowe it were so, yet Martin Luther the publisher and setter forwarde of this doctrine, didde write maruelous vehementlye and sharpely against them, and re­clamed [Page 176] them home to peace and obedience.

THE FIFTH CHAPTER.

Your impudencie of lying hath no measure nor ende.Confuta­tion. But we will saie litle here, hauing said ynough already in re­proufe of your falsehed. We leaue you to the wide world, who seeth and almost feeleth your lies. Do the catholi­kes charge you with olde matters, for that they can finde no newe and late faultes in you? How many yeres ago is it,Pultrot was he that by Beza and an other preacher was per­suaded to kill the duke of Guise. Armure taken by the Ger­maines for the defence of Lu­thers gos­pell A­gainst Charles the 5. Em­perour. VVhat maintei­ners of quiet of kingdo­mes the gospellers be, it ap­pereth by their sedi­cious bla­stes blo­wen a­gainst the regiment of womē. I pray you, sithens Beza, Pultrot, and your other brethren of Fraunce, and your Armies of the Gospellers there comonly called huguenots, wrought their feates and actes, which sore irketh all Christendome to heare of, fitter for your gospel of Geneua, then for the gospell of Iesus Christ? But we haue ouerthrowen no kingdome, ye saye. Ye would if ye could. We haue decayed no mans power or right. Ye haue done all that ye were able. Why rose your brethren of Germa­nie against Charles the fifth the best and noblest Emperour sence the great Charles, commonly named Charlemaigne? Why would they haue him no more called by the name of his highest honour and title, but by the name of Charles of Gant? Wente they not about to expelle him from the right of the Empire? Is this no decaying of a mans power and right? By what occasion is the realme of Hungarie de­cayd, and for the more part become a praye for the Turke, but through the dissension of the nobles raised and main­teined for your gospels sake? I put you here in mynde eft­sones of your traiterous blastes of your trumpettes against the regimēt of women. Is it not knowen who is in Scotland yet, and maye not come into England for hauing put his helpe to the making of those traiterous bookes? We haue disordered, saie ye no common welth. What common welth haue ye not disordered, shaken, and almost brought to [Page] nought, where so euer through [...] [...]geaunce for syn­nes your gospell is suffered to haue entraunce? Denye it, and let the world iudge. As for your Dukes, your Counties, your Marqueses, your Landsgraues, that ye crake of, and most of your free Cities in Germanie, if Charles the Emperour had either folowed the stomake of Conquerours, or had vsed toward them iustice, rather then clemencie: they had not ben in case at these dayes, that ye shuld haue made great bragges of them. For they had ben brought full lowe, as of late yeres the communalty of Denmarke, that rose a­gainst their nobles, as the nobles of Sueden, that made ba­taile against the king there, as your felowe Lutherans of Li­fland, that fought against the catholikes.

But I maruell not a litle that in this place specially, whe­re ye speake of the good order that your gospell breadeth,VVhat good or­der for common quiet this new gos­pell bree­deth, it appereth by the- first foū­der of it. Lib. de se­culari po­testate, vel ciuili Ma­gistratu. in [...]omo. 6. germ. Philip. 2.1. Petri. 5. Luther admitteth no ciuill magistra­te. Luc. 14. ye be not ashamed to make mention of Martin Luther. Good God how much could we, if we were so desposed, alleage out of his seditious and hereticall bookes by him writen a­gainst the power of laufull magistrates? At this time let one place suffise for all. Luthers wordes be these. Inter Christia­nos nullus neque potest, neque debet esse magistratus, sed &c. A­mong Christen men none can nor ought to be a magistrate, but ech one is to other equally subiect. After the Apostles saying, Thinking all others better then your selues, &c. Againe, be ye humble all one to an other. VVhereto Christ accordeth when he saith. VVhen thou art called to the mariage feast, go, and sitte doune lowest of all. A­mong Christen men, none is superiour saue one and only Christ. And what superioritie or magistrate can be there, where all be equall, and haue right, power, riches, and honor all alike? Further­more none coueteth to be ouer other, but all will be vnder one an other. VVhere such men be, though one would, yet can he not make a magistrate to beare rule ouer others, sith that nature suffereth not to haue superiours, where no man will, nor may be a superiour. And where such kinde of men is, there be they not Christen men, after the true and right sorte of Christen men. This farre Martin Lu­ther.

Staphylus where he [...]heweth how litle concord the Lu­therans haue among them selues,In Apolo­gi [...]. and that out of their owne writinges, declareth that Luther stirred vp by his seditious bookes the common people of Germanie against the nobi­litie. But ye saie, he wrote vehemently against them for it,Tho. Mū­zer Lu­thers sco­le [...] prea­cher to the com­mon peo­ple of Gemanie that rose against their princes. and reclaimed them home to peace and obedience. Yea, but he did it to late, and after there had ben a hundred thousand of them slayne as Sleidane one of your owne secte in his storie confesseth. He persuaded them to peace, when the­re was scarsly any lefte that could beare a clubbe. First he stirred vp his disciple Thomas Munzer in Thuringia, who was the rebelles preacher. After that he excused him of sedi­cious preaching to the Duke of Saxonie Prince Electour, trusting if Munzer were let alone, the matter should well go forewarde. But when he sawe the Princes addresse them selues to warre, and vnderstode their power was to mightye for the rebelles: fearing least his libertie,The soro­wefull di­rige that Luther kept for the hun­dred thousand boures slaine in Germanie through his occa­sion. In Farra­gine. which he had taught should be straighted, forthwith wrote to the prin­ces, exhorting them to destroie the poor deceiued hus­bandmen. After their terrible ouerthrowe, to declare, what thought he tooke at his harte for the great slaughter of the people by his meanes and doctrine seduced, he tooke Ka­terine Bore, the Nonne late stolen out of her monasterie, to be his yokefellowe, and called it wedlocke, and with her forsooth, who as Erasmus writeth of her, was a ioyly mery one, kept a sorowfull Dirige, and made greate mone for them.

But whereas it is wont sometime to be obiected, Apologie by personnes wantinge skill, touchinge the Heluetians chaunge of state and kil­linge of Leopoldus the duke of Austria, and restoringe by force their Countrie to libertie, that was donne as appeereth playnelye by all stories, for twoo hundreth and threescore yeares past or aboue, vn­der [Page] Boniface the eight, when the autho [...]ie of the Bishop of Ro­me was in greatest iolitie, about to hundreth yeares before Hulde­rike Zuinglius either beganne to teache the Gospell, or yet was borne. And euer sence that tyme, they haue hadde all thinges still and quiet, not onelye from forreine ennemies, but also from ciuell dissension. And yf it were a sinne in the Heluetians to de­liuer their own countrie from foreine gouernement, specially when they were so proudelye and tyrannouslye oppressed, yet to bur­then vs with other mennes faultes, or them with the faultes of their forefathers, is against all right and reasone.

Confu­tation. Duke Le­opold of Austria.Where ye discharge your selues of the Heluetians kil­ling of Leopold their duke, (which no man as I thinke was so foolish, as to burthen you with) and seme to excuse that fact in maner, because thereby they deliuered their countrie from forreine gouernement, specially when they were prou­dely and tyrannously oppressed, as ye saye beleuing their ow­ne cronicles, and would not any man to burthen you with other mennes faultes, nor them with the faultes of their fo­refathers: herein ye haue reason, and for some parte, right and equitie, and we require you to hold you in this min­de, and that ye admitte vs to the like equitie, where in like cases ye burthen the catholikes with other mens faultes, and with the vniust actes of their forefathers, as partly we haue before touched, and shall hereafter declare. Now your sprite is not content with that ye haue railed already against the Pope and holy church, but it moueth you againe to raue and crie out. But whether with more malice or reason, let vs indifferently consider.

Apologie But O immortall God, and will the Bisshoppe of Rome accuse vs of treasone? will hee teache the people to obeye and folowe their Magistrates? Or hath he anye regarde at all of the Maiestie of Prin­ces? VVhye doothe hee then as none of the olde Bisshoppes of Rome heretofore euer didde, suffre him selfe to bee called of his flat­terers, August. Steuchus. Ant [...]nius de Rosellis. Lorde of Lordes, as though hee woulde haue all kinges and Princes, whoe and what so euer they are, to bee his vnderlinges? VVhye dothe hee vaunte him selfe to bee kyng of kynges, and to [Page 178] haue kyngelye Roialtie ouer his Subiectes? VVhy compelleth he all emperours and princes to swere to him fealtie and true obedience? VVhye doth he boaste that the Emperous Magestie is a thowsand­fould inferiour to him? And for this reason, De Maior. & obedi. Solite. De maior. et obedie [...]. Vnā sanctā speciallye bycause God hath made two lyghtes in the heauen, and bycause heauen and yearthe were created not at two beginninges, but at on. VVhy hath he and hys complices (like Anabaptistes and Libertines, to the ende they might ronne on more licenciouslye and careleslye) shaken of the yoke, and exempted them selues from being vnder all ciuell power? why hath he his Legates (asmuche to say as most sutle spyes) lyeng in wayte in all kinges Courtes, Councelles, and priuey cham­bers? why doth he, when he list, sette the Christiā Princes one against an other, and at his owne pleasure trouble the whole worlde with debate and discorde? why dothe hee excommunicate and comma­unde to be taken as a heathen and a Pagan any Christian Prince that renounceth his authoritie? and why promiseth he his Indulgences and his pardons largely to any that will (what way soeuer it be) kill any of his ennemies? Doth hee maintaine Empires and kingdo­mes? Or doothe he once desire that common quiete should bee prouided for? You must pardonne vs good Reader, though wee seeme to vtter these thinges more bitterlye and bitingly then it be­commeth Diuines to doe. For bothe the shamefulnes of the mat­ter, and the desire of rule in the Bisshoppe of Rome is so exceding and outragious, that it could not well be vttered with other words, or more mildly. For he is not ashamed to saye in open assemblie, Clemēs. 5. in Concil. Viennensi. Leo papa. that all iurisdiction of all kinges dothe depend vpon him selfe. And to feede his ambition and greedines of rule, hath he pulled in peeces the Empire of Rome, and vexed and rent whole Christendome asunder: falsely and traiterouslye also did he release the Romains, the Italians, and him selfe to, of the othe whereby they and hee were straightly bound to bee true to the Emperour of Grecia, and stirred vp the Emperours subiectes to forsake him, and calling Ca­rolus Martelius out of Fraunce into Italie, made him Emperour: such a thing as neuer was seene before. Zacharias papa. He put Chilpericus the Frenche king, being no euel prince, beside his realme, only be­cause he fansied him not, and wrongfullie placed Pipin in his roume. Againe, after he had cast out king Philip, if he could haue brought it so to passe, he had determined and appointed the kingdom of Fra­unce to Albertus king of Romaines. He vtterly destroied the state of the most florishing city and common weale of Florence his own natiue countrie, and brought it out of a free and peasable state, Clemens papa. 7. to be gouerned at the pleesure of one man, he brought to passe by his procurement that whole Sauoye on the one side was miserably Idē Clemēs [Page] spoyled by Themperour Charles the [...] [...]d on the other syde by the Frenche kinge, so as the vnfortu [...] [...] [...]ke had scant one Citie le [...]t him to hyde his head in.

THE SIXTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion.It is a great eye sore to the ministers of Antichrist to see the vicare of Christ aboue lordes and kinges of this world, to see princes and Emperours promise and swea­re obedience vnto him.It is no absurditie the shepe­herd to be in aucto­r [...]tie ouer the who­le flocke. But they that are the faithfull sub­iectes of the church of God, thinke it no absurditie, that the shepherd be set not only aboue the Lambes and Ewes of the church, but also aboue the Wethers and Rammes them selues. It is a very great folie for them to finde fault with the superioritie of the bishop of Rome, who can neuer proue,Dist. x [...]vj. C. duo sunt Mat. 16. that he is not the vicare of Christ. If he were not his vicare, yet being a Bishop he is aboue any tēporall prince concerning his priestlye office. But sith Christ said to Pe­ter, vpon this rocke I will buyld my church, and hell gates shall not preuaile against it: Barke vntill your bellies breake, ye that be the hellhowndes of Luthers and Zuinglius littour or rather of Sathans your and their chiefe maister, shall not preuaile against the apostolike see of Peter. It hath with­standed all deuils and heretikes a thousand fyue hundred ye­res, and thinke ye, that your selues be stronger then Arius? It greueth you, that the Pope is higher then the Emperour, not for any loue ye beare to the Emperour,Christ impug­ned in the Pope his vicare. nor for hatred that ye haue to the Popes person, whom ye knowe not: but your quarell is against Christ, whose person the Pope beareth. Or tell vs I praye you, doth he call him selfe any princes or Emperours vicegerent, and not rather the vicare of Christ alone? Whom impugne ye then but Christ in his vicare?Luc. 10. Haue ye not readen, qui vos spernit, me spernit: [Page 179] he that despiseth you [...] [...]h me? Ye thought the Pope had no better text for his prunacie and supreme auctoritie, then two lightes which God made in heauen.Of the two ligh­tes. But if malice had not blinded you, in the very same chapter of Innocen­tius the third, (from whence like a spider ye sucked that ye thought was worst) ye might haue sene an other reason going before, where he said, Pontifex in spiritualibus antecellit, quae tanto sunt temporalibus digniora, quanto anima praefertur corpori. The bishop (said Innocentius) in spirituall matters passeth (the Emperour). which spirituall thinges are so much aboue the tēporall, by how much the soule is preferred be­fore the bodie. How like ye that reason? Knewe ye not that the great diuine Gregorie Naziāzene and other also vsed the same comparison?Oratione ad subd [...]os timore per­culsos & Imperatorē irascentem. Lib. 3. de digni [...]. Sa­cerd. Ierem. 1. Remember ye not that Chrysostom and Ambrose vse other much like? Within a litle after Inno­centius bringeth forth an other proufe. Where it was said to Ieremie the Prophete, who came of the priestes race, and was a priest him selfe, beholde I haue set thee our nations and kingdomes, to the intent thou mayst pull vp and scatter, and buyld, and plant. By which wordes it appereth by Gods good pleasure great power to be geuē to a priest in some case tou­ching the dispositiō of kingdomes. These proufes our defen­ders could not finde, and yet they are to be sene in the same place and chapter before that Innocentius commeth to the similitude of the two lightes. When will ye forsake the scoole of lying, and leaue to saye, that Innocentius or any other for him proued the superioritie of the Pope, specially or chiefly because God hath made two lightes? Is not your word maximè, chiefly? Ye haue not gained so much these fewe yeres past by deceiuing the simple, who haue perused and read your booke: as of right ye shall lose now, when your falshed is detected.

Then after that Innocentius had by naturall reason and holy scripture proued the highest bishops superioritie aboue princes, he commeth in the hird place not now to proue, but to make his former saying already proued more plaine,The allu­sion of the two lightes conside­red. by al­luding to that is written in the beginning of Genesis. Whe­re Moyses declareth how God made two lightes in the fir­mament of the heauen, a greater and a lesser. Now Inno­centius farre better lerned then all our newe maisters of this late deuysed diuinitie, was not ignorant that heauen signi­fied in the scriptures the catholike church of Christ, and that those who rule others in this church, be as it were lightes di­recting the blinde and sely wayegoers into their right waye either of going to heauen, either of liuing vertuously in this world. But as heauen passeth earth more then seuenty and seuen folde, so doth he that guideth to heauen, (which is the spirituall Gouernour) excede passingly the guide that ruleth in the worldly busines.

But this can not sounde in the eares of our newe prea­chers. They would not haue the guide of heauenly thin­ges aboue the guide of earthly cares. They loue the earth, the flesh, the world to well, to be of that minde, and therefore do aske why the Popes of Rome like Anabaptistes and Li­bertines haue shaken of the yoke, and exempted them selues from all ciuile power. What yoke meane ye? The yoke of infidels and Paynimes? Thereof it is written as some expounde,Psal. 2. proijciamus à nobis iugum ipsorum, Let vs cast of their yoke from vs. Whiles infidels ruled at Rome, the Popes were vnder them. But when Constantine was baptized, he gaue place to S. Syluester then Bishop of Rome,Great ho­nour do­ne by Cō­stantine to Pope Syluester, and to the chur­che of Rome. and to all others successours of S. Peter. O how that irketh your hartes, that so great an Emperour, and the first that openly professed Christianitie, should by the same holy ghost, who [Page 180] called him to the faith of Christ, be made to departe from that citie, which ruled the world, and to yelde his owne Pa­lais partly a church to our sauiour Christ, partly a dwelling house for the bishops of Rome? Aske of Constantine, why he submitted his necke to S. Syluester. We haue cause to thinke, that Constantius the heretike sonne of Constanti­ne, was not very glad of his fathers doing. And yet God suffered him not to retourne and dwell at Rome, but to lea­ue that Citie free to the rulers of the church. And we are su­re that ye be full angry with Constantine, and iudge him not so wise, as ye would haue ben in that case. But as Con­stantine left Rome to Syluester, so his faithfull successours neuer vsurped in matters ecclesiasticall any superioritie ouer the bishops of that see. Only so long as the people had a voice in chosing the Pope: it was reason the Emperour should much rather also haue his voice therein. But as the faith of Christ did more and more encrease, so did the light of Christes vicares true honour ouer the world spred abro­de the brighter beames: and that by shaking of the yoke, which was vniustly put vpon the highest power in earth. For who shall be iudge of the chiefe iudge, as the fathers of the councell at Sinuessa said in the cause of Marcellinus, and yet ye finde fault, that now he is suffered to rule his ow­ne subiectes.

The Pope hath a kingly power ouer his owne subiectes euen in temporall thinges. Why should ye enuie that,The Po­pe hath kingly power ouer his temporall subiectes. who neuer gaue him one foote of his landes? When the Chri­stians came to a place and state of rest, God inspired into the hartes of the fathers and bishops euen of the primitiue church, to take and kepe such landes as were geuen to the churches. Which thing is at large debated by S. Vrbane aboue thirten hundred yeres past.

The Po­pes lega­tes in Princes courtes.The being of the Popes legates and ambassadours in Princes courtes, is a thing nolesse conuenient, then it is mee­te for him that hath cure of many flockes of shepe, to set his seruauntes as whatchmen in euery part, where such sloc­kes do feede.Laufull punish­ments. The proscriptions and other punishmentes that Popes do vse, are not euill, when they are done for lau­full causes, as it is our part alwaies to iudge, who are but loo­kers on, and no maisters in that behalfe. His indulgences and pardons depend vpon the power of binding and loo­sing,Matt. 16. which Christ gaue to Peter and his successours. Ye must demaund of Christ, why he gaue that power, and not be angry with his vicare for vsing the same.

If all the right of all kinges depend of Christ, who is king of kinges,The mi­nisteriall power of the Pope. as long as the Pope truly hath Christes name, (as being a rocke built next vpon Christ the first and the true rocke) as long as he hath Christes office, (as being com­maunded in S. Peter whose successour he is to fede both lambes and shepe):Ioan. 21. so long he shall haue as a minister in earth that right which Christ had in earth, and still hath in heauen. Is not the Viceroy of Naples of that power by right of ministerie vnder king Philip, (so farre as thauctoritie of a Viceroy extendeth) as the king him selfe absolutly is by his owne right? We knowe that ye saye, Christ nedeth no vicare.Christ doth ma­ny thin­ges, that he nedeth not to do, but for mans necessitie. Prouer. 8. But we tell you, he made a vicare to fede his shepe vnder him. And Christ doth many thinges, which he hath not nede to do, touching him selfe, being absolutely nedeles, as is before said, but for mans necessitie. He neded no kin­ges, being nolesse able to rule alone in thinges temporall, then in spirituall. And yet now kinges raigne by him, and be his deputes in worldly affaires, and temporall gouerne­ment of the people.

The Em­pire trās­lated frō the East in to the west in the time and by the aucto­ritie of Pope Leo the third.Ye finde fault with Leo the third for making an Empe­rour [Page 181] in the West. I dare saye it greueth you. For if there had ben none in the West, the Turke might haue ben our Emperour er this, and to his barbarous and wicked tyrannie might haue subdued this part of the worlde, specially Ger­manie, as he hath subdued Grece, Asia, Egypte, Syria, and all the East church. Against which mischefe the vicare of Christ by his maisters mercifull warning with the princes of the West made prouision, and at the length planted the Empire in this order, we see it now in. Which reducing of the Empire from the East to the West, maye doubtles se­me to haue ben done by Gods prouidence.Causes of the trans­lation of the Empire For the Maiestie of it was before almost decayd, and at that time it became vile, partly by continuall aduersitie, partly by here­sie, ciuill dissension, and other manifold impietie. And at lenght a woman alone named Irene ruled not being of the bloud Emperiall.Irene Empresse a­lone. Wherewith the princes of the West being moued and finding that seat as it were left not sitten on, as Paulus Aemylius writeth,Lib. 3. folowing the will of God as they thought, made the worthiest prince that then was in the earth (I meane the great Charles) Emperour.Charlemaigne by agree­ment of Princes made Emperour of the west. And if that good had not then ben wrought, the Lombardes had wasted and spoiled all Italy, whose power the Greke Emperours neither cared for, and through their cowardnes and negligēce suffered so farre to growe, as at lenght, they durst not to en­counter them in fylde, and muchlesse were they able to chase them away. That besides other weighty causes, very necessitie compelled the Latine princes to set vp an Emperour for maintenance of their states and countries.

All this mislyketh your proceding heads because it is profitable for the maintenance of Christian faith, ad­uaunceth the honour of Christes church, and stoppeth the course of the Turkes conquestes ouer the West: vnder [Page] whom libertie (as ye thinke) should be graunted you to pro­fesse what religion ye fansye most. Why thinke ye not the Grekes to be punished rather for rebellion against the see of Rome, then that the Pope did amisse for chastising them? If they had obeied the Pope, it is likely they should not haue failed in their belefe concerning the proceding of the holy Gost. Will ye alwayes holde with the Iewes, with the Grekes, with the heretikes and schimatikes, and with the Turkes, rather then with him, whom God hath ordeined she­peherd ouer you?

King Childeri­ke of Fra­unce de­posed by Zacharias the Pope, and Pipi­ne aduaū­ced to the croune.If the Pope Zacharias deposed Childerike (for so I finde him more commonly named) the king of Fraunce, only vp­pon his owne pleasure or displeasure, as ye saye, and placed Pipine for him, can ye tell that storye, and not see what a strength of auctoritie is in that See, which is able with a word to place and displace the mightiest king in Europe? With a word I saye, For I am sure ye can shewe vs of no armie, that he sent to execute that his will. Is that the power of a man trowe ye, to appoint kingdomes? Can the deuill him selfe at his pleasure set vp and depose kinges? No surely. And much lesse can any member of his do the same.Matth. 12. Remember ye what Christ saide when the Iewes obiected, that he did cast out deuils in the name of the prin­ce of deuils? Beware ye synne not against the holy ghost, who confesse that the Pope hath pulled downe and set vp kinges. Which thing vndoubtedly he could not do profitably and peaceably,The pros­peritie of the line of Pipine & Char­les sur­mounted all other. but by the great power of God. And yet did that line of Pipine and Charles the great, which the Pope did set vp, florish aboue any other stocke, that ye can name sence the inclination of the Romaine Empire. Which in that transposed state of so great a kingdome, ma­keth no obscure argument of heauenly approbation and di­uine [Page 182] prouidence.

Neither did the pope Zacharias depose Childerike,VVhat did Pope Za­charias in the depo­sing of King Childe­rike. VVhat maner a mā Chil­derike was. be­cause he fansied him not as ye slaunder, but only consented to loose his subiectes from bond of othe made to hym, at the generall and most earnest request and sute of all the nobilitie and communaltie of the whole realme of Fraunce, finding him very vnprofitable and vnmeet for the kingdome, as one who being of no witte, and therefore commonly named Stupidus, as much to saye a dolt, was altogether besides like a Sardanapalus geuen wholly to belly chere, and to filthy lo­ue of women. Therefore in your owne wordes ye con­fesse a diuine power in the Pope, as by whom God dire­cteth the willes of faithfull Princes on the earth. The more such examples ye bring, the worse ye make your cau­se. I would hyer you to ease me of the labour of prouing such a notable facte.

Concerning that ye saye of king Philip surnamed lebel,The cau­ses of the strife be­twen Phi­lippus Pulcher, and Pope Bonifa­cius. if we may beleue Paulus Aemylius the best writer of the French chronicles, the cause was such betwen Pope Bonifa­cius and that king, that if he did not onely excommunicate him, but also offered gifte of his kingdome to Albert the Emperour, as Platina your authour herein writeth: he maye seme therein to haue done not all together so euill, as ye pre­tende. For as both Aemylius and Platina do witnesse, the cause of their falling out was, that whereas the Pope being first sued vnto by Cassanus a Christian Prince and a great conquerour in the East to ioyne with him for the recouery of the holy land, sent the bisshop of Apamea to the French king for his necessary aide in that so common a qua­rell of all Christendome: he being offended either that the sute was not first made to him, either for that the said bishop had done his Ambassade with shewe of more auctoritie, [Page] then the king thought it became him, or vppon some other priuate grudge, did not only vtterly refuse to send any helpe toward the voyage, but also cōtemptuously, beside common order, and cruelly, committed the Popes legate to prison, and there kept him, vntill such time, as through the Popes interdict, the king was compelled to set him at libertie. Now of geuing awaye his kingdom, this chiefe French histo­riographer maketh no mention. And if the Pope so did, why may he not seme to haue done it rather to feare him, and to reclaime his mynde from disobedience? Verely Platina writing it declareth, how before the Pope proceded to that extremitie, the French king did what in him laye, to withdraw the people of Fraunce from the obedience of the church and See Apostolike. All these thinges with euen iudgement weighed, that Pope semeth not so much worthy of the blame which by your maligne report ye charge him with, specially the occasion being first geuen of the kinges vnlaufull demeanour. But what soeuer may be iudged hereof, yea though the Pope therein be without all excuse, what is that to you? How serueth it you to any colour of excuse of your schisme, and cutting your selues from the rest of Christendome Christes mysticall bodye?

What ye saye of florence and Sauoye, we nede not care, sith ye proue nothing els, but that all Christen princes and common weales one way or other haue in all ages obeyed the see of Rome.Sauoye was not spoiled by the Pope, nor by Charles the v. as the defen­ders slaū­der them. That Sauoye was so much spoiled, ye are to blame to burthen either the Pope, or that worthy late Emperour Charles the fifth with it. Whereas ye professe lying and barking against Christes vicare, be he faulty or be he faultlesse, yet ye shuld haue spared a prince of so great worthynes, and of so famous memorie. The truth is, Sa­uoye substeined most harme by the french king, and by your [Page 183] owne good brethren the sacramentarie Suitzers of Berna, leuied and sent thereto in dede by king Frauncys of that na­me the first. Who tooke his aduauntage therein and vsed his best oportunitie, when the Emperour might not defend his frend the duke, as being occupied in other warres at Tu­nes in Afrike. Now that the Pope would ioyne with here­tikes, and those of the worst sorte, which your selues are of, against that good and catholike Duke so derely beloued of the Emperour then absent, hardly (I wene) ye shall make it to any wiseman very credible.

And where ye seme to saye that the state of Florence was in more quiet and tranquillitie being free in popular gouer­nement, then it is now vnder the Duke: naturall reason,Florence is now in better sta­te vnder gouer­nement of the du­ke then before. exeamples of both testamentes, monarchies instituted by the prouidence of God as well in the whole world, as in the par­tes thereof, and the common experience of all soueraigne states, and of the Florentines them selues, do controll that rash sentence of yours. Verely this well sheweth how vntrue an harte ye haue against our owne most laufull prin­ce at home, and that ye speake ye care not what, so that ye vtter your malice against the Pope. Doubtles in procuring the change of the Florentine common weale, from popular state to the monarchie which now they lyue in,Clement the seuēth deserued. immortal thanke of Flo­rence his countrie for chaū­ging their state. Clemēt the seuenth deserued immortall thanke an renome of that his countrie. For so he ended the continuall mutations of that common welth, the endels tumultes and dissensions betwen families, and the cruell murthers and slaughters among them daily committed, and brought the Citie to a good stabili­tie, to concorde and tranquillitie, and the citizens to a godly amitie and frendship with them selues.

We are cloyed with examples in this behalfe, Apologie and it shuld be very tedious to recken vp all the notorious deedes of the bishops of Ro­me. [Page] Of which side were they, I besech you, which poysoned Hen­ry the Emperour, euen in the receauinge of the sacrament? Whiche poysoned Victor the Pope, euen in the receauing of the Chalice? Which poysoned our king Ihon kinge of England in a drinkinge cuppe? Who soeuer at least they were, and of what sect soeuer, I am sure they were neither Lutherans, nor Zwinglians.

THE SEVENTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion.Ye demaund of which side they were, that poisoned Henry the Emperour, and Victor the Pope, and Ihon the king of England. Ye saye, of what sect soeuer they were, Lutherans and Zwinglians they were not. Ye answer well and truly. And wote ye why? Forsooth your church was not yet framed, your gospell was not yet deuysed. Wit­tenberg, Zurich, Basile, Francford, Strasburg, yea Gene­ua it selfe, and all Christendome then were papistes. The findes of hell were not yet let loose, that begate Lutherans, Zwinglians, and Caluinistes. And hereof we vnderstand the yowth of your church, which hauing diuided it selfe from the olde and catholike church, is no other but the malignant church and synagog of Satan.

To answer your demaundes. Who soeuer they were that poisoned these great personages, (if they were poisoned at all) good men were they not, neither the doers, nor the counsailours.It is not agreed vpon by historio­graphers how Hē­ry of Luxen­burg dyed. Henry of Luxenburg it was, who was poi­soned by report. Whom your Latine booke printed among the huguenots calleth Henry the seuenth, M. Doctor Had­don in his answer to Osorius, accompteth him the fourth, in both your english translations (that I haue sene) he is cal­led only Henry. As he laid sige to the Citie of Florence, and had now brought the Citizens to despaire of their saf­tie: whē manly courage might not serue, they betooke them to cowardly malice. First they poysoned (as it is said) the minde of a frier dominican with gold, that afterward he [Page 184] shuld aduentere to poison the Emperours body with venime. Paulus Aemylius saith that he died of a sickenes,Lib. 8. which he fell into at Bonconuento, as he iourned from Pisa thither. Onu­phrius writing of his death,In scholijs in Plati­nam. saith that he died at Bonconuen­to a towne in the territorie of Siena, and maketh no men­tion of his poisoning. Cornelius Cornepolita writing this story, semeth to geue litle credite vnto it. For he addeth vt aiunt, as they saye, In Chrono­graphia. as though it were a matter auou­ched by no certainetie, but by hearesaye. Nauclerus reporteth, that the order of those religious men is said to haue a testimoniall in writing, witnessing the foresaid frier to haue ben innocent, and that the whole was but a fained tale.

Victor the third Pope is mencioned by Martinus Polo­nus to haue ben poisoned by the malicious procurement of the Emperour Henry the third,The death of Victor the Pope not a­greed vpon. because he stood in defence of Gregory the seuenth, whom the Emperour so much hated and persecuted. Vincentius holdeth contrary opinion, that he dyed of a dysentery, as Platina reciteth.

Touching king Iohn of England,Diuerse opinions of king Iohns death. they that write that he was poisoned in a drinking cuppe by monkes, them selues make no better then a fable of it: and who so euer write it re­ferre them selues to hearesaie, and to the popular fame. The author of your actes and monumentes reporteth, that many opinions are among the chronicle writers of his death. For some write that he died for sorowe and heauines of hart, as Polydorus: some of surfeting in the night, as Radul­phus Niger: some of a bloudy flixe, as Roger Houeden: some of a burning ague, some of a colde sweat, some of eating ap­ples, some of eating peares, some of plummes, some of pea­ches, some by drinking of new sydar. Tell vs for truth how he dyed, before ye burthen the church with that fable. These [Page] euill actes for lacke of worse matter, ye are glad to reherse a­gainst the estimation that Christen men haue in their hartes toward the church of Christ and ecclesiasticall persons, which no man can saye for certaintie, whether any such were euer done or no. And be it they were done, yet is it materia facti, non iuris, and the catholike faith, which ye la­bour by all meanes to impugne, therby is no white dispro­ued. As ye procede in your malicious railing against the Pope, ye spitte out your poison, demaunding certaine que­stions, short in wordes, but full stuffed with false and canke­red slaunders.

Apologie VVhat is he (saye ye) at this daye, which alloweth the mightiest kinges and monarches of the world to kisse his blessed feete?

Confuta­tion.It is he (saye we) that humbly for his owne person refu­seth such honour, that calleth and thinketh him selfe, Seruum Seruorum Dei, the seruant of the seruantes of God. But when he seeth the great powers and Princes of the world humble them selues to Christ, Lord of all Lordes and king of all kinges, in the person of him whose vicare on earth he is and chiefe depute in those thinges that be to God­ward:The humble seruice of princes in kissing the Popes feete for good cau­se suffered not demaunded. Platina in vita Adri­ani. Great prīces kis­sing of the Popes fee­te is often and aun­cient example. To what purpose serueth the Porphyry stoole of casement in Latera­ne at the Popes cre­ation. See befo­re. fo. 167. Apologie not vnmindefull what he is of him selfe, for the ro­mes sake that he beareth, and for his honour whose Vice­gerent he is, the rather also for example of humilitie and obedience so to be taken and lerned of others of inferiour degree: he suffereth that honour to be done, which is more then a mere man can require. Neither is this the pride of Popes at these dayes only, as ye obiect, but the example of such humilitie in princes we can proue to be auncient.

The great king Charlemaigne who afterward was create Emperour could not be withholdē by the Pope Adrian the first, but at the first meeting he would kisse his feete. Many other Emperours and kinges haue of olde time done like­wise. [Page 185] And lest the soueraintie of such honour exhibited vnto him should in his owne conceit lift him higher then for the degree of humaine condition, to that purpose serueth the stoole of naturall easement at his creation, whereof your surmise is very vile, to temper the highnes of that vocation with the base consideration of humaine infirmities and ne­cessities.

What is he (saie you) that commaundeth the Emperour to go by him at his horse bridle, and the French king to holde his stir­rop?

What he is we knowe not,Confu­tation. Examples of the Emperours and Frēch kings hu­militie to­wards the Pope. The nota­ble humi­lie of Cō­stantine the greate in going by the Po­pe at his horse bridle. nor you neither Sir Defen­der. This we knowe, that in these wordes most impu­dently you belye the Pope. For neuer was there Pope that commaunded either French king or Emperour to do the seruice you speake of. Part of that I haue readen perteining hereunto, I will here recite.

The worthiest and greatest prince that euer was in earth, Constantine the great to witnesse openly the reuerence which he bare in his hart to Christ our Sauiour, and to S. Peter, whose successour the Pope is, as li [...]ewise Christes vicar in earth, disdained not to honour S. Syluester Pope in his time, with doing the office of a foote man to him, and with leading his horse by the brydle. Wherein he semeth, as first of all Emperours he professed the faith of Christ openly, so first of all Princes to haue geuen to the posteritie an ex­ample of humilitie. That no man doubt of it, this much I finde recorded by an olde father of the Greke church, Mat­thaeus Hieromonachus, as vttered by Constantine him self. [...]. Which in english is this much. Submitting our selfe to the office of a foote man, and holding his horse by the bridle, we leade him forth out of his sacred palais, [Page] in the woorship and reuerence of S. Peter.

That sithens both Emperours and French kinges of humi­litie and deuotion, and to witnesse their humble obedience to Christ in his vicare, haue done the like seruice, yea though the Pope shewed him selfe neuer so vnwilling therto: we fin­de it reported in sundry good recordes. But that he euer commaunded any such seruice to be done vnto him, ye can neuer shewe it by any indifferent and credible witnes. Paulus Aemylius an Italian of Verona in the second booke of his Chronicles, which both diligently and eloquently he wrote of Fraunce,Kinge Pipines humilitie. describeth how honorably Pipine that worthy king of Fraunce receiued Steuen the pope, that succeded Zacharias, when he came into his realme. He both kissed his feete, and went by him at his horse bridell. Looke in the pla­ce before alleaged, there ye shall finde these wordes. Pipinus ad tertium à Cariasiaco oppido lapidem obuiam Pontifici progres­sus, Lib. 2. pedes (vt ferunt) exosculatus, coerceri non potuit, quin in equo sedentem ipse pedibus ad frenum prosecutus in Regiam deduceret. As much to saye in english. Pipine went forth to meete the Pope three myles from the towne of Cariasiacum. There kissed his feete (as they saye) and could not be withholden, but that he would nedes go a foote by him at his horse bridell as he was a horse backe, and so lead him vnto the court,

The like honour of holding the stirrop would Charles the fifth the late great Emperour haue done at Bononia to Pope Clement the seuenth,The hu­militie of Charles the fifth Emperour towardes the Pope. S [...]i temp. Lib. 27. had not the Pope with much adoo put him from it. Whereof thus writeth Paulus Io­uius. Conscendenti equum Pontifici, Caesar ad laeuam pedes a­stitit, vti benigne auratam staffam sacrato pedi protinus inductu­rus. Sed pium Caesaris obsequium, Pontificis humanitas, reli­giosáque modestia superauit. As the Pope was mounting on his horse, the Emperour stood on the left syde by him a foote, as being [Page 186] forthwith ready gentilly to put the gilted stirrop on his sacred foo­te. But the Popes humanitie, and religious modestie preuailed, that the Emperour should not do that deuout seruice. Many other the like examples of the same humble seruice done by great Monarkes to the Popes, could I here reherse, but these two may now suffice.

Who hurled vnder his table Frauncys Dandalus the Duke of Ve­nis king of Creta and Cypres, Apologie. Sabellicus. fast bounde with chaines to feede of bones among his dogges?

Were not this Defender passed all shame,Confuta­tion. he would not make so many and so shameles lyes. Malice hath so farre blinded him, that he semeth not to see, what becommeth a man. Though he feare not to be accompted a lyer, yet he should be loth to be accompted an vnhonest man, yea and specially a foole. Let truth and honestie go, for in dede there is title in these felowes: what foolishnes is it a man to bring all his doctrine and all his sayinges, touching thinges that he would so faine to be beleued, into so great and certaine dis­credite by such open and manifest lyes? The truth hereof is this,Sabellicus Decadis. 2. li. 1. 1220. Historiae rerum vene­tarū. lib. 4. as I finde it witnessed in Sabellicus and in the chiefest Chronicles the Venetians haue, written by a noble man of Venis named Petrus Iustinianus. The Citie of Venis being interdicted of the Pope, Frauncys Dundalus was sent by the duke and Lordes of the councell there, to sue for absolution. At that time was he neither king of Creta, nor of Cy­pres, nor duke of Venis, as it pleaseth this lying De­fender to write of him, and that in the defence of their english church written to all the world, Ioannes Superan­tius then was Duke,A strata­geme of Frauncys Dandalus Ambassa­dour to the Pope from the signorie of Venis. and this Frauncys Dandalus was but a priuate man for that time, as others there were. This Ambassadour Frauncys Dandalus finding the Pope at his first comming not well inclined to graunt his petition [Page] as he wisshed, the qualitie of the offence deseruing the same: to moue him to clemencie and pitie, aduised with him selfe to play this pagent. He caused an yron chaine to be tied about his necke. Therewith he came to the Pope as he sate at dyner. Put him selfe to crepe on all foure, and like a dog­ge laid him downe vnder the table, so long vntill the Popes displeasure being assuaged, he obteined pardon for his countrie. Whereof they saie he had afterward the surname of dogge geuen him, as Iustinianus writeth. Who desireth to see the whole storie, he shall finde it well written by the said Petrus Iustinianus, Fyue no­table lyes made in one short sentence. historiae rerum venetarum libro quarto. Now let vs see Syr Defender, how many lyes you make in one sentence. 1. Lye.That Frauncys Dandulus was by the Pope hur­led vnder his table, this is one lye. 2. Lye.That he was then Duke of Venis, king of Creta and Cipres, there be two lies, beside the notable lye, you seme to be very ignorant of the state of Venis, in that you make the duke an Ambassadour, who being once created duke, goeth not out of the Citie. Nei­ther is euer any of their state king of Candy and Cipres. For their state admitteth none to be a king among them, how be it at the time of Frauncys Dandulus Candy rebelled, and Cipres was not yet come to be vnder the gouernement of the Venetians, as you might haue lerned in the elo­quent historie that Petrus Bembus wrote of Venis his coun­trie. 3. Lye.That he was fast bounde with chaines, there be three lyes. For he was not fast bounde, only he had cast a chaine about his owne necke, which he might haue taken of at his pleasure. 4. Lye.That he was so throwen vnder the table to gnawe bones among the Popes dogges, there be foure lyes. 5. Lye.And that the Pope had dogges feeding of bones vnder his table, I doubt not but it is an other lye. Whether these fyue lyes be not ynough for one litle sentence of three lines, [Page 187] I report me to whosoeuer of your owne fellowes lyeth for the best game. I thinke verely this Defender if he be not very shameles, wisseth he had a thicker bearde to hide his slike chekes from blusshing. Such false causes must be defended by lying proctours. If they belyed storries only, and taught not also false doctrine in the chiefe pointes of our faith, their lying were lesse hurtfull.

Who set the Emperiall crowne vpon the Emperour Henry the sixth hys head, not with his hande, but with his foote, Apologie and with the same foote againe cast the same crowne of, Caelestinus Papa. saying with all hee had power to make Emperours, and to vnmake them againe at his pleasure?

We denye that Celestinus,Confuta­tation. A very vayne fa­ble ima­gined against Celesti­nus the Pope. whom you note in your bo­kes margent, or any other Pope did this. It is a vaine fable deuised rather of malice, then witte. Ye should haue done well to shewe vs, with which foote the Pope did set on the crowne vpon Henries head, the right or the left, standing, sitting, lening, or lying, barefooted, and vsing the helpe of his great toe, or shodde, whether he had some iymme iamme ma­de for him to take it vp, holde it, and put it on handsomly, or conueyd it on by a vice, or how it was done. Mary the casting of it from his head is sone conceiued. For the Emperour might come with his crowne on his head, and kneele or stoupe downe so low before the Pope, as he stan­ding vpon one foote, might strike it of with the tother, and so playe at foote balle with the Emperiall crowne. Ah maisters, that ye seeke to defend your naughty causes with vayne matters, and bring the church in contempt with such childish tales, which be so foolish as scarsly any olde sot­tish beldame sitting idell by the fyre would tell children. The seeking out of these vaine thinges, as it sheweth your malice, so it bewrayeth your weaknes, and declareth how litle ye haue to charge the Pope with all.

VVho put in armes Henry the sonne against the emperour his Apologie [Page] father Henry the fourth, and wro [...]t so that the Father was taken prisoner of his owne sonne, Hildebrand Papa and beinge shorne and sha­mefullye handeled, was thruste into a monasterie, where whith hunger and sorow he pined away to death.

Confuta­tion.It was not the Pope that armed Henry the seconde against Henry the fourth, who by thaccompt of some is Henry the third. Stories declare other causes of their fal­ling out, and the more part of the writers impute it to the iudgement of God, for punishment of his great wickednes. After that he was ouercome with all his power by the Saxons, in seuentin dayes he durst not to appere ab­rode. In the meane time his sonne tooke vpon him forth­with the administration of the Empire, went into Italye with an armie, would not surrender the state which he liked well, his father being therewith offended he tooke prisoner without any motion of the Pope, with whom he was also at variance, and committed him to straight custody. The Pope then being who was Gregory the seuenth, only ex­communicated him,Henry the fa­ther takē by Henry the sonne and com­mitted to prison at Leodiū. as he had iust cause so to do. For con­tempt whereof it may be thought he sped neuer the better. By report of all writers he was kept in prison at Leodium by commaundement of his owne sonne, where he ouerthrew him in bataile, and there sone after of anguish of mynde he died. That he was shorne and thrust into a monasterie, and there sterued with hunger and sorowe, it is a very vaine lye. Who listeth to reade, what a man this Emperour Henry the fourth was, how farre his marciall vertues were vnder­neath his great vices, him I referre to Io. baptista Egnatius. Romanorum Principum, lib. 3.

Hilde­brand, Gregorie the seuēth t [...]a [...]s [...]o euill re­po [...]ted of by the gospel­lers, by the truer histories is men­cioned to haue ben a very worthy Pope.Concerning Gregorie the seuenth Pope, who before was called Hildebrandus, whom that Emperour with endles ma­lice persecuted, because he would not ratifie his Simoniacall making of Bishops and geuing of ecclesiasticall benefices, [Page 188] and defended the church against his wicked attemptes: besi­de sundry writers of histories in that time, as Lambertus Schafnaburgensis. Leo Hostiensis, and afterward, Otho Frisingensis, who so much commend him for sundry excel­lent vertues: no man hath so largely and so diligently set forth his worthines, as Onuphrius Panuinius, who hath wri­ten of him fiue bokes,

VVho so ilfauoredlye and monstrouslye put the Emperour Frederikes necke vnder his feet, Apologie and as though that were not suffi­cient, added further this texte out of the Psalmes: Innocenti Papa 3. Thou shalt go v­pon the Adder and cockatrice, and shalt treade the Lyon and Dra­gon vnder thy feete? Suche an example of scorninge and contem­ninge a Princes maiestie, as neuer before this was heard tell of in any remembraunce, except I weene, either of Tamerlanes the kinge of Scithia a wilde and barbarous creature, or els of Sapor king of the Persians. All these notwithstandinge were Popes, all Peters suc­cessours, all most holy fathers, whose seuerall wordes wee must take to be as good as seuerall Gospels.

THE EIGHT CHAPTER.

Ye aske who put the Emperour Frederikes necke vnder his feete, &c. Verely, who it was, I knowe not,Confu­tation. That a Pope trod on the necke of an Emperour named Frederi­ke, it is a very false fable. neither your selues I beleue. In the margent of our ladies transla­tion, and in your latine booke first printed in London, I fin­de the name of Innocentius. 3. in that of your mans transla­tion, Innocentius. 8. is noted. Your latine bookes printed among the Huguenots of Fraunce haue the name of Alex­ander. 3. so it appereth ye knowe not who it was. By like­lyhod ye founde this lye, where many other be of this sort, in fryer Bale your worthy doctor, or in frier Barns de vitis Pon­tificum, where be mo lyes then leaues, or in Illyricus, or in Petrus Paulus Vergerius. In some such gospelling bodger or other ye found it doubtles. I thinke ye shall neuer be able to auouch it by any graue writer. If ye alleage either heretike, or schismatike of that time, or any one that held [Page] with the Emperour against the see of Rome, remember ye the whole matter is discredited by the parcialitie of such a re­porter. But what if ye bring good authoritie for it? So farre as any man doth euill, be he Pope, be he bishop, empe­rour or king, or what so euer he be, we defende him not. Po­pes them selues be men, and do not at all times behaue them selues like angels. But what is that to your purpose? Our matter is questio iuris non facti, once more I must tell it you. And if that were a fault in the Pope, we acknoweledge it to be as Tertullian saith,Praescrip­tion. contra haeretic [...]s. Faultes founde in life do not pre­iudicate auctori­tie. vitium conuersationis, non predicationis. The fault of conuersation, not of doctrine preached. Faultes foun­de in lyfe do not preiudicat the auctoritie either of office or of doctrine. But concerning this fact, I thinke verely, there was n [...]uer no such thing done, as you tell it. Platina sheweth that Frederike kissed the Pope Alexander the third his foote at Venis in the entrie of S. Markes church, and saith neuer a woord of that for which ye make so much adoo. If there were any such thing done, besides that it hurteth not our cause, it remaineth that ye proue it, and that by such witnes­ses, as the suspicion of parcialitie may not blemish theire cre­dite.

All these (though ye scoffe neuer so much) were Popes, all were Peters successours, and notwithstanding any thing that ye can saye against them to the contrary without making a lye, all were holy fathers. But theire seuerall wordes we be not bounde to esteme for so good as seuerall gospels. Neuer the lesse their publike decrees we acknowledge and reueren­ce,An obser­uation for triall of truth concer­ning thī­ges repor­ted by the Po­pes. and thinke they ought to be obeyed.

For a reasonable and true answer to be made to sundry euill matters obiected to the Popes, it is to be considered, in what Emperours time ech one lyued, which is burthened with any thing that deserueth reproufe. For sometimes the [Page 189] Emperours fauoured not the Popes, for that they withstood their vnlaufull requestes, and reuoked them (so farre as they could) from their vngodly attemptes.VVicked Empe­rours en­nemies to the Po­pes. The flat­terers of wicked Empe­rours cō­monly haue re­ported vntruthes of good Popes to serue the hu­mour of the times they ly­ued in. Of which the chiefe were Henry the third, the fourth, the fifth, the sixth, Frederike the first, the seconde, and Ludouicus of Bauaria. As these were great Princes, and such as oftentimes vsed lust for rea­son, and will for lawe: so had they flatterers, who for worldly preferment serued their euill desires, praised their wicked ac­tes, and spake euill of good Popes, that sought their amende­ment. Among them some haue not only spoken euill wordes of the Popes of their time, which passed away, as all wordes do: but also committed to writing their euill repor­tes of them, which remaine. Which they did rather to serue the time, and procure them selues fauour in those courtes, then that them selues thought the thinges to be true, which they burthened thē with al. Againe when so euer lewde prie­stes in any countrie were restrained of their vngodly lustes, and put from their Concubines, whom they called their wi­ues, as our holye gospellers do, and when so euer any schisme or heresie rose in the church: then were the Popes, who would not wincke at the iniquitie of their times, sure to be euill treated, to be railed at, to be openly reprehended and slaundered in bookes. Now as for loue commonly men praise some aboue the truth, so for hatred and euill will they blame many beyond desert. As the good nature beleueth the one rather then the other, so the wise man litle regardeth reproufes, when by examination of the occasions and cir­cumstances, he findeth the groundes whereof they spring. Such examination well and truly made, I doubt not but to good and wisemen most of the euill matters, with which of these Defenders or any other the professours of the newe gospell the successours of Peter are burthened, shall appere [Page] vaine, false, and slaunderous.

Apologie Yf we be compted traytours whiche do honour oure Princes, whiche giue them all obedience as muche as is due to thē by Godds word, and which doo praye for them, what kinde of men then bee these, whiche haue not onely done all the thinges before saide, but also alowe the same for speciallye well don? Do they then either this way instruct the people as we do, to reuerence their magistrate: or can they with honesty appeache vs as seditious personnes, brea­kers of the common quiete, and despisers of princes maiestie?

Truly we neither put of the yoke of obedience from vs, neither do we disorder realmes, neither do we set vp or pull downe kinges, nor translate gouernementes, nor geue our kinges poison to drinke, nor yet holde to them our feete to be kissed, nor opprobriously trium­phinge ouer them, leape into their neckes with our feete.

Confuta­tion.What nede ye to speake of traison? Mistrust ye your selues? Is your conscience gilty? It had ben better, ye had holden your peace. Now ye geue men occasion in their hartes to charge you with that, whereof ye seme to fynde your selues giltye. As rattes be commonly taken by occa­sion of their owne noyse, so workers of euill many times by vntimely excuse of their gylt, and craking of their innocen­cie, bewraye them selues. Christ had not so sone said at his last supper, He that dippeth his hande with me in the dish, the same shall betraye me, Matth. 26. wo be to that man &c. but Iudas, who knewe him selfe gilty, which is specially noted of theuange­list, by and by tooke vpon him to saye, as though he had ben giltles, is it I maister? Like vnto Iudas, ye do, what in you lieth, to betraye and crucifie Christ againe in his church, and his true members. As for princes that stand in your waye, how obediently ye vse your selues towardes them, the world seeth. Yet now to put from you the odious name of trai­tours, when no man chargeth you therewith, ye step forth malepertly, and saye, that ye honour your princes, that ye praye for them, and that ye geue them all obedience, as much as is due to them by Gods word, that is to saye, so farre a sit [Page 190] standeth with the furtherance of your gospell, your fleshly lustes, and plesant libertie. And here your secretary taketh an occasion to range the filde as it were, and to shewe some copy of his eloquence, and largely to set forth the goodnes of your doctrine, and your great obedience to the magistra­tes. Whereunto when he hath told all his gaye tale, a plaine man might right aptly in fewe geue this answere: Sir I could like well all that you saye, if it were true.

This rather is our profession, this is our doctrine, Apologie that euerye soule of what callinge soeuer he be, be he monke, bee he preacher, bee he prophet, bee he Apostle, ought to be subiect to kinges and magistrates: yea and that the Bishop of Rome him selfe, Chrysost. in 13. cap. ad Romanos. onlesse he will seeme greater then the Euangelistes, then the Prophetes, or the Apostles, ought bothe to acknowledge and to call the Emperour his Lord and maister: which the olde bishops of Rome, who lyued in ti­mes of more grace, euer did. Our common teaching also is, Gregorius papa saepe in epist. that we ought so to obey princes as men sent of God, and that who so with­standeth them, withstandeth Gods ordinance, This is oure scolinge, and this is well to be sene bothe in oure bookes and in our preachin­ges, and also in the maners and modest behauiour of oure peo­ple.

The doctrine of obedience apperteineth specially to sub­iectes.Confuta­tion. The Bishop of Rome sitting by due sucession in the chaier of Peter,In what cases haue the Popes demeaned thē selues as subie­ctes. in spirituall causes can haue no supe­riour. In temporall matters it maye be, that in one age he hath acknowledged the Emperour, as the Lord of that pro­uince where he lyued, as before Constantine all the Popes did lyue in subiection: and in an other age he may be lorde thereof him selfe.In epistolis. Likewise S. Gregory might call Mau­ritius his lord, either of courtesie, or of custome: and yet our holy father Pius the fourth shall not be bound to do the like, in consideration that the custome hath long sence ben discontinewed.In matters of spiritual iurisdi­ctiō, the b. of Rome oweth o­b [...]dience to no prince. Lib. 4. epi­stol. 34. Neither did S. Gregorie by that title of honour preiudicate vnto him selfe in any spirituall iurisdi­ction. For that name notwithstanding he gouerned the [Page] whole church, and complained that Maximus was made bi­shop of Salonae a citie in Illyrico, without his auctoritie, not regarding that Mauritius the Emperour was thought to ha­ue willed it so to be done. And therefore he writeth to Con­stantia the Empresse, that for as much as neither he nor his depute was made priuie to it, that the thing had ben done, which neuer was done before by any of the Princes that we­re the Emperours prodecessours.

Seing then our question is of the superioritie in spiri­tuall matters, what skilleth it whether for any other respect the Pope do salute the Emperour by the name of Lord, or els by the name of sonne? Is not the name of father and sonne more amiable betwene the shepeherd and his shepe, and more conuenient for our profession, then the high ti­tle of Lord and maister? Concerning the vertue of obedien­ce, how so euer ye boast of your goodly teaching, and of your holy scholing, of your bookes and of your preachinges: yet ye were not best to speake much of the maners and mo­dest behauiour, either of your selues or of your gospelling disciples, as your huguenots and others. Whose obedience I wene ye will confesse, that ye haue no great cause to com­mend.Esai. 5. Yet your faces are such, as for the preferment of your gospell ye will litle sticke to saye, that good is euill and euill is good. Sweete is bitter, and better is sweete. Light is darkenes, and darkenes is light.

a But where they saye, we haue gon awaye from the vnitie of the catholique Church, Apologie this is not onely a matter of malice, but be­sides, thoughe it bee moste vntrue yet hath it some shew and appa­rance of trouth. For the common people and ignoraunt multitu­de giue not credit alone to thinges true and of certaintie, but euen to such thinges also, yf any chaunce, which may seeme to haue but a resemblaūce of trouth. Therefore we see that subtle and craftie per­sones, This tou­cheth your selues. when they had no truth on their side, haue euer cōtended and hotely argued with things likely to be true, to the intent they which [Page 191] were not able to espie the very grounde of the matter, might be ca­ried away at least with some pretense and probabilitie thereof. b In times past where the firste Christians, oure forefathers, in makinge their prayers to God, didd tourne themselues towardes the Easte, there were that sayde, they worshipped the sunne, and reckened it as God. c Againe, where oure forefathers sayde that as touchinge im­mortall and euerlasting life, Tertull. in Apol. c. 16. they liued by no other meanes but by the flesh and bloud of that lambe who was without spotte, that is to saye, of oure Sauiour Iesus Christe, the enuious creatures and foes of Christes Crosse, whose only care was to bringe Christian religion into slaunder by all manner of wayes, made people beleeue, that they were wicked personnes, that they sacrificed mens fleshe, and dronke mennes bloud. Also d where oure forefathers saide, that be­fore God there is neither man nor woman, Tertull. in Apologet. ca. 7. 8. 9. nor for atteininge to the true richteousnes there is no distinction at all of personnes, and that they didde call one an other indifferentlye by the name of Sisters and Brothers, there wanted not menne whiche forged false tales vpon the same, sayenge that the Christians made noe difference among them selues, eyther of age or of kinde, but like brute beastes without regarde had to do one with an other. Tertull. in Apologet. 2.3.9. And where for to pray and heare the Gospell, they mette often together in secret and byeplaces, because Rebelles somtime were wonte to do the like. Rumors were euery where spredd abroade howe they made priuie confederacies, and counceled together either to kill the magistrates, or to subuert the common wealth. And where in celebratinge the holye mysteries, after Christs institution, they tooke breade and wyne, they were thought of many not to worshippe Christe, Augusti­nus. but Bacchus and Ceres, forsomuche as those vaine Goddes were woor­shipped of the Heathē in like sort, after a prophane superstition, with bread and wyne. These thinges were beleued of manye, not bi­cause they were true in deed (for what coulde be more vntrue?) but bicause they were lyke to bee true, and through a certain sha­dow of truth myghte the more easilye deceiue the simple. e On this fashion likewise doo these menne slaunder vs as Heretiques, and saye that we haue lefte the Church and felowshippe of Christe: not bicause they thinke it is true, for they dooe not muche force of that, but bicause to ignoraunte folke it myght perhappes somwaye ap­peere true.

THE NINTH CHAPTER.

aThat ye are gone from the vnitie of the catholike church,Con­futation. it is euident, and nedeth no proufe. Yea your selues within a [Page] fewe sentences seme not obscurely to confesse no lesse, and therefore ye ease vs of labour to proue it. The imputing of it to you is not a matter of malice, as ye saye, neither hath it only a shewe or apperance of trouth, but a very trouth it selfe.

bThough the Painymes, before our faith was well kno­wen,Thexā­ples of painy­mes to no pur­pose al­leaged. beleued that Christian people worshipped the Sunne, because they prayed to the Fast:c that they sacrificed mens flesh and dronke their bloud,d and did many other strange and heinous thinges, in reckening of which ye spend muche time: what serueth that to your purpose? Infidels vnderstode not the mysteries of our faith, and therefore reported of them farre otherwise, then truth was. But what then? What conclude ye of all this?

eOn this fashion (saye ye) likewise do these men slaunder vs as heretikes, and saie that we haue left the church and felowship of Christ. I looked for a better matter and a greater reason. Knowe ye not that your similitudes and comparisons make weake argumentes?Similitu­des make weake reasons. We like them in your Rhetorike, but now we require of you good logike. And now let vs see by what logike ye will make good, that ye go about to pro­ue: that is to saie, that ye be not gone from the vnitie of the catholike church, that the church we professe our selues to be of, is not the church of Christ, that the church hath ig­norance, errour, superstition, idolatrie, mens inuentions contrary to the scriptures, and that therefore ye had iust cause to forsake the church, and to depart from our compa­nie.

Apologie Wee haue in deede putt oure selues aparte, not as heretikes are woonte, from the Churche of Christ, but as all good menne oughte to doo, from the infection of naughtye persons and hypocrites. Ne­uerthelesse in this poynte they triūphe maruelouslye that they bee the Churche, that theyre Churche ys Christes spowse, the piller of [Page 192] truthe, the arke of Noe, and that without it there is no hope of sal­uation. Contrarywise, they saye that wee bee ronnegates, that we haue torne Christes seat: that wee are plucked quyte of from the bo­dy of Christe, and haue forsaken the catholique faithe. And when they leaue nothinge vnspoken that may neuer so falselie and mali­tioslye be saide against vs, yet this one thynge are they neuer hable truely to saye, that we haue swarued eyther from the worde of God, or from the Apostles of Christ, or from the primatiue Chur­che. Surelye wee haue euer iudged the primatiue Churche of Chri­stes tyme, of the Appostles, and of the holie Fathers to be the catho­lique Church: neyther make we doubt to name it Noes arke, Chri­stes spouse, the piller and vpholder of al trueth: nor yet to fixe ther­in the whole meane of oure saluation. It is doubtles an odiouse mater for one to leaue the fellowshipp whereunto he hath ben ac­customed, and specially of those men, who though they be not, yet at leaste seme and be called Christians. And to say truely, we do not dispise the Churche of these men (howe soeuer it be ordered by them now a dayes) partely for the name sake yt selfe, and partely for that the Gospell of Iesu Christ hath once ben therin truely and pu­relye set furth. Neyther had we departed therfrom, but of very ne­cessitie, and much against our wils.

We graunt that in olde time slaunders were made vpon the faithfull.Confuta­tion. But no like slaunder is made by vs vpon you in the matter whereof ye speake. For let vs graunt, that ye haue in dede put your selues a part, and are gone from the contagion of naughty persons and hypocrites:Though we were so euill as the De­fenders report vs to be, yet haue they no iust cause to depart from vs, and cut the church. Mat. 23. This is the very thing we laye to your charge. For though we were such, as for a great nomber ye shall neuer be able to proue, yet by Christes owne sentence ye must do that, which they that sit in the chayre of Moses bid you do, although they be hypocrites, as the scribes and Pharises were, of whom Christ spake. We byd you not to folow the dedes of the bisshops of Rome, albeit ye folow dedes of worse men. For neuer did so vncleane a man sit in Peters chaire, as Martine Luther that filthy frier was, whose departing frō Peter the rocke ye folo­we. But it shal be ynough for you to do, as the successours of Peter bid you to do, and so to folow their sayinges, and not [Page] their doinges. Now if because any of them haue ben an hypocrite or euill man, ye forsake their sayinges: ye haue broken the rule of Christ, and are gone from his church.

