painted-vaile Theodosius commanded the image of our sauiour to be taken downe where so euer it should be found This sentence of M. Iewels he will confute And first concerning the examples of Ezechias and Epiphanius he will not say one word more then he hath said before cap. 3. cap. 4. Sauing that hee affirmeth Ezechias brake downe but one image that was abused and left the Cherubims the altar the temple which were obscure images of christ And therfore he thinketh if som one image of theirs that hath chanced to be abused were broken by this example yet all the rest should stand But if it please his wisedome to read the historie better he shall find that Ezechias destroyed all images that were forbidden of god As for the Cherubims were made by Gods appointment the altar and the temple were no images Finally what image is there in the Popish Church but it hath bene abused to grosse idolatrie To the lawe of Theodosius he saith it is both misreported and misse Englished Misreported bicause the Emperour ment such honour to the crosse that he would not haue it lye on the ground whereof how true or likely it is we haue spoken before in the 13. Chapter whither also M. Sander referreth vs. It is misse Englished he saith in translating tolli to be taken downe which signifieth to be taken vp I haue answered before that tolli signifieth generally to be taken away without respect of vp or downe And yet bicause M. Sander and his fellowe Papistes thinke they haue taken Maister Iewell in such a great fault for Englishing tolli to be taken downe they shewe I can not tell whether more spightfull malice or grosse ignorance or ridiculous captiousnesse For tolli doth signifie as wel to be taken downe as to be taken vp For else howe shall we English these words in the nineteene of Saint Iohns Gospel Rogauerunt Pilatum vt frangerentur eorum crura tollerentur They desired Pilate that their legges might bee broken and that they might be taken downe Likewise Ioseph desired Pilate Vt tolleres corpus Iesu that hee might take downe the body of Iesus But the 73. Canon of the sixt Councell of Constantinople doth confirme this interpretation of M. Sander as he supposeth and the reading of this lawe in Iustinianâ— Code Which Canon bicause he not onely choppeth into three pieces but also displaceth euery one of them omitting that which sheweth the true sense of the Canon I will set it downe word for word as it is Cum crux viuifica illud salutare nobis ostenderit nos omne studium adhibere oportet vt â—iper quam ab antiquo lapsu saluari sumus cum qui par est honorem hebeamus Vnde mente sermone sensu adorationeÌ„ ei tribuentes crucis figuras quae nonnullis in solo ac pauimento fuent câ—â—nino deleri iubemus Nâ— incedentium conculcatione victoriae nobis tropeaeuns iniuria afficiatur Qui secus secerit excommunicâ—â—i decernimus For as much as the quickening crosse hath shewed vnto vs that sauing health it behoueth vs to vse all diligence that to it by which we are saued from the olde fall we giue that honour which is due Wherefore giuing reuerence vnto it both in minde in worde and in sense we commaund that the figures of the crosse which of some men are made in the ground and pauement be vtterly put out or taken away least the trophee of our victorie by treading vpon of them that walke about be iniuried He that shall doe otherwise we decree that he be excommunicated Concerning the authoritie of this 73. Canon first I must say the trueth that it was not made by the sixt Councell which either made but nine Canons or none at all The second Councell of Nice liking some of these 102. Canons saith they met againe foure or fiue yeare after in the time of Iustinian and made these Canons But how so euer it was it was not of that Councel nor of that authoritie but of a later time when imagerie beganne to be more esteemed Nowe to the purpose I say this Canon doth not helpe the vnderstanding of that auncient lawe which was made almost three hundreth yeares before to be meant of crosses on the ground only which needed not to haue bene forbidden in this Canon if the former lawe of Theodosius and afterward registred by Iustinian had bene made onely against crosses on the ground but the execution of that lawe might haue beene required Nowe touching the sense of this Canon it is this they did so much honour the death of Christe which they call the quickening crosse that they would not haue the figure of the woodden crosse to be troden vnder foote This was their iudgement about 700. yeares after christ The later age was more superstitious and brake out into open idolatrie And whereas M. Sander cauelleth at M. Iewels translation of Signum saluatoris for the image of our Sauiour which saith he is the signe of the crosse he affecteth too great a tyrannie in the Latine tong that wil haue no mans translation stand but his owne I am sure signum is often taken for an image and in this place none but a froward quareller would take it otherwise and for the signe of the crosse there is no probable coniecture that it should be so taken in this place Hee misliketh not the order taken by the Councell of Mentz that images abused should be altered or taken away but he will haue the question generall whether it be expedient to permit images to be honoured or no in which question the daunger of idolatrie must be compared with the profite of images the daunger hee counteth small the profite great And considering the question at this day hee counteth there is no daunger at all neither was there euer any great daunger and this he will proue by nine reasons The first the newe Gospellers haue preuailed so much with their doctrine of images that it is not lightly possible they should be honoured too much The diuell yet confesseth that the doctrine of the Gospell hath chased away idolatrie in most places I would to GOD it had in all The 2. in the most Popish times the people seeing the Sextan sweepe copwebs from the images and putting thâ— crosse so homely vnder his cloake might see a great difference betweene the reuerence giuen to images and the honour giuen and due to the sacrament of the altar As though the Priest also did not sometimes carrie the Pixe in his bosome with the consecrated cake in it and sometime they might as well see him burne his breaden Gods as the Sextan sweeping copwebs from the golden idolls and yet none of these were euer able to keepe the people from idolatrie 3 It is lesse euill to suffer some one to doe amisse then to falsifie the whole lawe and right it selfe And here againe he opposeth the lawe of idolatrous nations against the lawe
Whether the same degree of honour be due to the Images of Christ or of his Saintes which is due to Christ and to the Saintes themselues Three things are to be considered in an artificial image M. Iewels forging is detected Doulia onely cōmeth to Christ by his image M. Iewell alledgeth wordes out of a booke which is forged The Churche honoureth not the image for his owne sake M.S. confesseth this pointe to be in controuersie betweene the Catholikes themselues But yet he saith it is a question of phylosophie rather then of diuinitie which the church hath not determined As though the churche had any thing to do to determine questions of phylosophie or as though a question about the true worship of God were not a question of diuinitie His sophisticall reasons on both sides are superfluous to repeat seeinge we take neither of both parts but denie that any kinde of religious honour is to be giuen to images yet briefely I will runne ouer the contentes of the chapter Three things he saith are to be considered in an artificial image the matter the forme and the representation The two former deserue no honour in religion but the representation onely The image as a representation is considered either as a part from the trueth and then it hath a lesse honour thē the trueth or els together with the trueth and then it must haue all one honour with the trueth And then he maketh the question this whether as his minde is in one instant mooued and caried by the meane of the image to the remembrance of the trueth so the honor of both be all one or no But if he were in the schooles at Cambridge the boyes would tell him that there can bee no mouinge in one instant because in euerie moouinge there must bee the marke from whence and the marke whereunto the moouinge is Neuerthelesse hee aunswereth this question with a doughtie distinction that the honour giuen to the image and to Christe is either the same in number or the same in kinde or degree And his opinion is that it is the same in number but not in degree And of this aunswere he maketh the seuenth generall councell auctor Actione 4. Where Iohannes vicegerent of the East saith Non sunt duae adorationes sed vna adoratio imaginis primi exēplaris cuius est imago There are not two adorations but one adoration of the image and of the first examplar whereof it is an image And here he raileth against M. Iewel for falsifying and forging in translating duae adorationes two sortes of worshipping and exemplifyinge his doctrine by Latria and Doulia whereof Iohannes meant not but the contrarie is taught before in the same Action How impudent and shamelesse the cauill of Master Sander is I haue shewed before when I rehearsed howe Constantius bishoppe of Constantia in Cypres affirmeth that he woulde giue the same honour to images that he did to the holy trinitie that giueth life vnto whome al the rest did assent So that M. Sanders opinion is contrary to the determination of the councel For he holdeth that not Latria but Doulia only commeth to Christ by his images By which opinion you see how greatly Christ is promoted that in steed of Latria a Diuine honour which they confesse to be due to him he must be content with the lower degree of honor by his image because the image can receiue nor cary no greater But if the image be neither a receiuer nor a carier Christ must lose all his honour as he doth indeed which is that way offered Yet