Creede vppon the knowledge and conformitie of scriptures but vppon the doctrine receiued and approued of the people of God as the Auncient churche yea afore the wrytings of the newe Testament were written had a custome to propone to great and small the beléefe of the Créede afore they would commende to them the holy scriptures as appeareth by christian Antiquities And therfore the beleefe of a Christian dependes not of the woorde written by the Créede but of the woorde reuealed to the people and church of God. Aunswere Touching the firste Article it is moste necessary in teaching the Apostles Creede to a childe or other ignorante persone that therewith also he be instructed in the Doctrine of the Prophetes and Apostles seeing the Créede containes none other matter than this selfe same Doctrine and that they are things not onely conioyned but also like if not in termes at least in sense and substance For the second Article they denie that that which is alleaged before is any way contrary to the order established in the churche of Geneua or other church well directed wherin touching the reason taken of the fourme of Baptisme vsed in the saide churches it foloweth not by the woordes and speeches which haue bene alleaged that Caluine woulde shut oute the Créede and seperate it from the writings and Doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles a thing impossible but sheweth euidently that he ment to comprehende it therein when he added this woorde and generally which the Doctoures haue put in their Allegation to comprehende what mighte be ouer and aboue the holy Scriptures after the deduction which he made of the points of the Doctrine comprehended particularely in the saide Créede Touching the other reason that afore there were any Booke of the newe Testament written the Creede was proponed to such as were Catechised it is agréed vnto But it folowes not for al that that it is not founded vppon the woorde and Doctrine which the Apostles preached albeit at that time it was not set downe in wryting and likewise vppon the wrytings of the Prophetes vppon which the Doctrine of the Apostles is grounded For Conclusion the Ministers putte no difference betwéene Goddes woorde preached and written touching the sense Obiection It séemes the Ministers haue not well vnderstande the meaning of the Doctoures For there is no Question to knowe whether the Créede carie conformitie of hymselfe with the Apostolike writings but whether firste we muste vnderstande and beléeue that the Apostles and Prophetes haue set downe by wryting a Doctrine wherewith the sayd Créede dothe conforme and that other wayes a man can not beléeue the saide Créede But to vnfolde it more easily the Question is if it be not possible that a childe being come to the age of discretion or any other may by instructions of the Parentes or others beléeue the Articles contained in the Créede and be not firste instructed by them that there be certaine Apostolike writings whereunto the Articles of the Créede may be conformed And if it be necessary to moue him to beléeue it to knowe this conformitie And to these let the Ministers Aunswer absolutely Aunsvvere Faithe is by hearing and hearing by the woorde of God according to the consent of Iesus Christe who putting the hearing of the woorde afore the Faithe of the same saythe Who heares my woord and beléeues him that hath sent me c. Like as also he commaunded the Apostles to preache first the Gospell to the ende the hearers by the preaching might be disposed and led to Faithe By these reasones to knowe whether the Doctrine that is taughte be the woorde of God it is necessary to beléeue without the which also it is impossible that a man may either haue Faithe or beléeue in God onlesse he be assured that that which is taught him is Gods woorde And for the Question touching the instruction of children at the age of discretion or others whether it be necessary they knowe the woorde afore they beléeue the Aunswere is that it is néedefull And Thomas sayeth that the Faithe of the Articles of the Créede ought to be explicated that is declared which can not be done without knowledge of the woorde Obiection This Aunswere containes frothe of speache withoute any touche of the pointe proponed For there is no doubte that children and others muste not be Catechised and the Articles of the Faithe vnfolded to them by the woorde of God But the Question is to knowe if it be necessary they vnderstande that thys Woorde be wrytten in the Bookes of the Prophetes and Apostles so as wythoute the knowledge of the sayde wrytings they can not knowe nor beléeue the Articles of Faithe contained in the sayde Créede Whereunto the Doctoures pray the Ministers to Aunswere directly either yea or no. And after the aunswere to adde suche reason as they will which if they will not doe the Doctoures are of minde to procéede to an Article after they haue tolde them notwithstanding for conclusion of all that if this knowledge of the scriptures were necessary to the vnderstanding of the Articles of the Créede examining them according to the conformitie of the same Scriptures that it behoueth séeing the foundation is so necessary amōgst the Articles of the Créede to put this I beléeue there be holy scriptures and it is to note that in the said Simbole there is no mention made that there is holy Scripture so that a mā may be a true christian afore he vnderstand there is any christian Doctrine or woorde of God written therefore not necessary for the beléefe and vnderstanding of the Créede to know the woorde of God to be written in which respect the Doctors protest to speake no more of this Article Aunsvvere By collation and view of the Demaundes and Answers it is easie to iudge who offende moste in circumstaunce of woordes either the proponentes or respondentes Touching the second Article the Answere is as before that the knowledge of Gods woord is necessary to beléeue and to be a christian whether it be written or reuealed Touching the declaration that was made the Ministers Answere in their owne respecte not to approue in any sort that any thing be added to the pure woorde of God And they beléeue the Simbol of the Apostles to be no other thing than the pure woord of God which is proposed to vs by his spirite and therefore it should be a contrauention againste his commaundement to adde newe Articles to it mainteining also that if there had bene others necessary to saluation the spirite of God had not bene forgetful For cōclusion albeit there is no expresse mention of holy Scripture made in the Créede yet couertly it is vnderstande therein bicause the churche which can not subsist that it is not founded and builded vpon the grounds of the Prophets and Apostles is proponed there as an Article to beléeue Replie This Answere the Doctors say is impertinent and no more to purpose than
ReuelatioÌ„s of the holy spirite which are most certaine and of no lesse assurance And so lastly touching our Answeres to be out of the first matter or spéeche If they be so so also are the Demaundes Obiection The Conclusion is whether euery one ought to be beléeued saying he hath a particulare Reuelation of the holy spirite without Declaration otherwayes that there be holy Scriptures and that there is difference betwéene the same Let euery one be iudge whether the Demaundes and Aunsweres be pertinent to this difficultie or not like as also whether the one importe more credite and beléefe than the other as the one béeing a newe Doctrine shewes not any proofe more than the other of their particular inspiration Aunswere In our former Answers we haue declared howe the Reuelations supposed by particulare persons ought to be examined by suche meanes as they may be discerned whether they be of Gods spirite or not Héere Doctor Vigor intercepted his further spéeche saying that in the discourse aforesaide he vnderstoode muche matter in the mynisters Aunswers to be against the woorde of God as where it is sayde that first the Sonne must be honored afore the father which Spyna mainteined to be vndoutedly true alleaging that proposition to haue his ground and authoritie on the holy scriptures as in the gospel and first Catholike of S Iohn Whervnto Vigor Replies that in the saide places is not founde this woorde firste albeit in respecte not to incident the matters alleaged in the beginning of the conference he wil forbeare for the present to enter into Confutation reseruing that charge til the ende of al the conference Aunswere Spyna requires Doctor Vigor to coate the places of scripture which he pretendes to be contrary to the contentes of his Aunswere And to iustifie his opinion to glorifie first the Sonne afore the Father according to the testimonie of the textes afore noted he preferres this reason grounded and drawne out of the Scriptures we can not knowe the Father onlesse we haue knowne the Sonne we can not glorifie the Father onlesse we haue knowne him by which the consequence foloweth that the knowledge and glorie of the Sonne is a degree to come to the knowledge and glorie of the Father which being referred by Vigor to be more amplie debated in the conclusion of the whole conference Spina was also content Obiection Vigor Obiectes without entring further into this disputation that by the selfe same reason inferred by Spina it foloweth that we must honoure the Father afore the Sonne for by the Father we come to the knowledge of the Sonne as appeareth by the woordes of our Lord to S. Peter Caro sanguis noÌ„ reuelauit tibi sed pater meê° qui in coelis est The same aduouching manifestly that the heauenly Father reuealed to S Peter that our Lord was the Sonne of the liuing God Whereupon Vigor argues in this sorte whether the reason of Spina be vaileable by the Father we knowe the Sonne therefore muste we firste honoure the Father afore the Sonne Aunsvvere To followe the order of the knowledge which we oughte to haue of Iesus Christe and his Father propouned to vs in S Iohn we must begin by the Sonne and from the Sonne to the Father For S. Philip desiring him once to shew to him and his companions his Father He answered Philip who hath seene me hath also séene my Father the same teaching that the meane to come to the knowledge of the Father is a former knoweledge of the Sonne which may be also approued by the Authorities of other places where Iesus Christe saithe that none knoweth the Father but the Sonne and he to whome the Sonne wil reueale him And to aunsweare the Authoritie of S Mathewe alledged by Vigor Spina saithe that the place by him produced contained no mention of the knowledge of the Father nor the meane to come thereunto but only of the Reuelation which was made by the grace of God and his holy spirite to S. Peter and his other companions to know Iesus Christ and in him his Father Whereupon Vigor calles vppon the iudgemente of the Auditorie whether this be an Answere to his Obiection reseruing notwithstanding till an other conference to handle this pointe more largely if he wil mainteine it as not now to incident that which hath bene proponed whereunto Spina consentes Vigor addes further vpon an Answere made by Spina where he vsed a difference betweene the Reuelation certaine by the Lorde to a particulare man and the holy Scripture in which Aunswere he seemes to put a maruell the rather for that there is no Faithe giuen to holye Scripture but only that the Lorde is the Author thereof who can not lie euen so if a particular man be assured that a Reuelation is made to him by the Lord or that a persone be assured of the Reuelation made to an other be bound asmuch to giue faith to the Reuelation as to the scripture the which matter also he will not as he may amplie handle and deduce but falles eftsoones vpon the first Question which as yet hathe not bene resolued to the which he prayes Spina to aduaunce and prepare himselfe Aunswere The cause of Vigors maruell touching the Reuelation of the Lorde and the woorde to be thinges differing produced in one of Spinas Answeres moues in that he conceiues not the sense and meaning of the spéeche For Spina wil not put a difference touching the certaintie betweene the true Reuelations of the Lorde and the woorde whiche proceeding from him is no lesse true than the Reuelation and the Reuelation of Reciprocal Faithe with the woorde and yet it followes not for all that that the woorde and Reuelations of Goddes spirite by whiche we may be ledde to the vnderstanding of the woorde be not things differente and that the one goeth not afore the other And touching Vigors request to prepare to the pointe he Aunswereth that he can not frame or draw his Answers from other grounde than the Demaundes that are made him To this Vigor Replied that touching the sense he layeth him selfe vpon the contentes of Spinas Aunswere And where he saithe that the woorde goeth afore the Reuelation that deserues not to set a difference vppon the question propouned And touching the matter of the pointe Vigor Demaundes if a persone may be assured that he hath the Reuelation of the Lord or that a Booke be a Booke of holy scripture and when he may iudge assuredly of his inwarde inspiration And lastly how he may assertaine any of this inspiration which he hath of the Lord. Aunswere The first Article of the last demaunde is not a thing impertinent to distinguishe the scripture from the interpretation of the same seeing they are matters diuers and sundry giftes of the lord And to answer that part of the demaund how a particulare man hauing in his heart the Reuelation and inwarde witnesse of Gods spirite may knowe that it is Canonical the spirite of God is
