diuersitie of opiniō as hath bene shewed M. Charke can not geue one example to the cōtrarie for the maintenance of this absurde definition of different forme in profession c. VVhereby he wold make all them sectaries whiche differ in anye externall forme By whiche reasō all their owne byshops ministers Iudges lawyers and the like are sectaries and all diuersities of states are sects For is there not a different forme in making of a byshope and of a minister is not there diuersitie in their authorities in their apparell in their state and forme of lyfe notwithstanding that bothe doe professe ministerie of the woorde The laye man and the preacher doe professe one religion and yet is there no difference in the forme of their profession is the ministers forme of apparell of preaching of ministring the sacraments of obedience to his byshope of obseruing the statuts of college or church wherein he is nothing different from any other laye man or is he a sectarie for this who wold say this and much lesse print yt but onelie william Charke I leaue the begynning of his definition as too too childish ridiculous for hym that professeth learning where he sayeth a sect is a companie of men as yf a man should say an heresie is a compauie of men or an opinion is a companie of men or a frencie is a companie of frentike men VVhen S. Paul saieth I liued a pharisey according to the most certaine sect of our religion will ye say he meant according to the moste certaine number of men of his religion or rather according to the moste certaine deuided opinion of his religion for the number of phariseys were not certaine Againe when S. Paul sayeth the vvoorks of the flesh are manifest as sects c. VVill you saye here multitudes of men are workes of the fleshe where as the greek hath heresies So like wyse when S. Peter sayeth of false prophets they bryng in sectes of perdition in greeke heresies of perdition will you saye multitudes of men of perdition I omitt many other examples in scripture which doe conuince your absurditie and besides that doe proue our principall point that sects and heresies are all one Although I am not ignorant that in common speeche this woorde sect may improperlie signifie the men also whiche professe the same but not in a definition where the proper nature of eche woorde is declared After this new definition set downe M. Charke proueth the Iesuites to be a sect by the same for whose disgrace onelie he deuised it His collection or argument is this Seing therefore the Iesuits receyue a peculiar vovve to preache as the Apostles dyd euery vvhere to doe it of free cost to vvhipp and torment them selues after the example of a sect called by the name of vvhippers and condemned longe a goe seing thy are deuided from all others and doe folovv the rule of Loyolas it appeareth plainlie they are a sect A substātial conclusion for a man of your making These be like the conclusions ye made in the tower against M. Campian I meane not of your last conclusion to dispache hym at Tiburn for that was vnanswerable although nothing foloweing of the premisses I meane of your pretended dysputations wyth hym But to our matter what is there in this illation that can make the Iesuits a sect if it were all graunted to be true that they vovv to preache as the Apostle dyd Yow know the scripture doeth allow and commende the dedication of a mans lyfe by vow to gods seruice Num. 6. Psalm 131. VVhat then To preache euery vvhere and at free cost This you should be a shamed to say seinge Christ hym selfe commaundeth it to his Apostles Teache all nations preache the gospell to all creatures yovv haue receyued it freelie geue it freelie And S. Paul gloryeth muche that he had taught the gospell of free cost 2. Cor. 11. VVhat then maketh them sectaries To vvhipp and torment them selues yf it were true why for what reason It is writen of S. Paul by hym selfe that he chasteyned his owne bodie 1. Cor. 9. yea and that he caried the brāds of Christe in his flesh 2. Cor. 4. And the scriptures do talke muche of mortyfyeing our members of crucifyenge our flesh and the like and neuer a woord of pamperinge the same And ecclesiasticall stories doe make large mention of great seueritie of the auncient fathers and Saints heerein As of the seueritie in lyfe of S. Iohn Baptist and other Saints Also of the Saints of the olde testament who went about as S. Paul sayeth in camels hears in goats skinnes and the like And he that will see great store of examples gathered together out of all antiquitie about this matter lett him reade but one chapiter of Marcus Marulus de castigatione corporis per flagella of chasteyning the bodie with whippes S. Ierom. testifyeth of hym selfe by an occasion gyuen to a secret frende of his That his skynne vvas novv become as blacke vvith punishement as the skinne of an Ethiopian And Ioannes Cassianus that liued about the same time hathe infinite examples of the practises of holy fathers in this point And albeit Peter Martyr a renegate friar after he had now coped with a wenche doeth ieast at S. Basil and S. Gregorie Nazianzen for the hard handling of their owne bodies yet there is reason to think that they knew what they did as well as he And yf you ministers of England wold vse a litle of this salue sometimes also possible the worlde wold goe better with you fewer Eatons should neede to stand on the pillorie for lyeing with their owne daughters fewer hynches flye the countrie for rauishing of yong gyrles especiallie being preachers and hauing wiues of their owne besides And manie other foule enormities in this kynde wolde easier be auoyded But yf you will not practise this remedie your selues for contristing or making sadde the holie ghoste within you as your phrase is yet impute it not as Schisme and heresie to them which vse it moderatelie as you may imagin the Iesuites will being not fooles nor hauing yron bodies but sensible as yours are And as for the last reason you add of their folowing Loyolas his rule of lyfe and that they are deuided from others made schismatikes therby I haue shewed before that being but a particular direction of lyfe and maners grounded on the scripture and practise of auncient fathers and allowed by the superours of the Churche it can be no matter of sect or heresie nether are Iesuites seperated frome others by this but rather nearer ioined with all the godlie for that vertue is but one and he that leadeth the most vertuouse lyfe is ioyned nearest to Christ and to all good Christians And this now may be answered supposing that all were true that you report in this place of the Iesuites lyfe and vocation which is not
sayd trueth and also confirme many of your owne syde that now iustlye doe wauer vpon this open discouerie of your feare in tryall VVherfore once againe I saye vnto you ministers obtaine vs this disputation thoughe it be onelie but for a shevv therby to hold maintaine your credites VVe protest before God that vve seek it onelie for the triall of Christ his trueth for searche vvherof vve offer our selues to this labour charges perill of lyfe VVe aske for our safties but onelie such a vvarrant from her Maiestie as the late Councell of Trent dyd offer vnto all the protestaÌ„ts of the wolrd wherof you haue the copie vvith you VVee will come in what kynde number at what tyme to what place you shall appoint Yf you will haue your owne countrie meÌ„ they are redie to come Yf you will haue straungers to dispute in your vniuersities before the learned onely there shall not want For your selues vve gyue you leaue to call all the learned protestants of Europ for your defence VVe will take onelie our owne countrie men yf you permitt vs. VVe gyue you leaue to oppose or defende to appoint questioÌ„s to chuse owt controuersies to begynne or end at your pleasure and to vse any other prerogatyues that you please so that they impugne not the indifferencie of tryall VVhat can yow alleage whye yow should not accept this If you had leuer make this triall in other countries than at home before your owne people as perhaps you had chuse you what protestant state you lyst and procure vs therin the forsayd saftie from the prince and we will nether spare labour nor cost to meet you therin also Or yf this seeme hard or lyke you not then take you but the paynes some number of you to come into any Catholique kyngdome or countrie where you best please And wee will procure what securitie soeuer reasonable you shall demaund for your persons And more then that we will beare your expenses also rather than so good a woorke shall remayne vnatteÌ„pted And yf you can deuyse any other conditioÌ„ to be performed on our partes whiche I haue left owt doe you adde the same and we will agree by the grace of God to fullfill it If we offer you reason than deale somewhat reasonablie with vs againe For all the world will crye shame and begynne to discredit you yf you will nether gyue nor take vpon so great oddes as heere are offered you If you dare not venture with disputatioÌ„s yet graunt vs certaine sermons to encounter with you vpon this matter Or yf that also be to daungerous procure vs but a litle passage for our bookes at leastwyse you M. Charke shall doe an honorable acte to obtayne