practise of the primitiue Church proueth it to be necessary as in the example of Serapion Euseb. lib 6. cap. 44. and of Satyrus Saint Ambroses brother In obitum Satyri c. And is it euen so Doeth the example of one man that was excommunicated and could not be quiet vntill he had receiued the communion and of an other that neuer receiued it nor was baptised prooue it necessary for all men Yea saith Stapleton who will reade onely but one Canon of the Nicene councell shal finde therein not only a generall commandement for al Christendome but also the auncient practise of the Church before that time And I say who so will reade not only the whole Canon but the very title thereof shall finde that it was a remission only for excommunicated persons Câ—no 12. De excommunicatis a saeculo exâ—untibus Of excoÌ„municated persoÌ„s departing this world De his verò qui recedunt ex corpore antiquae legis reguia obseruabitur etiâ— nunc ita vt si fortè quis recedat ex corpore necessario vitae suae viatico non defraudetur Quod si desperatus aliquis recepta Communione superuixerit siâ— inter eos qui sola oratione coÌ„municant De omnibus tamen his qui a corpore recedunt in tradendo eis Communionem cura probatio sit episcopi But concerning them which depart out of this bodye the rule of the auncient lawe shalbe obserued euen nowe also so that if perhaps any depart out of y e body he may not be defrauded of the necessary prouision of his life But if any being at the point of death after he haue receiued the Communion do recouer liue let him be among them that communicate in prayer onely Neuerthelesse concerning all those men that depart out of y e body in deliuering to them the communion let both the charge and the tryal be in the bishops discretion This Canon was not made for all Christian men that at times of publike administration of the sacraments might freely be partakers but onely of such as were excommunicated appointed a time of penance for their tryall before they should be admitted to the Lordes supper before which time if they were at the point of death and the bishop allowed of their repentance this Canon prouideth that they might be receiued to the Communion for their comfort but yet so that if any did recouer and liue they shuld accomplish their time among the penitentes that was before enioyned them This thing being so apparant what shall wee saye of these English Louanistes that either they neuer read the bookes out of which they cite their authorities or else without all shame they wrest them against their owne conscience The 19. difference is the reseruation of the sacrament wherein as I confesse in some erronious kinde of reseruation wee differ from some of the primitiue Church so they differed from Christ which coÌ„maunded it to be eaten and dronken And it is manifest y t their reseruation differed from the popish reseruation both in the manner and in the ende But concerning reseruation I referre the reader to mine answere to D. Heskins first booke Cap. 24. 25. 26. 27. where you shall finde all his authorities discussed except the 14. Canon of the Councell of Nice out of which hee alledgeth that the Deacons might absente Episcopo presbitero proferre communionem comedere In the absence of the Bishop and priest take out the communion and receiue it Whereby he sayeth it is euident that it was reserued in the Churches where the Deacons might come to receiue it But I must admonish the reader y t these wordes which he citeth are an addition of Gratian and the popish church and are not in the true copies in Greeke of that Councell nor in the right Latine translation as euen Peter Crabb the Papist confesseth nor yet in the edition of Ruffinus But such draffe and dregges of falsifications additions detractions mutations c. are good ynough for popishe swyne The 20. difference is blessing with the signe of the Crosse for fortification of which piece he referreth the reader to Martials treatise of the Crosse. And I to M. Calfhils Aunswere and my Reioynder The 21. difference is benediction of the bishop which he sayeth is mocked at and reuiled by Protestantes But he sayeth vntruely for although wee may iustly deride the vaine ceremoniall casting of crosses in the ayre of their bitesheepes rather then bishops with their two fingers which is nothing else but a ridiculous superstition yet wee contemne not the godly benediction of a Christian Bishop and pastour which vseth the same according to the word of God Therefore the examples of Nectarius which desired the benediction of his Bishop Diodorus at his departure and Aurelius which blessed Augustine and his company after he had visited them shewe no difference of them from vs. And if Eudoâ—ia the Empresse desired Chrisostome to blesse her sonne Theodosius his godson What did Chrysostome but pray for him and with him well in the name of the Lorde And how did Diodorus blesse Nectarius And Aurelius blesse Augustine and the rest but by godly prayer made to God for them not with vaine dombe idle ceremonies after the Popish manner So that the manner of blessing of the auncient times doeth rather proue a difference of Papistes from them then of vs from them And moreouer you may consider how to make vp a number of differences what small matters he is fayne to flye vnto and euen such as he hath no shewe of holde at all in the writers of the auncient Church of 600. yeares after Christ for them But onely to set a face of the matter as though there were nothing newe amongest them when not onely their ceremonies but also many of the principall articles of their doctrine wherein they differ from vs were either not heard of in those ages or else were openly impugned by writers of those times Onely the dregges and refuse of the former age they retayne as prayer for the deade inuocation of Saintes and a fewe other such matters CAP. VII Of pilgrimage and reliques of Church seruice of Altars of Church ornaments holy vessels of the ecclesiasticall â—onsure and of holy water The 22. difference is pilgrimage to holy places especially to Rome In deede we finde that peregrination to Ierusalem was esteemed of many and great resort to Rome of the wiser sort not for the holinesse of the places but for the frequence of godly learned men then liuing in those places Otherwise for the holynesse of the place S. Hierom ad Paulinum whether M. Sapleton sendeth vs doth sufficiently declare what was to be esteemed of it Non Hierosolymis fuisse sed Hierosolymis bene vixisse laudandum est It is no praise to haue beene at Hierusalem but to haue liued well at Hierusalem And speaking euen of our owne countrye he addeth Et de Hierosolymis
from the Gospell and doctrin of saluation in setting vp a newe sacrifice in seeking iustification by workes in ouerthrowing the true and spiritual worship of God As for the two Iudges the worde and the spirite he denyeth them finding manye defectes in the worde As that it is sencelesse dombe deafe not able to prooue it selfe to be the worde of God hauing no more power to be Iudge and decide controuersies then the booke of statutes to put on my lorde chiefe Iustices robes and to come to the Kings bench and giue sentence I thinke there is no Christian man but abhorreth to reade these blasphemies But let vs see whether the booke of statutes although it put on no robes is not iudge even ouer my lorde chiefe Iustice him selfe who is a minister seruing to pronounce the lawe not a King to alter the lawe for he him selfe must be obedient to the lawe Nowe in all controuersies that be de iure either the lawe is plaine to be vnderstoode or it is obscure If it be plane as that a felone must be hanged or the sonne must inherite his father c. the Iudge pronouncing the lawe with authoritie and execution following his sentence brydleth the obstinate person that will not obey the lawe which he knoweth as well as the Iudge If the lawe be hard to be vnderstoode the Iudge must seeke the interpretation thereof according to the minde of the law-maker and not according to the his owne fantasie So that in all cases the Iudge hath no authoritie ouer the lawe but vnder the lawe so that if the giue wrong sentence both he and his sentence are to bee iudged by lawe Or else why doe you Martiall in your ciuill lawe courtes so often crye out sit liber iudex