shaken Alleage the auncient fathers not one or other but al together affirming one and the self same thing they answere If you argue from the vvitnesse of men be they neuer so learned and auncient vve yelde no more to their vvordes in cause of faith and religion then vve perceaue to be agreable to scripture Nether thinke you your self to haue proued any thing although you bring against vs the vvhole consent and svvarme of fathers except that vvhich they say be iustified not by the voice of men but of God himself And it is their common maner as to make smale accompt of any author that is against them so least of al of the old auncient fathers whom some of them are not ashamed in most despiteful sort to cal Pillorie doctors But this their behauiour towards the auncient fathers and Doctors that be of our Church may seeme in the iudgement of many to stand with reason For why may it be said should they be bound to our Austins HieroÌ„s and Cyprians more then we wil be bound to their Luthers Caluins and Melanchthons At the least then say we they ought to be ruled by doctors of their owne such as they cal and honour for Apostles Euaâ—geâ—istes of their new church and beleefe Yet when the authoritie of such is pressed against them it weigheth no deeper then of those other whom they cal pillorie doctors For how freely contemne they Martin Luther how freely reiect they Hulderike Zuinglius VVe receaue M. Caluin saith T.C. and vveigh of him as of the notablest instrument that the lord hath stâ—rred vp for the purging of his churches and restoring of the playne and sincere interpretation of the scriptures vvhich hath bene since the Apostles time And yet vve do not so reade his workes that vve beleeue any thing to be true because he saith it but so far as vve caÌ„ esteeme that that vvhich he saith doth agree vvith the Canonical scriptures The very self same answere geueth the contrary part wheÌ„ the same mans iudgement is obiected against him I reuerence M. Caluin saith D.W. as a singular man and a vvorthy instrument in Christes church But I am not so vvholy addicted vnto him that I vvil contemne other mens iudgmentes in diuers points not fully agreing vvith him c. vvhen as in my opinion they come neerer to the true meaning and sense of scripture then he doth And because the course of this new diuinitie is now brought to rest most of al on the credit of these reuereÌ„d fathers and doctors and in steede of the auncient forme of alleaging T. us saith S. Chrysostom thus S. Augustin thus S. Basil the fashion is now to alleage Thus saith M. Caâ—uin thus M. Bucer thus M. Bullinger therefore thorough varietie somewhat to avoyde tediousnes and not greue to much the eares of their auditors by flat denyal diuers wayes and reasons haue they to passe ouer when they please the authoritie of such their owne doctors and maisters One way and the same very playne is to refuse them because they were men As for example If you presse me vvith M. Martyrs and M. Bucers authoritie I first say they vvere men and therefore though othervvise very vvatchful yet such as slept somtymes A second way is because they had some other error as M. Bucer you say allovveth priuate baptisme and consequently the baptisme by vvomen It may be that as M. Bucer although othervvise very learned hath other grosse absurdities so he may haue that A third because some other doctor of as good credite and estimation is of a contratie opinion as M. Musculus a learned man is of your iudgement and M. Caluin as learned as he and diuers other are of that iudgment that I haue alleaged This is no great profe on your side nor reprofe of ours A fourth and the same most sure is to chalenge the libertie of the gospel and therefore not to admitte their verdict but at pleasure as Touching M. Bucers M. Bullingers Illyricus allovvance of holy daies if they allovv them in such sort as M. Doctor vrgeth then that good leaue vvhich they geue the Churches to dissent from theÌ„ in that point I do take it graunted vnto me being one of the same church Although as touching M. Bullinger it is to be obserued that since the time he wrote so there are aboue 35 yeres since vvhich time although he hold stal that the feastes dedicated vnto the lord as of the Natiuitie Easter and Pentecost may be kept yet he denieth flatly that it is lavvful to keepe holy the dayes of the Apostles If these serue not the turne a man would thinke their martyrs those who were so ful of the spirite that they willingly shead their bloud and suffered death by fier for confâ—irmation of their faith these mens testimonie should be irrefragable for iustifying of those pointes especially for which they lost their liues But nether want they their old ordinary meanes to shift of the authoritie of these martyrs were they neuer so glorious For although they vvere excellent personages say they yet their knovvledge vvas in part and although they brought many thinges to light yet they being sent out in the morning or euer the sunne of the gospel vvas risen so high might ouersee many thinges vvhich those that are not so sharpe of sight as they vvere may see c. And if they had died for this or that article yet the authoritie of their martyrdome could not take avvay from vs this libertye that vve haue to enquire of the cause of their death Martyrs may not be said to seale their errors vvith their bloud or vvith the glory of their martirdome preiudice those which vvrite or speake against their errors For this is to oppose the bloud of men to the bloud of the sonne of God What remayneth now for the last cast but the maiestie not of one or other doctor or of a few martyrs but of great and ample reformed churches as of France of Germany of Zurike or Geneuâ— yet euen these also passe with like maner of answere And they haue as general a rule to reiect such as they haue the poorest doctor that commeth in their way As for exaple when other reformed churches are brought to reforme the disorders of the English church To vvhich reformed church saith the ansvverer vvil you haue the church of England framed or vvhy should not other reformed churches as vvel frame them selues vnto vs For vve are as vvel assured of our doctrine and haue as good groundes reasons for our doing as they haue except you vvil bring in a nevv Rome appoint vs an other head church and create a nevv Pope by vvhom vve must be in al thinges directed And againe I haue told you and novv I tel you againe that there is no cause vvhy this church of England
ether for truth of doctrine sinceritie of publike diuine seruice and other policie should geue place to any church in Christendome England is not bound to the example of ether France or Scotland I say truely that vve are not bound to their examples These be al the places and corners of argumentes vvhich â—n their diuinitie by any search vve can find out For although they haue amongst them Popes I meane such ministers as affect and vsurpe Papal and more then Papal authoritie as the Tigurines against Luther and other Zuinglians against the Lutherans commonly inueigh for such arrogant behauiour and the gouernours of Berna being them selues Sacrâ—mentaries vsed to cal Caluin Pope of Geneua for his lordlynâ—s and sway which there he bare and Caluin writeth of Ioachim Westphalus that in sending forth condemnations and excommunications against the churches of his sect he passed al the Popes officers Omnes Papae scribas et datarâ—os superat and the Germane Lutheranes of one fashion accuse their felow Lutherans of an other fashion that they play the Popes and practise ouer them a nevv dominion of Antichrist and that al their doings sauour of a very Papacie and the Puritanes commonly name the Archbishop of Canterbury the perie Pope of England and D. Whitgift sheweth wel that euery Puritane minister laboureth to haue in and ouer his owne parish more then Papal iurisdiction yea that they seeke to transfer the authoritie both of Pope Prince Archbishop and Bishop to them selues bring the prince and nobilitie into a very seruitude so as the Protestant churches want no Popes but haue them after an other sort and in far more abundance then haue the Catholikes yet because these Popes of theirs differ nothing from the doctors of whom before I haue spoken no seueral or distinct kind of argument can be drawen from their primacie And as for general Councels so far are they from euer hauing any that I verely suppose they can not so much as in their fansie and imagination conceaue how any one should be euer gathered For hauing no one head amoÌ„gst them who should take order for any such assembly hauing no consent and vnitie among the members who should labour to the helping forward of such a coÌ„pany being diuided into so many churches sectes and congregations they can neuer resolue ether who should be the President in such a CouÌ„cel or who should be the actors or disputers or of what strength the Canons should be or who should haue the execution of them And when al coÌ„meth to al the libertie of the gospel which maketh euery man iudge of other fathers doctors and auncient Councels wil geue like freedom to euery particular man to take like iudgement and controle ouer the fathers of such a Councel Wherefore these being al the meanes and waies which we haue to reason or write against them and these being their fashions of answering as we find in euery Germane Zuitzer or French Protestant albeit for the readers ease and more facility of iudgement I haue exemplified the same by two or three of our English writers such as I take to be common in most mens hands if now a man list to draw these their answeres into a certaine methode we shal find that they containe for euery vnlearned bold â—angler an vniuersal forme and art of reiecting whatsoeuer Theological argument he may be pressed withal and of reducing the supreme conclusion and resolution to his owne singular fansie and wilfulnes Against many bookes of Scripture he is taught to say that they are superstitious and therefore he vvil not beleeue vvhat they teach though it be affirmed in them a hundred times Against CouÌ„cels that they are not to be admitted because by them the principal groundes of his faith are shaken Nether yet the auncient doctors vnto whom he yeldeth no more in cause of faith and religion then him self perceaueth to be agreable to scripture And touching the late doctors and writers of his owne church and gospel although in courtly and honorable termes he magnifie them far aboue the other yet nether to their iudgment wil he stand farther then he can esteeme that which they teach to agree with the canonical scripture when as in his opinion they geue the true sense and meaning thereof And vvhereas to refuse any it is sufficient to say that he vvas a man or he had some other error or some other is of a contrary iudgement which neuer wanteth amongst doctors guided by so contrary spirites or they geue the churches leaue to dissent from them vvhich I take graunted vnto me being one of the same church vvho can be so simple as to be tyed to one or other doctor hauing so manifold reasons to refuse them al And as for their martyrs whose names should be most reuerend and iudgement most weighty they also are reduced in to the same order and obedience with the rest For their martyrdom may not take avvay from the Protestant this libertie that he hath to enquire of the cause of their death or preiudice him in speaking against their errors for this is to oppose the bloud of men to the bloud of the sonne of God And those martyrs being sent out in the morning before the sunne of the Gospel vvas risen so high ouersaw many thinges which these men see now which liue as it were at noonetide in the most cleare beames light of the same gospel Which comparison expressing most apâ—ly their continual proceeding and running forward to new pointes and articles of faith alâ—o before hand instructeth their after coÌ„mers to keepe on the like course which they see these their predecessors to haue begoÌ„ne For as those Protestants who liued twenty yeres since and bragged then of the cleare light of the gospel are now cast backe by these men in to a darksome kynd of twylight vnto whoÌ„ the sunne was not yet risen so the posteritie who shal liue ten or tweÌ„ty yeres after these are by like example informed to turne ouer this present age vnto that obscuritie of the day dawning and chalenge vnto them selues the brightsomnes of the noone light And the same may euery age and sect say as it marcheth farther farther on in newnes of heresie last of al the authoritie of whole Churches and prouinces is as lightly shaken of as any of the rest for so much as England is not bound to folovv France or Germany more then France or Germany is bound to folovv England ech Sect of Protestants is as vvel assured of his doctrine and hath as good groundes and reasons for it as hath any other to chaleÌ„ge such authoritie to the church of any prouince is to bring in plaine papistry and make that Church Romish and Antichistian Iudge thou now Christian reader what hold or stay we haue in disputing with these felowes whom thou seest to cast away and refuse al
which they receaued of Apostles VVe repose no such confidence in the fathers vvritings that vve take any certaine profe of our religion from them because vve place all our faith and religion not in humane but in diuine authoritie If therefore thou bring vs vvhat some one father hath thought or vvhat the fathers vniuersally al together haue deliuered the same except it be approued by testimonies of scriptures it auaileth nothing it gaineth nothing it conuinceth nothing For the fathers are such vvitnesses as they also haue neede of the scriptures to be their vvitnesses If deceaued by error they geue forth their testimonie disagreing from scriptures albeit they may be pardoned erring for vvant of vvisedome vve can not be pardoned if because they erred vve also vvil erre vvith them The fathers for the most part thought that Antichrist should be but one man but in that as in many other things they erred ether because they yelded to much to the common opinion concerning Antichrist ether because they vveighed not the scriptures so diligently as they ought c. In these his vvordes Christian reader thou maist see the very image principal part of Antichrist For preferring him self before the vniuersal primitiue Church of al the fathers then vvriting and expounding the scriptures teaching Antichrist to be one man According to the faith receaued of the Apostles he manifestly preferreth him self before the holy Ghost the ruler and dirâ—ctor of the Apostles and that Apostolical Church according to Christes most assured infallible promise vvhat is this els but to extolle him selfe aboue God Super omne quod dicitur Deus vvhich is one of the special markes of Antichrist And yet this Antichristian arrogancy in treading vnder his feete al fathers al churches al antiquitie is the very maine grouÌ„de of al the rest of his answeres As for example M.D. Sanders second demonstration is this The Church of Rome can not possibly be the Seate of Antichrist because it is that Seate vvhich hath most faithfully kept diligently enlarged the faith of Christ against al Antichristes This he proueth by S Ignatius S. Policarpus S. Ireneus Tertullian Origen SS Cyprian Athanasius Ambrose Hierom Optatus Austin Ciril Prosper Gregory c. by al good and learned vvriters that florished vvithin the first six hundred yeres That it coÌ„tinued the same faith and departed not from it in any point the last nyne hundred yeres he proueth by S. Isidorus by Theodorus by S. Beda Regino S. Lanfrancus Rupertus S. Bernard the general Councels of Laterane of Lions of Vienna of Constance of Florence the most sufficient authoritie that caÌ„ be alleaged in the vvorld Now vvhat is M.VV. ansvvere to this The fathers of the first six hundred yeres he graunteth to haue spoken truely for so much as al this vvhile that Church was very pure excellent and maintained inuiolably the faith deliuered by the Apostles S. Peter and S. Paule and briefly vvas of al other Churches most notable and florishing omnium ecclesiarum praestantissima florentissimaquè But touching the later nyne hundred yeres he maketh so great a difference as betvvene the hovvse of God and a den of theeues betvvene a liue man and a dead