do principally concerne him The first is his writing which as shall appeare by this authors defense doth conuince him of grosse ignorance and that in verie common matters both of diuinitie and of Philosophie wherein it is well knowne that Campian was moste excellent But seeing the proofe of this conuiction resteth onely in the authors defense the discreete reader will suspend his iudgement vntill he see Master Charkes answere also In the meane time it will appeare by that which other men write in his defence likewise that all is not grosse ignorance which cauilling and malitious Papists seeking to deface him with a false accusation are disposed to impute vnto him As for Campians learning in these two sciences I may be as bold to saie it is well knowne that it was but vulgar and inferior to manie of his yeares and tyme of studie which you commend to be in the superlatiue degree of moste excellencye Some peece of his diuinity he shewed in the conference with in the tower of London His knowledge in Philosophie as it is not to be waighed in the controuersie of Religion which we haue in hand so it is not to be thought that he so far excelled therein but Oxford and Cambridge can aforde an hundreth Masters of Arte his iuniors in time at the lest way his equalls if not his betters therein That Master Charke outfaced him in the towre of London by reason of his high place gaie apparell great wordes assistance of friendes countenance of authoritie and applause of Protestantes standing by it is a poore excuse of Master Campians insufficiencie which though it was manifest to the wise and learned in euery of the former daies of conference yet in that last daie of Master Charkes encounter with him was apparant euen to the simple ignorant so that Campians impudencie wherein he chieflie excelied was so repressed at that time as euen in the opinion of euerie man albeit he was vanquished before yet now at last he seemed to be cleane ouerthrowne And this shamefull foile you would faine haue to be thought to haue happened vnto him as one ouermatched with M. Charkes highe place gaie apparell great wordes c. It is pittie your Champion was noe better armed aganst so weake arguments but did suffer him self to be outfaced with such friuolous reasons of place garmentes wordes countenance multitude verely they that knew his audacitie from a childe marueled to see him so greatlie daunted but that it pleased God that day to make him and all the papists in their foolish deuise of his impudent challenge ridiculous to al the world But if we maie examine these reasons by which he seemed to be so much outfaced what difference of place I praie you was there betweene the opponents and the respondent were not there stooles of equall height you would haue fooles imagine belike that Charke sat a loft in a throne seauen stepps higher then Campian or what meane you to prate of high place As for gay apparell men maie see Master Charke daielie how gorgeouslie he is araied so that he turneth the eies of all men vppon him which waie so euer he goeth or els Campian had smale cause to feare him for his gaie apparell In trueth his apparell was of colour blacke of matter wollen of making such as the common sorte of Ministers in London commonly do vse to weare But if Campian had bene stripped out of his rugge gowne whereunder his ruffianlike garments were hidde he would haue appeared in much gayer apparell for matter colour and fashion then Master Charke was euer seene to weare since he came into the ministerie Neuertheles his gowne could not hide his to spots hat which if not on that daie yet at all other times of the conference it is certaine was the same that was seene with the rest of his Iesuiticali robes when he ridde through Cheap-side towards the tower of London And therefore mee thinkes you neede not to haue spoken of Master Charkes gaie apparell But what were those greate words of his a foote and a halfe long at the lest that Master Campian might be outfaced with them They that were present could obserue no affectation os wordes but weight of matter that bare downe Campians courage especially when he was pressed to answere to syllogismes which as though no man but he could skill of at the first he did scornefully call for The assistance of friendes was a smale prerogatiue when they were onelie hearers and not helpers of his disputation The countenance of authoritie litle auaileth in conference where each partie by leaue of authoritie may saie what he can for his cause Last of all the applause of the Protestantes standing by was no cause of Campians outfacing but a consequent of his vnsufficient answering That vaine scoffe of Campians comming within the reach of Charkes ministeriall power and authoritie sauoreth of nothing but of proude follie and foolish malice For all men maie easilie know that when Campian was apprehended for mouing the Queenes subiects to sedition and committed to the tower for imagining and practising of high treason he was not within the reach of anie Ecclesiasticall persons power or authoritie much lesse of poore M. Charkes iurisdiction which is none at all further then by commission might be graunted to anie of the state ciuill or Ecclesiasticall to examine him or to conferre with him The second matter you haue to speake to Master Charks owne person is of his false dealing to deceaue wherin you graunt him principalitie not onely aboue Campian who had no talent at all therein but euen aboue the chiefe masters of his owne syde most expert in that facultie The terme of talent being taken out of the gospell and signifying some grace or gyfte of god how vngraciouslie it is abused not onely in this place for a facultie of false dealing but also by the auctor him-selfe asterward for a custome of rayling I wish the sober reader to obserue and to consider what religious affection these men beare to the doctrine of Christ that can finde no termes to play with all in their spitefull inuectiues but such as are shamefullie detorted and abused from the holy vse and phrases of the blessed scriptures As for the crime of false dealing let it appeare in Gods name by the tryall and examination of both the parties writings and rest where it shal be found to be practized In the meane time we must a litle consider of these examples here brought for a taste to shew his false dealings by Master setter forth First M. Charke inueigheth against the Censurer verie sharpely because he chargeth Luther with an opinion which he confesseth that sometimes he held and afterward recanteth concerning the licensing of wiues to lie with their neighbour when their husbands by naturall infirmitie were not hable to do their partes This say you seemeth a very reasonable defense where is then the false dealing Mary say you the words
the arguments as of the answeres and when he repeated anie argument that he had written it was that the opponent might acknowledge that he had taken it truely As like wise he repeated Campians answere also who often times when he misliked it him-selfe either added or detracted or altered the same so that he weried the writer not a litle vntill it was set downe as he would haue it stand and as he would stand to it otherwise it had bene smal matter of applause that Master Charke should get to haue an other man vrge his arguments for him to the purpose as though he could not follow them himselfe sufficientlie so greate likeliehoode of trueth your surmises haue which yet you set downe as absolutelie as they were oracles of Apollo For which cause also you had Master Norton the rackemaster c. But how well do you remember the rule of ciuilitie in wordes whereof you are such a rigorous exactor in other men that so reprochfully scoffe at M. Norton who besyde his rare giftes of witte learning and wisedome was of speciall trust with other appointed by the Prince and her moste honnorable councell to examine such as were thought meete to be tried or terrified with the racke therefore in respect of the authoritie by which he dealt in those cases neither in ciuilitie nor in christianitie deserued the odious and opprobious name of a rackemaster Againe you pittie the case that we durst not make those few disputations publike where more men might haue laughed bene witnesses of our folly c. No no if we had parted with Master Campian but at an euen hand as we ioyned with him with all inequallitie you shoulde haue had bookes of triumphset forth before now this secret of ours al the people of England doth knowe What secret of ours be like that we durst not make these disputations publiker by printing the report thereof For otherwise there were witnesses enow at the hearing of them But now all the people of England know that you lie impudently For the report of that conference hath bene imprinted almost this two yeares and neuer a papist of you all at home or abroad hath aduentured to controll it although there haue bene printed brags that you would shortly set'it out your selues to our shame You will say it is set downe by our selues or our owne friendes and consequently partially in reporte of Campians answers Admit it were so as in deede it is otherwise for Campians answers touching the substance of them and in his owne wordes are as trulie set doune as the opponents argumentes yet because the matter is not the victorie against Campians person but against his heresies if you thinke Campian or your cause haue iniurie by the report of his answers whie do not you shew either what his answers were or what they should haue bene to the auoiding of those argumentes that then were brought against him Which arguments as they were then propounded to Camipans person so now by publishing of them in print they are offered as a smal taste to al his fautors abbertors to answere them if they can better then Campian but a young nouis in popish diuinity was hable to doe But I suppose it much more easie for you to laugh at them in corners and smile in your sleeues in open presence then keeping the lawes of disputation to auoide the force of them As for the vaine glory whereof you dreame that we be so greedie you see by differring the publication of that conference so long that we could wel haue forborne it altogether if vour insolent bragging false surmising impudent slaundering and childish daring had not in a manner extorted the setting forth thereof The example you bring of our desire of praise by Doctor Fulke looking into Wisbige Castle is by the same man sufficientlie answered with all other quarrells that you picke against his writings in a seuerall treatise annexed to his defense of the English translations against Gregorie Martine and therfore there needeth not anie other confutation of those slaunders and cauills then is alreadie set forth But with what inequalitie did we ioine with Campian by meanes whereof he might be lesse hable to make his partie good We know you saie the inequalitie whereby we dealt with that man being but one vnbooked vnprouided wearyed with imprisonment and almost dismembred with the rack threatened and terrified with death to come appointed onely to answere and neuer to oppose yea all this wee know and the world both knoweth and marueileth at it abroad The world maie maruell at his arrogancie in making such a proude challenge and at your impudencie in defending his insufficiencie with such manifest vntrueths First you saie he was but one and the world knoweth there were but six of more then six hundreth whome he challenged hable to haue incountred with a greater giant then he was that at seuerall times had conference with him He being but one with manifest note of intollerable pride prouoked al the learned of England and do you complaine that being but one he was assaied by so few of so greate a number as he challenged There was but one that challenged all and therefore it was thought meete that this one should be a litle discouered partelie to represse the insolencie of him-selfe and of his friendes partlie to satisfie the weakenes of some ignorant persons that might imagine there was some greate matter in his bold challenge who shewed therein the greatest follie that could be if it had notserued for an other subtill practize Hewas vnbooked you saie but in deede he was licensed to haue what bookes soeuer he would call for Canisius great Catechisme he required and had which he saide should be vnto him instar omnium Vnprouided he could not be being opposed in his owne booke or at lest wise could not complaine of it hauing as long time to consider of the questions as his aduersaries had His imprisonment had not bene so long before the conference nor his keeping so straite that his witts could be dulled or his memorie quailed in so short a time of fiue or six weekes That he was either almost or anie thing at all dismembred or distracted in bodie with the racke is a most false lie and shamelesse slaunder although he bragged as of his suffering by the rack which he rather saw then felt as Master Lieuetenant told him It is as false that he was threatened or terrified with death by anie of the disputers If he were terrified in minde with conscience of his treasons to feare that death which he knew he had deserued there was none to blame but him-selfe Otherwise his behauiour was not like one that feared death as it was afterward when death in deede was present before his eies Finallie that he was appointed onelie to answere and neuer to oppose it was noe disaduantage to him if he had maintained a true cause and had beene that man of
notwithstanding her maiesties warrant anie daunger to your liues or boast that you offer your selues to perill of life when you demaund a warrant for your safeties without the which you dare not so much as vtter your name that be the challengers And therefore it were a ridiculous sute for a warrant that our ministers shoold commence in your behalfe when they know not what you are nor what warrant you haue from any learned Papists to make such large offers vponwarrant of your safteties seeing it is knowne that the best learned of your side in England haue not only refused the same but some also iudged al disputation to be vnprofitable Your offers I confesse are verie large as that we shal appointe in what kinde and number at what time to what place you shal come either our countrey men onely or strangers to dispute in our vniuersities before the learned onelie that you giue vs leaue to call all the learned protestantes of Europe for our defence you taking onelie our owne countrimen That you giue vs leaue to oppose or defend begin or end or vse anie prerogatiue that maie not impugne the indifferencie of triall But when you aske what we can alleadge why we should not accept this We answere that beside manie causes not here needefull to be rehearsed though before in parte touched we alleadge for this present that we do not beleeue that you are able to performe anie of these liberall offers except we see matter of greater credit then an epistle of an vnknowne papist written to Master Charke a priuate man If you had shewed vs such warrant or commission as wee might probablie haue beene perswaded of the performance of these promises you might more reasonablie haue required what we had to alleadge whie we did not accept them but now there is noe reason in the worlde that we should intreate with our Prince Magistrates vppon these friuolous wordes of an obscure hedge-creeper or boasting bench-whistler for anie thing we knowe I am in the name of all my fellow Catholikes to renew c Once againe I saie to you ministers c. We will giue you leaue c and such like But it is not sufficient that you are liberall at home onelie except you be lauish abroade also for if we had leuer make triall in other Countreies we maie choose what Protestant state we liste and procuring you safetie there you will meete vs. Or if we please to come into anie Catholike Kingdome or Countrie you will procure what securitie soeuer reasonablie we will demaunde and more then that you will beare our expenses also rather then so good a worke should remaine vnattempted or anie other condition that we can denise you will fulfill Then you conclude If we offer you reason then deale somewhat reasonablie with vs againe For all the world will crie shame and beginne to discredite you if you will neither giue nor take vpon so greate oddes as here are offered you I answere you offer vs great wordes but no reason at all because we knowe not what assurance you can make vs to performe your wordes If Master Charke a man well knowne by his name should make the like offer to you by such an other printed epistle or taking your offer should promise you as great warrant as you require at home or abroad and moreouer to beare your expenses rather then you should saile to appeare at anie time or place by him assigned is your simplicitie so great that you would keepe the appointed daie and place of disputation vppon his pure promise without further assurance And yet you can not misse to heare of him his dwelling place at London whereas we know not to whome nor whether to returnethe warrant that it may come to you except per haps youwould haue it proclamed with sound of trum pet sent into all partes of the realme that you maie heareof it It maie be you will alleadge that it is great daunger for you to appeare without warrant of securitie and noe perill for vs to procure you assurance of safetie But all wise men maie see that we should deserue noe lesse punnishment by procuring such a warrant for you vppon so light a grownde if you did not accepte it as you should incur appearing without warrant for anie difference in religion if you be not guilty of fellonie or treason If you ment nothing but peaceable disputation for trial of truth you would not make your challenge in printed libels and seditious pamphlets but rather seeke it at the handes of them that haue authoritie to graunt it by intercession of those forreigne princes with whome you pretend your credit to be so great that you can procure what securitie soeuer reasonablie we can demaund in their dominions But to vse anie such lawful meanes I trowe you will make no haste when you wil not accept that quiet forme of triall by syllogismes in writing which by Doctor Fulke so manie yeares agoe was offered vnto you and yet is free for you to take if it please you and that without sute without daunger and to the best and surest triall of the trueth But if we dare not venture with disputations yet you require vs to graunt you certaine sermons to encounter with vs vpon this matter A verie reasonable request I assure you when you will graunt the like libertie of preaching in Spaine or Italie we will become suters for you to preach in England Or if that also be to daungerous we must procure you but a litle passage for your bookes speciallie Master Charke must obteine licence free passage for this booke vntil it be answered Sir whenwe see what passage you can wil procure for our bookes at lest such as be not answered vntill they be answered in places where they are now restrained we will endeuour that you shall haue the like entertainement with vs. In the meane time take what controuersie you will or thinke you selfe best hable to prooue against vs set downe such arguments as you haue to oppose against our assertion in lawfull and logicall syllogismes and whether you send them written or printed you shall receaue them againe printed with our answeres to them and haue as free passage for your arguments as shall be graunted for our answers If you will replie against our answers in like forme aforesaide you shall haue our 〈◊〉 in like manner set forth with your replie and 〈◊〉 the grace of God you shall not faile of toties quoties vntill you be non plus or which we had rather will he vntill you yeald to the trueth This offer is so reasonable that when the like was made to M. Mettham one of the prisoners at Wisbeach M. Fecknam of his equitie acknowledged that there could no more be required Butas Mettham did then refuse it so I am afraid will you And yet it is more then you will doe for vs to giue licence that our bookes may
be read of euerie man amonge you with your confutations And Doctor Windham then saide that no wise state would suffer it Neuerthe lesse our state God be thanked vpon conscience of trueth on our side hath with no lesse wisedome then good successe alwaies permitted your bookes with our answers to them to be read of all men to iudge indifferentlie so they conteine nothing but question of religion and not shamefull diffamations and inuectiues against the prince and the state of gouernement which matters deserue to be answered with an axe or an halter rather then with penne and paper But to permitte your bookes vnconfuted to haue free passage althoughe they passe with an hundred times lesse daunger then ours maie doe among you as you require it were neither wisedome godlines equitie nor reason AN OVERTHROVVE OF THE ANSVVERE TO Master Charkes preface touching Discerning of Spirites M. Chark beside the matter in question c. IF this answerer beside the matter in question had not made manie vnnecessarie and vnpertinent digressions the substance of his answere might haue bene contained almoste in as fewe lines as nowe it filleth leaues The triall of the Spirites which Saint Iohn requireth that is by the kinde of doctrine in teaching Christ and not the qualitie of the teachers Master Charke desireth the aduersaries refuse allowing nothing finallie but the onelie and falselie named title of the Catholike Church of Rome for them-selues and accusations of the persons some perhapes true some vtterlie false against vs. To this practize so manie popish treatises and this especiallie in hand doe giue testimonie This is the summe of Master Charkes preface Nowe commeth our answerer and because he had manie by-quarrels to deliuer he taketh occasion to vtter them in this place though litle or nothing pertaining to the direct confutation of Master Charkes preface First he chargeth Master Charke to saie that the Papists refuse Saint Iohns triall which is false for their bookes are extant wherebie they haue called to triall all sectaries of our time among whome he nameth Munster and Stancarus against whome I neuer heard what Papists haue exercised their style especiallie Stancarus holding one principle comming verie neare to their position of Christs priesthood to be onelie according to his manhood as Stancarus taught that Christ was a mediatour onelie after his humanitie but reade their bookes who shall and he must needes confesse Master Charkes saying to bee true For first or last they draw all triall to Rome and not to examine which doctrine giueth al glorie to God by Iesus Christ our onelie Sauiour which is the scope of Saint Iohns triall But if wee had not desired triall of Spirites saith he wee would not haue laboured so much to obteine the same of our aduersaries in free printing preaching or disputation You speake of great labor which none of vs euer heard that you tooke except it were in spreading a fewe coppies of Campians seditious libell not to the end of triall of spirites for discerning of trueth but to the stirring vp of mens bodies and mindes to treason and rebellion as the like labors by the like messengers tooke effect and make manifest demonstration in Ireland But if free printing preaching and disputation be a goodway for discerning of Spirites that Christ maie be knowne from Antichrist whie doe not you Papists graunt the same in Spaine Italie and other countreis thrall to the Popes tirannie yet assaulted by the doctrine of the gospell as by the power of Christ against Antichrist if it be not a good waie as it seemeth you thinke because you take it not your selues how can you saie that you require in those places this triall of spirites No no it is an other triall of the sharpest swordes that you meane when you require such triall of Spirites You adde further of the aduenturing of your liues in comming and offering the same to vs at home with so vnequall conditions on your side as you haue done and dailie doe for the triall of trueth There is no daunger of life among vs in offering the triall of Spirites according to Saint Iohns rule but in seeking to auerte the Queenes subiects from their duetifull obedience vnto her Maiestie to make a waie for the execution of the Popes moste blasphemous and traiterous Bull and this hath procured moste iuste and necessarie execution of some fewe of you and not as you slaunder iustice that offering to trie the truth hath obtained nothing hitherto but offence accusations extreame rackings and cruell death Againe these inequall conditions these daily offers these manie petitions and supplications that you speake of whoe hath made to whome haue they bene offered when were they presented where were they seene or heard by whome were they refused except Campians ridiculous challenge be all in all with you But what will a Papist spare to affirme that he maie make falsehood haue some likly shape of truth yet being admitted that you offer trial it must be seene whoe doe offer best meanes of triall And here you will endeuour to shew that all meanes of triall which Master Charke and his fellowes will seeme to allow in worde For they offer none in deede are neither sure possible nor euident but meere shifts to auoide all triall and that your selues do offer all the best and surest waies of triall that euer weere vsedin the Church for discerning an hereticall spirit from a Catholike Your indeuour is great but your abilitie is small for you shall neuer be able to demonstrate either the one or the other howsoeuer with vaine sophistications and wrested authorities you seeke to dasell the eies of the simple Let vs heare therefore howe you beginne The onelie meanes of triall you say which Master Charke will seeme to allowe is the scripture But this is a shift common to all heretikes especiallie of our time First you slaunder Master Charke in saying that he alloweth the scripture to be the onelie meanes of triall of spirites whereof he speaketh not at all in this preface but of triall of spirites by the doctrine of Christ which is moste plainlie and certenlie set forth in the holie scriptures and therefore by the holie scriptures the doctrine maie best and moste certenlie be tried and iudged But that Master Charke by referring him selfe to the holie scriptures onelie as suffiâ—â—â—n and â—â—le to decide all controuersies of Religion doth denie or exclude all other meanes of 〈◊〉 whereby the true meaning of the scripture may be knowne it is impâ—dent he affirmed without either proofe or likelihood of truth as hereafter more plainlie will appeare Saint Augustine as though he were an enimie of conâ—â—â—â—ing heresies by the authoritie of the scriptures onelie is quoted in the margent de nupt Concup lib 2. cap. 31 whose words are these Non est miâ—â—am si Pelagiani dicta nostra in sensus 〈◊〉 volunt detoâ—quere conaâ—tur quando de scripturis sanctis non vbi obscurè
Iesuites in discredit whose infections are well knowne abroade and are now entred to worke treason in the land Also because he graunteth the speaches which in all hatred of Popish practizes so directlie attempted against the maiestie of God and the peace of this noble kingdome he vttered in diuerse places of his answere But if you had not omitted the reasons which he setteth downe of his acknowledging and graunting of those vehement speaches they had beene sufficient in any reasonable mans opinion to discharge him out of that crime of rayling For you your selfe confesse afterward that euerie hotte word vttered in Catholike bookes by occasion of matter is not to be taken for rayling Now Master Charke standeth to the defence of his booke to be Christian and Catholike and him-felfe to be a true member and Minister of the Catholike Church of Christ and for occasion of matter he alledgeth the infections of the Iesuites well knowne abroad and their late entrie to worke treason in the land Also those Popish practises against which he vttered those speaches to be directlie attempted against the Maiestie of God and the peace of this noble kingdome so that such sharpe speaches and yet but sparinglie vttered in comparison of so many reproches as you haue belched out against him and our religion are not to be charged with the preiudice of rayling neither in regard of the person whoe did vse them or of the matter that did occasion them At the least wise vntill you had disprooued him to be a Catholike or discharged your Iesuites of the crimes of heresie and treason intended against them neither doth he with slaunder deuised against their persons as the manner of the Papists is seeke to discreditte their doctrine but in detestation of their false doctrine attribute such termes vnto the men as for their doctrines sake they deserue But you are gratious to graunt him pardon for that he confesseth hatred to haue beene the cause as though hatred not of the persons whome he wisheth to repent vnto saluation but of the practizes which he knoweth to be against God and the peace of the realme may not be a iust cause of more vehement inuectiues then he hath anie expressed And yet you see not how any learned or common honest man and much lesse a preacher can iustifie such vnciuill and outragious termes against his brother by any pretence of Christianlike or tollerable hatred I will not say how mány foule re proches be included in this one sentence taking it according to your meaning for I will graunt that you saie to be true if it may be vnderstoode of him that is a brother in deede But that Iesuites are brethren to Master Charke and such preachers as he is I thinke neither the Iesuites nor you your selfe if you be demaunded when you are awake will acknowledge Therefore being such as M. Charke had before described them by their infections treasons practizes against God and the realme he was not to imbrace them as bretheren but to detest them as heretikes and traytors The turning backe of the crime of railyng which he vseth vnto you was not for any excuse of the crime committed by him selfe for he doth not at all excuse but iustifie defend those speaches which you cal railing as fit words against the wicked Monkish fryers or fryerlie Monks affirming that if he were disposed to place your ordinary and extraordinary rayling in a ranke he might gather of your reproches more then can come into ten leaues but this you saie is neither to the purpose nor trewe not to the purpose because you were prouoked by his example and iniurie who began without example He might answere you that he began not with you but you with him neither did he prouoke you by any priuate iniurie but if you count the cause of the Iesuites to pertaine vnto you as a publike iniurie then iudge in differentlie whether the heresies and treasons of the Iesuites doe not minister iust cause to him of his hatred and bitter speaches against them But that he could gather ten leaues of your rayling you say it is a licentious lie For as Printers count leaues that is wholl sheetes there are but halfe ten in your booke and albeit they be counted as they are folded yet ten leaues are a greater part thereof then can be filled with rayling termes onelie So you saie and seeme to saie somewhat to your purpose but Master Charke hauing tolde you before vnto which your silence may stand for a confession that almost euerie line soundeth loud with some foull reproch who cannot see that it were easie to gather almost out of euerie line so many foull reproches as would fill more then ten of your folded leaues For of Printers large count no reasonable man would vnderstand him except you would allow him also to make as large letters and as fewe lines as Printers sometimes vse to doe in such large leaues of their account But this matter you may not so soone passe ouer for that you thinke it of importance to descrie she spirites of vs that are aduersaries in this case Rayling in deed is a fault in whomsoeuer it be found but it had beene requisite that you had first defined what is rayling that we might haue agreed vpon the matter in question You tell vs afterward what is not rayling namelie euerie hotte word vttered in Catholike bookes by occasion of matter is not railing nor the thing in question for both Christ his Apostles and many holy fathers aster them vsed the same sometimes vpon inst zeale especially against heretiks So that vntilyou haue prooued Protestants to be noe true Catholikes discharged papists from being heretikes euerie hotte worde in our bookes vttered against Papistes can not iustlie be accompted railing Naie if Catholikes by heate of zeale in a iust cause or in a case that they thinke to be iust be caried somtimes in vehemencie of speech beyond the bandes of modestie as they maie be iustlie reprooued therefore so they maie not straightwaie be condemned for heresie in so doing Iames and Iohn were so farre deceiued with zeale and in a cause that they thought to be cleare and iust that they would haue praied that fire might come downe from heauen by example of Helias and destroy the Samaritanes that resused to receiue their master Christ and were otherwise heretikes for which they weere reprooued but yet as they which knew not or had forgotten of what spirit they were yet not by and by reiected for heretikes The contention was sharpe betweene Paull and Barnabas and there was a fault betweene them yet both holie Apostles Saint Ierome is misliked of manie for immoderat vehemencie of speech against Rusfinus as good a Catholike as him-selfe yea he is not to be excused in heat against Saint Augustine Vigilantius and Iouinian he handleth more hardlie in termes then the cause of either of them did deserue although the one were in