saith Master Sander doth not his image any more hinder his honour then Sainte Paule doth For when I honour S. Paule for Christs sake no greater honour then Doulia commeth to Christ Verely Master Sander how it is when you honour S. Paule I knowe not but when I honour him for Christes sake I honour not him but Christ with Diuine honour as the onely author of those giftes of his spirite by whiche he is preferred before other men And where you say M. Iewel alledgeth wordes out of a book of Carolus Magnus written against that Idolatrous synode of Nice which is forged you speake not more peremtorily then falsly and perniciously For what reason haue you to prooue that booke to be forged forsooth you aske howe could Carolus Magnus write such a book which built so many churches and monasteries As though Churches and monasteries could not bee builded but by an idolater Yea which so diligently obeyed the B. of Rome which crowned him As though the bishop of Rome crowned him Emperour to be his slaue and an Idolater who left so many reliques at Aquisgraine and a little image of our Ladie with other Iewels Paraduenture as truely as the image of Diana came to the Ephesians from Iupiter Who caused the French men to conforme themselues in their Church song to the Romanes But where finde you that hee caused them to conforme themselues in image worshipping to the Grecians Finally a booke of such smal credit that neither the librarie whence it was taken nor towne where it is printed nor the man who printed it is named These be weightie reasons to discredit the booke as though it were necessarie that euery booke must come out of a librarie some haue ben preserued in priuate studies some haue beene closed vp in walles The place and name of the printer is not expressed for that it is like to haue bee printed where it might not be suffered to be solde But the very stile argueth it is not forged in our time and I haue before it a testimony of Mattheus West-monasteriensis which was writen about 200. yeares agoe that such a booke was written against that councell by Albinus or Alcuinus and presented to the French King Carolus whose name it beareth not perhappes written by him but by his commaundement and authority published After this he discourseth vpon Thomas of Aquines opinion which holdeth that diuine honour which they cal datria is due to the image of Christ which if it be an errour saith maister Sander it is an errour in Phisophie which to affirme is a most shamelesse absurditie Last of all he concludeth against S. Thomas that a lesse degree of honour is dewe to images then to the paterne affirming that the church honoreth not the image for his own sake for no man is taught to beleeue in images or to cal them his gods or to do sacrifice to them What say you M. Sander who teacheth pilgrimage to images doth not your churche And how can they pray to thē if they do not beleeue in them Who teacheth them to cal an image Christ that is their lord and God but euen you which defend images to be honoured by the names that they haue of the things whereof they be images Therefore when you call an ymage Christ you call it God and Lord sauiour and redeemer The image of the Trinitie
was to come nowe Christe is come To come and is come are diuerse wordes but the same Christe Let M. Heskins nowe go and saye that Manna was a figure onely of Christe and not Christ him selfe to the beleeuers let him saye that our sacraments in substance are not all one with theirs Finally that we eate Christ corporally which eate him none otherwise then they did before he had a bodie For in all these Augustine is directly contrarie to him though he be not ashamed to abuse his name as though he were of his opinion Nowe followeth Oecumenius a writer farre out of the compasse of the challenge But what sayeth he in 1. Cor. 10. Comederunt nempe Manna c. They haue eaten Manna as wee the bodie of christ They haue dronke the spirituall water flowing out of the rocke or stone as wee the bloud of Christ. Maister Heskins inferreth that the fathers did eate Manna and drinke the water corporally therefore wee eate and drinke the bodie and bloud of Christe corporally By the same Logike he may conclude the fathers did eate manna visibly and sensibly therefore wee eate the bodie of Christ visibly and sensibly Or else as the wordes of Oecumenius sounde wee eate the bodie of Christe inuisibly so the fathers did eate Manna inuisibly But euery man that hath but halfe an eye seeth these grosse inconsequences and yet they are as good as Maister Heskins argument and illation Oecumenius therefore meaneth that as Manna and the water were their sacraments so we haue ours whose spirituall substance is the bodie and bloude of Christ the earthly substance is bread and wine and Manna and the water were to them sacramentes of the same Christ whome wee receiue And whereas M. Heskins sayeth that no catholike doctour teacheth the sacrament to be only a figure we agree with him for we hold him accursed that compteth it to be onely a figure or a bare figure as he doeth often most iniuriously charge vs The rest of the Chapter is spent in vaine repetitions of sentences collections before set downe and aunswered The ninth Chapter proceedeth in the declaration of the same by Haimo Theophylact. Although neither Haimo nor Theophylact speake more for M. Hesk. then the former auctors yet because they are but burgesses of the lower house which whether they giue their voyces with the bill or against it it shall passe neuer the sooner I will spende no time in aunswering their authorities They are both but late writers The patches of Chrysostome Ambrose Cyprian are often aunswered at large in their proper places But whereas he challengeth the spirit of vnitie vnto the Papistes and chargeth the Protestants with the spirite of diuision it is well knowen that in the cheefest articles of religion we agree God be thanked better then the Papistes do who haue not yet agreed whether the Pope or the counsell bee to bee followed in matters of faith so that they disagree in the verie foundation of their religion Finally where he chargeth vs with the heresies of the Anabaptistes we may be bolde to charge him with the spirite of Sathan who was a lyer a slaunderer of Gods Saintes from the beginning The tenth Chapter proceedeth vpon the same text by Ruperâ—us Rich. Holkot and endeth with Gagnegus If a man should vouchesafe to admitt such authorities as these there should be no end of quarrelling I am content to yelde them to Maister Heskins and fiue hundreth more such as they be as for the sayings of Ambrose and Cyrill which he enterlaâ—eth they are answered in other places although that of Ambrose be flat against him the other of Cyrill nothing for him The eleuenth Chapter declareth the prophesies of the sacrament vnder the names of Manna the water of the rocke These Prophesies hee imagineth to be conteined in 77. Psalme 104. Psalme which as the whole Psalmes declare to them that read them be praises and thankesgiuings for Gods benefites past and not prophesies of things to come The first sentence is this Hee commaunded the clowdes aboue and opened the gates of heauen And he rayned to them Manna to eate and gaue them the bread of heauen So man did eate the bread of Angels Vppon this text he citeth Hierome Sed fantem c. But the same stone also sheweth out the founteine of baptisme For out of his side when he was striken came foorth water and bloud which figured baptisme and martirdome Here he maketh the water a figure of baptisme and martirdom not of the bloud of Christe in the sacrament and much lesse a prophesie except Maister Heskins be so madde as to make a figure and a prophesie all one But Hierom sayeth more Panem Câ—â—â—i dedit c. He gaue them the bread of heauen man did eate the breade of Angels Hee him selfe gaue meate vnto man which saide I am the breade of life which came downe from heauen he that shall eate of this bread shall liue for euer This is so farre from a prophesie of the time to come that hee declareth that God did feede the Israelites with the fleshe of Christe which is the breade of life that came downe from heauen figured in Manna being the foode of all the Saintes of God from the beginning of the worlde as is moste manifest by the verie next wordes following in Hierome which Maister Heskins hath craftily left out Ex hoc enim pane coeli Sancti reficiuntur Angeli For of this breade of heauen both the Saintes are fedd and the Angels Where note also that hee sayth the Angels to be refreshed with this breade of life euen aâ— the Saintes are but the Angels eate not the fleshe of Christe corporally therefore neither do the Saintes Finally Hierome in that place is so farre from a corporall manner of eating and drinking that he writeth thus Praestita sunt haec Haebries sed modò in ecclesia Prophetis Apostolis praecipitur vt nobis verbum praedicationis quo anima spiritualiter pascatur annuncient These things were perfourmed to the Hebrues but nowe also in the churche it is commaunded to the Prophets and Apostles that they declare to vs the worde of preaching wherewith our soule is spiritually fedd In these wordes hee maketh Manna and the water figures of the preaching of Gods worde which is a spirituall foode of our soules Nowe vppon the other texte Psalm 104. Hee satisfied them with the breade of heauen Saint Hierome sayeth For as they were refreshed by Manna rayning from heauen so wee at this day are refreshed receiuing the bodie of the Lambe He brake the rocke and the waters flowed For that precious corner stone was striken and brought foorth vnto vs vnmeasurable fountaines which washe away our errours and water our drynesse Here is as before a comparison of Gods benefites towarde them and towarde vs which he seemeth to make equall as they were in deede in substance and