in writing in the two firste conferences where was continuall speache to examine the Articles of their confession without making mention of the Masse And where they pretende a seeming and meaning in the Doctours to examine the Catechisme and not the Articles of the Confession the Doctours are contente to proceede in the saide Articles conferring them with the Catechisme séeing they two oughte to accorde together And so they call all the assistantes to witnesse and iudge by whom it standes that the conference is not begonne Touching the change of order whiche the ministers demaund this day it is a late fashion and a new trouble seeing hitherunto they haue kept the place of respondentes deliuered the Articles of their confession to be examined where the Doctors were alwaies arguers of their side not proponed any thing to examination yet are they contente after the said confession be examined that the Ministers propound suche difficulties as they haue againste the Catholike Doctrine whereunto the doctors with Gods grace will make aunswere Demaunde Whether the Ministers beleue that the créede called the Symbole of the Apostles was made by the Apostles and whether they beleue al that is conteined therein Aunswere It is a thing different whether the Apostles them selues being together haue written it euery one bringing to it his sentence as somme hold whether it hathe bene gathered of diuers places of holy writings yet in the reformed Church we beleue euery point to be drawne out of the pure doctrine of the Prophetes Apostles conteined in their writings as if we should say by the importaunce contentes that it is a summe of the doctrine whiche the Apostles preached Demaunde Leauing a part to auoide tediusnes whether it be a thing indifferente to a christian to beleue that a doctrine hathe ben written by the Apostles or not so that it kéepe a conformitie with the matter of the holy writings the demaund is if al doctrine conformed to the said holy writings may take indifferently the title of the Apostles or other authours of the scripture Aunswere We cannot faile in calling it Apostolike doctrine but naming it the writing of the Apostles séemes to giue a sense that it was either written with their handes or spoken of them But be it what maye be wheresoeuer we acknowledge any doctrine taste sauer of the sprite wherwith the holy men of God haue bene moued we wil cal it Propheticall and Apopostolical doctrine Obiection The Demaunde stretcheth not whether the doctrine be Apostolicall in respecte of suche conformitie but whether by that reason it mighte be attributed to the Apostles and of equall authoritie with the writings wherewith it is conformed bicause it procéedes of a selfe same sprite as the aunswere saithe Aunsvvere The aunswere is already made whiche is that such writing conteines Apostolical doctrine in what sense it maye be termed to be of the Apostles Obiection The aunswere vnder correction apperteines nothing at al to the demaunde for the question is not whether for the conformitie it maie be accompted Apostolical But whether in regarde of this conformitie it maie be attributed to the Apostles and beare the title and name of the Apostles with equal authoritie to the proper writings of the Apostles Aunswere The first demaund was if the créede was made of the Apostles whereunto a sufficient aunswere was made After which it is lawfull to fashion a second demaund which differeth from that Obiection The seconde dependes vpon the first which also is made and whether it be satisfied in aunswere or not let the Readers discerne and iudge Aunswere To depende vpon it is not therefore the same Demaunde Whether they approue the said Créede only bicause they knowe it to be conformable to the writings of the Apostles or whether there be any other thing that induceth them to beleue it Aunswere That not only it is conformable but euen the doctrine it selfe for which cause they beleue and approue it Demaunde Whether a man be not bound to receiue it but in respect he knoweth it to be the selfe writing or haue conformitie with the writings of the Apostles as is saide Aunswere The chefe cause that may moue him that beleues it to beleue it in déede is the knowledge whiche we haue spoken of Demaunde Notwithstanding this be the principall cause yet wée require to be absolutely aunswered whether there be no other sufficient reason to induce beléefe so that this firste maye be necessarie Aunswere Aswel for the matter of the Créede as euery other thing which we beleue the principall cause is the knowledge wee haue that the same hath ben left vs written or gathered out of the writings of the Prophets Apostles And for our parts we search no other reason than that of our Faithe Obiection Yet vnder correction the Demaunde is not fully aunswered Whiche is to knowe whether to receiue the creede of the Apostles this cause be necessarye to vnderstande the writings of the Apostles and that withoute the same no man either can or oughte receiue it The Doctours praye to be absolutely aunswered either in the one or the other without circuit of woordes And the more simplye to vnfolde and explicate the Demaunde thus it is whether a personne oughte not receiue the Créede of the Apostles but vnder knowledge that it is conformed to the writings of the Apostles Aunsvvere Séeing with the doctrine of S. Paule there is no true faith without knowledge assurance of the woord to beleue it is necessary we know that it is the woorde of God. Demaunde To knowe whether they vnderstande this woorde to be written or not written Aunswere The woorde written and reuealed by the Prophetes and Apostles whiche is the fundation of Christian Faithe Obiection The ministers then mainteine that after the créede be beleued or proponed to beleue it is needefull to be taughte or to teache an other the wrytings of the Apostles and Prophets the same being againste all order euer holden in the Churche and against the contentes in the fourme to administer the Sacramentes in the Churche at Geneua made by Caluine and brought in amongst his woorkes The woordes are these Goe to them that haue charge of the childe that is Baptized séeing there is Question to receiue this childe into the companie of the Christian churche you promisse when he comes to age of discretion to instruct him in the Doctrine receiued and approued of the people of God And after these woordes they bring in the Creede according to the whiche they are willed to procéede in the instruction of the childe in all the Doctrine contained in the holy Scripture of the olde and newe Testament so that afore they propone to beléeue the Creede they persuade not to beleeue that there is any woord of God written nor what it is nor what is there contained as to knowe the conformitie of the Créede with the same They lay not also the foundation of the beléefe of the
the former And albeit the Prophetes and Apostles had not written at al the church notwithstanding had bene grounded vpon their foundation as it was in the time of Abraham and afore there were any Scripture which if it had bene necessary to saluation it had bene put among the Articles of Faithe Aunsvvere The Ministers holde this Replie muche more impertinent and touching the reason that is added that Faithe was in the time of Abraham albeit there was no woorde written they accorde to it But this is euil inferred there is no woorde written then there is no woorde at all And it is a fallax in argument which the Dialecticians name a Dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter from a saying modified to that is simplie saide The fourth day of disputation being Friday the tvvelfth of Julie THe Ministers aduouche to cleane alwaies to their former request obseruing the Protestations aforesaide made by the Doctoures who haue twise declared that they assembled not but to satisfie the Lord of Montpensier and the Ladie Buillon according also to whose request publikely made in the company to be instructed vpon the point of the Supper and not in other matters wherein shée accompts her selfe sufficiently taught and hath no neede of more ample instruction and therefore the saide Ministers require as afore that the first pointe which they should conferre vpon might be the supper and the masse the rather for that they vnderstoode by people woorthy of faith and credite that the Doctoures meant nothing lesse than to enter disputation vpon that grounde Héereupon the Doctoures say they are ashamed to heare so often Protestacions and that the Ministers séeme to féede with suche fashions of purpose to eschue conference in the Articles of their Confession which notwithstanding they haue oftentimes offered to be examined And where they alleage that the Ladie of Buillon for whose instruction the companie is assembled hathe openly required to be instructed vppon the Article of the Masse and not otherwayes They Aunswere that shée put out a motion to procure conference of the Masse but they neuer heard that shée helde hir selfe sufficiently instructed touching the other Articles If the Duchesse will confesse that shee beléeues all the other Articles proponed by the Ministers and their likes against the doctrine of the Catholike church to be erronious they are ready from the present to enter into conference of the Masse But of the contrary if shee be imbrued with the erroures impugning the doctrine of the Catholike church in respect to vse order appertaining to instructoures and to lay the foundations of the Masse the Doctours are determined according to the good and holy desire of the Lorde of Montpensier to Catechise and teache the Lady his Daughter euery Article and by order They say further that the Ministers are infected with the custome of those of their Church which is that to eschue alwayes conference with the Catholikes afore the decision of the poynt proponed they thrust an other into disputation according to the example of Beza and other ministers that were with him at Poyssi who séeing the matter of the Supper was argued against them in the Priours chamber at Poissi in the presence of the Quéene Princes of the bloud and other Lordes of the Councell made Request many times to let fall that point indecided and enter vppon others more euident and manifest againste the Catholikes as of Images and other like And of the contrary the Ministers this day to auoide the great erroures in their interpretation of the Créede will foiste in the pointe of the Supper onely the Doctoures beséeche as before that confusion auoided Religion may be examined by order And leaste it be thought that the Doctoures refuse to enter conference of the Masse and Supper according to their constante meaning as in déede vnder generall correction they neuer denied to dispute of them the better to instructe the Duchesse and with more spéede they are readie to dispute with open voice and euident Declaration by the expresse woorde of God that Iesus Christe hath instituted and saide the Masse and his Apostles also They offer also that what so euer shall be deliuered by voice and spéeche touching this matter to be sette downe in wryting the next dayes after and put in order as the instruction of the Duchesse requires it Referring themselues for the day to the oportunitie of the Ladie Héere the Ministers made Aunswere that all these offers were superfluous and vnprofitable because suche conferences are but debates and alterations offending and slaundering more than they edifie Resolution of the Doctoures THe Doctors according to the order already begon and their charge which is to conferre with the Ministers and then yéelde Resolution for the instruction of the Duchesse of Buillon Touching the two pointes proponed yesterday whether the Apostles be Authoures of the Créede and why we ought to giue Faithe thereunto say it ought not to be estéemed a thing indifferent to knowe if the Apostles made and erected the Créede no more than to know if the Apostles be the Authors of their wrytings For as their Authoritie is farre greater in the assuraunce that they procéede certainely from the Apostles euen so of the contrary it should be lesse by many degrées ▪ if we either doubted of it or vsed it as indifferent They say further it is no sufficient reason to cal this Créede Apostolicall and to Christen it by the name of the Apostles in respecte of the conformitie it hath with their writings seeing that by the same reason other Simbols as that of Niceus Athanasius suche other like writings may beare also the name of the apostles Creede as containing a doctrine agréeing with the writings of the Apostles and therfore the Doctors say we must beleeue that the Apostles haue made deliuered to Christians this Créede and applie faith to it as being a wryting composed by the Apostles for proofe whereof they haue the aucthoritie of all times since the Apostles till now that this Creede hath bene proponed in Baptisme and Catechisme as appeareth by the Authors which haue bene from the Apostles til our time neither can we name or note any Author or Councell which hathe made this Créede that afore the same Author or Councel euen vntill we come immediatly to the Apostles this Simboll hath not bene proponed in Baptisme and Catechisme and called amongste Christians the rule of Faithe which our such argument S Augustine in many places against the Donatistes estéemes inuincible to proue that something there is of the Apostles Omitting willingly for wearinesse sake other Auncientes who acknowledged this Créede to be made and receyued namely of the saide Apostles as S. Ambrose S. Ierome and others Touching the second pointe the Doctoures say that the bonde and necessitie to beléeue this Simboll dependes not of the knowledge of the Apostolicall or Propheticall wrytings nor of the knowledge of their conformitie with them for it was
as the Woorde is euery where of which Woorde the Flesh was taken to constitute a person and Hypostâ—se For when it was vpon the earth it was not in heauen and now that it is in heauen sure it can not be vpon earth And much lesse that it is there séeing we exspect that Iesus Christ come according to the Fleshe whom notwithstanding wee beleeue is with vs on earth according as he is the woorde By these Authorities and such like which are often found in the writings of the Auncients the world may perceiue that Peter Martyr and Theodore de Beza be not the first Authoures of this Doctrine but that it is falsly laide vppon them bicause they haue but drawne and as it were written it woorde for woord out of the Bookes of the Auncients Where the Doctoures pretend that the fourme of Argument which the Ministers vse affirming that to say any thing is impossible to God dothe not derogate his omnipotencie destroyeth the fourme of argument vsed by the Angell speaking to the virgine for the confirmation of his message that nothing was impossible to God the ministers Answer that that is nothing to purpose bicause the question doth neither importe a thing containing in it selfe any contradiction nor that is contrary to the truthe of god Touching the opinion of the Doctors that God can chaunge the nature and qualitie of things there is none that doubtes thereof But when that is done it must also be aduowed that things being changed remaine no more in their first nature and the Ministers say that it is not all one touching the thing héere proponed bicause the Doctoures would haue a thing dwell in his essence and nature notwithstanding his essentiall partes be chaunged yea and wholly extincte and abolished Touching the limitation of the power of God on the behalfe of his creatures there is no man so sencelesse as to enterprise to limite in all respectes that which he will and that confesseth not that he may ordeine and dispose of all his Creatures in general as it pleseth him and as a potter doth of his mould wherein their opinion runnes that the authoritie of Ieremie ought to be referred thither as appeareth clearely by these Hebrue woordes lo gippale mimiuecha col-dauar which is Lord nothing shall be harde to thée Touching the perill which the Doctoures pretende may rise of the Ministers saide Aunsweres they say that people of good and sounde iudgement can not frame any euill consequence of it considering that all this Doctrine is true and containes no obscuritie but if perhappes any cull oute an euill profite of it it is to be imputed to themselues and their euill vnderstanding by which not only any Doctrine but also the woorde of God it selfe may sometimes be peruerted and corrupted To be short all things as sayeth the Apostle are cleane to those that be cleane and filthie to such as are so and haue a wicked Conscience Where the Doctoures alleage that there may be occasion taken by the Doctrine aforesaide to interpreate the Scriptures according to a selfe sense and fansie the Ministers denie it and say That if the worlde enterprise it it is casie inough to reiecte his interpretation as not correspondente to the Rules and Analogie of Faithe wherewith the sayde Doctrine and interpretation of the Ministers dothe agrée and consent And where they say that the Ministers chaunge and alter the Scripture they Aunswere that it is a reproche and slaunder not to be verified againste them neither touching their writings their woordes nor any thing by them deliuered either by speeche or thought Where they say that the Scripture is of opinion that the bodie of Iesus Christe is in two places the Ministers denie it and say that on the contrary the Scripture establisheth him in heauen and not elsewhere And Heauen muste containe hym vntill the time of restauration of all that hathe béene forespoken by the mouthe of his holy Prophets from the beginning of the worlde And where they alleage that the Scripture ought not to be interpreted according to the sense and fansie of euery one The Ministers confesse it with this Addition that all interpretations ought to be examined as S. Paule saithe and that suche examination be made by the collation and conference of the Scriptures And lastly where the Doctoures accuse the Ministers to haue alleaged no place of the Scripture before they produced the Auncientes to confirme their sayde Doctrine the Ministers