carcas Thus he speaketh Although the auncient Romane Church receaued Christ most of al and those that vvere in the societie of the Romane Church defended the Christian faith most valiantly yet these prayses appertaine nothing to the present Romane Church vvhich refuseth Christ him selfe furiously assaulteth the Christian faith I am vides Sandere tuae demeÌ„strationi securim esse inflictam quando a prima ecclesia Romana quae fuit optima et purissima tuam hanc distinguo c. Novv thou seest M. Sanders thy demonstration knocked on the head vvith a hatchet vvhereas from the first Romane church vvhich vvas best and purest I distinguish this thy Romane church vvhich a man may truly caâ— the synagoge of Satan Now this being in deede the very hatchet of his ansvvere as he calleth it and vvhereby he choppeth of the necke of D. Sanders demonstration and vvhich therefore it principally standeth him in hand to proue let the reader consider if he bring any probabilitie any argument storie father Councel authoritie any kind of reason other then his ovvne naked and peeuish asseueration Only he varieth as boyes in grammar scholes that his assertion by many pretie phrases as that Rome is degenerated into a bastard faith that our Popes are altogether vnlike to the auncient Popes that novv there is an other forme of faith in Rome an other religion that our Popes possesse the same place vvith those auncient but haue lost their faith many hundred yeres since that in the Romane church novv nothing remayneth of old Rome besides the name that of old soueraine vvas the authoritie of the Romane Sea amongst al people both for the goodlynes of the citie and puritie of religion and constancie of the men but novv none of these thinges remayneth c. Thus in euery page welnye he affirmeth sayth telleth vs againe againe that thus it is departed and thus it is degenerated and thus it hath altered the faith and is become the synagoge of Antichrist Against vvhich ridiculous and childish babling vvhen his aduersary obiecteth those Confessors Martirs Historiographers Sayntes that liued since S. Gregories time together vvith the general Councels the very flovver of Christianitie he vvith one railing blast turneth them al a side sayng he admitteth them not because they al more or lesse receaued the marke of the beast Aske him a reason why he so rayleth consider what authoritie he opposeth against these reason thou findest none authoritie thou findest none Only as kings and princes ratifie their edictes and Proclamations with their owne only name Teste meipso so this man confirmeth his answeres with the sole authoritie of Guilielmus VVhitakerus which being put in the fronte of euery answere is in deede the very pith and effect of al the answeres folowing And therefore whereas he saith If vve shal receaue for vvitnesses al those men 〈◊〉 to Antichrist vve shal neuer haue end of contending I say if it may be lawful for euery heretike thus to deare with such wodden or leaâ—en hatchers to cut of the synewes of such strong and forcible demonstrations thus so answeare reason with rayling and graue authoritie with Luciferlike arrogancy if the Trinâ—tariaÌ„s Lutherans Anabaptistes or ArriaÌ„s may haue like libertie to auoyde the whole army of Christes Catholike Church Arrianisme wil neuer be rooted out Lutheranisme wil neuer haue end the Anabaptistes and Trinitarians can not possibly be maystred the worst of these being able to say for him selfe at the least as much as doth the Zuinglian in defence of his Zuinglianisme And this is the verie forme fashion maner and substance of his
answere to the next demonstration where to S. Austin and S. Hierome reaching Peters chayre and succession of Priests in that Sea to be the very rocke vvhich the proud gates of helâ— ouercome nor which thing they affirme vpon manifest warrant of Christes wordes he answereth vpon warrant of his owne vvord that that succession of priestes is not the rocke the gates of hel haue prevayled against that church so as the faith vvhich somtimes florished there novv appeareth no vvhere in it long since is departed into other places Whereas D. S. replâ—eth this to be false and and that church euer to haue reteyned the same true faith and neuer to haue brought in any heresie or made any chaunge of doctrine vvhich he proueth by al historiographers that euer liued in the church Eusebius Prosper Beda Regino Marianus Scotus Schafnaburgensis Zonaras Nicephorus Cedâ—enus Sigebertus Gotfridus Viterbiensis Trithemius and many others against them al this only censure he opposeth Historias vestras Sandere non moramur vve regard not M. Sanders your stories and yet him selfe for his ovvne side bâ—ingeth not so much as one story So that against scriptures reason councels fathers old and nevv historiographers al kynd of vvriters him selfe euer cometh in as an omnipotent and vniuersal Apostlâ— Doctor Father c. as though in his only vvord consisted more pith then vvas in al mens that euer liued since Christes time And now somwhat farther to descrie the incredible vanitie folie pride and selfe loue of the maÌ„ let the reader note the grosse and barbarous impossibilitie of that paradox vvhich by this his supreme authoritie he vvould defend He graunteth the Church of Rome to haue bene pure godly christian for six hundred yeres after Christ as before hath bene declared VVhen then grew it to be so impure wicked and Antichristian ten yeres after For thus he writeth Six hundred and ten yeres after Christ or there about Bonifacius the third gouerned the Romane church VVhat vvas he to ansvvere truly very Antichrist In which wordes ioyned together thus much he saith in effect That whereas within the space of ten or twelue yeres before the Romane church was religious and euangelical in such sense as they vnderstand it that is abhorred the Popes vniuersal iurisdiction as Antichristian and limited his power within the precinctes of his owne Patriarkship reuerenced euery prince as supreme head of the church within his owne dominion detested the sacrifice of the masse as iniurious to the death of Christ acknowledged no iustification but by only faith allowed mariage of priestes and religious persons as agreable to the libertie of the gospel held for sacramentes none other but Baptisme the Eucharist and Baptisme an only signe not remitting synnes and the Eucharist a sole figure from which the truth of Christes body was as far distant as heauen is from earth and so forth according to the rest of the articles of their reformed faith within the decourse of so few yeres al these thinges were turned vpside downe the contrary faith planted in steede thereof That is the Romane church of late so sound and perfite sodaynly became most corrupt and impure she approued the vniuersal authoritie of the Romane Bishop and appointed no boundes or limites to his iurisdiction which was mere Antichristian she tooke from Princes their Supremacie she brought in the sacrifice of the masse and highly aduaunced it against the death and sacrifice of Christ she acknowledged iustification to proceede not of only faith but of workes also she established the single life of priestes and votaries and condemned their mariages as sacrilegious and execrable for two sacramentes she admitted seuen to baptisme she attributed remission of sinnes and in the Eucharist she beleeued the real and substantial veritie of Christes presence so forth according to the articles of Catholike religion or papistrie as these men terme it Now whereas thus much is comprised in their paradox of making the succession of the Romane bishops Antichrist whereas such weight lieth in the matter which of it selfe to common intendement is so absurd vnreasonable and in deede vnpossible whereas we also bring forth Fathers Councels and Doctors auouching the contrary gather thou Christian reader whether vve haue not iust cause vtterly to discredite them in this so blunt sensles assertioÌ„ vntil we see their Chronicles their monumeÌ„ts their aÌ„tiquities some maner warraÌ„t besides their owne in a matter of such importance Whereas they allow vs no such and yet chalenge to be credited vpon their owne vvord assure they selfe reader their dealing in this behalfe is not only foolish vnlearned and ignorant but also inhumane furious and diabolical Notwithstanding whereas M.W. besides those former profes which to any indifferent man may seeme more then sufficient requireth of vs farther declaratioÌ„ that in these later ages the Romane church hath not departed from that faith which in her first time she professed to content him if any thing mâ—y content him and make more euident the inuincible equitie of the Catholike cause I wil proue the same by such â—istoriographers as him selfe I trust wil allow for vpright and nothing fauorable to our cause Those witnesses I meane to be first of al him selfe and then Iohn Calum Peter Martyr Martin Luther Flacius Illyricus with such other pillers founders of his owne congregation Out of him self this I gather That to haue bene the true and Christian faith which the Romane church maâ—ntained the first fiue hundred yeres at what time that church vvas must pure excellent preserued inuiolablâ— the faâ—th deliuered by S. Peter and S. Paule This proposition is commonly found almost in euery page of M.W. answere to the second DemoÌ„stration Out of the other Caluin Luther c. this I gather that the Romane church in her first primitiue puritie maintained and beleeued the Popes Supremacie the sacrifice at the masse the same to be auailable for the dead priesthode the real presence c. no lesse then we do now This thou shalt find witnessed by their seueral confessions and approued at large hereafter in places conuenient The conclusion hereof rising is this first that these are no pointes of false or AntichristiaÌ„ doctrine but such as Peter Paule taught the primitiue Romane church Next that the later Romane church hath not departed from the former but hath kept inuiolably the self same faith without chaunge or alteration And so the false supposal whereupon this booke standeth being by such euideÌ„ce refuted the rest of the building must needes come to ground Now I say farther that this point which M.W. taketh for a most certaine and cleare veritie that is the fal of the vniuersal church for after the fal of the Romane church they can shew none that stoode and it is their general both preaching and writing that she corrupted the whole world with her errors and her
that these thinges shal be performed hereafter or haue bene already or God is to be accused of lying If a man ansvvere me that they haue bene performed I vvil demaund of him vvhen If he say in the time of the Apostles I vvil demaund hovv it chaunceth that nether theÌ„ the knovvledge of God and true religion vvas altogether perfite and aftervvardes in so short a space vanished avvay vvhich vvas promised to be eternal and more abundant then the fluddes of the sea Which argument of his if we marke wel and euery part thereof it is easely perceaued that he concludeth those thinges not to haue bene performed in the Church of the new testameÌ„t which al prophetes foretold should be performed at the comming of the Messias For whereas he driueth the summe of al to one of these three necessary consequentes ether that God is a lyer ether that the Church erected by Christ should euer stand in the sight of the world and euer florish with most abundaÌ„t knowledge of the wil of God or that such a Church shal be founded hereafter by the Messias and then remoueth the first which the nature of euery man abhorreth to heare then denieth the second according to the general scope of the protestants doctrine which affirmeth the Church for these thousand yeres passed to haue bene drowned in palpable darkenes superstition and idolatry what remaineth but to approue the third vz that the things foretold to be wrought by the Messias are not yet accomplished but shal be hereafter which is as much as in euideÌ„t termes to say that the Messias is not yet come or Christ is not the true Messias who hath performed nothing of that which was his part and office according to the oracles of the Prophetes This if I would prosequute at large by shewing into vvhat straightes and shameful and miserable shiftes some principal Protestants for example Caluin and Luther disputing vvith the Iewes haue bene brought by reason of this detestable supposition that the church so many hundred yeres hath failed the reader could not but abhorre and detest euen to the gates of hel this damnable heresie which vpon pretense of reforming the church and making al thinges pure and perfite doth in deede ioyne with the Turkes and Iewes and thrust men headlong to the very denial of Christes Incarnation And most certaine it is we can neuer against the Iewes maintayne Christ to be the true Messias if we put this paradox of the Protestants to be true that Christes church within so few yeres after his departure was suppressed trode vnder foote by the Pope And this one reason to passe by al other wil iustifie the same to their eternal confusion that whereas by the incarnation and coÌ„ming of Christ the church of Christians should be enlarged infinitely in al kingdomes prouinces and cities aboue the sinagoge of the Iewes which after that time should be narrow contemptible remayning in a few and nothing comparable to that other by the Protestants faith this is turned cleane contrarie For in any age or time of these later thovvsand yeres it is easie to shew by sufficient authoritie of cronicles histories that the Ievves haue had their knovven and visible sinagoges in the most notable places and prouinces of the vvorld in Greece in Constantinople in Germanie in Mantua in Venice in Paris in England in Spaine in Portugal vvhereas for many ages they can not name vnder the cope of heauen any kingdome prouince citie tovvne village house or sheepecote where the church of christ hath appeared if we esteeme the same according as they now by their preaching and writing describe it And therefore whereas M. W. obiecteth commonly that Doctor Sanders denying the Pope to be Antichrist and defending that an other shal come hereafter withdraweth men from consideration of the true Antichrist to a false and fayned one on the contrary side let the reader take this for a veritie as certaine and sure as the Gospel that he and his vpon such pretense of a false and imagined Antichrist of late daies conceaued and brought forth in the faÌ„tastical braines of a few heretical miscreantes vpon pretense of bringing men a neerer way to heauen then euer their forefathers went vpon pretense of framing a church more pure more sincere more perfite Apostolical then was in the world before I say vpon these false and lying reasons they withdraw men froÌ„ the only true auncient Catholike Apostolike church wherein they were baptised to their manifold scattered diuided apostatical congregations they leade men out of the way where only saluarion is to be looked for and place them there where remaining they are most certaine and assured of euerlasting damnation of body and soule Yea as appeareth by the course of their doctrine the drift of their preaching and writing and experiment of their brethren vnder the veile and shadow of this their Antichristian doctrine they induce meÌ„ to beleeue that al scripture is false that the prophetes were lyers that the Apostles were deceauers that Christ was a false teacher and seducer not the Messias described by the prophetes that Iudaisme standeth vpon better groundes then Christianisme which conclusion they can neuer avoyde except first they abandon and reuoke this their doctrine of Antichrist suppressing the Church as false and execrable And as for the Popes of Rome whom this man wil needes haue to be Antichrist this I dare say boldly and stand to the arbitrement of any reasonable and indifferent Protestant that by experience knoweth Rome and England the demeanure of the bishops who of late haue gouerned there as for example Pius 4. Pius 5. and Gregorius 13. and our Superintendents who in the same tyme haue ruled in England Let Antichrist be described in such sort and with such qualities as the scripture describeth him Afterward let there be laid in equal balance that which the world knoweth by publike vew and experience to haue bene in the foresaid bishops their feare of Gods iudgement testified by their whole order of life their much praier their infinite almes their iustice towards al their singular care to remedie the vvoundes of the Christian vvorld and gather into one the scattered flocke of Christ vvherein they haue spared no trauail or charges Lay vvithal the publike and knovven losenes in many of our English SuperinteÌ„dents the contempt of Gods iudgementes so much as may be gathered by their external behauiour maner of liuing their oppressioÌ„ of the poore their infinite auarice their few prayers their lightnes their carnalitie and whatsoeuer els is better knowen to the people where they liue then to me let these thinges I say be weighed by the iudgement of any reasonable Protestant and I doubt not but he wil confâ—sse that if in the tyme of the forenamed Popes the Sea of Rome was possessed of Antichrist in the same season many bishops Seas in England were possessed of double and
