Much a doo we had to perswade you that Sabellicus wrote Decades and I think you would neuer haue grauÌ„ted it except other men might haue found the booke in Powles Churchyard and so haue sene your fâ—lsehood But of al other impudencies this which you staÌ„d in coÌ„cerning this saying of S. Ambrose is not the lest of al. Confutat fol. 97. For you defend it and repeat it againe and again notwithstaÌ„ding it was fully by me coÌ„futed and yet it is so childish an errour that I can not thinke you to be deceiued therin but rather to be set desperatly in defence thereof for which ye haue nor learning nor reason and onely bicause you would not seeme ouercome Who would thinke that a man of your studie and learning and of that place would say and maintein it that S. Ambrose meaneth bread and wine after Consecration to remaine stil in substaÌ„ce that which they were before M. Ievvel defendeth his parte by falsifiyng S. Ambrose Ambros de Sacra lib. 4. cap. 4. To beginne first here with the terme of bread and wine is no part of S. Ambroses wordes it is your forgerie it is your corruption it is one of your owne falsifiyinges His words are these Panis iste panis est ante verba Sacramentorum vbi accesserit consecratio de pane fit caro Christi Hoc igitur astruamus Quomodo potest qui panis est corpus esse Christi Consecratione Consecratio igitur quibus verbis est cuius sermonibus Domini Iesu Nam reliqua oiÌ„a qua dicuÌ„tur laus Deo defertur oratio praemittitur propopulo pro regibus pro caeteris vbi venitur vt coÌ„ficiatur venerabile SacramentuÌ„ iam noÌ„suis sermonibus sacerdos sed vtitur sermonibus Christi Ergo sermo Christi hoc coÌ„ficit SacrameÌ„tuÌ„ Quis sermo Christi Nempe is quo facta sunt oiÌ„a Iussit Dominus et factuÌ„ est coeluÌ„ Iussit dominus et facta est terra Iussit Dominus et facta sunt maria Iussit Dominus et omnis creaturage nerata est Vides ergo quaÌ„ operatorius sit sermo Christi Si ergo taÌ„ta vis est in sermone Domini Iesu vt incipereÌ„t esse quae noÌ„ eraÌ„t quantò magis operatorius est vt sint quae eraÌ„t in aliud commutentur Coelum non erat mare non erat terra non erat Sed audi dicentem Ipse dixit facta sunt ipse mandauit creata sunt Ergo tibi vt respondeam non erat corpus Christi ante Consecrationem sed post Consecrationem dico tibi quòd iam corpus est Christi Ipse dixit factum est ipse mandauit creatum est This bread is bread before the wordes of the Sacramentes when Consecration commeth to it of breade is made the flesh of Christ Let vs confirme this How can that which is bread be the bodie of Christ By Consecration With what wordes then is Consecration made and with whose wordes With the wordes of our Lord Iesus For as for al the rest that is there said praise is geuen to God praier for the people is sent before for kings and for al other When the Priest commeth to make this honourable Sacrament he vseth not now his owne wordes but the wordes of our Lord. The worde therefore of Christ maketh this Sacrament What worde of Christ Verely that wherwith al things were made Our Lord coÌ„maunded and heauen was made Our Lord commauÌ„ded and the earth was made Our Lord coÌ„maunded and the seas were made Our Lord coÌ„maunded and euery creature was brought forth Thou seest therefore howe workeful the word of Christ is If then so great force and streÌ„gth be in the word of our Lord Iesus that those things should beginne to be whiche were not of how muche more strength is it to worke that the things which were be that is to say haue a beeing and be changed into another thing The Heauen was not the Sea was not the Earth was not But harken to him who saith He saied and they were made he coÌ„maunded and they were created Therefore that I maie make thee an answere to this question it was not the body of Christ before Consecration but after Consecration I tel thee that now it is the body of Christe He said and it was made he commaunded and it was created Who seeth not here this drifte of S. Ambrose to proue that as the Worde or speach of our Lorde made al thinges of nothing euen so it is much more hable to change one thing into another thing And bicause I required M. Iewel to coÌ„strue S. Ambroses wordes which yet he would not do though he promised to do it I wil construe them for him and wil shewe his extreme blindnesse or rather his wilfulnesse in the vnderstanding of that sentence Ergo then si tanta vis est if so great strength be in sermone Domini Iesu in the speach of our Lord Iesus vt that quae non erant the thinges which were not inciperent esse beganne to be that is to saie to haue a being quantò magis operatorius est how much more is our Lordes speach workful vt that quae erant the thinges which were sint be that is to saie haue a being in aliud commutentur and be changed into an other thing By these wordes it is cleere that S. Ambrose here speaketh generally of al thinges whiche God worketh by his word and not particularly of bread and wine Now wil I construe the same woordes as M. Iewel would haue them to be takeÌ„ First he vnderstandeth and supplieth bread and wine to be the nominatiue case to the verbe sint be or rather to the verbe SuÌ„t as for his aduantage he altereth that holy Doctours wordes Wheras it is euident that in the same whole sentence breade and wine are not particularly once named Secondly he beginneth the construction with the verbe sint whereas quae erant should go before it as it may wel appeare by setting the one part of the comparison against the other For the one part is thus to be set Quae non erant incipiunt esse the thinges which were not beginne to be Therefore the other must be thus set accordingly quae erant sunt in aliud commutantur The thinges whiche were be and be changed into an other thing Thirdly betwen quae and erant M. Iewel conueieth in a pronowne demonstratiue which hath no place there saying which they were as if bread and wine were respected Againe you translate Sunt quae erant they remaine the same that they were And those wordes you put forth in great texte letters Is Sunt to be englished They remaine the same Sunt is no more but They be If S. Ambrose would haue said as you vntruly translate him his wordes had benne these manent eadem for that is the Latine of this your English they remaine the same But S. Ambrose meaneth thus Those thinges
that Leo expoundeth him selfe That which he was him selfe he willed Peter to be named saying Thou arte Peter asmuch to saie thou art a Rocke and vpon this Rocke I wil builde my Church and least we should thinke that Christ gaue him that name onely and not the thing signified by that name Leo addeth further Vt aeterni aedificatio teÌ„pli mirabili munere gratiae Dei in Petri soliditate coÌ„sisteret that the building of his euerlasting Temple should by the marueilous gifte of Goddes grace stande in the foundenesse of Peter Christ is the Rocke Christ is the Rock and Peter is the Rocke and hovv either Leo sermo 2. in Natiuitate Ap. Petri Pauli Matt. 16. and Peter is the Rocke How Christ How Peter Christ by his owne power Peter by participatioÌ„ But let vs heare Leo expounding him self more plainly Thus he saith Euangelica siquidem referente historia c. As the storie of the Gospel telleth our Lorde asketh of al the Apostles what menne thought of him And so long as they be in declaring the doubtefulnesse of mannes vnderstanding the talke of them that answer is common among them al. But when it is required of what sense the Disciples are there he is first in confessing our Lorde which is firste in the Apostolike dignitie Who when he had said Thou arte the Sonne of the liuing God Iesus answered him Blessed arte thou Simon the sonne of Iona bicause fleshe and bloude hath not reueled this vnto thee but my Father that is in heaueÌ„ Therefore blessed arte thou bicause my Father hath taught thee neither hath earthly opinion deceiued thee but heauenly inspiration hath instructed thee and it is not fleshe and bloude that hath shewed me vnto thee but it is he whose onely begotten Sonne I am And I quod he tel thee that is as my Father hath manifested my diuinitie vnto thee so I make knowen to thee thine excellencie Quia tu es Petrus id est cùm ego sim inuiolabilis Petra ego lapis angularis qui facio vtraque vnum tamen tu quoque Petra es quia mea virtute solidaris vt quae mihi potestate sunt propria sint tibi mecum participatione communia Peter is asmuche to saie as Rocke Bicause thou art Peter that is whereas I am the inuiolable Rocke I the Cornerstoane whiche make both one yet thou also arte the Rocke bicause by my vertue thou arte made sounde and sure that the thinges which are proper vnto me by power maie be common to thee with me by participation Thus farre Leo. By these laste wordes he declareth vnto vs how Christe receiued Peter into the companie of his indiuisible vnitie to witte by admitting him to enter commons as I might saie with him and by making him partaker throughe free gifte