let the booke be Iudge If you will not allow the booke of Gods law to be Iudge euen ouer them which haue authoritie as Iustices haue in the common lawe to pronounce it and to declare it The Spirite he refuseth to be Iudge because it is inuisible secreate vnknowen vnable to be gone to but in the Church therefore the Church is the Iudge and neyther the worde nor the Spirite But the Spirite by his owne substance incomprehensible is by his effects in the holy Scriptures visible reuealed knowen and able to be gone vnto therefore a sufficient Iudge taking witnesse of the Scriptures and bearing witnesse vnto them For that maiestie of trueth that power of working that vniforme consent which is in all the Scriptures inspired of God maketh a wonderfull difference of them from all writings of men of all sortes But let vs see Martials arguments against the Spirite of God to be iudge of the interpretation of the Scriptures Paul and Barnabas in the controuersie of circumcision went not to the word and Spirit but to the Apostles and Elders at Ierusalem O blocke-head and shamelesse asse Paul and Barnabas doubted not of the question but sought the generally quiet of the whole Church by consent of Councell But whether went the Apostles and Elders for decision of the question but to the worde and Spirite Reade Act. 15. Againe he citeth Deuteronom 17. that the people in controuersies should resort to the priestes for iudgement but where should they fetche their iudgement but of the lawe of God as it is in the same place Againe Christ hath appointed Apostles Euangelistes c. therefore it is not a generall precept for all men to trie all men to iudge what doctrine they receiue bicause all be not Apostles Euangelistes c. Then in vaine saide Christ to all men search the scriptures in vaine the Apostles trie the spirites neither did the Boerheans well that daily sought the Scriptures to see if those things were so as the Apostles taught Martiall is to be pitied if he knowe no difference betweene authoritie of publike teaching and the triall and examination of doctrine whereof this pertaineth to all men the other to such onely as are called thereto But Martiall proceedeth to shewe that as GOD appointed one high Priest to the Iewes to avoide schismes so he appointed Peter among the Christians and for this purpose he citeth diuers sentences of the auncient Fathers which all in order almost the reader shall finde cited and satisfied in myne aunswere to Doctor Sanders booke of the rocke of the Church Cap. 5. except one place of Tertullian De pudicitia which I maruell this Popish Lawyer would alledge being so contrarie to his purpose but that the poore man vnderstoode it not Qualis es c. What art thou ouerthrowing and changing the intention of our Lorde giuing this personally to Peter Vpon thee saide he I will builde my Church If it were personally saide to Peter Syr Bacheler counsel with Baldus and Bertholdus whether it goe by succession to the Pope or no Which Tertullian denyeth to pertaine to euery Elder of the Church bicause it was spoken personally to Peter And nowe at the length beginneth he to come to the argument of his booke the signe of the crosse Which he saide was the fourth signification of the word Crosse in Scripture and calleth it the materiall and mysticall signe of the crosse which Master Calfhill denieth to be once mentioned in Scripture in that sense that Martiall taketh it Martiall repeateth that which he had saide before that Esaye cap. 49. saith I will set out myne signe on high to the people which Hierome vpon that place expoundeth to be the standard of the crosse that it may be fulfilled which is written the earth is full of his praise Et iterum c. And againe In all the earth his name is wonderfull Which wordes following immediately Martiall craftily suppresseth and falleth into a brabbling matter that preaching which Master Calfhill saide was this standard is not the onely standard or signe lifted vp by GOD for conuersion of the Gentiles but miracles and good examples of life c. Whereas the question is whether the Popish signe of the crosse be the signe spoken by Esay and Hierome And the exposition added by Hierome sheweth plainely that he meaneth not a red or blue crosse banner but the preaching of Christe crucified whereby the earth is filled with the praise of GOD and his name is wonderfull in all the earth But Martiall in the end concludeth that it hath pleased the auncient Fathers to appoint and ordeine the signe of the crosse to he one meane among many by which the praise of GOD is set foorth Where he should haue proued that the signe of the crosse as he taketh it is mentioned in the scriptures Other cauils and slaunders not more false then foolish I will clearely omit as I purposed in the beginning and followe onely such matter as is proper to the question in controuersie namely the signe of the crosse The second text to proue that the signe of the crosse is mentioned in the scripture he citeth out of Iere. 4. Lift vp a signe in Sion which
is a worthie witnesse of such a worshipfull ceremonie In the end of this chapter he inueigheth against a newe tricke which he saith y â— preachers haue to make their audience cry Amen CoÌ„paring it with the applause and clapping of handes vsed in the olde time but misliked of godly fathers Chrysostome and Hierome So that for the preacher to pray to God anâ— to giue God thankes whereto the people aunswereth â—â—en it is counted of Stapleton a newe tricke and yet it is an auncient as S. Paul 1. Cor. 14. vers 16. But to make such a loude lye that Sathan him selfe the father of lyes I suppose for his credites sake would be ashamed to make in his owne person Videlicet that To teares to lamenting or to bewayling of their sinnes no Protestant yet moueth his audience It is an olde trickes of a cankared stomaked Papist CAP. VIII Differences betweene the former faith of Catholikes and the late newes of Protestants concerning the gouernement and rulers of the Church The 30. difference is Synodes of the Cleargie which is a lewd and impudent slaunder for we allowe them and vse them as all the world knoweth but saith he no conclusion is made in them but such as pleaseth the Parleament This is a false lye for although no constitution made in the conuocation hath the force of a lawe except it be confirmed by Parleament yet many constitutions and Canons haue bene made that were neuer confirmed by Parleament The 31. difference is imposition of handes which is a meere slaunder for that cerimonie is vsed of vs in ordeining of Ministers likewise where he saith that wheÌ„ all the Popish Bishops were deposed there was none to lay handes on the Bishops that should be newely consecrated it is vtterly false For there was one of the Popish Bishops that continued in his place there were also diuers that were consecrated Bishops in King Edwardes time and although there had bene but one in that time of reformation it had been sufficient by his owne Gregories resolution Bed lib. 1. cap. 27. An other example is Lib. 3. cap. 28. of Ceadda Archbishop of Yorke consecrated by Wini Bishop of the West Saxons assisted by two Bryton Bishops that were not subiect to the see of Rome Bicause at that time there was neuer a Bishop of the Romish faction in England but this Wini who was also a Simoniake and bought the Bishoprike of London for money I speake not this as though in planting of the Church where it hath bene long time exiled an extraordinarie forme of ordaining were not sufficient but to shewe that the Papistes doe picke quarels contrarie to their owne pretended recordes of antiquitie and Catholike religion Where he inueigheth against the vnsufficiencie of a number of our Ministers which are come out of the shop into the Cleargie without giftes sufficient for that calling as I can not excuse them nor their ordeiners so I dare be bolde to affirme they are no worse either in knowledge or conuersation then the huge rable of hedge Priestes of Poperie The 32. difference that such Bishops as were created by the Archbishops of Canterburie and Yorke were created by the appointment of the Pope This is a shamelesse lye for which he can bring no colour either out of the first sixe hundreth yeares or out of Bedes historie Where he saith If it can be shewed by any historie that at any time by the meere temporall authoritie euer any Catholike Bishops were created he dâ—re yelde and graunt that ours are lawfull Bishops For aunswere that Catholike Bishops of olde by as meere temporall authoritie were created as any are created among vs I referre him to Bede lib. 3. cap. 7. 29. lib. 4. cap. 23. of Agilbert and Wini by authoritie of Sonwalch Wighard nominated by authoritie of Oswine and Egbert Ostfor consecrated at the commaundement of king Edilred beside Wini made Bishop of London for money by Wulfher king of Mercia which authoritie he could not haue abused except it had bene in him lawfully to vse The 33. difference is that Princes had not the supreme gouernement in ecclesiastical causes For proofe whereof he alledgeth Gregorie Nazianzen and Saint Ambrose both which speake not of chiefe authoritie but of knowledge of spirituall matters which is not to be sought ordinarily in Princes but in the Cleargie Secondly he citeth Caluine and Illyricus which do write against such ciuill Magistrates as thinke by their supremacie they haue absolute authoritie to decree what they wil in y e Church wheras we in England neuer attribute so much to the Princes authoritie but that we alwayes acknowledge it to be subiect to God and his word The Papistes right well vnderstand this distinction but it pleaseth them to vse this ambiguitie of supreme authoritie to abuse the ignorance of the simple The 34. difference is that the Bishops and godly men in matters of doubt counselled with the Pope of Rome so did the Pope of Rome with them while there was any modestie in him so did Pope Sergius aske counsel of poore Beda Math. West Nay but Saint Hierome so well learned consulted with Pope Damasus which entred his See with the slaughter of sixtie persons I might aunswere that Damasus also asked counsell of Saint Hierome So that in him which is consulted there is rather opinion of knowledge then of authoritie But Hierome confesseth that he will not separate him selfe from the Church of Rome c. Ep. ad Dam. 2. So long as the Church of Rome was the Church of Christ there was great cause he should ioyne with it But nowe is it ceased to be the spouse of Christ and is become an adulteresse as the prophete saith of Ierusalem yea it is become Babylon the mother of all abhominations and therefore that heauenly voice commaundeth all Christians to depart out of her But concerning the Popes authoritie I haue aunswered at large to D. Sanders rocke of the Popish Church The 35. difference but I knowe not howe it differeth is the Popes authoritie abolished by whom Christianitie was first in this land receiued It is wel known that there was Christianitie before Gregorie sent Augustine not of Popelike authoritie but of godly zeale as it seemeth to winne the English nation to Christe After followeth a large complaint for abolishing the Popes authoritie a Canon inuectiue against discentions among vs and slight fortification of the Popes authoritie for vnities sake out of Hierome Cont. Iouinian Cyprian de simpl prael aunswered at large in the discouerie of D. Sanders Rocke The 36. difference Augustine came first in presence of the king with a crosse of siluer and an image of Christ painted in a table The Protestants beganne with taking away the crosse and altering the Letanie But this part is left vnfortified except it be with a marginall note that Chrysostome vsed in Letanies crosses of siluer and burning tapers In deede I reade Chrysostome had certaine candlestickes or cressets
Apostles haue preached vnto vs be he accursed Here the quarreling lawyer findeth fault with his translation because Euangelizauimus may be referred as well to the Disciples as to y e Apostles so that y e Disciples preachings are to be credited as well as y e Apostles No doubt if they preach the doctrine of the Apostles of which the controuersie is and not of the persons that preach it But these quarels sir Bacheler are more meete for the bomme courtes where perhaps you are a prating proctor then for the schooles of diuinitie Wee are gone out you say and that we confesse in our apologie Yea wee are gone out of Babylon but not out of the church of God but abyde in the doctrine of Christ. And you are gone out of the Church of God which remaine in the synke of Rome that is departed frō that which was heard from the beginning and was sacrosanctum apud Apostolorum Ecclesias moste holy in the Apostles Churches You cannot abyde to be charged with the saying of Christ. They worship mee in vaine that teache the doctrine and precepts of men First you saye the Apostles were men whose traditions the Church must receiue yea sir but they deliuered no doctrine of their owne Secondly Christ speaketh of the Scribes Pharisees and their fonde traditions and not of the Church and her Catholike traditions and customes And they be Scribes and Pharisees which euen in the Church teach a false worshipping of God according to the doctrines and traditions of men disanulling the commaundements of God as the Popish teachers in their doctrine of Images communion in one kind priuate Masse c. That Augustine framing a perfect preacher willeth him to conferre the places of Scripture together you say it is a profounde conclusion to inferre that he sendeth him not to doctours distinctions censure of the Church Canons of the Popes nor traditions of the fathers but onely to quyet and content him selfe with the worde of God And these last wordes you saye are not found in Augustine de doct Chr. Cap. 9. sequentibus as though Master Calfhil recited the words not the sense for which he referreth you not only to that Chapter but to the rest following in al which there is no mention of doctors distinctions Popes Canons c. But this is an argument ab authoritate negatiuè Make as much and as little as you will of Augustines authoritie Master Calfhill hath rightly inferred vppon Augustines iudgement that if conference of Scriptures wil make a perfect preacher which you graunt he needeth neyther doctors distinctions nor Church censures c. but may quyet and content him selfe with the onely worde of God But it would make an horse to breake his halter to see howe Martiall prooueth out of Augustine that God teacheth vs by men and not by Angels and that knowledge of the tongues and instructions of men is profitable for a preacher yea the consent of moste of the Catholike Churches and the interpretations of learned men as though all those were not to be referred to the dewe conference of scriptures where onely resteth the substance of doctrine and the authoritie of faith and not in doctours distinctions Church censures Popes Canons c. which haue no grounde in the Scriptures or else be contrary to them Where Master Calfhill sheweth that as before the newe testament was written all things were examined according to the wordes and Sermons of the Apostles so after the newe testament was written all thinges ought to be examined according to their writings because there is none other testimonie of credite extant of their sermons writings Martiall replyeth out of Saint Augustine that wee haue many thinges by tradition which are not writen which being vniuersally obserued it were madnesse to breake Ep. 118. But Augustine speaketh not of doctrine but of ceremonyes or obseruations Out of Hierom ad Pam. he obiecteth that our Creede is not written in the Scriptures which is vtterly false although the fourme of the symbole be not set downe as wee rehearse it Thirdly out of Epiphanius contra Apostolic li. 2. Heres 61. that wee must vse tradition because all thinges cannot be taken out of the holy Scriptures Therefore the holy Apostles deliuered certeine things in writing and certeine things in tradition c. But they deliuered nothing in tradition contrary to their writinges neyther omitted they to write any thing that was necessarie for our saluation The matter whereof Epiphanius speaketh is that it is a tradition of the Apostles that it is sinne to marry after virginitie decreed and yet he holdeth that it is better to marrye after virginitie decreed then to burne contrary to the doctrine of the Papistes But Martiall frankely graunteth that no doctour is to be credited against the Scripture and the content of the whole Church Yet where Master Calfhill