hatred he beares vnto him so the divill to testifie how much hee hates God himselfe spends all his fury vpon him that beareth the image of God Hence is it that he is so wroth with the woman and from this Wrath is it that hee still persecutes her casts out floods of water to overwhelme her and maketh warre with the remnant of her seede which keepe the commandements of God and haue the testimony of Iesus Christ. As Satan so Satanicall and wicked men are deadly enimies vnto the Saints and holy members of Christ. Qui male agit odit lucem he that doth evill hates the light Now the whole world lyeth in wickednesse and therefore cannot endure the light either of Christs truth or their life If they were of the world the world would loue his owne but because they are not of the World but chosen out of the world therefore the world hateth them They thinke it strange that the Saints run not into the same excesse of riot with them What marvell then if hating them and being separated in life and conversation from them they continually stirre vp persecutions against them But it will bee said why doth not God hinder them being able Doth he not loue his Church yes he loues her as the apple of his eye and because her therefore he permits them For as our Saviour saith As many as I loue I rebuke and chasten the Apostle to the Hebrewes whom the Lord loueth he chastneth and scourgeth every sonne whom he receiueth Whereby it appeareth also that God not only permitteth but hath a hand in the afflictions of his children himselfe delivering them over vnto their adversaries to correct them Yea the Apostle S. Paul yet farther saith that wee are appointed to afflictions predestinated to be conformed vnto the image of the sonne of God as in other things so also to suffer with him that we may be glorified together The ends which God propounded to himselfe herein are partly his owne glory partly our good His owne glory in the manifestation of his iustice power and wisdome Iustice in that he beginnneth iudgement at his owne house not sparing them whom he loues most dearely nor suffering them to recover paradise so easily who had abandond it so wilfully Parvo parari tanta res non debuit it was not fit that such a peece should be won without striking any stroke His power in preseruing such earthen vessels notwithstanding all the knocks and blowes laid vpon them not suffering the bush to consume though flaming and all on fire yea multiplying his Church the more they are slaine and making the bloud of his Martyrs the seede of his Gospell and finally in her greatest distresses and extremities delivering her most miraculously His Wisdome in proportioning the body to the head for it was not fit that Christ should weare a crowne of thornes and we be clothed in purple and fine linnen and fare sumptuously every day but as he entred into glory by the crosse so should wee aspire to the same end by the same way As God in the afflictions of his Church respected his owne glory so also hee intended our good and benefit It is good for me saith David that I haue beene afflicted Hee chastneth vs for our benefit saith the Apostle to the Hebrewes First by the crosse he fanneth away from the church paleaâ— levis fidei the chaffe of those that are vnstable in the faith For the seede that falleth in the stony ground that is he that hath no root in himselfe dureth but for a while and when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word by and by he is offended And so the chaffe flying away the heape of corne remaineth more cleane in the garner of God as Tertullian speaketh Againe by it are wee much bettered for as a Corrosiue it frets away our ranke flesh and as a fire it purgeth away the drosse of corruption and refines vs. It worketh repentance of sinnes past it preventeh future sinnes it quickneth the spirit of grace within vs and maketh vs more carefull to obserue Gods commandements Thirdly it honours vs greatly by making our vertues knowne vnto the world For as the valour of a souldier is best seene in the battle and the skill of a pilote in a tempest so is the fortitude and patience of a Christian best discerned in tribulation Spices brayed yeeld the sweetest smellâ— as the broaching of heresies tries how much we know of God so the fire of persecution discouereth how much we loue the truth of God Fourthly it weaneth vs from the loue of this world and worketh in vs a longing to be dissolued and to bee with Christ which otherwise wee would hardly doe even as children would hardly forbeare sucking vnlesse the teat bee striken with wormewood or some other bitter and distastfull iuyce Lastly si compatimur etiam conregnabimus if wee suffer with Christ wee shall also raigne with him Exceeding great shall be our reward in heaven saith Christ. Here on earth shall we reape the peaceable fruite of righteousnesse and in heaven an exceeding weight of glory wherewith our sufferings are no way to be compared Thus by Scripture experience malice of adversaries divine ordinance it plainly appeares that every one that will come after Christ must of necessity beare his crosse I adde farther he must not only beare it but hee must take it vp also and that Daily He must not only endure it with patience but also willingly ioyfully thankfully Willingly for so did Christ who foreseeing it and hauing power to avoide it yet would not Nothing that is forced pleaseth God but only that which is voluntarie Ioyfully so did the Apostles reioycing that they were accounted worthy to suffer shame for the name of Christ and our Saviour commanded vs in the midst of persecutions to reioyce be exceeding glad Nor but that affliction is in it selfe and for the present greevous not ioyous but inasmuch as it is for Christs sake and to giue testimony vnto the truth Thankfully in regard of the benefit and reward we reape thereby So did Moses esteeme the reproach of Christ greater riches then the treasures of Aegypt And it is reason wee should thanke the Chirurgion that cures vs as well for his Corrosiues as his Lenitiues Neither must wee only take vp the crosse willingly ioyfully thankfully but also daily that is with constancy and perseverance He fighteth not the good fight that finisheth not his course It is not sufficient to beare out a brunt or two vnlesse hauing done all we stand God regardeth not so much the beginning as the end Finis coronat opus it is the end that crowneth the worke The reward is promised non pugnanti sed vincenti not to him that fighteth but to him that overcometh In a word he that continueth to the end