of that name and not of that name onely but also of that excellencie whiche is Christes owne by power Deceiue not the vnlearned Reader M. Iewel by suche peeces of Doctours sayinges whiche laid forth barely and alone without circumstance of the place whence they be pickte out maie perhappes seeme obscure and doubteful and being vewed in their Authours or otherwise set out in their owne colours appeare most true plaine and agreable to the Scriptures Furthermore where Leo saith The Councel of Chalcedon abhorred the prodigious deuises of the Deuilish heresie of Eutyches Leo epist 52. consenting vnto my writinges strengthened with the authoritie and merite of my Lorde the most blessed Apostle Peter My Lord S. Peter M. Iewel findeth a great fault with him for calling S. Peter my Lorde the most blessed Apostle Peter For the vse of whiche humble terme he might as wel finde faulte with S. Gregorie who calleth Mauricius the Emperour likewise by the name of Lorde the term my Lord vsed of the antiquitie Concil ChalcedoÌ„ Act. 3. pa. 834. co 2 and with the learned menne of the time that Leo liued in for so the Bishoppes at the Councel of Chalcedon spake of Leo him selfe Domini nostri sanctissimi patris Archiepiscopi Leonis lecta est epistola The Epistle of our lorde and most holy ffather and Archiebishop Leo hath benne readde with the whole nation of the Frenche menne who speaking of S. Peter of S. Iames and of suche others the frendes of God are wont to My Lord R. Peter My Lord S. Iames saie Monsieur sainct Pierre Monsieur sainct Iaques my Lorde saint Peter my Lorde saint Iames with the Italians also who vse to speake likewise That this manner of speache was not strange in the Churche it appeareth by sundrie Monumentes of the Grecians of later time Matthaeus Hieromonachus Matthaus Hieremonachus in Collectan maketh Constantine the Great so to speake 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We doo this in the worship of my Lorde S. Peter As for that other phrase Deo inspirante beatissimo Petro Apostolo by the inspiration of God and of S. Peter the Apostle so here it is tranâ—â—â—ted but falsely for whiche M. Iewel condemneth Leo as vsing immoderate and ambitious speache in the praise of S. Peter to the behoofe of his owne preeminence it seemeth strange in deede yea so strange that at the first reading my minde gaue me that M. Iewel to deceiue the Reader hath fowly abused the place As I thought so it was For now I finde that these wordes are in Leo in deede But they are to be construed farre otherwise then this translation reporteth Here I must bring M. Iewel to his smal Rules of Grammare and aske him how he construeth these wordes Leo epist 89 in fine Obtestamur vt ea quae à nobis Deo inspirante beatissimo Petro Apostolo decreta sunt seruetis Verely were he at a Grammare schoole and would tel his Schoolemaister that here beatissimo Petro Apostolo were put in the ablatiue case absolutely as Deo is and so would make S. Peter to geue inspiration to Leo as wel as God he were worthy to haue six stripes on the bare three for his negligent and grosse ignorance three for the blasphemie attributing that to S. Peter whiche is onely to be attributed vnto God There is no incoÌ„uenience in this sentence good Reader Thou maist tel M. Iewel that beatissimo Petro is here the ablatiue for the preposition à whiche requireth the nowne folowing it to be put in the ablatiue case And thus is the whole to be construed as if the preposition à were repeated againe before beatissimo we beseeche you that ye keepe the thinges whiche by the inspiration of God haue ben decreed of vs and of the most blessed Peter the Apostle Let no man thinke it strange S. Peter ioyned vvith Leo. that S. Peter is here ioined with Pope Leo. The Fathers speaking of any Godly Decree ordinance sentence or writing published by any Bishop of Rome for the benefite of the Churche haue commonly so spoken of it as both it proceded from the Pope for the
water And as by water touching our flesh cleannes cometh to our soule euen so by the body of Christ touching our flesh the fatnes of God so TertulliaÌ„ speaketh that is to saie the plentiful grace of God commeth to our soule Coloss 2. For in that flesh God the sonne dwelleth corporally And by that only flesh grace is most abundantly ministred vnto vs for which cause that flesh is made the instrument of grace to vs. Ambros de Sacrament li. 6. cap. 1. Hereunto agreeth S. Ambrose Idem Dominus noster Iesus Christus consors est diuinitatis corporis tu qui accipis eius carneÌ„ diuinae eius substantiae in illo participaris alimento The same our Lord Iesus Christ is partaker both of Godhead and of body And thou which receiuest his flesh art made partaker in that foode of his Diuine substance There S. Ambrose spake of receiuing the Sacrament and expounded how Christe is the liuing bread that came downe from heauen Ioan. 6. His flesh saith he came not from heauen but whiles thou receiuest that flesh in that foode thou art made partaker of the godhead But if it were bread which we receiue at Christes supper in that foode of bread we should not be made partakers of the diuine substance For the diuine substance is in none other foode as to be receiued of vs but only in the flesh and bloude of Christ And there it is for our sakes and for that diuine substances sake the flesh of Christ is geuen really to vs that thereby the Godhead may the more mightily poure grace and the seede of immortalitie into our soules By faith we might feede of the Godhead but by that meanes onely we should not be made partakers of the godhead as by the best meane For the flesh of Christ with our faith is a better meane to deriue the godhead vnto vs then faith alone Faith suffised the olde Fathers bicause there was yet no better meane But when Christ had once taken flesh then his flesh together with saith Ioan. 1. was an other manner of meane to make vs partakers of more abundant grace Christe is touched novv of vs. Luc. 6. For now we touch really the flesh of Christ by the formes of bread and wine euen as in the daies when he liued in earth diuers personnes touched him by touching his garment which was about his flesh And by that meanes as they were most spedily healed so are we Chrysostom crieth out Chrysost in epistol ad ephes homil 3. Quomodo comparebis ante tribunal Christi qui manibus ac labijs immundis ipsius audes contingere corpus Et regem quidem nolles ore tuo foetido adosculari regem verò coeli anima graueolenti oscularis Oro te an voles manibus illot is ad oblationem accedere Atqui manibus quidem ad tempus continâ—tur in illâ—m ver◠〈…〉 resoluitur seu diuersatur Cur non vasa vides ita vndique lota ita splendida Illa non sunt capacia illius quem in se habent non sentiunt illum nos verò planè How shalt thou appeare before the throne of Christ who art so bold as with vncleane handes and lippes to touch his body Thou wouldest not aduenture to kisse the king with thy stincking mouth and wilt thou kisse the king of heauen with a foule stincking soule I praye thee wilt thou not washe thy handes before thou comest to the oblation And yet in thy handes he is holden but for a time but into the soule he is wholy resolued or there maketh his abode Wherefore beholdest thou not the vessels how they be cleane washed and shine ful brightly And yet they be not partakers of him nor feele him whom they conteine but we doo truly Christe holdeÌ„ in our hand In this discourse it is euident that we touch Christ in the Sacrament In so much that he saith the vessels hold him our handes holde him and our soule holdeth him Marke wel that the selfe same thing is in the vessels to wit in the patin and in the chalice and in the hand also which is in the soule Bread and wine are not in our soule but only Christes fleash Wherefore it is Christ also which is in the vessels and in our hand â–ª But he is holden in our hand saith S. Chrysostom ad tempus a while But he dwelleth in our soule none other wise then if one thing were made of bothe and one were resolued into the other Againe the vessels hold him but they partake him not bicause they lacke faith But it is the same Christ in the vessels and in our handes which is in our soule For from the vessels he commeth to our handes and from our handes into our bodies and so into our soules What extreme impudencie then is it to say that in these wordes S. Chrysostom meant not the bloud of Christ to be really in the Chalice and his body to be really vnder the forme of bread Leo the great saith Leo sermone 6. de ieiunio 7. mensis Christes bodie is receiued vvith mouthe ye ought so to communicate of the holy table that ye doubt nothing at al of Christes body and bloud Hoc enim ore sumitur quod fide creditur for that thing is taken in by mouth which is beleeued in faith But the thing beleeued in faith concerning Christes supper is the manhod and godhead of Christ Therefore the selfe