or testimonie And I doubt not but he was called brother as all Christians are called one of an other but not as Friers are called fratres You adde further out of Saint Ambrose that he ware a blacke hoode and a girdell of lether Ser. 94. so that nothing wanted in him to the verie habit of an Augustine Frier But seeing there are of Ambrose his sermons numbred in all but 93. this bastarde bable where this of the hood and the girdle is written must be set out for a wrangler and he had beene worthy to be set one the pillerie that fayned such a sermon vnder the name of Saint Ambrose to giue creditte to the Augustine Friers Possidonius testifieth that his apparell shooes and bedding were of moderate and competent habit neither too fine and costlie nor too verie abiect or contemptible In which he kept the meane As for the blacke hoode and lethern belte he that liued 40. yeares with him as you say can tell vs nothing of thē so that you haue neither the weede nor the profession of Friers in S. Augustine Where the example of Christ is alledged to vpholde the institution of Iesuites which Master Charke affirmeth to be blaspemous against his Maiestie you confesse that Christ did not whippe him selfe because he had no rebellion in his flesh as you haue and therefore vse mortification of your bodie according to Saint Paules counsell Coll. 3. You shew how wiselie you vnderstand mortification which you referre to the bodie onelie where Saint Paul commandeth vs to mortifie our members which are vpon earth And least you should thinke he meaneth your head your armes or your shoulders he addeth fornication vncleanes lust euill concupiscence couetousnes and such like which be the members of the olde man that must be mortified not the natural body of man or the partes thereof But though you haue no example of Christ whipping himselfe yet you haue of long fasting praying and lying all night one the ground which notwithstanding you thinke we ministers wil not imitate for prayer and fasting we know it to be our dueties hauing not one lie the example but also the commaundement of Christ for it But for lying all night on the grounde we finde no example of Christ. The Euangelist Luke 6. which you quote for it saith that Christ continued all night in prayer but that he lay all night on the grounde he saith not so you declare your selfe as well by this as by many other things to be verie well studied in the scriptures Where Master Charke saith that Christ came eating and drinking did frequent the publicke assemblies and was sometime entertained at great feastes he sheweth the forme of Christes life differing from Iohns the Baptistes which was more austere whose example is more like your profession then that example of Christ although your vocation be nothing answerable to his Concerning pouertie Master Charke asketh what worldly blessing giuen vnto Christ by his father did he at any time abandon how doth his example recommend wilfull pouertie to you Iesuites or to any except you would by vertue of the example haue all men be of your order because all should be followers of Christ and holde it as commaunded or recommended for an example to be followed of all whatsoeuer he hath done before And then the Pope aboue all other by his owne claime must be the poorest of all and become a brother of your beggerlie order To this you an swere by asking if it were not wilfull pouertie for him the was Lord of all to liue of almes Yes verilie he did willingly forbeate to challenge that which was his owne neuertheles it was necessarie for his office to become poore that he might inrich vs with his grace so is it not for Iesuites or any other to whome God hath giuen such benefites as they should not neede to liue of almes You aske further if he that counselled men torenounce all they possessed for his service and to giue all to the poore that would be perfect did not he recommend voluntarie pouertie though he commaunded it not Surelie if the necessitte of his seruice doe require it there is no doubt but that it is euerie mans durie to renounce all that he possesseth But what necessitie compelleth the Iesuites to any such seruice of his but that they may liue of their owne and eare their owne breade As for the place you quote Luk. the 14. is verie Anabaptisticallie applied to actuall forsaking of mens possesons whereas it is manifestlie to be vnderstood of renouncing in affection is not counselled onelie to some but commaunded of necessitie to all euerie one of you saith he which renounceth not all that he possesseth cannot be my disciple For euen as bearing his crosse is necessarie for all Christians so is willfull pouertie and it is impossible for anie rich man to enter into the kingdome of heauen which places if they be vnderstood against actuall possession of worldlie goods what followeth but Anabaptisticall confusion For they are expresse commaundements and denialls to all not lost to the choise of a fewe It remaineth therefore that they be vnderstood of the minde loue affection and truste in wordlie riches not of budelie vse or hauing eiuill proprietie in them Neither doth it follow that the perfection of a Christian life consisteth in wilfull pouertie because our sauiour said vnto the rich yonge man that boasted that he had fullfilled the commaundements If thou wilt be perfect goe sell all that thou haste c. For by perfest he meaneth such a one as the yong man professed him-selfe to be in whome nothing wanted Againe he was further commaunded to follow Christ as his Apostles did and to take vs the crosse Therefore it was no generall counsell to all that desire perfection but a speciall discouerie of that mans worldely affection and hypocrisie which preferred temporall things before eternall felicitie and yet boasted that he had kept the commaundements from his youth And Luke 12. where he willeth his disciples to sell their possessions and giue almes he sheweth the dutie of all men which is not to spare their owne patrimonie but euen to sell their possessions rather then the poore shoud perish for lacke of necessaries yet not to make our selues beggers or to be pinched that other might haue ease but that equalitie might be obserued as the Apostle saith 2. Cor. 8. 13. So that hetherto we haue not willfull pouertie such as is that of the Iesuites by Christes example or counsell commended vnto vs. But you adde further If the Apostles left all proprietie and did liue in common as the seripture noteth c. But the Apostles left not all proprietie allthough they forsooke all thinges For Peter retained the proprietie of his house Matthew made agreat feast of his owne goodes I warrant you Iohn receiued the virgine Mary into his owne to prouide for hir Neither had the Apostles and Christians in
called the Epistle of Saint Iames Stramineam And I pray you good sir where doth Luther so call it For admitting your reporte of his wordes Iacobi autem epistola pre illis straminea est the epistle of Iames in comparison of those of Peter and Paul is like strawe or but strawie we finde not yet that he doth so call it absolutelie but in comparison which may be done without contempt or reproch As when the Apostle saith the law hath but a shadow of good thinges to come he meaneth not that the law to alintents purposes is nothing but a shadow for then it should be a vaine thing but in comparison of the truth exhibited in the Gospell The intollerable impudency therefore is yours and your fellows and the laughter and admiration of all nations if all nations may heare of your shameles follie may be against you rather then Master Whitaker that blush not to say absolutelie Luther called the epistle strawy when he spake onelie in respect and comparison of greater plentie of more waightie matter in the Epistles of Peter and Paul then in that of Iames. But the matter presseth Master Whittaker verie heauily for that he being a reader in diuinitie could not choose but haue read those wordes alledged by learned men aboue a hunddred times against Luther As though he is bound to beleeue whatsoeuer he readeth by papistes alledged against him In deede this siaunder of Luthers reiecting that Epistle and calling it strawie is often thrust in by Popish writers yet without alledgeing the place where or the wordes in which it is written Prateolus out of Lindane of late hath sette it forth in these wordes eam non modò reiecit epistolam ceu canone indignam sed contumeliosissimè quoque appellauit Praealiis verè stramineam quòd nihilipsius iudicio haberet Euangelicae indolis He did not onelie reiect that episile as vnworthie to be in the Canon but also moste contumeliouslie hath called it in comparison of other verilie of strawe because in his iudgement it had nothing of Gospellike nature in it In the preface in Dutch whereof you speake we neither finde this word verilie or truelie nor anie reiection of this epistle or anie such iudgement of Luther expressed that should containe in it nothing that sauoreth of the Gospell You see therefore what credit is to be giuen to Popish writers in their reports against Luther Now whether Saint Iohn did speake lesse of good workes in his Gospell then the other three Euangelistes you handle a vaine question when you confesse that Iohn writing by the same spirit could not but haue manie thinges to the same effect Neither are you hable to sette downe those wordes of Luther our of which it maie be prooued either that Luther affirmed that the Gospell of Iohn was the onelie true Gospell or that the other three were to be reiected or mishked because they spake too much of good workes so that you remaine stil forany defense you haue brought a famous liet animpudent slaunderer The fourth doctrine of Luther you reported to be this If anie woman can not or will not proue by order of the lawe the insufficiency of hir husband let her request at his handes a diuorse or els by his consent let her priuelie lie with his brother or some other man Master Charke answered that this was Luthers counsel while he was a Papist which he reuoked after his conuersion For this you charge him with such wilfull and shamefull dishonestie as can not be excused and aske how he will looke his owne friendes in the face hereafter with such fonde insultation against him as was vsed in the preface whereunto hath sufficientlie beene answered to discouer your impudencie For Luther would not reuoke his former counsell saie you but do farre worsse namelie take the man by she lockes and touze him except he did it Wheras in plaine trueth Luther meaneth nothing els but to compell such a man to an open diuorse as I shewed in answer to the preface and as the woll discours of Luthers wordes shall make plaine euen to a partiall reader Serm. de matr speaking of the causes of diuorse Priores autem quos Christus ex matris vtero c. The former sort whome Christ saith to be borne eunuches from their mothers wombe are those which are called impotent which by nature are vnable for procreation and multiplying In whome coldnes and infirmities do exceede or els are so affected in bodie that they are not meete for the life that is in matrimonie such as a man maie finde both men and women These as exempted by God and so created as they are not partakers of the blessing of generation and multiplying are to be put awaie For in them there is left no place for that word of God increase and multiplie euen as if God had made some lame or blinde which are free from walking or seeing Concerning such a great while a goe I committed to writing a counsell for confessours which they should vse if the husband or wife came to them to aske counsel what they should do for as much as their yoke fellow is not able to render the due beneuolence and yet the other partie can not be without it when he feeleth sufficientlie that the creature of God in him-selfe to be of habilitie Then they slaundered me that I taught thus that if the husband can not satisfie his wiues wantonnes she ought to flie from him to another But I suffered those froward triflers to lie The sayinges of Christ and his Apostles were peruerted and made worse what maruaile if the same thing happen to me But who shal be hurt thereby they them-selues shall see at the length Therefore after this manner I gaue counsell If to a woman meete for the matter there do happen a husband that is impotent and she can not openlie be married to another man and she vnwillinglie went against the common vsage and would not haue her credit and fame to be obscured whereas in this case the Pope requireth without cause manie witnesses that she should speake to her husband after this manner Beholde my husband you cannot render vnto me the due beneuolence and you haue deceiued me and my youthfull bodie beside this you haue brought me into perill of my good name and health or saluation neither is there before God anie matrimonie betweene vs. Fauour me I praie you that I maie contract a secret matrimonie with your brother or your next of kinne so that you may haue the name that your goodes maie not passe to strange heires and suffer your selfe willinglie to be deceiued by me as you haue deceiued me against my will I proceeded also further that the husband in this case ought to assent vnto his wife and by that meanes to yeelde vnto her the due beneuolence and hope of issue And if that he refused that she by secret flight should prouide for hir owne safegarde and
quote Gal. 5. where there is not onelie whordome glottonie drunkennes and such like but Idolattie witchcraft heresie c. which are sinnes against faith and knowledge and doubtles haue thir first motions as well as other sinnes that are principallie committed with the body as adultrie drunkennes c. and may haue their first motions both in the body in the minde but chiofly in the minde Therefore while you charge Master Chark with intollerable ignorance you bewraie intollerable want of knowledge in one that would be taken both for a philosopher and a diuine The second absurditie you saie is greater in affirming that the sensuall parte of man is not so much corrupted by originall sinne as the reasonable parte But master Charke saith the former that is that parte of our naturall soule where bie we haue life and sense onelie is not in the same sorte corrupted as the second neither doth sinne so worke in naturall life and sense as it doth in the heart by the corruptions and guiltines of the soule Now these words do declare a comparison in qualitie not in quantitie for the question if you be remembred was of a similitude which is a comparison in qualitie not in quantitie But if he hadmade comparison in quantitie I thinke there is no wise man but feeleth temptations against the knowledge of God and faith greater and more dangerous then to commit sinne in the abuse of any of the senses And seeing all that defileth man commeth first from the heart I maruell how you place concupiscence in the sensitiue part except you place the sensitiue parte in the heart Although it is not without fraud that you change Master Charkes wordes who speaketh altogether of life and sense and you onelie of the sensitiue part in which you include the inward senses as well as the outward where as Master Charke speaketh of the outward onelie as his examples of smelling seeing hearing and feeling declare The third absurditie is ioyned with flat Pelagianisme where he saith that the necessarie actions of life and sense remaine now in man as they were before his fall For which is alledged a saying of Saint Augustine de Eccles. dogm cap. 38. that if anie man shall affirme that man both in bodie and soule is not chaunged into worse he is deceiued with Pelagianisme But Master Charkes wordes are that the nenecessarie actions of life as eating drinking c. and of sense as smelling ate of them selues all free from sinne remaining as they were in man before his fall he doth not denie that they are changed into worsse but that of them selues they are not sin It is not sinne to eate but a man may easilie sin in eating it is not sinne to see but by sight a man may easily fall into sin Neither doth your author saie that the actions of life sense are sinne but he speaketh against them that thought by the fall of Adam the bodie onelie was subiect to corruption the liberue of the soule being vnhurt Now if you holde that the simple and necessarie actions of life and sense are sinne I wounder how you can deny the first motions and vnlawfull desires of sinne to be sin But you 〈◊〉 them from sin because they be not voluntarie which is serase true of the senses for a man need not to see except he will seeing he maie close his eies But against this point of voluntarie you say he obiecteth originall sinne which is answered before and shewed how it is voluntarie And I answere that the first motions are voluntarie by the same reason Secondlie he obiecteth that god saieth in Genesis euerie cogitation of mans heart is euill euermore To that you answer that it inclineth to euill by reason of concupiscence left in vs. Thus God and you agree not He saieth it is euill you saie it inclineth to euill but yet is not that inclination sinne without consent But God saieth it is onelie euill and that alwaies Thirdlie you saie he obiecteth the commaundement Thou shalt loue the Lord thy God with all thy heart c. Whereby the first motions being against the great cōmaundement must needes be sin But that you saie is false For though we be stirred by this commaundement to all perfection that we can in this life yet no more is inioyned vs thereby vnder paine of sinne and damnation but onelie that we doe not yealde consent to sin If you say that god imputeth not vnto vs that are his children all breach of this commaundement to our condemnation I would agree with you But that anie man in this life can keepe this commaundement or that no transgression thereof except it be with consent is damnable sinne I doe vtterlie denie Yet you make Saint Augustine author of your interpretation First lib. de spirit lit cap. vltimo Who both affirmeth that this commaundement is not fullfiled by anie man in this life and also that there is no perfect iustice in this life but that man hath profited moste which knoweth how farre he is from perfection of iustice Againe that there is no iustice in this life but by faith therefore walking by faith he may be saide not to sinne against the iustice of this commaundement seeing he is not to be blamed if he loue not God so perfectlie as when he shall knowe him perfectlie But all this is to be vnderstood of the new man so farre forth as he is reformed according to the Image of God And therefore he concludeth in the end that of what qualitie soeuer or of what quantity soeuer we can define iustice in this life there is no man voide of sinne and it is necessarie for euery man to praie for remission of sinnes and to presume of no iustice of his owne but of the grace of God Secondlie you quote lib. 1. de doct Christ. cap. 2. where there is nothing to the purpose Thirdlie de natura gratia cap. 69. where he saieth this commaundement is not heauie where there is that loue whereby faith worketh where this loue is not it is heauie But that the breach of this commaundement is not sinne where we yeald no consent he saieth not one word Lastlie you quote lib. 2. de pecc merit cap. 6. where this commaundement is not once mentioned Thus you thinke to carie awaie the matter with dumme quotationes when in the places quoted there is nothing to vpholde your assertion Next followeth a question whether Protestantes or papists do represse the raines of lusts which he knoweth best that searcheth the heart the raines But the doctrine of the protestantes saie you doth take awaie both raines and bridle out of our handes while they teach the first motions to be naturall and that we cannot let their effect but that they worke sinnes in vs whether we consent or not But that is false for we saie that by the grace of God we maie resist their effect which is to worke actuall sinne
FVLKE In that you allow no necessitie that should driue any man to take any sacrament of such as you count heretikes but onelie the sacraments of baptisme and penance in present perill of death and yet account the receiuing of sacraments so necessarie you insinuat whereunto you would bring the matter if it laie in your power and perswasion Your late attemptes by excommuncations and inuasion haue made open your meaning But he that sitteth in heauen shall laugh you to scorne the Lord him-selfe shall haue you in derision and all reasonable men shall thinke you ridiculous while by declaming generallie against heresie and the hurt that cometh thereby you labour to bring your falsehood into credit and the trueth into disdaine It is a great part of popish rhetoricke in these daies to enueie mightelie and eloquentlie against schisme heresie salsehood errors c. let the triall goe whether partie maie be iustlie charged with these crimes But Master Allen albeit he liketh that kinde of disputing and vseth it much him-selfe yet his purpose is in this treatise to examine the matter so throughly that men shal be able not onelie to vnderstand the trueth in their mindes but also to feele it with their handes Of which trueth he hath so great assurance that he sweareth as deepelie as anie Christian man can doe not onelie that he doubteth nothing but also that he can neuer mistrust anie point of that faith in which he was new borne baptized How wel he performeth this large promise as also of such moderation as he wil vse in touching the inmous persons of his aduersaries the booke following will declare wherein if auricular confession be so sensi blie prooued out of the holie scriptures as he maketh vaunt it shal be I my selfe will ioine with him that if it were ten times as burt henous as it seemeth to be no Christian man ought wilfully to omit it in paine of eter nall damnation but if the scriptures of God will afford no commaundement for it and the moste auncient Catholike Church on earth neuer thought it necessarilie to be required I maie reasonablie require that such as thought it needles before this treatise was written when they see as much as can be said for it to be disprooued they will acknowledge that without tyranie to mens consciences it cannot be imposed That Christ did forgiue sinnes not onelie by proper power and nature as he was God but also by ministerie as he was a man and as he was a Priest and head of the Church and that vpon that ground the priests power in remitting sinnes in the Church doth stand THE FIRST CHAP. ALLEN CHrist Iesus the Sonne of the liuing God being euerlastinglie of the same substance power and nature that his Father and the holie Ghost be of as being equall and one God with them both worketh mightelie all thinges in heauen and in eartb iointlie with them both and therefore by excellencie of power propertie of nature and by full and perfect dominion ouer his owne creature he remitteth mans sinnos by the same soueraingne right that they do Who being thus in all excellencie equall with God hath notwithstanding vouchsafed of his singular bountifullnes ioined with maruelous humilitis to abase him-selfe to the receiuing of our nature in which now he hath wrought the same thinges in earth by seruice sute and commission which before he onelie did by might and maiestie of his owne power procure Euen the selfe same God that by will and commaundement might most iustly both haue punished and pardoned whome he list of loue and wisdome infinite continuing alwaies in like excellencie as before became the minister of our reconcilement to God In which state he offereth sacrifice as a Priest for sinne he vseth sacramentes for the remission of sinne he praied to God his Father for the sinnefull he is made the head of the Church the Gouernour of the Church and the iudge of the Church All which functions perteine to our Sauiour in respect and consideration of his humane nature according vnto which power is giuen him of the Father thorugh the holie Ghost to practise the same FVLKE THat the ignorant be not ouertaken with the subtiltie of this Sophister which to deriue his popish absolution from the perso of our sauiour Christ plaieth on while the Nestorian another while the Eutichian It shal be good for them to remember what they are taught in their Creed concerning the person of Christ which is verie God and verie man consisting of two moste diuers natures so vnited into one person as they maie neither be deuided nor confounded without horrible blasphemie In which person ech nature so retaineth the essentiall proprieties of it selfe vnconfounded or destroied that he is but one person our Lord and sauiour Iesus Christ. Whereupon it followeth that some actions arepeculiar to his godhead some proper to his manhood and some proceeding iointlie from him as he is God and man As God he worketh euen as his Father he knoweth the th oughts of mens heartes he knoweth the last daie whereof he is ignorant as man Againe that he did eate drinke sleepe sorrow die it was proper to his humanitie Finallie that he preached the Gospell wrought miracles offered sacrifice for our sinnes rose againe c. and such like thinges he did as the Mediatour God and man And although by reason of the vnitie of the person that is often spoken of the whole person which is peculiar to either nature or of God which is proper to man or of man which is proper to God yet to preserue the essentiall properties of ech nature we must wiselie distinguish that which is proper vnto the diuinitie from that which is proper vnto the humanitie whereof we see Master Allen hath small regard while he affirmeth that all these functions of Christ whereby he offereth sacrifice as a Priest vseth sacramentes praied to God is made the head of the Church the gouernour of the Church and the iudge of the Church pertaine vnto him in respect and consideration of his humane nature For of the sacrifice ofhim-selfe the Apostle expresselie affirmeth that it was made by his eternall spirit which being offered by an inferior nature could not haue beene acceptable vnto God Heb. 9. 14. Also that Christ God and man is the head of the Church and aduanced in his humanitie to be iudge of the worlde it is in respect and consideration ofhis godhead vnto which his humanitie is vnited For as he is the image of the inuisible God by whome all thinges are created in heauen and earth he is the head of his bodie the Church Col. 1. 15. c. And the Apostle Phil. 2. 10. shewing his exaltation from the base shape of a Seruant to be the most honorable iudge of the world vsing the words of the Prophet Esaie cap. 45. in which God challengeth the iudgement to him selfe sheweth plainelie that Christ hath this honour in respect
