emong honest studies so for to abuse the ignorance of the vnlerned and vnstedfast people that they should think nothing els to be in the sacrifice and oblation of the Catholikes but an obseruation of a strange tong lynen cloth altar of stone chalice of gold or other such matters Although I would not suffer a suspect person to cutt my heare and would not trust hym with paring of my nailes and no man that wyse is permitteth his enemie to doe with the makyng of his apparell or the prescribyng of a diete and order vnto hym yet the life it selfe ys an other thing then heare nayle apparell or diete and the heretike hath not to meddle with the behauyors and ceremonies of Catholikes althowgh the life of owr sowle consisteth not in them but in the holie and relieuing Sacramentes What should we doe by M. Iuells pryuie and wise counsell if we did putt awaie for his pleasur the ceremonies which offend his ghostlie spirite should we haue nothing to putt the bread and wyne vpoÌ„ that he findeth so great fault with an altar surelie what so euer matter the altar had ben made of good men would haue sone applied some one text or other to that purpose He hath a spite against the golden chalice shold we drink then without a cupp what so euer metall the chalice had ben made of great scholars would haue shewed some place or other seruing for it And no doubt the thinges them selues were first vsed for some good cause and reason not expressed in writing perchaunse but left in tradition which being not alwaies knowen and manifest vnto all lerned men they vpon the confidence of the trueth and holines which is in the churche and also vpon this principle that nothing is to be condempned which serueth vnto charitie added a probable and likelie reason which shold make for the ceremonie receiued And whereas without any reason alleaged euery tradition ys to be continued why should it be so much the worser bycause a reason is inuented for it There ys no principall part of a man of whose fasshion situation or manner the philosophers did not either geue the reason or seek after it at the lest As why the eyes be placed on high why there be two of them one tong seruyng vs why the fingers be so manye why the thumbe so thick and short why the braine so colde sett in the head why the hart so hott placed in the middle and so fuâ—the in the rest Yet I am sure they stode not by God when he made the world that bycause of the Ergo which they had concluded God should make that part of his creature which should agree with their reason As in example the hart 〈◊〉 hott and some colde thing must be inuented to asswage the feruentnes of it ergo sett the colde braine directlie ouer it I thinke not that any man dyd at the begynnyng make this reason and that therefore God dyd answer hym with yow say well gentle philosopher it shall be so as yowr ergo concludeth But God most wyselie and agreablie hath sett euerye part of vs in his order of which has doing there be causes and reasons more then any man can tâ—ll vpon the inventing and serching of which he hath sett those occupyed which will studie naturall philosophie and consider the workes of wysedome Not so yett that when any man hath geauen a proper and probable cause of the makyng or disponing of any creature that cause which the man inventeth should be termed the occasion and cause of that creature But this doth folowe that God ys a wonderfull wysedome which allthowgh no man should fynd fault with his doinges but take them as he hath apoynted hath prouided yet that such good reason should be seen in all his workinges that he must be not onlie stubburne but also folish which would striue and murmur against them And so I think for the ceremonies of all kindes which are vsed in the church of which a great number haue come from the verie Apostles and the rest haue ben apoynted by them which had Apostolike authoritye These ceremonies then once receyued of the Catholykes were kept of them for obedience sake which knew not the reason and occasion of them Then loe the lerned men hauyng good iudgemente and leisure and knowing that nothing hath ben rasshelye alowed in the vniuersall Church of the Catholikes eyther receyued or inuented as God should putt in their mindes a probable cause of the churches ceremonyes and traditions and the posteritye also woulde perchaunse increase theyr forefathers godlye inuentions so that at this day of one ceremonie of the churche yow may haue three or fower deuoute causes wherin we must not make folysh argumentes of this sayeth Durand ergo this was the verye fundation of the ceremonie And now lett euerie man so worke abowt the reason of it as he may gather most vantage and profitt to the sturring vpp of his deuotion Christ was buried in a shroude