nature of God and man is receiued in mouth What can be prentended here to the contrarie Cyrillus saith The mystical blessing Cyrillus lib. 10. in Ioan. c. 13. when it is becomme to be in vs doth it not cause Christ to dwel corporally also in vs by the coÌ„municating of his flesh Marke that the meane of Christes dwelling corporally in vs is the receiuing of the Sacrament And with Cyrillus it is wel knowen Hilarius de trinit lib. 8. Gregorius in Euangelia homil 22. how thorowly S. Hilarie agreeth Last of al S. Gregorie saith Quid sit sanguis Agni non iam audiendo sed bibendo didicistis Qui sangus super vtrumque postem ponitur quando non solùm ore corporis sed etiam ore cordis sumitur In vtroque etenim poste sanguis Agni est positus quando sacramentum passionis illius cum ore ad redemptionem sumitur ad imitationem quoque intenta mente cogitatur Nam qui sic redemptoris sui sanguinem accepit vt imitari passionem illius nec dum velit in vno poste sanguinem posuit What the bloud of the Lambe is ye haue now learned not by hearing but by drincking This bloud is put vpon both the postes when it is receiued not onely by the mouth of the body but also by the mouth of the soule For the bloud of the Lambe is put vpon both postes when the Sacrament of his passion is both receiued by mouth for our redemption and is also ernestly thought
wel done of you to take some litle paines to searche out who of you was the first author of that famous lie against the Catholique Bishoppes The false bruite of king HeÌ„ries body taken avvaie that to bringe them in displeasure with the Quenes Maiestie whiche now is reported that they had taken awaie kinge Henrie the eightes body whiche matter after great bruite spred aboute the Realme after that it came to be searched was tried false and forged and the body was founde safe where it had benne laied But the body of king Henrie the sixth that holy man King HeÌ„rie the sixth his body taken vp and consumed was not founde in his place but said to haue benne burnt by certaine I wil spare their worshippes of Catholique religion I warrant you There is a wiued Superintendent in England that if he be asked can tel tidinges how these thinges were conueied But al thinges ye doo are wel donne and worthie of praise Yet what an impudent lye was that deuised against the Catholique Bishoppes And what an hainous deede was it to violate the Graue to take vp a good Kinges Body and to burne it or otherwise to consume it Yet bicause they that are of your fecte did it it must be praised though it be donne against al good Order Religion and humanitie To be shorte as you are not hable to defende al thinges as wel donne that ye and your felowes haue donne euen so we haue not taken in hande to defende the innocencie of euery Pope in al actes of his life nor yet to take the Popes wil and pleasure to be our staie in al doubteful cases as you impute vnto vs. But the Popes aduised and mature determination folowing the aduise of his learned Doctours assembled together for discussion of weightie matters in general Councelles whiche is an other thing then the Popes wil and pleasure whiche your scoffing head would haue to be our staie we take to be a sufficient resolution of al doubtful cases that are necessarie for vs to knowe Iewel Pag. 100. Hovv be it this I trovve is not the readiest vvaie to procure peace and to mainteine vnitie in the Churche Harding Vnitie is best mainteined by the gouerment of one general Head The .13 Chapt. If the hauing of one king or Prince be the readiest waie to procure peace and mainteine vnitie in worldly matters of a Realme why should not the hauing of one general Head be the readiest waie to procure peace and vnitie in the Churche If that be not the waie you leaue vs none at al. If euery man take that Religion that liketh best his owne phantasie as many doo in diuers partes of the worlde already who shal cal them backe to the true Catholique Religion Iewel And therefore Gregorie saith of Iohn the Bishop of Constantinople that claimed to him selfe this vniuersal povver c. Harding What neede we bestowe moe wordes about this matter of Iohn of Constantinople Iohn the ambitious Bishop of Constantinople claimed the title of vniuersal Bishop M. Stapleton hath answered fully vnto it This Iohn claimed to him selfe the title of vniuersal Bishop meaning thereby that there was no Bishop in the worlde but he whiche title in deede S. Gregorie in that sense coulde not brooke but tooke it to be arrogant and proude And we saie as we haue alwaies said that no Pope euer claimed the title of vniuersal Bishop in that sense that there ought none others to be Bishoppes but he And yet S. Gregorie claimed the right title of the Primacie apperteining to his See in his answere made to Mauricius the Emperour as Platina recordeth And S. Chrysostome Chrysos in Matth. homil 55. in illa verba Ioh. 21. Sequere me homil 87. Aug. de vera religione cap. 45. as we said before doth not spare to tel al Christian menne that to Peter was committed the Charge and Cure of the whole worlde Iewel For although al the vvorlde either vvould or could geue eare and credite to one man yâ—t vvere not that therefore alvvaies Christian vnitie S. Augustine saith Pride it selfe hath a certaine desire of vnitie and of vniâ—ersal povver Harding What should moue you to allege S. Augustine De vera religione against the vnitie of the whole Churche obeying their vniuersal head Did S. Augustine speake any thing of the Pope in that place What so'euer affection there be of Pride or Singularitie in the ruler it toucheth not others but disgraceth his personal actes onely I meane in respect of his owne person not of others who doo but their duetie in obeying what he teacheth or biddeth being their general gouernour or head And in that duetie doing what soeuer the rulers affection is in gouerning they keepe Christian vnitie iâ— Faithe Matth. 23. and Doctrine Vpon the chaire of Moyses the Scribes and Pharisees haue sitte al thinges what so euer they tel you doo ye saith Christe If Christe bad vs to obey the Scribes and the Pharisees as long as they sate in Moyses chaire although their life agreed not with their doctrines what can the Popes il affection of pride hurte the vnitie of Christian menne who doo their duetie in obeying his lawful power Iewel Pag. 100. An other of M. Hardinges reasons is this The Churche labouring here in earth must resemble the Churche of the Saintes triumphing in heauen But in heauen God onely is the gouernoure ouer the vvhole Therfore in the Churche beneathe the Pope likevvise must needes be gouernour ouer the vvhole Thus God must be rated to gouerne aboue and the Pope beneath and so as one some time saide Diuisum imperium cum Ioue Caesar habet Harding You falsifie my wordes and reason my terme is not Must but Meete Shewe it not to be meete Leaue you skoffing and come to the matter Euery good thing is the worse that cometh into your handes Iewel Pag. 100. This is a valiant kinde of argument It holdeth from heauen to earth from angelles to menne from God to the Pope Harding Wel skoffed M. Iewel It was not for naught that the Prophete Dauid in the description of a blessed man saith emong other thinges Psal 1. that he sitteth not in the chaire of Mockers by whiche worde Heretiques are signified which in deede are very skoffers and mockers of al good thinges And weene you good Sir â–ª that an argument maie not holde from heauen to earth Thy wil be donne in earth as it is in heauen Vpon these wordes if you list Matth. 6. maie ye not frame an argument that shal holde from heauen to earth Now from Angelles to menne Videte ne contemnatis vnum ex his pusillis dico enim vobis Matth. 18. quia Angeli eorum in coelis semper vident faciem patris mei qui in coelu est See ye despise not one of these litle ones For I saie vnto you that their Angelles in heauen doo alwaies see the face of my Father whiche