The De­fenders vaine replye a­gainst the crime of their scisme.To this ye replie, saying that ye are not gone from the word of God, nor from the Apostles of Christ, nor from the primitiue church. As though the ten tribes of Israel going from the high bishop of Ierusalem, did not thereby de­part from Moses and Aaron and from Gods holy word, and all the holy scriptures. The primitiue church is continewed with our time, by the successours of S. Peter, for whose faith neuer to faile Christ prayd,Luc. 22. Ioan. 21. and whom only he made shepe­herd to feede all his flocke of shepe and lambes. Now seing ye forsake the shepeherd for the time being, ye forsake that pri­mitiue church, frō whence he came. Were he not a wise trai­tour, who taking weapō against our soueraigne Lady quene Elizabeth, would saye he taried in the obediēce of king Henry the seuenth, notwithstanding he fought against this present Quene?3. Reg. 12. Doubt ye not Ieroboam made asmuch in woordes of Moses and Aaron, as ye do of Peter and Paul. And yet was he a scismatike for with drawing his owne and his peo­ples obedience from the see of Ierusalem. Christ now requireth of you not to obeie Peter and Paul, but to obeie him, who sitteth in their chaire. Where ye saye it is an odious matter to forsake vs, and yet haue forsaken vs, where ye con­fesse that ye despise not the church we be of, and yet graunt that ye haue departed from it: how standeth this together? Remember ye what ye saye? Knowe ye what ye do? Who will regard your word, which with one breath saye and vnsaye? If it be odious, why do ye it? If ye despise not the church, why depart ye from it?

a Apo­logie But I put case, an idoll be sett vp in the church of God, and the same desolation which Christ prophesed to come, stoode openly in the holy place? VVhat if some theefe or pirat inuade and possesse [Page 193] Noes arke? These folkes as often as they tell vs of the Churche, meane therby themselues alone, and attribute all these titles to their owne selues, boasting as they did in tymes past whiche cryed, The temple of the Lorde, The temple of the lorde: or as the Phariseis and Scribes dyd, whiche craked they were Abrahams children. Thus with a gay and iolie shewe deceiue they the simple, and seke to choke vs with the very name of the church. Muche like as b yf a theefe, when he hath gotten into an other mans house, and by vio­lence eyther hath thrust out or slayne the owner, should afterwarde assigne the same house to hym selfe, casting furthe of possession the right inheritour: Or yf c Antichrist after he hath once entred into the Temple of God, should afterward saye, This house is myne own, and Christ hath nothinge to do withall. For these menne nowe after they haue left nothyng remaining in the churche of God that hath any liknes of his Church, yet will they seeme the Patro­nes and the valiaunte maynteners of the Churche, very like as Gracchus amongest the Romaynes stoode in defence of the treasu­ry, not withstanding with his prodigalitie and fond expences he had vtterlye wasted the whole stocke of the treasurie. And yet was there neuer any thing so wicked or so far out of reason, but lightelye yt might be couered and defended by the name of the church. For the d waspes also make honyecombes as well as Bees, and wicked men haue companyes lyke to the Churche of God, yet for all that they be not streight wey the people of God whiche ar called the people of God: neither be they all Israelits asmany as ar com of Israel the father. The Arrians notwitstanding they were heretiques, yet bragged they that they alone were Catholiques, calling all the rest nowe Ambrosians, nowe A­thanasians, now Iohannites. And Nestorius, Augusti­nus in epi. 48. ad vincent. as saith Theodore­te, for all he was an Heretique, yet couered he hym selfe [...], that is to weete, with a certaine cloke and colour of the true and right faith. Ebion though he agreed in opinion with the Samaritanes, yet as saith Epiphanius, he woulde be called a Chri­stian. The Mahomytes at this daye, for all that all histories make plaine mention, and themselues also cannot denye, but they toke their first begynning of Agar the bondewoman, yet for the very na­me and stockes sake, chuse they rather to be caled Saracenes, as though they came of Sara the free wooman and Abrahams wyfe. So likewise the false Prophetes of all ages whiche stode vp against the Prophetes of God, whiche resisted Esayas, Ieremye, Christ, and the Apostles, at no tyme craked of any thing so muche, as they dyd of the name of the Church. And for no nother cause did they so fearce­ly [Page] vexe them and call them Ronneawayes and Apostatas, then for that they forsoke their fellowshipp, and kepte not thordinaunces of the Elders: e wherefore yf we would folow the iudgementes of tho­se men only, who then gouerned the Churche, and would respecte nothing els neyther God nor his word, yt muste nedes bee confes­sed, that the Apostles were rightlie and by iust lawe condemned of them to death, bycause they fell from the Byshops and Priestes, that is you must thinke, from the Catholique Churche: and bycause they made many new alterations in Religion contrarie to the Bys­shops and Priestes willes, yea and for all their spurninge so ernestlye against it?

Confuta­tion.For lacke of a better shift, this Defender is here dryuen to put a case, that an Idoll be set vp, and that some theefe or pirate possesse Noes arke and beare rule. But him we an­swere and saye. Syr what he is, you must leaue that vnto God,Rom. 14. who is his maister, to him he standeth or falleth. Ye are cōmaunded to obeie, and not to iudge before your time. And what a foolish putcase, and what a fond whatif is that, to saye, what if a pirate inuade the arke of Noe? As though God sate not at the sterne and had the helme in his owne hand.God ru­ling the ship, the losse of the ship is not to be feared. Or as though if God suffered an vsurper to gouerne the shippe, therefore ye would droune your selues? If the maister and also the maryners be euill men, wil ye therefore cast your selues into the sea? Knowe ye not that there is no way to escape drowning so long as we rowe in the seas of this world, without the shippe of Noe, that is to saye, the church?

bYe imagine that we haue cast the true Lord out of the house, and haue made forcible entraunce into possession of the same. That your selues haue so done, we can shewe euidently. We can tell, what daye ye entred, whose chur­ches and houses ye inuaded, neuer built by you nor by any of your religion. But name the daye or yere, that we in­uaded any house of yours. Yea name any house for reli­gion [Page 194] or church of yours in all the world, which is fifty yeres olde. Do not your selues here acknowledge that your title came in with Luther and Zuinglius? What nede we inuade your houses? Shewe vs in all England one chapell of your setting vp, among so great a number of fayre churches ye haue throwen downe, erected of vs and our forefathers.

cAntichrist can not sit in the temple of God, vntill the vicare of Christ, who kepeth possession, be throwen out, and then will Christ come with his angels to destroie the wic­ked man with the breath of his mouth.2. Thess. 2. Ye that are the her­bingers of antichrist, are not yet able to cast out the lieute­nant of Christ. Ye heaue at the vnderministers.Matt. 24. Your maister will accomplish all iniquitie, and he shalbe the deso­lation that Christ spake of. We vnderstand, what ye shoote at. But ye are ashamed to vtter plainely your blasphemie. Ye would saie (as it may seme) if ye durst, that Christ is the desolation, and that Antichrist is the true God. In effect I do not greatly belie you. For if the blessed sacrament of the aulter, be no other thing then the very body and bloud of Christ, in case that seme to you the desolation spoken of, do ye not make Christ the idol, and consequently Anti­christ the true God? Let any that hath but common sense weigh your blasphemie, and forethinke, whither this go­spell of yours tendeth. What ye speake of thed Waspes, of the Arians, of Nestorius, of Ebion, of the Mahometans, of the false prophetes in the time of the olde lawe, we retourne it all backe againe vpon you. It perteineth to you, not to vs. Like as scoldes do, ye preuent the crimes we might laufully obiect vnto you. Your comparisone of your selues with the Apostles, and of vs with the false prophetes, hath no ground, reason, nor scripture. It is but your railing talke, which we set litle by.

Neither if the Apostles might go from the bishops of Moses lawe, therefore may ye depart from the vicare of Christ. For the lawe of Moses is changed, and the priest­hod of Aaron is transferred, but the lawe and priesthod of Iesus Christ tarieth for euer,Psal. 109. as Dauid said. Thou art priest for euer according to the order of Melchisedech. Ye hault to ma­nifestly. Euery reason ye endeuour to make, retourneth vpon your owne head, like childrens arrowes which they shoote against hard bourdes. Let him that departeth beware how he depart.Matth 4. Christ saith Nolite exire, Go ye not out. And S. Iohn describing heretikes,1. Ioan. 2. saith, exierunt ex nobis, they be gone out from vs. Ye graunt ye are gone out, we must nedes con­clude, that ye be heretikes.

Apologie Wherefore like as it is written that Hercules in olde time was forced in striuing with Antaeus that huge giaunt, to lyfte him quite vp from the earth that was his Mother ere he could conqueere him, euen so must our aduersaries be heaued from their Mother, that is from this vaine colour and shadowe of the church, wherewith they so disguise and defende them selues, otherwyse they can not bee brought to yelde vnto the word of God. And therefore saithe Ieremye the Prophete, Make not suche great boaste that the Tem­ple of the Lorde is with you, this is but a vaine confidence, for the­se are lyes. The Aungell also saith in the Apocalyps. They saye they be Iewes, but they be the Synagoge of Sathan. And Christ sayd to the Pharisies when they vaunted them selfe of the kynred and bloud of Abraham: Iohn. 8. Ye are of your father the Deuell, for you resemble not your father Abraham, asmuche to saye, ye are not the men ye woulde so faine be called, ye begyle the people with vayne titles, and abuse the name of the Churche, to the ouerthrowing of the Church.

Confu­tation. Our per­sons may be diuided from our churches by power of men, as Antaeus was by Hercules lifted vp from the groūd, but our hartes from the cōmuni [...]n of the ca­tholike church can not be di­uided.Concerning your fable of Hercules and Antaeus, as ye are farre vnlike to Hercules, (for he destroied monsters and ye breed monsters both in doctrine and maners) so neither can we be remoued from the faith of the catholike church, as Antaeus was lifted vp from his mother the earth. And as, [Page 189] although Hercules by force kept that Gyauntes body from his mother, yet was he not able to kepe his harte and desire from her: so well maie ye by power of the sword kepe our persons from our churches and benefices and from doing the duties that belong to our spirituall charge: but our hartes and willes from thence, and the desire and consent of our spirite from the communion of the catholike church, and our mou­thes from confession of the faith thereof, which is the true church of God dispersed through the world, not a colour or shadowe of the church, as your blasphemous tonge vtte­reth, heaue at vs whiles ye will and whiles ye maye, ye shall neuer remoue. In which stedfastnes we trust to stand by Gods grace to the last breath. Heaue at vs with all for­ces of your cunning, of your malice, of your flatterie, of your policies, and with what so euer ingens ye haue: ye shall neuer be able to ouerthrow the house of our consciences bu­ilded vpon the sure rocke.Matthaei. 7. Let the gourders of raine come downe from you and all other heretikes,The De­fenders obiections returned vpon thē againe. let the floudes of worldly rages thrust, let the windes of Sathans temptations blowe their worst, this house shall not be ouerthrowen. Lea­ue to shoote the weake arrowes of your slender rhetorike at this house. They pearse not the strong walles, they re­bounde backe vppon your selues againe. For beholde that which ye tooke out of the quiuer of Ieremie,Ierem. 7. of the apoca­lips, and of the gospell, we shoote backe againe vpon you. For with that prophete for good cause we tell you, make not such great boast, that the temple of the Lord is with you, or rather the word of the Lord is with you, for of that much ye crake. As for the temples, full litle ye regard them. This is but a vaine confidence, for these are lyes. With the An­gell also we saie of you. They saye they be Iewes, Apocal. 2. but they be the synagog of Sathan. And with Christ we tell you that [Page] which he tolde the Pharises,Ioan. 8. ye are of your father the Deuill, and the lustes of your father ye will do. That is to saye, ye are not the men ye beare the world in hand ye be. Your tonge speaketh of the gospell, and for gospellers you would be taken, your life is contrarie to the gospell, your dedes shewe you to be the ennemies of the gospell. The Lord the Lord, the word of God, and the spirite of God is much in your mouth. Were the feare of our Lord in your hart, were it the word of God in dede ye talke so much of, were it the spirite of God ye pretend to haue, ye would shewe mo­re vertue and holines of life, lesse iniquitie and folowing of pleasures. More truth in commō life and doctrine, lesse lying and fewer errours: a further mortification of the owtward man, and lesse satisfying of the vncleane lustes of the flesh. To be short, like practized ministers of Antichrist, with false titles, with colours of holy zeale, and with deceitfull pretence of Gods word and the spirite, ye begile the peo­ple, and bring them quite from the feare of God to Sa­than, from the truth to errours, from vertue to all kinde of synnes.

Apologie So that these mens parte had ben first to haue clearely and truely proued that the Romishe churche is the true and right instructed Churche of God, and that the same, as they do order it at this day, dothe agre with the primatiue church of Christ, of the Apostles, and of the holye Fathers, wihche we doubt not but was in dede the true catholique Church.

THE TENTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion. The Ro­maine church is the true church. And to cōmuni­cat with the Ro­maine church, is to holde thunitie of the ca­tholike church. Luc. 22. Rom. 1. Lib. 4. Epist. 8.Ye would vs to proue that the Romaine church, is the true church of God. Ye graunt that once it was the true church of God. And the gospell sheweth that Christ prayd for it in S. Peter, who made his successours there. What foloweth hereof, but that it must nedes abyde as true as euer it was, except Christes praier were not heard? S. [Page 196] Paul likewise witnesseth, that the Romaine faith is prea­ched in the vniuersall world, geuing a manifest prophe­cie, that the Romaine faith and the catholike faith should be all one. S. Cyprian calleth the agreing with the bis­shop of Rome and communicating with him, catholi­licae ecclesiae vnitatem, &c. the allowing and firme hol­ding of the vnitie of the catholike church. And wri­ting to Antonianus in the same booke, he accompteth it for one thing, to communicate with Cornelius the bishop of Rome, and to communicate with the catholike church. For you it is vaine to saye, that it hath erred, when the holy ghost hath signified, that it can not erre.

Now whereas your departure from the communion of the church is none otherwise excusable, but so farre as ye can proue the same either to be no church, or to be without all doubt in perrilous errour: Let vs see, how ye proue either of both, your wordes by these.

For our partes yf we could haue iudged ignoraunce, Apologie errour superstition, Idolatrie, mennes Inuentions, and the same common­lye disagreinge with the holy Scriptures, eyther pleased God, or to be sufficient for thobtaininge euerlasting saluation, or yf we could assertaine our selues that the worde of God was written but for a time only, and afterwarde againe ought to be abrogated and put a­waye, or els that the sayinges and commaundementes of God ought to be subiecte to mans will, that whatsoeuer God sayeth and com­maundeth, exceptt the Byshop of Rome willeth and commaun­deth the same, it must be taken as void an vnspoken. Yf we coulde haue brought our selues to beleue these thinges, we graūt there had ben no cause at all why we should haue lefte these mennes cōpanie.

God forbid that either ye or any Christen man shuld iudge, that ignorance, errour, superstition, idolatrie,Confuta­tion. mens in­uentions contrary to the scriptures, either pleased God,Slaunde­rous ly­ing with­out mea­ne or rea­son. or to be sufficient to saluation. Bicause ye laye this to the ca ho­like church, we can saye nolesse of you, but that ye be false [Page] lyers, and deuilish slaunderers. And who teacheth, that Gods word was written but for a time only? That his commaun­dementes be subiect to mans will? That Gods sayinges and preceptes be void, except the bishop of Rome ratifie them? Here would I saye vnto you at least, fy for shame, but that I thincke I should preuaile no more, then if I said to an impu­dent and cōmon harlot, fy for shame. Who may not plainely see,Ierem. 3. the scripture verified on you, Frons mulieris meretricis fa­cta est vobis? Ye haue goten to you the impudent face of an har­lot. But for answer to your last sentence of this paragraphe, If ye finde no iust cause (as hitherto ye haue not) why ye shuld burthen the catholikes with these thinges, ye must ne­des acknowledge the gilt of your owne consciences, and graunt that in dede there was no cause why ye shuld haue cut of your selues from our communion and societie.

Apologie As touching that we haue now don, to departe from that Chur­che, whose errours were proued and made manifest to the world, which Church also had alredy euidētly departed from Gods worde, and yet not to departe so much frō it selfe, as frō therrours therof, and not to do this disorderly, or wickedly, but quietlie and sobrelye we haue done nothing herein against the doctrine eyther of Christ or of his Apostles. For neyther is the Church of God such as it may not be dusked with some spot, In Consil. Lateranēs. sub Iulio. 2. or asketh not sometime reparation: els what nedith there so many assembles and Coūcelles, without the which, as saith Egidius, the Christian faith is not hable to stand? For loke saith he, howe often Councelles are discontinued, so often is the Church destitute of Christ.

THE ELEVENTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion. The De­fenders confesse their de­parting from the church.That ye haue now done as heretikes be wonte to do, that is departed from the church, ye confesse. But that the er­rours of the church haue ben proued and made manifest to the worlde, and that the same is euidently departed from Gods word: so ye saye and belye the church, but where be your proufes? Because ye proue it not, nor euer shalbe able to proue it, in going from the church ye haue done wicked­ly. [Page 197] That the church maye and is sometime dusked with the mistes of ignorance, in some particular persons, and smutted with spottes of euill life, and therefore requireth oftentimes a redresse we graunt: but that the whole church, for whom Christ prayed to his father for the heauenly conforter to be geuen vnto her, being his dere spouse, the spirite of truth,Ioan. 14. Mat. vlt. to remaine with her for euer, with whom he promised to be all dayes vntill the worldes ende: that his church in pointes of our faith necessary to saluation erreth, we denie it, and vpon warrant of Christes promise, we tell it you all assu­redly, ye shall neuer be able to proue it.

Councels are kept, and bishops be made by the same pro­uidence of God, which prouideth partly by that meanes, and partly by other, that the Romaine faith, chaire, and rocke, shall stand for euer.Lib. 1. epist. 3. That the Romaine church erreth not. Ad quos (saieth S. Cyprian speaking of them of Rome) perfidia non potest habere accessum: to the which vnfaithfulnes can not haue accesse. He sayeth not only, shall not haue accesse, but can not haue accesse. Which many other holy and lerned doctours haue written, as ye maye see in the places where the catholikes do treate of the suprema­cie, for it were to great an excourse to handle so copious an argument at this time. Neither saith that lerned and eloquent man Egidius Viterbiensis in his oration at the councell of La­terane kept vnder Iulius the second,Eg [...]dius vntruly alleaged by the Defen­ders. that without assemblies and councels the Christen faith is not able to stand. For though they be a remedie against errours and heresies rising vp, yet the faith shuld stand and continewe, if there were none, and before any were assembled, the faith stood in for­ce. In dede he sayeth, that when councels haue discontine­wed, we haue sene the diuine spouse left alone of her spouse. Whereby he meaneth not an vtter forsaking and destitution of the church,Mat. 28. for Christ hath promised to be with his chur­che [Page] to the worldes ende: but a present and euident help for so much as semeth to mans sight, and therefore he vseth the word vidimus, we haue sene, not that it was so in dede, but that it appered so to man. And that to be his meaning the circumstance of the place, and the next wordes that folowe do sufficiently shewe: for there he alleageth the wordes of Christ,Ioan. 16. which he spake a litle before his resurrection, iam modicum & non videbitis me. Now a litle while, and ye shall not see me. Whereby Christ meant not that he would vtterly goe from them and forsake them, but that for a while, he would so withdrawe his visible presence from them, as they should not haue him with them in such sort as before. This sense yet Egidius sheweth more plainely by an other place alleaged. Vidimus Christum in nauicula obdormientem, we haue sene Christ a slepe in the bote. As we haue not in dede sene Christ a slepe in the church Peters shippe, neither now slea­peth he at all, but by his prouidence alwayes watcheth ouer his church, though for lacke of present helpe, we imagine him to haue left vs alone, and to be as it were a slepe: so nei­ther is the church destitute of Christ, when councels be dis­continewed. But so it appereth to men, whom it grieueth to see helpe and redresse of thinges that be amisse, so long differred.

Or yf there be no peryle that harme maye come to the church, what nede is there to reteyne to no purpose the names of Byshops, as is now commenlye vsed amonge them? For yf there be no shepe that may strey, whye be they called shepardes? Yf there be no Citie that may be betraied, why be they called watchemen? Yf there be nothing that may ronne to ruyne, why be they called Pillers? Anone after the first creation of the worlde the churche of God be­gan to spreade abrode, and the same was instructed wyth the hea­uenly word, whiche God him selfe pronounced with his owne mouth. It was also furnished with diuine ceremonies. It was taught by the spirit of God, by the Patriarches and Prophetes, and continued so euen till the tyme that Christe shewed himselfe to vs [Page 198] in the flesh. This notwithstanding, how often o good God, in the meane whyle, and howe horribly was the same Churche darkened and decayed?

THE TVVELFTH CHAPTER.

Here ye laye together all that euer ye can saye,Confuta­tion. VVhome do these Defen­ders folo­we in holding opinion, that thu­niuersall church erreth. Lib. 1. ad­uersus Ca­taphryg. Lib. 5. ec­cle. hist. ca. 16. Lib. de prophan. No­ua [...]. for prou­fe that the whole church erreth, for so ye meane we knowe well, for that particuler members erre, it is not denied. And in this wickednes ye folow Montanus the heretike, who persuaded his scolers, to geue no reuerence to the church that is on earth, as Appollinaris and Eusebius do witnesse of him. Nestorius affirmed, that the whole church erred, and folowed ignorant and erroneous doctours, as Vincentius Li­rinensis writeth. So the Imagebreakers said the church erred in setting vp Images, as we finde in the seuenth gene­rall councell, actione sexta. How the Donatistes and Ro­gatians condemned the auctoritie of the church, S. Augusti­ne declareth epistola. 48. ad Vincentium. 50. ad Bonifa­cium. 161. ad Honoratum, and in sundry other places. So did Wiclef, so did Luther, and those be your fathers, whom ye ha­ue folowed.

But to make a short answere to your slender obiections, thus we saye. Bishops and shepeherdes haue ben ordeined by Christ, and the same be pillours, not for that els the church should be in perill, and straye, and fall downe, but because God hath appointed bishops, shepeherdes, and pil­lours, hauing speciall care of his church: therefore shall the church be saued from danger and harme, from wandering and straying, from ruine and falling. Now come ye in with your scriptures, whereby ye would proue, the church may erre, faile, and haue the light quite put out. And thus ye saye.

VVhere was that Churche then, Apologie when all fleshe vpon earth had defyled their owne waye? Gen. 6. where was it when amongest the nom­bre [Page] of the whole world there were onely eyght persones (and they neither all chast and good) whom Gods will was shoulde be saued aliue from that vniuersall destruction and mortalitie? 3. Reg. 13. VVhen Ely the Prophete so lamentablie and byterly made mone, that one­lye him selfe was left of all the whole world whiche dyd truly and dewly worshipp God? Esai. [...]. And when Esay said, The siluer of God­des people (that is of the Churche) was become Drosse: and that the same Citie which a foretime had ben faithfull, was now become an harlot, and that in the same was no part sound through out the whole body from the head to the fote? Or els when Christ him selfe sayde, that the house of God was made by the Pharisies and Pristes a Denne of theues? Matth. Of a trouth, the Church euen as a cor­nefield except it be ared, manured, tilled and trimmed, in stede of wheate, it will bring furthe thystles, darnell and netilles. For this cause did God send euer among both Prophetes and Apostles, and last of all his owne Son, who might bringe home the people in­to the right waye, and repayre a new, the tottering church after she had erred.

Confu­tation.These and the like places haue ben allready alleaged of olde time against the catholikes, by the Donatistes, as S. Augustine sheweth, and of late yeres by your scoolemaister Iohn Caluine of Geneua. We nede not to study for ne­we answeres to the argument made out of these and such other places, much fitter for this purpose then these are, sith that the same is so well answered by S. Augustine.Lib. de v­nitate ec­clesiae. cap. 12. Oftentimes (saith he) Gods word rebuketh the wicked sortes of the church so, as though all were such, and none at all remayned good. For thereby we are warned, them in their certaine number to be called all, as much to say, all the children of hell. These men therfore do either vn­skilfully, or guilefully, in that they gather such places out of the scriptures, which haue ben spoken either against euill ones euermo­re mingled with the good vnto the end, or of the destruction of the people of Iewes, that were before the Christians, and will violently wrest them against the church of God, that it might seme as though it had failed, and were vtterly vndone through all the world. This farre S. Augustine. So that this is the sense of so ma­ny [Page 199] such places, that because the good be so fewe in compa­rison of the euill, as they seme to be none: the scripture vnder one speach reprehendeth the whole people together, albeit some be good.

But Syrs, what if the church at the beginning of the world, and at the generall drowning was of small number? And what if the Synagog were sometime quite extinqui­shed? Must it therefore folow, that the church also after that God hath geuen to Christ his sonne the endes of the world to be his possession, maye nowe be brought to a fewe,Psal. 2. and to faile altogether? And beholde howe true it is that S. Augu­stine now alleaged saith. God said, all flesh had corrupted their waye. Yet Noe and his familie were not corrupted.Gen. 6. So in the same chapter God said, interficiam omnem carnem, I will kill all flesh in which is breath of life vnder heauen, and all thinges that be in earth shalbe destroyed. Yet he saued Noe and seuen other with him, likewise cleane beastes by seuen and seuen, the male and the female, and vncleane beastes, by couples, male and female, and many other thinges did he saue and not destroye.

Where was the church (saye ye) when of all the world there were but eight persons, and they only saued alyue from the vniuersall destruction? Forsooth they were in Noes arke. And now haue we our Noes arke also, in which who so euer abydeth not, the same is drowned. Because we knowe you to be out of this arke, for charities sake, we desyre you to come in againe, that ye may be saued. If ye will not, beware, ye pull not others into the sea of damnation with you, if not for loue of Christ your iudge and ours, yet for feare of gre­uous encrease of hell tormentes. God graunt some take this for a warning.Answere to thob­iection of Elias.

Neither was the church vndone among them of the olde [Page] Lawe, when Elias made mone, as though none had ben left beside him selfe.3. Reg. 19. For God tolde him of seuen thowsand that had not bowed their knees to Baal. And though Esaie said,Esai. 1. the siluer of Gods people was become drosse, the citie a harlot,All na­med such, as the greater part is. and that there was no whole part in all the body from the crowne of the head to the sole of the foote, yet God in that people had his church. But because the greater part was euill, he rebuketh al, as though there had ben none at al good. And that maner of speaking generally, where notwithstāding an exceptiō is to be vnderstanded, is not in scripture strāge, as S. Augustine teacheth.Ezech. 3. The na­me of all sometime is takē for the more parte. Ezech. 9. The house of Israel (saith our lord to Eze­chiel) will not hear thee, for they will not hear me. For all the hou­se of Israel is of a hardworne forehead, and of a hard hart. Yet in another place he saith otherwise. Make the signe of Thau vpō the foreheads of the menne that lament and bewaile al the abominations that be in the middest of the Citie. This place of Ezechiel here leadeth vs to vnderstād the wordes of Ezechiel before not to be extended to al. For by these wordes it is euident, that some remained, who consented not to the generall wickednes of that people, and had not hardned their foreheads and their hartes.

Psal. 11. Saluum me fac, quoniam defecit Sanctus, saue me Lord (saith Dauid) for there is not a holy one left. They haue spoken vaine thinges euery ech one to his neighbour. But heare what answer our Lord maketh vnto him. For the miseries sake of the nee­die, and the wailing of the poore, now will I stand vp. Whe­reupon the prophete perceiuing that he had mo com­partners that lamented with him, said, Thou O Lord shalt kepe vs safe from this generation for euer. Thus the sayinges of Esaye report the greater part of the peo­ple to be euill, not all the people. And in those fewe good the church remained then, Albeit we may saye of such [Page 200] places of the Prophetes, that they were in maner rather pre­dictions and foretellinges of the state of that people to co­me, then reprehensions. For so is that people described, not such as they were then, but such as they became to be after the comming of Messias.

Where Christ said the scribes and Pharises had made the house of God a denne of theues,Mat. 21. yet was the same the temple of God, and resembled the whole church, and so that not­withstanding there was the church.A neces­sary ob­seruation for an­swere to the gos­pellers obiectiōs. Deut. 7. Exod. 33. It is agreable to the maner and custome of the holy scriptures, to call the selfe same people at one time for good and iust mennes sake hap­py and blessed, at an other time for the wicked mennes sake, wretched and vnhappy. Moses now calleth the Israelites an elect and blessed people, a holy nation, the peculiar people of God. And by and by he nameth them a stiffe necked, a folish and an vnaduised people. The Prophetes calle thē sometimes the people of Sodoma and Gomorra,Esai. 1. Ierem. 23. sometimes againe the people of God. S. Augustine doubted not by way of interpre­tation to terme the church alluding to the wordes of Salo­mons mysticall cantikes, blacke in the euill, faire in the good.De doct. Christ. li. 3. cap. 32. In Mat. cap. 15. Origen also calleth the church a denne of theues for their sake, which in the church sell doues. So for the wicked scri­bes and pharises sake Christ called the house of God a den­ne of theues, notwithstanding the number of the righteous and holy.

Your comparison of the church with a corne field we do not mislike. For Christ him selfe saith in the gospell,Ioan. 15. that his father is a husbandman. To thintent this field shuld bring foorth good corne, he hath and doth, and shall to the worldes end, send workemen into it to care it, till it, and dres­se it. Such as will not proue good wheate by no manuring and diligence, but either thistles, darnell, cockell, nettils, or [Page] chaffe, though he suffer the one to remaine with the other for a time,Matt. 3. when Christ shall come to wynnowe that he shall finde in his bernes flower, the wheate he shall lay vp in his granards of heauenly blesse, the chaffe shall be puffed awaye, the rest shall be bounde together in bundelles, and cast into the fire. Neither were the prophetes and Apostles sent, nor Christ came him selfe, to repaire a newe the church, which had in faith wholy erred, but both they were sent, and he ca­me, that it shuld not wholly erre. Though among the Ie­wes at his coming into flesh fewe were found iust, yet euen then also had he his number, of whom Esaie said, that our Lord had left them sede, for els had they ben like Sodoma and Gomorra. Of which sede after his ascension grewe a great heruest.

Apologie But least some man shuld saie that the foresaid thinges happened in the time of the lawe onely, of shadowes, and of infancie, when truth lay hid vnder figures and ceremonies, when nothing as yet was brought to perfection, when the Lawe was not grauen in men­nes heartes but in stone (and yet is that but a foolish saying) for euen at those daies was there the very same God that is nowe, the same spirite, the same Christ, the same faith, the same doctrine, the same hope, the same inheritance, the same league, and the same efficacie and vertue of Gods word. Eusebius also saith, all the faithfull euen from Adam vntill Christ, were in very dede Christians, though they were not so termed. But as I said, leaste men should thus speake still, Paul the Apostle found the like faultes and falles euen then in the prime and chiefe of the Gospell, in chiefe perfection, and in ligh­te, so that he was compelled to write in this sorte to the Galatians, whom he had well before that instructed: I feare me (quod he) leaste I haue laboured emongest you in vayne, and leaste ye haue heard the Gospell in vaine. O my litle Children, of whom I trauaile a new, til Christ be fashioned againe in you: And as for the Churche of the Corinthians, how fouly it was defiled, is nothing needefull to rehearce. Now tel me, might the Churches of the Galathians and Corinthians goe amisse, and the churche of Rome alone may it not fayle ner goe amysse?

THE THIRTINTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion.This defender hauing spent all his stuffe which he [Page 201] brought out of the olde testament for proufe that the catho­like church may erre and faile: commeth now to the newe te­stament, and alleageth S. Paul finding faultes and falles (as he sayeth) in the Galathians, and in the Corinthians.It is not denyed but that particular churches may erre. But that the who­le church erreth in faith, that is denyed Whereto we answer, that in partes of the church faultes may be foun­de, and sundry men that seme to be of the church, and be in the church in dede, may fall and perish, all this we graunt. but that the whole, catholike, and vniuersall church, whose faith we professe, maye erre, fall, and faile: that we denie vtterly, which had ben this Defenders part to proue, els he talketh to no purpose. And where S. Paul rebuketh all the Gala­thians in generall, as though all had forsaken their faith, he doth it after the wonte of the prophetes both in that and o­ther epistles, for the greater partes sake reprehending all, though some deserue praise, as contrarywise sometimes he praiseth all, where some deserue rebuke, as S. Augustine ob­serueth, libro contra Donatist. post collation. For in the same epistle he sayeth afterward:Cap. 20. Gal. ca. 6. Brethren if any man be fallen by chaunce into any fault, ye which are spirituall, help to amend him in the spirite of meekenes, considering thy selfe, lest thou also be tem­pted.

As for the Corinthians though many among them were faulty, yet who considereth how he beginneth his epistle to them, shall finde that he acknowleged a church among them. For thus he writeth. Paul by vocation an Apostle, 1. Cor. 1. &c. to the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Iesu, Sainctes by calling, with all that call on the name of our Lord Iesus Christ in euery place &c. I thancke my God al­wayes on your behalffe, for the grace of God which is geuen you by Iesus Christ, that in all thinges ye are made rich by him, &c. Who readeth this, will thinke, they were all very good rather, then that any reprobates were among them. But for the right vn­derstanding [Page] of such sayinges, S. Augustines obseruation must take place. And as among the Galathians and Corinthians some went amisse, so also may some in the particular church of the citie of Rome. But that the whole catholike church, (which in respect of the head may in a good sense be called the Romaine church) erreth or faileth in faith, that still we denie, and yet ye bring no argument worth the hearing to the contrary. Yet ye goe forth, and faine would ye seme to saye somewhat, though to no purpose, whiles ye saye thus.

Apologie Surely Christ prophecyed long before of his Churche, that the time should come, when desolation shoulde stande in the holy place. And Paul saith that Antichrist should once set vp his owne ta­bernacle and stately seat in the temple of God: Thess. 2. Daniell. 8. and that the time shoulde be, when men shoulde not awaye with holesome doctrine, but be turned back vnto fables and lyes, and that with in the very Church. 1. Petri. 2. Daniel. 8. Peter likewise tellyth, how there shoulde be teachers of lyes in the Church of Christ: Daniell the Prophete speaking of the later times of Antichrist, Truthe saith he, in that ceasone shalbe throwen vnder foote, Ma [...]t. 24. and troden vppon in the worlde. And Christ saith, howe the calamitie and confusion of thinges shalbe so exce­ding great, that euen the chosen, if it were possible, shalbe brought into errour: and how these thinges shall come to passe not amōgest Gentiles and Turkes, but that they should be in the holy place, in the temple of God, in the Church, and in the companie and felo­weship of those which professe the name of Christ.

Confu­tation. VVhat is ment by Daniels Desola­tion. Daniel. 9. Matt. 24.The prophecie of Daniel concerning the abomination of desolation whereof Christ spake in the gospell, we thin­ke with the best lerned diuines, that it is to be referred not to the ende of the world, nor to the driuing away of the faith by Antichrist, as ye imagine, but to the consummation and final ending of the Synagog.

Touching that ye saye of Antichrist, it maketh nothing against the catholikes, against whose faith he preuaileth not. Mary many good menne thinke thath he hath alrea­dy begonne to set vp his tabernacle and stately seate in theForran­ners of antichrist. [Page 202] hartes of many, which ought to be the temple of God, by his forerōners Martine Luther, Zuinglius, Caluine, and you their scolers with the rest of that wicked rable. And to saye the trouth, who seeth not the time nowe come, that S. Paule spake of to Timothe? For sithens your gospell was tapt, men be so dronke with the poison thereof for a great meany, as they can not away with holesom doctrine, but be turned backe from the sad preaching of the catholike faith vnto your fa­bles and lyes. Where ye adde, and that within the church, 2. Tim. 4. it is more then ye founde in S. Paul. But we vnderstand your good will, though we finde you without euer a good re­ason. And yet we graunt, ye came out from vs,1. Ioan. 2. as S. Iohn say­eth, but ye were not of vs. For if ye had ben of vs, ye would haue taried with vs. So may the saying of S. Peter be refer­red to you, and likewise that of Daniel, which ye alleage, though the wordes be not in Daniel, for your scoolemaisters and you are a lymme of Antichrist, and ye labour what ye can, to ouerthrowe and tread vnder foote the true faith of the church and the catholike religion. But the same in the world well may ye do, in the church otherwise shall ye not do it, but so as the same shall remayne,Matt. 28. and Christ our Lord with her according to his promise, to the ende of the worlde. And this much might ye haue gathered of the place, which here ye alleage out of the gospell, had not heresie and malice against the church blinded you, which reporteth that through the exceding greatnes of the cōfusion to come, Matt. 24. euen the elect should be brought into errour, if it were possible. Lo heare ye not, how it is not possible, but that for all the stirre of Antichrist and his faction, the chosen shal kepe their faith, and the church stand, though it be neuer so much persecuted, in the true belefe? Now this defender to proue the church to haue erred, goeth from the scriptures of the newe testament vnto the doctours, [Page] and sayeth.

Apologie Albeit these same warnynges alone may suffice a wyseman to take heede he do not suffer hym selfe rashelye to be deceiued withe the name of the Churche, and not to staye to make further inquisition thereof by Gods word, yet besyde al this, many Fathers also, manye learned and godly men, haue often and carefully complained, how all these thinges haue chaunced in their lyfe time. For euen in the middest of that thick myst of darknes, God would yet there should be some, who thoughe they gaue not a cleare and bright light, yet should they kyndle, were it but some sparke, whiche menne might espie being in the darkenes.

Contrà Auxentiū. Hylarius, when thinges as yet were almoste vncorrupt, and in good case to, Ye are yll deceiued, saith he, with the loue of walles, ye do ill worship the Church, in that ye worship it in houses and bu­ildinges: ye do yll bring in the name of peace vnder roofes. Is there anye doubt but Antichrist will haue his seate vnder ths same? I ra­ther recken hilles, wodes, pools, maryshes, prisons, and quauemires, to be places of more safetie: for in these the Prophetes either abiding of their accorde, or drowned by violence, didde prophecie by the spirite of God.

THE FOVRTINTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion. The faith in Hilari­us time most of all other­times per­secuted by the Arians vnder Constan­tius the Arian Empe­rour. Aduersus luciferian.I maruell what ye meane to saye of Hilarius time, that then thinges were yet almost vncorrupt and in good case. Was there euer a more corrupt or worse time? Was not the Empe­rour Constantius an Arian? Did he not bannish the ca­tholike bishops, and place the Arians in their romes? Haue ye not read how lamentably Athanasius, that suffered so much persecution for the catholike faith, how Basilius, how Gregorie Nazianzene, how Ambrose, briefly how all the ho­ly fathers of that age complaine of the great miseries of that time? Sayeth not S. Ierome, ingemuit totus orbis, & Arianum se esse miratus est? The whole world lamented the case, and marueled, that it came to be of the Arians side. Verely had ye misliked the Arians heresie, ye could not so farre haue commended that time. But yet to saye somewhat in your excuse, perhappes ye thought good to help a bad matter with a lye, wherein ye steppe neuer a foote from your common [Page 203] custome, I meane specially the penman of this Apologie.

For the place of Hilarius, that answere may serue you, which S. Augustine made to an heretike alleaging the same as ye do, writing to Vincentius, it is thus. Ecclesia aliquando ob­scuratur quidem &c. Epist. 48. od Vincen­tium. In very dede the church is sometimes dar­kened with the multitude of offences. But withall euen then in her most firme and assured ones she holdeth vp her head. Someti­mes she is flasshed and tossed with the waues of temptations. And such was the time then, that Hilarius wrote of, from whence thou thoughtest craftely to take aduātage against the diuine testimonies, &c. After a fewe there he sayeth further. VVho knoweth not, how at that time many of litle vnderstanding were deceiued with darke wordes, so as they thought, the same to be beleued of the Arians, which they them selues also beleued, and how some gaue ouer for feare, some yelded faynedly? Albeit they who then stode to it most stoutely, and could vnderstand the guilefull wordes of the heretikes, they were fewe in comparison of the rest, yet they for all that certaine of them abode bannishment manfully for the faith, and certaine laye hid secretly in corners all the world ouer.

So then Hilarius rebuked either the darnell of the ten prouinces of Asia, not the wheate, or the wheate it selfe also, because it semed to be in some danger of a certaine geuing ouer: he thought good how much the more vehemently so much the more profitably to checke it. For the canonicall scriptures haue this maner of checking, that the word be spoken as to all, and perteine but to certaine. This farre S. Augustine answering the place alleaged out of Hi­larius. Whereby we vnderstand, that in those stormy times and dangerours tempestes, the church kept vp aboue water, in respect of her strongest and most valiant gouernours and shipmaisters, though in respect of a number of weake and fainte mariners, to the face of the world it semed halfe sonckt, specially when heretikes had inuaded the sterne of spirituall [Page] rule in sundre prouinces.

Apologie In R [...]gist. li. 4. epist. ad Maurit. Gregorie, as one which perceaued and forsaw in his mynd the wrack of all things, wrote thus to Ihon Byshop of constantinople, who was the firste of all others that commaunded him selfe to bee called by this newe name, the vniuersall Bisshop of whole Christes Church. Yf the Church saith he, shall depende vpon one manne, it will at once fall downe to the grownd. Who is he that seeth not how this is come to passe longe since? For longe agone hathe the Bishop of Rome willed to haue the whole Churche depende vpon himselfe alone. VVherefore it is no maruail, though it be clean fallen downe longe agone.

Confuta­tion.Ye make a fowle lye Syr defender vpon S, Gregorie. The wordes you recite, be your owne, not his. Is it not ynough to lye your selfe, as you do very often, but that you father lyes also vpon the doctours? Thankes be to God, that so ye be­wraie the weaknes of your cause. Neither in any epistle to Iohn bishop of Cōstantinople, as you say in your Apologie, nor in any to Mauritius the Emperour, as you haue noted in the margent, writeth Gregorie, that if the church shall de­pend vpon one man, the whole shall fall to grounde. I see well you would faine Gregorie had so writtē. And if he had, yet your argument had ben naught. For you take not the right minor, which should haue ben this, the church doth de­pend vpon one man, if you would make your reason good and after the rules of logike. For where your minor spea­keth only of the Popes will, thereof your conclusion folo­weth not. Dispose your propositions in the forme of a syl­logisme, and you shall espie your owne feble reason. And if you make that your minor, then graunt you that which you denie.

The wordes whereof you gather this pretensed saying of Gregorie,Epist. lib. 4. ad Maurit. epist. 32. as I suppose, be these. If any man hath caught vnto him selfe that name (of vniuersall bishop) in that church (of Constantinople) then the whole church, (which God forbid) fell [Page 204] from his state, when he that is called vniuersall, fell. VVhat Gregorie meant by vniuersal bishop Gregorie vn­derstandeth by the name vniuersall bishop, as him selfe de­clareth in many places, such a one, as is a bishop altogether and only, so as there be no other bishop besides him. Now if it were graunted, that the bishop of Cōstantinople were this one and only vniuersal bishop, this inconuenience would fo­lowe, that with the fall of that vniuersall bishop, the vniuersal church also fell. For where the churche is, there be bishops and where be Bishops, there is the church: and a bishop vniuer­sall by [...]regorie is as much as all bishops. That this being graunted, the whole church is fallen from the faith thus he proueth.By S. Gregory if one be vniuersall bishop, that is by his mea­ning, if one be al, and none be bishop but that one, then at the fall of that one, the whole church falleth which were ab­surd. For (sayeth he) the Bishops of Constantinople haue fal­len into the gulfe of great and detestable heresies, as Nestorius, who thinking Christ to be two persons, and beleuing that God could not be made man, ranne to a Iewish infidelitie, and as Macedo­nius, who denied the holy ghost to be God. VVherefore if the B. of Constantinople be the vniuersall bishop according to the sense a­foresaid, then at the fall of him from the faith, as when those two before named fell, the church also falleth, as then by this reason when they were bishops, it fell. Thus reasoneth S. Gregorie in that e­pistle to Mauritius. But because to Gregorie it semeth ve­ry farre from reason and incredible, that the church should fall from the faith and faile: therefore he enueigheth against Iohn the bishop of Constantinople for chalenging that na­me of vniuersall bishop, and concludeth that the bishop of that see in any wise can not so be.

But if the word vniuersall signifie a soueraintie of char­ge, and supremacie of gouernement ouer the whole church,In what sense the B. of Ro­me may iustly be called vniuersal bishop. Iohn. 21. which Christ committed to Peter, and in Peter to his suc­cessours the bishops of Rome, when he said, fede my shepe: in this sense it is not impious nor erroneous, nor contrary to the mynde of S. Gregorie, to call the successour of Peter [Page] Christes vicare in earth, the vniuersall bishop, that is to saye the highest of all, and hauing power ouer all other bishops, and bishop of the vniuersall church. And as Christ gaue to S. Peter and his successours for the benefite of his church a su­preme auctoritie and power:Iohn. 1 4 so for the same churches sake, for whose loue he delyuered him selfe to death, by petition made to his father he obteined for him and his successours, the pri­uilege of this supreme and most excellent grace,Luc. 22. that their faith should neuer faile. In consyderation of which singular priuilege obteined by Christ and graunted to the see Aposto­like and to none other, Gregorie rebuketh Iohn the bishop of Constantinople so much, as one that presumptuously vsur­ped that newe name of vniuersall bishop against the statutes of the gospell, and against the decrees of the Canons.

To cōclude, if either Gregorie or any other mā should saye, that the church dependeth vpon one man: he might seme to saye truth meaning rightly, and that not alone, nor without good authoritie. For such a saying we finde vttered by S. Ie­rome.Contra Luciferian. The saftie of the church (sayeth he) dependeth vpon the dig­nitie of the highest priest, who if he haue not auctoritie peerlesse and aboue all other: there will be so many schismes in the church, as there be priestes. Which peerlesse auctoritie aboue all other as S. Hierō in that place doth attribute to the bishop of euery Dioces di­rectly: so consequently to Peters successor, to whom it was said,Iohn. 21. f [...]de my shepe. For by what reason in ech Dioces it beho­ueth one priest to be highest ouer other priestes, by the same and in like proportion nolesse it behoueth, that in the whole church one bishop be highest ouer other bishops. I meane, for auoiding schismes.

Apologie Bernard the Abbot aboue foure hundred yeares past writeth thus: Nothinge is nowe of sinceritie and purenes emongest the Cleargie, wherfore it resteth that the man of sin should be reuealed. The same Bernarde in his worke of the conuersiō of Paul, It semeth now saith he, that persecution hath ceased: no no, persecution see­meth [Page 205] but nowe to beginne, euen from them whiche haue chiefe preeminence in the Churche. Thy friendes and neighbours haue drawen neere, and stoode vp against thee: from the sole of thy foot to the crowne of thy heade, there is no part whole. Iniquitie is proceeded from the Elders, the Iudges and deputies which pretende to rule thy people. Wee cannot saye nowe, Loke how the people be, so is the priest. For the people be not so ill as the priest is. Alas, alas, o Lorde God, the selfe same persons be the chiefe in persecutinge thee, which seeme to loue the highest place, and beare moste rule in thy church. The same Bernard again vpon the Canticles writeth thus. All they are thy friendes, yet are they all thy soes, all thy kinsefolke, yet are they all thy aduersaries, being Christes seruants, they serue Antichrist, Beholde in my rest, my bitternes is moste bit­ter.

Here you haue heaped together many sayinges of S. Bernard. And to what purpose?Confuta­tion. Read them againe and a­gaine, and all S. Bernardes workes,Bernard reproueth euill ma­ners, not the supre­me aucto­ritie of the b. of Rome. and you shall not finde one sentence against the bishop of Rome his supreme aucto­ritie, nor against the catholike doctrine of the church, that ye impugne, and we professe. What Bernard thought of the Popes supremacie, anone ye shall heare Bernard tell his owne tale. He reproueth somewheres the maners of the clergie, which neither we do alowe, if they be euill. But for maintenance of your schismaticall doctrine against the power, dignitie, and office of the Pope, which he beareth ouer the whole church, he speaketh not so much as one worde.

Roger Bacon also a man of great fame, Apologie. In libello de idiomate linguarum. after he had in a vehement Oration touched to the quicke the wofull state of his owne time, These so many errours saith he, require and loke for Antichrist. Gerson complaineth how in his daies all the substance and efficacie of sacred diuinitie was brought into a glorious contention and ostentation of wits, and to very sophistrie. The Friers of Lions, men as touching the maner of their life, not to be misliked, wer wōt boldly to affirme, that the Romish church (from whence alone all counsel and ordres was thē sought) was the very same harlot of Ba­bylon, and rowt of Diuels, wherof is prophesied so plainely in the Apocalyps.

THE FIFTINTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion.After that this defender hath brought in all that he fo­unde in his note bokes gathered out of the olde and newe testament, and out of S. Hilary, Gregorie, and Bernard, soun­ding as he imagineth somewhat against the catholike chur­ches continuance in faith, lest perhappes his matter were not yet sufficiently proued, as in dede hitherto he hath pro­ued nothing, but hath only shewed the malice of his harte and the weaknes of his side:A newe band of tag and rag brought in against the chur­ch by this Defender, rather to shew of malice thē proufe of purpose. Cantic. 6. Now commeth me he in with a newe band, which consisteth of tagge and ragge, and a weake companie God knoweth they be to shewe their faces against the catholike church, which (as the holy ghost spea­keth by Salomon) is terrible like an armie of men set in bataile raye. And how they will agree together fighting vnder this new clergies banner, I doubte. For some be catholike, and some be heretikes, some Poetes and fablers, some good and graue men, who will do this Defender litle seruice, some of one language, some of an other.

First frier Bacon the coniurer and negromanser as com­monly they saye of him,Frier Ro­ger bacon. he is set in the forewarde, a man of great fame forsooth. Yet fewe there be that can so much as name his workes, they be so obscure. And what sayeth he? Mary he reproueth sharpely the vices of his time, and telleth men, that the same require Antichrist to come. For that he speaketh of errours in doctrine, I can not beleue it. That poore obscure booke written haue I sene, printed I neuer sawe it. Neither be many of his workes compted worth the printing. I should the rather beleue that he saith so as here we are borne in hand, were it an other man that had al­leaged his wordes. As for this Defender, I haue taken him in so many notorious lyes, that I can not beleue him fur­ther, then I see with myne owne eyes. But let it be true, [Page 206] that he said so as he is alleaged. We graunt that Antichrist is coming, and that these Defenders with their scoolefelo­wes of Germanie, Suitzerland and Geneua, be his forron­ners: of these meante frier Bacon. How proue ye the con­trary?

Then commeth in the good plaine father Gerson a wri­ter in our graundfathers time, he complayneth,Gerson alleaged to no pur­pose. that friers and studentes gaue them selues to much to the vnprofitable subtilitie of scolasticall questions. What maketh this against the faith of the church?

After these this Defender placeth in an owtwing the false brethern of Lyons,The au­ctoritie of heretikes alleaged by hereti­kes aga­ynst the church. commonly called Waldenses or Pauperes de Lugduno, notorius heretikes condemned of the churche, whom it liketh this allowed interpreter for good will she beareth to religion, to call friers. And they sticke not to saye, the church of Rome to be the whore of Babylon, whe­reof S. Iohn speaketh in his reuelation. These being dete­stable heretikes cōdemned of the church, we recke not what they saye, no more then what Luther sayeth, what Zuin­glius, what Caluine, what these Defenders them selues saye, what Antichrist, what Sathan sayeth. For the ennemies of Gods truth may not be admitted to geue witnes against the truth.

I knowe well enough the authoritie of the foresaid persons is but lightly regarded amongest these men. Apologie Howe then if I call furth those for witnesses whom them selues haue vsed to honour: what if I saye that Adryan the Bisshop of Rome did franklye con­fesse, that all these mischieues brast out first from the high throne of the Pope?

This Defender in putting his armie in araye vseth the policie of some capitaines. Who when they lacke souldiers,Confuta­tion. A poore policie of the De­fender. and feare to be encountered, take haye or strawe, and there­with stuffe mens clothes, and set them vp in sight to kepe a [Page] standing in stede of men, to make their ennemies beleue their campe is well manned. So here haue we a man of stra­we set vp, whom this defender nameth Adrian bishop of Ro­me.Adrian a fained fe­lowe brought for shew. He geueth him a waze of strawe in his hande, that a farre of semeth to be a sore weapon taken out of the armorie of Platina, as is pretended. But when ye come near and behold what felow this is, and conferre with Platina touching his weapon, ye see it to be a fained thing. For there is no such saying by Platina attributed to any of the six A­drians Bisshops of Rome, whose lyues he writeth. And mo there were not. Therefore where you saye, what if I saye that Adrian, &c. I answer therto, that if you saie so, you saie a false lye.

Apologie Pighius acknowlegeth herein to be a fault, that many abuses are brought in, euen into the verye Masse, whiche Masse otherwise he would haue seme to be a reuerēd matter. Gerson saith, that through the number of moste fonde ceremonies, all the vertue of the holye Ghoste, which ought to haue full operation in vs, and all true god­lines is vtterlye quenched and deade. VVhole Grecia and Asia, com­plaine howe the Bisshoppes of Rome with the martes of their Pur­gatories and Pardons, haue both tormented mennes consciences, and picked their purses.

Confu­tation.By this propre felow Adrian is placed Pighius. And he is by this Defender made to be ennemie to the church now after his death, which he was neuer in his life, and to confesse abuses in the masse. In dede in his sixth controuer­sie speaking of priuate masses, he denieth not but certaine abuses be crept into that most holy and most helthful thing, for so he speaketh. And adding further, we know (saith he) to what man, and to what men it perteineth the same to correct. And let ech man acknowledge his owne measure, and vnderstand his dutie. As who should saye, it is not meete for euery man to take vpon him to amend any thing that is amisse about the masse. For he meaneth not that the Masse it selfe is errone­ous, [Page 207] as ful wel there he d [...]c areth:VVhat maner ab­uses be they whi­che Pi­ghius cō­plaineth to haue crept into the serui­ce of the Masse. but that mē be faulty in abu­sing that most holy sa [...] [...]ce. For many come to the aulter, vnworthely. Many be present at it, that ought not to come within the church dores. Some priestes be of so lewde lyues, and of so vnreuerent behauiour at it, as it were better they ab­steined. Albeit I thinke he meant rather such abuses, as the ler­ned fathers of the prouinciall councell of Coulē would to be amended, to witte, certaine peculiar offices of Masses deuised by men of late yeares besides the ordinance of the auncient forefathers, which they misliked, for that so high a mysterie is not to be ordered after euery mans affection.Offices of Masses of priuat af­fection, vnlerned Proses, and Antemes song at thele­uation repro­ued. Also certaine vnlerned Proses without iudgement of late put into the masse bookes. Againe playing at organs and singing of An­temes at and after the eleuation of our Lordes body and bloud for peace, against pestilence, and mortalitie. Whereas at that time mē should rather praye in silence, and call to their remembrance the death of our Lorde, and geue thankes to Christ our redemer, for that he hath wasshed vs with his bloud, and with the same paid our ransome. Which Ante­mes those fathers thinke better to be songe after Masse.

Furthermore in some places good men complaine of Douch songes vsed to be songe in the masse, in some other places of the disordered melodie of organs, which stirreth to wantonnes rather then to deuotion. These and the like abuses meaneth Pighius, where he confesseth abuses not to be mainteined, but to haue crept into the holy seruice of the Masse. Which thing hath ben considered by the fathers of the late Tridentine councell,C. 2. de ce­lebrat. miss. as also of olde time by the fa­thers of the councell Triburiense. All this being knowen, Pighius can not seme to help your cause any whit at all. Of the same abuses complaine we nolesse then he, yet remem­bring, to whom the redresse apperteineth

As for the other greate troupe ye bring with you out of Grece and Asia, first, we require you to make them agree with your selues, and with the catholike church about the procession of the holy ghost, and then we shall answer both you and them concerning your greuous matter of purga­torie and pardons. It is not our maner to take the sayinges of heretikes for good and sufficient auctoritie.

As touching the tyranny of the Byshops of Rome and their barbarous Persianlike pride, Apologie to leaue out others whom perchaun­ce they recken for enemies, bicause they freely and liberally find fault with their vices, the selfe same men whiche haue ledd their lyfe at Rome in the holye Citie, in the face of the moste holye Fa­ther, who also were able to see all their secretes, and at no tyme de­parted from the Catholike faith: As for example Laurentius Valla, Marcilius Patauinus, Fraunces Petrarke, Hierome Sauanorola, Abbott Ioakim, Baptist of Mantua, and before all these, Bernar­de the Abbotte, haue manye a tyme and muche complayned of yt, geuinge the worlde also sometyme to vnderstande, that the Bis­shoppe of Rome hymselfe (by youre leaue) is very Antichriste, VVhether they spake yt truelye or falselye, lette that goe: sure I am they spake it plainelye. Neyther canne anye manne alledge that those authors were Luthers or Zwinglius schollers, for they were not onely certaine yeares, but also certaine ages or euer Luther or Zwinglius names were hearde of.

THE SIXTINTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion. The De­fender compa­red to a mad dog.If this Defender were compared to a mad dogge, some perhappes would thinke it rude and an vnmanerly compa­rison. Let the man be as he is, who soeuer he be: verely the maner and fashion of both is like, howsoeuer I be content, his person be honoured with the due regard of a man. For as the mad dogge runneth vp and downe, here and there, and now byteth one thing, and then an other, snapppeth at man and beast, and resteth not in one pla­ce: So this Defender to deface the church, sheweth him selfe to haue a very vnquiet head. He starteth from one thing to an other, and setleth him selfe in no one matter, but in [Page 208] malice. His will and [...]ose is to persuade, that all for­sake the catholike churc [...],The will and pur­pose of the De­fender. as he and his companions haue done. To bring this to passe, he startleth to and fro, and can staye nowhere. Now he ronneth at the bishop of Rome, then at the whole clergie.The fow­leshiftes the Defender maketh. Now he barketh at errours in doctrine, and sheweth none, then he snappereth at maners, and backebiteth mens lyues. Now he bringeth forth scrip­tures, and them he stretcheth and racketh, but they reach not home. Then commeth he to the doctours, and maketh them of his syde whether they will or no. From doctours he ronneth to coniurers, to ryming Poetes, and to hereti­kes them selues. I thinke they had rather ronne to the Turkes, then the catholike faith should be receiued. And here leauing that he tooke in hand to proue, that the churh erreth in necessary doctrine, he flyngeth at the tyran­nie and pride of the bishops of Rome, and bringeth in for witnes against them white and blacke, good and bad. So he hurt them, he careth not how, by what meanes, ne by what persons.

First to gete credite, he vttereth a manifest lye, saying of them all, they lead their life at Rome in the holy Citie vnder the nose of the most holy father, and might see all his secretes, and neuer forsooke the catholike faith.The best witnesses the De­fender hath a­gainst: he bishops of Rome. His wit­nesses be these. Laurence Valla, Marsilius of Padua, Fran­cis petrarche, Hierome Sauonarola, Ioachim Abbot, Baptist of Mantua, and S. Bernard, whom of spite he calleth Ber­nard the Abbot. Now let vs see how many lyes here be made at once. Whereas of all these neuer a one leade his life at Rome, but Laurence Valla, who was a canon of Laterane, and this Defender sayeth that all did: there is one lye. That all these might see the Popes secretes, there be two lyes. That none of these forsooke the catholike faith, there be three lyes. [Page] As for Laurence Valla he was not in euery point very soun­de,Laurens Valla not soūde in some pointes of fa [...]th. as it appereth in his booke of free will, and in his annota­tions vpon the newe testament. In all thinges he hand­led, he shewed him selfe newe fangled, rather then groun­dedly lerned, as well in grammer and logike, as in diuini­tie.

Marsilius of Padua a schis­matike, and at length an hereti­ke.But Marsilius of Padua, to please the Emperour Ludo­uicus Bauarus, who liued aboue two hundred yeres past, through malice conceiued against Pope Ihon the xxij. of whom the said Ludouicus was for iust causes excommu­nicate, went so farre in schisme, as at length he fell into he­resie.

Abbot Ioachims booke condem­ned for heresie.And Abbot Ioachim whiles he reproued Peter Lombard, vttered heresie contrary to the catholike faith touching the Trinitie, and therefor his booke was condemned by the chur­che, though his person was not condemned, because he sub­mitted him selfe and his writinges to the iudgement of the holy Romaine church,Extra de summa trinit. & fide cathol. cap. 2. as we finde in the Decretals. That all these haue greatly and often complained of the bishops of Rome their tyrannie and pride, there be foure lyes. That they declared the Pope him selfe to be very Antichrist, there be fyue lyes. And whereas to make this shameles lye you as­ke leaue, so we aske leaue of you to tell it you, and to chalen­ge you of a lye, and say plainely vnto you, that speaking of them all, you belye them, and that you shall neuer be able to proue that you say of them.

Frauncis Petrarch, and Bap­tist of Mantua.Francis Petrarch the Italian poete, and Baptist of Mantua the Latine poete, speake like poetes, ech of them once in their workes against the euill maners of the courte of Ro­me. But what proufe maketh all this, that the Romaine chuch, that is to saye, the west church, which only remai­neth, and euer hath remained whole and sound of faith, er­reth [Page 209] in doctrine? O [...] [...]at argument can you gather out of all these, I wil not [...] against the life, but against the office, auctoritie, and dignitie of the Bishop of Rome? The argument you can make hereupon is this. Poetes repre­hend the vices of the courte of Rome: ergo, the Pope is An­tichrist. Or, ergo the catholike church erreth, and is to be for­saken. What force is in this reason, euery reasonable man, be he neuer so meane of witte may sone iudge.