his Epistle to the Romaines and before Peter also came thither as it is plaine by the Epistle to the Galath cap. 2. And therefore seeing the church of Rome was first founded neither by Peter nor Paule she hath nothing to brag of their preheminence which many churches planted by the Apostles might with more equitie challenge As for the bequething of Peter and Paule that hee speaketh of when he can shew vs a copie of their Testament we wil shape him an other answere 24 That there were many martyrs and confessours at Rome in the primitiue churche the cause was the great multitude of people in that church by reason of the frequens of the imperial city But this proueth no prerogatiue of ancestrie ouer other churches That so many of the first bishops suffred death for Christs cause although it may be doubted of the number of 30. vpwarde because no auncient writer doth testifie it it was by reason they were neerest vnto the greatest persecutors which were the emperors of Rome But this proueth not the supremacy of the bishop of Rome before the bishops of other cities who haue likewise suffred death for Christ. 25 It is vtterly false that he affirmeth that no faithful people of any citye had euer so notable witnes as the church of Rome of S. Paul your faith is preached in the whol world In which translation he falsifieth the words of S. Paule for he saith your faith is reported or commended in all the world not that it was preached for thē an vnsufficient faith should haue bin preached which needed the iustification of that Epistle And whereas M.S. saith that Cyprian saith the Apostle spake it prophetically not onely in respect of their faith present but also of thē that should folow it is to smal purpose except M.S. can proue that the Romanes now do hold the same faith which S. Paul S. Cyprian commended in his felow bishop Cornelius and the Romanes of his time And as for as notable and a more notable testimonie of an other people then the Romanes read the beginning of the 2. Thessalon capit 1.1 Collossians cap. 1. 26 Whereas he saith that S. Hiero. proueth the faith of the Romaines which Saint Paule praised to haue remayned in his dayes because none other people did so deuoutly visite the sepulchres of the martyres which the protestantes counte for infidelitie rather then faith he sheweth himselfe to bee an impudent wrangler The words of Hierom be these In prooem lib. 2. in Epist. ad Gal. 3. Vultis scire ô Paula Eustochiū quomodo Apostolus vnam quāque prouinciā suis proprietatibus denotarit Vsque hodie cadem vel virtutum vestigia permanent vel errorum Romanae plebis laudatur fides Vbi alibi tanto studio frequentia ad ecclesias martyrum sepulchra concurritur vbi sic ad similitudinem caelestis tonitrui Amen reboat vacua idolorū templa quatiuntur Non quod aliam habeant Romani fidem nisi hanc quam omnes Christi ecclesie sed quod deuotio in eis maior sit simplicitas ad credendum Rursum facilitatis superbię arguuntur Will you know ô Paula Eustochium how the Apostle hath described euerye prouince in their owne properties Euen to this daye the steppes remaine either of vertues or of errors The faith of the Pope of Rome is praised Where is there such concourse any where els with so great desire and frequence vnto the churches and sepulchres of martyres Where doth Amen so rebound like to heauenly thunder the emptye temples of Idoles so shaken with it Not that the Romaines haue any other faith but the same which al the churches of Christ haue but because in them is greater deuotion and simplicitie to beleeue likewise they are reproued for too much facility pride These words declareth that Hierome speaketh of no Popish pilgrimage but of resorting to the churches which were builded vpō the sepulchres of the martyrs therefore called the memories of the martyrs Secōdly what he meaneth by faith namely deuotion simplicitie of beleeuing not doctrine Thirdly that the Romaines reteined aswell the vices as the vertues of their auncesters But nowe they reteine onely the vices 27 The Papists liue vnder a visible head but the same is Antichrist the protestants vnder an inuisible head which is christ The Pope fitteth in Rome the mother of al abhominations hauing nothing to brag of but the vertues of such as haue dwelled there before him and no good qualitie of his owne Yet the title of vniuersall shepherd M.S. denieth vnto him although he most arrogantly do vsurpe it Howbeit properly M.S. saith he ought not to haue it 28 Therfore the bishops of Rome before Gregory the first refused the same title as prophane proude which belongeth onely to christ Yet the councel of Chalcedō offred it to Pope Leo the first but he refused it as slanderous This being cōfessed by M S. chuse whether you wil say the councell did erre in offring the same or Pope Leo in refusing or the latter Popes in vsing the same 29 Gregorie the first in deede tooke vppon him the humble style of the seruaunt of the seruaunts of God as M.S. saith but his successors vsing that title for a formality hauing bene content to be called Lord of Lords and God aboue all gods and our lord God the Pope and the most holiest and an hundreth more blasphemous titles beside treading on the Emperours necke such like examples of prophane pride as Nero Heliogabalus no Dioclesian euer shewed the like 30 It is not to be proued that he saith there were 4. Patriarks at the beginning nor that the Pope of Rome was chiefe For the councell of Nice Canon 6. doth make the patriarke of Alexandria and the rest equall with the bishop of Rome Although afterward the bishops of Rome as they were cōmonly ambitious when persecution was staied by prerogatiue of the imperiall citie challenged a kinde of primacie yet not of authoritie but of order And whereas he sayeth other Patriarches were preferred in respect of the affinitie they had with S. Peter it is false for the Patriarch of Constantinople was placed next to him of olde Rome because Constantinople was newe Rome the imperiall cittie Concil Constantinop Cap. 2. or after Garanza Cap. 5. That the Pope did erect patriarchal Seas at Aquileia at Senis it was not for that the other were infected with heresie but that they refused to acknowledge his Antichristian authoritie bought of Phocas the murtherer by Boniface the third for if his authoritie had bene so great as is pretended he would haue deposed those hereticall bishops and set vp Catholikes in their places rather then to haue spoyled the seates of their dignities for euer for the fault of the bishops 31 It is false that he sayeth neuer any bishop was so much esteemed as the bishop of Rome for Athanasius of Alexandria was more esteemed of the
godly then any bishop of Rome in his time Likewise when the Sea of Rome vsurped prerogatiue it was reiected by the Councell of Africa which decreed that none should appeale thither discouered the counterfaiting of the bishops of Rome Con. Mileuit Cap. 22. Conc. Aphrican Ep. ad Coelestin Likewise it was reiected of the church of Alexandria whereof great dissention arose Con Affric Cap. 68. That Irenaeus Tertullian Optatus Hierom Augustine Eugenius Theodoretus poynted to the church of Rome as to a witnesse of trueth it proueth her clearnesse from those heresies in their tymes but giueth her none authoritie ouer other churches nor yet maketh her a rule of trueth to all churches for then there needed none other arguments against heretikes but the authoritie of the church of Rome whereas the testimonie of that church was one of the weakest reasons they vsed and that least preuailed 32 That he affirmeth other cities to haue chosen Bishops of their owne tongue it is also true of Rome For he cannot shewe one Pope that was ignorant of the Latine tongue while it was spoken in Rome And not many I thinke not one ignorant of the Italian tongue since that time although they were borne in other countries Besides that it is the fondest reason that euer I heard one or other alledge that the Popes haue bene borne in diuerse countries therefore they are supreme heade of the church more then other bishops that were bishops in the countries where they were born and yet more foolish that speaking of Bishops of other tongues hee nameth so manye places all of one tongue As Syna Antioche Galile Ierusalem Bethelem which are all of one tongue Campania Thuscia Aquileia Pisa Genua Bononia Millaine Parma Rauenna which are all Italian Gascoyne Lorayne Sauoy Burgundie Rhemes Tholose which are all frenche Saxonie Bauier Hollande Alsaria Mastriche which are all duche Cappadocia Thracia Creta Sicilia Sardinia Athens Nicopolis which are all Greeke There remaineth Spaine which is in a manner Italian and last of all Englande and Affrick So that there are not past fiue or sixe diuerse tongues of so many places as hee hath alledged to bleare the eyes of foolish Papistes As if one shoulde saye the Bishops of Caunterburie haue beene borne some in Yorke shire some in Durham some in Chester some in London some in Norfolke some in Cambridge c. Some in Italie some in Greece some in Fraunce some in Wales some in Normandie therefore that churche of Caunterburie is the chiefe Sea in the worlde 33 The See of Rome in deed was verie forward in vsurping authoritie of a chiefe iudge ouer other churches as Victor in excommunicating the bishops of Asia about the celebration of Easter But they vtterly neglected his sentence yea and diuerse did not as Maister Sanders sayeth gently wish him not to deale so seuerely but sharpely rebuked him for his presumption and contention as Eusebius sayeth lib. 5. Cap. 25. Extant autem verba illorum qui victorem acriter reprehenderunt Equibus Irenaeus c. Their wordes are extant which sharply reprehended Victor of which number Irenaeus was one And whereas hee sayeth that Saint Cypriane desyreth Pope Stephanus to depose Martianus bishop of Arles in Fraunce it is false for hee exhorteth Stephanus beeing somewhat slacke against the Nouatians to write his letters vnto his fellowe Bishops in Fraunce as he him self oft had done that they woulde depose Martianus the heretike and suffer him no longer to insult ouer the churche which argueth the remissenes of Stephanus to doe that which was the charitable duetie of euerie bishop as Cyprian sheweth but proueth not his authoritie ouer all bishops That Felix the thirde deposed Aacarius bishop of Constantinople hee shewed the time of the full reuelation of Antichriste to bee at hande yet did hee it not of his owne authoritie but by authoritie of a Synode and afterwarde by a Synode restored him But Iustinianus the Emperour deposed two bishoppes of Rome Syluerius and Vigilius by his owne authoritie 34 That the bishop of Rome hath beene made the Committie of diuerse Councels to receiue the subscription of such as haue beene noted of heresies after their repentance it prooueth no superioritie in the worlde but a good opinion that those Councels had of his fidelitie 35 The letters of Leo to Flauianus and Theodosius proue not that the Patriarches Flauianus and Anatolius were commaunded to giue an accompt to the Bishop of Rome but rather Leo humbly desyred the Emperour Theodosius to commaunde a Synode to bee gathered in Italy because Flauianus had appealed not onely to the Bishop of Rome but to all the Bishopâ— of Italie Ep. 23. And that hee writ that Anatolius shoulde confesse his faith before hee were ordeined it was his good councell to the Emperour no commaundement to either of them Ep. 31. 