is in heauen Out of this Scripture if your good wil and cunning would serue you ye maie see an argument plainely made from Angelles to menne Likewise from God to the Pope Petre amas me Pasce oues meas Peter louest thou me Iohan. 21. Feede or rule my sheepe If your cunning can not compasse suche Argumentes M. Iewel that are vsed in Scriptures from heauen to earth from Angelles to menne from God to the Pope yet it were good for you to leaue skoffing at suche argumentes as are vsed in the very Scriptures Iewel Pag. 100. But hovv knovveth M. Harding vvhat Orders of Angelles and Archangelles there be in heauen VVhat they doo Hovv they deale c. Harding Of Angelles to what purpose Osee was alleged of the Head inuisible and visible Forsooth I maie easily know that The 14. Chapt. whiche is euidently reueled in the Scripture yea so euidently that yoâ—â— ignorance must seeme to grosse to aske any suche question Of the Angelles That there be orders of Angelles it appeareth boâ—â— in diuers other places and specially by the fourth Chapter of S. Matthew where we finde that the Angellâ—s waite on Christe Matth 4. Beholde saith the Euangeliste the Angelles came and ministred vnto him You might haue founde mention of many thousandes of Angelles in the 12. Hebre. 12. Chapter to the Hebrewes There is mention also made of diuers Orders of Angelles in the epistle to the Colossians Coloss 1. Siue throni sine Dominationes siue Principatus siue Potestates omnia per ipsum in ipso creata sunt Ephes 3. 4. Archangelles 1. Thess 4. The like is to be seene in the epistle to the Ephesians Of Archangelles we reade in the epistle to the Thessalonians that our Lord shal come downe in the voice and in the commaundement or shoute of the Archangel and in the trompe of God In S. Luke we reade that there is more ioie in heauen before the Angelles for one sinner doing penaunce Luc. 15. then there is for 99. iust menne that neede no penaunce In the epistle to the Hebrewes we read that al the Angelles doo honour Christe Hebre. 1. and that al Angelles are spirites to doo seruice sent into seruice for them that doo receiue the inheritance of saluation Dionysius de Coelesti Hierarch cap. 6. Tobia 3. S. Dionyse the Areopagite speaketh of nine Orders of Angelles The Scripture in sundry places telleth vs that the Angelles doo offer vp the praiers of the faithful before God This we knowe of Angelles in heauen that they obey one God that they are spirites so confirmed in grace that now they can not sinne that they are ready to doo Goddes commaundement at al times that there are Orders emong them as there shal be emong them whiche shal be saued emong vs some placed in greater glorie then some others as S. Paule declareth by the diuersitie of Starres 1. Cor. 15. that are not al of one brightnesse We knowe that they being Spirites confirmed in grace hauing no motions at al to doo any thing contrarie to Gods wil neede no Pope to correct to pounish to excommunicate to depriue to depose them and to assoile them This muche we knowe concerning the Angelles and this might you M. Iewel also haue knowen And this confession if occasion so required would better haue becomme you then your skoffes fitter for a common Table Ieaster then for a man who professeth to teache others the duetie of life and truthe of beleefe To S. Dionysius M. Ievvel commoÌ„ly argueth negatiuely from autorities that wrote purposely of the gouernment of the Churche and made no mention of one Pope whiche you obiecte we saie that we holde him for vnskilful in his Logique who deduceth Argumentes negatiuely from any Fathers authoritie as for example That Father or this Father spake not of the proceding of the holy Ghost from the Father and the Sonne Ergo there is no suche thing Yet it had benne more for your commendation to haue argued from Heauen to earth from Angelles to menne from God to the Pope then so sottelike to reason against al good order of learning from Authorities negatiuely Howbeit in dede the manner of your reasoning is not from God to the Pope from Angelles to menne from Heauen to earth â–ª but from truth to errour from Religion to Hugonotrie from Christianitie to Paganisme from good to naught from Christe to Antichriste from God to Satan whiche manner of argumentes is not very holesome The Obiection of the name of Iosue mistaken for Osee You make muche a doo for that I mistake the naâ—â— of Iosue for Osee To mistake one mannes name for an other as long as there is no preiudice thereby made to the necessary doctrine of our Faith and the place truely alleged althoughe the name were mistaken it is but humaine errour In that I named Iosue for Osee I acknowledge myne errour and wishe you would doâ— the like when you erre and then ye should cal in againe al that you haue written hitherto wherein you should doo wel in wise mennes Iudgement and most safely for the wealth of your owne soule But to traine the people from truth to heresie and stubbornly therein to continew as you doo M. Iewel and where no other shifte wil serue you there to assaie whether you can skoffe out the truthe this is not humaine errour but a Deuilish practise Osee to vvhat purpose alleged The place of Osee was alleged for no other purpose but to shew that God doth vs to vnderstand that his Churche militant is then in most perfite state and in best order when al true beleeuers bothe conuerted Iewes and Gentiles doo obey one Head Now then if in the Gouernment of one Head consiste the best Order and state that can be planted in the Church though it be true Christe one and only head Inuisible that our Sauiour Christ be that one Inuisible Head as I neuer denied but that he is yet that the Visible Churche atteine vnto that perfite Order and state whiche the Prophete Osee commendeth for the best Head Visible it behoueth that it haue one Visible general Head that shal keepe and mainteine visible and external Order emong al the faithful This is the force of my drifte Neither for al that did I denie Iohan. 10. but that Christe is that one Head that Christe is that one Shepeheard that S. Iohn spake of whiche I doo openly confesse in my Confutation of the Apologie in the selfe same place where I allege the saying of the Prophete Osee and the saying of Christe out of S. Ihon. So that you needed not to allege al that out of S. Hierome Nicolaus Lyra and S. Augustine to proue that which I confessed before M. Ievvels coÌ„moÌ„ maÌ„ner in al his vvritiÌ„ges But this is your manner alwaies M. Iewel to shewe your copie in matters vndoubted and impertinent and when ye come
saie Bonifacius obteined verely not that the See of Rome should be made Vniuersal or be made Head of al Churches for so it was euer but that it might be so taken and called of al men lest the Grecians should thinke that the chiefe Pastour of Gods sheepe sate in Constantinople Whereof it would folow that if the chiefe Postour once taught Heresie as now the Bishop of Constantinople doth concerning the proceding of the holy Ghost then the whole Church should perish sith al the flocke dependeth vpon the chiefe shepeheard Now M. Iewel as he is woont to doo hath most guilefully endeuoured to persuade the Reader that the Popes cal them them selues Vniuersal Bishoppes and bringeth Platina forth in suche sorte that he wil not let him speake his whole minde His wordes are these Platina in vita Bonifacij 3. Bonifacius tertius à Phoca Imperatore obtinuit magna tamen contentione vt sedes beati Petri Apostoli quae caput est omnium Ecclesiarum ita diceretur haberetur ab omnibus quem quidem locum Ecclesia Constantinopolitana sibi vendicare conabatur fauentibus interdum malis Principibus affirmantibúsque eò loci primam sedem esse debere vbi Imperij Caput esset Affirmabant Romani Pontifices vrbem Romam vnde Constantinpolis Colonia deducta est Caput Imperij meritò habendam esse cùm etiam Graeci ipsi literis suis principem suum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est Romanorum Imperatorem vocent ipsique Constantinopolitani etiam aetate nostra 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non Graeci vocentur Omitto quòd Petrus Apostolorum Princep◠Successoribus suis Pontificibus Romanis regni coelorum claues dederit potestatémque à Deo sibi concessam reliquerit non Constantinopoli sed Romae Illud tamen dico multos Principes maximè verò Constantinum comparandae Synodi ac dissoluendae confutandi vel confirmandi ea quae in Synodis decreta erant Romanae sedi tantummodo concessisse Meritò igitur sedes Romana caeteris antefertur cuius integritate constantia cunctae haereses confutatae sunt explosae Boniface the third obteined of Phocas the Emperour although not without great difficultie that the See of the blessed Apostle Peter whiche is the Head of al Churches should both so be called and also taken of al men the which place or preferment the Churche of Constantinople went about to chalenge wicked princes sometimes helping foreward the matter affirming that the chiefe See ought to be in that place where the Head of the Empire was The bishops of Rome auouched that the citie of Rome was for good cause to be taken for the Head of the Empire as from whence the citie of Constantinople had benne translated Whereas also the Grecians them selues cal their Prince the Emperour of the Romains and they of Constantinople euen in our daies are called Romaines and not Grecians I let passe how Peter the prince of the Apostles gaue vnto his Successours the Bishops of Rome the Keies of the Kingdom of Heauen and leafte the power that was geuen him of God not to Constantinople but to Rome Onely this I saie that many Princes but specially Constātine graunted to the See of Rome only power and authoritie to gather and dissolue Councels to reiecte and allow those things that were decreed in Synodes Therefore the See of Rome is worthily preferred before the rest as by whose integritie and constancie al Heresies haue ben confuted and quite put awaie This was the Platina M. Iewel whom you alleged and durst not let him to tel out his tale But he saith not that the Popes laboured to be called Vniuersal Bishops but onely to staie the Grecians from a false and erroneous opinion and to kepe them in the vnitie of the Romaine Churche from whence that vsurped name did by litle and litle withdraw them Thus haue we seene two errours of yours the one Three errours of M. Ievv touching this point of vniuersal Bishop whereas you reproue me for saying that the name of Vniuersal taken in a right sense is no prowd name in respect of the Bishop of Rome the other bicause you impute to the Bishops of Rome that they laboured for that ambitious name The third errour foloweth Pag. 118. which is worse then the other two For you saie these be the wordes of the Coūcel of Carthage as Gratian allegeth them Dist 99. Prima Vniuersalis Episcopus nec ipse Romanus Pontifex appelletur The Bishop of Rome him selfe may not be called the vniuersal Bishop And this thing you prosecute Pag. 121. 