They well sawe that euen in their daies errour had crept into the church, and wished earnestly they might be amended. Apologie

Lo how this Defender skippeth.Confuta­tion. Before he spake of maners, and now he goeth forth, and with the same breath inueyeth against doctrine, and imputeth errours to the church.

And what maruaile yf the Churche were then caryed awaye with errours in that time, Apologi [...] specially when neither the Byshop of Ro­me who then only ruled the roste, nor almoste any other, either didde his dewtie, or once vnderstoode what was his duetie. For it is harde to be beleeued, whyles they were ydle and fast a sleepe, that the Diuell also all that whyle either fell a sleepe, or els continu­ally lay ydle. For how they were occupied in the meane time, and with what faithfulnesse they tooke care of Goddes house, though wee holde oure peace, yet I praye you lette them heare Bernarde their owne friend. Bernarde ad Eugniū. The Bysshops (saith he) who now haue the charge of Gods churche, are not teachers but deceauers, they are not feeders butte begylers, they are not Prelates butte Pylates. These woordes spake Bernarde of that Bysshoppe, who named him­selfe the highest Bysshoppe of all, and of the other Bysshoppes like­wyse whiche then hadde the place of gouernement. Bernard was no Lutherian, Bernard was no heretike, he had not forsaken the Catholike churche, yet neuertheles he didde not lette to call the Byshoppes that then were, deceiuers, begilers, and Pylates. Nowe when the people was openly deceiued, and Christian mennes eyes were craftely bleared, and when Pilat sate in iudgement place and condemned Christ and Christes members to the swoorde and fyer, Oh good Lord, in what case was Christes church then? But yet tell me, of so manye and grosse errours, what one haue these men at a­nye time refourmed, or what faulte haue they once acknowleged and confessed?

THE SEVENTINTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion. Why Syrs, are ye so well lerned and so holy of life your selues, that ye take vpon you to iudge the bishop of Rome Christes chiefe officer in earth, Thinso­lent iud­gement of the de­fenders. and all other men before the time of your Apostates and renegate friers, to haue ben both impious for not doing their dutie, and ignorant for not kno­wing what was their dutie? Was all vertue so farre banni­shed, all necessarie knowledge and christian lerning so cleane put out, that we must now beginne to lerne how to beleue, and how to liue a Christian life of such light preachers, wicked vowbreakers, lewde Lecherous Lurdens, and dete­stable blasphemers, as your deuillish rable is? If the deuill at that time was stirring so much, they being idle and a slepe as ye saye, what meane ye by that? Is he nowe a slepe, that ye be so busye? For so much your wordes do geue. In dede the deuill maye nowe go plaie or take his rest, if he wist how, whiles ye do his worke for him. And when he is sure of one, he is not very busy about him. And that is the cause that being sure of you doing as ye do, he letteth you alone.

S. Bernard reproueth not the doctrine of the church, nor the auctoritie of the Pope, but the euill life of the Pope and of the cler­gy. But because ye alleage S. Bernard so much, as though he holp your cause, who in all that ye bring out of him, repro­ueth only the eulll life of the Pope and the clergie, not the doctrine of the church: I thinke good here to reherse a place of that holy father euen out of the same booke, which you pike wordes out of for your purpose against the Pope. By which euery man maye assure him selfe, how much he ho­noured the office and dignitie of the Pope, how so euer so­metime vpon his great affiance of frendship with Eugenius, who once had ben his scholer, he sticketh not to speake plai­nely against his defaultes. These be S. Bernardes wordes worthy to be well weighed and considered of all, specially of those, who through your false and slaunderous teaching [Page 210] being deceiued, thinke so [...]hat to be in him, A notable place of S. Ber­nard, wherein he declareth fully, what he thought thouching the Popes auctoritie ouer the church. whereby he may seme to fauer your [...] [...]maticall doctrine touching the Pope. His wordes to Eug [...] [...]s be these.

Age indagemus adhuc diligentius, quis sis, &c. VVell goe to. Let vs somewhat more diligently examine, what maner a man thou art, what person thou bearest for the present time in the church of God. VVho art thou? The great priest, the highest bishop. Thou arte the chieffe of all bishops, thou arte the heire of the Apostles: for primacie thou art Abel, for gouernement Noe, for patriarkship Abraham, for holy order Melchisedech, for dignitie Aaron,Li. 2, de cō­sideratione. The Pop [...] who is he by S. Ber­nard. for auctoritie Moyses, for iudgement Samuel, for power Peter, for thy anoynting Christ. Thou art he to whom the keyes were deliuered, to whom the shepe were committed. There be also other porters of heauē, and pastours of flockes. But thou so much farre pas­sing all other, as thou hast inherited both names much more indiffe­rent. They haue their flockes assigned vnto them, ech man one. All are committed to thee, the one whole flocke to one. Neither arte thou only the pastour of all the sheepe, but also the only pastour of all the pastours.

Demaundest thou of me how I proue it?Ioan. 21. Forsooth out of the word of God. For I praie you to whom (I will not saye of the bis­shops) but also of the Apostles, were all the sheepe so absolutely and indeterminatly committed? If thou loue me Peter, feede my sheepe, which sheepe? The people of this or of that citie, of this or of that countrie, or kingdome? My sheepe quoth he. VVho now doth not euidētly see, that Christ did not appoint him certaine, but assig­ned him all? VVhere no distinction is made, there nothing is excep­ted. And peraduenture his other fellovv disciples were present, when Christ committing all to one, commended vnitie to them all in on one flocke and in one shepeherd, according to that is said, One is my doue, one is my bewtifull, my perfect.Cant. 6. VVhere is vnitie, there is perfection. Other numbers haue not perfection, [Page] but by diuision depart from vnitie. Thereof it commeth, that other had particular churches, ech mā one [...]nowing this mysterie. And S. Iames who semed to be a pillour of the church,Galat. 1. was contented with Hierusalem onely,Vniuersa­litie yel­ded to Peter. yelding the vniuersalitie to Peter. And right well was he placed there, to raise vp sead of his dead brother, where the same was slaine, for he was called our Lordes brother. Fur­thermore when our Lordes brother had geuen place, what other should intrude himselfe into Peters prerogatiue? VVherefore ac­cording to thine owne canons, other are called into parte of care, thow into fulnes of power.The po­pe cal­led to fulnes of power. The auctoritie of others is restrained to certaine prescript boundes, thine is extented euen vpon those, who haue receiued power ouer others. Canst not thou if there because why, close vp heauen gates against a bishop, depriue him of his bishoprike, and geue him vp to the deuill? Thy priuilege then remaineth to thee vnshaken, as well in the keyes which were geuen thee, as in the sheepe that were commended vnto thee.

A reason for the Popes {pre}rogatiue after the iudgemēt of S. Ber­nard. Ioan. 21.Now heare another reason which confirmeth that prerogatiue to thee, as well as the other. The disciples rowed, and our Lord ap­pered vnto them on the shore, and that in his body now againe resto­red vnto life, which was more confortable vnto them. Peter knowing that it was our Lorde, leapte into the sea, and so ca­me vnto him, and the rest came by bote. VVhat meaneth this? Forsooth it was a signe of the singular Popedome of Peter, by which he tooke into his gouernement not one only one shippe,Peter to­ke into his gouerne­ment the whole world. The Po­pe Chri­stes vica­re. as the other did, ech man his owne, but the whole world. For the sea is the world, the shippes are the churches. And that is the cause that at another time walking vpon the water as Christ did, he de­clared himselfe to be the only vicare of Christ, which shuld not haue the preeminence ouer one only people, but ouer all. For many waters, are many peoples. So whereas euery other man hath his, to thee is committed the greatest shippe of all, made out of all other shippes, to witte, the vniuersall church dispersed through out [Page 211] the whole world. This [...] S. Bernard. Who speaketh so much for the Popes auc [...] [...]e ouer Christes flocke, howsoeuer somtimes he blameth sharply the euill life of the clergy, as of all writers by men of any shamefastnes against the Popes supremacie he is least to be alleaged. Wherefore from henceforth take nomore holde Sirs of S. Bernard. For he is quite against you, as all other holy fathers be.

But forsomuche as these men auouche the vniuersall possession of the catholike Churche to bee their owne, Apologie and call vs Hereti­ques, bicause we agree not in iudgemente with them, let vs knowe I beseeche you, what propre marke and badge hathe that Churche of theyrs, whereby it maye be knowen to bee the Church of God. I wys it is not so hard a matter to finde out Goddes Churche, yf a manne will seeke it earnestlye and diligentlye. For the Church of Godde is sette vpon a high and glistering place in the toppe of an hil and buylte vpon the foundacion of the Apostles and prophettes: There saith Augustine, lette vs seeke the Church, there lette vs trye oure matter. And as he saith againe in another place, The Churche must be shewed out of the holy and canonicall scrip­tures: and that whiche can not be shewed, out of them, August. de Vnitate Eccles. Cap. 3. Idem. Ca. 4. is not the Churche. Yet for all this I wote not howe whether it be for fea­re or for conscience, or despearing of victory, these men alway ab­hor and flie the woorde of God, euen as the theefe fleeth the gal­lowes. And no wonder truely, for lyke as men saye the Cantharus by and by perisheth and dyeth, assone as it is laide in balme notwith­stāding balme be otherwise a most sweete smellynge ointmēt: euen so these men well see their owne matter is dampped and destroyed in the woorde of God, as if it were in poyson. Therefore the ho­ly scriptures whiche oure Sauioure Iesu Christe did not onely vse for authoritie in all his speache, butte didde also at last seale vp the same with his owne bloude: these menne to the entent they mygh­te with lesse busines driue the people from the same, as from a thin­ge daungerours and deadlye, haue vsed to call theim a bare letter, vncertaine, vnprofitable, domme, killing, and dead: Albertus Pighius. in Hiarar. which seemeth to vs all one, as if they shoulde say, The scriptures are to no purpo­se or as good as none. Hereunto they adde also a similitude not very agreeable, howe the scriptures be like to a nose of wax, or a shipmans hose: how they may be fashioned and plyed all manner of waies, and serue al mennes turnes.

THE EIGHTINTH CHAPTER.

Where ye say the church is buylded vpon the founda­tionConfuta­tion. [Page] of the Apostles and prophetes, and shewed by the ho­ly canonicall scriptures: we confesse the same with S. Au­stine.De vnit. Eccle. c. 3. &. 4. When ye adde, the church which can not be she­wed out of the scriptures to be no church, we saye, that though S. Augustine haue no such wordes in the chapters which ye alleage in the margent, yet were it neuer so much graunted, that he had those wordes in that place, they should make nothing for your purpose. S. Augustine in that booke disputeth against the Donatistes, who would restraine the catholike church to the only countrie of Aphrike, denying other Christen men to be members thereof. S. Augustine refuting their heresie,VVe must holde both with the body and head, if we will be saued. declareth the sonne of God to be head, and all the true faithfull to be the body of the church, and that it is not sufficient to holde with the head alone, or with the body alone: but we must holde with both toge­ther, if we will be saued. The Donatistes did graunt the head Iesus Christ,The Do­natistes heresie. Cap. 4. and denyed his body the church. For this cause saith S. Augustine, Ipsum caput de quo consentimus, osten­dat nobis corpus suum de quo dissentimus. Let the head vpon whom we agree, shewe vnto vs his body, whereupon we disagree. The head is Christ, who spake first by his prophetes, afterward by him selfe, and last of all by his Apostles. In his igitur omnibus quaerenda est ecclesia. VVhere is the chur­che to be sought. In all these (saith he) the church must be sought.

If thou marke good Reader that, which I haue here re­hersed out of S. Augustine, it is to be sene, that he bindeth not the proufe of the church simply to the holy scriptures, but only in a case, when he hath to do with an heretike, who wil not admitte the auctoritie of the church. Therefore a true church may be founde, which is not shewed in the scriptures, so the contrarie thereof be not shewed in the scri­ptures. For as when S. Augustine disputeth with the Ma­niches, [Page 221] he sheweth their falsehed only out of those bookes of the newe testament which they will admitte, so disputing with the Donatistes, he must shewe the true church not by succession of the bishoppes of Rome, as he doth in other pla­ces, but (because the Donatistes denied that kinde of proufe as the heretikes of our time do) he must shewe it only out of the holy scriptures, to the intent he maye conuince them, by such principles, as them selues graunt.

Now if these Defenders will haue that to be no church which can not be shewed out of scriptures, they shall vnder­stand, that as therein they play the Donatistes, so we must nedes folowe S. Augustine in bringing scripture against them,Proufes out of holy scri­ptures that our new cler­ges chur­che is not the true church. Gen. 22.26.28. Galat. 3. Esai. 49. & 53. Esai. 2. Mich. 4. Psal. 2. Matt. 28. Act. 1. Mat. 28. Ioan. 16.14. Matt. 5. Psal. 18. Luc. 8. Matt. 5. 1. Tim. 3. Our new English church, is not dis­persed through all the world, nor is of all times. A new start vp church. not as the only proufe in dede (which they falsely saie) but as a very good and chiefe kinde of proufe, most profita­ble in all cases, and necessary at such time, as the aduersary will admitte none other proufe.

To proue therefore out of holy scriptures that their church is not the true church, thus we saye. God promised to Abraham, Isaac and Iacob, that all nations shuld be blessed in their sead, which is Christ. Who is set to be the light of the gentiles, and all nations shall see the saluation which is from God, and go vnto his holy hill, as being the heritage which Christ asked of his father. And for this cause he did will his Apostles to teach and baptise all nations, and to be his witnesses euen to the end of the earth. With whom he promised that him selfe and the holy ghost would remaine for euer. This church is a Citie buylded vpon a hill, which can not be hidde. A tabernacle placed in the sunne, a candel set not vnder a busshell, but on a candellsticke, which al men may see that enter into the house, or be within the house the pillour and ground of truth.

By these places it appereth that the church of God is eue­ry [Page] where dispersed, and euidently to be sene. But that church which now is set vp in England, had within these fyfty ye­res no one chappell in the whole world, wherein it might serue God, after that vse and number of sacramentes, after that gouernement of the church and forme of faith, which now they kepe in England. It must nedes be an obscure companie, if it were any at all, whereof no bishop, no do­ctour or head, nor parish priest or parish clerke can be shewed fyfty yeres olde. They can not be the lightsome and shi­ning church of Christ buylded vpon the foundations of the Apostles and prophetes, which florisheth for euer. Where­fore it remaineth that it is the synagog of Antichrist, and Lucifer. Who as he fell out of heauen like a lightning, so he maketh a blaze and shewe of a church in the earth for a time. But as we can tell when it was not borne, so shall it not be long, but that through Gods power it will vanish a­waye, dispersed and be scattered by the lightsome maiestie of Christes true church, which from S. Peters time to this daye florisheth in her head the bishop of Rome, and in her mem­bers throughout the worlde, which abyde in the vnitie of the same bishop.

Our aduersaries perceiuing well they haue no good grounde to staye vpon, would make the world beleue, that for this our glorious church, we had no scriptures. They laye to our charge, that we call the scriptures a colde, vncer­taine, vnprofitable, domme, killing and dead letter. But this is a slaunder,The re­uerence which the catholikes bea­re to the scriptu­res. as many other in their Apologie are. The scri­ptures we reuerence a great deale more then they do, as the thing it selfe will beare witnes. We first exhort euery man to prepare him selfe both by cleanes of life, and exercise of tonges and ernest study, before he come to read or expo­unde the holy scriptures. They prostitute them as baw­des [Page 213] do their harlottes, to the vnlerned, vngodly and rascall sorte of men, without any discerning of what disposition they be. We suffer no man though he be well lerned and ver­tuous, to buylde any thing vpon the scriptures, except he haue either some of the olde fathers, or practise of the church for his guyde and interpretation. They seeke in them no­thing but newe toyes, carnall libertie, breach of order, and contempt of antiquitie. We esteme and vnderstand the scriptures to be the sense and the word.The scri­pture is the sense and word not the bare word only. If they can pre­tende the bare word, they thinke them selues good ynough to make a sense of their owne. Which bare word as they misuse it, Pighius perhaps compareth to a nose of waxe. But the scriptures he neuer meant to dishonour with that similitude. If it were laufull for vs to vse scripture after our owne interpretation as they do, we should not lacke suf­ficient matter in the holy bookes to ouerthrowe by our owne applying all their false opinions and heresies. But we are bounde to that religious awe and reuerence of them, that except we haue an authour to auouch the sense where­of we take holde, we dare bring forth nothing. And yet read our bookes who will, he shall lacke neither scriptures in them, nor witnesses of our interpretation in any controuer­sie of this age. Let it be agreed that for decision of con­trouersies such sense of the scriptures be taken for scripture, which the holy ghost hath taught the church, and then let the world iudge, who flyeth the worde of God, as the thefe doth the gallowes, we, that alwaies require them to be tryed by the scriptures, as they are by the fathers expounded, or they, who boast of the bare word of the scripture, and that as them selues vnderstand it: then shall it appere, whether part like the Cantharus loseth his force and power in the swete balme of gods worde.

Apologie Wotteth not the Bysshop of Rome that these thinges are spoken by his owne minions? or vnderstandeth he not, he hath suche champions to fight for him? Let him harken then how holilye and how godlye one Hosius writeth of this matter, a Bysshop in Po­lonia as he testifieth of himselfe: a man doubtlesse well spoken and not vnlerned, and a very sharp and stout mainteinour of that syde. One will maruaile I suppose, howe a good manne coulde either cō­ceaue so wickedlye, or wryte so dispytefullye of those woordes whiche hee knewe proceeded from Goddes mouthe, and speciallye in suche sorte, as hee woulde not haue it seeme his owne priuate o­pinion alone, butte the common opinion of all that band. He dis­sembleth I graunt you in deede, and hydeth what hee is, and setteth fourth the matter so, Hosius de expresso verbo dei. as though it were not hee and his syde, butte the Zwenkseldian heretiques that so didd speake. We saythe hee, will bidde awaye with the same scriptures, whereof wee see brought not onelye diuerse, butte also contrarye interpretations: and we wil heare God speake, rather then wee will resorte to the naked elemen­tes, and appoynt oure saluation to reste in them. It behoueth not a manne to be experte in the lawe and scripture, butte to bee taught of God. It is butte loste labour that a manne bestoweth in the scri­ptures, for the scripture is a creature and a certaine bare letter.

This is Hosius sayeng, vttered altogether with the same spirit and the same mind, wherwith in times past Montane and Martion were moued, whoe as men reporte, vsed to saye when with a contempt they reiected the holye scriptures, that themselues knew many mo and better things then eyther Christe or the Apostles euer knewe.

What thenne shall I saye heere, O ye principall postes of Reli­gion, O ye Archegouernours of CHRISTES Churche, is this that youre reuerence whiche ye geue to Goddes woorde? The holye Scriptures which S. Paule saith came by the inspiration of Godde, whiche God did commende by so many miracles, wherein are the moste perfit printes of Christes owne steppes, which all the holy Farthers, Apostles, and Aungeles, whiche Christ him selfe the sonne of God, as often as was nedefull dyd alleadge for testimonie and proufe: will ye, as though they were vnworthye for you to he­are, bid them Auaunt away? That is, will ye enioyne God to kepe silence, who speakith to you most clearely by his owne mouth in the Scriptures? Or that worde, whereby alone, as Paul saith, we are reconciled to God, and whiche the Prophet Dauid saith, is holye and pure and shall last for euer, will ye call that but a bare and dead lettre? Or will ye saye that all our labour is lost, which is bestowed in that thinge which Christ hath commaunded vs diligently to searche and to haue euermore before our eyes? And will ye saye that Christ [Page 214] and the Apostles mēt with subtelty to deceiue the people, when they exhorted them to reade the holie in Sriptures, that thereby they might flowe in all wisedom and knowledge? No maruaile at all, though these men despise vs and all our doinges, which set so litle by God him selfe and his infallible sainges. Yet was it but want of witt in them, to thintent they might hurt vs, to do so extreme in­iury to the wor of God.

But Hosius will here make exclamation saieng, we do him wrong, and that these be not his owne wordes, but the wordes of the here­tique Zwenckfeldius.

THE NINETINTH CHAPTER.

How ignorantly, wickedly,Confuta­tion. Hosius slaunde­rously burthe­ned by the Apologie. and stubboornely the author of this Apologie burdeneth the reuerent father in God and honourable prelate Cardinall Hosius with that he neuer said, it is not vnknowen to all men, who haue readen that booke, which he wrote, de expresso verbo Dei, of the expresse word of God. Here I aske so much pardon as to detect an he­reticall touch or two, before I make direct answer to the fou­le slaundering of Hosius.

First I note with what fidelitie these newe holy bre­thren do their thinges.The best that may be said for this Defen­der. It maye be thought that the secre­tary of this newe clergie at his penning of the Apologie sawe not Hosius booke of the expresse worde of God. But as they haue ben conuersant in S. Augustine, Hierome, Chrysostom and the auncient fathers, so vse they Hosius at this time: that is to saye, they read neither the olde fathers with any diligence, neither the writers of our time. But by snap­pes and peaces either them selues write out here and there a lyne or two, or vse that which some of their owne secte hath taken out of them. So that for most part they ne­uer knowe the true meaning of the place, whiche they alle­age. But vsing patched note bookes, and bringing in scat­tered authorities, they be deceiued them selues,An excuse fauoura­bly cōcei­ued for the De­fenders vniust charging of Cardi­nall Ho­sius. and deceiue others. After this sorte they fell on some note booke ma­de out of Hosius, where the said wordes that they burthen [Page] him with, were written. And he that tooke the note, kne­we well they were not the wordes of Hosius, and did but only put the name of Hosius vnto them, because they we­re taken out of his booke. The writer of this Apologie not knowing or not remembring so much, when he founde in the note booke the name of Hosius with such wordes, he dyd rashly put them in print to his owne great shame and discredite. If this excuse be not true, we must nedes laye maruelous malice to the said writer, who wittingly and of set purpose did impute these wordes to Hosius, which he re­ported by waye of misliking of them, and shewing whose heresie they conteined.

The au­thour of the Apo­logie is of necessitie to be charged of ig­norance or of ma­lice, for the slaū­der of Hosius. The wōt of hereti­kes deprehended in falsehed.Now let the Defenders chose whether they will haue their secretary condemned of ignorance, or of malice. How so euer it be, marke yet the third point, which hereof we wil gather. The Apologie was skant printed and published, but that grosse errour was out of hande espied, and word there­of brought to the authour, I meane him that penned it. But what did he? Did he confesse that he was deceiued? Did he crie Hosius mercie? No, no. That is not the wont of heretikes. They will go foreward with the matter once begone, what so euer come of it. What did he then? When it should be set forth in english, and word came to hym thereof, he made an excuse, I warraunt you meete for an heretike, whose propertye it is proficere in peius, as S. Paul sayeth, to procede to worse and worse, to take his de­gree backeward, and of agreat fault to make a farre grea­ter.How this Defender amended his fault. For whereas before (as charitie moueth me to thinke) he had made an errour, supposing Hosius to haue said that which he had not, afterward by stubborne mainteining of it, he sheweth what spirite he is of. And when he might reasonably haue excused his ignorance, chose rather spite­fully [Page 215] to discouer his malice. As it shall manifestly appere by the circūstance of the thing. He laieth to Hosius charge, and in his person to all our charges, that we do not esteme the holy scriptures. He proueth it by certaine wordes allea­ged out of a treatise made by Hosius de expresso verbo dei. The wordes are here put in the Apologie,The ar­gument of Hosius boke De expres­so verbo dei. as the reader may see. The true argument of Hosius booke is no other then to shewe, that all heretikes haue alleaged the wordes of God, as they be writtē. But none of them all haue taken the right vnderstanding of Gods wordes, as they do in dede signifie. For that only the catholike church atteineth vnto, because only it hath the holy Ghost. All heretikes haue brought for their opinions the written word of God so long, vntill at the last (sayeth Hosius) there were founde, who by the wordes of the scriptures toke vpon them to take away al au­ctoritie frō scriptures. Natum est (sayeth he) nouūquoddā pro­phetarū genus, qui non sunt veriti scripturarum auctoritate scrip­turis auctoritatem omnem detrahere, en quo perduxit rem tandem Satanas. A certaine newe kinde of prophetes is risen, who sticke not by the auctoritie of scriptures to take away all auctoritie from scriptures. See whether at the lenght the deuil hath brought the matter.

Now afterward expounding this matter more at large, he declareth the capitaine of that heresie to haue ben Zwenfeldius. He sheweth that by a text of scripture where Dauid saith, I will heare what our lorde speaketh in me: Psal. 48. Zwēck­feldius went about to wil mē to heare what God telleth eue­ry man by inspiration, rather then to geue attendance to the written word of God. And whiles Hosius reporteth what Zwenckfeldius said for the maintenance of his fond heresie, among other his wordes these are, which be brought in this Apologie against Hosius and against the Catholi­kes, [Page] whereas it is neither Hosius nor any Catholike that speaketh them, but only Zwenckfeldius him selfe. As well might he haue appeached the auncient fathers of heresies, because in sundry places of their workes, they alleage the wordes of the heretikes, whom they confute. So should S. Basile be made an Eunomian, S. Ambrose an Arian, S. Au­gustine a Pelagian. &c.

Hitherto we haue shewed that the wordes alleaged in the Apologie vnder the name of Hosius, make neither against him, nor against vs, as not being his wordes nor ours, but only the wordes of Zwenckfeldius. Well, what credite maye we geue to this man in expounding the word of God,Hosius cleareth him selfe of the false slaunder made vpon him by the De­fender, before the Apo­logie was written. (whose true meaning he may falsifie at his pleasure because we can not bring forth God him selfe to declare his wordes) seing he dareth to burthen Hosius, with these wordes, which Hosius him selfe being yet alyue can declare to haue an other meaning, as the booke it selfe doth witnesse to all that list to read the same. This was a great fault to impute so horrible an heresie to Hosius vn­iustly. This was a great ignorance to charge him with that heresie, which he refuteth and impugneth. They are great crimes, and yet such, as might rise of misreport and ignoran­ce. But when he was tolde of them, he should of reason haue corrected them. He should haue repented with Pe­ter, and not despaired with Cain and Iudas.

The ma­lice of this De­fender truly de­tected.But what did he, when he vnderstode he had erred? He addeth a glose farre more malicious, then the former errour was. For graunting that Hosius setteth out the matter so, as though neither he nor any of his syde, but the hereti­kes Zuenckfeldians spake so, this notwithstanding he bur­theneth both him and the catholikes with it saying, that he dessembleth, and hydeth what he is. Syr, was this the way to [Page 216] amend your fault? To graunt that Hosius spake against the Zuenckfeldians, and yet to beare men in hande, he fauoured them? If he had fauoured their heresie, what neded he to refell it? But how say you, that Hosius dissembleth and hydeth what he is, sith that euen here in two places in most plaine wordes you laye the Zuenckfeldian heresie to his charge? Read your owne booke. Before thallegation of Zuenckfeldius heresie, saye you not thus? We, sayth hee, will bid away, &c. And after thallegation, haue you not these wor­des. This is Hosius saying? How standeth all this together? You haue forgoten the prouerbe, that biddeth a lyer to be myndefull. I can not tell how to name this kinde of your dealing, lying, or detraction, slaundering, or malicious spea­king. But Sir if Hosius haue spoken euill, why geue you not witnes against him of euill? If he haue spoken well, euen by your owne confession in reputing the Zuenckfeldians for heretikes, why finde you fault with him for his good wordes, such I saye, as your selfe confesse to be good? You reproue him who speaketh not against Zuenckfeldius, and againe you graunt he speaketh against him, and yet because you had once reproued him, you will continewe in it without reason, lerning, or witte. But it must nedes so be, for without partinacie no man is either a perfite heretike, or a perfite slaunderer.

I am sure this one dede can be iustified by no honest man, although he were but a naturall politike citizen, who should haue the iudgement of the matter. Seing you haue belyed Hosius in print, aske him forgeuenes in print. But you are so farre from that humilitie, as you are from the loue of the catholike religion. Yea rather ye sticke not to ioyne an other lye to it, and that in print also, to make excuse of your former offence, by committing a more greuous offen­ce. [Page] If yet you stand in defence of it, all the world will ac­compt you for a desperat person. For no man that euer sa­we Hosius workes, can thinke that he was gylty of that you burthen him with. But some man might thinke you were deceiued and mistooke Hosius. But sith you graunt, you do not now mistake him, and yet charge him with auouching that which he hodleth for heresie: he that vnderstandeth this much of you, may assure him selfe, that you are disposed to belye and slaunder Hosius, though it cost you the damna­tion of your soule. For shame man repent and reuoke that for which your owne conscience stinteth not to barke at you. But this greueth me somewhat more then your selfe. How founde so many flatterers in their hartes to kepe you from making amendes by confession of your default, that they also mainteine you in it? For the man who trans­lated your booke, and likewise the woman semeth to be ac­cessary to your fault. And how many mo were accessary to it God knoweth. Beleue me you seme to haue neuer a frend in England.An eui­dent to­ken that this De­fender hath ne­uer a true frend. For if you had but one, he would ne­uer leaue you, vntill you had promised him to amend this great enormitie. It is a fowle matter for a Superintendent to be a slaunderer of set purpose and wilfull malice, to go from ignorance to stubborne defence, to heape one synne vpon an other.

All the booke of Hosius de expresso verbo Dei, declareth, that he doth reuerence the holy scriptures, as he ought to do. If you list not to read it all ouer, see but one place where he sayeth by waye of an obiection against him selfe after this sorte.That Hosius reue­renceth the scrip­tures, it is proued by Hosius Num tu dei verbum extenuare, num omnem ei aucto­ritatem detrahere conaris? An haec ita multa propterea produ­xisti, vt ostenderes haereticum esse, si quis testimonio scripturarum vteretur? Doest thou go about to make the word of God to be lesse [Page 217] estemed, and to take all auctoritie from it? Hast thou therefore brought forth these many thinges, to thintent thou mightest shewe him to be an heretike, if any man did vse the witnes of scripture? To this demaund he answereth after this sort. Proculae nobis absit, vt vel cogitemus haec, quae sunt ab homine Christiano aliena. God forbidde that we should euer so much as thinke these thinges, which belong not to a Christian man. For (saith he) we holde with S. Hilarius, Lib. 2. de trinit. who iudged heresie to come from the vn­derstanding, not from the scripture. Then if Hosius detest that opinion, which you impute vnto him, why do you by your impudencie in this matter betraye an other pryuy fault of yours, which is that you will not go from that you haue once said, though you perceiue it to be neuer so false: but with a newe lye farre worse fortifie the former lye?

But how then, Apologie yf Zwenkfeldius make exclamation on the other syde, and saye that the same very wordes be not his but Hosius own wordes? For tell me where hath Zwenkfeldius euer written thē? Or if he haue written them, and Hosius haue iudged the same to be wicked, why hath not Hosius spoken so much as one worde to con­fute them? Howsoeuer the mater goeth, although Hosius paraduen­ture will not allowe of those wordes, yet he doth not disallow the meaning of the wordes. For well nere in all controuersies, and na­mely touching the vse of the holy communion vnder both kindes, although the wordes of Christ be plaine and euident, yet doth Ho­sius disdainefully reiect them, as no better then colde and dead ele­mentes: and commaundeth to giue faith to certaine new lessons a­pointed by the Church, and to I wot not what reuelations of the holye Ghoste. And Pighius saieth, men ought not to beleue, no not the most cleare and manifest wordes of the scriptures, onles the same be allowed for good by the interpretation and auctoritie of the churche.

THE TWENTITH CHAPTER.

This Defender goeth forewarde,Confuta­tion. A proce­ding in lying. and as though his pro­fession were to saye no truth, he addeth vnto the heape of his former lyes mo and mo with like impudencie, as he beganne. What if Zuenkfeldius crye out (saith he) that they be not [Page] his, but Hosius his owne woordes? Whereby he meaneth as we gesse, that Hosius faineth these wordes vpon Zuenk­feldius. If this much had ben put in the latine Apologie at the first, it might haue come to the knowledge of Hosius, and him selfe would haue declared, how he came by these wordes, and whether he had them by most faithfull report of mouth, (which kinde of instruction Epiphanius writing against heresies sometimes vsed) or founde them written in latine by any man, or translated them out of the Douch tonge, as he might take them out of diuerse writers. This is more then probable, that Hosius lyuing in Prussia among the Germaines, would not be so bolde, as to make an open lye vpon any of them in his publike writinges. He hath more regard of his honour then so to do. Would God ye had some like regard of your honestie.witnesses of Zuenkfeldius heresie be­sides Ho­sius by whom Hosius is clea­red of charge of slaunder. Now the same thing that Hosius layeth to Zuenkfeldius, also Fridericus Staphy­lus witnesseth to haue ben his heresie. And Flacius Illyricus hath written fyue bookes against the said Zuenkfeldius in the Douch tōge, as Hosius reporteth in his first booke against Brentius. Where also he putteth the wordes, which Zuenk­feldius vsed with his owne scolers. Moreouer Philip Me­lanchthō in a certaine preface before parte of his workes, reporteth his doctrine (as Hosius sayeth) to drawe men from the reading and thinking of written scripture to inspiration. I thinke these are sufficient meanes to cleare Hosius from suspition of slaundering Zuenkfeldius.The De­fenders acknow­ledge the Zuenk­feldians to be heretikes, and yet they charge Hosius for saying so. But what nede we so many witnesses? Do not your selues in your Apologie acknowledge the Zuenkfeldians for monstrous heretikes? If it be laufull for you so to accompt them, what reason or witte is it, to lay that to Hosius charge, which ye do your selfe? But lyers many times contrary to thaduise of tholde prouerbe, forgete them selues.

But let vs graunt that ye mistrusted whether Hosius ac­cused Zuenkfeldius iustly or no. Was that a sufficient cause why ye should burthen him to haue thought the same thing, which he reproued in an other? Is your backebyting excu­sed thereby? Admitte that Hosius being sure of Zuenk­feldius heresie, did in his owne latine wordes set it forth at large. What can you make thereof? It is knowen the same is an heresie. Your selues confesse it and condemne it. So doth Hosius likewise. And yet would you make vs beleue, that Hosius him selfe thought so? Yea saye you, for he hath not spoken so much as one word to refute his wor­des. This is an other of your lyes.He that calleth Zuenkfeldius an heretik [...], speaketh against his here­sie. For when he sheweth it to be an heresie to saye as Zuēkfeldius did, I suppose it is one word, that may seme to refute it in a Christen mans eares. so farre as a lerned mans condemnation is a confutation. I am sure you saye no more against it in your Apologie. And because otherwise ye confute it not, nor certaine other heresies, as Mennonians, Anabaptistes, Libertines, &c. were it reason therefore to charge you with the maintenāce of thē?

Well to answer somewhat for Hosius,A place alleaged out of Hosius pertei­ning to the refu­tation of zwenk­feldius. read the lerned boo­ke which Hosius wrote against Brentius, and there shall you fynde Hosius to saye this much of Zuēcfeldius, Excogitauit & ipse nouā haeresim, ac scripturarū nixus praesidio, scripturis au­ctoritatē omnē abrogare conatus est. Zuencfeldius also for his par­te hath deuised a newe heresie, and leaning to the help of scriptures, went about to take away all auctoritie from the scriptures. All these wordes he bestoweth to thintent we shuld beware of his heresie. Which may seme to any man of iudgement to make somewhat on Hosius behalfe for confutation of Zuenkfeldius heresie.

But yet let vs see a farther refutation thereof. The pla­ce is somewhat long. I will recite it in English out of the [Page] first booke contra Brentium. For whereas Zuenkfeldius brought for his opinion out of S. Paul,1. Cor. 13 that place where the Apostle conferreth the knowledge of this present life which is vnperfite, with the perfite knowledge which shall be in the life to come: Hosius sayeth, that these men wrest such thinges to this life, applying that, which S. Paul nameth knowledge in a part, to holy scripture, and that which he calleth perfite, to the reuelations of the spirite as though when a man is come to reuelations, that which is a peece of knowledge (which was by Zuenfeldius the handeling and vse of scriptures) were by reuelations taken awaye. Is not this the refutatiō of Zuēkfeldius, or at least is it not one word towardes the refutation of him? He that listeth maye see more in the said booke against Brētius. Whereas the good life of the Zwenkfeldiās was wel reported and praised in the presence of Hosius at Charles the late Emperours courte, Hosius fearing least that report might infect some mā, saieth, the Deuil chāgeth him selfe into an Angell of light, that by the shadowe of holynes he maye deceiue that simplicitie of the hearers. And yet Hosius semeth to you to fauer the Zwenkfeldians, because he likeneth them to the Deuill.

Hosius reckeneth zwenck­feldius with hai­nous he­retikes.Furthermore in the very booke de expresso verbo dei, he reckeneth Zwenkfeldius with Marcion, Photinus, Monta­nus, Sabellius, Manichaeus, Luther and Zwinglius. And yet these men he not a shamed to beare the world in hand, as though Hosius were a Zwenkfeldian. They are so good in the arte of lying, that their scolers wil not sticke to saye hereafter, that Hosius was a Zuinglian, and thought as Caluine did of all thinges, not withstanding his worthy writinges, in which he hath spent the better part of his age, against them. For at the lest they will make surmise, that at his death he recanteth, as they haue and do report of sundry [Page 219] lerned catholike men, namely of doctor Pendilton in En­gland, of Picus Mirandula of Italy, of D. Clingius preacher of Erford in high Almaigne, of Latomus of Spire, of D. Gropperus of Coulen, and last of all of the late most catho­like Emperour Ferdinand of famous memorie.

But Hosius (saye they) peraduenture will not allow the wor­des of Zuenkfeldius, yet he doth not disalowe the meaning of the wordes. Well and clerkly reasoned. As though wor­des were allowed or dissallowed for any other so principall a cause, as for theire meaning. And therefore he that di­salloweth wordes, hath much more disallowed the meaning of them. Yet, (saye they) of the holy communion vnder both kindes he reiecteth the plaine worde of Christ as dead and colde elementes. Verely a man might thinke this boo­ke was set forth by some ennemye of our newe english cler­gy, it is so much to their defacing, had not them selues at di­uerse times acknowleged it for a whelpe of their one lit­tour. A man for his life can not finde one lefe in it with­out many lyes. Where doth Hosius reiect Christes wor­des? I knowe where he reiecteth your wordes, who saye that both kindes are to be geuen to all the laie by com­maundement and institution of Christ. But Christes wordes he maketh a farre more accompt of, then ye do. For he sayeth they were spoken to the twelue Apostles, with whom only he sate downe, as the gospell sheweth. And ye pretende they were spoken to all men and women. Nei­ther doth he any iote diminish the estimation of the scrip­tures,Mar. 26. Mar. 14. Luc. 22. where he biddeth vs to geue credite to the lessons of the church, whether they be newe or olde, so long as they come from the true church of Christ, which is knowen by the succession from the Apostles, and specially from Pe­ter the head shepeherd of all Christes flocke. In dede ye [Page] wote not what reuelations of the holy Ghost are in the church, because ye are gone out of it, and do not acknowled­ge that head and the generall councels,Mat. 18. where the holy ghost reueleth his truth, according to that he said: where two or three be gathered together in my name, I am in the middest of them.

Touching that for which ye reproue Pighius, he mea­neth, that we can not knowe, which are true scriptures, vn­till the church hath shewed them vnto vs. And before we knowe them, we can not expresselye geue credite vnto their sayinges. For diuerse heretikes haue gone about to set forth workes of their owne making or corrupting vnder the name of scripture, and would haue geuen them thauctoritie of scripture. But not contenting your selues with this great iniurie done to Hosius, ye come also to do a greater to all the catholikes, saying that they hate and burne the holy scriptures. This is an intollerable surmise, a malicious report, and most shameles lye.

Apologie And yet as though this were to litle, they also burne the holy scriptures, as in times past wicked king Aza did, or as Antiochus, or Maximinus did, and are wont to name them Heretiques boks. And out of doubt to see to, they would faine do as Herode in old time did in Iewrie, Eusebius. that hee myght with more surety kepe stil his domi­niō. Who being an Idumeā borne, and a straunger to the stocke and kinred of the Iewes, and yet coueting much to be taken for a Iew, to thende be might establish to him and his posteritie the kingdom of that countrey which he had gotten of Augustus Cesar, he com­maunded all the Genealogies and Petigrees to be burnte and made out of the waye, so as there shoulde remaine no recorde, wherby he might be knowen to thē that came after, that he was an Aliaunt in bloud: wheras euen from Abrahams time these monumentes had been safelye kepte amongest the Iewes and layde vp in theire thre­sury, bicause in them it might easely and moste assuredly be found of what linage euery one did descende. So (in good faith) doe the­se menne when they woulde haue all their owne doinges in estima­tion, as though they had ben deliuered to vs euen from the Apost­les or from Christe him selfe, to thende there might be founde no [Page 220] where any thing able to conuince such their dreames and lyes, either they burne the holy scriptures, or els they craftely conuey them from the people surely.

THE XXI CHAPTER.

Pardon me I praie thee Reader,Confuta­tion. if I vse wordes somewhat vehement, the cause so requiring. We are taught by the scriptures, to take vp an heretike sharply, as though that were the waye to help him, if any be. For if that remedie serue not,Tit. 3. we are aduised after a rebuke or two to auoide him, as I most ernestly require thee to do, that thou mayst saue thy soule. As they lye vnto thee in such plaine mat­ters, so do they much more, and to thy greater perill lye in sundry pryuy pointes of thy faith. Once trye them of set purpose false, and for euer beware of them, lest thou be con­demned for consenting to their wickednes.

This Defender cryeth out, O ye pillours of religion. But how much more iustly crye we againe to him. O thou ca­pitaine lyer, O most worthy not the reward of a whetstone, but the iudgement of a backebyter, of a slaunderer, of a cur­sed speaker, of a mocker, of the accuser of the brethren, of a blasphemer: Is this the regard thou hast, I saye not to God, or to Christen men, but to thyne owne estimation, and co­mon honestie of a man? Canst thou persuade thy selfe to gete credite by lying? To seme sober by rayling? Honest by villanie? Charitable by slaundering? Vpright by deceit? Iust by impietie? Why sayest thou of vs in generall, that is to saye of the catholike church, that we despise, hate, cast away, and burne the holy scriptures? Had we not loued and kept the scriptures, how couldest thou and thy fellowes haue co­me by them? Had ye not them of vs? From the Apostles tyme to this daie we haue kept them vnspotted and vndefi­led, and ye within these fifty yeres haue by your vulgare trās­lations corrupted them, that lamentable it is to consider. [Page] And when we burned the same corrupt translations or any part thereof,VVe bur­ne hereti­call boo­kes and false trās­lations, the scrip­tures we burne not. or any of your hereticall treatises, we burned not the scriptures, no more then one doth the apple tree, that burneth the caterpillers.

The scriptures we honour and kepe most reuerently and diligently. Thefore your comparing of vs with the wicked kinges Aza, Antiochus, Maximinus, and Herode, is false and slaunderous. For how saye you syr capitaine of lyers, had we not the scripture in euery monasterie, cathedrall church, college, in euery priuate lybrary of any that was lerned? Doth it not appere to you, how litle the catholikes stikt at costes and charges, to be furnished with store of faire writ­ten bibles? If printing were so costly nowe, as handwryting was then, is it to be thought, ye would your selues haue ben so well stored with these holy bokes, as they were? Doubt­les your domesticall charges about your yokefellowes and your children would haue withdrawen you from that charge. Yet come ye forth and most impudently bur­then vs with burning and conueying awaye of the scriptu­res.

The like thing was obiected to S. Augustine and the ca­tholikes in his time by the Donatistes being then heretikes, as ye are nowe. To whom he answereth, as we wil answer you. Certe ille ignibus tradidisse credatur, De vnit. eccles. ca. 3. qui eis lectis non consentire conuincitur. Let him be thought to haue cast the holy scriptures into the fyre, who when they are read is conuict not to consent vnto them. The ca­tholikes beleue the scrip­tures mo­re then the gos­pellers, We read in the holy scriptures, that Christ said this is my body. Who beleueth it, ye, that denie it, or we, who are content to dye for the defence of that his reall body in the blessed sacrament? S. Iames sayeth, a man is iustified by wor­kes, and not by faith onely. Who beleueth this, they which saye that only faith iustifieth, or they which saye, that wor­kes [Page 221] be required also to iustification? Christ saith,Ioan. 6. qui mandu­cat hunc panem, viuet in aeternum, he that eateth this bread, shall lyue for euer. Who beleueth this, they that saye both kin­des be necessary to laie men by commaundement of Christ, or they who saye, that one kinde is sufficient to saluation concerning the eating of the sacrament, although both be necessary concerning the consecration and oblation there­of? The like I might saye of all the controuersies which are betwen you and vs. If then by S. Augustines rule he must be thought to haue burnt the scriptures, who is conuict not to beleue them, and you against the holy scriptures do saye, that Christes body is not present, that faith only iustifieth, that both kindes be of necessitie: Ye be they who must be thought to haue burnt the holy scriptures, because ye beleue them not. Burthen vs nomore with such slaunders, lest when they are turned vpon your selues, ye repent your folie to la­te. Thinke ye that when heretikes and hereticall bookes be burnt, the scriptures are burnt? Other scriptures the catho­likes do not burne. Albeit them also, I meane heretikes, the secular officer burneth, the spirituall doth but excommuni­cate them, as their duty requireth.

Very rightly and aptly doth Chrisostom write against these men. Apologie Chrysost. in opere imper. Heretikes, saieth he, shutte vp the doers against the truth: for they knowe full well, if the doore were open the church shuld be none of theirs.

You alleage out of Chrysostome,Confuta­tion. that heretikes shut vp the gates against the truth. The truth is to be sought no­where els, but in the church. Which by promise of God hath both the word of God,Esai. 59. How he­retikes shut the gates a­gainst the truth. and also his holy spirite to vnder­stand the same. Heretikes may well be said to shut vp the gates against the truth. For with all endeuour they leade men from the church to their priuate synagoges, where tea­ching [Page] contrary doctrine and condemning the church, they bring their folowers to a false belefe vnder the name of the gospell. So what by leading men out of the true waye, and what by their false doctrine stopping them so as they come not obedientlye to the church to lerne the truth, they seme plainely to shut the gates against the truth. Now right well knowe these Defenders, that if the gates of the catho­like church were open, so as euery man might freely entre to see and lerne the truth, sone after their whole rowte should be ouerthrowen, driuen out of the church, and the priuiledge of that name and blessed state be taken from them. But Syr here you neither shewe your selfe, who are the heretikes, nor in what place of that vnperfite worke Chrysostom wri­teth it.Hom. 44 An hereti­ke by Chryso­stom is the sonne of hell. But we answer you, that the same Chrysostome vpon the 23. of Mathew saith, that an heretike is the sonne of hell, quia veritatem quam ten [...]bat reliquit, because he hath forsaken the truth, which he did holde. You knowe right well that the catholikes abide still in that faith which they helde in their baptisme. Ye be they that haue forsaken the truth which once ye helde, and now will not retourne to it againe, and thus are ye the heretikes, that shut the gates a­gainst the truth.

Apologie Theophylact also: Gods worde saith he, is the candle whereby the theefe is espied:

Confuta­tion.The word of God is a candle, by which the thefe is taken But the thefe is he, that goeth about to robbe God of his truth,VVho is the thefe that [...]y the candle of gods w [...]rd is espied. saying, that his church might erre, as ye haue said in this Apologie. The thefe is he that robbeth the word of God of his true meaning, as ye haue done about these wordes, this is my bodye, and such like places. The thefe is he, that robbeth the church of the very letter of Gods word, as ye haue robbed it (so much as in your power lyeth) of the [Page 222] Machabes, denying that booke to be the word of God, as certaine other partes also both of the olde and new testa­ment. Ye therefore are the theues. And by Gods word the lanterne of light which is set in the candelsticke of the catholike church to shyne ouer al them of the house of God, ye are espied.

And Tertullian saith, Apologie. the holy scripture manifestlye findeth out the fraude and theafte of heretiques. For why do they hyde, why do they kepe vnder the gospell, which Christ would haue preched a­lowde from the house toppe? Why whealme they that light vnder a Bushell, whiche ought to stande on a Candlestick?

The holy scripture detecteth the deceites of heretikes,Confuta­tion. first shewing that they departe from the companie which professeth Christ, as S. Iohn saith. Ex nobis exierunt. 1. Ioan. 2. They went out from vs, as it is knowen, that ye went out from among the catholikes, with whom once ye serued God in one house. Againe the scripture saith there shalbe men stan­ding in their owne conceite, vnchast, louing pleasure more thē God. 2. Tim. 3. Who be those that stande in their owne conceite? We, who haue great dread and religion to steppe a side one ynch from the interpretation which olde councels and holy fathers il­luminated with the spirite of God, haue geuen vpon the holy scriptures, or ye, who thinke your selues wiser then euer they were, and to see that was neuer sene before? Who are vnchast? they that exhort all men to chastitie, and them sel­ues absteine from wedlocke for the better meane to serue God: or ye, that bid men which haue vowed chastitie to breake their vowes, and your selues against the expresse wordes of the Apostle (who willeth none to be bishop, that hath ben the husband of mo wiues then one) do;1. Tim. 3. yea after that ye be made bishops in your owne conceit, mary a newe, some a widowe, some twise, some oftener, louing the plea­sure of your flesh and the satisfiyng of your owne lustes, [Page] more then Christ, who both him selfe gaue example of chastitie, and his Apostles left the vse of their former wiues, as partly it is iudged by that Peter said, Beholde we haue for­saken all thinges, Matth. 1 [...]. and haue folowed thee, and partly by that the doctours of the church haue alwayes so vnderstanded, much lesse did they mary after they were bishops, and lest of all did they mary twise or thrise. Therefore the scripture hath de­tected your going out of the church, your pride, your incon­tinencie, and your vniuersal dealing, that is to saye, the fraude and thefte of heretikes, whereby they robbe simple soules of the catholike faith.The ca­tholikes haue not kept the gospell vnder the busshell. Neither can ye iustly burthen vs with keping the gospell vnder couert. For we haue alwayes preached the true word of God so lowde, that we haue tur­ned infidels vnto the faith, as Germanie, Pole, Lithuania, Prussia, Sueden do witnesse. which were conuerted before Luther, and yet within these 900. yeres, the faith of which time ye reproue. Ye on the other syde so preach, that of Christen men ye make apostates, renegates, epicures, Turkish Huguenots and heretikes, who be worse then infidels.

Apologie Why trust they more to the blyndenes of the vnskilfull multi­tude and to ignoraunce, then to the goodnes of their cause?

Confuta­tion.We do not trust in the ignoraunce of the people, as you report. And yet better it is they were ignorant, then euill taught. But b [...]ause they are ignorant, we will them not to lead the scriptures to their own grosse fantasie, for as S. Paul sayeth,1. Cor. 8. non in omnibus est scientia, Knowledge is not in all: but to be lead by them, who according to the tradition, that hath ben left from the begynning, do rightly vnderstand the scriptures.

Apologie. Thinke they their slightes are not alredy perceiued, and that they can walke nowe vnespied, as though they had Giges ryng to go in­uisible by, vpon theire finger? No no:

Confu­tation.It is ye that faine would walke inuisible, and carye the [Page 223] ryng of Gyges about with you,The gos­pellers shew thē selues de­syrours of Gyges ring, that they might walke in­uisibl. who being vnder catholike magistrates would escape punishement, because by your doctrine no man may be punished for his conscience. But hauing the sworde on your side, ye whette it against the ca­tholikes, who haue good cause to cōtinewe in their olde cō­science, ye haue no cause to frame your selues a newe. And I praie you Syrs whiles ye with your rebellious trompettes blowe such traiterous blastes against the regiment of wo­men without putting your names vnto thē, and in like ma­ner set forth heretical bookes, as the late booke against the coūcel of Trent, the Defence of the truth, the Herborough, this present Apologie, and almost all other bookes both of you of England and of your brethren the huguenots of Fraunce: do ye not practise to goe inuisible? Do ye not shewe your selues desyrous, that ye had the ryng of Gyges?

All men see nowe well and well againe, Apologie what good stuffe is in that chest of the Byshop of Romes bosome. This thinge all one of it selfe maye be an argumente sufficiente, that they worke not vprightly and truely.

You are much troubled with the chest of the Popes bo­some, wherein he is thought to haue all lawes.Confuta­tion. At this you scoffe foure or fyue times in your Apologie, medling with a matter that you vnderstand not. For it is a lawiers phrase. Who presupposeth the prince of euery common weale to knowe the lawe of the same,The chest of the Popes breste. no lesse then if it were written in his breaste. And therefore when he maketh a newe lawe, he repealeth the former lawe, whereunto the later is contra­ry. And whereas one might saye, he remembred not his former law at the making of his later, and therefor except in his last he make special mēcion of the first, the same should stande in his force: hereunto answer is made, that although mention be not made of the first, yet it is repealed by the later lawe, being contrary vnto it. And why? Because who [Page] so euer hath power to make a newe lawe, is presumed alwa­yes to haue the olde law of the same common weale before his eyes. For though him selfe haue it not in remembrance, yet the lawiers that be of his councell can not be vn­myndefull thereof. And how so euer it were, yet it should not be thought, the Prince were ignorant of his owne lawe.

These be the wordes of Bonifacius the Pope, which be­long not only to him, but to all Princes and magistrates, who haue auctoritie to make lawes.De constit. in sexto. c. 1. Romanus Pontifex qui iura omnia in serinio pectoris sui censetur habere, constitutionem condendo posteriorem, priorem, quamuis de ipsa mentionem non faciat, reuocare noscitur. The bishop of Rome, who is thought to haue all lawes in the chest of his breste, by making the second lawe, is knowen to reuoke the first, although he make no mention of it. What is here to be laughed at? Reproue the matter if you can. The briefe summe of that chapter made by Ioannes Andreae a lerned Lawier is this. Noua constitutio principis tollit primā contrariā, quamuis id nō exprimat. The new lawe of the prince taketh away the former lawe being contrary, although it expresse not so much. The reason of this rule is, because the prince is presumed to haue as it were within the cheft of his brest all his owne lawes. The Pope being a prince also for his part (greater then the ennemies of vnitie would he were) made a secōde lawe, which reformed the former contrary lawe, by the force of this principle. No­we come these felowes, and either not vnderstanding the matter, or maliciously abusing it, ceasse not to scoffe at the Pope, for the chest of his bosome. But verely neither the Po­pe nor any other prince euer had so many lawes in his boso­me, as they haue fardles of lyes in their tonges and pennes, and heaps of malice in their hartes. This maye be applied [Page 224] as an answere to euery such place, where this Defender brin­geth in mention of the chest of the Popes brest for matter to scoffe at.

Worthely ought that mater seme suspicious which fleeth triall, Apologie and is afrayde of the light: for he that doth euill, as Christ saith, seekith darkenesse, and hateth light. A conscience that knowith it selfe cleere, commeth willingly into open shew, that the workes whiche procede of God may be seen. Neither be they so very blind, but they see this wel ynogh howe their owne kyngdome strayght way is at a pointe, yf the scriptures once haue the vpper hande and that lyke as men say, the Idolles of diuells in times past, of whom menne in doubtfull matters were then wont to receiue aunswers, were sodenly striken domme at the sight of Christ, when he was borne and came into the worlde: euen so they see that nowe all their s [...]tle practises will sone fall downe hedlong vpon the sight of the gospell. For Antichrist is not ouerthrowen but with the brightnes of Christes comming.

He that doth euill hateth light, very true it is.Confuta­tion. Ioan. 3. The De­fenders may seme to flye triall, who re­fused to come to the late generall councell. And be­cause your selfe that made this Apologie did euill, you durst not set your name to the booke. Yea further I saye to you Defenders, none of all your companie were so hardy, as to come and to shewe their faces at Trent, where the chief lightes of Christendome were assembled together these late yeres past. But in the meane time they thought it better to fit with their wiues at home, dandeling their children vpon their knees. Well, they lacke not their policie. They be not so blinde, as not to foresee, that if once their handling of scriptures should come to light, they should be knowen for such as in dede they are. And as all idols fell downe at the presence of Christes blessed body and bloud being offered vnbloudely where so euer his faith was preached and receiued,1. Reg. 5. and as Dagon fell downe at the presence of our lords arke: so all hereticall doctrine is dete­cted at the meeting of bishops and lerned fathers in generall councels. For Christ said,Matt. 18. where two or three be gathered to­gether [Page] in my name, Heretikes alwayes refuse to come to councels. I am in the middest of them. And therefore as the Arians obeied not the councell of Nice, nor the Mace­donians the councell of Constantinople, nor the Nestorians the councell Ephesine, nor the Eutychians the councell of Chalcedon, nor the Imagebreakers the second councell of Nice, nor other heretikes other auncient Councels: so the Lutherans, Zuinglians, Osiandrines, Zuenckfeldians, Calui­nistes, and other sectes of our time, neither came at Trent, nor will receiue the catholike truth there declared, nor obeie the godly and lerned decrees there made. Had they not sus­pected their cause, had they not lurked and sought after dark­nes, and hated the light: they would not haue refused their doctrine to be tried there by men of vnblamed life, of appro­ued auctoritie, and the best lerned of the world. As for dan­ger of their persons which they should haue ben in by com­ming thither, saye they what they will for excuse, with truth they can pretend none.

Apologie As for vs, we runne not for succour to the fier as these mens guyse is, but we runne to the scriptures: neither do we reason with the sworde, but with the worde of God: and therewith as saith Ter­tullian, do we feede our faith: by it do we styr vp our hope, and strenghten our confidence.

THE XXII. CHAPTER.

Confu­tation.Ye flie not to the fyre as we do, saye ye, but vnto the scri­ptures. Neither do ye reason with vs with the sword, but with the word of God.The gos­pellers vse the sword, not only the word. Ah good word of God, thou ser­uest to many purposes. And is it in dede the word of God Syrs, that kepeth so many reuerent fathers in prison these many yeres? Is it the word of God, that hath depriued so many men, some of their lyuinges, some of their countries, whose life ye can not blame? Is it the word of God, that by crueltie of imprisonment of late yeres gaue most certaine occasion of death to those holy, lerned, and worshipfull men, [Page 225] who for their singular vertue being well knowen, nede not here to be named? Is it the word of God, that made so much adoo in your late parlament for establishing of your bloudy lawe, whereby ye would haue power to put men to death for the faith of Christendome? The Turkes and Saracenes haue alwayes suffered them to lyue in their dominions, but our Gospellers by their woord of God are taught to kill them. Blessed be God, who hath geuen to our noble and most clement Quene Elizabeth a better spirite to vnder­stand his word in this point, then these gospellers haue yet attained vnto. Is it the word of God, that throweth downe Images, crosses, chappelles, churches, colledges, hospitals? Is it the word of God, that contrary to the good example of the Quenes maiestie besyde the armes of the realme setteth vp a dogge and a dragon in the place of the blessed virgine Mary mother of God, and S. Iohn the euangelist which were wont to stand on either side of the signe of Christ crucified? Well maye it be your word of God, verely the word of God it is not.

If any of you do saie, that the newe superintendentes do not kepe the olde bishops and lerned clergy in prison, but the lawe of the realme: I answer, first, that the la­we is a crabbe of your owne stocke, next that neither the bishops before time burnt heretikes, but the lawe of the real­me, the lawe of the Prince, the lawe of all Christendome. Neither was the same made by Papistes of late yeres, as ye would your deceiued disciples to beleue, but of olde time thought necessary by Princes to be enacted, for the better maintenance of quiet in their dominions.The ec­clesiasti­call lawe condem­neth no­man to death.

The lawe of the church commonly called the canon la­we burneth no man. But only vseth the ecclesiasticall cen­sures, as depriuation, deposition, excommunication, degrada­tion, [Page] &c. according to the enormitie of the crime. In case of stubborne heresie, it procedeth no further but to excom­munication, leauing the punishement of their persons, who in that case be founde incorrigible, to the secular magistrate, who maye let them lyue, if he thinke it meete for the trāqui­litie of his dominion, and for the saftie of his people, to suf­fer them to remaine in his lande, that be expelled out of Christes church.

Apologie For we knowe that the gospell of Iesu Christ is the power of God vnto saluation, and that therein consisteth eternall life. And as Paul warneth vs, we do not heare, no not an Angell of God com­ming from heauen, if he go about to pull vs from any part of this doctrine. Yea more then this, as the holy martyr Iustine speketh of him selfe, we would geue no credence to God him selfe, if he should teach vs any other Gospell.