the Church may be without them So was it for some while after Christs Ascention for then neither was the Christian Church so Eminent as that of the Iewes nor was it Vniversall as being confined within Iudea nor great in number as consisting but of a very few nor in Possession of the name Catholike it being a word of a latter date and such as could not well be giuen it vntill it was growne Catholike So will it be also if wee may beleeue your owne writers in the time of Antichrist For then the Church shall bee darkned all externall communion with it shall cease there shall be no Sacrament in publike places all the glory and dignity of Ecclesiasticall order shall lye buried none shall come vnto the solemnity of the Lambe an innumerable multitude shall cleaâ—e vnto Antichrist even all besides the elect and those whose names are written in the booke of life But lastly whether these things be Markes or no is not now much materiall for it makes little to the purpose wee haue sufficiently proued that the Church is not the last Resolution of Faith As touching the second point that the Church may be beleeved securely for that shee can neither deceiue nor bee deceiued I demand what you meane by the Church If the company of all true Beleeuers that now are and heretofore haue beene including the holy Apostles together with them then I grant it For these were so lead by the Spirit into all truth that they could not possibly erre in any matter of Faith that was either to be taught by them or knowne by vs. But if you meane the Present Church in every age successiuely after the Apostles as here Saint Austin doth referring his friend Honoratus therevnto then I distinguish Either you must vnderstand thereby the whole number of true beleeuers who for the present life in the world or the Society and Fellowship of those that in their time rule and sway most in the Church If you take it in the former sense I grant what you say to be true in Fundamentall points but not in such as are not absolutely necessary nor preiudice the Foundation of Faith If in the latter then I affirme that the Church may both deceiue and be deceiued even in Doctrines of highest consequence neither can with such security bee beleeued Witnesse the time when the whole world groaned vnder Arianisme and the greatest part of the Prelates together with Liberius Bishop of Rome subscribed therevnto Neither doth the passage you alledge out of Saint Austin inferre the contrary For although the surest course to put an end to all labours and turmoiles be to follow the way of Catholike discipline which hath flowne downe to vs from Christ by his Apostles yet the Authority that swayeth most in the Present Church doth not alwaies either follow this way her selfe or direct others vnto it as for example it did not in the time aboue mentioned of the Arian heresy And thus much in answere vnto your generall ground N. N. Now I will shew first out of the old Testament how it was prefigured and prophecied and in the new both promised againe exhibited and confirmed by the intendment interpretation of the gravest and most ancient Fathers that haue lived in the Church of God from age to age who vnderstand so the said Figures and foreshewing of the old Testament As for example the Bread and Wine mysteriously offered vnto almighty God by Melchizedek King and Priest who bare the type of our Saviour The shew-bread among the Iewes that only could bee eaten of them that were sanctified And the Bread sent miraculously by an Angell to Elias whereby he was so strengthned as hee travelled forty daies by vertue only of that Bread These three sorts of bread to haue beene expresse Figures of this Sacrament of the true flesh of Christ therein contained doe testify by one consent the ancient Fathers as Cyprian â—lemens Alexandrinus Ambrose Hierom Chrysostom Augustine Cyrill Arnobius Euseb. many others as my author fetâ—eh downe Three other figures not expressed in the forme of Bread but other things more excellent then Bread as the Paschal Lamb the blood of the testament described in Exodus and to the Hebrues and fulfilled by Christ when he said This cup is the new testament in my blood and againe this is my blood of the new testament The Manna also sent by God from heaven was an expresse figure of this Sacrament as appeareth by the words of our Saviour and of the Apostle I. D. This Argument seemeth to be of great esteeme among you for who almost vrgeth it not and that with great confidence It standeth thus Melchizedecks Bread and Wine the Shew-bread Elias his Bread the Paschal-Lambe the Bloud of the Testament and Manna bee Figureâ— of our Sacrament Ergo Christ is corporally and locally present therein by way of Transubstantiation The consequence you maintaine in the next Section the Antecedent in this Wherevnto I answer first that the Legall sacraments and ceremonies if we may beleeue Scripture directly respected Christ So saith S. Paul They are a shadow of things to come but the Body is of Christ. And again Sacrifice and offerings thou wouldest not but a Body hast thou prepared me And hence is it that he doubteth not to call Christ our Passeouer or 〈◊〉 Lambâ— and to affirm that the Rock whereof the Israelites dranke in the â—â—ldernesse was Christ. Yea our Saviour himselfe plainly professeth that the Brasen serpent did prefigure him and that he was the Bread or Manna that came downe from heauen But that those Sacraments and Ceremonies are Types Figures of ours otherwise then by representing the same Substance together with ours I suppose if you searched every corner of Scripture neuer so narrowly you should never finde it therein Adde herevnto that our SacrameÌ„ts are themselues Figures being as S Augustine saith one thing and signifying another Whence it would follow that the old Sacraments being Figures of the New they should be Figures of Figures and Sacraments of Sacraments which standeth not greatly with reason For thus the Circumcision of the foreâ—kinne should figure the Water of Baptisme and water Christ and curious heads might runne on infinitely and as Irenaeus sometime obiected vnto the Heretikes of his time might ever bee devising of types vpon types and figures vpon figures Lastly if the Sacraments of the old Testament were but Signes of ours it would follow that they were ordained rather for the benefit of the Christian then the Iewish Church which is absurd For of our Sacraments which you say is the thing signified by theirs benefit they never reaped any as neuer being partakers of them and to leaue vnto them no more but bare signes that is emptie shels without the kernell how it might availe them I cannot conceaue Certainely all Sacraments
was never either seen or heard the like Idolatrie vnto yours as your own Coster confesseth For saith he it is a more tolerable error to worship Images of silver or gold or other stuffe with the Gentiles or a red cloath on a pike with the Lieflanders or liuing creatures with the Egyptians then to adore a morsell of bread Oh therefore let me yet againe beseech you and that by the dearest name of Iesus Christ to pitty your owne soule and with all speed to retire your selfe from Babylon the mother of all spirituall whoredome Heretofore happily your ignorance might in part excuse you but now that the light hath shined vpon you if wilfully you close your eies against it you are altogether vnexcusable and these papers one day will appeare in iudgement against you Oh how glad would the blessed Angels in heaven bee might they once behold your conversion How readily and louingly would the true Church of Christ entertaine you and how humbly thankfull would my poore selfe be vnto the Divine Maiestie if through his blessing these endeauours of mine might be a meanes to reclaime you For my part I haue done what belonged vnto me that truth I haue both propounded and demonstrated vnto you To turne the heart is not in my power that I leaue vnto God whose office it is Yet will I neuer cease to addresse my vowes vnto him for you if at any time hee may bee pleased in Iesus Christ to haue compassion vpon you FINIS A DEFENCE OF THE FORmer Answer against the Reply of N.N. OXFORD Printed by I.L. for E. F. 1633. A DEFENCE OF THE FORMER ANSWERE AGAINST the reply of N. N. SIR I perceiue would I follow the tract you seeke to set me in I might travell long enough and be never the neerer my journies end All the Passages alleadged by you in maintenance of Transubstantiation I haue fully answered adding therevnto sundry arguments clearly demonstrating the impiety thereof Wherevpon I expected either that you should yeeld being convinced by the evidence of truth or particularly acquaint me wherein I had not satisfied you Now what you Forsooth neither the one nor the other But insteed thereof you send me a fardle of idle Generalities pickt out of I know not what blind author all making no more to the matter in hand then as he saith a Cypresse tree doth to a table of shipwrack In regard whereof I could not hitherto perswade my selfe to reioyne vnto it For why should I stray with him that will needs out of the Way Neverthelesse fearing least by holding my peace I might seeme either to prejudice my cause or to disable my selfe and knowing what clapping of wings and crowing there vseth to be amongst you vpon every the least shew of advantage I haue at length resolued to vouchsafe you one encounter more and then if you still persist in your outlopes and impertinences to wast no more oile or paper vpon you For it is St Pauls advice to avoid an heretike after one or two admonitions knowing that such a one is perverted and sinneth being condemned of himselfe To proceed therefore in order let vs begin with your Preamble N. N. Musing why your kinsman delivered me not your papers you suppose it was because hee conceited not well of them or thought they would not pleasure I. D. You coniecture not amisse For being demanded the reason he answered because you had written nothing to the purpose and yet continue obstinated in your errour Which how could it be welcome to either of vs But take heed I beseech you how you close your eyes any longer against the light of truth For to them that receiue not the loue of truth that they may be saved God threatneth to send them the efficacy of errour to beleeue lies N. N. The passages now sent are taken out of your Papers These againe out of your author Yet truly And all to shew you build not vpon any one mans opinion I. D. You might haue done well to name your Author that we might know his worth and whether your Papers haue wronged him and if not whether your Authors selfe haue not wronged those out of whom hee hath taken his collections But suppose neither You nor your Author faile yet is your inference ridiculous For though the writers you quote be many yet is your Author but one And alleadging them vpon his sole credit without any particular knowledge of your owne you build herein but vpon one mans opinion N. N. No nor on