Christians and Catholikes who could ether perceaue what I meant or who would not iudge that I did them great iniury in making them to write against Christians which none do but Iewes Turkes or against Catholikes vvhich none do but heretikes and Apostataes And marueil it is that the name of Protestātes is novv grovven into so great dislike vvhich hitherto hath bene so magnified in bookes pulpits and ordinarie phrase of talke and vvhich M. Fox in his huge volume of Actes and Monumentes alvvayes vseth as most proper to their gospel maketh it opposite sometimes to Papistes somtimes to Catholikes which he vseth for one But the truth is those that professe the English faith and religion ether haue no name at al to be knovven by but the common name of heretikes vvhich is to general and vvould be to odious or their most propre name is Zuinglians or Sacramentaries For to cal them Catholikes and Christians besides that it is false and ridiculous and may vvith like probabilitie be chalenged of euery other kind of secte Lutheran Brentian Arrian Puritan besides that their greatest vvriters mocke and scorne at the name Catholike as Popish and superstitious besides this I say it expresseth not that particular religion in vvhich they differre from the rest of the Christian vvorld for vvhich vve vvrite against them and for vvhich the Lutheranes oppose thē selues against them and vvhich by their name ought specially to be signified The name of Protestantes which commonly they vsurpe is wrongfully chalenged of them as which duely only belongeth to the Lutheranes who for opposing them selues against the decrees of the Empyre Emperour touching Catholike religion and protesting that they would stand in defence of their owne according to the Confession exhibited at Auspurg were first for their so doing and protesting named Protestantes as much to say as men that stood and protested against the Catholike faith for their priuate in such sort as hath bene noted From which Confession of theirs as likewise from al other communion those of the English religion vvere by the name of Zuinglians expresly excluded And briefly that no other name can be duely applied vnto them besides the name of Zuinglians by this reason it may playnely appeare When they brake from the rest of the Christian vvorld vvhich they say vvas couered vvith palpable darkenes and betooke them selues to that light of the gospel vvhereof novv they so much brag and boast vvho vvas their maister ringleader and Apostle therein but Huldericus Zuinglius So much they vvrite most euidently in the Apologie of their English church In the middest of that darknes say they those most excellent men Martin Luther and Hulderike Zuinglius sent from God to illuminate the vvhole vvorld first came to the Gospel Missi à Deo ad illustrandum terrarum orbem primū accesserunt ad Euangelium Now whereas them selues al other name those gospellers which folow Luthers sense and interpretation by the name of Lutherans they vvho prefer Zuinglius before Luther and professe them selues to haue receaued the light of the Gospel from him hovv should they be called but Zuinglians not only for like reason vvhich hath bene vsed in al times and ages from the first beginning of the primitiue Church vvhere the Secte-maisters haue geuen appellation to their after-commers as in Marcion Valentinus Carpocrates Nouatus the rest but much more and especially because them selues chalenge him for their maister in their particular faith and religion And therefore it can not be avoided but as Luthers scholers are called Lutherans so Zuinglius disciples ought of like right to be called Zuinglians And to end this quarel our aduersaries them selues who haue written of these matters shal serue to quite vs of al fault M. Fox in his storie when soeuer he speaketh of that sect vvhich him self best-liked ordinarily calleth them sometime Protestants sometime Hussites sometime at large men forward in promoting the proceedings of the gospel sometime more briefly Gospellers And writing precisely of the diuision betvvene Luther and Zuinglius he saith VVith Luther in the opinion of the Sacrament consented the Saxons vvith the other side of Zuinglius vvent the Heluetians and as time did grow so the diuision of these opinions increased in sides and spread in farther realmes and countries the one part being called of Luther Lutherans the other hauing the name of Sacramentaries So in Sleidan vve haue very common the name of Zuinglians and Sacramentaries as likewise he calleth the other part Lutherans and their religion Lutheranisme and euen so they termed them selues It were tedious to iustifie this out of Luther Zuinglius especially al historigraphers of our age And in truth it is much like as if a man should light a candle at noone-tide Wherefore in this we must desyre our aduersaries to beare with vs if we speake not only as al Catholikes but as al Protestants as Luther as Sleidan as M. Fox as generally al writers in their bookes and volumes are accustomed to speake and as the world of thē hath learned and as the aduersaries them selues by al reason induce vs to speake and as of necessitie we must speake if we wil speake and be vnderstoode Touching any other fault I shal be ready ether to defēd it or to correct it to correct it if it be noted against me iustly to defend it if it be obiected vndeseruedly this I protest not only in words as cōmonly do al Protestantes but in simplicitie of truth as meaning to performe the same And therefore willingly I submit what so euer I haue written to the iudgment of al Catholikes symply and with out exception to whom iudgment of these matters appertaineth to the iudgment of al Protestants euen of M. W. him selfe so far furth as he shal geue censure of it and refel it by the written word of God expounded according to the analogie of faith A TABLE OF THE CHAPTERS Chap. I. Of Luthers contemning S. Iames his Epistle and calling it stramineam Pag. 1. Chap. II. Of the Canonical scriptures and that the English cleargie in accepting some and refusing others are lead by no learning or diuinitie but by mere opinion fantasie Pa. 19. Chap. III. How M.W. defendeth Luther preferring his priuate iudgement before al auncient fathers and Doctors Pag. 42. Chap. IIII. Of priesthod and the sacrifice continued after Christ in the state of the new testament and that it derogateth nothing from Christ Pa. 56. Chap. V. Of Penance and the value of good workes touching iustificatiō and life eternal Pag. 82. Chap. VI. How vnreasonably M.W. behaueth him self in reprouing and approuing the auncient fathers for their doctrine touching good workes Pag. 114. Chap. VII Of M. Iewels challenge renewed by M. W. and the vanitie and falshod thereof Pag. 129. Chap. VIII Of Beza corruptly trāslating a place of scripture Act. 3. and of the real presence Pag. 169.
of Protestāts pa. 411. M. W. inuectiue against the Annotations of the nevv Testament page 476. The summe thereof pa. 477. Annotations of the new Testament vvhat they cōteine pa. 484.485 what fault M.W. findeth in them 484.491 Blasphemie in the Annotations touching Christes Priesthod pa. 528.529 Ansvvered 530. vsque ad 542. blasphemie touching merite of vvorkes pa. 543. ansvvered 544 c. Hovv the Protestants fel to cal the Pope of Rome Antichrist in praef pa. 42. M. W. knovveth not vvel vvhat that Antichrist is against vvhom he vvriteth Ibid. pa. 4. The absurditie of that assertion Ibid. pa. 4. The impossibilitie of that opinion 52.53.54 The end of that doctrine 72.73 Arguments ridiculous made by M. W. and attributed to vs. pa. 497.498.499.502.504.510.511.513 such arguments tend to make a mockerie of al faith 516.517.521.522.523 S. Leo the great called Antichrist by Beza pa. 155. The first Apostles of our nation were Papistes and Massing priestes by the cōfession of our aduersaries p. 165.166 Auncient archheretikes the protestants forefathers in sundrie partes of their faith pa. 31.32 S. Athanasius called Sathanasius by the heretikes pa. 84. S. Austin called a blind bussard pa. 166 S. Austin most filthily abused and mangled by the Sacramentaries pa. 166.177 S. Austin a priest 65. S. Austin S. Hierom old papistes 121. B BEza a fierbrand of sedition pa. 231. VVriters against him pa. 232. He correcteth S. Luke and our Sauiour 233.234.236.241 and is defended by M. VV. in so doing 236.237 His reasons 238.239 Refuted ibid. et 240.241 Refuted long ago by Luther 257.258 how he correcteth the new Testament 260.261 Bezaes fault in excusable for ought M. VV. ether hath said or can say 250. He doubteth of a part of S. Iohns gospel 363.364 He furthereth the Anabaptistes against Christes incarnation of the B. virgin 368.369 See Translation of scripture Bible-beaters pa. 400. The Bible neuer so mangled by any as by the protestants 400.401 Their bible is no bible 404.405 See Scriptures Ceremonies in Baptisme pa. 504.505 C Catholike doctrine vnpossible to be ouercome by any heresie least of al by this of our time pa. 41. The name Catholike not applicable to the English religion praef 87.88 Caluin condemneth the auncient fathers for approuing Melchisedecs sacrifice pa. 60.61 Caluin for the real presence pa. 223. Carolostadius exposition of Christes wordes Hoc est corpus meum pa. 254. allovved by Zuinglius 255. Castalios translation of the Testament much commended by the protestants pa. 380. His discours that Christ is not the Messias praef pa. 67.68 The Church catholike after Christes time is euer populous and spread in many nations pa. 350. et praef pa. 62.63 She is the ground of al faith 442. built vpō a rocke vnmoueable 479. No good worke or martyrdom profiteth to saluation out of the Catholike Church 116.117 Infinite difference betvvene the Catholike cause and the Protestante pa. 556.557.558 No stay in faith out of the Catholike Church praef pa. 24. To say that the vvhole Church hath fayled is to deny Christes incarnation pref p. 56.57 58.59 to make him a lyer ib. 66.67 to deny him to be the true Messias ib. 68.69.70.71 The inuisible Church a poetical fansie pref pa. 60. refelled by Melanchton 60.61 by Caluin Oecolampadius and others 62.63.64 the Protestants sensibly cōtradict them selues in deuising it 64.65 The foundation of the English Protestant church pa 480.481.482 The antiquitie thereof 524. It is ful of Atheistes 410. S. Chrysostom for the real presence p. 188.208.215.217.218 his place comparing Christ vvith Elias pa. 207. It proueth inuincibly the real presence a pa. 204. vsque ad 214. S. Chrysost for the sacrifice pa. 214.215 He is almost as ful of lies as words by the protestants doctrine pa. 227. S. Ciril for the real presence p. 198.199.200 D S. Damascene for the real presence pa. 201.202 Dauid George vpon vvhat ground he denied Christ pref pa. 66. Defendere is vvel translated to reuenge pa. 464.465.466.467 The Doctors of the primitiue Church condemned by euery priuate sectarie in that vvherein they gain say his heresie pa. 82.83 by the Zuinglians for approuing the sacrifice of Melchisedech pa. 60. and Masse pa. 69.70.71.72 and for disallowing the mariage of priestes and votaries 83. by the Puritanes for allovving holydaies in the honour of Christ his Saintes 84. by the Trinitarians for acknovvledging the B. Trinitie 84. by the Lutherans for denying the Vbiquetie of Christs body 85. by M. W. for their doctrine of penance and vvorkes 82 11◠and for sayng that Antichrist is one man pref pa. 44.45 See vvorkes E Elias cloke the Zuinglians supper compared together pa. 212.213 Elias shal come before the day of iudgment pa. 494.495 English vvriters 478. their maner of vvriting 284.285.475 and disputing 477. more absurd then others pref pa. 6.7 Those of the English religion are not Protestants pref pa. 88. they are properly called Zuinglians or Sacramentaries ibi 89.90.91 by vvhat names they cal them selues praef pa. 91. hovv they are called by Acte of parlament ibi 21. F The true meaning of Only faith iustifying pa. 280.411.412 Libertinisme the end thereof 127.128 The nature of true Christian faith pa. 517.518.519 hovv one part of faith is applied to the confirmation of an other 521. Ecclesiastical maner of fasting commeth from Christ and his Apostles pa. 89.90 The Zuinglians figure in Christs wordes touching the sacrament pa 251. The figure of the Catholikes ib. infinite difference betvvene these tvvo 252.253.254.255 Freevvil pa. 509. G Grace hindereth nothing the merite of workes pag. 102.103 To say God is the author of synne is to say God is an Idol or a deuil pa 451. The protestants say so 451.453 454. S. Gregorie much praysed by the Protestantes pag. 158. much rayled at by the Protestantes 164. A booke written against him by Vergerius 165. S. Gregorie a priest without al reason made minister by M. Iewel 164. The Greeke Testament more aduantageable for the Catholikes then the common latin pa 283.284 Our common latin Testament more pure then the greeke now extant 361.362.363 The greeke Testament now differeth much from the old 363.364 Additions rashly made to the greeke 365.366.367 Parcels of importance left out of the greeke 367.368.369.370 H HEauen is of grace vvorkes pa. 104.105.106.107 544.545 Of mercy and iustice 105.106 107.108.109 Heauen must receaue Christ Act. 3. v 21 maketh nothing against Christs presence in the sacrament pa. 179.180.181.193 handled at large a pag. 170. vsque ad 175. S. Paule to the Hebrevves as much doubted of in the primitiue church as the epistle of S. Iames. pa. 38.39 The Apostles cited not scripture alwaies according to the hebrue pa. 287.288.289 Bookes of scripture written in hebrue lost 290. S. Hierom preferring the hebrue before the latin in his time iustifieth not the hebrue of our time pa. 297.337 More probable that the hebrue hath bene corrupted then the latin pa. 297.298.299.300 Corruptions in the hebrue pa. 302. in Isai against
Christs diuinitie 303. confessed by Luther 304. cōfessed by Lyra. 306. Item in Ieremie 307. confessed and proued by Lyra. 308.309 in Isai against Christs passion 310.311 confessed by Luther 312.313 item in the psalmes 355. folowed by the Tigurine Translators 358. and Bucer 357. item in Daniel 313. General reasons why the hebrue text can not be so sincere as the heretikes pretend 317.318 c. Many bookes of the Prophetes and histories of the old Testament lost pa. 317.318 Great difference in the hebrue by mistaking one letter for an other pa. 322.323.325 That the hebrue bibles are faultie confessed by Castalio pa. 326.327 by D. Humfrey 327. by Conradus Pellicanus 327. It is a Iewish opinion to thinke them altogether faultles 327. They haue great diuersitie of reading 331.332 somewhat wanteth in them 332.333 Although S. Hierom appealed from the latin to the hebrue yet the like reason is not now pa. 333.334 He confesseth and proueth the hebrue to be faultie 334.335.336 An argument commonly made for the puritie of the hebrue pa. 338.339 answered 339 340. c. S. Iustine proueth the Iewes to haue corrupted their bible pa. 341.342.343.344 Hebrue knowledge much aduaunced by Catholikes pa. 352.440 The hebrue tonge much subiect to cauilling pa. 431.432.433 See Rabbines A man must haue a setled faith before he confer greeke and hebrue textes pa. 441.442 best Hebritians are not best Christians pa. 441. our first Apostles planted perfite christianitie without hebrue pa. 345. Heretikes generally geuen to scorning pa. 511. S. Hierom condemned as ignorant of al diuinitie pa. 371. I S. Iames epistle refused by Luther Lutherans Zuinglians pa. 8.9.10.11.12 et 17.22.23 Caluin mangleth it 288.289 M. Ievvels challenge pa. 133.138 The true image thereof 133. vsque ad 138. It is grounded vpon no reason or learning 138.139.140.141 It cōtaineth in effect only three articles the primacie of the Sea Apostolike the real presence and the sacrifice 133.136.137.138 See of them in their seueral places M. Ievvels passing vanitie in bragging and lying pa. 460. his maner of ansvvering D. Harding pref 75.76 Reuerence done to the name of Iesus pa. 513.514.515 The Ievves corrupt the text of scripture pa. 304. in despite of Christians 314.329 negligent in conseruing their scriptures 328.329 their malice against the Sea of Rome 329.330 Very probable that Christ reprehended them for corrupting the scripture 339. See Hebrue S. Iohn Baptist liued a monastical life pa. 492. K That the vvise men vvhich came to worship Christ were kings pa. 485. vsque ad 489. that they vvere three 489. 490. their names 490.491 L S. Lukes gospel called in question pa. 27.28.29.32 Luthers vvorkes altered and corrupted by the Lutherans pa. 5 6.13 by the Caluinists 7. He denieth S. Iames epistle p. 11. his immoderate bragging 42. his extreme hatred of the Sacramentaries 43.44.45.46 his iudgment of their religion 52.53.483 he refuseth their bibles 45. singularly honoured by the English church 18.191 preferred by M. W. before al doctors 47. most absurdly 48.50 He derideth the Zuinglians fond arguments 258. Luther a shameful corrupter of scripture 377.378 Lucians true histories praef pa. 4.5 M Heretical martyrs damned pa. 117. S. Matthevv vvrote his gospel in hebrue pa. 290. the protestants hold the greeke translatiō more autentical 291. The protestants reason against the Machabees is as forcible against S. Luke S. Paul 506.507.508 Melchisedech did sacrifice pa. 57. graūted by M. W. denied by al other protestants pa. 58.59.60 acknovvleged by the auncient fathers 60. vvhy not expressed by the Apostle 61.537 c. Melanchthon for the real presence pa. 190. Merite of vvorkes See in Heauen and vvorkes N Noueltie of vvords daungerous in Christian religion pa. 266.267 exemplified 268.269 it induceth contempt of faith 270. and leadeth to paganisme 276.277.278 O Only faith See Faith P Penance what it is by the Protestants doctrine 86.90.91 It reiecteth external workes of fasting discipline ibid. which are required by the scripture 87.88.89 90. by S. Cypian and the primitiue church 124.125 the Catholike doctrine touching the value of them 92. the Protestantes contradictory argument against them 91. 93.94 S. Peters being at Roome denyed most absurdly pa. 130.131.132 his primacie 498.510 Pilgrimage to holy places pa. 502. 503.512.513 Primacie of the Romane Sea proued euidently by those fathers whom M. Iewel nameth his maisters to the contrary pa. 143. by Anacletus and Xystus 143.144 by S. Leo 146 147. S. Leo gouerneth in al partes of Christēdom 147.148.149 his authoritie ouer the bishop of Constantinople 148. he summoneth general Councels 152. he is head of them 153. no lawful Councel without his approbation 152. This primacie is grounded vpon Christes words and the Apostles ordinance 143.144.153 S. Gregorie accompteth the Romane Church head of al other pa. 156.158 his authoritie ouer the bishop of Constantinople 156. ouer the bishops of Europe Asia and Africa 156.157 158.162.163 The Protestants common obiection taken out of S. Gregorie answered pa. 159.160.161.162 the name vniuersal in what sort and sense disliked by S. Gregorie pa. 160.161.163 Priestes properly so called were appointed by Christ pa. 64. S. Austin such a priest 64.65.66 So was S. Leo and S. Hierom. 69. The church of Christ was neuer ruled but by such priests 67.68.69 Such were the orderers of our Ecclesiastical state and builders of our churches in England 68. S. Paules discourse of Christs eternall priesthod Hebr. 7. maketh nothing against the priesthod of the church pag. 74. vsque ad 79. The name of Protestants praef pa. 88.90 It agreeth not properly to our English gospellers ibi In their faith there is no stay or certaintie praef pa. 7.24.37 Exemplified by the Supremacie of princes ibid 9.10 by baptisme 11.12 Confirmation 13. Christs descending into hel 14. Christs diuinitie 14.15 Rebellion against princes 15.16 Regimēt of women 18. great difference in their Communion bookes 11.12.13 the diuers chaunges of religion in England since the time of schisme 20.21.22 In the Protestants vvriting and disputing there is no ground pref pa. 8. exemplified by their refusal of scriptures ibid. pa. 26. Apostolical Traditions and general Councels ibi Auncient fathers 27. Apostles Doctors of their owne 28.29.30 Martirs and whole Churches of their owne 30.31.32 They reduce al to priuate fansie 35.36.37.38 They passe the auncient heretikes in denial of al things pa. 38.39 their manifold Popes 33.34 The forefathers of the Protestants church pa. 349. of whom they must looke for the true scripture 348.351 a true confession of a principal protestant 407. their churches voyd of al truth and knowledge 407.408 they perswade Atheisme by scripture 408.409 al their preaching and writing tendeth therevnto 410.411.428 their vaunting of the cleare light of the gospel sensibly refuted 408. The Protestants maner of ansvvering the Catholikes pag. 412. They deny al Doctors 413. They deny sundry partes of scripture 413.414 They pretend the greeke 415. They falsely translate the greeke 416. They refuse the ordinary sense of the greeke
shaken Alleage the auncient fathers not one or other but al together affirming one and the self same thing they answere If you argue from the vvitnesse of men be they neuer so learned and auncient vve yelde no more to their vvordes in cause of faith and religion then vve perceaue to be agreable to scripture Nether thinke you your self to haue proued any thing although you bring against vs the vvhole consent and svvarme of fathers except that vvhich they say be iustified not by the voice of men but of God himself And it is their common maner as to make smale accompt of any author that is against them so least of al of the old auncient fathers whom some of them are not ashamed in most despiteful sort to cal Pillorie doctors But this their behauiour towards the auncient fathers and Doctors that be of our Church may seeme in the iudgement of many to stand with reason For why may it be said should they be bound to our Austins HieroÌ„s and Cyprians more then we wil be bound to their Luthers Caluins and Melanchthons At the least then say we they ought to be ruled by doctors of their owne such as they cal and honour for Apostles Euaâ—geâ—istes of their new church and beleefe Yet when the authoritie of such is pressed against them it weigheth no deeper then of those other whom they cal pillorie doctors For how freely contemne they Martin Luther how freely reiect they Hulderike Zuinglius VVe receaue M. Caluin saith T.C. and vveigh of him as of the notablest instrument that the lord hath stâ—rred vp for the purging of his churches and restoring of the playne and sincere interpretation of the scriptures vvhich hath bene since the Apostles time And yet vve do not so reade his workes that vve beleeue any thing to be true because he saith it but so far as vve caÌ„ esteeme that that vvhich he saith doth agree vvith the Canonical scriptures The very self same answere geueth the contrary part wheÌ„ the same mans iudgement is obiected against him I reuerence M. Caluin saith D.W. as a singular man and a vvorthy instrument in Christes church But I am not so vvholy addicted vnto him that I vvil contemne other mens iudgmentes in diuers points not fully agreing vvith him c. vvhen as in my opinion they come neerer to the true meaning and sense of scripture then he doth And because the course of this new diuinitie is now brought to rest most of al on the credit of these reuereÌ„d fathers and doctors and in steede of the auncient forme of alleaging T. us saith S. Chrysostom thus S. Augustin thus S. Basil the fashion is now to alleage Thus saith M. Caâ—uin thus M. Bucer thus M. Bullinger therefore thorough varietie somewhat to avoyde tediousnes and not greue to much the eares of their auditors by flat denyal diuers wayes and reasons haue they to passe ouer when they please the authoritie of such their owne doctors and maisters One way and the same very playne is to refuse them because they were men As for example If you presse me vvith M. Martyrs and M. Bucers authoritie I first say they vvere men and therefore though othervvise very vvatchful yet such as slept somtymes A second way is because they had some other error as M. Bucer you say allovveth priuate baptisme and consequently the baptisme by vvomen It may be that as M. Bucer although othervvise very learned hath other grosse absurdities so he may haue that A third because some other doctor of as good credite and estimation is of a contratie opinion as M. Musculus a learned man is of your iudgement and M. Caluin as learned as he and diuers other are of that iudgment that I haue alleaged This is no great profe on your side nor reprofe of ours A fourth and the same most sure is to chalenge the libertie of the gospel and therefore not to admitte their verdict but at pleasure as Touching M. Bucers M. Bullingers Illyricus allovvance of holy daies if they allovv them in such sort as M. Doctor vrgeth then that good leaue vvhich they geue the Churches to dissent from theÌ„ in that point I do take it graunted vnto me being one of the same church Although as touching M. Bullinger it is to be obserued that since the time he wrote so there are aboue 35 yeres since vvhich time although he hold stal that the feastes dedicated vnto the lord as of the Natiuitie Easter and Pentecost may be kept yet he denieth flatly that it is lavvful to keepe holy the dayes of the Apostles If these serue not the turne a man would thinke their martyrs those who were so ful of the spirite that they willingly shead their bloud and suffered death by fier for confâ—irmation of their faith these mens testimonie should be irrefragable for iustifying of those pointes especially for which they lost their liues But nether want they their old ordinary meanes to shift of the authoritie of these martyrs were they neuer so glorious For although they vvere excellent personages say they yet their knovvledge vvas in part and although they brought many thinges to light yet they being sent out in the morning or euer the sunne of the gospel vvas risen so high might ouersee many thinges vvhich those that are not so sharpe of sight as they vvere may see c. And if they had died for this or that article yet the authoritie of their martyrdome could not take avvay from vs this libertye that vve haue to enquire of the cause of their death Martyrs may not be said to seale their errors vvith their bloud or vvith the glory of their martirdome preiudice those which vvrite or speake against their errors For this is to oppose the bloud of men to the bloud of the sonne of God What remayneth now for the last cast but the maiestie not of one or other doctor or of a few martyrs but of great and ample reformed churches as of France of Germany of Zurike or Geneuâ— yet euen these also passe with like maner of answere And they haue as general a rule to reiect such as they haue the poorest doctor that commeth in their way As for exaple when other reformed churches are brought to reforme the disorders of the English church To vvhich reformed church saith the ansvverer vvil you haue the church of England framed or vvhy should not other reformed churches as vvel frame them selues vnto vs For vve are as vvel assured of our doctrine and haue as good groundes reasons for our doing as they haue except you vvil bring in a nevv Rome appoint vs an other head church and create a nevv Pope by vvhom vve must be in al thinges directed And againe I haue told you and novv I tel you againe that there is no cause vvhy this church of England
Chap. IX Wherein is refelled M.W. answere to certaine places of S. Chrysostom touching the real presence and sacrifice Pag. 203. Chap. X. Of the place in S. Lukes Gospel cap. 22. corrupted by Beza Pag. 231. Chap. XI M.W. general answere to the booke of Discouerie and of the notable impietie committed by the translators of the English Bibles Pag. 260. Chap. XII M. W. reasons against the latin bible are answered and the same bible is proued to be in sundrie places more pure sincere then the hebrue now extant Pag. 280. Chap. XIII Of the puritie of our latin testament in respect of the greeke copies now extant Item a comparison of our translator with other of this age with an answere to those obiections which M. W. deuiseth against him Pag. 360. Chap. XIIII That to leaue the ordinarie translation of the bible appointed by the Church and to appeale to the hebrue greeke and such new diuers translations as the protestants haue made is the very way to Atheisme and Infidelitie Pag. 406. Chap. XV. How M.W. inueigheth against the new testament lately set forth in this college with a cleare refutation of such faultes as he findeth in the translation thereof Pag. 443. Chap. XVI A defence of such faultes as are found in the Annotations of the new testament Pag. 474. Chap. XVII Of certaine blasphemies contained in the Annotations pag. 527. The Conclusion Pag. 548. A REFVTATION OF M. WHITAKERS REPREHENSION OF THE LATE ENGLISH TRANSLAtiō and Catholike Annotations of the new Testament and of the booke of Discouery of hereticall corruptions CHAP. 1. Of Luthers contemning S. Iames his Epistle and callinge it STRAMINEAM AMONG sundrie cōtrouersies raysed by the Protestants in our dayes one and that of greate weyght and consequence is the Canon of holy Scriptures that is what bookes are to be admitted into diuine and supreme authoritye and as certaynlye wrytten by inspiration of the holy Ghoste to be receaued without any doubte or contradiction In examininge which question the behauiour of our aduersaries deserueth diligent consideration For as in the beginning they much praysed the Fathers Church Councels of the firste fiue hundred yeares not for any respecte or reuerence they bare vnto them but by so doinge to discountenance and thrust out of credite the Fathers Church and Councels of the later thowsand by whom they saw most euidently their heresies to haue bene condemned so not long after for lyke purpose they made vaūt of the scriptures agaynst those very first and moste auncient Fathers not for any iuste honor or regarde which they had of the scriptures but by that meanes to disgrace the Fathers and ease them selues of answering their authoritye when soeuer they should be pressed therewith For that in deede they accompte not of the very scriptures more then of the Fathers but turne them ouer for vs to defende no lesse then the Fathers time and experience hath shewed their publike wrytinges professe as by that which hereafter ensueth shall manifestly appeare and M. Whitaker though in worde he would fayne dissemble the matter yet in facte and truth playnly declareth so much which being so let the Christian Reader as in other things so in this especially note the proceeding of that which these men call the gospell the grosse impietie wherevnto it tendeth and in to what open profession of infidelitie in a shorte space it is likely to breake out which in the compasse of so few yeares is growen to such a head that now already they dare as boldly call in question and deny partes of the holy scriptures as not long sithence they made the like quarels against the wrytings of the auncient Fathers Let the Christian Reader note I say not their wordes but their doinges not their coūterfeit dissimulatiō in speach pulpit sometyme vsed but their euident practise reasons asseuerations published in bookes confirmed by arguments deduced by necessarie coherence from their doctrine and many wayes expressed by them selues in sundry their Cōferences Institutions and disputations and he shall easely perceaue our aduersaries after denyall of the Fathers Councels Tradition and the authoritie of the Church Catholike now at this present to stand vpon lyke deniall of the written worde the Apostles Prophets so as they leaue no one ground whereupon a christian man can rest his fayth or stay him selfe Thus much I gather not onely by the writinges of sundry other Protestants whereof some I shall touch hereafter but euen of M. Whitakers discourse in defence of Luther about S. Iames Epistle whose words and reasons for this purpose and the Readers better intelligence I will sett downe and prosequute somewhat the more at large And firste of all concerning S. Iames his Epistle M. Martin reproueth M. Whitaker for denyinge that Luther called that Epistle stramincam and in so cleare a case charged Father Campian with a notorius lye It is easie to gesse sayth M.W. vvhat a fellovv vve shall fynde you in the reste vvho are not ashamed in the very beginning to lye so egregiously When F. Campian replyed that it was in some one of Luthers first editions though otherwyse altered in the later nether so sayth M.W. Praefationem illam purgatam esse dixisti quam tamen constat nullo vnquam verbo mutatam esse You saye that preface vvas corrected vvhereas it is certayne that there vvas neuer anye vvorde changed in it Now this being the faulte which M. Martin layeth to M. W. see how wel he defendeth himselfe First because after he had read ouer all Luthers prefaces vpon the new Testament as he sayth he found none such there of he inferreth He is not to be accounted impudent as you call me vvho denieth that to be true vvhich he knovveth not to be true but he that to deceaue others defendeth that as false vvhich he knovveth to be most true but I am so farre from acknovvledging this to be true that I neuer thought it to be more false then I thinke it novv I will not wrangle vpon the definition of impudency but whether this dealing be not moste shamelesse and detestable in a Christian let any man of indifferencie iudge First it can not be excused of grosse and insolente boldnesse and rashnesse vpon the vew of one onely edition to deny so peremptorily a thing obiected so often by so many learned men of name and for ought I coulde yet reade or heare neuer denyed by the Lutherans especially whereas withall nothing is more notorious then the manifold alteratiōs which Melanchton and those of VVittenberge haue made in Luthers works corrupting deprauing putting in and taking out so much and so far forth as pleased their chāgeable humor where of the zealous Lutherans in a synode holden at Altemburg by procurement of the Duke of Wirtemberg and Palsgraue of Rhene lamentably complayne Electorales say they Lutheri scripta enormiter quám faedissimé deprauant ita vt post obitū Lutheri c. The