Confuta­tion.Boast nomore of the gospell. We (I meane the ca­tholike church) had it, we kept it and vnderstode it, before ye were borne, and before your heresie was heard of. And because we had it in peace and generally ouer the whole world according to the scriptures, we are sure we had the true meaning of it, in so much that an Angell from heauen shall not leade vs from the gospell, which we receiued of S. Augustine, who baptized our nation, and was the Apostle of our countrie. But a deuill comming from hell (for who is authour of diuision but Satan?) hath caried you awaye in­to an other gospell, whereas in dede there is but one true go­spell.Gal. 1. And here let any indifferent man consider, how vp­rightly you alleage S. Paul. You write, that Paul warneth you not to geue eare to an Angell comming from heauen, if he goe about to drawe you from any part of this doctrine. Of which this doctrine meane you? Of this which you haue declared in this Apologie? did S. Paul euer reade your Apologie? How then pronounced he of it that sentence? [Page 218] We meane (saie you) by this doctrine,VVhat gospell is that S. Paul spa­ke of. the doctrine of the gospell. If you meane so, we saie the same. But we tell you that S. Paul spake not of euery gospell generally, but of a certaine gospell qualified. For he saieth, Si quis vobis euan­gelizauerit praeter id quod accepistis, anathema sit. Gal. 1. If any man preach a gospell vnto you besides that ye haue receiued, be he accur­sed. Heare you the gospell S. Paul speaketh of? It is not euery gospell. It is a gospell preached and receiued. If ye preach that gospell, which ye receiued, we ioyne handes with you. But if ye preach a gospell which ye haue receiued of no Apostle nor Apostolike preacher, and which was not heard of in the earth, when Luther ranne out of his cloistre, and forsooke his religion: then be ye assured, that ye are the men, who are holden for accursed of S. Paul,Gal. 1. of which the like he said in the same place, sunt aliqui qui vos conturbant, & volunt conuertere euangelium Christi. There be some that trou­ble you, and will tourne the gospell of Christ.

Let it be considered, the gospell which ye preach,VVhat maner a hospell is rhe De­fenders gospell a gospell of olde recei­ued, or of late new­ly deuised. whether it be that which ye receaued, or els tourned from that to one of your owne or rather of Luthers, and Caluines deuising. And yet you are not ashamed to alleage that out of S. Paul for your tourned gospell, which maketh most against you. For what maner of gospell is that you alleage? Is it a recei­ued gospell? No, beware that. For that is the papisticall gospell. They who gaue you your baptisme, neuer gaue you that gospell, whereby Christes body in the blessed sacra­ment is made an idoll, wherby the most high sacrifice of the Masse is condemned and called a strompet, whereby the ho­ly sacramentes of the church are misprised. That gospell was neuer delyuered vnto you, neither to any christian by Christ or his Apostles. When S. Paul wrote to the Gala­thians, he willed them to kepe the gospell, which he had [Page] preached, and they receiued. And in them he spake to all other beleuers, willing them to kepe that gospell, which his successours should preach, and other should receiue. So that from S. Paul to this daye there must be a continewing preaching and receiuing of one and the same gospell. But he that once preacheth that he neuer receiued, let him put what face he will vpon it, he is accursed, because he hath tourned the gospell.

Apologie. For where these men byd the holy scriptures away, as domme and frutles, and procure vs to come to God him selfe rather, who speaketh in the church and in the councells: which is to saie, to be­leue their fansies and opinions. This waye of finding out the truth is verye vncertaine and exceeding dangerous, and in maner a fanta­sticall and mad waye, and by no meanes allowed of the holy fathers.

Confuta­tion.The Catholikes because they will be sure that no man shall tourne the gospell of Christ, or misconster it, they kepe certaine solemne meetinges which are called generall coun­cels,The in­tent of councels. where diligent inquisition is made, how the gospell of Christ is preached. If they vnderstand that any man pre­ach ought that he receiued not of his forefathers, they call him to accompt, as in the old time they called Arius, Mace­donius, Nestorius, Eutyches, and of late yeres Iohn Huss, Ie­rome of Prage, and Martine Luther, and such others. Such as will not be obedient and conforme them selues to the ca­tholike faith, but mainteine newe and contrarie doctrine: by the councels they are denounced to the world for heretikes, that all men may beware of their errours. For this cause the Defenders of our newe clergy in their Apologie inueigh against councels, as theues do against iudges. For full well they knowe, that their newe deuysed gospell shall not by any their policie or lerning be able to abyde the triall of lerned fathers in a councell.

Where they saye, we passe litle on the scriptures as dum­me [Page 227] and vnprofitable, therein they slaunder vs, as in other thinges. We do not so. But we saye, that as euery act of parlament must be executed by a laufull iudge, so the holy scriptures haue their execution by laufull iudges, who are the bishops and fathers as well in other places, as specially when they be laufully assembled in generall councels.

Now saye these men, that way is very vncertaine, dange­rous, in maner mad and not allowed of the fathers. Who euer heard men thought to haue their right wittes, talke af­ter so loose a sorte? Did the fathers disproue the ordre of comming together in generall councels? Or thought they the same to be a way for men to be the soner deceiued If so many may be deceiued with most diligent studie and mature iudgemēt cōferring together,The cre­dite of generall councels. how much soner may one or two alone lead by priuate phāsie and selfe wil, be ca­ried away into errour? At the Nicene coūcel came together 318. bishops. at the first of Cōstantinople 150. at the Ephesine coūcel 200. at that of Chalcedō 630. Al these foure councels sundry auncient fathers, namely S. Gregorie, estemed as the foure gospels. Yet is this a very vncertaine waye to finde out the truth, and dangerous, sayeth this Defender, and of the holy fathers neuer approued. I saye nothing of so many thousand fathers, which haue sithens the first foure mette at diuers coūcels generall and prouincial, in the East and West. May not he seme mad and besides him selfe, who calleth the world from the iudgement of three hundred most lerned and vertuous fathers, and requireth al mē to beleue him selfe alone? Yea but saith he I haue the word of God. But what if three hundred farre holyer and better lerned men saye,Euery cō­mom person that can read is not mee­te to iud­ge. he hath it not? Let the reader be iudge sayth he. A meete iudge in such a cause. The scolers maye read, but iudge of their maisters they maye not by Christes doctrine, who said, [Page] Non est discipulus supra magistrum, Mat. 10. the scoler is not aboue his maister. Why not for al that, saye you, if the holy ghost inspi­re him? Sir it is not to be thought, God doth assist his church repersented in such solēne assemblies of three hundred or mo fathers gouernours of Christen people, rather then one man? Againe we be assured, Christ promised the as­sistance of his spirite to such comminges together in his na­me, of the like promise made to one man we haue no good assurance.

Apologie Chrisostome saith, there be many often times which boast them selues of the holy ghost: but truely who so speake of their owne head, do falsely boast they haue the spirite of God. For like as, saith he, Christ denied he spake of him selfe when he spake out of the lawe and prophetes, euen so now, if any thing be preassed vpon vs in the name of the holy Ghost saue the gospell, we ought not to beleue it. For as Christ is the fulfilling of the lawe and prophetes, so is the holy Ghost the fulfilling of the gospell. Thus farre goeth Chrisostome.

Confuta­tion.They alleage out of Chrysostō, that who soeuer speake of their owne, do vntruly attribute to them selues the spirite of God. But they remember not, how they who are ga­thered together in the name of Christ, do not speake of their owne, because Christ, who is the truth, hath promised to be in the middest of them,Mat. 18. If ge­nerall co­uncels. assembled of bishops lacke the holy ghost, how may we be as­sured, the dietes of late men be assisted with it? Now if they tell vs that the fathers at Trent were not gathered together in the name of Christ, how much more truly maye we reply to them, that the temporall men assembled together at Auspurg, at Marpurg, at Wormes, at Smalcald, at Baden, at Westminster, or any where els, came not together in the name of Christ? For as the olde councels were kept by bishops and not by lay men: so was this at Trent. As they for the defence of truth, for the peace of the church, and for abandonning of heresies: so this. As in those the bishop of Rome his Lega­tes were president: so were they in this. As they were con­firmed [Page 220] by the successours of Peter: so was this. And come they now with laie men not lerned in the scriptures called together by some temporall prince, whose actes be not con­firmed by the Apostolike see, and require that we obey ra­ther an act of parlament made concerning religion, from which al the bishops thē present, whom the holy ghost had placed to rule the church of God, as S. Paul sayeth,Act. 20. and the whole Synod of the lerned clergie expressely dissented, then a full councell of mo then 200. bishops laufully consecrated and confirmed? I require but a man of common sen­se to sit iudge in this cause. They can not possi­bly bring any thing out of the scriptures or aū­cient fathers for maintenance of this their greate case. So weake it is, so farre from reason it is, so mightely pre­uaileth veritie ouer their de­uises that be besides Gods word.

THE FIRST CHAPTER.

Confu­tation. NOW these Defenders going about to perswade men that the olde fathers be not on our syde, and that the whole religion which Christen men pro­fesse [Page 229] and call catholike is not auncient, but newe: being gil­tye as it were in their owne consciences, before they enter into the matter, they remoue from their owne doctrine the opinion of newnes. And so they fall into a great discourse whereby to proue, that the truth which in it selfe is eternall, among men oftentymes is called newe. Wherein they had said somewhat, if they had proued that the doctrine of Christ, had ben called newe by them, who were the profes­sours and folowers of it.The be­leuers ha­ue not called the doctrine of truth, a new doctrine, but only infidels. But now reporting that the gen­tils who knewe not God, as Aman, as the Athenians, as Cel­sus the ethnike, and such the like, called the right and true religion of God, newe: they saye nothing to any purpose. But let them shewe that before the comming of Christ, any such religion was allowed, that was newe. Or that sithens Chri­stes incarnation, among Christian men what so euer reli­gion was not shunned and reiected as hereticall, which was newe. Here are they domme. And yet for shewe of ler­ning in a matter not necessarie, they bring forth their store, and declare that the doctrine and religion of truth was ne­we to them, which knewe not God nor Christ the sonne of God, which no man denieth.

Thus all men of any iudgement may see, how fondly they reason. We tell them that all newe doctrine now in the chur­che of Christ is naught, and they proue, that infidels haue in the time of Moses lawe, and at the first preaching of the gos­pell, impugned Gods euerlasting truth with theodious ter­me and reproch of newnes. Newe doctrine was good to vs at our first conuersion from infidelitie. But since that we receiued the true faith from S. Gregorie the bishop of Ro­me, who conuerted the realme of England to the faith by S. Augustine his legate, and others sent for that godly purpo­se: worthely we shunne and abhorre all newe gospels; newe [Page] faithes, newe doctrines, newe religions.

Apologie Doing much like to the enchaūters and sorcerers now a daies, whi­che working with diuels vse to say, thei haue their bokes and al their holy and hid mysteries frō Athanasius, Cypriā, Moses, Abel, Adam, and from the Archaungell Raphael, because that their conning cō­ming from suche patrones and founders, might be iudged the more high and holy. After the same fasshion these men, bicause they would haue their owne religion whiche they themselues, and that not longe since, haue brought forth into the world to be the easilier and rather accepted of foolishe persons, or of suche as caste little whereabouts they or other do go, they are wont to say, they had it from Augustine, Hierome, Chrysostome, frō the Apostles, and from Christe himselfe. Full well knowe they, that nothinge is more in the peoples fauour, or better liketh the common sorte then these names.

Confuta­tion.Nay Sirs your selues may with more reason be likened to enchaunters, Negromancers, and witches. For as they saye that they haue their bookes and their mysteries from those doctours, and first fathers, and from Raphael the Ar­changell, but can not shewe the delyuery thereof by any suc­cession from hand to hand, as for example who receiued the same from Raphael, from Adam, from Abel, &c. and who kept them from time to time: So ye saye also, that ye haue your gospell and euery part of your doctrine from the Apo­stles, from Christ, from the prophetes, from the patriarkes, from heauen,Iac. 1. The new gospellers can not shewe vs the succes­sion of their bis­hops, by whom they haue receiued their do­ctrine. Berenga­rius. from Gods owne bosome, who is father of lightes. But ye can not shewe vs your laufull succession, by whom and by whose preaching as by handes it came downe along from Christ and his Apostles vnto you. Where laye your sacramentary doctrine hidden betwen the time of your prophete Zuinglius, and your patriarke Beren­garius? How and by what deliuery from hand to hand continewed the same those fiue hundred yeres? Shewe vs your succession. Where be your bishops, where be your churches? Againe at whose hādes did Berengarius receiue it?

O ye saye, Bertram was before Berengarius. I trowe ye will not be tried wholy by Bertram.Bertram. But we graunt, he was before him. What then? Whither go ye then? Whom haue ye to name aboue him that professed that doctrine? Where lerned he the same? Recken vs vp the ordre and rowe of your bishops. Certaine it is ye can not. Here haue ye nothing to saye. Your lyes and coniectures serue not your tourne. And we tell you, that Christ had his church, and the truth of his word in the same was preached, and the holy ghost according to Christes promise had taught the beleuers all truth for the space of seuen hundred yeres befor Bertram was borne. The doctrine which the catholikes of our countrie holde and professe,From whence cōmeth the do­ctrine of the catho­likes. as well touching the bles­sed sacrament, as all other pointes of our faith, they haue re­ceiued it of their bishops, and they of their predecessours, by order vntill they reach to S. Augustine, S. Augustine recei­ued it of S. Gregorie, he of others before him, and they all one of an other by contynuall ascent vnto S. Peter, who re­ceiued it of Christ, Christ of God his father. And this doctrine we finde taught and plainely set foorth in the boo­kes that S. Augustine, Hierome, Chrysostom, Ambrose, Basile, Cyprian, Dionyse, and the other holy fathers haue left to the posteritie. And so they be witnesses of the truth of the doctrine which our bishops haue taught vs.

Preach ye and crye ye out neuer so much, make so many lawes in your parlamentes as ye list, imbrue your swordes in the bloude of the catholike christians, as ye crye for it in your pulpits, yet shall that rocke whereon we staye, be to hard for you. Neither shall ye euer be able to ouerthrowe the catholike church buylded thereupon. For certaine we are,Mat. 16. that neither all your power nor hell gates shall preuaile against it. Thus it appereth clerely that ye are to be like­ned [Page] to the Negromancers,The De­fenders likened to Ne­gromansers. not we. For we shewe by whom we haue receiued our catholike faith from hand to hand, from this age vpward to S. Peter, and so to Christ by succes­sion without discōtinuance of time one bishop delyuering it to an other. Which in like sorte ye can not shewe for those partes of your doctrine, wherein ye dissent from vs, no mo­re then Negromancers, coniurers and witches can shewe, by whom they haue receiued their superstitious and deuilish mysteries from Raphael the Archangel of God

Apologie But how if the thinges whiche these men are so desirous to haue seeme newe, be found of greatest antiquitie? Contrariwise, howe if all the thinges well nye, whiche they so greatly set out with the na­me of antiquitie, hauing been well and throughly examined, be at lenght founde to be but new, and deuised of verye late? Southly to say, no man that had a true and right consideration, would think the Iewes lawes and cerimonies to be new for all Hammans accusation: for they were grauen in very auncient Tables of most antiquitie. And although many did take Christ to haue swarued from Abraham and the old fathers, and to haue brought in a cer­taine newe religion in his owne name, yet aunswered hee them di­rectly: Yf ye beleeued Moses, ye woulde beleeue me also, for my doctrine is not so new as you make yt. For Moses an author of greatest antiquitie, and one to whome ye geue al honor, hath spo­ken of me. Paul likewise, though the Gospell of Iesus Christe be of many counted to be but new, yet hath it (saith he) the testimonie most old, both of the law and prophetes. As for our doctrine whiche wee may rightlier cal Christes catholik doctrine, it is so far­re of from newe, that God who is aboue all most auncient, and the father of our Lorde Iesus Christe, hath left the same vnto vs in the Gospell, in the prophets and Apostles woorkes, beinge monuments of greatest age. So that no man can nowe thinke oure doctrine to be newe, onlesse the same thinke either the prophetes faith, or the Gospell, or els Christe him selfe to be newe.

Confuta­tion. How ifs and what ifs proue nothing.Your ow ifs, and what ifs, be but wordes of course with you. They proue nothing, and yet your Apologie is full of them. So barraine is your rhetorike. Where ye proue againe that Christes doctrine was not newe, ye forgete that [Page 231] the same maketh most against you. For if Christ would his doctrine to be spoken of by the prophetes, to thintent it should not be newe, when it was preached, seing ye can she­we vs no prophete that prophecied of your doctrine, we must nedes take it still for newe, for how can ye haue any prophet for you? Do not the prophetes saie that Christes church once established shall florish from generation to ge­neration euen to the worldes ende?Psal. 44. Esai. 60. And contrary to this do not ye teach, that our Christen parentes and forefathers were all deceiued? And so do ye not make a discontinuan­ce contrary to Christes promise, saying that the church of Christ florished not these nyne hundred or thousand yeres past?

And as for their religion, if it be of so longe continuance as thei woulde haue men weene it is, Apologie. why doe they not proue it so by the exaumples of the Primatiue Churche, and by the Fathers and Co­uncels of old tymes? Whye lyeth so auncient a cause thus longe in the duste, destitute of an Aduocate? Fyer and sworde they ha­ue had alwayes ready at hande, but as for the olde Councels and fathers, al Mum, not a word. They did surely against all reason to beginne first with these so bloudy and extreme meanes, if they could haue found other more easy and gentle wayes.

THE SECOND CHAPTER.

Ye aske why we proue not the antiquitie of our church,Confu­tation. as though your selues had not first geuen vs nyne hundred yeres. About which time the sixth generall councell was kept at Constantinople vnder Pope Agatho, who preached the very same gospel which he tooke of Domnio bishop of Rome before him. And Domnio tooke the same of Adeo­datus, he of Vitalianus, Eugenius, Martinus, Theodorus, and so vpward vnto Gregorius magnus. From him by order to S. Syluester, and so forth vnto S. Peter. But yet ye aske why no man proueth it. Why Syrs haue ye sene neuer a booke of so many that both in our time and sithens the time of [Page] Berengarius and Wicklef haue ben written for proufe of our catholike faith, by Algerus, Faber, Gropperus, Phlug, Wicelius and Staphylus of Germanie? By Hosius and Cromerus of Pole? By Peresius, Melchior Cano, Medina, Viguerius, Soto, Turrianus, and Casalio of Spaine? By S. Ber­nard, Guimundus, Petrus Cluniacensis, Guiliaudus, and Vil­lagagno of Fraunce? By Lipomanus, Contarenus, Catari­nus, Delphinus, and Gaietanus of Italie? By Ruardus Tap­per, Sonnius, Pighius, and doctor Hessels of base Almaine? By bishop Lanfrancus, Thomas Walden, bisshop Fissher, B. Tonstall, and B. Gardiner, Syr Thomas More, and others of England? In the lerned workes of these men it doth well appere, what scriptures, fathers, and councels haue ben brought for the catholike belefe. Therefore your slaun­der is very grosse and to euident, where ye saye, we bring not good auncient witnesses for our doctrine.

Apologie And if they truste so fully to antiquitie, and vse no dissimula­tion, why didde Iohn Clement a countrye manne of owres, but fe­we yeares past, in the presence of certaine honest menne and of good credite, teare and cast into the fyer certaine leaues of Theodorete the moste aunciente Father and a Greeke Bysshoppe, wherein he plainelye and euidentlye taughte, that the nature of breade in the Communion was not changed, abolished or brought to nothing. And this didde he of purpose, bicause he thought ther was no other copy thereof to be found.

Confuta­tion. Doctor Clement belyed of the De­fender.Maister doctor Clementes honestie, lerning, and vertue is so great, and yours so small, his grauitie so much commen­ded, your lightnes so much misliked, his truth so well appro­ued, your common lying so well espied: that whether you syr Defender, or any of your felowes, praise him, or backebyte him, his estimation thereby is neither aduaunced nor abased. More credite is to be geuen to a becke of his countenance, then to all your brabling vttered in booke or pulpit. Tou­ching [Page 232] the matter you haue deuised vpon him, he doth not only denye in word, that euer he burnt or otherwise destro­yed any leafe of Theodoritus, but also declareth by the who­le order of his life, and by speciall regard and loue he bea­reth to the tonge which that lerned bishop wrote in, that he hath euer ben and yet is farre from the will to burne or de­stroye any scrappe, syllable, or letter of greke, much more cer­taine leaues of the lerned father Theodoritus, where any such thing was written, as you imagine. Naye will ye haue the trouth? In very dede he sayeth, and by such waye as a godly and graue man may auouch a trouth, protesteth, that he ne­uer had hitherto any part of that booke neither in greke or in latine in written hand. As for a printed booke, by tea­ring and burning the leaues thereof, he could not haue satis­fied the purpose, which by your report he went about, the copies being in great number multiplied. And where as you say the thing was done in presence of certaine honest men and of good credite, for maintenance of your credite, and proufe that you be not a shameles deuyser of lyes, by this write peremptorely we require you, to name them, and bring them forth in your defence, that will saye they were present when it was done. If you do not, you shall declare to the world, how litle truth is in you. This is an euident marke by which false teachers may be espied. Who so euer vnderstandeth this to be an open slaunder, you ought to-pardon him,Apologie Dist. 27. Quidam. Augu. de bono vidu. ca. 10.27.41. Nup­tiarum bonum. Confuta­tion. if he beleue the summe of your doctrine accor­dingly.

Why saith Albertus Pighius that the auncient father Augustine had a wronge opinion of originall sinne? And that he erred and lyed, and vsed false logique as touching the case of matrimonie, cō­cluded after a vow made which Augustin affirmeth to be perfect matrimony in dede, and cannot be vndone again.

We neuer toke our selues bounde to any priuate opinion of [Page] what so euer doctor. For all our faith is catholike, that is to saye, vniuersall, such as not one doctor alone, but the vniuer­sall number of doctours haue taught, and Christen people haue receiued. If in a secrete point of lerning S. Augustine or S. Cyprian teach singulerly, we folow them not. Much lesse do we bynde our selues to mainteine, what so euer Al­bertus Pighius hath written. Our doctrine of originall synne,Sub Pau­lo. 3. is to be readen in the fifth session of the late Triden­tine councell. If Pighius dissent from that, he dissenteth from vs. But if he stand only vpon some point not yet de­termined by the church, his opinion maye be tollerated vn­till the church define that question. When you note the point, (for there are many pointes in that doctrine) then we will shewe you further our mynde therein.

Of the case of mariage after a simple vowe of chastitie.The mariage which is made after a simple vowe of cha­stitie, standeth in his force, by reason that there is more in the mariage, then was in the bare vowe. For in the simple vowe there is nothing but a promise made to God without any deliuerance of that thing, which was promised. But in mariage the man and woman by present acceptation of ech others bond, do make the matter to extende beyonde the nature of a promise.Mariage after so­lēne vo­we hol­deth not. Therefore if likewise the vowe made to God were not a simple promise, but also a deliuering of the thing promised: then can not the mariage folowing ma­ke void the vowe, which was not only promised, but also performed. The performance is, when he that voweth, doth professe him selfe in the handes of his superiour by ta­king the habite of some religion, or by receiuing holy orders of the bishop. For in that solemne act he delyuereth vp all his owne right and power, so that now he is not maister of him selfe to geue his body to any person in mariage, or o­therwise. You should knowe by the lawe of nature, if you [Page 233] would consider it, that if I promise a horse to one man, and afterward promise the same and deliuer him to an other: that the second man is true Lord of that horse, although I haue done iniurie to him, to whom I made the first promise. For the promise with the delyuery, is more vaileable to trans­ferre my right in the horse, then my promise alone. Euen so it is a great synne to breake a simple vowe of chastitie made to God. But that notwithstanding if before my pro­fession I deliuer myselfe in mariage vnto any person, by the lawe of nature (which is the lawe of God) I am bound to abyde in mariage. But if first I delyuered my selfe in a solemne consecration of my person (as monkes and priestes do) then mariage in fact folowing is none in lawe.

S. Augustine speaketh of a simple vowe. And there­fore in the same distinction from whence you alleage S. Au­gustines wordes, it foloweth immediatly.Dist. 27. Si vir simplex votum virginitatis habens adiungitur vxori, postea non dimittat vxorem. Sed tribus annis paeniteat. If a man hauing made a simple vowe of virginitie, be ioyned in wedlocke to a wife. Let him not afterward dimisse his wife, but let him do penaunce three yeres. And there forthwith it foloweth concerning the so­lemne vowe out of S. Hierome. Si nupserit virgo, non peccat. non illa virgo quae semet diuino cultui dedicauit. Harum enim si quae nupserit, habebit damnationem, quia primam fidem irritam fecit. If a virgin mary, she synneth not. Not that virgin which hath dedicated her selfe to the seruice of God. For if any of them marye, she shall haue damnation, because she hath made voide her first promise. Again, Virgines quae post consecratio­nem nupserint, non tàm adulterae sunt qûā incestae. The virgins which marye after their consecration, be not so much aduoutresses, as incestuous. Is not the mynde of S. Hierome plaine, that a virgin once solemly professed (which he calleth consecra­tion) [Page] can not mary any more? For as if a man in fact ma­ry his sister, it can be no mariage, because it is incest, so sith it is incest also by S. Hieromes verdite for Nonnes to marye, it can be in lawe no mariage, and therefore they must be sepe­rated. The like is to be holden of all men hauing made a solemne vowe and so professed chastitie, as all secular prie­stes, monkes and friers haue done. This hath euer ben the catholike faith in this matter. We knowe that ye like well the breaking of all maner of vowes, (euen of such as be most solemly and aduisedly made) and fauer incestuous mariages, But be ye not offended with vs,1. Timo. 5. if we remaine in S. Paules doctrine, who pronounceth damnation to them which ma­rye against their first faith. which damnation is so much the more greuous, by how much the vowe and promise was more solemne.

Apologie Also when they did of late put in printe the auncient father Origenes worke vpon the Gospell of Iohn, Liber ho­die extat & circumfer­tur mutilus why left they quyte out the whole sixth Chapitre, wherin it is likely, yea rather of verye suerty, that the sayd Origene had written many thinges concerning the Sacrament of the holye Communion, contrarie to these men­nes myndes, and woulde put further that booke mangled rather then full and perfit, for feare it should reproue them and their parteners of their errour. Call ye thys trusting to antiquitie, when ye rente in peces, kepe back, mayme and burne the auncient Fathers wor­kes?

Confuta­tion.A wise man affirmeth nomore then he knoweth, a good man nomore then standeth with charitie, a lerned man in matters of weight, no more then he can auouch by euident reasons,A slaūder vpon a very light coniectu­rer used by the Defenders a­gainst the catholikes for Ori­gens lacke of the sixth chapter vpon Iohn. sure proufes, or sufficient auctorities. This De­fender charging the catholikes with mangling of Origen v­pon S. Iohns gospell, as though of purpose they had left out the sixth chaptre, which he imagineth to conteine their sa­cramentary doctrine contrary to the catholike faith: for as­much as he is vncertaine hereof, and thereby noteth a great [Page 234] vntruth in the setters forth of that worke, neither by any meanes is able to proue the same: he sheweth him selfe a foole, a slaunderer, and an vnlerned man. We are like I per­ceiue, to heare of the faultes they knowe by vs, sith that they burthen vs with that they knowe not, and for the same can pretend but a slender coniecture. But Syr defender why complaine you not of the leauing out of other chapters and partes of that worke, as well as of the sixth chapter? For whereas Origen wrote vpon Iohn nyne and thirty tomes, as S. Hierome witnesseth: the latine translation printed in Venis hath but .32. lacking the seuen last tomes.In prologe. 39. hom. Origenis in Lucam. Neither be al they whole and perfite, but many of them maymed and mangled. Ambrosius Ferrarius that translated the worke out of greke into latine, with all truth and fidelitie caused so much to be printed as he founde. If the whole had come to his handes, the whole had ben printed. What wanteth, there is hope it maye yet be set forth. For the same lerned man Ambrose writeth of him selfe,Ambro­sius [...]er­rarius trā­slator of Origen v­pon Iohn. that with great charges (though not without other helpe) he hath sent men abrode into all Grece, and to all famous libraries of euery nation, to serch for the remnauntes as well of these .39. tomes, as of o­ther Origens workes. If the partes that lacke be founde and printed, then shall we see I doubt not your false conie­cture, that writing vpon the sixth chapter he taught many thinges touching the sacrament contrary to the catholike doctrine of the church, to be agreable vnto your sundry o­ther lyes.

What maner a doctrine of the blessed sacrament he hath vttered vpon the sixth chapter of Iohn,That ori­gens do­ctrine cō­cerning the truth of chri­stes body in the sa­crament, was agre­able w th that of the church. Hom. 13. in exod. and how catholike he was in that point, it appereth by diuerse his other workes. that you haue no cause to belye him in that you neuer sa­we. For the truth of Christes body in the sacrament, his [Page] testimonies be euident. For credites sake here will I recite a couple. In one place he sayeth thus. Ye knowe which haue ben wonte to be present at the diuine mysteries, how that when ye take the body of our Lord, ye kepe it with all ware­nes and reuerence, that no whit thereof fall downe, that nothing of the consecrated gift miscary. For ye beleue your selues to be gilty, and right well do ye so beleue, if by negligence ought fall downe. In an other place writing vpon the Cen­turions wordes spoken to Christ, Math. 8. When (sayeth he) thou takest that holy meate and that vncorupt deinty, Hom. 5. in diuersos euangelij locos. when thou enioyest that bread and cuppe of life, thou eatest and drinkest the body and bloud of our Lord, then our Lord entreth vnder they roofe. These testimonies and many other the like that we finde in his workes extant, make vs to beleue, what so euer he wrote vpon the sixth chapter of Ihon is such as confirmeth the catholike, and impugneth your sacramentarie doctrine.

Go your waye nowe, and with as much truth, as ho­nestie, report to the world, that we teare, suppresse, mangle, and burne the bookes of the auncient fathers. This hath ben the practise not of the catholikes, but of heretikes such as ye are, as S. Cyprian and Gregorie writeth of them, and sundry fathers of certaine councells haue manifestly deprehended in them. Truth is defended by truth, it is he­resie, that nedeth such false sleightes.

Apologie It is a world to see, how well fauouredly and how towardly, touching religion, those men agree with the fathers, of whom they vse to vaunte they be their owne good.

THE THIRD CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion.Here beginneth this Defender to bringe in the proufes of a common place, in which he thinketh to acquitte him selfe like a clerke. For what he founde either in his owne [Page 235] or his felowes note bookes perteining to the point he hand­leth, here hath he heaped it together. So that who an­swereth the places here alleaged against vs, may seme to ha­ue answered a great parte of their chiefe doctrine, for vs. He goeth about to shewe a diuersitie betwen the catholikes of our tyme and the auncient fathers,Euery va­rietie in points of small weight, proueth not a dis­sension in religiō. which falsely after his accustomed maner, he calleth disagreeing in religion. Whereto we saye first of all; that we dissent not frō the olde fathers in religion, albeit in some pointes of lesse weight so­me varietie without blame maye be founde betwen the church nowe and some particular church or doctor then, and that not so much in doctrine, as in a common obserua­tion. But let vs see what they bring.

The old Councell Eliberine made a decree, Apologie that nothing that is honored of the people, should be painted in the churches.

The wordes of that prouinciall councell by these.Confuta­tion. Cap. 36. It is thought good that paintinges be not in the church, that what is worshipped or adored, it be not painted on walles. This expresse prohibition of painting, and that nought be pain­ted in church walles that is worshipped or adored, maye seme both to presuppose a former vse of such paintinges, and also to allowe the other sorte of images. Whether it do or no, it forceth not greatly.The se­uenth ge­neral coūcell con­demneth Image­brakers. The seuenth generall councell assembled at Nice against the Imagebreakers, hath not only allowed the deuoute vse of images common­ly vsed in the churches of Christen people: but also con­demned all those that throwe them downe, and mainteine the contrary opinion. Now we are taught that a prouin­ciall councell ought to geue place to a generall. Neither is it reason we folowe the iudgement of a fewe bishops of Spaine, where that synode was kept, and refuse the determi­nation of all the vniuersall church represented in the second [Page] generall councell of Nice. But both their decrees maye stande full well,The con­sideratiō of the [...] ­libertine councell touching the pro­hibition of pain­ted ima­ges in church walles. this generally, and that by limitation, in consideration of the state of that time. Yet we thinke those fathers of that Elibertine councell had great cause in their troublesom time so to decree. Which is thought to be, lest when the Christians were compelled to flye in tyme of persecutions, which then were very often and common, they might no otherwise do, but leaue their painted images in the walles, to be mocked and scor­ned, and vyly vsed of the paynimes, whereas other ima­ges might vpon the suddeine be taken downe, and hidde awaye.

Apologie The olde father Epiphanius saith, it is an horrible wickednes, and a sinne not to be suffered for any man, to set vp any picture in the Church of the Christians, yea though it were the picture of Chri­ste himselfe. Yet these menne store all their [...]emples and eche corner of them with painted and carued ymages, as though with­out them, religion were nothinge worth.

Confuta­tion. In epist. ad Ioan. episcopum Hierosoly­mitan. in­ter opera Hierony­mi To. 2. Epipha­nius opi­nion alo­ne ought not to be preferred before the generall consent of al other holy fa­thers. Epipha­nius be­lyed of the De­fender. Answere to Epi­phanius place cō­monly al­leaged by the gos­pellers against Images.To that ye pretend to alleage out of Epiphanius, we saye, first, that although he were of the minde you make him to be of, and said, as you report of him, yet is he but one man, whose singular opinion is not to be preferred before the iudgement of all other so many excellent fathers, and the de­termination of the whole church. Now in dede you misre­port Epiphanius. For he saith not so as you write. He cal­leth not the hauing of the image of Christ or of any sainct in the church an horrible wickednes, or a synne not to be suf­fered, he hath no such wordes.

Secondly, what if we saye, this place maketh nothing at all against the vse of Images, and that he speaketh neuer a word against the Image of Christ or his sainctes in the church, but only against one particular Image, which he founde hanging at a church dore in a village of Palestine [Page 236] called Anablaetha? And seing he speaketh not generally a­gainst all Images, but against such as that was, which there he noteth by this speciall word istiusmodi vela, vailes of this sort: he geueth vs to vnderstand that he mislyked some qua­litie or circumstance of that one Image, and not reproued the common and receiued custome of the church in hauing Images in due order. Now what circumstance that was, it dependeth of so many particularities, which might happen either on the Images part as it is most like, or on the peoples part there inhabitant, and is so litle declared by Epiphanius in that place: that neither we can saye any thing determinatly thereof, nor ye should bring such an obscure and vncertaine matter to the disproufe of a veritie alwaies so well in the church acknowleged and practised. We alleage for the vse of Images the doctrine and practise of the church confirmed by a generall councell, and ye against Images with false ag­grauating of the wordes of Epiphanius, bring one fact only, the begynning, middle, or end whereof ye can neither make others to vnderstand, nor knowe your selues. And if it may like you to haue this matter tryed by doctours, we assure you, that we can alleage mo euident sentences for Images out of the auncient fathers, then in this place of Epiphanius ye haue syllables. A tast as it were of which sentences ye maye haue in myne answere to your felow M. Iuell his chalen­ge.Article. 14. Apologie Origen. in Le. ca. 16. Chrysost. in Matthae. 1. Hom. 2. Idem in Iohan 31. Confuta­tion. Homil. 9. in Leuit. Cap. 16.

The olde Fathers Origene and Chrisostom exhorte the people to reade the scriptures, to buy them bookes, to reason at home betwixt them selues of diuine matters: Wiues with their husbands, and pa­rentes with their children. These men condemne the scriptures as deade elementes, and asmuch as euer they maye barre the people from them.

Partly it is true, partly false, that you saye. Origen ex­horteth all to resort to the churches in the holy dayes, and [Page] there to heare the wordes of God.Origen and Chrysostome truly re­ported to the dis­prouse of the De­fenders vntruth. And thereof afterward to thinke ernestly, and to meditate on the lawe of God, and to exercise their myndes in it daye and night, in the waye, in their house, in their bed, and when they rise. This holde we withall, and be desyrous, the people beare awaye that the true and Godly preachers teach them in the church, and that they thinke of it, and put it in daily practise of life. For els to what serueth all our preaching?

Chrysostom Hom. 2. in Math. speaketh against them, which contemned the scriptures, and said they were no monkes, but had wiues and children and care of householde. As though it perteined not to maried men to reade any part thereof, but to monkes only. There he admonisheth them the rather to bestowe some time in the meditation of the ho­ly wordes,To what ende would Chryso­stome the scrip­tures to be read of the late. because lyuing in the world, and all together oc­cupied about wordly affaires, the more they were woonded, the more nede had they of salues. Therefore he counsaileth them not to refuse the reading of the scriptures, to thintent by Gods word they might vnderstand what synnes are, and lerne how to bridle their euill desires and Lustes.

Likewise in the. 31. homilie vpon S. Iohn which you allea­ge, blaming certaine that bought faire bookes, and kept them in their cupbordes, for an ambitious ostentation, rather then for any loue they had to the scriptures: he exhorteth them to esteme more the holesome reading of Gods holy word in their bookes conteined, then the limmed letters, fayer wri­ting,The ende of rea­ding the holy scri­ptures. and finesse of the veleme. And to this ende only he stirreth them to the reading of the scriptures, that thereby their myndes might be made cleane, that the deuill might be stopped from entring into their soules, that so they might procure them selues remedies against their synnefull lu­stes.

If in our time the people might be induced to read the holy scriptures with such mindes, for such causes,In what cases may the peo­ple be ad­mitted to reade part of the scriptures in our time. to such in­tents and purposes only, as Chrysostom requireth: God for­bid we should by any meanes staie them therefrom. But considering the maner of our time, and calling to due exa­mination the curiositie, the temeritie, the vnreuerence, the contempt of all holy thinges, that now all men may espie in the people, if we thinke it not good they be admitted to the reading of the scriptures freely and without any limitation: how so euer you and your fellowes iudge of vs, we doubt not of the accompt we haue to make of that our meaning before our Lordes dredfull seate of iudgement. Neither doubtles would Chrysostom dissent from vs herein, if he were now alyue, and sawe the disposition of the people, and condition of the time. This matter I haue in fewe wordes touched in my answere to M. Iuell.Article. 15. Chryso­stome and specially origen misrepor­ted by the Defen­ders. Now to con­clude we tell you, that you haue misreported both Chryso­stom, and specially Origen. For how so euer they speake of the reading and meditation of the scriptures for amendment of life, verely in the places by you quoted, they exhort not the people to reason and dispute of diuine matters among them selues, specially the husbandes with their wiues, the pa­rentes with their children, as you saye they do. Neither is it other then a slaunderous lye,A slaunderou [...] lye. that ye saie of vs, and haue neuer done with it, that we condemne the scriptures as dead elementes, for which we with that lerned Cardinal Hosius do condemne the Zuenckfeldians as detestable heretikes. We esteme the scriptures, so as the signification of Gods holy will, and the very voices of the holy ghost are to be estemed. If ye did the like, they should not be so propha­ned and abused as they be, to the vtter losse of so many sou­les.

Apologie Cypri. epis. 11. lib. 1. Epipha. cō­tra Apostolicos. haeres. 61. Hieronym. ad D [...]me­triadem. The auncient fathers Cyprian, Epiphanius and Hierome saie, it is better for one who perchaunce hath made a vowe to leade a sole life, and afterward liueth vnchastly, and cannot quench the flames of luste, to marie a wife, and to lyue honestly in wedlocke. And the olde father Augustine iudgeth the selfe same mariage to be good and perfite, and ought not to be broken again: These men if a man haue once bound him selfe by a vowe, though afterward he burne, kepe queanes, and defile him selfe with neuer so sinfull and desperate a life, yet they suffer not that persone to marye a wife: or if he chaunce to mary, they alow it not for mariage. And they comonlye, teache it is muche better and more godlye to kepe a Concubine and an harlot, then to liue in that kynde of mariage.

Confuta­tion. The pla­ces of Cyprian and Hierome discussed.S. Cyprian to Pomponius, and S. Hierome ad Demetriad. de virginitate seruanda, speake only of virgins, that had dedica­ted them selues to God by priuate vowe, and had not yet made their solemne vowe by publike profession with recei­uing the vaile of virginitie at the handes of a bishop, as the maner was, when they were consecrated. Neither do they allowe their mariage, but seme to suffer it for auoiding of a worse inconuenience. Neither they, nor Epiphanius, nor any of the olde fathers alloweth any man or woman to quenche the flames of luste which you speake of in the bed of wedlocke after a solemne vowe of chastitie made and ta­ken.Ca. 15. By the Councell of Chalcedon all your hote lu­sting companions, who haue so farre condemned God, as to coole their flames sticke not to wallowe in fleshly filthines vnder the name of wedlocke notwithstanding their solemne vowe, be they men be they women, vntill they repent and amende, remaine excommunicated.

Concerning mariage and the vowe of chastitie, it is an­swered before, that promise in either of them bindeth in the sight of God. But the formest performing of promise in either of both preiudicateth the other. And therefore the church suffereth not a man after that he is in state of wed­locke to vowe chastitie, such as we speake of. Nor him who [Page 238] hath deliuered him selfe to his superiour by a solemne vowe of chastitie, afterward to retourne to mariage.

We saie not, it is better to kepe a harlot or concubine, then to marye. That is your slaunderous lye, whereto we haue answered before.Folio. 158. But we saye here that after a so­lemne vowe of chastitie, all pretensed mariage is incest and iniurious to Christ, whose spirituall mariage the party hath chosen interdicting him selfe all carnall copulation. And how much incest is worse then simple fornication, so much is the votary maried worse then he that kepeth a concu­bine. But neither of both without repentance and the sa­crament of penaunce, (where no necessarie let thereof is,) shall enter into the kingdome of heauen.

The ould Father Augustine complained of the multitude of vayne ceremonies, Apologie Ad Ianua­rium. wherewith he euen then sawe mens mindes and consciences ouercharged: These men as though God regarded no­thyng els but their ceremonies, haue so out of measure increased them, that there is now almoste none other thinge left in theire Churches and places of prayer.

The multitude of ceremonies be burthenous,Confu­tation. when they are kept with bodely seruice only, after the seruile and bond maner of the Iewes. But we touching sundry our ceremo­nies do acknowledge them not so to be of necessitie, but that they maye be remoued by the same auctoritie which placed them. Also in our ceremonies we do spiritually remember and consider the benifites of Christ doing all thinges come­ly and orderly as S. Paul biddeth vs. In so much that euery simple woman in maner in the catholike church is able to tell you, what the crucifixe meaneth, what lightes, holy wa­ter, asshes, and Palme bowes betoken. But ye teach them so, as the best of your scolers can not well tell so much as how many sacramentes there be. And no wonder, sith your selues be not yet agreed vpon the nomber.

[...]s [...]i. 119.But to answer you more directly, ye abuse the name of S. Augustine. In that epistle to Ianuarius, he speaketh against certaine seruill burthens, with which in some places men were laden, and specially against humaine presumptions, vnto which he would men not to be subiect. For that he accompteth to be worse then the condition of the Iewes. who although they acknowledge not the time of freedome, yet are they subiect (saith he) to the burthens of the lawe, not to the presumptions of men. These humaine presumpti­ons (for so S. Augustine termeth them and not by the name of vaine ceremonies as you report him) he would to be cut awaye.Cap. 19. What they be, there he declareth. to witte, all such thinges, which are neither conteined in the auctorities of the scrip­tures, nor be founde ordeined in the councels of bishops, nor be rati­fied by the custome of the vniuersall churh, but be innumerably va­riable for the diuerse maners of diuerse places, so as scarse or rather neuer at all the causes may be founde out, that moued men to or­deine them. Such he calleth humaine presumptions, for that men take them to them selues before they haue either auctoritie of scripture, or of coūcels, or of custome of thuni­uersall church for the same. One of these persumptions or vaine deuises of particular mē and places, there he cōplaineth of, which we may take for an example to iudge, of what sort the rest were.Per octa­ [...]as suas. The same is, that who had touched the groun­de with his bare foote within the space of certaine da­yes, he should haue ben more greuously rebuked for it, then he that hath buried his mynde in dronkennes. Now as the church neither vseth nor defendeth any such superstitions, humaine presumptions or vaine obsertions: so with S. Augustine it alloweth those customes and ceremoni­es,Cap. 18. which be neither against faith, nor against good maners, and haue some what in them, whereby men may be exhorted vnto a better life. [Page 239] Of which sort the ceremonies be that the catholike church now vseth. I meane not only the vniforme and generall, but also the particular and variable, for the diuersitie of maners and places. And this is called of S. Augustine in that place saluberrima regula, a most hole some rule.Cap. 18.

Againe, Apologie. that old father Augustin denieth it to be leefull for a Monke to spende his tyme slouthfully and ydleye, and vnder a pretensed and counterfeite holines to liue all vpon others. And who so thus lyueth, an olde father Apollonius likeneth hym to a theefe. These men haue (I wote not whither to name them dro­ues or heardes of monkes) who for all they do nothing, nor yet on­ce intend to beare any shew of holines, yet lyue they not onelye vp­pon others, but also ryot lauyshly of other folkes labours.

We do not mainteine that a monke should liue idly.Confu­tation. Seruice of God ac­compted idlenes of the De­fenders. But we reproue you for accounting the seruice of God idle­nes. Neither is that the thing only which ye can alleage in de­fence of that your brethren haue done to monasteries in the countries where your gospel procedeth. For ye haue remo­ued not only such monkes as were proued idle, but all mon­kes generally, that would serue God according to that vo­we, which they made vnder the approued rule of S. Bene­dict, S, Augustine, S. Francis, S. Dominicke, or of any other. You saye we haue droues and heardes of monkes, thereby signifying they are beastes rather then men.Monkes much praised of Augu­stine. De opere Monacho. rū. ca. 23. Whereas S. Augustine calleth them seruos dei, the seruants of God, in that very worke which you alleage. And speaking of a certaine straight exercise of anchoretes, he sayeth in the same booke, Horum quidem exercitationem in tam mirabili continentia, quandoquidem habent ocium quo haec agant, quantum dignum est laudare non possum. The exercise of these men in so marue­lous continencie (for asmuch as they haue l [...]isure whereby they may do these thinges) I can not praise so farre as the thing de­serueth.

The same S. Augustine lamenting the abuse which was crept in amongest certaine of his time, who went about vn­der the habite of monkes to lyue in rest without all labour, sayeth notwithstanding, monachorum propositum tàm bonum, tàm sanctum, quod in Christi nomine cupimus sicut per alias ter­ras, sic per totam Aphricam pullulare. The purpose of monkes is so good and so holy, that we be desirous it maye bud vp in the name of Christ in all Aphrike, as it doth in other countries. Are you not a shamed to alleage that booke of S. Augustine against mō­kes, where so greate praise is made of that profession? But what should you alleage that maketh not against you?The De­fenders religion. For what is your religion, but such as your selues haue deuised, a profession to talke of the gospell, and to liue like men of the world, to speake much of the spirite, and to folow the lewd lustes of the flesh, to pretend holynes in word, and to perfor­me none in dede?

Against what monkes disputeth S. Augu­stine. Matt. 6.S. Augustine disputeth there against those monkes which defended idlenes, refused to labour vtterly, and said they ought not to labour, alleaging the wordes of Christ mēcio­ned by S. Matthew touching prouision of lyuing, which the fowles of the ayer had at Gods hand without all trauail, against the saying of S. Paul to the Thessalonians, forbid­ding him to eate,2. Thes. 3. that laboureth not. Now as the monkes of our time defend not that erroneous doctrine, so neither can you proue, that they are bounde to labour, more then other men be. The lawe of nature (I graunt) requireth euery man to gete his lyuing by labour, not being let by in­firmitie or other laufull impediment, if otherwise he haue not how to lyue, or except his vocation be to minister vnto men spirituall thinges, for which he may require temporall thinges for his necessitie, forbearing bodyly labour. In consideration whereof sith that our monkes (I meane all re­ligious [Page 240] men) serued the aulter, and were appointed to preach, minister the sacramentes, and bestow their time in prayer for their owne infirmities and for the synnes of the people: by the doctrine of S. Augustine,De opere monacho­rum. Cap. 21. An euill chaunge. they are not bounde to la­bour, as they who for sowing spirituall thinges to the behofe of others, may reape their temporall thinges to their owne necessary sustenance. And they which haue thinges geuen them for prayers sake, why may they not liue thereof? Now ye haue cast out the seruantes of God, and placed in many of their houses, I will not saye droues and heardes in dede, verely idle seruantes, I thinke I should not greatly swarue from truth, saying seruantes to the world, and seruantes to the bellye. And so your holy gospelling religion hath dis­placed the seruice of God immortall, and setled the seruice of a God corruptible.

The olde Councell at Rome decreed, Apologie Concil. Rō. cap. 3. that no man should come to the seruice sayd by a Priest well knowen to keepe a Concubine. These menne let to fearme Cōcubines to their priestes, and yet con­streigne men by force against their will to heare theyr cursed paltrie seruice.

We finde no such canon in the olde Romaine councels.Confuta­tion. Your allegations noted in the margent be false for the more part, as your doctrine is.Dist. 25. Ca. nullus. Yet finde we that Nicolaus and Alexander Popes haue willed no man to heare the masse of that priest, whom he knoweth vndoubtedly to kepe a con­cubine.VVhat is vndoub­ted know­ledge in this case. Our new maried ministers that were either deacon [...] or prie­stes befo­re their mariage, be kepers of con­cubines. In Ioan. c. 1 tract. 5. A Slaun­derous lye. But wise men in the lawe thinke only that to be an vndoubted knowledge, when either the iudge hath by open sentence puplished such a man to kepe a concubine, or the fact it selfe is notorious. As now it chaunceth to all our newe ministers, that once hauing made solemne vowe of chastitie, be for all that maried. Who in the face of all the world kepe strumpettes, bearing men in hande, that if they name them wiues, sisters, or yokefellowes, all the matter is [Page] excused. This is certaine, that who so euer abuse his body in holy orders, though he do it to his owne damnation, yet the sacramentes of Christ can not thereby be defiled, as S. Augustine at large disputeth writing vpon the gospell of S. Iohn.

Whereas you saye, we let concubines out to fearme to our Priestes, it is meete for you to saye it, because it is false and slaunderous. Neither was euer any man, or at this daye is dryuen to heare his masse, who kepeth a concubine. For if he will take vpon him to proue any priest to kepe a con­cubine, him selfe not being so infamous as he maye not stand in iudgement, it is certaine he shall be heard. If he can not proue it, then is not he out of doubt by order of lawe, that this priest kepeth a concubine, and therefor he is boun­de as other christian people be, to heare his masse. Which is no sacriledge as your sacrilegious hearte thinketh, and bla­sphemous tonge vttereth: but the blessed and holy sacrifice, which Christ made at his last supper.

Apologie The oulde Canons of the Apostles commaunde, that Byshop to be remoued from his office, whiche will both supplie the place of a ciuill magistrate, and also of an ecclesiasticall person: These menne for all that, both do and will needes serue both places. Nay rather the one office which they ought chiefly to execute, they once touch not, and yet no body commaundeth them to be displaced.

Confu­tation. Can. 7. & Can. 80. The true meaning of the A­postles canons by the Detender alleag [...]d. Diu. 88.The true meaning of the canons of the Apostles is, that a bishop or priest should not abase him selfe to the admini­stration of secular cares and offices. For the greke worde [...], which is in latine dimittere or deijcere, doth signifie, that it is to lowe and vile a thing for a bishop to become a baily, a mayour, a shriue, a receiuer, or surueiour to a tempo­rall lord. And much viler it is to become a sergeant, a mer­chant, or a pleader of secular causes in a temporall courte. All these thinges be interdicted to bishops and priestes, and that [Page 241] either because they are to base and vile occupations for so high a degree as priesthod is, or els for that a priest may not be stopped by the administration of such, from his chiefe of­fice, which standeth in discharging his spirituall charge. But if the cause of widowes, orphans, or poore folke re­quire the bishops or priestes help, it is laufull by the canons to do that belongeth to their necessities, as being high and great matters, by doing whereof the bishop is not dishonou­red. If a bishop haue a rich patrimonie of his owne,Dist. 87. or els temporall iurisdiction belonging to his bishoprike, that part of it, which is base and abiect, he must commit the execution of it to others that are no priestes. But that which neither is vnsemely for him to do, nor hindereth his spirituall du­ties, he may him selfe execute.Psal. 98. As Moses was both pri­est and chiefe ruler of the people, as Heli and Samuel go­uerned both in temporall and spirituall causes. To this per­teineth that S. Paul sayeth,1 Cor. 6. knowe ye not that we shall iudge an­gels, how much more worldly thinges?

If we ought to sticke at any one certaine worldly busi­nes, which maye seme vnsemely for a bishop or a priest,Among worldly busynes mariage may iu­stly seme vnsemely for a bi­shop or priest. 1. Cor. 7. as to base for his dignitie, and to much hinderance to his voca­tion, vndoubtedly mariage is of that sorte. Whom maye we better credite for this case, then S. Paul? He that is without a wife (sayeth he) is carefull for the thinges that be of our Lord, how he may please God. But he that is coupled with a wife, is carefull about the thinges which are of the world, and is diuided. Here are both causes expressed which are forbid­den a bishop or priest by the Apostles. For he that hath a wife, is first carefull of that thing, which hindereth his spiri­tuall vocation. Then the thing whereabout he is carefull, is a worldly busines, vnworthy and vncomely for his office, as to prouide for maintenaunce of his houseshold, to procure [Page] land and lyuing for his children, to lend the vse of his body to that seruice, wherein reason is swallowed vp, and the mind cast downe from the tower of her dignitie,Solilequi­rum. c. 10. de [...]ui [...] dei. lib. 14. [...]. 16. as S. Augustine saith. More may be thought, that is not necessary to be spo­ken. In consideration whereof when the priestes of the olde lawe serued in the temple, they absteined for that time from their wiues and houses. But with our fleshly mini­sters this busines is not fleshly and worldly at all, but all to­gether spirituall, because their spirite is wholly occupied the­rein. For their defence it foloweth in the Apologie.

Apologie The olde Councell Gangrense commaundeth, that none should make suche difference betwen an vnmaried Preist and a maried pre­ist, as he ought to think the one more holye then the other for sin­gle lyfe sake. These menne put suche a difference betwene them, that they streight waye thinke all their holie seruice to be defiled, Confut. The coū­cell of Gangres falsefied by the Defenders, because it speaketh of exter­nall sacri­fice, that is, the Masse. Can. 4. yf it be done by a good and honest man that hath a wyfe.

It was not for your purpose Syrs to vse true dealing and to alleage the wordes as they are in that olde councell. For they speake of an externall sacrifice, which the church calleth the Masse. The same it behoued you to dissemble, lest ye bewrayed your cause. The wordes be these. If any man make a difference of a priest who hath ben maried, as though when he [...]. Neuer yet heard, that a priest af­ter priest­hod mari­ed, before our time. sacrificeth, a man might not communicate with his oblation, be he accursed. Those fathers speake euidently of a priest, who hath sometime ben maried, that is to saye, before his priesthod. For after priesthod, it was neuer heard sithens the time of Christ, that any priest might marie by the lawe either of the Greke or of the latine church. We therefore condemne the mariages of priestes, which be made after the taking of holy orders, and saye, that he is no good and ho­nest man, but an incestuous aduouterer that marieth after­ward.In authent. Collat. 1. Tit. 6.

In alleaging this Canon first the word of sacrifice [Page 242] was dissembled, next the name of oblation.Many fal­se points done by the defen­der in al­leaging one canō. Thirdly no mention was made of the participle of the preterperfect tense, [...], which speaketh of him that hath maried be­fore his priesthod. Fourthly it is pretended, as though the canon said, that a priest maried is as holy as a priest vnma­ried. There is no such thing there:Eustachi{us} condem­ned ma­riage. but only that the Masse of the one is as good, as the masse of the other. Last of all the argument of that councell was against Eustachius the heretike, who condemned mariage it selfe, as though a maried man might not be communicated withall.

The auncient Emperour Iustinian commaunded, Apologie that in the ho­ly administration all thinges should be pronounced with a cleare, In Nouel. Constit. 123 & 146. lowde, and tretable voyce, that the people might receiue some fruite therby. These menn least the people shoulde vnderstande them, triumble vp all their seruice, not onlye with a drowned and hollow voice, but also in a straunge and Barbarous tonge.

Iustinian the Emperour willeth prayers at the holy ob­lation,Confuta­tion. Iustinia­nus wor­des falsefied. [...]. (which these Defenders here trāslate* administration as being ashamed of their owne author because they holde against the sacrifice of the masse) to be made not in silence, but with an audible voice. Not meaning as though prayers made in silence were vnfruitfull to the people, as these men would make vs beleue. And therefore they corrupt his wordes. as what thing do they not corrupt that commeth vnder their handes? They saie Iustinian made that lawe, Vt fructus ex ea re aliquis ad populum redire posset, that some fruit might come thereof to the people, as who should saie, no fruit were like to come, if prayer were made in silēce. But what sa­yeth Iustinian? His wordes be, quo maiore exinde deuotione in depromen is domini dei laudibus audientium animi efferantur. In nouell. constitut. 123. To thintent the mindes of the hearers may thereby with the more deuotion be lifted vp in setting forth the praises of our lord God. He sayeth that the lowd voice helpeth to more deuotion, he sayeth not to some fruit, but with more deuotion. Some [Page] fruit is alwayes had euen by secret praier, and more fruit so­metime, then by lowd praier.

The fal­sehed of this De­fender in fiue pointes. See in my answere to M. Iuelles cha­lenge ar­ticle. 3.Two faultes then are committed or rather two lyes made in Iustinians wordes, one that for oblation, they tourned ad­ministration, which falsehed M. Iuell vseth in his printed sermon and in his replies to M. D. Cole. Whether he be also gilty of this? And other fault is, that for more deuotion, they put some fruit. The third lye is, in that they saie, we do whisper all our seruice, so is the latine, albeit this good lady liketh better the terme of mumbling, I wene fewe who haue the sence of hearing will saie with them, that the singing of psalmes, hymmes, epistle, gospell, grailes, offertories, preface, and such like seruice vsed in the catholike church, is whispe­ring or mumbling. The fourth lye is, where they saie, we do it so, lest the people should vnderstand vs. We wish that all the people vnderstode all our praiers. But we thinke it not conuenient in a common prophane tongue to vtter high mysteries. Therefore we wish they would lerne the my­sticall tongue, and gladly do we teach their children the sa­me. Some thinges in dede the latine church rather chose to worship with silence, then to make them contemptible by diuulging them.Conse­cration of the la­tines is pronoun­ced se­cretly, of the Grekes openly. And they are such, as only belong to pri­estes. As the act of consecration, which the Grekes prono­unce openly, the latines secretly. And both well. But if we come to compare thinges, the latines may seme to do it more conueniently. For S. Dionyse the Areopagite scoler to S. Paul, teacheth Timothe, and in him all vs, communicare ea quae vim perficiendi habent, cum ijs qui perficiunt, to communi­cate those thinges which haue power to make men perfite, with them who make men perfite, that is to saye, to publish priestly office of consecration, (for nothing maketh vs more perfite) among them only, who are priestes, and not among others.

Last of all the fifth lye is to saye, that we pronounce our seruice and our mysteries in a barbarous tongue. As though the latine tōgue wer barbarous and not rather euery vulgare tongue. That tongue is most barbarous,The lati­ne tonge is with­out rea­son called barbarous of the Defender. which is most vsed of the vulgare sort, most priuate, most vnknowē in respect of all. But in the latine church wherein al our seruice is said, and whereof the true catholikes of England be members (as wherein they were Christened) in this church the latine tongue is more knowen and more vniuersall, and therefore lesse barbarous, then the englishe tongue. It is otherwise when we preach. For then we teach the people, and speake to them only. But in our publike praiers we saie the cōmon seruice of all the West church, and not only the seruice of England. When England commeth to haue a seruice of their owne, a tongue of their owne in churches, and hath a church of their owne besyde the whole, thē haue they lost their part with the catholike church, whereunto God restore it againe.

The olde councell at Carthage commaunded nothing to be reade in Christes congregation, but the canonicall scriptures: Apologie the­se men reade such thinges in their churches as them selues knowe for a trouthe to be starke lyes, and fonde fables. Concil. Cart. 3. cap. 47. Confuta­tion

A man were better I assure thee good Reader to make two newe bookes, then to correct one so full of lyes and falfefied places, as this Apologie is. This olde councell of Carthage is newely falsefied by our newe clergy. The wor­des of the coūcell are these.Concil. Carthag. 3. c. 47. Placuit vt preter scripturas canoni­cas nihil in ecclesia legatur sub nomine diuinarum scripturarum. It hath semed good vnto vs, that b [...]sides the canonicall scriptures nothing be read in the church vnder the name of the holy scriptures. They leauing out these foure wordes, sub nomine diuinarum scripturarū, vnder the name of diuine scriptures, would beare men in hand the councel willed nothing to be read in the church besides the holy scriptures. Are not these trusty mē to [Page] whom ye may committe the charge of your soules for your faith and saluation?

It is lau­full by the coun­cel of Cartha­ge, other thinges to be read in the chur­che besy­de the ca­nonicall scriptu­res.It foloweth in the same decree, liceat etiam legi passiones martyrum, cum anniuersarijdies celebrantur. Let it be laufull also for the martyrdomes of martyrs to be read, when their yerely festes are kept. And yet dare they not only to saie, nothing must be reade besides the scriptures, but also to alleage that very place for that speciall lye, which sayeth the contrary. Looke in the booke thy selfe good reader, and see how fal­sely they handle so holy matters. An other lye is, when they saye we reade those thinges in the church, which our selues knowe to be starke lyes and fond fables. When they can not them selues shewe that we haue any such, it is a vai­ne lying rhetorike to saye, we doubt not of it, or knowe it ourselues for a trouth. I wonder not if they blush not in belying vs, who haue belyed so many scriptures, councels, and fathers.

Apologie But yf there be any that thinke, that these aboue rehersed aucto­rities be but weake and slender, bycause they were decreed by Em­perours, and certein petie Byshops, and not by so full and perfit Councelles, taking pleasure rather in the auctoritie and name of the Pope: De Cons. Dist. 2. 1 Cū enim nemo. let suche a one know, that Pope Iulius doth euidently forbid, that a priest in ministring the Communion, shoulde dippe the bread in the Cuppe. These menne contrarie to Pope Iulius decree, diui­de the bread, and dip it in the wyne.