licence of free passage for this booke vntill it be answered by you to the end that men hauinge reade this ouer may be the better able to conceyue your answer when it comethe THE ANSVVERE TO THE PREFACE TOVCHINGE DISCERNINGE of Spirites MAister Charke besides the matter in question maketh a praeface to the reader touching the vtilitie necessitie and waye of tryeing spirites alleginge the woordes of S. Iohn whereby we are willed not to beleeue euerie spirite but to trie the spirites whether they be of God VVhich he saythe he and his felowes offer to doe and we refuse But that this is clearlie false and a formall speche onelie withoute trueth or substance our dedes doe testifie which are alwayes with indifferent men as good as woordes Our bookes are extant whereby we haue called to tryall all sectaries of our tyme as they rose vpp and shewed new spirites as Luther Corolostad Swinglius Munster Stankarus and Caluin whome our aduersaries folow as one of the last And nowe in England yf we had not bene willing or rather desirouse of this triall of spirites we wolde neuer haue laboured so muche to obtayne the same of our aduersaries in free printing preaching or disputatioÌ„ much lesse wolde we haue aduentured our liues in comming and offering the same to theÌ„ at home with so vnequall conditioÌ„s on our syde as we haue done and doe dayly for the triall of truthe And yf all these our offers and endeuours ioyned with so many petitions and supplications for triall haue obtained vs nothing hitherto but offence accusations extreme rackings and cruell deathe me thinke M. Charke had litle cause to make this preface of our refusing triall and their offering the same except it were onelye for lacke of other matter and to kepe the custome of sayeing somewhat in the beginning But perhappes M. Charke will saye that althoughe we offer triall yet not suche nor by suche meanes as in his opinion is lawfull sure and conuenient VVhen we come to the coÌ„bate then remayneth it to be examined whiche parte doeth alleage best meanes whiche shalbe the argument of this my answer to this preface And I will endeuour to shew that all the meanes of tryall which M. Chark his felowes will seme to allow in woord for they offer none in deede are neyther sure possible nor euident but onelie meere shyftes to auoyde all triall and that we on the coÌ„trary parte doe not onelie allow but allso offer all the best and surest wayes of tryall that euer were vsed in Gods churche for discerning an hereticall spirit from a Catholique The onelie meanes of tryall whiche M. Chark will seme to allow is the scripture wherto onelie he wolde haue all triall referred and that which can not be tryed therehence by hym must stand vntryed And then as yf we refused all tryall of scripture he vseth his pleasure in speche against vs. But this is a shyft common to all suche as M. Chark is And the cause thereof I will declare immediatlye S. Augustin dothe testifye it of the heretiques of his tyme. And all the sectaries of our dayes doe make it plaine by experience referring theÌ„ selues in woordes eche one to the holie scripture onelie for maintenance â—f there errours and denyeing all other meanes of tryall whereby the true meaning of scripture may be knowen The causes of this shyft in all new teachers are principally three The first to gett credit with the people by naming of scripture and to seme to honour it more than their aduersaries doe by referring the whole triall of matters vnto it The second is by excluding councels fathers and auncitours of the churche who from tyme to time haue declared the true sense of scripture vnto vs to reserue vnto them selues libertie and authoritie to make what meaning of Scripture they please and thereby to gyue colour to euerye fansie they list to teache The third cause is that by chalenging of onelie scripture they may delyuer them selues from all ordinances or doctrines left vnto vs by the first pillers of Christe his Church thoughe not expresselie sett downe in scripture thereby assume authoritie of allowinge or not allowing of comptrolling or permittinge what soeuer liketh or
serueth their turnes for the tyme. So Martin Luther after he had denied all testimonie of man besides hym selfe he beginneth thus aboute the number of Sacramentes Principio neganda mihi sunt septem sacramenta tantùm tria pro tempore ponenda First of all I must denye seuen sacraments and appoint three for the tyme. Marie this tyme lasted not long for in the same place he sayeth that yf he wold speake according to the vse of onelie scripture he hathe but one sacrament for vs that is baptisme But yet the confessioÌ„ of Auspurge whiche pretendeth to folow Luther in all things doeth allowe three by onelye scripture Mary Melancthon whiche professeth onelye scripture more than the rest and wolde seme to knowe Luthers meaning best of all men for that he lyued with hym holdeth fower by onelye scripture and Iohn Caluin holdeth two Agayne by onelie scripture Iohn Caluin fownd the title of heade of the church in king henry to be AntichristiaÌ„ vvhich novve our folovvers of Caluin in England doe finde by onelie scripture to be most christian Mary yet the Magdeburgians by onelie scripture do condeÌ„ne the same still In like sorte by onelie scripture the protestantes defended a greate while against Catholiques that no heretiques might be burned or put to deathe whereof large bookes were written on bothe partes But now our protestants in England hauinge burned some them selues haue fownd as they write that it is euident by scripture that they may be burned Luther by onelie scripture found that his folowers and the Sacramentaries coulde not both be saued together and therefore he condemned the one for arrant heretiques Doctor fulke findeth by the same scripture that bothe partes are good Catholiques neyther of them heretiques Finallie how many things doeth M. VVhittgift defend against T. Cartwright to be laufull by scriptureâ— as byshops deanes archedeacons officialls holy dayes and a hundred more whiche in Geneua are holden to be flatt contrarie to the same scripture So that this appellation to onelie scripture bringeth good case in manie mattâ—rs For by this a man maketh hym selfe Iudge and Censurer not onelie of all fathers doctors councels histories examples presidents customes vsages prescriptions and the like but also of the bookes of scripture and sense it selfe reseruing all interpretation vnto hym selfe But Catholiques albeit they gyue the soueraigntie to scripture in all things yet bindinge theÌ„ selues to other things beside for the better vnderstanding of the meaning of scripture as to councels auncient fathers tradition of the Apostles and primatiue churche with the lyke are restrained from this libertie of chopping and chaunging affirming and denyeinge allowinge and misliking at theyr pleasures For albeit they hauing wittes as other men haue might drawe some problable apparaÌ„ce of scriptures to theyr owne deuises as euery heretique hitherto hathe done yet the auncient interpretation of holie fathers and receiued consent of the churche not alloweing the same it wold preuaile nothing Mary the selfe-willed heretique that reiecteth all things but scripture and therein alloweth nothing but his owne exposition may runne and range and deuise opinions at his pleasure for he is sure neuer to be conuicted thereof allowinge no man to be iudge of his interpretation but onelye hym selfe or some of hys owne opinion This we see fullfilled in all heretiques and sectaries that now lyue whome it is vnpossible so to conuince by onelye scriptures but they will alwayes haue some probable shew whereby to defend them selues and theyr owne imaginatioÌ„s M. Charke therfore chanting so muche vpon this point of onelie scriptures treadeth the pathe of his forefathers and pleadeth for a pryuilege of ease which whether we will allovve hym or no he entreth vpon it of his ovvne authoritie and dravveth scripâ—ure to euerye deuise of his owne braine so violentlie as a man may take coÌ„â—â—ssion to see yt I shall haue many examples hereafter in this ansvver but yet one vvhich is the chefe ground of this his preface I can not omitt After he had proued ovvt of Saincte Iohn that vve must trie spirites and not beleeue euerye nevv spiritt whiche is true he will nedes alleage owte of the same Apostle a full and plaine rule as he termeth it whereby to discerne and trie his oure spirites The rule is this Euery spirit vvhiche acknovvlegeth Iesus Christe to haue come in fleshe is of God and euerye spirit vvhiche dissolueth Iâ—sus is not of God but of Antichriste Here now may be sene what difference there is in exposition of the scriptures For the auncieÌ„t fathers interpreted this place as of it selfe it is most euident â—o be gyuen as a rule against the Iewes which denied Christe to haue taken fleshe Also against Ebion and Cherinthus heretiques nowe gone into the worlde as fore-runners of Antichriste dissoluing Iesus that is denieing his godheade and coÌ„sequently denyeing the sonne of God to haue come in fleshe Martin Luther interpreteth this place to be vnderstoode of M. Charke and his felowes sayeinge That spirit is not of god but of Antichriste vvhich dissolueth Christs fleshe in the sacrament But to vs Catholiques how can it be by anie deuise wrested who neyther denye Christe to haue come in fleshe nor yet do dissolue the name of Iesus by anie doctrine of ours But yet Marke how M. Charke interpreteth this place and coÌ„fesse that he hathe a singular grace in abusing scripture VVhat soeuer spirit sayeth he shall confesse Christe to haue come in fleshe as a prophet alone to teache as papistes doe not teaching traditions besides the vvritten vvoorde also as a kinge alone to rule as papistes doe not defending the popes authoritie also as a preest alone to sanctifye as papistes doe not vpholding the Masse this spirit is of God and the other of Antichriste Is it maruaile yf these men build what they list vppon scripture when they can fovvnde so many absurdities vppon one sentence thereof I wolde here aske first whether M. Chark thinketh that vve exclude Christe vvhen vve allovve prophetes to teache vnder hym kinges to raigne vnder hym preests to sanctifie vnder hym or no If he thinke we exclude Christe he is to fond to reason against sensible men knowing not what they holde But yf he thinke we allowe prophets kings and preests vnder Christe onelie and in hys name how can he call this the spirit of Antichrist doe not the scriptures allowe Prophets and teachers vnder Christe in the churche Ephes. 