sayde that no man in any age was so perfect that a certeine trueth was to be buylded on him bringing examples of Aaron and Peter the one the high Priest of the Iewes the other affirmed by the Papistes to be the same of the Christians He quarreleth at his induction because he sayeth not sic de singulis where as his argument followeth not of the fourme of induction but of the place a maiore ad minus After this as he doeth nothing but cauill hee chargeth Master Calfhill for corrupting Saint Augustine saying Truth mee not nor credite my writings c. Proem lib. 3. de Trinit For Saint Augustine sayeth not trust mee not But he confesseth that he sayeth Do not addict thy selfe to my writings as to the Canonicall Scriptures See what a corruption here is when Master Calfhill rendereth not the words but the meaning of Augustine Againe saint Basil he sayeth is vilely abused because Master Calfhill sayeth Saint Basil setteth forth by a proper similitude with what iudgement the fathers of the Church should be read Conc. ad Adol wheras Basil speaketh of prophane writers As though Basils similitude may not serue to shewe howe both should bee read because he speaketh but of one sorte Likewise he cryeth out that Saint Hierome is not truely alledged because the Printer in the English translation of Hieroms words hath omitted this word not which he hath set downe in the Latine The 4. pretie persons he putteth vppon Master Calfhill as foolishe and childishe I omitt onely the slaunderers persons I will touche In saying that the fathers declyned all from the simplicitie of the Gospell in ceremonies He chargeth M. Calfhill to be a slaunderer Because God hath not suffered all the fathers to declyne lest hell gates should haue preuailed against his Church Although M. Calfhill speake of those fathers onely whose writings are extant yet the gates of hell in ydle ceremonies did but assault they did not preuaile against the Church And these fathers departed not from the Gospell but declined from the simplicitie thereof But you Papistes haue departed
of their Emperour in the consecration of their dead Emperours images whom they worshipped as Gods For which causes Iustinus thought it vnreasonable that they should contemne Christ for his crosses sake But of vsing the signe of the crosse in all sacramentes there is no mention in Iustinus That in Chrysostomes time other more ancient fathers y e signe of y e crosse was vsed at the celebration of the sacramentes M. Calfhil granteth as a ceremonie you confesse It is but a ceremonie and that our sacramentes lacking the signe of the crosse and that vsual ceremonie be perfect notwithstanding And yet you exclaime against vs for omitting a needelesse ceremonie where we see it hath bene turned from that indifferent vsage of the forefathers into an idolatrous custome opinioÌ„ of necessitie The credite of Dionysiê° for so ancient a scholler of S. Paul as you would make him it too much cracked by Erasmus to be cured by Martial Where M. Calfhil truly faith you can not deny but he hath as good authoritie for honie mike wine to be restored in baptisme and the communion to be giuen to children as you haue for the crosse you aunswere these were altered by the Church of Rome which hath authoritie so to do y e crosse stil remaineth but marke what you say were these traditions of the Apostles if you say no y e like wil I say of the crosse for y e same authoritie coÌ„mendeth theÌ„ al a like for traditions of the Apostles Wel if they were traditions of y e Apostles by the holy Ghost which you hold to be of equal authoritie w t y t scriptures y e Church of Rome hath abolished the one why may she not abolish the other so y t your answer conteineth manifest blasphemie To fortifie your traditions you alledge y t Iesus did many thinges which are not written c. but you leaue of y t which foloweth but these are written y t you might be leeue in beleeuing haue eternal life Io. 20. yet S. Iohn speketh of miracles not of ceremonies to be vsed in baptisme wherunto you apply it But Iesus himself saith he hath many things to say that y e apostles could not then beare c. Ioan. 16. And you would know in what worke of the Apostles those thinges are written yea you would haue the Chapter noted Pleaseth it you to looke your selfe in the Actes of the Apostles and in their Epistles c. And you shall finde that the scriptures will instruct the man of God vnto all good works make him wise vnto saluation if these wil not serue your turn seeke where you wil find y e deuil eternal damnatioÌ„ But I pray you could not y e apostles beare y t hearing of the signe of the crosse of salt oyle spittle in baptisme were these such harde lessons to learn or heauy to beare if you think they were I enuy not vnto you so wise a thought But you will teach vs how we shal know y t these are traditions of y e apostles to this inquire you answer euen as we know y e gospels epistles to be y e Canonical scriptures by authoritie of y e church which you think sufficient for y t purpose But so do not we for although we receiue the testimony of y e Church yet we haue greater authoritie out of y e scriptures of y e old TestameÌ„t y t spirit by which they were writeÌ„ being alwais y e same by which we are perswaded y t y e gospels epistles are the holy scriptures Againe y e vniuersal Church of all times places giueth witnes to those writings so doeth it not to these traditions Therefore we are neuer the neare to knowe Apostolical traditions by authoritie of the Popish church whiche ascribeth thinges manifestly contrary to the worde of God and writinges of the Apostles to Apostolike traditions as Images halfe communion priuate Masse c. After this brabbling of traditions followeth a long brawle about numbers which the Papistes do superstitiously obserue and of the authoritie of the seuentie interpreters whose translation if it were extant no doubt but it were worthie of great reuerence but seeing these questions are fruitelesse and impertinent vnto the article I wil clearely omit them Martial returning to proue that the signe of the crosse was vsed in consecrating the body and bloud of Christ findeth himselfe greatly greeued that M. Calfhil calleth the Masse the sacrifice of the deuil wherein be so many good things as the Collets Gospel epistle Gloria in Excelsis c. by which reasoÌ„ I might proue a diuelish coniuration in which be so many names of God and good words to be an holy peece of worke Therfore it is not many good parts abused to make a wicked thing good that can iustifie the Masse which is an hurrible blasphemie against the death and onely sacrifice of Christ. But M. Calfhil doth not satisfie him where he citing out of Albertus Magnus That Christ did blesse the sacrament with a certeine signe of his hand as Iacob laide his hands on Iosephs sons and Christ laid his hands vpon the children lifted vp his hands blessed his Apostles c. asketh why we might not say Christ made a signe of y e crosse considering that Chrisostome Augustine and Euthymus testifie that in their time the signe of y e crosse was vsed in consecration this question he saith is not soluted This is sone answered because laying on of hands and lifting vp of handes which be sometime vsed in blessing doth not proue a crossing with the finger of ones hand as the Papistes vse and because the Euangelistes which describe all that he then saide or did for vs to followe make no mention of any such signe of hand made by him in blessing The long discourse that followeth of blessing and giuing of thankes is needelesse for we know and confesse that as they somtimes signifie all one thing so they differ sometimes we confesse that the bread and wine in the Lords supper were blessed that is to say sanctified and consecrated but not with any signe of hand which is the mater in question but with the worde of God and with prayer not onely as bodily meates but as heauenly and spirituall mysteries to feede the soule But it is a sport to see how Martiall when he hath prooued that which was not in question that the bread wine were blessed sanctified by Christ that they must nowe be so consecrated by the Church he runneth away with the signe of the Crosse whereof he hath brought no proofe of the vse by Christ saying There must be consecration by honouring the wordes of Christ and calling vpon his name making the signe of the crosse which maner of coÌ„secration the Church learned of Christ hath continued euer since so that we may boldly say with Albertus He blest it with a certeine signe of his