122. and repeate againe and againe But you belie the Councel and Gratian and the Glose too al at once And yet you are so highly auaunced in your owne conceite that ye seeme to make a glorious triumphe for it Thus you saie Iewel Pag. 121. Novv M. Harding compare our vvordes and the Councelles vvordes together VVe saie none othervvise but as the Councel saith The Bishop of Rome himselfe ought not to be called the Vniuersal Bishop Herein vve do neither adde nor minish but reporte the vvordes plainely as vve finde them If you had lookte better on your booke and vvould haue tried this mater as you saie by your learning ye might vvel haue reserued these vnciuil reproches of falshed to your selfe and haue spared your crying of shame vpon this defender Harding I neuer cried so ofte shame vpon the Defender as he deserued and that he is a shamelesse man it shal now be here as cleerly tried as euer it was before I laie three maine Lies to your charge in this mater Three main lyes laid to M. Ievvels charge Pag. 118. Pag. 121. Let the worlde vnderstande how wel ye are hable to discharge them One for that you say the Coūcel of Carthage forbiddeth the Pope to be called Vniuersal Bishop An other for that you saie that Gratian saith so The third for that you saie that so muche is noted in the Glose First the Councel of Carthage is extant bothe in Greke and in Latin but those wordes be founde in neither of bothe Copies In Greeke the Decree is thus vttered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In whiche wordes there is no mention made of the Vniuersal Bishop Now the Latin wordes are these in the first booke of the Councels Carthag Conc. 3. c. 26. Vt primae sedis Episcopus non appelletur Princeps Sacerdotum aut summus Sacerdos aut aliquid huiusmodi sed tantùm primae sedis Episcopus It is by vs decreed that the Bishop of a first See be not called the Prince of Priestes or the highest Priest M. Iev falsifieth the Coūcel of Carthage In Nomocanon or any the like but onely the Bishop of a first See Where also no mention is made of the Vniuersal Bishop Balsamon also making a Comment vpon the same Canon yet speaketh no worde of the Vniuersal Bishop We see then plainely that M. Iewel hath falsified the said Canon by
ye must go into the pit of Hel to fetch out Aêrius Pelagius Vigilantius Iouinian Heluidius Manichaeus and such others of condemned memorie to geue light vnto your Churche or els you can bring foorth none at al. For whereas al the Greekes Epiphan Haeres 75 as it may appeare by Epiphanius and al the Latines as it may appeare by S. Augustine condemned him for an heretike who said the prayers of the liue could not helpe the dead what catholike is it possible to bring foorth for the yere of our Lorde three hundred and fiftie or foure hundred who taught as ye now teache that it is not lawful nor profitable to praye for the dead Wel ye are not the light nor the daye Is your doctrine at the least the truth Nay that is the truth which is also the light For the true doctrine is taught in that Church which is built vpon an hil and can not be hid The truth is vniforme Math. 5. but emong you Luther and Zuinglius Caluine and Westphalus Bullinger and Brentius Illyricus and Beza and sundrie other couples and partes agree so wel that a man may easily know them to be false Prophetes For whereas they al disagree yet they are al without that Churche where vnitie is preserued in the perpetual Succession of many Bishops alwaies agreeing in one saith Therefore your doctrine is neither the light nor the daye nor the truth but darkenesse but night but errour Iewel 131. Novv for as much as ye haue thought it so good to examine the petite degree of Bishops of Sarisburie I trust you vvil not thinke it il if I a litle touch the lâ—ke in the Bishops of Rome that vve may thereby the better be hable to see some of the branches of your Succession Harding In dede they of whom you speake are but some of the branches of our Succession For you touch of two hundred and thirtye Bishops of Rome not thirteene and yet our Succession consisteth also of al the Bishops in Italie Spaine Fraunce Germanie Sicilie Polonia Hungarie Denmarke Suethen and England euen til king Henrie the eightes time But go too on Gods name touche whom you can I am wel assured you wil plaie the Spider to espie if any poison can be found any where Let vs see with what truth and honestie you blase their faultes The worst that can be said of al the Popes touching doctrine by the Protestantes is here gathered together and laid forth by M. Iewel and the same is truly answered Iewel Pag. 131. Therefore shortly to say you knovv that Pope Marcellinus committed Idolatrie Harding Of S. Marcellinus Martyr and Pope I know that after his Idolatrie whereto he yeelded for feare of death he repented and shed his bloud for Christe and dyed a glorious Martyr euen as S. Paule after that he had persecuted the Churche through grace repented and died for Christes name Who ought now to be more ashamed of S. Marcellinus you that chalenge him for an Idolatour or I that chalenge him for a Martyr The Idolatrie you speake of is gone and pardoned the Martyrdome whereof I speake is euerlastingly crowned in heauen The ende M. Iewel trieth al whereof you should haue taken your iudgement And yet this very Idolatoure bicause he was S. Peters Successour and sate in the first See was in case for the roume he occupied to be iudged of no man in the earth as tâ—e Councel of three hundred and thirtie Bishoppes assembled at Sinuessa pronounced aboue twelue hundred yeres past Tom 1. Concil Primasedes non iudicabitur à quoquaÌ„ The first seate shal not be iudged of any man What haue you wonne now by this example but that you do the world to vnderstand what malicious stomake ye beare against the Popes of Rome whose faultes ye are right glad to espie and blase abroade although they repented of them Verely it would haue becomme a sonne of the Churche to conceele suche actes of frailtie and not to see suche spottes that were with so abundant founteines of teares cleane washed awaie and with the bloude of so glorious Martyrdom quite blotted out Iewel 131. Pope Syluester the secoÌ„d vvas a Coniurer and gaue himselfe vvhole body and soule to the Deuil and by the Deuilles procurement vvas made Pope Harding That Syluester the second came to be Pope malis artibus by euil meanes it is not so cleare a matter as you make it Platina the chiefe author we haue for credite of that Storie vttereth it doubtefully by his Parenthesis vt aiunt as they saie Whereby he geueth vs to vnderstand that he was not hable to auouche it for a certaine truthe but referreth him selfe to the vulgare rumour of the people which most commonly bruteth abroad moe lies and vanities then truthes and certainties How beit Platina Platinae in vitis PontificuÌ„ Pope Syluester 2. his repentance at the ende who tolde you al this added also Poenitentia motus errorem suum coram populo fassus c. being moued with repentance and confessing his errour before the people he first exhorted them al that ambition and the deuilles deceites laide aside they should liue wel And afterward his body was miraculously drawen by horses to the chiefe Church of Rome and there was buried If you beleue the one you must beleue the other sithence it is but one Storie whereof you told the first parte and I the last Whereupon I attribute so much to that holy Succession that I doubte not as euil a man as he once was but God delte the more mercifully with him for his good predecessours sakes who I doubte not prayed for him that he might die penitently and be a saued soule Iewel 131. Pope Zosimus for ambition and claime of gouernment corrupted the holy Councel of Nice Harding You say it Pope Zosimus sclaundered by M. Ievv but neuer did any honest man say it from the beginning of the worlde til this time neither was the same yet euer proued For albeit he alleged such wordes of a certaine Canon as the other copies had not yet did no man lay to his charge that he had corrupted the CouÌ„cel For he alleged that which he found in his own copies I say to you M. Iewel there is nothing shewed by this your tale but that you are a man of il dispositioÌ„ who gladly reporte euil and besides that you finde reported of others inuent your selfe that which vtterly is false to diminish the estimation of a holy man that died eleueÌ„ hundred yeres past Marke the point I say if it be said of any man that euer wrote in the olde time that Pope Zosimus corrupted the Councel of Nice then you or your fellowes did not feine it but if no man said it but bawdy Bale or Illyricus and suche others the like then your part is with liers and sclaunderers and thereafter shal your iudgement be without you repente whiche God graunt you M. Stapleton in the