is and must be deduced to wit the cause why the Englishe congregatioÌ„ admittinge S. Iames hath reiected those other and we shall straightwaies finde not only that he ouerthroweth himself which is a comoÌ„ tricke amoÌ„gst such good writers but also concludeth the contrarie of that which here he preteÌ„deth The Church readeth the bookes of Iudith Tobie and the Machabees saith S. Hierome but reckeneth them not amongst the Canonicall scriptures In that the Church at solemne times read them it is a great argumente that she much honoured them although she admitted them not as then vniuersallie into that highest roome of supreme authoritye But of S. Iames we heare not so much but contrariwise Eusebius directlie affirmeth if M. VV. saie true and iudgeth wold all other men so to iudge that that epistle of S. Iames is a false and bastard epistle and Hierome a prieste after the order of the Romane Church and not a minister after the fashion of the English congregation is brought to proue the same Who seeth not now what greate difference there is betweene these two verdits geuen in by these auncient fathers the first being read in the Church had a degree to Canonicall scriptures the later had no such Of the first he bringeth in S. Hierome saynge onlie that as then it was not acknowledged for Canonical he bringeth in S. Hierome to saie as much of the second and for a surcharge he ioyneth Eusebius directlie affirming it to be a bastard epistle and withall wishinge all men so to iudge of it him self inferreth that Luther in his rashnes which we condemne folowed the iudgement and testimonie of the auncieÌ„t primitiue Church he affirmeth farther as a general principle namely treatinge of this epistle Quod principio statim non habet diuinam authoritatem non potest tempore hominum approbatione fieri diuinum That vvhich at the first hath not presentlie diuine or canonicall authoritye as in their opinion S. Iames had not can not be made canonicall by the approbation of men yet now of these he wold haue vs learne this distinction that the primitiue Church vniuersallie reiected the bookes of Iudith Tobie the Machabees some onlie and those without iust cause refused S. Iames epistle and therefore that the English congregation hath done verie discretelie to authorize the one disauthorize the others let him not playe to much the Sophister but answere as becoÌ„meth a Diuine saue him self in this froÌ„ opeÌ„ folie contradiction he shall shew more wisedome learning theÌ„ hetherto he hath geuen vs occasion to deeme in him And that he may the better waye the veritie and substance of his aunswere and the reader haue occasion to consider what a variable tottering gospel these men preache and how iustlie we obiect to them that at their pleasure they make hauocke of scripture I will laye to M.VV. reasoning the effecte of the late disputation had in the Tower with F. Campian touching this pointe This they make the mayne grounde of their whole argameÌ„t Those bookes vvhich olde fathers and Councels haue not receaued for canonical bookes to ground our faith vpon them can not nevâ— meâ— nor the Tridentine Councel make canonical This proposition standâ—ng for good which they so confidentlie vrge and M.VV. thinketh yâ— moste assured let vs see vppoÌ„ this rule what waste they make of the sacred bookes vppon that ground thus they buylde or rather pull downe Aug. li. 2. cap. 8. de doct Christiana leaueth out Baruch and the tvvo last bookes of Esdras Hierom in his preface vppon the booke of Kinges saith that Sapientia Salomonis Iesus the sonne of Sirach Iudith and Tobias are not in the Canon Eusebius in his sicâ—e booke and 18. chapiter it is the 19. leaueth out the third and fourth of Esdras Tobias Iudith Baruch Sapientia Ecclesiasticus and the bookes of Machabees and concerning the epistle to the Hebrevves though him selfe say plainly it is S. Paules yet he confesseth that many haue doubted thereof also coÌ„cerning the second epistle of S. Peter he saith it vvas doubted of many so of some vvere the last tvvo epistles of Iohn The same Eusebius li. 4. ca. 26. it is 25. speaketh of Melito bishop of Sardis vvho reckening vp the volumes of the old testament omitteth Esdras Tobie Hester Iudith Baruch VVisdome Sirach the bookes of Machabees And the CouÌ„cel of Laodicea omitteth Lukes gospel the Apocalyps you see therefore that these olde Fathers haue leaste these books out of the canon yet vvere not called heretikes nor blasphemers Thus farre they Afterwards they define those to be not Canonical but Apocriphal that are not in the auncient Canon receaued and allovved to haue proceeded vndoubtedly from the holy Ghost and those Apocriphal are forbid to be read and though they may be read for moral lessons yet not for matters of religion Afterward the same argument is resumed againe and especially that parte vrged that the Councel of Laodicea leaueth out those former bookes in the olde Testament Tobias Iudith the booke of vvisdome Ecclesiasticus and in the nevv Testament Luke and the Apocalyps And when F. Campian answered that that Councel was but particuler reply was made that the Councel vvas prouincial and farther confirmed by the sixte general Councel holden in Trullo Constantine being presideÌ„t as Bartholomeus CaraÌ„za vvriteth fol. 71. And therefore vve may leaue out of the canon Tobie Iudith c. vvhich your Councel of Trent thrust in as autentical Hetherto your brethren in the fourth dayes conference In the first day vpon like warrant they recken amongst Apocryphal bookes that which you labour so much to saue S. Iames which there is called a counterfeit or bastard epistle by iudgement of Eusebius Item the epistle of Iude the later of Peter the second and thirde of Iohn And against these they alleage Eusebius Hierome Epiphanius and the Councell of Laodicea confirmed as they say there againe by the general Councel holden in Trullo And yet such is their inconstancie in the same place some of these in worde they professe to receaue but only as at pleasure of curtesie and liberalitie not as of fayth dutie and necessitie For the summe of all commeth to this and it is the effect of that disputation Such bookes as of olde haue bene doubted of we are not bound to admit for Canonical but may refuse now These particuler bookes here named haue bene doubted of in olde time ergo these bookes we are not bouÌ„d to admit for Canonical but may refuse them now This being your reason and the same so manifestly approued by them and you out of the same for our presente purpose against you this I note First how iustly we accuse you for defacing and renting out so many parcels and whole bookes of scripture In the olde Testament Tobias Iudith Hester Baruch The booke of Wisdome Ecclesiasticus The two bookes of the Machabees
the author or hinderance to your Gospel though at the first for a while it astonished many as a thing bearing great countenance of learning vntil in tyme by learned men the visard was pulled from it yet seing you proclaime it agayne so couragiously I wil in few wordes touch the substance and meaning of it It conteyneth in effect 2. or 3. heretical articles which M. Iewel dilated and parted into a great number as it were some poore rag cut out into many shriddes partly of pride and brauery to win among the simple an opinion of learning partly of spite and malice against the Catholike church which he sought specially to disgrace and which by nothing could be disgraced more then if she held and mayntened 27. articles the highest misteries and greatest keyes of her religion as he termeth them without any authoritie example clause or sentence of ether scripture father Councel or writer that liued within the first 600. yeres of the primitiue church The insolent vanitie of which bragge to my seeming is much like to that which T. Quintius the Romane Consul noted in the Embassadors of King Antiochus who comming into Grece to perswade that people to take part with Antiochus against the Romanes they magnifyinge the force of Antiochus their maister aduaunced infinitly the great hoastes which he would bringe and terrified the simple Grecians with straunge names of men neuer heard of before he wil bringe sayd they into the field Dahas Mâ—dos and Eâ—imaeos and Cadusios and touching his nauie so great as no porte of Grece is able to receaue the one parte thereof is guided by Sidonians and Tyrians the other by Aradians and Sideâ—ians of Pamphilia nations that haue no peere in the world for skilfulnes in war by sea Here vnto T. Quintius replying this king quoth he by these his embassadors vaunteth of clowdes of horsemen and footemen and couereth the seas with his nauie but al the matter is verie like to a feast which once mine host at Chalcis made me of whom being enterteyned at a certen tyme when I marueyled at so great prouision and demaunded how so suddenly he came by such varietie and store of venison he not so glorious as these men smiling answered that al was but the art of his cooke and dyuers dressinge of the same thinge for otherwise touching the substance of the feast tota illa varietas et species ferinae carnis er at ex sue mansueto facta al that varietie and shevv of venison vvas made of a tame sovv so it is of these straÌ„ge and terrible names Dahae Medi Aradians and Sidonians for al these are but Syâ—ians touching any valour that is in them more fit to make slaues then souldiers The selfe same may be trewly verified of M. Iewels so many and so great articles for al that straunge varietie and multiplication of particulars is made but as it were ex mansueto sue of two or three heretical propositions thorough his skil in that kind of varying so drawen forth and minced that it mustereth in the eye of the ignorant as though it had great store of new matter for grauÌ„ting to him one and the same no general but a particular heresie that the Zuinglian opinion is true touching the Sacrament that there is no real presence which is his fift article thereof foloweth directlie the 6. that the body of Christ is not in a 1000 places the 8. that no diuine honor is due to it the 10. that bread and vvine remaine as vvel after consecration as before the first and 13. that there could not be any priuate or many priuate masses sayd whereas there was no masse at al. the 17. that Christ could not possiblie be offered in sacrifice whereas there was not any such sacrifice nor the substaÌ„ce thereof in rerum natura the 21. that Christian men could not cal that lord or God which was nothing but bread wine and so forth many other which a man of meane skil may see to be as plainlye included in that one as manie lesse numbers are included in a greater or many partes and qualities are necessarily consequent to a perfect bodie as on the coÌ„trarie side put the Catholike opinion to be true which he denieth in the tenth article then al or most of the same articles folow as clearly vz. Article 5 That the body of Christ is really substantially c. in the sacrameÌ„t Article 6 That Christes body is may be in a thousand places or moe at once Article 8 That diuine honor is due vnto it Article 22 That a man may cal it his Lord and God c. and likewise many of the rest So that in deed that glorious challenge is altogether such as if MarcioÌ„ in auncieÌ„t tyme or some of your brethren who in this point seeme as verie heretikes as he should haue prouoked the Catholikes to defend S. Lukes Gospel after this sorte If any learned man of my aduersaries or if al the learned men aliue be able to proue that S. Lukes Gospel is canonical scripture Or that the first chapter is canonical scripture Or that the second chapter is canonical scripture Or that the third chapter is canonical scripture Or that the storie of Marie Magdalene cap. 7. is canonical scripture Or the tale of Lazarus and the riche man cap. 16. Or that wicked doctrine touching the real presence in the 22. chapter c. I am content to yeld and subscribe For as here one article agreed on draweth the rest one denied denieth the rest so is it in the deuise of M. Iewel therefore as Marcion the more particulars he had vttered if he had run into as many ORS as there be chap. or stories or verses in S. Luke which wel he might haue done by M. Iewels example the farther he had run in that vayne the more notably he had layd open to the world his owne ambitious itching folie pride and arrogancy the verie selfe same is to be deemed of this conceyte of M. Iewel touching the far greater number of his articles Three he hath of weight and more principal then al the rest the primacie of the Sea Apostolike the real presence and the sacrifice vnto these 3. let vs applie his challenge and see now he is gone how wel you can supplie the office of his champion to maynteyne it O Gregorie saith he O Austine O Hierom O Chrisostome O Leo O Dionise O Anacletus O Xistus O Paule O Christo if vve be deceaued you have deceaued vs. you taught vs these heresies thus ye ordered the holy CoÌ„munion in your time the same vve receaued at your handes c. None of our aduersaries that staÌ„d against vs are able or euer shalbe able to proue against vs any one of al these pointes ether by scripture or by the example of the primitiue Churche or by the old Doctors or by the auncient general Councels and if any man aliue be
as M.W. can neuer maynteine except withal he maynteine him selfe to be an Anabaptist an Ebionite and a Nestorian And thus much touching your philosophicall reason wherein I haue staied somewhat the loÌ„ger partly because you crake so much of it as though it were verie pregnant partly because it is an argument whereinto both in pulpit and writyng you gladly fall because it standeth wel with sense and reason easely deceaue the simple partly also because it toucheth M. Iewels challenge which here is disproued sufficiently except these great States and Euangelistes so magnified by your selues be so fowly ouerseene as so vehemently to auerre that which hath no one clause of Scripture Father Councel or Doctor to vphold it And if they do so in this where they vse such heate and detestation how may we credite them in any other parte of their doctrine how may we be perswaded but they continually lye and deceaue vs in like sorte But I trowe you wil not iudge so rashly especially of Luther what soeuer you accompt of Barns Frith Westphalus Melanchthon and Illyricus and those auncient fathers alleaged by him and his companions for seing the whole church of England commendeth Luther for a man so excellent sent of God to geue light to the vvhole vvorld I hope that you being but a simple member of thar church wil not by defending the contrary oppose your selfe vnto him And certaine it is you can not come from God if you poore worme resist withstand that excellent man whom God sent to be your Prophete and Euangelist which is as monstrous a case as if some simple sheepe should presume to direct his skilful pastor some ignorant scholer to teach his maister most learned or some Alexander a myserable coppersmith should oppose him self against S. Paule whom Christ had made his gouernor and furnished with sufficient giftes to instruct him and al the world besides But you haue I feare a general salue for such fores that you beleeue nether Luther nether yet the church of England any farther then they agree with Gods worde your owne conceite thereof And so still the supreme rule determition of al shal rest in your owne handes After your reasons against the sacrament you bring in to like purpose a place out of S. Ciril that Christ is ascended in to heauen and is absent from vs in the presence of flesh vvhich if vve did not beleeue vve vvould neuer say the Crede so oft as vve doe nor keepe the day of Christes AscensioÌ„ so honorable and festiual as you I thinke may knovv Mary if you thinke there is more pith in S. Cirils vvorde of absence you myght better haue obiected Christes ovvne vvordes The poore you shal haue alvvaies vvith you me you shal not haue but then for ansvvere I should haue sent you to the note vpon that verse as I do novv also for this the reason being al one For that S. Ciril vvas not a Sacramentarie appeareth most clearely by a large discours vvhich he maketh as it vvere of purpose against that maner of reasoning vvhich you haue geuen out in this place Thus he vvriteth Quomodo potest hic nobis carnem dare c. The Ievves aske hovv can he geue vs his flesh Thus they crye out vpon god not vvithout great impietie nether remember they that vvith god nothing is impossible But let vs making great profit of their sinnes and hauing a firme faith in these mysteries neuer in such diuine thinges vtter or so much as thinke of such doubting for that vvord Quomodo hovv is Iudaical and cause of extreme punishment And after a long and good treatise against such peeuish fantastical toyes as here M.W. obiecteth for profound arguments thus he concludeth Yf notvvithstanding al this thou Ievv crye stil hovv is this done I folovving thy ignoraÌ„ce vvill demaund of thee hovv so many miracles vvere done in the old testament the passinge ouer the red sea Moses rod made a serpeÌ„t etc. vvherefore vve ought rather to beleeue Christ humbly to learne of hym then like drunken sots to cry out hovv can he geue vs his flesh by vvhich questioning thou must needes be driuen to deny the vvhole scripture In vvhich vvords vve see he reckeneth you amongst the Ievves accompteth you nethâ—r verie learned nor much better then an Infidel for these stout reasons vvhich here you so magnifie And Peter M. being pressed vvith the authoritie of this Ciril that Christ by the mystical benediction that is by receauing of the Sacrament dvvelleth corpâ—rally in vs vvhich M. Ievvel after his maner ansvvereth verie learnedly though verie easely by comparing it vvith an other phrase that corporally is as much as truly and truly may signifie spiritually and that is al one vvith tropically saith more rudely yet more sincerely The flesh of Christ so to dvvell in vs corporally that the substance of his body should be coÌ„municated vvith vs that is as this man interpreteth it be mingled vvith our flesh it is not in any case to be graunted no not if a thousand angels much lesse if one Ciril said it For it can not be that Christs flesh should so be diffunded or multiplied in infinite men and places which sheweth that Peter Mart. tooke not S. Ciril to be of your faith touching this article of the sacrament The place vvhich you cite out of S. Damascene because you direct me no vvhere to find it I vvil not bestovv the paines to seeke it being graunted it is not much to the purpose and I marueile vvhy you put it in greke as though there vvere some great terrible bugge in it That vvhich vvas circumscript saith he vvas circumscript vncircumscript vncircumscript and visible visible and inuisible inuisible vvhich I take to be as true as that a spade is a spade and a mattock a mattock fier is fier not vvater and the sunne is the sunne and not the moone And if you meane hereof to infer your heresy that therefore Christ is not in the sacrament frame you the argument perhaps it vvil persvvade much In the meane season that Damasc vvas no more of your religion then S. Ciril I refer you for proufe to his books de Orthodoxa fide vvhere namely in the fourth you finde a verie good and large chapter against your Zuinglian heresie especially against your philosophical fansies he disputeth thus If the vvorde of god be liuely forcible if vvhat soeuer our lord would he did if he said let light be made it vvas made let the firmament be made and it vvas made if by the vvorde of god the heauens vvere established and vvith the spirite of his mouth all the povver of them if heauen and earth and vvater-fier and ayer and al their furniture and man him selfe vvere perfited by his vvorde if vvhen god the vvord so vvould he became man and of the moste pure and immaculat
euery day more and more misdoubt the ruine of their Atheistical gospel which dayly the more it is knovven the more it grovveth in horror and execration amonge honest natures not only such as are directed by the spirit of God but euen such as are somevvhat holpen vvith the assistance of natural wisedome and honest inclination But come vve to the particular crymes layde against vs and vvherevpon this dreadful inuectiue is properly builded vvhich is our corrupting the text or departing from our latin testament For as vve in examining their testament framed according to the greeke as they pretended reproued them not in their translation nor could so doe reasonably so long as precisely they kept them selues to their greeke for vvhether the greeke â—aâ—ere so to be folovved is an other question in like maner vve proposing to translate the latin vvhich to vs is as autentical as the greeke to them can not reasonabâ—y be blamed as false and corrupt translators but vvhere vve haue gone aside and leaft that original which vve pretended to translate And if herein vve haue erred vve gladly vvil acknovvledge our ouersight and are ready to ameÌ„d the same And here Reader hast thou specially to marke by what argument he verifieth that which he obiecteth Our prophane corruptions our outragâ—ous boldnes our more violence vsed to the holy testameÌ„t of Christ then euer vvas vsed by any kinde of heretike so notorious that al the world may iudge that our intent was To make the peopâ—e scorne and contemne the vvord of God how iustifieth â—e al this by what proofe for hitherto we haue wordes and nothing but wordes such as euery grammar-boy can picke out of the booke which he readeth and ioyne together But from M. W. the Q. Maiesties reader his auditors looke for sounder stuffe then such childish grammatical declaiming Many places saith he haue I noted vvherein you haue manifestly erred from that your vulgar latin edition that vvil I declare by one example the like vvhere of I could bring forth many Surely this is very weake to maintaine the greatnes of the accusation thundered out before And whereas you promise one example and geue vs two the reader may assure him self you would haue spared vs three if you had bene able But belyke these one or two are horrible monstrous faults and touch matters of maruelous great height Christs Diuinitie Humanitie Incarnation Heauen and Hel such as are the faults of these mens bibles and so these two may serue in steed of a number Let vs here them in M. W. owne words In the epistle to the Rom. ca. 13. v. 19. thus it is read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vvhich vvords the old interpreter turned thus Non vosmet ipsos desendentes but by you they are turned othervvise according to the greeke veritie Not reuenging your selues The like place is in Matth. 4. v. 16. vvhere these vvords 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the old interpreter turned The people vvhich vvalked in darkenes ambulauit in tenebris as also in Hierom vve reade but you folovving the greeke exemplat haue turned othervvise and more truly The people that sitteth in darknes Qui sedes in tenebris Thus M. VV. and this is al. And here first of al the reader may againe remeÌ„ber how iust cause I had to charge him with affected hypocrisie for exclaming so tragically vpon our testament wherein he findeth only these faultes which if they were faultes of what weight they are euery child may iudge But to passe that ouer let the reader see how blindly fovvly he is deceiued We haue left our latin folovved the greeke saith he in turning Defendentes Reuenging and why so hovv proueth he that vve leaue our latin he vvil ansvvere I suppose for reason him selfe yeldeth none because in al M. Coopers Dictionarie vve finde not that Defendere signifieth To reuenge If that be true then belike if vve vvere maister Coopers scholers the case vvould goe somvvhat hard vvith vs. But if he vvil vevv other Dictionaries as wel as M. Coopers he shal find both that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in greeke in latin is truely turned by Defendere and Defendere in latin is vvel and properly turned in English by Reuenge So the greeke dictionarie of Basile printed the yere 1557. teacheth vs. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 defendo vindico vlciscor in alicuius gratiam So the latin and french and latin greeke french dictionaries printed at Paris the yeres 1559.1575 1580. set forth by Sonnius Rob. Stephanus teach vs that Defendere signifieth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 defender garder et preseruer venger as vvel to reuenge as to defend gard preserue And which is to vs more then al the dictionarie of the Church that is the auncient ecclesiastical vse of this vvord in the scripture fathers teacheth vs somtimes in this place this to be his proper grammatical ense and so the auncieÌ„t fathers vsed this word So Tertullian Durum videbatur populo a deo expectare defensam edicendam postea per prophetam mihi defensam et ego defendam It seemed a hard thing for the Ievvish people in Moyses time to expect reuenge from God vvhich vvas aftervvards promised by the prophete saing To me reuenge and I vvil reuenge Where manifest it is that Defendere and defensa is graÌ„matically Reuenge To reuenge manifest it is that S. Ambrose doth not expound but grammatically take the word Defendere in the self same maner that is to signifie ReueÌ„ge eueÌ„ as S. Hier. put it or rather as I thinke leaft it being so vsed by the former traÌ„slator So doth Haymo so doth S. Bede and maketh no scruple at it but in his commentarie taken out of S. Augustine expresseth by Vindicare that which our interpreter vttered by Defendere And the same is most plaine by the traÌ„slatioÌ„ of the bible it self For whereas in other places for example in the storie of Holofernes the greeke is That he sware he would 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Reuenge him self of al the laÌ„ds that doth the old interpreter vtter by Defendere And in the 9. chap. where Iudith praiseth God saing according to the later English bible O Lord God of my father Symeon to vvhom thou gauest a svvord to take vengeance of the strangers the latin is Gladium ad defensioneÌ„ abienigenaruÌ„ the greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the English bible printed two yeres before traÌ„slateth A svvord for a defence against the enemies and putteth in the margent Or to reuengment The former bible vseth only Defence not ReueÌ„ge at al whereby it is cleare that those traÌ„slators hauing belike some more skil in the old vse of this word theÌ„ M.W. accoÌ„pted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be wel turned ether by Reuenge which is more proper or by Defence which is also most true respecting the vse of the latin
vvorthely through his owne vvilfulnes be deceaued Now vvhether part fayleth in perfourmance of that vvhich it vndertaketh vvhether vve geue not The sense of holy scriptures according to the Apostolike tradition the expositions of holy fathers or vvhether he conuince vs of Desperatnes and importunitie and such contamination as he threatneth this is that vvhich the reader concerning ether side hath ro note and consider Of the vvise men thus vve say These three sages being principal men of their countrie represent the vvhole state of Princes Kinges and Emperours that vvere according to the prophecies of Dauid and Esay to beleeue in Christ to humble them selues to his crosse to foster enrich adorne and defend his church vvhere vpon it is also a very conuenient and agreable tradition of antiquitie and a receiued opinion among the faithful not lacking testimonies of auncient vvriters and much for the honor of our Sauiour that these three also vvere Kings to vvit ether according to the state of those countries vvhere the princes vvere Magi Magi the greatest about the prince or as vve reade in the scriptures of Melchisedech King of Salem many other Kings that dvvelt vvithin a smal compasse or as Iobes three frendes are called Kings These are commonly called the three Kings of Colen because their bodies are there translated thither from the East countrie Their names are said to haue bene Gaspar Melchior Baltasar In these wordes thou seest reader vpon what ground and with what moderation we speake of that matter not precisely auouching them to be Kinges in such sort as we commoÌ„ly esteeme of that name but after an other sort and some inferiour degree Albeit if we affirmed them to be as great monarkes as the Kinges of Fraunce or Spaine or the great Sophie of Persia we might so affirme for ought he bringeth to the contrarie But because M. W. maketh his first entrance with this matter as though it were so absurd let vs search out wherein lieth the great absurditie and fault committed in this note Is it trowe you in that we cal them Kinges or in that we saie they were three or in that by our reporte their names are sayd to haue bene such If because of the first let him shew his reason why that can be so harmeful what it maketh against the honor of Christ what against the veritie of the scriptures the faith of the church tradition ecclesiastical the maners of meÌ„ or any title point or dependence of Christianitie and Christian profession The like I affirme of the second the like of the thirde the like of al three ioyned together VVe cal them kinges and why not seyng the scripture wel beareth with that appellation and the auncient fathers haue so called them many hundred yeres before vve vvere borne So Tertullian in his 3. booke against Marcion calleth them so S. Cyprian calleth them in his sermon De baptismo et manifestatione Christi And S. Chrysostom proueth by scripture that they vvere kinges thus he writeth The vvisemen offered giftes to this child Christ according as the holy Ghost had testified before of them saing Esai 60. They shal come from Saba offering gold and frankencense pretious stone VVe acknovvledge that the vvise men euidently fulfilled this prophecy Dauid quoque de his ita testatur psal 71. Reges Thaersis et Insulae munera offerent Reges Arabum et Saba dona adducent Dauid also vvitnesseth of these psal 71. The kinges of Thaersis and the Isles shal offer gifts The kinges of the Arabians and Saba shal bring presents And S. Hierom applieth that text of the psalme to them in like maner And Tertullian against the Ievves vvho seemed vvith M. W. to enuie al this honor of Christ vvriteth thus Dauid also spake of this offring of gold vvhen he sayd ps 71. there shal be geuen to him of the gold of Arabia and againe the kinges of Arabia and Saba shal bring him gifts Nam et magos reges serè habuit Oriens For the East part had commonly such vvise men for their kinges S. Augustin plainely nameth them kinges so doth Claudianus so doth S. Isidorus so doth S. Remigius so doth Theopâ—ilactus so do generally the writers that haue liued in the church this later 500 yeres as we learne by S. Anselme who speaketh De istis tribus regibus Of these three kinges as of a thing most vsual vulgar And Conradus Gesnerus directeth you to certaine writers who haue made treatises De tribus Magis De tribus sanctis regibus Of these three vvise men Of these three holy kinges And among these auncient and Catholike fathers to alleage one new Zuinglius holdeth it as very probable that they were kinges Thus he speaketh of them writing vpon the 2 chapter of S. Matthew Magi saith he sunt sapientes et astrorum et omnium rerum peritissimi huiusmodi homines ferè administrationi rerum publicarum adhibuerunt gentiles Magi are vvisemen skilful in astronomy and al other matters The gentiles made such men commonly gouerners of their common vvelthes After al which for vs to cal them kings how can it in any sort be hurtful or preiudicial to any truth of Christian religioÌ„ Nay on the contrarie side whosoeuer carpeth at this certainely he maligneth the glorie of our Sauiour he secretly detracteth from his honor and malitiously pincheth and snarleth at the auncient and Apostolike church which in this sorte witnessed such prophecies to haue bene fulfilled But perhaps M. W. is offended at the number of three vvhere vpon S. Augustine so sweetely alludeth vnto the mystery of the Blessed Trinitie and that Christe was King God and yet should dye as a mortal man This is that great corruption which so greueth him But who would be greued here at except some detestable Arian Trinitarian Libertine or Anabaptist against whose religion only for ought I know that note maketh And touching the story that they were three S. Austin plainely affirmeth it Tres erant So saith S. Leo the Great and first of that name aboue a dozen times in his sermons vpon the feast of the Epiphanie And whereas the EuaÌ„gelist speaketh of them not in the dual but in the plural number 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fewer they could not well be and more we neede not to beleeue except we see more reason theÌ„ yet appeareth And touching the last part vz Their names are said to haue bene such how could vve haue spoken more moderatly For who hath heard them called by any other names And I suppose they were not namelesse And if they had names why not Gaspar Melchior Baltazar rather then William Iohn and Thomas or any other that M. W. list to imagine whereas the common opinion of our forefathers maketh for the first no probabilitie or reason can be brought for the second And if M. VV. beleeue that the Ievvish Sinagoge erred not in continuing by