needefull nor profitable The memory of that godly learned man Maister Doctor Calfhill whome he abuseth is written in the Booke of the righteous and shall not be afraide of any slaunderers reporte Omitting therefore all friuolous quarels I will onely endeuour to answere that whiche hath in it any shewe of reason or argument to defende the idolatry of the Papistes In which matter also as many thinges are the same which are already satisfied in my confutation of Doctor Sanders Booke of Images so I will referre the reader to those Chapters of that treatise where he shal finde y â— which I hope shal suffice for the ouerthrowe of Idolatry This reply as the first treatise is diuided into ten articles all which in order I will set downe with such titles as he giueth vnto them But first I must say a fewe wordes concerning his request made to the Bishop of London and the rest of the superintendentes of the newe Church as it pleaseth him to call them and his preface to the reader His request is that the Bishops should certifie him by some pamphlete in printe whether 61. articles which he hath gathered out of Maister Calfhils booke be the receyued and approoued doctrine of the newe Churche of England able to be iustified by the worde of God and the Fathers and Councels within sixe hundreth yeares after Christ How wise a man he is in making this request I leaue to reasonable men to iudge And touching the articles themselues I aunswere that some of them be such as the Church of England doth holde and openly professe as that Latine seruice Monkish vowes the communion in one kinde c. are contrary to Gods worde the other be particular affirmatioÌ„s of Maister Calfhil which in such sense as he vttered them may be iustified for true and yet perteyne not to the whole Church to mainteine and defende as whether Helaena were superstitious in seeking y e crosse at Ierusalem whether Dionyse and Fabian were the one suspected the other infamed c. beside that a great number of them be so rent from the whole sentences whereof they were partes that they reteyne not the meaning of the author but serue to shewe the impudencie of the cauiller As that the counsels of Christe in his Gospel be ordinances of the Deuill the prayers of Christians a sacrifice of the deuill the councell of Elibeus was a generall councell c. Wherfore I will leaue this fond request with all the rayling that followeth there vppon and come to the preface to the Reader First he findeth himselfe greatly greeued that not only ancient fathers are by M. Calfhil discredited but also the holy crosse is likened to a gallowes c. which moued him to follow Salomons counsell to answer a foole according to his folly After this he taketh vpon him to coÌ„fute M. Calfhils preface in which he proueth y t no images should be in churches to any vse of religion because God forbiddeth them Exo. 20. Leuit. 19 in y e first table of religion His reply standeth only vpon those common foolishe distinctions of Idols Images of Latria Doulia which are handled more at large with greater shewe of learning by D Sander in his booke of Images Cap. 5. 6. 7. 8. whither I refer y e reader for answer Likewise y t discourse which he maketh to proue y t an image of Christ is not a lying image is answered in y e same booke Cap. 7. The authoritie of Epiphanius he deferreth to aunswer vnto y e 5. article To Irenaeus he answereth y t he only reporteth y t the Gnostike heretikes had y e image of Iesus but reproueth not y t fact But he reproued them only because they placed the image of Christ w t the images of Plato Pithagoras c. vsed them as y e Gentyles do This were in deed a pretie exception for a brabling lawyer to take but a student in diuinitie should vnderstand that Irenaeus in y t book Chapter li. 1. Ca. 24. declareth no fact of y e heretiks y t was good but his declaration is a reproof And so it is throughout that whole booke conteining 35. Chapters But he chargeth M. Calfhill for falsifying Augustine in sayng that he alloweth M. Varro affirming that religion is moste pure without images first quarreling at the quotation which by errour of the Printer is de ciuitate Dei lib. 4. Cap. 3. where it should be Cap. 31. a meete quarrell for such a lawyer secondly shewing that the Latine is Castius obseruari sine simulachris religionem that religion woulde haue beene more purely kept without Idols or fayned Images as though there be anye Images but fayned and the worde Imago euen in their owne Latine translation of the Bible is indifferently taken for Idolum and simulachrum and that in many places Deut. 4. ver 16. 4. Reg. 11. ver 18 Sapient Cap. 13. 14. Esai 40. ver 18. 44. ver 13. Ezec. 7. vers 20 where imagines simulachra are both placed together Ezech. 16. Ca. 17. Amos. 5. ver 23. wher he sayeth Imaginem idolorum the image of your Idols and many other places declare that this counterfait distinction was not obserued no not of the Latine interpreter As for his other logicall quiddity wherin he pleaseth him selfe not a little that religio non suscipit magis minus sheweth that eyther his lawe is better then his Logike or else both are not worth a strawe Further he chargeth M. Calfehill for adding words which are not founde in Augustine where images are placed in temples in honourable sublimitie c. These wordes are founde in the Ep. 49 ad Deogratias Cum hiis locantur sedibus honorabili sublimitate vt a praecantibus atque immolantibê° attendantur when they are placed in these seates in honourable sublimitie that they are looked vpon by them that praye and offer c. But Martiall looked onely to the quotation Ps. 36. 113. Yet doeth not M. Calfhill rehearse the wordes but the iudgement of Augustine from which he doth nothing varie except Martiall will cauill at the wordes images in temples where Augustine sayeth Idola hiis sedibus Idoles in these seates speaking of temples in which images were placed But he speaketh saith Martiall in the Psalmes against the images of the heathen and not of the Christians Then reade what he writeth De moribus ecclesiae Catholicae lib. 1. Cap. 34. de consensu Euangelist lib. 1. Cap. 10. where you shall finde his iudgement of such images as were made of Christians to be all one with those of the Gentiles The iudgement of other doctours whome he nameth you shall finde aunswered in the 14. or 13. Chapter of Master Sanders booke of Images That the Iewes had no images in their temple he sayth it is a Iewish and Turkish reason to proue that we should haue none Much like y e priest that would not beleeue in Christe if he
knewe that he were a Iewe. So wise he is to compare the superstition of the wicked Turkes with the obseruation of the lawe by the godly Iewes Nay hee is yet more eloquent and sheweth that the Protestantes are like the Turkes in condemning of images in allowing marriage after deuorce c. as though we might not acknowledge one God lest we should be like the Turkes and Iewes nor honour vertue nor dispraise vice because they do so nor obey magistrates nor eat and drinke because the Turkes and Iewes doe so O deepe learning of a lawyer diuine That Images do not teach he sayeth it is a position more boldly aduouched then wisely proued then quoteth Gregorie Ep. 9. lib. 9. c. but he is deceiued if he thinke we holde that images teach not for we affirme with the Prophet Abacuc that they teache lyes Cap. 2. ver 18. vanitie Ier. 10. ver 8. As for the story of Amadis the Goldsmith and the Epistle of Eleutherius fetched out of the guild hall in London as M. Calfhill maketh no great accompt of them so I passe them ouer although Martiall would haue men thinke they be the strongest arguments the Protestants haue against the superstition of the crosse and the vsurped tyrannie of the Pope Finally the excuse he maketh of his railing by M. Calfhils example how honest it is I referre to wise men to consider If M. Calfhill had passed the bondes of modestie it were small praise in Martiall to follow him yea to passe him But if M. Calfhill as indifferent menâ—â—ay thinke hath not greatly exceeded in termes