36 It is false that all nations appealed to the Pope of Africa did excommunicate all them that so would or thought meete to appeale Concil Mileuit Ca. 22. Concil Aph. Ep. ad Coelest And although some appealed to the iudgement of the church or Bishop of Rome yet that proueth no generall authoritie The Councell of Sardike which M. Sanders citeth Can. 7. did moderate those appeales which had not bene lawfull if they perteined to the Bishop of Rome de iure of right Liberatus whom he citeth for the appeale of Athanasius affirmeth that the Councel of Chalcedon confirmed by the Emperor gaue no place to the contradiction of the Bishop of Rome nor his legates Cap. 13. which disproueth his supremacie more then any appeale can proue it As for the appeale of Athanasius if any were it was euer ruled by the Emperour who appointed him a synode to iudge his cause at Tyre Socrat. lib. 1. Cap. 28. Theodorete testifieth that after he was called to Rome by Iulius the bishop by the Emperour Constantius his commaundement his cause was referred to the councell of Sardica when he had first appealed to the Emperour Constans lib. 2. Cap. 4. He citeth Chrys. Ep. ad Innocentium to proue that he did appeale to the Bishop of Rome where there is no such matter Only he declareth how iniuriously he was dealt withal by meanes of Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria from whome he appealed not to the Bishop of Rome but to a Synode Of the appeale of Flauianus we haue spoken euen now by the confession of Leo himselfe Ep. 23. As for other appeales of later times they proue the ambition of the Romish bishops that would receiue them although of many they were misliked 37 That Gelasius affirmed bishops condemned by prouincial councels were restored by the Pope alone hee citeth his Epist. ad Faustum in which is no such matter yet if it were so I say it proueth nothing but the ambition of that See which before his time began to encrease toward a supremacie and not long after obteined that it sought for But from the beginning it was not so
The bishop of Rome bearing witnesse of him self for his owne aduauntage is not to be credited In that Epistle he sheweth that Acacius by Lyra was cōdemned according to the Councell of Chalcedon which was lawful not only for him but for any other Bishop to haue done in as much as he inuented no newe heresie but did communicate with an other heresie alreadie condemned in a Councell 38 In the third generall Councell holden at Ephesus there is mention that Cyrillus was President of the councell but not that hee was Lieuetenant of the Bishop of Rome although Euasius a late writer in comparison doth so suppose But the wordes of the Councel are these Denique Petrus Ioannes aequalis sunt ad alterutrum dignitatis propter quod Apostoli sancti discipuli esse monstrantur Peter and Iohn are of equall dignitie one with the other bicause they are shewed to be Apostles and holy Disciples This confession of the Councel maketh more against the Popes supremacie then the Lieuetenantship of Cyrillus to the Pope if it were true could proue for it 39 Maister Sander saith without proofe but of declining times almost 500. yeares after Christe and later that the See of Rome had Legates both ordinarie and extraordinarie throughout all Christendome which if it were true proueth no more his supremacie then that the King of Spaine hath dominion ouer all those countries where he hath Legates ordinarie and extraordinarie He citeth the seuenth Canon of the councel of Sardica which was that he might send a Priest from his side Which in deede was a restraint of his vsurped authoritie and not a confirmation or an enlargement thereof For the Canon is this That if any Bishop that was deposed by the Bishops of his owne countrie did appeale to the Bishoppe of the Church of Rome the Bishop of Rome should write to the Bishops of the next prouince to examine his cause and if the partie by his opportunitie should moue the Bishop of Rome the second time to be heard againe then he might send Presbyterum à latere an elder from his side one or more which either with the Bishops aforesaid should iudge and determine the matter or else leaue it wholy to the iudgment of the Bishops of the Prouince By this Canon the singular authoritie of the Romish Bishop is modestly excluded 40 The examples of Bishops Perigenes and Martinus translated by the Bishops of Rome in the declining times proueth not the perpetual supremacie of the Pope seeing by generall Councels al such translations haue bene forbidden in elder times Nic. c. 15. chalc c. 5. 41 The consent of the B. of Rome was not so necessarie to generall Councels but that they were held without his presence or his sending For concerning his personal presence he was not at any of the 4. first approued generall Councels neither any for him at the second of thē which was held at Constantinople where Nectarius Bishop of the citie was president Also the fourth of Chalcedon made the See of Constantinople equal with the See of Rome which although Leo Bishop of Rome disalowed yet did it take place as Liberatus testifieth Cap. 13. 42 Although the Bishop of Rome had his Legate in some prouinciall Councels yet it is great impudencie to say he had them in al. And such as then were present they bare no rule or preheminence but as the Legates of other Bishops Philippus and Asellius were at the Councell of Aphrica in which decrees were made against the supremacie of the Bishop of Rome and yet they subscribed cap. 92 43 That the Pope hath procured a fewe nations to be conuerted within these thousand or 900. yeares as England by Augustine Saxoni by Bonifacius c it can not excuse him from being Antichrist him selfe ▪ although M. Sander saith we account him to be but the forerunner of Antichrist For though Gregorie otherwise a ceremoniall and superstitious man was moued with zeale of Christes glorie to seeke the conuersion of as many as he could yet the Popes which followed after him in procuring the cōuersion of some countries rather by cruell warres then by preaching of the Gospell as Prusia Liuonia Lithuania c. sought their owne glorie and aduauntage vnder the colour of Christes religion and therefore were not diuided against Satan but ioyned with him in hypocrisie 44 As for the conuersion of the Infidels in the newe found landes is a newe found argument to proue the primacie of the See of Rome Like as the conuersion of Elias the Iewe by Pius 5. Many Iewes and some of greate learning as Emanuel Tremelius haue bene conuerted to the Gospel And one within this two yeares was baptized in London 45 That the See of Rome hath so long flourished like a Queene in worldly pompe it is the more like to the See and citie of Antichrist Apoc. 18. verse 7. And that the cities of the other Patriarches and their Bishops be oppressed with Infidels it letteth them not to be true Christians For Esaie 60. prophesieth not of worldly pompe but of the spirituall glorie of the Church which was as great before Constantius stayed the persecution as euer since 46 That no Bishop was euer so honoured of Princes Kings or Emperours as the Pope c it proueth him to be Antichrist and his Church the whore of Babylon Apo. 17. vers 2. 17. cap. 13. 16. 47 That the Frenchmen deposed their King Childericus by the Oracle of Pope Zacharie which discharged them of their lawful othe of obedience it proueth mightily the Pope to be Antichrist Peter saith Feare God honour the King 1. Pet. 2. 48 And much more that Pope Leo the third did transferre the Empire it selfe into the West For Peter commaunded obedience to be giuen to euery ordinance of man for the Lord whether to the King as to the most excellent or to those rulers that are sent of him 1. Pet. 2. 49 That Pope Gregorie the fift gaue an order for the election of the Emperour confirmeth our iudgement of the Pope to be Antichrist as also that Nicholas the first threatened the Emperour Michael the ouerthrowe of the Empire of the East whereof hee by his proud rebellion and disobedience and diuiding the West part from it was a cause 50 That the succession of the Bishops of Rome hath ben continued in histories with the reigne of Emperours and Kings it proueth in deede that the Church of Rome hath ben either very famous when it was gouerned of good Bishops or infamous when it was degenerated into Antichristian tyrannie but this proueth no more the authoritie thereof to be lawfull or the religion good then the succession of Heathen tyrants Emperours Kings great Turkes proueth their religion true or their vsurpation lawfull As for the light of worldly fame that M.S. boasteth of is spirituall darknesse and not the light of the Gospell which our Sauiour speaketh of Luke 5. No man lighteth a candle c.