FAVLTES ESCAPED IN THE first Booke Pag. 2. lin 37. Wylie 15. 11. vainelie 62. 21. renforce 64. 35. come 65. 8. the. 82. 8. runneth forth almost into ouer great 90. in the marg ad illumin 91. 4. soone 103. 28. immortall 111. 16. litterallie 118. 13. textes 33. as expreslie 124. 33. left 126. 13. one of other 130. 24. Spanianum 156. 32. without confusion 169. 26. brandes 177. 29. which with 184. 15. learned 186. 5. contra 206. 37. put out that 212. 8. hic 29. fiat hoc 215. 22. 〈◊〉 228. 1. is 237. 28. some 239. 17. haue 240. 30. a thought yet raueth 256. 8. dare not 274. 21. greatest fault 279. 31. Pacianus 280. 10. quotations 282 5. remaineth 299. read the 9. line before the 8. 309. 22 Ioh. 1. 321. 18. He faith 324. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 333. 8. de gen ad Lit. 336. 17. de Sp. S. 30. it is 36. not whatsoeuer 337. 36. suppose 351. 3. euer 352. in the marg cont 3. in margine 353. 37. is the. FAVLTES ESCAPED IN THE second booke Pa. 4. l. 2. to 7. 19. disorder 22. 9. euer 41. 12. to God 13. put out to 44. 33. to the. 49. 34. in the marg put out Allen. 37. where 103. 16. For. 114 8. Matthie 115. 1. thisplace 128. 23. the. 138. 2. expound 158. 6. grounded 173. 30. at hand 177. 24. strong ones 184. 2. by himselfe or by his saints and therefore remission ofsinnes by himselfe 186. 15. saide 201. 35. of mutuall offence 212. 5. but from 222. 1. as 〈◊〉 35. eordes 251. 36 Christes 311. 2. demurre 314. 3. that 〈◊〉 ters 17. Monkes 324. 28. delegaui 325. 33. put out 〈◊〉 334. 14. both 341. 1. halfe 35. deemed 342. 26. no 〈◊〉 345. 13. consortatiues 346. 33. false 350. 29. to the. 366. 27. 〈◊〉 30. I. 369 28. prostant 398. 15. mony 483. 30. put out not 521. 34 the marg 1. Ioh. 5. 529 2. and figures In the answere to Prarine p. put out the note in the marg TO THE READER AGainst this Popish and trayterous defense of the proude Censures giuen vpon Master Charkes and M. Hanmers bookes there hath bene alreadie set forth an answere conteining a maintenaunce of the creditte of those excellent Ministers and Elders of Gods Church which this malitious slaunderer hath sought to deface for staie of the simple reader till Master Charkes booke come forth There hath also bene printed and set forth by Doctor Fulke a briefe confutation of sundrie cauills and quarrel vttered by diuerse Papists against his writinges and speciallie by this Censurer in this his booke of defense whereby some parte of his vnhonest dealing is displayed to the discredite of this defender and to the shame of all Papists Neuerthelesse vnderstanding that Master Charke is not minded 〈◊〉 set forth his answere although he haue it 〈◊〉 written before this defender hath 〈◊〉 his wholl booke as he promiseth I haue thought it not amisse to write a shorte treatis for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the matters of doctrine especially which are in controuersie betweene M. Charke and the Censurer either omitting or but breiflie touching the points handled more at large in the two 〈◊〉 books Neither do I thinke M. Charkes staying to be misliked for diuerse causes First to auoyd confusion which might ensue if the defender should replic vpon his answere to the first parte before the confutation of the second parte were finished published Secondlie to auoyd misunderstanding for that diuerse pointes touched in the first parte may be more at large and otherwise handled in the latter parte vpon vew whereof Master Charke would change his answere And last of all lest replying and reioyning vpon the first parte might be occasion that the latter parte should neuer be handled For which reasons and some other perhaps better knowne vnto him-selfe indifferent readers may gather that it is expedient for him to staie vntill he see the wholl charge of the aduersarie and then more orderly and seasonablie he may publish his answere altogeather But now to the purpose taken inhande Three tall fellowes step forth vpon this bulwarke of defense the Corrector of the printe the setter forth of the booke and the graunde Captaine defender himselfe The Corrector commeth forth with his parte to stoppe a gappe or emptie place of a page with the reall 〈◊〉 of a nowne Heretike and that presuming as he 〈◊〉 without the authors knowledge to wise a man belike to be made priuie of such gramaticall trifles But whereas he weeneth that by reading his authors treatise a man shall see the moste points verified in Master Charke and his companions he is fouly beguiled For there is no wise man but seeth all the pointes of his newlie deuised declension throughly verified in his author and his Complices who hath shewed himselfe to be not in one but in all cases a proude maleperte Lyar and an obstinate seditious Atheist 〈◊〉 hereunto an impudent heretike and a malitious traytor And if any man be so simple that he cannot yet perfectlie be holde all these pointes in his owne treatise yet in the answeres and confutations thereof he that will not acknowledge them to be verified in him is like to proue a nowne of the same declension with him Thus the Owlie Corrector hauing shotte his bolte out of the bulwarke which by euil happe of a contrarie winde is caried backe against him selfe and his owne freinds retireth into a corner and doth no more appeare sauing that some notes of his negligence here and there bewraying him do declare that this was not the first time that he was ouerseene in his life that he should haue done his Master better seruise if he had imploied the time he spent in deuising this grammatication in being occupied more diligentlie about his office of Correction The setter forth of this booke hath the next place who writing an epistle to Master Charke minister as he termeth him and as he is indeede of the Church of god in England vnder colour of expostulation of some particuler matters concerning the person of M. Charke taketh occasion to be a setter forth not onelie of a seditious slaunderous booke against the Church but also of moste spitefull accusations against the prince and Magistrates of the realme a sin the particuler vew of this epistle shall moste manifestlie appeare First therefore he excuseth the long delaie of setting forth this defense of the Censure which hath beene deferred more moneths then the Censure was daies in writing vpon such cause as is easie to iudge and speciallie to Master Charke which for the moste parte is priuie to the same The meaning is that the author is so quicke a dispatcher of his matters partely by meanes of the weakenes of our cause partelie by singuler dexteritie of his owne wit and learning that hauing finished his Censure in eight or nine daies space at the moste he coulde also in like proportionable time haue
accomplished his defense if he had not by the cause pretended beene stayed or interrupted And here the author is much beholding to the setter forth that doth so cunninglie commende his facultie in expedition of such writings which in a Papist must needes be an argument of great and wonderfull promptnes both of wit learning though in a protestant it be gyrded at by the author him-selfe with a scorneful reproche of rashnes and ignorance But what is the cause trowe ye that hath stopped the force of these flowing streames of the authors eloquent style that in so many monethes he hath not fullfilled that course which without impediment he had beene able to haue dispatched almost in as fewe daies Euerie one sayth he may imagine how difficult a thing it is in England for a catholike man to write any booke where neyther libertie nor rest nor librarie nor conference nor being is permitted But I praie you sir if I may be so bolde to aske you what greater libertie rest lybrarie conference or being had your Catholike author in contriuing his Censure which he wanted in writing his defense Or rather what cause had he to complaine of the difficultie of the tymes which with such facultie in so shorte a tyme could performe so greate and waightie a peece of worke as by his owne iudgement who you know is nothing partial in his owne cause deserued to be called by the honorable name of a Censure vnles perhaps you thinke that either the Prince her Councell or the Cleargie of the realme should haue inuited him to write against the religion of God and the state of the realme with promis of libertie rest librarie and all other thinges the lacke whereof you pretend to haue hindred him And yet whatsoeuer you say in generall you confesse in particuler that all difficulties notwithstanding the author had soone after M. Charkes replie to his Censure in greate parte dispatched his defense readie for the printe but that by misaduenture your seditious printe was discouered and taken with many things printed or in printing concerning your defense of trueth and equitie against his falshoode and violent oppressions That you speake against M. Charkes falshoode it is lawful for you to renew if you can discouer any committed by him As for his violent oppressions being a man of noe power or authority out of the Church al may know how vainly you charge him or rather how lewdlie in speaking to him you speake of the lawful proceedings of the Prince and all her magistrates against Popish traytors terming them no bettet then violent oppressions when God knoweth you haue but in a few yet tasted of most iust condemnations and executions Oflike stomach and style it is that you say the same print was so long sought and much feared by him By like he thought that your printe being taken you had noe meane to publish your authors defense against him as though you haue not printers enow in places beyonde the sea How daungerous an vnknowne printe within the lande may be to the state if it be abused by seditious persons no man of meane vnderstanding can be ignorant and therefore meruell not if the magistrates haue beene carefull to search for it and diligentlie to suppresse it being founde But of this disturbance as you tell vs had like to haue come a greate losse for the author had almost giuen ouer his enterprise of defense not onely vpon these difficulties alleadged but also because Master Charkes replie did seeme sufficientlie to answere it selfe A pitifull case but how did the replie answere it selfe so sufficientlie He telleth vs it was so obscure in many places as moste men without the Censure might not vnderstande it Admit it were so is the obscuritie of a replie a sufficient answere to it selfe but why might not he that could not vnderstande it haue recourse to the Censure whereunto his replie had relation Then he answereth for a second reason It was so weake otherwise as it needed litle confutation of others This will best appeare by the authors doughtie defense when both are compared and examined together A third reason Campian the subiect of the Censure being fallen into Master Charkes handes it was looked for that according to reason and all his promisses he should be disputed withall openlie publikelie and freelie and so the matter without writing dispatched No man is so simple but he may well perceiue that while the wordes are directed to Master Charke they are ment against the Prince and state For who can trulie say that Master Charke had Campian in his handes or that he had made promis of open publike and free disputation whoe knew full well that he was not able to performe such promis if Campian had beene taken or that any man of our profession made any one such promis what meaneth then our setter forth by these his wordes and all your owne promises but thorough fayning of many promises to slaunder vs of many breaches of faith and much falshoode This is in Poperie and Knauerie a common practize to charge men with a promisse where none was that they maie ouercome modestie with impudencie or at left to make her blush beeing vniustlie accused of vnfaithfulnes But you will saie it was according to reason that Campian should haue beene so disputed withall if there had beene no promise at all Great reason forsooth that a well knowne vaine light runnagate person challengeing all the graue wise and learned of the land to disputation should so greatlie be regarded that his chalenge should be taken Nay that an arrant traytor furnished with faculties from the Pope the Queenes open enemie whose banner of defiance at the same time was spread within her Maiesties dominions should be admitted vnder colour of an open disputation to stir vp the vnconstant people to tumult and sedition as though the religion so long by lawe established were now brought into doubte and disceptation Finallie it was small reason in wise mens iudgement that such a lustie Champion as did first cast his gloue of defiance out of a secret corner after he hath beene long sought for is at length drawne out of the bench holl shoulde be set on the open stage to answere his challenge against al commers with no smal glory of his foole hardy attempt though he loose the daie and be vanquished in the cause Neuer the lesse it pleased them that had authoritie partelie to represse the insolencie of the proud peeuish challenger and his foolish fautors that made no small accounte of such a glorious Thraso pattelie to satisfie the weake mindes of such as might surmize of his bragges otherwise then they deserued there was a conference or disputation graunted wherin although Campians learning was well knowne before to all them that knew his bringing vp and studies yet was it then throughlie discouered to many others which conceiued better of him before then at that time shewed manefestlie to be in him For
besides his shamefull ignoraunce in the learned tongues which he sought most rediculoussie to couer and hide there appeared in him to all indifferent mens iudgements no more then is writen of Catiline the Romane whome he followed as well in practize as he resembled him in qualities Loquentiae multum sapientiae parum many words little wisdome impudent loquacity smale learning lesse iudgement But when it came to the hearing of the worlde sayth the setter forth how courteouslie you had vsed this learned man with torments The world here signifieth the secretrable of trayterous papists which giue themselues to no thing more then either to heare or inuent most impudent lies against religion al mainteyners professors of the same For to omitte the common phrase of this epistle wherewith all thinges that are done against the papists are imputed to M. Charke whom al reasonable men knowe to be one of the moste that may doe lest in these cases who is so farre from all sense or vnderstanding if he know what racking meaneth to beleeue that Campian endured such torments of racking whereof no signe could appeare in any part of his body either before the conference or after whereby he should be lesse hable to dispute as may be prooued by many hundred witnesses yet the glorious foole partly to boast of his sufferings partly to excuse his impatience and pusillanimity which for feare rather then feeling of the racke had discouered many of his friendes complices with his owne hand writting immediately after his racking was not ashamed on the day of the first conference to complayne of his grieuous torments vntil by testimony of Master Lieuetenant of the Tower and others that were present his impudencie was so restrained for that time that he thought it not best to bragge any more of his intollerable racking But in the conference say you he was handled without all indifferencie or law of reasoning How so I praie you The questiones were taken out of his owne booke in which he could not bevnprouided he had as great warning of them as any of his aduersaries he required no booke to furnish his memorie but it was prouided for him the opponents for the moste part dealt with him in lawfull syllogismes except when his owne lauish tongue discoursing against the lawe of reasoning enforced other manner of communication he was neither threatned nor reuiled though he gaue great occasion by his insolent speach gesture He was pressed with no authority but the booke was shewed him what other indifferencie or lawe of reasoning would you require But it is no maruell though you dare be bolde to quarrell at his handling in the conference when you are not ashamed to speake so impudently of his open trial and condemnation saying Finally you made him away by cruel death without any shew or shadow of particu lar crime committed by him against Prince or countrey This were more then barbarous immanitie if it were true but being false what is it but a most heynous and sedi tious slaunder whether you consider the matter or the persons against whome it is vttered Let vs begin with the persons Who made Campian away not M. Charke I am sure for all men would laugh at you if you so should say for immediatlie after you distinguish him from that action saying and that your selfe Master Charke followed him in person Then whoe can be vnderstoode to haue made him away by cruell death but they by whose authoritie in whose highe Courte by whose order he was brought to triall by whome euidence verdite and sentence was giuen and execution commaunded Now let vs waigh the matter was he not in dighted arraigned found guiltie atteinted iudg ed according to the ordinarie accustomable manner alwaies vsed in the case of hie rreason according to the lawes of the realme had he not leaue to answere for him selfe to challenge the Iurie or to vse any other plea that is permitted and allowed in such cases was there noe shewe or shadowe of particuler crime conteined in the inditement or in the euidence The worlde knoweth it must needes be the recordes are yet to be seene But there was nothing prooued perhaps you will say though much was alledged against him he was slaundered by them that gaue euidence against him he neuer did beare a trayterous or vndutifull minde against the Prince or the state Well admit for Campians sake that the credit of sworne witnesses and the wholl processe of so honourable a state as is of this lande must stand in suspense and not prooue so much as any shew or shadow of treason committed by him yet what shall his owne confession subscribed with his hande testifie concerning his treasonable affection against her Maiestie shall it not confirme the testimonie of such as gaue euidence against him prooue him moste manifestly to be guiltie of high treason his owne confession taken the first of August 1581. subscribed with his hand remaineth to be seene in which after certaine moste trayterous sentences were shewed him out of the bookes of Saunders and Bristow concerning the Bull of Pope Pius by which he tooke vpon him by his Antichristian sentence to depriue her Maiestie of her regalitie and to discharge her subiects of all obedience and dutie towardes her highnes it followeth in these wordes Edmund Campian being demaunded whether he woulde acknowledge the publishing of these things before recited by Saunders Bristow Allen to be wicked in the wholl or in any parte and whether he doth at this present acknowledge her Maiestie to be a true and lawful Queene or a pretensed Queene and depriued and in possession of her Crowne onelie de facto he answereth To the first that he medleth neither to nor fro and will not further answere but requireth that they may answere To the second he saith that this question dependeth vpon the fact of Pius Quintus whereof he is not to iudge and therefore refuseth further to answere Edmund Campian Answered and subscribed in the presence of Owin Hopton Iohn Hammonde Robert Beale Thomas Norton Here except you will say that it is no treason in a naturall borne subiect of this lande though he refuse to acknowledge the Queenes Maiestie to be a true and lawfull Queene and in possession of her Crowne de Iure and though he will not in one worde disalow them that speake write practize against her right her Crowne and dignitie and seeke by all meanes they can to depose and disposesse her of the same there was neuer traytor more clearlie discouered by the testimonie of others then Campian is displayed by his owne confession I neede not here note the faculties graunted by the present Pope Gregorie the 13. to Campian and his fellowe traytor Parsons which were taken about one of their complices immediatelie after Campians death in which they desire of the Pope the explication or meaning of the Bull of Pius Quintus giuen
forth against our Souereigne Lady Queene Elizabeth and yet because they doe most plainelie conuince him of the same horrible crime where of he was condemned I will here set downe the same as it is testified in the booke of execution of Papists for treason and not for religion Facultates concessae PP Roberto Personio Edmundo Campiano pro Anglia die 14. Aprilis 1580. PEtatur à summo domino nostro explicatio Bullae declaratoriae per Pium Quintum contra Elizabetham ei adhaerentes quam Catholici cupiunt intelligi hoc modo vt obliges semper illam haereticos Catholicos verò nullo modo obliget rebus sic siantibus sed tum demum quando publica eiusdem Bullae executio fieri poterit The answere to this and many other faculties by them required is this Has praedictas gratias concessit summus Pontifex patri Roberto Personio Edmundo Campià no in Angliam profecturis die 14. Aprilis 1580. praesente patre Oliuerio Manarco assistente Which is thus much in English Faculties to the two fathers Robert Persons and Edmund Campian for England the. 14. daie of Aprill 1580. LEt it be desired of our most holy Lord the explication of the Bull declaratory made by Pius the fift against Elizabeth and such as doe adhere vnto her which Bull the Catholikes desire to be vnderstood in this manner that the same Bull shall alwaies binde her and the heretikes but the Catholikes it shall by noe meanes binde as matters doe now stande but hereafter when publike execution of that Bull may bee made The highest Pontiff or Pope graunted these fore saide graces to father Robert Persons and Edmund Campian who are now to take their iourneyes into England the 14. day of Aprill 1580. Being present the father Oliuerius Manarcus assistant These things knowne considered it is euident that none but as honest a man as Campian could write that Campian was made away by cruell death without any shew or shadow of particuler crime committed by him against Prince or countrey or that Campian suffering for such horrible treason is a Martyr of Christ or that he and his fellowes died moste constant pure and innocent martyrs of their Lord and Master Iesus Christ. But for that Master Charke in person followed Campian to his execution as a conqueror of his aduersarie with bigge lookes sterne countenance proude wordes and merciles behauiour the author of the Censure was mooued to resume his answere as well for the honour of Christs martyr as for declaration of what value he is in reason learning and weight of argument by writing which is so feirce and violent upon Gods saints in death and torments so pompous in gate and speach vnto the people c. Here are many greeuous accusations but no proofe at all but the common reporte and that of trayterous Papists for no honest man will charge Master Charke with these crimes If he followed Campian it was not to insulte vpon his miserie but to exhort him to repentance What bigge lookes or stearne countenance he could put on in that time and case I cannot conceiue I hope all men that know his face will testifie that he looked then no otherwise then he doth at all times except commiseration of the damnable state of those obstinate traytors and heretikes did cause some tokens of heauines to appeare in his countenance What his proude wordes and mercilesse behauiour was in what pointe he shewed him selfe so feirce and violent vpon those trayterous heretikes in death and torments when you can declare but in three wordes you shall receiue an answere In the meane time you may not thinke that with any reasonable man it is sufficient for you to accuse him of pride in wordes and crueltie in behauiour when you bring no example nor proofe thereof And sure I am what wordes of his soeuer then vsed you may wrest to make a shewe of pride you are hable to alledge no action wherein you may declare his vnmercifulnes feircenes or violence As for his pompous gate and speach which you note in the last place I doubt not but all they which know him do laugh to heare you obiect it to him as also that you note him afterwarde to weare gorgeous apparrell and therein to haue excelled Campian His valew in reasoning learning and weight of arguments in writing what they are and how to be esteemed albeit his friendes know already yet I hope his aduersaries also shall in their conscience acknowledge especiallie after the smoke of your authors cauils be driuen away by the cleare light of trueth As for the disturbance thorough searchers and persecuters that you complaine of which caused your author to breake of in the middest is but a shift of descant For as your author whatsoeuer he be is still hidden so in his hiding place he may goe through if it please him or if he be weary of his enterprise he may take his ease without controlement For the extremitie of the time is not such though you whine neuer so much but if he can abstaine from vndermyning the state he may enioy more rest then an heretike deserueth to haue or then Papists in time and places of their gouernement wil afforde vnto true Catholikes But you saith the setter forth hauing gotten the starte before vs in the fauour of our Prince you follow the same with such vehemency and streightnes as you allow vs no one 〈◊〉 either of curtesie or humanity or of reasonable indifferency First marke how manerly he speaketh of our princes fauour as a matter not bestowed by iudgement but gotten by starte of that party that first steppeth vnto her Secondly how hyporbolically he describeth our vehemency no one iot of curtesie humanitic reasonable indifferencie Why sir who are you with whome we deal so streightly for whome we make search so diligently and punish so extreamely A wholl hundred of Papists and more be daylie in our sight dwell in their houses and suffer not so much as the lest ordinarie punishent which is appointed by law for them which come not to Church They be temporall men you will say Read the booke entituled the execution for treason c. and you shall finde a number of your cleargy men vsed with all curtesie and humanity that maie be shewed to men of a contrary religion It remaineth then that you are some rebeilious Iesuits or seminary priests which are sent hither by the Pope and his Antichristian adhaerents to alienate the princes subiects mindes yea to steal away their hearts from obedience of their Lawfull Soueraigne that you might by such meanes prepare a waie the soner for the publike execution of that blasphemous bul of Pius Quintus And would you wandring about with such intents and practises haue curtesie and gentlenes shewed you And yet when you are apprehended there is no duety of humanity denied you You haue the due triall of law and many times the deserued execution is forborne
that immediately follow in Luther declare that now he would doe worsse then before for now he would compell the poore husbandes to graunt their wiues that libertie or els would he tugge them by the lockes of the heade And can there be anie more shameles dealings c. If Luther declare his opinion in the words following to be as you say I must needes confes that this was a great ouersight in Master Charke at lest if it were not shameles dealing But if Luthers meaning by the whole scope of that place be plaine not to giue the wife licence to lie with an other man the band of wedlocke continuing but to compell such an insufficient husband to be deuorced from his wife because she cannot haue the lawfull remedie of incontinency by his companie do you not plaie the papist in graine thus to exclame against Master Charks false dealing As for the phrase of tugging by the Locks being a Dutch prouerb signifying no more but inforcement to vse your owne words hath that man anie conscience trow you that will vrge it to colour such vnhonest and false accusations Verily you had bene better to haue held your peace for now you are and shal be more hereafter discouered while you slaunder him vntruely to vse deceit and do vse false plaie your selfe and that most impudentlie Another example of his false dealing you bring in the controuersie Whether concupiscense in the regenerate without consent be sinne Where Master Chark being sore oppressed by many places of Saint Augustines auctoritie brought by the Censurer findeth no other reliefe of his credit with the reader but to forge a place of Saint Augustine to the contrarie in which to deceaue the reader he foisteth in this word sinne reciting his words thus Concupiscense is not so forgiuen in Baptisme that it is not sinne By which addition of the word sinne the matter seemeth to stand cleere on his side And this cannot be excused by ignorance but sheweth open and wilfull malice in the man Hasty iudgement Peraduenture he may excuse the addition by the Printers fault and so it was neither ignorance nor malice in him But take it moste hardly that Master Chark did purposely adde the word sinne vnto S. Augustines text which yet in a strict translation where there is no neede is not alowable if it be manifest that it is Saint Augustines meaning the addition of a word for explication of the sense is neither forging nor foisting But it is most impudentlying in you sir setter forth to say he findeth none other reliefe of his credit with the reader but to adde this word sinne to S. Augustines text when immediatly after this pretended forgerie he bringeth a most cleere place of Saint Augustine in which he doth expressly affirme that concupiseense euen in them that haue the spirit of God is sinne which argueth that he needed not at al to forge and foist hauing Saint Augustines words so euident on his side and that he findeth not onely another but a farr better reliefe of his credit with trueth then he could looke to gaine if he had bene disposed to vse false dealing Master Charkes wordes are these Saint Augustines place making it no sinne in the regenerate without consent is expounded by him-selfe afterward saying Concupis cense is not so forgiuen in Baptisme that it is not sinne but that it is not imputed as sinne For a cleere proofe hereof in another booke he saieth plainly it is sinne and so shewing the occasion of his saying citeth the place at large Cont. Iul. lib. 5. cap. 3. in which are these wordes Concupiscense of the flesh against which the good spirit lusteth is sinne because there is in it a disobedience against the regiment of the minde Where he saith for a cleerer proofe it is probable that the word sinne in the formet text was not added by him at lest wise not to deceaue for with the addition you will confesse it is as cleare as can be for his parte But if he added that word as being of the plaine meaning of Saint Augustine yet subiect to cauilling because it is not in him expressed to take awaie al colour of wrangling about the terme he ioyneth a moste cleere proofe of Saint Augustines iudgement plaine that concupiscense in the regenerate is sinne in his owne nature although because it is forgiuen it is not imputed to them as sinne So that the sense is manifest that concupiscense in the regenerate is sinne but sinne forgiuen or sinne not imputed And therefore although in some sense a man may truely say that sinne forgiuen as adulterie is no sinne or sinne not imputed is no sinne because the guiltines there of is remoued from the 〈◊〉 remission couering or not imputing through Gods mercy or satisfaction of Christ yet it followeth not there of that sinne of his owne nature is not damnable because mercy hath made it remissible or that sin forgiuen as adultety or such like cannot be properly called sinne because it is pardoned but the cleane contrary doth follow of necessity euen so is cōcupiscens which is forgiuen in the regenerate yet remaineth in them not as a vertue or an indifferent thing but as an euil thing as Augustine els where confesseth yet no sinne able to condemne them because it is not imputed to them or because it is pardoned in them Therefore except you wil say that sinne forgiuen or not imputed ceaseth to be sinne in his owne nature concupiscense in the regenerate is sin although forgiuen not imputed to them But of this matter inough at this time seing it is to be handled more at large hereafter and to be plainly shewed that Saint Augustine although in some sense he say that concupiscense is no sinne yet in another sense he doth as plainly affirme that it is sinne and such as would condemne vnto death if it were not satisfied by Christ and remitted vnto the regenerate Your third example of his purpose to deceaue is that not hauing at hand the Censure of Collen it selfe he reporteth diuerse vntruthes against the Iesuites out of Gotuisus concealing his name quoting onely Censura Coloniensis which he is sure cannot be seene as not to be had in England andomitting Canisius whom his author Gotuisus doth likewise cite which may be had and red of euery man This is but a bare surmise without any sufficient reason to vphold it of two he citeth one Ergo he seeketh to deceaue And as for the Censure of Collen it is now as common to be had in England as Canisius his Catechisme although when Master Chark did set forth his first booke it was not to be sold in the shops yet many had it in their studies And it seemeth he did chuse to cite that which was like to be of greater authoritie among the Papists as done by consent of a wholl Vniuersity But it toucheth him more neerely that where Gotuisus did not beelie the Iesuites sufficiently Master