of â—eate against Martials person whatsoeuer he hath spoken against his heresies the continuall scorning both of M. Calfhils name and his person vsed so often in euery leafe of his reply in the iudgement of all reasonable persons will cause Martiall to be taken for a lawlesse wrangler rather then a sober and Christian lawyer The first Article This article hath no title and in effect it hath no matter For 13. leaues are spent about a needelesse impertinent controuersie of the Authoritie of y e holy Scriptures and of the Church of God whereof the one is the rule of faith the other is the thing ruled and directed thereby Nowe whether ought to bee y e Iudge the rule or the thing ruled is the question The rule say wee as the lawe the Church sayeth he as the Iusticier And then we are at as great controuersie what or where the Church is In effect the coÌ„trouersie commeth to this issue whether he be a Iusticier or an iniusticier which pronounceth sentence contrary to the lawe I would think that common reason might decide these questions That he which giueth sentence against the lawe may haue the name and occupy the place of a Iusticier but a true Iusticier he cannot be in deede Right so the Popish Church which condemneth the trueth for heresie hath vsurped as the Iudge but in deede is a cruell tyrant But the controuersie is not of the worde but of the meaning and where shall that be founde but in the mouth of the Iudge sayeth he if this were true I woulde neuer be a Bachiler of lawe if I were as Martiall nor yet a doctor thereof except it were to deceiue poore clyantes for their money if there were not a sence or meaning of the lawe which other men might vnderstande as well as he that occupyeth the place of the Iudge that I might appeale when I sawe he gaue wrong sentence But let vs briefely runne ouer his Achillean arguments The Eunomians Arrians Eutychians and Maximus the heretike reiected the testimonies of the fathers and the authoritie of the Church and appealed to Scriptures So doeth manye â— wrangling lawyer to continue his fee from his clyant appeale when he hath no cause but receyued right sentence according to the lawe ergo no appeale is to be admitted This is Martials lawe or logyke I knowe not whether But what was this Maximus you name so often Master Martial that S. Augustine writ against Could you reade your note booke no better Against Maximinus the Arrian he writeth that neither of them both was to be holden by the authoritie of Councels the Nicen or the Ariminense but by the authorities of the Scripture lib. 3. Cap. 4. But Tertullian would haue heretikes conuinced by the authoritie of the Church and not of the Scriptures Yea verely but such heretikes as denyed certeine scriptures and peruerteth the rest by their false interpretations Such are the Protestantes sayeth Martial for Luther denyeth the Epistle to the Hebrues the Apocalipse the Epistle of S. Iames and S. Iude. But Luther is not all Protestants neyther did Luther alwayes or altogether denye them Neither do the Protestantes affirme anye thing in matters of controuersie in their interpretations but the same is affirmed by writers of the most auncient and pure Church Martiall obiecteth that Christe sent not his disciples alwayes to the Scriptures but sometimes to the figge tree to the flowers of the fielde to the fowles of the ayre c. Paul alledgeth the heathen Poet also customs tradition And we also vse similitudes of Gods creatures and alledge custome and condition but so that the scripture be the onely rule of trueth whereto whatsoeuer in the worlde agreeth is true whatsoeuer disagreeth from it is false The traditions of the Apostles which by their writings wee knowe to be theirs we reuerently receiue not as mens traditions but as the doctrine of God for wee heare them euen as God Also we heare the voice of the Church admonishing vs if we giue offence Finally y e Patriarks Prophets Apostles EuaÌ„gelists Pastors and doctors we all reuerence and heare as the messengers of God but so that they approue vnto vs their sayings out of the worde of God and doctrine of Christ. Likewise we admit the writings of the fathers so farre as they agree with the writings of God and further to be credited they them selues required not The sayings of the doctors that Martiall citeth for the credite of old writers you shall finde satisfied in mine answere to Hoskins almost in order as they be here set downe for one Papist boroweth of another and fewe of them haue any thing of their owne reading The saying of Clemens is aunswered lib. 1. Cap. 8. Eusebius concerning Pâ—â— and Gregory and Hieronime Cap. 7. The sayâ—â—â— of Irenaeus and Athanasius that we ought to hauâ—â—course to the Apostolike Churches which reteine the doctrine of the Apostles against newe heresies as also of Tertullian to the like effect we acknowledge to be true but seeing the Church of Rome reteineth not the Apostolike doctrine at this day we deny it to be an Apostolike Church Therefore as many as build vppon it or vpon any auncient writers wordes which hath not the holy scriptures for his warrant as M. Cal. sayde buyldeth vpon an euill ground For if an Angell from heauen teach otherwise then the
after this discourse I wil referr the reader to mine answere to D. Sand. booke against images c1 13. or 12. after y e error of his print where Calfhil thinketh it not meete y t should be restrained to that whereof there is no precept in scripture nor they them selues yeld lawful cause Marti telleth him y t he must be restrained if he will be good Christian. For there is no precept in expresse scripture to beleue three persons one God in y e blessed Trinitie y e equalitie of substance of Christ with his father in his godhead c. The pertual virginitie of Marie y e keping of y e Sunday y e sacrament receiuing fasting y e baptisme of infants c. you see what an Atheist he is y t can find no more certaintie in y e scriptures for y e blessed Trinitie then for S. Maries virginitie for the godhed of Christ then for receiuing y e Cōmunion before other meates If Papistes haue no ground to their faith out of the scriptures yet we can proue what so euer is necessarie for vs to beleeue It he dalie vpō y e word expresse scripture either he answereth not to y e same thing wherof he is demanded or else he knoweth not y t an argument rightly concluded out of holy scripture is as good as y e very words of y e scripture as when I say if Peter beleued was baptized ergo he was saued is as true as these words whosoeuer beleueth is baptized shall be saued To y e second demand whether y e ancient fathers did attribute such vertue to the wagging of a finger y t the holy Ghost could be called downe y e diuell driuen away by it Mart. answereth it is most euident that as soone as praier is duly made the signe of the crosse made the holy Ghost according to the promise of Christ commeth downe sanctifieth c. and the diuel is driuē away This is Mart. euidence other reason he bringeth If he referre the promise and comming of the holy Ghost to prayer he playeth the palterer that being demanded of the crosse answereth of praier Otherwise let him shewe what promise Christ hath made to the signe of the crosse or to prayer with the signe of the crosse more then without it If he can not you may easily see his pouertie To the thirde whether they would haue refused the Church and sacraments for want of a crosse He beleeueth verily they would not for the sacraments lacketh not the vertue if the signe of the crosse be omitted yet the fault is great when the tradition of the Apostles is wilfully reiected Whether it be like they deliuered any needlesse or vnprofitable ceremonie let wise men iudge After this followeth a long and foolish dialogisme about the interpretation of Cyprians wordes What so euer the ministers of the sacraments be what so euer the handes are that dippe those that come to baptisme what so euer the brest is out of which the holy wordes proceede the authoritie of operation giueth effect to all sacraments in the figure of the crosse and the name which is aboue all names being called vpon by dispensers of the sacraments doth all Martial so scanneth these wordes as though M. Calfhil knewe not the difference betweene the power of God and the ministerie of man in the