witnesse and the Papistes wil not denie so many Schismes haue ben about election of their Popes But neerer to the matter Iulian the Apostata with the paganes pulled downe the image of Christ that was set vp in the streete of Caesarea Philippi in remembraunce of the miracle done vpon the woman that was healed of her issue of bloud not in the Church to be worshipped Wel he shewed his malice but he did no hurt to Christian religion This example hurteth not them that lawfully pul downe deface Images in the Church of Christ for Epiphanius before Iulian did so at Anablatha Epiph. epi. 34. But Iulianus did obiect vnto the Christians that they did worship the woode of the crosse when they painted Images therof on their foreheades and before their houses Hereof M. Sander gathereth that the Christians had a grauen image of Christe him selfe euen from his owne time in Paneade or Caesarea Philippi as images of the crosse before their houses for the image of Christe Eusebius testifieth it was set vp by the Heathen men and not by Christians Lib. 7. Cap. 18. Although it is not like that it was set vp in Christes time when it is manifest by Iosephus that the Iewes could not abide so much as the image of the Emperour or of his standerd the Eagle to be set vp among them The images of the crosses set before their doores declare they had not them and much lesse any other of Christ and his saintes in Churches which Iulian would not haue omitted to proue them woode worshippers and idolaters Cyrillus in deede defendeth these signes of crosses as better memorials of Christ and of his vertues then the Images of the Gentiles yet he defendeth not setting vp of crosses or any images in Churches creeping to them which is the filthie idolatrie of the Papists Iulian the vncle of this Apostata did sit vpon the vessels vsed at the communion in despight of our religion and was iustely plagued therefore Eustachius the heretike kept his conuenticles in priuate places he would not be ruled by his Bishop The protestants kepe open assemblies whē they are not hindred by persecution and are ordered by the Bishops Elders of their Church though they will not be obedient to the Hereticall Bishops of the Popishe Church The same Eustachius condemned the marriage of Priestes as the Papistes doe Ep. Con. Gangr Vigilantius iustly reproued the Christians for superstitious estimatiō of reliques which Hieronyme could not honestly defend for all his quarrelling To conclude Chrysostome complayneth of the iniurie done to him his church and the sacraments by barbarous souldiers Optatus of the like by the Donatistes Victor by the Arrians all these and an hundreth more that might be brought of like examples beeing actes of Infidels and Heretiques against true religion doe not proue but the commaundement of God must be executed against false religion by them who haue authoritie of God so to doe But now he commeth to answere our obiections and first the example of Epiphanius a godly bishop of Cyprus whose wordes I will first set downe as they are conteyned in an epistle of his to Iohn Bishop of Ierusalem Praeterea quod audini c. Moreouer whereas I heard that some men did murmur against me because that when we went together to the holie place whiche is called Bethel that there I might make a gathering with you after the Ecclesiasticall manner and was come to the village which is called Anablatha and had seene there as I passed by a candle burning and had inquired what place it was and had learned that it was a Churche and came into pray I found there a vale hanging at the doore of the saide Church steyned and painted and hauing the image as it were of Christe or of some Saint for I doe not well remember whose Image it was Therefore when I saw this thing that the Image of a man did hang in the Church of Christ contrarie to the authoritie of the scriptures I rent it and gaue councel to the keepers of that place that they should rather wrappe some dead poore man in it carry him to buriall in it And they contrariwise murmured said if he would haue rent it it had beene meete that he should haue giuen vs another vayle and haue changed it Which when I heard I promised that I would giue them one and send it shortly Now there was some stay in the meane time while I seeke to send them a very good vaile in steed of that. For I thought one should haue ben sent me out of Cypres But now I haue sent such a one as I could get And I pray you that you will commaunde the elders of that place to receiue this vale which we haue sent by this bearer And to charge them that here after no such vayles be hanged vp in the Church of Christ which are against our religion For it becommeth your honestie to haue such carefulnesse to take away scrupulositie which is vnworthie of the Church of Christ and the people which i◠committed to you These be the words of Epiphanius in his Epistle translated by S. Hierom. For answere to this first he will not affirme whether that Epiphanius the byshop of Cypres wrote this Epistle or some other of that name because Damascen that impudent corrupter of antiquitie when he can not answere the Epistle he moueth such suspition in his Apologie for the worshipping of Images But let Hierome himselfe testifie the matter Contra errores Ioan Hierosol ad Pampathiam in the end of the Epistle Secondly he answereth that notwithstanding the iudgement of Epiphanius it is not against the authoritie of the scriptures to haue Images in the churches for then shoulde not Theodorus the martyr haue had his martyrdome painted on the walles as Gregorius Nyssenus witnesseth In deede Gregorius Nyssenus which liued somewhat after Epiphanius speaking of the ornaments of the Churche affirmeth that there was the history of the martyr painted on the wall but so farre from anye spice of adoration that the same was also expressed vppon the pauement which men did tread vppon Like as for ornamente there were grauen also in woode the Images of beastes These were the beginnings and as it were the first budding vp of Idolatrie in the church yet gainesaide by godly men and forbidden in the councell of Eliberis Another reason he hath of those simple mens authoritie that hang vp the Image and their murmuring which was not for putting downe the Image but for that he gaue them not another vail or curtaine first That it was not his priuate opinion it appeareth in this that he writeth so confidently thereof to the bishop of Ierusalem in whose dyocesse Anablatha was and who was present whē the saide Image was defaced But if he had thought saith M. Sander the hauing of Images to bee an heresie he woulde haue noted it in his booke of Fourescore and more heresies where he noteth no
suche opinion of hauing Images in the Churche for hereticall This balde reason he learned out of the councell of Nice 2. act 4. of one Epiphanius which taketh vpon him to reiecte and controll the authoritie of this ancient Epiphanius of Cypres But howe falsely they haue affirmed this of him you may see in diuers places of Epiphanius booke against heresies First lib. 1. Tom. 1. he sheweth the punishment of God against Tharra an Image maker which ouer liued his sonne Aran which no man as he saith did before him Secondly lib. 1. Tom. 2. hee sheweth that Simon Magus the father of heretikes made Images of him selfe and his harlot Helena to be worshipped that Carpocrats the heretik made the Images of Iesus and of S. Peter and did cense them and worship them Also Her. 27. he saith Gnostici Carpocratitae c. The Gnostikes and Carpocratites haue Images painted in collours some also of golde and siluer and other matter which they say be the Images of Iesus and that these Images of Iesus were made when hee liued among men vnder Pontius Pilate Againe lib. 2. T. 1. her 55. he sheweth that there were some in Arabia Robas and Edom which worshipped the Image of Moses And Centra Cullyridianos her 79. which worshipped the Images of the blessed virgin Marye he saith Vnde non est c. Howe is not this desire of making Images a diuelish attempt PrÄ™textu enim IustitiÄ™ for the deuil alwais entring into the mind of men vnder pretence of righteousnes deifying the mortal nature in the ere 's of men by variety of arts hath set forth stocks or statues bearing the Image of men And they truely which are worshipped by theÌ„ are dead but they bring in their Images to be worshipped which neuer liued for they caÌ„not be dead which neuer liued Finally Lib. Autorato prima enim scortatio est excogitatio simulachrorum inquit scriptura The inuenting of Images was the first whordome saith the scripture By these places iudge howe true it is which Damascen writeth that his owne church was decked with Images But yet M.S. hath another shift of descaÌ„t that the cause of reÌ„ding this vail might be for auoiding of offence of the weak Iews PagaÌ„s lately coÌ„uerted in that place As thogh Epiphanius doth not plainly declare the cause to haue bin for that it was coÌ„trari to the scriptures The like cause he wold haue to be of the decree of the councell of Eliberis in Spaine Placuit pictâ—ras in ecclesia esse non debere ne quod colitur aut adoratur in arietibut depingatur It is decreed that there ought to be no pictures in the Church lest that which is worshipped adored should be painted on the walles But the Canon it self sheweth a reason why they would haue no pictures in the churches lest God whoÌ„ onely they worshipped adored might be painted on the wals which were an abhominable absurditie yet hath bene practised iâ— defended men be so prone to Idolatrie But M.S. gathereth that seeing there might be no pictures in churches ergo they might be in priuate houses if they be lawful to be in priuate houses much more they might be permitted in churches A proper ringworm a doctor like argumeÌ„t by which I may coÌ„clude as foloweth There may be no shoppes in churches ergo they may be in priuate houses and if they may be permitted â—n priuate houses much more in churches But yet he hath an other answer This fact of Epiphanius was a priuate zeale which is not to be folowed coÌ„trary to the decree of the catholike church but I reply it was a godly zeal because it was ruled by the coÌ„mandement of God the holy scripture against which no church hath authority to decree But the last answere is as good as cake pudding which yet he thinketh worthy of a note in the margent Images could not be brokeÌ„ before they were set vp therfore the setters vp of Images are ancienter neerer the Apostles time then the pullers down That is out of questioÌ„ Euen so heresies could not be confuted before they were inuented therfore the inuenters of heresies are ancienter neerer the Apostles times then the confuters Note ye papistes for your learninge or else note that this note of Master Sander is not worthye the notinge But hee proceedeth and will prooue as he sayeth that as there were some Images in Churches in the time of Epiphanius so straight after his time they were coÌ„mon in all churches but this straightway was almost 200. yeares after Epiphanius as he citeth out of Nicephorus of one Xenias who he saith was the first that spake against worshipping of Images which howe false it is al men that haue read the works of the ancient writers doe knowe sufficiently The next breaker of Images he would haue to be Serenus bishop of Marsiles who waâ— reproued by Pope Gregorie which wrote vnto him that he shoulde not haue broken the Images but prohibited the people from worshipping of them Lib. 7. Epist. 