Lutherans Anabaptists Protestants Puritans or tearmed Papists farther then they agree with the authority of the Catholike Church I. D. Lutheran is a name not chosen by vs who in point of Faith depend vpon no man but by you thrust vpon vs. Anabaptists we detest as much as you Puritan is the auncient name of the Novatians and better fitteth you then vs. For wee hold not as you doe that we can eschew all sinne all our life and perfectly fulfill the law yea supererogate and merit heauen by our workes The name of Protestant was first given vnto the Princes and Free citties of Germany Protesting their Faith at a Diet in Spire Ann. 1529. neither doe wee disclaime it But who I pray are those tearmed Papists For relying on the Omnipotency of your Lord God the Pope you are Papists indeed and your betters approue the terme Parsons saith that it importeth no more hurt then if in a sedition they that side with the King be called Royalists Florimond Raimond that it is a name of honour and whereat none should take offence Tho. Bozius that you haue good reason to glory in it And an old Catholike as Walsingham reports that it was a most honourable thing for men to stand with their Head and to haue their denomination from him Thus they But nor Papists nor others shall moue you farther then they agree with the Catholike Church And reason if thereby you vnderstand that of all times including the Apostles For they erred not And what they Preached they left in writing ever after to be the rule and ground of Faith But if you meane as I doubt you doe the Now-Roman Church besides that it is not Catholike there will be but little salt found in your speech For it will be as if you had said you will not rely on Papists or any other farther then they agree with Papists of which only that Church consisteth N. N. Succession continuance visibility vnitie are notes of the Catholike Church and only found in her I. D. These Notes are not Proper agreeing only and alwaies to the Church Certaine therefore and infallible they are not Not Personall Succession For in the beginning of the Church it was not and in the time of Antichrist you say it shall not be It hath also beene continued in the Churches of Hierusalem Antioch Alexandria Constantinople which yet you esteeme no true Churches The consideration whereof forced from
of Faith because it is not a matter altogether so necessary for all men and because for this reason peradventure it is omitted in the Nicen Creed the knowledge of which Creed seemeth to be sufficient for fulfilling the Precept of Faith Lastly for this cause peradventure Augustine and other of the Fathers expounding the Creed doe not vnfold this mystery vnto the people Thus he But perhaps your Author hath reason for what he saies Certainly none at all Only he rakes together all the vehement and passionate speeches whatsoever hee can finde to haue passed from any of our pens in heat of contention to worke all the disgrace he can vpon vs. And if any of vs for proofe of his Conclusion draw his Argument from an Article of Faith then shall say as sometimes through too much eagernesse men vse to doe the Controversie is about such an Article loe saith your Author by and by a difference in matters Essentiall and Fundamentall whereas notwithstanding we all agree in the Article and the difference lies only in the Conclusion And seeing in all disputations it is the manner to fetch proofs from common Principles assented vnto on all sides what folly is it leaving the Question in debate to make that the matter of controversie wherein we all perfectly accord If any in pursuing their quarrels haue suffered themselues to bee transported with passion farther then becomes Christian charitie I acknowledge humane infirmitie vndertake not to defend them Yet you may knowe that others haue proceeded much farther For in that of Theophilus Patriarch of Alexandria and Epiphanius B. of Cyprus against Chrysostome they grew to such violence that Epiphanius and he cursed one the other many were slaine in taking of parts the Cathedral Church of Constantinople and the Senate house were burned to the groūd Chrysostome himselfe lost both his Bishopricke and life in banishment Which made Baronius beginning to entreat thereof to vse these words A shamefull contention in the Church the lamentable narration whereof I now take in hand wherein shall bee described the bickering and cursed persecution not of Gentiles against Christians or Hereticks against Catholikes or wicked men against good iust men but which is monstrous and prodigious of Saints and holy men one against another But what is there all peace in the Romish Church no quarrell no contention at all So would your lying Masters haue all their credulous schollers to beleeue though all the world knowe to the contrary For haue there not beene therein about thirtie Schismes and some of them continuing many yeares together wherein Pope hath beene against Pope one thundring excommunications against another and by their factions renting the whole Christian world asunder Haue there not beene long quarrells betweene the Franciscans and Dominicans about the Conception of the blessed Virgin Mary Doth the Church of France at this day admit of the Councel of Trent which you count the chiefest stake in your hedge Was there not of late a foule bickering betweene the state of Venice and the Pope about the power hee would haue vsurped over them I suppose you are not such a stranger in England but you may haue heard of the infamous dissentions betweene the Secular Priests and Iesuits Which themselues were not ashamed to publish to the world For a tast thus say the Seculars of the Iesuits and you may assure your selfe they were repaid in their owne coine Howsoeuer Iesuits talke of their perfections holinesse and meditations exercises yet their plat-forme is heathenish