sacraments whiche Cyprian doth plainly distinguish in these wordes But to the purpose Cyprian seemeth to make the figure of the crosse a meane by which God worketh in the sacraments But in deede hee meaneth that all sacraments take their effect of the passion of Christ as a bare signe and token whereof they vsed the figure of the crosse and not as a meane whereby God worketh seeing it is confessed by Martial that the sacraments if the signe of the crosse be omitted lacke not their vertue An other foolish brable and vsherlike construing he maketh of Cyprians words de baptismo Verborum solemnitas sacri inuocatio nominis signa attributa institutionibus Apostolicis sacerdotum ministerijs visibile sacramentum celebrant For reprouing Master Calfhil for translating signa attributa institutionibus apostolicis signes attributed to the institutions of the Apostles he teacheth him to conster signes attributed by the Apostolicall institutions through the ministerie of the priestes Wherein I maruell that such an auncient student will nowe suffer the word attributa to goe without a datiue case which I thinke he would not haue done in his pettite schoole at Winchester But if I might be bolde vnder y e correction of such a grounded grammarian to conster the lesson ouer againe I would giue the Latine this English The solemnitie of wordes and inuocation of the holy name and the signes appointed by the institutions of the Apostles for the ministerie of the priestes doth make the visible sacramēt And what be those signes By M. Martials leaue the elements as water breade and wine But then M. Grindal whom I laugh to see this wise Dialogue maker to bring in swearing once or twise in this deuised talke as though out Bishops vsed that veine as commonly as Popish prelats M. Grindal I say must send me to Saint Anthonies schoole bicause the elements of the sacraments be of Christes owne institution and not of his Apostles wherfore those signes must be other goodly ceremonies and the signe of the crosse must not be lest But if Martial euer were a scholler in that schoole or any other of any value he might haue learned long agoe that institutio signifieth not onely the first beginning of an ordinance but also a teaching or doctrine and so doth Cyprian meane that by the doctrine of the Apostles y e Priestes are appointed to vse those signes which if Martials Vshership will not admit Cyprian in telling what maketh y e visible sacramēt hath left out the principal part thereof namely the element and that which in deede in it is onely visible for the solemnitie of wordes and inuocation are audible rather then visible But in this foolish Dialogue is cited Iustinus Apol. 2. to proue that the olde Fathers vsed the signe of the crosse in all sacraments Iustinus Martyr saith he in the place of M. Grindal talking of the crosse biddeth vs viewe in our mindes and consider with reason all thinges that are in the worlde and see whether sine haec figura administrentur they may be done without this signe How like it is that M. G. shold say Iustinus biddeth vs when he biddeth y e Gentiles I leaue to speake of But that he speaketh of our sacramentes how will Martiall prooue When both he speaketh to the Heathen and of Heathenishe customes and ceremonies or els ciuill and naturall matters As of sayling plowing digging and all handie craftes whose tooles had some figure of the crosse in which the Gentiles did so fondely abhorre and despise Christ for it Whereas it was to be found euen in the shape of man in the trophees and standerdes
serue their God Deut. 27. 3. But as for images and pillers he vtterly forbad them to set vp any for any vse of religion Deut. 12. 1. 16. ver 2. The ninth Article What commoditie euery Christian man hath or may haue by the signe of the Crosse. Whereas M. Calfhil detesteth the Idolatrous councell of Nice the 2. by the example of Ambrose who abhorred the hereticall councell of Ariminum Martiall willing to iustifie y t rable of Idolators assembled at Nice wold shew great difference not only between the councels but also betwene him Ambrose saying y t he was a catholike bishop acknowledging obedience subiection to the Popes holynes As though the bishop of Rome in his time either required such obedience subiection or y ◠Ambrose acknowledged any But concerning that assembly of Nice and y e authoritie thereof how they determined contrary to the worde of God not onely in the matter of hauing and worshipping of images but also in other things I referre y e reader to mine answer vnto M. Sanders booke of images Cap. 15. or 14. Of all y t M. Calfhill saith against that councel of Nice Martial chooseth but one saying of Germanus to defend wherin he picketh two quarels against M. Calfhil one y t he should misvnderstand the saying of Germanus as though he meant y t grace were dispensed by Images where he sayth an image is a figuring of holy vertue dispensation of grace But if grace be not dispensed by images whether Germanus said so or no I pray you to what purpose are they set vp in the churches or what profit may a Christian man haue by the signe of the crosse when Martial denyeth y t any grace is dispensed by images The seconde quarel he picketh is y t M. Calfhill denyeth y ◠the vertues of saints can be seen in their images which could not be seene in their persons Martial sayth this reason condemneth the scripture as well as images for the ynke and paper hath no mynde or sense to hold the power of Christ vertue of the Apostles more then images haue As though the scripture were nothing but ynke paper or as though y t all things y ◠may be learned vnderstood by hearing may be discerned by the eye which conceiueth only bodily shapes of things cannot attain to see faith holines vertue c. wherof no images can be made When M. Calfhill sayeth that the image of Mars or S. George Venus or the mother of Christ cannot be discerned asunder Martial hath nothing to reply but that we must not suppose to finde any images among the Christians but of Christ his saintes so that images be wise bookes which cannot teache their schollers what or whereof they are but they must learne of the common opinion how to esteeme of them That images be teachers of pride auarice wantonnesse c. as the Prophet sayeth they are the doctrine of vanitie lyes Abac. 2. Martiall sayth blasphemously y t images giue no more occasion of vices then the holy scriptures of which some wicked men take occasion of dronkennes whoredome vsury c. But seeing the scripture directly plainly condēneth al these other vices as occasion is giuē by thē howsoeuer any is taken by vngodly persons whereas images which teach no goodnes but being gorgeously whorishly decked with golde precious stones otherwise then the saintes delighted euen as in holy scripture they are counted as stumbling blocks so they teach men vainly affected to delight in such things as they see to please the saints But Martiall sayeth that gylded images make men thinke of the ioyes of heauen O ridiculous fantasie They may sooner make men thinke of the vanitie of the worlde to delight in it But when the holy ghost by y e mouth of his Prophets hath determined that images are the doctrine of lying vanitie it were lost labour to dispute any longer what good thinges they can teache Ier. 10. ver 8. Abac. 2. ver 18. The examples of Ezechias Iosias Salomon he sayth are brought to no purpose against images amōgest Christians As though it were more lawfull for Christians then for Israelites to commit idolatrie But y ◠Christians saith he direct their hearts offer their prayers to God therfore there is no mistrust of idolatry amongest them Why Martiall haue not y e Papistes in England made do they not yet still in other places make vowes to the images that are in such a place and such a place Do they not trauaile thither and offer vp both prayers and sacrifice of candels money Iewels and other things vnto the Images Haue not your idols giuen aunswer haue they not wagged their heades and lips c. O shamelesse dogges blasphemous idolaters The Lord so deal with you as you know in your own consciences y ◠the ignorant people haue made their prayers euen to the stockes stones thinking them to haue a life diuinitie in them and yet you say there is no mistrust of idolatrie lest you should be