169. But M. Sander will auoide that â—rohibition by the distinction of adoratioÌ„ that they should not be worshipped as God because Gregorie saith lib. 7. epist. 53. Scio quod c. I know that you desire not the Image of our Sauiour to this purpose to worshippe it as god By which wordes he meaneth that all worshippe is due vnto God and that by worshipping an Image it is made a false God. But it foloweth in the same Epistle saith M. Sander which proueth that Gregorie acknowledged some worshippe due to Images Nos non quasi ante Diuinitatem ante imaginem proster nimur c. We fall not downe before an Image as before the godhead but we worship him whome by the Image we remeÌ„ber to haue ben borne or to haue suffred and also to sitte in the throne But these wordes import no such matter but rather the contrarye except M. Sander can prooue that it is all one to fall downe before an Image and to fall downe vnto an Image Although he seemeth to say that they falled not downe at all before anye Image but onely vsed them for their remembraunce M. Sander continuing his petegrue sheweth that Philippicus the Emperour being a monothelite anno 710. threwe downe the Images of the fathers of the sixe generall councels that were set in the Churche porche of Sophia belike he was afraide they woulde come shortly into the Church Pope Constantine caused the like pictures to be set vp in the Church porche of Saint Peter at Rome And what of this Forsooth hee was an heretike that threwe downe images So was Pope Honorius condemned for a monotholite archeheretike in the seuenth generall councell that mainteined images After him An. 730. Leo persuaded by two Iewes saith the late idolatrous writers threwe downe the images at Constantinople and anno 740. Constantine his sonne a wicked man and an heretike followed him But vnder Irene
or to fall downe before holy images What say you maister Sander will you abide by it Haue you either forgotten the grammer you taught vs before of ioyning the aduerbe with the verbe or thinke you that we haue learned so little either grammer or logike that wee cannot see a difference betweene a proposition affirmatiue and negatiue If a boy should construe Gregories latine as you haue englished it hee were worthie of a dosen strips though he had gon to grāmer schoole but two or three yeres Non quasi ante diuinitatē ante illam imaginē prosternimur We fall not downe before that image as before the diuinitie thus would I english it conster it if it were for my life And that which you make affirmatiue I must make negatiue for I haue learned fiue or sixe twentie yeare agoe that it is a negatiue proposition when the principall Verbe is denyed But perhaps you will gather that though he fell not downe before an image as before God yet he fell downe before it as before an image Howe certeine this collection is you may see by an hundreth examples if you list to consider them If I saye Non quasi ante diuinitatem ante diabolum prosternimur woulde you translate it we fall downe before the deuill but not as before God or rather thus we fal not down before the diuell as we do before God. Non quasi panem lapides commedimus would you turne it thus we eate stones but not as bread or rather we eate not stones as we eate breade Non quasi ante regem ante mendicum prosternimur woulde you translate it thus we fall downe before a begger but not as before a king or else wee fall not downe before a begger as before a king Such examples might bee multiplied infinitely by which you may see what pith there is in maister Sanders argument to proue that Saint Gregory lay prostrate before an image where as contrariwise he denyeth it and maketh such prostration and falling downe with affection of religion to be dewe onely to GOD euen as the Angell infinitly more excellent then all the images that euer were made refusing that honour offered to him by Saint Iohn willed him to giue it to god 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fall downe to god Apoc. 22.9 THE XV. or XIIII CHAP. That the seuenth general councell was a true councell and ought to be obeyed and Maister Iewels slaunders be aunswered concerning the same Where also it is briefly shewed that miracles might and haue bene wrought by holy images Also Maister Iewels vaine arguments against the seuenth generall councell and Irene the Empresse that Maister Iewell committeth three faultes about fiue Latine words that the shadowe of Peter was accounted of vertue and power to heale men That they were and are in possession of honouring images who defended the honouring of them The cause why the seuenth generall councell was called The seuenth generall councell is conferred with the first What Bishops recanted in the seuenth councell The Bishop of Salisburie reiecting the authoritie of this Councell of Nice the second saith it was holden wel neere eight hundreth yeares after Christe and therefore was out of the compasse of those sixe hundred yeares of which he made his challenge Maister Sander answereth it was seuen hundreth yeares before Maister Iewell as though the controuersie were of antiquitie of the men and not of the doctrine The Bishop saide it would require a long treatise to open the whole follie and fondnesse of that Councell M. Sander answereth it is more like that M. Iewell is a fond foole then 350. Bishops of such wit vertue and learning as though their multitude could proue their wit vertue and learning when their words and deeds plainly declare their follie ignorance and vngodlinesse The B. saide Irene the Empresse which gathered this Councell was a wicked woman M. Sander citing diuers writers to and fro in the end concludeth that by repentance she was made a good woman and her zeale towards holy images did make her the better so he bringeth that for an argument which is the matter in controuersie The Bishop said She was the kings daughter of Tartaria an Heathen borne So was Constantine the great saith M. Sander yet was she Christened before she procured that Councell whereas hee doubteth whether Maister Iewell thinke that Constantine was baptized when hee gathered and confirmed the first Councell of Nice The Bishop doth not for that cause onely reiect the second Councel at Nice bicause Irene was an Heathen borne but thereby sheweth that she sauoured of Gentilitie in being earnest to set forward idolatrie And whereas Maister Sander doubteth whether Maister Iewell thinke Constantine were baptized before he gathered the Councel he neede not at al seeing Eusebius which knewe Constantine very well affirmeth that he was not baptized but euen imediatly before his death Contrarie to that fond fable which among other is auouched by Pope Adrian in this Councell that Constantine was cured of a leapresie baptized by Siluester Bishop of Rome And whereas he thinketh it a daungerous matter to take the authorizing of that Councel from Siluester and to ascribe it to one that was not baptized there is no perill at all in it for Constantine did then beleeue in Christ and was certainly determined to be baptized in Iordan if he had not bene preuented by death Yea although hee had beene an Heathen man seeing he gaue no sentence but assented to the sentence of the Bishoppes it had beene none inconuenience at all The Bishop saide She caused that Councell to be summoned in despight of the Councell of Constantinople that had decreed against images Maister Sander although he confesse there was such a Councell yet bicause the whole processe of the actes thereof is not extant being defaced by the idolaters he quarelleth that it was an obscure Councell and asketh by what Emperour it was gathered as though it were not testified that it was gathered by Leo the third but it lacked saith he the Bishop of Romes authoritie and therefore was no general Councell so did the Chalcedonense and the sixt of Constantinople in some partes and yet it went forward with the decree which had bene in vaine if the Romish Bishop had a negatiue voyce in all Councels The Bishop sayde She tooke her owne sonne Constantinus and pulled out his eyes The Councell is not therefore naught saith Maister Sander But she is thereby proued to bee a cruell woman which was the Bishops meaning The Bishop saith She did it onely bycause he would not consent to the idolatrous hauing of images Maister Sander denyeth this but proofe hee bringeth none sauing that hee sheweth there was an other cause why shee might doe it namely bicause hee deposed her of her gouernement wherein hee did well after the example of Asa which is commended in the scripture for that hee did put downe his mother Maachah from her estate bycause she