Chap. IX Wherein is refelled M.W. answere to certaine places of S. Chrysostom touching the real presence and sacrifice Pag. 203. Chap. X. Of the place in S. Lukes Gospel cap. 22. corrupted by Beza Pag. 231. Chap. XI M.W. general answere to the booke of Discouerie and of the notable impietie committed by the translators of the English Bibles Pag. 260. Chap. XII M. W. reasons against the latin bible are answered and the same bible is proued to be in sundrie places more pure sincere then the hebrue now extant Pag. 280. Chap. XIII Of the puritie of our latin testament in respect of the greeke copies now extant Item a comparison of our translator with other of this age with an answere to those obiections which M. W. deuiseth against him Pag. 360. Chap. XIIII That to leaue the ordinarie translation of the bible appointed by the Church and to appeale to the hebrue greeke and such new diuers translations as the protestants haue made is the very way to Atheisme and Infidelitie Pag. 406. Chap. XV. How M.W. inueigheth against the new testament lately set forth in this college with a cleare refutation of such faultes as he findeth in the translation thereof Pag. 443. Chap. XVI A defence of such faultes as are found in the Annotations of the new testament Pag. 474. Chap. XVII Of certaine blasphemies contained in the Annotations pag. 527. The Conclusion Pag. 548. A REFVTATION OF M. WHITAKERS REPREHENSION OF THE LATE ENGLISH TRANSLAtiō and Catholike Annotations of the new Testament and of the booke of Discouery of hereticall corruptions CHAP. 1. Of Luthers contemning S. Iames his Epistle and callinge it STRAMINEAM AMONG sundrie cōtrouersies raysed by the Protestants in our dayes one and that of greate weyght and consequence is the Canon of holy Scriptures that is what bookes are to be admitted into diuine and supreme authoritye and as certaynlye wrytten by inspiration of the holy Ghoste to be receaued without any doubte or contradiction In examininge which question the behauiour of our aduersaries deserueth diligent consideration For as in the beginning they much praysed the Fathers Church Councels of the firste fiue hundred yeares not for any respecte or reuerence they bare vnto them but by so doinge to discountenance and thrust out of credite the Fathers Church and Councels of the later thowsand by whom they saw most euidently their heresies to haue bene condemned so not long after for lyke purpose they made vaūt of the scriptures agaynst those very first and moste auncient Fathers not for any iuste honor or regarde which they had of the scriptures but by that meanes to disgrace the Fathers and ease them selues of answering their authoritye when soeuer they should be pressed therewith For that in deede they accompte not of the very scriptures more then of the Fathers but turne them ouer for vs to defende no lesse then the Fathers time and experience hath shewed their publike wrytinges professe as by that which hereafter ensueth shall manifestly appeare and M. Whitaker though in worde he would fayne dissemble the matter yet in facte and truth playnly declareth so much which being so let the Christian Reader as in other things so in this especially note the proceeding of that which these men call the gospell the grosse impietie wherevnto it tendeth and in to what open profession of infidelitie in a shorte space it is likely to breake out which in the compasse of so few yeares is growen to such a head that now already they dare as boldly call in question and deny partes of the holy scriptures as not long sithence they made the like quarels against the wrytings of the auncient Fathers Let the Christian Reader note I say not their wordes but their doinges not their coūterfeit dissimulatiō in speach pulpit sometyme vsed but their euident practise reasons asseuerations published in bookes confirmed by arguments deduced by necessarie coherence from their doctrine and many wayes expressed by them selues in sundry their Cōferences Institutions and disputations and he shall easely perceaue our aduersaries after denyall of the Fathers Councels Tradition and the authoritie of the Church Catholike now at this present to stand vpon lyke deniall of the written worde the Apostles Prophets so as they leaue no one ground whereupon a christian man can rest his fayth or stay him selfe Thus much I gather not onely by the writinges of sundry other Protestants whereof some I shall touch hereafter but euen of M. Whitakers discourse in defence of Luther about S. Iames Epistle whose words and reasons for this purpose and the Readers better intelligence I will sett downe and prosequute somewhat the more at large And firste of all concerning S. Iames his Epistle M. Martin reproueth M. Whitaker for denyinge that Luther called that Epistle stramincam and in so cleare a case charged Father Campian with a notorius lye It is easie to gesse sayth M.W. vvhat a fellovv vve shall fynde you in the reste vvho are not ashamed in the very beginning to lye so egregiously When F. Campian replyed that it was in some one of Luthers first editions though otherwyse altered in the later nether so sayth M.W. Praefationem illam purgatam esse dixisti quam tamen constat nullo vnquam verbo mutatam esse You saye that preface vvas corrected vvhereas it is certayne that there vvas neuer anye vvorde changed in it Now this being the faulte which M. Martin layeth to M. W. see how wel he defendeth himselfe First because after he had read ouer all Luthers prefaces vpon the new Testament as he sayth he found none such there of he inferreth He is not to be accounted impudent as you call me vvho denieth that to be true vvhich he knovveth not to be true but he that to deceaue others defendeth that as false vvhich he knovveth to be most true but I am so farre from acknovvledging this to be true that I neuer thought it to be more false then I thinke it novv I will not wrangle vpon the definition of impudency but whether this dealing be not moste shamelesse and detestable in a Christian let any man of indifferencie iudge First it can not be excused of grosse and insolente boldnesse and rashnesse vpon the vew of one onely edition to deny so peremptorily a thing obiected so often by so many learned men of name and for ought I coulde yet reade or heare neuer denyed by the Lutherans especially whereas withall nothing is more notorious then the manifold alteratiōs which Melanchton and those of VVittenberge haue made in Luthers works corrupting deprauing putting in and taking out so much and so far forth as pleased their chāgeable humor where of the zealous Lutherans in a synode holden at Altemburg by procurement of the Duke of Wirtemberg and Palsgraue of Rhene lamentably complayne Electorales say they Lutheri scripta enormiter quám faedissimé deprauant ita vt post obitū Lutheri c. The
that it svvarueth from the Apostolicall doctrine and teacheth cleane contrarie to S. Paule and all scriptures if Luther flatly expresly deny it to be Apostolical and affirme it to conteyne no one title or letter of such matter as the Apostels are wont to haÌ„dle if WolfgaÌ„gus Musculus vse him so contemptuouslie as though he were some poore rascall not worth the naming and teache him what he should say and sette him to schole this being euident then F. Campions conclusion standeth strong that Luther with his complices contemne that parte of scripture howsoeuer he calleth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 strawen or wodden And therefore ether let M. VV. lyke a good childe confesse with Luther vvhom gladlie he vvorshippeth as his father and vvith the Lutherans vvhom he embraceth as his most deere brethren in Christ that this epistle is no more worth then his father and brethren make of it or if he mislike such consanguinitie as sure I am they abhorre him let him then detest them as profane and wicked men who so impiouslie reiecte the written worde of God that is the foundation as they say whereon is buylte their newe congregation and so may the reader note downe one more capital and substantiall point of dissension betwene those two churches lutheran zuinglian then heâ—herto he hath consâ—dered although nether can he so doe precisely but rather note it as a diuision amonge the zuinglians also for so muche as it appeareth by Musculus that the Zuinglians of SuitzerlaÌ„d no lesse then the LutheraÌ„s of Germanye disagree from the Englishe churche in their Canon of scripture yea the Englishe church within it self as shal appeare in the nexte chapiter CHAP. II. Of the Canonical scriptures and that the English cleargie in accepting some and refusinge others are ledde by no learning or diuinitie but by mere opinion and fantasie AFTER S. Iames foloweth a questioÌ„ proposed by M. Martin how it chauÌ„ceth that the English church doth admit S. Iames epistle which sometime was not admitted and yet wil refuse Tobias Ecclesiasticus the books of Machabees which were no farther disproued then that of S. Iames. The reason in truth is the same in effecte geuen by M.VV. because these later contayne such proofe of the Catholyke religion as by no sophisticatioÌ„ can be eluded S. Iames they thinke is not so flat but shifts they haue to ridde their handes of him well inough So much writeth Caluin Some there are that thinke this epistle not vvorthie of authoritie but I because I see no sufficiente cause vvhy it should be reiected gladly vvithout controuersie embrace it for vvhereas the doctrine of free iustification semeth to be refuted in the second chapiter in his place I shall easelie ansvvere that matter As if he had sayd that therefore he admitted it because he had found out a quidditie to auoide that hard obiection agaynst only faith which answere notwithstaÌ„ding because it is false peeuish sophistical and cannot abide the tryall as wel proueth Illyricus Pomerane Musculus they therfore thought the other way more cleanlie rather vppoÌ„ preteÌ„ce of some doubte made in the primitiue churche cleane to shake it of with the rest then vppon a vaine toy which must in fine shame it selfe make hazard of their solifidian iustificatioÌ„ which must needes come to the grounde if this Apostle retaine his old credite This I say in deede is the reason but because thus to haue spoken plainlie had geuen a sure demonstratioÌ„ to the reader that they make no more account of scriptures then of fathers no more reckning of Iames or Peter then of Gregorie or Austin if they be against their conceaued heresies therefore M. VVhit semeth to shape a more cleanlie answere and this yt is All the church saith he reproued not the epistle of Iames and they that reproued it vvere moued so to doe by no sure reasons but these bookes vvhich you name Tobias Ecclesiasticus the Machabees the vvhole churche of old reiected nether vvere they vvritten in the Hebrevv tounge vvhereas no bookes of the old testament vvere Canonicall but onlie those vvhich the lord commended to the old churche Two reasoÌ„s he seemeth to geue the first that no bookes in the olde TestameÌ„t are Canonicall but such as were written in the Hebrew the proofe wherof consisting onlie in M.VV. authoritie without ether reason or probabilitye or Doctor or Councell if I oppose against him S. Augustine with the catholike churche of that age I trust the reader wil not greatlie stagger which syde he ought to take and if this reason hold I marueile what shall become of Daniel a great parte wherof is held of them for Canonical yet is not writteÌ„ in the Hebrew His other argument is of more force that the vvhole primitiue church refused the bookes of Machabees Iudith Tobie but certaine onlv that vppon no good reason refused S. Iames. These two partes if he proue and shew this difference he sayth somewhat I wil be of iudgement as he is if not whereof I assure my self then as before so here styll lust and fantasie ruleth them in mangling thus the scriptures not reason diuinytie let vs see how he proueth that the whole churche reiected the former S. Hierom sayth the church readeth the bookes of Iudith Tobias the Machabees but reckeneth theÌ„ not amongst canonicall scriptures This for them how may we fynd now that not the whole churche but some particuler men and they not vppon any good reason refused S. Iames For this part we must credit M.VV. vppon his worde for besyde his worde reason or coniecture he yeldeth none but coÌ„trariwise to disproue this his distinction and approue that without reason or conscience he and his fellowes haue made choyse of the one with condemnation of the other thus to do M.VV. him selfe ministreth vs mattet abundant for thus he wryteth in his first booke in iustifiynge frier Luther against S. Iames. Luther vvas not ignorante vvhat the aunciente church iudged of Iames his epistle Eusebius doubted not to vvrite of that epistle expresslie I vvold have all men to knovv that the epistle vvhich is ascribed to Iames is a bastarde epistle vvhat could be writteÌ„ more plainly but perhaps Eusebius pleaseth you not geue me a reasoÌ„ vvhy heare then Hierome vvhom you knovv to have bene a Priest of the Romane Church The epistle of Iames is auouched to have bene set forth by some other in his name the one affirmeth it to be a counterfeite the other saith it is supposed to have bene published not by the Apostle but by some other vvhy then are you angrie vvith Luther vvhom you see not suddenlie or rashlie first to have begon to doubâ—e of that epistle but therein to folovve the iudgement â—â—stimonie of the auncient Church Let vs now ioyne together these two proofes of M. VV. with consideration what thence