But saith M. Iewel He that condemneth Marriage in a few Pag. 182. must likewise be called a condemner of Marriage Why sir doo you allow Mariage betwen the Father and the Daughter or betwen the Brother and the Sister If not then you condemne Marriage in a fewe It is to be knowen that Marriage is then forbidden when it is taught that a man hauing no impedimēt in his owne person or when there is no impediment in the person whom he would take is yet forbidden to marrie as if Marriage of it selfe were il or as if it were an il thing in it selfe a man to marrie There is impediment as of blould as betwen brother and sister so of Solemne Vow and of Religion as betwen a Priest and a Nonne or any other woman And as S. Paul doth allow the impediment of bloude counting him a great sinner who had his fathers wife 1. Cor. 5. so doth he allow the impediment of a vow when he saith that the yong widowes if they should be receiued into the number of those chast persons whom the Churche vsed to feede were like to haue damnation bicause they would desire to marie and so would in harte at the least breake their former faith or promise of perpetual Chastitie But saith he let yonge widowes marrie 1. Tim. 5. and bring forth children As who should saie If they were receiued into the solemne number of Widowes then they should make promise not to marrie and that promise perhaps they would breake if not openly yet in hart Thus it is no Deuils doctrine to teache that a person hauing once vowed can not marrie bicause he him selfe geueth the impediment and not the lawe of the Churche For that lawe was in S. Paules time as I now haue shewed after S. Chrysostoms minde Oecumenius saith Pactae sunt quòd Christo adiungerentur reijciunt autem ipsum ad humanas reuolutae nuptias Item pòst verùm quia hoc faciunt nubant seipsas Christo non despondeant They couenaunted that they would be ioined vnto Christe but they shake him of and turne them selues to humaine Marriages But bicause they doo so let them marrie on Goddes name let them not by Vow betroth them selues to Christe Marke Reader S. Paule would not haue them marrie after their profession of Chastitie that might not be in any wise and therefore he wil haue them not to be professed and so to marie Pag. 182. Pope Innocentius is belied he condemneth not Marriage but Incest and vnlauful Marriage and preferreth in Priestes and Deacons holy continencie before the satisfying of Carnal luste Likewise Pope Siricius is fowly belyed If thou deale not chastly yet deale charily Pag. 183. what is meant thereby and how reasonably it is said Infra li. 5. cap. 15. I shal hereafter declare in due place Where I shal cleare the Canonistes of the sclaunder you vtter against them of teaching the people that Simple fornication is no sinne whiche they neuer taught We saie not that men in Marriage can not please God but that such men can not please God who hauing promised by taking holy Orders that they wil liue chaste do breake their promise It is better to marrie in a case then to liue single to some man I graunt it is the auoyding of a greater euil but not of it selfe better For the Apostle saith he that ioyneth his virgin in Marriage doth wel 1. Cor. 7. but he that ioyneth her not doth better Whom God hath ioyned let no man sunder But God ne-neuer ioyned a Priest in Christes Church to a wife after his Priesthood bicause the mans owne facte and vow Pag. 185. is against his Marriage Againe he is alreadie married to Christe who liueth for euer and so whiles his firste spouse liueth he maie marrie no more that is S. Basils reason Although simple fornication be not now pounished with deposing the Priest yet it is not leafte vnpounished Last of al you repeate manie abuses of the Clergie which as in some part maie seme to arise and come of single life so I doubt not but if Priestes were commonly married the case would be muche worse Certainely seeing Christe said there are Eunuches Math. 19. who gelde them selues for the kingdom of heauen the Churche hath done right wel to reserue the highest order for them who do most force vnto them selues for heauens sake And seing S. Paule would haue al men chaste without Marriage as him selfe was muche more it is to be thought 1. Cor. 7. he would haue his owne Successours in the publike ministerie to be suche Againe if among married men he be meetest to be chosen Priest who hath had but one wife he yet were more meete who had none at al. If before Priesthod one wife be the most afterward one is to much If perfection and an Angels life be in most perfite chastitie that same is most meetest for Priestes who are the Angels of God If married persons ought to be apart for a time to haue the more leisour to praye and to communicate he that must stil attend the publike prayer and must bothe offer and minister the Communion had nede stil to absteine from wedlocke specially seing the Priestes of the lawe during the time of their ministerie did not companie with their wiues Eusebius and Epiphanius accompt those counselles and praises of single life which are in holy Scripture to apperteine to Priestes as to the most excellent degree and not vnto the Laie men as who are permitted to vse a lower state of perfection If no man that liueth in warfare to God doo wrappe him selfe in secular busines and yet S. Paul saith 1. Cor. 7. that the maried person doth thinke vpon the thinges of the world and is distracted thereby how conueniently hath the West Churche ordeined that he should only be made a Priest who by Gods grace is content to professe and leade a single life Or how can that Bishop or Priest wholy attend hospitalitie and almose dedes and the profit of his flocke and the setting vp of common schooles of vniuersities of hospitals and almose houses for the poore and such other like dedes of mercie and of publike profit who hath his wife and children to prouide for Had we now had in al England the furniture of Colleges and Scholes whiche God be praysed we haue and should yet haue had more had not the blaste of your Euangelical spirite ouerthrowen them if the Clergie had alwaies ben married Nay the married Bishops that now liue so merily and kepe such continual dalliance and cheere vpon other mennes paines and trauailes were nourished in the Vniuersities specially by their almose and foundations who were single and chaste Bishops and Priestes Thus though nothing be perfite in this life yet the single life of the two is more conuenient for the Clergie both by Gods Worde and by the experience of Ciuil policie Of the Canonical Scriptures the Worde
of late by the learned Iesuites of Dilinga in Germanie intituled Augstuiniana Cōfessiō where in manner no worde is founde besides that whiche is in S. Augustins owne workes And there al seuen Sacramentes are proued at large out of S. Augustin alone and that maie suffice in this behalfe For if ye refuse S. Augustines authoritie I know not whose authoritie ye wil allowe Of the power of Baptisme in infantes and of Concupiscence The 4. Chapter Harding What M. Iewel would saye in this matter Incertaintie of M. Iewels doctrine Pag. 215. Pag. 216. Pag. 215. I can not certainly tel he is so inconstant and like a man that is halfe ashamed of his doctrine For one while he saith the Sacrament dependeth of no man At another time The iust man shal liue not by the faith of his parentes but by his owne faith And yet he saith S. Augustine Iustinus Martyr S. Cyprian S. Hierom and others write plainely that the faith of the Parentes doth helpe But how truly that is written he wil not saye Againe he saith that Infantes are not void of faith Pag. 216. A litle after he writeth God is able to worke saluation both with the Sacraments and without them And then he mingleth the Signe with the Thing and the Thing with the Signe Last of al he saith In deede Pag. 217. and in precise manner of speache Saluation must be sought in Christe alone and not in any outward signes In effecte he sticketh and maketh muche a doo and faine he woulde