Chark without blushing will falsifie his wordes to make them more odious as where Gotuisus his wordes are that the Iesuites say the scripture is as it were a nose of wax Master Chark saith their wordes are the scripture is a nose of wax This quarrell was obiected at the first by the Censurer and answered by M. Charke in his reply that protesting at the first not to set downe the very words but the meaning he hath nothing varied therfro For there can be no other sense of these words the scripture is a nose of wax and these The scripture is as a nose of wax seing no man would dreame of a transsubstantiation but al reasonable men vnderstand a semblans or likenes although the note of similitude as be not expressed Therefore there appeareth no purpose of deceauing by this citing out of Gotuisus when Paiua Andradius also excusing the same crime against Kemnitius confesseth that the fathers of Collen in a most apte similitude called it a nose of wax Pighius the leaden rule of the Lesbian building as Master Charke sheweth whose purpose is no more but to prooue that this is an vnapt and an vnworthie similitude and therfore hath offered no wrong to the Iesuits or Censurers of Collen nor vsed any fraude to deceiue the reader Now concerning his other behauiour towards M. Campian in the tower of London els where you mean not greatly to stand vpon because you cannot imagine what colour you should set vpon your slaunder and yet somewhat you must say or els burst for spight First his inciuility in wordes vttered against Campian in his booke These blasphemous heretiks and arrant traitors where they haue no authoritie and most bloodie butchers of gods saints where they haue power require to be reuerenced euen of them whome by all possible meanes they persecute and abuse so that there may not an vngentle word be spoken against them though it be not halfe so much as they deserue to heare but they complaine forsooth of greate inciuilitie vsed toward them But what the Ceusure noted the reply hath answered and therefore to a generall charge I neede make none other but a generall answere But that was nothing to the contemptuous vsage of so learned a man in open audience Surely learning goeth very low among the English Papists when Campian is made so learned a man and euen with lothsomnes so often commended for learning in whome as we acknowledge there was more learning then honesty so they which either were priuy to his studies or had trial of his knowledge must needes confes that there wasin him much more arrogancie then learning But what contemptuous vsage I pray you can you lay to Master Charks charge Barbarous threatening of that further crueltie which then he had in minde and now hath put in execution vppon him Is any man so simple to belecue this slaunder hath M. Chark put any crueltie or punishment of iustice either vpon Campian in execution or had he any more to do in Cam pians punishment then you or was any greater cause thereof then you nay verily I maie thinke probably that you or at lest wise I may saie boldly that some of his greatest friendes the Papists were a much greater cause of Campians death then any minister in England For they knowing his proude stomach arrogant disposition which no man could be ignorant of that was acquainted with Campian chose him for a meete instrument to be sent into England as a trumpet of sedition with his traiterous faculties which is in deede the right and true cause meritorious of such paine as he suffered not Master Charks crueltie or malice which if he had borne any against Campian he is neither of authoritic nor credit to procure execution thereof in such sorte as Campian was punished Therefore this slaunder of Barbarous threatning and contemptuous vsage is as the rest of your honest reportes which neither haue trueth nor likely hoode of trueth in them But of all other things it seemeth to you most ridiculous and fit for a stage which yet Master Charke thought was excellent and became him well and that was his often turning to the people and requesting them to reioyce and thanke the Lord that had giuen him such an argument which when it came forth prooued not worth three eggs in Maie for that Master Campian dispatched it often times in lesse then halfe three wordes Ofthis turning and requesting they that were present do saie you lie in your throate that anie such was vsed by Master Charke as also where you saie that when he was brought to a non plus and thereuppon the people beginning to departe he caused the dores to be shut and no man to be let out vntill they had ioyned with him in praier to thanke the Lord for his victorie c. But if it had bene true that he had requested such thankesgiuing of the people or caused the dore to be shut that the wholl multitude of hearers might ioyne with him in prayer is praier thankesgiuing ridiculous meete for a stage doth the vse of them prooue a comicall exercise to get applause of the people if the one or the other be so in the accompt of papists surely they are otherwise iudged of among true christians But it was the weaknes of the arguments you wilsay which were so lightly dissolued in lesse then halfe three words which made that preparation ridiculous A maruelous dexteritie of the Champion orels a ridiculous maruell of his parasite to saie that he could dispatch arguments often times and shew the infirmitie of them in one worde onelie so that all men might laugh at the opponents follie Of like credit it is that Master Charke in the end was brought to a non plus and thereupon the people began to depart when as manie as were present can testifie that the daie being farr spent Master Liuetenant signified that the time was past whereupon Master Charke gaue ouer and concluded with praier In which if anie Papist by reason the dore was shut by order of them which might commaunde it were constrained like an hypocrite to vaile his bonet or bow his knees against his minde yet none was so hardie to protest that he would not ioyne in praier with him but ouelie your grande Captaine Campian which yet was so courtcous a gentleman that he offered to ioyne hands with them in familiaritie with whome he refused to ioyne his tongue in praier A lack that treason and vaine glorie would not suffer him to liue for otherwise manie thinke he would haue beene tractable enough in Religion But it was to get applause of the people that Master Norton the rackmaster was at Master Charkes elbow to repeate and vrge his arguments for him to the purpose What els except we might be bold with your worship and tell you that you gable Master Norton was there as a diligent and faithfull writer as well of
causes that he alledgeth of setting downe his proud censure might seeme somewhat probable if he had set downe Master Charks replie also Which seeing he durst not doe he cannot boast that all thinges shal be made cleere by putting downe the censure onelie and ioyning thereto his owne defence thereof when there is more lacke of Master Charkes replie betweene then there would haue beene of his censure before it But he pleased himselfe as arrogant fooles doe commonly so much in his owne brood that he thought it was neuer sufficiently seene when all wise men were cloyed with it alreadie How well he performeth his brags of answering all the substance of Master Charkes replie the thing itselfe would shew to them that shall read both the treatises together without partialitie AGAINST THE DEFENSE THe defender in the last wordes of his answere to Master Charkes preface promising to omit nothing of substance which Master Charke saieth nor to let it passe without due examination doth neuerthelesse omit more then two whole leaues of Master Charkes replie vntouched and that in the verie beginning where there is more matter of substance to discouer the false and fraudulent dealing of him and his fellowe papistes then he might abide to examine meaning to continue his lewde purpose lest he should be driuen to discouer some part of his owne vnhonest practises And yet he is not ashamed to saie that the replier euen at the veric entrance lceseth his patience for that the papistes require short triall in disputation How so good sir for sooth because he asketh whoe is Campian or the seedemen that they shouldpresume to make so shorte worke in auowing the popishe religion which hath nothing but tyrainnie lyes hypocrisie and rebellion to defend it or restore it Which as it may be saied with trueth so it maie be saide with pacience without anie feare of the name of disputation in which Master Charke by Gods grace did quit him selfe so well against your Champion as if euer a proud hypocrite were apalled you may haue shame of your bragging Iesuite howsoeuer you would turne it ouer vnto Master Charke and saie that Campians quiet behauiour cooled him with shame Where contrariwise Campian being put out of his byas of loose and lauish talke by that order which was taken to haue his answeres written and read vnto him to be acknowledged of him was so amazed at the waight of Master Charkes arguments which he perceiued could not be answered with bare wordes wherein he vsed to applaude vnto him selfe before that he was enforced to a quiet behauiour much like a quarelling Ruffian which when other men are quiet is challenging of al men but when he seeth himselfe ouermacthed can learne to be quiet and calme enough As for the reproches iniuries and tormentes that you saie Campian tooke so patiently at Master Charkes handes al men may see how falselie you charge him with such matters as do nothing appertaine vnto him while vnder the name of Master Charke and the rest of his fellow Ministers you thinke you maie more largelie raile against the Prince and Magistrates for execution of iustice against Campian and his traiterous Complices Master Charke next to his question Who is Campian c. addeth another Where haue these disputers staied so long time But to this you make no answer and yet a matter of substance that after more then twentie yeares staying from challenge of disputation now you come forth on a soddaine as though you desired nothing so much as disputation To the third question you would seeme to answer What can they get by renewing the battelles so often and so latelie refused by their Captaines and fathers c Here because the names of Doctor Watson and Master Fecknam are noted in Master Charkes margent you conclude that nothing els is ment but that which is contained in the litle pamphlet of the conference in Wisbeach for which so much as concerneth Doctor Fulke answere is made by him-selfe in his confutation of papistes quarelles pag. 16. 17. 18. 19. c. but that Master Charke meaneth not onelie of that you might well enough perceiue by his wordes so often and so latelie refused That of Wisbeach was but one refusall whereas to the same persons and other of like quallitie the conference hath bene often offered and neuer accepted whether they were challenged priuatlie as in those Bishoppes houses where they remained daintie prisoners or els by commaundement from the Magistrats as at wisbeach more then once they were offered to haue conference if it had liked them to consent thereunto And who knoweth not the most solemne publique conference at Westminster in the first yeare ofher maiesties raigne with too too much shame of the popish prelacie giuen ouer and refused Yet you saie that at the verie same time of Wisbeach conference and both before since both you and they haue sued by all meanes possible to be admitted to a lawfull equall and free disputation either in Cambridge or anie place els that shall be appointed Name the pesons that sued and them to whome they sued and all the possible meanes you vsed and bring good proofe of your saying for any such disputation before the time of Campians challenge or els we must be faine to thinke and bolde to saie that you faine without colour and lie without measure Our offers and your refusal haue bene publike and notorious besides many priuat offers able to be prooued by sufficient testimonies I thinke not denied by the persons them selues while they liued You bring nothing but a seditious libell of Campian of all the possible meane of suit and yet you aske Master Charke what proceeding is this Where are now the lies and hypocrisie As though they were not manifest one your part As for tyrannie being an odious word you will say nothing nor turne it to vs againe Let racking quartering of those that offered disputation saie you be accounted scholasticall reasoning with you A pretie ieste for men wot well that Campian was racked for nothing els but for offering disputation and quartered for the same Although his owne letter conuinced him to conceale some secret which he promised neuer to vtter come racke come rope and much other plaine euidence prooued him to be a ranke traytor besides his answeres subscribed with his owne handes to these interrogatories Whether he doth acknowledge the traiterous writting of Saunders Bristow and Allen to be wicked in wholl or part and whether he doth acknowledge her Maiestie to be a true and lawfull Queene or a pretensed Queene and depriued c. To the first his answer was that he medleth not to nor fro and will not further answer To the second that this question dependeth vpon the fact of Pius Quintus whereof he is not to iudge and therefore refuseth further to answere Let this be the answere of a loyall subiect with you if Campian or any of his complices were racked and
testament Sozomenus in the place by you cited after he hath commended the Philosophie or contemplatiue life of the solitarie men in those daies hath these wordes of this excellent Philosophie was the beginner as some saie Elias the Prophet and Iohn Baptist so that it is not so absolute as you sett it downe but as some saie and it is of a Philosophicall studie and life in which if comparison be made with Popish Monkes for one thing which they haue like they haue three things vnlike or contrarie to the profession and practise of those auncient Monachi which might haue some resemblance with the manner of Elias life in some thinges and were more agree able to the example of the sonnes of the Prophets which were students in diuinitie as those olde Monks of the primitiue Church readie to serue in the place of teachers whensoeuer they were called That antiquity onely should let the Prophets to be examples of monasticall life it is your owne vaine collection and as vaine is your comparison of Adam to be a paterne of marted men Abel of sheepherdes Caine of husband men c. For M. Charke asketh what you are able to bring out of the word of God why Elias should after more then two thousand yeares be brough in for a patrone of friers which for so manie yeares could neuer be espied in the Church either of the Iewes or of the Christians As for the estate of maried men sheepherds husbandmen citizens Tentdwellers musitians smithes c. is either necessarie or otherwise commendable then by the examples of those auncients of which some in respect of their antiquitie are not to be followed at all as Cain and the rest of his cursed line who yet were inuenters of profitable artes by the gift of God and not by the worthines of the persons As for the slate of the Munkes and friers such as we striue about is neither necessarie nor profitable to the Church but a great infection and poison of the same Nowe whether Iohn Baptist were a president to Monkes whome Master Chark saith to haue beene an extraordinarie and perpetuall Nazarite whose example is not now laid vpon them that teach in the Church you answere that he doth wilfullie mistake the question for that you affirme not that such extraordinarie austeritie is laid vpon anie man of necessitie but that it is lawfull and maketh no sect when it is voluntarilie taken and vsed You do wilfullie omit the pith of Master Charkes argument who is not ignorant of your pretense of voluntarie but addeth that the seuerall offices of those that teach in the Church are expressed in the word of God and therefore there can be no new order of Ministers by anie title or voluntarie assumption but it is a suspitious sect howsoeuer seuerall persons maie as they see iust cause more or lesse prescribe vnto them-selues some extraordinarie austeritie of life for their priuate exercise or chastisment That Saint Iohns austeritie was for the moste parte voluntarie and not of necessitie of the vocation of a Nazarite it is fondlie proued of you by example of the superstitious sect of the Essenes described by Plinie and Iosephus of which Plinie speaketh verie little but Iosephus at large and in some points of austeritic noteth them to exceede any thing that we read in scripture of Saint Iohn Baptist as of their continuall exercise in labour of their handes their forbearing to spitte in the assemblies of men their forbearing to ease their bodies on the sabboth daie and such like superstitious toies Now the austeritie of Saint Iohn in that he did willinglie and not by compulsion vndergo it maie be called voluntarie otherwise in that it was appointed by the wisdome of god whose spirit directed him it was necessarie and especially for the forerunner of Christ to sing the dolefull song and to call the people to repentance and therefore not without presumption drawne into example by them that are neither led with the same spirit nor called to the same office and so no example nor platforme for the superstitious order of Monkes and friars albeit they alwares kept as great austeritie in deede as they professe in wordes But it is a wonderfull argument for your Monkes that the Nazarites did make a religious vow for their dedication to God as your religious people do also vse For it were somewhat that you saie if you could bring as good warrant for the vowes of your Popish votaries to be prescribed and accepted of God as you bring for the vow of the Nazarites otherwise it maie be said vnto you by God as he speaketh by the Prophet quis requisiuit c. who required these things at your handes which if it were said of those things which in some manner and to some end were required how iustlie maie it be spoken of these that in no manner nor to anie end are by God required at your handes but that Saint Iohn was a Monk of the new Testament and a patron of monasticall life although you confesse it to be more then you were bound to prooue so manie fathers as you name do testifie with one consent And what if he were an example followed of those Monkes that liued in moste of those fathers times is he therefore a patrone to your Popish Monkes of these late daies and new orders it will be more then hard for you to prooue that Now let vs consider your authorities which you affirme to testifie that Saint Iohn was a Monk of the new testament and a patterne of monasticall life First Gregorie Nazian orat de S. Bas. 1. hath this testimonie onelie he compareth Basill with Saint Iohn Baptist as resembling him in some thinges as he doth with Peter Paul Iohn the Euangelist and Stephan except you will saie theese were all Monkes Chrisostome in deed Hom. 1. in Mark. calleth Saint Iohn prince of the Monasticall life but not a Monke of the new testament as I haue shewed before in answer to your preface Neither doth Saint Ierome epist. ad Eustoch saie that Saint Iohn was a Monke and patterne of Monasticall life but speaking of the life of an Anachoret which liued by him-selfe alone in the wildernesse he saith huius vitae auctor Paulus illustrator Antonius vt ad superior a conscendam princeps Iohannes Baptista fuit Of this life Paul was the author Anthonie the beautifier and that I maie ascend higher the Prince or cheefe was Iohn Baptist. Where is Iohn Baptist the Monke or patterne of your Papisticall monkish life when they liued not in the wildernes but in cities populous townes not in caues and tents but in gorgious palaces Although Saint Iohn be the cheife of them that liued in the wildernes the same Ierome in the life of Paule the Heremite whome before he calleth the author of the Anachorites life hath these wordes Inter multos saepe dubitatum est à quo potissimùm monachorum eremus habitari
caepta 〈◊〉 quidam enim altiùs repetentes à beato Helia Iohanne sumpsere principium quorum Helias plus nobis videtur fuisse quà m Monachus Iohannes antè Prophetare caepisse quà m natus est alij autem in quam opinionem vulgus omne consentit asserunt Antonium huius propositi fuisse caput quod ex parte verum est It hath beene often douted among many by which of Monkes especiallie the wildernes began to be inhabited for some fetching the matter somewhat high haue taken the beginning of blesseá Elias and Ihon of which two Elias seemeth to vs to haue beene more then a Monke and Iohn to haue prophecied before he was borne but other into which opinion all the common sorte consenteth affirme that Antonie was the heade or cheefe of this purpose which is partlie true By these wordes it is euident that Saint Ierome counteth Helias and Ihon Baptist to be of a higher calling then that they could be called Monkes or patterns of Monasticall life ascribing the beginning of them rather to Paul and Antonie then to Helias and Iohn Baptist although they both for some time did lead an austere life in the wildernes the same doth your next author Cassianus Collat 18. Cap. 6. neither doth he once call Iohn Baptist a Monke or patterne of monasticall life but onelie sheweth that the Anachorites desiring to encounter openlie with the deuill feared not to pearse into the vast solitarie places of the wildernes ad imitationem scilicet Iohannis Baptistae to the imitation of Iohn Baptist who ledd his life in the wilderens so doe not your Popifh Monkes but lie in their warme nests in the cloysters What Sozomenus saith I haue shewed a little before Isodorus agreeth with Saint Ierome and Cassianus that the Anachorites which liue alone doe follow Elias and Iohn Baptist where as the Coenobites which liue in companies in that point more like your Monks do follow the Apostles As for Theoph. in c. 1. Lu. which you note next hath nothing sounding towards the name of monkor monastical life except you meane where he saith that Iohn liued in the wildernes as Elias did The last author you quote Nicephorus Hist. li. 8. c. 39. hath nothing more then the verie words of Sozomene that some men said that Elias was the beginner of that solitarie life of Christians some that Iohn Baptist. And among all your authors there is not one that saieth Iohn Baptist was a Monke of the newe Testament or a patern of such monasticall life as you defend that there should be so great consent there of that matter where of you bragge so much But names and quotations of Doctors are sufficient either for you that by all likeliehood neuer turned the bookes your selfe or for your sottish schollers that accept all your wordes without examination and triall After this followeth a vaine strife of words cōcerning the signification of this terme sect which of M. Charke is taken for a schisme as it is manifest by the example he bringeth of the 1. Cor. 1. The Censurer sometime taketh it in good part and sometime in euill sometime he maketh it equall with the terme of heresie sometime more particulare which contention seeing it is vnprofitable for the readers I do willinglie omit referring them that list to vnderstand ofit further to the comparison ofboth their writings where they shall finde that Master Charke in effect preuenteth all his cauillations by saying that the names of heresie and sect areoften times confounded which to prooue the Censurer busieth him-selfe in vaine It is somewhat materiall that he saith the Corinthians erred in a point of faith esteeming the vertue or power of Baptisme not to depend onelie of Christ but of the dignitie of the Baptizer And surelie there muste be some opinion touching faith where there is a schisme in the Church though there be not a dissent in the necessarie articles of faith but a schisme or sect may be where neither the generall doctrine nor the societie of the Church is forsaken as inthe example 1. Cor. 1. which is contrarie to the descriptionof the censure Sectaries are such as cut themselues of in opinion of religion from the general body of the Catholike Church for so did not the Corinth 1. Cor. 1. howsoeeur they had an opinion of some excellencie in the minister of Baptisme nor the 1. Cor. 11. 18. where Saint Paul likewise chargeth them with schismes when they came together to celebrate the communion which text being likewise quoted by M. Chark is cleane omittedby the defender But now you would cleare your sectes of Monkes and Fryers from the example of the Corinthian schismatikes by a fond similitude supposing our ministers should saie in a contrarie sense of libertie I will luie vnmaried after the order of my Lord of Canterburie I will bem aried after the platforme of my Lord of London I will haue two wiues together after the fashion of Master Archdeacon of Salisburie I will haue a wife and a wench after the custome of some other Archdeacon and preahcer Concerning your example if any Archdeacons be of such fashion as you describe them I would they had such punishment as to such fashions belongeth and if you be hable lawfullie to conuince them thereof I doubt not but they shal As for the other 2. of being maried vnmaried be matters in deede of Christian libertie that euerie minister may choose that which he findeth to be most expedient for him but if any minister should glorie of his continent life out of mariage by hauing my Lorde of Canterhurie for his patterne or of his chaste life in mariage by following my Lorde of Londons platforme he might iustlie be noted for a schismatike as Saint Paull doth the Corinthians when they saide I am of Paul I of Apollo I of Cephas and I of Christ. For the platforme order patterne or example of men in these cases must not be their warrant but the worde of God which text is plaine that in profession of Religion we may not be called by the names of men no nor by the name of Christ or Iesus therebie to make a diuision or seperation of our selues in excellencie from other to whome Iesus Christ is common as well as to our selues For euerie one of your sects termed of Benedict Augustine Frauncis Dominike Iesus c. although in the generall doctrine of Poperie they al agree yet haue they their seuerall opinions each one of the excellencie of thier orders and patrons which maketh a schisme and often times hath broken forth into great brawling and open contention It is too manifest that the Monkes commonlie hated the Fryars the Dominicans and Franciscans were at deadlie feede the not obseruants enuied the obseruants and they despised the children of their owne father Frauncis as bastardes in comparison of them selues and now the Iesuites are hated and inuicd of all other sects of Monkes and especiallie of Fryars whome they bring
he nor Doctor Folke do vse any hereticall sophistrie to condemne all for the ill life of a fewe or to condemne a lawfull calling for the misbehauiour of them that are in that vocation and much lesse for that men liue not so perfectlie in the same as they did in the primitiue Church about which hereticall consequences manie words are spent in vaine But now let vs heare what you answer to such difference as Master Charke maketh betweene the olde monkes and the newe His wordes you recite in this manner It is a plaine iniurie saith he to match those auncient Monkes of the primitiue Church with those of the popish orders for the olde Monkes liued in their house without vowes as studentes in diuinitie in Colledges they were holie painefull learned they laboured with their handes Their societies were nources of good learning and godlie life to furnish afterward the Church whereto being once called they ceased to be Monkes and left their monasteries Here first you charge him with bolde slaundering as though he said that all Monkes and sriers are vnlearned vnpainfull and vnholie whereas he saith not so knowing that some are vnlearned though neither all nor the moste part no not in this learned age manie friers also take paines in preaching which with more commendation and credit might holde their peace Yet fewe Monkes labour that waye As for labouring with the handes saie you though it be not necessarie to anie if they be occupied in greater matters yet their is no monasterie wherein some doe not exercise that function But Saint Augustine in his booke deopere 〈◊〉 holdeth it to be necessarie for all Monkes to labour and admitteth not the excuses of praying singing of Plalmes reading or preaching the word of God for anie to be priuiledged altogether from not labouring with his handes cap. 17. 18. That some in euerie monasterie with you are appointed to that function as you saie it is but a mockerie of the olde labour of Monkes and left for a shadow of some similitude with antiquitie and not taking awaie the difference set downe by Master Charke That manie Bishoppes are chosen out of monasteries and that Pius 5. chose 70. Bishoppes out of one order it is litle to the purpose For the olde monkes were not onelie chosen to the office of rich and statelie Bishoppes but to serue in the painefull office of teachers and pastours and were as Master Charke saith the nources of good learinng of the ministerie of the Church as your popish orders are not out of which they may not depart to serue the Church without a dispensation and capacitie as they call it Your iest of his poore benefice by London and the barbarres shoppe are both a like and the latter as well agreeth vnto him as the former seeing it is wel knowne he neuer had anie benefice rich or poore in London by London or farre from London The first difference you confesse to be the greatest although you speake of it last where you saie he affirmeth that the Monkes of the primitiue Church made no vowes the contrarie whereofyou prooue by manie testimonies of the auncient fathers and in the end you conclud against Master Charke asking what he will saie to this and much more that mighr be brought for this matter And maie he not blush saie yon to haue made In saing that the religion of the primitiue Church made no vowes so open and manifest alie But may not all modest Papists blush in your behalse seeing your owne forehead as it seemeth is hardned against shamefastnes for that you haue made so open and manifest a lie in saying that Master Charke affirmeth that the Monkes of the primitiue Church made no vowes whereas he saith not so but farre otherwise for these are his words they liued in their houses without any superstitious vowes Is it all one to saie they made no vowes to saie they made no superstitious vowes the like impudence you shew in charging him with cogging and foisting for placing his quotations of Saint Augustine in the margent right ouer against the matter of vowing which is both false and vniustlie laide to his charge the Printer had set them a litle wrie For the quotation beginneth right ouer against the name of Austen in the leafe or text although the taile of it extende to the line in which he speaketh of vowes The places that are quoted for vowes are speciallie against the mariage of them that haue vowed sole life yet haue we good testimonie of the fathers that such as are not able to keepe those vowes rashlie made ought to betake them-selues to the lawfull remedie of mariage Epiphanius Cat. Apostolic Haer. 61. Hieronymus ad Demetriadem c. Where M. Charke denieth Saint Augustine to be a Frier First you cauill which Austen he meaneth the Bishoppe of Hippone or of Canterburie and both you say were Monks and the later you make our first Apostle in England yet was he an Apostle from Gregorie not from Christ. What Doctor Fulke hath written of him he answereth in his confutation of Popish quarrels Pag. 43. But how prooue you that the elder Austen was a Monke as monkes were termed in his time you cite Ep. 89. tract 1. de com vita clericorum and Possidius or Possidonius in his life To the first quotation I answere that Saint Augustine in that epistle confesseth not that he was a Monke onelie he acknowledgeth that he once solde all that he had and gaue it to the poore But that he had priuate possession when he was Bishoppe Possidonius doth plainlie declare The second quotation is of no worke of Saint Augustines but of I know not what bable rule of some impudent counterfeiter whose style is as like Augustines as an asse is like a Lyon To the third I answere that the writer alledged saith that Austine when he was made prieste or elder of the Church of Hippo did institute a colledge or monasterie of studentes with in the Church which were especiallie appointed to serue afterward in the Church as they also that were afterwarde brought vp in other monasteries set vp by his schollers But neuertheles he neither calleth Augustine nor any of his schollers Monkes For these Monasteries by Augustine him-selfe are called diuersoria hostelles or Innes Demoribus eccl Cath. lib. 1. cap. 33. being distincte from Monkes which in those daies were onelie Anachorets or Caenobites both liuing in the wildernes whereas these liued within cities yet in streighter discipline then the common sorte vnder the gouernement of a verie Godly and excellent learned man in Christian charitie holines and libertie not in superstitious vowes are called by Augustine none otherwise but a laudable kinde of Christianes And all this maketh him neither Monke nor Frier You say he was not called so in English but in latine Frater and Monachus For the name of Monachus I haue answered that you are not hable to prooue it by authenticall author