no wiser then they who in so shorte space haue falleÌ„ out with your self altered your iudgmeÌ„te and now esteeme that for apocriphal which then was to yow canonical that is now iugde that to be the moone which then you thought to be the sunne Our lorde geue his people grace to thinke of you as you proue your selues that is so fantastical inconstant that you know not what to say and whyles you seeke to keepe your selfe aloofe from the Catholike churche the sure piller grouÌ„de of truâ—he you plunge your selues ouerhead and eares in such foule absurdities as neuer did heretikes before you For what is the reason of al this because besydes the written word or scripture yow wil not acknowledge any traditioÌ„ of the Church wherevnto by this question yow are enforced of necessitie For if we are bound to beleeue certaine bookes as for example the Gospel of S. Matthew S. Marke S. Iohn and S. Paules Epistles to be Canonical that is heaueÌ„ly and peÌ„ned by diuine inspiration and yet the same can not be proued by scripture theÌ„ cleare it is that we are bound to beleeue somewhat which by scripture caÌ„ not be proued and so the tradition of the Church is established And marueyle it is that yow perceaue not how grosly yow ouerthwart your self and plainly refel that which yow would seeme most earnestly to confirme For if yow march your beleefe of scripture with knowledg of the Sunne and Moone and such like as are knowen by only sense the light of nature then you deny it to be any article of your faith For these two are directly opposite and the apostle confirmeth this reason wheÌ„ he defineth faith to come by hearing and hearing by the vvord of God ergo fides ex auditu auditus per verbuÌ„ Dei And therefore if you beleeue not with humaine faith as yow beleeue Tusculanes questions to haue bene written by Cicero but with Christian diuine faith as yow beleeue Christ to be your sauiour if thus you beleeue the Gospel which beareth S. Matthews name as likewise that of S. Marke and S. Iohn to haue bene written by them then yow beleeue so because so yovv haue heard it preached and so yovv haue receaued and consequently by the Apostles authoritie that verie matter so preached vnto yow is the vvord of God which word of God whereas yow find not in the scriptures hereof it foloweth manifestly that somewhat is the vvord of God which is not scripture and therefore yow and your fellowes beleeuing only scripture beleeue not al the vvord of God but only a peece thereof and so did the worste heretikes that euer were yea so do at this day the verie Turkes and Mahometanes But to end this special matter with yow M. VV. touching your distinction betweene S. Iames and Tobias Iudith the Machabees c. where you make this to be the difference that S. Iames vvas refused but of a fevv and the other generally of the vvhole Churche tota Ecclesia repudiauit say you for declaration of your truth herein I referre you to the moste euident testimonies of the same auncient Churche S. Augustine setting downe the Canonicall scriptures as they were read and beleeued in his time placeth S. Iames I coÌ„fesse in order with the Gospels Pauls epistles yet not excludiÌ„g those other but in the selfe same place numbringe Tobie Iudith and the Machabees with the bookes of Moses and the Prophetes his saith he 44. libris veteris testameÌ„ti terminatur authoritas In these fourtie and foure bookes is concluded the authoritie of the old testament Likewise the Councel of Carthage approueth for Canonicall S. Iames but in the same CanoÌ„ it approueth as far the other forenamed and teacheth of them as directlie as of the other that they are Canonicall scriptures Somewhat before S. Augustines daies they were not by publike decree of the Church receaued as appeareth by S. Hierome and the Councel of Laodicea but then when there was as greate doubte of S. Iames epistle S. Paule to the Hebrewes and the Apocalyps touchinge the first it is manifest by that which hath bene said by you and your felowes Of the secoÌ„d there was more question then of the first and S. Hierome seldome citeth it but he geueth a note signifyinge that it was not in his time taken for Canonical In the Epistle to the Hebrevves vvhich the custome of the Latine Church receaueth not saith he it is thus vvritten Againe the blessed Apostle in his Epistle to the Hebrevves although the custome of the Latin Church receaueth it not amongst Canonicall scriptures Againe this authoritie the Apostle Paule vsed or vvhosoeuer he vvere that vvrote that Epistle In catalogo he saith that euen vnto his time it vvas not accounted the vvritinge of Paule and that Caius an auncient writer denyeth it to be his and in his epistle to Paulinus sette before the Bible he saith that a plaerisque extra numerum ponitur of the more part it is put out of the nuÌ„ber of Paules vvritinges The like might be declared by S. CipriaÌ„ Lactantius Tertullian Arnobius and S. Austine if it were needefull and the Apocalyps was yet more doubtful then ether of these two as wee see by the Councel of Laodicea leafte oute of the rolle of Canonicall writinges when both the other of S. Iames and S. Paule were put in Wherefore as false that is which M.VV. constantlie auoucheth of the auncient Church touchinge the seueringe of these sacred volumes so hath he not yet nor euer shalbe able with reason to satisfie M. Martins demaund why they of England haue coÌ„desceÌ„ded to admit the one rather then the other And here the reader may consider esteeme as it deserueth of that glorious 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in fine he singeth to him self settinge the crowne of triumphe vppon his owne head and his felowes Nothing saith he is novv more vulgar then the Papists arguments against vs. Quicquid afferri a quoquam potuit vidimus diluimus protriuimus vvhat so euer could be said of anie of them al vve haue seene it refelled it and trode it vnder foote he may consider I saie how like this man and his companions are to worke such maisteries who as yet knowe not what those weapons are which they should vse in atchiuing such conquests For whereas they vaunt to doe this by the written worde yet are not resolued amoÌ„gest them selues what that written word is and how farre it extendeth it is as fantastical a parte to bragge of victorie as if a mad man should ruÌ„ne into the field to slea his enemie and when he commeth there knoweth not with what weapon to begin the fight Wherefore wel may he and his felowes heare and see the Catholike doctrine as Esai speaketh of the Iewes concerninge the doctrine of Christ hearing shal you heare shall not vnderstand and seeing shal yovv
and maye retaine external peace and ciuil concord vvith the Zuinglians in matters temporal but quoad spiritum eos ad extremum vsque halitum deuitabimus arguemus damnabimus pro idololatris verbi Dei corruptoribus blasphemis deceptoribus c. touchinge the soule and matters spiritual vve vvil auoide thē as long as vve haue a day to liue vve vvil reproue and condemne them for idolaters corrupters of Gods vvorde blasphemers and deceauers and of them as enemies of the Gospel vve vvill sustaine persecution and spoile of our goods vvhat-soeuer they shal do vnto vs so lōge as God vvill permitte And in the same leafe it foloweth immediatelye aptlye may vve say to these men offeringe vs peace as Christe saide to Iudas in the garden Iudas vvith a kysse betrayest thou the sonne of man So this is the very peace and kisse of Iudas for offeringe vs their friendship they vvoulde vvithal obtaine of vs to holde our peace and in silence beholde the fyers and slaughters vvhereby they thrust headlong infinite thousandes of soules dovvne to hell Here is Luthers iudgmente and that with scripture for againste al communion with the Zuinglians he in this place vrgeth the wordes of our sauiour Math. 10. vers 34. Luk. 14. v. 26.2 Cor. 6. v. 14. Eph. 4. v. 5. May Luther now prefer his iudgmente thus qualified before a thousande Caluines a thousand Peter Martyrs or who-soeuer els be the greatest doctors of your congregatiōs before all Zuinglian churches Or if Luther may so do may not we do the like and thinke of you as he doth and that by vvarrante geuen vs from your ovvne mouthe Maye vve not saye to you vpon like grounde Scripturam Lutherus protulit cui nullus mortalis resistit c. Luther hath brought scripture vvhich no man can vvithstand and vvhich at lenght shal be the bane and ouerthrovve of all the Zuinglian and Caluinistical opinions Now if which is the extreme refuge you wil say that Luthers iudgmēt against you is not agreable to scripture and therfore not so deepely to be accompted of then see I beseeche you how finely and suttely you haue fet this matter about for now the sense of your distinctiō is that whē Luther affirmeth any thing agreable to the scriptures by iudgment of your selfe he ought to esteeme more of it thē of a thousand Austines a thousād Ciprianes an innumerable cōpany of catholike churches And thus whiles you first geue Luther power to iudge ouer al Fathers Doctors and Councels and then make your self iudge ouer Luther to approue reproue him as you please who seeth not that in fine you make your self supreme iudge of altas before of scriptures so now of Fathers and Councels old and new Catholike and heretike no lesse of your owne doctors then the auncient fathers and doctors of Christes church which is in deede the verie last refuge and extreme resolution of all your new diuinitie Finally because it greeueth me to spēde time in such vnreasonable pelfe may it please you at your better leysure to consider the sense of this parcel to put it downe somewhat more intelligiblie and if you can so do and saue your selfe from the note of much foly for from beinge an heretike by Luthers iudgment what soeuer the answere be you shall neuer saue your selfe you shal performe a matter of more difficultie then perhaps you are aware of In the meane season as it standeth it carieth with it grosse faultes as manie welnie as it hath lines whether you oppose Luther to the auncient primitiue Churche as it seemeth and as doubtlesse he meante or to the catholike churche of our time whiche you woulde inferre or to your owne deuided Zuinglian congregation which by like sequele doth folow or whether you consider Luther in this case only as one principal author of your Gospel so make this priuiledge common to him with other or rather consider him singularly by himselfe because he was the first that brake the yse and opened the waye to this soule Apostasie which is now so far spread or finally whether you thus aduaūce Luther but euer holdinge the raynes in your owne handes which I weene must be your laste refuge and final determination CHAP. IIII. Of priesthode end the sacrifice continued after Christ in the state of the nevv testament and that it derogateth nothing from Christ THE difference betwene you M. Martin aboute priestes is no priuate but a general controuersie betweene all Catholiks and Protestants your minister like termes of Baalites and Antichristian sacrificers I cōtemne am cōtente to dissemble many breaths more stronge and ranke then this we muste gladly abide or els we are not such as by Goddes mercy we hope professe our selues Comfortably saith our sauiour the disciple is not aboue his maister nor the seruante aboue his lorde if they haue called the goodman of the house Beelzebub hovv much more them of his housholde therefore feare ye them not For to comforte our selues withal if we be Baalites and Antichristians in respecte of oure priesthode then certainly Christe is the capitaine Baal Antichriste from whom our priesthode descendeth And that will I proue in few principally and first by your owne wordes secondarilye by manifeste deduction out of the scriptures A priest you define thus Sacerdotes ii verè propriè sunt qui sacrificia faciunt qualis fuit Aaron Aaronis filii Melchisedechus quem illi adumbrabant Christus Priestes truly and properly are they that offer sacrifices such as vvas Aaron and the sonnes of Aaron Melchisedech and Christe vvhom they prefigured Those that offer sacrifice you acknowledge to be priestes truly and properly not onlye by abuse of speeche as in this place againste S. Austine you falsly cauille In the number of such priestes that offered sacrifice you reckē Melchisedec after him Christe of vvhom Melchisedec vvas a figure This you woulde neuer haue said had you bene skilful ether in your owne diuinitie or in the faith of the Catholike Church for although hetherto we haue many wayes laboured and vsed all possible meanes of proufe that Melchisedec offered sacrifice yet we could neuer obtaine so much of your brethren because they wel saw that therein was included the manifest confirmatiō of the Catholike faithe touching priesthod the vtter ruine of your Geneuiā Ministerye For if Melchisedec sacrificed then was it in bread and wine for other sacrifice of his neuer man imagined and the scripture proueth it inuincibly which mencioneth that no other nor by worde sillable or title geueth the leste insinuation of any besides Then how necessarilie it muste folow that Christe sacrificed in like maner and how from him power to do the same is deriued vnto priestes of the new testament this shal be shewed hereafter First of all that of Melchisedecs sacrifice beinge most certaine of you graunted and of vs beleeued
presence VVell it may be that an other opinion more agreable to mans reason may please an idle mind especially if the opinion be furnished and commended vvith argumeÌ„tes vvel handled But vvhat shal become of vs intentation vvhen our coÌ„science shal be called to accompt vvhat cause vve had to dissent from the receaued opinion in the Church Then these vvordes This is my bodie vvil be thunderboltes So Ioachimus VVestphalus in his Apologie against Caluine answering this very argument the body of man is circumscribed in a place therefore at one time it can not be but in one place therefore not in al places vvhere the supper is ministred Is not saith he this Geometrical argumeÌ„t fetched froÌ„ Euclides demonstrations the piller and vpholder of all these Sacramentaries Doth not this vphold the building of their syllogismes vvhich corrupt verie many places of scriptures Most truly is verified of the Sacramentaries that memorable saying Take from heretikes that vvherein they agree vvith Philosophers and they cannot stand Take from the Sacramentaries that vvhich they dravv from Philosophie and hovv smal a quantitie vvill remaine of the great volumes of al the Sacramentaries Hovv long vvil it be before the doctrine of Berengarius fall to the ground VVel and truly vvrote Tertullian that Philosophers are the Patriarches of heretikes For philosophie brought forth all heresies and she begat the error of Zuinglius Finally because the English church in their Apologie acknowledgeth Luther for a most excellent man sent from God to lighten the vvhole vvorld and M. VV. saith that they vvorshippe him as their father in Christ I answere as that excellent man of God and their father answered long ago His discourse being longe I wil gather shortly the summe of it set it downe in his wordes If M.VV. would be better satisfied I remitte him to the maine worke First he confesseth this argument to be fundamentum quod habent omnium praecipuuÌ„ the chief ground foundation of the Sacramentaries But he asketh vvhat scripture they haue to proue that these tvvo propositions be so directly contrary Christ sitteth in heauen and Christ is in the supper whereas they can bring none he concludeth The contradiction is in their carnal imagination not in faith or the vvord of God vvhich teacheth no such matter Next vvhere-as Gods povver surpasseth al cogitatioÌ„ vvorketh that vvhich is to our reason incomprehensible and vvhich only faith beleeueth and the same God said This is my body vvhich shal be deliuered for you hovv can I persvvade my conscience saith he that God hath nether meanes nor abilitie to do as his vvordes sound Then he sheweth that although in the mind of man these thinges are contrary yet in the mind of God they worke no more repugnance then Mary bringing forth in her virginitie is against that vniuersal sentence Increase and multiplye or this proposition Christ is God ouerthroweth this other that Christ is man Out of which thus premised he falleth in to a vehement exhortatioÌ„ that al ChristiaÌ„s beware of the Sacramentaries in this kind of argument for so much as directly thereby they draw men to Paganisme and infidelitie the principal partes of our faith being in like sorte subiect to the controle of carnal reason humaine philosophie Boni isti Sacramentarii saith he sua nausea aditum parant ad Christum Deum ipsum omnes articulos abnegandum c. These good SacrameÌ„taries by their lothsomenesse make a vvay to denie Christ and God him selfe and al articles of our faith and truly for a great part they haue already begoÌ„ne to beleeue nothing For they bring themselues vvithin the compasse of reason vvhich is the right vvay to damnation and them selues knovv that these Ethnicall cauils ether are nothing vvorth against this article or if they coÌ„clude ought against this they do the like against al. For the vvord of God is foolishnes to mans reason 1. Cor. 1. and they vvould neuer haue vttered this if they had any regard of the scripture and vvere not their harts ful of infidelitie so as their mouth speaketh of the abundance of their hart After this he noteth the vnequal dealing of the Sacramentaries This truly saith he is vvorthy of admiratioÌ„ that none of the fathers vvhereof there is an infinite number did euer speake so of the Sacrament as do the Sacramentaries but cleane contrary Yet notvvithstanding if perchauÌ„ce they fal vpoÌ„ some odd place in a doctor that soundeth tovvardes their opinioÌ„ as vvhere S. Aug. saith corpus Christi in vno loco esse potest here saith Luther by reason of their preiudicate opinion they snatch at that make much of it vvhereas othervvise against the saings of all the fathers they are most stiffe and stubburne and sensles more vnmoueable then is any rocke amiddest the sea and though the fathers all vvith one mouth affirme yet the Sacramentaries harden them selues to deny them Last of all against Zuinglius and Oecolampadius vsing in their bookes the selfe same reasons which M. W. vseth here and triumpheth so insolently he concludeth as I conclude against him If these be the grounds and reasons vvhich should certifie vs of truth approue our faith and confirme our conscience then truly vve are in euill casâ— If a man had deliuered me such bookes vvithout title and name and I knevv not othervvise such excellent and learned men to haue bene the authors of them I should surely haue thought that some iâ—sting Comediant or Turkish vagabond had made them in despite and derision of Christians Verily I see not hovv they can be excused vvith any probable pretence as many other heretikes haue had For it appeareth that they play vvith Gods vvord of vvilfulnes malice And I thinke it can not be that such cold toyes and bablinges should in deede moue a Turke or a Ievv much lesse a Christian But that great lothsomenes and disdaine of the sacred supper and immoderate greedines to defend their opinion maketh them so mad or giddie that vvhat-soeuer they take hold of though it be but a stravv yet they imagine it to be a svvorde or a speare and that at euerie stroke they kill thousandes This is the terrible argument so magnified by M. W. quod impetus nostros non pertimescit that feareth not our forces an argument which plucketh vp the verie rootes of Christianitie gain saith many places and histories of the Scripture and maketh frustrate the testameÌ„t of Christ an argument carnal ethnical and for such contemned of the auncient fathers and condemned by the late heretikes of greatest learning an argument which Luther would neuer beleeue could proceede but from a Turke had he not seene it in the bookes of some of the Zuinglian Sect vsurping the name of Christians such an argument as he accompteth them heretikes wilful and inexcusable who are ought moued therewith finally such an argument