4. Act. 5 Also kinges and rulers thoughe puritanes wolde haue none 1. Pet. 2. Act. 2 Also may not preestes sanctifie by the woord of God 2. Timo. 4 How then are these things accompted Antichristian doe not protestants teache the same what deepe Mysteries of puritanisme are these Christe is a prophete alone a kinge alone a preest alone Againe I aske what doe the traditions of Christe and his Apostles for of those onelie
serua mandata yf thow wilt be saued kepe the cōmaundements and so deliuer all his gospellers from the burden thereof what differēce is there in these two speches of Christe seing they are bothe spoken to that yong man and bothe in the singular number as infinite other things of the Gospell are to other particular persones as to the Cananaea to the Adulteresse to Nichodemus to the Cēturio to Zachaeus to the blynde deafe and others which notwithstanding are common to all in that they touche eyther lyfe or doctrine The like absurd shiftes I might repeate in a hundred other points VVhat can be more plaine than the woordes of scripture videtis quoniam ex operibus iustificatur homo non ex fide tantum Doe you see how that a man is iustified by woorks and not by fayth onelie But yet it auayleth nothing VVhy so they auoyde it by interpretation S. Iames say they vnderstandeth of Iustification before men and not before God O poore deuise S. Iames hathe in the same place talking of fayth without woorkes Nunquid poterit fides saluare eum Can faythe without woorks saue him doeth S. Iames meane here of saluation before men or before God Again whē S Paul sayeth factores legis iustificabuntur the doers of the lawe shall be iustyfied whiche is the verie same thing that S. Iames in other woordes sayeth that mē shalbe iustified allso by woorks Doeth S. Paul mean before men or before God Yf you say before mē the text is against you which hath expressely apud deum before God The like euasiō they haue whē we alleage the woords of S. Paul qui matrimonio iungit virginem suam benè facit qui non iungit melius facit he that ioyneth his virgin in mariage doeth well and he that ioyneth her not doethe better VVhereof vve inferre that virginitie is more acceptable meritoriouse before God than mariage allthough mariage be holie No say our aduersaries S. Paul meaneth onelye that he doeth better before men and in respect of vvorldlie commodities but not before God But this is absurd for they graunt the former parte of the sentence he that ioyneth his virgin doeth vvel to be vnderstoode before God for that it is sayde also in other vvoordes non peccat he doeth not sinne whiche must nedes be vnderstoode in respect of God How thē can they denie the second clause and he that ioyneth her not doeth better not to be vnderstoode in respect of God also and in respect of merit and rewarde in the lyfe to come especiallie whereas Christ promiseth the same rewarde to virginitie in an other place where he sayeth there be Eunuches vvhich haue gelded them selues for the kingdome of heauen he that can take it lett hym take it You maye see now by this litle and I might shew by many mo examples howe bootelesse it is to bring scripture when we agree not vpon the interpretation VVhat then shall we bring the auncient fathers and doctors of the primatiue church for the vnderstanding of scripture shall we interpret it as they doe vnderstad it as they vnderstoode it No that our aduersaries will not agree vnto but onelie in matters indifferent owte of controuersie VVhere soeuer in matters of controuersie betwene vs and them the olde fathers doe make against them as in all points they doe there will they denie their exposition For example The consent of auncient fathers is alleaged against M. Fulke attributing superioritie to Peter vpon the woordes of Christ Thovv art Peter vpon this rocke vvill I buyld my Church but he auoydeth it verie lightlie thus It can not be denied but diuerse of the auncient fathers othervvyse godlye and learned vvere deceyued in opiniō of Peters prerogatiue S. Ambrose Ierome Chrisostom Cyrill and Theodoret are alleaged for expounding a pece of scripture against M. Fulk Ioh. 5. abowt Antichrist How doeth he shift it thus I ansvver they haue no ground of this exposition S. Ierome with all the ecclesiasticall writers are alleaged for interpreting of the woords of Daniel cap. 7. against the protestants M. Fulke I ansvver that neyther Ierome nor anie ecclesiasticall vvriter vvhome he folovveth hathe any direction out of the scripture for this interpretation S. Austen is alleaged for interpreting Dauids woordes he hathe placed his tabernacle in the Sunne of the visibilitie of the churche Fulke Austen doeth vvrongfullie interpret this place S. Ambrose Ephraim and Bede are alleaged for interpretatiō of certaine scriptures Fulke Gods vvoorde is so pitifullie vvrested by them as euery man may see the holie ghoste neuer meant any suche thing S. Chrisostome is alleaged for certaine interpretations of scripture Fulke he alleageth in dede scripture but he applieth it madlie and yet he often applieth it to the same purpose◠alas good man The consent of fathers is alleaged for interpretatiō of certaine places of scripture of the prefiguration of the crosse of Christ. Fulke The fathers do rather dallie in trifeling allegories than sovvndlie proue that the crosse vvas presigured in those places I might here make vp a greate volume yf I wolde prosecute this argumēt to shew how these new doctors doe contemne reiecte all authoritie antiquitie witt learning sanctitie of oure forefathers of all men in effect that euer liued beside them selues yea of their owne new doctors and maisters also when they come to be cōtrarie to anie new deuise or later fansie of theirs This is euidēt in Luther reiected by his ofspring about the reall presence number of sacraments images bookes of the Bible order of seruice and the like Also in Caluine reiected about the head of the churche in England and about all the gouernmēt thereof in Geneua And I coulde alleage here diuerse examples where he and Beza bothe are reiected by name in diuerse points bothe of puritanes and protestants in England when they differ from them but that this preface wold growe to be too long VVherefore I maye perhaps yf this booke come not otherwyse to be too greate adde a short table or appendix in the end to shew by examples the vnconstant dealings of our aduersaries herein and that in verie dede when all is done and sayd that may be and all excuses made that can be deuised the verye conclusion is that onelye that must be taken for truthe whiche pleaseth them last of all to agree vppon and theyr bare woordes must be the proofe thereof For those bookes onelie be scripture in the bible whiche they appoint in those bookes that onelie is the true sense whiche they gyue out the fathers erred in all things where they differ from them the new doctors as Luther Caluin and the rest sawe so much onelie of the truthe as they agree with them and no further This is the sayeing of our aduersaries this is the saying of all the other sectaries of our time this hathe bene the