tyrannicall satanicall and able to set Aretine Lucian Machiavel yea Don Lucifer in sort to schoole It seemeth impossible for Antichrist to invent a more sleightie plausible and colourable devise nor with greater art more cunning tricks bring it about to make him be credited then the Iesuits haue invented and put in practise Iesuits teach that the Catholique Church must now hang vpon the Monarchie of K. Philip and his heires A Iesuit maintained that a man that is no Christian may be Pope There is not a Iesuit nor a Iesuits fautor any where to bee found but hath a foule tast of Atheisme Iesuits impudence to deny all truths against them as lies obiect any slaunderous lie as a truth The Pope said of them that on the one side they pretended piety and zeale and on the other shewed the very spirit of the Divell in pride contumacy and contradiction c. They haue three maxims times are changed and wee are changed in them all for the time and nothing for the truth divide and rule Of Father Parsons also thus in particular A bastard vnhonestly begot basely borne a Wolsey in ambition a Midas in Mundicity a traitor in action The villany of this bastardly Renegate Parsons cursed be the houre wherein he was borne the sonne of sinne of iniquity of sacrilege of the people of the Divell The great Emperour illegitimate irregular abstract quintessence of all coines coggeries and forgeries Parsons the bastard of Stockersey O monster of mankinde fitter for Hell then middle earth Thou giuest occasion to divers to thinke thou art not a meere man but some Fairy-brat begotten by an Incubus or Aërish spirit vpon the body of a base woman I might be infinite in this kind but this is enough to let you see that all the distemper lies not on our side but that your very ring-leaders can outrage one another and farre exceed vs in bitternesse and tartnesse And least you should thinke that all your quarrells are rather about by matters then in points of Doctrine know that herein also you are miserably distracted and divided Your ancient Schoolemen Thomas Scotus Durandus Occam and the rest what almost doth any one of them say but is straight gainsayed by another Is it not ordinary also with your new writers Bellarmine Suares Gregory of Valentia Stapleton and others one to controll and confute the others opinions Bozius saith Warmington blameth many excellent Divines namely Bellarmine calling them new Divines and teachers of false Doctrine The Vulgar translation of the Bible I suppose is made Authenticall by your Trent Fathers yet saith the Iesuit Mariana there hath beene of Late especially in Spaine such disputation moued about it among Divines and pursued with such heat and eagernesse and implacable hatred on each side that from reproaches and contumelies wherewith they disgraced one the other they came at length vnto the tribunalls and that side which was most confident vexed their adversaries most greevously accusing them in point of religion as wicked proud arrogant such as boldly elevate the authority of the bookes of God and the credit of that interpretation which the Church every where vseth and is tearmed Vulgar preferring and bringing in new interpretations contrary to the Lawes both of God and man and the decrees of the Tridentine Councell not long since published And now at this instant what deadly warres are
The truth of which three questions while I endeavour to resolue not so much with heat and vehemence of passion as strength and evidence of reason let me entreat you all Right Worshipfull Reverend and beloued Christian brethren but for the space of one houre to lay aside all preiudice and to heare with indifference what I can say When I haue done if my resolutions appeare to be grounded vpon sound and convincing arguments I hope you will according to your duties readily yeeld vnto the truth if otherwise every one may still abound in his owne sense and yee haue free liberty to carry home the same opinion ye brought hither with you In the meane season I beseech the Lord to direct your hearts and to giue you a right iudgement in all things The first Quere is whether preaching in this place be distinguished from reading In resoluing whereof I will not be so peremptory as some are only I will shew what I conceiue and vpon what grounds This I conceiue that Preaching here is no other then the publike Reading of Moses and I conceiue so vpon these grounds because there appeareth nothing in the words to force a distinction but rather something importing an identity That there is nothing to enforce a distinction appeares if either yee consider the context and reason of the words or the text it selfe and the forme of words vsed therein First therefore as touching the Context It is manifest by this particle For that these words are inferred as a reason vpon some thing premised Thus. Some of the beleeuing Pharisees had taught the brethren at Antioch that except they were circumcised and together with the faith of Christ obserued the ceremonie of Moses they could not be saved Whereof after much altercation and dispute the Apostles being advertized they summon a counsell at Ierusalem to stint the quarrell In it Saint Peter expresly affirmeth that salvation is impossible by the law and that the grace of Christ is of it selfe every way sufficient which sentence Saint Iames hauing readily approved he adds withall that for the setling of the Churches peace it would not be amisse to write vnto the beleeuing Gentiles that they abstaine from pollutions of idols from fornication from things strangled and from blood For saith he Moses of old time hath in every Citty them that preach him being read in the Synagogues every Sabbath day Now how comes in this For and what is that conclusion whereof this is a reason Heere I finde difference of opinions but among them all three seeme to me to bee