persons of this one sauiour from which heresie Beza was not farre as you know now this heresie maketh that citatioÌ„ though otherwise good and sound yet not so perfect and absolute as it had bene to put in the worde god Because in this tyme and against such an heritike the place thus alleaged is more forcible S. Bernard erred not in citing the first but this heretike playeth the verie heretike in pressing it against the later Take an other example to make the thing more manifest In S. Luke we reade that the angel thus speaketh to our blessed Ladie Spiritus sanctus superueniet in te etc. ideoque quod nascetur ex te sanctum vocabitur filius dei The holy Ghost shall come vpon thee c. and therefore that vvhich of thee shall be borne holy shall be called the sonne of god who doubteth but S. Bernard or S. Thomas and some auncient copies albeit they leaue out the wordes ex te of thee neuertheles meane the true and perfecte sense of the place that our Ladie through the power of the holy Ghost coÌ„ceaued of her body and brought forth the sonne of god Now ryse your frindes the Ana baptistes and amongest other heresies spreade this that Christ brought his flesh from heauen and tooke it not of our blessed Lady but passed thorough her as water thorough a cundit pipe or according to your auncient comparison when you first began your gospel Christ was so in her as saffron in a saffron bagge And they being pressed with this place answere as you aÌ„swere for Beza that the true reading is to leaue out those two syllables ex te and so the place proueth nothing And this they would proue by better argument then you pretend any hauing for them some auncient copies both greeke and latin besides the reading of more fathers then one Can not you in this case easily conceaue how those fathers and writers gaue a true sense and far from the Anabaptisticall heresie and yet the Anabaptists are wicked heretiks in vrging this correction of the text why so because the fathers spake truly and meant entierly the full truth although the sense be not so full and absolute to all purposes and in euerie respecte namely of this new heresie whereof these fathers neuer dreamed as is the text it selfe in his naturall strength and force put downe in those words and syllables as it was first by the holy Euangelist the Anabaptistes speake falsly and meane detestably when by that alteration they will seeme to confirme their heresie take from the Catholike church so good a grouÌ„d refelling the same which those other fathers neuer entended This is your very case and so S. Basil meant truly and simply and as a Sainte and a Christian though Beza and you deale in the selfe same matter falsely and subtilly and as it becommeth heretikes And yet one step farther vvhen you haue done spoke al al that ye doe speake is nothing to the purpose For suppose ye sinâ—e many Basils and many greeke copies reading as you vvould haue it yet shall you be neuer for al that able to iustifie Beza because he coÌ„fesseth vvhen he so translated he neuer savv any and therefore vvas not moued by any such reading And therfore your pâ—ying searching for fyg-leaues to couer his filthines can no more serue the turne then if a man should excuse Iudas for betrayng Christ by reason of the good vvhich came thereby to the redemption of mankinde Because vvhatsoeuer vvas the euent of that actioÌ„ he sinned thâ—rin damnably vvho regarded no such matter but only for malice and gayne of xxx pence sold his lord and maister and the selfe same is to be saide of this Iudas vvhose honestie you vvould so fayne sane For vvhatsoeuer may be the successe of your labours in this argument he certainely plaid therein the parte of a damnable corruptor of gods holy vvord vvho for malice against the truth and loue of his heresie vvithout any such knovvledge committed so sacrilegious an acte And the reason vvhich you make helpeth the matter neuer a vvhit but so muche the more discouereth your folly Thus you argue If by the cuppe you vnderstande not the cuppe it selfe but the bloud of Christe in the cuppe is not this a trope vvhy then are you offended vvith vs vvhen you your selues graunt that there is a trope in these vvords Is it lavvfull for you to inuent tropes is it vnlavvfull for vs to appoint one necessarie trope Whereunto I ansvvere first that this is also from the purpose For be your Zuinglian heresie most true as it is moste false it furthereth you nothing nor abbettereth his rashnes in altering the text For vve may not make the scripture speake euerie truth in euerie place much lesse may vve make it speake vile heresie in any place Then the forme of your reasoning is so lose that if a man vvould studie for an argument to make sport vvithall he could not deuise one more fond and ridiculous We allovv of a trope vvhen vve interprete the cuppe to be the bloud or the thing conteyned in the cuppe Ergo vve ought to allovv your trope in the other parte of the sentence that the bloud shed for vs should signifie a cuppe of vvine What vvit reason probabilitie or sense induceth you so to talke vvhence riseth the coherence and connexion of this consequent Is it this because in one part of the seÌ„tence there is a trope or figure therefore the other part is figuratiue also as for example S. Paule sayth by the lavv I am dead to the lavv vvith Christ I am nayled to the crosse and agayne VVe that are baptised are buried together by baptisme in to death vvith Christ in vvhich sentence the Apostle ioyneth tvvo seuerall truthes in the first Christ vvas nayled to the crosse and I am nayled to the crosse vvith him in the next Christ vvas buried and vve that are baptised are buried vvith him Novv is this your argument S. Paule vvas nayled to the crosse mystically and this a trope ergo Christ vvas nayled to the crosse in such maner and that is also a trope vvhen the baptised are sayd to be buried vvith Christ it is a figure ergo that Christ vvas buried is likevvise a figure If this be the knitting of your argumeÌ„t you see vvhat pith is in it Or is it because of one particular figure you may infer an other then also you haue your aunsvvere geuen you partly in that vvhich is hovv sayd partly before by your father Luther that it is as substantiall a reason as if I should saie Peter vvas an Apostle ergo Pilate vvas an Apostle the blessed virgin brought forth and remained a virgin ergo Sara did so Or meane you that your trope hath as good reasoÌ„ to support it as hath ours if so vve geue you infinite difference because vpon our trope to vvitte that the
not of the Catholikes esteemed to be altogether autentical is much more of Luther and the Protestants condemned For of them thus he writeth in the same commentarie 70 interpretes digni sunt odio c. The 70. interpreters are vvorthie of hatred for I can not beleeue it is false that they translated and turned the bible by the holy Ghost for there appeareth in them manifest vanitie impietie studie to corrupt it Thus Luther VVhere in though he rayle to fowly yet hereof appeareth how much he esteemeth of the 70. And the true ground whereby both Luther and the Protestants hold this so singular a peece of scripture against the Iewes is nether the Chaldee interpreter nor the 70. as Luther pretendeth nor the hebrew fountaine which is worse but that whereby we retaine al scriptures that is the churches authoritie and warrant who testefieth vnto vs that this is the letter of the prophete as Lyra from whom Luther borowed his answere teacheth Thus he writeth In this place of Esaie is proued the humanitie and diuinitie of Christ but the Ievves ansvvere sayng it is not in the hebrue He shal be called but he shal cal and so that vvhich directly expresseth the diuinitie is not referred to the child borne but to the true god calling him and the name of the child is put in the end of the place that is Principem pacis prince of peace But they that thus say corrupt the text therefore vve must run to the translations And first that this is false is proued by the 70. vvho translate vocabitur he shal be called and by S. Hierom. And thus it is read in the office of the masse vpon Christemas daie and that office for the most part folovveth the traÌ„slation of the 70. And by this translation it is cleare that the hebrue should not be vocabit but vocabitur as these vvil haue it corrupting the text And the same is proued by the Chaldee translation VVhere the churches authoritie is the supreme grouÌ„d staye for in deede the other coÌ„uince nothing as shal better appeare heareafter An other example of like corruption and in as high and great a point as this against the diuinitie of our Sauiour I geue you Ierem. 23. where S. Hierom did reade and translate according to the hebrew thus Ecce dies veniunt dicit dominus et suscitabo Dauid germeÌ„ iustum er regnabit rex et sapiens erit et hoc est nomen quo vocabunt eum dominus iustus c. as in our vulgar translation Behold the daies come sayth our lord and I vvil raise to Dauid a iust branch and he shal raigne as a king and shal be vvise this is the name by vvhich they shal cal him Our iust lord or the lord our iustice where the name Tetragrammaton attributed to our incarnate Sauiour proueth that he is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or lord god of Israel wherein the two natures diuine and humane appeare most euidently S. Hierom in the text putteth a double reading one after the hebrew an other after the 70. Vpon the place in his commentarie he writeth thus If vve reade according to the 70 Vocauerit euÌ„ Dominus the sense is he shal be called Iosedech a iust lord if according to the hebrue nomen eius vocabunt then the sense is He shal be called the lord our iustice The thing which I note is the word vocabunt they shal cal him which in S. Hieromes time was the hebrevv reading and touching Christ his diuinitie is of that consequence as hath bene said In the hebrew text now it is cleane otherwise and vpon one point and letter chaunged thus it is to be translated God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vvho is our iustice shal cal him whereby is lost al the proofe of Christs diuinitie which that so pregnant a place otherwise should yeld And that this fault is likewise committed by the like malice of the Iewes and the true reading is to be taken from our latin translation Lyra in the place aforesaid sheweth in these wordes Other names of God are communicable vvith creatures but the name Teâ—ragrammaton is not so vvhich signifieth the diuine essence pure simple in it selfe vvithout relation to external vvorks or creatures and therefore vvhereas Christ is called by this name in the place of Ieremie it folovveth that he is true God But the Ievves ansvvere by corrupting the letter sayng that thus it is in the hebrevv Et hoc est nomen eius qui vocabit eum Dominus iustus noster And this is the name of him that shal cal him Our iust lord so that the name TetragraÌ„maton vvhich in our translatioÌ„ is turned Dominus is not referred to Messias the sonne of Dauid but to the true God who called Messias to deliuer his people And how goeth Lyra against this distinction saith he the Iewes are honest men haue kept their bibles pure and vncorrupted and in respect of them al the latin bibles are most contaminate after the paterne of M. VV Nay far otherwise notwithstanding he knew the hebrew bibles and tong in an other maner of degree and perfection as being him selfe a natural borne Iewe then M. W. or any of his great clearkes who vaunt so much of a litle yet he replieth thus Contra istam solutionem non potest argui c. Against this solution a man can not argue but by shevving them that here they corrupt the true letter and deny the truth because they vvil deny Christs diuinitie And this might best be done by old bibles vvhich vvere not corrupt in this passage and in others in vvhich mentioÌ„ is made of Christs diuinitie if a man could come by any such And thus our forefathers disputed against them out of this place and the like And although I neuer yet savv any bible of the Ievves vvhich is not corrupted in this place yet I haue heard of men vvorthie of credit by reason of their life conscience and knovvledge vvho haue svvorne that they haue seene it so in old bibles as it is in S. Hieroms translation But if a man can not get any such bibles vncorrupt then must vve runne to other traÌ„slations vvhich the Ievves vvith reason caÌ„ not deny And the 70. reade as doth S. Hierom as appeareth by our Ecclesiastical office Here againe M. W. may see the foule monstruous corruptioÌ„ of the Iewes in these fountaines and originals vniuersally in al their hebrew bibles Vniuersally I say for if in our daies some one or other print be corrected that correction hath bene made in respect of the latin Church which hath kept the truth of doctrine therefore preserued the true letter not in respect of the Iewes vvho altogether as witnesseth Lyra corrupted the true letter because they vvould deny Christs diuinitie One exaÌ„ple more I geue him in an other kynd which neuertheles importeth vs as much as