sayeinge of all heretiques from the beginninge and this muste needes be the sayeinge of all heretiques for the time to come For except they take this waye it is vnpossible to stand or encrease against the Church And by this way a man may beginne what heresie he will to morow next and defend it against all the learning witt and trueth of Christendome Adioyne now to this that our aduersaries notwithstanding all request sute offer or humble petition that we caâ— make will come to no publique disputation or other indifferent and lawfull iudgement but doe persecute imprison torment and slaughter them which offer the same and then lett the reader iudge whether they desire offer iust triall or no â— M. Charke affirmeth Now for our partes as I haue sayd we offer vnto them all the best surest and easiest means that possiblie can be deuised or that euer were vsed in Gods Church for triall of trueth or discouering of heresie For as for the bookes of scripture seing we must receyue them vpoÌ„ the credit and authoritie of the auncient Church we are coÌ„tent to accept for canonicall and allow those none other which antiquitie in Christendome hathe agreed vpon Next for the contents of scripture yf our aduersaries will stand vpon expresse and plaine woords hereof we are content to agree therevnto and we must needes be farre superiours therein For what one expresse plaine text haue they in any one point or article against vs which we doe not acknowleige literallie as they doe as the woordes doe lie but we haue against them infinit whiche they can not admit without gloses and fond interpretations of their owne For example sake we haue it expreslie sayd to Peteâ— that signifieth a rocke vpon this rocke vvill I buyld my churche Math. 16. they haue no where the contrarie in plaine scripture VVe haue expresselie touching the Apostles he that is great among you let hym be made as the yonger Luc. 22. they haue no where there is none greater than other among you VVe haue expresselie this is my bodie Math. 26. you haue no where this is the signe of my bodie VVe haue expresselie the bread that I vvill gyue you is my fleshe Io. 6. they haue no where it is but the sygne of my fleshe VVe haue expresselie a man is iustified by vvoorkes and not hy faith onelie Iacob 2. they haue no where a man is iustified by fayth alone No nor that he is iustified by faith without workes talking of works that folow faith vvhereof onelie our coÌ„trouersie is VVe haue expresseselye vvhose sinnes ye forgyue are forgyuen vvhose sinnes ye retayne they are retayned Ioh. 20. They haue no where that preestes can not forgyue or retayne sinnes in earthe VVe haue expresselie The doers of the lavv shalbe iustified Rom. 2. They haue no where that the law required at ChristiaÌ„s hands is impossible or that the doing therof iustifieth not Christians VVe haue expresselie Vovv yee and render your vovves Psal. 75. they haue no where vow ye not or yf yow haue vowed breake your vowes VVe haue expresselie kepe the traditions vvhiche ye haue learned eyther by vvoorde or epistle 1. thess 2. They haue no where the Apostles left no traditions to the church vnwritteÌ„ VVe haue expresselie yf thovv vvilt enter into lyfe kepe the commaundements and when he sayd he dyd that allredie yf thovv vvilt be perfect goe and sell all thovv haste and gyue to the poore and folovv me They haue no where that eyther the commaundementes can not be kept or that we are not bound vnto them or that there is no degree of lyfe one perfecter than an other VVe haue expresselye vvoorke your ovvne saluation vvith feare and trembling Philip. 2. They haue no where eyther that a man can woorke nothinge towards his owne saluation beinge holpen with the grace of God or that a man should make it of his beleefe that he shalbe saued without all doubt or feare VVe haue expresselie doe ye the vvoorthie fruits of penaunce Luc. 3. They haue no where that faithe onelie is sufficient with out all satisfactioÌ„ and all other woorkes of penaunce on our parts VVe haue expresselie that euerye man shalbe saued according to his vvoorks Apoc. 20. They haue no where that men shalbe Iudged onelie according to their faith VVe haue expresselie that there remaineth a retribution stipend and paye to euerie good vvoorke in heauen Marc. 9. 1. Cor. 3. Apo. 22. Psal. 118. They haue no where that good woorkes done in Christ doe merit nothinge VVe haue expresselie it is a holie cogitatioÌ„ to praye for the deade 2. Machab 12. They haue no where it is superstition or vnlawfull to doe the same VVe haue an expresse example of a holy man that offered sacrifice for the dead 2. Machab. 12. They haue no example of any good man that euer reprehended it VVe haue expresselie that the affliction whiche Daniel vsed vppon his bodie was acceptable in the sight of God Dan. 10. They haue no where that suche voluntarie corporall afflictions are in vaine VVe haue expresselie that an Angel dyd preseÌ„t Tobias good woorkes and almes deedes before God Tob. 12. They haue no were that Angels can not or doe not the same VVe reade expresselie that Ieremias the pâ—het after he was deade praied for the people of Iâ—rael 2. Mach. 15. they haue no where the contrarye to this I leaue manie thinges more that I might repeate But this is enoughe for example sake to proue that albeit our aduersaries doe vaunt of scripture yet when it cometh to expresse woordes they haue no text against vs in lieu of so manie as I haue here repeated against them nor can they shew that we are driuen to denie anie one booke of the Bible nor to glose vppon the plaine woordes of anye one plaine place of scripture as they are enforced to doe But now yf they will not stand onelie to plaine and expresse woordes of scripture but also as in dede they must to necessarie collections made and inferred of scripture then muste we referre onr selues to the auncient primatiue church for this meaning of Gods woord For it is like they knew it best for that they lyued nearer to the writers thereof than we doe whoe could well declare vnto them what was the meaning of the same And then our aduersaries well know how the auncieÌ„t fathers do ground purgatorie prayer to saints sacrifice of the Aultar vse of the crosse and other like points of our religion besides tradition vpon the authoritie of scriptures also expounded accordinge to their meaning albeit oure aduersaries denie the same to be well expounded If our aduersaries will yet goe further for the triall of our Spirits we are well content and we refuse none that euer antiquitie vsed for the triall of a Catholique and hereticall spirit The olde heretiques
man reade his hundred thyrtie seuen epistle vvherof the title is That for a few euill monkes we should not infame all monkes In vvhich epistle hee shall see all the slaunderous argumentes of all heretiques against this kind of meÌ„ ansvvered VVherfore M. Charke and his felovves in condemning and deprauing the lyues of monkes and fryers folovve their auncestours and make vvarre vvith all the Saintes of Christ his holie Churche vvho haue soe much reuereÌ„ced and commended the sayde lyfe In like maner by calling them soo often Base and Beggerlie he shevveth vvhat spirit he is of that ys farre differing from the spirit of Christ vvhose voluntarie pouertie is noted in the scripture and the same moste highly commended by hym to all his folovvers THE DEFENCE To this in effect is replyed verie litle beside a vayne cauyll or two and certaine ordinarie euasions for first he misliketh greatly that Monkes Nounes and the like are called religiouse people as though they onelie sayeth he had religion in them But this is a meere cauyll For these vvere not called religiouse by antiquitie for that they onelye hadde religion in them but for that they made profession of more perfect folovveing of Christian religion than others by remouing vvorldlie impedimentes according to the counsayle of Christ touching perfectioÌ„ Mat. 19. 16. Esa. 56. where chastitie voluntarie pouertie and abnegation of our owne vvill are commeÌ„ded and counsailed to perfectioÌ„ and the countraries thereof in other places of scripture shevved to be great impedimentes Novv the vanitie of this olde hereticall quarell against religiouse may be shevved by a thovvsand examples VVhen vve say learned men vve meane onelie such as make profession of more excellent and deepe learning than the rest and yet vve mynde not thereby to exclude all other men from all learning and knovvlege besides them VVhen vve call ecclesiasticall persons the clergie that is accordinge to the signification of the vvorde the lott or inheritance of God as all antiquitie hathe called them namelie the first councell of Nice almost in euerie Canon And Origen and S. Ierom. proue the vse thereof out of the tvvelueth chapiter of Ieremie vve meane not hereby to exclude other Christians from all inheritance of Christ as suche a vvrangler as Sir vvilliam might cauyll but that these men are more peculiarlie dedicated to gods seruice than other The like when vve call onelie tvvelue Apostles vvhiche signifieth sent vve meane not that none were seÌ„t by Christ but they onelie For we read of diuerse others sent by him also Math 6. Luc. 10. vvhich in that sense are trulie also Apostles but vve meane that those tvvelue vvere principallie sent and therfore by a certayne excellencie onelie called Apostles By vvhiche examples and infinite more it appeareth that this man vveygheth not vvhat he sayeth so he say somevvhat The second thing whiche he answereth is that he is not like the olde heretiques for that they dispraysed the good and he onelie spake against the badde religious people As also S. Augustin hym selfe Barnard doeth VVhich I coÌ„fesse and yf M. Charke wold stand to this his sayeing we should quicklie be at an ende for this controuersie For we all speake against and coÌ„demne euell monkes as we doe also euell pryests euell byshops euell princes And we say that their damnation shalbe farre greater than the rest But yet we neyther condemâ—e all to be euell and muche lesse for the wickednesse of some doe we condemne the whole state and order of lyfe And in these two points we dyffer aswell from the olde heretiques as may appeare by S. Augustine alleaged in the Censure as also from M. Charke and his felowes who bothe condemne all religiouse people of our time to be lewde which is wicked presumption cleane contrarie to the scripture forbydding to iudge Rom. 2. 