of lynen cloth ergo the corporall must be made of fine lynen This argument may be found in Siluester quod master Iuell Ergo before this argument and before the tyme of Siluester was not the corporall of lynen yeas S. Bede an auncient father testifieth that holie Sixtus long before his tyme did make that order that the sacrifice of the altar should not be exequated neither on silk neither on colored cloth but cleane white lynen onlie Againe Babilon ys a cupp of Gold in my hand saieth the Lord ergo the chalice must be of siluer or gold This reason master Iuell testeth at as the argument of master William Durand But were chalices of gold neuer vsed before Durant made that reason or application yeas PrudeÌ„tius aboue .xij. hundred yeares past speaketh expreshe of golden chalices which the Emperor would haue takeÌ„ from the Christians VVhen Virgill sayeth Cum faciam vitula he vsed facere for sacrificare ergo hoc facite in meâ— memoriaÌ„ ys meant sacrifice this in remembrance of me May we thank Virgil then for owr sacrifice And except that verse had ben espyed would there haue ben no priesthode at all or proper sacrifices of the Christians And yet in the verie scriptures themselues facere ys vsed for sacrificare as in the .xiij. Chapiter of Iudges I beseche the sayeth Manue to the Angell that thow willt yelde to my requestes faciamus tibi hoedum de capris and that we may offer vpp vnto the a kydd of the gotes But what neede I to speake further in this matter The truth ys verie plaine that the thinges themselues were vsed before the reasons of Siluester and Durand were alleaged And therefore it is a plaine lye to imagin that their reasons were the fundations of our ceremonies and orders as who should saye before Durand and Siluesters dayes thei were neuer invented And therefore once to make an end of this place these nice felowes
in reasoning as your yea For although the coÌ„meÌ„dation of some person hath made you a Bishopp And by order of the church I am a simple priest yet as good the legges of a larke as the body of a kyte If we goe to craking in dede it is not good but this yet they would constraine many to do I wil yeld nomore vnto his auctoritie then reason will require Yet I may iustly crake not in my selfe but vnder the churches auctoritie and in the name of S. Cyprian and Tertullian Was that say you an abuse to carye the SacrameÌ„t home at those dayes and receaue it before other meates I vnderstand what greueth you in this example of the primitiue churche For it proueth plainly against you that euen in so nigh daies vnto Christ ther was no necessitie to receaue the Sacrament vnder both kindes And wheras the persequutioÌ„ and hatred of Christians was then so great that they could not frely meete together in any common and open place and so quietly serue God and receaue his benefices as they desired can ye blame them yf the clergie were coÌ„tent to let the Christians cary home with them that present comfort of their soule which is the body of Ihesus Christ to haue it alwaies in redinesse and to strengthen their weaknes therwithall if sodenly they were called vnto martyrdom Be you wiser then S. Cyprian and he writing not his priuate fashion and maÌ„ner which might be well inough corrected by greate counsell but writing of a certain fact of a woman which reserued the Sacrament in her chest wherby the custome of that tyme and most vndoutedlye the faith of that tyme may be gathered doe you reproue the odre of the primityue church and haue you forgotten so sone that old customes must preuaile where haue you readen in any old father or doctor or in any generall councell or how can you shew it by any treu example of the primitiue church that the carying home reseruing of the Sacrament was an abuse but let vs heare what S. Cyprian writeth in his sermoÌ„ de Lapsis He proueth Wherin I confesse he did vilye and damnablye misvse the people and coÌ„trary the church But it is to be noted that this Marcus went about to winne vnto him selfe an estimation aboue all other priestes which could not but folow when that at his coÌ„secrating the people should see the wyne turned as it were in to bloud and that the like did not appeare when other Priestes did consecrat And note that except the faith of the church in those dayes had ben that the very bloud of Christ was in the mysteries of the Christians he could neuer haue made any to reuerence hym the more for that practise but rather to haue brought him before the officers of the church and examined him saying We doe beleue that we receaue Christ onely by faith which faith goeth vp to heauen and eateth him as he sitteth at the right hand of his father but this man sheweth vs very plaine bloud in the chalice which is against our belefe And