tradition vvithout scripture the names of Pharaos vvicked sorcerers Iannes and Mambres vvhy thinketh he not this much more likely that the Church vvould keepe in remembrance the names of these such excellent men vvho vvith so great daunger came so farre to adore our Sauiour in his infancie and are called Primitiae gentium in vvhom the Church of the gētiles first begāne But hovvso euer the exacte truth be in this case it is a very smale point of desperatnes for vs to vvrite that their names are said to haue bene such most false it is that we set this forth as a most certaine article of the Romane religion and whatsoeuer ether in general or in special shal be obiected hereafter in the meane season the annotation grounded vpon good reason gathered out of the scriptures the psalmes of Dauid Esai Esther Tobias besides other authoritie sacred and prophane S. Ambrose S. Chrysostome Theophilact Cicero and Plinie in any iudgment I trow is able to coūteruaile the bare worde of so seely a man as M. VV. shevveth him self Touching S. Iohn thus we say Mat. 3. v. 1. Desert Of this vvord desert in greeke Eremus commeth the name Eremitages Eremites that liue a religious austere life in deserts and solitarie places by the example of S. Iohn Baptist vvhom the holy doctors therefore cal the prince and as it vvere the author of such profession S. Chrysost hom 1. in Marcum et hom de Io. Baptista Hierō ad Eustach de eustod virg Isid l. 2. c. 15. de diui off Bernardus de excel Io. Baptistae vvherevvith the protestāts are so offended that they say S. Chrysost spake rashly vntruly And no marueil for vvhereas the Euangelist himselfe in this place maketh him a perfecte paterne of penance and Eremitical life for desert or vvildernes for his rough and rude apparel for abstaining from al delicate meates according to our Sauiours testimonie also of him Mat. 11.8 Luc. 7.33 they are not ashamed to peruert al vvith this straunge commentarie that it vvas a desert ful of townes villages his garment vvas chālet his meate such as the countrie gaue and the people there vsed to make him thereby but a common man lyke to the rest in his maner of lyfe cleane against scriptures fathers and reason Here Christian reader to proue that S. Iohn was a monke thou hast as before reason plainly deduced out of the scriptures thou hast the auncient fathers deducing the same with vs S. Hierom S. Chrysostom S. Isidorus S. Bernard Against these scriptures and aūcient Doctors thou hearest the bare word of this new Doctor who had he euer bene a good scholer would neuer so boldly without face or forehead haue abused thy patience as to oppose his only word against these reasons Doctors and scriptures Touching the stone which is reserued at Ancona and the comming of Elias before the day of iudgment thus we say Of the first Reade a maruelous narratiō in S. Augustine of one stone that hitting the Martyr on the elbovv reboūded backe to a faithful mā that stood neere vvho keeping carying it vvith him vvas by reuelatiō vvarned to leaue it at Ancona in Italie vvherevpō a Church or Memorie of S. Steuen vvas there erected and many miracles done after the said martyrs body vvas found out and not before Aug. tomo 10. Ser. 38. de diuersis in aedit Paris Now of al these miracles Church built in memory of Martyrs Reuelations Stone reserued M. W. digesteth wel the rest only he seemeth to wonder that a stone could be kept so long As though that were so wonderful a case or there were not both in scripture as Aarons rod and the Manna and out of the scripture as al Churches through Christendome are witnes many things preserued as long time far more vnlike to continue then stones which may wel endure fifteene hundred yeres fiue times told if they be kept as wel as that at Ancona And whatsoeuer fault he find in the storie let him scoffe at S. Austin who so seriously rehearseth it not at vs who refer only the reader to S. Austin and speake neuer a worde of our selues And the like I answere for the second of which these are our wordes Christ distinguisheth here plainly betvvene Elias in person vvho is yet to come before the iudgement and betvvene Elias in name to vvit Iohn the Baptist vvho is come already in the spirit and vertue of Elias So that it is not Iohn Baptist only nor principally of vvhō Malachie prophecieth as our Aduersaries say but Elias also him self in person which annotatiō conteineth nothing els touching this point but the very wordes of our Sauiour and the prophete Malachie That Elias shal come which wordes when our Sauiour spake S. Iohn Baptiste who was Elias by some resēblāce figure and office was past and dead This truth els where we approue by the authoritie of S. Aust Tract 4. in Ioan. li. 1. de pec mer. ca. 3. and the rest of the latin Doctors as S. Hierom ad Pammach epist 61. ca. 11. et in psal 20. S. Ambr. in psal 45. S. Hilar. can 20. in Matth. Prosper lib. vlt. de promiss ca. 13. S. Greg. lib. 14. Moral ca. 11. et homil 12. in Ezech. Beda in 9. Marci The Greeke fathers also as S. Chrysost hom 58. in Matt. et hom 4. in 2. Thess et hom 21. in Genes et hom 22. in epist ad Hebr. Theophilact and Oecumen in 17. Matth. S. Daemas lib. 4. de Orthodoxa fide ca. 27. Finally by the vniuersal consent of al Christians where of S. Austin is witnes in these wordes Heliam Thesbitem vltimo tēpore venturum ante iudicium celeberrimū est in sermonibus cordibusque fidelium That Elias the Thesbite shal come before the day of iudgement it is a most notorious thing in the mouthe and hartes of faithful men And now the Prophet foretelling so our Sauiour affirming so the auncient fathers both Greeke Latin teaching so faithful and christian men alwaies beleeuing so this is the questiō which I wil not dispute but leaue it at large and M. W. may do wel to put it to his thesis of Antichrist for they are both iust of like probabilitie and handle it at the next comencemēt vz whether we must rather credite him vpon his bare word telling vs one thing or the vniuersal consent of Christendome the primitiue Church rising vpon the expresse wordes of the prophete and our Sauiour him self teaching vs the contrarie And these touching matters historical be the horrible faultes of our Annotations for which he accuseth vs of Desperatnes and them of such absurditie that neuer any thing more contaminate and corrupt vvas set abrode in the sight of the vvorld Our errors in making arguments are far more at least in number and shew how soeuer they proue in substance and truth I wil folow the
418. They leaue corrupte the greeke 420. vsq ad 427. They interprete at pleasure greeke latin and euerie tong els 429.430 their straunge interpretations of scripture pa. 324.382.429.430.424 of fathers 217. Their maner of arguing 225. of one figuratiue speach they conclude as many as they list ibi et 226. The foly thereof 226.251.252 The agrement betwene the Protestants of our time and old heretikes pa. 430.431 they are most desyrous of noueltie 455.456.457 they mocke at the Prophetes and sundry writers of scripture 458. their preaching a verie mockery of scripture 458.459 they proceede to infidelitie pa. 2.3 559.560 et pref pa. 21.22 they make thēselues supreme iudges of scripture al other authoritie pa. 54 pref p. 19 20. c. they are obstinate in what soeuer absurditie they once take 237. they honour the Iewes more thē S. Paul 325 326. or the Church of Christ 353. like to the Iewes in malice against the Sea of Rome 329.330.331 they vse more reuerence to the images of beastes thē of Christ 514.515 Be they neuer so cōtrarie they are all assured of the truth pref 32. The Protestants allow all Sectes to rebelle for their seueral heresies pref pag. 16.17 R The Rabbines of the Ievves not to be folowed in the sense of the hebrue wordes pa. 434. the Protestants translating after them translate wickedly 434.435 They corrupt the text of scripture by mispoynting it 314.315 Power to Remitte sinnes geuen to the English ministers by act of Parlament pa. 79.80 M. Iewels chalenge touching the real presence artic 5. answered pa. 182. vsque ad 196 the Zuinglians most vsual and popular argument against it 178. answered at large 179. c. the first heretikes of the English church approued it 182. Many things in scripture as vncredible as that 183.184.186 the Zuinglians argument against the sacrament is the roote of Paganisme 184.185.193.199 It ioynerh them to the Anabaptistes Ebionites Nestorians 185.187 It is reiected by the auncient Fathers 188.198.199 Condemned by the Lutherans 189.190 answered at large by Luther 191.192 he supposeth it to proceede rather from Turkes then Christians 194.195 In the sacramēt al humane philosophical reason must yelde to faith p. 188.189.190.192.198.199.201.202 Scriptures and fathers for the real presence S. Luke 235.236 Ieremie 342.343 S. Chrisostom S. Leo. 238. S. Ciril 200. Heretikes for the real presence Melanchthon 190. Westphalus 190.191 Luther 221. Caluin 223. The ground of the Sacramentarie diuinitie p. 191. The Sacramentaries infidels 193. Infidels their forefathers in mocking Christians for their beleefe in the sacrament 222. how they deale with the fathers 193.194 no one father euer was of their religiō 167. See more in Supper The sacrament a figure ioyned with the veritie pa. 223.224 The Romane Church constant in holding fast the doctrine once deliuered pa. 300.301 pure for six hundred yeres after Christ in pref pa. 47. It can not be proued that she euer changed her faith ibid. 47.48.49.55.56 S Christ sacrificed at his last supper pa. 62. the sacrifice of the Church deduced thence 62.63 sacrifice offered by S. Austin for the dead 66. sacrifice for the dead and in the honour of Saints was vsual in the primitiue church 70.71 Christ a priest in respect of the churches sacrifice 530.531.532 In the church we see Christ sacrificed 217 218.219.220 True sacrifice in the church 214.215.229.230 Melchisedechs sacrifice See Melchisedech M. Ievvels chalenge touching the sacrifice artic 17. ansvvered by the chiefe protestants pa. 70.71.72 Saintes heare our praiers pa. 500.501 Sundry bookes partes of scripture denied by the protestants pa. 26. vsque ad 32. et 401.402 they refusing the authoritie of the church beleeue not the scripture 33.34.35.36 they open the vvay for euery man to deny vvhat he listeth 402.403 A part of S. Iohns gospel doubted of 364. S. Peters second epistle 441.415 the epistle to the Hebrues denied ibidem See S. Iames. S. Luke scripture made ridiculous vvhē it commeth to profane handeling 498. somevvhat is the vvord of God besides scripture 36.37 Scripture corrupted by heretikes in fauour of their heresies 176.177 in Genes against the sacrifice pag. 59.60 in S. Peter against freevvil and good vvorkes 416 417. Christs vvordes in S. Luke notably corrupted for the same purpose 420.421.422 Esai translated detestably agaistn Christs incarnation 439. S. Peter corrupted to make God the author of sinne 451.452.453.455 S. Paul against Christs diuinitie 315. Act. 3. against the real presence 174.179.180 against the immortalitie of the soule 273.274 scripture falsly interpreted by heretikes is the vvord of the Deuil 180.50 The protestāts by their exāple make the text of scripture very vncertaine pa. 241.242.243 one yere canonical the next yere not 366. It is not to be altered vpon one doctors reading 244.245 the partialitie of heretikes choosing precisely one or other reading because it best serueth their heresie 246.247.248.249 they apply scripture to proue any thing be it neuer so vnreasonable 255. to proue Atheisme 408.409 Bookes of scripture faithfully kept by the church though the hebrue text be false 346.347 heretikes may not prescribe the church in what tonge to keepe them 347.348 Stancarus iudgement of the principal Protestant writers pa. 96.97 The Septuaginta interpreters condemned by Luther pa. 305. The Zuinglians true opinion of their Supper p. 209. it differeth nothing from common breakfasts 209.210.211.213 it is no more the body of Christ then a paynted scutchion is king of France 210. only bread 210.214.222 the Supper of the Sacramentaries hath no vse of Christs wordes 257. their arguments against the words of Christ in S. Luke foretold answered by Luther 258.259 T Tradition of the Church necessary pa. 36. S. Hierom author of the common Translation of the nevv Testament vsed in the Church p. 294.295 by appointemēt of Pope Damasus 294. it is approued by the Councel of Trent 281.389 It agreeth with the auncient greeke 372.373 commended for synceritie by the Protestant writers 374.375 defended by them preferred before al nevv 383.387.388.389 preferred before the greeke 393. not to be corrected by the reading of some doctor 394.395 M.W. argument against the same 391.392 the answere 392.393 c. English translations of the nevv Testament al approued by M.W. pa. 262. his wickednes therein 263.264 Such translations leade men to Atheisme 271. are condemned by the learned Protestants 271.272.273.274.275.436 for Hel they trāslate Graue most wickedly 272. thereby mouing men to thinke that the soule is mortal 273.274 A briefe sūme of damnable faultes cōmitted by those translators 278.279 English Translations made in schisme al naught 385. English Translations leaue the hebrue 312. differ notably one from an other 321. Protestante Translations of the new Testament all partial in fauour of their peculiar heresies pag. 365. Luthers condemned by Zuinglius 376.377.378 Al Zuinglian translations condemned by Luther 378.379 that of Basile condemned by Beza 379. item Castalios 380. Caluins corrupteth the text 381. Bezaes most variable and
then our auncieÌ„t Note this Few faultes are fouÌ„d by any protestants in our old translation which by other Protestants are not iustsied Bulling decad 5. serm 5. Bez. in praefatio noui testamenti an 1556. Supra Our old translation better then any of the protestants Beza The Councel of TreÌ„t The later translatioÌ„s of heretiks as likewise al other their procedings are worse then the former according to S. Pauls prophecie proficieÌ„tes in peius 2. Timo. c. 3. v. 13. In approuing our old translation we are warranted by the Protestants theÌ„ selues Pa. 17.18 M. W argumeÌ„t against the old traÌ„slation The answere 1. Cor. 15. v. 53.54 Beza in Luc. ca. 20. v. 28. Beza praeferreth our latin translation before al greeke examples Ibi. c. 7. v. 31 Testament of the yere 1577 1579. and 1580. the Scottish great bible of the yere 1579. S. Hieroms translatioÌ„s more auteÌ„tical then the reading of many docâ—ora Beza in praefat nouâ— testamen an 1565. S. Chrys iustifieth our latin reading Chrysost in 1. Cor. ho. 15 S. Ambrose vntruly cited Ambros in 1. Cor. 15. Beda in 1. Cor. ca 15. pag. 18. pag. 20. Benedictus Arâ—as Montanus a Catholike priest Bible-beaters Neuer since Christes tyme were there such manglers defacers corrupters of the bible as are the protestaÌ„tes of our age See example before pag. 288 The protestaÌ„ts lay the way open for any man to deny the scripture at his pleasure Hier. prefat in Iudith M. Charke hath a deeper insight in scripture then al the bishops fathers of the great Nicene Councel Whit. coÌ„tra Camp pa. 17 Light reasoÌ„s to disauthorize receaued parts of scripture Before pag. 364. S. Hier. ad Edibiam quaest 3. Beza in IoaÌ„ ca. 6.18 19 Luc. 22. The protestates bible is no more a bible then a headles maÌ„ is a man Castalio in praefat ad Edouardum sextum Angliae regem A true confession of a principal protestant The protestate church drowned in grosse ignorance A sure proofe thereof The protestaÌ„ts voyde of the spirite of God and al truth Their light of the gospel is the night of the gospel The end of their religion is Atheisme eeuery maÌ„ to beleeue what he listeth Vbi supra Marke this plaine confession approued by so manifest reason against their common vaunting of the cleare light of the gospel Scripture applied to proue Atheisme 1. Mach. 4. Num. 15. Act. 5. Rom. 14. Mat. 7. D. Whitg defen tract 3. c. 6. pa. 178 The protestants maner of preaching the right way to Atheisme See the preface Impossible to do good with any kind of heretike so long as he may haue libertie to flee to diuers translations and interpretations Antinomi a sect of protestants Sleid. li. 12. anno 1538. fol. 199. The true coÌ„clusion of only faith iustifying The protestaÌ„ts maner of aÌ„swering the Catholikes Al fathers Councels contemned Concil Trident sess 6. cap. 9. See before chap. 3. in the praeface S. Iames refused Before c. 1. Caluin Beza in coÌ„mentar ad Hebr. in argumento ca. 2. v. 3. Cent. 1. li. 2. c. 4. col 328. S. Paules epistle to the hebrewes reiected Iew. defeÌ„ce of the Apolog par 4. c. 19.20 ¶ 1. 2. Pet. 1. v. 10 S. Peters second epistle may be denyed The fourth dayes conference see before cha 2. A place of S. Peter refused â—â—cause it waÌ„teth in many greeke priâ—â—es Luth tom 5. in 2 Pet. ca. 1. fol. 487. Testamentâ— of the yeres 1577.1570.1580 the Scottish bible Vergerius dialog 1. de Ofio â—0 27 1. Pet. ca. 1. v. 22. Ibid. v. 17. Luther tom 5. in 1. Petri ca. 1. fo 451. Illyricus Tâ—gurine translation Yere 1561. S. Peter notably corrupted in the later protestants translations against freewil good workes Testament of the yere 1556 1565 yere 1579. yere 1561. yere 1579. S. Peters words cleane inuerted Cone Trid. sess 6. ca. 4. â—hisi 1. v. 28 Sophistical quarelling Beza annot in illum locum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Testament of the yeres 1577. 1579. 1580. 1561. â—ood works the cause of our saluatioÌ„ Theod. in Philip. ca. 1. Before ca. 5. pa. 98 in sequentib Luc. 7. v. 47. Beza transl anno 1565. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quoniaÌ„ because The yeres 1579. 1580. a 1553. b 1547. c 1536. 1540 1543. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christs words clean inuerted Beza in Luc. 7. vers 47. Intolerable pride malice in abusing the scripture to helpe only only fayth The sense of Christs words according to the auncieÌ„t fathers Chrys hom 6. in Mat. Sinnes purged by workes of penance claritie Greg. hom 33. in EuaÌ„g Ambros in Luc. lib. 6. c. 7. de mulicre peccatrice Aug. hom 23. inter 50. An example of singular notorious wrangling Good grouÌ„des to expound and correct scripture vpon Musculus in locis coÌ„munibus ca. de Iustificat num 5. Luc. 7. v. 47. Yet S. Luke tooke it otherwise dilexit Note the wonderful tearing and renting of this short sentence No spirite but the spirite of SataÌ„ could teach the protestants this desperate maner of interpretation Protestant shiftes to auoide scripture when it is plaine against theÌ„ Zuing. to 4. in Luc. 7. Propre expositions dilexit id est credidit works that is faith the sunne that is the moone vertul de praescripti num 5. The agreement betwene the protestants of our time and auncieÌ„t heretikes touching their behauiour about scriptures Not possible to do good with an heretike hauing this liberty to discourse The hebrew tonge open to infinite cauillinge and so vnfie to bind a coÌ„tentious heretike Hebrew words haue great diuersitie of significations Psal 54. v. 21. Marlorate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whence coÌ„meth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psal 59. v. 6. The yere 1577. 1579. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A hard difficulty what masters we must folow touching the true signification of the hebrew words Humf. lib. 2. de rat int pa. 219.320 The protestaÌ„ts folowing the Iewish Rabbines translate wickedly Dictionariâ— Munsteri printed at Basile the yere 1564. Munster in praef bibli tom 1. Humf. vbi sup pa. 225. Before chap. 12. Bez. in praef Test noui ann 1565. principi Cond dicaâ—i Molinae in a. Luc. Christs incarnation of the virgin can not be proued by scripture according to the protestantes maner of expounding it Mat. 1. v. 23. Before pag. 286.287 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See Munst in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Oecolamp in Esa ca. 7. Translation Iudaical Antichristian Luth. tom 2 ad Amsdorf de Eras fol. 485. Iren. lib. 3. cap. 24. vide Euseb li. 5. ca. 8 Epiph. haer 30. Iustin in dialog eum Triphoâ—e The hebrew and greeke knowledge much aduaunced by Catholikes A man must haue a setled faith before he come to coÌ„ferre greeke and hebrew els shal he neuer haue any faith Vide Aug. de Gen. ad lit lib. 1. ca. 21. tract 18. in Ioan. Hier. ep 138 Marcellae
by the same authoritie Euery man sayng publishing preaching teaching affirming declaring disputing arguing or holding opinion against the first of these articles is adiudged a manifest heretike c. misbeleuers in the other are with great rigor corrected and reformed This was the state of religion left by king Henry after whose death in the time of his sonne vpon very â—ight occasion was quite disanulled al this that the father had by parlament Actes and statutes so carefully established For streight vpon his fathers funerals king Edward saith M. Fox being but a child of nine or ten yere by the instinct of his vncle the Lord protector and Cranmer by consent of parlament did first abolish these six articles and then set forth a second booke of Reformation and after that a third as the religion had dayly more encrease more perfite then the first vnder the title and authoritie of his name After which sort the Zuinglian religion being placed with much dissension and alteration held out for the time of that Prince and was of the next with like authoritie of ParlameÌ„t reiected abolished But being restored againe in the beginning of the Q. Maiesties reigne from that tyme hetherto how the body of the realme hath more and more degenerated from that Zuinglianisme to Puritanisme which as D. Whitg wel proueth is the very next degree to Anabaptisme what infinite numbers in euery shyre as their owne writers record are ioyned to tâ—e Familie of loue which is a mere abnegation of Christianitie what swarmes of Atheistes haue sprung vp with which as D. Whig telleth vs their English congregation is râ—plenished this I leaue to the knowledge remembrance experience and eye sight of the discrete reader If I should note the varietie and difference betwene our Protestantes and the Protestantes of other nations as of Germany Polonia Zuitzerland and France I should neuer make an end because most true it is there is no one article of faith ether touching the blessed Trinitie Christes incarnation and passion resurrection ascensioÌ„ touching the person of the holy Ghost or touching his office there is no one sacrament as the Eucharist Baptisme Forgeuenes of sinnes in penance confession of sinnes to a priest Holy orders there is no one rite or ceremonie ether touching gouernement or diâ—cipline of the church wherein they disagree not These few examples which I haue brought conteining matters of such weight That princes are heads of the church and are not that baptisme remitteth sinnes and remitteth not that priuate baptisme is lawful and vnlawful Confirmation allowed and disallowed Christs descending into hel graunted and denied that he is God of his father and yet is God of him self that al kinds of Religions may for their conscience sake take armes against their prince yet Catholikes may not in any case or for any cause make supposal of such a matter that women are barred by the law of God from exercising authority ouer men euen in matters ciuil and agâ—ine that women by the law of God haue supremacy ouer the cleargy bishops and archbishops eueÌ„ in matters most diuine spiritual that copes and such like ornamentes are to be vsed in church seruice and are to be abolished and burned as monumentes of Idolatrie that by like authoritie of parlaments diuers and contrary faithes are confirmed and ratified These few examples I say al appearing manifestly in the practise and behauiour of one litle Iland and in the compasse of a few yeres al notoriously to be seene in perusing a few english bookes and writers declare sufficiently how true that is which D. Whiteg affâ—rmeth of the Puritans and we find as true in all sortes of Protestants that commonly such as once diuide them selues from the Church fal from errour to errour vvithout stâ—y they declare sufficiently how true that is which I affirme â—â—at these meÌ„ haue no certaintie or stabiliâ—ie of faith therfore hard it is foâ— vs to know what to refâ—â— or dispute aâ—aâ—nst whereas we find such continuâ—l chaunge and varietie Yet al this notwithstanding albeit they haue one faith for Germany an other for Engâ—and and in England one for the South an other for the North one for the fathers reigne an other for the sonnes one for the brother an other for the sister and vnder the â—ame Prince one for the beginning of her reigne an other for the time ensuing one for the nobilitie an other for the commonaltie one for the publike church another for their priuate houses one in their CoÌ„munion booke an other in their seueral writinges although they haue Annuas and menstruas sides as S. Hilary and S. Basil said of the Arrians euery yere and somtimes euery moneth a new faith yet gladly could we deuoure the paine to finde out and learne such their yerely monethly faithes that by refelling them we might saue those christian sowles which through the same monethly dayly and hourely perish euerlastingly had we not a far greater dâ—fficultie in learning out what maner of argumentes are of force and allowable amongst them for refuâ—ing of the same Among Catholikes in al scholes and Vniuersities in al bookes writings argumentes drawen from the scriptures of God from the Traditions of the Apostles from the Authoritie of the Catholike Church of general Councels of the auncient Doctors fathers of the supreme Pastors of the Church geuing sentence definitiue in any controuersie these al and singular are of such weight and estimation that ech one coÌ„uinceth the aduersarie part and no Catholike dare euer resist or oppose him self if he heare the voice and sentence of any one of al these and besides these other argumentes in diuinitie we can not possâ—bly deuise any Vse any of al these in disputation with the Protestant he careth not for them nether wil be bound to them farther then it liketh his owne lust and fansie Approue the Inuocation helpe of Angels by the authoritie of Tobias the free wil of man by the booke of Ecclesiasticus they answere Litle care vve for the example of Raphael the Angel mentioned in Tobie nether acknovvledge vve those seueÌ„ Angels vvhereof he speaketh As litle accompt make I of the place of Ecclesiasticus nether vvil I beleeue the freedom of mans vvil though he affirme it a hundred times And as for the Traditions of the Apostles besides the written word it is their very profession to contemne them and who is there of them al that euer wrote any booke of câ—mmon places who hath not a large treatise particularly against them Alleage against theÌ„ general Councels they answere If this be a sufficient profe to say such a CouÌ„cel decreed so such a doctor said so there is almost nothing so true but I can impugne nothing so false but I can make true and vvel assured I am that by theâ—r meanes the principal groundes of our faith may be
ether for truth of doctrine sinceritie of publike diuine seruice and other policie should geue place to any church in Christendome England is not bound to the example of ether France or Scotland I say truely that vve are not bound to their examples These be al the places and corners of argumentes vvhich â—n their diuinitie by any search vve can find out For although they haue amongst them Popes I meane such ministers as affect and vsurpe Papal and more then Papal authoritie as the Tigurines against Luther and other Zuinglians against the Lutherans commonly inueigh for such arrogant behauiour and the gouernours of Berna being them selues Sacrâ—mentaries vsed to cal Caluin Pope of Geneua for his lordlynâ—s and sway which there he bare and Caluin writeth of Ioachim Westphalus that in sending forth condemnations and excommunications against the churches of his sect he passed al the Popes officers Omnes Papae scribas et datarâ—os superat and the Germane Lutheranes of one fashion accuse their felow Lutherans of an other fashion that they play the Popes and practise ouer them a nevv dominion of Antichrist and that al their doings sauour of a very Papacie and the Puritanes commonly name the Archbishop of Canterbury the perie Pope of England and D. Whitgift sheweth wel that euery Puritane minister laboureth to haue in and ouer his owne parish more then Papal iurisdiction yea that they seeke to transfer the authoritie both of Pope Prince Archbishop and Bishop to them selues bring the prince and nobilitie into a very seruitude so as the Protestant churches want no Popes but haue them after an other sort and in far more abundance then haue the Catholikes yet because these Popes of theirs differ nothing from the doctors of whom before I haue spoken no seueral or distinct kind of argument can be drawen from their primacie And as for general Councels so far are they from euer hauing any that I verely suppose they can not so much as in their fansie and imagination conceaue how any one should be euer gathered For hauing no one head amoÌ„gst them who should take order for any such assembly hauing no consent and vnitie among the members who should labour to the helping forward of such a coÌ„pany being diuided into so many churches sectes and congregations they can neuer resolue ether who should be the President in such a CouÌ„cel or who should be the actors or disputers or of what strength the Canons should be or who should haue the execution of them And when al coÌ„meth to al the libertie of the gospel which maketh euery man iudge of other fathers doctors and auncient Councels wil geue like freedom to euery particular man to take like iudgement and controle ouer the fathers of such a Councel Wherefore these being al the meanes and waies which we haue to reason or write against them and these being their fashions of answering as we find in euery Germane Zuitzer or French Protestant albeit for the readers ease and more facility of iudgement I haue exemplified the same by two or three of our English writers such as I take to be common in most mens hands if now a man list to draw these their answeres into a certaine methode we shal find that they containe for euery vnlearned bold â—angler an vniuersal forme and art of reiecting whatsoeuer Theological argument he may be pressed withal and of reducing the supreme conclusion and resolution to his owne singular fansie and wilfulnes Against many bookes of Scripture he is taught to say that they are superstitious and therefore he vvil not beleeue vvhat they teach though it be affirmed in them a hundred times Against CouÌ„cels that they are not to be admitted because by them the principal groundes of his faith are shaken Nether yet the auncient doctors vnto whom he yeldeth no more in cause of faith and religion then him self perceaueth to be agreable to scripture And touching the late doctors and writers of his owne church and gospel although in courtly and honorable termes he magnifie them far aboue the other yet nether to their iudgment wil he stand farther then he can esteeme that which they teach to agree with the canonical scripture when as in his opinion they geue the true sense and meaning thereof And vvhereas to refuse any it is sufficient to say that he vvas a man or he had some other error or some other is of a contrary iudgement which neuer wanteth amongst doctors guided by so contrary spirites or they geue the churches leaue to dissent from them vvhich I take graunted vnto me being one of the same church vvho can be so simple as to be tyed to one or other doctor hauing so manifold reasons to refuse them al And as for their martyrs whose names should be most reuerend and iudgement most weighty they also are reduced in to the same order and obedience with the rest For their martyrdom may not take avvay from the Protestant this libertie that he hath to enquire of the cause of their death or preiudice him in speaking against their errors for this is to oppose the bloud of men to the bloud of the sonne of God And those martyrs being sent out in the morning before the sunne of the Gospel vvas risen so high ouersaw many thinges which these men see now which liue as it were at noonetide in the most cleare beames light of the same gospel Which comparison expressing most apâ—ly their continual proceeding and running forward to new pointes and articles of faith alâ—o before hand instructeth their after coÌ„mers to keepe on the like course which they see these their predecessors to haue begoÌ„ne For as those Protestants who liued twenty yeres since and bragged then of the cleare light of the gospel are now cast backe by these men in to a darksome kynd of twylight vnto whoÌ„ the sunne was not yet risen so the posteritie who shal liue ten or tweÌ„ty yeres after these are by like example informed to turne ouer this present age vnto that obscuritie of the day dawning and chalenge vnto them selues the brightsomnes of the noone light And the same may euery age and sect say as it marcheth farther farther on in newnes of heresie last of al the authoritie of whole Churches and prouinces is as lightly shaken of as any of the rest for so much as England is not bound to folovv France or Germany more then France or Germany is bound to folovv England ech Sect of Protestants is as vvel assured of his doctrine and hath as good groundes and reasons for it as hath any other to chaleÌ„ge such authoritie to the church of any prouince is to bring in plaine papistry and make that Church Romish and Antichistian Iudge thou now Christian reader what hold or stay we haue in disputing with these felowes whom thou seest to cast away and refuse al
groundes of disputation such as are vsed ether in our church or in their owne and how far these men be groweÌ„ to a headstroÌ„g desperatnes beyond the maner of al the auÌ„cient heretikes For when S. Austin and the old fathers had to dispute with such as Donatistes ArriaÌ„s Manichees Pelagians and others they vrged them with the authoritie of Gods Church with the iudgement of the Sea Apostolike the Succession of bishops in the same with the determination of general Councels finally with the name Catholike and that which was so called of al men and the heretikes seemed to be moued therewith and acknowledge such maner of argument But the heretikes of our time conteÌ„ning impudently al these Church Sea Apostolike Succession of bishops general Councels and whatsoeuer els may be inuented are come so far that they now despise and treade vnder foote the name Catholike which the Apostles by diuine wisdome found out and by their Creede sanctified appropriated to true ChristiaÌ„s members of Christs only Catholike and Apostolike Church in so much that in the sinode holdeÌ„ at Altemburg betwene the Diuines of the Palsgraue of Rhene and the Duke of VVirtemberg when one part brought forth a text of Luther against the aduersaries they perusing the place at large and finding there the word Catholike streightwaies reiect the whole as corrupt and counterfaite because Luther was neuer vvont to vse that vvord Ista verba catholicè intellecta non sapiunt phrasin Lutheri say they and vpon this only reason conclude that booke not to haue bene made by him And yet would to God our aduersaries could be content to yelde to the very scriptures them selues such peeces I meane and bookes as they leaue vnto vs and hetherto with vs acknowledge for Canonical VVouâ—d to Gâ—d they could frame them selues humbly to admitte such scriptures when of theÌ„ selues they are playne for vs against them For so surely buâ—ldâ—d is the Catholike cause that by such helpe she is able sufficiently to defend her selfe and confound the aduersaries But whereas besides the reâ—usal of al the forenamed witnesses both of our church and of their owne as though none euer besydes them selues in particular no Saint or man ether in heaueÌ„ or earth had wit learning or grace whereas I say besides al this they expound the same scriptures by plaine partialitie fantasie frensye whereas they make them selues the only arbiters both what bookes are Canonical what Apocriphal and which is the true sense of them whereas in examining the sense they runne sometime from greeke to latin sometime from lâ—tin to greeke sometimes vrge one or other greeke example against innumerable latin sometimes prosse one or other fathers reading against al greeke commonly corrupt the sense both of latin and greeke sticke only to certaine heretical versions made by their maisters in fauour of their seueral heresies whereas they are groweÌ„ to such extreme folly hardnes impudency it may seeme nothing els but wast of vvords to deale vvith men whom contention pride ignorance malice and obstinacie against the Church and her pastors hath so pitifully blinded Novv if I may vvith the readers patience descend from this vvhich I speake generally of the English protestants to apply the same more specially vnto the party vvhose booke I haue to examine it shal both iustifie more clearly that which hetherto hath bene said touching their irreligion want of faith and withal set forth the practise of those proud and arrogant rules of answering which I before haue noted and besides shew what stuffe is contained in his booke of Antichrist wherein he so vainely and insolently triumpheth It hath bene an old disease of auncient heretikes first of al to inuade the cheefe pastors of the church that they being remoued from the gouernment them selues might more freely spoyle the flocke as witnesseth S. Cyprian And for like reason their maner hath bene more malitiously to barke at the Sea Apostolike as saith S. Austin In this as in many other mad partes the heretikes of our age haue not only matched but also far surmounted the heretikes of auncient time For when as vpon their first breach from the church spreading of this new heresie they were reproued by their cheefe pastor and gouernor vpon malice and spite and desire of reuenge they brast forth into this rayling to cal him Antichrist not meaning for al that to cal him Antichrist in such a seÌ„se as the church and faith of Christian men vnderstandeth vvhen vve speake of Antichrist vvhich shal come in the end of the vvorld and of vvhom S. Paule to the Thessalonians and the scriptures in some other places specially do meane but in such a general sense as S. Iohn intendeth wheÌ„ he saith that novv there are many Antichristes and vvho so denieth Christ to haue come in flesh he is Antichrist But the later Protestants going beyond their maisters as commonly it fareth in euery heresie to make their cause more plausible and iustifie their schismatical departure from the church more assuredly haue taken vp the proposition in the more extreme and desperate sense and now hold the Pope of Rome to be that singular Antichrist of whom S. Paule and some other of the Apostles fore-prophecied This wicked and shameles assertion being refuted at sundry times and of sundry men namely of D. Sanders not only as false vnprobable but also as heathenish vnpossible M. Whitaker hath now taken vpon him to make a reply against his argumentes and maintaine that former assertion of his brethren but after such a sort as partly argueth in him want of al religioÌ„ and conscience partly declareth him to haue deepely impressed in his harte a vvonderful pride and coÌ„tempt of al others a principal note and marke of Antichrist And to beginne vvith the later I vvil shortly runne ouer one or tvvo of the first demonstrations and M. W. ansvveres framed there vnto First of al D. Sanders disputeth that the succession of the Romane bishops can not be Antichrist because Antichrist is one man vvhich he confirmeth by sundrie good testmonies of scripture vvherevnto he ioyneth the vniuersal consent of al the auncient fathers His vvordes are Denique omnes sancti patres Graeci Latini Syri quiper tot saecula vel in Oriente vel in Occidente vel in Aquilone vel in Meridie vixerunt secundùm fidem traditionem ab Apostolâ—s acceptaÌ„ de Antichristo locuti sunt velut de homâ—ne vno Briefly al the holy fathers Greeke Latin Syrian vvho for so many ages liued ether in the East or VVest or North or South according to the faith and tradition receaued from the Apostles haue spoken of Antichrist as of one man VVhat is M. VV. answere to this After certaine cauils made to the places of scripture thus at a clappe he dischargeth the fathers writing according to the faith