THE FOVRTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion. Pope Iu­lius de­cree truly discussed.Ye may be sure many men thinke this your homely stuf­fe not only weake and slender, but also corrupt, venemous, and lothsome. But now by like ye will amend your fault. But how? Surely by going from very euill to as bad or worse, if ye can do worse then hitherto ye haue done. Iulius the Pope (saye ye) doth euidently forbid that a priest in mini­string the communion, Iulius de­cree false­fied by the De­fenders. should dippe the bread in the cuppe. Now verely your former fault of lying is well amended. For [Page 244] where before ye left out, cast in, or changed some of those wordes, which ye pretēde to alleage, now ye make euery whit newe of your owne. Where hath Iulius these wordes? I spea­ke not of your false alleaging of places in your bookes mar­gent. I forgeue you the putting of cū enim nemo, De conset. Dist. 2. cū omne. in stede of cū omne. These be small and slypper faultes, which if they were alone might be wincked at in such flipper merchantes as ye are. But let vs heare what Pope Iulius sayeth. Cum omne crimen atque peccatum oblatis Deo sacrificijs deleatur, quid de cae­tero pro delictorum expiatione Domino dabitur, quando in ipsa sa­crificij oblatione erratur? VVhereas euery fault and synne is ta­ken away by sacrifices offered vnto God, what shall hereafter be geuen to our Lord for the purging of synnes, when errour is made in the very offering of sacrifice? How like ye this maisters?Sacrifice auouched by Iulius the first. Would any man haue thought, that ye would haue alleaged this place for your purpose? Loue ye sacrifice so well, as to be carefull that no fault be committed therein? Ye will be sure to haue no fault in your sacrifice I trowe, for ye will haue none at all, that shall consist in any outward act. Whe­reas Iulius alltogether speaketh of faulte committed in offe­ring of the externall sacrifice.

Ye will saye perhaps, I do you wrong, because ye brought not forth this place which I haue alleaged. Nay syrs I do as I am constrained, for that it ioyneth with that part which ye alleage. And it is not euen dealing to alleage one peece, and kepe backe the other, which helpeth to the vnderstanding of the whole. Well, hitherto ye haue small aduantage of Pope Iulius. Let vs see what foloweth. Audiuimus enim quosdam schismatica ambitione detentos contrà diuinos ordines, & Apostoli­cas institutiones, lac pro vino in diuinis sacrificijs dedicare. For we haue heard saye, that certaine men bound with a schismaticall desire of honour contrary to diuine ordinances and Apostolike in­stitutions, [Page] do dedicate milke in stede of wine in the diuine sacrifi­ces. Milke through abuse de­dicated in sacrifices in stede of wine in Iulius ti­me. The eu­charist styped geuen for the who­le com­munion through abuse. Well, this is not your fault, for ye denye the sacrifices which Iulius meant, and therefore to the doing of such sa­crifices ye can finde nothing in your harte to dedicate at all. Alios quoque intinctam eucharisliam populis pro complemento cō­munionis porrigere, VVe haue heard also of others, who geue to the people the euchariste dipped or stiped for making vp of the commu­nion. It is to be vnderstanded, that whereas Christ gaue the blessed sacrament of the aulter to his Apostles, he gaue it vnder both kindes. And when the priestes in some coun­tries either for lacke of wine at all times ready, either for some priuate fansie vsed to dippe or stipe the sacred body of our Lord vnder forme of bread in the consecrated bloud, and so to geue it to the people: Pope Iulius findeth fault therewith, for that neither Christ ordeined so, nor the Apostles left such order to the church. So that Iulius meaneth nothing els, but to reproue and reforme that vse of dipping or styping the one kinde in the other in the administration of the com­munion vnto the people. Reade the place who listeth, he shall finde the same sense more largely vttered a litle af­ter.

But what sense make these Defenders a Gods name? They saye Iulius forbiddeth the priest, The false sleightes of this Defender in false­fying Iu­lius de­cree. ne dum peragit mysteria panem immergat in calicem, that in ministring the communion, (so the lady tourneth) he should dippe the bread in the cuppe. There is no such word in the whole decree. Iulius nameth eucharistiam, they call it bread. Iulius hath intinctam por­rigere populis, that no priest geue the sacrament dipped to the people, they leauing out geuing it to the people, saye he forbad the priest to dippe it. They leaue out also the chiefe cause of the whole, which is, pro complemento commu­nionis, for making vp of the communion. For he forbiddeth to [Page 245] geue vnto the people only the consecrated hoste dipped in the chalice, as though it were the whole communion, no­lesse then if the bloude were geuen aparte. These men (saye they) contrary to the decree of Pope Iulius, diuide the bread, and dippe it in the wine. We in the masse breake the hoste in three partes not without signification of a my­sterie, two we receiue apart, the third we put into the cha­lice, and receiue it together with the bloud. What haue ye to saie against this? Neither is this that Iulius reprehen­deth. He forbiddeth to geue vnto the people the blessed Sacrament dipped. We neither do it, nor euer haue done it. Iulius would not the dipping to stand for the supplying of both kindes apart, and for the making vp of the sacra­ment. Neither do our priestes in the masse in that sense take it, nor to that ende vse it: but for signification only of a speciall mysterie, and that not of a priuate fansie or ambi­tion, but by publike auctoritie. And therefore that decree of Iulius perteineth not to the reproufe of any thing, that now is done in the church.

Pope Clement saith, Apologie it is not laufull for a Byshop to deale with both swords: for yf thou wilt haue both saith he, thou shalt deceiue both thy selfe, and those that obey the. Now a dayes the Pope cha­lengeth to hym selfe both swordes, and vseth both, wherefore it ought to seeme lesse maruaile, yf that haue folowed whiche Clemēt saith, that is, that he hath deceiued both his own selfe, and those whi­che haue giuen eare vnto him.

If these felowes had not sworne to belye all the world for maintenance of their newe gospell,Confu­tation. A lye for­ged vpon S. Clemēt they would at this time at lest haue made a true report of S. Clementes wordes. S. Clement speaketh not of two swordes. The place truly alleaged hath thus. Si mundialibus curis fueris occupatus, & teipsum decipies, & eos qui te audiunt. If thou be occupied in worldly cares, thou shalt both deceiue thy selfe, and those that listen [Page] to thee. The auctour of this Apologie hauing spite at the church which is Christes folde, and at the Pope the head shepherd thereof, enuying at his auctoritie, forgeth a lye v­pon S. Clement, making him to saie, Si vtrunque habere vis, if thou wilt haue both swordes, thou shalt both deceiue thy selfe, and those that, obeye thee. Whereas Clement speaketh no word of the two swordes, but of worldly cares, wherewith what bishop so euer is entāgled, shall (as he saith) deceiue both him selfe, and others that harken to him. For which cause these Defenders being coupled with yokefellowes in pretensed wedlocke, which state wrappeth a man in worldly cares, be­cause such a one careth for the thinges of the world, how to please his wife,1. Cor. 7. and is diuided, as S. Paul sayth: it must nedes folowe, that hauing taken the office of superintendentes and charge of soules vpon them, they haue deceiued them selues, and dayly do deceiue so manye as heare them, and folow their false doctrine.

Apologie Pope Leo saith, vpon one daye it is laufull to say but one masse in one Churche: These men say daily in one Church commonly tenne Masses, twentie, thirty, yea often tymes moe. So that the poore gaser on, can scant tell which waye he were best to turne hym.

Pope Gelasius sayth, it is a wicked deed and subiect to sacriledge in any man to diuide the Communion, and when he receiued one kinde, to absteine from the other. These menne contrarie to God­des worde and contrarie to Pope Gelasius: commaunde that one kinde onely of the holy Communion be giuen to the people, and by so doing, they make their preistes gilty of sacriledge.

Confuta­tion.There is no small number of men, which are moued to suspect, that this Apologie was deuised by some catholike mā intending to mocke this newe clergie of England, and to put them quite out of estimation and credite. And to that very end this innumerable cōpanie of lyes to them semeth of purpose to be set out. For no man hauing his fyue wit­tes would thinke good for maintenance of his owne part, to [Page 246] affirme so many thinges, the contrary whereof to his great discredite and shame, by serch is easely founde.In epist. ad Diosco­rum Alex­andriaum. Leo sayeth cleane contrary to that is here in his name auouched, that when so euer a newe multitude filleth the church, so as all can not be present at the sacrifice at once, that the oblation of the sacrifice be without casting any doubt done againe. Which thing I haue more at large treated and proued in the 13. article of my answer to M. Iuelles chalenge. Likewise the obiection made out of Gelasius, which this defender ma­keth great store of, and setteth forth with his often and te­dious repetition almost euery where, is sufficiently exami­ned and discussed in the second article of the feresaid an­swere.

But yf they will saye that all these thinges are worne now out of vre, and nye dead, and pertaine nothing to these present tymes, Apologie yet to thend all folke may vnderstande what faith is to be geuen to these men, and vpon what hope they call togithers their generall Councelles, let vs see in few wordes what good heed they take to the selfe same things, which they them selues these very last yeres (and the remembraunce thereof is yet new and freshe) in their own generall Councell that they had by order called, decreed and com­maunded to be denoutely kepte. In the last Councell at Trident, scant fourtene yeares paste, it was ordeined by the common consent of all degrees, that one man should not haue two benefices at one ti­me. What is become now of that ordinaunce? Is the same to so sone worne out of mynde and cleane consumed? For these men ye se giue to one man not two benefices onely, but sundry Abbaies many times, sometime also two bishoprikes, sometime three, sometime foure, and that not onely to an vnlearned man, but often times euen to a man of warre.

In the sayde Councell a decree was made, that all Byshops should preach the Gospell. These menne neyther preache nor once go vp into the Pulpet, neyther thinke they it any parte of their Office. What great pompe and crake then is this they make of antiquitie? Why bragge they so of the names of the auncient Fathers, and of the new and olde councelles? Whye wil they seme to trust to their auctoritie, whom when they lyst, they despise at their owne plea­sure?

THE FIFTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion.Concerning the decrees of the councell of Trent, if ye estemed them as ye ought, ye would neuer haue vttered such vile stuffe as your Apologie is farced withall. But as ye bring that councell against vs which your selues beleue not, so haue we great cause to thinke, that ye beleue none of all the rest, which ye alleage in that lying booke. For truly ye haue so vsed both scriptures, councels, and fathers in it, as mē that make none accompte of them, so ye might seme to the vnlerned people to make a shewe of somewhat. Ye must vnderstand the councell of Trent was not ended vn­till the yere of our Lord 1563. and not confirmed vntill the yere. 1564. from which time one yere is geuen to the pu­blication thereof. So that now the time is that it be execu­ted. And we trust it shall be executed in all catholike real­mes.Fault fo­unde with plu­ralitie- of be­nefices. But what reason is it they should speake of keping that councell, who saye it is not laufull? With what face finde they fault with the pluralitie of benefices of one man, who among their owne secte accompte it not vn­laufull one man to haue two sundry bishoprikes? Haue they so sone forgoten Syr Ihon Hooper one of the chiefe pillours of their congregation,Hooper posses­sour of two bis­hoprikes atonce. specially a late martyr of their owne canonization? Had he not the superintendent­ship both of Worceter and also of Gloceter together? But how so euer it be, and whether we offend in this point or no, yet we kepe and mainteine a godly doctrine as touching the same. They for their part, as they offend in the thing, so doctrine for due order of it, haue they none. So vnperfite is yet their newe vpstart church.

That ye saie catholike bishops come not in the pulpit, it is a slaunderous lye. For it is otherwise, though some here­in be faulty, and that they thinke it not any part of their of­fice [Page 247] it is a malicious and to incredible a lye. Albeit some bishops I trow, ye will hold excused for this behalfe. For, whom ye haue procured to be locked vp in prisons, that they should not confute your heresies in their lerned and godly sermons: if they go not into the pulpites, ye haue not cause to blame them.

But I haue a speciall fansy to common a word or two rather with the Popes good holinesse, Apologie and to saye these thinges vnto his owne face.

Here pricketh forth this hasty Defender,Confu­tation. as peart as a pea­remonger, and faine would he talke with the Pope him selfe forsooth face to face. But syr I praye you,The De­fender will ne­des talke with the Pope him selfe. be not to hasty in taking your iourney to Rome. Tell vs before ye go, may not a meaner mā serue in stede of the Pope, for your masship to talke withal? If you thought your questions to be of so de­pe lerning, as no man at home were able to resolue you in them, when you wrote your Apologie: why went you not to Rome? Or if that iourney had ben to long, why resorted you not to those godly and the best lerned fathers of the world, at that time assembled in coūcell at Trent? Doubtles if either reason, witte, lerning, or auctoritie, could haue satis­fied you, there had you ben satisfied. But all this serueth not. This felowe hath a speciall fansie, and will nedes to the Po­pe him selfe, and talke with him of his high matters presently to his owne face. I praye you syr may not a poore man hea­re your tale before hande? By often telling of it, you shall haue it in better redines, when you come there. The tale he hath to tell the Pope, for all his companions, it is here set forth in printe. It consisteth most of certaine questions, as foloweth.

Tell vs I praye you, good holy Father, Apologie. seyng ye do crake so much of all antiquitie, and boast your selfe that all menne are bounde to you allone, which of all the Fathers haue at any time called you by [Page] the name of the highest Prelate: the vniuersall Byshop or the head of the Church.

THE SIXTH CHAPTER.

Confu­tation.What the Pope him selfe wil say vnto you, when you come before him, I know not. Because you make no hast (I suppose) as yet to go vnto his person, maye it please you in the meane time to be answered by an other mā, thus now til then. Tou­ching the first part of your first question read S. Hierome ad Damasum, Praefatione in euange­listas. and aduersus Luciferianos, where he calleth the Pope summum sacerdotem. And if ye require a word of greater sounde,Epist. 162. reade S. Augustine where he sayeth, in Roma­na ecclesia semper viguit Apostolicae cathedrae Principatus. In the Romaine church the princedome of the Apostolike chayre hath alwaies florished. For the second part, looke in the councell of Chalcedon. For the third, read victor in his se­cond booke de persecutione Vandalorum. And for a full re­solution of this whole matter, reade myne answere to M. Iuelles chalenge in the fourth article. There shall you finde your demaunde fully answered.

Apologie De Maior. & obediētia. Vnam Sanctam. Confuta­tion. L [...]si quis. C.d. test. Of the Popes temporal sword. De consi­derat. lib. 4. Mat. 26. Which of them euer said, that both the swordes were commit­ted to you?

Let S. Bernard writing to a Pope answer for the Pope. He is a sufficient witnes. Where your selfe do alleage him much against the Pope, you can not by the lawe iustly refu­se him speaking for the Pope. The spirituall sword you de­nie not I trowe. Of the temporall sword belonging also to the Pope, thus saieth S. Bernard to Eugenius. He that denyeth this sworde to be thine, semeth to me not to consider suffi­ciently the word of our Lord saying thus (to Peter thy predeces­sour) Put vp thy sword in the scaberd. The very same then is also thine to be drawen forth perhaps at thy becke, though not with thy hande. Els if the same belonged in no wise vnto thee, where as the [Page 248] Apostles said, beholde there be two swordes here: Luc. 22. The churche hath both swordes by S. Ber­nard. Our Lord would not haue answered, it is ynough, but it is to much. So both be the churches, the spirituall sworde, and the materiall. But this is to be exercised for the church, and that of the church. That by the hande of the priest, this of the souldier, but verely at the becke of the priest, and commaundement of the Emperour. Thus touching the Popes both swordes, you are fully answered by S. Bernard. I trust you will not be so vncourteous, as to put him besyde, being so often alleaged by your selfe and them of your syde: nor so parciall, as to allow him when he semeth to make so­me shewe for you, and to refuse him, when he is founde plai­ne contrary to your false assertions.

VVhich of them euer said, Apologie that you haue auctoritie and a right to call Councelles?

Who hath auctoritie to cōmaunde the partes of the body,Confu­tation. but the head? And that the Pope is head, where it is amply declared, ye heard euen nowe. Where you aske, which euer said, that the Pope hath auctoritie to call councels, if you knowe not so much, we tell you that Socrates the writer of thecclesiasticall historie sayeth so, not speaking in his owne person, but reporting an old rule of the church in these wor­des. Sed neque Iulius interfuit maximae Romae praesul, Histor. tripart. lib. 4. cap. 9. neque in locum suum aliquem destinauit, cum vtique regula ecclesiastica iubeat, non oportere praeter sententiam Romani Pontificis concilia celebrari. But neither Iulius the bishop of great Rome was pre­sent, (at the councell of Antiochia) neither sent he any man in his place, whereas the ecclesiasticall rule commaundeth, that without thaduise and will of the Pope of Rome no councels be kept. And as Socrates witnesseth of the calling of councels, so doth So­zomenus witnesse of the thinges done in them.Hist. eccle­siast. lib. 3. cap. 10. in graecis. Cum sacer­dotali lege constitutum sit, prò irritis haberi debere, quae praeter sen­tentiam episcopi Romani geruntur. VVhere as (sayeth he) it hath [Page] ben ordeined by a lawe of bishops, that what thinges be done (in a­ny councell) besides thaduise and will of the Bishop of Rome, they ought to be taken for none and void. If you will see more for this auctoritie of calling councels, read Rescriptum Iulij Pa­pae contrà Orientales. Epist. Athanasij & Egyptiorum Pontificum ad Felicem Papam. This matter is also fully answered.

Apologie VVhich of them euer saide, that the whole worlde is but your diocesse?

Confu­tation. Ioan. 21.He that said to Peter, fede my Lambes, and, fede my shepe, which Lambes and shepe all Christen men be through the world.

Apologie Durandus. Confut. Lib. 2. Before fo. 210. b. VVhich of them, that all Bishops haue receiued of your ful­nes?

Besides others so hath S. Bernard said in his booke de con­sideratione ad Eugenium. Where he saieth that he is called in plenitudinem potestatis, into the fulnes of power.

Apologie Concil. La­teran. Sub Iulio. 2. Confu­tation. Which of them, that all power ys gyuen to you as well in heauen as in yearth?

All they which speake of the ministeriall power, wherby vnder Christ the militant church by him is gouerned. But if you meane absolutly, as your wordes seme to sounde, so no discrete catholike man euer said or thought.

Apologie Which of them, that neyther kinges nor the whole Clergie, nor yet all people togyther, are able to be iudges ouer you?

Confuta­tion.What shepe shall be iudges ouer their shepherd? For as the fathers of the most auncient councell of Sinuessa said in the cause of Marcellinus the Pope,Tom. 1. Concil. Nemo vnquam iudicauit Pontificem. No man euer iudged the Pope, nor any prelate his high priest. Quoniam prima sedes non iudicabitur à quoquam, be­cause the first see shall not be iudged of any body.

Apologie VVhich of them, that kynges and Emperours by Christes com­maundement and will, do receiue aucthoritie at your hand?

Confu­tation.What is to be answered hereto, you may gather of that is alleaged before out of S. Bernard speaking of both swor­des.

Which of them with so precyse and mathematicall limitation hath surueied and determined you to be seuenty and seuen times greater then the mightiest Kinges? Confut.

Some mery felow or other, which thought he might be bold to speake mathematically, so he kept him selfe within compasse, and without iust reprehension. For whereas the spirituall power so farre passeth the temporall, as the soule doth excell the bodie, and the heauens surmount the earth, asClem. cō­sti. Aposto. li. 2. c. 34. S. Clement sayeth, and GregorieNazian­zene [...]. De maior. & obed. Nazianzene: you should not so greatly be offended with the seuenty and seuen times greater dignitie, and we nede not condemne him as an heretike, which would be pleasaunt in his algori­sme, especially Ioannes Andreae in the same place referring the matter to the Astronomers.Solis

VVhich of them, that more ample authoritie is geuen to you, Apologie then to the residew of the Patriarkes?

The fathers of the Nicene councell,Confuta­tion. by witnes ofIn rescri­pto contra Orient. Iulius the first, who then liued,Caus. 3. &. 7. and those of the councell of Sar­dica,Epist. ad Felicem pa­pam. Athanasius, and the bishops of Egipt, Thebaida, and Libya, and the fathers of certaine other councels.

Aboue all other most specially the first Christian Empe­rour Constantine the great. Who being fully instructed of the most godly and lerned bishops of his time, what au­ctoritie the successour of Peter had by commission of our Sauiour Christ,The great auctoritie and ho­nour whi­che Con­stātine cō­maunded to be de­ferred to the bi­shop of Rome. thought good by his Emperiall cōmaunde­ment and decree to confirme, ratifie, and for his owne per­son to yelde vnto blessed Syluester then Pope, and to his suc­cessours bishops of Rome, the same auctoritie and superio­tie, not only ouer bishops and patriarkes, but also power and honour higher and greater, then that of kinges or Empe­rours. The wordes of his solemne decree in that behalfe made are these, which as they are founde in sundry other [Page] greke writers, so most plainely in Matthaeus Hieromonachus. [...]. Which in our tonge is this much to saye. We geue in de­cree and commaundement to all lordes, and to the senate of our Empire, that the bishop of Rome, and the successour of S. Peter chiefe of the Apostles, haue auctoritie and power in all the world more then that of the Empire is, and that he be honoured and worshipped more then the Emperour, and that he be head of the foure patriarchall seates, and that thinges apperteining to the right faith, be of him iudged and determined.In authent. de ecclesias. tit. Iustinian the Emperour likewise made an expresse decree, that the most holy Pope of the elder Rome (for these be his very wordes) be taken according to the determinations of the holy councels, to be the first and prin­cipall of all bishops. It were not hard to alleage much more for proufe hereof of good and sufficient auctoritie, but in a matter not doubtfull this may suffise.

Apolog [...] Confut. VYhich of them, that you are the Lord God?

None that wise is, so speaketh absolutlye, neuerthelesse in some certaine sense S. Clement calleth euery bishop,Co [...]st. A­postol. li. 2. cap. 30. psal. 81. Iohn. 10. Apologie terre­num quendam deum, a certaine earthly God, as it is written, I haue said, ye are Gods, &c.

Or that you are not a meere naturall man, but a certaine sub­staunce made and growen together of God and man?

Confuta­tion.Can you bring him before his face, that shall saye so vn­to him? I warrant you (maister Defender) he shall either be reproued for his flattering, or proued to vnderstand no more by it, then a certaine diuine power aboue the naturall state of men, or warned, that he be more circumspect in his glo­sing, [Page 250] when heretikes are ready to slaunder the whole church, because of one priuate mans affection.

VVhich of them, Apologie that you are the onelye headespringe of all lawe?

Who so euer sayeth it,Confuta­tion. speaketh not without euident rea­son, considering that of the principall of euery gouerne­ment, all lawes belonging to the same, be deducted and de­riued.

VVhich of them, that you haue power ouer purgatories? Apologie

O that ye would first beleue a Purgatorie,Confuta­tion. and then should ye vnderstand, what dispensation of loosing and bin­ding is committed to the vicare of Christ.Esai. 7. For as Esaie sayeth, except ye beleue ye shall not vnderstand, and the conse­quent doctrine must nedes be obscure, as long as the princi­pall ground thereof is wickedly denyed.

VVhich of them that you are able to commaunde the Aungels of God as you list your selfe? Apologie

Nor old father, now new doctor.Confuta­tion. And what so euer he be that shall so tell you, beleue him not. He speaketh not catholiklye, and you must make no scruple in such matters.

VVhich of them that euer said that you are the Lorde of Lordes, Apologie and the Kinge of Kinges?

He vseth the cleane contrarie title,Confuta­tion. calling him selfe Seruū seruorum dei, the seruant of the seruants of God. Yet if he for the largenes of his iurisdiction, haue a number of Lordes and kinges within his folde, although he him selfe doth not boast of it, yet in a right good sense that title may be geuen to him.

We canne also go further with you in like sorte. Apologie What one amongest the whole numbre of the olde Byshops and fathers, euer taught you either to say priuate Masse whyles the people stared on, or to lyfte vp the sacrament ouer your heade, in whiche point con­sisteth nowe all your religion? Or els to mangle Christes sacra­ments, and to bereaue the people of the one parte, contrary to Chri­stes institution and plaine expressed wordes. But that wee may on­ce come to an ende: VVhat one is there of all the Fathers, which [Page] hathe taught you to distribute Christes bloud and the holy martyrs merites, and to sell openly as marchandizes your pardons, and all the roomes and lodginges of purgatorie?

THE SEVENTH CHAPTER.

Confu­tation.Your obiections of Priuate masse, of lifting vp the bles­sed sacrament, of ministring the communion vnder one kin­de, be as common with you, as life be with beggars, and lyes with heretikes. For in dede your questions be but beggarly and hereticall. Touching the same, I haue said so much in my answer to M. Iuell your nearest frende his chalenge,Article. 1.7.2. as here to reherse it againe, it is nedeles. You may seeke it there. The doctrine of pardons I iudge verely you vnder­stand not. Here is no oportunitie to discusse it. The full treatise of the same requiring a long processe, may wel to an other time be differed. Of Purgatorie I haue said some deale here before.Fol. 117. These be the matters, wherein you and your ignorant felow ministers gladly shewe your vile railing and scoffing eloquence. Yet concerning the doctrine of pardons least I seme to saye nothing, this much I haue thought good to saye here.

Of par­dons.In the sacrament as well of baptisme, as of penaunce, all the bandes of sinne are loosed, and the whole euerlasting paine due to synne is forgeuen. At baptisme no temporall paine is enioyned to vs, because Christ most freely besto­weth the benefite of his death vpon vs at that our first en­trie in to the church. But if afterward we abuse his mercie returning againe to filthy synne, Christ would our second, third, and all other reconciliations from thence forth, to be with due satisfaction not of his dreadfull angre, (which only his bloud and the sacrament of penaunce by due contrition and confession in dede or in vowe receiued is able to re­moue) but with satisfation of such temporall paine, as his [Page 251] mercifull iustice required both of all others from the begin­ning, and namely of king Dauid.2. Reg. 12. To whom confessing his fault Nathan sayed, Our Lorde hath put away thy sinne, thou shalt not dye. Beholde the forgeuenes of the mortall synne, and of the euerlasting paine due to the same. But yet so is it forgeuen, that withall it is transferred into a temporall satis­faction. What was that? It foloweth in the storie, that bicause Dauid through his aduoutrie and murther had caused then­nemies of God to blaspheme his holy name, the childe borne of the wife of Vrias should surely dye. And so it came to passe. If the death of a sonne be so greuous a punishment to a good father, that king Dauid was content to praye, to faste, to lie on the ground, afflicting him selfe seuen dayes, only to trie whether he might as it were by exchaunge bye out the death of his sonne, and yet so could not obteine his desire: we may be most certain, that the very best frendes of God synning after baptisme (or circuncision which in the olde lowe stode in place thereof) must by ordinary course satisfie with some temporall affliction that iust iudgement of our mercifull maker and redemer, if farther grace be not founde by some other waie. This satisfactionSatisfac­tion. hath ben there­fore iustly called the third and last part of penaunce. Which if it be not fullfilled in this life, vndoubtedly it shall be straightly exacted in the world to come in the fyre of Pur­gatory. For that synnes may be in an other world forgeuē to those who die not in the deadly bondes of them, our Saui­our hath geuen vs to vnderstand, saying,Math. 12. that the synne against the holy ghost shall not be forgeuen, neither in this world nor in the world to come, whereof it appereth that some other synnes may be forgeuen in the worlde to come.

Well, this satisfaction may notwithstanding be fulfilled more then one waye. For a man being once by the sacramēt [Page] of penaunce iustly recōciled to the mysticall body of Christ,Psal. 118. which is his church, wherein (as the prophete sayeth) a faith­full man is made partaker of all that feare God and kepe his commaundements: we haue in that bande of peace such an vnitie of Spirite communicated to vs all, that the defect of one may be in spirituall causes supplied out of the plen­ty of all others his felowe membres, according as the Apostle sayeth,Galat. 6. Beare ye one an others burdens. And because the head (which is Christ) is the chiefe membre of all, and farre more then all the rest, such influence is from him deriued through out his mysticall body, that euen his death may as well inwardly by charitie, as outwardly by an other waie al­so be applied to vs for the pardoning of that temporall satis­faction, which after the sacrament of penaunce is left vnfor­geuen. And that is by such authoritie, as Christ gaue to Peter, Math. 16. saying: To the I will geue the keyes of the kingdom of heauen, and what soeuer thou bindest in earth, it shall be bounde also in heauen, and whatsoeuer thou loosest in earth, it shall be loosed also in heauen. Lo, whatsoeuer Peter looseth in earth, it shall be loosed in the sight of God. If therefore the Pope who succedeth Peter, do by iust cause loose not only the mortall sinne by the sacrament of penaunce, but also the bande of temporall paine, which re­maineth yet due to the synne: it is vndoubted, that such paine is loosed in the sight of God. The cause of loosing must be not only the will of the Pope (who is put in authoritie to build, and not to destroy, to dispense and not to lauish) but a reasonable change or recompence substituted in that behal­fe, such as apperteineth to the honour of God, or to the pro­fite of soules: As mainteining warre and sighting against in­fidels for the defence of Christendō, recouery of the sepul­chre of Christ, succouring widowes, orphans, or other poore [Page 252] persons, the building or mainteining of holy places, the visi­ting of prisons and Martyrs toumbes, or any like deuout and charitable dedes. Which whiles the faithfull Christian doth obediently performe (although otherwise the thing enioy­ned be not great) he may obteine remission also of that tem­porall satisfaction, which was left in penaunce vnremitted. This kinde of pardon S. Paul gaue to that notorious synner, who at Corinth had his fathers wife,1. Cor. 5. and was for that fault separated from the church of God, to be afflicted temporally in his flesh. But when the Corinthians had informed S. Pau­le of his ernest and true repentaunce, and had shewed their owne fauour and good willes toward him: the Apostle an­swereth, VVhom ye forgeue ought, 2. Cor. 2. I also (forgeue) for I also in that I haue forgeuen, if I haue forgeuen ought: for your sakes in the person of Christ, I haue forgeuen it. Well, we are assured the Apostle speaketh of forgeuing such afflictious, as the partye was in by reason he was deleuered out of the defence of holy church to that state,In. 1. Co. 5. Hom. 15. where the deuill as S. Chryso­stom vpon that place noteth, pro solutione peccatorum for pay­ment of his synnes might vexe him, and wherein such persons being put to their penaunce vsed to remaine for a certain space of moneths or yeres, vntill their penaunce were done and expired. Now the reconciling of the man not yet ha­uing done due satisfaction before his ordinary time, is a par­don. Which the Apostle sayeth, he doth geue in the person of Christ, as hauing auctoritie of him to do it, and for the Corinthians sakes, as who were able by their holy praiers and common sorowe (whereof the Apostle speaketh) to make recompence for that which lacked on the behalfe of his owne satisfaction. If this much do not satisfie any man, desyring to be fully resolued herein, let him resorte to the latin workes of that holy and lerned Bishop of Rochester. [Page] The purposed breuitie of this treatise admitteth not special­ly in this place, a full discussion of so harde and intricate matters.

Apologie These men are wont to speake muche of a certaine secreat doctri­ne of theires, and manifolde and sundrye readings. Then let them bring furthe somwhat now if thei can, that it may apeare they haue at least reade or do knowe somwhat. They haue often stoutly noysed in all corners where they went, how all the partes of their religion be very old, and haue been approued not only by the mul­titude, but also by the consent and continuall obseruation of al na­tions and times: let them therefore once in their life shew this their antiquitie: let them make appere at eye, that the thinges whereof they make such a dooe, haue taken so longe and large encrease: let them declare that all Christian nations haue agreed by consent to this their religion.

Nay nay, they tourne their backes, as we haue said alreadye, and flee from their owne decrees, and haue cut of and abolished againe within a shorte space, the same thinges which but a few years before themselues had established, for euermore forsoothe to continewe. How shoulde one then trust them in the Fathers, in the olde coun­cels, and in the words spoken by God? They haue not good Lord they haue not (I say) those things which they boast they haue: they haue not the antiquitie, they haue not that vniuersalitie, they haue not that consent of all places, nor of all times. And though they haue a desire rather to dissemble, yet thei themselues are not igno­raunt herof: ye and somtime also they let not to confesse it openly. And for this cause they say, that the ordinaunces of the old Coun­cels and Fathers be such as may now and then be altered, and that sundry and diuers Decrees serue for sundry and diuers times of the church. Thus lurke they vnder the name of the Church, and be­gile seely creatures with their vaine glosinge. Yt is to be meruai­led, that either men be so blynde as they canne not see this, or if they see it, to bee so pacient, as they canne so lightly and quietly bea­re it.

THE EIGHT CHAPTER.

Consuta­tion.Here is much adoo, and as some saye, great bost and smale rost, many wordes, litle matter. The sense of these wor­des (if I be not deceiued) resembleth M. Iuelles chalenging sprite, as like as an Ewe resembleth a sheepe. What we can [Page 253] bring forth, we saye not. Neither thinke we it necessary at your request, to shewe what we haue read, and what we knowe. Bosting and bragging shewes we leaue to you. That you require, hath ben sufficiently declared other wheres. All thinges are not to be said at all times. Our sauiour Christ demaunded of Pilat, what is veritie, gaue no answere.Iohn. 18. Two lyes discoue­red. Yet two of your lowd lyes besides other that you make here, I will be so bolde, as to discouer. The decrees of the late Tridentine Councell (for that is it you meane) although they be not yet in all places most exactly obserued,No de­crees of the Tri­dentine councell be abo­lished. yet be they not repealed, cut of and abolished againe, as you saye. Both those decrees and other holesome discipline might the rather be established, and to the necessary reformation of maners be put in vre: were not your hereticall doctrine a great hinderance, which leadeth the people to libertie and loosenes.

And what a fowle lye is that other, where you saye, that our selues acknowledge and confesse openly, that the faith and doctrine which we holde, is not auncient, and vniuersall for times, places, and consent of all? What els meane we-when we chalenge vnto vs and claime the catholike faith?

But this is your accustomed slender Rhetorike, when prou­fes and argumentes of truth faile you,The com­mon and chiefe point of this De­fenders rhetori­que. to vse the figure of impudent lying, and saye, that we our selues confesse it to be true, which you impute vnto vs. What so euer you saye in this place, we may of right retourne it euer to you. So we do, and so take you it. Albeit to what purpose should we require you to shewe the antiquitie, and the vniuersalitie of times, places, and consent of your gospell, sith that you con­fesse, it sprang and came to light within the memorie of men yet lyuing? For who preached your gospell, and where was your church, before that fryer Luther ranne out of his [Page] cloister,The an­t [...]quitie of the Go­spellers church. and tooke Caterine Bore the Nonne to be his yo­kefellowe? If you referre vs for proufe of your antiquitie and vniuersalitie, to Huss, to Wiklesse, and so vpward to Berengarius, (there ye will staye I trowe or thereabout): we tell you, your succession is intermitted, and not contine­wed, and therefore it is not to be alleaged. For easely may we take exceptions against the continuance as all the world knoweth. Now Christ pardy promised (if you remember) to be with his church all dayes to the worldes ende.Mat. vlt. And for ought that I can see yet, as your synagog had of late the beginning, so is it like shortly to haue an ending. Christes saying must nedes be true.Mat. 12. Euery kingdome diuided against it selfe, shalbe brought to nought. And euery citie or house, di­uided against it selfe, shall not stand. How ye be diuided into sectes, and striue amonge your selues, partly I haue touched before, and Friderike Staphylus hath amply declared.

Apologie But whereas they haue commaunded that those Decrees shoulde be voyde as things now waxen to olde, and that haue loste their grace, perhappes they haue prouided in their steede certaine other better thinges, and more profitable for the people. For it is a cō­mon sayenge with them, that if Christe himselfe or the Apostles were aliue againe, they coulde not better nor godlyer gouerne God­des Churche, then it is at this presente gouerned by them. They haue put in their steede in deede, butte it is chaffe in steede of wheate, as Hieremie saithe, and suche thinges as accordinge to Esayes wor­des, God neuer required at their handes. They haue stopped vp saith he, all the vaines of cleere springing water, and haue digged vp for the people deceiuable and puddlelike pyttes full of myre and filth, whiche neither haue nor are able to hold pure water. They haue plucked away from the people the holie Communion, the worde of God, from whence all comforte shoulde bee taken, the true worshippinge of God also, and the right vse of sacramentes and pra­yer, and haue geuen vs of their owne to play withall in the meane whyle, salt, water, oyle boxes, spittle, palmes, bulles, iubilies, par­dons, crosses, sensinges, and an endelesse rabble of ceremonies (and as a man might terme with Plautus) pretie games to make sporte withall.

THE NINTH CHAPTER.

If some decrees of olde time be growen out of obserua­tion, the causes for which they were made, ceassing,Confu­tation. what blame or wonder is it?Certaine olde ordi­nances growen out of vse. Be not certaine ordinances euen of Christ and the Apostles growē out of vse, as eating of bloud, and of any thing that is strangled, and wasshing of feete, and that without offence? Raile and reuell whiles ye will, the church is gouerned by word, and by discipline. If Christ him selfe or his Apostles were alyue againe, the word, that is to saye,The do­ctrine of the chur­che is such, as cā not be made bet­ter, becau­se it is the holy go­stes. Malach. 3. Psal. 118. the doctrine of our belefe now preached and receiued in the catholike church, neither should be altered, nor could be bettered. For it is the same he taught him selfe. And that we doubt not of it, according to his promise, he hath sent the holy ghost to enforme the church of all truth. Re­member you not who said, I am God, and am not changed? againe that the word of God remaineth for euer? His worke is perfite, and can not be changed nor amended. As for dis­cipline, our positiue ordināces be good and holesom. Would God the time were such, as they might be obserued tho­roughly. In example of life and common practise, we graunt, there is much imperfection, and great nede of refor­mation. But what cause is that why ye should derogat the doctrine, which the holy ghost hath taught?

This being true, it is euident that we haue the sounde and weihty wheate, which no persecution of tyrauntes, no blastes of heretikes, no contagion of euill maners, for these fiften hundred yeres could either blowe frō the floore of our Lor­des berne the church, or corrupt. We haue according to the Apostles counsell kept that hath ben commited vnto vs.Depositū. 1. Tim. 6.

We haue enioyed the fonteine of the water of lyfe. Ye are they who haue refused the wheate and chosen the chaffe, ye haue brought into the church and set vp on hye the idols [Page] of your strange and false doctrine,Ierem. 2. which God abhorreth. Ye haue digged to your selues leaking pittes, which holde no pure and holosome water, but myre and puddles, with the corruption whereof ye haue poysoned many soules.

Ye charge vs sore that we haue plucked away frō the peo­ple the holy cōmunion, the word of God, the true worship­ping of God, the right vse of sacramentes, and prayer. Who so euer taketh these fyue away, wherein chiefly standeth our saluation, the same is Antichrist. Were not that ye haue alrea­dy done so much for vs, as the world maye take you for im­pudent lyers, we would not quietly beare so greuous a mat­ter. But now that ye haue tried your selues so false of your word, we litle esteme it, your railing is no slaunder. Yet we would all men indifferently to consider and iudge this mat­ter. For who haue bereft Christen people of the holy com­munion,The De­fenders and their fellow sa­cramēta­ries haue bereft the people of the holy cō­munion. 1. Cor. 11. This new clergy robbeth Christen people of the bene­fite of gods true word. we, that after consecration and oblation made, dely­uer the very body it selfe of our Sauiour Christ to such as by dewe examination in that case by S. Paul required, haue pre­pared them selues thereto: or ye, who denye the presence of his body, and for a signe only thereof (whereas Christ would vs to eate his body) by your will would geue to who so euer and how so euer any commeth, without former con­secration and oblation, no more but a peece of bakers bread and a sippe of common wine? Who haue taken away the great benefite of Gods word, we, that plainely and diligently expound and declare that sense of the scriptures, which the holy ghost according to Christes promise hath taught the church: or ye, who propoūd to the people the outward letter, wresting and stretching the same so, as ye may seeme to haue some colour for your newe doctrine, which is almost in euery point found repugnant to the scriptures, the exposi­tion of the fathers, decrees of councels, and consent of the [Page 255] whole church? By whom is the true worshipping of God diminished, by vs,By the de [...]en [...]ers the true worship­ping of God is di­minished. that besides a pure faith and sted­fast hope, most ernestly preach and teach charitie, and exhort the people alwaies to good woorkes: or ye, who for feare of superstition, and lest they should trust in their good dedes, beare them in hande, that faith only is sufficient, and that if they trust in the mercie of God promised for Christes sake, how so euer they lyue, all shalbe well? What shall I speake of the right vse of the sacramentes?Our new clergy lea­ueth vs but two sacramēts of seuen, and the same much prophaned. Prayer aboli­shed. As the church hath ben taught by the Apostles, and hath alwayes obserued, so we vse them inuiolably. Ye haue not only abandoned them all except two, but those also with your hereticall and schismaticall deuises ye haue dānably propha­ned. Lastly concerning praier, what hath ben ordeined by our holy forefathers of all ages, directed with the spirite of of God, for the maintenance and encreace of it to Gods ho­nour, all that in fewe yeres by the instinct of Sathan, to pro­mote his kingdome ye haue vtterly abolished, and by wicked violence brought the people from deuotion to a carelesse idlenes, from speaking to God with hartes and lippes, to a spirituall dumnesse, from praiers to chapters, from holy thinking to vnprofitable harkening.

Ye can not abide salt, water, oyle, palme, the crosse,The De­fenders can not away with ho­ly cere­monies. incense &c. no maruell. No more can not the deuill, who possesseth you, and rydeth you, and after his owne will dryueth you from truth, from Christen religion, and from all Godlines. Were it so that your sprite could away with those thinges, then were it not agreeing with his sprite. Vntill ye geue place to the spirite of God, who may dryue out of you the spirite of Sathan, we looke to heare no better tidinges of you. We tell the deuout and well disposed sort, who be not so rash as to venter their soules vpon your lying word, that these thin­ges [Page] and ceremonies and certaine other such, are to be kept in the church, and not rashly to be abolished, as being certain lyuely stirringes to faith and godlynes, necessary for the set­ting forth of religion, and such as whereby the people is lead as it were by the hande, to vnderstand and reteine the my­steries of Christ. Neither is it to be doubted, but that the greatest part of ceremonies which be vsed in the administra­tion of the sacramentes and otherwheres, came to vs from the primitiue and Apostolike church, as one of your owne companions called Theodor Basile in Greke,Theodore Basile, ali­as Thomas Beacon. and Thomas Beacon in English, hath ben for­ced to confesse in his relikes of Rome. And because right well it may be proued they are not a newe deuise of the pa­pistes (that is to saye of Christen men that shunne heresies) we thinke it a wickednes to cast that awaie, which hath ben accompted holy so many ages, and of so many godly men. In those thinges sayeth S. Augustine,Ad Casu­lanum epist. 86. of which the holy scripture hath ordeined no certaintie, the custome of the people of God, or the ordinances of the forefathers are to be holden for a lawe. And (which he saith an other where) as the breakers of Gods lawes, so the despisers of ecclesiasticall customes be to be punished.

Apologie In these thinges haue they set all their religion, teachinge the peo­ple that by these God may be duely pacified, spirites be driuē away, and mens consciences well quieted.

Confu­tation.What shall I saye to all this, but that ye lye? I would saye as the maner is, sauing your worshippes: but that your often and vnshamefast lying hath quite taken away from you all opinion of honestie. All Christes religion which we pro­fesse, consisteth not in these thinges, neither by these be mēs consciences quieted. By these men be put in minde of those thinges, and moued to the same, whereby quietnes of conscience may be atteined. By certaine of these euill and [Page 256] impure sprites be dryuen awaye in dede. Which here by sundry auncient recordes and testimonies I would declare to be most true, were it not well ynough knowen by dayly ex­perience. What benefite Christen people haue obteined by the signe of the crosse, both against the deuill and other­wise: in a treatise of late set forth of the crosse, euery one that listeth to see, maye read. By what other holy thinges being with prayer of the church consecrated through the power of God, he is dryuen awaye, it is not vnknowen. But as for you, whereas neither bread, nor water, nor crosse, driueth you awaye, it semeth ye are worse to be coniured, then the deuill him selfe. Many of your sect catholike Princes haue founde so stubborne, as they could yet neuer ridde their countries of them, but by coniuration of fyre.

For these lo, Apologie be the orient colours and precious sauours of Chri­stian religion: these thinges doth God looke vpon, and accepteth them thankfully: these must come in place to be honored and put quite away the institutions of Christ and of his Apostles. And li­ke as in times past when wicked king Ieroboam had taken from the people the right seruing of God, and brought them to worship gol­den calues, least perchaunce they might afterwards chaunge their minde and slippe awaye, gettinge them againe to Ierusalem to the Temple of God there, hee exhorted them with a long tale to be sted­fast, saying thus vnto them: O Israell, these Calues be thy Gods. In this sorte commaunded your God you should worshippe him. For it shoulde be wearisome and troublous for you to take vpon you a iorney so farre of, and yearly to go vp to Ierusalem, there to serue and honour your God. Euen after the same sorte euery whit, when these men had once made the lawe of God of none effect through their owne traditions, fearing that the people should afterwarde o­pen their eyes and fall an other way, and shoulde som whence els see­ke a surer meane of their saluation, Iesu, how often haue they cried out. This is the same worshippinge that pleaseth God, and whiche hee straitly requireth of vs, and wherwhith he will be tourned from his wrath, that by these thinges is cōserued the vnitie of the church, by these all sinnes clensed and consciences quieted: and who so de­parteth from these, hath left vnto himselfe no hope of euerlasting saluation. For it were wearisome and troublous (saye they) for the [Page] people to resorte to Christ, to the Apostles, and to the auncient fa­thers, and to obserue continually what their will and commaunde­ment should be. This ye may se, is to withdraw the people of God from the weake elements of the worlde, from the leauen of the Scribes and Pharisies, and from the traditions of men. It were reason no doubt that Christes commaundemētes and the Apostls were re­moued, that these their deuises might come in place. O iuste cau­se I promise you, why that auncient and so longe alowed doctrine should be now abolished, and a newe forme of religion be brought into the Churche of God.

THE TENTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion.It should haue becomme Scoggin, Patch, Iolle, Harry Pattenson, or Will Sommer, to haue tolde this tale much bet­ter, then your superintendentships. And if ye would nedes haue played the part your selues, it had ben more conuenient to haue done it on the stage, vnder a vises cote, then in a booke set abrode to the world in defence of all your newe Englishe church. Ye shall neuer make any reasonable man beleue your scoffing tale. For thankes be to God, we be not so farre destitut of his holy spirite and the light of his truth,By kepīg of aun­cient ce­remonies we do not put a wayeth institu­tions of Christ and his Apostles. as for placing of ceremonies to put quite away the in­stitutions of Christ and of his Apostles. Though we este­me litle your railing comparison of the catholike clergy with wicked Ieroboam, yet ye should not so horribly haue backebitten all Christen people which haue ben before your time, with your spitefull wordes of going from God to ido­latrie, of blindnes, and of a godlesse state. Neither be these thinges ye speake so much deuilish villany of, our owne tra­ditions, but for the more part either of the Apostles of Christ, or of most holy and auncient fathers. Neither through the same haue we made voide the lawe of God, but rather caused it thereby to be the better vnderstanded and followed. And alwayes we haue taught the people a diffe­rence betwen ceremonies, and Gods expresse commaunde­mentes, [Page 257] betwen the traditions of holy fathers, and the special ordinaunces of God him selfe. Yet these mockers and slaun­derers burthen vs with abolishing of the auncient doctrine of Christ, and his Apostles, and with bringing in a newe for­me of religion into the church.

And yet whatsoeuer it be, Apologie these menne crye still that nothing ought to be chāged, that mens mindes are well satisfied herewithal, that the Churche of Rome the church which cannot erre, hath de­creed these thinges. For Siluester Prierias saith that the Romish churche is the squyer and rule of truth, and that the holy scripture hath receiued from thence bothe authoritie and credite. The do­ctrine faith he, of the Romish church, is the rule of moste infallible faith, from the whiche the holy scripture taketh his force. And In­dulgences and pardons (saith he) are not made knowen to vs by the authoritie of the scriptures, but they are knowen to vs by the au­thoritie of the Romyshe Church, and of the Byshops of Rome, whiche is greater [...] Pighius also letteth not to say, that without the licence of the Romyshe Church, we ought not to beleue the very plaine scriptures: much like as yf any of those that cānot speake pure and cleane Latin, and yet can bable out quickely and redily a litle some such law latin as seruith the Courte, would needes hold that all others ought also to speake after the same way which Mame­trectus and Catholicon spake many yeare ago, and which them sel­ues doe yet vse in pleadyng in Courte, for so may it be vnderstand sufficiently what is said, and mennes desires be satisfied, and that it is a fondenes now in the later end to trouble the worlde with a new kind of speaking, and to call againe the old finesse and eloquence that Cicero and Cesar vsed in their dayes in the Latin tonge. So­much ar these men beholden to the follie and darknes of the former tymes. Manye thynges as one writeth, are had in estimation often tymes, bycause they haue ben once dedicate to the temples of the Heathen goddes: euen so see wee at this daye many thinges alowed and highlye sett by of these menne, not bycause they iudge them so­much worth, but only bycause they haue ben receiued into a cu­stome, and after a sorte dedicate to the Temple of God.

To answer you orderly,Confuta­tion. we crye not that nothing ought to be changed. In thinges that be amisse we are desyrous of a redresse. And where that is procured,In what case we can both suffer, and also do desire a change. there is a change of abuse to the right vse. This as well for orders [Page] of the church, as for common manners. And for necessa­rye pointes darkely perceiued, or not perceiued at al, of them whom it behoueth to knowe perfitely: we ceasse not to re­quire a plaine and cleare declaration, so as all doubtes discus­sed the truth be sene euidently.The cau­ses of ge­neral Coun­cels. In poin­tes of faith we suffer no change. For these causes, and for reformation of maners generall councels be holden. Thus we refuse not a profitable and a godly change. Mary tou­ching the faith and truth, which euery christen mā is bound to holde, therein we admit no change, but rather offer to lose goodes, landes and life, then to suffer any iote therein to be changed. Which constancie because ye like not in vs, the­refore ye haue departed from our communion, and diuided your selues with Luther, Zuinglius and Caluine, as it were the ten tribes of Israel with wicked king Ieroboam, from the church of God.

Ye haue neuer done with the church of Rome. I can not blame you. For so long as that standeth, without ye repēt and tourne, ye shall neuer be taken but for such as ye be, schisma­tikes and heretikes. But alas poore soules, what thinke ye to ouerthrowe that church buylded vpon the rocke Pe­ter, against which hitherto neither tyrauntes, nor heretikes farre passing you in lerning and honestie of common life, could euer preuaile? Trow ye to extinguish that faith of the Romaine church, which is the same that was the faith of Peter,Luc. 22. for which Christ prayed, that it shuld neuer faile? Ye labour in vaine. Well may Sathan wynne you, the church which our lord prayed for, by you shall he neuer wynne. Geue ouer therefore your vaine and wicked at­temptes. Trust not in the patches, that falsely ye alleage out of Canonistes gloses, scoolemen, ryming poetes, hereti­kes, and who so euer, be they neuer so bad. Some igno­rant persons may ye deceiue, whose synnes deserue the same. [Page 258] The more damnation ye heape to your selues. Gods church shall ye neuer deceiue.

What Syluester Prierias sayeth, I minde not here to dis­cusse. Neither where he saieth that you alleage, haue you thought good to tell vs, lest by perusing the place, we should take you in a lye, as we haue almost in all your other allega­tions. The like sinceritie you vse in alleaging Pighius.

We binde ourselues neither to the wordes of Syluester, nor of Pighius. If they erre, what is that to vs? Let them be­are their owne burthen, if they tell truth, we beleue them for truthes sake. If otherwise, we leaue that part for you to carpe. If ye were forced by vs or any other, to answer for all the strange and pernicious doctrines of your fellowes of Ger­many, Fraunce, Suitzerland, and Geneua, and for the peeuish pointes of your ministers bookes of England: Lord what a doo should ye haue, howe irksomly should ye be graueled, when ye might not see, how to plaister their ilfauored lyes, but with the scabbes of other your owne lyes? If Syluester Prierias said, that for pointes of belefe, the doctrine of the Romaine church is a squyre to trye their truth by: the same being well vnderstanded is right true. Likewise if Pighius saye, that the Romaine church sheweth vnto vs, which be the approued and vndoubted scriptures, and which be not: this is so true, as your selfe (I suppose) will yeld therevnto. As for that the scripture receiued from the church of Rome auctoritie, credite, and force, if in your meaning you exclude God, that is your lye, not Syluesters sentence. If relation be made to vs, that we ought not geue credite vnto it, on­lesse it had ben shewed to be holy scripture by the Romaine church, which is the true church of Christ:Contra epist fun­damenti. cap. 5. in this sense be it Syluester or who els so euer sayeth it, it is a true saying, and agreable to S. Augustine, who said, Ego euangelio nō crederem, [Page] nisi me catholicae Ecclesiae commoueret auctoritas. I would not bel [...]ue the Gospell, except the auctoritie of the catholike church mo­ued me. And for that you alleage out of him touching in­dulgences, truth it is, the full and whole knowledge of them is not plainely opened vnto vs by expresse and euident wor­des of scripture, no more then the mysterie of the blessed Trinitie, baptizing of infantes, and many other truthes, but rather by the doctrine of the Romaine church.

Where you tell vs of Pighius, that he letteth not to saye, that without the licence of the Romish church (for in that word you please your selfe well) we ought not to beleue the very plaine scriptures: we wil proclaime you a lyer, vntill you shewe vs where he spake so farre beside reason and ler­ning. The holy church doth not will vs to staie from be­lefe of the scriptures, vntill we haue lycence, but by allwayes and meanes inuiteth and stirreth vs to beleue the truth in the scriptures vttered. Your similitude wherein you seme to mislike the lawiers latine vsed in their courtes, how it squareth with your former tale, I see not. But as they who go to lawe, had rather winne the right of their causes by a lawyer that pleadeth substantially, though in meane courte latine, such as he might haue lerned out of Mammetrectus and Catholicon, then to be differred from courte to courte, and at lenght to lose his right by one that handleth his mat­ter in fyne latine, and garnisheth his plea with trimme [...]hrases of Cicero and Caesar: So Christen people who re­ [...]arde their soule helth, thinke it a surer waye to receiue the doctrine of our saluation at the teaching of the catholike church, wherein is no curiositie nor noueltie affected, then to be lead awaye dangerously, they knowe not whether, by Lutherans, Zwinglians, and Caluinistes, who vse many gaye wordes, solemne protestations, and with fyne lying, [Page 259] promise to bring all men to the faith and purenes of the pri­mitiue church.

Our Churche saye they cannot erre: Apologie they speake that (I thinke) as the Lacedemonians longe synce vsed to say, that yt was not pos­sible to fynde any Adulterer in all their common welth: whereas in dede they were rather all adulterers, and had no certeintie in their mariages, but had their wyues common amongest them all. Or as the Canonistes at this day, for theire bellies sake vse to saye of the Pope, that forsomuche as he is Lord of all benefices, Summa Angelica dictione Papa. Theodori­cus de Schismate. Plutar­chus. though he sell for money Byshoprikes, monasteries, preisthod, spirituall promo­tions, and partith with nothing freely, yet bicause he counteth al his owne he cannot committ Simony, though he woulde neuer so faine. But how stronglye and agreablye to reason these things be spoken, we are not as yet able to perceue, except perchaunce these men haue plucked of the wynges from the truth, as the Romaines in old tyme did proine and pinion their goddesse Victorie, after they had once gotten her home, to thende that with the same wynges she shoulde neuer more be able to flee away from them againe.

THE ELEVENTH CHAPTER.

Toward the end of your Apologie Syr Defender,Confuta­tion. who so euer you be that pieced it together, you do but trifle. Of like your stuffe is spent. For here litle saye you, that you haue not said already. Wherefore I craue pardon of the Reader, if according to the slendernes of matters obiected, my con­futation seme also slender. Sir you do now but patch peeces together, which you haue gathered out of your note bookes into the same infarced, some out of the Canonistes, some out of the scoolemē, and them not of the greatest estimatiō, most of al out humanitie bookes, wherein you be pretely sene. And that semeth to be your chief profession. As for diuinitie, there appereth no great knowledge in you. And because you do litle other then iterate your vaine toyes, which you haue here before vttered: I thinke good to bestowe the lesse la­bour in answering. You make an offer as though you would proue the catholike church to erre. But God wo­teth [Page] your proufes be very childish. Neither be they so much proufes, as peeuish asseuerations. Marke who liste, what rea­son you bring in this paragraphe, or els where, that may moue a meane wise man to come to your syde. What ye reherse of the Lacedemonians, it perteineth to your owne compaines no lesse then to them, I meane only your Apo­states, monkes and friers, priestes and Nonnes. For all these by reason of thier solēne vowe of chastitie made, not being in case they may laufully mary, and their sacrilegious con­iunctions after the myndes of the best lerned fathers not being wedlockes, but incestes, as we haue before declared: truth it is, they haue as great a gyfte as the olde Lacede­monians had, if among them women were common with­out distinction of mariage,Among the vo­wed gos­pellers is neuer an aduou­trer, be­cause all be inces­tuous. The De­fenders be like the Lace­demo­nians. after the order of Platos com­mon weale, as you report. For within them selues, and keping within their owne communes, how can they ha­ue any aduoutrer? For where is nor wife nor husband, as among that holy companie: where shall there any aduou­trer be founde? And as among them there is neuer an aduoutrer, because all be incestuous: so for that they haue all diuided them selues from the church by schismes and heresies, there is neither amongest them all, euer a good Christen man.

You finde great fault in the Canonistes that be at this daye, and name in your margēt Summa Angelicae, the author whereof died many yeres past. If he, Theodoricus, what so euer he was, or any other Canoniste offend you, as for his bellies sake speaking of the Pope, that should sette your teeth an edge: what perteineth that to vs, who defend the catholike faith, not the sayinges of euery Canoniste? You were best, seing you make so much adoo with them, to article their errours, and either write a railing booke against them, which [Page 260] ye cā easely do, or sende one of your best lerned superinten­dentes to Bononia, there in open scoole with disputations to confute them. And so doubtlesse ye shall either conuert them, which were a worthy act, or proue your selues fooles, which were greate pitie.

But to answer your obiection, we saye, first, that you al­leage Summa Angelica falsely. Nothing is found sounding to that you burthen the Pope with all in the place by you quo­ted. in dict. Papa. Next, whereas it is writtē in Sūma Angelica, In dict. si­monia. verb. vtrū auctoritas. In curia Romana titulus de simonia non habet locum, you Syr Defender either not knowing what folowed, or of malice a­busing the place, haue reported the same, as if it were preci­sely said without any distinction. Where as in dede the sel­fe same summe vseth this distinction, saying, verum est in ijs quae sunt Simoniaca de iure positiuo solum, sed non in ijs quae sunt simoniaca de iure diuino. Whereby he meaneth that the Pope is not vnder the rules of simonie concerning such lawes and paines, as he him selfe or his predecessours haue made in that behalfe. For they haue made many thinges belonging therto, as you may well knowe your selfe, who are so pretely sene in the canon lawe, as it may appere by the often and cunning allegations which you bring out of the gloses. But concerning that simonie which properly is so called, the Po­pe is no lesse subiect therto by the true iudgement of Summa Angelica, which you haue shamefully belyed, then any other man.

You iest at Gods blessed truth alwaies remaining in his holy church, and prophanely resemble it to a bird proined and pinyoned, that it flye not awaye. As though the church kept truth with such policie,The churche is ne­uer desti­tute of the truth. as the olde Romaines are fai­ned to haue kept their Goddesse Victorie. Well Syr, we tel you in sadnes, we are assured of the truth, that it is in the [Page] church, and that it shall neuer depart from thence. And if ye call this cutting away of her winges, that it neuer flye from the church: we graunt they be cut in such sorte, as she shall kepe the church for euer as her owne neast. And will you knowe who telleth vs this? Euen God him selfe sa­ying in his Prophete Esaye to Christ of his church.E [...]ai. 59. I will make this couenaunt with them sayeth our Lord.Thr chur­che hath alwaies the wor­d [...]s of t [...]uth, and the spirite of God, to vnderstād t [...]em.My spirite which is in thee, and my wordes which I haue put in thy mouth, shall not depart from thy mouth, and from the mouth of thy sead, and from the mouth of thy seades sead, sayeth our Lord, from this time forth, for euermore. Thus the church is promised to haue the wordes of God which he vouchesaued to put in the mouth of Christ, who are the wordes of truth, and also the spirite of God, by which those wordes be rightly vnderstan­ded, to remaine and abide with her for euer. For this spirite Christ prayed to his Father,Ioan. 14. as him selfe sayeth in S. Iohn, to be geuen to the church, the spirite of truth, to remayne with her euerlastingly. In respect of the comfort and guyding of this spirite,Mat vlt. In what sense it may be said, the truth hath no winges to flye a­way [...]. he promised to be with his church all dayes to the ende of the world. In this sense we graunt you, the truth now hath no winges to flye awaye from the church withall. Against this truth what soeuer ye bring in reproufe of Po­pes lyues, whom notwithstanding most impudently ye be­lye, what vndiscrete sayinges or flateries so euer ye burthen the Canonistes with, all tourneth to nothing. The truth remaineth vnshaken: your spirite of lying, scoffing, and ma­lice thereby is discyfred.

But what yf Ierem ye tell them, as is afore rehersed, that these be lyes? What yf the same Prophete saye in an other place, that the selfe same men who ought to be kepers of the vineyarde, haue brought to naught and destroyed the Lordes vineyard? How if Christ saye, that the same person̄es who chiefly ought to haue a care ouer the temple, haue made the Lordes temple a denne of [Page 261] Theues?