say they are falsely imposed for that if they well remember they alleaged to the same ende in the beginning of their discourse the opinion of S. Paule written in the seconde Epistle to Timothe and the second Chapter where it is saide that God can not denie himselfe and also that is written in the sixthe Chapiter to the Hebrues that it is impossible for God to lie Which places togither with the opinions of the Auncients were not alleaged as to diminishe the omnipotencie of God but rather to establishe it and cut of the way to many impieties and blasphemies which they would falsly exhibite and couer them vnder the couler of Gods almightinesse without hauing regard to the will declared to which we must referre the power The sixth day of disputation being Tewsday the sixtenth of Julie THe Doctoures Obiecte that they haue made this Argumente God can not bring to passe that one body be in two places then God is not Almightie which consequence how necessary it is is fully manifest without other proofe by the lawe of contradiction for according to the rule holden in all Schooles of Philosophers two contradictions can not be true To be able to doe all things and not able to do certaine particulare things be contradictions séeing this particulare thing is one part of the whole So that it must néedes be that if the antecedent be true the consequent must be false according to the lawe of contradiction for both can not be true together as things of contradiction And albeit by the knowledge of the very termes the consequeÌ„ce may be iudged to be good yet it may easily be knowne by the handling of the Obiection against the Answere of the Ministers that the Doctours haue proued the consequence This was the reason of the Ministers God can not lie nor sinne and can not bring to passe that things done should not be done bicause that either it impugnes his nature or there is repugnancie of the parte of the creatures bicause there is contradiction entangled But the Doctors affirmed in their Obiection that there is no suche thing in the Question proponed which is if one body may be in two places whereof they make this kinde of Arguing taken of their Obiection God can doe all things that impugne not his nature either when there is no resistance of the parte of the creatures and that there is implied no contradiction to affirme that a body may be in two places at one instant is a thing not repugnaÌ„t
place Touching the fourth and fifth Articles to know whether the Ministers haue imposed any vntruth vpon the Doctors they send the Readers to the actes of the former conference as also to learne in what sense and to what ende the Ministers haue alleaged the Ancients which they may more easily perceiue by the reading and diligent obseruation of theire places and sentences there inferred Touching the sixth Article wherin the Doctours had rather confesse their Canons to be false than in deferring the authoritie of the same to auowe the body of Iesus Christ to be true and being true that it is necessary that it be in one certaine place the Ministers answere that by the obseruation of S. Augustines place from whence is taken the saide Canon it is easie to iudge that the terme Oportet is muche more conuenient there than this woorde Potest To the eighth Article the Ministers answere that a substance without quantitie neither is or can be any waie a body whilest it is and remaines so and the reason is bicause they are twoo diuers predicaments that of the substance that of the quantitie vnder the which one selfe thing for one selfe respecte cannot be in any sorte comprehended Besides Christe alleageth no other reason to declare his body was not a sprite but that he had members and partes which bicause of their measures mighte be handled and touched Wherupon it foloweth that without that a substance can not be a body And touching the difference that shuld rest according to the opinion of the Doctors betwéene our soules and bodies exempt from quātitie if the same were possible we say that albeit they were substaunces different bothe in number and species yet they shuld be like touching genus and that bothe the one and other should be contained vnder the kinde of substance not corpored The ministers passe ouer the ninthe Article as a matter but of repeticion of woordes and sufficiently aunswered alreadie Touching the tenth Article we say in the first place that the consequence whereof there is Question can not otherwayes be defended by the Doctoures than by the rule that saithe of one absurditie may be inferred all things we complaine bisides of the time which the Doctoures make vs lose in the reading of so many matters already aunswered and which seeme so often repeated by them for none other ende than to fill paper and persuade the world that they do something For in the first place the Euangelist saithe not as the Doctoures pretend that Christe entred not by the shutte doores but only that he came the doores being shutte so that he speakes not there in any sort of the manner of his entrie nor how the doores were opened nor yet of any other parte of the house by the which he entred And as al the sayings of the doctors cannot be founded neither on the scripture nor any authoritie of the Auncients by them alleaged who stand rather againste than with them So for conclusion they haue no other ground of their opinion than their singulare coniectures and imaginations wyth sinister interpreting the wrytings of the Auncients to whose Faith they would constraine and assubiect the Church to the ende that hauing laid this foundation they may builde afterwardes thereupon all their absurdities and erroures which they meane to deduce And where they presupposed that when Iesus entred the doores shut when he walked vpon the waters and came out of his graue those miracles were done rather in his person than in other things Iustine wrytes the contrary that without any mutation happening in his body nor in the body of S. Peter he brought to passe by his diuine vertue that the Sea againste his nature serued him as a way As also S. Hillarie saith to the same respecte that by his power he did all things passible with whom S. Iohn Chrysostome consents as attributing all that to a power Diuine and confessing frankely that he was ignorant of the manner and fashion thereof By meane wherof the Ministers maruell much of the presumption of the Doctors to offer to determine a thing left indecided by the scripture the Auncients and touching the which according to the wise opinion of S. Hillarie bothe the sense and the woorde do faile and the truthe of the facte excéedes the capacitie of humaine reason How then dare the Doctors say so impudently that Christes body passed thorowe the doores that there was penetration of Dimensions and that two bodies were in one place séeing that of all this there is not one only sillable either in the scripture or witnessed by the Auncientes who confesse as is saide that their vnderstandinge and senses were to weake to comprehend or declare the reason of suche a Misterie Touching the birthe of Iesus Christe the ministers stand vpō the scripture whose cleare opinion is that the virgin was bigge bellied shée broughte foorthe and was deliuered shée gaue sucke and that in the deliuery aperta est vulua And yet dothe none of all this derogate or preiudice the state of hir Virginitie or integritie the same consisting in thys one pointe that shée neither knewe nor was knowne of any man. Wée say moreouer that in beléeuing this we folowe the scripture and by consequence can not erre nor be Heretikes neither likewise any other that assubiecte their sense to Gods woorde as the Auncientes by vs alleaged haue done in this In the Article folowing proponed by the Doctoures touching the manner of Christes Resurrection it containes nothing but coniectures and reproches with superfluous and weary repeticions which we haue already satisfied at the full by our former Aunsweres And what so euer folowes after in the writings of the Doctoures are but wrongs and iniuries in place of reasons and argumentes the same being the laste shifte of contencious wittes who being destitute of reason and not able to yelde to truthe defende themselues with clamoures and sinister impositions The Doctoures had some reason in their interpretation of the woorde Aphantos if there folowed autois but the Euangeliste saithe apantoin shewing clearely that the interpretation of the said place and vnderstanding of S. Ambrose in which the ministers do settle is better than the exposition of the Doctoures Touching the opening of the Heauens we Aunswer that they coulde not faile vsing the phrase of the Scripture who saithe clearely that at the Baptisme of Iesus Christe the Heauens were deuided and open when S. Stephen was stoned And as we take it for an imagination of man to applie to the aire the signification of the Heauen So we thinke it should be to diminishe the maiestie of God and Iesus Christ raised aboue all the Heauens to establishe the throne of his Maiestie so lowe as in the aire Neither is there any resemblaunce or likelihoode in the saying of the Doctoures touching the being of two bodyes in one place and the persuasion of the Ministers of the sighte of S. Stephen which stretched euen to the Heauens
body yea euen his owne inuisible And that he could not bring to passe that a Camel or cable kéeping his grosenesse might passe thorow the hole of a Néedle From these is deriued the deniall of his almightinesse a blasphemie moste execrable and very atheisme These be the disordered absurdities which such are enforced to confesse that denye the Reall presence of the body of Iesus Christ in the Sacrament of the Aultare which the Doctors pray may be well considered by the Readers of this present cautele Where the ministers in the last Article of their Answer chalenge vs for calling Faith an humaine worke seeing it is of God that is not to be maruelled in them no more than a numbre of other truthes which séeme straunge to them bicause their Doctrine is grounded vpon the foundation of error amongst the which this is not least in degrée that man hath not a frée will and that for a man to thinke well to wil well and to do well dothe not worke with God contrary to many places of the Scripture which settes a man woorking with God bothe for his Faithe and workes and receiues recompence for the same which shall be more aptly handled in an other place without varying from the matter We are very glad the Ministers confesse that the Auncientes neuer saide that a body was in two places which is true but the reason they giue why they haue not saide it is of the forge and inuention of the Ministers they might tel vs as muche out of the testimonie of scripture wherin is no more founde than in the writings of the Auncients wherof we haue sundry times warned the said ministers who chalenge to groūd all their Doctrine vpon Gods woorde If the ministers at the beginning had confessed the truthe of the omnipotencie or that they would haue acknowledged that Christe might bring to passe that his body mighte be on high and néere below in the Sacrament really and truely if he would we had no néede to handle the questions passed which notwithstanding contain no small consequence as the ministers estéeme the same appearing by the wrytings of the Auncients who haue handled those places with great diligence and with them haue aided themselues againste the heretikes But bicause the ministers wil not agrée that God may bring to passe that one bodie be in diuers places at one instante And that if they had begon to shewe his will to be suche as to ordaine that the body of Iesus Christe might be in heauen and in the sacrament they might haue sayde as is the opinion of these of their secte that God would it not bicause he could it not And albeit we had rather treate first of the omnipotencie than of the wil so séeing the first hath ben sufficiently handled we are nowe in minde to proue that Iesus Christe woulde and did ordaine his body to be in diuers places in the proofe wherof we will enter into the first conference after we vnderstande the fansie of the Ministers what they helde in their Churche touching this matter to the ende we trauaile not in vaine as iudging that they folowe not the opinion of Caluine and Beza for which cause we say they muche abused the people faining to teache according to the Custome and Direction of the Refourmed Churche and yet in their Aunsweres they declare the contrarie Where they holde themselues righte happie to endure suche reproches as to be estéemed seducers by vs Let them remember that all sectes may say as much as they but whether it be righte or wrong we shall make séene by the examination of their Doctrine The Resolution of the Doctoures touching the Article of Gods omnipotencie as for the regarde of the foure Questions proponed by them to the Ministers the same seruing to the vnderstanding of the Reall presence of the Bodie and Bloud of Iesus Christe in the holy Sacrament ALl men disposed with patience to runne thorowe the scriptures and beginning from Abraham the Father of the Faithfull euen vntill the laste wryting of the Apostles shall finde that the very roote and fountaine of all infidelitie ordinarily was in hauing regarde to the propretie of creatures and common order of nature as to gainesay and enter into doubt and distrust of the woorde of God. In respecte of which reason Tertullian and other firste Christians saide wel that the Philosophers and suche as depended vppon naturall things were the Fathers of Heretikes bicause the contemplation of nature engendred almost al heresies of the contrary men may perceiue that the omnipotencie of God is proponed by the scriptures as a knife cutting in sunder all argumentes which might come of naturall reasons as to take a certaine and last resolution to beléeue al that is written and imported by the said woord of God albeit it séeme impossible and incomprehensible to all creatures and that our Faithe might rest vppon the same power in all doutes what so euer All the difficulties that Abraham made vppon the promises which God made to him proceeded of certaine impossibilities of nature which he saw in himselfe in his wife wherin it séemes that his cōsideration stretched no further til God vsed his authoritie and said to him I am God almightie since warning of God Abraham forgate all regardes to the propreties of his nature and tooke holde of this buckler of faith which is to knowe and fully persuade himselfe that God is almightie to whome nothing is hard or impossible And after this when there was question to slea his onely sonne notwithstanding he had greate apparance of contradiction in nature and in the woord of God giuen to him which was that from the séede of that sonne should issue one that should blisse all nations and yet he must kill him afore he had any linage discending of his bodie yet he did not contest as opposing this contradiction of nature and of the woord of God to maintaine that which had bene saide and promised him was impossible but he had recourse to the pilloure of the Faithe of the Faithfull as S. Paule to the Hebrues which is to the omnipotencie with this persuasion that God had the meane to make the one and the other true as to make his Sonne die and raise him vp againe to the ende to drawe out of him afterwarde linage and posteritie albeit as then there had bene no example of the Resurrection Likewise the consideration of creatures and the order of nature which Moises saw before him made him fal into infidelitie but God shewed him his fault when he denyed that he was able to nourish the people long with flesh séeing the nature of the deserte did not beare it warning him to raise vp his spirite to the almightinesse against nature and there to settle and assure his Faithe Moyses saide Héere be sixe hundred thousande people in the midst of whom I am and thou hast said I wil giue them fleshe to the ende they eate a whole