which they receaued of Apostles VVe repose no such confidence in the fathers vvritings that vve take any certaine profe of our religion from them because vve place all our faith and religion not in humane but in diuine authoritie If therefore thou bring vs vvhat some one father hath thought or vvhat the fathers vniuersally al together haue deliuered the same except it be approued by testimonies of scriptures it auaileth nothing it gaineth nothing it conuinceth nothing For the fathers are such vvitnesses as they also haue neede of the scriptures to be their vvitnesses If deceaued by error they geue forth their testimonie disagreing from scriptures albeit they may be pardoned erring for vvant of vvisedome vve can not be pardoned if because they erred vve also vvil erre vvith them The fathers for the most part thought that Antichrist should be but one man but in that as in many other things they erred ether because they yelded to much to the common opinion concerning Antichrist ether because they vveighed not the scriptures so diligently as they ought c. In these his vvordes Christian reader thou maist see the very image principal part of Antichrist For preferring him self before the vniuersal primitiue Church of al the fathers then vvriting and expounding the scriptures teaching Antichrist to be one man According to the faith receaued of the Apostles he manifestly preferreth him self before the holy Ghost the ruler and dirâ—ctor of the Apostles and that Apostolical Church according to Christes most assured infallible promise vvhat is this els but to extolle him selfe aboue God Super omne quod dicitur Deus vvhich is one of the special markes of Antichrist And yet this Antichristian arrogancy in treading vnder his feete al fathers al churches al antiquitie is the very maine grouÌ„de of al the rest of his answeres As for example M.D. Sanders second demonstration is this The Church of Rome can not possibly be the Seate of Antichrist because it is that Seate vvhich hath most faithfully kept diligently enlarged the faith of Christ against al Antichristes This he proueth by S Ignatius S. Policarpus S. Ireneus Tertullian Origen SS Cyprian Athanasius Ambrose Hierom Optatus Austin Ciril Prosper Gregory c. by al good and learned vvriters that florished vvithin the first six hundred yeres That it coÌ„tinued the same faith and departed not from it in any point the last nyne hundred yeres he proueth by S. Isidorus by Theodorus by S. Beda Regino S. Lanfrancus Rupertus S. Bernard the general Councels of Laterane of Lions of Vienna of Constance of Florence the most sufficient authoritie that caÌ„ be alleaged in the vvorld Now vvhat is M.VV. ansvvere to this The fathers of the first six hundred yeres he graunteth to haue spoken truely for so much as al this vvhile that Church was very pure excellent and maintained inuiolably the faith deliuered by the Apostles S. Peter and S. Paule and briefly vvas of al other Churches most notable and florishing omnium ecclesiarum praestantissima florentissimaquè But touching the later nyne hundred yeres he maketh so great a difference as betvvene the hovvse of God and a den of theeues betvvene a liue man and a dead carcas Thus he speaketh Although the auncient Romane Church receaued Christ most of al and those that vvere in the societie of the Romane Church defended the Christian faith most valiantly yet these prayses appertaine nothing to the present Romane Church vvhich refuseth Christ him selfe furiously assaulteth the Christian faith I am vides Sandere tuae demeÌ„strationi securim esse inflictam quando a prima ecclesia Romana quae fuit optima et purissima tuam hanc distinguo c. Novv thou seest M. Sanders thy demonstration knocked on the head vvith a hatchet vvhereas from the first Romane church vvhich vvas best and purest I distinguish this thy Romane church vvhich a man may truly caâ— the synagoge of Satan Now this being in deede the very hatchet of his ansvvere as he calleth it and vvhereby he choppeth of the necke of D. Sanders demonstration and vvhich therefore it principally standeth him in hand to proue let the reader consider if he bring any probabilitie any argument storie father Councel authoritie any kind of reason other then his ovvne naked and peeuish asseueration Only he varieth as boyes in grammar scholes that his assertion by many pretie phrases as that Rome is degenerated into a bastard faith that our Popes are altogether vnlike to the auncient Popes that novv there is an other forme of faith in Rome an other religion that our Popes possesse the same place vvith those auncient but haue lost their faith many hundred yeres since that in the Romane church novv nothing remayneth of old Rome besides the name that of old soueraine vvas the authoritie of the Romane Sea amongst al people both for the goodlynes of the citie and puritie of religion and constancie of the men but novv none of these thinges remayneth c. Thus in euery page welnye he affirmeth sayth telleth vs againe againe that thus it is departed and thus it is degenerated and thus it hath altered the faith and is become the synagoge of Antichrist Against vvhich ridiculous and childish babling vvhen his aduersary obiecteth those Confessors Martirs Historiographers Sayntes that liued since S. Gregories time together vvith the general Councels the very flovver of Christianitie he vvith one railing blast turneth them al a side sayng he admitteth them not because they al more or lesse receaued the marke of the beast Aske him a reason why he so rayleth consider what authoritie he opposeth against these reason thou findest none authoritie thou findest none Only as kings and princes ratifie their edictes and Proclamations with their owne only name Teste meipso so this man confirmeth his answeres with the sole authoritie of Guilielmus VVhitakerus which being put in the fronte of euery answere is in deede the very pith and effect of al the answeres folowing And therefore whereas he saith If vve shal receaue for vvitnesses al those men 〈◊〉 to Antichrist vve shal neuer haue end of contending I say if it may be lawful for euery heretike thus to deare with such wodden or leaâ—en hatchers to cut of the synewes of such strong and forcible demonstrations thus so answeare reason with rayling and graue authoritie with Luciferlike arrogancy if the Trinâ—tariaÌ„s Lutherans Anabaptistes or ArriaÌ„s may haue like libertie to auoyde the whole army of Christes Catholike Church Arrianisme wil neuer be rooted out Lutheranisme wil neuer haue end the Anabaptistes and Trinitarians can not possibly be maystred the worst of these being able to say for him selfe at the least as much as doth the Zuinglian in defence of his Zuinglianisme And this is the verie forme fashion maner and substance of his
answere to the next demonstration where to S. Austin and S. Hierome reaching Peters chayre and succession of Priests in that Sea to be the very rocke vvhich the proud gates of helâ— ouercome nor which thing they affirme vpon manifest warrant of Christes wordes he answereth vpon warrant of his owne vvord that that succession of priestes is not the rocke the gates of hel haue prevayled against that church so as the faith vvhich somtimes florished there novv appeareth no vvhere in it long since is departed into other places Whereas D. S. replâ—eth this to be false and and that church euer to haue reteyned the same true faith and neuer to haue brought in any heresie or made any chaunge of doctrine vvhich he proueth by al historiographers that euer liued in the church Eusebius Prosper Beda Regino Marianus Scotus Schafnaburgensis Zonaras Nicephorus Cedâ—enus Sigebertus Gotfridus Viterbiensis Trithemius and many others against them al this only censure he opposeth Historias vestras Sandere non moramur vve regard not M. Sanders your stories and yet him selfe for his ovvne side bâ—ingeth not so much as one story So that against scriptures reason councels fathers old and nevv historiographers al kynd of vvriters him selfe euer cometh in as an omnipotent and vniuersal Apostlâ— Doctor Father c. as though in his only vvord consisted more pith then vvas in al mens that euer liued since Christes time And now somwhat farther to descrie the incredible vanitie folie pride and selfe loue of the maÌ„ let the reader note the grosse and barbarous impossibilitie of that paradox vvhich by this his supreme authoritie he vvould defend He graunteth the Church of Rome to haue bene pure godly christian for six hundred yeres after Christ as before hath bene declared VVhen then grew it to be so impure wicked and Antichristian ten yeres after For thus he writeth Six hundred and ten yeres after Christ or there about Bonifacius the third gouerned the Romane church VVhat vvas he to ansvvere truly very Antichrist In which wordes ioyned together thus much he saith in effect That whereas within the space of ten or twelue yeres before the Romane church was religious and euangelical in such sense as they vnderstand it that is abhorred the Popes vniuersal iurisdiction as Antichristian and limited his power within the precinctes of his owne Patriarkship reuerenced euery prince as supreme head of the church within his owne dominion detested the sacrifice of the masse as iniurious to the death of Christ acknowledged no iustification but by only faith allowed mariage of priestes and religious persons as agreable to the libertie of the gospel held for sacramentes none other but Baptisme the Eucharist and Baptisme an only signe not remitting synnes and the Eucharist a sole figure from which the truth of Christes body was as far distant as heauen is from earth and so forth according to the rest of the articles of their reformed faith within the decourse of so few yeres al these thinges were turned vpside downe the contrary faith planted in steede thereof That is the Romane church of late so sound and perfite sodaynly became most corrupt and impure she approued the vniuersal authoritie of the Romane Bishop and appointed no boundes or limites to his iurisdiction which was mere Antichristian she tooke from Princes their Supremacie she brought in the sacrifice of the masse and highly aduaunced it against the death and sacrifice of Christ she acknowledged iustification to proceede not of only faith but of workes also she established the single life of priestes and votaries and condemned their mariages as sacrilegious and execrable for two sacramentes she admitted seuen to baptisme she attributed remission of sinnes and in the Eucharist she beleeued the real and substantial veritie of Christes presence so forth according to the articles of Catholike religion or papistrie as these men terme it Now whereas thus much is comprised in their paradox of making the succession of the Romane bishops Antichrist whereas such weight lieth in the matter which of it selfe to common intendement is so absurd vnreasonable and in deede vnpossible whereas we also bring forth Fathers Councels and Doctors auouching the contrary gather thou Christian reader whether vve haue not iust cause vtterly to discredite them in this so blunt sensles assertioÌ„ vntil we see their Chronicles their monumeÌ„ts their aÌ„tiquities some maner warraÌ„t besides their owne in a matter of such importance Whereas they allow vs no such and yet chalenge to be credited vpon their owne vvord assure they selfe reader their dealing in this behalfe is not only foolish vnlearned and ignorant but also inhumane furious and diabolical Notwithstanding whereas M.W. besides those former profes which to any indifferent man may seeme more then sufficient requireth of vs farther declaratioÌ„ that in these later ages the Romane church hath not departed from that faith which in her first time she professed to content him if any thing mâ—y content him and make more euident the inuincible equitie of the Catholike cause I wil proue the same by such â—istoriographers as him selfe I trust wil allow for vpright and nothing fauorable to our cause Those witnesses I meane to be first of al him selfe and then Iohn Calum Peter Martyr Martin Luther Flacius Illyricus with such other pillers founders of his owne congregation Out of him self this I gather That to haue bene the true and Christian faith which the Romane church maâ—ntained the first fiue hundred yeres at what time that church vvas must pure excellent preserued inuiolablâ— the faâ—th deliuered by S. Peter and S. Paule This proposition is commonly found almost in euery page of M.W. answere to the second DemoÌ„stration Out of the other Caluin Luther c. this I gather that the Romane church in her first primitiue puritie maintained and beleeued the Popes Supremacie the sacrifice at the masse the same to be auailable for the dead priesthode the real presence c. no lesse then we do now This thou shalt find witnessed by their seueral confessions and approued at large hereafter in places conuenient The conclusion hereof rising is this first that these are no pointes of false or AntichristiaÌ„ doctrine but such as Peter Paule taught the primitiue Romane church Next that the later Romane church hath not departed from the former but hath kept inuiolably the self same faith without chaunge or alteration And so the false supposal whereupon this booke standeth being by such euideÌ„ce refuted the rest of the building must needes come to ground Now I say farther that this point which M.W. taketh for a most certaine and cleare veritie that is the fal of the vniuersal church for after the fal of the Romane church they can shew none that stoode and it is their general both preaching and writing that she corrupted the whole world with her errors and her
apostasie from Christ these later hundred yeres vpon which as I haue said dependeth the verie substance of this his booke is an absurditie in Christian religion so foule monstruous and abominable that it can not be defended of any man except he first of al deny the very incarnation of Christ his preaching his death and passion his eternal kingdome priesthod the sending of the holy Ghost the entier summe of all whatsoeuer hath bene written by the Apostles or foretold by the prophetes For to what end was Christes incarnation but to ioyne him selfe vnto a Church from which he would neuer be separated To what end was his preaching but to erect and instruct such a Church To what end his death and passion but to redeeme sanctifie such a Church leaue vnto it an euerlasting remedie to blot out her sinnes and offences How is he an eternal king who hath not an eternal people obeyng him and obseruing his lawes how an eternal priest whose priesthod and sacrifice for so many hundred yeres was applied to none auailed for none and to what puâ—pose was the holy Ghost sent but to remayne vvith the church for euer and leade her into al truth And vvhat is the summe of the gospels but a declaration that Christ by him self by the holy Ghost by his Apostles founded such a church in vvhich his wil should euermore be openly preached his sacramentes rightly euermore ministred true faith and religion alvvaies preserued a certain vvay for conuerting infidels to the faith for coÌ„futing errors and heresies be continued and al true ChristiaÌ„s maintained by lawful pastâ—rs in vnitie of his true faith against al blastes of vaine doctrine euen vntil his coming to the general iudgement Finally that such a citie and common welth it should be so coÌ„stant so stroÌ„g so vnmoueable that it should vpholde the glorie and name of Christ â— gainst Princes against Potentates against Kings and Emperours against al the force of the world the deuil though they al with might and mayne applyed their whole power to the suppressing and rooting out of it And the self same is the effect of al the auncient Prophetes that the preachers of Christes catholike church should neuer cease day nor night to preach the truth that howsoeuer darknes couered al other nations yet the light there of should neuer be extinguished that the spirite of God and truth of doctrine should neuer depart from it but remayne in it froÌ„ one generation to an other euen for euer that it should neuer be brought in to a narow roume as was the synagoge of the Iewes but should be diffunded thorough al prouiÌ„ces of the earth that the course of heauen of the sunne of day and night should rather faile then priests and preachers of the new testament that albeit other monarchies had an end were altered as the Assyrians the Persians the Macedonians the Romanes yet this should neuer suffer any such a teration but should stand vnchangeâ—ble for euer Wherefore to affirme that this Church hath failed is to affirme that Christ his Apostles Prophetes are al liers that what soeuer is written in the old and new testameÌ„t is all vaine and fabulous For touchâ—ng the straunge deuise of an inuisible church which some of them haue of late imagined it is nothing els but a mere poetical fansie a fansie vvhich consisteth only vpoÌ„ their ovvne vvord and credite for profe vvhereof they neuer yet brought any scripture couÌ„cel father doctor chronicler or writer nor euer shal be able a fansie by which any sect neuer so horrible may defend them selues to be a Church as wel as they a fansie framed and patched together of mere contrarieties and contradictions a fantastical opinioÌ„ which being long since abandoned of the learned protestants in other countries as most vvicked and pestileÌ„t is novv I knovv not vpon vvhat miserie and necessitie receaued of our English Diuines VVhensoeuer vve thinke of the church saith Melanchthon let vs beholde the company of such men as are gathered together vvhich is the visible church nether let vs dreame that the elect of God are to be found in any other place then in this visible societie For nether vvil God be called vpon or acknovvledged othervvise then he hath reuealed him self nether hath he reuealed him self els vvhere saue only in the visible church in vvhich only the voice of the gospel soundeth Nether let vs imagine of any other inuisible church but let vs knovv that the voice of the gospel must sound openly amongst men according as it is vvritten Psal 18 Their sound is gone forth in to al the earth Let vs knovv that the ministery of the gospel must be publike and haue publike assemblies as it is sayd Ephes 4. Let vs ioyne our selues to this company let vs be citizens and members of this visible congregation as vve are commaunded in the 25. and 83. Psalme VVhich places and other the like speake not of Platoes Idea but of a visible church c. And in sundry other places refelling this mad fansie he euer concludeth Necesse est fateri esse visibilem Ecclesiam de qua filius Dei c. It is of necessitie that vve confesse a visible church whereof the sonne of God saith Matth. 18 Dic ecclesiae Tel the church vvhereof Paule saith 1. Cor. 4 VVe are made a spectacle to the vvhole vvorld to angels and to men VVhat a spectacle I beseech you is that vvhich is not seene and whereunto tendeth this monstruous speach vvhich denieth the visible church Delet omnia testimonia antiquitatis abolet iudicia facit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 infinitam illam Cyclopum politiaÌ„ in qua◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vt est apud Euripidem It abolisheth al testimonies of antiquitie it taketh avvay al iudgementes it causeth an endles confusion and induceth a common vvelth of vnruly ruffians or Atheists vvherein no one careth for an other And Caluin interpreteth the article of our creede Credo Ecclesiam CatholicaÌ„ of the Catholike visible Church saith furthermore that the knowledge therof is so necessary that there is no hope of life by grace in this world except we be conceaued brought forth nourished aâ—d ruled by her so long as we liue Adde quod extra eius gremium nullae est spâ—randa peccatoruÌ„ remissio neque vlla salus teste Iesai c. 37. vers 32. Ioel. ca. 2. v. 32. Ezechiel ca. 13. v. 9. psal 106. v. 4. Adde here vnto that out of the lap of this visible church no pardon of synnes is to be hoped for nor any saluation as vvitnesse Isaie Ioel Ezechiel and the Prophete Dauid And OecolaÌ„padius writing vpoÌ„ the Prophete Isaie and those wordes ca. 2. Fluent ad eum omnes gentes Create is the dignitie saith he of the Christian church aboue the synagoge of the Ievves in that it shal
triple Antichrists I come now to speake of the secōd part vz the want of religion and conscience which M. W. sheweth in this his answere wherein I must be the shorter because I haue stayd somewhat long in the first His want of cōscience as in sundry other pointes so in this I note especially that whereas he pretendeth to set downe M. D. Sanders arguments fully and entierly and so to frame his answere accordingly he in many and the same of best moment performeth nothing lesse then that which he most pretendeth M. Iewel amongst many false practises vsed this as one very apt to beguile the simple and whereby I thinke at this present very many learned men are deceaued That is frō the discourse of his aduersary he would cut out remoue frō the sight of the reader the principal strength were it Scripture Councels Fathers or reasō whereby the aduersary iustified his cause after shufle vp some od talke impertinent allegatiōs against the rest For exāple let the Defence of the Apologie of the English church serue vvhere there is no matter seriously handled from the first beginning to the last line of the booke but the very pith and most forcible partes as it vvere the ioyntes and sinevves are thus taken avvay and left out of the booke sometime vvhole and many pages together sometime half pages sometime fovver or fiue lines in a side sometime vvhole sentences or peeces of sentēces according as he thought requisite for the bettering of his cause and disgracing of his aduersarie yet notvvithstanding he peeceth and patcheth vp the rest as though it vvere the ful and perfite discourse of D. Harding This is as much as if some bragging Thraso appointed to combat vvith his enemy should at the time of fight cause his enemy to be tied vp in prison and shevve his chiualry vpon a man made of cloutes this is in steede of a body to fight with a shadovv I vvil not exemplifie this by any particularitie because I can assure the reader by certaine experiēce let him in that booke fal vpon vvhat place he list he shal hardly misse an example This very practise hath M.W. learned of him and putteth it in vre in this his answere to D. Sanders demonstrations For wheresoeuer D.S. disputeth most firmely out of scriptures and reasons grounded there on multitude of fathers agreing in the exposition of the scriptures wheresoeuer he preuēteth the cauils of the aduersaries and forestoppeth the common arguments which they make for the cōtrary parte there M. W. diligently and carefully taketh order to cut and leaue out al such peeces that he may haue the more libertie to runne at randon and talke his pleasure of the rest So for example in the seuenth demonstration he leaueth out in the middle almost halfe a side of D. Sanders a pece of very good importance for the fortifying of his argument In the tenth demonstration where D. Sanders preuenteth and answereth their obiections and where in deede he fully cōfuteth before hand the substance of M. W. replie there a whole page is leaft out And the self same part he plaieth in the thirtenth demonstration leauing out almost two entier pages where in like maner his replie was before hand thoroughly discharged So in the sixtenth demonstration he omitteth almost a side of the argument where D. Sanders conuinceth the Protestants of contradiction to them selues and proueth them to play the part of Antichrists for corrupting the verie letter of scripture at their pleasure And to passe by the like false demeanure in other places and to make a litle stay vpon one only example in the 36 demonstratiō he so wickedly behaueth him selfe as the reader can neuer otherwise iudge of him then that he is a mā wicked vnconscionable without al feare of God or regard of man geuen only to continue talke and serue the time without any care to search out the truth D. Sanders there disputeth thus Christ instituted a true real sacrifice at his last supper This he proueth by scriptures reasons drawen out of the scriptures fathers interpreting the scriptures This sacrifice Antichrist shal abrogate take avvay This he proueth also by fathers expoūding the scriptures and gathering so much of Daniels Prophecie These be the parts of which he concludeth the Pope not to be Antichrist who taketh not away that sacrifice but defendeth wel alloweth it Nowhere wōderful it is to note what mangling and defacing and peecing and patching he vseth in setting downe this demōstratiō In the first paragraph of D. Sanders fiue lines he leaueth out wherein is compared the state of the Iewes and Christians touching the law and sacrifice Then shufling in fower lines he furthwith leaueth out almost a whole side of a leafe where D.S. by good reasons conference of Scriptures and fathers proueth the Masse to be the sacrifice of the new testament and then putting in one line of S. Ireneus cited by D.S. and leauing out many lines folowing of the same author and pertaining as much to the matter omitting withal D.S. discourse therevpon he furthwith ioyneth an other place of S. Ireneus cited likewise by D.S. but after his maner cutting of at the least the one halfe and omitting D.S. argument therevpon as also a notable place of Hippolitus the Martyr writing that in the time of Antichrist the holy churches shal be like vnto poore cottages and the pretious body and bloud of Christ shal not be extant in those daies the Masse shal be abolished c. al which he saith is nothing to the purpose whereas D. S. bringeth in a large place of S. Hierom he setteth downe one peece of a line and leaueth out ten times as much ensuing and the same most to the purpose And finally vsing the like treachery tovvards S. Chrysostom cited as the rest by D. S. from vvhom he croppeth the greater part and the most necessary thus he maketh vp his ansvvere to the 36. demonstration And that the reader imagine not the places of those fathers S. Ireneus S. Hierom S. Chrisost to be ydle needeles let him know that they are such as whereby D. Sanders proueth directly one of his principal propositions that Antichrist shal abrogate take away the sacrifice of the nevv testament according to the prophecie of Daniel Finally in the 38 demonstration where the argument is framed that the best princes haue alwaies fauoured the Sea of Rome as Constantinus Magnus Theodosius Martianus Carolus Magnus Ludouicus Pius c. persecutors tyrannes and wicked princes haue most dishonoured it as Constantius Iulianus Valens Anastasius Theodoricus c. the answere is made by cutting away al this out of the booke and thrusting in a tale of a tub that Cardinals bishops be kings who much honour the Pope This maner of answering is not to search out the truth as becometh Diuines or to bring men
that it svvarueth from the Apostolicall doctrine and teacheth cleane contrarie to S. Paule and all scriptures if Luther flatly expresly deny it to be Apostolical and affirme it to conteyne no one title or letter of such matter as the Apostels are wont to haÌ„dle if WolfgaÌ„gus Musculus vse him so contemptuouslie as though he were some poore rascall not worth the naming and teache him what he should say and sette him to schole this being euident then F. Campions conclusion standeth strong that Luther with his complices contemne that parte of scripture howsoeuer he calleth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 strawen or wodden And therefore ether let M. VV. lyke a good childe confesse with Luther vvhom gladlie he vvorshippeth as his father and vvith the Lutherans vvhom he embraceth as his most deere brethren in Christ that this epistle is no more worth then his father and brethren make of it or if he mislike such consanguinitie as sure I am they abhorre him let him then detest them as profane and wicked men who so impiouslie reiecte the written worde of God that is the foundation as they say whereon is buylte their newe congregation and so may the reader note downe one more capital and substantiall point of dissension betwene those two churches lutheran zuinglian then heâ—herto he hath consâ—dered although nether can he so doe precisely but rather note it as a diuision amonge the zuinglians also for so muche as it appeareth by Musculus that the Zuinglians of SuitzerlaÌ„d no lesse then the LutheraÌ„s of Germanye disagree from the Englishe churche in their Canon of scripture yea the Englishe church within it self as shal appeare in the nexte chapiter CHAP. II. Of the Canonical scriptures and that the English cleargie in accepting some and refusinge others are ledde by no learning or diuinitie but by mere opinion and fantasie AFTER S. Iames foloweth a questioÌ„ proposed by M. Martin how it chauÌ„ceth that the English church doth admit S. Iames epistle which sometime was not admitted and yet wil refuse Tobias Ecclesiasticus the books of Machabees which were no farther disproued then that of S. Iames. The reason in truth is the same in effecte geuen by M.VV. because these later contayne such proofe of the Catholyke religion as by no sophisticatioÌ„ can be eluded S. Iames they thinke is not so flat but shifts they haue to ridde their handes of him well inough So much writeth Caluin Some there are that thinke this epistle not vvorthie of authoritie but I because I see no sufficiente cause vvhy it should be reiected gladly vvithout controuersie embrace it for vvhereas the doctrine of free iustification semeth to be refuted in the second chapiter in his place I shall easelie ansvvere that matter As if he had sayd that therefore he admitted it because he had found out a quidditie to auoide that hard obiection agaynst only faith which answere notwithstaÌ„ding because it is false peeuish sophistical and cannot abide the tryall as wel proueth Illyricus Pomerane Musculus they therfore thought the other way more cleanlie rather vppoÌ„ preteÌ„ce of some doubte made in the primitiue churche cleane to shake it of with the rest then vppon a vaine toy which must in fine shame it selfe make hazard of their solifidian iustificatioÌ„ which must needes come to the grounde if this Apostle retaine his old credite This I say in deede is the reason but because thus to haue spoken plainlie had geuen a sure demonstratioÌ„ to the reader that they make no more account of scriptures then of fathers no more reckning of Iames or Peter then of Gregorie or Austin if they be against their conceaued heresies therefore M. VVhit semeth to shape a more cleanlie answere and this yt is All the church saith he reproued not the epistle of Iames and they that reproued it vvere moued so to doe by no sure reasons but these bookes vvhich you name Tobias Ecclesiasticus the Machabees the vvhole churche of old reiected nether vvere they vvritten in the Hebrevv tounge vvhereas no bookes of the old testament vvere Canonicall but onlie those vvhich the lord commended to the old churche Two reasoÌ„s he seemeth to geue the first that no bookes in the olde TestameÌ„t are Canonicall but such as were written in the Hebrew the proofe wherof consisting onlie in M.VV. authoritie without ether reason or probabilitye or Doctor or Councell if I oppose against him S. Augustine with the catholike churche of that age I trust the reader wil not greatlie stagger which syde he ought to take and if this reason hold I marueile what shall become of Daniel a great parte wherof is held of them for Canonical yet is not writteÌ„ in the Hebrew His other argument is of more force that the vvhole primitiue church refused the bookes of Machabees Iudith Tobie but certaine onlv that vppon no good reason refused S. Iames. These two partes if he proue and shew this difference he sayth somewhat I wil be of iudgement as he is if not whereof I assure my self then as before so here styll lust and fantasie ruleth them in mangling thus the scriptures not reason diuinytie let vs see how he proueth that the whole churche reiected the former S. Hierom sayth the church readeth the bookes of Iudith Tobias the Machabees but reckeneth theÌ„ not amongst canonicall scriptures This for them how may we fynd now that not the whole churche but some particuler men and they not vppon any good reason refused S. Iames For this part we must credit M.VV. vppon his worde for besyde his worde reason or coniecture he yeldeth none but coÌ„trariwise to disproue this his distinction and approue that without reason or conscience he and his fellowes haue made choyse of the one with condemnation of the other thus to do M.VV. him selfe ministreth vs mattet abundant for thus he wryteth in his first booke in iustifiynge frier Luther against S. Iames. Luther vvas not ignorante vvhat the aunciente church iudged of Iames his epistle Eusebius doubted not to vvrite of that epistle expresslie I vvold have all men to knovv that the epistle vvhich is ascribed to Iames is a bastarde epistle vvhat could be writteÌ„ more plainly but perhaps Eusebius pleaseth you not geue me a reasoÌ„ vvhy heare then Hierome vvhom you knovv to have bene a Priest of the Romane Church The epistle of Iames is auouched to have bene set forth by some other in his name the one affirmeth it to be a counterfeite the other saith it is supposed to have bene published not by the Apostle but by some other vvhy then are you angrie vvith Luther vvhom you see not suddenlie or rashlie first to have begon to doubâ—e of that epistle but therein to folovve the iudgement â—â—stimonie of the auncient Church Let vs now ioyne together these two proofes of M. VV. with consideration what thence