such like being Papistes might write eleuen score lies against Luther Zuinglius Oecolampadius Caluine Beza and the rest Concerning the reporte of Prateolus that Luther should be begotten of a deuill you saie Master Charke greatlie bewraieth his fasehoode and after you haue set downe the reporte of Prateolus vnperfectlie you praise his modestie and blame the bolde impudencie of William Charke in saying he auoucheth that which he auoucheth not But where doth William Charke faie that Prateolus doth auouch it his wordes are of a slaunder laid downe against Martin Luther how he was begotten of a deuill which you confesse that Prateolus reporteth as he doth in deede out of Coclaeus and Cocleus out of other mens writings whether Prateolus him-selfe doth credit it altogether or no it skilleth not this slaunder among other he laieth downe against Luther and fauoureth the reporte of other so farre that he woulde haue it seeme credible but as for saying that he auoucheth it Master Chark speaketh not one whit Let the Reader therefore iudge who bewraieth his falsehood in this point and vppon whome the reproch of bolde impudencie maie iustlie be laid But Master Charke sheweth as great fullie as impudencie if we beleeue you in making mention of such a foule matter whereupon at the least remaineth a shamefull suspicion In deede it is the triumph of slaunderers if they cannot kill with their stroke yet to leaue a scarre where the wound is healed Although the slaunder of a matter so impossible leaueth no suspition in anie mans head that hath anie witte or vnderstanding in it but discouereth the malice and follie of the inuenters of such monstrous slaunders yet you affirme that the probabilitie of the thing seemeth to haue beene so great in those daies as Erasmus beleeued it But here you go asfarre beyond the modestie of your author Prateolus as ere while you charged Master Charke to be runne For his wordes are these Adhans historiam alludere alicubi Erasmum non est à vero alienum to this story it is not altogether vnlikelie or straunge from the trueth that Erasmus doth in some place allude he saith not that Erasmus did beleeue it No he is not able to prooue that Erasmus did obiect it For the speech of Erasmus is onelie of certaine vncleane speeches where with he complaineth that he was vniustlie charged by Luther in that vnmodest epistle which you translate drunken Now saie you if Master Charke will stand vpon the deniall not so much of the fact as of the nature of the thing it selfe as impossible that spirites can so abuse lewd women that will consent to their lustes you will oppose against him S. Augustine which saith it were impudencie to denie it and Ludouicus viues vpon the same place Sir Cauiller the thing in question is not whether foule spirites maie abuse the bodies of lewd women for beside the authoritie of Saint Augustine who standeth moste vpon testimonies we haue the testimonie of Wierus a man verie expert in such matters who maketh reporte of diuers Nunnes so abused by vncleane spirites yea of diuers Nunneries in which manie were so dealt with all and namelie a notable nunnerie in the borders of the prouince of Collene where the deuill in the likenes of a dogge in the daie time was seene to fall vppon them in moste beastlie manner about 26. yeares agoe Also the Nunnerie of Nazareth in Collen Anno 1564. where the Nunnes in most filthie manner suffered the same illusion oftentimes in the presence and sight of manie But the matter in controuersie is whether Luther were begotten of a Deuill in deniall where of Master Chatke doth stand becuase it is impossible that although the Deuill should abuse the bodie of a woman yet that a man should be borne or gotten by such illusion which neither Augustine affirmeth nor Ludouicus Viues And if you dare auouch that the deuill can begette a childe as it seemeth you would draw your argument to prooue the probabilitie of Luthers conception by such deuillish abusement we will be bolde to saie that you are worthie to be whipt out of the Schooles of Philosophers Phisitians and Diuines if you dare not abide by it to what end do you oppose Saint Augustine and Ludouicus Viues against him Touching the matter of the thunderbolte you saie Master Charke denieth it stoutlie confidentlie and I knowe not how But in trueth Master Charke saith that it is of it selfe vncredible that you saie Luther was stroken with a thunderbolte which would haue taken awaie life or lefte a marke behinde it Neuertheles you williustifie your saying by testimonie of Malancthon who saith he suffeted great terrors that yeare in which he lost his com panion slaine I know not by what chaunce and by Luthers owne confession that he was called by terrours from heauen and for feare of death vowed to be a frier yet neither of these doe prooue either that he was ouerthrowne or striken with a thunderbolte The reportes of Lindane Prateolus and such like you cannot enforce vs to beleeue who sought by all meanes to deface both the person and doctrine of Luther But whether he were ouerthrowne by lightning as Prateolus saith or by feare seeing his fellow flaine by the same and so vowed a superstitious vow it is not greatlie materiall That the deuill cried out of his mouth we hold it still for a verie fable vntill you bring better proofe then the report of Luthers aduersaries Lindane and his fellowes Your ribaudrie termes of Luther coping with a nunne and your blasphemous scoffing ofhis lying with a nunne in the Lord I cōmit to the vengeance of him that is the instituter of holie matrimonie That many of the auncient fathers iudged it vnlawfull for vowed persons to marrie it is not denied of our parte but then it is to be vnderstood of them which maried not for necessitie but for wantones and for such as made vowes aduisedly not rashlie voluntarilie and not by compulsion For of them that could not conteine after they had vowed virginitie I haue shewed before the plaine testimonies of Saint Hierome and Epiphanius Now are we come to those nine articles of Doctrine with which you haue charged Luther how iustlie we shall see by by The first is that you affirmed Luther to teach that there is no sinne but incredulitie neither can a man damne him-selfe doe what mischeefe he can except he will refuse to beleeue To this Master Hanmer answereth that all sinnes proceade of the roote of incredulitie as al good workes from the roote of faith but this you will not vnderstand and bring in a contradiction of Master Charkes which doth pronounce that in wordes and matter you reporte an open vntruth And so you doe for any thing that you bring in your defense For Luther saieth not absolutely but in comparison that there is no sinne but vnbeleefe as our sauiour Christ sayth to the Pharisies if you were blinde you should
goeing into an other countrie be married to an other man Such counsell I gaue euen them when as yet the feare of Antichrist did holde me But now my minde were to giue farre other counsell and to such a husband which should with such craft beguile a woman I would laie hand on his lockes and pull him vehementlie as the prouerb is And the same I iudge of the woman although it be more rare then in men For it auaileth not anie thing to defraud the neighbour in such waightie causes as touch the bodie substance credit and happines it were needfull that he should be commaunded no tably to pay for such deceitfulnes Thus farre Luthers wordes truelie translated How say you now is not this sufficient to declare Luthers minde that he would reuoke his former counsell of priuie contract or flying awaie and compell the partie to an open diuorse But if anie man thinke this is not sufficient you shall heare what he writeth further concerning this matter while he rehearseth how many causes in Poperie are allowed for diuorces Decima quarta est quam supra recensui simaritus vxor impotentes euirati atque haec estynica inter octodecim illas causas que admatrimonium dissipandum sufficit quanquam ipsa 〈◊〉 obstringatur legibus priusquam tyranni earn permittant The fourteenth cause is that which I rehearsed before if the husband and wife be impotent and vnapt for generation and this is the onelie cause among these eighteene cause which is sufficient to dissolue the matrimonie although the same also be bound with many conditions before the tyrantes will permit it And yet againe speaking of those causes which he him-selfe allowed for diuorcement he saieth Quae nune personae segregari queant intersese videbimus Tres ergo causas noui ob quas diuortium fieri potest prima quae iam in superioribus recitataest cùm marious vxor impotentes ad rem fuerint membrorum aut naturae causa c. Now what persons may be separated one from an other we will see Three causes I knowe for which there may be diuorce The first when the husband and the wife are impotent and vnhable for the matter through cause of their members or nature howsoeuer that may be of which sufficient hath beene spoken Is not all this as plaine as can be that Lutherspeaketh of a diuorce necessarie to be had in that case As also in the same sermon afterward he teacheth that all diuorces are to be made by publike authoritie and with the knowledge and consent both of the common wealth of the Church or of one of them at the least Therefore that I maie rightlie vse your owne wordes against you which you doe vniustlie abuse against M. Charke Can this be excused from extreame impudencie and most willfull falsehoode against your owne conscience Defend this if you can with all the helpes and deuises of your fellowes er els let the reader by this one point of open dishonestie discouered iudge of the rest of your dealings and slaunderings of vs without all conscience both in your sermons and in your bookes c. Now whether he were a Papist or noe when he gaue this first counsell to such as heard shrift you moue the question and conclude against his plaine wordes as it seemeth that he was none Well let vs heare your reasons First you saie that many yeares after his conuersion he sloode in feare of the Pope and said nothing against conâ—ession How many yeares I beseech you For as soone as the Pope excommunicated him and condemned his writings to be burned at Rome he did open lie burne the Popes Canon law at Wittemberge which was Anno Dom. 1520. before that time he acknowledged the Popes authoritie and humblie submitted him-selfe to his Censure if either the grosse abuse of pardons might haue beene reformed or he him selfe conuinced by the scriptures to haue erred But from that time he neuer stoode in awe of the Pope as that open fact declared and there had passed but foure yeares before since he first began to inueigh against the abuse of pardons Your second reason is that it appeareth evidentlie by his wholl discourse in the place alledged where he saith plainlie beside other things that the Papists did seeke advantage against him for this opinion of his and to that ende did misreporte his wordes The wholl discouse I haue set downe that you may see how euidentlie it appeareth For that the Papists did slaunder him it is graunted but therebie it doth not euidentlie appeare that Luther at that time was no Papist For doth not one Papist slaunder another sometime was there not spight and malice betweene friers of other orders against them of that order that Luther was of especially the Dominicans which might cause them to peruert his words meaning As for other things beside and seeking aduantage against him for this opinion you sucked out of your fingers ends for in the wholl discourse there is no such matter Your third reason is that Papists teach no such doctrine but cleane contrarie as though some Papists haue not their priuate opinions which are not generallie receiued Neither is there any thing in substance but in circumstance contrary to the Papists doctrine in that counsell of Luthers For the Papists in the case of impotencie or frigiditie doe graunt a diuorce which Luther thought without triall of law might be made by priuate consent or in case of the impotent persons dislent by voluntarie departing of the other so that this reason disproueth him not to haue beene a Papist at that time any more then the rest The fourth reason is that putting such a thing in writing he should haue beene resisted presentlie if he had bene of your Church But that followeth not especiallie if the writing were not publike but priuate to a fewe gostlie fathers perhaps of his owne order and house and his aduise or opinion onelie not a matter obstinatelie defended And yet it appeareth that is was notwel brooked wheÌ„ his enimies had an inkeling of it Your last reason is that it appeareth by his owne wordes and the computation of time when he wrote this booke that he had left Papistrie a good while before In deede if you can conuince vs by his owne wordes that he had left Papistrie when he gaue this counsell you haue some aduantage against Master Charke but that is yet to come As for the computation of time in which he wrote this sermon of Matrimonie wil not helpe you to prooue that he was no Papist when he wrote the shrifte aduise For he speaketh of it as of matter that was verie olde olim he saieth long agoe For the booke was written much about the time of his mariage which was fiue yeare after his open renouncing of the Pope before which time he was a Papist though in some points he began to espie the grosse errors of Papistrie But as
marrie The third doctrine touching the necessitie of a wife to euerieman to be as great as the necessitie of eating drinking or sleepeing which importeth that he maie not welmisse her 24. houres together you maruaile Master Charke was not ashamed to maintaine But neither Luther nor Charke do maintaine it necessarie for euerie man to haue a wife but onelie for them that haue not the gift of continencie which cannot auoide sinne without mariage as the text of the Apostle is manifest Where you inferre that then he maie not well misse her 24. houres together it is a fond conclusion For the like necessitie of thinges bindeth not to the like often vse of the same thinges As if I should saie meate and drinke is as necessarie for the life of man as breathing it followeth not that a man must eate and drinke euerie moment because he must breath euerie moment Correction we saie commonlie is as necessarie for children as meat and drinke and yet I trow it followeth not that children must of necessity be beaten once in 24. hours Letting of blood or sweating for some bodies is as necessarie as sleepe therefore must they be lette blood and sweate allwaies once in 24. houres But you maruaile especiallie if that sentence of Luthers be added to the former serm De matrim Verum est profectò it is true verilie that he must needes be a baud that flieth matrimonie seeing God hath created man woman for copulation and 〈◊〉 sake This you saie is a wise reason of a 〈◊〉 Apostata for euerie man must either couple and marie by this or be a baude But in trueth we maie saie this is a slaunderous conclusion of an impudent lier For Luther in the place quoted speaketh against them that differ and flie mariage that they might liue more licentiouslie in whoredome as his wordes going before are plaine Plerique ideo matrimonium differunt fugiunt quòd primùm satis ad tempus aliquod vsque scortari velint suamque explere voluptatem 〈◊〉 vbi saturi fuerint honestatise item dedere sed bonae verba quaeso c. Manie do therefore differ and flie mariage because they will first for a certaine time committe whordome inough and take their pleasure to the full afterward when they are glutted they will giue them-selues to honestie also but suft I praie you c. and so proceedeth to inueigh against such purposes and at length commeth to these wordes cited by our defender and other that follow Verum profectò est eum lenonem esse oportere quimatrimonium fugiat quî aliter eueniret posteaquam marem foeminam commixtionis multiplicationis causa condidit At quare scortatio matrimonij statu non anteuertitur Nam vbi praecipua gratia non excipiat necessum est naturam feruere multiplicaeri Si â—d in matrimonio non contingat vbi aliâs quà m in fornicatione aut peioribus peccatis accideret It is true in deed that he must needes be a baude which flieth matrimonie And how can it be otherwise seing he hath created man and woman for copulation and multiplications sake But whie is not whordome preuented by the state of mariage For where speciall grace doth not except a man nature must needes boile and be multiplied if that happen not in mariage where should it happen els but in fornication or worse sinnes Yea the saying which I cited in answer to the next point before doth follow necideo coelibatum c. neither doe I reiect continencie or virgininitie let euerie man vse his gift as he hath receiued it of God All which I suppose is manifest to declare that Luther compted not all men baudes that liued vnmaried but those onelie that had not the gift of continencie and which by flying holie mariage fall into greeuous sinnes of fornication and vncleannes The last Doctrine that al Chrstians are as holie as iust as the mother of god as the Apostles were if it be vnderstood as Luther meaneth containeth no absurditie neither is it any badge of intollerable pride For Luther meaneth of the holines iustice of Christ communicated vnto vs by which we are made holy iust as Christ is made equallie to al Christians iustice and holienes not of the effects of this grace which worketh inequallity of holines righteousnes as the image of God is more or lesse restored in euerie one And this his words declare Quia verò renati sumus filij atque haeredes Dei pari sumus in dignitate honore D. Paulo Petro. S. deiparae virgini ac diuis omnibus Habemus enim eundem the saurum à Deo bonaque omnia tam largiter quà m ipsi Siquidem ipsosnon secus atque nos renasci oportuit quare non plus habent quà m quilibet reliqui Christiani Because we are borne againe the sonnes and heires of God we are equall in dignitie and honour to Saint Paul Saint Peter to the virgine mother of God and to all the Saints For we haue the same treasure of God and all good thinges as largelie as they For that was necessarie for them also no lesse then vs to be borne againe Therefore they haue no more then all other Christians By these wordes it is euident that Luther maketh this equallitie in the grace of regeneration the common effects thereof not in the speciall gifts that follow according to the seueral measure of grace that God giueth to euerie one and therefore it is out of season to dispute here of the degrees of rewardes or the excellencie of Gods giftes in some more then other no nor of the merit of good works except you wil saie that the grace of regeneration is giuen according to merit Although the terme of merit vsed often times in the Fathers which you doe gladlie vsurpe signifieth not the desert of good workes as the Papists take it but the praise commendation or honor of vertue and sometimes vertue and good deedes themselues Finallie to compare with the Apostles and the virgine Marie in holines and righteousnes of life it is neither the meaning of Luther nor of the Ministers of England but to acknowledge that we haue receiued the like pretious faith in the righteousnes of our God and Sauiour Iesus Christ by which we are made holy righteous in him Saint Peter will warrant vs. 2. Pet. 1. For the ligittimation of Dyonise falselie surnamed the Areopagite you would faine bring the authoritie of generall Councelles but your note booke deceiued you For you quote Concil Const. Act. 4. can 2. both 〈◊〉 your page and in your correction but in deede 〈◊〉 which is saide of him is in Concil Constantinopol 6. 〈◊〉 vndecima Which was holden almoste 700. yeares after Christ where oue Sophronius Patriarch of 〈◊〉 writing to the Councell maketh mention Dionysius the Areopagite and his writtings as he supposed not counterfeit But where lay the bookes of Dionyse for 600.
But in what asses eares should it so sound when euerie reasonable man must needes vnderstand that there be offences against the Prince and common wealth as fellonie misprision of treason Mayhem and such like which yet are not offences in so a high a degree as treason is The thing in question you confesse that there is something that doth repugne the law of God and yet is no sinne at all if it be without will or consent as the first motions of concupiscence are Another cauill you haue that his authors haue not onelie these wordes but somewhat more as when they saie Sinne is not whatsoeuer repugneth the law of God but c. If Master Chark had denied the rest it were somewhat that you saie but seeing you graunt they haue all that he rehearseth he is without blame and whether it be part of a definition it skilleth not seeing it is part of their affirmation A third cauill is that he chaungeth the place of the negatiue which in framing propositions altereth often the sense as for peccatum est non quicquid he saith non est peccatum quicquid If Master Charkes chaunging in this place did alter the sense you would haue tolde vs of it but seeing the sense is all one the chaunge is no fault Lastlie for repugneth the law of God you say he putteth it is against the worde of God But here by your leaue you make a peece of a lie for in his first answere he saith it repugneth the law of God which when he repeateth in his replie it is against the worde of God it can haue none other sense then before That you will admit as much as the Iesuites in word or sence haue vttered it is as much as Master Charke requireth Now to the obiection against the Iesuites definition made by Master Charke you saie that to prooue that sinne is no act he obiecteth that iniustice is a sinne and yet no act He were a poore sophister that could not espie your paultrie in this place Master Charke doth not prooue that sinne generallie taken is no act but he affirmeth that there is some sinne which is not an act And therefore the Iesuites in their definition haue not geuen the right Genus or materiall cause of sinne Now for iniustice to passe ouer your knauish example of the execution of Campian and his fellowes so innocent and learned men by great iniustice You take vpon you to teach Master Charke an high point of learning Of the difference betweene a vice that is an habite and a sinne that is a singuler fact which perhapps you weene he learned not before yet euerie young sophister in Cambridge knoweth it well enough But Master Charke speaketh of generall iniustice as his wordes are plaine which is a sinne in not doing the thing commaunded because it is a manifest transgression of the lawe of God whoe commaundeth the wholl and euerie part to be fullfilled and is the sinne of omission which you make the second obiection But euerie omission you saie includeth an act which is a grosse absurditie meaning such an act as is sinne For I maie doe a good act while I omit a better the omission of a better act is sinne the doing of a good act is no sinne To tith mint and anise is a good act of it selfe for it was commaunded by God must not be omitted yet was it sinne to omit mer cie and iustice as the wordes of Christ are plaine this you ought to doe and not to omit the other The examples you bring of one resoluing not to goe to Church Helie determining not to punish his children and the watchmen not to sound the trumpet where the determination and resolution as the cause is the principall part of the sinne are foolish For there maie be omission which is sinne where there is no resolution and determination to the contrarie of that which should be done but negligence or forgetfullnes yea there is omission which is sinne where there is no power in vs to performe that should be done as in all the reprobate and vnregenerate and in the regenerate also in part which neither doe nor can in this life loue God and their neighbour in such perfection as the lawe of God requireth There is omission also through ignorance of Godes lawe which is sinne and deserueth stripes and yet ignorance the cause thereof is no act but the lacke of knowledge But being ouercome by scripture and reason you flie to the authoritie of the auncient fathers and first you quote Chrysost. Homil. 16. in Epist. ad Eph. moste impudentlie where by scriptures reason examples he teacheth the cleane contrarie that omission of dutie is sinne though there be no act to the contrary as when Christ shall saie I was an hungred c. and concludeth Nihilenim boni facere hoc ipsum est malum facere to doe no good euen that is to doe euill or to sinne The like he saieth Hom. de virtut vitiis Satis est igitur mali hoc ipsum nihil fecisse boni Euen this is euill inough to haue done noe good Ambrose hom 18 hath nothing to the purpose or if you meane 81. which is translated out of Basils hom which you quote nexte he hath nothing to your purpose but rather against it For vpon the wordes of Christ Math. 25. I was an hungred and you gaue me not to eat he writeth thus Neque enim in his verbis qui aliena inuasit arguitur sed is qui non communiter vsus est iis que habuit condemnatur For in these wordes he is not reprooued which hath laid bolde vpon other mens goodes but he which hath not communicated those thinges which he had is condem ned Basills wordes in Greek are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the extorcioner is not there accused but he that doth not communicate is condemned Last of all you charge vs with that definition of Saint Augustine contra Faust. lib. 22. cap. 27. Peccatum est factum vel c. Sinne is something done or said or coueted against the eternall lawe But if this were a perfect definitiō what needed the Iesuites to frame another according to whose definition this of Saint Augustine is larger then the word defined and in respect of the sinne of omission it is streighter then the terme of sinne yet it serued Saint Augustine for his purpose in hand concerning the facts of the Patriarches mentioned in the scripture which were to be praised and which to be dispraised As for Ambrose in the place by you quoted lib. de paradiso cap. 8. hath another definition then Augustine and a more perfect taken out of Saint Iohn Quidest enim peccatum saith he nisi praeuaricatio legis diuinae coelestium inobedientia praeceptorum For what is sin but the transgression of the lawe of God and a disobedience of the heauenlie commaundements This definition of Ambrose is perfect and maketh
wher of the high Priest was a figure Neither was the citie of refuge appointed onelie for the triall of the slaughter whether it were willinglie or vnwillinglie committed as you saie but also for a kinde of punishment and detestation of manslaughter so that if the sleaer were found out of the City before the death of the high Priest the auenger of blood might kill him and not be charged with his blood Where you refuse the mysterie of Christes death in the death of the high Priest and flie to the fantasies of the Iewes you declare that you care not what you bring so you maie obtaine your purpose But Chri stian diuines as Cyrillus Maximus and others of the death of the high priest in that place gather deliuerance by the death of Christ. Saint Ambrose also is cleere that the high Priest in this place signifieth Iesus Christ and confuteth the politike reasons by you rehearsed out of R. Mose and R. Leui for that in causis paribus there was impar euentus In equal causes vnequall end For the high Priest might die saith he the next daie after the manslaier hath taken his refuge Againe he addeth that Christ is exors omnium voluntariorum accidentium delictorum void of all offences voluntarie and chaunceable by which he acknowledgeth vnwilling manslaughter to be an offence Saint Ierome also Dialog aduers. Pel. lib. 1. is plaine in that wholl case and sinne of ignorance and that he which is fled to the citie must tarie vntill the high Priest die that is vntill he be redeemed by the blood of our Sauiour Beda also vpon this place by his allegorie sheweth how he thought of that kinde of sinne Also Theodoretus in lib. Num. quaest 51. declareth both the mysterie of the high Priests death and sheweth that such vnwilling manslaughter is sinne Cur ad obitum Pontificis praescribet eireditum qui nolens interfecit Qnia 〈◊〉 Pontificis secundùm ordinem Melchisedech erat humani peccati solutio Whte vntill the death of the high Priest doth he prescribereturne vnto him which hath slaine a man vnwillinglie Because the death of the high Priest after the order of Melchisedech was the loosing of the sinne of man and so forth to the same effect And if all the politike reasons be graunted of the mans tarying vntill the high Priest die yet the mysterie of Christes death is not thereby taken away whoos 's blood clenseth vs from all sinne voluntarie or vnuoluntarie The last fault of the definition is that the Iesuites acknowledge not the sinne of ignorance you answer they do of that ignorance whereof a man him-selfe is the cause but not of that ignorance which the schoolemen call inuincible which is not in the doers power to auoid nor he fell into it by his owne defaulte as in the example of the Queenes subiect being in his Princes affaires in India and commaunded by proclamation in Westminster to appeare there at a certaine daie in which cause his absence is excused by inuincible ignorance This case graunted betweene the Prince and his subiect prooueth not that ignorance excuseth before God because there is not the like reason seeing no such ignorance whereby a man should transgresse the law of God is in man but by voluntarie and witting transgression of the first man and his owne negligence which maketh his fact sinfull because he is cause of his ignorance by negligence or in the sinne of Adam in whome you confesse that all men sinned At least wise if originall sinne be voluntarie by the sinne of Adam so also is the transgression of gods law in these cases of inuincible ignorance wittinglie committed by the same sinne of Adam Augustine whome you quote for your purpose speaketh of naturallignorance and infirmitie which is in insants not of that whereby men fall into error and so transgresse Gods law For that he calleth penall ignorance and difficultie which is iustlie laid vpon them that neglected to seeke knowledge and is sinfull therefore cannot excúse sinne Chrisostome whome you quote likewise is manifestly against you his wordes are these Quòdsi ea ignoraueris quae scriri non possunt praeter culpam eris siverò quae scitu possibilia sunt facilia extremas poenas merito dabis If thou be ignorant of those thinges which are not possible to beknowne thoushalt be blamles but if they be possible and easie to be knowne thou shalt worthelie suffer extreame punishment As in the cases of Abimelech with Abrahams wife and Iacob with Lea who if they had made diligent inquirie needed not to haue beene deceiued through ignorance Neither doth God excuse Abimelech from sinne altogether as you saie albeit he pardoned his ignorance and kept him from the fact of adulterie acknowledged his minde to haue beene free from the purpose of Adulterie For the punishmeut laid vpon him argueth what he deserued by his ouer hastie purpose of mariage with Sara and Abimelech confesseth that Abraham had brought vpon him and his Kingdom a great sinne Also when God saith to him I haue kept thee thatthou shouldest not sinne against me he declareth plainlie that if Abimelech had lien with Sara vpon that ignorance he had sinned against God But of Iacobslying with Lea in steade of Rachell you mooue a greater contention and alledge Saint Augustine in his defense But whosoeuer gaue you your notes through your negligence in not reading the places your selfe made you erre through ignorance For S. Augustine doth notin all those Chapters once touch the question whether Iacob sinned in that he did not regarde what woman was laid in his bedde by which negligence as Master Charke saith he might haue committed most horribleincest with his mother aunt or daughter Onelie he defendeth his Polygamie by the custome of that time and the contention of his wiues for their lodgeing with him and last of all allegorizeth vpon the wholl storie drawing the error of Iacob and all the rest to a mysterie Nor yet de ciuit dei lib. 16. c. 38. doth he defend his negligence rehearsing onelie how he came to haue foure wiues when he went into Mesopotamia for one onelie adding that because he had lyen with Lea vnwittinglie he did not put her awaie lest he might be thought to haue mocked her Neither hath Iustinus Martyr lib. de verit Christ. rel anie defense of Iacobs innocencie or excuse of his negligence in this fact but sheweth onelie what mysterie maie be gathered of his marriages as Saint Augustine doth Finallie Theodores your last auncient witnes agreeing with the rest saith that Iacob betrothed onelie Rachell and beside the purpose of his will had to doe with Lea. But immediatelie assoone as he perceiued the deceit he tooke it heauilie and complained to his father in law what word of defense or excuse of his fact committed through ignorance negligence haue you in this saying yet you conclude after your vaunting mannner And what one