month shal we kil them Muttons or Béeffes which may suffice them Or shal we gather all the Fishes of the sea to content them God answered to Moyses the hand of the Lord is it shortned thou shalt sée now whether my woorde wil come to passe or not In like manner as often as we reade in the Scriptures that the multitude or other particular sort fel into infidelitie or distrust of the aide and succors of God we shall finde that ordinarily it moued in respecte they rested vppon the nature and disposition of humaine things and did not comprehende sufficiently the power of God and of the contrary to confirme them we finde that this power was put before their eies wherof we haue héere before produced certaine Examples of Esay and Ierome In the newe Testamente the Virgine séemed to make some doubte of the meane of hir Conception as hauing regarde to the naturall manner of conceiuing For shée sayde howe may this be séeing I know no man But the Aungell Aunswered nothing is impossible to God drawing her by that from the imagination of naturall propreties which is the roote of infidelitie exhorted hir to aspire to the almightinesse of God as being the first stone and rocke wherupon is builded true religion This being considered and so to resolue with the Ministers for this conference we say that by good right gods almightines obteines expressely the first place amongest the Articles of the Apostles Créede as being the same by the which the other Articles of Faith and dooings of God aboue nature are beleued and mainteined against all contradiction and repugnancie of nature or reason that may be pretended or alleaged and without the which neither Article of the Faithe or any dooings of God surpassing nature and conteined in the Scripture can be defended against the malice and deprauation of humaine Sprite which tendes alwayes to infidelitie and disobedience to God and is prompt and suttle from his byrth to depraue and reproche the woord and commaundement of the same by meane whereof wée say that so much the more euery good Christian oughte to enforce himselfe to hold preserue this Article whole without either suffering any exception or to restraine it to our single pleasure or purpose vnder colour of incertaine pretended repugnances of Creatures mouing in the Sprites of men for want of direct vnderstanding comprehending the greatnesse of God for as the Scripture giues to vs alwayes this Omnipotency in generall without any restrainte in regarde of creatures and dooings of God so it teacheth vs that creatures are vnder his obedience as the Clay in the handes of the Potter to receiue such chaunge and forme as he thinks best without that they can say why doo you this to me or why chaunge you me such similitude of speach vse the Prophet Esay Ierome and S. Paule Wée say further that so much lesse ought it to be licenced to men to limit and bound the said power according to the contradictions which they imagyn in their fansies of the nature wisedome or eternall will of God séeing the expresse sentence of the Scripture is that as God can doo more than wée vnderstand so he smiles at such as wil meddle with his nature wisedome eternal wil as if they were his Counsellers and knewe further of his iudgements and ordinaunces than his owne woord dooth pronounce and in the ende all sprites created are constrained with S. Paule to cry out confessing their ignorance of the power wisedome of God and of his dooings Oh depth of Riches of the knowledge wisedome of God Oh that his iudgementes are incomprehensible and his wayes impossible to finde For who is he that hath knowne the intent of the Lord or who hath bene his Counseller Wherewith wée may also note vpon this pointe a godly sentence of S. Augustine in an Epistle of his to Volusianus Wée confesse that God can doo something which in searching wée cannot finde meaning that as God can doo something so albeit in our naturall iudgemente wée thinke it impossible yet let vs hold it possible only the capacity of our sprite is not able to comprehende it Wée say further that by suche licence and meane to exempt from Goddes power at our pleasure vnder colour of certaine impossibilities of nature or repugnancy supposed by our owne iudgement in the nature wisedome or will of God euery one may study to faine the like in all matters of Faith wherein suche things may be easily inuented or disguised And that it be so if all the Heresies be obserued that haue withstād it in euery time from the first Article of the Creede euen to the laste it will appeare that they al haue kept this way and methode to shake euery Article of the Faith as impossible to God considering the impossibility of the facte according to nature and certaine pretended inconueniences against nature wisedome will and glory of god To this effecte also wée apply the twoo firste Bookes of Tertullian whereof the one is of the Incarnation of Iesus Christe and the other of the Resurrection of his Fleshe againste the Marcionistes wherein the Christian Reader shall reade like Argumentes of the saide Marcionistes labouring to exempt the Incarnation of our Sauiour and Resurrection of his Fleshe from the Omnipotency of God. Nowe to conclude this pointe wée speake it to all good Christians that to the ende to adde nothing to the Scriptures whose speache is alwayes of the power of God to his Creatures withoute any lymitation and to the ende to glorifie the infinite power wisedome and eternall will of our Creatour and Redéemer and also not to open the vessell of the secretes of God to euery impudent who of his owne folie will sette Lawes to men but to the power wisedome and eternal wil of God. And lastely to the ende not to bring into the worlde all Heresies onely but also an Atheisme who according to his sense and fansie may and will oppose and gainesay the infinite power of the true liuing and eternall God. Wée affirme eftsoones that it is necessary to beleue confesse and mainteine that our God is the Almighty Lorde without ende to whom as nothing is impossible so euen the least of his woorkes standing daily afore our eies cannot be comprehended And in plaine speache he is no more a Christian nor a faithfull man who restraines or drawes into any lymit the power of God for thereby he reuerseth the maintenaunce of the Faithe which ought to be generall as to the which no exception can be giuen But as the Omnipotency ought to be kepte in his generalitie and perfection so our opinion is that it is not inough to say that God is almighty and hath the vertue to doo any thing as to inferre that it is done for all that our Lorde can doo he hath not yet done nor neuer wil do bicause his power is infinite But the knowledge of this omnipotency serues to confesse magnifie
persuaderi As also Tertullian Duritia haeretica vincenda est non suadenda And touching the iniuries which the ministers multiplie in this behalf against vs in that they folowe all the aduersaries to the truthe and giue good testimonie what disquiet of minde suche kinde of people suffer when their errors are laid afore them of whom such is our pitie that we pray God to restore them to their good minde as knowing that the Conuersion of an heretike is one of the things reserued to the omnipotencie of God. The ministers labor in vaine to produce much Gréeke to shew that penetrare coelos signifieth not to passe the Heauens without opening bicause this verbe Dierchestai is found to passe where is opening But we neuer said that penetrare or Dierchestai can not be applied to places opened or that in opening them they were pierced thorow For we know in all Authors that doth encounter We said that as the ministers would inferre the Reall opening of the heauen by the rigor and propretie of the verbe aperire so might they alleage that the heauens were shutte in the Ascention of Iesus Christe by the verbes Dierchestai and penetrare signifying with rigor to pierce or passe thorowe without that of it selfe it importe opening notwithstanding it may be vsed where is a place open But by the rigour of their signification opening can not be necessarily inferred if by some woorde from else where or euident condition of the thing that is pierced the opening be not shewed as it is in the textes alleaged by the ministers In the Ascention these Verbes Dierchestai and penetrare be vsed as to pierce neither is any woord added which imports diuision of the heauens whose condition nor the estate of the glorified bodie of Iesus Christe doe not enforce any necessary vnderstanding of opening to be made to suffer the saide body of Christe to enter Therfore we argued of the rigor of penetrare as the ministers did of the wresting of aperwe which is founde in the scripture and not to signifie a Reall opening of the heauens more often than penetrare is red in the Scripture to signifie diuision or actuall seperation of the heauens for eperire coelos is founde very often for spirituall and imaginatiue opening and penetrare coelos is scarcely euer taken for actuall diuision of the Heauens And therfore better was our reason to conclude by the rigor of the verbe Dierchestai or penetrare to passe without actual diuision of the heauens than the ministers to infer the opening of the same by wresting the Verbe aperire In the last Article the ministers obiecte to vs to haue passed ouer certaine places of scripture by which appeares that Faithe is a woorke of God whereunto we say that in some of our wrytings we haue expresly confessed that Faithe in that it is a gifte of God is a woorke of god But in that he that beléeues woorkes with God in beléeuing for Nemo credit nisi volens it is a humaine worke and it is not repugnāt one selfe woorke for diuers considerations to be a woorke of God and a woorke of man And where they bring the Auncientes to haue sayde if not in propretermes yet in like that God can not bring to passe that a body be in diuers places that is false for they neuer either coulde or can shewe it as also they gainesay their laste wryting for bringing the reason why the Auncientes saide it not in expresse termes they alleaged it was bicause they neuer thoughte suche absurditie coulde fall into the braine of man which reason oughte to take place as well to speake it in termes like as in expresse termes séeing it is one selfe thing signified as wel by the one as by the other For the rest the ministers neuer Aunswere to the principall whereof they haue bene often warned and eftsoones we doe admonishe them although they terme a thousande times our spéeche matter of repetition it is that we require them to bring scripture to proue that it impugnes the order established in the world the truthe wisdome omnipotencie and immoueable wil of God one body to be in two places which they can not doe but Aunswere according to their custome nothing wherein may be discerned that their Doctrine is not founded vppon Gods woorde but vpon their propre opinion or particulare inspiration which can not be but of Sathan for being contrary to the common consent of the vniuersall Churche it can not be of the holy Ghost And vppon the same are founded also the other Articles of their Religion albeit they disguise and promisse at euery woord the word of God. A short aduertisement of the Doctors vpon the resolution of the Ministers touching the omnipotencie of God. WE maruaile of the maner of spéeche and writing vsed by the Ministers who since the beginning of the conference could neuer endure to pursue conclude one onelye point without entermedling of others which belonged nothing to the matter of the question as maye appeare by the reading of their Actes Wherein afore they set downe their resolution of Gods omnipotencie they heaped together as many Articles as they coulde remember and thrust them one vppon an other withoute occasion and reason Notwithstanding vpon their owne request we had set afore them articles of the Supper yea to the intent that after we had disputed of the almightynesse of God to make present the body and blood of Iesus Christ in the holye Sacrament we might discende by order into the declaration and proofe that suche was Gods wyll and also that he is there But we are not ignorant of the good customes of those of the religion pretended reformed to blow in the eyes of the Christians all the articles of their religion together with the polutions they inuent thereupon all vppon one lyne to the ende nothing be determined but all rest in confusion and that the Serpent runne away when he hath vomited his poyson Besides by the obseruation of their aunswers it is to bée discerned that they neuer rested vpon any certaine and selfe aunswer But to euerye question they haue returned aunswers no lesse diuers than impertinent and sometimes not to be suffered of the which we giue warning to all suche as shall reade the conferences and laying our selues vppon their iudgement beséeche them to haue good regard to the doinges of the Ministers side Moreouer we tell the Ministers that either they may or ought to know that all the sectes of our time bleare the eyes of such as they meane to blinde with the selfe same traine of articles which they haue gathered together in their resolution and that to obtaine audience in the catholike Churche and to bring in theyr errours and heresies vnder the name of Gods glory Of the which they vaunt them selues to be protectors no lesse than the Ministers wherein lyke as notwithstandyng all these they are not to be receiued or allowed in their opinions and conclusions so the Ministers cā not