1. cor 4. and for their supposed euell life doe also coÌ„demne their whole vocation which is an hereticall sophistrie as S. Augusten proueth ep 137. I confesse sayeth M. Fulke there vvere colleges of virgines and Monkes vvithin the first six hundred yeres after Christ but they differed as muche from your Nonnes as these from honest vvomen and as muche from your popishe boars as Angels doe from deuils If I had not named this doctor you might haue knowne hym by his tongue especiallie yf you haue any skill in ruffianlie speeche But by this you see that these mens last refuge against Monkes and Nonnes is to saye they are not like the olde monkes and Nonnes of the primatiue churche and the differences you shall nowe heare out of M. Charke It is a plaine iniurie saieth he â—o matche those auncient monkes of the primatiue churche vviâ—h those of the popish orders For the olde Monkes liued in their houses vvithout vovves as students of diuinitie in colleges they vvere hoâ—ie painefull and learned â—hey laboured vvith their hands their societies vvere Nourices of good learning and godlie lyfe to furnish aftervvard the churche vvhereto being once called they ceased to be Monkes and left their Monasteries Heere are in effect fowre or fyue differences gyuen betwene our monkes and those of the primatiue churche to proue that their states of lyfe are not the same All whiche except onelie the first yf they were proued or graunted as they lye doe not proue one iote of diuersitie in their state of lyfe thoughe somewhat in their manners As we may easilie graunt that the men of no state doe liue so perfectlie now in their vocation as they dyd in the primatiue churche and yett this doeth not alter their state or vocation For example Yf I should reason against the byshops of England as M. Charke doeth against Monkes our byshops are not so learned painefull and holie as they of the primatiue churche were â—hey doe not labour with their hands as the first byshops dyd they doe not goe a foote preache of free-cost watche praye fast as they dyd therfore they are no byshops or their vocations is not the same that the others was is this a good argument no surelie nor you shall neuer fynde it vsed by a Catholique man For by this means we might ouerthrow all states seing that they lyue not so well as man of their calling in the primatiue churche dyd VVe can distinguish betwene the lyfe of men and their vocation or state of lyfe And though we mislike the one yet we can permit the other Onelie troublesome heretiques from the begynnyng to engarboyle common wealthes haue impugned the states of lyfe for the vitiouse manners ether true or supposed of some priuate men as for that some pope lyued euell therfore no popedome no authoritie to be graunted hym For that some monks or Nonnes haue liued wickedlie and contrarie to their vocation therefore no monks or Nonnes are to be permitted And this is now vpon supposall that all were true which M. Charke sayth of these differences
and affirmed that the husband ought to geue consent to his wife in this matter and that yf he refused then shee might prouide for her healthe by secret flyeing from him and goeinge into an other countrie might marie an other This counsaile I gaue when I was yet in feare of Antichrist But now my mynde should be to geue farre other counsaile that is layeing my hands vppon the locks of suche a husbaÌ„d that should so craftelie deceyue a woman I wold shake hym as the prouerbe is and that vehementlie and the same is my Iudgement of the woman also albeit it falleth out more seldome in women than in men to neede this counsaile Now let the reader Iudge whether M. Charke be a true man or no in cutting of the woordes that folowed immediatlie in Luther after the sentence by hym alleaged and notwithstandinge with a moste impudent face to crye out and insult against me as reading a peece of Luthers senteÌ„ce against the manifest purpose of the vvriter can this be excused from extreme impudencie and moste willfull falsehoode against his owne coÌ„science Lett hym defend this yf he can with all the helpes and deuises of his felowes or else lett the reader by this one point of open dishonestie discouered Iudge of the rest of their dealings with vs of their slaundering of vs without all coÌ„scieÌ„ce in their sermons where they are sure not to be controlled Lutheâ— goeth on to inueigh against that husband that wolde not in this case permitt his wyfe to lye with an other he being not hable to serue her turne hym selfe coÌ„cludeth egregie deberee solucre eiusmodi imposturam that he ought to pay sweetly for deceauing her so And in an other place he sayeth that yf a man haue tenne vvyues or more â—ledde froÌ„ hym vpon like causes he may take more so may vvyues doe the lyke in husbands VVhereupon Alberus one of your owne religion noteth that IOHANNES Leidensis tooke many wyues and one KNIPPERDOLLINGE tooke thirtene for his parte So that this doctrine was not onelie taught but also practized vpon Luthers authoritie The fifthe dostrine Fyftlye Luther is reported to teache Yf the vvyfe vvill not come let the mayd come To this M. Hanmer answereth You â—ather vpon Luther an impudent slaunder being not in deede his ovvne vvordes but alleaged by hym as spoken by an other M. Charke graunteth them absolutelye to be Luthers owne woordes but seeketh an interpretation for Luthers meanyng sayeing In this place Luther speaketh of a thyrd cause of diuorse vvhen the vvomaÌ„ shall obstinatlye refuse her husbands companie So that these men doe litle care what they answer so they say somewhat and we may see how trymlye they doe agree But the truthe is they are Luthers owne wordes deliuered to the husband to vse to his wyfe as the woordes before were for the wyfe to vse against her husband and they can not be excused eyther by M. Hanmers shamelesse deniall or by M. Charks impartinent interpretation thus they stand in Luther Hic nunc oportunum est vt maritus dicat si tu nolueris alia volet si domina nolit adueniat ancilla Here now is oportunitie for the husbande to say to the wyfe yf you will not an other will yf the mistresse will not lett the handmayde come And that this was practized in Germanie to all kynde of lasciuiousenesse yea among the ministers them selues Sebastian flaske a preacher once of Luthers owne familie doeth testifie And when you are not a shamed to defend the doctrine you are more bolde than the Lutherans them selues who for verie shame doe suppresse the Germane booke wherein it was written as Cromerus a Germane testifieth And Smideline hathe no other waye to answere it against Staphilus but to aske vvhy Luther might not retract this as S. AusteÌ„ dyd maniâ— thinges but yet proueth not that euer he offered to recant it Now whereas you seeke to couer this dishonest doctrine of your prophet by alleaging two positions of the Catholiques about deuorse in mariage as absurd in your sight as this the one that a man may deuorce hym selfe from his vvyfe for being a bondvvoman yf he kuevv it not before the mariage the other that he may do the same for couetousnes in her by Peter lombards opinion the first is true allowed by all lawes of nature Ciuill and Canon that vpon great reason for that he which marieth a bondwoman vnwittinglie leeseth his free choyse by ignorance nor can not haue power ouer her bodie as mariage requireth she beyng in bondage to other Also he can not beget childeren but bonde cum partus sequatur ventrem And coÌ„sequentlie can not bring them vpp at his pleasure nor instruct them necessarilie which things doe repugne to the state of mariage The second albeit it be but the sayeing of one man yet his meanyng is that yf this couetousnes or other notoriouse vice of the wyfe should break out to the husbands notable dammage or daunger as yf she should fall to stealing or the like then he might dimittere eam as lombards woordes are that is dimisse her from his companie but not dissolue the knott of wedlock as bothe S. Thomas doeth expounde it 3. p. q. 59. art 6. and Dominicus Sotus in 4. sent dist 39. art 4. But yet what are all these things to the lasciuiouse doctrine of Martin Luther The last fovver doctrines The other fower doctrines foloweing for that you graunâ— them as they lye think them sownd enough to â—tand with your gospell I nede not to repeat in particular or alleage other places where Luther holdeth the same By your Censure they are curraÌ„t Catholique and good But yet in the first where you preferre matrimonie before virginitie yt may be noted of the reader for examples sake how farre you differ from the spirit of the primatiue churche whiche condemned this position as an intolerable heresie in IOVINIAN and others onelye to make equall matrimonie with virginitie as appeareth by S. Ierome in his two moste learned and vehement bookes against Iouinian and by S. Augustin recounting the 82. heresie of his time And by S. Ambrose also in his epistle to Syricius the pope and by other fathers And yf this auncient churche whiche our aduersaries in woordes will graunt to be the true and pure churche dyd detest this heresie in IOVINIAN HELVIDIVS BASILIDES I mean to affirme matrimonie paris esse meriti cum virginitate as their woordes are that is to be of equall meritt with virginitie what wolde the same churche doe to M. Luther M Chark for preferringe mariage before virginitie And yf to omitt all others S. Cyprian Athanasius Basil Ambrose Chrisostom and S. Augustin did write whole books in commendation and preferment of virginitie aboue all other states of lyfe comparing it to the lyfe of Angels and affirming the dignitie thereof to be incomparable what