Here come you in with your whatiffes,Confuta­tion. which commonly you vse, when other rhetorike faileth you. We tell you plainely without any iffes, that Ieremie meant of you,Ieremies and Christes say­ing re­tourned vpon the Defen­ders. Ierem. 7. Ierem. 12. and such as you be, and calleth your whole newe fangled doctri­ne, verba mēdacij, the wordes of lying, ernestly geuing warning, that men geue no credite to them. His other rebuke pertei­neth also to you. For whereas ye haue broken into the church our Lordes vineyard vnder pretence to till it, and ke­pe it: who seeth not how ye haue trauailed all that ye can, to destroye it, and bring it to naught? Touching Christes saying, how truly may it be applied and spoken, to you, that of our Lordes holy temple ye haue made a denne of thee­ues?Matt. 21. When were euer such theeues in the church of God, as ye are, who robbe both the owtward temples of all treasures and ornamentes appointed to gods honour, and al­so the inward temples the soules of Christen people, of the holy sacramentes, of all godly seruice, of the true sense of Gods word, of the suretie and simplicitie of their faith?

Yf it be so that the Churche of Rome cannot erre, Apologie it must nedes folowe, that the good lucke therof is farre greater then all these mē­nes policie. For suche is their lyfe, their doctrine, and their dili­gence, that for all them the Churche may not onely erre, but also vtterly be spoyled and peryshe. No doubt, yf that Churche maye erre whiche hath departed from Godds worde, from Christes com­maundementes, from the Apostles ordinaunces, from the primatiue Churches examples, from the old Fathers and Councelles orders, and from their own Decrees, and which will be bound with in the compasse of none neither oulde nor new, nor their owne, nor other folkes, nor mannes lawe, nor Goddes law, then yt is out of all que­stion, that the Romyshe Church hath not onely had power to erre, but that it hath shamefully and must wickedly erred in very deed.

THE TWELFTH CHAPTER.

A man would haue thought, you would haue brought some substantiall argument whereby to proue, that the chur­che [Page] erreth. Neither make you excuse in that you speake of the Romaine church. In this accompt we make no differēce betwen the Romaine church, and the church. But all your proufes depend vpon your isses, which being denyed, you haue no more to saye. No doubt (saye you) if that churche may erre which hath departed from Gods word, from Christes commaundementes, &c. then it hath erred in very dede.

But Syr, what if a man denye your supposall, and staye you in your first if? What haue you to proue it? All that you haue said hitherto, we knowe, and of litle force it is. But no boubt saye you, if that church maye erre, which hath de­parted from Gods word, &c. Yea forsooth if all iffes were true, then if heauen fell, we should catch larkes. And if a bridge were made betwen douer and Calys, we might go to Boleine a foote, as William Somer once tolde king Henry, if it be true that I haue heard saye.

Apologie But say they, ye haue ben once of our felowship, but now ye are become forsakers of your profession, and haue departed from vs. It is trew we haue departed from them, and for so doing we both giue thankes to almightie God, and greatlye reioyce on our owne behalfe. But yet for all this, from the primatiue Church, from the Apostles, and from Christ wee haue not departed, true it is. VVee were brought vp with these menne in darkenes, and in the lacke of knowledge of God, as Moses was taught vp in the learning and the bosome of the Egyptians. VVe haue ben of your companye saith Tertullian, I confesse it, and no maruaile at all, for saith he, menne be made and not borne Christians.

Confu­tation.Although what so euer ye saye here, ye haue said be­fore, as in all this later part of your Apologie ye do but like younge scolers, that in grammer scooles varie their vulgares in diuerse latine, and the same hath ben allready answe­red: yet because ye knowe this to be one of the greatest matters, that ye are charged with, ye haue differred your full discourse thereof vnto this place. The matter is great in de­de. Your owne conscience telleth you, (as here ye shewe) [Page 262] that we burthen you with it. We do so verely.The De­fenders be worthely charged with de­parting from the commu­nion of the catho­like chur­che. 1. Ioan. 2. And would God ye considered the same duly. We saye, (as ye report) that ye haue ben once of our feloweship, but nowe ye are become Apostates and forsakers of your profession, and haue wickedly departed from vs. By the name of vs, we meane not some one particular companie, but Chri­stes catholike church. We saye of you, as S. Ihon said of the like, whom he calleth Antichristes: Ex nobis exie­runt sed non erant ex nobis. Nam si fuissent ex nobis, permansis­sent vtique nobiscum. They are departed from out of vs, but they were not of vs. For if they had ben of vs, they had doubteles remai­ned still with vs.

But what is your answere hereunto? It is desperat, foo­lish, and lying. First ye confesse the thing, and not only that, but also thanke God for it, and greatly reioyce in it. And therein ye folowe the worse sorte of sinners, of whom Salo­mon sayeth. Laetantur cum male fecerint, Prouerb. 2. & exultant in rebus pessimis. They be glad when they haue done euill, and reioyce in the worst thinges that are. Ye haue diuided the church of God, ye haue rent our Lordes nette, ye haue cut his wholewo­uen cote, which the wicked souldiers that crucified him, could not finde in their hartes to do. Dionysius Alexan­drinus writing to Nouatus the great heretike, who did as ye haue done, sayeth thus vnto him, as Eusebius reciteth,Eccles. hist. lib. 6. ca. 5. in graecis. How hay­nous a cri­me it may be estemed to diuide the ahur­che. whe­reby ye may esteme the greatnes of your crime. Thou shouldest haue suffered what so euer it were, that the church of God might not be diuided. And martyrdome suffered for that the church should not be diuided, is no lesse glorious, then that which is suffered for not doing idolatrie. Yea in mine opinion it is greater. For there one is martyred for his owne only sou­le, and here for the whole church. Thus it foloweth that by your Apostasie and by your diuiding of Gods church, ye ha­ue [Page] done more wickedly, then if ye committed idolatrie.

The De­f [...]nders excuse of their A­postasie. But yet for all this, (saye they) from the Primatiue chur­che, from the Apostles, and from Christ we haue not departed. What can be said more foolishly? Why Syrs is not the primi­tiue church and this of our time one church? Doth it not holde together by continuall succession till the worldes en­de?The pri­mitiue church and the church of our time is one church. What, hath Christ mo churches then one? Is the pri­mitiue church quite done, and now must there beginne a newe? Is not Christ, his Apostles, and all true beleuers in what time or place so euer they liue, his one mysticall bo­dy whereof he is the head, all other the members? As Christ is one, the holy ghost one, one faith, one baptisme, one vocation, one God: so is the church one, which began­ne at the first man, and shall endure to the last, whereof the lyuing part on earth before the cōming of Christ into flesh, was sometime brought to small number, after his comming, and after that the Apostles had preached and spred the gospell abroad: the number neither was euer, nor shalbe other then great (though sometime accompted small in respect of the vnbeleuers) vntil the cōming againe of the sonne of mā, at what time he shall skantly finde faith,Luc. 18. specially that which worketh by charitie, in the earth. Against which time busely ye make preparation.

For some part of excuse of your forsaking the church, ye saye,A colour of excuse of their forsaking the chur­che. ye were brought vp with vs in darkenes, and in the lacke of knowledge of God, as Moses was among the Egyp­tians, for that ye bring out of Tertullian, helpeth you no­thing at all. I pray you Syrs, what darkenes meane ye? Speake ye of sinne? We excuse not our selues. But when tooke ye out the beame of your owne eyes, that ye espie the mote of our eye? It were well ye proued your selues honest men, before ye required vs to be Angels. If ye meane the [Page 263] darkenes of ignorance, as peraduenture ye do, and the lacke of knowledge of God: Now that ye are departed from vs, and haue set chayre against chaire, (I se not cause why to saie aulter against aulter) what more and better knowledge of God haue ye, then we haue, and euer haue had?VVhat knowled­ge of God can these De­fenders shewe thēselues to haue, mo­re then the catho­lik [...]s? Ioan. 17. Mat. 16. Do we not knowe the articles of our belefe? Tell vs which do we lac­ke. This is lyf [...] euerlasting (sayeth our sauiour in the gospell) to knowe thee God alone, and whom thou hast sent Iesus Christ. So farre as God lightneth our vnderstanding with the super naturall light of his grace, this much we knowe. For which Peter the sonne of Iona was accompted blessed of Christ, the same we sinnefull papistes through Gods grace, also knowe and confesse. The commaundementes of God we knowe, what is good, what is euill, which be synnes, which be vertues, what is to be folowed, what is to be shun­ned, so farre as is behofull, we be not ignorant.

What is the darkenes then, for which ye would nedes be gone from vs? And what is that worthy knowledge ye haue wonne by your departure? Tell vs, that we may bye the bookes, and go to scoole with you. Truly without ye haue some hidden and secret knowledge, which ye haue not vtte­red to the world hitherto, as we beleue ye haue not being such boasters as ye are: we see litle cause, ye should twyte vs of ig­norance, and bragge of your owne knowledge. This we see full well, they that ronne away from vs to your side,Our re­negates be wor­thy Do­ctours a­mong the gospel­lers with in fewe dayes of their ron­n [...]ng a­way from v [...], were th [...]y ne­uer so ignorat at before. be they monkes or friers, tinkers or tapsters, coblers or bodgers, white or blacke, by and by in your synagoges they be great rabbins. And ye the superintendentes admitte them to be your mi­nisters and preachers of the word, and tell them they can do well, and they beleue no lesse them selues. But the people take them for such as they knewe them before they tooke such degree, and many times for their good behauiour they [Page] forgete their holy ministerie, and christen them by their common name, which was not geuen them at the fonte. Yet all this proueth not either our ignorance, or yout mar­uelous and rare knowledge. Neither shall ye euer be able to proue to any man of lerning and iudgement, that in any li­berall sciences, or right knowledge of the scriptures, ye are comparable to the lerned men of the catholike church. Though about fifty yeres past and vpward for a space, the studies of eloquence and of tonges were intermitted: yet then and before those times was there no small number of men,Tho. walden, Al [...]um{us}, Beda, three worthy English men. who had profound knowledge of all good artes, and specially of the holy letters. I report me to Thomas Walden, who very lernedly confuted the heresies of your great gra­undfather Ihon Wicklef, to Alcuinus in the great Charles time, to Beda before that, all three English men, to Anselme and Lanckfranck Bishops of England though strangers bor­ne,Anselme, Lanfrāk, Thomas of Aquine, S. Ber­nard, Ru­pertus. to S. Thomas of Aquine, S. Bernard, Rupertus, and hun­dreds mo, which here is no place to reckon. Were not they by confession of all, great clerkes, do not the best lerned of our time in obscure matters fetch light of them? To saye the truth, in comparison of their cleare light, your ill sauoring snoffes maye scantly seme to yelde a darke smoke. Many talke of your painted sheath, who were they lerned in dede, would sone perceiue neither that to be very fresh and gaye: for as for your sworde, what rusty and beggerly metall it is, the wiser part of the world seeth. Therefore ye shall do well Syrs to speake no more of the darkenes and ignorance of the catholike church, and to boast lesse of your great cun­ning and knowledge.

Apologie But wherefore I pray you haue they them selfe, the citizens and dwellers of Rome remoued, and come downe from those seauen hilles, whervpon Rome sometime stood, to dwell rather in the plai­ne called Mars his field? They wil say peraduenture, by cause the cō­ductes [Page 264] of water, wher without menne cannot commodiouslye li­ue, haue now failed and ar dried vp in those hilles. Well then, lett them giue vs lyke leaue in seeking the water of eternal lyfe, that they giue them selfes in seekyng the water of the well, for the water ve­rely fayled amongest them. Thelders of the Iewes sayth Ieremye, sent their litle ones to the wateringes, and they finding no water, beyng in a miserable case and vtterly marred for thurst, brought home againe their vessels emptie. The nedye and poore folke saith Esaye, sought about for water, but no wheare founde they any, their tonge was euen withered with thirst. Euen so these menne haue broken in peeces al the pypes and conduites, they haue stopped vp all the springes, and choked vp the fountaine of liuyng water with durte and myre. And as Caligula many yeres past locked fast vp all the storehouses of corne in Rome, and thereby brought a gene­rall derth and famyne amongest the people, euen so these men by damming vp all the fountaines of Goddes word, haue brought the people into a peetifull thirst. They haue brought into the world as saith the Prophete Amos, a hungre and a thurst, not the hunger of breade, nor the thurst of water, but of hearing the worde of God. With greate distresse went they scattering about, seeking some spar­ke of heauenly light to refresh their consciences withall, but that light was alredy thoroughly quenched out, so that they could finde none. This was a ruefull state. This was a lamentable forme of Goddes Churche. It was a miserie to liue therin without the Gospel, without light, and without all comfort.

THE THIRTINTH CHAPTER.

Well and witteely reasoned forsooth.Confuta­tion. A substā­tiall cau­se why these De­fenders shuld de­part from the chur­che. Matt. 5. Because the Citi­zens of Rome for commodities sake of water, which Pinda­rus calleth best of all elementes, withdrewe them selues from their seuen hilles, and placed their habitations beneath in the plaine about the ryuers side of Tyberis: therefore these men must haue leaue to depart from the church, which as Christ sayeth, is a citie buylded on hye vpon a hille, and to come downe into the pleasant valleis of this world, to seeke for the water of eternall lyfe. No no Syrs, if it were that holesome water of eternall lyfe which ye thirst after, ye would neuer haue departed from the high hill the Catholike church, and come downe into the valleis, where ye finde the durty pud­dles [Page] of fleshly pleasures,Iob. 40. where the deuill Behemoth as Iob sayeth,Num. 14. dormit in locis humentibus, sleapeth in moyst places. Israel the people of God kept on high in the mountaines, but the vngodly. Amalekite and the Cananey dwelt beneath in the valleis, as by Moises not without cause it is mencioned. By my reade ye shall forsake the damnable companie of A­malekites and Chananees,Beware of Behe­moth Defenders. beware of Behemoth the sprite of pride and lecherie, and gete ye vp againe from whence ye de­parted, into the hille, the church of God, where ye shall finde pure and holesome ayer, and the cleare water of the fonteine of lyfe, whereof ye may drinke your fyll, and thirst no more euerlastingly.The ri­uers of the fon­teine of life wer [...] neuer wholly dryed vp For after that the vaines of that fonteine were once opened, and ryuers from thence deriued through all the earth by the Apostles of Christ, the church being by them planted, and by their successours watered and multi­plied ouer the whole world, through Gods goodnes and mercifull prouidence, they were neuer stopped, much lesse wholly dryed vp. Although for synne some partes or mem­bers of the church haue ben punished with scarcetie of that water, with drowth, and thirst, specially before the comming of Christ into flesh, (at what time he opened the springes more abundantly), as the prophetes Ieremie, Esaie, and Amos by you alleaged do witnesse: yet neuer was the time, but in his church water was to be founde, all that sought water brought not home their vessels emptie. All were not ster­ued for hunger and thirst of that water of Gods word. The­refore ye speake both slaunderously and ignorantly for diui­nes, where ye saie, that we had broken in peeces all the pipes and conductes, that we had stopped vp all the springs, and choked and damned vp all the fonteines of lyuing water with durte and myre.

Your malice against the church hath blinded your hartes [Page 265] so farre, that ye saye,If all the fonteines of Gods word had ben stop­ped vp in times past, what in conue­nience therof should haue fo­lowed? Rom. 10. Matt. 28. all fonteines of Gods word were dam­ned vp, whereof it foloweth that then the lyfe of all men was lost, and so that Gods promises failed, and Christes bloud was frustrat. For where all the fonteines of Gods word are stopped vp, there is no faith, for faith is of hearing, and hearing by the word of God. Then was the faith quyte gone by these felowes. Then was Christ false of his pro­mise, who said, I will be with you all dayes to the worldes ende. And lest I should seeme to take their wordes captiously, and stretch them to a further sense, then they meant, as they would beare vs in hande, that the water of life was quite stopped vp, and that Gods word was nowhere heard (for nyne hundred yeres they make their accompt): so repeting the same sentence in other wordes folowing, they be not ashamed to saye, the light was throughly quenched out, so that men could finde none at all. Yet vnwares or igno­rantly they call that faithles and pagane state, a lamentable forme of Gods church, whereas they should haue accomp­ted it no church at all. For where is no word of God, no light, no gospell at all, how can there be any church? With­out these any multitude is no more a church, then without Christ, a man is a Christian, then a dead man is a man. And thus with malicious slaundering, not with lerned reasons, with their owne affirmations, not with apt allegations, haue they gone about to proue, that these many hundred yeres the church hath erred. But thankes be to God, all this winde shaketh no corne. When all these hasty blastes be blowne ouer, the church of God shall stand still vnmoued vpon the rocke Christ buylded it on, and appere glorious in her stedfastnes and truth, maugre the gainesaying of all he­retikes,Cantic. 6. and shall appere to them terrible as a strong armie set in battaile raye.

ApologieWherfore though our departing wer a trouble to them, yet ought they to consider withall, how iust cause wee had of our departure.

Confuta­tion.In dede our charitie is such, as we confesse it to be a griefe vnto vs, to see you playe the part of rebellious children, to vse presumption for submission, contempt for obedience, spite for loue. Yet sith that ye are desperate and incorrigi­ble: as by your departing from vs the church felt some an­guish and trouble, so now that ye are gone, it is releued, as the body is eased, when after a purgation it hath auoided e­uill humours. For your excuse ye would vs to consider, how iust cause ye had of your departure.The De­fenders offe [...] to shewe iust causes of thei [...] de­parture from the church. Although no cause can iustly be alleaged, why any man should forsake the catholike church, and ioyne him selfe to sectes: yet let vs he­are, what cause ye pretend. That all the fonteines of Gods word haue ben by vs stopped vp, that the water of life was not to be founde in the church, that the gospell was quite lost, and all the light put out: this already haue ye said, but yet not proued. Now saye your best.

For if they will saie, it is in no wise laufull for one to leaue the fe­lowship wherein he hath ben brought vp, Apologie they maye aswell in our names or vpon our heades condemne both the Prophetes, the Apo­stles, and Christ him selfe. For whye complayne they not also of this, that Lot went quitte his way out of Sodome, Abraham out of Calde, the Israelites out of Egypte, Christ from the Iewes, and Paule from the Pharisees? For except it be possible there maye be a law­ful cause of departing, we see no reasone whye Lot, Abraham, the Israelites, Christ and Paule may not be accused of sectes and seditiō, aswel as others.

THE FOVRTINTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion. The De­fenders make a rope of sande, whē they go about to shewe causes of their de­parture. Apocal. 18Yet bring ye nothing to the purpose. Your proufes be so weake, and hange so euill together, that we may well tell you (which Irenaeus obiected to heretikes) that ye make a rope of sande. We saye not, it is in no wise laufull for one to leaue the felowship, wherein he hath ben brought vp. But contrarywise, if the felowship be naught and wicked, euery [Page 266] one is bounde to eschewe it. Depart from Babylon my peo­ple, and be not ye partakers of her sinnes, sayeth the heauenly voice to S. Iohn. Therefore the examples ye bring, help nothing your cause.

Loth went out of Sodome, Abraham of Caldea, the Israelites of Egypt, Paule from the Pharises, by Gods speci­all warning. Where ye saye Christ went from the Iewes, onlesse ye referre it to his stepping aside from them for a whyle: ye should rather haue said, the Iewes went from Christ. But whereto perteineth this? Though ye were so malicious, as to compare the Catholike church to So­dome, to Caldea, to Egypt, to the Iewes and pharises: yet I wene ye are not so proude, as to compare your selues to Loth, to Abraham, to Gods peculiar people, to Paule, to Christ him selfe. These departings we allowe, and God required them, yours we blame, and God detesteth.

And yf these men will needes condemne vs for Heretiques, Apologie by­cause we do not all thinges at their commaundement, whom (in gods name) or what kynde of menne ought they them selues to be taken for, whiche despise the commaundement of Christ, and of the Apostles?

Our frailtie concerning lyfe we accuse and lament,Confu­tation. and commende our selues to Gods infinite mercie. Touching belefe and necessarie doctrine of faith, raile ye at vs neuer so much, we neither despise the commaundementes of Christ, nor the traditions of the Apostles. If we condemne you and take you for no part of our body, which is the mysticall bo­dy of Christ, because ye teach strange doctrine contrary to that ye haue receiued, and will not heare the church nor obey the churches cōmaundementes: we do none otherwise then Christ him selfe hath taught vs,Mat. 18. that who so euer will not heare the church, we take him for no better then for an hethen and a publican.

Apologie If we be scismatiques bycause we haue lefte them, by what name shall they be called themselues which haue forsaken the Grekes, from whom they first receiued their faith, forsaken the primatiue Church, forsaken Christ hymselfe and the Apostles, euen as Chil­dren should forsake the parentes?

Confuta­tion. Proufe sufficient that these gospel­lers be schisma­tikes.Who soeuer depart from the Catholike church, they be schismatikes. ye haue departed from the catholike church, of these nyne hundred yeres, ergo ye be schismatikes. The first proposition ye will not denye, the seconde your selues con­fesse, the conclusion then must nedes be true. If we saye the same, blame vs not. Neither saye we that only, but also that ye are heretikes. Whereby the measure of your iniquitie is increaced. The same crime ye would impute vnto vs, if ye wist how. If ye haue no more to laye to our charge, but that we haue forsaken the Grekes,The west church hath not forsa [...]en the Gre­kes, but the Gre­kes haue forsaken the west church in some pointes. The Ro­maine church receiued not the faith from Grece. ye shall not be offended with the world, if it geue vs the title, name, and estimation of ca­tholikes, as heretofore. For (remember your selues) we haue not forsaken the Grekes, but the Grekes in some pointes ha­ue forsaken vs. By the name of vs, alwayes I vnderstand the catholike church, euen the holy Romaine churh, whose faith we professe, and with whom we communicate.

And how standeth it with your lerning, that we receiued the faith first from the Grekes? For where ye saye we haue forsaken the primitiue church, yea Christ him selfe and the Apostles, ye haue tolde vs this so often, that nowe we take them to be but wordes of course, and a common blast of your railing sprite. The Romaine church receiued the faith from Ierusalem and not from Grece, as the rest of the world did, according to the prophecie. De Sion exibit lex, & verbum domini de Ierusalem. Esai. 2. The lawe shall come out of Sion, and the word of God from Ierusalē. VVho brought the faith into the VVest. Peter and Paule the chiefe Aposttles (and Ihon also if we maye beleue Tertullian) brough the faith into the West. At Rome they preached. At Rome they [Page 267] founded the church. Frō Rome they directed (specially Peter) into the prouinces of the West, Apostolike men to teach and preach. To this church as Hilarius saith, they powred out the gospell with their bloud.Of whō receiued the land of Britai­ne the faith. Ioseph of Arima­thaea. Eleuthe­rius Po­pe. Luciu king of the Bri­tons. As for the lande of Britaine our na­tiue countrie, if the faith were first brought hither by Ioseph of Arimathaea, and his fellowes, as by olde tradition we are tolde: then was the church here first planted by faithfull Ie­wes, and not by Grekes. Certaine it is, that afterward it was watered by those whom the blessed martyr Pope Eleuthe­rius sent hither at the the request of king Lucius. At lenght the English nation also receiued the faith from Rome by meanes of S. Gregory, who sent hither the holy man S. Au­gustine with certaine others, of whom neuer a one was a Greke.

The like maye be said of other countries of the West, of which euery one receiued the faith by preachers sent some by Peter, some by Clement, some by other successours of Peter in the see Apostolike. Though S. Dionyse and Theo­dorus Tharsensis bishop of Cantorbury, were Grekes borne, yet both they and who so euer els were sent into Fraunce, or any other prouince hereabout by Clement, Eleutherius, or Gregorie, or any other bishop of Rome: sure we are their doctrine was before tried to be agreable in euery point with the doctrine of the church of Rome, found by those two glorious Apostles Peter and Paul. This being true, we maruell what ye meane to charge vs with forsaking the Grekes, specially where ye saye, we first receiued the faith from them. Which is no truer, then that we receiued our english language from them.

For though those Grekes, Apologie who at this daye professe religion and Christes name, haue many thinges corrupted amongest them, yet houlde they still a greate numbre of those thinges which they recei­ued from the Apostles. They haue neyther priuate Masses, no [Page] mangled Sacramentes, nor Purgatories, nor Pardons. And as for the titles of hygh Byshops, and those glorious names, they estime them so, as whosoeuer he were that woulde take vpon hym the sa­me, and woulde be called eyther vniuersall bysshop, or the hed of the vniuersall church, they make no doubt to call suche a one, both a passing proude man, a man that worketh despite against all the o­ther Bysshoppes his bretherne, and a plaine Heretique.

THE FIFTINTH CHAPTER.

Confu­tation. The Grekes be­lyed by the De­fenders. The Grekes haue Masse without cōpanie commu­nicating with the priest. The Grekes pray in their Masse for the dead. VVhat thinges haue the Grekes receiued of the A­postles after the mynde of this De­fender. H [...]lding without hauing.As ye haue oftentimes belyed vs, so nowe ye belye the poore Grekes. So litle are ye able to saye somewhat, and therein to saye truth. For they haue masse commonly with­out companie to communicate with the priest, which ye cal priuate masse, so is it all Grece ouer, so is it in Asia, in Syria, in Assyria, in Armenia, and where so euer the religion of Christ is professed. As among the Grekes in Venis I my selfe and diuerse of our countrie men haue sene it commonly practi­zed. Likewise praye they all for the dead, and thinke them to be relieued by the prayers, oblations, almose, and dedes of charitie done for them by the lyuing. Which mynde and o­pinion implyeth that faith which the church holdeth of purgatorie.

But though (saye ye) those Grekes haue many thinges corrup­ted, yet holde they still a great number of those thinges which they receiued of the Apostles. And wilt thou knowe Reader what they be? Forsooth they haue neither priuate masses, nor mangled Sacramentes, nor Purgatories, nor Pardons. Is not the witte of this Defender to be commended, that maketh a man to holde that which he hath not? Those Grekes holde still sayeth he. What holde they? Mary they haue not this and that. This is a newe kinde of holding, for a man to holde that he hath not. If they holde still, then haue they still. But they haue not, sayeth he, then how holde they? A man maye by the rules of this newe logike, thus reason. The [Page 268] Turkes, Saracines, Iewes, Infidels, Idolaters, yea, the shepe of Cotteshold also if ye will, haue neither priuate masses, nor communion vnder one kinde, nor purgatories, nor pardons: ergo they holde a number of thinges which they receiued from the Apostles. The antecedent is true. Who so euer denieth the consequent, must compte this Defenders logike very simple. What if one should make this argument, this Defender hath neither good logike, nor very fyne rhetorike, nor profounde philosophie, nor the right knowledge of di­uinitie: ergo he holdeth many heresies? Though both the antecedent and consequent be true, yet is the argument naught. For by like reason one might conclude an honest vnlerned catholike man to be an heretike, which were false and iniurious. Such is the logike,Ablatiue and ne­gatiue di­uinitie. such are the topikes of this newe negatiue and ablatiue diuinitie, for so may we worthely call it. Negatiue, in respect of their blasphemous tonges denyng sundry weighty pointes of our faith, Ablati­ue, in respect of their wicked handes, casting away, thro­wing downe, and taking awaye many good thinges pertei­ning to the maintenance of Christen religion and Gods honour. Put them from their negatiues and from their ab­latiues, then in what case shall they stand?

Now then synce it is manifest and out of all peraduenture, Apologie that these mē are fallen frō the Grekes, of whom they receiued the Gos­pell, of whome they receiued the faith, the true Religion and the Church, what is the mater why they will not now becalled home again to the same mē, as it were to their originals and first founders? And whye be they afraide to take a paterne of the Apostles and old Fathers tymes, as though they all had ben voyde of vnderstanding? Do these menne, wene ye, see more or set more by the Church of God, then they dede who firste deliuered vs these thinges?

Softe and fayer Syr Defender,Confu­tation. you haue not yet proued that you saye is manifest, and out of all peraduenture. Remem­ber you not the olde homely verse of your sophistrie, neque [Page] negatiuis, rectè concludere si vis? Though your eares be of­fended with the vndue quantitie of the syllables, yet ought your sense to admitte the veritie of the rule. What part of the faith the Grekes haue sounde and catholike, according to the scriptures rightly vnderstanded and expounded by the church through the instruction of the holy ghost, the same holde we also. Mary them (as we haue said) we take not for our originals and first founders. What faith the A­postles and their laufull successours preached and taught,The tri­sting of the De­fender toward thende of thapolo­gie cau­seth this confuta­tion to conteine some thinges of lesse weight. the same we haue receiued, the same we kepe, in the same will we dye. Speake to the purpose, or els I would you would ma­ke an ende of your silly follies. For in dede you trifle and saye nothing worth to be answered. And here litle cause do you minister vnto me, to vtter substantiall stuffe. Which I desire the discrete Reader to consider for myne excuse, that with a trifler I do also buttrifle. Yet because hitherto I haue truly al­leaged all that ye bring, let vs see more of your stuffe, and pa­tienly though not vnlothsomly heare your one selfe tale di­uerse times tolde with some varietie of wordes.

Apologie We truely haue renounced that church wherein we could ney­ther haue the worde of God sincerely taught, nor the Sacraments rightlye administred, nor the name of God dewly called vppon, whiche Churche also themselues confesse to be faulty in many poinctes: And wherein was nothing able to stay any wise man, or one that hath consideration of his owne sauetie.

Confuta­tion.Ye haue renounced that church, wherein ye might at all times haue the word of God truly taught, the sacramentes rightly administred,The cau­ses which moued the De­fenders to renoū­ce the church. the name of God duly called vpon, wherein we acknowledge no default touching faith. And why haue ye renounced this church, but for that ye might not be suffred to set forth to the losse of christen soules the detestable heresies of Wicklef, Lu [...]her, Zuinglius, Caluine, and other your false maisters, which ye call your syncere [Page 269] worde of God, for that ye might not at your pleasure abro­gate fyue sacramentes, and minister two only after your schismaticall and hereticall manner, for that ye can not finde in your hart to call vpon the name of God after such sorte, as other Christian people do, and to desire Gods neare fren­des the sainctes to praye for you, for that ye can not abide the order, ceremonies, and discipline of the church, for that ye will not be shepe of Christes folde vnder the feding and go­uernement of the head shepeherd Peters successour?An impu­dent lye. That ye saie there was nothing in the catholike church able to staie any wyse man, or any that hath consideration of his sa­fetie: it is one of your impudent lyes. There were both wise men in the church, and great multitudes of such as had good regarde of their soule helth, alwaies before the deuill had such a hande vpon Luther, and the rest of your newe Apostles, and Apostates.

To conclud, wee haue forsaken the Church as it is now, Apologie not as it was in olde time, and haue so gon from it, as Daniell went out of the Lyons denne, and the three Children out of the furnesse: and to say trouth, we haue ben cast out by these menn (beyng cursed of them, as they vse to saye: with boke, bel, and candell) rather then haue gon awaye from them of our selues.

The church that now is,Confuta­tion. and the church that was in olde time, is one church, as a man in his olde age is the same man, he was in his youth. From the which church no faultes or imperfections can excuse you for your departing. Because you confesse it your selfe, blame him not that sayeth vnto you, ex ore tuo te iudico serue nequam. Luc. 19. Of thine owne mouth do I iudge thee thou naughty seruaunt. Neither haue ye gone from it as Daniel was delyuered out of the Lyons denne,Daniel. 6. &. 3. nor as the three children out of the furnesse: but ye haue departed wilfully from the house of God, where touching faith all be of one accord, vnto the synagog of Antichrist, [Page] vnto babylon of sectes, where is no order but confusion, vn­to the kingdome of Satan, and there ye remaine as it were in a denne of lyons, where that roring lyon with his fellowes, lyeth in wayte seeking whom he maye deuoure.1. Pet. 5. Ye haue stepped from the place of spirituall refrigerie, into the frying panne of schismes and heresies, and from thence after that ye haue now boyled and fried in malice and rancour against the church, except ye repent, ye are like to leape into the furnesse of hell, that for euer shall torment you, and neuer consume you. Complaine not of your casting out of the church. To be excommunicate ye haue deserued. And that kinde of punishment is by a mercifull discipline exten­ded vpon you, partly for your amendment, partly to con­serue the reste of the body whole from your pestiferous contagion. Neither were ye by excommunication put from vs, vntill ye had by contumacie seuered your selues from the church, and shewed your selues desperate and incor­rigible.

Apologie And wee are come to that Churche wherein they themselues cannot denye (if they will saye truely and as they thinke in their owne conscience) but all thinges be gouerned purely and reuerent­ly, and asmuch as we possibly could, very neere to the order vsed in the olde time.

Confuta­tion. whither these go­spellers be come.To saye truly, and as we thinke in our conscience, as we knowe by lerning, and as the spirite of God, who teacheth his church all truth, informeth vs, ye are come vnto the ma­lingnant church, to the congregation of reprobates, whither as into a sincke in maner all the heresies that Satan euer rai­sed vp from the begining, be auoided, that the holy thinges, scriptures, and mysteries of God were neuer so impurely and villainously handled, neuer so contrary to the will and or­der of those holy fathers, who first founded and instructed the churches.

Let them compare our Churches and theirs togither, Apologie and they shall see that themselues haue moste shamefully gon from the Apo­stles, and we moste iustely haue gon from them. For we folowinge the exaumple of Christ, of the Apostles, and the holy fathers, giue the people the holye Communion whole and perfite: But these mē contrary to all the fathers, to all the Apostles, and contrarye to Christ himself, do seuer the sacraments, and plucke away the one parte from the people, and that with moste notorious sacriledge, as Gelasius termeth yt.

VVee haue broughte againe the Lords supper vnto Christes institution, and will haue it to be a Communion in very deede, common and indifferēt to a great number, accordinge to the name. But these men haue chaunged all things contrarie to Christes insti­tution, and haue made a priuate Masse, of the holy Communion. and so it commeth to passe, that we giue the Lordes supper vnto the people, and they giue them a vaine pagent to gase on.

VVe affirme togither with the auncient fathers, that the body of Christe is not eaten but of the good and faithfull, and of those that are endued with the spirit of Christe. Their doctrine is, that Christes very bodie effectually, and as they speake, really and sub­stantially, may not only be eaten of the wicked and vnfaithful men, but also (which is monstrous to be spoken) of myse and dogges.

VVe vse to praye in Churches after that fashion, as accordinge to Paules lesson, the people maye knowe what wee pray, 1. Cor. 14. and may an­swere Amen, with a generall consent. These men like soundinge metall, yelle out in the churches vnknowen and strange wordes without vnderstanding, without knowledge, and without deuo­tion, yea and do it of purpose, because the people should vnderstand nothing at all.

THE SIXTINTH CHAPTER.

As comparison can not dewly be made betwen light and darknes, betwen truth and lying, betwen Christ and Belial:Confuta­tion. so neither betwen the catholike church, and starting holes of heretikes. You saie much, and proue nothing. How often times do you tell vs, that we are gone from the Apostles, and that ye are iustlye gone from vs? Affirme it lesse, and proue it better. The most ye haue to crake of,The thinges whe­reof the Defen­ders cra­ke, and for whi [...]h they will seme to passe the catholi­kes. which ye haue ne­uer done withall, is your ministring of bothe kindes vnto the people, your newe founde holydaie the english commu­nion, [Page] your seruice in the vulgare tonge, and your vile obiec­tion of mise and dogges. This is the storeboxe of M. Iuel­les high diuinitie, which he maketh no great store of, but shaketh it abrode euery where. To euery point I haue said so much, as is ynough to staye the hartes of those that feare God, in myne answere to M. Iuelles chanlenge. To the mat­ter of both kindes and the obiection made out of Gelasius, in the seconde article. To that of priuate masse, in the first ar­ticle. To all that is said for the church seruice in the vulgare tonge, in the third article. To the obiection of Mise, dog­ges, and wormes, in the 23. article. The same here to re­herse againe, I thinke it nedeles.

But where ye affirme the body of Christ not to be eaten but of the good and faithful only, if ye meane the sacramen­tall eating, so as it is eaten vnder the sacrament in the visible forme of bread and wine, and not of the spirituall eating on­ly: that is false. In that ye saye the fathers be on your side, meaning the sacramentall eating: ye belye them. And so likewise reporting our doctrine to be, that wicked and vn­faithfull men may eate the body of Christ effectually, ye be­lye vs. We teach that the euill may eate the body of Christ really, that is in dede, but not effectually. They only eaten effectually, who eating it worthely obteine the effect of Christes body. Which is the vnitie of the mysticall body of Christ,Lib. 4. dialog. and increace of grace. There is verely (sayeth S. Gregory) in synners and in them which receiue vnworthely, the true flesh of Christ, and his true bloud, sed essentia, non sa­lubri efficientia, but in substance not in holesome effect. If your lady the interpreter hath put in a sponefull of lying of her owne tēpering into your hochepot, that was full of fal­se mengle mangle before: blame her for it, reuoke the errour, and beware hereafter, how ye admitte women, though ye [Page 271] loue them neuer so much, to be medling and tampering with your clergy matters. That euill men receiue the true body of Christ sacramentally, nolesse then good, where I might alleage in manner all the olde fathers: S. Augustine only may suffice,Epi. 162. who affirmeth the same speaking thus of Iudas. Tolerat ipse dominus Iudam, diabolum, furem, & ven­ditorem suum sinit accipere inter innocentes discipulos, quod no­runt fideles praetium nostrum. Our Lord himselfe doth tolerate Iudas, and suffereth a deuill, a thefe, and him that solde him, to receiue amongest his innocent disciples our price, which the faithfull do knowe. Who desireth to see some good number of testi­monies out of the fathers for this point, that euill and wic­ked men eate the body of Christ,In respon­sione ad obiect. 94 though to their condem­nation: may it please him to read the lerned confutation of the wicked Capharnaites made by the reuerent prelat Ste­uen late bishop of Winchester of blessed memorie. There he shall finde ynough to satisfie his desyre. But what nede any man to require the testimonies of fathers,1. Cor. 11. sith S. Paul teacheth vs so to beleue? VVho so euer (sayeth he) eateth this bread, and drinketh of the cuppe of our Lord vnworthely, he shall be gilty of the body and bloud of our Lord.

But not to tarry about rehearsing all pointes wherein we and they differ, for they haue well nye no ende, Apologie we tourne the scrip­tures into all tongues, they scant suffer them to be had abroad in any tongue:

Concerning the tourning of the scriptures into all ton­ges,Confuta­tion. The trās­lation of the bible into vul­gar ton­ges. I referre the reader to the fiftinth article of my an­swere to M. Iuelles chalenge. We gladly suffer them to be had in euery place of Christendome in the lerned ton­ges, Hebrewe, Greke, and Latine. Neither were they alto­gether forbidden to be had in some vulgare tonges, before the fancy malepertnes of heretikes forced the gouernours of the church for sauegarde of the people to take other [Page] order.

Apologie VVe allure the people to read and to heare Gods word, they dry­ue the people from it.

Confuta­tion.Ye allure the people busely to heare and reade the scrip­tures for euill purpose. And thereby ye haue filled their hartes whom ye haue deceiued, with pride, so as they thinke them selues able to iudge of the highest questions that be in diuinitie. We kepe the people so farre as we can for you, from heresies, and require them rather to be hearers, then iudges, and to lerne necessary knowledge of Gods word at holesome and Godly sermons.

Apologie VVe desire to haue our cause knowen to all the world, they flye to come to any tryall.

Confuta­tion.Then why came ye not to the chiefe and most laufull consistorie of the world, the late generall councell at Trent? But perhaps your desyre is to haue your cause knowen to all the world, not to be examined by laufull iudges. Ye haue your desire. Your cause is knowen to all, and of all good men condemned. What tryall should we come vnto? Our doctrine hath had to high a teacher, to be tried by men now. It hath ben approued to long, to be put in daying in these dayes at the later ende of the world.

Apologie VVe leane vnto knowledge, they vnto ignorance. We trust vnto light, they vnto darkenes.

Confut.Ye leane to the fauour of secular Princes, whom by flat­tery and heresie ye may deceiue. Where ye be not admit­ted to their fauour, there ye leane to sedition and rebellion. Whether it be so or no, I reporte me to the late tumultes of Fraunce, and the subiectes rule of Scotland. What your com­panie attempted in England in Quene Maries time, I wene ye can better remember it, then commend it. Crake not of your greate knowledge, nor of your light. O be to them, crieth our Lord in Esaie,Esai 5. that saye, good is euill, and euill is [Page 272] good, that put light for darkenes, and darkenes for light. Though all among vs haue not so much knowledge and light, as their vocation requireth, yet to impute ignorance and darknes to the whole church, and to all in generall, yea and to saie, that we leane vnto it, and trust in it: as it is said with much vntruth, so besides all modestie. Had ye that knowledge and light, ye ought to haue, neuer would ye so haue said. Your demeanour is so euill, your doctrine so fal­se, your tonge so railing, that we take your word for no sla­under.

VVe reuerence as it becommeth vs, Apologie the writinges of the Apostles and Prophetes, and they burne them.

He that reuerenceth these holy writinges of the Apostles and Prophetes,Confuta­tion. reuerently obserueth the preceptes in them conteined. For he that loueth me sayeth Christ, Iohn. 14. Good li­fe trieth the loue of Gods percep­tes. will kepe my wor­de. This keping consisteth in practise of life. And he that liueth best, loueth him most. How farre ye kepe the precep­tes of holy scripture, your rebellion against the church, your despite against him, whom Christ hath appointed to be she­peherd ouer all, your breach of vowes, which with solemne protestation ye haue made to God, your contempt of the most high sacrament of the aulter, wherein we haue assu­rance of our Lordes true and reall body by his owne worde, your tredding of it vnder feete, briefly your manifold despi­tes, disobediences, and villanies to all holy thinges, orders, ce­remonies, mysteries, and disciplines, do shewe. As for those holy writinges of the Apostles and Prophetes, we burne not. But it irketh you, that we burne your false and corrupt trans­lations, and such bokes of yours, as we finde to conteine pe­stilent heresies, which being suffered to go abrode, were like to poison many a Christen soule.

Finally we in Gods cause desire to stand to Gods only iudge­ment, they will stand only to their owne. Apologie

Confuta­tion.What so euer ye pretende, the cause ye haue taken in hande to defend, is not Gods cause, neither is this stirre, which ye make in the world,Hosius cō­trabren­titon lib. 1. Fonteine. This new gospell is not so er­nestly be­gonne to be set forth, and maintei­ned for Gods sa­ke. Theues and the defenders desire to haue their cau­ses iudged of God, and not of laufull iudges appointed by God. for Christes sake. Luther him selfe when at a disputation with doctor Eckius, inflamed with anger, and passing the boundes of modestie, was admo­nished of certaine, for as much as it was Gods cause that was treated, to handle the matter more soberly and with the spi­rite of softnes, he brake out into these wordes. Non propter Deum haec res caepta est, nec propter Deum finietur. This mat­ter is not begonne for Gods sake, neither for Gods sake shall it be en­ded. Therefor speake no more to vs of Gods cause. There be other causes that moue you to do, as ye do.

But in this cause (ye saye) what so euer it be, ye stand to Gods only iudgement. So faine would theeues also. For then would they hope to escape hanging, if they had none other iudge but God. This is your shifte, because your gil­tye conscience dareth not to be iudged by the church of God that nowe liueth on earth, though Christ would it to be heard neuer so much. Ye appeale to the primitiue church, to the Apostles and Prophetes, who be gone out of the earth, and be not nowe in state to pronounce sentence a­gainst you, and to God him selfe, who hath left now to spea­ke to men as he spake in the olde time to the patriarkes, to Moyses, and to the Prophetes.

But Syrs beware how ye stand to Gods only iudgement, thinke with your selues, that by the iudgement of God ye are already comdemned, because his holy church which iud­geth his iudgementes, hath for your heresies pronounced sentence against you. Were not your speciall trust in ly­ing, ye would not saye, that we stand only to our owne iud­gementes. Ye knowe well ynough, (for ye blame vs for it) that touching pointes of faith and necessary doctrine of [Page 273] saluation, we folow not our owne priuate iudgemntes, but the sense of the holy ghost diuulged to the church, the scri­ptures by the same expounded, the traditions of the Apo­stles, the auctoritie of the councels, and the mindes of the most auncient and best lerned fathers.

VVherfore if they will waye all these thinges with a quiet mind, Apologie. and fullye bente to heare and to learne, they wil not only alow this determination of oures who haue forsaken errours, and folowed Christe and his Apostles, butte themselues also will forsake their owne selues, and ioyne of their owne accorde to oure side.

All these thinges and the whole summe of your doctrine,Confu­tation. all your begynninges and procedinges we haue aduisedly weighed, and the same by no meanes can we allowe, except we would leaue the faith, and embrace heresies, forsake Christ and his Apostles, and folowe wicked Luther, and that detestable rable of lecherous vowbreakers, that be your Apo­stles and authours of your damnable sectes, and depart from the pillour and ground of truth, and come to your waue­ring and mutable companie the synagog of Antichrist. But if ye would call to God for grace, humble your selues, re­moue from within you the spirite of pride, of selfe lyking, of malice, and of lechery, which kepeth you from seing what ye ought to beleue, and how you ought to lyue, and would by humilitie, obedience, charitie, and cleanes of lyfe, make in you a place ready to receiue the holy ghost: we doubt not but ye should see the damnable state ye stand in, forsake your heresies and incestuous wedlockes, boast lesse of your folo­wing of Christ and his Apostles, and become the true disci­ples of Christ in dede, ioyne with his church againe, from whence ye haue seuered your selues, and so lyue in hope of blisse to come, whereof none shalbe partakers, that forsake to be members of the catholike church.

THE FIRST CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion. HEre entre these defenders into a common place concerning generall councels. And because if generall councels continewe in that estimation and auctoritie they haue euer had, their priuate conspiracies and false conueiances in corners be like to be dasshed: they stretch all the synnowes of their wittes to saye what they can against councels in generall, and chiefly a­gainst the late generall councell of Trent. Now pricketh forth their Secretary,The De­fenders geueth the onset vpon vs with a­blinde peraduen­ture. who thinketh him selfe a fresh souldier in rhetorike, and geueth the onsette vpon vs, with a blinde peraduenture. But Syr what so euer you imagine vs to saye, touching a generall councell, we are not so simple as to graunt (which your peraduenture semeth to surmise of vs) that your hereticall and most vngodly matters, which you speake of, might without blame be attempted by licence of any councell. Now once againe because your stuffe is spent, and haue no other thing to saye: thereof it foloweth by the topikes of your rhetorike (for good logike we see none ye haue) that we haue broken Gods commaundementes, the [Page 274] decrees of the Apostles, the ordinances of the primitiue church, and I can not tell what els. To let passe that you haue well near a hūdred times said, and proued neuer a once, take this for an answere to your where they saye, that such wicked changes in religion, as ye haue made, neither is it lau­full to make with a councell, nor without a councell, because they are against the substance of our religion founded and instituted by Christ.

Kinge Agesilaus, truelye didde butte fondelye, Apologie whoe when hee hadde a determinate aunswere made him of the opinion and will of myghtye Iupiter, woulde afterwarde bringe the whole matter be­fore Apollo, to knowe whether hee alowed thereof as his father Iupiter didde or no: But yet shoulde wee dooe muche more fonde­lye, when wee maye heare Godde him selfe plainelye speake to vs in the moste holye scriptures, and maye vnderstande by them his will and meaninge, yf wee woulde afterwarde (as thoughe this were of none effecte) bringe oure whole cause to be tryed by a Councell, which were nothinge els but to aske whether menne would allowe as God did, and whether men would confirme Gods commaunde­ment by their authority.

Iupiter and Apollo whom the deceiued antiquitie ho­noured as Gods, in dede were Idols.Confuta­tion. Into whom euill sprites ennemies of mankinde entered, and out of them gaue an­swers to those that consulted them for thinges vncertaine. Their answeres sometimes were true, sometimes false. With both their intent was to deceiue men. Agesilaus hauing founde by experience of others, that either at sometimes it was not true, what so euer Iupiter had answered, or at lest very doubtfull and hard to vnderstand: he thought good, to be the better assured of that he demaunded, to heare also the answere of Apollo, who had speciall praise for oracles. Nei­ther herein did he so fondly, as you saye.

Now (if I maye haue leaue to compare holy thinges with prophane which you do without leaue) forasmuch as the scriptures wherein God speaketh vnto vs, be in sundry pla­ces [Page] not most open and plaine to humaine senses, and many by mistaking them be deceiued: were it not well done of you for the more suretie and better vnderstanding of that ye go about,It is a wi­se waye to trye and exa­mine do­ctrine by the rule of the Traditiō of the church. Iohan. 14. I meane in matters concerning religion, to folowe the iudgement of the catholike church represented in generall councels? Yea we saye boldlye, that surer it is in pointes of faith to leane to the exposition of the fathers agreing toge­ther, and to folowe the tradition of the church: then to trust to your selues, or to the letter of the scriptures scanned only by your owne wittes. For the church is promised to be lead into all truth by the holy ghost. Ye can not saye any such promise hath ben made to your particular companie. The­refor it were not fondly done, as ye saye, but wisely saye we, if ye tried and examined your doctrine, which ye pretend to be according vnto the scriptures, by the rule of ecclesiasticall tradition, which is the chiefe rule to trye euery doctrine by. Which rule is nowhere better to be sene, then in generall councels, where is both excellencie of all knowledge, and the assistance of the holy ghost the spirite of truth. Neither is this to seeke allowance of that which God doth at mans han­de, nor confirmation of that he commaundeth, by humaine auctoritie, but to examine priuate censures by the censure of the holy ghost, and to submit priuate opinions to publike iudgement.

Apologie VVhy I besech vou, except a councell will and commaunde, shall not truth be truth, or God be God? If Christ had ment to do so from the begining, as that he would preach or teach nothing with­out the Bishops consent, but referre all his doctrine ouer to Annas and Caiphas, where should no we haue ben the Christian faith? Or who at any time should haue heard the gospell taught? Peter ve­rely, whom the Pope hath oftener in his mouth and more reuerent­ly vseth to speake of, then he doth of Iesu Christ, did bodly stand a­gainst the holy councell, saying, it is better to obey God, then men. And after Paul had once intierly embraced the Gospell, and had re­ceyued [Page 275] it not from men, nor by man, but by the only will of God, he did not take aduise therin of flesh and bloud; nor brought his case before his kinsemen and brethern, but went forthwith in­to Arabia to preach Gods diuine misteries, by Gods only aucto­ritie.

If you occupie a flute no better,Confu­tation. by my reade you shall geue ouer your piping and flouting. Truth is truth, and God is God, whether any councell will or nill. Mary as for the truth and for God, euery councell laufully assembled hath will: so against the truth and against God, it hath no nill. As God is of him selfe and by him selfe, and not of man or angels: so his euerlasting truth dependeth not of Councels. Yet as God hath reueled him selfe to his church, and by his church is set forth to the world: so to the church he hath commended the word of his truth, and geuen his spirit to vnderstand it, and in the church it is kept, and by the church it is declared. Wherein who so euer agreeth not with the church, but repyneth against the church, he strayeth from the truth, and holdeth of Antichrist.

To that you bring of Christ, Peter, and Paul, we saye, Christ is peerlesse, Peter agreed with the rest of the Apost­les, and for good cause refused conference with the wicked synagog of the Iewes, who openly professed enemitie against the truth, neither was it right that he should heare them, but now rather that they should heare him and the Apostles. As for that you saye of Paul in your defence, your case is farre vnlike. When ye proue vnto vs, that ye are specially called as Paul was, and haue a speciall commission to preach against the doctrine of the church, as he had against the wicked Ie­wes, then a Gods name take no aduise of any man, but forth­with preach and crye out so lowd as ye list, so that ye goe in­to Arabia, as Paul did, or where els so euer ye will. For euery good man would be loth England should be troubled with [Page] you.

Apologie. Yet truely we do not despise Councels, assemblies, and conferen­ces of Bishops and lerned men: neither haue we done that we haue done altogether without Bishops or with out a Councell. The mat­ter hath ben treated in open parlament, with long consultation, and before a notable Synode and Conuocation.

THE SECOND CHAPTER.

Confu­tation. Contem­ning the generall councels they will seme to esteme parlamē­tes and their ow­ne parti­culer cō­uocatiōs. Either your tonge agreeth not with your harte, or els I wil proue the contrarie by your owne argumentes, which in the next Paragraphe before this ye haue huddeled vp. For whe­reas your matters are (as ye ordinarily saye) euident by plaine scripture, and the word of God is readen of euery man (with­out distinction and limitation) therefore ye do first of all playe as fond a part as king Agesilaus did, who receiuing an answere of mighty Iupiter, wold afterward bring the mat­ter before Apollo. Yea furthermore, ye do much more fondly then he, if when ye may heare God him selfe speake plainely to you in the most holy scriptures, ye would bring the whole cause to be tried by a councell. Thirdly, I can not but desdaine at your doinges, and saye with your own wor­des vnto you: Why I besech you except a councell will and commaund, shall not truth be truth, and God be God? Fourthly, I alleage after your maner the example of Christ him selfe, who preached without the bishops consent, and re­ferred not his doctrine ouer to Annas and Caiphas. Fifthly, I put you in remembraunce of Peter, which boldly stode against the holy councell. Sixthly, to conclude I saye that Paul, after he had once entierly embraced the Gospell, he did not take aduise therein of flesh and bloud,Galat. 1. nor brought the case before his kinsmen and brethren.

How saye ye then nowe, are not these your owne proper reasons, as by the lineaments of them ye may see at the first, and do they which vse such maner of arguments, conclude [Page 276] any regard to be made of councels? For if against generall coūcels, which are furthered with the wisedome, experience, authoritie, power, and prayer of the best and the most in all christendome are disgraced, withstanded, condemned by your foresaid worshipfull reasons: what estimatiō can ye re­quire to be geuen to assemblies and conferences of prouin­ciall councels? Therefore either ye greatly belye your sel­ues, in making a wise as though ye despised not councels, against which ye argue so lustely, or els ye do wickedly to geue by your argumentes occasion to your readers, to condemne the assemblies and conferences of bishops out of all christendome, your selues in the meane while most ho­nestly beleuing it, that councels are not to be despi­sed.

But go to now notwithstanding your examples, which do all make to the contrarie. How proue ye that ye despi­se not councells? Mary by your owne fact and example, saying that ye haue not done that which ye haue done alto­gether without bishops, or without a councell. Surely won­der it was, that ye remembred not then king Agesilaus, Christ, S. Peter, S. Paul, besides other examples, which folow hereafter in this your Apologie, and vpon the sight of them departed frō the assemblie and councell, to which your bis­shops (as ye call them) and lerned men resorted. But your heads were occupied with other matters, and it semed worth­while to do that which ye would do not altogether without bishops and councell.

Be it so then. Where haue ye treated of your matters? That matter hath ben treated (saye ye) in open parlament, with long consultation, and before a notable Synode and conuocation. First in what parlament? Meane ye the first of our soueraig­ne lady Quene Elizabeth, or any of those of king Edward [Page] the 6. his dayes? If ye meane any of those so long ago passed, such as afterward in his sister Quene Maryes time were re­pealed,The De­fenders argument or parla­ment ser­ueth in defence of the ca­tholikes, no lesse then of the gos­pellers. although ye made no lye at all, in saying your matters to haue ben treated then in opē parlamēt, and with long con­sultatiō: yet except ye proued them to be allowed also by full parlament, ye should neuer haue made mention of them, specially whereas the parlaments in Quene Maryes dayes with as due consultation and full assent of all states and de­grees condemned your predecessours doinges, as euer they were by any fauour cōmended, that was shewed in the yon­ge princes nonage. But if ye meane (as by reason ye must) the parlamentes of these later dayes, the first of al did make most for you, and yet how open was it for you? Had ye any place at all in it? Were ye admitted within the dores? Or had ye any thing to do in that assemblie? Consider then with what consultation your purposes were concluded. Did they tarie many monethes about it? Had they bishops? Had they diui­nes and the most lerned, to reason to and fro with all libertie? Was the authoritie of the vniuersall church of Christ and the doctrine of the auncient fathers considered? Ye saye in latine plenis comitijs, that is in the full and whole assemblie, as though none at all had there resisted, but euery man had yelded to your matters. What saye ye then of the spirituall lordes a great part of the parlament, and without all doubt the part which must be chiefly and only regarded when the question is of religion? How many of them gaue their voice to your gospel? Yea which of thē al did not resist it? One alone, I must confesse, was afterward made to breake vnitie, of whom a right good and catholike bishop said, to a noble man, we had but one foole among vs, and him ye haue gotten vnto you. But as of the spirituall Lordes ye had none at all, (except that one litle worthy of the name of a [Page 277] bishop and lord whose lerning was small and honour ther­by much steyned) so of the temporall ye had not all, and so had ye also in the lower house very many and well lerned, that spake against you. And mo woulde, had conscience ben as free, as auctoritie was dredfull. And yet, call ye this a full parlament, and a parlament which had all his partes wholy fauoring you?

But let vs consider the notable conuocation in which your matter hath ben treated.Of the gospel­lers not a­ble con­uocation. If ye meane the clergie comming together at that first parlament time of which we speake, it was of catholikes not of sacramentaries, and it put vp a bill against your procedinges, so farre it was of from confirming them. If ye meane any since that time in which your superintendentships mette together, for what cause was it a notable synode, and a notable conuocation? Or with what possibilitie of consultation may we thincke, that ye did treat there of your matters, which were first concluded, against the catholike bishops willes, and without any voice of yours, before ye came to your consultation? Marke I praye you well, these two times. When ye did first in this our Quenes time breake into the realme, in the parlament forth­with ensuing, the Pope was renounced, your cause was pre­ferred. But how? Against the will and sentences of the bishops and lerned men, and against the expresse instructi­ons and intimations of the conuocation then gathered. And therefore ye can not crake, concerning that time, of your long consultation and full parlament, by which your matter should seme to be commended. It folowed then afterward, that catholike bishops were imprisoned, and ye placed in their churches. And then in dede, when all went with you, a parlament was holden, and a conuocatiō also of ministers. But is this that notable conuocation, without which ye did [Page] not that which ye do? How sensible and folish a lye is this, to report as though ye had not proceded in your mat­ters, without long consultation, wheras your purposes were by other wayes concluded for you, before ye had any power to make a conuocation? Yet these absurdities and obiections notwithstanding, ye dare to speake of full parlament, long consultation, notable Synode, as who should thinke, that it were no maruell, why your gospel hath ben receiued, because forsooth, all thinges were examined to the vttermost, in full parlament and a notable conuocation. Which if it were true in dede, it might iustly moue a simple and vnlerned mā, to see a whole realme in a full parlament, aduisedly to deter­mine any matter. And this being most auailable to win­ning of credite, and yet in the very dede it selfe, lest able to be proued, ye be desperate in your lying, and crake of a full par­lament and a notable synode, not regarding by what meanes ye promote your cause to the multitude, and saue your sel­ues from reproch of extreme folie. For otherwise ye which can so amplifie the small and obscure meetinges of a fewe Caluinistes of one litle Iland, what would ye not saye of the last generall councell, to which more nations were as­sembled together,The gre­atnes of the last generall councell of Trent. then are shyres in England, more yeres were bestowed in consultation, then weekes in your full par­lament, more bishops defined and subscribed, then were mi­nisters of all sortes in your notable Synode by many par­tes.

I haue taried the longer about this point (gentle reader) because it is much worth to be considered quietly. first how shamefully and notably these men trotte forth in lying, then how gorgiously and solemnely they can com­mend their owne conuocations, and last of all how iniuri­ously and contemptuously they dare speake of the generall [Page 278] councell. An other thing yet more is to be considered,The super indentes children not yet made le­g t mate by parla­ment. that all their doinges are so well allowed in full parlament, that to this daye it can not be obteined, that their superintendents and ministers children so many as haue taken holy orders, should be legitimate. Lastly if they will nedes haue their matters seme to depend of their parlament, let vs not be bla­med, if we call it parlament religion, parlament gospell, par­lament faith.Parlamēt faith. Yet shall ye geue vs leaue, who feare to lose our soules, to beleue that we haue receiued of olde from Christ and his Apostles by continuall successions of laufull bishops. As for your notable synode and conuocation ye speake of, Peter and Paul, Ierome and Augustine we knowe, these new Apostates, and strangers of Geneua, from whence they came, and whither they will, we knowe not.

But touchyng this Councell whiche is now sommoned by the Pope Pius, Apologie wherin men so lightly are condemned whiche haue ben neither called, hearde, nor seene, yt is easie to gesse what we maye looke for, or hope of yt.

THE THIRD CHAPTER.

The generall councell of Trent is now at length by Gods speciall fauour concluded and ended.Confuta­tion. Of the Councell of Trent. What haue ye to saye to it? Forebeare your accustomed lying, what haue ye to saye to it? For matters of faith, what is not sounde and true? For maners, what sore lacketh due salue? For discipline, what disorder hath not holesome restrainctes and punishmentes? What defectes be not prouidently considered how to be sup­plied? What abuses be not required to be taken away, as farre as mans witte could deuise, and the weaknes of the pre­sent age can beare?

In times paste when Nazianzene sawe in his daies how men in suche assemblies were so blynde and wilfull, Apologie that they were caried with affections, and laboured more to get the victory then the truth, he pronounced openly, that he neuer had sene a good ende of any Councell: what woulde he saye now yf he were a liue at this daye, [Page] and vnderstode the heauing and shouing of these men? For at that time, though the matter were laboured on all sydes, yet the contro­uersies were wel heard, and open errours were put cleane awaye by the generall voice of all partes: But these men will neyther haue the case to be freely disputed, nor yet how many errours soeuer there be, suffer they any to be chaunged. For it is a common custome of theirs, often and shameleslye to boast that their Churche cannot er­re, that in it there is no faulte, and that they muste giue place to vs in nothynge. Or yf there be anye faulte, yet must it be tried by Bisshoppes and Abbottes, only bycause they be the directers and Rulers of matters, and they be the Church of God. Aristotle saith, that a Citie cannot consist of Bastardes: but whether the Church of God may consiste of these men, let their owne selues consider. For doubtles neither be the Abbottes legitimat Abbottes, nor the Bys­shopes naturall right Bysshoppes.