wheras this Necromanser did turne his craft to the pleasing of the people and so made bloud to appeare in the chalice it foloweth that the whole people of the church did reioyce in the bloud of Christ which thei beleued to be in the mysteries and so he craftely serued their faith an deuotion that he might winne their praise and fauor and that he might be pointed vnto with loe there goeth a good priest and a blessed man But will yow heare more abuses Som take the Sacrament for a purgation against slaunder som hang it before their brestes for a protection S. Benet sayeth he ministred the communion vnto a woman that was dead Ergo what doth folow Ergo the sacrament may be abused I graunt it may be as when wicked and false coniures doe make it a meane to binde the diuell or when heretikes or infidells tread it vnder foote or cast it in the fire or pricke it with kniues to proue whether God his worde be trew that this is his body which was deliuered for vs. But none of your premisses almost doth inferre rightly that conclusion For wherby shew you that S. Benet did abuse the Sacrament in ministring it vnto a woman that was dead All your argument is this Christ did not appoint that the Sacrament shold be hanged about ones necke or put in chest or geauen to dead women ergo these be great abuses Is this in deed good reason that what soeuer Christ hath not expressely willed that may not be vsed Sir Christ did not bid vs that if ther were not present three at the least which would receaue ther should be therfore no communion that daye Christ did not bid vs knele downe and say Lorde we doe not presume to com to this thy table trusting in our owne merites Christ did not bid vs when one chalice is supped vp to fill it again out of the whole potle or quart potte Christ did not bid vs cary home with vs the pieces of bread or cantells therof and doe what we would with it Ergo these be great abuses in the coÌ„munion boke no Sir no the truth must be tryed by other argumentes then these rhetoricall repetitions and negatiues of Christ did not appoint this ergo it is an abuse especially whereas to many doe thinke that Christ will be content with no other thinges but such onely as are writen as though the holy ghost the spirite of truth were idle in the church all this while how dare you to iudge of S. Benet his fact the like vnto which S. Gregory doth alleage for a miracle and for a notable matter S. Austen so wise and blessed a man wheras he disputeth in his boke De Ciuitate Dei of deathes which som haue vsed towardes them selues and wheras he well remembred that the precept of God was Thou shalt not kill also remembred that the church doth honor for martyrs certain which did runne into the waters and to kepe their virginitie lost their liues in this so doubtfull a case wherin the church seamed to stand against God and the precept of God to be contraried by the holye daye of the church he dared not rashely to conclud but stoode herein that the precept of God must haue his force and with what conscience and prayse those virgins drowned them selues that must be left vnto the working of God the holy ghost and not curiously serched of men for what if they did so sayeth he not deceaued as women may be but commaunded by God neither â—rring therin but obeying As of Sampson it is not lawfull for vs to thinke any other thing And we therfore sayeth he afterwardes come to the conscience by hearing but of secret thinges we take not vpon vs the Iudgement Thus Sir it did becom you to doe for asmuch as you confesse Sainct Benet for a Sainct and wheras
call the Sacrament bread which yet condemneth all Lutherans and Zuin glâ—ans And she calleth the Sacrament bread bycause the Sacrament hath the forme of bread and bycause bread in the Scripture signifyeth any foode and bycause Christ his bodye ys in deede true bread and bread of life and heauenlie bread Therefore bycause it ys called bread vpon that onlye to conclud that it contynueth bakers bread it ys the argument of thinkers tailers and coblers and not of lerned scholars Then as concerning Gelasius which sayeth that the substance of bread or nature of wyne doe not cease to be in the Sacrament he expowndeth hym felfe by that which foloweth strayt after in thâ— same sentence adding these plaine wordes But they remaine in the proprieties of theyr nature Which proprieties are these folowing whitnes thicknes breadeth weight tast and power to norissh and feede the bodye with such like which he calleth the substance of bread and wyne and more playnelie the properties of their nature The lyke is to be answered vnto Theodoretus whiche sayeth that Christ honored the bread and wyne which we see with the names of his bodye aud bloud not chainging the nature of them