most probable Of them all take which you list and the publike Reading of Moses alone will bee a sufficient proofe thereof The first opinion is Saint Chrysostoms in whose iudgement Saint Iames would proue this conclusion that it is altogether needlesse to write vnto the beleeuing Iewes touching abstinence from these things And why is it needlesse Because they perfectly know these things already But how came they to the knowledge of them By hearing Moses publikely read in the Synagogues every Sabbath day for he in such cleare expresse tearmes hath deliuered the same that whosoeuer heareth cannot but take notice thereof as besides sundry other places you may see in Num. 25. and Lev. 17. which you may pervse at your better leasure The second opinion is of the French translators this Ye may not thinke that by this decree the law of Moses will be vilipended or disesteemed Why Because the Reading of Moses saith the marginall note will not be discontinued in the assemblies of the beleeuing Iewes neyther will the beleeuing Gentiles make scruple to assist them therein The third and last is the common opinion and carries with it best likelyhood this We must for a while condescend to the beleeuing Iew in observation of the ceremonie least wee scandall them and cause them to stagger in the faith The reason because they know by the weekely reading of Moses that it is his ordinance to whom they are so strongly addicted that they cannot yet without danger to their faith be weaned from him And thus take which of these conclusions you please and the sole reading of Moses is a sufficient proofe thereof You will say so is interpretation also I denie it not only I affirme that from the context or reason of the words yee cannot force a distinction betweene Preaching and Reading No more can you from the Text and the forme of words vsed therein Indeed if the words were in the originall as Hieron to whom wee are referred englishes them debellatum esset the warre were ended For thus he renders them Moses was both read and preached then which a plainer distinction cannot bee Whether so reading he intended the advantage of his cause I will not say Demortuis nil nisi bene he was while hee liued a graue and reverend preacher Howbeit the originall reads otherwise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hee hath them that preach him being read Beza turnes it thus cum legatur seeing he is read others thus in that or inasmuch as hee is read Which how it can inforce a distinction I see not rather it imports the contrary that Preaching here is no other then Reading So seemeth the Syriack also to vnderstand it Moses hath Caroze Haralds or Criers in the Synagogues who read him every Sabbath day And indeed the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here vsed whence also Caroze as Casauhon thinketh fetcheth its pettigree properly imports the art of a Praeco or Crier Now Praeco a crier as Whitaker obserueth Recitat edicta non exponit barely reads or recites his Princes edicts doth not expound them If then I should say the King hath in every towne those that preach or publish his proclamations being openly read by the Towneclarke vpon market dayes could any man of sense or vnderstanding distinguish the preaching or publishing of the proclamation from the publike reading thereof No more can he Preaching from reading in this place for the case is exactly the same Adde herevnto that such Preaching euen in the judgement of the adversarie is here meant as was ever performed in every Synagogue vpon every Sabbath day Now that Moses of old was read in the Synagogues every Sabbath day it is cleare in my text So is it also Act. 13.27 the voices of the Prophets are read every Sabbath day But that Moses in every Synagogue every Sabbath day was interpreted and Sermons made vpon him doth not appeare and I thinke will hardly be proued For as for those places where in mention is made of exhortation after reading they are to little purpose inasmuch as they only show what sometimes and vsually not what was alwaies done In the Sabbatticall yeare vpon the feast of Tabernacles the law was commanded to be read of expounding there is no mention at all Nay seeing then the whole law was intirely to be read it seemes very probable that
then a lot and wise men refuse to commit matters of such consequence vnto the hazard thereof As for that you adde What difference betweene the toungue speaking and the hand writing in regard of testimony saving that hand-writing is the better and more excellent I con you hearty thankes for it For if Divine testimony be the ground and reason of Faith and the word written be Divine testimony as well nay better as you say and more excellent then the word spoken by mouth it followeth that the word written may beget Faith and convert a soule as well as the word by mouth preached Whether you would willingly be of this opinion or no I cannot say sure I am you must of force if you will hold to your owne Premisses This by the way N. N. If it were in doubt or a thing in controversie who should haue the mony that I possesse If I should heare a voice in the aire commanding me to dispose of it to such a person I should still doubt and iustly might whose voyce it were whether Gods or Sathans But if it were once put to a Lot and disposed of to such a person I could never doubt afterwards but that it was done by Gods immediat appointment DEFENCE No could Why I pray you For may not Satan as well haue a hand in a Lot as in a voice in the aire What is not sorcery or divination by Lots a Satanicall invention and may not Satan be a worker in his owne art If he may how am I certaine that the Casuall event is rather of Gods appointment then of Satans The maine error is a conceit you haue that in all Casualties God worketh by his immediate speciall Providence which is vtterly