Confuta­tion. Epi. 102.Gregorie Nazianzene in his epistle to Procopius sayeth thus. I refuse to come to whatsoeuer councell of bishops. Because I could neuer yet to this daye see the ende of any councell endewed with any profite, and after which, thinges amisse were not rather made more greuous, The pla­ce of Na­zianzen answe­red. then healed. Nazianzene in that epistle spa­ke of prouinciall councels, specially those that were holden in his troublesom times, where most commonly heretikes through fauour of their deceiued Princes bare the swea. Whi­che in matters of faith could hardly then obteine any credi­te among the catholikes, onlesse they had ben confirmed by the auctoritie of the Bishop of Rome, of which sort at that age were fewe. Those other Nazianzene had experience of, of these he had not. Albeit in dede the vtilitie of the Ni­cene councell in his time, that is to saye within so fewe yeres after the same was holden, was not yet thoroughly espied and fully knowen abrode. Neither would he, if he were alyue at this daye, reproue the holy generall councell of Trent, as ye do. For why should he? Was not all that ye haue to saye in defence of your heresies, there proponed, freely disputed, to the vttermost discussed, and finally put cleane away by the generall voice of all partes?

What ye meane by your heauing and shouing, we vnder­stand not. That all the fathers there concluded their decrees with perfite vnitie and concord, which spiteth you and the deuill not a litle, we are well assured. That we acknowledge no errours in our catholike faith, neither that the church er­reth, hauing alwayes according to Christes promise the as­sistance of the spirite of truth,Ioan. 14. which the world can not recey­ue, sayeth our Lord, and therefore neither your sectes, being altogether of the world and of the flesh: herein we boast not shamelesly, but ye impute errours vnto vs shamelesly, and ha­ue neuer done with it, and yet can charge vs with proufe of neuer a one. And how shamelesse be ye to require vs to yel­de and geue place vnto you? Who made you iudges ouer vs? Who gaue you commission? Where is your warrant?

Ye harpe much vpon our faultes.The De­fenders neuer stint to charge the ca­tholikes with their faultes of li­fe. We confesse we are not faultles, for we are men. What meane ye to obiect them vnto vs so oftentimes? Are ye angels your selues? Or lacking iust cause to charge vs with any errour in doctrine, thinke ye good to tell men, we haue faultes in life, lest ye should be dry­uen to saye nothing, which is as greuous vnto you, as to sa­ye truth? What nede ye to shewe your malice so much at bis­shops and Abbottes? Which of them hurteth you? Haue ye not in prison or in custody at your appointement all the bis­shops of England, one Apostata yet lyuing excepted, which after sundry flightes and changing of cotes, is fled from the tentes of the church to your scattered troupes? The Ab­bottes, haue ye not dryuen them away? Be ye yet a frayd of their shadowes? As by Aristotle a Citie can not consist of ba­stardes, no more can the church of England consist of such bastard bishops as ye be: what number of Abbottes ye haue left in cloisters, such number of true bishops haue ye left in churches. One must I still except, who is a true bishop by [Page] consecration (as I vnderstand) though a false man by Apo­stasie and going from his faith, and from his religion.

Apologie But graunt they be the Churche: let them be heard speak in coun­celles: let them alone haue auctoritie to gyue consent: yet in olde ty­me when the Churche of God (yf ye will compare it with their Churche) was very well gouerned, both elders and deacons as saith Cyprian, and certeine also of the common people were called there vnto, and made acquainted with ecclesiasticall matters.

Confuta­tion. The De­fenders would the com­mō peo­ple to co­me to ge­nerall councels.Ah Syrs would ye haue the common people come to the generall Councell? Whom meane ye I praie you? Tinkers and tapsters, fydlers and pypers, such as your ministers be? Alas poore soules, what should they do there? For there is no tinking nor tippling, no fidling nor pyping. There may they shut vp both budgets and mouthes. For neither can they speake in such an audience to be vnderstanded, nor can they vnderstand, what is spoken. Looke in your bookes better, and you shall finde Cyprian to make litle for your purpose.

Had your matter ben good, it might haue ben defended without lyes. Being as it is altogether besyde truth and reason,A notable lye for­ged vpon S. Cy­prian. for some colour of maintenance of the same, ye passe all measure in lying. Where saith S. Cyprian that certaine of the common people were called to ecclesiasticall councels? Yea specially where saith he, that the common people were made iudges of ecclesiasticall matters, for so hath your lati­ne, which not without guile your lady interpreter com­mōly tourneth, were made acquainted with ecclesiastical matters? If you had meant true dealing Defender, you would haue quoted the place. but you knewe thereby your falsehed should haue ben espied. The place which you meane, dout­les in the secōd to me of S. Cyprians workes, where we finde the sentences of the bishops of Aphrike de haereticis bapti­zandis. Which proueth your straunge saying by you fathe­red vpon that holy martyr nothing at al. The wordes be the­se. [Page 280] Cum in vnum Carthagini conuenissent, &c. The place of S. Cy­prian which the De­fender meaneth. VVhen many bishops in the first daye of September were assembled together at Carthage out of the prouince of Aphrike, Numidia, Maurita­nia, with their priestes and Deacons, the most part of the people also being present, after that the letters of Iubaianus written to Cyprian and of Cyprian to Iubaianus againe had ben readen, concerning heretikes to be baptized: and what after that the same Iubaianus wrote againe to Cyprian: (all this done) Cyprian said. &c. These be the wordes in the actes of that prouin­ciall synode put before the sentences of the bishops.

Now what can you gather out of them for your purpose more, but that a great number of the people were present only in the church or other place, where the bishops were assembled? That certaine of the common people were cal­led to this councell, there is no such worde mencioned nor by Cyprian, nor by any els. Neither were the priestes them selues (which this youthfull gentilwoman interpreteth el­ders) and Deacons called thither, but they attended vpon the bishops, as in such case it hath ben accustomed, for sen­tence none might geue in a councell, but only bishops. Then how much lesse were the common people called to that councell, specially to sitte as iudges in ecclesiasticall mat­ters? Though the english interpretation nameth it acquain­tance, yet the latine hath the terme of iudging, and therfore I slaūder you not. Of the presence of the people you cā not make argument, that they were thereby made iudges. Who seeth not how boldly the people putteth thē selues in presse where so euer any such solemne assemblie or meeting is? Yea almost who can kepe them from comming in place where any publike notable act is done? Because they will be present only to heare and gase, shal we say, they be called the­reto, and made iudges or chiefe doers? Shall we saye, that the [Page] people which is cōmonly sene in Westminster hall at a ter­me, be iudges of matters pleaded there, because they be pre­sent? At the first conuocation in Quene Maries time, when certaine catholikes and your brethrē reasoned together about pointes of religion, the people in great nūber at Paules were present. Likewise at the disputatiō holden at Oxford betwen certaine catholike Doctours and Cranmare, Latimer, and Ridley, no small nūber of the people both of the towne and the countrie there about were also present. So was it in the first yere of the Quenes maiesties raigne, when disputation was gone about to be kept at Westminster. If this be chro­nicled, as I thinke it shalbe, shall the posteritie hereof argue, that the common people were called to be iudges in syno­des, in cōuocations, in publike disputatiōs of matters pertei­ning to religion? Of such causes their only presence maketh them iudges no more, then it maketh them bishops. Mary that you would so haue it, I thinke well. For such confusion might best serue you to procure the ouerthrowe of good order, in which the church is gouerned. which if it be main­teined duly, your disordered and rebellious state will sone be confounded.

As for laye men, truth it is, in due order, they are admitted to councels. And all Catholike princes had their Ambassa­dours in this late councell at Trēt. That our soueraigne lady Quene Elizabeth sent not thither, as other Christen prin­ces did, being thereto of her owne good deuotion well inclined: by whom, and for what intent it was letted, it is not ve­ry obscure. God preserue her highnes, assist her with godly counsell, and send good ende of all.

Apologie But I put case these Abbottes and Byshopes haue no knowlege: what yf they vnderstande nothing what Religion is, nor how we ought to thinke of God? I put case the ponouncyng and ministring [Page 281] of the lawe be decayed in preists, and good counsell faile in the Elders, and as the Prophete Micheas saith, the night be vnto them in stede of a vision, and darkenes in sted of prophesieng. Or as Esaias saith, what yf all the watchemen of the city are become blind? What yf the salt haue lost his propre strengh and sauerines, and as Chri­ste saith, be good for no vse, scant worthe the castyng on the doun­gehyl?

When iust and laufull proufes faile you Syr Defender,Confu­tation. then come you in with your vaine putcase, and what if.

But we answer. If all were fooles,Answere to the Defenders put cases and what iffes. then was there neuer a wise. If all were naught, then was there neuer a good. If all were blinde, then was there none that sawe light. If all salt lost his proper strength, then was there nothing sauery. But if some Abbottes, many doctours, most bishops in that coun­cell were very wise and lerned, good and vertuous, lightened in their hartes with the abundant light of the holy ghost, well ceasoned with the salt of Gods wisedome: then is your putcase put cleane away, then are your whatiffes but slaun­derous surmises, and signes of a malicious harte; that concei­ueth naught, and worse would the penne to report, if it wist what. The world knoweth so well, (yea heauen also) the great worthines of those fathers in euery respect, that I should do them wrong here to praise them, for that by your fond surmises you seke their dispraise. But hereof more shall be said anonne.

Wel yet then, they will bring al matters before the Pope, Apologie. who cannot erre. To this I say, firste it is a madnes to thynke that the holy Ghoste taketh his flight from a generall Councell to run to Rome, to thende yf he doubt or sticke in any matter, and cannot ex­pound it of him selfe, he maye take counsell of some other spirite, I wote not what, that is better learned then him selfe. For if this be true, what neded so many Byshopps, with so great charges and so farre iorneyes, haue assembled their Conuocation at this present at Trident? Yt hadde ben more wisedom and better, at least it had ben a moche nearer way and handsommer to haue brought all thinges rather before the Pope, and to haue come streght furth, and haue as­ked counsell at his diuine breast. Secondly, it is also an vnlaufull [Page] dealing to tosse our matter from so many Byshoppes and Abbot­tes, and to bryng it at laste to the trial of one onely man, specially of hym who him selfe ys appeached by vs of hainous and foule enor­mities, and hath not yet put in hys aunswere: who hath also afore hand condempned vs without iudgement by order pronounced, and or euer we were called to be iudged.

THE FOVRTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion.We maye lesse wonder at your iesting in other thinges, sith now we see you scoffe and iest in thinges touching God him selfe. Syr set you so light by the holy ghost, as thus vnreuerently to talke of his flight and running to Rome, of his doubting and sticking,The De­fenders vnreuerēt and pro­phane tal­ke of the holy ghost. of his vnablenes to declare doubt­full cases, of asking counsell of an other spirite? Who euer vttered such vile talke of the holy ghost, but some vile cai­tife quyte voide of his grace? Can not you conceiue that reasonably the determinations of councels be referred to the Pope Christes vicare in earth, onlesse ye vtter such vnreue­rent and prophane scoffes? It had become a wicked Cel­sus, a Porphyrius, a Iulian, thus to talke rather then any chri­stian hickescorner. You should at lest haue looked on your square cappe and your white rochet, if you haue any: if nothing els, they would haue tolde you, that such prophane lightnes became not your person. And though the holy ghost be not among the fathers of a generall councel, which is not to be graunted, if they come together in the name of Christ: shall we not suppose the Pope may haue him, on­lesse we imagine that he take his flight from the councell and runne to Rome? Will you appoint the holy ghost but one place to remaine in? May he not be at the councell, and in the popes harte at one time? If you graunt he may, speake no more like a scoffer of his flying and running, doubting and taking counsell of an other spirite. If you re­uerence not man, yet feare God.

Concerning the point it selfe you touch, although the Pope haue that priuiledge,Luc. 22. which Christ prayed to his father for to be geuen vnto Peter, as being Peters successour, that his faith faile not, and that he confirme his brethren, and the­refore be an assured iudge in matters of faith: yet this not­withstanding councels be not assembled together in vaine.Councels be not as­sembled in vaine. For first, the Pope ought not to define and determine con­trouersies about faith rashly and lightly, but wisely and with mature deliberation, calling together lerned and expert counsailours mo or fewer according to the weight of the matter that is in question. For the fathers of the councell do helpe the faith and doctrine of the highest pastour. Whe­refore in the first councell at Ierusalem, when as a great que­stion rose,Act. 15. and Peter had said his iudgement not propped with any testimonie of the holy scriptures, Iames approued it adding thereto the testimonies of the Phrophetes. For Gods prouidence so tendereth the church, that the chiefe members, though they depend of the head, yet defend and helpe the head.

Againe, the councell maketh the people better willing to receiue the faith, by reason of the most acceptable witnesses and iudgementes of a great meany. For we see the lawes de­maunded, made, and enacted by aduise of the nobilitie and chiefe states of a common weale, to be better accepted of the people, then if they were set forth by proclamation of the Prince only. Wherefore Beda admonisheth discretly,Lib. retra. in act. a­postolorū. that Paul conferred the gospell which he had preached a­mongest the gentiles, with the other Apostles, seeking ware­ly to be resolued, whether he preached rightly of the ceassing of the obseruances of the lawe. Not that he doubted ought thereof him selfe (sayeth he) but that the mindes of them that were in doubt, might be confirmed by thauctoritie of that [Page] Apostolike councell.

To that you alleage secondly as a great inconuenience, we tell you, that forasmuch as the Pope is at euery generall councell laufully assembled either in person, as sundry Po­pes haue ben, or by his legates: neither it is an vnlaufull dea­ling,Matters debated in coun­cels be reasona­bly refer­red to the Pope for finall cō­firmatiō. nor such tossing as you terme it, matters maturely de­bated in the councell, to be referred to the Pope head of the councell, not so much for a newe triall, as for finall confir­mation. The fathers of the Nicene councell besought S. Syluester, that what they had ordeined, he would confirme and ratifie. And Leo what thinges the councell of Chalce­don had decreed touching matters of faith, sayeth, that he approueth them. And the councel it selfe speaking to Leo sayeth thus. Decretis tuis nostrum honora iudicium. VVith thy decrees honour our iudgement. Likewise the fathers of other councels, required their constitutions to be strengthened by confirmation of the Popes auctoritie.

This auctoritie ouer councels, which ye graunte to Prin­ces ouer the actes of their parlamentes, ye will not in any wise the Pope should enioye, because he is appeached by you of hainous and foule enormities, and hath not yet forsooth put in his answere. As for the Popes enormities, what they be, I knowe not, neither your selfe I beleue, nor any of your companions. Where at ye raile, I remember, but what ye pro­ue against him, yet I see not. And syr finde you fault with the Pope,VVhere shuld the Pope put in his an­swer beīg railed at of these Defen­ders? because he hath not yet put in his answere? I praie you, who accused him? Where, when, and whereof? In what laufull courte? Before what laufull iudge O you saye, he hath not yet put in his answere. Be it that Hicke, Hob, and Hans of your sectes haue impudently accused him. How would ye haue him bring in his answere? To what seate of iudgement, to what Consistorie can ye cite him, that is by Christ ap­pointed [Page 283] to be the supreme iudge of all his church, the she­peherd of all his flocke? It is not for him, you knowe, to bring in his answere in Westminster haull, nor in Sterre chamber. Will ye haue him appere before your high commissioners in the long chappell at Powles, or in M. Grindalles chamber thereby, where ye haue said and done your pleasure, and de­priued many honest men of their benefices? Or will ye ra­ther haue him come to Geneua, to Zurich, to Frankford, to Strasburg, to Wittenberg, or to some other corner, where ye haue your congregations, there to be iudged by Iacke and Gylle? I pitie you poore soules, that ye talke thus so farre out of square, and would the Pope to bring in his answere, ye knowe not where, hauing neither iust courte or consistorie to call him vnto, nor laufull iudge, nor lawe to passe vpon him. For through your schismes and heresies, as ye haue made your selues churcheles, Christles, and Godles: so also court­les, iudgeles, and lawles. I can not compare you better then to the rebelles of Northsolke vnder Captaine Kete,Captaine Kete. amon­gest whom mount Surrey was their London, and an Oke or an elme commonly called the tree of reformation, was their Westminster haull. Such Prince, such dominion, such iudge, such consistorie.

Ye complaine the Pope hath condemned you without iudgement by order pronounced, and before ye were euer called to be iudged. This is as true, as that the murderer or these answereth the iudge at the barre, saying, not gilty my Lorde.Sundry laufull meanes haue ben attemp­ted for a­mende­ment of the gos­pellers, but all in vaine. Ye haue ben sundry times called to laufull consisto­ries, to synodes, to Councels. Alwayes either ye made not your apperance, or by right of safe conduct conueyed your selues away, without any shewe of obedience, or vpon pro­mise of a mendement, you were dimissed. How many le­gates and Nuncios haue sundry Popes sent into Germanie [Page] and other prouinces, to conuent you, to heare you, to moue you to a better mynde, and call you home, and with all mer­cifull meanes to gather you againe into the lappe of the church? He may saye to your condemnation, that was said of the Iewes:Esai. 5. what is that I ought to haue done to my vineyarde, which I haue not done? But all was in vaine, such hath ben your stubbournes. In this case what should the Pope do, but (which the scripture requireth) excommunicate you, and pronounce the terrible curse of anathema against you, that the corrupt and rottē mēbers being cut away, the rest of the body be kept whole from the contagion? And yet he hath mercifully spared you hitherto, looking for your amendmēt.

Apologie How saye ye, do wee deuise these tales? Is not this the course of the Councelles in these dayes? Are not all thinges remoued from the whole holy Councell and brought before the Pope alone? That as though nothing had ben don to purpose by the iudgementes and consentes of suche a numbre, he alone maye adde alter, diminishe, disanull, alow, remytt and qualifie what soeuer he lyst? VVhose wordes be these then? And why haue the Byshoppes and Abbottes in the last Councell at Trident but of late concluded with sayng thus in thende, Sauing alwayes the auctoritie of the sea-Apostolique in all thynges? De electiō. & Electi pote. cap. Signifi­sti. Or why doth Pope Pascall write so proudelie of him selfe as though saith he, there were any generall Councell able to prescribe a law to the Church of Rome, whereas al councelles both haue ben made and haue receaued their force and strenght by the Church of Romes auctoritie? And in ordinaun­ces made by Councelles, is euer plainely excepted the auctoritie of the Byshop of Rome. Yf they will haue these thynges alowed for good, why be councels called? But if they commaund them to be void, why are they left in their bookes as thinges alowable?

Confu­tation.This hath ben answered now already. Your common repetitions of that you haue said before, be very tedious and idle. Time is lost in reading of them. And Syr, what nede you bestow so much talke in vaine? Is it not reason the members acknowledge the head? Would you the members to worke their actions without the head? Is Pope [Page 284] Paschalis to be called proude for preferring the church of Rome before a Councell? Haue not Councels euer ben thought to lacke their full auctoritie, which were not called and confirmed by the bishop of Rome? Now why maye not both this due order be allowed for good, and councels also for weighty causes be called? Neither is it necessary al writinges be void, which the Pope hath not allowed. They may remaine in bookes without harme, if conteining no euill doctrine they be not expressely forbidden. Neither is al commaunded by the Pope to be void, that is not expres­ly confirmed.

But be it so, Apologie Let the Byshop of Rome alone be aboue all coun­celles, that is to say, lette some one parte be greater then the whole, let him be of greater power, let him be of more wysedome then all his, and in spite of Hieromes head, Hieron. ad Euagriuū. let the auctoritie of one Citie be greater then the auctoritie of the whole worlde.

THE FIFTH CHAPTER.

It is a common manner of this Defender,Confuta­tion. what he must nedes graunt, to make a shewe in wordes, as though it were free gifte. So many times beggers will seme gentilmen, and paiers of debte will seme geuers. Let the Byshop of Rome, (sayeth he) alone be aboue all councels. Syr he is so, no thanke to you. Yet speake you like a liberall gētilman. that is to saie, let some one parte be greater then the whole. No syr maugre your scoffing head, part shall not be greater then the who­le, but part shall be greater then part.Part greater then part. In a right sense is not the head greater then the body, the bishop then his clergy, the maister of a house more then his fami­lie? Neither is the councell the whole pardy, except your mery witte can deuise vs a whole body without a head. Let him be of greater power, saye you. And so he is. Let him be of more wisedome then all his. We saye not so. It may be that his councell hath more lerning, more know­ledge [Page] and more wisedome,The wisedom of the See Apostli­ke. thē his only person. Albeit when we speake of that wisedome of the See Apostolike, which is sure, infallible, and can not erre: we meane not only the Popes singular person, but the head Pastour and bishop, as he doth those thinges which perteine to that chaire: that is to saie, in asmuch as he procedeth not vpon his owne priua­te iudgement, but by the instinct of the holy ghost promised by Christ to his vicare. Where you saye, and in spite of Hiero­mes head, Let the auctoritie of one Citie, be greater then the aucto­ritie of the whole world: we tell you that this you speake more spitefully, then lernedly. For S. Hierome in his epistle to Euagrius speaketh only of a particular matter, blaming the custome of Rome, where contrary to the custome of the whole world, deacons in certaine cases were preferred befo­re priestes, wherefo we haue spoken before.

Apologie Howe then if the Pope haue sene none of these things, and haue neuer read either the scrpitures, or the olde Fathers, or yet his owne councelles? How if he fauour the Arians, as once Pope Liberius did? Or haue a wicked and a destable opinion of the lyfe to come, and of the immortalitie of the soule, as Pope Iohn had but few ye­res synce? Or to encrease nowe his owne dignitie, do corrupt other Councelles, as Pope Zosimus corrupted the Councell holden at Nice in times past, and do say that those thinges were deuised and appointed by the holy Fathers, which neuer once came into their thought, and to haue the full sway of auctoritie, do wrest the Scrip­tures, as Camotensis saith, is an vsuall custome with the Popes? How yf he haue renounced the faith in Christ, and become an Apo­stata, as Liranus sayth many Popes haue bene? And yet for all this shall the holy Ghoste with turning of a hand, knock at his breast, and euen whether he will or no, yea and wholy against his will, kin­dle hym a lyght so as he may not erre? Shal he streght waye be the head spring of all right, and shall all treasure of wisdome and vnder­standing be founde in him, as it were laide vp in store? Or yf these thinges be not in him, can he giue a right and apte iudgement of so weightie matters? Or if he be not able to iudge, would he haue that those matters should be brough before hym alone?

Confuta­tion.To your how ifs and what ifs I could sone make an an­swere [Page 285] by the contrary.It is a tokē good rea­sons faile where how if and what if is so of­ten de­maunded. And Syr how if the Pope haue sene all these thinges, the scriptures, fathers, and councels? What haue you then to saye? Is not your tale then at an ende? Were your matter good and your selfe wise, you would not so commonly vse that weake kinde of reasoning. But to a number of your howifs and whatifs, for the readers sake, to put awaye all scruple, I geue you this answere.

Gods wisedome (as the scripture sayeth) disposeth all thinges swetly, and in one instant forseeth the ende,Sapient. 8. and mea­nes that be necessary to the ende. If he promise any man life euerlasting, withall he geueth him grace also to do good dedes, wherby to obteine the same.Rom. 8. VVhom he hath glorified (sayeth S. Paul) them he hath iustified and called. Mat. 16. Luc. 22. So where­as he hath by force of his prayer made to the father, promised to Peter, and for the saftie of the church, to euery Peters suc­cessour, that his faith shall not faile, and therefore hath wil­led him to confirme his brethren, that is, to remoue all doubtes and errours from them: we are assured, he will geue him such witte, diligence, lerning, and vnderstanding, as this firmnes and infallibilitie of faith and cōfirming of brethren requireth. Shall we stand in doubt whether that happe­neth in thinges supernaturall, which we see to be in thinges naturall, that who geueth the ende he geueth also thinges that perteine to the atteining of the ende? If God would promise vs abundance of corne for the next yere to come, what were more folish, then to doubt, and saye like to this Defender, how if and what if men will not till the ground, nor sowe any seede? Doubtles if they sowe, they shal reape, if they sowe not, neither shall they reape. But what?

We maye gather of the promise of God, that we shall haue not only fayer and ceasonable wether, wherby the fruites of the earth maye proue plentifull, but also that the busband­men [Page] shall emploie their endeuour, paines, and labour. For the abundance of corne so promised shall not be geuen but to such, as till, sowe, and trauaill. Euen so whereas Christ hath promised to the successours of Peter, firmnes of faith, to the Apostles and their successours the spirite of truth, and likewise to councels gathered in his name: we must perswade our selues that nothing shall wante necessary for the con­trouersies touching faith to be decided.

Pope Li­berius fa­uoured not the Arians.That you say of Liberius the Pope, is starke false. He neuer fauoured the Arians. The most ye can finde against him, is that he was compelled by the great persecution of Constantius the Emperour, to subscribe to the Arians. Nei­ther is that by the auncient writers of the ecclesiasticall sto­ries constantly affirmed, but of the chiefe of them not spo­ken of, where most occasion was to signifie it, if it had so ben,Sozom. lib. 4. cap. 15. Lib. de vi­ris illustrib. in chronicis of some denied, of some mencioned not as true, but as a false rumour bruted abrode of him. By which rumour it se­meth S. Hierome was deceiued remaining in the East farre from the places where the truth might more certainely be knowen. But were it true that he subscribed as Peter de­nyed Christ, yet being done for lacke of charitie and not by errour in faith, well might that fact be slaunderours to the churche, but it was not a decre made in fauour of the Arians, neither to confirme that heresie.

Pope Iohn cleared of a slaunder. Pope Iohn the 22. held no euill opinion touching thimmor­talitie of the soule.That you report of Pope Iohn the. 22. is likewise most false. The worst that Marsilius of Padua and William Ockam heretikes wrote of him to flatter the Emperour Lu­douicus of Bauaria, is, that he had taught openly (which al­so is referred to the time before he was Pope) that the soules of the iuste see not God vntill the daie of iudgement. That he had a wicked and a detestable opinion of the immortali­tie of the soule, there was no such his opinion, but it is your [Page 286] false slaunder, by which your wicked and detestable malice imagined to deface the church, and specially the auctoritie of the holy See Apostolike. No storie of any estimation men­cioneth that he was of that first opinion, after he came to be Pope, much lesse that he gaue any definitiue sentence of such matter. But contrariwise, when as he prepared him selfe to go to the definition of that question, concerning the seeing of God which iust soules haue before the daye of iud­gement, as Benedictus theleuenth in sua extrauagante sayeth, he was preuented by death, so as he might not do it.

You belye Zosimus,Zosimus corrupted not the councell of Nice. he corrupted not the councell of Nice. But signified to the bishops of Aphrike assembled in Councell at Carthage the truth concerning the canons of the Nicene councell. The same may be proued by Iu­lius the first, by the epistle of Athanasius and other bishops of Egypt, Thebais, and Libya, written to Marcus the Pope of the originall of the. 72. canons of the Nicene councel, that remayned in safe custodie in the church of Rome, subscri­bed with the handes of the fathers that at the same councell were present. And what credite was to be geuen to the contrary information of only twenty canons, that was re­tourned from the bishops of Constantinople and Alexan­dria, when heretikes before had burned the bookes where the whole number was conteined, and left but those twen­ty, that all bookes now commonly haue?

If we should alleage CamotensisCamo­tensis. and Lyre, you would cal them the blacke garde, and set litle by them.In his re­ply to d. Cole. fo. 70. b. First shewe vs where they haue that you alleage out of them. M. Iuell allea­geth that of Camotensis in an other place. But where it is, he kepeth it to him selfe, and of him selfe it is likely it proce­ded. For his dealing is such, as any false practise in respect of him may seme credible. Albeit what worshipfull doctour [Page] ye meane by Camotensis I knowe not. Peraduenture you meane Carnotensis, otherwise called Iuo. I haue cause to ges­se that so it should be. And yet foure bookes of sundry Printes both English and latine so haue. If there be any such, as I suppose there is not, he is very obscure, nor worth the naming.

Your prophane talke of the holy ghost, and other scoffes that folow, in this paragraphe be not worthy to be answered further then I haue answered before.

Apologie What will ye say, yf the Popes Aduocates, Abbottes and Bys­shops dissemble not the matter, but shew them selues open enemies to the Gospell, and though they see, yet they will not see, but wrye the Scriptures and wyttingly and knowingly corrupt and counter­feite the word of God, and fouly and wickedlye applye to the Pope all the same thinges whiche euidently and proprely be spokē of the person of Christ only, nor by no meanes can be applied to any o­ther? Host. cap. Quanto. Abbas Pa­no. de Ele. ca. Venera­bilis. Cornelius Episcopus in Concil. Tridētino. And what thoughe they saye, the Pope is all and aboue all? Or, that he can do asmuch as Christ can: and that one iudgement place and one Councell house serue for the Pope and for Christ both together? Or that the Pope is the same light whiche should come into the world? VVhich wordes Christ spake of him selfe alone: and that who so is an euill doer, hateth and flyeth from that light? Or that all the other bishops haue receyued of the Popes fulnes?

THE SIXTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion.You haue neuer done with your what ifs. Your inter­preter good gentilwoman that fauoureth your pleasant di­uinitie so much, semeth to be weary of it her selfe. For here she tourneth your Quid si, into what will ye say, if. And now Syr do you demaund of vs, as madame Interpreter maketh you to speake, what we will saie? Forsooth for this you allea­ge against the Popes aduocates, Abbottes, and Bishops, we saye, that the most parte is very false and slaunderous, some what may be taken for truth in a right sense. As for the ad­uocates, I minde not to be their aduocate, neither haue they nede of my helpe. Let them answere one for an other. Ho­stiensis [Page 287] for Abbot Panormitan, and he for Hostiensis.Ho [...]tiēsis. Pauormi­tanus. In good sooth were those excellent men at this daye lyuing, I thinke verely, they would not do you that honour, as to an­swere you them selues. Or if they would vouche saue to do so much, I doubt not but they would make short worke with you, and take you vp roundly for halting, with one word mentiris, dasshing all your allegations. Which word in your diuinitie is a verbe commune.

Thus leauing Hostiensis and Panormitan to defence of the canonistes, telling you by the waye that in questions of diuinitie we stand not alwaies to their sayinges:Cornelius episcopus Bitōtinus. we answere you on the behalfe of Cornelius the bishop of Bitonto in Italie, (for him ye meane I suppose putting in your margent the name of Cornelius only) that he neuer said, the Pope is the light which should come into the world, in that sense as it is spoken of Christ. If you were hardly charged to shewe, where he said it, or where he wrote it, you would be founde a lyer, as in many other pointes you are founde already. That he neuer wrote it in any of his eloquent Italian sermons set forth in printe, I am assured. And more hath he not set forth. Now it remaineth that you tell vs where he saith so, or els confesse your flaunderous lye.

Shortly, Apologie what though they make decrees expressly against Gods word, and that not in hucker mucker or couertly, but openly and in the face of the world: must it nedes yet be gospell straight what so euer these mē saie? Shall these be Gods holy armie? Or wil Chri­ste be at hande amonge them there? Shall the holy ghost flow in their tongues, or can they with truth saie, we and the holy ghost haue thought so?

After a great meanye of your folish and false whatifs,Confuta­tion. you conclude shortly, with what if, they make decrees expressely a­gainst Gods worde, and that openly in the face of the world?

Hereto we answere, requitting your whatif, with an other whatif, and saye. What if the Lerned and holy fathers of [Page] Christendom be assembled together in a generall councell laufully in the name of Christ, and celebrate the same lauful­ly? By that I saye in the name of Christ, I meane all that is behofull in that case. Shall we not thinke then, Christ being in the middest of them according to his promise,Mat. 18. that they make good and holesom decrees? Shal not we deme of them, that God ruleth their hartes, that the holy ghost assisteth their vtterance, that they may truly vse the stile of the A­postles at their first councell,A [...]t. 15. it hath thus semed good to the ho­ly ghost and to vs?

Apologie In dede Peter Asotus and his companion Hosius sticke not to affirme, Hosius contra Brentiton, Lib. 2. that the same Councel wherein our sauiour Iesu Christe was condemned to dye, had both the spirit of prophesieng, and the holy Ghost, and the spirite of truth in it: and that it was neither a false nor a trifflinge saieng, when those Byshoppes sayde, VVe haue a lawe, and by our law he ought to dye, and that they so sayenge did light vpon the very trouth of iudgement: for so be Hosius wordes, and that the same plainelye was a iuste decree, whereby they prono­unced that Christ was worthy to die. This me thinketh is straunge, that these men are not able to speake for themselues and defend their owne cause, but they must also take parte with Annas and Caiphas. For if they will call that a laufull and a good Councell wherein the Sonne of God was moste shamfully condemned to dye, what Councell will they then alowe for false and naught? And (yet as all their Councels, to say truth, commonly be) necessitie compelled them to pronounce these thinges of the councell holden by Annas and Caiphas.

Confuta­tion. Lady A. B. nicknameth Pe­ter a So­to.Yea Madame, what sprite taught you so to nickename that reuerent, sober, holy, and lerned father? You knewe his name to be Peter a Soto, and so founde you in the latine. But because you hearde saye that asotus is a greke word, by which a lewd intemperatlyuer is signified, you had rather plaie the false interpreter with some note of malice, then vsing plaine truth to let him passe without a cast of your office. As by this lightnes you haue hurte that worthy mans estimation nothing, so haue you impaired your owne [Page 288] very much. Such vnhonest toyes better become Brentius that shameles railing heretike, who so commonly calleth him, then your ladiship, whom nothing commendeth more then truth, and honestie, and womanly shamefastnes. For who taketh those vertues from you, shall leaue you litle worth, for all your prety Greke, Latine, or English. This much I saye to your ladiship gently, trusting you will vse your selfe more honestly in your next booke: If your sto­macke will serue you to write againe as well as to speake of­ten which skant I beleue. If this be the fault of the author him selfe, by whom your translation hath ben corrected and allowed, beshrewe his fingers for so writing, and blame your owne shrewed head for willing it so to passe abrode in your name A. B. if those two letters report your name. And now to you Syr defender.

You belye Hosius, as Brentius,Peter a Soto be­lyed by the De­fender. of whom you borowed this, belyed the reuerēt father Peter a Soto. Either you haue readen the place of Hosius, or you haue not. If you haue not, then are you to blame to saye so much euill, that you knowe not. If you haue readen the place, then is your fault plaine malice in putting that to Hosius, the contrary where­of you finde in the place by your selfe alleaged, by which you leade vs as it were by the hande to beholde and consider your owne dishonestie. Chose of these two faultes, with which you had rather to be burthened. For the one han­geth on you, and you shall neuer honestly shake it of. How iust cause you haue to reprehēde Hosius, for that he wrote against Brentius in defence of Petrus a Soto touching the councell in which Christ was condemned by Caiphas, it should best appere to him, that would read the whole place, where Hosius treateth that matter. The same would I here haue rehersed to the discouering of your false dealing and [Page] shameles lying, were not the same very long, and this booke now riseth to a greater quantitie, thē my purpose was at the beginning it should. Wherefore referring the lerned reader to the place in the second booke against Brentius, these fewe I saye here in defence both of Peter a Soto, and specially of Hosius.Hosius defended against the slaunder of the defender.

First, this is the truth touching the whole. The actes of those priestes of the Iewes synagog were wicked and con­trary to Christ. But their sentence, though them selues were neuer so euill, was not only true, but also to mankin­de most profitable. And S. Iohn in his gospell witnesseth, it was the oracle of God. For when after long deliberation of the councell, Caiphas the high bishop and president of that councell, had pronounced his sentence, whereunto all the rest almost gaue their consent, it is expedient for vs that one man dye for the people, Ioan. 19. and not that all the nation perish: the euangeliste thereto added his verdite saying, this he said not of him selfe, but whereas he was high bishop of that yere, he prophecied. Therefore let this be the true conclusion of the whole matter. The actes of that councell were wicked, the sentence was true and good. Now Hosius treateth this matter so lernedly and so substātially, as you cā not truly ta­ke any aduātage of his wordes to reprehend him. He stayeth him selfe vpon the scripture, a good ground to stand vpon. Which scripture referreth doubtfull and hard questions to the priestes of the Leuiticall order. Of whom it is said, Indicabunt tibi iudicij veritatem. Deu. 17. They shall shewe vnto thee the truth of iudgement. In this iudgement sayeth Hosius, though it were neuer so wicked, yet was the truth of iudge­ment. How that might be, there he proueth it to Brentius by most manifest argumentes. And concludeth that foras­much as by testimonie of the Gospell, Caiphas, for that he [Page 289] was the hgih bishop of that yere, prophecied: that the Leui­ticall priesthod lacked not the spirite of prophecie, the holy ghost, the spirite of truth, vntill the time in which Christ offered him selfe a bloudy sacrifice to God the father, and so gaue ende vnto that priesthod and sacrifice. Their saying, VVe haue a lawe, and according to this lawe he ought to die, was a true worde, as Hosius declareth. For in dede it was the lawe of God the father, which the sonne by his owne ac­cord tooke vpon him, and submitted him selfe thereto, to dye for our synnes. Which lawe by the decree of the wic­ked bishops was fulfilled, when Christ was crucified, which Christ him selfe signified, by that he spake at the ge­uing vp of his ghost on the crosse, Consummatum est, Ioan. 19. it is en­ded.

Where ye impute to Hosius to haue said, that the same plainely was a iuste decree, whereby they pronounced that Christ was worthy to dye, that is your slaunderous lye, not Hosius saying. For he sayeth the cleane contrarye, and that sundry times, that it was a wicked councell, and most vniuste decree. God forbidde any christen man should saie, that Christ was worthy to die. He saith, it might haue ben truly pronounced by Caiphas, that he was gilty of de­ath. And there he sheweth how, very religiously and wise­ly admonishing the reader, that he was most innocent, and deserued not to dye. And thus Syr you may see, we take not part with Annas and Caiphas as you raile, and yet be a­ble God be thanked, to defend our true cause, and declare you to the world to be false teachers. Therefore belye vs no more. We call not that a laufull and a good councell, but contrariwise most wrongful and wicked. If you conti­newe in lying, thinke that it will be retourned ouer vpon you to your owne shame. Verely such dealing maketh [Page] argument of the weakenes of your part, and of your wic­ked impudencie. If your bokes be thus suffered to go abro­ad, and your selues to preach, what maruell is it, if the peo­ple be deceiued? Our lord looke mercifully vpon them, and deliuer them from such deceiuers, who put their hope and trust altogether in lying.

Apologie. But wil these men (I say) refourme vs the churche, beinge them­selues both the persons guilty and the Iudges to? VVill they abate their own ambition and pride? VVill they ouerthrow their owne matter, and giue sentence against them selues, that they must leaue of to be vnlearned Byshoppes, slowbellies, heapers together of bene­fices, takers vpon them as princes and men of warre? VVill the Abbottes the Popes deere darlinges iudge that monke for a theefe, which laboureth not for his liuing? and that it is against all lawe, to suffer suche a one to liue and to be found either in citie or in coun­trie, or yet of other mennes charges? Or els that a monke ought to lye on the ground, to liue hardly with hearbes and peason, to study earnestly, to argue, to praie, to worke with hande, and fully to bend him selfe to come to the ministery of the church? In faith, assone will the Pharisies and Scribes repaire againe the Temple of God, and restore it vnto vs a house of prayer, in steede of a theeuish denne.

THE SEVENTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion.Ye leap with a light skippe from one thing to an other, neither dwell ye long in any one point, but in lying. Euen now ye made offer to shew, that lawyers, abbottes, and bi­shops be open ennemies to the Gospell, that they wrye the scriptures, that they corrupt and counterfait the word of God, which accusation toucheth doctrine, and in dede pro­ued neuer a whit. Here ye come to manners, and aske whe­ther these men whom ye spake of before,The De­fenders skippe frō doctrine to maners will reforme the church, being them selues both the gyltie and also the iudges. Whereto we answere. They will do the best of their ende­uour, remembring whom they serue, and with what dili­gence such seruice ought to be done, calling to mynde the saying of the Prophete Ieremie,Ierem. 48. accursed is he that doth the [Page 290] worke of our Lord guilefully. Which now (praised be God for it) is done. For the Tridentine councell that was lau­fully called together, and laufully celebrated, is also laufully confirmed by Peters successour, who was commaunded to confirme his brethren. What issue will folow of it,Matt. 16. our Lord knoweth. The Bishops haue done their dutie. We hope the best. If not so good, as was entended, the lest part of the blame shall not be yours, Who with example of euill life, with false doctrine, and with sundry great disorders and enormities, in these dayes hinder all vertuous procedinges.

But ye saye, they be both the persons giltye and the iud­ges also. Iudges doubtles they be. For their vocation is laufull, ye can not disproue it. Gylty also they be, we denye not, but wherof? Of fraile lyuing, not of false teaching.

And where? In the courte of conscience, not in the courte of man. Or if any of them be, both before this councell, and in this councell godly orders haue ben decreed for hole­some reformation.

Concerning the other faultes which ye obiect odiously vnto the fathers of the Councell, and in generall to all spiri­tuall gouernours of the catholike church, we promise no­thing. for all dependeth of Gods grace mouing the free will of man.By what meanes may the Defen­ders be brought to iudge better of the catho­likes. But if ye for your part will be so willing to amend your owne vices, as ye be more then bolde to charge vs both with some faultes truly, and with very many vntruly: we doubt not but your selues shall confesse and acknowledge our amendement. If ye dispose your hartes through grace to obedience and humblenes, ye shall lesse finde faulte with our ambition and pride. If ye studie (as becommeth good Chri­sten men) to be lerned in those holy letters which frame in a man the spirite of meekenes, and not so much to atteine that knowledge, which as S. Paul saieth,1. Cor. 8. puffeth vp a man and [Page] maketh him high in his owne conceit: ye shall finde no small number of such men in our clergy, as your selues will be a­shamed to call vnlerned bishops, slowbellies, heapers together of benefices, &c.

Of Mōc­kes in this age.As for Monckes, ye maye not looke now, that either they gete their lyuing only by their hande labour, or that they be bound to the hard discipline which Monckes lyued in for twelue hundred yeres past. Now be other dayes, other man­ners. Such great austeritie is to be woundred at, and to be wisshed for. But whether the religious men of our time be to be compelled thereto,A discre­tion to be had cōcerning the reli­gious, in generall named Monckes. I leaue it to wise consideration. If it may be laufull do direct vs in such spirituall cases by an olde example of externe prudencie, me thinketh the discre­tion of Iacobs answer to his brother Esau is worth to be thought on. When Esau courteously offered his brother Iacob retourning from Mesopotamia with all his traine of houshold and catell, to go with him, and kepe him compa­nie the rest of the iourney that remained from the place of their first meeting:Gen. 33. Iacob full myldely said, Syr you know if it like your lordship, that I haue here with me tender babes, ewes with lambe, and kyne with calfe. If I ouerlabour them with fast going, my flockes will dye all in a daye. Maye it please your lordship to go before me your seruaunt, I will folow after the floc­ke fayer and softe, so as I shall see my litle ones able to bea­re it.

Likewise if there be not a discrete moderation vsed, but al Monckes be rigorously dryuen to the austeritie of life they lyued in of olde time, in this so great loosenes of maners, specially the discipline of all religions being so farre staked in comparison of the auncient seueritie: it is to be feared, we shall rather see cloistres forsaken, then a Godly reformation procured. But how doth this become you Syrs to fynde [Page 291] fault with Monckes not labouring for their lyuing, seing your selues without all labour enioye the lyuinges of other men by vniust intrusion? What meane ye to require Monc­kes to lye on the ground, your selues lying so softe in your delicat fetherbeds with your nyce quenes so many of you as haue receiued holy orders, or made vowe of chastitie, with your wiues peraduenture ye that be laye ministers? With what faces can ye shewe your selues to be discontented with Monckes, that lyue not hardly with hearbes and pea­son, which both lyue like Epicures your selues, and with your pleasaunt gospell inuite men to all libertie and pleasure of the bellye? How would ye dryue Monckes to studye, to argue, to praye, to watch, to worke with hand: which content your selues with litle lerning, esteme in your ministers the reading of English more then logike, philosophie, knowled­ge of tonges and good artes, which praye not, ne watch not but in chamberinges, which folowe all fleshly pleasu­res?

In the end of this Paragraph, ye shewe your selfe to dispai­re of our amendement. God geue you grace so to do for your partes, as we maye haue good cause to hope better of you. But whether we amend our faultes, or otherwise, what perteineth that to the iustification of your newe gospell, and to the disproufe of the catholike faith by vs defended? You know it is no good argument à moribus ad doctrinam. Thargu­ment ma­de à mori­bus ad do­ctrinam, is naught. Who would not hisse you and tramp you out of schooles, if ye made this fonde reason, the Papistes lyues be faulty, er­go their teaching is false? To this head all the reasons of your Apologie in effect maye be reduced, and they holde per lo­cum topicum noui Euangelij à malis morihus. Doth not Christ him selfe confute all such your feble reasons, where he sa­yeth, The scribes and Pharises, sit in the chayre of Moses, Matt. 23. what [Page] so euer they saye to you, do ye, but after their workes do ye not?

Apologie Ther haue ben, I know, certain of their own selues which haue found fault, with many errours in the church, as Pope Adriā, Eneas siluius, Cardinall Poole, Pighius and others, as is afore saide, they held afterwards their councell at Trident in the self same place whe­re it is now appointed. There assembled many Byshoppes and Ab­bottes and others whom it behoued. For that matter they were a­lone by themselues, whatsoeuer they did no body gaine said it: for they had quite shut out and barred oure syde from all māner of as­semblies, and there they sat sixe yeares feedinge folkes with a mer­uelous expectation of doinges. The first sixe moneth, as though it were greatly nedefull, they made many determinations of the holy Trinitie, of the Father, of the Son, and the holy Ghost, which were godly thinges in deede, but not so necessarye for that time. Let vs see in all that while of so many, so manifest, so often confessed by them and so euident errours, what one errour haue they amended? from what kinde of idolatrie haue they reclaimed the people? VVhat superstition haue they taken away? VVhat peece of their tyranny and pompe haue they diminished? As though al the worlde may not nowe see, that this is a Conspiracie and not a Councell, and that the­se Byshoppes whom the Pope hath now called together, be wholy sworne and become bounde to beare him their faithful allegiaunce and wil do no manner of thing, but that they perceiue pleaseth him, and helpeth to aduaunce his power, and as he will haue it: Or that they reckon not of the number of mennes voyces, rather then haue weight and consideracion of the same: Or that myght doth not often times ouercome the right.

Confu­tation.Here ye skippe againe from our manners to errours. And because ye can iustly burthen vs with none touching our faith, ye referre vs to Pope Adrian, to Pope Pius the second first called Eneas Syluius, Cardinall Poole, Pighius, and others. God be thanked that ye haue said the worst of our doctrine ye cā saie. And that ye haue brought together as in­to one heape, all that ye could gather out of your fellow gos­pellers bookes against the catholike faith. For hereby it ap­pereth how soūde and hole it is. To al that ye obiected to vs out of these or any others, we haue fully answered you befo­re. Neither was there cause why you should reherse thē agai­ne, [Page 292] which you haue already prosecuted to the vttermost of your poore eloquence, but to fill vp more paper and make some shewe of a six penny booke.

As you procede, you talke your pleasure of the godly and lerned fathers assembled in the late councell of Trent. By the waye as your manner is, you droppe lyes. Of which one is is, that they had quite shut out and barred your side from all manner of assemblies, which is a foule lye. That the first six monethes they occupied them selfes with ma­king many determidatiōs of the holy Trinitie, that also is an other lye. For then the world had no nede of any newe de­terminations or decrees concerning the Trinitie, what it shall haue hereafter by occasion of your chief Maister Iohn Caluines doctrine, it is more feared then yet perceiued. As a long treatie of that doctrine was nedeles, so about the same they employed not much time. And if you or any of your sect vouchsafe to vewe the booke of the Councell, you shal finde no whit set forth thereof.

Where ye would faine see of so many, so manifest, so of­ten confessed by them selues, and so euidēt errours, what one errour they haue amended: they are not like to satisfie your longing. And yet they haue taken order for the amendment of so many as they knowe. Neither is any of the same about any point of our faith, but about thinges of lesse weight. Your exaggeratiō of the termes so many, so manifest, so oftē confessed by them, and so euident, reporteth in one sentence your so many, so manifest, so often confuted by vs, and so euident lyes. For as I haue often times ben compelled by your vaine repetitions to answere you, so here I saie once againe for all, ye shall neuer be able truly and iust­ly to, charge the catholike church with errours in the faith.

When you folow your hote humour, and aske, from [Page] what kinde of idolatrie the fathers of the Tridentine coun­cell haue reclaimed the people,No ido­latrie vsed nor ac­knowled­ged in the church. you go to farre. What so euer blasphemie ye vtter in bookes and sermons against the adoration of the blessed sacrament of the aulter, we knowe no kinde of idolatrie vsed in the church. Niether is any idolatrie cōmitted by vs in worshipping of sainctes, in pray­ing to them, nor in the reuerence we exhibite to their ima­ges, as ye beare the people in hand. As I can not well take a hear from your lying beard, so wish I, that I could plucke malice from your blasphemous hart.

Were it true, that some sely soules among the people vsing vndiscrete deuotion stombled at superstition, that so­me of the clergy were loth to diminish their tyrannie and pompe, as you raile: is that councell therefore a conspiracie, and not a laufull councell? You haue put many cases in your Apologie, geue me leaue to put one. At the next par­lament among other lawes it shall be enacted by the con­sent of the Lordes spirituall and temperall and reall assent of the prince,A case put to the Defēder. that all and singuler spirituall persons shall weare square cappes and syde gownes, as hath ben accusto­med, and so many as haue vowed chastitie, shall leaue the vnlaufull companie of yoke systers, such as ye haue yoked your selues vnto. What though many of you shall refuse to obey this order? Shall not that neuerthelesse be a parlamēt? Right so is this a councel, though al men that be faulty, a­mend not all faultes.

The euill life of the clergy is no cause why the gospellers shoulde forsake the chur­che.But syr let vs graunt vnto you many, thinges be amisse in the life of the clergy, and our Lord geue vs grace to amēd them. Let not at Popes seme faultles. Be it so that some bishops do flatter him. What is this in respect of the oddes that is betwen you and vs? Is this a sufficient cause, why ye should breake companie, and cut your selues from the church? [Page 293] Agree with vs first in faith, and then let vs ioyne frendly and put our handes all together to thamendment of our ly­ues. It is not our euill lyfe, that shall excuse your euill faith. Our departing for a time from God by frailtie and synne, shall not be the defence of your departing for euer, both from God and his church, by contēpt and rebellion. Though all we be not as Sem and Iaphet were, yet ought not all ye plaie the part of Cham. What do ye els the sobrest of you all, and specially you syr Defender, who so euer ye be that penned this Apologie, but delight to shew abrode the shame­ly partes of your mother the church, where ye may espie any in some her fraile members, as wicked Cham did? Yea be ye not worse then Cham forasmuch as he did so but once, and ye do it continually? If ye reuerence not your brothers, and dishonour your mother, yet feare the curse of your fa­ther. Your father I meane God, who is father of all by creation, for through malice forsaking your mother, ye haue nowe made Sathan your father.

And therefore we knowe that diuers times many good men and Catholique Bysshops did tarry at home, Apologie and would not come whē such Councels were called, wherein men so apparauntly laboured to serue factions and to take partes, bicause they knewe they should but lose their trauaile and dooe no good, seeinge where vnto their enemies mindes were so wholye bent. Athanasius denyed to come when hee was called by the Emperour to his Councell at Cesarea, perceiuinge plaine he shoulde butte come amonge his ennemies whiche deadly hated hym. The same Athanasius when he came af­terwarde to the Councell at Sirmium, and foresaw what would be the ende by reasone of the outrage and malyce of his ennimies, hee packed vp his carriage, and went away immediately. Tripartita Hist. li. 10. cap. 13. Euseb. li. 1. cap. 17. Iohn Chry­sostome, although the Emperour Constantius commaunded hym by four sundry lettres to come to the Atrians Councel, yet kept he hym selfe at home still. When Maximus the Byshop of Hierusalem sate in the Councell at Palestine, the olde Father Paphnutius toke him by the hande and ledde hym out at the doores sayinge: It is not leeful for vs to conferre of these matters with wicked menne.

The Bysshopes of the Easte woulde not comme to the Syrmian [Page] Councell, after they knewe Athanasius had gotten hymselfe thence againe. Cyrill called menne backe by letters from the Councell of them, which were named Patropassians. Paulinus Bysshoppe of Tryer, and manye others moe, refused to comme to the Councell at Millaine, whenne they vnderstoode what a styrre and rule Auxen­tius kepte there: for they sawe yt was in vaine to go thither, where not reasone but faction shoulde preuayle, and where folke conten­ded not for the truth and right iudgement of the matter, butte for partialitie and fauour

And yet for all those fathers hadde suche malitious and stiffe nec­ked ennemies, yet if they hadde come, they should haue hadde free speache at least in the Councelles.

Confuta­tion.First here I note the falsehed of the lady enterpre­ter, who turneth the latine speaking of Athanasius, Cum vocatus esset ab Imperatore ad concilium Caesariense, when he was called by the Emperour to his Councell at Cesarea. Where by adding the worde his, of her owne, she or a worse shrew vn­der her name, goeth about to perswade as heretikes do, that the Councels be to be accompted the councels of temporall princes, not of bishops, and that they be the heads of them, not the Bishop of Rome.That in cases men may ref [...]se to come to coun­cels it is not deny­ed. This much to her. Now Syr to you Defender. All these examples serue you to no purpose. It is not denyed you, but that in cases men may refuse to come to Councels. Your examples declare, that catholike bishops shunned to come to the vnlaufull councels of here­tikes. But ye holding strange opinions condemned by the church, denye to come to the laufull councels of catholike bishops. When ye haue proued vs to be heretikes, I meane the fathers of the late councell,These fa­ther [...] re­fu [...]ed to come to hereticall councels. then may ye iustly alleage the example of Athanasius, Chrysostome, Maximus, Paph­nutius, Cyrill, Paulinus, and such other, for not comming to the councell. But if we shall be tried catholike, then haue ye no excuse of your not comming thither. If ye for your part would or could kepe any conuenticle for maintena­unce of your schismes and heresies, by the example of these [Page 294] before named worthy bishops we might iustlye tarry at home, and refuse to come among you. Where ye say these good bishops should haue had free speach, if they had come to the councels of their malitious and stiffe necked enne­mies, ye saye that vpon coniecture. Certaine it is that A­thanasius, if he had come to some, had ben like either to be killed, or put in prison, or other wise outragiously handled.

Butte nowe sithens none of vs maye bee suffered so muche as to sitte, or once to bee seene in these mennes meetinges, Apologie much lesse suf­fered to speake freelye oure minde, and seinge the Popes Legates, Patriarches, Archebyshops, Bysshoppes, and Abbottes, all beinge conspyred togeather, all linked together, in one kinde of fault, and all bounde by one othe, sit alone by themselues, and haue power a­lone to giue their consent: and at last when they haue all done, as though they had done nothing, bringe all their opinions to be iud­ged at the wil and plasure of the Pope, being but one man, to thend he may pronounce his own sentence of himselfe, who ought rather to haue aunswered to his complaint, sithens also the same auncient and Christian libertie which of all right shoulde speciallye bee in Christian Councelles, is now vtterly takē away from the Councel: for these causes I say wise and good men ought not to maruaile at this day, though we doe the like now, that they see was don in times past in like case of so many Fathers and Catholike Byshops, which is as though we chuse rather to sit at home and leaue our whole cause to Gode, then to iorney thither, whereas wee neyther shall haue place, nor bee able to dooe anye good: whereas wee can obtaine no audience, whereas Princes Embassadours be but vsed as mockyng stockes, and whereas also all wee be condemned alredy before trial, as though the matter were a forhand dispatched and agreed vpon.

THE EIGHT CHAPTER.

If I wist ye would take my counsell in good part,Confu­tation. and listen vnto it, as it standeth you vpon, I would aduise you to call in all the bookes of your Apologie, and that with no les­se diligence, then ye went about to suppresse the bookes of my answere to M. Iuelles chalenge at their first comming abrode. That done to cast brutes abrode, that the Apologie was made and counterfeited by some crafty Papist, to bring you quite out of credite with all the world. So might ye per­haps [Page] in time recouer some part of your lost estimation. For whiles your bookes be in mens handes, they shalbe an eui­dent witnes to all the world of your shameles lying. We nede not to proclaime you lyers, your owne publike writing maketh proclamation of it euery where. Ye alleage six causes why ye came not to the councell. The first is because (as ye pretend) ye be not suffered so much as to sytte or once to be sene in our meetinges,Syx cause alleaged by the defenders, why they came not to the late generall Councel. much lesse to spea­ke freely your mynde, and that the auncient and christian libertie, which of all right should specially be in christian co­uncels, is now vtterly taken a waye from the coun­cell. How true this is all Christendome knoweth, and your selues can not be ignorant. The booke of the canons and decrees of the councell hath ben printed almost in all partes of Christendome.Safecon­ductes graunted forth for gos­pellers sa­fe coming to the co­uncell at Tren e. Loke who liste, in euery booke he shall finde three seuerall solemne safeconductes graunted by the councel, and cōfirmed by the three Popes, vnder whom the same was celebrated. Which safeconductes conteine first in most ample wise full libertie, power, auctoritie and assurance for all and singuler persons of all Germanie, of what degree, state, condition or qualitie so euer they be, that would come to that oecumenical and general coūcel, to cō­ferre propoūd, and treate with al freedom, of al thinges to be treated there, and to the same councell freely and safely to come, there to tarry and abide, and to offer and put vp ar­ticles, so many as they thought good, as well in writing as by word, and with the fathers and others thereto chosen, to conferre, and without any reproches or vpbraidinges to dispute, also at their pleasure safely againe frō thēs to depart.

Furthermore in the forsaid safeconductes the Protestan­tes are permitted for their more libertie and securitie, that if for offences by them committed or to be committed they [Page 295] were desirous to haue iudges deputed to them, they should name such as bare them good will, yea though their offences were neuer so haynous and sauering of heresie.

This is the abridgement of either of those three safecon­dutes. The first so graunted and confirmed by Pope Paul the third, is put in the booke of the councell after the xiij. Session. The second so graunted and confirmed by Pope Iulius the third, is set after the xv. Session. The third is pla­ced after the xviij. Session. Which was graunted likewise by the countcell, and confirmed by our holy father the Pope Pius the fourth yet lyuing. After which immediatly folo­weth an extension of the same libertie, securitie, faith publi­ke, and safeconduct, to other nations. The same because it is short, hauing relation to the safeconduct before expressed, which is very lōg: I wil not let here to put in truly trāslated.

An extension to other nations.

The same holy councell in the holy ghost laufully assembled, An extē­sion of the safe­conductes pertei­ning to all in ge­nerall. the same Legates de la­tere of the See Apostolike being president in it, to all and singuler others, which haue not communion with vs in those matters that be of faith, of what so euer kingdomes, nations, prouinces, cities, and places, in which openly, and without punishment is preached or taught or beleued the cōtrarie of that, which the holy Romaine church holdeth, geueth [Page] faith publike or Safeconduct, vnder the same forme, and th [...] same wordes, with which it is geuen to the Germaines.

This being most true, as the better part of the world seeth, and the bookes and publike instrumtēes extant do witnesse: your excuse of your refusal to come to the coūcell, as bishops of other christiā Realmes did, is founde false. Ye had al free li­bertie and securitie graunted vnto you for that behalfe in so ample and large maner, as mans witte could deuise. And if your selues would haue penned the instrument of the safe­cōducte to your one most cōmoditie, all your heads could not haue deuised how to haue made it more free and sure for you (onlesse ye would haue had your heresies being once perfitly confuted to be allowed for truth) then it was. Thus is your first cause fully answered, and cleane wy­ped awaye.

2The second cause why ye came not, is, for that the Popes legates,The De­fenders complai­ne of the fathers concord at the Tridenti­ne coun­cell. Patriarches, Archebishops, Bishops, and Abbottes, all being conspired together, all lincked together in one kinde of fault, and all bounde in one oth, sit alone by them selues, and haue power alone to geue their consent. What is here that should let you to ioyne with others for procuring vnitie and peace in Christendom? Complaine ye of the fathers concord and agreeing together? That is a signe the spirite of God auctour of charitie and vnitie gouerneth their hartes. In that respect they seme to come together in the holy ghost. For what els you meane by your terme of conspiring and lincking together in one fault,The vni­tie of the catholi­kes se­meth to heretikes a conspi­racie. I knowe not. Ye had rather they were diuided I suppose, and that were more to your purpose. In dede their ioyning together in defence of the ca­tholike [Page 296] faith, semeth to you a fault and a conspiracie. For to you it is a most damnable fault, a man to be a Papist, that is so saye, catholike. And who so euer ioyne together in the ca­tholike faith, the same seme to you to conspire against you. So true and trustie subiectes conspire against rebelles. So the iudges, iustices, and the twelue men at the assises conspire a­gainst felones.