that is to saye the naturall proprieties because in all poyntes it appeereth vnto owr eye to be euen as it was before consecration but ioyning grace vnto that nature Ouer and aboue all this a most true and readie answer ys that the faithfull doe consider allwayes not what one or two doe saye but what the whole cumpanye of lerned men or the greater part doe testifye Agayn before the church had expressed it and opened by her sentence the manner of Christ his being in the Sacrament it was no heresie if proude obstinacie dyd not make it to saye that bread remained or that it vanished in to nothing Bicause both opinions dyd hold with reall presence and the authors of them were contented to yeld vnto their betters iudgement And so if we should graunt vnto the heretâ—kes that which thei do require about Gelasius or Theodoretus they both defending the reall presence it ys no small matter against the heretykes other opinions and it ys nothing at all against the Catholykes But in these dares now when it hath been decreed according vnto scriptures and auncient fathers in a generall councell that the substance of bread is conuerted in to the bodie of Christ now to denie transsubstantiatioÌ„ and to reuyle the decree of the Catholike church this is greatlie against the faith and this is it which maketh heretikes S. Cyprian which defended the rebaptizing of them whom heretykes had baptized before was no heretyke in so doing bycause the question was not then determined by the church vnto whose iudgement he submitted his lerning and authoritie But now if it should come in to an idle head to bring that blessed martyrs reasons and to withstand the Catholike church he should do nothing els in wyse mens iudgementes but declare his owne vaine gloriouse folie And yet I do not ne will not vse this defence but plainelie answer that Gelasius and Theodoretus doe meane well and speak as papistes may doe that the substance or naturall propertie of bread remaineth that is to saie the same quantitie vertue and qualitie which it had before the coÌ„secration Wherefor to conclud the cleane contrarie vnto Master Iuells assertion I saie that neither the auncient doctors do affirme that the substance of bread remaineth vnderstanding by substance the essentiall and internall forme or nature of bread neither Duns and Durand doe saie that if bread remain there is daunger of Idolatrie Farther yet the scholemen say quod M. Iuell that yf a man happen to worship the accidentes of bread Idolatrie may be done to the sacrament No good Syr not to the sacrament but to the accidâ—ntes wherein if fault shold be committed it is not the fault of the institution of Christ but of the silence of priestes or simplicitie of the people Neither is adoration therefor to be forbydden but the manner of adoration is discretelie to be opened whiles owr Sauior him selfe walked visiblie vpon the earthe if one should haue worshipped his verie face or garment not able to distinct betweene the two natures of God and man neither in what diuersitie and degree the face and the garment appertein vnto one selfe same person whereas in truth it were idolatrie to worship that face with godlie honor in that respect and consideration as it is onlie an holie and graciouse visaige of a right excellent and perfect man bycause herein may be daunger should we not worship Ihesus Christ at all or not worshipp hym before we vnderstand the distinction betwene Latria and Dulia that is honor due and proper vnto God and honor which may be geauen vnto any holyâ— creature O miserable people sayeth master Iuell that thus are lead to worshipp they know not what For alas how manie of them vnderstand these distinctions or care for them How manie of them vnderstand after what sort accidentia be sine subiecto c. But o miserable world saye I allso then and alas alas that any wyse man should be so taken to thinke that what so euer ys concluded in scholes should be opened in the pulpites Alas alas the churche doth teache openlye that the Father ys vnbegotten the Soune onlye begotten the Holye ghost proceding and this who so euer doth not beleue shall not be saued O miseserable people that this are lead to beleue they know not what For what know they or what care haue they of proceding or begetting or how can they vnderstand those misteries of the schole men as for example Christ toke the nature of man he toke not the person of man as coÌ„cerning Christ his person God died for man as concerning the diuine nature God can not die and he which beleueth not those thinges shall neuer be saued O miserable people that this are lâ—â—d to beleue thei know not what for which of them vnderstandeth the distinction betwene substance and person But what shall we saie must the lerned