styl that parcel but most vvanted it and manifest it is that the Ievves nether in our time keepe so honorably the translation of the 70. in their sinagoges much lesse did they keâ—pe it in S. Iustines daies vvhen as appeareth by the vvhole discours and manifest vvordes of this author in this same place they much more detested it The third a ligno is vvanting in al greeke and hebrevv bibles is only reserued in our ecclesiastical Breuiarie certaine Doctors as Tertullian Lactantius Cassiodorus and S. Austin vvho notvvithstanding so readeth it as though it vvere the common reading in the churches of Africa in his time and maketh no mention of any other reading vvhere those vvords should be leaft out And from S. Hieroms time vntil our daies very probable it is that these errors and corruptions haue multiplied not only for the general and particular reasons already touched but for this especially that whereas since that time the Iewes obstinacie barbarousnes impietie and ignorance in their owne tonge hath much increased the Christians notwithstanding haue not had any great occasion to handle much or exercise that language therefore haue had smaler regard to bookes written therein without which as first of al they perfectly receaued the Christian faith and planted it in these partes of Christendome so without it haue they as perfectly continued in the same and now enlarged it euen to the extreme corners of the world and without the which they haue for these thousaÌ„d yers liued most christiaÌ„ly as Saintes christianly as Saintes finished their teÌ„poral liues after liued with Christ for euer And now touching M. W. question demaunding how the Church hath faithfully conserued the bookes of scriptures who thus findeth fault with the hebrew bibles as corrupt I answere as before that the Church hath most faithfully conserued the scriptures albeit not in this or that tonge which the wanton curiositie of euery fantastical heretike coueteth We haue the true word and gospel of Christ though perhaps we haue not ten words in that laÌ„guage which our Sauiour spake And then why may we not haue the law the prophetes though there were neuer an hebrew bible in the vvorld Againe vnreasonably demaundeth he of our church for hebrevv bibles vncorrupt vvhich perhaps neuer had any such and neuer vndertooke to keepe the vvord of God in that language more then in Arabike or Syriake no more then she vndertooke to keepe S. Matthevves Gospel in hebrevv or S. Paules epistle to the hebrevves But if she deliuer faithfully to the Christians that vvhich she receaued of Christ and his Apostles touching al parts of Christian faith and religion be it vvritten or vnvvritten in one language or other she performeth that vvhich Christ committed to her charge and vvhich is sufficient for the saluation of euery Christian and vvhereby she proueth her selfe to be the House and Church of the liuing God the sure Piller and ground of truth the Spovvse of Christ and faythful mother of al Christians M. D. Whitgift thinketh it vntolerable that the English ministers should appoint vvhat maner of apparel is coÌ„uenient for them selues to vveare vvhat ceremonies or rites should be vsed in their poore Seruice He by many arguments taketh from them al authoritie in such matter vvil haue the vvhole Ministerie altogether to depend be directed by the superior magistrates the Quene and the Lordes of her CouÌ„cel Then hovv much more vntolerable is it that some one or other single minister should appoint the vniuersal Church gouernours thereof in what maner and fashion the word of God must be kept in what language as it were in what kind of paper or parchement he wil haue it written As if some busye headed felow in a coÌ„mon welth not contented to be ruled preserued by his Prince in true religion iustice and quiet possessioÌ„ of his owne should farther take vpon him to prescribe vvhat maner priestes hovv qualified and in vvhat Vniuersitie brought vp should preach vnto him the vvord of God minister the sacraments vvhat sort of men should exequute vnto him iustice and examine his cases of law by what capitaynes of vvhat byrth countrie and experience by vvhat kind of defence open force or secret policie fight by sea or rather land strength of horsmen or footemen he vvil be mainteined in peace and quietnes And vvhat meaneth he to require for pure bibles in any language of our Church vvhich he holdeth for Antichristian and the prelates thereof and al other Catholikes for members of Antichrist For vvhiles he thus thinketh vvhat soeuer bibles hebrevv or not hebrevv Greeke or Arabike vve offer him he can by reason yelde no more credite vnto them then to our latin no more then to our traditions or any other thing proceeding from vvarrant and credite of such professed enemies of Christ as vvel and learnedly proueth S. Austin in his booke de vtilitate credendi Much more agreable to reason ChristiaÌ„ diuinitie is it for him and his to resort to their ovvne church of elect predestinate or hovv so euer he list to terme them vvhich hath so florished these many hundred yeres by vvitnes of their ecclesiastical stories by report of M. Fox in his Actes and monumentes Let him resort to the brethren of Lions to VVycleffe and the VVycleffisâ—es to Robert Rigges Iohn Puruey Henry Crompe Iohn of Chlum Iohn Scut William Havvlam Richard VVich Iohn Hus alias Iohn Goose the Hussites and Thaborites of Bohemia and such other vvho as they tel vs vvere glorious pillers doctors and maintainers of their church and Protestant-gospel and like glistering starres shined in the face of the ChristiaÌ„ world And that I tye him not to particular meÌ„ or one only prouince of Bohemia in many other prouinces and kingdomes of the world hath their church continued as most confidently writeth D. VVhitgift against T. C. who framing an argument against the Archbishops authoritie draweÌ„ from this supposition VVhat if the vvhole church be in one prouince or in one realme vvhich hath bene and is not vnpossible to be againe M. D. VVhit answereth it thus To your supposition if the vvhole church c. I say that if the skie fal you may catch larkes as the common prouerbe is making it as vnpossible a case to haue the church of Christ in one only kingdom as it is vnpossible for the skie to fal And presently in the same page Do you not knovv that the church of Christ is dispersed thorough the vvhole vvorld and can not novv after Christs ascension be shut vp in one kingdome much lesse in one prouince except you vvil become Donatistes He that is not vvilfully blinde may see in to vvhat straightes you are driueÌ„ vvhen you are constrained to vse such impossibilities for reasons And M. VV. in this booke telleth vs that there neuer wanted mightie
these two translations howsoeuer it seeme to thee Christian reader the difference is as great as is betwene our doctrine theirs And first they make a wilful fault and corrupt the text by making a fuller pointe then ether the greeke or latin beareth And Beza doth somewhat more desperately who maketh a downe ful point thereby more diuiding and distracting the later parcel from the former as though it contained not a reason of that which went before as it doth but were some new matter wherein he is controled of fowle dealing by his owne translation set out the yere 1556 and by the very greeke prints of Geneua Zurick Basile other Germane cities who point it as doth our latin and english But the reason of his and their turning Quoniā in to Nam Because in to For descrieth yet more their obdurate harts against Christ and his worde For where as Christ by S. Lukes reporte saith in effect thus because she loued much therefore manie sinnes are forgeuē her they by this peruersion and mispointing make a cleane different and almost contrarie sense thus because she had many sinnes forgeuen her therefore she loueth much this loue folowing was a token of the remission which she by only faith had obtained before so turning the cause in to the effect the antecedent into the consequent and hereby vtterly spilling the doctrine which Christ by his words and reason geueth and the Church of his words reason gathereth That this is the true groūd reasō why they so Luciferlike alter the speech of Christ Beza plainly cōfesseth Thus he writeth Nam dilexit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For she loued The vulgar translation and Erasmus turne it Because she loued but I had rather interprete it as I do that men may best vnderstand in these vvords to be shevved not the cause of remission of sinnes but rather that vvhich ensued after such remission that by the consequent is gathered the antecedent And therefore they vvhich abuse this place to ouerthrovv free Iustification by only fayth are very impudent and childish wherein he speaketh very truly the words and sense being so as he hath framed them But if he had not plaid the part rather of a diuel then of an heretike to alter in pointing worde and sense the speach of our Sauiour and so taught him his lesson what he should say it had not bene impudencie for vs thus to argue but it had bene more then brutish ignorance in him to haue denied that charitie is required as wel for obtaining remission of sinnes as is faith which both in this place our Sauiour most diuinely conioyneth saying of charitie Many sinnes are forgeuen her because she hath loued much and adding straight way Thy faith hath made thee safe goe in peace And so of this text gathered al the auncient fathers who were for al that nether impudent nor childish So S. Chrysostom As first by vvater and the spirit so aftervvard by teares and confession vve are made cleane And he proueth it by this place So S. Gregorie expounding the same place Many sinnes are forgeuen her because she loued much as if it had bene said expresly He burneth out perfectly the rust of sinne vvhosoeuer burneth vehemently vvith the fier of loue For so much more is the rust of sinne scoured avvay by how much more the harte of a sinner is inflammed vvith the great fier of charitie And S. Ambrose vpon the same words Good are teares vvhich are able to vvash avvay our sinnes Good are teares In quibus nō solū redemptio peccatorum sed etiam refectio est iustorum vvherein is not only the redemption of sinners but also the refreshing of iust men And S. Austin debating this storie in a longe homelie saith This sinful vvoman the more she ovved the more she loued the forgeuer of her debtes our lord him selfe affirming so Many sinnes are forgeuen her because she loued much And vvhy loued she much but because she ovved much Quare fecit illa omnia nisi vt dimitterentur sibi peccata VVhy did she al those offices of vveping vvashing c. but to obtaine remission of her sinnes I omitte other fathers al agreing in the selfe same veritie al making her loue to be a cause going before nor only an effect or sequele comming after the remission of sinnes And this was the gathering of the auncient fathers S. Chrysostom S. Gregorie S. Ambrose S. Austin c. who were euer reuerenced for holy and learned fathers by the children of Christs Catholike Church vntil this Chams broode and prophane generation inuaded their roomes who now condemne them for impudent and childish But let me with thy leaue and patience Christian reader prosecute in one worde more their wonderful tossing and turning and inuerting this shorte sentence of our Sauiour And in this one allegation which I wil now produce thou shalt see the very image of Atheisme of contempt of God and man of impossibilitie to do any good by scriptures so longe as this licence of framing new translations is allowed Thou seest what sturre Beza hath kept and to serue his turne what fowle and detestable corruption he hath vsed But to make vp the matter and reconcile Christs words a litle better to this new solifidian gospel commeth in Wolfgangus Musculus with a deeper fetch after this maner First because S. Lukes words be very plaine and he can not so probably wrangle vpon thē in greeke he in his owne fansie imagineth what Christ ether did or should haue spoken in hebrew Next that fansie he putteth to be true and forthwith according to the same he correcteth S. Luke and so concludeth that al matcheth right with their Lucianical only faith For nowe by this time with his good helpe not one worde in effect stādeth as Christ spake it at least by S. Lukes reporte Thus he discourseth Ecce inquiunt manifestò datur dilectioni remissio peccatorum Ergo non sola fides iustificat c. Behold say the Papists remission of sinnes is attributed to loue ergo faith alone iustifieth not but vve ansvvere that loue in this vvoman vvas not the cause of remission of sinnes but a token declaration thereof Remissiō of her sinnes she obtained by faith in Christ Therefore vvhereas Christ saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The vvorde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as vvitnesseth Suidas is a Dorical vvorde signifieth not in the imperatiue Remittantur Remitted be they but in the preterperfect tense Remissa sūt Haue bene remitted Next the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth here not the cause but the probatiō of that vvhich is put before Thirdly the vvord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath loued is an hebrew phrase by vvhich the preterperfecttense is put for the present For the hebrevves speake thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is because she hath loued much in
Ergo so oft as vve heare the name of Iesus vve must put of our cappes and make curtesy For confirmation of this ergo I send M. W. to M. D. Whitg who wil ease me of some labour in this behalfe He telleth him That this gesture of capping and kneeling at the name of Iesus hath continued in the Church many hundred yeres yeldeth this reasoÌ„ thereof that the Christians to signifie their faith in Iesus and their obedience vnto him and to confute by open gesture the vvicked opinion of the Ievves and other infidels vvho most abhorred that name vsed to do bodily reuerence at al times vvhen they heard the name of Iesus but specially vvhen the gospel vvas read vvhich contained that glad tidings of saluation vvhich is procured vnto man by Christ Iesus vvhere vpon also he is called Iesus that is a Sauiour Hereof he inferreth Nether caÌ„ it be against Christianitie to shevv bodily reuerence vvhen he is named by vvhom not only al the spiritual enemies of mankind are subdued but also the faithful be made partakers of the kingdome of heauen Thus far he Now if we shal ioyne to this reason the reason geuen in the Annotation that the Protestants gladly yelde this honour of cap and curtesie to the letters maces name seale seate and very many other things hauing any relation or dependence of the Q. maiestie of these two thus conferred togither we shal find this to folow and be a very good consequent M. VV. yeldeth lesse honour and reuerence to the name and crosse of Christ then he doth to the name and so many base signes appertaâ—ning to a temporal prince Eâ—go M. VV. is a very Atheist one that maketh no account of Christ This is the note Name of Iesus By the like vvickednes they charge the faithful people for capping or kneeling wheÌ„ they heare the name of Iesus As though they vvorshâ—pped not our lord God therein but the syllables or letters or other material elements vvhereof the vvord vvritten or spoken consisteth and al this bâ— sophistications to dravv the people from due honour and deuotion tovvard Christ Iesus vvhich is Satans drift by putting scruples into simple mens mindes about his sacraments his Saints his Crosse his name his image such like to abolish al true religion out of the world and to make them plaine Atheists But the Church knovveth Satans cogitations and therefore by the scriptures and reason vvarranteth and teacheth al her châ—ldren to do reuerence vvhen so euer Iesus is named because Catholikes do not honour these things nor count them holy for their matter colour sound and syllables but for the respect and relation they haue to our Sauiour bringing vs to the remembrance and apprehension of Christ by sight hearing or vse of the same signes Els vvhy make vve not reuerence at the name of Iesus the sonne of Sirach as vvel as of Iesus Christ And it is a pityful case to see these prophane subtelties of Heretikes to take place in religion vvhich vvere ridiculous in al other trade of life VVhen vve heare our Prince or Soueraine named vve may vvithout these scruples doe obeisance but tovvardes Christ it must be superstitious These be the arguments which he saith are of our making how truely thou maist now iudge To speake of them more at large and in special ech one contayning so diuers matter of Praying to Sainctes of the Real presence of Peters primacie of Pilgrimage of Canonical scriptures c. vvould amount to a great volume Touching these and the like because it is growen now of late to a common veyne in writing and preaching thus much wil I say in general that M. VV. and his felowes in making such sporting conclusions First shew them selues as ignorant in diuinitie as may be for so much as hereby they geue forth plaine signification that they know not the first rule or principle of Christian religion they know not what Christian faith meaneth Secondarely that by so doing they instruct their scholers and auditors to make a mocke of Christ and his gospel and to scoffe at euery part of Christianitie Both these I wil ioyntly declare in a few lines Note thou therefore good reader that Christian faith and the articles thereof are of this propertie