of the Lady after he had imparted his intente with the Duke hir husbande it was agreed that the persuasions should be ministred to hir in the presence of certayne Ministers as Spina with other suche as he woulde call vnto him with libertie to alleage what they coulde against the doctrine of Vigor vnder this condition that if after the Conference they were not consuted and wholly vanquished by him his daughter shoulde remayne quiet in hir opinion without further attempts to draw hir from it Herevnto the Duke of Buyllon did not vnwillingly condiscende and for a better proofe of his readinesse in the cause he imparted the whole businesse with the Admirall by whose aduise with others assisting the procéeding Spina was immediatly sente for who at his comming tolde the Lordes that the qualitie and humor of his aduersarie considred he hoped for no great frute in this conference as beeing far more parciall for the Pope and his traditions than of any zeale at all to the word and truth of Iesus Chryst which albeit was affirmed by all the assistants yet it was agréed that he should vndertake the conference that for two considerations the one to instruct and strengthen the good duchesse agaynst the sophistries cauillations of Vigor the other to take from him al occasions to brag as he is wont to doo that the Ministers durst not appeare before him Here the order methode to procede in this businesse was agreed vpon with licence to Spyna to require the authoritie and sufferance of the King that to auoyde confusion it might passe in a small presence that a certayne Theame and subiecte might be proponed to conferre vpon And lastely that there might be established two Moderators for all the Actes and two others deputed to gather faithfully all the Reasons and arguments of either parte All whiche orders béeing orderly communicated to the Duke of Buyllon by the L. Admirall and Spina he iudged them of suche reason as not to be denied warning Spina to prepare him selfe agaynst the firste of Iuly when the conference should begin in the after noone Spina intreated Monsieur Barbasta minister to the quéene of Nauar to accompanie him in this disputation who at the day and houre aforesayde conducted by thrée Gentlemen appoynted by the duke of Buyllon went to the L. of Montpensiers house where the duke of Buyllon aduertised belike of their comming mette thē in the hal and there induced as it séemed by the doctors who were in the chamber frō whence he came asked Spina if afore the beginning of the conference he were determined to make his prayers according to the custom of the reformed churches He answered yea and that neither he nor his companion either might or ought to set vpon a matter of suche importance as to treate vpon the mysteries of Christian religion afore they prepared them selues thervnto by inuocation to the name of god With which answere he returned eftsones into the Chamber of the Doctors who after some priuate counsell amongest them selues appoynted Doctor Ruze to tell them that for their parts they would not assiste their prayers and that there was no more reason for them to be present when they prayed than for the ministers to forbeare their Masse The ministers answered that in good conscience they could not beginne to dispute afore they had prayed to God and for the Doctors they had libertie either to assiste or be absent from their prayers at their pleasure but touching them selues they were content to make their prayers in the place where the assembly and conference shoulde bee onely they sayde there was greate difference betweene their prayers which haue conformitie with the pure worde of God as they them selues confesse and the matter of their Masse which conteynes many things quite contrary as is easely seene and iudged by suche as will examine it by the rule of the Scripture and therfore by reason of the impietie and idolatrie in their Masse as they can not any way communicate therewith without offence to God and bring them selues guyltie afore him so yet neither he nor the other Doctors his companions stoode barde from the societie of their prayers by that difficultie bicause there was neither poynt nor article which by their owne confession was not holly and consonant to god Doctor Ruze replied that they rested vpon a small matter but they answered him that as the principall exercise of Christian religion stoode vppon prayer so it was also the moste necessarie meane to obtayne Gods grace without the which mortall men coulde not attayne to any successe in their doings and therefore very dangerous to omitte it they tolde him also that they marueled on his behalfe that professing the name of a Doctor and a Deuine he made such a negligent estimation of prayer which is the true practise fruite and vse of all the knowledge touching God and his worde like as by this the worlde might discerne what was the nature of their iudgementes who measured diuinitie by idle and vayne speculations He answered that the Duke of Montpensier would neuer suffer such a brauerie in his house and muche lesse that it should be sayde that it was a place for the Ministers to make their prayers in The ministers protested to be farre from their profession to braue it and that muche lesse they would vse any brauerie towards Princes whom they honored with all feare and obedience but that they would condemne themselues if they vsed it to any man of what meane condition soeuer he were wherwith they assured him that aswell he as others which layde such slaunders vpon them afore Princes to kindle enflame them against them shoulde one day giue reason of their doings afore the maiestie of god Here Doctor Ruze asked them why they stoode so resolutely vpon this poynt of prayer they answered that the purpose of the Conference was to reueale the true sense of the Scripture and deliuer it to the vnderstanding of the Bearers which coulde not be done without the spirite of God who cleareth the vnderstanding of men to comprehende it and openeth their mouthes to pronounce it in which respecte they are to implore and obteyne Gods grace by prayers besides God hath commaunded all suche as haue neede of wisedome to demaunde it of him to searche what they would finde to knocke at the gate if they would haue it opened to them all which beeing not otherwise to be obteyned than by prayers they concluded that for that occasion their inuocation was necessarie They alleaged moreouer that all things ought to be referred to the glory of god and therefore prayer to be requisite in the beginning and thankesgiuing in the ende and consummation of all our indeuors euen as when wee begin and ende the ordinary refection of our bodies wee blesse and glorifie the name of God. Here Doctor Ruze tolde them that they should not haue any let to pray so that they prayed in their hartes but they
to pray to God in their beginning as they had desired were not taken awaye meanes for good order established the better to brydle the confusion of popular showtes and voyces as happen ordinarily in the Schooles of Sophisters and people inclyned to cauell Thys spéeche of the Lord Admirall kindled such a sense of reason in the Lorde of Neuers that induced chiefly by the spirite of God and partly by an heroycall instinct of heart laboring in desire to aspire to the direct truth of things hée became a sutor to their Maiesties that by their authoritie and suffraunce the sayde disputation might procéede and be eftsoones restored wherein as he preuayled to the full effect of his request and purpose so after he had ymparted wyth the Lorde Admirall the disposition of the King and Quéene they ioyned in deuise touching the order to be obserued in the sayd conference naming the sayde Lorde of Neuers and the Duke of Buyllon as Presidents of the place wyth certaine numbers of Gentlemen mutuall assistauntes to recorde and witnesse the manner of their procéedings prouyding lastly two Notaries of Parys for eyther side to subsigne and set downe in wryting the true discourse of eyther seuerall parties These condicions thus determined by the Lordes were also receyued of the Doctors Vigor and De sainctes for the Papistes and De spina and Sureau Ministers Assembling according to the appointment the ninth of Iuly at the Lorde of Neuers house where in hys presence and hearing of the reast of the assistants after the Ministers had prayed which the Doctors did shonne as retyring elsewhere till they had done Doctor Vigor vndertooke the first spéeche with protestation that neyther he nor his companion came thyther to enter argument with the Ministers in any néede or meaning to be instructed in pointes of religion and much lesse to impugne in any sort the counsels and specially that of Trent by which they were forbidden to dispute with Heretikes Assuring resolutely for themselues to abyde constantly in the fayth of the Church of Rome onely such was the request of the Lorde of Montpensier who to reclaime his daughter the Lady of Buyllon had procured that conference as they were the rather drawne thyther aswell to satisfie hym as also to declare their holy zeale to séeke and bring agayne to their flock such as were gone astray The Ministers for their partes protested lykewise not to be enforced to conference by any doubt they made in anye article of their confession as knowing the same to consent simplie and fully with the perfite worde of God but rather to strengthen and defende it agaynst the Sophistries of such as séeke to impugne it pretending also to kéepe and establish the sayde vertuous Ladie of Buyllon in that state and holye institution which Gods grace had happily instilled into hir These protestations thus mutually alledged the Ministers looked that the Doctors according to the meaning of the Lorde of Montpensier and desire of his daughter woulde beginne their disputation with the matter of the supper and the Masse albeit vsing the example and pollicy of such as pretending the siege and batterie of a towne beginne to raise their Trenches a farre off so they the better to prepare themselues to decyde and consult in the sayde two poyntes began to lay their foundation by the authoritie of the church vpon the which they sought to establishe the certaintie of the articles of fayth and generally of all the holye scripture And so the demaundes and obiections passing from the Doctors and aunswers returned by the Ministers De sainctes began and Despina aunswered as followeth Question Vpon what doe you establishe your religion Aunswere Vpon Gods worde Question What vnderstande or meane you by Gods worde Aunswere The wrytings of the Prophets and Apostles Question Doe ye receyue by their wrytinges all the bookes of the Byble as well of the olde as newe Testament gyuing to them all an equall authoritie Aunswere No but according to the instruction of antiquitie we vse distinction betwéene the Canonical and Apocryphall bookes calling such canonicall vpon whose doctrine both faith and all christian religion is founded and the other we name apocryphall as vpon whose authoritie we cannot establishe any article of fayth onely they are proper in respect of their notable sentences to instruct the state of lyfe and maners of christians Question Howe know you that the one are canonicall and the other apocryphall Aunswere By the spirite of God which is a spirite of discretion gyuing lyght to all such to whom it is communicated to make them capable of power to iudge discerne spirituall things and comprehende the truth when it is propounded to them by the testimonie and assuraunce which he kindles in their hearts wherein as we discerne the light and darkenesse by the facultie of the sight that is in our eye euen so being furnished with Gods spirite and guyded by the lyght which he kindles in our hartes may we easily deuyde and knowe the truth from deceyt and generally all other thinges which may contayne falshoode absurditie doubt or difference Question But some may vaunt to haue the spirite of God which haue him not lyke as we finde by the hystories that all the heretikes thought assuredly to haue the truth on their sides studying to authorize their doctrine by the inwarde reuelations which they fayned to receyue of Gods spirite by which may appeare what daunger it were to reappose or commyt the censure of a booke or doctrine to the testimonie of Gods spirite which a priuate man perswades or faynes to haue receyued in his hart Aunswere This perill is easily auoyded by the aduise of the Euangelist Iohn in his first Catholike as not to settle an indifferent beliefe to al spirites but rather to prooue and examine them diligently afore we admit them and then allow what they propownde wherein the examination which we ought to make in thys case is to consider first the ende of the doctrine that shall be pronounced purpose of any booke presented to vs For if it tende to rayse and establishe the glorie of God it is true according to the woordes of Iesus Christ in Iohn hee that searcheth Gods glorie is true and there is no iniustice in him in this viewe and examination we haue also to consider that if it consent with the proportion and analogie of fayth as Paule sayth it agrées fully with the chiefe groundes of religion Question All men say and may saye as much but for this reason it is an argument insufficient tyll I be warranted by effect and other proofes how I may rest and stay my selfe vppon it Besides this aunswere excéedes the lymites of the proposition as presupposing the scripture to be knowne to be the grounde of religion and the proposition was layde to giue the reason to assure me that the scripture was of God and that we must put a distinction betwéene the bookes of the same Aunswere
It is easie to iudge whether the ende of the doctrine which is propownded stretch to establishe and exalt the honor and glorie of God as if the same mooue exhortations to men to withdrawe whollie their trust from creatures and reappose and lay it altogyther vpon God to haue recourse to hym in their necessities to depende vpon his prouidence in all their transitorie affayres and lastly to prayse hym with thankesgyuing for all the benefits they haue which being presupposed there is no doubt that the doctrine including this purpose and ende is not good and to be receyued touching the obiection that our former aunswere fell from the boundes of the first proposition it séemes not so bicause the first matter propownded tended to knowe what was the grounde of our religion to the which it was aunswered that it was the wrytings of the Prophets and Apostles Question This aunswere is common to the Lutherans and Anabaptistes yea and to the Deistes who aboue the reast professe to searche the glorie of God and what else the aunswere conteynes and generally all men vsing this spéech coulde not but erre in all the articles of the Créede except the first But to cut of this circumstance of spéeche and returne to the point we thinke it not lawfull to vse a foundation of the scripture afore it be knowne and assured that it is the holye scripture and that there is difference betwéene the bookes of the same and also afore it be manifest that I haue a particuler inspiration of the holye spirite and that such a priuate breathing of the holy ghost be a sufficient ground of religion Aunswere The Deistes or other heretikes can not serue their turne with the sayde aunswere for the confirmation of their errors bicause the Deistes denying Iesus Christ can not glorifie God seing that to glorifie the father it is néedefull first to knowe and glorifie the sonne and euen so the other heretikes who notknowing the truth nor by consequent Iesus Christ whichis the waye the lyfe and the truth muste néedes be ignoraunt of God and howe to glorifie hym And where our aunswere is noted superfluous or to wander indecently we lay our selues to be measured and iudged by the conference of the demaunde and aunswere And touching the last point of the obiection that the reuelation which a priuate man sayth he hath of the spirite of God is to hym as a grounde of religion that is without the sense wordes of our aunswere which stretched onely to laye the foundation of true religion vpon the doctrine of the Prophetes and Apostles of whose truth all the church generally and euerie particuler member of the same are assured by the testimonie and inwarde reuelation of the spirite of God. Question All that is here spoken must be added to the other aunswere afore it be good and it séemes that the aunswere contaynes but matter of mockerie For it is most certaine that when all truth is in the doctrine of one man he is no more wicked or an heretike But we search still the beginning of truth and what it ought to be And touching the replye denying that the particuler reuelation is the ground of religion there is no great difference For if the particuler reuelation be a sufficient grounde for euery one to know that which is of the Apostles and Prophets it is by consequent the foundation of religion as being the grounde to know vpon what euerie particuler man knoweth and sayth his religion is founded Aunswere We framed our aunsweres according to the nature and maner of the demaunds by which appeares no likelihoode of disposition to scoffe or iest séeing that in such a conference as this is where is question to searche the honor and glory of God mockerie could not be without impietie But touching reuelation to be like to the scripture which is the grounde of religion we denie it and affirme them to be things different notwithstanding their coniunction as following one an other according as it is written in Esay Beholde my allyance with them sayth the Lorde my spirite which is in thee the wordes which I haue breathed into thy mouth shall not depart out of thy lippes nor from the mouth of thy seede and so as followeth by which maye be iudged the distinction that the Prophet vseth betwéene the reuelation of the holy spirite and the worde Question I leaue for conclusion of this conference euerye one to iudge of the conueniencie or agréement of the aunsweres and obiections And touching the wordes alledged out of Esay of the vnitie of the worde and holy spirite they be but spéeches without purpose and newe matter neyther ought we to compare the reuelation of euerye particuler man which was the question with that of the Prophet Esay who had the other proofes that the holy ghost spake by him and made demonstration thereof many times Lastly what soeuer is alledged I leaue to the iudgement of euerye christian Aunswere Euen so also we referre to iudgement what hath béene inferred mutuallie of the one other part And touching the place of Esay which we produced there is no question at all of the reuelation of the Prophet nor the spirite that was communicated to hym but onely of the spirite and wordes which God promised to all his people with whome he entred his alliance For the other proofes pretended that the Prophete had of his vocation we make no doubt at all of them onely we protest that to be principall and most assured which he had by the testimonie of Gods spirite as appeareth in the sixt Chapter of his prophecie Question Be it that he spake to his people by the person of Esay yet it followes not but that he spake first to Esay neyther doe I denie that he promised not his spirite to his people meaning to his vniuersall Church not that he would that euery one yea being in thys church might vsurpe or vaunt to haue this spirite promised particulerly And touching the particuler inspiration of Esay it was not founded onely on his fancie and presumption but in the assuraunce which God gaue him in supernaturall woorkes as is witnessed in hys sixt chapter Besides it was not sufficiently grounded to be beléeued as to haue an inspiration if he had not declared it by other effects and prophesies which hapned as belonges to euerie Prophete to doe afore he beléeued But referring all these things as matters fetched from farre and out of the first proposition I leaue the iudgement as before Aunswere There is not one of the church if he be a true member of the same to whome the spirite of God is not communicated according to the testimonie of the Apostle Paule and also the Euangelist Iohn in his first Catholike For the presumption pretended there is great difference betwéene presumption and the imaginations of the spirite of man which is but darknesse and of himselfe knoweth nothing in the things of God and the