vntrue as wee haue already shewed And I am strongly perswaded that this very opinion was the principall roote out of which sorcery sundry other heathnish soothsayings first grew and by which among simple and superstitious Christians they are yet still maintained and continued But to put you from this conceit let mee intreat you seriously to consider the Lot that Haman cast from day to day and from month to month to know what month or day were fittest for the generall massacring of the Iewes The Lot must needs fall on one day or other it fell as it seemes on the thirteenth day of the twelfth month which is Adar What Must wee now needs say that the hand of God yea the immediat hand of God had appointed that day to that end I trow no for the very same day Haman his whole family with many thousands of the enimies of God were destroyed by the Iewes the Iewes themselues were deliuered Doth not Solomon also speake of theeues who share their pillages and robbers amongst themselues by Lot And did not the Romane souldiers agree to cast Lots who should haue our Saviours seamlesse coat Yet by your opinion when the Lot hath disposed to every one his portion neither the theeues nor the souldiers needed afterwards to doubt but that God by his immediat hand assigned it vnto them and testified by his speciall Providence that hee would haue it so A strange and fearfull assertion directly reversing that law of justice which requireth restitution of whatsoever is wrongfully gotten But to what end all this Forsooth to perswade that a Lot declares will of God as well if not better then his owne voice from heaven Wherevnto I answere no more and I can answere no lesse then the Angell did vnto Satan Increpet te Dominus the Lord rebuke thee for what you say is no lesse then flat blasphemy N. N. Againe it is for the resolution of a doubt namely who shall haue these Cards or that Mony Hence I conclude againe that the vse of Cards and Dice as it is now vsed by our Gamesters is a meere Lottery DEFENCE That in Cards and Dice there is intended the resolution of a doubt is already granted neither is it denied that they are Lots but that they are all Meere Lots 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to driue out one naile with another I conclude against your Conclusion that you haue not yet not never will be able to proue that all Games at Cards and Tables and the like are Meere Lottery N. N. But I leaue mens testimony which may erre and will try it by Scriptures that never erre Prov. 16.33 The lot is cast into lap but the whole disposition thereof is of the Lord. Prov. 10.18 The Lot causeth contentions to cease Such a thing is practized by Gamesters There is a Lot cast what else meaneth the shufling of the Cards and the shakeing of the Dice which I heare Gamesters call for so earnestly The whole disposition therefore is of God If I packe the Cards or cogge the Dice not shufle the Cards or shake the Dice like honest dishonest Gamesters thou wouldst refuse my company at play DEFENCE To let passe that both vnsavoury and vncharitable jest of honest dishonest gamesters yet doing you to wit that there are diverse in this land of farre greater learning then your selfe and of singular both piety and gravity who refuse not at times to recreate themselues at Cards after their more serious studies to let passe I say this pure vnpure iest thus I thinke out of these two passages you would conclude That Lot the whole disposition whereof is of God is a meere Lot But Cards and Dice are such Lots the whole disposition whereof is of God Ergo Cards Dice are meere Lots The Maior you take for granted for you goe not about to proue it The Minor you confirme by two sentences of Solomon and the former part that cards and dice are Lots by the latter because they stint controversies the latter that the whole disposition of them is of God by the former because in euery Lot the whole disposition is of the Lord. This as I take it is or should be the right frame of your argument Which I now come to answere The knot of all lies in the right vnderstanding of the former passage wherein some are of opinion that Extraordinary Lots only or to vse their owne words Singular Miraculous Divine not Civill Lots are meant And then the Assumption is false for all Lots and among the rest cards and dice are not such Lots Others stand precisely vpon these words in the Originall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But every iudgement of it is of Cod and comparing it with the like places affirme that it importeth no more but this that in all things yea even the most vnlikely such as are Casuall Euents and Lots there is a Divine Providence and hand of God Which exposition no way confirmeth your Maior For every Lot wherein God hath a hand is not presently a Meere lot But to answere yet more plainely and fully it is to be obserued that the wise man saith not God disposeth all immediatly but only thus All the disposition
Conversion Mutation and the like I. D. Had you attentiuely read my Answer you would never haue said I excepted to two or three Passages only For I excepted to all the passages of Ignatius Cyril of Hierusalem in his Catechismes Ambrose de Sacramentis and Mysterijs initiandis Eusebius Emissenus Cyprian de caena Domini the Canon of the Nicen counsell and Magnetes as suspected by your owne Rabbies not to be the men whose names they beare Againe of Damascen Theophylact Euthymius Nicephorus and Rupertus as being Punies and too young to be Fathers besides those many Passages which are miserably either curtald or rackt or falsely alleaged Neither are their words so plain for you as you pretend For I haue made it to appeare that some of them say nothing at all for you some speak rather against you then for you and to those that seeme to say any thing I haue opposed a whole grand Iury