men of the church O master Iuell beleue no more then the people are able to conceiue or bycause the people vnderstand not what is accideÌ„ce or what is substance or what is quantitie or qualitie relation or action is it therefor no matter whether it be fysh or flesh square or round white or black worldlie or euerlasting for the 〈◊〉 this is sufficient to beleue that Christ is in the sacrament vnder forme of bread and wyne the bread bâ—â—ng chainged by his almightines in to his boâ—â—e and the wyne in to his bloud or if some can not beare awaye all this let hym cleane to the Catholyke faith and hold vp his hands at sacring as others doe and beleue more excellent thinges to be present then hym selue can see or feele and be content to be reformed if perchaunse he should be in any error and God will 〈◊〉
as S. Augustine when he came from Rome in to this countrie of owrs he made not a new Englisshe seruice or Kentish rather after the nature of those quarters at which he arriued but ratheâ— vsed the Romane fasshion and language neither hath it euer ben writen or testifyed that according to the diuersitâ—â—s of speaches here in England proper seruice for euerye quarter therof was prouided But the coÌ„trarie rather doth appere that one tong was generally vsed in their masse and mattins â—uen as at these dayes there is no fault fownde or ells it is no dawngerous fault for the Welsche men Cornyschemen Northerne and Irysh to vse one order of the English church and the longer it is suffered the farther of it is still from amendyng So what cause is there why that laten seruice beyng browght into this realme by the Pope his goodnes and owr Apostle S. Augustine the same myght not coÌ„tinew throwgh the realme as it was by litle and litle subdewed vnto the ghospell of Christ. Especiallie where as in these dayes fault is fownd with the vnknowen tong which people can not vnderstand and yet the welshemen haue no welshe communyon and at those blessed and quyet tymes there was no lack fownd at all when the priest and the clergye should syng and pray by them selues and the people by them selues entend their priuate deuotion S. Paule writing to the Romaynes not a forme of seruice but a verie sermon as it were wherin he entreateth of most high and agayne most familiar matters yet he write in Greik and not Latin Which thing did he trow yow for the lack of the Latin tong no that is not trew in him which had the gift of all tonges Did he think that all the Romanes had the knowledge of Griek as well as of Latin Trulye that was for any simple man more meeter to think then for the wisedome of S. Paule Had he forgotten him self beyng allwayes of that mynde that in the coÌ„gregation he would rather speke fiue wordes that other myght be the better for them then fiue thowsande in a sâ—rawnge tong No he thowght to earnestly of the cause of Christ to forgettsuch a principall matter as this is according to the heretykes declamations And then in an epistle by twentie partes there is more cause to wryte in the vulgare tong then in a coÌ„mon prayer bycause in the seruice the quyer occupyeth the place of the people and answereth in their steede but in his epistle none were excepted but vnto all you which be at Rome welbeloued of God and faythfull grace be to yow sayth he â–ª and peace In to the quyer all dyd not come in a clompe togeather to here what the priest did reade but abowte the pulpet or other where all myght stand well inowgh to here the epistle readen And so after this sort I myght fynd twentie differencyes betwixt an order of seruice and an epistle Wherfore I wonder much that they make such a brablyng abowte the strauÌ„ge tong and requyre what aucthoritie example or reason we haue for it owt of Doctor Councell or Antiquitye It is reason auctoritye and proufe abundant for a Christian man that this or that thing hath ben done or vsed vniuersallie in the church of Christ were it vsed but for one yeare onlye bycause the church is the pyllar of truth and hath the holy ghost her teacher and gouernor for euer and neuer hath ben suffered vtterly to haue erred in all her members at one tyme. And then wheras the latin seruice in the Latin church hath been so long vsed in these contreys which vnderstode not the latin tong and also they confesse a very long vse of it yt is well inowgh proued that there is no dampnable error in the matter for what tong fownd yow M. Iuell in the English church when yow were borne or how long before had the english seruice been left vnsayed and the latin entertayned a strawnger before a cuntreye man of owr owne yf yow can bryng forth the bokes where the english common prayers were euer in the common vulgare tong and tell vs the name but of one Bishop which vsed it in his diocese