and nature that they can not be concluded or proued by any manifest rules of natural wisedome and reason as we find in other sciences Geometrie Philosophie Law c. but they rest only vpon the authoritie of Christ our Sauiour and his Apostles who first deliuered them vnto vs. For as the Apostle teacheth Fides est substantia rerum sperandarum argumentum non apparentium Faith is the substance or subsistence and foundation of things hoped the argument or sure persuasion of things not appearing to sense or reason or humane discourse As for example we beleeue the resurrection of our bodies not because it can be confirmed by any philosophical or logical demonstration for if it could be so then were it not properly an article of faith but because Christ and his Apostles so taught This being the ground and essential forme of faith and of euery parte thereof because men are hardly mâ—ued to beleeue things so vnprobable so fâ—r bâ—yond reason and against coÌ„mon sense the office of Diuines is by comparâ—ng these articles with other workes of God ether in the creation of the world or redemption of the same to declare that these are not so vnpossible or vncredible as men imagine but such as God hath done the like in many other and therefore may also in this present So our Sauiour disputed against the Sadduces Erratis non scientes scripturas neque virtutem dei c. You erre not knovving the scriptures nor the povver of God And concerning the resurrection of the dead haue you not read that vvhich vvas spoken of God sayng I am the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Iacob In which wordes are conteined 2 or 3 arguments to proue the resurrection One that God can do it because he is of such power An other that it is not vnâ—â—kely but he wil do it because he doth towardes the dead things as hard vnprobable as that vz that he protecteth sustaineth and preserueth them as their God and Sauiour and in that sense is called the God of AbrahaÌ„ Isaac Iacob many huÌ„dred yeres after their death Nether of which argumeÌ„tes for al that proueth directly that the dead shal rise but that dependeth only vpon the wil and word of God reuealed in the scriptures which our Sauiour doth first of al insinuate After like maner disputeth S. Paule in his epistle to the Corinthians If the dead rise not againe then in vaine is our preaching then in vaine is your faith then are vve the most miserable men that liue then nether Christ is risen As the graine vvhich is sovven in the earth dieth first
of Protestāts pa. 411. M. W. inuectiue against the Annotations of the nevv Testament page 476. The summe thereof pa. 477. Annotations of the new Testament vvhat they cōteine pa. 484.485 what fault M.W. findeth in them 484.491 Blasphemie in the Annotations touching Christes Priesthod pa. 528.529 Ansvvered 530. vsque ad 542. blasphemie touching merite of vvorkes pa. 543. ansvvered 544 c. Hovv the Protestants fel to cal the Pope of Rome Antichrist in praef pa. 42. M. W. knovveth not vvel vvhat that Antichrist is against vvhom he vvriteth Ibid. pa. 4. The absurditie of that assertion Ibid. pa. 4. The impossibilitie of that opinion 52.53.54 The end of that doctrine 72.73 Arguments ridiculous made by M. W. and attributed to vs. pa. 497.498.499.502.504.510.511.513 such arguments tend to make a mockerie of al faith 516.517.521.522.523 S. Leo the great called Antichrist by Beza pa. 155. The first Apostles of our nation were Papistes and Massing priestes by the cōfession of our aduersaries p. 165.166 Auncient archheretikes the protestants forefathers in sundrie partes of their faith pa. 31.32 S. Athanasius called Sathanasius by the heretikes pa. 84. S. Austin called a blind bussard pa. 166 S. Austin most filthily abused and mangled by the Sacramentaries pa. 166.177 S. Austin a priest 65. S. Austin S. Hierom old papistes 121. B BEza a fierbrand of sedition pa. 231. VVriters against him pa. 232. He correcteth S. Luke and our Sauiour 233.234.236.241 and is defended by M. VV. in so doing 236.237 His reasons 238.239 Refuted ibid. et 240.241 Refuted long ago by Luther 257.258 how he correcteth the new Testament 260.261 Bezaes fault in excusable for ought M. VV. ether hath said or can say 250. He doubteth of a part of S. Iohns gospel 363.364 He furthereth the Anabaptistes against Christes incarnation of the B. virgin 368.369 See Translation of scripture Bible-beaters pa. 400. The Bible neuer so mangled by any as by the protestants 400.401 Their bible is no bible 404.405 See Scriptures Ceremonies in Baptisme pa. 504.505 C Catholike doctrine vnpossible to be ouercome by any heresie least of al by this of our time pa. 41. The name Catholike not applicable to the English religion praef 87.88 Caluin condemneth the auncient fathers for approuing Melchisedecs sacrifice pa. 60.61 Caluin for the real presence pa. 223. Carolostadius exposition of Christes wordes Hoc est corpus meum pa. 254. allovved by Zuinglius 255. Castalios translation of the Testament much commended by the protestants pa. 380. His discours that Christ is not the Messias praef pa. 67.68 The Church catholike after Christes time is euer populous and spread in many nations pa. 350. et praef pa. 62.63 She is the ground of al faith 442. built vpō a rocke vnmoueable 479. No good worke or martyrdom profiteth to saluation out of the Catholike Church 116.117 Infinite difference betvvene the Catholike cause and the Protestante pa. 556.557.558 No stay in faith out of the Catholike Church praef pa. 24. To say that the vvhole Church hath fayled is to deny Christes incarnation pref p. 56.57 58.59 to make him a lyer ib. 66.67 to deny him to be the true Messias ib. 68.69.70.71 The inuisible Church a poetical fansie pref pa. 60. refelled by Melanchton 60.61 by Caluin Oecolampadius and others 62.63.64 the Protestants sensibly cōtradict them selues in deuising it 64.65 The foundation of the English Protestant church pa 480.481.482 The antiquitie thereof 524. It is ful of Atheistes 410. S. Chrysostom for the real presence p. 188.208.215.217.218 his place comparing Christ vvith Elias pa. 207. It proueth inuincibly the real presence a pa. 204. vsque ad 214. S. Chrysost for the sacrifice pa. 214.215 He is almost as ful of lies as words by the protestants doctrine pa. 227. S. Ciril for the real presence p. 198.199.200 D S. Damascene for the real presence pa. 201.202 Dauid George vpon vvhat ground he denied Christ pref pa. 66. Defendere is vvel translated to reuenge pa. 464.465.466.467 The Doctors of the primitiue Church condemned by euery priuate sectarie in that vvherein they gain say his heresie pa. 82.83 by the Zuinglians for approuing the sacrifice of Melchisedech pa. 60. and Masse pa. 69.70.71.72 and for disallowing the mariage of priestes and votaries 83. by the Puritanes for allovving holydaies in the honour of Christ his Saintes 84. by the Trinitarians for acknovvledging the B. Trinitie 84. by the Lutherans for denying the Vbiquetie of Christs body 85. by M. W. for their doctrine of penance and vvorkes 82 11◠and for sayng that Antichrist is one man pref pa. 44.45 See vvorkes E Elias cloke the Zuinglians supper compared together pa. 212.213 Elias shal come before the day of iudgment pa. 494.495 English vvriters 478. their maner of vvriting 284.285.475 and disputing 477. more absurd then others pref pa. 6.7 Those of the English religion are not Protestants pref pa. 88. they are properly called Zuinglians or Sacramentaries ibi 89.90.91 by vvhat names they cal them selues praef pa. 91. hovv they are called by Acte of parlament ibi 21. F The true meaning of Only faith iustifying pa. 280.411.412 Libertinisme the end thereof 127.128 The nature of true Christian faith pa. 517.518.519 hovv one part of faith is applied to the confirmation of an other 521. Ecclesiastical maner of fasting commeth from Christ and his Apostles pa. 89.90 The Zuinglians figure in Christs wordes touching the sacrament pa 251. The figure of the Catholikes ib. infinite difference betvvene these tvvo 252.253.254.255 Freevvil pa. 509. G Grace hindereth nothing the merite of workes pag. 102.103 To say God is the author of synne is to say God is an Idol or a deuil pa 451. The protestants say so 451.453 454. S. Gregorie much praysed by the Protestantes pag. 158. much rayled at by the Protestantes 164. A booke written against him by Vergerius 165. S. Gregorie a priest without al reason made minister by M. Iewel 164. The Greeke Testament more aduantageable for the Catholikes then the common latin pa 283.284 Our common latin Testament more pure then the greeke now extant 361.362.363 The greeke Testament now differeth much from the old 363.364 Additions rashly made to the greeke 365.366.367 Parcels of importance left out of the greeke 367.368.369.370 H HEauen is of grace vvorkes pa. 104.105.106.107 544.545 Of mercy and iustice 105.106 107.108.109 Heauen must receaue Christ Act. 3. v 21 maketh nothing against Christs presence in the sacrament pa. 179.180.181.193 handled at large a pag. 170. vsque ad 175. S. Paule to the Hebrevves as much doubted of in the primitiue church as the epistle of S. Iames. pa. 38.39 The Apostles cited not scripture alwaies according to the hebrue pa. 287.288.289 Bookes of scripture written in hebrue lost 290. S. Hierom preferring the hebrue before the latin in his time iustifieth not the hebrue of our time pa. 297.337 More probable that the hebrue hath bene corrupted then the latin pa. 297.298.299.300 Corruptions in the hebrue pa. 302. in Isai against
vvorst of al other 381.382.383.384 he then most busily corrupteth scripture vvhen it is most to the dishonour of Christ 384.385 M. W. inuectiue against the late Catholike translation of the new Testament 444. it is mere histrionical 445.446.448 in condemning it he reproueth himself 447.454.455 the hypocrisie of his accusation 449.450 Notable bragging and lying 459.460.461 how weakely he iustifieth his inuectiue 462.463 he obiecteth only two faults 263.264 both false and if they were true of no importance 464.470.472.473 What they are in particular 464. his vnconscionable dealing 472.473 What is principally requisite in a Translator of scripture pa. 371.372.375 Translations more autentical then the original pa. 290.291.306 V Of the name Vniuersaliâ— See Primacie W Arguments that Good vvorkes are not the cause of saluation pa. 95. refuted at large 99.100.101 c. Good vvorkes in Christians are cause of saluation pa. 99.100 vsque ad 106. 418.421.422.423 as euil workes are cause of damnation 104.105.106.107 See Heauen Good vvorkes are in no respect necessary to saluation by the Protestants doctrine pa. 110.111.113 their argumentes prouing the same 112.113 The fathers doctrine touching good vvorkes set downe by M. W. pa. 115. the wickednes thereof 116.118.119 they are therefore condemned by Luther as verie Iewes 120.121.122 M.W. notable wrangling pa. 14.15 his manifold ouersights 97.98 he vnderstandeth not the Protestants doctrine of only faith 109. he commonly contradicteth him self 23.25.114.115.123.126.319 he proueth the English ministers to be Antichrists for sayng Communion 127.128 how fondly he answereth a place of S. Chrysost 204.206.211.212 his straunge assertion that only the hebrue text is scripture 286.287 Refuted 287.288.289 he calleth S. Austin a Sorbonist for his doctrine touching the value of good workes p. 543.545.546 and by like reason al the Apostles and Prophetes pag. 545.546 his arrogancie in condemning al doctors 495.496 et praef pag. 44.45 The summe of his answering D. Sanders consisteth partly in preferring him self before al other pref pa. 42. ad 51. partly in leauing out the substance of D.S. arguments ibid. pa. 75. vsque ad 81. Z Zuinglius the Apostle of the English church pref pa. 89.90 Zuinglians notable lyers pag. 525.526.555 and braggers 554. their maner of writing pref pa. 81.82 The faultes correct thus Pa. 4 linea 13. for charged reade charging Ibidem in many copies wanteth a marginal note Contra Campian pag. 11. Pa. 41 li. 26. Estaticus reade Ecstaticus Pa. 85. lin 6. Christ reade Christes Pa. 145. lin 18. forth reade forth Pa. 195. l. 17. argumenr reade argument Pa. 328. li. 8. for the two hebrew letters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where also in some few examples the later hebrue word is diuided which should be ioyned Some other faultes there are of like qualitie especially of one letter for an other as s for f and r for t and in one place of some copies is vvhich for vvhich is al which considering the ordinarie difficulties of printing where straungers are the workers coÌ„positors correctors besides other extraordinarie mishaps I trust the Reader of his curtesie wil easely pardon Whom I request if by reading hereof he fynde ought for the encrease of his faith towardes Christ and his Church Catholike euen for loue of the same Christ and Church to help me with his prayer FINIS Contra Sand. pa. 5. in fine Ib. pa. 6. in principio M.W. knoweth not wel what that Antichrist is against whom he writeth Lucian de vera historia lib. 1. Cyclades Lucians historical verities the Protestants Euangelical verities are of like nature and probabilitie Much good time spent in reading or refuting heretical bookes 1. Tim. 6. Tertul. de praescript Heretikes are generally proude and ignoraÌ„t 2. Timoth. 6. v. 4. W. contra Sand. pag. 250. See after chap. 7. pag. 130.131 Whit. contra Camp pag. 154. Ibi pag. 153. Fulke con Mart. pag. 64 65. in sine Supra pa. 4. A strange proposition to say the church is Antichrist In the Protestants faith there is no cercertaintie In their writing and disputing there is no ground That the Protestantes haue no certaine fayth The Prince supreme head of the church The Prince not supreme head of the church A declaration of the iust c. Printed by special commaundement and licence â—no â—532 a pag. 411. Cart. in his second reply b 412. c 413. d 414. Ibi. 419 Communion booke in the forme of publike baptisme Baptisme remitteth sinnes Baptisme remitteth not sinnes Tower disputatioÌ„ the second day Priuate baptisme allowed Priuate baptisme disallowed M. W. contra Sander pag. 276.278 Ficta quaedam necessitas Great difference and coÌ„trarietie in the Communion bookes The sacrameÌ„t of confirmation admitted Refused T.C. pa. 174 apud Whitg pag. 785. Christ descended into hel Christ descended not into hel Carlile Caluin Instit aedit anno 1553. ca. 7 ¶ 28. et in postre aeditione l. 2. c 16. ¶ 9. Christs diuinitie graunted Christs diuinitie denyed M. Whit. contra Campian pag. 25.2.153.154 Sleid. Coâ—â— 17. an 1546. Rebellion against princes iustified and commended Ibidem lib. 8. an 1531. fol. 124. Ibid. lib. 22. an 1550. fol. 411. Sleid. li. 18 anno 1546 fol. 320. Beza ad D. Elizabeth Angl. Regi in praefat noui testament aedit 1565. Fox Actes and monumentes pa. 250.255.257 Ibi. pa. 251.252 a pa. 250. ad 260. Vbi supra pag. 250. Ibi. pag. 260 Gilbie Goodman c. WomeÌ„ may beare no rule ouer men in matters temporal The boâ—kes were pâ—inted at Geneua the yere 1558. yere 1559. Women may beare rule ouer men in al matters temporal and spiritual The Communion booke in the beginning before morning praier Copes and such like ornaments approued CoÌ„demned General chaunges and contrarieties in faith Foâ— actes monumeÌ„tes pag. 586. Real presence CommunioÌ„ in one kynd Mariage of priests vnlawful Vowes of chastitie Priuate masse Auricular confession These articles were according to the law of God in king Henries time Ibi. pag 587 The same articles were contrarie to the law of God in king Edwards time Fox vbi su in historia Cranmeri pag. 1473. A realme pitifully ordered where a chyld of 9 yeres old may by order of law ouerthrow al religion Chaunge vpoÌ„ chauÌ„ge D. Whitg Defensâ—a pa. 31. vsque ad 51. Ibi. pag. 178 Infinite difference betwene our English protestants and those of other nations Whit. Def. Tract 1. p. 74 A rule most assured Groundes or heads of disputation In the protestants writing or disputing there is no grouÌ„d Scripture denyed Whit. contra Camp pag. 17. Traditions of the Apostles denyed General Councels denyed T.C. pag. 16. apud D. Wh. Tract 2. p. 95 Of this see more chap. 3.5.7.17 after in the praeface Auncient doctors of the Catholike Church denyed Whit. coÌ„tra Sand. pa. 92. then we perceaue to be agreable to scripture Si vel intogrum patruÌ„ Senatum in nos commoueris D.