speaking farre more plainely on our side For what words can be more plaine then these This is my body that is the figure of my Body that Christ said This bread is my body which your owne men grant cannot bee true vnlesse figuratiuely vnderstood that Bread and Wine still are what they were that the Nature of bread continues that the nature of bread and wine cease not to be but continue in the propriety of their nature that the signes after consecration depart not from their proper nature but remaine in their former substance figure and forme and suchlike many But perhaps your Fathers speake as plainely Let vs try that They say that the Body flesh and bloud of Christ is truly in the Sacrament Ergo a Reall Presence Who denies it Transubstantiation is that which you should proue which Reall Presence inferres not This you say you vnderstand not The more is your dulnesse For Really and Corporally are not all one and that which is Spiritually present is Really present vnlesse you will say that a spirit is Nothing Is not the Bloud of Christ really present in Baptisme to the washing away of sinne Is hee not Really also present to the Faith of every true beleever even out of the Sacrament Doubtlesse he is and none will deny it but he that never felt the vertue and efficacy thereof What should let then but the Flesh of Christ may bee present in the Eucharist Really and yet not after the Corporall manner Nay what if I should yeeld you a corporall presence Would that necessarily inferre a Transubstantiation Nothing lesse For it may be by consubstantiation the flesh being there together with the Bread without turning the Bread into Flesh. Neither may you deny this to be possible vnlesse you will deny the Omnipotency of God and your Transubstantiation withall for therevpon doe you build it Transubstantiation therefore and the Reall presence are not all one Yea but the Fathers vse the tearmes of Conversion Mutation What then Ergo Transubstantiation A pittifull consequence For this is to argue from the Generall to Speciall as if you should say It is a colour therefore it is blacke there being many colours besides blacke Learne then that Change is a generall word and there are divers kindes thereof of Substance by Generation and corruption of Quality by Alteration of Quantity by Augmentation and Diminution of Place by Lation Now he that affirmeth a Change doth not presently affirme Change of Substance for it may be some other either of Quality or Quantity or Quantity or Place The Fathers therefore speaking of a Change in the Sacrament may as well meane a Change of Alteration in the Vse and Uertue of the Elements as of Substance by way of Transubstantiation And so for ought the Fathers say Transubstantiation may still be a brat of the Lateran Councells disputed of perhaps before but neuer beleeved as an Article of Faith till then N. N. I allow no authority after 600. yeares Ergo I acknowledge the next 1000. to be contrary in this and all other controversies betwixt vs. I. D. To speake plainely I allow no Authority at all as Infallible but only that of Christ and his Apostles Those that afterwards succeeded were all of them subiect vnto errour and cannot be the ground of our Faith as I haue elsewhere answerably demonstrated Howbeit those of the first 600 yeares wee reverence more and rather admit then those of the 1000 following because they were freer from errour as liuing neerer the Apostles times and before the first discouery of Antichrist which was about the yeare 607. when Boniface the third purchased of that bloudy tyrant Phocas the title of Vniversall Bishop and with it the supremacy over all Churches Whereof his predecessor Gregory the great seemed to prophecy when writing against Iohn B. of Constantinople for vsurping that title he gathereth from thence that the times of Antichrist are at hand After which discouery although errours every day crept in apace yet wee yeeld you not that all your opinions instantly and at once leapt into the Church For as Rome it selfe was not built in a day so neither was that huge heape of Romanish impieties raised in one age It was a good while after this before Transubstantiation began to appeare Damascen in the East not contenting himselfe with the old language of the Church fell a coyning of new Phrases yet reached not home to Transubstantiation A hundred yeares after Amalarius in the west maintained in plaine tearms that the simple nature of Bread and wine is turned into a reasonable nature to wit of the body and bloud of Christ. And herein was he seconded by Paschasius Radbertus and others Yet could they not carry it so clearly but that they were mightily opposed by the most famous writers in their times whose names you haue in mine Answer But specially by Bertram vnder Carolus Calvus of whom Turrian the Iesuit thus to cite Bertram what is it other then to say the heresie of Calvin is not new And a good time afterwards againe by Berengarius on whose side many disputed both by word and writing and those not of one nation only but English French and Italians as Mathew of Westminster saith But all these Antichrist who was now in his height bare downe and at length anno 1215. vnder Innocent the third in the Lateran Councel was the Idol set vpon its base and adored So lately with so much adoe was your doctrine of Transubstantiation brought in and established N. N. For 900. yeares was no outward face of a Church in England but the Catholike In which it were vncharitable to say that none knewe the meaning of Scriptures and Fathers as well as we or all liued in ignorance till the true light came in with Luther Yet in this last age England hath yeelded many learned men among others an vnkle of yours and Master of Arts who left all his hopes for his conscience and would not bee perswaded to returne to his great possibilities which