yow shall make all men wonder at your inuention and yf neuer any other but latin hath ben vsed yt is authorytie and reason sufficient for all English men that the first coÌ„uertors of this land vnto the sayth did leaue the latin seruice in it nothing fearing or caring what a few fyne felowes would persuade to the contrarie after .viij. or .ix. hundred yeares continuance Then also must all prayers of necessitie be in the common tong or may a few be excepted yf yow except any one why should not the people here all and answer Amen vnto all and especiallie in the most secrete matters which haue most weight in them and in which the cause of the people is most expressed yf all of necessitie must be audiblye expressed how then doth your doctrine agree with S. Basill and S. Chrysostomes masses in the which the chief priest prayeth secretelye at the altar at certen places whiles the quyer in the meane time syngeth Or how could S. Ambrosâ— O worthy Byshop how could he standing at the alter commaund the Emperor by his archedeacon to stand without the Chauncell doores Rather he shuld haue sayd to the Emperor in his own person in owr most huÌ„ble request maye it please your most excellent wysedome and maiestye to com more nere to the altar to here the word of God which doth saue our sowles or els to coÌ„maunde the altar to be pulled downe and that a table maye com downe to your highnes the more commodiouslye to answer Amen vnto my blessing euen as it shall please your maiestie so shall it be But not so S. Ambrose not so he which moved not one â—oote from the altar but sent his archeadeacon not with supplication but with reprehension not as to an Emperor of the world but as to a common Christian saying O Emperour the inward places are appoynted for priestes onelye which others are not permitted neither to entre into neither to touche Goe furth therfore and â—arye for the receiuyng of the mysteries as others doe for purple maketh Emperours and not priestes Vnto which the Emperor answered so mekely and Christianlike that he is more to be wondered at for the ouercummyng of his passions then conquerying of barbarous nations But to my purpose it appeareth by this distinction of places in the church that the people were not suffered to here al thinges And therfor I conclud that wheras it is no necessite that all thinges be vnderstode which the priest in the church sayeth yea rather yf thys be agaynst all good order and discipline there is no necessitie that the tong should be common all to geather where the hering of the same tong must be kept secrète Or that the Bisshopp of Rome was then called an vniuersall Bisshopp or the
the seruice of his maiestie with mortifiyng of owr affections and euill desyres Or that there was no priesthode theÌ„ according to the order of Melchisedech or that priestes haue not a singular sacrifice which they must offer for the sinnes of the people OR that the Baptisme which Christ instituted is no better then the circumsâ—â—sion of the old law Or that baptisme ys a signe onlie of owr profession and that owr synnes are not trulie and in deed forgeauen vs in it Or that the Sacrament of Confirmation ys an inuention onlie of man and that no spirituall strength cuÌ„meth vnto vs by signing of vs with holie oyle and imposition of the Bishoppes handes Or that Christ delyuered in his last supper a figure onlie of his bodie to be eaten of his Apostles Or that the power of forgeauing or reteyning sinnes which Christ gaue to his Apostles and by them to laufull priestes ys nothing els but a comforting or a fearing of mens consciencies by the promyses or menacies of the scriptures â–ª and that in deed priestes can not as ministers vnder God forgeaue synnes and offences which by absolute aucthoritye ys proper vnto God alone and no others Or that to confesse our sinnes to a priest with sorow of hart and contâ—tioÌ„ and to labor by fasting prayeing almes deedes and hard discipline to helpe forward towardes the makyng vpp of a full satisfaction and perfect ys iniuriouse vnto Christ his passion and merites and a superstitiouse and thanklesse trauaile Or that the knowledge and vnderstanding of scriptures ys sufficient licence inowgh to instruct and teach others and that there is no such difference betwene the clergye and the laytie but that the layetie hath before God as good and great priesthoode as the clergie Or that a temporall and Christian Prince were he man woman or childe had then or may haue now the aucthoritie of a supreame head in Christ his churche and ouer the churche Or that faith onlie iustifieth after one be baptized and sanctified Or that all the Iustice and holines which good men of those daies had or now shall haue is but an Imputatiue Iustice and such as pleaseth