c. 2 â—ed in Luc. cap. 5. Act. 4. v. 37. 2. Pet. 3. v. 3. Psal 1. Heretikes generally geuen to scorning mocking Vide Brentium contra Bullinger de mansionibus in caelo anno 1561. fol. 22.23.35 Carlile in his booke that Christ descended not in to hel fol. 35 36 37 38 96 97 98. Sleid. li. 17. pa. 311. 4. Reg. 4. v. 37. Luc. 8. v. 47. Luc. 7. v. 38. Act. 8. v. 27. Pilgrimage to holy places Phil. 2. v. â—0 D. Whit. defens tract 21. c. 7. pa. 743. M.W. taketh parte with Iewes and Infidels against Christians Why Christians do honour at the name of Iesus The Protestantes vse more deuotion and yelde more reuerence to the pictur of a dog and a lyon then to the name image or crosse of Christ. The Protestants wil haue no reuerence done at the name of Iesus How Catholikes honour the name of Iesus and other things pertaining to him Wherevnto the Protestants tenâ—t by such ridiculous coÌ„clusions Heb. 1. v. 1. Ibi. c 11. v. 1. Rom. 8. v. 24 The true nature of Christian faith Marc. 12. Mat. 22. 1. Cor. 15. How S. Paul proueth the resurrection Cor. 15. How one part or article of faith is applied to the confirmation of an other Before pa. 177.178 Whitg defeÌ„ce against M. Car. Trac 3. c. 6. ¶ 4. The English writers teach the way to scorne al Christian religion M. Iewel thoroughout his first booke against â— Harding Pag. 2â— Pag. 114. Annot. in Mat. cap. 10. v. 22. The antiquitie of the Protestants church Haddon in fine epist contra Osoriâ—â—â— Aug. de nupt et con cupis lib â— cap. 31. Luth. to 7. defens verboruÌ„ coenae fol. 400. Debacchari The Zuinglians notable lyers The pitiful shiftes of our aduersaries Pag. 23. Hebr. 7. v 17. The first blasphemy The answere Lye vpoÌ„ lye S. Paules epistle to the hebrewes reiected by the protestants Before pag. 414. 1. Cor. 3. v. 12 Bible of the yere 1579. in the preface of this epistle How Christ is a priest for euer Christs eternal priesthod consisteth in the perpetual sacrifice of his body bloud in the Church The protestants cauilling vpon particles against Melchisedecks sacrifice priesthod directly against the Apostle Christs eternal priesthod and sacrifice in the Church is proued out of the fathers Heretikes very blynd in the scripture though they crake much of their deepe insight in them Tit. 3. v. â— Rom. 1. v. 28 Luc. 8. v. 10. 2. Thess 2. v 11. See the Anotations in cap. 5. v. 11. 7. v. 11.12 c. 9.12.15.25 c. 10. v. 2. Multiplication of lyes 7. v. 4.11.23.9 v 12.15.10 v. 2.4.5.11 No time to talke of the Sacrifice of the church wheÌ„ the Sacrifice of the crosse is not first beleeued The auncient fathers speake more plainely of the church Sacrifice then doth S. Paule without any derogation to S. Paule Act. 2. v. 22. Ioan. c. 12.13 14.15.16.17 The councel of Nice expressed the consubstantialitie of Christ with his father more plainely then any Euangelist M.W. last obiection Answered Answered by him self before pag. 17. Answered by M. Iewel Iewel in his Replie art 1 ¶ 5. in M. W. translation pag. 9. Answered by Illyricus Illyric ad Heb. c. 7. v. â— Who euer saw such foly pride and partialitie Mat. 7. v. 3. The second and last blasphemie pag. 24. Rom. 6. v. 23 The principal of these Sorbonists after S. Paule is S. Austin Life euerlasting a stipend and yet grace Aug. epist 105. How eternal life is of grace yet the reward of iustice Let M W. marke this True it is Al the Prophetes Euangelists Apostles were Sorbonists by M. W. iudgment a Prou. 11. v. 18. c. 24. v. 12 Sap. 5.16 ca. 10.17 Ecclesia 16.12 c. 51.38 b Psal 61.12 c Esa 40.10 c. 62.11 d Ierem. 31.16 e 1. Peter 1.17 f 2. Ioan. 8. Apoc. 2.23 c. 22.12 g Rom. 2.6 1. Cor. 3.8 2. Cor. 5.10 2. Thess 1. v. 6.7 h Mat. 5.12 c. 6.1 c. 10.41 c. 16.27 c. 20.8 c. 25. Sorbone a famous College in Paris Shameful ignorance See before pag. 99.100 c. M. W. hath vndertaken hard matters to defend Chap. 1. Chap. 10. Chap. 5. M Iewels chalenge Chap. 7. The proceeding of our aduersaries Many of theÌ„ are proceeded thus far already See the prface pa. 65.66 c 2. Cor. 4. Hieron ad TheophiluÌ„ contra errores Ioannis Hieros Nicep li. 8. cap. 42. Mar. 2. v. 11. See before chap. 11. pag 31.32 If Luther be saâ—ed al they of English religion are damned See before chap. 3. Aug. epi. 56. 2. Pet. 2. v. 28 The ZuingliaÌ„s proue al thing by boasting Luther defens verborum caenae fol. 405. Ibi. fol. 381.382 Ibid. fo 394 406. No more reason to be a Zuinglian then a Lutheran or Arrian â—nfinite difâ—â—rence beâ—wene the Catholike â—ause and â—he proteâ—tantes Church of â—he tyme present Church of the tyme past Scriptures Preface pa. 35.36 Iudgment Neuer was there any common welth worse ordered theÌ„ the Church of Christ by the Protestants diuinitie No ground of the English religion See chap. 7. pag. 165. Chap. 4. pa. 69.70 c. c. 6. p. 121.122 Chap. 3. pag. 45. Chap. 1. 2.
groundes of disputation such as are vsed ether in our church or in their owne and how far these men be groweÌ„ to a headstroÌ„g desperatnes beyond the maner of al the auÌ„cient heretikes For when S. Austin and the old fathers had to dispute with such as Donatistes ArriaÌ„s Manichees Pelagians and others they vrged them with the authoritie of Gods Church with the iudgement of the Sea Apostolike the Succession of bishops in the same with the determination of general Councels finally with the name Catholike and that which was so called of al men and the heretikes seemed to be moued therewith and acknowledge such maner of argument But the heretikes of our time conteÌ„ning impudently al these Church Sea Apostolike Succession of bishops general Councels and whatsoeuer els may be inuented are come so far that they now despise and treade vnder foote the name Catholike which the Apostles by diuine wisdome found out and by their Creede sanctified appropriated to true ChristiaÌ„s members of Christs only Catholike and Apostolike Church in so much that in the sinode holdeÌ„ at Altemburg betwene the Diuines of the Palsgraue of Rhene and the Duke of VVirtemberg when one part brought forth a text of Luther against the aduersaries they perusing the place at large and finding there the word Catholike streightwaies reiect the whole as corrupt and counterfaite because Luther was neuer vvont to vse that vvord Ista verba catholicè intellecta non sapiunt phrasin Lutheri say they and vpon this only reason conclude that booke not to haue bene made by him And yet would to God our aduersaries could be content to yelde to the very scriptures them selues such peeces I meane and bookes as they leaue vnto vs and hetherto with vs acknowledge for Canonical VVouâ—d to Gâ—d they could frame them selues humbly to admitte such scriptures when of theÌ„ selues they are playne for vs against them For so surely buâ—ldâ—d is the Catholike cause that by such helpe she is able sufficiently to defend her selfe and confound the aduersaries But whereas besides the reâ—usal of al the forenamed witnesses both of our church and of their owne as though none euer besydes them selues in particular no Saint or man ether in heaueÌ„ or earth had wit learning or grace whereas I say besides al this they expound the same scriptures by plaine partialitie fantasie frensye whereas they make them selues the only arbiters both what bookes are Canonical what Apocriphal and which is the true sense of them whereas in examining the sense they runne sometime from greeke to latin sometime from lâ—tin to greeke sometimes vrge one or other greeke example against innumerable latin sometimes prosse one or other fathers reading against al greeke commonly corrupt the sense both of latin and greeke sticke only to certaine heretical versions made by their maisters in fauour of their seueral heresies whereas they are groweÌ„ to such extreme folly hardnes impudency it may seeme nothing els but wast of vvords to deale vvith men whom contention pride ignorance malice and obstinacie against the Church and her pastors hath so pitifully blinded Novv if I may vvith the readers patience descend from this vvhich I speake generally of the English protestants to apply the same more specially vnto the party vvhose booke I haue to examine it shal both iustifie more clearly that which hetherto hath bene said touching their irreligion want of faith and withal set forth the practise of those proud and arrogant rules of answering which I before haue noted and besides shew what stuffe is contained in his booke of Antichrist wherein he so vainely and insolently triumpheth It hath bene an old disease of auncient heretikes first of al to inuade the cheefe pastors of the church that they being remoued from the gouernment them selues might more freely spoyle the flocke as witnesseth S. Cyprian And for like reason their maner hath bene more malitiously to barke at the Sea Apostolike as saith S. Austin In this as in many other mad partes the heretikes of our age haue not only matched but also far surmounted the heretikes of auncient time For when as vpon their first breach from the church spreading of this new heresie they were reproued by their cheefe pastor and gouernor vpon malice and spite and desire of reuenge they brast forth into this rayling to cal him Antichrist not meaning for al that to cal him Antichrist in such a seÌ„se as the church and faith of Christian men vnderstandeth vvhen vve speake of Antichrist vvhich shal come in the end of the vvorld and of vvhom S. Paule to the Thessalonians and the scriptures in some other places specially do meane but in such a general sense as S. Iohn intendeth wheÌ„ he saith that novv there are many Antichristes and vvho so denieth Christ to haue come in flesh he is Antichrist But the later Protestants going beyond their maisters as commonly it fareth in euery heresie to make their cause more plausible and iustifie their schismatical departure from the church more assuredly haue taken vp the proposition in the more extreme and desperate sense and now hold the Pope of Rome to be that singular Antichrist of whom S. Paule and some other of the Apostles fore-prophecied This wicked and shameles assertion being refuted at sundry times and of sundry men namely of D. Sanders not only as false vnprobable but also as heathenish vnpossible M. Whitaker hath now taken vpon him to make a reply against his argumentes and maintaine that former assertion of his brethren but after such a sort as partly argueth in him want of al religioÌ„ and conscience partly declareth him to haue deepely impressed in his harte a vvonderful pride and coÌ„tempt of al others a principal note and marke of Antichrist And to beginne vvith the later I vvil shortly runne ouer one or tvvo of the first demonstrations and M. W. ansvveres framed there vnto First of al D. Sanders disputeth that the succession of the Romane bishops can not be Antichrist because Antichrist is one man vvhich he confirmeth by sundrie good testmonies of scripture vvherevnto he ioyneth the vniuersal consent of al the auncient fathers His vvordes are Denique omnes sancti patres Graeci Latini Syri quiper tot saecula vel in Oriente vel in Occidente vel in Aquilone vel in Meridie vixerunt secundùm fidem traditionem ab Apostolâ—s acceptaÌ„ de Antichristo locuti sunt velut de homâ—ne vno Briefly al the holy fathers Greeke Latin Syrian vvho for so many ages liued ether in the East or VVest or North or South according to the faith and tradition receaued from the Apostles haue spoken of Antichrist as of one man VVhat is M. VV. answere to this After certaine cauils made to the places of scripture thus at a clappe he dischargeth the fathers writing according to the faith