we talke when we compare them with scripture impeache the teaching of Christe and his Apostles what doeth the spirituall authoritie of the pope vnder Christe diminishe the kinglie power and authoritie of Christe how doeth the preesthode of mē as from Christe or the sacrifice of the Aultar instituted by Christe disgrace Christs presthoode or his sufficiēt sacrifice ones for all offered on the crosse There is noted in the Margent the epistle to the Hebrewes where it is saied that that sacrifice on the crosse was ones offered for euer for oure redēptiō VVhiche we bothe graunt and teache in that manner as then it was done but yet that impeacheth nothing this dayly sacrifice of ours whiche must be in the churche vntill the end of the woorde as Daniel prophecyed and that in euerie place amongest the Gentiles that is in all the worlde is Malachie fore-tolde being called by Sainct Cirill and other fathers incruentum sacrificium the vnbloodie sacrifice which being one and the selfe same with that which was offered once vpon the crosse is appointed by Christe to be offred dayly in remembrance and thanks geuing for that bloodie sacrifice as Sainct Chrisostom doeth proue at large vpō the epistle to the hebrewes whom other his like yf M. Chark his felowes wolde not disdaine to reade beleeue they wold be a shamed to cauill and blaspheme gods mysteries as they doe But for a large and full answere of this common obiection of theirs owte of the epistle to the hebrewes towching Christe once bloodilie offered for all I referre the reader amōges many other to certayne particular auncient and learned fathers of the primatiue churche whoe doe handle this obiection and answere it of purpose The one is Theodoret byshop of Cyrus whoe handleth this question vvhie Christians doe novv vse to sacrifice in the nevv testament seing the olde lavv vvith all sacrifices vvere abolished by the one sacrifice of Christe The other is S. Augustin whoe proposeth this dowbt hovv vve sacrifice Christe euery daye vpon the Aultar seing he is sayd to be sacrificed once for all vpon the crosse And then he answereth it bothe fullie and largelie in that sense as I haue sayd before So that this obiection was a cómon thing in the primatiue churche and commōlie answered by euery writer which M. Chark his felowes do make so much a doe abowt now crieing owt that we denie the vertue of Christes passion the effects of his offices and the like See the same answered also by Eusebius li. 1. demonst euang cap. 6. and 10. And by Theophilact in cap. 5. ad hebr And so hauing answered now the substance of all that which M. Chark hathe in his preface I might here make an end but that I haue promised to shew how we offer hym and his felows moste reasonnable meanes of triall and that they in deede admitt none at all For what is it to name scripture in woordes when all thee controuersie is about the sense thereof wherein they admit no Iudge but them selues yf we bring scripture neuer so playne yet will they shift it of with some impartinent interpretation And what remedie or further triall haue we then I will gyue an example or two for instruction of the reader in their procedings The most of the auncient fathers wrote books in prayse of virginitie aboue wedlocke vsed to proue it by the sayeing of Christe There be Eunuches vvhiche haue gelded them selues for the kingdome of heauen he that can take it let hym take it Also by the woordes of S. Paul he that ioynethe his virgine in mariage dothe vvell and hee that ioynethe her not dothe better VVhiche woordes being alleaged against Martyn Luther whoe preferred mariage yea though it were of a vowed Nunne before virgnitie he answered it thus that Christ by his woordes terrified men from virginitie and continence and S. Paul by this speche dyd diswade them from the same Now what could be replied in this case trow you An other exāple may be towching S. Iohn Baptist of whome the scripture sayth first concerning his place of liuinge that he vvas in the vvildernesse vntill the day of his appearing to Israel Secōdlie touching his apparell Iohn vvas appareled vvith the heares of Camels Thyrdlie touching his diet his meate vvas locustes and vvilde honie Of whiche three things the olde fathers of the primatiue Church dyd gather a great and singular austeritie of S. Iohns lyfe and doe affirme with all that Eremits and Monkes and other religious people did take their paterne of straite lyuing from hym For whiche cause S. Chrisostome dothe often call S. Iohn Baptist Monachum principem vitae monastice a monke and prince of Monasticall lyfe whiche protestants being not able to abyde doe rage maruailouslie against S. Chrisostome condemning hym of rashenes and falsehode for vsinge those termes wherefore they fall to interpret the alleaged woordes of scripture farre otherwise sayeinge that by the desert wherein he liued vntill he began to preache is vnderstoode nothing els but his priuate lyfe at home in his fathers ovvne hovvse And for his apparell say they of Camels heare it was not straunge apparell but vsual to Mountain men that is vndulata◠sayeth another VVater chamblet hansome and decent albeit somvvhat plentifull in that countrie And lastlie touchinge his dyet of locusts and wilde hony it was no hard fare say they for the locustes were creuises cast awaye by the fishers of Iordan as vncleane by the lawe but eaten of Iohn by the libertie of the Gospell And the wilde hony was no vnpleasant thing as the fathers doe imagin but it was say Cossius and Strigelius that pleasant Manna whiche Apothecaires vse to kepe in their shoppes So that accordinge to these men all that austeritie of lyfe whiche the scriptures so particularlie doe recounte all antiquitie doeth wounder at in S. Iohn Baptist cometh but to this that he was brought vp priuatelie in his fathers house cladde in chāblette fedde with creuisses swete Manna VVhat great hardnesse was this A thyrd example may be aboute the controuersie of reall presence in the sacrament for whiche we bring plaine woordes of scripture oute of fower diuerse places of the new testament where the same woordes are repeated withoute exposition or alteration to witt hoc est corpus meum this is my bodie VVhiche woordes dyd seme so playne and cleare for the reall presence of Christe in the sacrament to all antiquitie as no man might without great offence doubt thereof as the woords of S. Ambro. S. Ciril are And as the same Ciril in an other place proueth at large to aske onelye quomodo how it may be is the parte of an vnbeleuinge Iewe seinge God was able as he sayeth as well to doe this as to turne the rodde of Moyses into a serpent To whiche purpose allso holy Epiphanius
Samosatenus Arrius Macedonius Nestorius Eutiches were tried and condeÌ„ned by the councells of Antioche Nice Constantinople and Chalcedon and other heretiques by other councelles since VVe are content to referre our selues to all the Christian councells that euer haue bene sence Christ dyed And all men knowe that the last moste learned godlie and generall councell of Trent was gathered for that purpose offered all safe-conduct to our aduersaries to come thither to triall but they refused it Besides this the auncient fathers haue vsed diuerse times diuerse other means of triall As first by referring the matter to the triall of olde doctors which lyued before the coÌ„trouersies begaÌ„ne This meane vsed S. Austen against Iulian the pelagian and produceth the consent of fathers bothe of the east and of the west Churche vntill his tyme and there asketh hym whoe he is that dareth to oppose hym selfe to the credit of these men to call them blynde to saye they were deceyued where as they were the verie lights of the citie of God The like waye dyd Theodosius the Emperour take by the counsaile of Sisinius and suggestion of Nectarius to bring the ArriaÌ„s heresie to some ende as Socrates writeth And Epiphanius I sayethe this is enough to say against all heresies Ecclesia Catholica haec non doeuit Sancti paâ—res haec minimè receperunt The Catholique Churche hathe not taught this the holie fathers haue not admitted this Now how our aduersaries doe flie this means of triall they are not ashamed to confesse it openlie An other waie is to consider whiche is the Catholique or vniuersall Church or great multitude of Christians