And what saye ye here for flying conference in the late councell, where ye were summoned, called, and required to come, and to saye for your selues what ye could, that rebel­les, traitours, theues, murtherers, and such the like might not saye for their not appering in iudgement? With as good rea­son as ye saye here, they may saye also. What madnes were it for vs to come to the Assises or Sessions? The Iudges, the Iustices, the Lawyers, the whole bench, the twelue men, be they not all conspired together? Be they not all lincked toge­ther in one fault of riddyng vs out of the waye? Be not they bound by one oth to serue the Quene truly? Haue not they only the handling of our matter in their owne handes? Ha­ue not they power to geue verdite and sentence against vs? Wherefore we were worse then madde to come there, if we maye kepe our selues awaye. The tale ye tell here for your selues, is none other. And in dede had ye gone thither, your heresies had ben confuted, your selues required to yelde, and to conforme you to the catholike church, or els ye had ben anathematized, accursed, and condemned. Now, because ye thought ye should do no good there, that is to saye, ye should not be able to mainteine your newe gospell, ye thought bet­ter to tarry at home. For my part in good sooth I would not blame you, were it so for suretie, that after this good chere ye make here with your brethren and systers in Christ, a hard reckening were not to be made, where if ye repent not, ye [Page] are most assured to paye and laye downe your myserable soules to the euerlasting torment of hell fyre.

But ye complaine, the Legates, Patriarkes, archebishops, &c. sitte alone by them selues, and haue power alone to geue consent. What would ye laye men to haue gone thither and sit among the Bishops? Would ye haue swordes and buckelers, rapiers and buskines, come into a generall Councell, and ge­ue sentēce in matters of faith?Laie men be not wholly excluded from councels. Not so. Yet laye mē be not who­ly excluded. For there be the Ambassadours of all Princes and states. But sentence they geue not, that perteineth to Bishops only. Doubtles if M. Doctor Parker, and M. Yong had bē Ar­chebishops, and gone thither, they should haue had their sea­tes amongest the Archebishops there. Lykewise if ye had had any bishops in your clergy, comming thither they had ben placed among the bishops. Mary their wiues I thinke should not haue ben suffered to sit amongest them. Therefore to kepe them companie they had rather tarry at home. Thus is your second cause refelled.

3Your third cause is, for that the determinations and de­crees of the councell be referred to the Pope. To that we ha­ue answered before. The Pope confirmeth all, being head o­uer the councell. Doth not the Quene so pardy confirme your actes of parlament, by geuing her Roiall assent vnto them at thend of the parlament? What thing can be done perfitly by a body without the head? And who might better confirme councels, then he, whose faith in pronouncing sentence rightly and duly in matters concerning faith, we a­re assured by Christes prayer,Luc. 22. to be infallible.

4Your fourth cause is, forasmuch as the auncient and Chris­tian libertie, which of right should specially be in Christian Councels, is now vtterly taken away. This cause is not dif­ferent from your first. Your repetition is voide and vaine. [Page 297] One answer maye serue both. That ye pretend in both is false, as I haue now proued.

5Your fifth cause is a false lye, that Princes Ambassadours be vsed but as mocking stockes. Truth it is,Princes Ambassa­doures be honora­bly pla­ced in ge­nerall councels. they haue most honorable seates in all councels. In this Councell they sate by the Legates. Euery Ambassadour hath his place there ac­cording to the degree of honour, the kingdomes, common weales, states, and Princes be of, from whence and from whom he commeth. And that altogether by an auncient or­dinance in that behalfe made and agreed vpon of olde time, for auoyding of stryfe and emulation. Which all men maye see set forth in print.

6The sixth and last cause, ye alleage for your not com­ming to the councell is, for that ye be condemned already before triall, as though the matter were a forehand dispat­ched and agreed vpon. In dede your heresies for the more part be and haue ben condemned aboue a thousand yeres past. And therefore they are not now to be called vnto a newe triall,The go­spellers heresies nede not a newe discussiō. Iohn. 14. as though the church vntill this daye had ben deceiued, and so many fathers ouersene. If the holy ghost haue hitherto taught the church, and derected it vnto all truth, according to Christes promise, they should do iniu­rie to the holy ghost, who would bring your doctrine, that so euidently appereth contrary to the catholike faith, to be tried by a newe discussion. And yet to thintent ye might be conuerted and made good christian men, had ye come thither, ye had ben heard to saye what ye could, your argu­mentes had ben clearly discussed, and the truth playnely set forth before you. For who knoweth whether God will open your hartes, and geue you grace to repent? This notwith­standing may ye well saye touching that point, your matter is afore hand dispatched and agreed vpon. For they knowe [Page] what ye can saye, and see, that ye saye nothing, but only stand wilfully and stubbornly in your false opinions, and fleshly pleasures. This the world seeth and considereth, that ye can not alleage somuch as one iust and reasonable cause, why ye would not come to the generall Councell.

Apologie Neuertheles wee can beare pacientlye and quyetely our owne priuate wronges: but wherfore do they shut out Christian kynges, and good Princes from their Conuocation? Why do they so vn­courteously, or with such spite leaue them out, and as though they were not either Christen menne, or els could not iudge, will not haue them made acquaynted with the cause of Christian Religion, nor vnderstand the state of their own Churches?

THE NINTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion.Ye commend your owne goodnes more then the world seeth cause. If ye haue such quietnes and patience, as ye say, how happeneth it, ye haue made such vnquietnes, tumultes, and rebellions in England, Scotland, Fraunce, and other par­tes of Christendome? No wronges are done to you. But because ye can not thrust forth your gospell so farre abroad in the world, as ye desire: ye do what ye can to styrre princes ha­tred against vs.Christen Princes be not shut out of councels. But to your bitter obiection we answere, that Christen kinges and good princes be not shut out from any generall councell. They are not left out vncourteously and with spite, as though they were not Christen men, as ye very vncourteously and not without spite laye to our charge. If ye had ben at Trent, ye should haue sene the Ambassadours of all catholike christen kinges and princes there. Wherefore ye finde your selues grieued as it were in the princes behalfe, where them selues, as they haue no cause, so neither at all be grieued with vs. But for all the praise ye geue to your owne patience and quietnes, ye would faine put the sworde in prin­ces handes against vs, and where they be not for your owne tooth, there put ye the sworde in the peoples handes against [Page 298] the princes. The worst I wish you is, that either God geue you grace to repent and amende, or take power from you to do euill.

Or yf the sayd kynges and Princes happen to entermedle in such matters, and take vpon them to do that they may do, Apologie that they be commaunded to doe, and ought of duty to do, and the same thinges that we know both Dauid and Salomon and other good Princes haue don, that is, if they whiles the Pope and his Prelates slugge and sleepe, or els mischeuouslye withstande them, doe bridle the Prie­stes sensualitie, and driue them to do their deuty, and kepe them still to yt: yf they do ouerthrow Idols, yf they take away supersti­tion, and set vp again the true worshiping of God, whye do they by and by make an out crye vpon them, that suche Princes trouble all, and presse by violence into an other bodyes office, and do therby wickedly and malepartly. What scripture hath at any time for­bidden a Christian Prince to be made priuey to such causes? VVho but themselues alone made euer any suche lawe?

Ye confounde the offices of the spirituall gouernours and temporall magistrates.Confuta­tion. What kinges and Princes may do, what they be commaunded to do, and ought of dutie to do: in Gods name let them do, and well may they so do.

Who is he that gaine saith? If by the pretensed example of Dauid and Salomō ye animate them to intermeddle with bi­shoply offices, then beware they (saye we) that Gods ven­geance light not vpon them for such wicked presumption, which lighted vpon king Ozias for the like offence.2. Par. 26

Ye teach princes to vse violence against priestes, as though their faultes could not be redressed by the prelates of the cler­gy, of whom ye speake by spitefull surmise, as though God had vtterly withdrawen his holy spirite from them. But forasmuch as Christ assisteth his church alwayes, and shall neuer faile in thinges necessary, it is not to be doubted, but the church shall euer be prouided of some good gouernours, so as, though some slugge and slepe, yet some other shal wake and diligently attend their charge. Priestes haue their eccle­siasticall [Page] courtes,Priestes defaultes ought to be puni­shed by the e [...]clesiasti­cal courtes where their defaultes and offences may du­ly and canonically be punished, and the offenders by priestly discipline be redressed. Neither is it conuenient for a king to come into priestes consistories, nor to call priestes before him to his owne seat of iudgement.

So many as be necessarie to minister and performe those thinges, that apparteine to the building vp of Christes body the church vntill it come to his perfection, S. Paul reckeneth by name in his epistle to the Ephesians, saying that Christ hath to that ende placed in his church some Apostles, Ephes. 4. some prophe­tes, some Euangelistes, some shepeherdes and teachers. Kinges and Princes be not there named, as they who haue their propre rancke, though they be highest of all and most to be honou­red and obeyed of all amonge the shepe, yet be they shepe, and not shepeherdes, but in respect of temporall gouernement of the people, as Homer calleth king Agamemnō the shepeherd of people. God in the scripture calleth kinges the nourri­shers,Esai. 49. and Quenes the nourses of his church. Spirituall gouer­nement of the church common with bishops who so euer ge­ueth to temporall princes, he confoundeth all order. Which confusion best pleaseth these Defenders, for when order ta­keth place, their disordered state must be displaced.

Neither thanked be God be there nowe idols in the church for thē to ouerthrow, neither is the true worshipping of God so cast downe, as it require princes to set it vp againe. We haue the right worshipping of God in the church. Your presump­tuous heads would that princes should take vpon thē the of­fice of bishops, yea and of the Pope him selfe, and by force to dryue mē to a new kinde of worshipping of your own deuise. That being once receiued and for good admitted without checke or controll, as your newe schismaticall Seruice yet is not, but by terrour of punishment only obtruded to the vn­willing [Page 299] people: then would ye make great boast of your re­formations and restitutions, and beare the world in hand they were not Christians before your tyme. So would ye damne all that lyued before our dayes in word, and damne all that beleue you at these dayes in dede.

That the people be to be stirred by vs to more feruent de­uotion to worship God, and some perhaps to be warned of some cases of superstition, we graunt. But that any other manner or kinde of worshipping of God is either by vs or by temporall Princes to be set vp in Christes church, that we denye.

They will saie to this, I gesse, Apologie Cyuill Princes haue lerned to go­uerne a common welth, and to order matters of warre, but they vnderstand not the secret misteries of religion. If that be so, what is the Pope I praie you, at this daye, other then a monarche or a Prin­ce? Or what be the Cardinals, who must be no nother now but Princes and kinges sonnes? What els be the Patriarches, and for the most part the Archebishops, the Bishops, the Abbottes? What be they els at this present in the Popes kingdome, but worlikely Princes, but dukes and earles, gorgiously accompained with bandes of men whither so euer they goe? Oftentimes also gayly arrayed with chey­nes and colours of golde. They haue at times to, certaine ornamen­tes by them selues, as crosses, pillers, hattes, myters, and Palles, whi­che Pompe the auncient bishops Chrisostom, Augustine, and Am­brose neuer had. Setting these thinges aside, what teach they? VVhat saye they? VVhat do they? How lyue they? I saie not, as maye beco­me a bishop, but as maie become euen a Christian man. Is it so grea­te a matter to haue a vaine title, and by changing a garment only to haue the name of a bishop?

The dutie of ciuill Princes consisteth in ciuill matters,Confuta­tion. the dutie of Bishops in spirituall thinges. That serueth to the pre­seruation of mens persons, this to the saluation of their sou­les.Heb. 5. Euery high priest (saieth S. Paul) that is taken from among men, is ordeined for men in thinges apperteining to God. In case of Bishops negligen­ce the tē­porall Prince may not take vpō him thoffice of a Bis­shop. Ye moue temporall Princes to take vpon them the office of the Pope and Bishops, as though it were a thing so indifferent and so [Page] common, that when Bishops be negligent, temporall men maye do their stede. But the reason which to this ende ye make, is so slender, as I wene fewe Princes that feare God, wilbe greatly moued to aduenter that thing so much subiect and thrall to Gods reuenge. In effecte your reason is this, cō­syder it who will. They of the clergy be no other but ciuill Princes, ergo temporall Princes maye beare the office of bis­shops. Syr both your argument is naught, and your antece­dent is false. For although bishops had but a title, and the na­me of bishops by changing a garment only, as you saie: yet that defect in them should not geue abilitie to the mere laye, as to kinges and Quenes, to do the office of Bishops. Now is your antecedent manifestly false, for the Bishops of the ca­tholike church, which in scoffe ye call the Popes kingdome, be duly ordinated and consecrated.

Though the Pope haue a princely dominion, and some o­ther Bishops of Christendome haue dukedomes and Erledo­mes, though they ryde well accompanied with men and hor­se, yea though some of them otherwise then becommeth that vocation, do weare cheynes and colers of gold, as you belye them: though they haue other ornamentes to their states per­teining, which griueth you much in comparison of the beg­gery of your maried estate: yet all this imbarreth them not but that they be Bishops. As in your worthy clergie an honest so­ber tapster, that can read in the communion booke, may be a minister of the congregation, although he weare a square cappe, be it neuer so great a disorder in your conceite: so these landes, traines, rich ornamentes and fournitures take not a­waye from bishops, but for all that they be bishops.

Though they teach not, though they saye not, though they do not, though they lyue not, as becommeth bishops, neither as becommeth euen a Christen man, as you raile, all [Page 300] this notwithstanding, yet be they bishops, though euill bisshops. Neither for all this may it be laufull for laye men to ta­ke their office vpon them. Iudas was an Apostle till the rope choked him. Neither for his wickednes might Steuen, Ma­thias, or any other of the disciples of his owne presumption haue stept into his rome. Now as this is true, so is your ray­ling talke false, which malice hath stirred you to vtter. And that we depart not out of our owne countrie for examples, saye the worst ye can by our bishops of England, whom ye haue depriued and at this day kepe in prison, the world is for good cause persuaded of their worthines both for lerning and good life.

Surely to haue the principall staye and effecte of all maters com­mited wholy to these mennes hands, Apologie who neyther know nor will know these thinges, nor yet set a iote by any poinct of Religion, saue that which concernes their belly and ryot, and to haue them alone sit as Iudges, and to be set vp as ouerseers in the watch tower being no better then blynd spyes: of the other side, to haue a Christian Prince of good vnderstanding and of a right iudgement, to stande still like a blocke or a stake, not to be suffred: nother to giue his voi­ce, nor to showe his iudgement, but onely to wayt what these men shall will and commaund, as one whiche had neyther eares nor eyes nor wytt, nor hearte, and whatsoeuer they giue in charge, to alowe it without exception, blindly fulfilling their commaundementes, be they neuer so blasphemous and wicked, yea although they com­maunde him quite to destroye all Religion, and to crucifie again Christ him selfe. This surely besides that it is proud and spitefull, ys also beyond all right and reason and not to be endured of Christian and wyse Princes. VVhy I praye you, may Cayphas and Annas vn­derstand these mattes, and may not Dauid and Ezechias do the sa­me? Is it laufull for a Cardinall being a man of warre and delightius in bloud, to haue place in a Councell, and is it not lauful for a Chri­stian Emperour or a kynge?

THE TENTH CHAPTER.

Put the wordes of this railing Defenders amplification a­side, and the whole sentence that riseth of all this talke,Confuta­tion. is on­ly this. It is not reason Bishops be iudges in matters of faith, [Page] and not secular Princes.The summe of this chapter cōfu­ted. Now to geue a colour hereto, and to moue Princes to take the matter into their owne handes, they saye as becommeth them and none els. For there is no man of wisdome or honestie, that would with so impudent lyes di­minish his credite, and with so immoderate vpbraidinges im­paire the estimation of his modestie. Neither be these men so hote in this matter for any loue they beare to secular Princes. For if any such Prince be not a fauorer of their gospell, then haue they a blast of a trompet to blow him downe, as it appe­reth by their bookes made against the monstrous regiment of women, and by the good obedience their French brethren the Huguenots kepe toward their king in Fraunce. Other ex­amples of the like Euangelicall obedience in other countries, I leaue to mens remembrance. If a cardinall, be he of neuer so euill life, defend their preaching, he is an honest man I war­rant you, and of a good iudgement, and worthy of that ro­me. Thus they measure all thinges by phansie, not by truth.

But now let vs see what complaint they make both a­gainst bishops, and in the behalfe of ciuill magistrates. Bishops saye they, neither knowe nor will knowe the matters of religion, nor yet set a iote by any point thereof, saue that which belongeth to the kitchin and to the bellye, for so hath the latine. And they be no better ouerseers of the watche tower, then blinde spies.

These wordes being thus spoken in generall of all, be odious in respect of men, and blasphemous against Christ. For nei­ther be bishops generally so ignorant, so negligent, so voide of religion, so geuen to the bellye, so blinde: nor Christ so vnmyndfull to assist them with grace, whom he hath mad his commissioners.Mat. 28. He that said to bishops, docere omnes gentes, teach all nations, geueth also to bshops, both know­ledge how to teach, and a will to teach as God, who said, Crescite & multiplicamini, increase y [...] and multiplie: gaue to his [Page 301] creatures power and meanes to encrease and multiplie. Were it not so, Christ should haue failed his church in necessaries, and haue laid awaye his prouidence and care of the church, which to saye is blasphemous.

Touching the reproch of the kitchin and the bellye, in what countrie vtter these lyers this kinde of slaunder? Had they any sparke of shame in them, they would not speake this in England, where catholike bishops be founde so farre from kitchin and bellye matters, as the newe superinten­dentes there are nigh to them. Who setteth more by his bellye, he that often times fasteth, and by abstinence from meates and drinkes punisheth his belly for Christes sake, the better to subdue the rebellion of his lustes, and to make his flesh obedient to the spirite: or he that eateth and drinketh alwayes of the best, to the intent he maye serue the lustes of his strumpet at her commaundement, without whom most of our newe gospellers can no more lyue, as them selues saie, then a fish without water, or as Luther said, then a man can liue without spitting? If they meane not of english bishops, but of others, let them go and possesse their places, whose lyues they reprehend: what do they nowe in England in their chayres,VVhat bishops be most ready to receiue this new gospell. the shadowe of whose vertues they can not folowe? This I will boldly say, in what so euer countrie Bishops lyue worst, euery of them as he vseth him selfe most licenciously for his belly and the thinges that be vnder his belly, so much the more forewarde he is to receiue this newe gospell. And most of them all of that sorte, were it not for some indirect regard which they haue to their honor and richesse vnder a catholike prince, would soner become here­tikes, then remaine Papistes.

Let any man of reason iudge, whether he that maketh his belly his God, would not holde with that gospell which [Page] mainteineth only faith to iustifie, the keping of the com­maundementes to be impossible, confession of synnes not to be necessarie, a stedfast trust in Christes passion to be the only sufficient waye to saue al men, lyue they neuer so loos­ly and disorderly: rather then with the gospell, which prea­cheth no saluation to be without keping the whole lawe (so farre as man may kepe it), or rising againe from synne by pe­naunce, that only faith to iustifie which worketh by chari­tie, that all mortall synnes vnder paine of damnation must be confessed to the priest if occasion suffer, that Christes passion is applyed by meanes of the sacramentes vnto vs, and not by confidence of our owne phansies. What synne­full man I saye, all thinges being equal, would not rather be­leue and folowe this newe wrested kinde of gospel, then the olde interpretation thereof? Where any secular Prince in any realme hath consented to change religion, doth not ex­perience euidently shewe, that bishops, abbottes, priestes, monkes, friers of loose lyfe forthtwith embraced this newe gospel, and those only withstod it, who were chaste and ver­tuous? Therefore we cōfesse some fewe euil bishops to be in other countries, but they are the shame of your gospell Sirs, whereunto they belong. And they in dede set not a iote by any point of religiō, but only by their belly and fleshly lustes.

Now where as ye finde fault, that princes be executours of bishops decrees, and be not iudges, nor geue sentence therof them selues: ye must vnderstand, that Princes will al­so at an other time make a lawe of temporall matters, as of paying tributes,The offi­ces of a priest and a Prince be di­stinct. of warre, of peace, whereof sometime the bis­shop shal be in some parte executour, and yet not the iudge. The offices of a priest and a prince be so much distincted, as the state of the church differeth from a prophane com­mon weale. In the church he is head, whom Christ ap­pointeth [Page 302] shepeherd ouer his flocke. In a common weale, he is head, who hath right to it by inheritance, or whom the people maketh ruler. If the matter decreed be spirituall and apperteining to faith, the prince ought to obeie without question or grudge. If it be a temporall decree, the bishop who hath temporall goodes vnder the prince, must likewise obeie without grudge or gainesayng. So shall that which belongeth to God, be geuen to God,Luc. 2. and that which belon­geth to Caesar, shalbe geuen to Caesar.

Neither can a christian bishop commaund any prince to destroie religion, and to crucifie Christ him selfe againe, for then he leaueth to be a Christian, and becommeth an infidell, whose decree a prince ought not to be obey.

Ye set Annas and Caiphas, to Dauid and Ezechias, who­se lyues, offices, and merites, were farre different. Would God we had many Dauids, and Ezechiases. I knowe not where ye can iustly crake of them. As for Annas and Caiphas, they were bishops, after that euill kinde of bishops (touching merite of life) who now are called superintendētes. For they forsooke the true spirite and harte of the lawe, as our newe superintendētes altogether folowing the flesh haue forsaken the spirite and hart of the gospell, only pretending a name and colour of it without any truth or honestie.

And yet concerning the office of bishops, Annas and Cai­phas came to it not fully by so euill meanes, as our superin­tendentes came to their office. They kept yet the traditi­on and order of the lawe in outward thinges. They suffered the temple and aulter to stande. Sacrifice was done to God. But these superintendentes haue throwen downe aul­ters euery where, the temples of Christ in many places, and denye the thankefull sacrifice to God, which is the bo­dy and bloud of his dere sonne. If therefore they bid [Page] Christ to be throwen out of the church, his blessed body to be troden vnder feete, no Prince ought to heare them.

Now Dauid and Ezechias were they neuer so good men, yet their office was not priesthod, as it shall appere hereafter. If a Cardinal being a mā of warre, and delighting in bloud (as these men saye) sit in the councell, he increaceth his ow­ne damnation, by handling holy matters with synnefull handes. But that excuseth not a temporall Prince requiring to haue the place of a iudge there. But if any Christiā prince without auctoritie of iudging will sit in the councell, it is not denyed to him. Yea all Christian Princes, as we haue said before,A Prince may sit in a genreall councell without auctori­tie of iud­ging. haue their place assigned them in a generall co­uncell, and their oratours and ambassadours haue it in their absence. And had not certaine gospellers geuen contrary aduise, we had sene at the late councell of Trent the am­bassours also of our soueraine lady Quene Elizabeth, with those of other christian princes. But they that sought diui­sion, (which is not the best waye to procure safetie) diswa­ded her Maiestie from that matter.

Apologie VVee truely graunt no further libertie to our Magistrates, then that we know hath both ben giuen them by the word of God, and also confirmed by the examples of the very best gouerned com­mon welthes.

THE ELEVENTH CHAPTER.

Confuta­tion.If a man should aske you where that word of God is, that maketh a temporall prince supreme head of that part of the church, which he hath gouernement of in all ciuill matters: I am sure you can can bring forth no other word of God,1. Pet. 2. Rom. 13. then that wherein S. Peter and S. Paul willeth all mē to obeye the superiour powers, especially kinges. Which thing was written to all christian men, whiles they lyued vnder he­then princes and infidels, as Claudius Cesar and Ne­ro were, whom I suppose ye will not saye to haue ben [Page 303] heads of the whole church, as they were Monarkes and Prin­ces of the whole world. If then by those scriptures which can not proue Nero (being persecutour of Christes church) to haue ben head of the same, you will now proue that other princes are supreme heads of the church: it semeth that either you make Nero head of the church with them, or geue more vnto them, then the word of God will beare.Neuer was there before our tyme any temporall Prīce, that toke vpō him to be supreme head of the chur­che. And as for ex­amples of good common weales, shewe vs but one since Christes ascension, wherein before Luthers time any Empe­rour Christian or other Prince, did attribute that title vnto him selfe: and we will saye, that when you speake of com­mon weales in the plurall number, you make but one lye, but in case you shewe vs no one common weale that hath so done, then you lye in the plurall number. Yea further if at this daye the common weales in Christēdome not only that are catholike, but the best also of those that are Lutherish and newefangled, do abhorre from that strange and vnheard title of supreme head of the churche: why do you saye, that ye haue either worde of God for it, or example of approued common weales?

For besydes that a Christian Prince hath the charge of both ta­bles committed to him by God,Apologieto the ende he maye vnderstande that not temporall matters only, but also religious and ecclesiastical causes perteyne to his office:

You will proue that ecclesiasticall causes perteine to a kinges office, because he hath the charge of both tables.Confuta­tion. If you meane that a king is bound to kepe bothe tables of the lawe, so is also euery priuat man. And yet as no priuat man is supreme head of the church by keping them, so neither the king is proued thereby the supreme head. If you mea­ne that the king ought to see others to kepe both tables of the lawe: that maye he do either in appointing temporall paines for the transgressours of them, or in executing the [Page] said paines vpon the transgressours. But as he can not ex­communicate any man for not appering when he is called, so can he not iudge all causes of the lawe. For if a man syn­ne only in his harte, as for example in murder, or aduoutrie: the king can not haue to do with him. And yet the true supreme head of the church shall haue to do with him. For that malicious and sinfull thought shall neuer be forgeuen, except the party come to be absolued of their successours, to whom Christ said,Ioan. 20. whose synnes ye forgeue, they are forgeuen, and whose synnes ye reteine, they are reteined. To committe murder in harte is a synne, and it is reteined vntill it be for­geuen. Neither can it be forgeuen, vntill he that is Iudge, by the keye of discretion perceiue that it is to be forgeuen. Which he can not knowe, vntill it be confessed with a con­trite hart by him who only knoweth it, and is bound to tell it for absolutions sake. If then there be a iudge, who can see the lawe kept in an higher pointe and beyond the reach of the king, surely the king shall not be supreme head, sith an other is more like to God, then he. As who is iudge of the inward conscience, whereunto no king rea­cheth, but only the minister of Christ, who is the spiri­tuall king,Matth. 16. and hath geuen the keyes of his kingdome to his minister.

Apologie Besides also that God by his Prophetes often and earnestly commaundeth the king to cut downe the groues, to breake dow­ne the Images and aultres of Idoles, and to write out the bookes of the lawe for him selfe: and besides that the Prophet Esaias saith, a king ought to be a patrone and nurse of the churche:

Confu­tation.Your second argument for the ecclesiasticall power of kinges is, because God bad them to cut downe superstitious groues, and ouerthrowe idols, as though this were not an office of executing a commaundement, rather then of de­creeing any thing. The authoritie to discerne an image of [Page 304] Christ from an idoll of the deuill, belongeth to them who knowe that an image is a name of arte, which is of God, an idoll is a name of false worshipping, which is of the de­uill. So that an image is godly, and idoll deuilish. When the priest hath iudged this or that to be an idoll, or when it is euident, that so it is, then the king shall do well to breake it downe. But if the king will breake downe the image of Christ, when the priest telleth him it is a godly represen­tion, and no idol: then the king doth more then his office re­quireth. And shall not only not proue his supremacie,1. Reg. 28. but also shall incurre danger to be reiected of God, as king Saul was, when he despised to kepe the commaundement of Sa­muell the high priest.

Whereas you alleage for a kinges ecclesiasticall power, that he was commaunded to write out the boke of the lawe for him selfe: why left ye out that which foloweth there im­mediatly, accipiens exemplar à sacerdotibus Leuiticae tribus? Deut. 17. The king must write out a booke of the Deuteronomie, but the example thereof he must receiue of the priestes that be of the tribe of Leui.Priestes aboue kinges in spi­ritual thinges. If in spirituall matters the king were aboue the priestes, why had he not the keping of the lawe in his owne handes? Why must he take it of the priestes? why did not rather the priestes come to him, sith the inferiour taketh all his right of the superiour? If the priestes must geue the holy scripture vnto the king, then verely must he take such as they geue him, and with such meaning as they geue vnto it. So that if you had not falsefied the meaning of Gods word by leauing out halfe the sentence, this place had pro­ued against you.To what ende is a [...] king re­quired to read the scripture. It is to be weyed to what ende a king is re­quired to haue and to reade that holy booke. Verely not to take vpon him the parte of a iudge in causes of religion, but as there it is expressed, to thintent he learne to feare his Lord [Page] God,Deut. 17. and kepe his wordes and ceremonies in the lawe commaunded, and that his harte be not lifted vp into pride aboue his brethren. &c. I omitte that you read librum legis, where as the church readeth deuteronomium, it were to long to enter into that disputation. the booke of the lawe signi­fieth the whole lawe, the deuteronomie is but one of the fyue bookes.

VVhere Esaye calleth a king a patrone of the church, I ha­ue not founde. But were it he called him so, it betokeneth, that he should defend the church frō worldly ennemies, as in repelling the Turkes, in expelling heretikes, and such the like kingly actes. Which proueth no spirituall supremacie, but vn­der God a fealtie and seruiceable power. I finde where Esaye sayeth,Cap. 49. Et erunt Reges nutricij tui, & Reginae nutrices tuae. Kin­ges shall be thy fosterers, and Quenes thy nourses. But not euery nourse or fosterer is aboue him, who is nourrished. A faith­full seruant oftentimes fostereth the maister. Yet is he not aboue his maister. Besides S. Hierome vnderstandeth the kinges whom Esaye nameth, to be the Apostles, accor­ding to which sense it maketh nothing to the purpose it is alleaged for.

Apologie I saye besides all these thinges, we se by histories and by examples of the best times, that good Princes euer tooke the administration of ecclesiasticall matters to pertein to their duety.

Confuta­tion.Where you saye the godly princes haue taken the care­full charge or procuratiō (for so is your Latine) of churches to perteine to their duetie, (the ladies false interpretation calleth it thadministration of ecclesiasticall matters): I graunte it be most true. But this charge or procuratiō is not by and by a supreme gouernement. You haue forgotten I perceiue, or would seme to forget the state of the question. We denye that the authoritie to decide controuersies in religion is in a [Page 305] temporall princes power, you affirme. But like wyly wor­kers, ye myngle truth among falsehed, to make your matter more apparent.

Moses a Ciuile Magistrat & chief guide of the people, Apologie Exod. 32. both recei­ued from God, & deliuered to the People al the order for religion and Sacrifices, and gaue Aaron the Bishop a vehement and soare re­buke for making the golden calle, and for suffering the corruption of Religion.

Moses was not only a ciuill Magistrate, but also a priest.Confuta­tion. In that he had both offices, it proueth that a priest maie haue both, but not contrariwise, that a king may haue both. For the greater may include the lesse, but the lesse can not include the greater. The office of a priest is the highest of all. And Christ comming naturally of the kinges lyne from Dauid in the tribe of Iuda, yet estemed that honor nothing in re­spect of that he was a priest according to the order of Mel­chisedech. Therefore Melchisedech also being both priest and king, was not yet said to be the figure of Christ somuch con­cerning his kingdome, as his priestehod. For Dauid sayd of Christ,Psal. 109. Thou arte a priest for euer after the order of Melchise­dech. As for his kingdome, it was included in his priestes of­fice. And therefore when we speake of Christes king­dome, though in euery respect he be the very king in dede of all kinges and Lord of all Lordes: yet we assigne it also to haue ben vpon the crosse, vbi regnauit a ligno deus, Iustinus in dial. aduer­sus Tryph. Exod. 19. 1. Pet. 2. where God reigned from the woodde. According to the same mea­ning, whereas the people of Israel were called regnum sacerdo­tale, a priestly kingdome: S. Peter writing to Christians, tourned the order of the wordes,Moses was both a pri [...]st and a ciuil Mag [...]stra­te. calling the church of Christ sacerdotium regale, a kingly priesthod. Moses was both a priest and a ciuill gouernour, as being a figure of Christ, who ioyned both together, making the tribe of Iuda which was before kingly, now also to be priestly. Therefore S. Au­gustine [Page] vpon those wordes of Dauid,Psal. 98. Moses and Aaron are in the number of his priestes, concludeth, that Moses must ne­des haue ben a priest. For (sayeth he) if he were not a priest, what was he? Nunquid maior sacerdote esse potuit, could he be greater then a priest? As who should saye, there is no greater dignitie, then priesthod. And seing moses had the greatest dignitie, for he ruled all and consecrated Aaron high bishop and his sonnes priestes, therefore him selfe must nedes haue ben a priest. Now if Moses were both, and his chief office was priesthod, it foloweth by that example, that the Pope maye rule temporally, but not that a king maye rule spiritual­ly. Thus you haue gained nothing by this example.

Apologie Iosua also, though hee were no nother then a Ciuil Magistrat, yet assone as he was chosen by God, and set as a Ruler ouer the peo­ple, Iosua. ca. 1. he receiued commaundements, specially touching Religion and the seruice of God.

Confuta­tion.There is no doubt but Iosue receiued commission and commaundement to worship God, but none to rule priestes in spirituall matters. Yea rather he was commaunded to go forth and comein at the voice and word of Eleazarus the high priest,Numer. 27 he and all the children of Israel. Do not these men proue their matter handsomly?

Apologie 1. Paral. 13 Kynge Dauid, when the whole religion was altogethers brought out of frame by wycked kyng Saul, brought home againe the Arke of God, that is to say, he restored Religion again, and was not onely amongest them him selfe as a counseller and furtherer of the worke, but he appoincted also hymnes and Psalmes, put in order the com­panies, and was the only doer in setting furth that whole solemne shewe, and in effect ruled the preistes.

Confuta­tion.As Dauid restored all thinges to good order, after the euill king Saul, so did Quene marye redresse disorders before committed. But as Quene marye did it by the meane of priestes,1. Paral. 15. so king Dauid in priestly matters called for Sadoch and Abiathar. In dede Dauid passed other Princes he­rein, [Page 306] because he had the gift of prophecie,Dauid was no iudge of spirituall matters. whereby he wrote Psalmes, which to this daye we sing. But all this maketh no­thing to proue him iudge of spirituall matters. He did not v­surpe the auctoritie to sacrifice, to discerne the lepre, and to do the like thinges of priestly charge.

Kyng Salomon builte vnto the Lord the Temple, Apologie 2. Paral. 6. 3. Reg. 8. which his Fa­ther Dauid had but purposed in his minde to do: and after the fi­nishing therof, he made a goodly oration to the people, concerning Religion and the seruice of God, he afterward displaced Abiathar the Priest, and set Sadock in his place.

Salomons buylding of the temple and praying therein proueth no supremacie ouer the priestes in spirituall thinges.Confuta­tion. 3. Reg. 2. His putting of Abiathar out of his dignitie and rome,Outward executiō of iustice proueth no right of deter­mining spirituall causes. was li­ke to that Quene Marye did to Cranmare. Whom she might haue remoued for treason, as Salomon laid the like to Abia­thar: yet she chose rather to burne him for heresie. But this proueth only an outward execution of iustice without any preiudice to the substance of our question. Which is, whe­ther a temporall Prince maye determine the causes of religon or no.

After this, Apologie 2. Paral. 29. when the Temple of God was in shamefull wyse pol­luted thorough the naughtines and negligence of the priestes, Kyng Ezechias commaunded the same to be clensed from the ruble and filthe, the priestes to light vp candelles, to burne incense, and to do their diuine seruice, according to the olde allowed custome. The same kyng also commaunded the brasen Serpent, 4. Reg. 18. whiche then the people wickedly wordshipped, to be taken down and beaten to pouder.

Ezechias did will the temple to be clensed,Confu­tation. as we trust God will moue the harte of our soueraine lady Quene Elizabeth in England, and of other good Princes in other countries to clense it from the filth, which ye haue brought into it. Who haue in many places tourned churches into stables.4. Reg. 18. He brake the brasen serpent, which being first commaunded to be set vp by God, was afterward with great abuse worshipped. As [Page] your communion table ought to be taken awaie and broken, because ye haue set it vp against [...]hrist, and in despite of the blessed sacrifice of the aulter, wh [...]h [...]e haue abandoned. But how often shall I tell you, that this proueth no more, but that good kinges do good dedes, mainteine true religion, and pull downe the false, as the Constable of Fraunce burned the pul­pites of the Huguenots in Paris? But these factes proue not that kinges and Constables be iudges of religion, which is good, and which is euill, which true, which false. For therein they folow the iudgement and aduise of priestes, and Prophe­tes,4. reg. 20. 4. Reg. 9. who be about them, as Esaias was at hand with good king Ezechias to direct his doinges, and so was Elizaeus with king Iehu.

Apologie 1. Par. 17. Kyng Iehosaphat ouerthrew and vtterly made awaye the hill aultres and Groues, wherby he saw Goddes honoure hindered, and the people holden backe with a priuate superstition from the ordi­narie Temple whiche was at Ierusalem, wher to they should by or­dre haue resorted yearely from euery part of the Realme.

Confu­tation.Ye put vs in mynde to consider how that your selues are those priuate hill aulters and darke groues. For ye be they that stop the people from the common temple of Christendo­me, the catholike church, out of which is no saluation, the head whereof sitteth in Peters chaire at Rome. If any good Prince would ouerthrow this your superstition, and restore the temple of England,No king nor ciu [...]ll Mag [...]stra­te can be shewed to haue decided any con­trouersie in religiō ye maye be sure that Prince should rather shewe him selfe in that fact a good member of the church, then supreme head. All your proufes do but shewe, that Princes may further and set vp a knowen true religi­on. But when any question riseth of religion, you shew no king to haue decided the same by his owne auctoritie. And as for king Iosaphat, him selfe gaue a rule plaine con­trarie to all your allegations. For setting order both in matters of common weale and others, he said thus concer­ning [Page 307] religion:2. Par. 19. Amarias sacerdos & pontifex vester in ijs quae ad deum pertinent, praesidebit. Amarias the priest and high bi­shop for such matters as perteine to God, he shall be head ouer you.

Kynge Iosias with great diligence put the Priests and Byshops in mynde of their duety: Apologie 4 reg. 12. 4. reg. 10. Confuta­tion. Kyng Iohas bridled the ryot and arrogan­cie of the preistes. Iehu put to death the wicked Prophetes.

The putting of priestes and bishops in mynde of their dutie, is not a supremacie in determining ecclesiasticall cau­ses. And whereas you saye that king Ioas bridled the riot and arrogancie of the priestes, if it were so, it was well done. But I finde not those wordes in the text, Concerning that king Iehu did, it is a mere temporall office,4. reg. 10. to put false prea­chers and heretikes to death. Neither can it belong to priestes, onlesse they haue also ciuill iurisdiction. Much lesse doth that acte proue, that kinges be supreme heads ouer the church, and ought to be iudges in controuersies and questions of religion.

And to rehearse no more examples out of the old law, Apologie let vs rather consider since the birthe of Christ, howe the Churche hath ben go­uerned in the Gospels time.

THE TWELFTH CHAPTER.

It was a great tediousnes good reader aswell for thee to read,Confuta­cion. as for me to answere these vnsensible argumentes of our newe english clergy. One answere might haue serued to them all, but I thought it would be looked for, that I should saye somewhat to euery example.Thoffice of a king cōsidered in it selfe' is one euery where. Now I will con­clude this matter, doing thee to vnderstand, that if we con­sider the office of a king in it selfe, it is one euery where, not only among christen princes, but also amōg hethē. The defi­nition of a king which agreeth to Iulius Cesar, or to Alex­ander the great, as they were Monarkes and Princes, is one with the definition of aking which agreeth to Henry [Page] the eight, or to Charles the fifth. So that no more could king Henry as king, meddle with religion, then Alexander or Iulius Cesar. But when we speake of a christian king, we then adde a qualitie of Christianitie to the kingly office. By which qualitie that king is a member of the church of Christ. And according to the place which he hath in Chri­stes mysticall body, there after may he worke. His place is chiefe among the laye euen when they are in the church at the seruice of God, and without the church in all temporall thinges and causes he is ouer the priestes them selues.

And because all these examples are taken out of the old testament,VVhat auctoritie had pri­estes and kinges by the olde lawe. Deut. 17. I will geue thee a true resolution out of the same booke, what auctoritie priestes had, and what auctoritie kin­ges had. Moses gaue this rule concerning the same matter. If (sayeth he) thou perceiue an hard and doubtfull iudgement to be with thee betwen bloud and bloud, cause and cau­se, lepre and lepre, and seest the wordes of the iudges within thy gates to varie, arise and go vp to the place, which thy Lord God shall chose, and thou shalt come to the priestes of the stocke of Leui, and to the iudge that shall be for the time, and thou shalt de­maund of them, who shall shewe the truth of iudgement to thee. And thou shalt do what soeuer they, who are rulers ouer the place which God shall chose, haue said vnto thee, and taught thee according to his lawe, and thou shalt folow their verdi­te. Bowe not neither to the right nor to the left hand. Hi­therto it is shewed, that the Leuiticall priestes and the iudge for the time being shall heare and determine the doubtfull causes. But this hearing and determining may be taken, that either the priest alone heard and de­termined a mere spirituall controuersie, as whether a disease were the lepre or no, or that the iudge alone determi­ned a mere temporall matter, as what punishment this [Page 308] or that traitour should haue: or that both together should de­termine a cause of mixte lawe and iudgement, as in what maner the temple ought to be repayred. But neither the priest by this place may medle with that iurisdiction, which belonged to the temporall iudge, neither the iudge with that which was spirituall and belonging only to the priest. For of such causes Azarias the priest and bishop said to king O­zias, It is not thy office Ozias to burne incense vnto our Lord. 2. Paral. 26. It is the office of the priestes. That is to saye, of the sonnes of Aaron. Who are consecrated to do such ministeries. But this the king might do euen in matters of religion. When the high priest had geuen sentence, he might see the execution thereof to be done. But otherwise what so euer king or tem­poral iudge might not do in his own persō, much lesse might he iudge, whether an other did well there in or no. And this much concerning the olde testament.

The Christian Emperours in the olde time, Apologie. appoincted the coun­cels of the bishops. Constantine called the councell at Nice, Theo­dotius the first, called the councell at Constantinople. Theo­dotius the second, the councell at Ephesus, Martian the councell at Chalcedon.

The calling or summoning of councels may be done ei­ther by waye of auctoritie, which the caller him selfe hath,Confuta­tion. Empe­rours ha­ue not cal­led coun­cels by their ow­ne only auctori­tie, but by thassent of the bis­hop of Rome. or by waye of auctoritie, which he taketh of an other. If Con­stantine, the two Theodosians, and Marcian called the foure first generall councels by their auctoritie only, then were they no generall councels. Neither could their decrees binde the whole worlde. For although they were great Em­perours, yet was not the whole Christian world vnder them. And therefore those Christian Bisshops who lyued in Per­sia, in Ethiopia, in Scotland, in Scythia, or in any other land not subiect to the Emperour, were neither bound to come, nor bound to obey the lawes made by them, who were not [Page] their superiours. But if it be farre from reason that a generall councell should not binde all bishops and all Christians, it is also farre from reason, to saye that Emperours called gene­rall councels by their owne only auctoritie. In dede they called them by the assent of the bishop of Rome. Who being the generall shepeherd of Christes flocke, and therefo­re also of all bishops, might commaund all his shepe to come together, except they were reasonably to be excused, and they were bound to heare his voice, and to obey his decree. So that although ye proued the Emperours to haue summoned and called the foure first councels, yet were ye not able to proue, they did it without the assent of the bishops of Ro­me, which for the time sate in Peters chaire. And by the force of that assent the dede must take effecte. And this much ge­nerally.

S. Sylue­ster assen­ted to the calling of the first generall councell.Nowe to proue vnto you, that S. Syluester assented to the calling of the first councell at Nice, it is to be considered, that he only hath auctoritie to ratifie, who hath auctoritie to commaund and to geue assent and strength from the be­ginning. For none other difference is betwen commaun­ding, assenting, auctorizing, and ratifying, but that assenting is common to them all, commaunding is a thing that goeth before the facte, auctorizing is the making of a thing good by present agreeing to it whiles it is done, ratifying is the al­lowing of it when is it done. If then I shewe, both that the Pope did ratifie the calling of the generall coun­cels,The sen­ding of the Popes legates to al coūcels, sheweth an aucto­rizing of of the sa­me. and auctorize them: I shewe much more that he as­sented to the calling of them. The auctorizing is proued, by reason he sent his legates to euery of them. As S. Syluester sent Osius Cordubēsis of the prouince of Spaine vnto Nice with Victor and Vincentius priestes of the citie of Rome. Of which the last two being them selues no bishops, yet for [Page 309] that they were legates of the chiefe bishop, did in the firste place put vnto the decrees of that councell their consent and names, writing after this sorte. Pro venerabili viro papa & episcopo nostro Syluestro subscripsimus. VVe haue subscribed for the reuerent man our Pope and bishop Syluester. A councel at Rome And at the ve­ry same time that the generall councell was kept at Nice, S. Syluester called an other councell in Rome, at the which two hundred seuenty and fyue bishops were assembled. And it is exprssely written in the same councell,The cause why coū­cels wer called bye the aduise and coun­sell of Empe­rours. Syluester collegit vniuersam synodum episcoporum cum consilio Augusti vel matris eius. Syluester gathered together the whole synode of the bishops with the counsell of the Emperour or his mother. Why his coun­sell was nedefull, it appereth there. Because the Emperour bare the charges of their diete, and cariage. So that his coun­sell was necessary, not chiefly for religion, but rather for sup­portation of the charges of so great a iourney. For then nei­ther was the bishop of Rome nor other bishops endewed with so large possessions, as they were afterward.

Now to retourne to the councell of Nice.Concer­ning the calling of the first generall Councell. The Empe­rour was in dede the cause of their comming together, aswell for that him selfe persuaded that meane of concord, as also for that liberally he defrayed the charges. yet called he not the bishops of his owne head. And that these men might haue sene in the ecclesiasticall historie, where Rufinus writeth,Lib. 10. cap. 1. Marke, ex sacerdotum sententia. Tum ille ex sacerdotum sententia apud vrbem Nicaeam episco­pale concilium conuocat. Then the Emperour calleth together a councell of bishops according to the determination of the priestes. He did it according as it semed good to the bishops.Thaucto­ritie of the bi­shop of Rome. In sum. Nice. Cōcil. And shall we thinke the bishop of Rome was none of them that consented to the calling? Yeas verely he was the chiefest of all. How can it otherwise seme? For when all the decrees were made, Placuit vt hec omnia mitterentur ad Episcopum vr­bis [Page] his Romae Syluestrum. It was thought good that all those actes and decrees should be sent to Syluester bishop of the Citie of Rome. If he were the last that had the vewe and confirming of all thinges, there is no doubt but he had a voice and great aucto­ritie in calling the councell.

Councels might not be kept without the will and adui­se of the b. of Rome.What other is that which Socrates in his ecclesiasticall hi­storie witnesseth saying, Cum vtique regula ecclesiastica iu­beat non oportere praeter sententiam Romani Pontificis concilia celebrari, whereas the ecclesiasticall rule commaundeth, that no councels ought to be kept besides the determinate consent of the bi­shop of Rome? VVe knowe (sayeth Athanasius and the bishops of Egypt assembled in councell at Alexandria) that in the great councell of Nice of. Hist. trip. li. 4. ca. 9. Epist [...]la Aegyptior. pontificum. Thumili­tie of Constantine the great. Ruf. li. 10. cap. 2. Hist. trip. li. 7. ca. 12. 318. bishops, it was with one accorde by all con­firmed there, that without the determination of the bishop of Rome, neither councels should be kept, nor bishops condemned. I omitte here as a thing well knowen, how Constantine the Empe­rour refufed in expresse wordes to be iudge ouer bishops, say­ing, that God had geuen them power to iudge of him, much lesse did he arrogate to him selfe only and chiefly auctoritie to summon councels or to iudge bishoply affaires. As for me (sayeth Valentinian the Emperour) in asmuch as I am but one of the people, Valenti­nian refu­seth all auctoritie in matters of religiō. it is not laufull to serch such matters, (he speaketh of the heretikes doctrines) but let the priestes, to whom this charge belongeth, be gathered together within themselues, where they will, &c.

Of the second councell generall confirmed by Dama­sus.Concerning the second Councell, which was the first of those that were kept at Constantinople, it may be that Theo­dosius called it, as Constantine called the first at Nice. But what auctoritie Damasus bare in the same, it appereth partly by that he had his Legates there, partly also by that Photius Patriarke of Cōtantinople writeth in his epistle to Michael prince of Bulgaria. Where hauing declared the cōming toge­ther [Page 310] of the Patriarkes of Alexandria and Ierusalem, he sayeth thus.Photius in lib. de con­cilijs. Quibus haud multo post & Damasus episcopus Romae eadem confirmans atque idem sentiens accessit. To which (patriarkes of Alexandria and Ierusalem) not long after Damasus the Bishop of Rome ioyned him selfe confirming and determining the same matter. This much sayeth Photius of the second Councell, the confirmation whereof he doth attribute not to Theodo­sius the Emperour, but to Damasius the Pope.

But what did Theodosius then, (will some mā saye) did he nothing? ye as verely he did very much, as in the said epistle Photius recordeth.The Em­perours parte. Then did great Theodosius (sayeth he) in de­de worthy of great praise rule the Empire, who was him selfe also a defender and a mainteiner of godlynes. Beholde what the Emperours part was, not to sitte in iudgement of matters of religion, and determine which was the true faith, but to de­fend it and mainteine it. And that thou mayst see reader plai­nely, what Theodosius thought of religion, whom these De­fenders would make a iudge in causes of religion: I aduise thee to reade the ninth booke of the tripartite historie,Cap. 7. what was great Theodo­sius opi­nion tou­ching re­ligion. where ap­pere many great argumentes of his owne faith. Which he pu­blisheth to the world from Thessalonica in a publike lawe to be such, as Peter had taught the Romaines, and as Damasus who succeded Peter, taught at that daye, requiring all his sub­iectes to beleue the same. He required not them to folow his owne priuat faith, but Peters faith and the Popes faith. And whereas there were two Bishops of Alexandria at that time,Ruf. li. 11. cap. 3. the one whose name was Peter holding with the bishop of Rome, the other named Lucius not so: Theodosius com­maunded his subiectes to beleue as Peter did, who folowed the first Peter and Damasus the Bishop of Rome.

Touching the third generall Councell, it was kept in dede vnder Theodosius the yonger at Ephesus.In the third ge­nerall Councell Cyrill wa [...] pre­sident for and in the stede of Cele­stinus B. of Rome. But he was not su­preme [Page] head there. Yea rather who knoweth not that Cyrillus being him selfe Patriarke of Alexandria, yet was president at Ephesus bearing the stede and person of Pope Celestine? If Cyrill was in stede of the Bishop of Rome there president, who maye doubt, but that he was supreme head of the chur­che, in whose name the president sate? Doth the president of the Quenes maiesties counsell vse to sitte at her counsell in the name of any other inferiour person? If Theodosius were supreme and chiefe, why sate not Cyrill in his name as presi­dent? But seing that Photius writeth, andLib. 14. c. 34. Nicephorus also, that Cyrill Archebishop of Alexandria sate in the stede of Celestine Pope of Rome ouer that Councell kept at Ephe­sus, vndoubtedly it can not be denyed, but that Celestine was supreme head as well of the church, as of the generall coūcell.

It is not therefore only to be considered, that Theodosius sent abrod his messengers to summon the fathers to the gene­rall councell, but also it is to be considered, by whose auctori­tie it was done. If in our time it had pleased the Emperour Ferdinande of famouse memorie to haue sent his messengers to the kinges and princes of Spaine, Fraunce, England, Hun­garie, Bemelande, Pole, and to the estates and dukes of Italie and Germanie, to summon them to the councell which the Pope thought good to indict at Trent: I thinke verely the Pope would haue thancked the Emperour for it, and him sel­fe should haue saued so much charges, as men of experience knowe such an enterprise to require. But now sith the Pope hath of his owne sufficient to beare the charges of such affai­res, he asketh not any more of the Emperour such expenses, as in olde time to that necessarie purpose by the Emperours were allowed.

The fourth generall councell how was it called and som­moned by Mar­cian.Last of all Marcian (saye you) called the fourth gene­rall councell at Chalcedon. We answere. He called it [Page 311] not in such sorte as ye meane, to witte, as supreme head and ruler thereof, but as one able to sende messengers for the bishops about the world, and to susteine the charges, also willing to see peace and concord in the church of God. Who list to reade the epistles of Pope Leo to Pulcheria the Em­peresse, to Marcian him selfe, to Theodosius, to Flauianus Archebishop of Constantinople, to the synod first assem­bled at Ephesus, afterward for certaine causes at Chalcedon: in the same epistles he maye see both the cause of the coun­cell, and what conference was had thereof with the said Leo bishop of Rome, who sent first to Ephesus, Iulianus a Bis­shop, Renatus a priest, and Hilarius a deacon, and afterward to Chalcedon, Paschasinus and Lucentius Bishops, and Bo­nifacius a priest, to represent his person. In one of the said epistles written to the second synod at Ephesus,Epist. 15. Leo sayeth thus. Religiosissima clementissimi principis fides &c. The most religious faith of our most clement prince knowing it to perteine chiefly to his renome, Lo them­rour vseth the auc­toritie of the see Apostoli­ke to bring to effect a holy pur­pose. if within the catholike church no branch of errour spring, hath deferred this reuerence to Gods ordinaun­ces, as to vse the auctoritie of the see Apostolike to acheue the effect of a holy purpose, as though he were desyrous by the most blessed Peter him selfe, that to be declared, which in his confession was praised. By which wordes it is plaine, that in matters of re­ligion the Emperour proceded not vpon his owne head, but was directed by the see of Peter. What shall I saye more?

If the Emperour first Christened the Pope, let the Em­perour be superiour in thinges to Godward. But if the Pope christened the Emperour, (as Syluester did Constantine) let the spirituall father in that degree of rule be aboue the spiri­tuall childe.

And when Rufine the heretike had alleaged for authoritie, Apologie. a [Page] Councell whiche as hee thought shoulde make for him: Hierom his aduersarie to confute him, Tell vs (quod hee) what Emperour commaunded that Councell to be called? The same Hierome a­gaine in his Epitaphe vpon Paula, maketh mention of the Empe­rours letters, whiche gaue commaundement to call the Bishoppes of Italie and Grecia to Rome to a councell.

Confuta­tion.Besides that ye do strangely to call Rufine an heretike, we saye, that S. Hierome might well demaund, what Empe­rour summoned that Councell, which was neuer summo­ned. Againe we confesse that some Emperours haue sum­moned both Latine and Greke bishops. But ye proue not, that any did it as supreme head, and as iudge in matters of religion, but by the consent of the bishops of Rome, as I ha­ue declared before.

Apologie Continually for the space of fyue hundred yeres, the Emperour alone appointed the ecclesiastical assemblies, and called the councels of the bishops together.

We now therefore maruaile the more at the vnreasonable dealing of the Bishop of Rome, who knowing what was the Empe­rours right when the church was well ordered, knowing also that it is now a common right to all Princes, for so muche as Kinges are now fully possessed in the seuerall partes of the whole Empire, do­the so without consideration assigne that office alone to himselfe, and taketh it sufficient in summoning a generall Councell, to make a man that is prince of the whole world no otherwise partaker the­reof then hee woulde make his owne seruaunte.

Confu­tation. The Em­perour appointed not coun­cels alo­ne. But by the aduise and will of the bis­shops.When you saie the Emperour alone appointed theccle­siasticall assemblies, and the councels of bishops together, you put in the word (alone) more then euer you proued. We haue shewed out of thecclesiasticall historie, that he did it ex sacerdotum sententia, by determination of the priestes. The­refore he did it not alone. We haue alleaged out of Leo, that to theffect of that which was holily disposed and pur­posed, the auctoritie of the see Apostolike was adhibi­ted. And yet you saie, the Emperour alone called Coun­cels.

Where you adde the Emperour alone celebrated, kept, or held councels, for so is your latine, it is to impudently faced without any face, without proufe, without truth. They were celebrated or holden by the Popes legates, the patriarkes, and bishops, and not by Emperours. Albeit Em­perours might sitte in them, but not as iudges. And they haue euer ben called Episcopalia Concilia, not Imperatoria, Councels be of bis­hops not of Empe­rours. councels of bishops, not of Emperours. And diuerse councels not accompted generall were kept by bishops before any Emperour was Christened. As those, which were kept by S. Peter in Ierusalem mencioned in the actes of the Apostles:Acto. 15. in the time of Victor the Pope in Palestina, and other places, concerning the keping of Easter:Councels kept by bishops before Empe­rours we­re christe­ned. At Rome about the tyme of Pope Fabian against the Nouatian heresie: At Antioche against Paulus Samosatenus, and many others. All which councels were kept not only without the presence of the Emperours person, but also without his power or auctoritie. And yet if he were head of the church, it could not haue ben done without him.

If you saye he was not then christened, I answere that christianitie is no parte of his Imperiall power. It is a spiri­tuall power. whereby he is made the sonne of God. He maye thereby be ruled by a christian bishop. But verely he hath no power geuen to him, whereby he may rule bis­shops. Baptisme maketh a man the childe of the church.Empe­rours we­re not the holders of councels the first fyue hun­dred ye­res. But it is Imposition of handes in consecrating a christian priest to be a bishop, that geueth him rule ouer others, and not the sacrament of baptisme. Therefore Empe­rours were not the holders or kepers of councels the first fy­ue hundred yeares. Yea three hundred were fully expired, before the Emperour professed openly the christian faith. So much the lesse maye you marueill, that now the bishop [Page] of Rome calleth and kepeth councels chieflly by his owne auctoritie. For he succedeth Peter, not Nero. He tooke his auctoritie of Christ immediatly, not of the people of Rome. Be the Emperour Christian, or not Christian, the bishop of Rome by nature of his bishops office, is not only alwayes a christian man, but also a chiefe priest.

Where you saye the bishop of Rome in summoning the late councell did besides good consideration, in that he ma­de a man that is Prince of the whole world, no otherwise partaker thereof,The De­fender ei­ther for­geteth him selfe, or careth litle what he saye. Contra­diction. then he would make his owne seruant: you forgete your selfe fouly, and seme to recke litle what you speake, so you vtter your malice. For who is that whom you call Prince of the whole world? What contradiction is this? Sayd you not in the same sentence before, that kin­ges are nowe fully possessed in the seuerall partes of the whole Empire? How then call you Ferdinande Prince of the whole world? Well this is but one of the common or­namentes of your rhetorike. Syr the Emperour Ferdinan­de of famous memorie was not so abused of Pius the fourth that blessed man bishop of Rome in these our dayes. Ye rather are they who abuse the Emperours maiestie. For ye depose him cleane from his seate, ye finde fault that euer Leo the third made an Emperour in the West. Ye com­plaine openly that the Emperiall maiestie had not conty­newed still at Constantinople. Bylike to the intent the Turke might now haue had it, wko is knowen to suffer in his dominions all faithes, and religions, for which cause it maye seme, ye fauer him. As for Pope Pius that now is, he deferred the olde priuilege of honour vnto the Emperour Ferdinande without the olde burthen. For whereas in olde times Councels were holden by auctoritie of the Pope, as Socrates witnesseth,Li. 8. c. 2. yet the Emperour bare the charge of cal­ling [Page 313] the bishops together. But now the Pope him selfe bare a great part of that burthen, and communicated his purpose fully with the Emperour.

Furthermore ye would, sith that all Christian Princes are nowe come to the possession of the seuerall partes of the Empire, that they also should haue right to call councels.The mar­ke which the de­fenders shoote at is, that there may neuer be any gene­ral coun­cell at al. It maye sone be iudged what ye meane by this matter. Ye would that if any Christen Prince would withstande the calling of it in his owne dominiō for his owne part, it should be no generall councell at all. By which meanes it should come to passe, that forasmuch as so many Princes would har­dly agree all together, there should neuer lightly be any ge­nerall Councell. Which were a great commoditie for you. For so should your heresies be blasted abrode without con­troll.

Maye it please you to vnderstand,The Pope maketh all Chri­sten Prin­ces priuey to the calling of euery ge­nerall Councel. there is no catholike Prince in Christendome, (who would suffer him selfe to be spoken withall) but Pius the Pope made him partaker of the calling of the Tridentine councel. They sent their Ambassa­dours vnto it, as it appereth in the actes of the same. Ye only that haue stayed certaine Princes from sending thither, are gylty of all the diuision and schisme, which now Chri­stes church is lamentably troubled withall.

And although the modestie and mildenes of the Emperour Fer­dinande be so greate that hee canne beare this wronge, Apologie bycause per­aduenture he vnderstandeth not well the Popes packing, yet ought not the Pope of his holines to offer him that wronge, nor to claime as his owne an other mans right.

If the Emperour Ferdinande vnderstode not the sleightes of the Pope which in dede were none,Confuta­tion. how shewed he his modestie and mildenes in bearing the wrong, which he kne­we not to be a wronge? If he knewe no wronge done to him, because in dede none was done: then you are to busy to [Page] meddle in a matter, which you knowe not. Is it to be thought that the Emperour with his graue and wise counsellours knewe not what he had to do, but that you must shewe him that he had wrong?

Apologie Hist Eccli li. 1. cap. 5. But hereto some will replye: the Emperour in deede called Coun­celles at that tyme ye speake of, bycause the bisshop of Rome was not yet growen so greate as hee is nowe, but yet the emperour didde not then sitte togeather with the Bisshoppes in Councell, or once bare any stroke with his authoritie in their consultation. I aunswere nay, that it is not so. For as witnesseth Theodorete, Themperour Constantine sate not only together with them in the Councell at Nice, but gaue also aduice to the Bysshoppes howe it was best to trye out the matter by the Apostles and prophetes writinges, as appeereth by these his own woordes. In disputation (saithe hee) of matters of diuinitie, wee haue sette before vs to followe the doctrine of the ho­lye Ghoste. For the Euangelistes and the Apostles woorkes, and the Prophetes sayinges shewe vs sufficientlye what opinion wee ought to haue of the will of God.