what call you it but the trinitie Fie vppon this horrible idolatrie which is defended with such a sleueles excuse that you honour not the image for his owne sake no more did the Gentiles their images Chrisostom in Homi. 18. in Ep. ad Eph. writeth thus of them Cum illi dicimus quòd simulachrū adoret non inquit simulacrum sed Venerem sed Martem Et cum rogamui quae est ista Venus Qui grauiores inter eos sunt respondent voluptas quis est Mars Animus masculus vehemens When we say vnto him that he worshippeth an image No saith he not the image but Venus or Mars And when we aske what is this Venus the grauer sort among them aunswere pleasure And who is Mars A manlike and valiant corage Augustine in Psal. 96. which place I haue cited before sheweth that the Gentiles affirmed that they worshipped not the images for their owne sake but for the diuine powers which they did represent euen the same which the Christians called Angels So that the Papists are all one with the Gentiles in their excuse as they agree with them in Idolatrie worshipping of images FINIS God be praysed A REFVTATION OF MAITER IOHN RASTELS CONFVTATION AS HE CALLETH IT OF maister Iewels sermon by W. Fulk To the Preface TO giue the Reader a tast of such sinceritie as he must looke for in all M. Rastels booke of confutation hee sheweth in his preface where speaking of three maners of aunswering he declareth the same by an example taken out of the bishops sermon that sole receiuing is not to be suffered among Christians where as the bishoppe hath no such position in all his sermon but that priuate masse was not vsed for the space of sixe hundreth yeares after christ Thus admonishing the Reader that maister Rastell as his grand capteine M. doctour Harding not able to finde any thing either in scripture or antiquitie for the maintenance of their ordinary priuate Masse doth flie to extraordinarie vses and vnlawfull vsages of sole receiuing being all such as either some necessity might seeme to excuse or as all the Papists themselues do confesse to haue beene abuses I leaue his leude preface hasten to the book it self A refutation of maister Rastels confutation SECTIO PRIMA In which he speaketh of the councel of Nice of vnwritten verities TO passe ouer the two first leafes of his booke and halfe the third in which is much vaine babling but no point of confutatiō in the second face of the third leafe he beginneth to picke his iust quarel at the sentence set before the bishoppes printed sermon which is this Let old customes preuaile It greueth M. Rastel his fellowes which perswade the ignorant people that our relygion is all nouelty that M Iewell should make any such claime vnto antiquitie And first therfore he wil know whether the scriptures do not cōteine al things necessary to saluatiō Yes verely and Gods curse light on him that teacheth the contrarie Then he will knowe where we finde this saying in scriptures or if it be not in the scripture of god why we wil vse a sentēce of the coūcel of Nice which was but a cōgregatiō of mens Verily if we found not the matter of this sentence in Gods worde we durst not auouch it to be true that was vttered by men being applied to any point of doctrine But we finde the same doctrine in the sixt of Ieremy where the Lord saith Stand in the wayes and beholde and aske for the olde way which is the good way and walke therein and you shall finde rest for your soules Nowe this saying of the councell of Nice let olde customes preuaile being the same in effect and meaning though somewhat differing in sounde of wordes we embrace it as the worde of God and the holy scripture which we do not restraine vnto the letters and sillables but vnto the plaine and manifest sence and vnderstanding of them The seconde quarrell he picketh to the placing of this sentence before the bishoppes sermon because it is vttered by the Councell of Nice in a particuler case concerning the iurisdiction of the bishops of Alexandria and Antioch and therefore cannot serue for a generall sentence For all olde customes saith he must not be preferred before new customes example of washing of feete abstaining from eating of bloud which were olde customes But if the councell meant that olde customes should preuaile against newe writinges then all books of Luther such like are striken through which one foine Wherefore hee concludeth that the councell meant that olde customes shoulde preuaile against the pretensed alledging of the verye scripture it selfe and newe doctrine of men And so this sentence doth at once ouerthrow all maister Iewels religion But hauing compared this sentence to the text of scripture by which the true meaning therof may appeare I will not stand about this trifling cauils Cōcerning our iudgmēt of antiquitie this it is We wil not admit whatsoeuer is old but only the religiō which is eldest of al which hath god for the autor the Patriarches Prophetes and Apostles for the witnesses and all learning doctrine and religion which is vnder the age of these yeares we reiect as newe false and diuelish As for customes ceremonies and manners which are subiect to mutation we receiue them or refuse them as they be approuable or disprouable by the saide old auncient and Catholike doctrine And bicause M. Rastel hath not only touched the sixt Canon of the Councell of Nice where this sentence is written but also charged M. Iewell with ouerthrowe of his religion thereby I must let the reader vnderstand that he suppresseth one point thereof that vtterly ouerthroweth the piller of all Popish religion that is the Popes supremacie For that Canon maketh the Bishop of Alexandria equall in iurisdiction to the Bishop of Rome For the reason of the iurisdiction confirmed vnto the Bishops of Alexandria is this Quia vrbia Romę Episcop◠parilis mos est Bicause the Bishop of the citie of Rome hath the like or equall custome of iurisdiction But M. Rastell will proue by the storie of Arrius that the Councell meant by that sentence that it is onely tradition custome and manners which killeth the hearts of heretiques and defendeth the Catholike Church and not the authoritie of the Scriptures Bicause Arrius was such a proude heretique that he despised all the interpretations of the auncient Fathers that were before his time as Alexander Bishop of Alexandria writeth of him Yea he is not ashamed to say that although the Fathers of that Councell had scriptures against Arrius yet their chiefe stay was not in that scriptures but in the receiued tradition But this is a most impudent lye for although the consent of Catholike writers of all ages with the word of God is not to be contemned yet the only authoritie in determining of controuersies of faith in
all Councels is and ought to be by the authoritie of the holy scriptures The Apostles thēselues in the Councel of Hierusalem decided the controuersie of circumcision by the scriptures Act. 15. A worthy paterne for al godly Councels to folow Constantine also in the Councel of Nice charged the Bishops there assembled by his commandement to determine the matter by the authoritie of the holy scriptures Euangelici enim Apostolici libri necnon antiquorum Prophetarum oracula planè instruunt nos inqui sensu numinis Proinde hostici posua discordia sumamus ex dictis diuini spiritus explicatione◠The bookes of the Gospels and the Apostles and also the Oracles of the auncient Prophetes do plainly instruct vs saith he in the vnderstanding of god Therefore laying away hatefull discord let vs take explications out of the sayings of the holy Ghoste Therdor lib. cap. 7. By this charge it is manifest how truely M. Rastel faith that the decree of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or equalitie of the Sonne in substance with the Father was made only by tradition and not by the authoritie of the scriptures For the Councel examining by scriptures the tradition and receiued opinion of the Fathers and finding it agreeable to them did confirme the same And whereas the Arrians quarrelled that this worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was not found in the scriptures and therefore would refuse it it helpeth nothing M. Rastels vnwritten verities for the trueth of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is proued by an hundreth textes of scriptures as the truth of the Trinitie is although neither of both words are found in the scriptures We quarell not as those heretiques did and M. Rastel a Popish heritique doth of letters syllables words and sounds but we stand vpon the sense meaning vnderstanding doctrine which we affirme to be perfectly contained in scripture what so euer is necessarie to saluation as S. Paul saith Al scripture inspired of God is profitable to teach to improue to correct and to instruct in righteousnes that the man of God may be absolute being made perfect to al good workes 2. Tim. 3. And therefore olde customes being referred vnto the custome of the Church of God in the time of the Patriarches Prophetes Apostles and Doctours that followed the same vnitie of Gods wordes is the thing wee desire might preuaile in all our controuersies of religion and so the sentence is wel inough placed if Momus could let any thing alone SECTIO 2. Frō the second face of the 12. leafe to the first face of the 19. leafe When any order giuen by God is broken or abused saith the Bishop the best redresse thereof is to restore it againe into the state that it was first in the beginning M. Rastel saith the Bishop can not tell where of he speaketh For whereas he affirmed that S. Paule had appointed an order touching the ministration of the sacramentes vnto the Corinthians M. Rastell will not simplie graunt that this order was appointed by God although S. Paule himself say he receiued it of christ which he deliuered to thē For this difference hee maketh That an order giuen by God must be obserued without exception and yet he addeth an exception of reuelation and especial licence from god But what so euer order S. Paule did giue he saith is subiect vnto