scriptum est post concupiscentias tuas non eas sed non perficit quia non implet quod scriptum est Non concupisces He doth much good which doth that which is written goe not after thy lustes but he maketh not his good perfect because he fulfilleth not that which is written Thou shalt not lust These wordes and the wholl Chapter prooueth that Saint Augustine vnderstandeth the tenth commaundement of concupiscence whereunto no consent is added Againe lib. de spir lit cap. vltimo he saith that this commaundement Thou shalt not lust perteineth to the life to come because no man can fulfill it in this life but the other Goe not after thy lustes perteineth to this life because men may restreine by Gods grace consent and delectation in lust Your third quotation is lib. 19. Cont. Faustum cap. 7 where Saint Augustine saith no more for you then in the rest sauing that he saith That for as much as it is hard for vs to fullfill in euerie respect that which is written in the law thou shalt not lust Christ beeing made a prieste by the sacrifice of his flesh obteineth pardon for vs euen so fulfilling the law that by his perfection might be recouered that which by our infirmitie we could not In which saying except you will cauill vpon the terme of difficultie which in other places he maketh a flat impossibilitie there is no shadow for your assertion In your fourth quotation Cont. 2. ep Petil. lib. 3. cap. 7. or in steede of Petil. as I gesse you would saie Pelagianorum is nothing sounding to the matter but rather the contrarie that perfection cannot be in this life because there cannot be perfect iustice or fulfilling of the law Where fore I can but wonder at your impudencie in these quotations And yet as though you had found a great 〈◊〉 you saie it is most worthie of laughter which Master Charke for filling vp of a page discourseth of S. Pauls estate when he saith Paul compareth his estate before his knowledge of the tenth commaundement with his state afterward c. Verelie the Greeke prouerbe hath place in you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. A foole lauheth when there is nothing worthie of laughter You aske how he could be ignorant of that commaundement considering his education yet be able to 〈◊〉 other sinnes by the light of naturall reason But Master Charke saith he knew other sinnes by the law and light of nature He knew also by his bringing vp that it was written in the law thou shalt not lust but he vnderstood it not otherwise then the Pharises did which thought they were able to keepe the law But after he learned what originall sinne and the lust thereof proceeding was he sound himselfe condéned by the tenth commaundement which he could not doe by the other nine from which it is perfectlie distinct nor by the light of reason for the philosophers could neuer atteine to vnderstand that sinne But concupiscence with consent and delectation they could perceiue to be vitious and sinfull So that your sardonicall laughter may be staide and turned to weeping if 〈◊〉 had grace to know that commaundement as Saint Paul had whereof it appeareth you are as ignorant as euerhe was Concerning the similitude of the latine tongue whereof the tongue is onelie an instrumentall cause as it answereth not the effect of originall sinne so being a contention of termes I will not stand vpon it Againe I confesse it is not necessarie that euerie effect of originall sinne should be sinne in the regenerate as hunger sicknes c. but originall sinne is not so the efficient of these as of actuall sinnes for the iustice of God is the good proper and principall next efficient of those punishments sinne is the cause moouing the iustice of God to punish but original sin is the immediat euil material cause of actual sin That the guilt of original sin is taken-away from theregenerate in and by baptisme we do not denie yet remaineth the sin after baptisme though it be not impured as sinne vnto condemnation in the children of God That Christ is called sinne because i. e is a sacrifice to take awaie sinne maie prooue as you saie that something is figuratiuelie called sinne which properlie is no sinne But that concupiscence should as vnproperlie be called sinne you can not prooue because it is a matter and increaser of sinne Your false quotation Rom. 8. where Christ is called sinne you would iustifie by the 3. verse where there is no such matter but that God sent Christ in the similitude of sinfull flesh and of sinne condemned sinne in the flesh But if the text will not serue you send vs to the commentaries which can not alter the text howsoeuer some do compare this place with that of 2. Cor. 5. 21. and other some do take it otherwise Touching the auncient Fathers 〈◊〉 in the Censure to testifie that concupiscence is not sin in the regenerat if consent be not yealed c. you saie he hath passed ouer Cyprian and Pacacius without anie word vnto him The cause is for that they saie nothing to him in the matter controuersed beteweene him and you For Cyprian in both the places sheweth that baptisme by the spirit of God purgeth a man and washeth him cleane from all spots of sinne Which Master Charke confesseth as concerning the guilt because concupiscence though it remaine is not imputed for sinne in the regenerated But the question is what concupiscence of it selfe deserueth 〈◊〉 in the regenerated if it were imputed by Gods iustice as it is forgiuen by his grace Albeit he be not bound to take all that Cyprian writeth for Gospel especiallie in that Sermon de ablutione pedum if it be Cypriant As for Pacianus he saith not all so much If you haue anie wordes in the Fathers that maie enforce your meaning set them downe plainlie and mocke vs no longer with dumme questiones Ambrose and Clemens Alexandrinus as Master Charke telleth you haue not your wordes nor sense for whatsoeuer they saie of the purenes of them that are regenerated we acknowledge with them in respecte of the remission of their sinnes not that the regenerated are voide of al sinne or naturall corruption more then they be voide of infirmitie and mortalitie Where Clemens saith that concupiseence alone is adultrie you labour in vaine to adde consent for the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alone doth exclude what soeuer you can adde vnto it Where you cauill that he exhorteth the Gentiles to resist these motions of concupiscence and would prooue thereby that they are not the first motions which are vnauoidable it is a tale for he exhorteth the Gentiles to Christianitie where they should finde remission of all sinnes and all honnstie oflife Gregorie Nazianzen hath an oration or homilie intituled of holie baptisme but not de S. Iana as your Censure had in the first edition and in that oration he prooueth not your
third question you haue what difference is betweene these speaches namelie of proceeding and begotten which question you saie with the rest though Master Charke seeme ignorant in them all and not to vnderstand so much as the verie 〈◊〉 themselues yet Catholike diuines know what the Church hath determined herein But concerning this question Saint Augustine shall answere for our ignorance Cont. Maximin lib. 3. cap. 14. Quid autem inter nasci procedere incersit de illa excellentissima natura loquens explicare quis potest Non omne quod procedit nascitur quamuis omne procedar quod nascitur 〈◊〉 omne quod bipes est homo est quam nis bipes sit omnis qui homo est haec scio Distinguere autem inter illam generationem hanc processionem nescio non valeo non sufficio Ac per hoc quia illa ista est ineffabilis stcut Propheta de filio loquens alt Generationem eius quis enarrabit ita de spiritu sancto verissimè dicitur processionem eius quis enarrabit c. What difference is betweene begotten proceeding speaking of that moste excellent nature whoe is able to expresse Not all that proceedeth is begotten although al proceedeth that is begotten As not euerie two legged thing is a man although euerie one is two legged that is a man Those thinges I know But to distinguish betweene that generation and this procession I know not I am not able I am not sufficient And for this reason because both that and this is vnspeakeable as the Prophet speaking of the sonne saith whoe shall declare his generation so of the holie ghost it is saide moste trulie whoe shall declare his procession This is Saint Augustines iudgement of this question Yea this is the Master of the sentences iudgement also as well of this question as of the proceeding of the sonne from the father against you Yet you saie of these as wel of as the other they are no lesse to be beleeued then other mysteries of the trinitie wherewith your conclusion is that you would not haue troubled Master Charke if you had supposed him so grosse therein as by examination you finde him Alacke poore Sir William A lacke for pitie what high points of learning you haue shewed which in the Master of the sentences whome soeuer he wil of an hundred schoolemen that wrote vpon him euerie sophister may finde mooued debated and defined in lesse then one daies studie no meruaill then if Master Charke be so grosse in them as you by examination finde him But while you in your owne imagination are so subtile in them that you thinke your crest perceth the clowdes you haue bewraied more shamefull proude ignorance then any of vs would haue suspected that it might be found in such a great Champion of the Papistes such a Lorde he censuter such a doughtie defender When in some of the questions propounded by your selfe you neither know the doctrine of the scripture the iudgement of the auncient fathers the determination of your Church nor the conclusion of your owne schoole doctors in whole mysteries neuertheles you would seeme to be an other Mercurie For the rest of the handes that you draw against Doctor Fulke you are answered in this consutation of popish quarrelles from pag. 48. vntill pag. 55. And where you saie that euerie litle gesse at our pleasure is sufficient to prooue what we will whereas no testimonies of your part will serue except they be so plaine and euident as by no waits they maie be auoyded and thereupon charge vs to be Lordes of the scriptures it is as manie other of yours a detestable slaunder For as I haue shewed before in matters necessarie to saluation we admit no gesses but either manifest wordes of scripture or els that which is necessarilie concluded out of manifest wordes and principles confessed and such if you haue anie bring them forth and we will hearken vnto them Ouer against the article of punishing heretiks by death which you saie was a long time denied by our selues to be allowable by scripture you note in the margent Luther against Latomus de incendiariis of burners For what purpose I maruell seeing in that booke he complaineth of the Louanistes not for burning heretikes but for burning of his bookes For the mention which Saint Paull is thought of some to make of an Epistle written to the Laodicenses you are not a litle netled that Master Chark condemneth both you and Saint Ieromes translation of ignorance You saie he should not obiect ignorance so peremptorilie to you you ought not so rigorously to haue beene reprehended and you name a great manie auncient writers which may be sufficient to wipe awaie Master Charkes bitter reproch against you But let vs see howrigorously and bitterly he hath delt with you yea how peremtorilie he obiecteth ignorance to you by his own wordes The Episile to the Laodiceans although manie make mention of it Paull maketh none so that either you ignorantlie passed ouer the greeke or willfullie addicted your selfe to the olde translation being in this place plainlie corrupted For by the originall Paull speaketh of an Epistle from Laodicea and not writen to the Laodicenses as you vntrulie assirme Here is all that he saieth you are a daintie Parnell that count your selfe so rigorouflie reprehended and so bitterlie reproched in those wordes where ignorance is not peremptorilie obiected as you saie but either that or willful addiction to the olde translation which I know not vpon what ground you doe so peremtorilie call S. Ieromes translation Master Charke hath more cause to complaine of you for that you affirme that he saith the greeke text hath of an Epistle written by S. Paull from Laodicea For he saith not an Epistle written by Saint Paull but from Laodicea by whome soeuer it was written Where you cite manie that thought mention to be made of one written by Saint Paull to the Laodiceans he confesseth as much But it is more against Master Charke that you haue two Greeke editions the one of Pagnine the other of Plantine which make for you as you affirme But what if you be deceiued in them as great a clarke as you would seeme to be that maie not be touched with the least suspicion of ignorance The most of the copies both printed and written haue 〈◊〉 the Epistle from Laodicea Your two editions leaue out the preposition and then it must be translated that Epistle of Laodicea which it seemeth your vulgar interpreter followed in sense though not in wordes which saith eam quae Laodicensiumest that which is of the Laodiceans Where is there now in anie of these that which maketh for you that Saint Paull speaketh of an Epstle written by him to the Laodicenses For the Epistle of Laodicea which your two greeke editions haue and the Epistle of the Laodicenses which your vulgar translation hath cannot signifie an Epistle written to the Laodicenses but from
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which are able to make thee wise you harpe onelie vpon the word of instructing which the vulgar interpreter vseth not sufficient to answere the greeke verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and yet if it be rightlie vnderstood as perhappes he meant it signifieth to furnish and not to teach properlie so the sense might be that the scripture is able to furnish thee with knowledge to saluation and that 〈◊〉 a sufficiencie Now to your pelting cauilles You aske if the Scriptures which can shew Timothie the waie to saluation and bring him also to it if he will follow them be sufficient for the wholl Church so that all Doctrine by tradition is superfluous I answere yea For there is but one waie to saluation for all the Church But you obiect that euerie Epistle of Saint Paull enstructeth a man to saluation yet it not sufficient for the wholl Church I answere that euerie Epistle of Saint Paull is not sufficient to instruct a man to saluation or to make him wise vnto saluation But that which Saint Paull spaketh is of the wholl scripture not of euery epistle For you might as well obiect that euery chapter and verse instructeth a man toward saluation rather then to saluation but not sufficientlie yet the wholl is able to make a man wise vnto saluation Your second obiection is that the Apostle speaketh principallie of the olde Testament and will Master Charke saie that the olde Testament is sufficient to Christian men for their saluation without anie other writt Yea I warrant you for there is no Doctrine in the new but it was taught in the olde Saint Paull affirmeth that he said nothing but that which the Prophetes and Moses had spoken of thinges to be performed The new Testament hath no other Doctrine then the olde onelie it testifieth the performance of those thinges in Christ which the olde Testament foreshewed to be performed Againe because you grate so much vpon the exclusion of other writt Saint Paull addeth by faith in Iesus Christ which containeth all that is written in the new Testament concerning the storie of performancet and seales of this faith And if the olde were sufficient how much more is the olde the new together a rich aboundant Doctrine The 〈◊〉 that you make against his translation of the wholl Scripture which you would referre to euerie Scripture is answered before the translation must be according to the circumstance of the place Euerie Scripture which is euerie seuerall booke or euerie seuerall Chapter or euerie seuerall verse is not able to make the man of God perfect and perfectlie prepared to euerie good worke but the wholl is therefore the translation must be the whole scriptures and not euerie scripture But now to your tow reasons In the first you saie that Saint Paull could not meane to Timothie of all the scriptures together which we now vse for that all was not then written To this you confesse that he answereth there was inough written then for the susficient saluation of men of that time and therest is not superfluous But this you saie is from the purpose Yea is how so I praie you you answere it was sufficient with the supplie by worde of 〈◊〉 vnwritten but that is contrarie to the purpose for Master Charke telleth you that from the time that any 〈◊〉 was written that scripture contanied sufficient 〈◊〉 to saluation without anie supply of anie other Doctrine that was not in that Scripture comprehended although preaching and other meanes were necessarie to reach men which is beside the purpose Before the scripture was written the same doctrine in substance was deliuered by reuelation that afterwarde was written The continuance thereof was not onelie by bare tradition but also in euerie age renewed by reuelation Againe the age of men was lo long that there remained alwaies faithfull and ceratine witnesses of the doctrine aliue so that it could not be corrúpted but it was easie by those witnesses to be refuted But when the age of man was drawne into the streights of 70. yeares or litle more as Moses sheweth the Doctrine of the Church was committed to writing euen as much at the first as was sufficient for the instruction of the people vnto saluation without anie supplie of traditions The 〈◊〉 of the Prophetes and Apostles writinges is a more full and plentifull declaration of thesame Doctrine of saluation not anie addition of anie new Doctrine or waie to saluation Your second reason is that 〈◊〉 partes of scripture be wanting now which were in Saint Pauls time But that you are not able to prooue For although there is mention in the olde testament of diuerse bookes written by Prophets which are not now extant yet it followeth not that those were extant in Saint Pauls time And if any were yet were they but explications and interpretations of the bookes of Moses which are extant euerie syllable and pricke and shall be to the ende of the world But Epiphanius affirmeth that all thinges cannot be taken from the scripture wherefore the Aposties 〈◊〉 somethings in writing and somethings in tradition To this I answere first that Saint Paul is greater then Epiphanius Secondlie that Epiphanius saith not that anie thing necessarie to saluation cannot be taken out of the scripture For he speaketh onelie of this opinion that it is sinne to marrie after virginitie decreed which neuertheles maie be taken out of the scripture if the vow were aduisedlie taken and no necessitie of incontinencie requiring mariage But of tradition we shall haue further to consider in the next section The thirteenth section intituled Of teaching traditions besides the scripture Art 5. GOtuisus reporteth the Iesuits to saic that the want of holie scriptures muste be supplied by peecing it out by traditions Cens. f. 220. Here you repeat your olde friuolous quarrel that the Iesuites haue no such vnreuerent words Master Chark chargeth you out of Hosius with a farre worseisaying that if traditions be reiected the verie Gospell it selfe seemeth to be reiected For what els are traditions then a certaine liuing Gospell But thereto you answere not one worde and the meaning of those words reported by Gotuisus you mainteine egerlie thorouhout this section as you did in parte in the 12. section that the scriptures are not sufficient and that there must be traditions receiued beside the scripture To what ende but to supplie the want and insufficiencie of the holie scriptures Nay saie you Though both parts of Gods worde that is both written and vnwritten be necessarie vnto Gods Church yet both of them do stand in their full perfection assigned them by God neither is the one a maime or impeachment to the other You meane they are as perfect as God made them not that the written word is sufficient to teach all trueth vnto the perfection of the man of God And so for all your vaine compasse of wordes the sense is all one The scripture is but a part or a
Secondlie he speaketh of the fourth daies or Wednesdaies fast to be appointed by the tradition of the Apostles which yet neuerthelesse the Romish Church doth not obserue Thirdlie that the Pente cosse or fiftie daies by the tradition of Apostles are exempted from the Fridaie fast which tradition is not kept in the Popes Church except you will saie that Pentecost is taken for whitson weeke and then the custome of the PopishChurch is directlie contrarie to the tradition of the Apostles for Wednesdaie and Fridaie that weeke are 〈◊〉 daies And as for the Wednesdaie fast as well as the Fridaie Epiphanius is so earnest that he addeth further Deinde verò st non de eodem argumento quartarum Prosabbatorum ijdem Apostoli in constitutione dixissent etiamaliter vndique demonstrare possemus Attamen de hoc exactè scribunt Assumpsit autem ecclesta in toto mundo assensus factus est c. And moreouer if the same Apostles in their constitutions had not spoken of the same argument of wednesdaies Fridaies we could otherwise throughly make proofe of it But they write exactly ofit and the Church hath taken it vp assent hath bin geuen in al the world You see he alledgeth not onely a decree of the Apostles but also the consent of all the world for the wednesdaie fast as well as the Fridaie fast So that if the Apostles tradition beside the scripture be necessarie for lent whie is it not also for wednesdaies fast And if wednesdaies faste is not necessarie no more is lent fast Further you affirme that Dionystus and Tertullian saie that praiers and oblations for the dead are traditions of the Apostles De Eccles. hier c. 7. de corona milit but Dionystus al beit we do not acknowledge him for a man of such antiquitie as the papists would obtrude him yet hath not any mention of traditions of the Apostles in that Chap ter touching praier for the dead but either of tradition in scripture orels at large endeuoring to prooue that he saith by scripture Tertullian in the place quoted speaketh onelie of oblations for the dead in that yearelie day which maie signifie thanksgiuing as pro nataliliis for their birth doth in in the verie same clause Not denying yet but Tertullian when he forsooke the Church and became a Montanist yealed to praier for the dead as a thing reuealed by the spirit aud new prophecie of Montanus Last of all you saie Saint Basill teacheth that the consecration of the fant before baptisme the exorcisme vpon those that are to be baptized their anointing with holie chrisme and diuerse like thinges are deliuered to vs by prescript of Christ and his Apostles lib. de spi. 5. cap. 27. Of consecration or blessing of the water to the holie vse of baptisme of those that are to be baptized there neede no tradition to be alledged the scripture is sufficient in the institution of baptisme whereby both the water and the perfon are dedicated to God aud his holie worke of regeneration The anointing with chrisme seemeth at the first to haue beene the signe of the giftes of the holie Ghost which were wont to be graunted with baptisme which though it had beene vfed by the Apostles in baptisme yet that particular grace being ceased which to signifie it was vsed it hath no longer anie profitable vse in the Church As for exorcisme vpon those that are to be baptized Is is your owne addition for Saint Basill hath it not But where you saie he hath diuers like thinges as deliuered by traditian it is verie true and among them this sor example that it is necessarie for the children of the Church to praie standing on the Lords daie But this necessitie euen in the popish Church is notacknowledged therefore whatsoeuer he saieth is a tradition of the Apostles is necessarieto be kept of all Christians although all the Church in his time beleeued it as that which Epiphanius reporteth of the wednesdaies fast before spoken of You demaund vpon what ground you shall discredit or reiect these traditions deliuered by such fathers cheife Doctors and pillers of the Church Euen by the same ground that you giue ouer other traditions deliuered by the same persones either because they are not true traditions or els because they are not necessarie for the Church albelt they were deliuered as no doubt some ceremoniall matters were euen by the Apostles them selues Your other reasons are friuolous That they were neerer the Apostles then we For the neerest and moste immediat successours to the Apostles Policarpus and Anicetus could not agree vpon the tradition of the Apostles one of them building vpon Iohn the other vpon Peter as is testified by Eusebius out of Irenaeus in the place before cited An other reason is that they were honest men and would not deceiue vs willinglie And so much we acknowledge yet might they be deceiued in ascribing the common practise of their time to Apostolike tradition and so deceiue vs vnwittinglie nor be controlled because the custome generall acceptation of that ceremonie restreined men Which things considered it is a great iniquitie as Master Charke saieth to adde traditions to the written word of God as if of it selfe it were not sufficient to instruct the Church in all thinges necessarie to saluation That which followeth of Doctor Fulkes handling the olde Fathers about traditions is answered by himselfe in his confutation of popish quarrells from pag. 55. to pag 61. After this you cite foure seuer all Doctors in defence of traditions vnwritten whereunto as some of auncient writers were too much inclined so haue you not so sure ground out of them for your popish traditions as you purpose And to beginne with Basill who by Apostolike traditiō defendeth the custome of the Church which was to sing Glorie be to the Father and to the sonne with the holie Ghost whereas the heretikes would haue it in the holie Ghost and cauilled that the other forme was not in the scriptures Saint Basil mainteineth it as agreeable to the scriptures by authoritie of auncient tradition although it were not expressed in so manie wordes in the scriptures as manie other thinges are which haue like force vnto pietie with those that are dilinered in expresse wordes as for example he alledgeth the confession of the faith in the 〈◊〉 which no man doubteth to be sufficientlie tanght in the scriptures although the verie wordes of our creed are not expressed in such for me As we rehearse our creede I omit 〈◊〉 things saieth he the verie confession of faith in which we beleeue in the father the sonne the holie Ghost in what scripture haue we it Againe And if they doe reiect the manner of glorifying of god as not written let them bring forth demonstration in writing of the confession of faith of other things that we rehearse By which it is manifest that the traditions he speaketh of are of two sortes the one