if he durst bring forth this proposition plainely condemned of the Churche in olde tyme That infantes maie be saued without Baptisme But it is the heresie of Pelagius and the same is against the word of God saying Ioban 3. Except a man be borne againe of water and of the holy Ghost he can not enter into the kingdom of heauen For whereas saith with the vow and desire of baptisme in a time of necessitie doth serue him that hath discretiō to beleue Augustinus Epist 23. seing the said faith is not in the child excepte baptisme which is the Sacrament of faith be receiued of him it doth folow that Children dying without Baptisme are condemned This much maye suffice for that point Iewel Concupiscence remaining in the faithful after baptisme is sinne forcing S. Paul to crie out Rom. 7. I see an other law in my members fighting against the law of my mind and leading me prisoner to the law of sinne And againe O wretched man that I am who shal deliuer me from this body of death Harding 1. Pet. 3. It is to be vnderstanded that whereas Baptisme saueth vs as S. Peter saith al sinne is washed away therein And we are made a new creature according to that S. Paul saith In Christ Iesus Gal. 6. Chrysost Ibidem ad Galatas neither Circumcision is ought worth nor vncircuncision but the new creature meaning by a new creature as S. Chrysostom and other holy Fathers expound it that our nature which was waxen old in sinne Repētè baptismi lauacro renouata est non aliter quà m si denu◠esset condita is renued in the washing of baptisme none otherwise then if it had ben made a newe So that no sinne at al can be in vs now baptized if wee haue worthily receiued Baptisme Whiche notwithstanding there is euidently perceiued in our fleashe a certaine resistance and rebellion against Reason in suche wise that as our minde and soule being indued with grace desireth to do al goodnes so do our senses and sensual appetites intise and prouoke vs to muche naughtinesse Now bicause the sensual appetite deliteth vs and so ouercommeth vs commonly more or lesse therefore it is called the law of the fleash or the law which the fleash would gladly follow and obey which law or concupiscence leadeth vs prisoners to sinne so much as lieth in it and so ofte as we obey it Whether concupiscence be sinne though we consent not vnto it But the point of the question is whether it be truly and in deed a sinne in vs although we consent not vnto it We saie it is not properly sinne M. Iewel defendeth the contrarie but S. Paules wordes proue not the concupiscence which remaineth to be a sinne except we obey it Otherwise if of it selfe it were sinne we had not benne made a newe creature in Baptisme For the creature wherein sinne is remaineth stil an old creature But albeit al sinnes be taken awaye in Baptisme yet God suffereth the concupiscence to remaine in our fleash partly that we maie by the Rebellion thereof perceiue from what an enimie our soule is deliuered and so geue thankes to God as the Apostle doth in this place Rom. 7. which M. Iewel alleaged partly that we may be exercised with tentation to th ende we may be crowned for our victorie I therefore saith S. Paule in minde or soule obey the lawe of God but in fleash I obey the law of sinne And who knoweth not it is the consent of the mind and not the desire of the fleash which maketh a man to be a sinner Concupiscence is in my fleash onely and not in my minde except I consent vnto it and so take it into my minde and then in truth it is a sinne And this is the very discourse of S. Paule For when he had said in mind or in the highest part of my soule I obey the lawe of God he concludeth thereupon Rom. 8. Nihil ergo damnationis est his qui sunt in Christo Iesu qui non secundùm carnem ambulant Therefore no part of damnation is to them who are in Christ Iesus who walke not according to the flesh For if a man walke according to the flesh then in deede his Concupiscence which before was no sinne is becom a sinne Thus albeit our flesh be the flesh of death that is to say Ibidem mortal as S. Chrysostom expoundeth it and therefore S. Paul would faine be deliuered from it as fearing lest he should at any time yeeld vnto it yet if he do not yeelde vnto it Rom. 8. there is no sinne in him For the law of the spirit of life which is the grace that iustifieth vs in baptisme deliuereth him from the law of sinne and of death euerlasting Ievvel 217. Lib. 10. epist 84. S. Ambrose saith There is not found in any man such concord betvven the flesh and the spirit but that the lavv of concupiscence vvhich is planted in the members fighteth against the lavv of the mind And for that cause the vvordes of S. Iohn the Apostle are taken 1. Ioan. 1. as spoken in in the person of al Saintes If vve say vve haue no sinne vve deceiue our selues and there is no truth in vs. Harding I graunt that in this cōtinual fight we are daily so conquered in some smal sinne or other that we neuer remaine any long time without venial sinne But that
him them selues The fleshe is feeble the minde is sicke and so entangled in the bandes of sinne that it can not set forth her faint and feble foote towardes the seate of that Physician The Angels are to be called vpon for vs who are geuen vnto vs to be our Garde The Martyrs are to be praied vnto of whom it seemeth we maie as it were chalenge a certaine assistance for that we haue their bodies in pledge They may wel pray for our sinnes who with their owne bloud haue washed away their owne sinnes if they had any For these are the Martyrs of God our chiefe Prelates and the ouerlookers of our life and doinges Let vs not be ashamed to vse them as intercessours for our infirmitie whereas they them selues euen then when they wanne the victorie knew wel the infirmitie and weakenesse of the bodie This place M. Iewel sheweth that S. Ambrose who wil not haue any man to flee to Idolles woulde haue al faithful menne to praie to the Saintes for them And yet you for lacke of better stuffe were faine to make your Reader beleeue that the wordes written against the accursed Idolles might be applied by you against the blessed Apostles and Martyrs Whereby you shewe what good opinion you haue of that blessed companie of the house of God who reigning with him in heauen see in the face of the Lambe our hartes so farre as belongeth to their ioye and our comfort This one place of S. Ambrose might haue suffised The practise of the Churche touching the prayer to Saints aÌ„d honour to them exhibited but it shal be good that we ioyne therewith the practise both of the Church in those daies and also of the Heretikes that as wel the Catholikes may see how the Saintes were esteemed in olde time as M. Iewel may perceiue that he is not the first heretike whom it grieued to see Gods Martyrs so to be honoured as they are among the Catholikes Let vs then heare what S. Paulinus writeth in the life of S. Ambrose who liued in his time Paulinus in vita Ambrosâ— Per ideÌ„ teÌ„pus sancti Martyres Protasius Geruasius se sacerdoti reuelaueruÌ„t EraÌ„t enim in Basilica positi in qua sunt hodie corpora Naboris et Felicis Martyrum Sed sancti Martyres Nabor Felix celeberrimè frequentabantur Protasij verò Geruasij Martyrum vt nomina ita etiam sepulchra incognita erant in tantum vt suprà ipsorum sepulchra ambularent omnes qui vellent ad cancellos peruenire quibus sanctorum Naboris Felicis Martyrum ab iniuria sepulchra defendebantur Sed vbi sanctorum Martyrum sunt corpora leuata in lecticis posita multorum ibi Satanae aegritudines perdocentur Coecus etiam Seuerus nomine qui nunc vsque in eadem basilica quae dicitur Ambrosiana in quam Martyrum corpora sunt translata religiosè seruit vbi vestem Martyrum attigit statim lumen recepit Obsessa etiam corpora à spiritibus immundis curata summa cum gratia domum repetebant Sed his beneficiis Martyrum in quantum crescebat fides Ecclesiae Catholica intantum Arianorum perfidia minuebatur Denique ex hoc tempore sedâ—ri coepit persecutio quae Iustinae furori accendebatur vt Sacerdos de Ecclesia pelleretur Tamen intra palatium multitudo Arianorum cum Iustina constitutâ— deridebat tantam Dei gratiam quam Ecclesiae suae Catholica Dominus Iesus meritis Nartyrum suorum conferre dignatus est venerabilémque virum Ambrosium narrabat pecunia comparasse homines qui se vexari ab immundis spiritibus mentirentur atque ita ab illo sicut à martyribus se torqueri dicerent Sed hoc Iudaico ore loquebantur Ariani suppares scilicet eorum Illi enim de Domino dicebant Quoniam in Beelzebub principe Daemoniorum eijcit Daemonia Isti de Martyribus vel de Domini Sacerdote loquebantur quòd non Dei gratia quae per ipsos operabatur immundi spiritus pellerentur sed accepta pecunia se torqueri mentirentur Clamabant enim daemones Scimus vos Martyres Et Ariani dicebant Nescimus esse Martyres About this time the holy Martyrs Protasius and Gernasius reueled them selues to S. Ambrose For they were buried in the