no wiser then they who in so shorte space haue falleÌ„ out with your self altered your iudgmeÌ„te and now esteeme that for apocriphal which then was to yow canonical that is now iugde that to be the moone which then you thought to be the sunne Our lorde geue his people grace to thinke of you as you proue your selues that is so fantastical inconstant that you know not what to say and whyles you seeke to keepe your selfe aloofe from the Catholike churche the sure piller grouÌ„de of truâ—he you plunge your selues ouerhead and eares in such foule absurdities as neuer did heretikes before you For what is the reason of al this because besydes the written word or scripture yow wil not acknowledge any traditioÌ„ of the Church wherevnto by this question yow are enforced of necessitie For if we are bound to beleeue certaine bookes as for example the Gospel of S. Matthew S. Marke S. Iohn and S. Paules Epistles to be Canonical that is heaueÌ„ly and peÌ„ned by diuine inspiration and yet the same can not be proued by scripture theÌ„ cleare it is that we are bound to beleeue somewhat which by scripture caÌ„ not be proued and so the tradition of the Church is established And marueyle it is that yow perceaue not how grosly yow ouerthwart your self and plainly refel that which yow would seeme most earnestly to confirme For if yow march your beleefe of scripture with knowledg of the Sunne and Moone and such like as are knowen by only sense the light of nature then you deny it to be any article of your faith For these two are directly opposite and the apostle confirmeth this reason wheÌ„ he defineth faith to come by hearing and hearing by the vvord of God ergo fides ex auditu auditus per verbuÌ„ Dei And therefore if you beleeue not with humaine faith as yow beleeue Tusculanes questions to haue bene written by Cicero but with Christian diuine faith as yow beleeue Christ to be your sauiour if thus you beleeue the Gospel which beareth S. Matthews name as likewise that of S. Marke and S. Iohn to haue bene written by them then yow beleeue so because so yovv haue heard it preached and so yovv haue receaued and consequently by the Apostles authoritie that verie matter so preached vnto yow is the vvord of God which word of God whereas yow find not in the scriptures hereof it foloweth manifestly that somewhat is the vvord of God which is not scripture and therefore yow and your fellowes beleeuing only scripture beleeue not al the vvord of God but only a peece thereof and so did the worste heretikes that euer were yea so do at this day the verie Turkes and Mahometanes But to end this special matter with yow M. VV. touching your distinction betweene S. Iames and Tobias Iudith the Machabees c. where you make this to be the difference that S. Iames vvas refused but of a fevv and the other generally of the vvhole Churche tota Ecclesia repudiauit say you for declaration of your truth herein I referre you to the moste euident testimonies of the same auncient Churche S. Augustine setting downe the Canonicall scriptures as they were read and beleeued in his time placeth S. Iames I coÌ„fesse in order with the Gospels Pauls epistles yet not excludiÌ„g those other but in the selfe same place numbringe Tobie Iudith and the Machabees with the bookes of Moses and the Prophetes his saith he 44. libris veteris testameÌ„ti terminatur authoritas In these fourtie and foure bookes is concluded the authoritie of the old testament Likewise the Councel of Carthage approueth for Canonicall S. Iames but in the same CanoÌ„ it approueth as far the other forenamed and teacheth of them as directlie as of the other that they are Canonicall scriptures Somewhat before S. Augustines daies they were not by publike decree of the Church receaued as appeareth by S. Hierome and the Councel of Laodicea but then when there was as greate doubte of S. Iames epistle S. Paule to the Hebrewes and the Apocalyps touchinge the first it is manifest by that which hath bene said by you and your felowes Of the secoÌ„d there was more question then of the first and S. Hierome seldome citeth it but he geueth a note signifyinge that it was not in his time taken for Canonical In the Epistle to the Hebrevves vvhich the custome of the Latine Church receaueth not saith he it is thus vvritten Againe the blessed Apostle in his Epistle to the Hebrevves although the custome of the Latin Church receaueth it not amongst Canonicall scriptures Againe this authoritie the Apostle Paule vsed or vvhosoeuer he vvere that vvrote that Epistle In catalogo he saith that euen vnto his time it vvas not accounted the vvritinge of Paule and that Caius an auncient writer denyeth it to be his and in his epistle to Paulinus sette before the Bible he saith that a plaerisque extra numerum ponitur of the more part it is put out of the nuÌ„ber of Paules vvritinges The like might be declared by S. CipriaÌ„ Lactantius Tertullian Arnobius and S. Austine if it were needefull and the Apocalyps was yet more doubtful then ether of these two as wee see by the Councel of Laodicea leafte oute of the rolle of Canonicall writinges when both the other of S. Iames and S. Paule were put in Wherefore as false that is which M.VV. constantlie auoucheth of the auncient Church touchinge the seueringe of these sacred volumes so hath he not yet nor euer shalbe able with reason to satisfie M. Martins demaund why they of England haue coÌ„desceÌ„ded to admit the one rather then the other And here the reader may consider esteeme as it deserueth of that glorious 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in fine he singeth to him self settinge the crowne of triumphe vppon his owne head and his felowes Nothing saith he is novv more vulgar then the Papists arguments against vs. Quicquid afferri a quoquam potuit vidimus diluimus protriuimus vvhat so euer could be said of anie of them al vve haue seene it refelled it and trode it vnder foote he may consider I saie how like this man and his companions are to worke such maisteries who as yet knowe not what those weapons are which they should vse in atchiuing such conquests For whereas they vaunt to doe this by the written worde yet are not resolued amoÌ„gest them selues what that written word is and how farre it extendeth it is as fantastical a parte to bragge of victorie as if a mad man should ruÌ„ne into the field to slea his enemie and when he commeth there knoweth not with what weapon to begin the fight Wherefore wel may he and his felowes heare and see the Catholike doctrine as Esai speaketh of the Iewes concerninge the doctrine of Christ hearing shal you heare shall not vnderstand and seeing shal yovv
Stinckfâ—ldius and their scholer vvhether they be at Zuruke or in vvhat place else soeuer vnder the sâ—nne Thus Luther If you know this Maister Whitaker as you wil seeme to be ignorant of nothing what maketh you so busily to defend Luthers barbarous and proude vauntes as though he were such a piller without whom your church could not stande But belyke it is sufficient that he was an Apostata frier as were the founders of your gospel that he with you agreed in rayling at the Pope and Sea of Rome and so for his agreeing with you in these smaler toyes you care not for his disagreeing from you in those weightie matters Wel be it as you liste and perhaps you haue more reason then I perceaue otherwise you shall neuer be able to iustifie this demeanure in the sight of any man endued with common sence Let vs heare how conningly you cure this stinking sore for nothing stinketh more before the face of God and man then a poore contemptible wretch so Lucifer-lyke to prefer him selfe before inumerable excellent learned and glorious Saintes of God What distinction haue you to saue Luthers honestie Forsooth this In certaine cases Luther might more esteeme of his ovvne iudgement then of Austine Ciprian or a thousand Churches For if that vvhich Luther taught vvere agreable to Gods vvord then Luthers iudgment vvas to be preferred before the contrarie iudgment of al men and Churches Here M. VV. thinketh he hath spoken much to the purpose and therefore aduaunceth him selfe alofte Scripturam Lutherus protulit cuinullus mortalis resistit quaeque tandem Pontificiis decretis pesteÌ„ atque exitium afferet Luther brought vvith him scripture vvhich no mortall man can vvithstand and vvhich at length shall be the bane and distruction of the Popish decrees That I may the better conceaue this distinction and ether yelde to it if it stand with reason or discouer the vanitie of it if it fal out to be but a peeuish battologie of wordes as I trowe it will proue let me require a playner explication of that parte Luther might vvell prefer his iudgment before a thousand Austines Ciprianes and Churches if he spake vvith scripture Is this the meaning that in case and controuersie of religion if a thousand Ciprians that is all the Fathers teach vs one thing and bringe scriptures for them and one father Luther teach vs the contrarie and bringe scriptures for him may Luther in this case preferre his owne iudgement before al those Fathers if so as the speach it selfe is so monstrous execrable as the deuil him selfe can not open his mouth into more horrible pride so what heresie what Apostasie what Atheisme in the church can euer be coÌ„trouled if this rule be made currante why shoud Arrius yelde to the Councel of Nice Nestorius to the Councel of Ephesus Macedonius to the CouÌ„cel of Constantinople seinge they brought scriptures for them and by this rule ought to haue preferred their priuate iudgment before those byshops as Luther his offpringe doe theirs before the Councel of Trente or will he say that if perhaps a thousand Austines and Churches teache some doctrine without the writteÌ„ worde of God that is citing no text for it Luther against the same bring the written worde that is some texte of the scripture after his seÌ„se in this case he may better esteeme of himselfe then of al the rest But first he can neuer geue instance that ether the auncient fathers did so in their tymes or that we do so now for howsoeuer in the Councels of Nice of Ephesus of Chalcedon the byshops stoode much vppoÌ„ the traditioÌ„ of their elders ea que sunt patrum teneantur say they sic credere à sanctis patribus edocti sumus let vs hold fast the fayth and decrees of our fathers thus to beleeue vve haue bene taught by our holye fathers yet they waÌ„ted not scriptures as nether did the fathers in the Councel of Trent nor we at this day in our controuersies with the protestantes And if those auncient fathers had alleaged no direct euident place against Arrius Nestorius Eutyches yet notwithstanding the Christian people were bound to beleeue them grounding them selues only vpoÌ„ the Catholike vniuersal fayth of the churches which were before them as they did in the question of our B. Ladies perpetual virginitie And albeit the heretike brought some clauses of scripture for the coÌ„trary part yet ought al faithful men to yeld no more credit thereto theÌ„ to the deuil when he alleaged scripture against our sauiour because as the deuil so al heretikes may vse scripture against the true sense and meaning thereof the vniuersal church caÌ„ neuer teach or beleeue so as by Christ him self we are assured And this case in effect coÌ„meth to one issue with the former for geue this scope to an heretike that all the Bishops Churches Fathers may erre he alone if he can alleage a text may therefore rightly contemne al other in respecte of him selfe as euery Sectmaister doth and hath done where is the Churches quietnes what order is there for coÌ„tinuance of fayth to what ende was the comminge of Christ to what vse the sendinge of the holy Ghost Or perhaps M. W. wil say posito per impossibile that all the Churches fathers teach against scripture Luther alone teache with scripture then lo Luther maye thinke him selfe a better man then they all and this is true this I graunte as in like maner I confesse that if the heauen shoulde falle we knowe what woulde folow And yet of these two suppositions the Spirit of God putteth the later to be more possible that the course of heauen shal soner alter then the Catholike Churche of the new TestameÌ„te fal frome Christe to Apostasie But it may be M.VV. wil say I scanne his wordes to narrowlie his meaning is plaine that whereas Luther bringeth scriptures against vs that is against all the Austines and Ciprianes of the Catholike Church all the Byshops now liuinge he maye well truste his owne iudgmente if this be the meaning yet stil al commeth to one ende and whie may Luther so do more then Caluine whie Caluine more then Muncerus whie a ZwingliaÌ„ more then a Puritane Anabaptiste or Trinitarian Or what assurance hath he more then those other But if Luthers iudgment bringinge scriptures with him be so forcible against vs may not we trow you Lutherize a litle after your example and say the same against you As for example Luther hath made a booke entituled defensio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 verborum coenae accipite comedite hoc est corpus meum contra fanaticos SacramentarioruÌ„ spiritus In that booke not very longe or large yet contayninge more substaÌ„ce then some whole volumes of his do his principal conclusion risinge vpon this texte of scripture and grounded vpon many texts of scripture beside is that he and his vvill
and maye retaine external peace and ciuil concord vvith the Zuinglians in matters temporal but quoad spiritum eos ad extremum vsque halitum deuitabimus arguemus damnabimus pro idololatris verbi Dei corruptoribus blasphemis deceptoribus c. touchinge the soule and matters spiritual vve vvil auoide thē as long as vve haue a day to liue vve vvil reproue and condemne them for idolaters corrupters of Gods vvorde blasphemers and deceauers and of them as enemies of the Gospel vve vvill sustaine persecution and spoile of our goods vvhat-soeuer they shal do vnto vs so lōge as God vvill permitte And in the same leafe it foloweth immediatelye aptlye may vve say to these men offeringe vs peace as Christe saide to Iudas in the garden Iudas vvith a kysse betrayest thou the sonne of man So this is the very peace and kisse of Iudas for offeringe vs their friendship they vvoulde vvithal obtaine of vs to holde our peace and in silence beholde the fyers and slaughters vvhereby they thrust headlong infinite thousandes of soules dovvne to hell Here is Luthers iudgmente and that with scripture for againste al communion with the Zuinglians he in this place vrgeth the wordes of our sauiour Math. 10. vers 34. Luk. 14. v. 26.2 Cor. 6. v. 14. Eph. 4. v. 5. May Luther now prefer his iudgmente thus qualified before a thousande Caluines a thousand Peter Martyrs or who-soeuer els be the greatest doctors of your congregatiōs before all Zuinglian churches Or if Luther may so do may not we do the like and thinke of you as he doth and that by vvarrante geuen vs from your ovvne mouthe Maye vve not saye to you vpon like grounde Scripturam Lutherus protulit cui nullus mortalis resistit c. Luther hath brought scripture vvhich no man can vvithstand and vvhich at lenght shal be the bane and ouerthrovve of all the Zuinglian and Caluinistical opinions Now if which is the extreme refuge you wil say that Luthers iudgmēt against you is not agreable to scripture and therfore not so deepely to be accompted of then see I beseeche you how finely and suttely you haue fet this matter about for now the sense of your distinctiō is that whē Luther affirmeth any thing agreable to the scriptures by iudgment of your selfe he ought to esteeme more of it thē of a thousand Austines a thousād Ciprianes an innumerable cōpany of catholike churches And thus whiles you first geue Luther power to iudge ouer al Fathers Doctors and Councels and then make your self iudge ouer Luther to approue reproue him as you please who seeth not that in fine you make your self supreme iudge of altas before of scriptures so now of Fathers and Councels old and new Catholike and heretike no lesse of your owne doctors then the auncient fathers and doctors of Christes church which is in deede the verie last refuge and extreme resolution of all your new diuinitie Finally because it greeueth me to spēde time in such vnreasonable pelfe may it please you at your better leysure to consider the sense of this parcel to put it downe somewhat more intelligiblie and if you can so do and saue your selfe from the note of much foly for from beinge an heretike by Luthers iudgment what soeuer the answere be you shall neuer saue your selfe you shal performe a matter of more difficultie then perhaps you are aware of In the meane season as it standeth it carieth with it grosse faultes as manie welnie as it hath lines whether you oppose Luther to the auncient primitiue Churche as it seemeth and as doubtlesse he meante or to the catholike churche of our time whiche you woulde inferre or to your owne deuided Zuinglian congregation which by like sequele doth folow or whether you consider Luther in this case only as one principal author of your Gospel so make this priuiledge common to him with other or rather consider him singularly by himselfe because he was the first that brake the yse and opened the waye to this soule Apostasie which is now so far spread or finally whether you thus aduaūce Luther but euer holdinge the raynes in your owne handes which I weene must be your laste refuge and final determination CHAP. IIII. Of priesthode end the sacrifice continued after Christ in the state of the nevv testament and that it derogateth nothing from Christ THE difference betwene you M. Martin aboute priestes is no priuate but a general controuersie betweene all Catholiks and Protestants your minister like termes of Baalites and Antichristian sacrificers I cōtemne am cōtente to dissemble many breaths more stronge and ranke then this we muste gladly abide or els we are not such as by Goddes mercy we hope professe our selues Comfortably saith our sauiour the disciple is not aboue his maister nor the seruante aboue his lorde if they haue called the goodman of the house Beelzebub hovv much more them of his housholde therefore feare ye them not For to comforte our selues withal if we be Baalites and Antichristians in respecte of oure priesthode then certainly Christe is the capitaine Baal Antichriste from whom our priesthode descendeth And that will I proue in few principally and first by your owne wordes secondarilye by manifeste deduction out of the scriptures A priest you define thus Sacerdotes ii verè propriè sunt qui sacrificia faciunt qualis fuit Aaron Aaronis filii Melchisedechus quem illi adumbrabant Christus Priestes truly and properly are they that offer sacrifices such as vvas Aaron and the sonnes of Aaron Melchisedech and Christe vvhom they prefigured Those that offer sacrifice you acknowledge to be priestes truly and properly not onlye by abuse of speeche as in this place againste S. Austine you falsly cauille In the number of such priestes that offered sacrifice you reckē Melchisedec after him Christe of vvhom Melchisedec vvas a figure This you woulde neuer haue said had you bene skilful ether in your owne diuinitie or in the faith of the Catholike Church for although hetherto we haue many wayes laboured and vsed all possible meanes of proufe that Melchisedec offered sacrifice yet we could neuer obtaine so much of your brethren because they wel saw that therein was included the manifest confirmatiō of the Catholike faithe touching priesthod the vtter ruine of your Geneuiā Ministerye For if Melchisedec sacrificed then was it in bread and wine for other sacrifice of his neuer man imagined and the scripture proueth it inuincibly which mencioneth that no other nor by worde sillable or title geueth the leste insinuation of any besides Then how necessarilie it muste folow that Christe sacrificed in like maner and how from him power to do the same is deriued vnto priestes of the new testament this shal be shewed hereafter First of all that of Melchisedecs sacrifice beinge most certaine of you graunted and of vs beleeued
the spirite of grace CHAP. V. Of Penance and the value of good vvokes touching iustification and lyfe eternal NEXT in place foloweth Penance wherein M.W. keepeth his accustomed speaking so doubtfullie and ambiguouslie that he semeth not fullie resolued what to affirme yet in fine as commonlie his maner is he yeldeth sufficient matter to ouerthrow him selfe M. Martin here noteth him of two faultes one that he iniurieth the fathers the other that he contrarieth him selfe the iniurie done to the fathers is this that he affirmeth S. Ciprian and other fathers to haue depraued the doctrine of penance Before he come to iustifie this accusation he falleth into a common place common to all sortes of protestātes taking to him selfe supreme iudgement ouer the fathers complayninge of the Catholikes that so it fareth vvith them that excepte those thinges may preuaile vvhich in the fathers are most corrupte or vitious they are not able to maintaine their cause Whereunto I answere that so it fareth with the protestantes that except they may be soueraigne iudges of fathers Councels Church and al they must hold their peace and say nothing for this is as stale a tricke and currant amōgst any sect as any thinge hitherto spoken of to protest much reuerence to the fathers whē they are not against the word of God that is against their cōceiued heresies marie thē boldlie to stande with the word against them and say they were all beetle-blynd and saw nothinge for when and wherein the fathers hold with them then in such matters they were worse then madde altogether voyde of common sense if they would thus inueigh against thē In the last question presse them with the fathers and the primitiue Church touchinge external pristhod and the sacrifice it was their error saith Caluin Illyricus Zuinglius and Bale Presse the sacrilegious vowbreakers with the consent of the primitiue Church for condemnation of their vnlawful mariages I knovv saith Peter Martir and declared no lesse to my auditors in Oxford that Epiphanius vvith manie others of the fathers erred in that they helde it a fynne to breake the vovv of virginitie and they do ill to number it amongest the Apostolicall traditions Charge the English Puritanes with the consent of Antiquitie for obseruation of feasts holy-dayes in honour of Christ and his Saintes M. T. C. answereth VVhereas M. D. VVhiteg citeth Augustine and Hierom to proue that in the churches in their tymes there vvere holy-daies kept besydes the Lordes day he might haue also cited Ignatius and Tertullian and Ciprian vvhich are of greater aunciencie and vvould haue made more for the credite of his cause for it is not to be denied but this keepinge of holy-dayes especially of Easter and Pentecost is verie auncient and that these holy-dayes for the remembrance of Martyrs vvere vsed of long tyme. but these abuses vvere no auncienter then other vvere grosser also then this and therefore I appeale from these exāples to the scriptures Charge the Trinitarie Protestantes the Arians of Polonia Seruetus with the Coūcel of Nice and Crede of Athanasius the Councell of Nice say they vvas a congregation of Sophisters and the Crede of Athanasius may more iustlie be called the Crede of Sathanasius the first Nicene fathers vvith Athanasius inuented this tripartite God they vvere all blind Sophisters Ministers of the Beast slaues of Antichrist and bevvitched vvith his enchauntmentes for that the Pope is Antichrist in that as in verie manie other pointes they are iust of M.W. faith In like sorte dealeth the Lutherane Vbiquitarie against vvhose monstrous heresie vtterlie destroyng the mysterie of Christe Incarnatiō vvhen Bullinger vrged the consent of al the auncient fathers Brentius presētly gaue this general answere The fathers altogether in this question are of no vveight or authoritie They vvere taught not in the schole of the holy Ghost but in the schole of Aristotle they vvere deceiued and blynded by Aristotle humaine reason of celestial matters they haue childish imaginations and grosse dreames earthlie fansies and carnal conceites Thus answered Brentius and thus saith Bullinger of him Inuenit compēdium ad omnia veterum testimonia respondēdi A shorte compendious vvay hath he founde to solue all places of the fathers thus sayth euerie heretike touching euerie controuersie wherein the fathers stād against him the selfe same way hath M.W. taken But because this way is ether to large therefore to daūgerous as lying wide open for euerie kind of heretike that hath bene is or cā be or to straight if M. W. wil make it priuate to him self and deny it to all others let him therfore without this preiudicate condemnation geue reason whie he offereth the fathers this intolerable iniurie for so it must be called vntill he proue the cōtrarie his reasons are these Penance consisteth not in certaine externall penalties or in a certaine exquisite seueritie of discipline vvhich the Apostle calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vvherebie the bodie is chastised vvith certaine voluntarie punishmentes but in internal dolour conceiued through remembranco of out sinnes and in amendmente of lyfe and the fathers vvhen they supposed that by such greuous penalties their sinnes should be acquited and God pleased they erred greuously and somevvhat diminished the force of Christes deathe and bloud by vvhich onlie our sinnes are expiated for pardon of sinnes is to be expected of nothinge but of the bloud of Christ In which wordes three thinges I note his description of penance his reason prouinge the same and the sequele or absurditie which he inserreth thereof wherein stoode the auncient fathers error His description of penance is partlie affirmatiue as that he requireth internal greefe of hart and correction of life partlie is negatiue as that he remoueth from it all externall chastisement or discipline In the first we agree with him in the seconde we say he erreth and vnderstādeth not the scriptures As without the first the second is worth nothinge so ioyne them bothe together they greatlie please God are highlie commended in the Gospel our Sauiour when he denounced vae to Corozain and Bethsaida sayng if the miracles vvrought in thee had bene done in Tyre and Sidon they had not onlie done penance longe agoe but they had done it in beare-cloth ashes he sheweth this external afflictiō to be verie commendable and to make the penance more auaylable and withall pointeth the Iewes to their Prophetes who willed them with such external humiliatiō to prostrate them selues before God thereby the sooner to procure his mercie Conuert ye to me sayth the Prophete Ioel vvith al your hart in fastinge and mourninge and lamentation and rente your hartes and not your garmentes saith our Lorde omnipotent In the later parte of which sentence as he disproueth externall signes without internall remorse as being hipocritical reiected of God by
able to proue any of these articles by any one cleare or playne clause or sentence ether of scriptures or of the old Doctors or of any old general Councel or by any example of the primitiue Church vvithin 600. yeres after Christ I promise to geue ouer and subscribe vnto him Thus M. Iewel promised and do you promise as much what els and so longe as you haue a day to liue you wil stand in defence here of But how dare you say so whereas litle know you what al the doctors haue written and much lesse know you what books of theirs hereafter may be found and your selues if you remember not long sithence in your owne wasted libraries found out certaine straunge sermons in the Saxon tonge against some knowen and confessed partes of religion as you wold pretend And how cā you so confidently hazard your faith if you haue any vpon one sentence or clause of those men of whom sundrie times you professe that they wrote clauses sentences chapters and bookes in defence of as grosse errors as these Remēber your stomake against them in this same booke thus you write Al our faith and religion you meane I suppose so far as it is allowed by act of Parlamēt and practised within the Q. dominions for other ye defend not is grounded not vpon humane but vpon diuine autoritie Therefore if you bring against it vvhat some one father hath beleeued or vvhat the fathers al together haue deliuered except the same be proued by testimonies of scripture it vvaygheth nothing it proueth nothing it concludeth nothing for the fathers are such vvitnesses that they also haue neede of scriptures to be their vvitnesses if deceaued by error they haue said ought differing from the scriptures hovv soeuer they may be pardoned erring through vvant of vvit vve can not be pardoned if because they erred vve also vvil erre vvith them Being thus perswaded touching them all how dare you venture your faith vppon a clause or sentence of any one It is a peece of faith far more sure by al antiquitie and more surely grounded in the hart of any catholike that Christ is perfect God consubstantial and equal to his father then any of these paradoxes can be possiblie setled in your opinions and we honour the fathers much more then you do yet was there euer any Catholike so frantike mad that would promise to subscribe to Arianisme if out of any father greeke or latin within 600. yeares any one clause or sentence might be brought against the catholike beleefe wherefore this verie assertion is a most sure argument that you haue no kind of faith no faith I say at all nether diuine nor humane not diuine because you would neuer so lightlie esteeme it nor vpon so smal warrant hazard it not humane because it wel appeareth that nether you nether maister Iewel euer meant to stand to that which to the world in publike writing ye haue so solemly promised Wherefore albeit touching you affected as you are I accompt this labour as clearly lost as if I should water a fruitles tree tvvise dead and plucked vp by the rootes yet for the readers cōmoditie that he may perceaue how ignorant and foolish and proude and fantastical that vaunte of M. Iewels was and how like it is that you who know much lesse yet comonly who more bold then such can maynteine the quarel and wade thorough that myre wherein M. Iew. him self stucke fast I wil speake a few wordes of these his principal questions And because I couet so far as may be to cut of al occasion of cauilling I wil not run to any other doctors lest you take exceptiō against them then those who are named here of M. Iewel as his pretended maisters in these heresies and againe out of them I wil bring nothing but that only which I haue learned of your owne writers and read in your owne bookes and that againe in such sense without any alteration as your selues alleage them So that your heroical courage in answering shal first be exercised vpon these your owne brethren and what so euer blunted dartes you shal cast against me they shal not reach vnto me but thorough their sydes I wil passe ouer Christ and S. Paule vvho taught M. Ievvel these heresies as he saith which is not verie likely whether he meane in ieast or in earnest seing S. Paule willeth vs so to detest any kind of heretike that after one or two warninges we should let him alone and suffer him to perishe in his sinne knovving that he is damned in his ovvne iudgment our sauiour chargeth vs to hold them for no better then ethniks and publicanes who shal oppose them selues vnto his church and therefore i◠can not be that ether of those should teach you that for which before hand they threaten and assure you of damnation But Anacletus and Xistus old bisshops of the Romane church before that Sea grew to this vsurped primacie they perhaps taught you this herisie that the bishop of Rome hath no soueraintie ouer the rest of bishops and that such claime is altogether Antichristian If that be so then egregious lyers are your brethren the makers of the Centuries who tel vs the cleane contrarie Anacletus say they in the epistles vvhich beare his name in the general regiment of churches so ioyneth them together that to the Romane churche he attributeth primacie and excellencie of povver ouer al churches and ouer the vvhole flocke of the Christian people and that by the autoritie of Christ saing to Peter thou art Peter and vpon this rocke vvil I build my church c. the second sea after that he maketh the church of Alexandria by reason of S. marke scoler of S. Peter The third Antioche because S. Peter abode there before he came to Rome degrees of Bishops he maketh thus The bisshop of Rome is placed first as the supreme head of the church vvho though he erre yet vvil he not haue him to be iudged of others but to be tolerated the second place haue Patriarkes or primates the third Metropolitanes the fovrth Archbishops and aftervvard bishops he saith also that certaine cities receaued primates from the blessed apostles and from S. Clement epist 3.1 Tom. Conciliorum pa. 63. The same Anacletus appointing how controuersies in particular churches should be taken vp ended after the order of S. Paule 1. Cor. 5. willeth that greate matters should be referred to the higher bishops and primates but if greater difficulties arise or causes fal out among the bishops primates them selues let them be brought to the Sea Apostolike if such appealt be made for so the Apostles ordayned by the apoinment of our Sauiour that the greater and harder questiōs should alvvayes be brought to the Apostolike Sea vpon vvhich Christ builte his vniuersal church Mat. 16. And Xistus who succeded not long after Anacletus in his 2.