not different of him selfe and abiding in a particular man he shall alwayes acknowledge the Scripture that comes of him and which beares his markes And touching the second demaund we say also that the same spirite being in a third man shal acknowledge that aswell the woorde as the Reuelation are of him by the reasons alledged that is that Gods spirite in diuers persones is alwayes equal and like to himselfe Obiection This dothe not satisfie the firste Question proponed which conteined a demaunde how any man can iudge in him selfe that he hath the holy spirit to discerne and iudge a boke to be of the holy Scripture and an other not to be but Apocryphall and lastly how he can make demonstration to an other that he is possessed with this inspiration of God. Aunswere The spirite of God is called a seale in the Scripture for that the firste effecte he bringes forthe in the heart of him to whom he is communicated is to assure him of his presence And to assure a second of the Reuelation which we haue receiued of Gods spirite it is also easie for that the spirite of God which openeth the mouth of one to speake openeth also the eares of an other to heare his woorde the heart to beléeue him and himselfe to persuade it so that betwéene the maister and disciple the Doctor and the hearer being bothe furnished and lightened by Gods spirite there is also a mutuall concorde to knowe one an other Obiection Suche a certaintie is a great incertaintie neither is there any of what secte so euer he be who doth not assure him selfe to haue the holy spirite and truthe of his side which is a fond presumption howe may a man distinguishe a presumption from a true inspiration Aunswere S. Iohn Chrysostome saith that in vaine doth a man vaūte himselfe to haue the spirite withoute the woorde which is a meane to represse sectes and heresies and to iudge all matters that the heretikes and others would propounde vnder the authoritie and title of Gods spirite For as by this spirite we knowe the true sense of the woord euen so do we discerne mutually by the woord who they be that haue the spirite of God and who not Obiection This is no Aunswere to the Demaunde for there is no Question to examine the doctrine by the woord but to know that it be the woorde of God by whiche we wil examine the doctrine and approue it and how a man shall iudge assuredly that he hath a Reuelation of the Lord and that it be Gods woorde Aunsvvere If he be one of the faithfull he may iudge by Gods spirite that is in him as in him that telles it him And if he be of the vnfaithfull it is as impossible that he iudge as a blinde man to discerne coloures laid afore him bicause as S Paule saith it is by the spirite of God by whom we knowe and iudge the things that are of God. Obiection This Aunswere is yet insufficient to the Question produced wherof let the iudgement rest among the hearers and Readers But now wée put foorth an other demaund whether wee are certaine by Gods woorde that the Lord assistes his Churche and will assiste it vntill the consummation of the worlde And whether there be not more assurance to staie vpon the consentes and iudgement of the Church touching the determination of the Canonical Bookes of the holy Scripture and the distinction of the same from the Apocryphall than to rest vpon singular iudgement esteeming it to be an inwarde inspiration of the whiche there can be no proofe made but only by opinion that wee haue the holy sprite Aunswere The Doctors confuse the opinions of the fantastical sort with the testimonies and Reuelations of the Holy Sprite notwithstanding there is asmuch distinction betwene them two as from heauen to earth And touching the consente of the Churche supposed to procéede of the Sprite of God it is infallible and of no lesse certaintie than the particulare Reuelations of Esay and other Prophetes And because both the one and the other procéede of one Authour whiche is the Sprite of Truth the certeintie of the Reuelations of Gods Sprite made to al the Church in generall to euery particular member of the same conteine one self poyse weight Obiection The Ministers cannot conceale from the Catholikes or others but that they are fantastike as making no proofe of the Reuelation of the Holy Sprite made to them no more than other sectes doo And touching that pointe supposed that it proceedes of Gods sprit they seeme to dout of the assistance of the Holy sprite in Gods Church which as S Paule saith Est columna firmamentum Veritatis Wherein is to be wel considered that they hold them more certaine of the assistaunce of the Lorde in particulare than in the vniuersall Church by which the conclusion may folowe that aswel the particular faithful can neuer straie as also that he is a piller of truth no lesse than the vniuersal Churche besides in laying the particular Reuelations in equal ballaunce weight with the iudgement of the Church they doo openly impugne their confession of faith in the fourth Article wher it is thus written Wée know these Bookes to be Canonical a most certaine rule of our faith not so much by the common accord consent of the Church as the testimonies and inward persuasion of the holy sprite who makes vs discerne them from the other ecclesiastical Bookes By the said Article it is seene howe muche they doo attribute to them selues more than to the whole vniuersal Church which Article they doo now resist giuing asmuch to the one as to the other yea in the confession of faithe lastly printed the saide Article was taken awaye as appeareth by that whiche this daye Spyna hathe broughte hither printed at Geneua 1564. by whiche may be séene that they retracte them selues as confessing that it behooues more te staie vpon the common consents of the church than vpon particulare the same being reasonable séeing the holy sprite is promised to the vniuersal Churche and not to euery particulars man. Aunswere If the Ministers may be thoughte fantasticke notwithstanding they haue Gods woorde with better proofe the Doctors maie be holden such in matters which they mainteine and defende both without against Gods woorde touching the seconde pointe reprouing the Ministers that they dout of the assistaunce of the sprite of God to the Church your aunswere is that the dout is not there but to know which is the true Church For the third point where the Doctors allege that it maie be inferred that particular menne cannot erre the consequence is nothing woorthe bicause the Sprite of God maye sommetime departe from menne in whiche case they maye faile and erre as Dauid confesseth did happen to him To the fourthe pointe the Ministers aunswere that they impugne not in any sorte the Article alleaged of their confession bicause the Aunswere
conteined comparison of two Reuelations of the spirite the one made to the body and the other to the members which they maintaine to be of equal value touching the certaintie and in the confession is mention made of the Reuelation of Gods spirite which causeth the consent of the Churche which foloweth thereof as the effecte And if it be so that the cause being preferred afore his effect there is greate reason that the Reuelation of the spirite of God compared with the consent of the Churche should be preferred afore it as the cause to the effect which it produceth And touching the cōtrarietie which they pretend in Confessions Printed in diuers seasons and by sundrie Printers they shall be Aunswered when their pleasure is to debate the Articles particularly Question Where they made a doubt of the true Church euen the like may be said of the Reuelations pretēded of Gods spirit to particular men whom also we may dout whether they be members of the Church or not Touching the other point where they denie to impugne the fourthe Article of their Confession there séemes no small contradiction as comparing the particular Reuelation with the consent of the church as appeareth by their Aunswere it séemes also to serue to small purpose where they alledge the Reuelation to be the cause of the consent preferring it afore the same as the cause afore the effecte the same séeming as who should say the Reuelation is to be preferred afore the word of God and holy scripture for it is moste certaine that the Reuelation goeth before the woorde and scripture And as it appeares in the texte of the Confession which may be easily iudged the Authors of the same speake of the certaintie and infallibilitie of two Reuelations as holding themselues more assured of that they haue in their spirite than that which is of the iudgemēt of the churche Touching the other pointe that particulare men may sometimes faile when Gods spirite leaues them we may conclude by that we ought not to rest infallibly vpon the inspirations pretended of particulare men bicause it may be douted whether they be forsaken of Gods spirite or not which we can not do of the Church therefore it is more assured to stay vpon the Churche infallibly gouerned by the holy spirite than vpon the priuate pretended inspirations which the Catholikes do not folowing their priuate iudgement and therfore can not be estéemed fantastike but rather such are guiltie of that name who prefer their proper iudgement which they couer with the title of particulare inspiration The Doctors require a texte of the Scripture by the which the holy spirite is promised to euery particulare person as to the vniuersal church therby to know how to iudge and discerne what be the scriptures Aunsvvere Touching the first pointe as in déede we do not approue all churches to be true which are so said euen so we allowe not for faithfull suche as vaunt them selues to be so For the second the comparison of the Doctoures is improper in this pointe as who should say the Reuelation is to be preferred afore the woorde of god c. Bicause Gods worde and all the writings aswel of the Prophetes as Apostles are as so many Reuelations of Gods spirite and that betweene the one and the other there is no more difference than betweene genus and species Touching the Article that the Reuelation goeth before the scripture we muste distinguishe betwéene the Reuelations made to the Prophets before they committed them to writing and those which are made to them that read their writings to vnderstande them For the first we confesse they goe before the scripture and for the seconde we say they folowe it Touching the third Article the ministers Aunswere that it is easie to iudge whether Gods spirite assist a particulare man or whether he be drawne from him by the matters he propoundes when they be conferred with Gods woorde and censured by the rules of the same as is saide Touching their demaunde it were a long and weary encomber to alleage all the places where it is written that Gods spirite is communicated to the chosen the better to knowe and discerne the things that are of God in Esay 5◠the Lord promiseth to poure his spirite vppon the faithfull as water vpon the earthe Likewise in Ioel. 2 Ieremie 34. in the first Catholike of S. Iohn 2. vnder the name of vnction and many other places Obiection These places make no proofe at all that the spirite was promised to all to iudge of the Doctrine Other wayes euen women and all artificers that were faithfull mighte iudge of the Doctrine as the Prophetes and Apostles of the contrary S. Paule saithe Numquid omnes Propheta c. He saithe expressely that discretion of Spirites is to haue vnderstanding of the scriptures and be giftes not common to all the faithfull but particulare to some Aunswere The consequence which the Doctors make is nothing woorthe bicause Gods spirite oftentimes is communicated more aboundantly to some than to others and that also some be better exercised in the scriptures than others Touching the place of S. Paule 1. Corinth 12. the ministers say it makes nothing against them bicause the spirite of Prophecie and the spirite of discretion be giftes differing as appeares by the discourse of the Apostle in the same Chapter The second day of disputation being VVednesday the tenth of Iuly THe Doctors required that their Protestation made the day before might be Inregistred which was this that they would not enter into disputation of things receiued into the vniuersall Churche since the Apostles till our time decided and already determined by the holy Councels Ecumenike and general holding them most certaine and vndouted and that all Doctrine to the contrary was false Onely they were ready according to the holy desire of the Lorde Montpensier and the Ladie of Buillon his daughter to make knowne by the expresse woorde of God interpreted by the saide vniuersall Churche and Councels that their Doctrine is holy and conducible to saluation in which Doctrine as the saide Ladie had bene first instructed so all instruction ministred to her in the contrary is hurtful and damnable And lastly that this conference might be in manner of instruction and not a Disputation In like sorte the Ministers protested that they did not ioyne in assemblie with the Doctoures for any doubte they had that all that was centained in their Confession of faith was not certaine and true and grounded vpon Gods woord as appeareth by the places of Scripture noted in the Margent of the sayde Confession beléeuing that what so euer is contrary is damnable and to be reiected thoughe euen an Aungell of heauen would propone it And touching themselues they came not thither to be instructed in other Doctrine than that which they folowe and which they haue learned of Iesus Christe whome they acknowledge as the only maister and teacher of the churche Héere the Lorde of