Church where at this daie are the bodies of the Martyrs Nabor and Felix But menne haunted very muche vnto the holy Martyrs Nabor and Felix and as for the Martyrs Protasius and Gernasius as theire names were vnknowen so were also their Graues where they laie in so muche that men that were desirous to come to the Grates wherewith the toumbes of the blessed Martyrs Nabor and Felix were fenced from iniurie walked vppon their graues But after that the bodies of the blessed Martyrs were taken vppe and laid in their cofines that many were there cured of their Diseases it is wel knowen Seuerus a blinde man by touche of martyrs garment receiued fighte A blinde man named Seuerus who at this daie ful deuoutely serueth in the same Churche nowe called S. Ambroses Churche whither the bodies of the Martyrs were translated after that he had once touched the garmente of the Martyrs foorthwith receiued his fight Many bodies also possessed of wicked Spirites were cured and returned home with great grace But howe muche the faith of the Catholique Churche by these benefites of the Martyrs grewe more and more so muche did the perfidious falshood of the Arians wexe lesse and lesse Finally after this the persecution which was enkendled by the rage of Iustina the Emperesse which sought to driue Saint Ambrose out of his Churche beganne to slake Neuerthelesse the rable of the Arians who were in the Courte with Iustina scoffed at this great grace of God whiche it pleased our Lord Iesus to bestow vpoÌ„ his Catholike Church through the merites of his Martyrs And they bruted abroad that the reuereÌ„d Bishop Ambrose had hiered meÌ„ with money that should feine them selues to be vexed with vncleane Sprites and saie that they were as wel tormented by S. Ambrose as by the Martyrs But this the Arians like verie Iewes vttered as being in malice their owne companions For the Iewes said of our Lorde He casteth out Deuilles in Beelzebub the Prince of Deuilles But the Arians said of the Martyrs and of S. Ambrose the Priest of our Lord that the vncleane Sprites were not cast out by the grace of God which wrought by them but that menne hiered with money feined them selues to be tormented For the Deuilles cried out We know you to be Martyrs But the Arians said we know not them to be Martyrs Thus farre S. Paulinus Doo you know your Father M. Iewel if ye saw him I meane not your natural Father would God you were so good a man and of so good a faith as he was But I meane your other father that begote Arius whose yonger brother you are At that time the Arians mockte at the miracles wroughte by the Saintes
knowe the answere M. Iewel Nothing is more common You belie the Scripture that is the answer to you And your forefathers euen vp to Luther haue alwaies belyed it and being told of it wil not yet amende no more then the Deuil whom they followe A thing may be dead in two sortes Idle faith i◠a faith either bicause it had life in it of his owne or els bicause it had it of another thing If a man be deade he is deade in respecte of the life which belonged to him selfe For a man doth consist of body and soule and not of the one alone So that when the soule is aparte from the body then is he no more a perfitte man during the time of that separation But the Body being one parte of a man hath life in it whiles the soule abideth in it But that life is not the Bodies owne but it is the life of the soule geuing mouing vnto the Body which life when it is taken away the Body remaineth stil a perfite Body in his owne nature although it be vnperfite in respect of the soule which did commende it and set it forth Now it is to be considered whether Faith haue life in it selfe and of his owne nature as a man hath for then a dead faith is no faith or els whether faith hath life of another thing to wit of Charitie and then a dead Faith is a true Faith in his owne nature albeit it be disgraced for lacke of the life which it was wont to haue through Charitie The very expresse worde of God hath ended this question For S. Iames geueth vs to vnderstand that Faith hath life of an other thing like as the body hath of the soule for he saith Sicut enim corpus sine spiritu mortuum est ita fides sine operibus mortua est Iacob 2. As the body without the sowle is dead so is faith dead without workes Not as the man is dead without the sowle but as the body is dead without the soule so is faith dead without workes But the body being without the sowle is stil a true natural body Therefore faith being without good workes is stil a true real faith But it is idle and no more profitable vntil good workes be againe graffed into it This mater is so plaine that the confirmation of witnesses is needelesse and so M. Iewel is tried a lier in that he said an idle faith is in dede no faith at al. Iewel Pag. 321. We graunt good vvorkes haue their revvard but the same revvards standeth in mercie and fauour and not in duetie Iob saith If a man wil dispute with God he is not able to ansvver him one for a thovvsand I vvas a fraid of al my vvorkes Although I vvere perfit yet my soule shal not knovv it c. Harding These witnesses do proue wel against your assurednes of saluation which you warrant to your selues But concerning our question it shal be good here to laye certaine truthes confessed of al sides that the doctrine may be the plainer First there is no merite of workes at al before faith or without faith August epist 52. Defence 321. For els grace were not grace and thereunto perteine S. Augustines wordes by you alleged to an other purpose After faith no particular man is able to warrant his owne workes to be meritorious And that is proued by al the testimonies of Scriptures and Fathers which you haue brought For euery man is vncertaine of his owne state Ecclesiastes 9. Our vvorkes considered in themselfe can not deserue life euerlasting as not knowing whether he be worthy of hatred or of fauour But when wee dispute generally whether those men who being in grace in dede are confessed to haue wrought wel do merite life euerlasting thereby or no that being our question thus I saie No workes of man were they neuer so good could of them selues without Gods ordinance haue merited heauen of God or haue made him debter of such a reward or wages dew to them For they are al done in time and can not deserue an infinite reward such as is rendred in heauen Rom. 8. For I iudge saith the Apostle that the afflictions of this time are not worthy of the glorie that shal be reueled in vs. In vvhat consideratiō are our good vvorkes meritorious of infinite revvarde But seing it hath pleased God not onely to geue vs abundance of grace whereby our workes may be acceptable to him but also to promise euerlasting life to the doers of them and to make him selfe a debter to vs of suche a rewarde this promise of God being put it were iniurious to God if nowe wee should not saie that our good workes deserued life euerlasting For seinge God geueth them freely to th ende we shoulde thereby deserue heauen who is so voide of reason as to denie that those workes deserue Glorie of whiche God hath said the dooer◠of them shal haue glorie rendred vnto them as their wages Matth. 5. Merces vestra saith he copiosa est in coelis your wages is plentiful in Heauen Vnusquisque propriam mercedem accipiet secundùm suum laborem 1. Cor. 3. Euery man shal receiue his proper wages according to his owne labour Psal 61. Thou shalt render to euery man saith the Prophete according to his workes If then no mannes workes in no sense deserue glorie it muste follow that God shal render glorie to no man and yet S. Paule sayth Rom. 2. that God wil render life euerlasting to them who seeke glorie and honour and incorruption according to the patience or continuance of working wel The same worde reddere Reddere to render or paye doth import a title and right that good workers haue to demaunde life euerlasting For as if I promise one ten pound to bring me a cuppe of fresh water although before I had promised that wages the water were not worth one halfpennie yet if once vpon my promise a man do bring me the water I am bound by my promise and couenant to paie him his wages Mat. 10. euen so God hath bounde him selfe to geue vs life euerlasting for our good workes saying Hoc fac viues doo this thing and thou shalt liue Againe he that continueth til the ende shal be saued And therefore now he that hath wrought wel euen til the ende may require God to keepe his promise who surely is faithful and wil not faile to kepe it And this thing is meant by the Parable of him that hiered men to labour in his wineyard that is in his Church couenāting with them for a pennie that is to saie Mat. 20. for life euerlasting To whom when he paied their wages he said Nónne ex denario conuenisti mecum Tolle quod tuum est Diddest thou not bargaine with me for a pennie Take that whiche is thine And S. Paule testifieth of him selfe 2. Tim. 4. I