presence VVell it may be that an other opinion more agreable to mans reason may please an idle mind especially if the opinion be furnished and commended vvith argumeÌ„tes vvel handled But vvhat shal become of vs intentation vvhen our coÌ„science shal be called to accompt vvhat cause vve had to dissent from the receaued opinion in the Church Then these vvordes This is my bodie vvil be thunderboltes So Ioachimus VVestphalus in his Apologie against Caluine answering this very argument the body of man is circumscribed in a place therefore at one time it can not be but in one place therefore not in al places vvhere the supper is ministred Is not saith he this Geometrical argumeÌ„t fetched froÌ„ Euclides demonstrations the piller and vpholder of all these Sacramentaries Doth not this vphold the building of their syllogismes vvhich corrupt verie many places of scriptures Most truly is verified of the Sacramentaries that memorable saying Take from heretikes that vvherein they agree vvith Philosophers and they cannot stand Take from the Sacramentaries that vvhich they dravv from Philosophie and hovv smal a quantitie vvill remaine of the great volumes of al the Sacramentaries Hovv long vvil it be before the doctrine of Berengarius fall to the ground VVel and truly vvrote Tertullian that Philosophers are the Patriarches of heretikes For philosophie brought forth all heresies and she begat the error of Zuinglius Finally because the English church in their Apologie acknowledgeth Luther for a most excellent man sent from God to lighten the vvhole vvorld and M. VV. saith that they vvorshippe him as their father in Christ I answere as that excellent man of God and their father answered long ago His discourse being longe I wil gather shortly the summe of it set it downe in his wordes If M.VV. would be better satisfied I remitte him to the maine worke First he confesseth this argument to be fundamentum quod habent omnium praecipuuÌ„ the chief ground foundation of the Sacramentaries But he asketh vvhat scripture they haue to proue that these tvvo propositions be so directly contrary Christ sitteth in heauen and Christ is in the supper whereas they can bring none he concludeth The contradiction is in their carnal imagination not in faith or the vvord of God vvhich teacheth no such matter Next vvhere-as Gods povver surpasseth al cogitatioÌ„ vvorketh that vvhich is to our reason incomprehensible and vvhich only faith beleeueth and the same God said This is my body vvhich shal be deliuered for you hovv can I persvvade my conscience saith he that God hath nether meanes nor abilitie to do as his vvordes sound Then he sheweth that although in the mind of man these thinges are contrary yet in the mind of God they worke no more repugnance then Mary bringing forth in her virginitie is against that vniuersal sentence Increase and multiplye or this proposition Christ is God ouerthroweth this other that Christ is man Out of which thus premised he falleth in to a vehement exhortatioÌ„ that al ChristiaÌ„s beware of the Sacramentaries in this kind of argument for so much as directly thereby they draw men to Paganisme and infidelitie the principal partes of our faith being in like sorte subiect to the controle of carnal reason humaine philosophie Boni isti Sacramentarii saith he sua nausea aditum parant ad Christum Deum ipsum omnes articulos abnegandum c. These good SacrameÌ„taries by their lothsomenesse make a vvay to denie Christ and God him selfe and al articles of our faith and truly for a great part they haue already begoÌ„ne to beleeue nothing For they bring themselues vvithin the compasse of reason vvhich is the right vvay to damnation and them selues knovv that these Ethnicall cauils ether are nothing vvorth against this article or if they coÌ„clude ought against this they do the like against al. For the vvord of God is foolishnes to mans reason 1. Cor. 1. and they vvould neuer haue vttered this if they had any regard of the scripture and vvere not their harts ful of infidelitie so as their mouth speaketh of the abundance of their hart After this he noteth the vnequal dealing of the Sacramentaries This truly saith he is vvorthy of admiratioÌ„ that none of the fathers vvhereof there is an infinite number did euer speake so of the Sacrament as do the Sacramentaries but cleane contrary Yet notvvithstanding if perchauÌ„ce they fal vpoÌ„ some odd place in a doctor that soundeth tovvardes their opinioÌ„ as vvhere S. Aug. saith corpus Christi in vno loco esse potest here saith Luther by reason of their preiudicate opinion they snatch at that make much of it vvhereas othervvise against the saings of all the fathers they are most stiffe and stubburne and sensles more vnmoueable then is any rocke amiddest the sea and though the fathers all vvith one mouth affirme yet the Sacramentaries harden them selues to deny them Last of all against Zuinglius and Oecolampadius vsing in their bookes the selfe same reasons which M. W. vseth here and triumpheth so insolently he concludeth as I conclude against him If these be the grounds and reasons vvhich should certifie vs of truth approue our faith and confirme our conscience then truly vve are in euill casâ— If a man had deliuered me such bookes vvithout title and name and I knevv not othervvise such excellent and learned men to haue bene the authors of them I should surely haue thought that some iâ—sting Comediant or Turkish vagabond had made them in despite and derision of Christians Verily I see not hovv they can be excused vvith any probable pretence as many other heretikes haue had For it appeareth that they play vvith Gods vvord of vvilfulnes malice And I thinke it can not be that such cold toyes and bablinges should in deede moue a Turke or a Ievv much lesse a Christian But that great lothsomenes and disdaine of the sacred supper and immoderate greedines to defend their opinion maketh them so mad or giddie that vvhat-soeuer they take hold of though it be but a stravv yet they imagine it to be a svvorde or a speare and that at euerie stroke they kill thousandes This is the terrible argument so magnified by M. W. quod impetus nostros non pertimescit that feareth not our forces an argument which plucketh vp the verie rootes of Christianitie gain saith many places and histories of the Scripture and maketh frustrate the testameÌ„t of Christ an argument carnal ethnical and for such contemned of the auncient fathers and condemned by the late heretikes of greatest learning an argument which Luther would neuer beleeue could proceede but from a Turke had he not seene it in the bookes of some of the Zuinglian Sect vsurping the name of Christians such an argument as he accompteth them heretikes wilful and inexcusable who are ought moued therewith finally such an argument
bloud of the holy virgin framed him selfe flesh vvithout the seede of man can not he in the sacrament make of bread his ovvne body and of vvine vvater his bloud No mary can he not saith M.W. for that is against reason and so he should haue tvvo bodies one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. But S. Damascene conteÌ„ning such ethnical ioyes proceedeth coÌ„cludeth that as god in the beginning said let the earth bring forth greene hearbes and hetherto being holpen and strengthened by that precept it so doth so god said this is my body and this is my bloud and doe this in commemoration of me and by his omnipotent coÌ„maundement it is vvrought vvhich thing onely faith can conceaue Hovv shal this be done saith the B. Virgin the Archangel Gabriel ansvvered the holy Ghost shal come vpon thee and the povver of the most high shal ouershadovv thee And novv demauÌ„dest thou hovv bread is made the body of Christ and vvine and vvater his bloud I ansvvere in like maner that the holy Ghost commeth vpon it vvorketh that vvhich passeth the capacitie of reason and reach of vnderstanding Whereby you see that hovv soeuer circumscript remained circumscript and visible visible S. Damascene neuer intended by such visible folies so to circumscribe our fâ—â—th or subiecte our religion to humaine reason that Christes presence should be excluded out of the sacrament or the sacrameÌ„t should be esteemed a Zuinglian figure vvhich to induce you take much paine but to very smale effect CHAP. IX VVherein is refelled M. VV. ansvvere to certaine places of S. Chrysostome touching the real presence and sacrifice IN the last chapter vve had an example hovv sufficiently you are vvont to coÌ„firme your ovvne faith by scripture reason fathers here you geue vs an example hovv substantially you ansvvere the fathers vvhich vve vse for confirmation of our faith Tvvo places M. Martin obiected out of S. Chrysostom against your geometrical opinion of Christes body in one place you auoyde them so as you geue out plaine demonstration that you neuer coÌ„sidered them in the author him selfe but only tooke the answere at deliuery from M. Iewel without any farther search Thus you write To Chrysostom teaching that Christ both leaft his flesh vvith vs and ascended hauing the same vvith him I ansvvere that Christ placed his flesh in heauen and neuerthelesse leaft vs a sacrament of that flesh And our fayth enioyeth the same euermore present For the verie substance of his flesh Christ no more leaft in earth then Elias leaft his body vvhen he ascended in to heauen For so Chrisostom vvrote a litle before that Elias vvas aftervvardes double there vvas an Elias aboue and there vvas an Elias beneath Tell me I pray you M. Martyn vvas that Elias body in earth vvhen he leaft his cloke to Elizeus you vvill not say so So true it is vvhich Chrisostome vvriteth that Christ hath left his flesh vnto vs symbolically and yet hath caried the same in to heauen corporally This is your answere which I say you rather allow vs as may be thought because Maister Iewell applieth the same to the selfe same place albeit in my opinion els-where he geueth you a better For labouring to answere the place of S. Ciprian de caena Domini Panis iste quem dominus c. This bread vvhich our lord gaue to his disciples being changed not in shape but in nature by the almightie povver of the vvord of Christ is made flesh after a number of phrases alleaged against the other partes of this senteÌ„ce coÌ„ming to the last is made flesh he sheweth that nether this proueth the real preseÌ„ce that hystore of lyke phrases For S. Aust saith nos Christi facti sumus vve are made Christes Leo saith Corpus regenerati fit caro crucifixi the body of the man that is regenerate is made the flesh of Christ that vvas crucified Beda saith nos ipsi corpus Christi effecti sumus vve our selues are made the body of Christ Origen saith in like maner of speach spiritus sanctus non in turturem vertitur sed coluÌ„ba fit the holy ghost is not changed into a turtell but is made a doue Thus if you had answered that Christ departing tooke his flesh with him really leaft his flesh behinde him allegorically that is the Christian people his church which S. Paul many times calleth his bodye that had bene more probable more to S. Chrisostoms discourse you see what doctors you might alleage for it theÌ„ to say that Christ tooke away with him his flesh really leaft the same with vs symbolically that is bread and wyne which when we receaue at the supper we remember perhaps that Christe had flesh But because it was ether your chaunce or choise to geue vs the other let vs see how handsomly you frame it vnto S. Chrisostoms text The summe of your answere is that as Helias ascendinge leaft his cloke which for certeine reasons was called Elias so our Sauiour ascending leaft vs bread wyne which is a signe of his body for some reasoÌ„s is likewise called by the name of his body but was no more his body theÌ„ the cloke was Elias And are ye not ashamed thus to dally abuse the reader Or can your ignoraÌ„ce be so grosse as to thinke that this is S. Chrisost meaning Or caÌ„ your reader otherwise deeme of you then as of a man altogether rechlesse what you say if euer he reade the place in S. Chrisostome him self For so far of is it that S. Chrisostome hath any such thing that contrarywise he ouerthroweth most stroÌ„gly this your folly and vehemently vrgeth the cleane contrary First touching Elias he hath some of those wordes which you alleage As a great inheretance saith he Elizeus receaued the cloke and truly it vvas a verie great inheritance And aftervvardes that Elias vvas double There vvas an Elias aboue and there vvas an Elias beneath meaning as it is plaine that he was taken vp in body soule and remained beneath in power and operation for so much as by the cloke Elizeus wrought strange myracles such as Elias him selfe did before And so S. Chrisostome saith expresly propterea in coelum ascendens nihil aliud quaÌ„ melotem discipulo reliquit Therefore Elias ascending in to heaueÌ„ leaft to his disciple nothing els but his cloke And would he make a like comparison and say the same of our Sauiour Let vs heare his wordes Thus he coÌ„meth to speake of Christ quid igitur si vobis demonstrauero quid aliud quod illo multo maius c. vvhat then vvil you say if I shevv you an other maner of thing much greater theÌ„ that vvhâ—ch al vve haue receaued vvho so euer haue bene made partakers of the holy misteryes Elias in deed leaft his cloke
that taketh avvay the sinnes of the vvorlde Call S. Iohn to M. VVhitakers consistorie he wil â—â—â—ke him recant his speach For first Christ is no lambe because he hath no woll on his backe It is the self same reason which here is vsed against S. Luke about the meâ—â—all of the chalice Then being driuen from that the adsurditie of tautologia still remaineth Behold this lambe is the lambe of God what an idle speache is this what is this double lambe therfore sende it to Geneua to be cast a new in Bezaes forge The Catholiks of old time to proue distinction of persons in the deitie vsed that place of Genesis pâ—uit dâ—miâ—â—â— aâ— domino our Lord rayned from our Lord to proue the Trinity of persoÌ„s they vsed the place of the psalme Benedicat nos Deus Deus noster benedis at nos Deus God our God blesse vs our God blesse vs. This to a Trinitarian is absurda sententia and induceth a pluralitie of Gods vvhereas S. Paule saith vnus Deus vnus Domâ—nus oâ—â— God one Lord what remaineth theÌ„ but that according to the arrest of this supreme arbiter we fall to newe casting of the scripture and so in short space no doubt we shal growe to perfectioÌ„ that is to the Turks Alcoran if we be not come so farre already The scriptures are full of such absurdities which neuerthelesse are absurdities only to carnal cogitatioÌ„s to Sathan Sathans ministers but to theÌ„ that haue learned in the schole of the holy Ghost to subiect their vnderstanding to the obedience of faith they are nothing so And M.W. if he had in him any droppe of religion fayth he should thus thinke Howsoeuer I can reconcile two or three Gods with one the bloud shedd on the crosse with that which was in the chalice were it bloud or wine let Christs wordes stande as he spake them and the Euangelist wrote them and let vs afterward in the name of God be we Lutherans Zuinglians Caluinists Trinitaries or Anabaptists eche according to his priuate spirite search for the sense as wel as we can Christes soule went downe to hell saith our Creede and S. Luke It is absurde sayth Beza and papisticall and therefore for soule I haue translated carcas and for hell graue whom in so doing the English congregation approueth That Christ ascended into heauen it is a fansie of Aristotle and Mahomet sayth Brentius and to the Lutherans it is absurda sententia shal they now leaue out that word and put in the text for ascendit euanuit or disparuit he vanyshed out of sight in steede of he ascended which to them is the true and only sense of the place and which they may and ought to do by like reason and authoritie But S. Basil you say readeth as you translate graunt he did so but what translate you S. Basil or S. Luke if S. Basil you haue done wel to folovv your greeke copye If S. Luke then do you vvickedly to alter S. Luke vpon coniecture of one greeke doctor all greeke copies and doctors being to the contrarie And vvhat if S. Basil in an other place reade otherwise shal we not make a vvise patching of scripture if vpon euerie particular doctors citation vve alter the holie text S. Aug. in many places S. Bernard and other good men dravv exhortatioÌ„s for their frends or monks or people and commonly they do it in the verie phrase of scripture yet because they knitte together many sentences of scriptures that be in diuers places they must of necessitie adde some words or parcels of their owne Nether is it material if ofteÌ„times they leaue out one worde or a fewe words But if by such authoritie we should alter our text we should in short space haue so many texts that in deed we should haue no text because we should haue no certaine text whereunto we might trust And why remember you not that which in this self same place M. Martin tolde you out of Beza who noteth it to be the custome of the auncient fathers in citing scriptures to alleage the sense not to sticke precisely vpoÌ„ the words And that therefore how soeuer they reade that is no certaine rule to reforme or alter the vvordes of scripture But here you make your aduantage of M. Martins words and say if Basil cited not the vvords but the sense of the scripture theÌ„ Beza vvhen he so traÌ„slated missed nothing of the sense so M. Martin doth novv plainly acquite Beza vvhoÌ„ before he accused For if Basils vvords geue a true sense and the interpretation of Beza and ours all agree vvith Basils vvords then your accusation is false that vve had corrupted the sense of the scripture Somewhat you saye and this hath some appearance more then any thing that you haue sayde hitherto yet you reache not home and you are ouer hasty in your conclusion S. Basil geueth a true sense I confesse whether you respecte the particular matter whereunto he applyeth the place or the generall doctrine of the catholike church For his wordes are sufficieÌ„t for the one and the other And so are the wordes in our vulgar Latin and English and may well be taken as agreing with S. Basil hic est calix nouum testamentum in sanguine meo qui pro vobis fundetur This is the chalice the nevv testament in my bloud vvhich shall be shedde for you And whosoeuer readeth and taketh these later wordes as referring them to the bloud of Christ shedde on the crosse he thinketh very well and truly and no man would euer finde fault with such a sense or citation if it stayd there For this nothing impayreth the other truth whereof we speake that the same bloud is in the chalice But when there riseth vp a new heresie by one truth ouerthrowing an other and by one part of the sentence destroyng an other as it fareth betwixt vs this circumstance so farre altereth the case that the old father alleaging the text without any thought or imagination of heresie did well and christianlike the new heretike enforcing the same in defence of heresie doth nâ—ughtely sacrilegrously as for example If some good man as S. Basil or S. Bernard to induce his auditors to the loue of Christ had vsed this sentence of the Apostle In this appeared the benignitie of our lord sauiour tovvards vs that not by the vvorkes of iustice vvhich vve did but of his infinite mercie he saued vs. This place according to the sense had bene well trulye cited For albeit infinite is not in the text yet that is no hinderance to the meaning and although I name not Christ god yet nether that worde hindereth any thing because in a Christian audience it is all one to say our lord and sauiour Christe or our god and sauiour Christe But if there rose vp some Nestorian heretike that should diuide Christ from god and make two
now it is far othervvise and othervvise your selues translate it in your later bible their line is gone forth although in the bible of the yeare 1577. ye leaue the hebrew and folovv vs. Take heede saith the same Apostle lest that fal vpon you vvhich is spoken in the Prophetes See ye contemners and vvonder and perish which wordes in the hebrew are nothing so Shal we saie this is not scripture and the Apostle abused his audience and according to M. VV. diuinitie must needes tel them a lye when he telleth them this saith the Prophete this saith Esaie this Ieremie c. because he citeth the wordes not according to the original but according to the translation of the 70. which many times much varieth from that which we find now in the original The Apostle S. Iames reprouing the prowde and loftie mindes of some bringeth this text of scripture against them deus superbis resistit humilibus autem dat gratiam translated in your English testaments thus The scripture offereth more grace and therefore saith God resisteth the proude and geueth grace to the humble vvhich vvordes are taken out of the Prouerbes of Salomon but not according to the hebrevv but after the 70. vvhich Caluin cut cleane avvay and leaft out of his translation ether for this reason vvhich you geue or because belike they agreed not vvel vvith his proude and disdainful stomake notvvithstanding they remaine in the greeke testaments printed at Geneua But by your argument he doth wel therein and saueth S. Iames from a manifest lie who affirmeth the scripture to speake so whereas by yow it is no scripture And then it were wel done of yow to mend your testaments at the next edition and leaue out this so cleare a falshode except yow retaine it of policie that at a neede yow may haue one more reason to refuse this epistle which we see graueleth yow so sore I wil not multiplie exāples because it is a thing most euident and he knoweth litle that knoweth not this to be the common maner both of some Euangelists of S. Peter and S. Paule generallie to cite the scripture in this sort VVhereof S. Paules epistle to the Hebrues in euerie chapter almost geueth proofe as likewyse doth the first of S. Peter and Beza graunteth the same of the Euangelists the auncient fathers affirme both the one the other And what neede I to presse M. W. with sentences whereas I may dispute against him out of whole chapters and bookes For let vs suppose some part of the old testament to haue bene written first in hebrew or chaldee as is a part of Daniel and to haue bene translated into greeke or latin afterwardes the chaldee or hebrue to perish the greeke or latin to remaine as for example we see in the bookes of Tobie Iudith and one booke of the Machabees The two first of which S. Hierom translated out of the chaldee the third he found though he translated it not written in hebrue And the like is thought verie probably of the songe of the three children Shal we now be so fond as to imagine that as so one as the hebrue or chaldee was lost we lost our scriptures then what saie you to S. Matthewes gospel which certainly was written by him in hebrue as witnesseth Papias Ireneus Eusebius Pātenus Origenes Sophronius S. Hierom and al antiquitie Haue we not S. Matthewes gospel because vve haue not his hebrue text nay presuppose that a gospel of S. Matthevv in hebrue may be found as you knovv such a one is extant and setting aside the authoritie of the Church vvhich to yovv is nothing no reason can be brought but yovv ought as vvel to admit that for the original as the greeke of S. Luke and S. Iohn yet dare yovv prefer that before the greeke and count that the more autētical reforme the greeke according to that hebrue this one example if M. VV. had the grace to consider and the ground hereof it vvere sufficient to ansvvere vvhatsoeuer he saith in his idle discourse in praise of the greeke hebrue for defacing the latin But let vs examine his reason vvherein lieth the pith of this questiō Thus he declaimeth for the puritie of the greeke and hebrue VVhereas vve couet to attaine the meaning of the holy Ghost hovv shal vve do this more assuredly then if vve heare the holy Ghost speaking in his ovvne vvordes This is so cleare that the Papistes them selues confesse it to be necessarie if so be the first original copies vvere pure vncorrupt For now they crie that the old testament in the hebrue fountaine and the nevv testament in the greeke is most corrupt vvhy so vvhat causeth our Papistes so to refuse the hebrue and greeke fountaine and to hunt after the litle riuer of the latin edition vvho doubteth but it is done for that only reason because they find the fountaines to be not so commodious for them For if they had the fountaines fauorable inough they vvould rather take thence then from the diches and dregges of a corrupt translation Novv because they knovv that certaine destruction hangeth ouer their heads if they be called to the fountaines therefore are they constrained not only to auoyde the spring of the purest and most holesome vvaters but also they labour to proue that the litle riuers are purer then the fountaines Here Reader thou hast many wordes and litle matter much a doe and smale reason much craking and boasting of the pure fountaines by one who from his infancie neuer dranke but of the stinking puddles of Geneua lake In which discourse of his three thinges may be learned First that he confesseth of vs that we refuse not the fountaines but because we thinke them to be corrupt Wherein he saith truly and whereby thou maist note that in folowing the latin as we doe we are lead not as they are by fansie and panges but by conscience and iudgment The second is that he affirmeth it as a thing without al doubt that thus we say because the foūtaines be not so cōmodious for vs. once againe because the fountaines are not fauorable inough vnto vs. and yet once againe because vve knovv there is no vvay vvith vs but death and destruction if vve he called to the fountaines whereof because I haue spokē alreadie I wil say no more only this may serue for an example what a lustie courage they can shew in bragging and what a pretie feate they haue in so few lynes to varie a lye so many wayes And if M. W. had geuen but one example wherein he by his hebrue greeke text could so plage vs and bring vs certam perniciem assured destruction he had done somewhat like a professor of this new diuinitie and it were a readie way to end al these controuersies Because he doth not and I dare warrant him
of our latin translation affirme that howsoeuer some smale fault may be found in it absolutely it hath no error ether touching doctrine or touching maners For vvhy should I not so gather when as I see the aduersarie being so eager yet with al his search and studie findeth one only fault in it whiche I wil set downe in his owne wordes because I wil not diminish the force of his argument Very absurdly haue you done saith he vvhen in translating the testament in to English you had rather folâ—vv the latin translation then the greeke original and that so obstinatly that although al the greeke examples reade othervvise then is in your vulgar editioÌ„ yet you prefer that before them al. I vvil geue you one example In 1. Cor. 15. v. 54. Paule saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This parcel in your translation is omitted for vvhat reason because it is not in the latin vulgar edition as they cal it But it is in the greeke exemplars in the most auncient edition Siriake and vvhat if Hierom read it not yet Chrysostome and Ambrose him self read it vvhich men vvhereas they liued vvith Hierom hereof it folovveth assuredly ether that HieroÌ„ dealt not faithfully here or that his version vvas corrupted aftervvards vnto which thus I answere First that this omissâ—on if it be any could not proceede of malice or set purpose for so much as there is no losse or hinderance to any part of doctrine by reading as we reade for the self same thing is most clearely set downe in the verie next lines before for thus stande the wordes This corruptible must doe on incorruption and this mortal immortalitie And vvhen this corruptible hath done on incorruption and this mortal hath done on immortalitie where thou seest the words which I haue put downe inclosed within the parenthesis to be contained most expressely in the sentence going before which is in al our testaments so that there is no harme or dauÌ„ger ether to faith doctrine or maners if it be omitted Secondarely if we prefer our latin edition before the greeke and thinke that peece repeated not to be of the text what reason we haue so to do hath bene shewed in part and Beza by his example iustifieth our doing For so him self doth more theÌ„ once vpon S. Luke he thus writeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Omnia quae vidi exemplaria ita scriptum habent Al the greeke examples vvhich I haue seene reade so But the old interpreter readeth othervvise et rectius vt opinor and better as I suppose Againe in the same gospel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Haec verba deerant in omnibus vetustis codâ—cibus quae tamen prorsus videntur requiri These vvordes vvanted in al the old greeke bookes vvhich for al that seeme necessarie And therefore he supplieth his text vvith them out of our translatioÌ„ and so do the english translators who seldome depart froÌ„ him but like good scholers turne in to english his latin Thirdly that it was of old in some greeke copies as we reade is plaine by S. Hier. who translated thus And why should M. W. suspect any vnfaithfulnes in him seing he put the self same wordes and sense in the next line immediatly going before and that it was not corrupted since appeareth by the common reading of most men in al later ages And how vnlearnedly argueth he against S. Hierom from the authoritie of S. Ambrose and S. Chrysosâ—oÌ„ reading otherwise Must therefore S. Hierom be vnfaithful or the Church after him because S. Chrysostom or S. Ambrose haue those few vvordes more then he vvhy may he not far more reasonably more like a logician and like an honest man to inuent an other part and make a better diuision that ether S. Hierom dealt not faithfully or els his greeke copies had not that peece repeated vvhich I thinke to be most true certaine Againe vvhy should he rather correct S. Hierom by S. Chrysostome and S. Ambrose then contraryvvise thâ—m by S. Hierom vvhereas by common intendement and probabilitie S. Hierom framing a publike translation for the Church by supreme authoritie had more varietie of copies and examined the same more narrowly then doth ordinarily any other vvho expoundeth the scripture ether by vvay of homelies to the people as doth S. Chrysostome or by vvay of commentarie as doth S. Ambrose And truely writeth Beza that whosoeuer by such authoritie of one or other father would go about to alter the ordinary traÌ„slation except he vse an other maner of iudgment wisdome and diligence then we see vsed by our aduersaries he wil rather corrupt the scripture then correct it And his reason is very good pregnant Neque enim saith he scriptores illos seu graecos seu latinos existimandum est quoties locum aliquem citarint toties vel libros inspexisse vel singula verba numerasse For it is not to be supposed that those vvriters ether greeke or latin vvhen they had to cite a place alvvaies ether vevved the booke or numbred the vvords For this had bene a matter of infinite labour not necessarie c. To which infinite labour notwithstanding and vewing the booke numbring the words S. Hier. in his translatioÌ„ was of necessitie bouÌ„d as was nether S. Ambâ—n or S. Chrisost And yet S. Chrysostome maketh litle for you if you compare wel his owne discourse and text together Nay he maketh cleane against you and approueth our reading For though he haue those wordes in the second place yet he hath them not in the first and repeateth them not but only once readeth them in his text according to our latin And therunto agreeth his commeÌ„tarie therfore quâ—te ouerthroweth â—l that you vvould build vpon his credite Thus they stande in him For this corruptible must do on incorruption And vvhen this corruptible shal do on incorruptioÌ„ this mortal immortalitie theÌ„ shal be fulfilled c. And whereas you adde that S. Ambrose readeth as you do you must pardon me if I beleeue mine owne eyes better then your reporte Certâ—inely S. Ambrose in his commentarie vppon that place readeth as we do So readeth S. Austin de ciuitate Dei cited by S. Bede in his commentarie vpon the same chapter though S. Austin reade also as M. VV. would haue it according to the greeke And with S. Bede and after S. Bede so reade the rest of the Catholike interpreters and doctors Haymo Anselmus c. Farthermore in this verie place as I thinke most appeareth the sinceritie of our latin translatioÌ„ For as we keepe our text according as S. Hierom and the Church then deliuered it so notwithstanding because the words obâ—octed by M. W. are in the auncient greeke example whereof the church hath due regarde the same particle is added commonly in the margent of euerie latin testameÌ„t which the Church vseth as may be seene in diuers prints of