the sense and true meaning of thinges them-selues And this is Chrisostomes meaning not of traditions altogether without the compasse of the scriptures and yet held necessarie to saluation For of the sufficiencie of the scri ptures he speaketh in diuers places and namelie vppon that cleere text 2. Tim. 3. Hom 9. of the scripiure he saith Siquid vel diseere velignorare opus sit illic addiscemus If anie thing be needefisli to know or not to know in the scriptures we shall learne But because you saie those wordes of Saint Paulare cleere 2. Thess. 2. for vnwritten tradititions I praie you what argument can you conclude out of them Saint Paul deliuered to the Thessalonians something by preaching and something by writing ergo he deliuered something that is not contained in the holie scriptures written either by himselfe or anie other of the holie men of God appointed for that purpose Who is so childish thinke you to graunt you this consequence therefore for anie thing you haue brought or can bring or anie thing that the fathers haue said or can saie the word of God writ ten is perfect and hable to make a man wise to saluation by faith in Iesus Christ which is to be had sufficientlie in the holie scriptures as Christ him-selfe doth witnes Iohn 5. 39. And so the former conclusion doth still stand It is great iniquitie to receiue traditions altogether beside the holie scripture as necessarie to saluation which must needes argue the holie scriptures of imperfection and vnsufficiencie Neither doth the consent of Antiquitie refute this assertion of Master Charke seeing the auncients as it is said spake either of doctrine not expressed in word but contained in deede in the scriptures or els of rites and ceremonies the perpetuall obseruation where of is not necessatie to eternall life as is prooued by the discussing of manie of them which the elder fathers do father vpon the tradition of the Apostles as much as anie other that they name And if you saie they were deceiued in such as are abolished how shall we know that 〈◊〉 not in such as are retained For in their 〈◊〉 they were all generallie receiued as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well such as are discontinued as those 〈◊〉 remaine 〈◊〉 if any man will aske you what be these Apostolicall 〈◊〉 in particuler you could alleadge him testimonies 〈◊〉 auncient fathers for a great number But you referr 〈◊〉 Saint Cyprian Serm. de ablut pedum Tertullian 〈◊〉 milit and Saint Hieron dialog contra Luciferianos 〈◊〉 say he shall finde store Belike your note booke 〈◊〉 you thither although you listed not to take so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your selfe but turne it ouer to your 〈◊〉 Howbert he that is disposed to read the sermon 〈◊〉 Cyprian shall finde no store at all but of the necessitie of washing offcete which ceremonie was taken by the example of Christ yet is not thought necessarie in the Popish Church at this daie Tertullian in deede hath some prety store yet not to mantaine popish traditions so much as to ouerthrow them For he 〈◊〉 some things that are taken out of the scripture as to renounce the deuill in Baptisme c. some that are growne out of vse manie hundred yeares agoe as that the baptized should taste of milke and honie that they should abstaine from washing seauen daies after That men should signe their forheade at euerie steppe and proceeding going forth and comming home at putting on of apparell and at pulling on of shooes at washings at table at lighting of candells at beddes at stooles at all times and places Saint Hierome also in the person of the heretike rehearseth traditiones and among them such as Papistes do not obserue namelie the mixture of milke and honie geuen to them that are newlie baptized On the Lords daie and during the wholl time of Pentecoste neither to kneele in praiers nor to fast These are parte of those Apostolical traditions in particular which if they had beene necessary to saluation must haue beene perpetuallie continued If they were vntruelie ascribed to the Apostles what wartant can we haue of any other seeing the most auncient writers commend these as much as anie other for Apostolicall traditions Yet a few other examples you wil adde out of Saint Augustine whoe prooueth baptisme you sare by tradition of the Church lib. 10. de gen ad lit cap. 23. to this answere hath beene made sufficientlie in the 11. section that Saint Augustine doth not defend baptisme of infants onelie by the custome of the Church but also by the scriptures Likewise you saie he prooueth by the same tradions that we must not rebaptize those which are baptized of heretikes lib. 2. de bapt capt 7. lib. 1. cap. 23. lib. 4. cap. 6 It is true that he perwsadeth him selfe that this custome of not rebaptizing came from the Apostles tradition yet doth he by many arguments out of scripture prooue that such are not to be baptized againe which haue beene once baptized although by heretikes and therefore he saith of the same matter Hoc planè verum est quia ratio veritas consuetudini praeponenda est Sed cùm consuetudini veritas suffragatur nihil oportet firmius retineri This is plainlie true that reason and truth is to be preferred before custome but when truth consenteth with custome nothing ought more steadefastlie to be 〈◊〉 You see therefore that he buildeth not onelie vppon custome or tradition which is the matter in question but vppon trueth and reason which is founded by the holie scriptuers Your middle quotation de bap lib. 1. cap. 23. you may correct against your nextreplie for there are but 19. Chapters in that booke Againe you saie He prooueth by tradition the celebration of the Pentecost commonlie called Whitsontide ep 11 c. 1. If it were as you saie it is but a matter of ceremony not necessarie to saluation but in the power of the Church to alter as many like which are abrogated But in trueth he prooueth it not as you say by tradition For these are his wordes Illa autem quae non scripta c. But those thinges which are kept beeing not written but deliuered which are obserued thoroughout all the worlde it is giuen to be vnderstoode that they are retained as commended and decreed either by the Apostles them-selues or by generall Councells the authoritie of which is moste whollesome in the Church as that the passion of our Lord and his resurrection ascension into heauen and the comming of the holie ghoste from heauen are celebrated with yearelie solemnitie You see by his owne wordes that he is not certaine whether he should laie this ceremoniall celebration vpon deliuery of the Apostles or vpon decrees of general coun cells And whencesoeuer they came the matter is not great in such thinges as of their owne nature are indifferent and therefore alterable by discretion of the Church in all times Whether the Apostles were baptized which is
of Colene in a moste apt similitude called the scripture a nose of waxe and Pighius the leaden rule of the Lesbian building But now concerning the matter it selfe You would shift it of by saying The Iesuites doe compare the hereticall wresting and detorting of scripture vnso the bowing of a nose of waxe vpon certaine circumstances which are these First not in respect of the scripture it selfe but in respect of heretikes and other that abuse it and that before the rude people that cannot iudge thirdlie to the ende to flatter Princes or the people in their vices Thus much was said before in the Censure But it was replied that Andradius confesseth the fathers of Colene doe saie that the holie scripture is as a nose of wax So doth Pighius and it is a thing more commonlie knowen then that it can be denied Therefore the wresting of the scripture is not compared by them to the bowing of a waxen nose but the scripture it selfe to a nose of wax as that which is as easie to be drawne into any sense as a nose of wax may be turned euerie waie The wordes of Pighius are plaine Sunt enim scripturae velut caereus quidam nasus qui sicut hor sum illor sumque facilè se trahi permittit quo traxeris haud inuitus sequitur ita illae se flecti duci atque etiam in diuer sam sententiam trahi accomodarique ad quid-uis patiuntur nist quis veram illam inflexibilemque earundem amussim nempe Ecclesiasticae traditionis authoritatem communemque sententiam ilsdem adhibeat For the holie scriptures are as it were a certaine nose of wax which as it easelie suffereth it selfe to be drawne this waie and that waie and whether soeuer you draw it is followeth not vnwillinglie so also they doe suffer them selues to be bowed to be led and also to be drawen into a contrarie meaning and to be applied vnto what you will except a man lay vnto them that true inflexible rule of them namelie the authoritie and common vnderstanding of the Churches tradition These wordes declare if the sense of all Papists be the same that the Iesuites do not onelie compare the scripture it selfe but also that they make this comparison in respect of the scripture it selfe which suffereth it selfe as easelie to be wrested and abused as a nose of wax abideth to be bowed nor before the rude and ignorant onelie nor to flatter Princes and people in their vices alone but before any persons or to any purpose whatsoeuer and that there is not in them a certaine and infallible sense to iudge of the Churches doctrine or to finde out the true Church from all false congregations by the trueth taught in the scriptures but that the authoritie and common vnderstanding of the Popish Churches tradition is the onelie true sense inflexible rule of the holy scriptures wherebie also it is manifest though you denie it neuer so stoutlie that you doe impute the wresting of the scriptures vnto the imperfection of Gods worde set forth in them and not onelie to the malice of the wrester For if the will of God be but as well expressed in them as the will of princes is in their written lawes and proclamations the one maie as well be found out by reading and weighing of the holie scriptures as the other may be out of prophane writings especially where the spirit of God graunted vnto the praiers of the elect openeth their vnderstanding not onelie to conceiue as the naturall man maie by studie and ordinarie helpes the true scope and purpose of God vttered in them but also to beleeue and embrace whatsoeuer the Lord their God hath propounded in them Therefore though the scripture may be wrested to the destruction of the vngodlie as Saint Peter sheweth yet Master Charke telleth you that it cannot so be wrested but that still it remaineth the light vnto our feet and the lanterne vnto our steppes and euerie parte thereof is like the arme of a great Oke which cannot be so wreste but that with great force it will returne into the right position to the shame and perill of the wrester which answere of his you doe so dissemble as though you had neuer seene it And you doe wiselie seeing otherwise then by silence you could not auoid it But howsoeuer Master Charke storme you will defend your blasphemie of the nose of waxe not onelie in a kingdome where the Ghospell is preached but also in the kingdome of vs ministers where the letter of the scripture is worsse wrested by vs to all errors and licentiousnes then euerie waxen nose was yet bended to diuerse fashions O ye senseles papists had you neuer a man of moderat iudgement to set forth against vs but this loosetongued Gentelman which so he maie raile with full mouth against vs hath no care how his slaunders maie be coloured Doe we peruert the scriptures to all errors then surelie we holde no trueth there neuer was anie heresie neither can there be anie heresie but that with manie errors it maintaineth and holdeth manie truethes Yea the Deuill him-selfe the father oflies beleeueth some truethes and for shame dare not professe the maintenance of all errors We thinke verie hardlie of Antichrist and his brood the papists yet we maie not saie that they wrest the scriptures to all errors and licentiousnes for if they so did they should not deceaue so manie by shew of trueth in errors except they did professe some articles of trueth in deede As for the wresting of the Scripture to all licentiousnes let God and all the world of reasonable and indifferent men iudge how iustlie we maie be charged therewith If we be licentious in our liues God will finde it out and let man where he findeth it punish vs. But if we wilfully peruert the scriptures to the maintenance of all licentiousnes the Lord reward vs according to our deedes and be not mercifull to them that sinne of malicious wickednes But it is no fault in the scriptures saie you that they may be abused For Christ him-selfe was called the rocke of offence and the stone of scandall not for anie faulte or imperfection in him but through the wickednes of such as abuse that benefit So if the Iesuites had said no more but that the scripture maie be abused no man could haue found fault with them And Christ is called a stone of offence or stumbling not altogether in respect of the wicked that abuse him for he is called a stone moste precious and necessarie to build vpon of stumbling to those that refuse to build vpon him which meeting with him must either stumble and fall or els if it fall vpon them they must be ground to pouder But the the scripture is compared to a nose os wax because it is in their imagination that vse the comparison as pliant to follow euerie waie and to yeald as probable a sence one waie as an other as
in outward signes and elements to be instituted or commission of great matters graunted or charge of singular waight giuen to seruants in absense of their Masters in all such cases plaine speaking by Gods prouidence was euer vsed and by all reason must be vsed or ells man falling into error in the execution of his commission is sufficientlie to be excused because he could not attaine to the meaning of his Masters wordes And yet the wicked of these daies haue found such light in scripture that they haue made our Master Christ to speake one thing and meane the contrarie in the very instiution of Sacraments and haue found figures to delude deseat the world of the necessarie fruit of them al. FVLKE Since you were a Papist you neuer vttered a more fase proposition that in the institution of Sacraments Christs wordes were euer plaine and without colour or figure nor yet a more foolish and vnlearnd assertion For you oppose figure to plainenes and colorablenes As for your Metaphor of colour I will not meddle with it but if you meane thereby as it is commonlie taken for dissimulation I protest that Christ in no speach euer vsed anie As for plainenes he sought when he vsed figures or rhetorical colours Therefore as I graunt that in institution of Sacraments Christs wordes were euer plaine so Ivtterlie denie that in institution of sacraments Christes wordes were neuer figuratiue and I holde him for a verie either ignorant or impudent person that dare affirme the contrarie That the wordes of Christ could not worke with singular efficacie grace and vertue and therewith giue to the ministers iust authoritie for the execution of Christs meaning being vttered in figuratiue speaches parables without infinite error is a brutish affirmation as afterward I wil shewe by manie particular examples In the meane time that which commeth neare to this cause what boie that learneth Moselanes figures will denie that these speaches of binding of loosing of the keies of the kingdome of heauen of Peter being a rocke or stone on which the Church is builded are figuratiue speaches and parables meaning not proper binding loosing keies Rocke or building but parables or thinges like vnto those But against this you obiect with interrogation did God speake parables when he instituted the solemnitie of so manie sacrifices c Yea verilie then did he moste of all speake parables For then he signified that reconciliation was onelie by Christs death whereof all these sacrifices were parables similitudes and figures as the Apostle declareth Heb. 9. verse 9. in plaine wordes And yet it followeth not that euerie word was figuratiue or parabolicall which he vsed in the institution of euerie sacrifice and therefore the seuerall sorte of the beast or creature with the sexe and kinde and other partes of the ceremonie thereto belonging might be in proper tearmes without iustifying of that monstrous paradox that no figuratiue speaches were vsed in the institution of sacraments or that in the institution of sacraments Christs wordes were euer without figure But you vrge vs farther asking whether he did speake parables when the sacrament of the Lambe was to be instituted I hope you plaie not the lad to trifle about the distinction of parables and figures but you meane that he vsed no figuratiue speaches as your first proposition was I answer you he did and that doe I plainelie prooue when he said the Lambe so taken prepared and eaten with haste is the Lordes passeouer where indeede it was a sacrament and signe thereof and not the Lordes passeouer in proper speach Moses also reporting the Lords institution biddeth the people to slaie the passeouer and the people are willed to teach their yonge children ignorant of the end and vse thereof that it is the Lordes passeouer and so diuerse times both in the 12. and 13. Chapters it is repeated that the lambe so slaine is the passeouer of the Lord. Therefore it is plaine that God did vse figuratiue speach in the institution of the Sacrament of the Lambe euen when he did teach the people the vse and end thereof not to obscure the mysterie but by similitude of passing ouer their houses where the posts were sprinckled with the blood more plainelie to expresse and set forth the same You aske the third time whether God did speake by figure to Abraham when he commaunded him to circumcise the male of euerie one of his people Gen. 17 I answere you yea he did speake by figure For when he begane to speake of that matter ver 10. He said this is my couenant betweene me and you and betweene thy seed after the which ye shal keepe that euerie male among you be circumcised Which that you should not doubt to be a figure in the next verse following he expoundeth it saying that circumcision shal be a signe of the couenant that is betweene me and you And verse 13. he saith so shall my couenant be in your flesh for a perpetuall couenant And in the 14. verse the soule of the vncircumcised male shal be rooted out from his people because saith he he hath transgressed or made void my couenant The like demaund you make of the institution of the Sabbaoth which I knowe not whether you number among the sacraments or no. In Gen. 2. where it is said that God rested from all his worke which he had made there is a figure because he ceased onelie from creation but not from gouernment and preseruation of those thinges which he hath made And in the 35. of Exod. whereunto you send vs if you take the wordes of the law without anie figure whosoeuer shall do anie worke on the Sabboth day shal die the death you condemne a great manie whome our sauionr Christ doth excuse not onelie from punishment of death but euen from breach of the cōmaundement Luke 13. 14. Mat. 12. To your last question I answere that he neuer dissembled in the olde lawe or the new but if you vnderstand by speaking on thing and meaning an other figuratiue speaches I saie he often vsed them when anie externall worke was to be practized for euer by charge of his worde among the people as is moste euident in the sacramentes of circumcision and the passeouer therefore your distinction is falsc friuolous for God hath vsed figuratiue speaches often times in the institution of the sacraments not to deceiue the people that they should take one thing for an other but the better to expresse the vertue and effect of them according to the capacitie of the people As in calling the Lambe the pascal they were more liuely put in minde both of the temporall benifit and passing ouer and also of their spirituall deliuerance When circumcision is called the couenant whereof it was a signe the people were admonished what was the spirituall meaning thereof namelie that they should cut of the olde man with all concupiscences of the flesh which God requireth of all them that
to the proper power of God touching the release of the guiltinesse of sinnes although in executing of discipline they maie pardon the exercise of repentance that is appointed for triall of the parties true penitencie or some part thereof which as it is enioyned by the iudgement and discretion of men so they may by the same release it as vpon good cause they thinke conuenient Where you say that Priestes may pardon or retaine mans sinnes of al sortes as wel in the sarcrament of penance al that be confessed as in publike iudgement You thrust in diuerse matters whereof there is neither mention in the text nor anie necessarie collection to be made of them out of it as the sacrament of pennance whereof there is no outward element or signe instituted then your kinde of penance which includeth some peece of satisfaction for sinnes last of all your auricular and particuler confession as though genetall confession and acknowledging of mens sinnes before God might not obtaine remission of sinnes in his sight And as though if anie sinne be not remembred in shrift the priestes remission extendeth not vnto it or if it were remembred and be hypocriticallie concealed yet the remission were good auaileable for al other sinnes that are confessed Againe it is an insolent power you giue them in open Iudgement that they may at their pleasure where Iustice requireth correct the open offender For though you seeme to qualifie their pleasure by iustice yet to ascribe that to their pleasure which is laid vpon them of necessitie what warrant haue you for it For if they maie at their pleasure they neede not except it please them Finallie your argument holdeth not that as in exercising of discipline they maie chastice the offender by the censures of the Church so they may giue due punishment for sinnes 〈◊〉 in shrift Neither are those two endes you alledge true For the chastisement of sinnes pertaineth not to them but to God and the ciuill Magistrate and the iustice of God violated by sinne is satisfied by the obedience and suffering of our sauiour Christ. Wherebie also it should follow that the power of remitting of sinnes were made void and frustrate if men must endure due punishment which you call penance for the satisfying of Gods iustice by sinne violated AILEN The other text of holie scripture containing Christes wordes to Saint Peter seuerallie by certaine notable circumstances of the letter and by wordes of great graunt spoken singularlie to him giueth the chiefe of all his Apostles in more ample termes and beneficiall clauses this power and perogatiue also To him it was onelie said thou art Peter which is as much to saie as a rock for our Master gaue him that name new at his first calling in signification of further intent and purpose which he here vttered and vpon this rocke will I set my Church and hell gates shall not preuaile against it That so said he thus spake in plaine termes Et tibi dabo claues regni caelorum Et quodcunque ligaueris super terram erit ligatum in caelis quodcunque solueris super terram erit solutum in caelis And to thee wil I giue the Keies of the Kingdome of heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt binde in earth it shall be bound in the heauens And what thou loosest in earth it shall be loosed in the heauens This promis made vnto Peter and performed no doubt after his resurrection when he committed to him the feeding and gouernement of all his deare flock both yong and olde doth exceedinglie import a wonderfull incomparable soueraigntie and-iurisdiction ouer mens soules For a mortall man to receiue the keies of Christes Kingdome and by them to binde loose to lock out and let in before our Master Christ who had the full iurisdiction therein it was neuer heard of And when the holie Prophets do meane to set out the great and passing power giuen by God the father to his onelie sonne in earth they vse to expresse the same often by the termes of keyes as when the Prophet Esaie saith I will laie the keies of the house of Dauid vpon his shoulder he shall shut and there can none be hable to open and he shall open so that none can shut agiane And Christ him-selfe speaking to his beloued Iohn in the Apocalips saith I am the first and the last I am aliue and was dead before and I haue the keies of death and hell The keies therefore euer signifying power andgouernment of the houshold was giuen to Christ as to whom being the principal and most excellent rectour of his owne Church that he bought so dearelie they moste duelie belong But he communicated vnto Peter as to his speciall stewarde the vse of the same for the gouernment of our soules with exceeding much preheminence both in binding and loosing Yet I do not remember that anie of the olde writers do put anie great difference betwixt the authorities of Peter and the rest of the Apostles concerning the remitting of sinnes which is a thing perteining indifferentlie to the wholl order of priesthood and therfore no more proper to the Pope or Peter then to Priestes and Apostles though Origen noted well that the iurisdiction of Peter seemed by these words to be enlarged aboue the residue by that our sauiour said to him that whatsoeuer he bound or loosed in earth it should be loosed or bound in the heauens where to the rest he spoke of heauen onelie in the singular number I speake onelie of this latter clause of binding and loosing with the keies thereunto belonging For there is no doubt but great preheminence of rule and iurisdiction is promised before in the sametext now recited and els where actuallie giuen vnto him more then to the rest of his breethren Neuerthelesse euen this power of binding and loosing common to all the holie order was in him first seuerally planted for the commendation of vnitie and order as Saint Cyprian sath and so the same authoritie giuen to other might yet after a sort be deriued from his fullnes of power and perogatiue as from a fountaine FVLKE The other text of scripture containing the wordes of our sauiour Christ to Peter seuerallie giueth to him as you saie this power and prerogatiue also As for the not able circumstances of the letter the wordes of great graunt spoken singularlie to him the more ample tearmes and beneficiall clauses let vs examine what they are and whether they be of force to make him chiefe of all his Apostles First to him it was onelie said thou art Peter which is as much to saie as a rock what then ergo he was chiefe of all the Apostles who is so madd to gtaunt the consequence To the sonnes of Zebede onelie it was said that they were Bonarges that is the Children of thunder ergo they had greater authoritie then the rest of the Apostles But of all the Apostles it was said
sentence of priests but the life of the parties accused in iudgement is enquired of We reade in Leuit. of the Lepers where they are commaunded to shew themselues vnto the priests and if they haue the Leprosie then they are made vncleane by the prieste Not that the priests doe make men Lepers and vncleane but for that they haue knowledge of a Leper and of him that is no Leper can discerne who is cleane who is vncleane Therefore looke how priest doth there make a Leper cleane or vncleane so here doth a Bishop or priest binde or loose not them that are vnguiltie or guilty but according to his office when he hath heard the variety of sinners he knoweth who is to be bound or who is to be loosed In this saying of S. Ierome diuerse things are to be considered First that the gift of the keies the power of binding loosing graunted to Peter by his iudgement and al mens in his time peiteineth to euerie Bishoppe elder or priest of Gods Church Secondlie that God onelie doth properlie and absolutelie forgiue sinnes and thirdlie that the priests sentence vpon earth is but declaratorie vpon his knowledge of the offendours of Gods sentence as the priests authoritie to make a Leper cleane or vncleane was onelie vpon certaine knowledge to pronounce that which God had wrought vpon him to his punishment or deliuerance and according thereunto either to seperate him or to receiue him into the congregation That penance in those daies was giuen greater then the fault required you finde not in Saint Ierome either in the one place or in the other that you quote Onelie in the later vpon the text of Mat. 23. which you cite of importable burthens he saieth Hoc generaliter aduersus omnes magistros qui grauiaiubent minora non faciunt This is spoken generallie against all such Masters as commaund burthenous things and them-selues doe not lesser thinges So that you would seeme to auoide Saint Ieromes iudgement vpon a false surmise For Saint lerome findeth as much fault with the prelates of his time for loosing them that are guiltie as for binding them that are innocent The contempt of your priests which you lament is both for there ignorance vnlawfull calling Whereas you assure them of the keie of remission and reteining of sinnes to be giuen them by God in their orders and then you send them to obteine discretion knowledge vertue with other qualities meete to exercise that office by praier and industrie you take a wrong course and contrarie to that which the Apostle prescribeth for he will haue men first to be tried and then to minister They must first by praier and other ordinarie meanes seeke to be fit for their office afterwarde lawfully be admitted thereto But where this order is peruerted they may haue calling and admission by men but I see not how they can haue power and approbation of God And therefore Saint Ieromes sentence standing your conclusion of the fruite of an ignorant priests absolution is nothing worth though there were no doubt of his calling ALLEN For this I dare be bolde to saie that the lacke of the appointed fruite of any sacrament ariseth a thousand times oftner by the vnworthines of the subiect and him that receiueth the sacrament then vpon any lacke of the giuer and minister thereof and namelie in this sacrament of the Churches discipline it chaunceth more often For as Saint Basil saith Potestas remittendi peccata non est absolutè data sed in recipientis obedientia in consensu cum eo qui animae ipsius curam gerit sita est The power of remitting sinnes is not absolutelie without condition giuen but it standeth in the obedience of the penitent and in his agreement with him that hath the charge of his soul. Therefore for Christs loue let vs cast perill oftner of our owne case then vpon other mens states for we are not so assured of the holie spirit or his grace to qualifie vs for the worthie receiuing as they are out of doubt for the right power of ministerie And to conclude against Caluin and all other that thinke the power of priestes either to be lesse for lacke of good life or want of much learning I alledge Saint Cyprian thus Remissio peccatorum per baptismum siue per alia sacramenta donetur propriè spiritus sancti est ipsi soli huius efficientiae priuilegium manet Thus in English Remission of sinnes whether it be by baptisme or by other sacraments giuen it properlie perteineth to the holie ghost and the preheminence of the foreceable effect is onelie his the solemnitie of wordes the inuocation of Gods name and the externall signes prescribed to the priests ministeries by the Apostles to make vp the visible sacrament but the thing it selfe and effect of the sacrament the holie ghost worketh and the author of all goodnesse putteth his hand inuisible to the externall and visible consecration of the priests So saith Saint Cyprian and maketh a farre long discourse how the diuersitie of the ministers desertes doe nothing alter the sacraments or the effect thereof but beeing a like to all receiuers of fit capacitie and condition by whomesoeuer they be serued and dispensed with iustice authoritie and calling thereunto The Baptisine of Iudas Iscarioth was no worsse then Simon Peters For S. Peter saith Connumeratus erat in nobis sortitus est sortem ministerij huius He was counted as one of our number had the lotte of the ministerie Nor the ministerie of Nicolas of lesse acceptation in it selfe then the function of Stephen being men of one office but of unlike deseruings The prophesie of Esate no more true then the prophesie of Caiphas nor the prophesie of Balaam lesse true then the prophesie of Baruc. If we were either absolued or baptized in the name of Peter and Paull or Iudas or Apollo then we might bragge who were best baptized or sureliest loosed from sinne and euery one might so either crake or be ashamed of his minister whereof Saint Paull earnestly checked the Corinthians But now euery one beeing both baptized and loosed and houseled and annointed and honoured in all other spirituall acts in no other name but in the name of Iesus his father euerlasting and the holie ghost proceeding from them both all must needes receiue the like benefite that be like qualified thereunto of whome soeuer the office is exercised if he be lawfullie called that is to saie haue by the handes of priesthood receiued the gift and grace of the holie ghost for his lawfull authorizing in that case the which gift of the holy Ghost being the selfe same that the Apostles receiued of Christ for the like functions continueth with them still though their life and desertes be neuer so euill and their ignorance neuer so much yea though they be by inst occasion as for heresie schisme or notorious life through the Censures of