rather discerned by the woorde then by the consente of many it resembles nothing the purpose of the Doctors For the question is howe a man may iudge a Booke to containe Goddes woorde and not to iudge the Doctrine by the woorde already receiued to which the Doctoures desire and the Ministers make request that directly to the pointe they mighte dresse their Aunsweres Touching where they saide of the consent of many the Doctoures phrase was not so but spake of the consent of the Churche which is as infallible as Gods woorde for as it is certaine that the holy Spirite is author of the woorde so is it no lesse sure that he is the soule of the Churche by whose guide shee can neuer erre according to the witnesse of S. Paule who calles it Columnam firmamentum veritatis they will not enter into this Question whether the multitude of the Churche may erre or not and yet it can not be founde since the Churche was planted after the deathe of Christe that shée hathe béene in lesse number than the sectes of Heretikes neither dothe it serue to this purpose that hathe bene alleaged of Constance and of the time of the old Testament for there is greate difference betweene the Sinagoge of the Iewes and the Churche which as it is a congregation of all nations beleeuing in Iesus Christe so it can not but stande and consiste in moste great multitude for otherwayes the promises made to the Churche of the Gentiles shoulde be vaine For it is saide to Abraham that his seede we must not meane of the fleshe should be multiplied as the Starres of heauen or sande of the Sea. To the Article that beginnes touching the Prophets c. the Doctoures say and confesse that there is great difference betwéene fantasticall imaginations and Reuelation of the holy Spirite But the Ministers Aunswere not howe they woulde proue their particulare persuasions to be rather Reuelations then vaine and fonde imaginations of Prophets whereof Ezechiel speakes which notwithstanding they called inspirations as also what they saide and preached they called it the woorde of God. To the Article which beginnes touching Anabaptistes c the Doctoures Aunswer that to one ende the Ministers and Anabaptistes produce selfe places whereof mention is made as the better to assure their Doctrine to be of God bicause they haue a particulare Reuelation as God hathe promised them by his Prophetes For which selfe cause the Ministers haue broughte in the saide Testimonies of scripture to proue that euery Faithfull man may iudge by his particulare inspiration if a Booke containe the woorde of God with Distinction of the Canonicall from the Apocriphall and so discerne the true Doctrine from the false which is the very grounde of the Anabaptistes and other Heretikes To the Article beginning touching that which is produced of Brentius c the Doctors alleage that the ministers haue not vnderstande their intent For they bring not in the saying of Brentius and Bucer otherwayes than in a speache and meaning that they know the Canonicall Bookes of the holy scripture by the tradition of the Churche and not by particulare inspiration as the Ministers doe Touching the Article folowing the Doctoures say that certaine times there were that some men doubted of certaine Bookes of Scripture as the Apocalips and Canonicall Epistles of S. Iohn with others Albeit which time and of common consent the Churche led and guided by the holy Ghoste hathe receiued indifferently for Canonicall all the Bookes that be in the Bible which consent continued by so many hundred yeares had more authoritie than the saying of one or two who notwithstanding spake not but of their owne time Besides there is no comparison at all betwéene the saying of one or two particulare men and the determinations of Councels and consent of the Church as is saide it will be founde also that S. Ierome hathe approued those Bookes as Canonicall as appeareth in the Prologue he made of the Booke of the Machabees where he saithe As for the Hebrues they are not Canonicall but sunt canonicae Historiae Ecclesia or suche like woordes Touching the Councell of Laodicen they take it as it is albeit it may be they are deceiued naming one Councel for an other And for the Article beginning touching the experience c albeit it be a Question de facto yet it can not be but of special value which if it be founde as the Doctoures haue propouned whereof they doubt not the grounde of their particulare Reuelation is pluckt downe and confounded Touching the conclusion of the Ministers the Doctoures declare that many times they haue cōplained that matters were incidented laying themselues vpon the iudgement of euery one that their last Resolution was drawne in one direct line handling one selfe matter withoute varying in which notwithstanding if there had bene found any matter of difficultie and that the ministers had desired to proceede to the conference of the principal points they could easily haue cleared the said difficultie the Doctors wold haue enlarged further matter of these Articles sauing that to enforce and hasten the businesse for the whiche they are called they forbeare to multiplie speache Where the Ministers alleage that they receiue the xxiiij Bookes of the Olde Testamente with al those of the New the Doctors saie that is smal respecte of matter For al the conference whiche hitherunto they haue made as by what Rules a man might discerne one Booke from an other with iudgemente whether they were of Scripture or not was to bring them to this point that they receiued them by the tradition of the Churche who as shée is the iudge of the number of Bookes And that by the same meane when was question of the vnderstanding of Goddes woorde yea in the collation of the places of the same Scripture the Ministers Doctors might haue such reuerence to the vniuersal church that shée mighte be accessed on bothe partes as iudge of the vnderstanding of Scripture whiche they woulde acknowledge to haue receiued of her and whereof shée is infallible more certaine iudge than either the one or other Al which notwithstanding the Doctors offer to the Ministers not to inferre for that time other Bookes than such as they receiue for Canonical only when they shal fall into difficultie of the interpretation of any text or the conference of many the doctors accompte it more reasonable to haue recourse to the vniuersal Churche and Auncient Fathers than to their proper iudgements or fansies of the Ministers Aunsvvere For conclusion the Ministers consente to the offer of the Doctors to decide the pointes and Articles of their confession by the Bookes Canonical agreed vpon betwéene them as the xxiiij Bookes of the Hebrewes and all those of the Newe Testamente protesting notwithstanding that in the last writing proponed by the Doctors there be many things whiche they approue not in any sorte and whiche they hope to reuerse by Confutation
shoulde remaine a Virgine and that a thing done shuld not be done that being vnderstand as the Theologians say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 u câ—â—posito which is the things being suche and so done it is true and the reason is that otherwise it woulde implie contradiction But in the Question proposed there is nothing like which only Demaundes if God by his power can alter and chaunge the Nature and qualitie of things created as if he could bring to passe that a heauie thing abiding in his qualitie of heauinesse waighte which naturally weighes downewarde shoulde remaine by the onely vertue of God hanging on high as we reade in the holy Scripture that the fire which naturally ascendes and stretches on heigthe discendes downewarde by the vertue of God and also that fire of his proper nature ardente and burning makes cold his owne qualitie that is the heat reasting in the substance as also that two bodyes may be in one place as appeareth when our Lord entred where the Apostles were the doores being shut or that a great and large bodie remaining in his grosenesse and bignesse passeth thorow a place inequall to his greatnesse and largenesse as the Camell thorow the eie of a needell All which Examples as they are taken of the scripture so if it muste be that God can not bring to passe that one body be in two places he can no more doe the things aforesaide by the reasons which shall be deduced héereafter to that ende And as it wil neuer be found to enter into the brain of an interpreter to denie such power so the first that hath denied it openly was Peter Martyr and after him Beza The Doctoures say further that the fourme of arguing which the Ministers vse impugnes and reuerseth that which God obserueth in the holy scripture and the Angel speaking to the virgin for God ordinarily when he assureth any thing impossible to nature that men cannot coÌ„prehend alleageth generally his power like as also the Angel laying a fouÌ„dation of the Incarnation of our Lord saith generally there is nothing impossible to God as touching his creatures But is it so that the generalitie of an argument is deserued by particular exceptions and made vnprofitable and without force by that meane When God then alleageth generally that his power can doe it it may be doubted of and thought that the things proponed of God may be of those that are impossible to him aswel as the exceptions alleaged of the ministers And that also should be false which the Aungell saithe that there is nothing impossible to god by that that many things are alleaged and proponed to the contrarie So that to the ende God and his Aungelles be mainteined true in their woordes we muste not doubte that he can not chaunge and transforme his creatures and al their qualities muche more easily than a potter is able to worke his clay and fourme at his pleasure any vessell thereof Further if we limite the power of God towards his creatures there is daunger that we fal not to deny him his Empire and dominion ouer them for to be Lord ouer a creature is no other thing than to haue power to chaunge and alter him and giue him suche a nature and qualitie as he thinkes good as hauing him altogether in his power And therefore God in Ieremie to shewe that he had power to reuerse and destroy Ierusalem according to his pleasure begins to say I am Lorde ouer all fleshe is there any thing impossible to me and therfore the Doctoures conclude that there is daunger if this question be mainteined as impossible to God that euery one will doe as muche alleaging the selfe examples that the ministers do to exempt from Gods power al things that displease him And when suche matter shall be produced out of Scripture he may interprete the Scripture in other sense saying that suche a thing shal be impossible to God in the naturall sense of the woordes of the Scripture euen as the ministers chaunge the Scripture which saithe that the body of Iesus Christe is in two places that is the woorde of the Supper compared with the woorde of the Ascention and they say that that spéeche of the Supper oughte not to be vnderstanded literally bicause it is impossible to God that one Body be in twoo places And so the Doctours saie that euery one woulde corrupte the Literall sense of the Scripture holding that the thing is impossible to God and therefore the Scripture muste be otherwayes vnderstande and yet it maye so happen that it is only bicause it doth displease him producing notwithstanding the same reasons and allegations whiche the Ministers doo to declare that all things are not impossible to God. The Doctors conclude eftsoones that it is better to mainteine the Scripture in his truthe albeit shée propose things incomprehensible and impossible to our iudgement than to giue way to euery one to depraue Goddes woorde applying it to his owne will and fansie vnder shadowe to saie that it is impossible to God and so to alleage other examples Lastely they will not omitte that the Ministers who haue so déepely protested to rest stay vpon the pure woord of God allege not against Gods power but the ancient doctours aiding themselues with their authorities against the expresse woord of God which beares that nothing is impossible to him generally without some exception Aunsvvere The Ministers aunswere that the Doctoures proue not their consequence but leaue it as in a distruste not to be able to confirme it as is moste likely They make no mention but of the Antecedent of their consequence to the confession of whiche it will neuer be possible to them to bring the Ministers by the reasons and authorities by them alleadged so strengthen theire saide consequence bicause of a Particulare they inferre a Generall whiche is againste the Rules of Dialectice where they saye that the authorities alleaged by the Ministers apperteine nothing to reproue their consequence and to shewe that God forbeares not to be almighty notwithstanding that he cannot doo any thing which derogates his nature They referre themselues for that to the ancient authours aforesaid who for the same and reason of the ministers alleage the saide exceptions Where they pretende that the Authorities and Sentences alleaged of the Auncientes doo nothing apperteine to the presente question as denying that they oughte to be vnderstand of other things excepte suche as conteine in themselues contradiction The Ministers aunswere that euen so doothe that whiche they propone of a Body that in one instante he maye he in diuerse places the same being asmuch as if they had saide that a Bodye is and is not at one time and that a Body is one and not one And lastely that a Creature maye be incircumscript and not enclosed in certaine limittes whiche if it were so he shoulde be no more a Creature but a God as maye be gathered of the saying of S. Basile in his