out of whiche the one part first departed This way vsed S. Austen against diuerse heretiques as namelie against the Manacheis wheÌ„ he sayeth Multa sunt quae in Catholicae ecclesiae gremio me iustissimè teneant tenet consensio populorum atque gentium tenet ipsum Catholicae nâ—men There are manie things which vpon good cause doe holde me in the lappe of the Catholique Churche for the verie coÌ„sent of people and nations doeth holde me Also the verie name of Catholique church holdeth me And Vincentius Lirinensis liuing about the same time writeth to the same effect against heresies In ipsa Catholica ecclesia magnoperè curandum est vt id teneamus quod vbique quod semper quod ab omnibus creditum c. Sed hoc ita demuÌ„ fiâ— sv sequamur vniuersitateÌ„ antiquitateÌ„ consensionem Sequemur autem vniuersitatem hoc modo si hanc vnaÌ„ fidem veram esse fateamur quam tota per orbem terrarum confiâ—etur ecâ—lesia Antiquitatem vero ita si ab hiis nullatenus sensibus recedamus quos sanctos maiores ac patres nostros celebrasse manifestum est Consensionem quoque itidem si in ipsa veâ—ustate omnium vel certè penè omnium sacerdotum magistrorum definitiones sententiasque sectemur VVe must greatlie take heede in the Catholique Churche to holdeâ— that whiche hathe bene beleued in euerie place allwayes of all ChristiaÌ„s c. And this we shall doe yf in oure beleefe we folow vniuersalitie antiquitie and coÌ„sent VVe shall folow vniuersalitie yf we confesse that onelie faith to be true whiche the Churche spred ouer all the worlde doeth coÌ„fesse we shall folowe antiquitie yf we depart not from that meaning and sense of scripture which is euident that our forefathers and auncestours haue held we shall folow consent yf we embrace the definitions and opinions eyther of all or of the moste parte of preestes and teachers in antiquitie The like way doeth S. Ierome take against the Luciferians and other fathers against other heretiques And howe quicquelie our aduersaries spirit were tried by this way of Antiquitie vniuersalitie and consent all men that haue vnderstanding may Iudge An other way there is also and muche vsed by the fathers against heretiques and that is to proue theyr religioÌ„ by the successioÌ„ of bishops in the See of Rome wherein the successour alwayes teaching the doctrine of his predecessour it must nedes be a strong argument to proue the descent and continuance of one and the same faithe from the Apostles time This argumeÌ„t vseth S. Austen in the place before alleaged Tenet ab ipsa sede Petri Apostoli cui pascendas oues post resurrectionem dominus commendauit vsque ad praesentem episcopaâ—um successio sacerdotum The succession of preests in the Churche of Rome eueÌ„ from the chair of Peter vnto whome our lorde after his resurrection commended his sheepe to be fedde vnto this byshoprik that now is doeth holde me in the Catholique Churche The same waye of triall he vseth and muche more at large in hys hundred three skore and fyueth epistle where he reckoneth vpp all the byshopps of Rome from Peter vnto Anastasius whiche was byshop in his tyme and thinketh this a good proofe against the donatists that none of those held or fauoured theyr opinion The lyke waye of triall vsed Optatus Mileuitanus against the same donatists before S. Austen reckoning vp all the byshopps of Rome vntill SIRICIVS that satte in his time The same waye of triall vsed holy Irenaeus before eyther of bothe these men against the heretiques of his time reckoninge vpp all the byshops of Rome vntill Eleutherius that held the See in his time addinge that by this succession he dyd confovvnd the pride of all heretiques that durst to teache othervvise than this See had held And after concluding thus est plenissima haec ostensio vnam eandem viuificatricem fidem esse quae in ecclesia ab Apostolis vsque nunc sit conseruata tradita in veritate This ys a moste full proofe that one the selfe same quickninge faithe hathe bene deliuered in truthe and commended from the Apostles vnto this day But now this way of triall I know oure aduersaries will not admitt An other waye of triall is to examine what parte doeth holde anye olde coÌ„demned heresie For as an heretique hauing once lost the habit of fayth gyuen hym in baptisme is easily moued to cope with anye heresie new or olde that commeth in his waye and serueth his turne so moste certaine it is that the true Catholique churche can neuer admitt or defend any heresie For otherwyse she coulde not be the pillar of trueth And we beleeue with holie Athanasius in his creed that he vvhich holdeth not the faythe vvholye in all points shall perish eternallie howe soeuer our aduersaries doe salue the matter in theyr prophets Berengarius Husse VVikliffe and Luther whome they say to haue bene holie men yet to haue erred in diuers points of faithe and to haue held theyr erreurs obstinatelie to the daye of theyr deathe But wee beleue the contrarye as I haue sayed And therefore who soeuer could shew but one coÌ„fessed heresie to be defended by our churche there neded no more disputation
about the matter But now for the right vse of this way of triall there be two conditions to be obserued of his part whiche will obiect an olde heresie to an other The first is that the partie doe in dede holde that thinge whiche he obiecteth and not a certaine likeliehoode of it For that were to slaunder and not to obiect As when oure aduersaries doe obiect to vs the heresie of Pelagius abowt free will it is a mere slaunder For we holde that mans will beinge preuented and holpen with the grace of God may woorke well but he helde that it could do the same by the power and force of nature without the helpe of gods grace as S Augustin proueth at large in his booke of free will The like iniurie they doe vs in many other things which they obiect against vs as the heresie of those whiche dyd sacrifice to our ladie and the like whiche we doe not The second condition is that the heresie obiected be in dede suche as was accompted and condemned for an heresie in the primatiue churche and not onelie that an heretique held it For heretiques doe holde diuerse truethes alwayes together withe falsehode And for lack of this condition doe our aduersaries often abuse the simple people As M. Fulke oftentimes sayeth prayer for the deade is an heresie because the Montanists which were heretiques helde it But lett hym proue that euer this was accompted one of MoÌ„tanus hys heresies theÌ„ he proueth somewhat But that he can neuer doe for he grauÌ„teth Austen Ambrose Chrisostom Ierom and others â—o haue vsed prayers for the deade whoe notwitstanding were great enemies to Montanus and all his errors VVherefore this is a verie malitiouse kynde of abusing people And I heere saye again that lett hym and all the protestants in the worlde proue that we doe holde in dede but anie one thing which was accoÌ„pted an heresie in the primatiue church we will graunt that we are not the Catholique Churche but that in all other things we erre besides But we in charging them vvithe heresies doe obserue allvvayes the foresayd tvvo conditions As for example vve charge them vvith the opinion of Aerius vvhiche denied prayer for the dead And that they holde this verie same opinion they vvill not denie And that it vvas accompted an heresie in the primatiue churche vve alleage for vvitnesses S. Augustin and Epiphanius Hovv doe they auoyde this No vvaye but by sayeinge that Augustin and Epiphanius vvere deceyued in recording that for an heresie vvhiche vvas none for that is M. Fulks answere whiche is to condemne all that age for that those holie fathers wrote downe heresies as they were taken in those dayes by the church The lyke we doe about vigilantius whose opinions were among others that Saints were not to be prayed to nor their reliques to be honored Now that the protestants hold this no man dowteth And that this was accompted heresie in the primatiue churche we cite S. Ierome for a wittnesse which wrote against hym VVhat shift is there here None but to deface S. Ierome and commend vigilantius and to denie it to be an heresie for so doeth M. Fulke sayeing further that Ierome rather raileth than reasoneth and that vigilantius vvas a good man and his opinion sovvnd The like order we take in a nuÌ„ber of other olde hereticall points whiche we charge them withall as may be sene in the tables and books sett owt of this matter Now yf our aduersaries could bringe vs to anie suche confession of heresie the matter were ended But they can not and therefore I know they will neuer admitt this way of triall The last way of triall whereof I will speake at this time is to consider the maners of olde heretiques to compare the same with oures And here I wolde haue also the former two conditions obserued To witt that we consider suche qualities onelie as were accompted hereticall in them that is proper to heretiques and to examine them trulie withoute partiall affection in our selues For example S. Augustin doeth note it as an hereticall propertie in the donatists to hate the See of Rome and to call it cathedram pestilentiae the chair of pestilence Doeth this agree to protestants or to vs As also the defaming of the said See sor the euell pretended lyfe of