steede of because she doth loue much And plaine it is that Christ spake not greeke or latin but hebrevv Therefore vvhereas Christ said Many sinnes haue bene forgeuen her he proueth it by that which folovveth because she loueth much as if he had said That she loueth me much it is no maruel she hath good occasion so to do For many sinnes haue bene forgeuen her So vve say that he hath obtained that vvhich he desired because he is mery laugheth he is verie hūgrie because he eateth much c. I wil not bestow time in examining this answere who told him that Christ vsed the preterperfect-tense for the present whereas S. Luke so flatly affirmeth the contrarie or that S. Luke in this phrase so strāgely affected the Dorical lāguage with the rest of his bold assertion but wanting al reason of reasonable coniecture to support them this only I wish thee to consider whether thou didst euer see a litle sentence so racked and torne as this is For cōparing this sentēce as it is novv fashioned by them with the same sentence as it was first pronounced by our Sauiour not one word of any momēt remaineth in such sort as Christ vttered them Christ said Many sinnes are forgeuen her because she hath loued much now with their correction thus it is Many sinnes haue bene forgeuen her For she loueth much Where first they rent in sonder make that two which Christ ioyned and spake as one Then they wrest one of Christs words bringe it to a Dorical phrase of speach And by and by backe againe they make the next which signifieth a thing past in greeke to signifie a thing present by the hebrewe maner of speach which hath no present tenses the cleane contrarie whereof is auouched in the other Dorical word going immediatly before Afterwards they enforce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to signifie a cause antecedent but a signe or effect consequent And finally in al and euery of these tricks S. Lukes authoritie is vnder foote and lieth dead For nether Beza nor Musculus in this tossing and turning euer consider what S. Luke wrote what sense the Apostolical Church gaue and the holy Ghost in the same hath alwaies continued what the very letter of the greeke requireth as now it standeth but how it may possibly be wrested if a man wil folow the spirit of contention if he will fetch the pointing of the sentence from Geneua the meaning of one word from Dorica in one corner of the world of an other frō Hierusalem of a third from Swytzerlād the entier summe of al from the deepe pit of hell For excepte the deuil him self stoode by thē suggested to them such construction I thinke the nature of man hauing some regarde of honestie of learning of modestie of Christ his Euāgelists could neuer breake forth into so much monstruous absurditie Of al which this I conclude that allowing men this libertie vnto which now by this libertine-gospel they are driuen I say there is no possibilitie to conteine men in faith or to reduce men to faith or to proue any parcel of Christiā faith For setting aside church Doctors Custome Councels and resting in the only Scriptures priuate exposition of the same this one example geueth vs a paterne to care nothing for al scriptures For it is a maruelous flat text which a man of meane learning by one of these shiftes may not auoide ether by refusing it as not Canonical because it is reiected novv of Protestants in these daies or hath bene doubted of by Catholikes in old time vvhich cutteth of a number of bookes or by obiecting some one or other greeke example in vvhich the vvords vvant vvhich is easie to finde heretiks of diuers sects hauing novv the printing of most greeke testamēts and euery one being content to fauour his proper gospel and heresie or by producing some false translation and sticking to that vvith store of vvhich euerie prouince is pestered or by hunting out diuers significations of the greeke vvord and taking that vvhich maketh most for his aduantage or if that serue not then by corrupting one word by conferring an other with the greeke of this or that dialect a third with the Iewes or Chaldees or Suitzers maner of speaking and so patching vp a sense partly Christian partly Germane partly Ethnical and partly Iudaicall and finally which is al in al reseruing euer to him selfe supreme iudgement of al senses interpretations scriptures and languages As in this verie place whereof I speake Zuinglius folowing nether the words of the Euāgelist nor sense of the Church nor Cōmentarie of the auncient fathers nor inuention of Beza nor any of those manyfold shiftes of Musculus willeth vs rather for dilexit to put credidit for charitie faith and then geueth vs the meaning of Christs words thus Quoniā dilexit multum Ego puto dilectionem hic pro fide accipi quòd tantum mihi fidit tantum peccatorū ei remittitur Nam poste a dicit sides tua te saluam sec it Because she loued much I suppose that loue is here put for faith because she hath so great affiāce in me so many sinnes are forgeuē her for he saith afterwards thy faith hath saued thee that is hath deliuered and absolued the from thy sinnes which one distinction answereth al the places that in this controuersie vve bring out of the scriptures to refel their only faith By these fevv heretical sleights M. Whitaker knovveth his brethren haue many other as bad as these vsed in one particular controuersie any man may gesse hovv likely it is to tye an heretike hauing some vvitt and learning and sight in tonges vvith any text that gainsaith his opinion Hovv true vve finde by experience that vvhich Tertullian so many ages agoe spake of the heretikes of his time and prophecied as it may seeme of the heretikes of our time Ista haeresis non recipit quasdam scripturas c. These Zuinglian Lutheran Puritan Anabaptist Trinitarian c. heretikes admitt not some bookes of scriptures and those vvhich they doe admit by adding to taking from they peruerte to serue their purpose And if they receaue some bookes yet they receaue thē not intierly or if they receaue thē entierly after some sort neuerthelesse they marre them by deuising diuers interpretatiōs In this case vvhat vvil you do that thinke your selfe most skilful in the scriptures vvhē as that which you defend the aduersarie denieth that vvhich you deny the aduersarie defendeth Et tu quidem nihil perdes nisi vocem de contentione nihil consequeris nisi bilem de blasphematione And thou truely shalt leese nothing but thy vvordes in so contentious a brauling thou shalt gaine nothinge but greefe and anger in seinge an heretike so to blasphene And novv if I should shevv the like in the hebrevv and by examples manifest the same I should trouble my selfe
because they generally though not in euery place haue folowed the cōmon points and vowels according to which they frame vs their common Gloses Commentaries and Dictionaries But this very pointe is a sea of disputation and writing and therefore for a final conclusion to shew that the Protestants appealing to the hebrew vvil shortly fal to very plaine Atheisme I demaund of M. Whit. this question whether he thinke it flat Atheisme and Turkerie to denie that Christ vvas borne of a virgin I trust he wil cōfesse vvith vs that this denial is the denial and abnegation of al Christianitie For though they care not greatly vvhether mē thinke our Lady to haue remained a virgin in Christs birth or after Christs birth yet they seeme to beleeue most assuredly that she vvas a virgin vvhen she conceaued him That being graunted that this denial is plaine apostasie I require of him vvhat scripture he hath to proue that veritie for church Traditiō Fathers such other I know he contemneth and vve are bound to beleue nothing say they but that which is in plaine scripture The only place that may serue the turne is the first of S. Matth. for the allegories of Ezechiel conuince not vvhere it is said Ecce virgo concipiet c. Behold a virgin shal cōceaue bring forth a sonne But this place proueth nothing by M. W. ovvne rule by Bezaes common kinde of scanning such citations and by the Protestants interpretation of this place ether because the translation is framed according to the 70. not the hebrevv and so it is no scripture by M. W. or if it be then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 virgin accordinge to the hebrew must signifie a yonge vvenche adolescētula siue virgo siue maritata by Beza his rules and so saith Munster as vvel virgin as not virgin or because the most precise Iudaical Protestants translate it so to put the matter out of doubt So for example translateth Oecolampadius in the bibles of Basile which Bullinger in the preface so much commēdeth Ecce adolesentula illa praegnans et partens filium Beholde that yonge vvenche great vvith childe and Munster precisely according to the hebrevv as he sayth Ecce virgo illa impraegnata Beholde that virgin gotten vvith childe And hovvsoeuer M. W. may cauil vpon the later the first is mere Iudaical no wayes Christian and the peruersion rather of a monster then of a man as Luther pronounceth against Erasmus for the like cause and yet I acknovvledge according to the heretical maner of examining citations the hebrevv vvord may beare that sense vvhich Oecolāp yeldeth so did those old renegates and enemies of our religion Aquila Ponticus and Theodotion translate that vvord vpon which translation aftervvards the beggerly Ebionites founded their beastly opinion touching the maner of Christs incarnation And here Christian reader I haue to request thee not so to interpreete me in any thing which I haue spoken as though I coueted to disgrace the study of greeke and hebrew as this man would haue thee to conceaue of vs condēned those languages which I cōfesse to be great helpes to the attaining of the true sense in sūdrie places of scripture condemne my selfe for knowing so litle as I do in ether of them both And manifest it is what paine the Catholiks haue taken in setting forth the bible most perfitly and diligently in the Hebrew Chaldee Greeke and Arabike languages what labour they haue taken about the Greeke translation of the Septuaginta How continually and at this present most honorable Prelates and Cardinals other men of great name employ them selues in the same kinde of study to the end they may procure al helpes so far as is possible for the perfite vnderstādinge of the sacred scriptures How in most Catholike Vniuersities mē excellent for skil in these languages florish and are maintained to the great aduauncemēt of the faith Church Catholike with the liste or cataloge of whose names I thinke it needeles to trouble the reade◠because otherwise they are wel knowen to the Christian world But this I say thou shalt finde it true when soeuer thou commest to examine these matters with that aduisednes and maturitie of iudgement as the thing it selfe requireth that who so wil goe about to picke his faith out of the greeke and hebrew testaments without a setled and constant forme of faith before and from which he must not be drawen by any pretense of greeke hebrew his greeke hebrew wil neuer make him a Christian wil neuer establish him in any true faith Aquila Ponticus first a Christian after a Iewe was very perfect in the hebrew and translated the bible so as S. Hierom calleth him to his praise Diligentissimum verborum hebraicorum interpretem A most diligent interpreter of the hebrevv vvords and yet howe good a Christiā he was is noted before The Arrians Trinitarians Anabaptistes and Lutherans of our time want they greeke or hebrew No dout their arrogancie and pride which for their greeke hebrevv they cōceaue is a great cause of their continual alteration from one heresie to an other as vve see in the stories of Melancthon Blandrata Bernardinus Ochinus c. Before vve vvere Grecians or Hebritians or in deede Englishmen or vnderstoode any letter of any lāguage first of al vve were Christiās we were graffed into the Catholike Church the mystical body of Christ and made members of the same and by solemne vowe we bound our selues to honor loue reuerence and cleaue to her as the piller firmament of truth the spouse of Christ our diuine mother the arke of Noe and kingedome of God without which there is no way but death and damnation Let vs hold this fast and then our greeke and hebrevv may doe vs some good Let vs depart from her talke vve so longe as vve list of our greeke and hebrevv as S. Peter sayd of Simon Magus money so that vvil be to vs In perditionem To our euerlastinge destruction it vvil neuer doe vs good And as S. Austin sayth in the meane season vvhile the vnlearned rise get possession of heauē Nos cū doctrinis nostris ecce vbi volutamur in carne et sanguine We vvith our greeke hebrevv vvhat other learning so euer shal alwaies be tumbling in flesh bloud in continual braules and contentions vvhich vvil set vs the right vvay to hell CHAP. XV. Hovv M.VV. inueigheth against the nevv testament lately set forth in this colledge vvith a cleare refutation of such faultes as he findeth in the translation thereof Here now is the place to speake of our late English trāslation set forth in this colledge For though M. W. vpon passion and heate disorderlye before he had spoken of the originals and in respect of them condemned our latin reproued vs for translating according to the latin
that she vvil in short time leaue this zeale in preaching the Catholike religion and thereby that your congregatiō shal gather strength and stabilitie and vvise men vvil fal in good liking thereof then your ignorance is great vvho knovv nether the nature of our Catholike Church religiō nor of your ovvne heretical faith and congregation Not of ours because you may learne or remember that from Christs time hitherto nether by persecuting Emperours nor by vndermining heretikes othervvise qualified thē are the Lutherās or Zuinglians of these days it vvas or could euer be subuerted but rather the more it vvas assaulted the better irresisted the more it vvas gainsaid the more it florished vvhē suttle heretikes vpō temporal fauour vvere most insolent then she most excellently did defende her self Examples you haue of the times of S. Augustine against Pelagius the Manichees S. Hierō against Iovinian and Vigilantius Lanfrancus against Berengarius and al the Primitiue church against Constantius Valēs and Arrius Ignorant you are of your ovvne faith and gospel because you may remember that nether had it euer any stay or stabilitie since it vvas first begotten nether can it haue so longe as it endureth the very pillers vvhich vnder proppe it being such rottē matter as of it self quickly corrupteth falleth in to dust For when in king Henries raigne it first set foote in our realme vpon occasions which I am content to passe ouer though M. Fox to the euerlasting shame both of such a gospel and such gospellers haue recorded them and committed them to eternal memorie hovv variable a state it had your elders know he much complaineth Euē as the kinge vvas ruled saith he gaue care sometime to one sometime to an other so one vvhile religion vvent forvvard at an other season as much backvvard againe sometime cleane altered and chaūged for a season as they could preuaile vvhich vvere about the kinge So long as Q. Anne liued the gospel had indifferent good successe And not only Queenes but very meane gētlemen and doctors of phisicke were then able to craze your gospel and set it backward or forward as pleased them For so much also is recorded in M. Foxes storie in the ende of king Henries life Thus writeth he So long as Quene Anne L. Cromvvel B. Cranmer M. Denny D. Buts vvith such like vvere about the King and could preuayle vvith him vvhat organe of Christes glorie did more good in the church thē he Againe vvhen sinister vvicked counsel had gotten once the foote in thrusting truth veritie out of the princes eares hovv much as religion and al good things vvent forvvard before so much on the contrary side al reuolted backvvard againe And this gospel as M. Fox calleth it which King Henrie left established as he thought most assuredly by Acte of Parlament in his sonne King Edwards daies went cleane vpside doune In Q. Maries daies came a new alteration vnder the Q. Maiestie that now is an other cleane contrarie And at this present finde you not a general murmuring euen amongst the Protestants against the Communion booke and state of religion which in the beginning of hir Maiesties raigne was brought in If the Catholikes said nothing haue you not the Puritans most eagerly detesting your faith and were it not for the Princes sword like to dispossesse you of chayrs and churches And what stabilitie can that gospel haue which altogether dependeth of the good allovvance of the Prince and her councel in Parlament which we know within these fiftie yeres so often to gaine said one an other And if it should please God to turne the Quenes hart to the catholike faith for which we incessantly pray vvere not the face of your religiō streightvvaies altered turned quite vpside downe must nor the inferiour partes of the body turne and frame them selues according to the head would not the same statutes which now are vniustly executed vpon Catholikes without alteration of any one word be much more iustly executed vpon the Ministers Superintendents if so be they called her Maiesty Scismatike or Heretike Wherefore litle reason haue you to imagine that wisemen wil fall in liking of your new deuised fansie which as it altogether dependeth vpon the Fauour of Court and Courtiers so for this very reason must needes euer remaine as chaungeable as the Court and Courtly beneuolence is And your father Luther who best knew the nature of his children and qualitie of your religion geueth such a sentence of it as I doubt not at this present is allowed of al the wisest of our Realme and much confirmed by your maner of writing The arguments and reasonings of the sacramentaries saith he are such vaine vvordes vvithout witte that I can not maruaile sufficiently hovv learned men can be moued vvith such lyes truly they do their matters vvith so fearful a conscience that they seeme to vvish they had neuer taken them in hand Equidē opinor si eis esset potestas de integro cōsulēdi quòd nūquam inciperent Verily I suppose if they vvere to consulte of the matter a fresh they vvould neuer begin their sacramētarie heresie And I verely suppose if the wise gouernours of our Realme who now may see the issue of your gospel what wickednes and iniquitie in lyfe confusion and Atheisme in faith contempt of God and man it hath brought with it if they were now to consult of the matter a fresh I beleeue verily with your father Martin Luther that amongst al heresies of name at this time currant in the Christiā world they would least of al haue admitted yours as being the most grosse most licentious and most vnprobable of al others But come we to the particular faultes historical committed by vs. Things alvvays accompted false or suspected vve set forth as most true articles of the Romane religiō as that the vvise mē vvhich came from the East vvere 3 kinges and had such names That S. Iohn Baptist vvas father of monkes That a stone vvith vvhich Steuen vvas stoned to death is reserued at Ancona c. Before I come to make āswere I wish the reader to carie in remembrance first the greatnes of his accusation against vs That neuer any thing came forth in print More contaminate then these annotations That vve haue shevved herein great desperatenes and importunitie That things alvvays accōpted false or suspected vve affirme as most true articles of the Romane religion c. Then what we promised in these ānotations Touching which in the preface of the new testament thus we write In these annotations vve shevv the studious reader the Apostolike tradition the expositions of the holy fathers the decrees of the Catholike church and most auncient Councels vvhich meanes vvho so euer trusteth not for the sense of holy scriptures but had rather folovv his priuate iudgment or the arrogant spirit of these Sectaries he shal
for an old father reiecting S. Austin amongst the nevv maisters Thus saith Luther to Zuinglius and OecolaÌ„padius the rest of that sect thus he requesteth of them as we request of you being of the same order Obsecramus saith he obtestamur vos Sacramentarios c. VVe desire and beseech you Sacramentaries if hereafter you vvil needes rayle against the Lutherans or nevv papists as you cal vs yet abstaine from lying and fayne not nether vvrite of vs othervvise then vve publikely professe teach Nam ex his quae iam diximus patet nos non it a docere vt hactenus de nobis impudentissimè mentiti estis For by that vvhich hath bene spoken it is cleare that vve teach not so as hitherto you haue most impudently belyed vs. So Luther of the Zuinglians we leauing Luthers termes to him selfe request the like of our aduersaries If they tel vs of any fault coÌ„mitted in the haÌ„dling of Gods mysteries we are ready to acknowlegde and amend the same If we defend any point of doctrine erroneous in their iudgement let them refel it by Theological argument by Scriptures Fathers Councels or reasoÌ„ grounded vpon them and vve are in quiet and orderly sort ether to yeld to them or shew them their ouersight If they fal to scoffing scorning and making ridiculous boysh arguments of their owne then shew their profound wisedome in coÌ„futing the same and withal crye out vpon the Importunitie and Desperatnes of the papistes as we can not but tel them of their peeuishnes and laugh at such miserable shifts so we dare assure them that the wise wil neuer be moued to like wel of their ruinous gospel thorough such iesting trickes most vnfit for Diuines which are able to quayle and disgrace a good cause though it stoode vpon better grounds theÌ„ their gospel yet doth or I hope euer shal CHAP. XVII Of certaine blasphemies conteined in the Annotations As good orators according to the rules of their art reserue some chief and principal arguments vnto the end of purpose at parting to leaue a deepe impression in the minde of their auditors so doth M. VV. in this his inuectiue against vs. And increasing somewhat his accustomed style declaimeth terribly and laieth to our charge not errors or ouersights or meane corruptions as are our leauing the latin and folowing the greeke but horrible crimes euen blsaphemies blasphemies intolerable He presupposeth that wise men are somewhat moued by such reasons and perswasions as he hath vsed hetherto But it must needes be saith he that vvise men vvil be moued much more vvhen they consider the intolerable blasphemie of certaine places For answere whervnto we craue no pardon of him or the reader But if he proue his accusatioÌ„ let vs sustaine that iudgement as by the law of God and man to such Intolerable blasphemers is due Only of the reader we request indifferent audience and then we doubt not but this storme and tempest wil passe without any damage as quietly as the rest The first blasphemie is this The Apostle compareth together Christs priesthod and the priesthod of Melchisedech in the epistle to the Hebrues vvhere he maketh no mention at al of bread or vvine in which notvvithstanding they vvill Christ chiefly to haue bene like to Melchisedech Here these men vvrite flatly that of al those things vvhich are proposed by the Apostle it foloweth not that Christs priesthod is eternal and therefore that properly Christ is a priest after the order of Melchisedech because he instituted a sacrifice of his body to be continued for euer of his priests But this vvhich vvas principal the Apostle in that disputation omitted and brought those things vvhich proue not that vvhich he meant to proue But vvherein Christ vvas principally like vnto Melchisedech that must be learned not of the Apostle but of the Fathers vvho haue vvritten far more aptly and properly of Christs eternal priesthod then did the Apostle Of this he concludeth If they feare not to find some fault in the Apâ—stle and reprehend the holy ghost him selfe is it marueile if our doctrine displease them Thus M. VV. which if it be true if we thus disgrace the Apostle if we say he goeth about to proue a thing and proueth it not if we refuse to be taught of him and prefer the Fathers before him finally if we controle him so singular an instrument of the holy Ghost and reprehend the holy Ghost him selfe I can not blame M. W. if he crie out Intolerable blasphemie But if these things be so far of from al shevv of truth that there is no colour or pretence of so vnmeasurable lying vvhat should a man say but shame to the deuil and his ministers vvho novv are grovveÌ„ to such a passing impudencie that so they may haue licence to lye thâ—y care not hovv grosly and palpably they lye though they be takeÌ„ with the maner though it presently turne to their ovvne shame though the lyes which they inuent of others be most euidently and in truth only verified of them selues For vvho but they thus disgrace this Apostle and that in this epistle vvho but they find fault vvith the vvriter and reprehend the holy Ghost bearing vs in hand that this vvriting much differeth from other scriptures much from Christs preaching and the other Apostles therefore is to be reckened Prostipulis For stubble good for nothing els but for the fier for this vvould they signifie by that contemptible phrase And do not our english translators them selues in their Testaments leaue out S. Paules name in this epistle and plainly say It is not like that euer he was the author of it But let this passe vve vvil not vse this kinde of defence our vvords and sayings defend them selues sufficiently The vvords of vvhich he gathereth this Intolerable blasphemie stand thus Heb. 7. v. 17. A priest for euer Christ is not called a Priest for euer only for that his person is eternal or for that he sitteth on the right hand of God and perpetually praieth or maketh intercession for vs or for that the effect of his death is euerlasting for al this proueth not that in proper signification his Priesthod is perpetual but according to the iudgment of al the fathers grounded vpoÌ„ this deepe and diuine discourse of S. Paule and vpon the very nature definition and proprietie of Priesthod and the excellent act order of Melchisedec and the state of the nevv lavv he is a Priest for euer according to Melchisedecks order specially in respect of the sacrifice of his holy body and bloud instituted at his last supper and executed by his commission commaundement and perpetual concurrence vvith his priests in the formes of bread and vvine in vvhich things only the sayd high Priest Melchesedec did sacrifice For though S. Paule make no expresse mention hereof because of the depth of