the Church to remoue or pull vp as it shall please her Thus the blasphemous dog barketh against the spirit of god But I trust al sober Christian minds will rather beleue S. Paul then Rastel who saith of such orders as were giuen by him 1. Cor. 14. If any man seem to be a prophet or spirituall let him know the things that I write to you that they be the cōmandements of god But now M. Ra. will take vpon him to teach vs the order giuē that Paul speaketh of namely That the Christians had certein charitable suppers called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after which as August saith before which as Chrysost. saith they did vse to receiue the sacramēt Note here that M. Rast. which wil haue old customes tried by the fathers bringeth in here two Doctors one contrarie to the other To the purpose This order was taken away by cōtention disdaine of the rich against the poore therfore Paule purposed to bring them againe to that order of sitting eating their supper altogether that rich with the pore by saying That which I receiued of the Lord I deliuered to you And not to reforme any abuse of the sacramēt by reducing it to the first institution This iudgement of M. Rastell is partly by him proued by the authoritie of Theophylact but chiefly it standeth vpon his owne authoritie without further reason Howbeit it is manifest by the scripture that Paule reproued that mingling of prophane suppers with the Lordes supper appointing their priuate houses for their bodily refreshings of eating and drinking Haue you not houses saith he to eate and drinke in By which saying it is manifest he would haue no eating and drinking in the Church as M. Rastell dreameth but onely the eating and drinking of the Lordes supper And therefore that abuse of mingling their bodily suppers with the spirituall supper of the Lorde whereof came so many abuses and especiall the seuering and sundering of the congregation into diuers partes which ought to haue receiued altogether he laboureth to reforme by bringing it to the first institution of the Lord him selfe But M. Rast. following his owne dreame asketh what there was in the institution for sitting together or a sunder for eating at Church or at home Yes forsooth Christe did institute his supper to be a foode of the soule and not of the body and therefore to be celebrated in the congregation and in common as the saluation is common and not to bee mingled with prophane banquets of bellie cheare for which priuat houses and companies are meet and not the Church of god And wheras M. Rastel chargeth M. Iewel with not vnderstanding this place which he alledgeth namely therefore when you come together to eate tarie one for an other which he saith pertaineth no more to the institution of the sacrament then a pot full of plumbs doth to the highway to London he sheweth all his wit honestie at once For he denyeth that any thing that Saint Paule there rehearseth namely these wordes take eate this is my body c. is the institution of the sacrament or the originall paterne of reforming the Corinthians disorder bicause time place vesture number of communicants and such other accidentall and variable circumstà nces be not therein expressed So that by his diuinitie either the institution of the sacrament is not at all contained in the scriptures or else there is an other first paterne to reforme abuses by then this that is set downe in the scriptures I would maruel at these monstrous assertions but that I see the obstinate Papists cannot otherwise defend their Popish Masse
they were not erected according to Gods commaundent and yet was not hee accounted an heretike 2. Regum 18. Much lesse are they to bee called heretikes that throwe downe the Popishe aultars whiche were set vp against the onelye Aulter and sacrifice of Christ and his passion to the most blasphemous defacing of the same To the 41. that any bishop was maryed on Ashe wednesday it is a foolish demaund to require the proofe but that iâ— was lawful for a bishoppe to mary any day in the yeare it is proued by the authoritie of scriptures which exclude no day as vnlawfull to mary in To the 42. that no man did write that the gouernemeÌ„t of women was monstrous we grant neither do we holde this article though some one man haue witten it To the 43. that est in these words hoc est corpus meum is to be taken for significat it is proued by Tertullian who expoundeth hoc est corpus meum id est figura corporis 〈◊〉 This is my body that is to say this is a figure of my body contra Marc li 4. S. Ambrose ipse clamat dominus Iesus hoc est corpus meum Ante bedectionem verborum caelestium alia speciâ—s nominatur post consecrationem corpus Christi significatur â–ª Our Lorde Iesus himselfe saith alowd This is my body Before the blessing of the heauenly wordes it is called another kinde after consecration the body of Christ is signified Deijs qui myster init Chrysostome sayeth of the sanctified vessels in quibus non est verum corpus Christi sed mysterium corporis Christi continetur In which the very bodie of Christ is not but the mysterie of the bodie of Christe is conteined â–ª in Mat. Hom. 11. Augustine sayeth Nam ex eo quod scripâ—um est sanguinem pecoris animam eius esse praeter id â—uod supra dixi non ad me pertinere quid agatur de pecoris anima possum etiam interpretari prÄ™ceptum illud in signo positum esse non enim Dominus dubitauit dicere hoc est corpus meum cum signum daret corporis sui For as concerning that which is writen that bloud is the life of the beast beside that which I sayed before that it perteineth not to me what is done with the life of a beast I may also interprete that commaundement to consist in a signe For our Lord doubted not to saye This is my bodie when hee did giue a signe of his bodie contâ— Adamantum In this same Augustine sheweth that these wordes hoc est corpus meum are to be taken in the same sense that these words sanguis est anima pecoris where est is manifestly taken for significat by his iudgement there is no one article wherein we differ from the Papistes that hath more plentifull confirmation in the doctours of our doctrine therein then this of the carnall presence of Christ in the sacrament To the 44. that the lay people communicating did take the cuppe one at anothers hand it appereth by the words of Basill in Ep. ad Caesar. Patri for of those that dwelled in the wildernesse where no Priest was saith hee a seipsis communicant they receiue of themselues or one of another And in Alexandria and Aegypt euery one of the people hath the communion in his house and receiue it there at home Et in ecclesia sacerdoâ— dat partem accipit eam is qui suscipit cuÌ„ omni libertate ipsam admouâ—t ori propria 〈◊〉 Idem igitur est virtute sine vnam partem quis accâ—piet a sacerdote sine plures partes simul And euen in the Church the Priest giueth one part and he which receueth it taketh it with all libertie and putteth it to his mouth with his owne hand Therefore it is the same in vertue whether a man take one part of the Priest or more partes together Also it appeareth by the 6. Councell of Constantinople Can. â—8 that before that time Lay men in presence of the Bishop Elder or Deacon did diuide the deuine mysteries among theÌ„ selues which vntil then was not forbiddeÌ„ Our Sauiour Christe also hauing once deliuered the cup did not take it into his handes so often as euery one of his disciples did drinke but willed them to diuide it among them selues Luc. 22. To the 45. that a controuersie of religion being decided by the Byshop of Rome the contrary parte was not taken for heresie nor the mainteiners thereof for heretikes is proued by the controuersie of rebaptising them that were baptised by heretikes which when Cornelius and Stephanus Bishops of Rome had decided yet was not the contrary opinion taken for heresie nor Saint Cyprian al the bishops of Affrica which agreed vppon it in a councel at Carthage counted for heretikes a matter notoriously knowen to all them that reade Cyprians workes or Euseb. lib. 7. Cap. 3. which vtterly ouerthroweth the popes authoritie To the 46. that any executed for felony was put in the kalendar for a Martyr is a thing needelesse to proue yet the penitent theefe whiche being crucified with Christ was executed iustly for his offences is of good writers counted a Martyr So might one hanged for felonie and at his death repenting and detesting Papistrie To the 47. that such as refused to renounce the Bishop of Romes authoritie were excommunicated it appeareth by the Councell of Carthage 3. Cap. 26. which forbad that the Bishop of Rome or any other Bishop of the principal See should be called the highest Priest or the prince of Priestes or by any such title Also the Councel Mileuitanum doth excommunicate all them that appealed to the Bishop of Rome or any other out of Aphrica Cap. 22. Yea he that thought such appellations lawfull was excommunicated by which it appeareth that though there be no expresse mention of an othe yet an othe in that case vpon good ground might be tendered To proue that a Fryer of 60. yeares age being made Bishop did marry a woman of 19. yeares of age within sixe hundreth yeares after Christ which is the eight and fortith article it is impossible because there was not any fryer in the worlde 1200. yeares after Christ. To proue that any Bishop preached that it is all one to pray in a dunghill and in a Church whiche is the 49. article is no assertion of ours neither of any man I thinke in the worlde To the â—0 that such as were no heretikes refused to subscribe to a generall councell gathered by the Byshop of Rome is proued before by saint Cyprian and the Byshops of Aphrica of his time also by Saint Augustine and the bishopps of Aphrica in his time which refused to subscribe to the Bishops of Rome Zosimus Bonifacius and Celestinus pretending the councel of Nice for their authority in receiuing appeales but when the true Copyes were brought from Alexandria and Constantinople they werâ— found falsifiers of the Nicen Councel Concilio Aphricano â–ª cap 101.