some particular men As likewise he noteth it as an hereticall tricke in them to persuade the people that the visible churche had erred and oppressed the true churche banishinge her from the sight of the worlde Doe not our aduersaries say the verie same Also he noteth the same heretiques for hatinge and condemninge the lyfe of monkes as also for dravving Nonnes out of theyr cloysters and ioyninge them selues vvith the same in pretended vvedlocke Finallie he noteth it as hereticall in the ArriaÌ„s to appeale from traditions to onelie scripture Now before S. Augustin Optatus noted it as hereticall in the donatists to breake aultars vvherevpon the bodie and blood of Christ vvere kept as the woordes of Optatus are And about the same time Victor Vticensis wrote his storie against the vandall heretiques where he setteth furthe moste liuelie the state of our time by the maners and behauiours of those heretiques in breakinge chalices prophaning of holie Chrisme spoylinge of churche vestimeÌ„ts throweing the blessed sacrameÌ„t of the aultar on the ground with other moste horrible abuses to the same not to be repeated in prohibiting masse to be sayd by edicts and proclamation and a hundred things moe whiche are the verie exercises of our aduersaries now The like things in many points doeth S. Basil obiect as sacrilegious against Iulian the Apostata and his folowers wherfore I thinke our aduersaries will not admitt The cause inforcinge the author to break of pag. 1.2.3 M. Charks vntrueth and hypocrisie pag. 5.6.7.8 A Challenge to M. Charke and all his brother ministers for disputation page 9. 10.11 VVhye protestantes appeall to onelie scripture pa. 13. The dissention among heretiques of our tyme vppon onelie scripture page 14. Protestantes do admitt no tryall at all page 18. An absurd hereticall interpretation of scripture touchinge S. Iohn Baptist his place of lyuinge apparrell and diet page 19. Euident testimonies of scriptures and fathers for the reall presence in the sacrament page 20. Luthers mislyking of Corolostadius Zuinglius Oecolampadius others touching the reall presence pag. 22. M. Fulk his arrogant kynd of answering page 25. The protestants kynde of tryall is onelie that to be trueth whiche they will haue to be trueth page 26. Catholikes offer many kyndes of triall of spirites pa. 27. As by bookes of scripture and the expresse woorde therof Ibidem By necessarie collections vpon scripture page 29. By Councells page 30. By doctors Ibidem By the Churche and her notes Ibidem By sucession of Byshoppes page 31. By agreement of the doctrine of our aduersaries with olde heresies page
dishonour of his Maister yet maketh he mention bothe of this feare and also of the deathe of his companion and graunteth it to haue bene one principal motiue of his entraunce into religion His wordes are these Hos terrores seu primum seu accerrime sensit eo anno cum sodalem nescio quo casu interfectum amisisset Luther felt thes terrors feares eyther first or moste sharplie that yeare wherein he lost his companion slayne I know not by what chaunce Nay Martin Luther coÌ„fesseth the matter him selfe in an epistle to his father Iohn Luther to whome he yeeldeth a reason of hys runninge owt of religion by his vnlawfull entrance thervnto Memini nimis sayeth he praesente cum iam placatus mecum loquereris ego de coelo terroribus me vocatum asserereÌ„ Neque enim libens cupiens fiebam monachus sed terrore agone mortis subitae circumuallatus voui coactum necessarium votum I doe remember too well when yow beinge pacified talked with me present I affirmed that I was called by terrours from heauen to enter into religion For I was not made a friar willinglie and of my owne desire but beinge enuironed with terrour and with the agonie of suddain deathe I made a vow vpon necessitie and enforcement Heere the matter is euident by Luther hym selfe whiche M. Charke so confidentlie denieth and cryeth out against bishope Lindan for reporting the same sayeing That he vvill not beleeue Lyndan in this no more than he vvill beleeue his reporte that the Caluinistes doe vvorship the Image of the deuyll In deede he sayeth that Caluinists doe adore theyr owne imaginations suggested by the deuyll aboue all authoritie or proofe besides as all other heretiques doe and in that sense doe honour the deuyll Againe he sayeth that in the yeere of our lorde 1572. when Caluinistes went to ouerthrow a monasterie at a towne called Leyden in flauÌ„ders they erected the signe of the deuyll in theyr publique banner whiche neuer Christians dyd before Yf M. Chark could haue refuted any of these particulars he should haue done well But by his generall reporte though he seeke to bring Lyndan in hatred yet it turnethe to his owne discredit releeueth nothing his cause in haÌ„de For the deuyll crieing out of Luthers mouthe thoughe M. Chark woolde seme to denye yt yet bringeth he not one syllable in disprofe thereof so many particulars are put downe by Coclaeus whoe liued with hym as euerye man may see that the matter was euideÌ„t And no protestant in Germanie where the matter was done as where also being Lutherans they doe esteeme Luthers honour more than Caluinistes doe neuer yet hathe bene able to reproue the same But now come we to the doctrines of libertie and carnalitie whiche the Censure affirmeth Luther to haue taught after he had once coped with a Nonne VVhiche M. Charke after his ministeriall phrase expresseth in these woordes VVhen the lorde had opened hys eyes thinkinge hym selfe no longer tyed to hys vnaduised and superstitiouse vovv he maryed in the lorde and all this vvas laufull But how soeuer you name the lorde M. Chark to couer this lasciuiouse lecherie of a renegate frier with his vowed ladie yet I haue shewed before out of the auncient fathers that this pretended mariage on bothe partes was esteemed worse than adulterie in the primatiue churche whereof he that will see more lett hym read S. Basil de monast const cap. 22.34 35. Also quest 14. fuse explicat Also S. Augustin in Psal. 78. 99. also Concill Chalced cap. 26. Also fulgentius de fide ad Pet. ca. 3. And finallie S. Leo. ep 92. ad Rusticum But now to the doctrines them selues in whiche I will be as short as I may in defence of my reportes being moste true as shall appeare by luthers owne wordes and that in those books of his and editions whiche are to be had in England publiquelie So that the aduersarie shall haue no more refuge to saye he can not finde the booke And as M. Charks vntrue dealing hathe bene indifferentlie discryed by that which went before so shall it be muche more by these doctrines of Luther And because bothe M. Hanmer and M. Charke haue taken vppon them seuerallye to answer the same I will couple them together where soeuer they haue any thing woorthe the notinge aduertising the reader by the waie that whereas Luther hathe diuerse editioÌ„s of his woorks and diuerse of them diuerslie traÌ„slated out of duche into latin he must not maruayle yf the same booke some tymes haue diuerse titles though I meane now to cyte them vnder such names as nighe as I can as they are to be sene in the editioÌ„ of wittenberge sett furthe and as I haue seene them my selfe in England by melancthon Anno 1562. The first doctrine Fyrst then I affirmed Luther to teache that there is no synne but incredulytie neyther can a man damne hym selfe do vvhat mischefe he can except he vvill refuse to beleue M. Hanmer denieth not this doctrine but defendeth it onelye addinge that I haue racked Luthers vvoordes vpon the tentors of preiudice and then sheweth at large how all synnes doe lye sooking in the roote of increduâ—itie VVhiche is some what too fine for me to vnderstand M. Chark goeth further sayeing I may plainlie pronounce that in this place you doe in vvoords and matter reporte an open vntruthe For M. Luther hathe no suche doctrine Heere is no agreemeÌ„t in the deffeÌ„ders the one grauÌ„tinge it the other so flatly denyeynge the same But who wolde think M. Charke could answer thus without blushing heare Luthers owne woordes Ita vides quà m diues sit homo Christianus siue Baptizatus qui etiam volens non potest perdere salutem suam quantiscunque peccatis nisi nolit credere Nulla enim peccata eum possunt damnare nisi sola incredulitas So thou seest how riche a Christian man is who can not leese his saluation though he wolde with neuer so great sinnes except he will not beleeue For no synnes can damne hym but onelie incredulitie Again in the same tome he sayeth Infidelitas sola turbatio est conscientiae onelie infidelitie is a trouble of conscience Is not heere now as muche as I haue sayed If nothing must trouble a mans conscience but onelie vnbeleefe then nothing is sinne but onelye vnbeleefe Again yf a man can not leese his saluation yf he wolde neuer so fayne by committing neuer so greate sinnes except he will not beleeue then may a man doe what he will so he fall not into incredulitie But yet to shame these shamelesse men a litle further and to shew the wicked licentiouse doctrine of this loose apostata heare more what he sayeth in an other place Nihil prauum facit praeter infidelitatem Nothing maketh a man euell besides infidelitie And a litle after he concludeth thus Ex