vvay though in part against our vvilles especially vvhen vve are prouoked by aduersaries so insolent and ful of brauerie in vvordes and the same most feeble impotent vnable to performe any thing in deedes and therefore lying verie open to receaue a blovv of any scholer be he neuer so meane and indifferent And albeit no heretical opinion can lightly be defended vvithout many foule shiftes and inconueniences yet M.VV. hath brought him self vvithin harder straightes thē any other by reason of most straunge paradoxes which he hath taken vpon him to maintayne for vvhat man bearing the name of a Christian vvere he othervvise as excellent as euer vvas Cicero or Demosthenes can possibly without increase of infinite absurdities defend Luther against the Apostle S. Iames Beza against the Euangelist S. Luke Illyricus against S. Cyprian and al fathers of the primitiue Church And which in truth is more false wicked more vnreasonable and vnpossible then the rest M Iewels Challenge made at Paules crosse against al men liuing which long since is knowē for a mere shameles proud lying vaunt to Catholike and Protestant Lutheran and Zuinglian learned and vnlearned lippis tonsoribus and in effect notified for such by publike proclamation of the prince and Realme And therefore if he finde in this treatise some wordes more sharpe rough thē he is vsed to heare let him attribute that not to hatred of his person whom I neuer saw and for whose good and amendmēt in Christ God is my witnes I would refuse no paynes how soone I may fall into his handes our Lord knoweth but to hatred of his heresie and his immoderate heate ostentatiō vttered to colour and saue such things as can neuer stand but with open iniurie of Christ disgrace of his Apostles and ruine of Christian religion Our aduersaries Christian reader are now proceeded beyond their ordinarie beyond that which at first they pretended They pleade not now for scripture against fathers for the liuelie word of the Lord against mans traditions which a few yeres sithence was their common songe they are gone far beyond that note and oppose them selues not against S. Hierom S. Austin S. Gregorie but against the self same scripture the self fame liuelie word which they seemed so to honor against S. Iames S. Paule S. Luke against the Apostles and Euangelistes against the verie Gospel of our Sauiour And what can be their next steppe but to cal Christ him self in question to doubt whether he be the true Messias and redeemer of the world And if any of their brethren do moue that doubt as infinite there be that do yea that denie it vtterly what way in the world remayneth for profe thereof al other authoritie besides the written word as the old Fathers Coūcels Tradition Church being by these men quite abandoned and novv the vvritten vvord it self being reiected as far and vvhat Christian talking of these matters and seing these horrible mischeefes not intended in thought surmises cogitations and secret vvhisperings but practised and put in vre by vvriting defenses publike bookes open disputations manifest violences and most vniust murtherings of those which withstand it who I say though he were as pacient as Iob and as voyd of galle as the doue but would be moued Scriptū est saith the Apostle credidi propter quod locutus sum et nos credimus propter quod et loquimur It is vvritten I haue beleeued and therefore I speake vve also beleeue constantly therefore we speake boldy And as saith S. Hierom Quod simpliciter creditur simpliciter confitendum est And if Spiridion that reuerend and auncient Bishop in a great assemblie of Bishops were wel allowed for that he sharply rebuked in publike audience an other in learning his superior in vocation his equall who in citing a text of the gospell altered of finenes and curiositie one only word and the same of no great moment grabatum into lectulum what rigor and vehemencie of speach deserue not they who in Sacramentes chief pointes of faith in the Sacrifice in Baptisme in Priestes in Bishops in Church in Apostles in Angels in Christ him self haue made most prophane innouations and reduced all to the first ethnical termes But of this hitherto The rest which remaineth is only touching Luther Caluin whom M. W. singularly commendeth wherevnto he addeth certain ordinarie wordes of course concerning him self and his felowes how heroically they haue alwaies gotten the victorie ouer vs our forefathers Of these matters somwhat hath bene spoken before and therefore here I wil not say much Luther and Caluin if they were such notable good men they finde it now the better they were the better it is for them if otherwise M.W. commendation standeth them in smale steede Neuertheles certain it is both can not be so excellent as he would make thē being continually in opinion faith in word and worke in the whole trade of their lyfe and maners so opposite so contrary such deadly enemyes as their bookes testifie the world knoweth And M.W. doth verie vnwysely so oft and so painfully to range abrode in praise of that man who is so far abhorring from him and his secte that if Luther be right they are surely out of the way if Luther be a restorer of the gospel they are enemies and destroyers of the gospel if Luther be in heauen they continuing as they do are certain of hel For so Luther euery where pronounceth of them As for the other I meane that vulgar bragging and boasting it proueth not much It is a common itching humour of most kind of heretikes Omnium haereticorum quasiregularis est ista teme ritas saith S. Austin And S. Peter long before gaue it as a general marke of them that they shal be superba vanitatis loquentes speaking provvde arrogant vaine thinges Howbeit it seemeth in our dayes more proper in some special sort to M. VV. sect then to any other as iudgeth that excellent man of whom we last spake Martin Luther who reporteth of them and that by experience that they wil say any thing boast of any thing confidently affirme any thing bur proue nothing by any sound reason or argument nisi gloriatione inani de certissima veritate saue only by friuolous craking of the most cleare truth And if once they fal in to that veyne then is there no ende In suis libris gloriandi finem et modum nullum faciunt But against al such kind of talkatiue vanitie he geueth a very general and resolute lesson vvhich if I professe to take from him and commend the same to others M. w. can not be offended because he extolleh the man for so peerles a maister And this it is Nemo eorum obtestationibus et iactationibus quicquam cred at saith he Nam eos mentiri et dupliciter mentiri certissimum est Let
no man geue any credit to the fair speaches and crakings of the Zuinglians For most certaine it is that they lye and lye agayne VVherefore Christian reader to leaue M.VV. and returne to thee and so make an ende if thou be in iudgement Catholike I know thou findest not nor euer shalt finde reason to make thee a Protestant of any sect and least of al after the English fashion And if thou feele in thy self any such temptation consider aduisedly but this only why thou shouldest encline to be of that side more then to be Lutheran a Puritan an Anabaptist a Trinitarian and so furth and thou shal neuer finde any probable cause why thou shouldest not as wel become any of these as a Caluinist or Zuinglian And vniuersally to make thee detest all Sectes if thou haue some feare of God and regard of the iudgement to come waygh only that which the very nature of our religion this treatise offereth to thy consideration and thou shalt easely find abundant reason why to reiect forsake them al. Consider the infinite difference betwene the Catholike pleading reasoning and disputing and their perpetual wrangling brawling and rayling VVe geue thee to stay thy selfe in our time vnitie of faith in al Christiā prouinces Churches wel gouerned and in due obedience florishing commō welthes quietly maintayning the doctrine which of their fathers they receaued They geue thee infinite varietie and difference of religions disordered cōgregations the sheepe controling their pastors and scholers presuming to teach their maisters And in the ciuil common-welth disobedience against the magistrate contempt of princely authoritie spoile ruine of churches of palaces of al things sacred and profane In the former ages we shewe thee consent and agreement in the religion which we professe Bishops Churches Princes Prouinces Peoples al realmes Christened ioyning in the same They tel thee of inuisible churches imagined congregations Mathematical deuises in the ayre as it were Minotautes and Hippocentaures sometimes chalenging to them selues the company of Berēgarius VVicleff Hus the like sometimes refusing them as heretikes and running per saltum vnto the Apostolical age or the first 3.4 or 5. hundred yeres after Christ condemning al the church folowing of superstition and Papistrie and sometimes yea commonly condemning those former ages no lesse then the later VVhen we treate of scriptures vve geue them vnto thee syncerely and perfitely vvithout any cutting or paring avvay of this or that booke or this and that peece of such a booke al expounded vniformely by excellent Saintes by most learned Doctors by general Councels by the most approued practise of the Catholike church in al antiquitie They geue thee scriptures so peecemele and patchedly that they cut of at the least the third part of them sometimes sentences sometimes peeces of chapters sometimes chapters commonly entier bookes And as for the exposition of them contemning al Saintes Doctors Councels of antiquitie al Doctors Fathers and Martyrs of their owne Congregations they reduce the final scope and determination of al to This is my opinion this is my iudgment and the Doctors may not take avvay from vs our liberty to iudge of them c. Consider this intolerable wilfulnes wherevnto they are now growen and the more they shew them selues to abhorre from al reason stay or moderation the more oughtest thou to obhorre from them Consider with thy selfe that neuer the founder of any common welth as Solon of Athenes or Minos of Creta was so brutish or voyd of common sense as to leaue his common welth so disordered that there should be no iudges to end controuersies no gouernours to keepe the people in peace and tranquillitie but that euery man should liue according to his lust and liking Then how much more abominable is it for vs to imagine that Christ Iesus the eternal wisedom of God should frame a larger common welth then euer was vnder the Sunne dispersed thorough al quarters corners of the world and yet for order quietnes should leaue the same worse policed then was euer the least citie or borough towne whereof we reade in any story For so much as he bound euery one of his subiectes not only to liue wel and in charitie one with an other but also vnder payne of eternal damnation he bound them al to beleeue a like and to haue the selfe same faith vnchangeably in al places times and ages touching a number of articles and yet leaft no order whereby to procure any such vnitie nay rather tooke order to driue thē into diuers innumerable faithes appointing so many supreme heads of churches as there vvere soueraine kinges princes dukes rulers in seueral kingdomes countryes prouinces and cities appointing a booke of the gospels vvhereby they should be gouerned but leauing the exposition of the same at randon in the discretion or rather fansie of euery preacher and minister Recal to memorie that which their owne principall writers and maisters teach thee who deny not but that they leade thee an other way then any of thy forefathers wēt for these thousand yeres Againe they deny not but they geue thee a faith far differing from the faith which the more auncient fathers folowed in the first fiue hūdred yeres Then whereas they praise vnto thee for most diuine and Apostolical men of later memorie those who within these 80 yeres haue restored as they cal it the gospel by those mē also thou art earnestly dehorted from the Sacramentarie faith as a faith wicked blasphemous and damnable Furthermore remember that a long time they vsed to reteyne at least the name and countenance of the written word of the Gospel of the scriptures that those were altogether for them whatsoeuer became of the Fathers Councels and Doctors But now that hold also haue they geuen ouer cōfessing thereby the scriptures to be as plainly against thē as the rest And with what conscience or reason can any man folow such blind guydes as these are who professe them selfes to folow none but to be at plaine defiance with all Fathers and Churches of this later thousand yeres with al Fathers and Churches of the other fiue hundred yeres and with the sacred scriptures and Gospel of Christ it self whom for these other reasons their owne doctors maisters and brethren condemne as heretikes most wicked and sacrilegious God indue thee with his spirite and send thee of his grace that thou maist take the right way and folow it that thou maist renounce al sectes heresies and become a true member of Christes Catholike Church without which there is no sanctification of the holy Ghost no remission of sinnes and consequently no hope of the fauour of God no hope of life eternal LAVS DEO A GENERAL TABLE OF THE PRINCIPAL THINGES conteyned in this booke A ACADEMIKES a sect of Protestants page 279. their beleefe pa. 280. Antinomi a secte
vvorst of al other 381.382.383.384 he then most busily corrupteth scripture vvhen it is most to the dishonour of Christ 384.385 M. W. inuectiue against the late Catholike translation of the new Testament 444. it is mere histrionical 445.446.448 in condemning it he reproueth himself 447.454.455 the hypocrisie of his accusation 449.450 Notable bragging and lying 459.460.461 how weakely he iustifieth his inuectiue 462.463 he obiecteth only two faults 263.264 both false and if they were true of no importance 464.470.472.473 What they are in particular 464. his vnconscionable dealing 472.473 What is principally requisite in a Translator of scripture pa. 371.372.375 Translations more autentical then the original pa. 290.291.306 V Of the name Vniuersaliâ— See Primacie W Arguments that Good vvorkes are not the cause of saluation pa. 95. refuted at large 99.100.101 c. Good vvorkes in Christians are cause of saluation pa. 99.100 vsque ad 106. 418.421.422.423 as euil workes are cause of damnation 104.105.106.107 See Heauen Good vvorkes are in no respect necessary to saluation by the Protestants doctrine pa. 110.111.113 their argumentes prouing the same 112.113 The fathers doctrine touching good vvorkes set downe by M. W. pa. 115. the wickednes thereof 116.118.119 they are therefore condemned by Luther as verie Iewes 120.121.122 M.W. notable wrangling pa. 14.15 his manifold ouersights 97.98 he vnderstandeth not the Protestants doctrine of only faith 109. he commonly contradicteth him self 23.25.114.115.123.126.319 he proueth the English ministers to be Antichrists for sayng Communion 127.128 how fondly he answereth a place of S. Chrysost 204.206.211.212 his straunge assertion that only the hebrue text is scripture 286.287 Refuted 287.288.289 he calleth S. Austin a Sorbonist for his doctrine touching the value of good workes p. 543.545.546 and by like reason al the Apostles and Prophetes pag. 545.546 his arrogancie in condemning al doctors 495.496 et praef pag. 44.45 The summe of his answering D. Sanders consisteth partly in preferring him self before al other pref pa. 42. ad 51. partly in leauing out the substance of D.S. arguments ibid. pa. 75. vsque ad 81. Z Zuinglius the Apostle of the English church pref pa. 89.90 Zuinglians notable lyers pag. 525.526.555 and braggers 554. their maner of writing pref pa. 81.82 The faultes correct thus Pa. 4 linea 13. for charged reade charging Ibidem in many copies wanteth a marginal note Contra Campian pag. 11. Pa. 41 li. 26. Estaticus reade Ecstaticus Pa. 85. lin 6. Christ reade Christes Pa. 145. lin 18. forth reade forth Pa. 195. l. 17. argumenr reade argument Pa. 328. li. 8. for the two hebrew letters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where also in some few examples the later hebrue word is diuided which should be ioyned Some other faultes there are of like qualitie especially of one letter for an other as s for f and r for t and in one place of some copies is vvhich for vvhich is al which considering the ordinarie difficulties of printing where straungers are the workers coÌ„positors correctors besides other extraordinarie mishaps I trust the Reader of his curtesie wil easely pardon Whom I request if by reading hereof he fynde ought for the encrease of his faith towardes Christ and his Church Catholike euen for loue of the same Christ and Church to help me with his prayer FINIS Contra Sand. pa. 5. in fine Ib. pa. 6. in principio M.W. knoweth not wel what that Antichrist is against whom he writeth Lucian de vera historia lib. 1. Cyclades Lucians historical verities the Protestants Euangelical verities are of like nature and probabilitie Much good time spent in reading or refuting heretical bookes 1. Tim. 6. Tertul. de praescript Heretikes are generally proude and ignoraÌ„t 2. Timoth. 6. v. 4. W. contra Sand. pag. 250. See after chap. 7. pag. 130.131 Whit. contra Camp pag. 154. Ibi pag. 153. Fulke con Mart. pag. 64 65. in sine Supra pa. 4. A strange proposition to say the church is Antichrist In the Protestants faith there is no cercertaintie In their writing and disputing there is no ground That the Protestantes haue no certaine fayth The Prince supreme head of the church The Prince not supreme head of the church A declaration of the iust c. Printed by special commaundement and licence â—no â—532 a pag. 411. Cart. in his second reply b 412. c 413. d 414. Ibi. 419 Communion booke in the forme of publike baptisme Baptisme remitteth sinnes Baptisme remitteth not sinnes Tower disputatioÌ„ the second day Priuate baptisme allowed Priuate baptisme disallowed M. W. contra Sander pag. 276.278 Ficta quaedam necessitas Great difference and coÌ„trarietie in the Communion bookes The sacrameÌ„t of confirmation admitted Refused T.C. pa. 174 apud Whitg pag. 785. Christ descended into hel Christ descended not into hel Carlile Caluin Instit aedit anno 1553. ca. 7 ¶ 28. et in postre aeditione l. 2. c 16. ¶ 9. Christs diuinitie graunted Christs diuinitie denyed M. Whit. contra Campian pag. 25.2.153.154 Sleid. Coâ—â— 17. an 1546. Rebellion against princes iustified and commended Ibidem lib. 8. an 1531. fol. 124. Ibid. lib. 22. an 1550. fol. 411. Sleid. li. 18 anno 1546 fol. 320. Beza ad D. Elizabeth Angl. Regi in praefat noui testament aedit 1565. Fox Actes and monumentes pa. 250.255.257 Ibi. pa. 251.252 a pa. 250. ad 260. Vbi supra pag. 250. Ibi. pag. 260 Gilbie Goodman c. WomeÌ„ may beare no rule ouer men in matters temporal The boâ—kes were pâ—inted at Geneua the yere 1558. yere 1559. Women may beare rule ouer men in al matters temporal and spiritual The Communion booke in the beginning before morning praier Copes and such like ornaments approued CoÌ„demned General chaunges and contrarieties in faith Foâ— actes monumeÌ„tes pag. 586. Real presence CommunioÌ„ in one kynd Mariage of priests vnlawful Vowes of chastitie Priuate masse Auricular confession These articles were according to the law of God in king Henries time Ibi. pag 587 The same articles were contrarie to the law of God in king Edwards time Fox vbi su in historia Cranmeri pag. 1473. A realme pitifully ordered where a chyld of 9 yeres old may by order of law ouerthrow al religion Chaunge vpoÌ„ chauÌ„ge D. Whitg Defensâ—a pa. 31. vsque ad 51. Ibi. pag. 178 Infinite difference betwene our English protestants and those of other nations Whit. Def. Tract 1. p. 74 A rule most assured Groundes or heads of disputation In the protestants writing or disputing there is no grouÌ„d Scripture denyed Whit. contra Camp pag. 17. Traditions of the Apostles denyed General Councels denyed T.C. pag. 16. apud D. Wh. Tract 2. p. 95 Of this see more chap. 3.5.7.17 after in the praeface Auncient doctors of the Catholike Church denyed Whit. coÌ„tra Sand. pa. 92. then we perceaue to be agreable to scripture Si vel intogrum patruÌ„ Senatum in nos commoueris D.
1. cal 4. v. 27. see before pag. 59 The end of M.W. doctrine touching Antichrist If the Pope of Rome be Antichrist there be many worse Antichristâ— in the world M. Iewels maner of answering D. Harding He leaueth out the best part of D. Hardings booke An vnconscionable way of answering Apud Sander pa. 764. Sander pa. 767. Ibid. pag. 770.771 â—â—g 774. Vnreasonable mangling corrupting and falsifying Apud Sander pa. 785. Apud Sand. pag. 789. Illyr Luther Luther To. 7. Defensio c. contra fanaticos sacramentariorum spiritus fo 381. The Protestants forbid the reading of scripture See after pa. 459. The heretikes alter their workes continually Of the name Protestants and Sacramentaries Ful. in the Answere to M. Martins preface pa. 17. Pag. 653. 1717. Those that professe the English religion are not Catholikes Brentius et Lutherani passim See before pa. 39. Nor Protestants Sleidan li. 6 fol. 102.101.109 Ibid. lib. 7. fol. 110. et 114. et lib. 8. fol. 128.131 Those of the English fayth are most properly called Zuinglians or Sacramentaries Apol. Ecclesiae Anglicanae d. â— Protestants Hussites Gospellers See before pa. 16. Actes and monumentes pa. 901.902 Ibid pa. 993. aeditionis postremae Sacramentaries Lutherans Zuinglians These names them selues vse besides a more general name vsed and confirmed by Act of Parlament see before pag 21. Sleid. lib. 8. fol. 128.131.133 et lib. 9. fol. 150. Ibid. lib. 7. fol. 107. et lib. 20. fol. 368. lib. 21. fol. 382.390 ibid. lib. 5. fol. 75.78 The proceding of the new gospel In prefat pag. 2. In respons ad episto Campiani prefa pag. 2. The Heretikes corrupt their ovvne vvryters Anno 1568. Colloq Alt. in respo ad excusa cor fol. 227. 2. RespoÌ„ ad Hipothe a fol. 284. ad fo 290. fo 353.355.441 442.443.526 Ibi. Saxoni ad respons de difcess fo 539.540 Vvestphalus in apologia contra caluÌ„ Cal. ca. 46. pag. 458. The vvorks of Luther corrupted by the Caluinistes in Geneua Detruncaeti Bull resp ad Cocle. ca. 3. Pag. 4. Ibid. Manifest contradiction Duraeus fol. 8. S. Iames epistle denyed by the ProtestaÌ„ts Pomeran ad Rom. ca. 8. In Annot. in â—o Test pag. vâ—i S. Iames epistle the Apocalips lefte out of the Protestants bibles Câ—â— 1. li. 2. c. 4. colum 54. Cent. 2. ca. 4. colum 71. Luther 10.5 in 1. Pc. ca. 1. Muscu in locis coÌ„mu ca. de lusti num 5. pag. 271. pag. 4. M.VV. notable vvranglinge pag. 3. Illirieus in praefa Iac. Had it not bene a goodly matter vvorthy the labour of such greate men in the Tovver disputations to discusse vvhether Luther called S. Iâ—mes Epistle stramineâ— made of stravve simply or oÌ„ly in comparison * Cont. Campi pag. 198. Pag. 4. Whit. cont Camp pag. 17 1â—.19 Cal. in argument ep Ia. The Heretikes sit in iudgemente vpon the scriptures allovv disallovve as they find moste fit for their sectes Whit. pag. 5. The reason why the english cleargie admitte some books of scripture and refuse others Aug. de doct chri li. 2. c. 8. A ca. 2. vers 4. vsque ad finem 7. ca. Pag. 5. Contr. CaÌ„p pag. 9. vide ibi pa. 10.12 M. VV. reasons make most against him selfe pag. 5. The summe of the Tower disputation touching the scriptures The fourth dayes conference Whit. pref pag. 4. 5. con Camp Pa. â—0 Ibi. A. 2. â— Ibi. 3. b. 8. The firste dayes conference in the Tower D. 1.2 Sundrye bookes of the scripture denied by the protestantes S. Lukes gospel doubted of Contr CaÌ„p pag. 9 exagitat The open way to deny al scripture pag. 24. Aug. de heresiâ— heresi 53. Epiph. here 75. Hiero. cont Vigilanti Ioâ—iniat The protestantes as in suÌ„dry other partes of their doctrine so in denying certaine books of scripture imitate the auncieÌ„t heretikes The 4. daies conference Epiph. here 42. Epiph. her 51. W. contra Cam. p. 28. Insti li. 1. ca. 7. ¶ 4 The protestants refusing the authoritie of the church can neuer geue reason how they know some bookes and not other to be canonical scripture Cont. Campian pag. 9. I. Tim. 3. v. 15. The protestats refusing the churche beleeue not the scriptures See after chap. 16. Rom. 10. ver 17. 1. Cor. 15. ver 11. Somewhat is the word of god besides scripture Aug. de doc Chris l. 2. ca. 8. Con. Cart. 4. ca. 47. Con. Laod. can 59. The epistle of S. Paule to the hebrewes as much doubted of in the primitiue Churche as that of S. Iames. and bâ—â—n as much as those books of the olde testament which the protestants reiect Hier. in Esai cap. 6. et 8. Latina coâ—suetudo IdeÌ„ in Hier. cap. 31. Hiero. in Catalogo Caius CoÌ„ei Laod. can 59. Pap. 24. M.VV. brag of coÌ„futing the catholike doctrine vayne and impossible Mat. 13. v. 14 Mat. 7. v. 6. Mat. 16. Luc. 22. Luther tom 2. contr Regem Angl. fol. 342. The coÌ„mon vaine spirit of euerie Secte of protestants Henricianae ecclesiae Pag. 6. Luthers extreme hatred against the Sacramentaries Zuinglians Cleâ—â—â—ius a Zuinglian made a booke intituled victoria venitatis â—utiâ—a papaâ—us Saxonici an 1561 Confess orthodox Eccles Tigâ—r tractat 3. â—o 108. Immaniter contra nos expuit Ibid. in prefat fol. 3. â— Lauatieâ— in historia Sacram. fol. 32. Luther reiâ—cteth the bible translated by the Zuinglians how much more ought catholiks to auoyded the same In coÌ„fessio Tigur vers supra fo 30. Confes Tigur tract 3. fol. 108. The Zuinglians condemne them selues in defending Luther M.W. distinctioÌ„ wheÌ„ Luthers iudgemeÌ„t is to be preferred before al the Church The folie of M.W. distinction Cone Chal. actio 1. Lirine cont haeres ca. 43. Mat. c. 4. v. 6. Ioan. c. 14. et 16. Ephes cap. 4. b. c. Esa ca. 59. v. 21. In this case the authoritie of the deuel as wel as of Luther is better theÌ„ all Fathers or al the angels of heauen Gal. 1. Ierem. 31. g. 33. d. Luthers iudgement with scripture against the Sacrametaries Luther to 7. A defence of the literal sense of our Sauiours wordes etc. against the fanatical sprites of the SacrameÌ„taries Ibi. fol. 383. The Sacramentaries enemies of the gospell by Luthers iudgmeÌ„t coÌ„firmed with scripture Euerie protestant soueraine iudge of scripture CouÌ„cels doctors old new See the 5. chap. in the beginning pa. 7 Mat. 10. v. 24. pa. 6. Who are truly priests Melchisedec did sacrifice The sacrifice of Melchisedec denied generally by the protestants though confessed by M. W. Gen. 14. Heb. c. 7. v. 6 Mus in loc com cap. de Miss papist pa. 492. Bib. printed anno 1579. Corruption of the scriptures Cal. in com in episto ad Heb. c. 7. v. 9 Ibid. Caluin reiecteth the auÌ„cieÌ„t fathers touchinge the sacrifice of Melchisedec Cal. in psal 110. Heb. 5. v. 11. 1. Cor. ca. 2. ver 5. ca. 3. ver 2. Hier. ep 126 ad Euagri Greg. Nazi Christ did sacrifice at his
Whitg Trac 2. p. 112 The aunciâ—t fathers pillorie doctors New Euangelistes Apostles doctors of their owne church denyed a D Whitg defens c. Tract 4 c â—â— p. 230. Vide ibid. pa. 217. Vbi supra Tract 2. c. 4. pag. 111. So far as we â—an esteeme Ibi. Tract 3. ca. 7. pa. 201. When as in my opinion A great fal in diuinitie from the authoritie of Saintes to the authoritie of these Maisters Ibid. pa. 291 Ibid. Tract 9 pag. 522. Ibi. Tract 1. pag. 67. Vbi supra Tract 10. c 6. pag 549. It is to obserued that protestants seldome abyde 35 yeres in one opinioÌ„ Martyrs of their owne faith and gospel denyed D. VVhitg Tract 21. c. 1. pag. 710. Martyrs may not take froÌ„ any protestant his libertie to be supreme iudge Whole churches of their owne religion denied Ibi. Tract 9. ca. 1. pa. 481. Al protestaÌ„t churches be they neuer so contrary are assured of the truth Ibid cap. 2. pag. 491. Ib. Tract 20. pag. 704. a Orthod coÌ„fess Eccles Tigur fol. 105.106.107 b Cal. admonitio tertia ad Westpha p. 114. Zuin. tom 2 in Exegesi ad Luth. fo 327 c Histo de la vie de Calu. c. chap. 12. d Calu. vbi supra pag. 5. e Collo Altemburgense fol. 404. Nouum Antichristi dominium Redolent Papatum Ibi. fol. 535. f Apud D.W. Tract 18. pa. 685. g Ibi. Tract 11. pag. 559. Ibi. pag. 560. In stede of one true lawful Pope the protestants haue many tirannical popes The protestants can neuer haue any general Councel The protestants maner of answering reducing al to their owne singular arbiterment An apt comparison declaring that the protestaÌ„ts nether haue nether can haue any stay in their religion The protestants of our age in bold denyal of al things far exceede the heretikes of auncient time a Aug. de vtil cred ca. 17. contra epis Fundament ca. 4 contra Crescon li 4. cap. 61. alibi passim b August de pec orig li. 2. cap. 7.8.9 epist 90.92.95.106.157 vide Possid in vita Aug. lib. 1. ca. 18. c Aug. epist 165.166 Psal contra partem Donati Tom. 7. in principio d Aug. coÌ„tra â—ulian lib. 3 c. 1. con Donatist lib. 4. cap. 7. e Aug. cont epis Funda ca. 4 Trac 32. in loan f See Beza in praef test noui an 1565. dicat princ Condensi and Musculus in praefatio Io corum communium The protestants at defiaÌ„ce with the name Catholike Colloq Altemb in res ad excusat corrup fol. 154. The protestants admit not the very scriptures See after cha 13. 14. Ciprian epist 55. Aug. de vtilit cred cap. 17. How the protestants fel to cal the Pope Antichrist 2. Thess 2. 1. Iohn 2. v. 18. Ibi. 5. v. 2.3 The forme and maner of M. W. answering Pag. 2. Al the fathers vniuersally folowing ther in the tradition of the Apostles say that Antichrist is one certaine man pag. 21. They al erre 〈◊〉 so sayng Patrâ—â— etiaÌ„ simul vniuersi Al the fathers waÌ„ted wit and learning in comparison of the protestants A special marke of Anchrist 2. Thess 2. v. 4. Pag. 25. The second demonstration that the successioÌ„ of Popes can not be Antichrist The aÌ„swere pa. 35.36.37 38.39.40.42.43 Marke this wel A veritie manifest confessed pag. 4â— pag. 32 pag. 33. A falsitie euident which neuer was neuer wil be proued Beggerly stuffe pag. 34. pag. 35. pag. 3â— pag. 37. pag. 38. pag. 40. Reason Rayling pag. 44. Ibid. pa. 44. If other kinds of protestants vse the like libertie no heresie can euer be repressed The third demonstration Ibid. pag. 54. Matth. 16. Luc. 22. See the annotations in the new Test vpon these places Pag. 61.62 Pag. 54. pag. 6â— The impossibilitie of M. W. paradox that the Pope is Antichrist pag. 66. A wonderful chaunge vpon the sudden in al the ChristiaÌ„ world and yet more wonderful that no man should note it That the Romane Church of the later thowsand yeres hath not chaunged the faith which she had the first fiue huÌ„dred Before pag. 47. Chap. 4.7.10.11 Cal. insti li. 4. c. 18. ¶ 18. Omnes reges terrae populos à summo vsque ad nouissimum â—â—â—briauit To affirme with the protestants that the vniuersal church hath failed is to deny Christs incarnation and al scripture Ose 2. v. 19.20 Eph. 5. f. g. IoaÌ„ 17. v. 19. Eph. 2. v. 14. c. Ps 2. v. 6. 1 Tim. 6. v. 15. Hebr. 7. Act. 2. IôaÌ„ 24. v. 16. Mat. ca. 28 v. 20. Marc. 4. v. 32 1. Cor. 11 v. 26. Mat. 5 v 14.15 1. Tim. 3. v. 15 Luc. 24. v. 47 Act 15. 2. Timoth. 3 v. 9. Ephes 4. b c Mat. 10. v. 17 Mat. 16 v 18. Apoc. 20. v. 9. Esa 62 v. 6. Esa 60 v. 2.3 Ibid. v. 20. c. 62. v 4. c. 59. vers 21. Ibi. c 60. a b ca 2. v 2. Psal 2. v. 8. psal 71. v. 8.11.17 Ierem 33 c. d. e. psal 88. v. 34.35 c. Daniel 2. v. 44. Tower disputations the second day The inuisible church a poetical fansie Melanch in locis com c. de Ecclesia aedit 1561. The scripture knoweth no church but the visible Idem in praefat lib. Corpus doctrinae Christianae in Ecclesiis Saxon. Misnicis principis electorâ—s Saxon. impress Lipsiae anno 1561. Vide eundeÌ„ in Repetit Confes August offerendae Sinodoâ— Tridentinae anno 51. ca. de ecclesia Et in resp ad impios articulos Bauaricae Inquisitio quest 3. The protestants inuisible church Calv. institut lib. 4. ca. 1. ¶ 2. No saluatioÌ„ out â—f the visible church Ibid. ¶ 4. OecolaÌ„p in Isa c. 2. v. 2. Idem in Ieremiam ca. 33. v. 29. Kinges and Priestes neuer fayle in the church Illyr glossa in Math. ca. 1. v. 1. Some such stories of the Protestantes church what state it had 600. or 700 yeres agoe were worth the seing BreÌ„t in Luc. c. 17. hom 19 Lauath in Ezechiel ca. 20. v. 39.40 Luth. Tom. 4 in Isa ca. 9. c. 52. 53. 60. Bul. in Apo. Concio 62. 87. Notable forgetfulnes and contradiction See after pa. 177.178 After pa. 349.350 Cal libel de necessit reformandae ecclesiae To say that the church hath fayled is to make Christ a lyer and deceauer ab an 1544. ad 1556. Yere 1559. The storie of Dauid George set forth by them of Basile If Christ had bene the true Messias his church had neuer fayled Castalios discourse that Christ is not the true Messias The light of the church shal neuer be extinguished Quò magis libros sacros considero eo minus hactenus praestitum video vtcumque illa oracula intelligas An argumeÌ„t worthy to be consydered Caluin in Daniel ca. 2. v. 44. Lut. To. 7. li. de Iudaeis c. The Protestants vnder pretence of more puritie driue men to Iudaisme and Turkery Esa 49. per tot ca. 2. v. 3.4 Esa 54. v.