God to accept but in deede ys not true and right Iustice Or that the keeping of the fortie daies fast of lent was alowed then for temporall policie or bodylie healths sake onlie and had no coÌ„maundemeÌ„t from Christ or his Apostles Or that in most extremitie and at the verie poynt of death aneyling of Christians was abhorred of ChristiaÌ„s and the keeping of the SacrameÌ„t forbydden which is our true viaticum and viage prouision OR that the calling vpon Sainctes in heauen was accompted then blasphemie Or the setting vp of Christ his crosse or any holie Sancte his image was preached to be Idolatrie Or that the visiting of their tumbes kyssing their reliques was thought to be a superstitiouse vanitie Or that the miracles worked at their chappels or memories were attributed then at the first tydinges of them vnto the dyuel his subteltie OR that to pray for the sowles departed was thowght repugnant vnto the Scriptures Or that to offer sacrifice and geaue almes for their sowles health was accompted impâ—etie Or that the last willes and testamentes of fouÌ„ders of almes howsen Colledges and Monasteries were broken coÌ„cerning their temporal goodes and legacies and that no part thereof dyd come to their owne bloud and familie These be such articles as are directed first against the proper honor and glorie of God allmightie secondlie against the grace of â—hesus Christ and profit of all Christians in the world thirdlie against the dignitie estimatioÌ„ and honor of all Sainctes fourthlie against the profit of the sowles departed by debarring their commodities so that in all states worldes and persons Christ thorowgh these articlâ—s ys proscribed And againe in these articles the fundation estimation and perfection of their Ghospell and preaching consisteth so that without these or worser then these they could not be so singular and vnlyke other Christians Yâ— therefore any of all owr aduersaries be able with sufficient authoritie to proue these articles or conclusioâ—s of theirs owt of the Scriptures vse of primityue churche Doctors or Councels either he shall â—e proued manifestlie to misconster aâ—d misuse Scriptures doctors or councels â–ª either els he shall be praised for his labors and folowed with a free â—yll and submission Lett this be the challenge and let vs 〈◊〉 an answer vnto it for if thâ— Catholykes pressed with such questions which for the most part deserued no aunswer haue not refused to shew their faith and geaue reason of it vnto their aduersaries allthowgh the lack of conference with their felowes of free printing and open vttering of their bokes might with reason haue stayed them from their purpose and not haue moued to chainge their contrie for the matter how much more cawse and reason ys it that they which are so fauored in their procedinges should not lett to stand vnaunswered such principall questions as are moued agaynst them nor goe at that tyme backward and 〈◊〉 from the quarell when most of all they should shew them selues and spread furth then eunnying and sinceritie And yet if these forsaid articles are to manye for their leysure â–ª 〈…〉 they seeme to much particular â–ª for their profite which would 〈…〉 or yf the answering vnto 〈…〉 he sayed to be forbydden by wyse heades for a rumor may sone be made to faine that it serueth to a faction to make such challenges and â—ombattes Lett me be quietlie suffered then to speake a few wordes and indifferent such as to which euerie religion must agree yf with any reason it will be credited The heretykes sayeth Tertullian make a shew of Scriptures and by this their boldnes straytwayes some they moue Now in the very conference it selfe and meetyng togeather they weerie the stedfast and sure men they catche and intrapp the weake and the indifferent they dimisse and 〈◊〉 goe with grudges and scrupleâ— But this way must be stopped vpp against them at the fyrst â—â—d they are not to be suffered to dispute and reason vpon the Scriptures And why so Marye for good cause sayeth Tertullian â–ª For some one hereâ—ye doth not admitt certayne Scriptures and those which it doth alow and receiue it turneth vnto her purpose â–ª by putting vnto them or takyng awaie somwhat from them Some againe are so presumptuouse and tâ—ke so much vpon them that they will not acknowledge that for Scripture by which they may be 〈◊〉 Ergo we must not appeale vnto the Scriptures sayeth he and the triall ys not to be apoynted in them by which the victorie ys either none or vncertaine or not verie sure For allthowgh the conference vpon the scriptures â—hold come to that passe that it would leaue both sydeâ— alyke◠〈◊〉 the order of thinges reâ—quired that to be fyrst and formost proponed and putt furth 〈◊〉 which onlye it ys to be disputed at this