driuen by exāple of Ezechias to destroy break your images although otherwise they were not against Gods cōmandment but euen made by his appointment as y e brasen Serpent was That fond quarell of yours that Salomon was not abused by images but by women I leaue to women to laugh at your vanity when they reade that by women he was brought to be an idolater and worshipper of images And euery childe that readeth Chrysostome Hom. 54. in 8. Tom. can vnderstand that although occasioned by obstinate Iewes yet he speaketh generally of al obstinat minds whether they be professors of Christianity or no. Animo desperato c. There is nothing worse thē a desperate mind although he see signes although miracles be wrought yet he standeth still in the self same frowardnesse For an obstinate sinner that hath professed Christianitie is no more moued with miracles and the signe of the crosse then a Iewe or Pharao was It hath more colour but not more trueth that Athanasius ascribeth not all effectes of conuersion of wicked men c. wholy and solie to the faith of Christe when he saith who hath done this c. but the faith of Christ and signe of the crosse Martial confesseth that faith is able to do it w tout the crosse but y ◠God would haue y ◠signe of the crosse common with faith if ye aske in what scripture God hath reuealed this will he hath nothing to say Only he denieth M. Calfhils exposition of Athanasius that the signe of y e crosse was ioined to faith not as a fellow worker but as a witnesse signe of y ◠faith against the Gentiles bicause he hath neither scripture Doctor nor Councel for it Wherin he lieth shamefully for y e scripture shewing y ◠faith onely as y e instrumēt by which we apprehend Gods mercy our
vpon y e crosse yet saith he not that she worshipped the crosse Ambrose saith of Helena that when she found y e crosse she worshipped the king not the tree for that is an heathenish error a vanitie of vngodly persons wherfore if Hierome or any other father should teach vs to worship the crosse as an idol we might well say to him auoyd Sathan But Martial least he should seeme wearie of wrangling scoffeth at M. Cal. for talking of a wodden tree as though the matter of a thing might not be named but where there is difference of matter Why say we then an earthly or fleshly man if we may not say a woodden tree by Martials philosophie least men should thinke we talke of watrie and fishy men I had not thought to haue named Martials terme of Gentlemens recognisances of Dragon Eagles c. vsed in this Article but that he is so captious to take exceptions to M. Cal. termes himselfe being a lawier to trip in a terme of law That seruice and worship do so concur together that the one can not be w tout the other Martial granteth although he think M. Cal. can bring no scripture Doctor nor Councel for it when he bringeth the saying of Christ. Matt ◠4. But when he inferreth that we must serue God only therfore we must worship God only Mart. bringetl◠instāce of ciuil seruice worship of parents when our sauiour Christ speaketh onely of religious worship which the diuell required to be giuen him not as God but as the distributer of all the kingdomes of the world vnder God That Angels are inferiour to Christ which worship him and are not worshipped againe Martiall saith it is an addition vnto S. Paul bicause in all that Epistle we are not forbidden to worship Angels but where he proued before that God only is to be worshipped and the Angel refuseth to be worshipped of Iohn Apoc. 19. vers 10. 22. vers 8. who was not so madd to worship him as God but as an excellent creature what addition can this be to the sense and meaning of the Apostle especially when he addeth immediately that they are all ministring spirites appointed to minister for them that shall inherite saluation They are appointed of God to serue they are not set vppe to be serued and worshipped Their honour and delight is that God only may be serued and honoured Out of Damascen he excuseth their worshipping of the crosse for that they worship not y e matter as wood copper c. but the figure as if it were lesle idolatrie to worship an accident then a substance The honour which Peter refused to receiue of Cornelius was not such as became the minister of God and therefore was reproued by Peter without counterfetting of humilitie the other examples that Martiall bringeth of ciuill worship done vnto Dauid by Abigail and Nathan be cleane out of the purpose Concerning the worship of Angels I haue spoken immediately before Martial slaundereth S. Iohn that he would haue worshipped the Angles as God The conclusion of this argument he thinketh worthy to be hissed at Angels may not be worshipped ergo much lesle the crosse What shall we say to such a Chrysippus as alloweth not the argument a maioribus The obiection of the Cherubims y e brasen serpent y e oxen and other images in the Temple you shall finde answered cap. 5. or 4. of my confutation of D. Sanders booke of images The seuenteene authorities brought by M. Calfhil against the worshipping of images Martiall will aunswere if he can and first he denieth that Clemens speaketh of crosses crucifixe c. but of the images of the Gentiles In deede in his dayes the true Christians had no such images that he should speake of them But consider his reasons that he maketh against the worshipping of heathenish images and they serue also to condemne the worship of Popish images The fables of the image of Christes face that he gaue to Veronica and sent to Algarus is good draffe for such swine as delight in idolatrie But Martiall thinketh that as our eares call vpon vs to bowe our knees at the name of Iesus so doe the eyes at the sight of the crucifixe but he must vnderstand that we worship not the sound of the name of Iesus rebounding in the ayre but the power the maiestie and authoritie of Iesus we acknowledge and honor not called vpon by the sound of the name of Iesus but by the voyc◠of the Gospell to which the idol of the crucifixe hath no resemblance neither is it a lawfull meane to strirre vp our remembrance bicause it is forbidden of God Where Saint Paul saith that Christ was described or painted vnto the Galathians we must either say that the passion of Christ was painted in a table or else they caried the image of the crosse of Christ rent and torne in their mindes If they might carrie an image in their mindes why might they not haue it faire painted in a table speake Master Calfe aunswer if you can O mightie Martiall withdrawe your grimme countenance a while and giue him leaue to gather his wittes together First he saith that Saint Paul speaketh of neither of both your images but of the effect and fruite of the death of Christe which was so liuely described before them that they ought not to haue sought any thing more to the sufficiencie of his redemption and their saluation Secondly although the sense of hearing be appointed of God Rom. 10. to instruct faith yet he findeth not the sense of seeing and especially of images which God hath forbidden admitted to be a mouer to Christian deuotion or worship of God and therefore there is no like reason that as the storie may be caried in remembrance so the image may be painted and set vp in the Church to be worshipped The iniunction of kneeling at the communion intendeth no worship of the breade and wine more then of the table the cuppe the booke the deske the wall c. before which the people kneele and therefore it hath nothing like to your kneeling before the crosse which is not only before it but also to it to worship it But you thinke you haue an argument to choake vs of the ceremonie of swearing vpon a booke seeing swearing is a kinde of adoration But syr we sweare not by the booke as you Papistes doe we call God only to witnesse the booke is but an externall indifferent ceremonie and that rather ciuill then ecclesiasticall whereas adoration of GOD by images is prohibited by Gods lawe Againe we giue no honour at all to the booke as you do to your images That Clemens alloweth the honour giuen to man as to the image of GOD we allowe very well bicause man is a true image of GOD your blockes and stockes be all false and counterfet images To Clemens Alexandrinus Irenaeus and Tertullian he maketh the same aunswere that they speake only of heathenish