were by them Baptized it seemeth they take it of their Master Nouatus who because he had contemned he ceremonie vsed in that time of the Church him-selfe taught his schollers to doe the same left it should hawe beene reputed a want in him Although not the omission of the ceremonie but the contempt of the vsage of the Church being not impious in it selfe was chiefelie condemned in him For at such times as he was ordained Elder or Priest of the Church of 〈◊〉 it was thought by the Bishope a matter that might be remitted in him that for other respectes seemed meete for the office neither was it thought necessarie that he should receiue that cerimonie so by him omitted but not yet as it was thought in despight of the Church refused The Fathers oflater time as Theodoret writeth decreed that such as came from his heresie and would be incorporated into the Church should by receiuing that cerimonie which in time of their heresie they despised declare that they were truelie conuerted from it and willinghe submitted themselues to the Catholike Church and her Doctrine But of late daies when that ceremonie of anointing hath beene accounted a Sacrament yea and a greater Sacrament then Baptisme and thought necessary to eternall saluation whereas yet it hath no institution of Christ set forth in the holie Scriptures the reformed Churches haue iustlie abrogated that custome according to that libertie which the Church hath in all ceremonies not commaunded by God according to the example of the Church in former ages which hath abrogated manie ceremonies vsed of auncient times aswell as that of anointing with oile them that are Baptized ALLEN And first because generallie all the foresaid ioyne together against the trueth in this argument that it is dishonour to god and great presumption in a mortall man to claime the power so proper to God let the studious reader well consider that no function power ne dignitie be it neuer so peculiar to God him-selfe by naturaii excellencie but the same maie be occupied of man secondarilie as by the waie of seruice ministery or participation so that man challenge nor vsurpe it not as of him selfe or when it is not lawfuliie receaued nor orderlie giuen All the workes that extraordinarilie and miraculouslie were wrought either by Christ in his humanitie or by the Prophets or Apostles wordes or by their garments or by what other instrumēt so euer they were donne were the works of god no lesse then to remit sins yet al these things other the like brought to passe by man through the power of god that worketh by mans ministerie the same nothing derogateth to gods glorie but infinitelie augmenteth his honour euen so the power of pardoning mans sins being emploied by God the father vpon Christ his sonne by Christ vpon his Church ministers practized by them not of their owne might heades but in the 〈◊〉 of the holie ghost which by the sonne of god was 〈◊〉 vpon them this authoritie I saie is no derogation but an euident signe of his mightie power of saluation left for the faithfulls sake in the Church When the person that was lame from his birth begged of Peter and Iohn somewhat for his reliefe at the Temole dore as his manner was Peter answered him that golde and siluer he had none to giue but that which he had he would willinglie bestowe which was power to heale him of his incurable maladie for proofe whereof he bad him arise and walke and so he did at his word in the sight of all that there were gathered which being done and the people wondering thereat the Apostle thus instructed them Brethren faith he why wonder you at vs as though we had brought this strange worke to passe by our owne strength and power it is the God of Abraham Isaac Iacob that hath glorified his sonne Iesus whome you refused and betraied to Pontius Pilatus to be crucified in his name and faith this poore man is recouered Marcke well that the same thing which peter said him selfe had to giue quod habeo tibi do the same yet he professeth that he holdeth not as of his owne right or might but as of Christ Iesus in whose name he willed the lame to walke euen so the the power of pardoning sinner is truely and properly in the Priestes as the power of working miracles is properly in Peters hands neither the one noryet the other holden as of their owne might and power but both practized for the glory of God in the name of Iesus of Nazareth by their appointed ministery And as truly as Peter might saie to the feeble in body that which I haue I giue thee rise and walke in the name of iesos of Nazareth so surelie may the Priest saie to the sicke in souie that which I haue I giue thee in the name of Iesus thy Ennes my sonne be forgiuen thee No lesse is the one the peculiar worke of God then the other no more doth one dishonor god then the other FVLKE Nothing that is proper or peculiar to God can be communicated to man but it ceaseth to be proper to God For it is against the nature of properties to be made common to any other subiect then to that whereof they are proper adiuncts And yet I denie not but that which is proper to God he doth exercise often times by the seruice or ministery of men in which they are but instrumental causes he him selfe is the principal efficient otherwise man maie not occupie or execute secondly or thirdly or last of all by waie of participation that which is proper or peculiar to God So that it remaneth still an vndoubted truth that God onelie doth forgiue sinnes properlie and man doth not forgiue sinnes properlie but is the instrument of God to vtter and declare the good pleasure of God in forgiuing sinnes to all and euerie one that repent and beleeue the Gospe ll Your general negatiue that there is no function power nor dignitie be it neuer so peculiar to God by naturall excellencie but it maie be occupied of man secondly as by the waie of seruice ministery or participation if it were vrged against you would breed horrible absurdities To omit all other the power of creating thinges of nothing by what meanes maie man be partaker thereof occupie it or exercise it But let vs consider your induction All Miraculous workes worught by Christ in his humanitie the Prophets or Apostles were no lesse proper to God then the power to remit sinnes Yes verilie for manie miraculous workes that God did by Moses the inchaunters of Egipt did the like by the power of the deuill whereby it appeareth that although ail power be deriued from God as from the first cause thereof euen that power which the deuill hath yet it is otherwise communicated to creatures then the power of remission of sinnes is For that remaineth onelie in the hande of God and is not properlie
some to be obstinate or dissemblers he may know who is to be bound and who to be loosed which he cānot do by hearing the diuersity of their sins For if their sins be as red as scarlet if they be truelie penitent they are to be loosed and if they seeme neuer so small if they be not repentant nor humblie contrite in heart for them they are to be bound While you seeke to make a difference betweene the authoritie of the minister in the Ghospell of pardoning sinnes more properlie then the priest clensed the Leper you declare that you are not content with the sentence of Saint Ierome nor of so many of the auncient fathers as made the case all alike And where you saie it was not said vnto them as vnto ours whomsoeuer you punish with Leprosie or make vncleane he shal haue a Leprosie you speake beside the booke For this authoritie was giuen to them that they should make cleane or vncleane and whomesoeuer they made cleane he was admitted into the congregation and whomesoeuer they made vncleane he was so accounted of all men Yet properlie they made neither cleane nor vncleane but declared them so to be according to the institution which they had of Gods law in exercise whereof although they erred and so the partie might be receiued or refused according to their error yet was he neither cleane nor vncleane in deede by their sentence but by the work of God and so be sinners The blasphemie that you ascribe to Saint Hilarie I haue confuted before Your distinction of prius natura and quoad nos is foolish sophistrie in this case For except God first worke in our hearts by his holie spirit faith of forgiuenes we can haue but small comfort in the priests absolution That God doth alwaies wörke at the instant in which Baptisme is ministred it is false if Saint Augustines doctrine be true who reacheth that Baptisme may be receiued out of the Church but cannot haue effect but in the Church that is if the partie came from heresie and submit him selfe to the Catholike Church ALLEN And so it is in penance where God the principall and the priest the secondarie or seruisable cause ioyntlie forgiue together For so the words of institution of this sacrament doe moste plainlie conuince whose sinnes you shall forgiue they beforgiuen he speaketh in the present tence as though he would saie as you forgiue them or reteine them ipso facto I forgiue them or reteine them And therefore sauing the honour of the Master of the sentences he had not good consideration when he did holde as some other did after him that first mans sinnes be remitted by God in his contrition and purpose to come to the sacrament and afterwarde the same remission to be declared by the priests and as it were confirmed by his approbation in confession being therein partlie deceiued by the saying of Saint Hierome before alledged whome he tooke perchaunce to haue compared in all respects the office of the olde Priest for the viewe of the vncleane and ours of the new law in the iudgement vsed vpon mans sinnes and partlie as I take it by a sentence of Saint Augustine which compared together the receiuing of Lazarus by Christ and the Disciples loosing his bandes to Christes pardoning of sinnes first and then the priests loosing the same afterward in the face of the Church This to be shorte is a peece of Saint Augustines sentence Quid ergo facit Ecclesia cui dictum est Quae solueritis in terra erunt soluta nisi quod ait Dominus soluite illum sinite abire What doth the Church then to whome it was said vhatsoeuer you loose it shall be loosed Marie she doth that which our Lorde saied loose him and let him goe Wherein Saint Augustine meaneth nothing els but that Christ is the principall agent and that he properlie doth giue life to the soull the Priest for all that beeing his seruant and minister therein and therefore by nature is a latter agent in the same worke which els as I haue prooued ioynilie perteineth to them both for that the effect of a Sacrament commeth not to any man till it be receiued except it be in certaine cases of necessitie where the parties can not obteine the externall rse of the appointed element though they earnestlie desire the same But how the olde Priests office touching the Lepers of the law representeth our sacrament of the priests ministerie in the new Testament and how farre ours which is the truth excelleth that which was but a shadow of ours Saint Chrysostome doth excellentlic declare and therewith fullie may put out of doubt all men that our Priests properlie worke remission of sinnes as ministers in the same diuine action and not as declarers or approouers of that effect which before was wrought by God himselfe Thus he saith Corporis lepram purgare seu veriùs dicam haud purgare quidem sed purgatos probare Iudaeorum sacerdotibus solis liccbat at verò nostris sacerdotibus non corporis lepram verùm animae sordes non dico purgatas probare sed purgare prorsus concessum cst Quamobrem mco iudicio qui istos despiciunt contemnuntque multò sceleratiores ac maiori supplicio digni fuerint quà m fuerit Dathan vnà cum suis omnibus That is to saie To purge the Leprosie of the bodie or ells to saie as it was in deede not to purge but to discerne who were cleane was graunted onelie to the Priests of the olde law but it is fullie graunted to our Priests not to purge the bodilie lcprosie nor to snew who are cleaner purged but vtterlie to purge the verie filth of mans soull Therefore by my iudgement whosoeuer doe contemne or despise them they are much more worthie punishment then the disobedient Dathan with all his companie Thus saith this holie Father with many wordes moe which were worthie all consideration and rememberance in this case if the matter were not so abundant that it may not suffer ouer long abode in one place lest iniurie be done to other braunches of the cause no lesse necessarie to be knowne for full vpholding the truth thereof FVLKE Your argument taken of Christs speaking in the present tense is vaine and of no force to prooue that the forgiuenes or reteining of God and man concurre in one instant For in the latter sentence of reteining the verbe is of the preterperfect tense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but in the same sense that the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the former sentence which is of the present tence proouing Gods forgiuenes to goe before mans declaration thereof The Master of the sentences is litle beholding to you that doc so flatlie condemne him of error whereas he did write nothing in this point which was not commonly receiued in the Church of Rome in his time and long after For among the articles in quibus Magister non tenetur there is
none can be bound or absolued but of his owneiudge we thinke that the foresaid remissions doe profit them onelie to whome that they might profit their owne iudges haue spirituallie or speciallie graunted Also the glosse vpon this decretall the author whereof liued after the Later an Councell saith that it was an olde complaint and yet in his daies verie doubtfull to what purpose these remissions or pardons were profitable remissiones ad quid valeant vetus est querela adhuc tamen satis dubia and rehearseth foure seuerall opinions concerning the validitie of them Some saie they auaile onelie towarde God but not toward the church Secondlie other saie that they auaile toward the Church but not toward God Thirdlie other saie that as they are giuen they auaile both toward God and toward the Church And the fourth saith that they auaile onclie to the remission of that penance which is negligentlie omitted To which the glosse addeth his opinson agreeing fullie with none of them all nor with the later Canonists Among which opinions you haue patched vp your wauering sētence of the validity or inualidity of pardons in this Chapter This diuersity of opinions among the Papists themselues argueth that the doctrine of pardons was verie raw and not halse digested in those daies The agreeablenes thereof with the worde of God and the practize of the primitiue Church when it shall be shewed we shal thinke better of them in the meane time you must bring better proofe out of the scriptures for them then you doe for Popish Bishops blessing out of the 10. of Saint Matthew or ells we shall haue litle cause to esteeme them more then it ALLEN Truelie that holypeace which Christ gaue to his Apostles at his comming into them at his departure from them and ells as 〈◊〉 entreth vpon any holie action signified nothing ells but an agreement and peace of mans soull with God and did no doubt purge them from their dailie infirmities which we call veniall sinnes and the bonde of all paine as it may be thought due for the same that in the presense of Gods maiestie sinne might cease and the parties appeere cleane afore his face that had nospot of sinne in himselfe at all as by the saied peace yet giuen to the worthie receiuers by holie Bishopps ministerie some like effect doth surelie ensue I vse this terme of peace when I speake of pardons not because they are preciselie meant in the action of giuing peace common to Christ his Apostles but because I see the olde fathers lightlie call that peace which we now call pardoning and perchance they did allude to that which Christ willed his Disciples to bestow on euerie householde for a kind of blessing Which no doubt was some great benefite and so great that our Master signified vnto them that many should be vnworthie of it and that the fruite thereof should redound to them-selues Which caused both Bishops of olde for Saint Augustine maketh mention therof to giue their blessings and euerie man humblie to require the same on their knees whereby surelie some spirituall grace was receiued and remission either of veniall trespaces or paine due vnto for̄mer sinnes giuen Let apish Camites here mocke and mow at their Mother as they customablie doe whiles the obedient children the discreete and deuout of Gods Church thinke it an high point of wisedome onelie to consider the maruelous direction of our fathers waies in the doctrine of discipline and awe of Gods relgion FVLKE That peace which Christ gaue to his Apostles was the quietnes of conscience reconciled to god and discharged of all sinnes and the paine due to satisfie gods righteousnes for them and the same peace did Christ send his Apostles to offer preach and wish to all them that would receiue it which if they refused became vnprofitable to them But the Popish Bishops blessing which consisteth in shaking his fingers and murmering some wordes perhapps not vnderstood of the people whome they neuer teach what the peace of conscience meaneth is no better then a vilde mockery of the peace that Christ gaue and willed his Apostles to offer where they became Whereas you alledge Saint Augustine for the antiquitie of the Bishops blessing it is a friuolous matter For he maketh no other mention but that after earnest praierhad bin made for patience and constancie of faith in one that was the next daie with daunger of his life to be cut for a fistula both by the partie himselfe a Bishop and many other Godlie persons then present that they arose from praier accepta ab episcopo benedictione discessimus and hauing receiued blessing of the Bishop we departed How can the superstitious blessing of Popish Bishops be resembled to this but onelie in the name of blessing For here is no requiring of it on knees nor any opinion of remission of sinnes by it but onely a Christian salutation or farewell by praier mentioned which all Godlie Bishops and elders doe in our Church vse euen at this daie speciallie in dimission of a Godlie congregation gathered to heare the preaching to praier or participation of the sacraments or such holie purposes which all Christians do esteeme as it becommeth them without making an Idoll of the minister or trusting in the ceremonie confirming their faith in God by the praior and blessing of his seruants in his name in whome is all their hope trust and ioye reposed That the Bishops beeing the highest ministers of Gods Church and namelie the Pope as the principall of the rest may onelie lawfullie giue Pardons and in what sense the soules depatted may be releiued by the same THE 11. CHAP. ALLEN OF the necessarie disposition of them that should effectuallie receiue benefit by the pardons of the Church and of the right intent of them that should giue the same wee haue already sufficiently spoken And now perchance some may thinke it necessarie that it should be opened brieflie in whome this authoritie of releasing the paines inioyned for sinne doth principallie consist Whereof I shall with better will bestow a few wordes because we shall haue occasion thereby to open the common sense of a wholl Councel both learned and godly touching the matter of Pardons in the iudgement whereof assuredlie proceeding from the holy ghost we may with safetie take our rest Of the lawfull minister therefore of these remissions the scripture in precise tearmes prescribeth nothing though the power of binding and loosing whereupon the matter standeth is prooued properlie to be an act of the keie namelie of iurisdiction and externall regiment which agreeth not to the simple Priestes hauing no further iurisdiction but in the secret court of mans conscience Wherupon as also by the vsage of all ages and by the prescription of the lawe it is prooued that Bishops onely or such as haue their authority for the execution of their office may lawfullie giue remission of satisfactions appointed for sinnes remitted Neither were it
Ierusalem he thus mooueth himselfe to mercie Circuite vias Ierusalem a spicite considerate quaerite in plateis eius an inuenias virum facientem iudicium quaerentem fidem propitius ero ei Looke round about the citie and veiw the streets thereof and haue good consideration whether anie one maie be found there that doth instice and studeth after faithfullnes and I will haue mercie on the Citie In the fift of Ieremie Where you maie perceiue that God wil forgiue all for ones desertes and that the good workes of one maie by Gods iustice supplie the lacke of manie other not yet to deliuer anie man from euerlasting damnation that is impenitent and therefore in case and state of eternall death For the worke of the faithfull can not extend to do good to such as be for euer separated from their fellowship and therfore can be no members of the common bodie in the firme knot whereof onelie their is mutuall health and healpe among such as partlie lacke and partly do abound for release of the rodde of temporall correction that is often laied vpon the children and not of anie eternall punishment that onelie happeth to such as be separated and cut of effectuallie from Christes bodie which is the Church for euer FVLKE You continue still in Chrysostomes argument but you follow neither his wordes nor his meaning for he speaketh neither of meriting nor satisfying For his wordes are these immediatlie following that which I haue last rehearsed Haec nos Saepe facimus famulos qui peccauerunt dignos suppliciis nolentes punire neque à supplicij metu liberari anico iubemus vt illos è nostris eripiant manibiatque vt ita timor illorum in eis crescat nostra effugiant verbera Hoc Deus fecit Et quòd hoc sit verīs ex ipsis verb is manifestum est Dimitte me inquit irascar Etenim nullus remittit qui punire vult tuncenim irascimur Ipse autem dicit dimitte me irascar vt scias quodirain Deo non sit affectio sed pana in nos eo vocabulo nominetur Quando igitur audis Mosem dicentem siquidem dimittis pecceatum dimitte prae seruo Dominum obstupesee quod ipse fibi ipsi miserecordiae occasionem quaerit Non hîc autem solum hoc fecit sed ad Ieremiam ad Ezechielem idem hoc dicit circuite videte in viis Hierusalem num sit qui faciat iudicium insticiam miserieors ero cis Vidisti misericordiam Multietiam impij vnius virture simul fruuntur Multorum autem malitia quamuis vnus sit qui rectè agat in medio magni populi non 〈◊〉 Sed vnes quidem homo rectè viuens populum integrumeri pere potest ab ira Dei. Ciuitas autem integra per nersaque in suam poenam supplicium attrahere bene viuentem dietecre non potest Et hoc de Noe manifestum Pereuntibus enim omnibus solus seruatus est Et de Mose clarum est Solus enim potuit tanto populo impetrare veniam This doe we also oftentimes and being nether willing to punish our seruants worthie of punishment which haue offended nor to deliuer them from the feare of punishmēt we bid our friends that they should deliuer them out of our handes and that so their feare maie increafe in them and they maie auoide our stripes This did god also that this is true it is manifest out of the verie wordes Let me alone saith he and I will be angrie for no man relenteth that will punish for then we are angrie But he saith let me alone and I will be angrie that thou maiest know that anger in God is no affection but punishment toward vs is named by that terme Therefore when thou hearest Moses saying If thou doest forgiue this sin forgiue it wonder at the Lord in comparison of the seruant that he him selfe seeketh vnto him selfe occasions of mercie Neither did he this thing here onelie but also vnto Ieremie and Ezechtel he saith the same thing go round about and see in the waies of Ierusalem whether there be anie that doth iudgement and iustice and I will be mercifull vnto them Hast thou seene his mercie manie also vngodlie persons enioy the vertue of one man together And by the malice of manie although there be but one that doth well in the middest of a great people he doth not fall But one man truelie liuing well maie deliuer a whole people from the wrath of God but a wholl communaltie that is peruerse cannot draw into their paine and punishment him that liueth well nor cast him downe And this is manifest of Noe for when all perished he alone was preserued And of Moses it is cleere For he alone was able to obteine pardon for so great a people In all these wordes here is no mention or meaning of merit or satisfaction but onelie of mercie as appeereth in the example of men requiring their friendes to deliuer their seruants from punishment where not the worthines of the friendes can be the cause but the mercie of the Master Againe he speaketh of the auoiding of temporall plagues in this life whereof euen the vngodlie and they that perteine not to the communion of Saints often times are partakers which proceedeth of the loue of God towards his children and not of their merite which you confesse can not extend to them that be for euer separated from their fellowship ALLEN Neither doe the desertes onelie of the liuing helpe the necessitie of their fellow members being yet aliue but such as bedead also doe communicate in their workes with their brethren yet abiding in this world And God of his singular mercy is often contented to be answered by them for their poore fellow seruants that be indebted so far in the Church that they be not hable in their owne persons to dscharge their owne debt nor come out of the same whereof the said Saint Chrysostome doth excellentlie well consider in these wordes of his sermon de poenitentia mihi autem saieth he aliud maius est diuinae misericordiae iudicium quod dicam Cum enim non inuenis homines viuos fiducia praeditos qui possint intercedendo veniam obtinere confugit ad defunctos per illos inquit se remissurum peccata Ezechiae enim dicit protegam ciuitatem hanc propter me propter Dauid puerum meum Olim enim mortuus erat Dauid That is to saie I haue yet a plainer and greater token of Gods mercie which I will shew you For when he findeth none aliue that be of confidence which might by intercession procure pardon he turneth to the departed and saieth he will remit sins for their sakes For he spake to Ezechias thus I will defend this citie for my owne sake and my child Dauids sake and yet Dauid was dead long afore FVLKE This place of Chrysostome followeth immediately
fit of the common wealth Besides this he imputeth to those warres the Turkes gaine of Hungary and whatsoeuer calamitie insued thereupon As though the first miserie of Hungary beganne not at the breath of the league with the Turke whereof the Pope was cause The next which fel in Luthers time when Belgrade was taken was long before any wars were mooued by the Protestantes or against them and so was that ouerthrow in which Lewes the King was ouerthrowen and slaine Al other inuasions of Hungarie by the Turk haue beene by occasion of the claime which Ferdinande the Emperours brother made to that kingdome wherein be was resisted by the Vaiuode of Transiluania The cōquest against the Turk that Frarin dreameth of might be atchiued by occasion of his ouerthrow at Malta were not these dissentions in religion I passe ouer as a thing to be wished for rather then loked for vntil God se the good time When all was Poperie and no appearance of dissention in religion the Turke neuerthelesse gained and Christendome went to wracke Therefore moste vnreasonablelie is the Turkes gaine and our losse imputed to the Protestants warres whoe mooue none but such as are necessarie for defence of religion and the common wealth when they are lawfullie called thereunto Likewise the shutting vp of the schoole dores and the solitarines of diuerse vniuersities in Fraunce which is an vsuall effect of warre must be laied to the charge of them whose oppression crueltie and tyrannie inforced those warres That Luther despised the vniuersitie of Louaine and called it a stable of Asset stewes and schoole of the diuell it was not for hatred of good learning but in contempt of those Barbarous doltes which in those daies opposed them selues against the light of the truth Erasmus whome all men knewe to haue deserued verie well of good learning writeth as hardlie of the vniuersitie of Louaine in respect of the multitude of vnlearned sophisters which were in that time as Luther saying there was no place for the muses there where so manie hogges grunted where so manie asses routed so many Camells blattered so many Iaies chattered so many pies prattled But doctor Cox is chardged to answer why the schooles in Oxford were suffered to go downe in King Edwardes time and the ordinarie disputations in Logick and Philosophie were left of Not for contempt of learning I warrant you but either because the Papistes his predecessers had so wasted the vniuersitie stock as it was not sufficient to set them vp or els because those litle celles were thought to be vnsufficient for so famous an vniuersitie and therefore they hoped that through liberalitie of the king or of the nobles a more magnificall building able to receiue the multitude of that vniuersitie should haue beene erected In the meane time the exercises of learning ceased not in euery colledge no nor yet the ordinary disputations inlogick and philosophie were left of but remooued to a more publike place namelie to Saint Maries Church where Master Warde the great professor of philosophie in the hearing of manie yet a liue did exercise the same by meanes of which good learning was as much promoted in King Edwardes time as euer it was before or since Naie saith Frarine they haue set their heades together and fullie agreed among them selues to banish the greeke and latine tongues quite and cleane out of the country O monster of impudencie who hath more deserued of the Greeke Latine Hebrew Caldy Syrian and Arabique tongues then such as haue bene professours of the Gospell Who are found in all places better learned in the tongues then they who haue more care to instruct youth in the knowledge of the tonges then they I knew the vniuersitie of Cambridge in Queene Maries time and this I dare be bolde to saie there are more good Grecians in one of the litle colledges now then was in those daies in the wholl vniuersitie But it is a great confirmation of Frarines or Fowlers senslesse slaunder that a preacher in the diocesse of Sarum beeing ignorant in the Latine tongue thanked God that he had neuer learned that Romish and Papisticall tongue If any such thing were it shewed the folly of one man which might be requited with an hundred mery tales of Sir Ihon Lacklatines in poperie if a man were disposed to blot paper with such bables But their ouerthrow of schooles and vniuersities saith he they excuse by bringing all knowledge into the mother tongue and by inuenting a compendious order of teaching wherby children in short time may profit more then auncient men in many yeares of olde time True it is that much knowledge is brought into the vulgare tongue for the benefit of them which haue not studied the learned languages and the methode of teaching hath found an easie waie in shorte time to great knowledge learning but it is vtterlie false that any such excuse is made for the ouerthrow of schooles and vniuersities which the professours of Christiā religion desire by al meanes to be mainteined and increased as there is manifest experience in all places where our religion is imbraced by publike authoritie When Luther burnt certeine bookes of the Canon law he meant no decay of good learning but protested against the heresie blasphemie of the Pope of which those bookes were full who neuerthelesse most iniuriouslie condemned Luther vnhard burnt his bookes vnconfuted Whatsoeuer Corolostadius did against good learning seeing Frarine confesieth it was misliked by Luther what should the blame therof extend any further then the offendour But Frarine wisheth they had beene satisfied with burning of bookes and had not proceeded to burning of men cutting of throtes tearing chopping in peèces with much foolish amplification of their crueltie in generall tearmes All which might be exemplified more truelie of Popish tyrannie in time of peace then it can be verified of any outrage committed in time of warre allowed by the Princes and captaines of the fielde or by the preachers and teachers of the Gospel But at length he descendeth to some particulars calleth forth Beza to tell him why he went vp to the pulpit in Orlians with his sword by his side and a pistolate in his hand and exhorted the people to shew their manhood rather in killing the papists then in breaking of images al which was reported to him at Orlians Although in time of warre it were not much to be wondered if the peacher especiallie in such places where be manie traiterous enimies as were that time in Orlians should be armed as well as other men yet it hath bene reported vnto me by them which heard dailie Beza preaching at Orlianes that there was no such matter But if he exhorted soldiers to exercise their manhoode against their enimies rather then vpon stokes and stones seing the warre was lawfull and necessarie I see not whie he should be reprehended The rest which followeth wherein he is charged with murther of