to the nature of God and of the parte of the body doth implie no contradiction Then God can do it or else so God cannot do it then it foloweth that God is not almightie in this sorte is proponed the reason and deduction of the antecedent and consequent and also the proofe of the assumption or seconde preposition for it is proued that there is no contradiction in saying that one body may be in two places that it doth not impugne the nature of God whereof the proofe hathe bene made by the Example of like things as God may bring to passe that two bodies may be in one place with other like reasons which are deduced in the Obiection And where they say the Doctoures doe argue euil from a particulare to an vniuersal it seemes vnder correction they haue forgotten the rules of Dialectice as being most certaine that this rule hathe place in the affirmatiue and not in the negatiue But of the contrary when there is any thing affirmed generally and the default is proued in particular as say the Dialecticians Ad negationem perticularis sequitur negatio eius quod vniuersaliter affirmatum est In like sorte when any thing is affirmed of the whole which hath many partes and the default be proued in one parte the destruction of the whole foloweth As if one would say all the body is whole who would proue one part of that body diseased shuld proue this proposition false all the body is whole such is the manner of arguing which the Doctors haue made that is that if God can not do a particulare thing as to bring to passe that one body be in two places then he can not doe all things or if he can doe all things he can also doe that They are sory to be referred to their Dialecticke as consisidering none other end than to make the antecedent graunted which is that God can not bring to passe that one body be in two places wherein for their partes they are glad to vnderstand the Resolution of the Ministers vpon this Article which is that God can not bring to passe nor cā not wil that one body be in two places bicause it implies cōtradiction And where the Ministers say that the Doctors by their reasons can not inferre the truthe of the antecedent the Doctors confesse it by which the ministers also perceiue that the reasōs which they haue brought foorth are nothing woorth to the confirmation of the Antecedent which is their resolution But the Doctoures say that those reasons albeit they were not vailable yet were they brought forthe by the ministers to this end to proue the impossibilitie of God to bring to passe that one body should be in two places For the Article beginning touching the authorities c the Doctoures Obiecte that the Auncientes neuer thoughts to make any exception of any thing which is not subiecte to the power of God for as it is manifest he that saith all excepteth nothing so when the scripture saithe that God is almightie hir meaning is clear that there is no exception and to giue exception in this should be no lesse to gainesay many places of Gods woorde than to blaspheme his power But the Doctoures say that the Auncientes haue interpreted the omnipotencie of God not to comprehend that which toucheth the perfection of his nature but onely that which concerneth creatures So that there be not to manifest contradiction repugnancie of their parte The present Question importes not that there is not contradiction that one body be a body and that at one instant it be in diuers places For of the essence of bodies speaking of one body hauing his dimensions according to the phrase of the Philosophers de predicamenio quantitatis it is certaine that the Dimensions be of the essence of a body but to be circumscript and enclosed in a place is accidentall The same being declared by Philosophie for the moste high heauen according to his whole is a body and yet it is not in place according to his whole And therefore it is not a thing essentiall to a body to be enclosed in one place Wherein to speake of the present matter the Ministers should be muche encombred to proue that the body of Iesus Christe is in one place in Heauen séeing it is written in the fourthe of the Ephesians he is mounted aboue all the Heauens oute of the which there is no place as they speake of places in regarde of bodies according to nature And if it were so that it were essentiall to one body to be in one place according to the rule which the Ministers giue there wold followe an other blasphemie againste the omnipotencie of God that God could not make one body and bestow it aboue all the Heauens and to speake more vniuersally that God could not make a body without place equal to his greatnesse Touching the Allegations proponed by the Ministers of certaine Auncient authoures the Doctoures Obiecte that those Allegations make against themselues bicause to be enclosed in one place depends not of the essence of the body nor his dimensions as appeareth by the Authorities produced making mention of the Aungels who haue no bodies it it is not then an essentiall reason that the dimension of one body be contained in one place Neither dothe all this blonderment of Authorities make any thing to purpose séeing they tend not but to shew that the natural propertie of creatures is different from the nature Diuine as saithe S. Basile expressely in the place alleaged by the Ministers as S. Ambrose in the first Booke of the holy Ghost Chap. 7. where the saide Authoures declare that God of his nature may be euerywhere as his creatures by their natures not neither doo the said Authors pretend that God by his omnipotencie can not make one body to be in diuers places séeing euen very they or their like when they come to speake of the power of God in the holy sacrament affirme that Christes body is in heauen and in the holy Sacramente inueighing also by the same power that the Aungels and soules of the blessed may be in many places and the Doctours wil recite in their Resolution Where the Ministers saye that a Body muste be circumscripte of the place according to his essentiall propertie that hath bene declared false héere before And the Ministers confounde the name of a body which signifieth sometimes substance sometimes quantitie hauing his dimensions largenesse length and profoūdnesse which dimensions are essentiall in a body taking body for fourme of quantitie and not in a substantial body for then it is accidentall It is most certaine that God may seperate the accidents of a body make a substance without accidents otherwayes would folow an other blasphemie that God coulde not seperate the accident from a subiect and substance And where the Ministers say that by a violent mouing a stone may be throwne on highe it is not Aunswered to
firste place they alleage that God can not do a thing to derogate the order which he hath established in the world in the seconde that it were to establishe mutabilitie and chaunge in Gods councels to confesse that he is able to doe any thing contrary to the said order established in the world in the third that if it were so there should be contradiction in his will whereof should folow that he were a lier And for the fourth blasphemie that the power of God is his will and likewise his not power his not wil And for the fifth they pretende that God would haue a body which in one instant might haue bene in many places afore they beleue that God could haue made it otherwayes they meane to infer that he neither hath could nor can make it by which the Ministers will acknowledge nothing of Gods power but so muche as he shewes by effect for which matter they alleage Tertullian All these blasphemies are drawne out of the propre woordes of the first Article of the Ministers Touching the firste that God can not doe a thing to derogate the order he hath established in the worlde it is proued an apparant blasphemie by the Scripture who in infinite places makes mention of Gods works aboue nature which the Ministers call order established in the world the Scripture teacheth in proper termes the God can do infinite things aboue the order established in the world As the wife of Lot which was conuerted into a piller of Salte that a barraine woman in hir last age hauing an olde husband had a childe That a Vine all drie hathe flourished A shée Asse hath spoken that the Sunne stayed and went backe againe with other innumerable Examples contained in the olde Testament And for the new Testament that a virgin brought forth a childe That a body hath walked vpon the Sea and mounted to heauen and generally all the miracles done by Christ and his Apostles aboue nature the same being contrary to the order established in the worlde From this blasphemie growes an other that God séeing he hathe established his order in the world hath not done nor coulde nor can doe any miracle But to proue by the Authoritie of the scripture that God can do against the order established in the world it is writteÌ„ in Esay 50. My hand which is my power is it abridged that I can not redéeme buy againe is there no more power in me to deliuer Behold by threates I wil make dry the sea wil put the fluddes into the deserte so that the fishes shal perishe for wante of water and shal die of thirste I apparel the heauens with darkenesse and putte a sacke for their couer But more expressely in the newe Testamente where it is saide by S. Iohn that God can raise children to Abraham of the stones Which place albeit may be expounded Allegorically yet by the literall sense S. Iohn declares it was possible to God the Deuil knewe and hath confessed that if Christe were the true sonne of God he might transeforme stones into breade The same notwithstanding contrary to the order established in the worlde And we haue to note that there is no lesse impossibilitie that bread be turned into Flesh by Gods omnipotencie than a stone transnatured into bread Wherin for such as denie this last done by the power of God they declare that they beleeue lesse of the almightinesse than Deuilles The confuting of the seconde blasphemie dependes vpon the disproofe of the first for albeit God contrary to the order established in the world hath done many miracles as hathe bene recited héere before yet there is no mutabilitie or chaÌ„ge in his Councell Touching the third blasphemie that if God did any thing contrary to the order established in the worlde there shoulde be contradiction in his will and therfore he should be a lier The Doctoures Obiecte that it would folowe that suche should be the will of God neuer to doe any thing against the order established in the world and that he wold haue stayed and declared that to be his will by his woorde For otherwayes it coulde not haue bene knowne what was Gods will. And as the ministers neither haue nor can make appeare by Gods woorde that suche is Gods wil as not to do any thing against the order established in the world so they must firste teache and instructe that suche is Gods will afore they conclude that if God made one body to be in two places or other thing against the order of Nature established in the world he should be a lier Touching the fourth blasphemie that Gods power is his will and that his impower is his vnwill According to the sense which the ministers giue it if God can not doe but what he will to be an Heresie of the Heretikes called Monarchians in the primitiue Church against whom Tertullian writes in his Booke aduersus praxeam and since renued by one Petrus Abaillardus and continued by one VVickleffe they in déede measured Gods power according to his will the same contrary to the expresse woord of God which oftentimes declars many things to be possible to God which notwithstanding he wil not doe as appeareth in Sap. 2 where it is recited that God could sende many sortes of afflictions to the children of Israell to chastise them but he would not doe it hauing disposed all things by measure number and ballance and that he might destroy suche as had offended him but he would not but vsed mercy to them In the gospel our Lorde saide to S. Peter Thinkest not thou that I can pray to my Father and he will sende me more than twelue legions of Aungels and yet as he would not pray to him so his Father did not send them although he was able to haue done it in the persone of his sonne Christe might haue let his enimies to haue taken away his life but he would not And the Father might haue saued him from corporall Deathe saithe S. Paule by his power but neither the one nor other would doe it which albeit the ministers might say was foreordained yet the Scripture holdes expressely that he might haue done it notwithstanding it was foreordained And touching the authoritie of Tertullian the Doctoures are glad they produce it as making altogither for the truthe againste their blasphemies and yet they haue omitted many of his woordes and sentences to confute their erroure as the text it selfe heere witnesseth Nihil Deo difficile Quis hoc nesciat in possibilia apud seculum possibilia apud deum qâ—is ignorat Et stulta mundi elegit Deus vt confundat sapientia Ergo inquiunt heretici monarchiani scilicet difficile non fuit Deo ipsum se patrem filium facere aduersus traditam formam rebus humanis Nam sterilem parere contra naturam difficile Deo non fuit sicut nec virginem planè nihil Deo difficile sed si tam abruptè in
presumptionibus nostris hac sententia vtamur quiduis de Deo confingere poterimus quasi fecerit quia facere potuerit Non autem quia â—amia potest facere ideoque credendum est illum fecisse etiam quod non fecerit sed an fecerit requirendum Potuit ita saluus sum Deus pennis hominem ad volandum instruxisse quod melius prestitit non tameÌ„ quia potuit statim fecit potuit praxeam omnes pariter hereticos statim extinxisse non tamen quia potuit extinxit oportebat enim miluos esse hereticos oportebat patrem crucifigi Hac ratione erit aliquid Deo difficile id scilicet quod non fecerit non quia non potuerit sed quia noluerit etenim posse velle est non posse nolle By which texte may easily be séene according to Tertullian that God can doe many things which he will not doe as to make a man to flie but dothe it not he can destroy the heritikes yet spares them bicause he wil not do all he caÌ„ do And touching their conclusion of the saide place of Tertullian that the power of God is his will his impower likewise his vnwill they wel declare their sleight examination of the meaning of that place for Tertullian saith it not of his owne sentence considering he should conclude againste that he had saide afore but he inferres it against the Monarchian heretikes who held that what God might do he would do and it was done By which reason Tertullian concludes againste them that what God had not done muste néedes be hard and impossible to him so that according to those Heretikes it was all one to be done and might be done and not to be done as muche as to be impossible to God And of that as Tertullian inferreth would folowe that the power the will and the déede of God should be all one and of the contrary a thing not to be done and to be impossible to God to do it should also be all one And euen so also would be al one the power of God and his will and his impower and his vnwill which Tertullian concludes for an absurd thing procéeding of the opinion of the saide Monarchian Heretikes and not of his sentence which was altogither contrary wherin as we sée the ministers consent in opinion with the said Monarchian Heretikes which Tertullian refutes so the moste euident proofe standes in the fifthe blasphemie And for conclusion against the said blasphemies the Doctoures declars that God can doe much more than he wil doe and more than he hath established in the world for otherwayes woulde folowe yet other blasphemies as this that the power of God should not be infinite but limitted An other that for necessitie all things should be done in the world bicause God could not otherwayes doe than entertaine the order established in the world which Caluine himselfe detestes saying that God of his omnipotencie chaungeth and altereth the order established as it séemes good to him and to thinke otherwayes were to limite his power and prouidence Where the ministers say in their saide first Article that the auncient Doctors of the churche denied the omnipotencie of God it is a most manifest falshoode great wrong for they deny it not but interprete the scripture which séemes to deny it and so giue to vnderstaÌ„d how it ought to be taken that much lesse by the same scripture well vnderstanded there is any exception at al suffred against the almightinesse of God séeing that in the contrary it is confirmed as S. Augustine saithe in his fifth Booke de Ciuitate Dei. Cap. 10. Gods power saithe he is in nothing diminished when it is saide he can not die nor be deceiued For he can not suche things bicause if he coulde them his power shoulde be lessened concluding that he can not doe things which are of infirmitie bicause he is almightie Vppon the ende of the first Article the ministers chalenge vs as saying their difference is that we mainteine a body to be in many places bicause God can do it and that of the contrary the ministers holde that it is not in Gods power to do so bicause he wil not The doctors declare that for their part they neuer concluded to be true that a true body was in two places bicause God could do it But the Question was only to know if God could doe it to come afterwardes by order to proue by Scripture that he wold do it they haue already heretofore recited the scripture of the supper and the Ascension adding withall the Doctrine of Caluine touching the said supper to shewe that Gods will is to bring to passe that a body be in two places as in déede it is according to the expresse woorde of God. Besides we haue produced to the same end the scriptures of the doores being â—â—t of the birth of our Lord and of the Resurrection thorow the â—â—one which be like déedes and of the selfe reason to one body in many places Of the contrary the ministers to deny the will of God and depraue holy Scripture which sheweth that suche is Gods will that a body be in diuers places alleage not any thing more instantly than the impossibilitie of God to doe it But to the ende that al the world vnderstande the difference betweene vs we presently declare that there hathe bene no other difference touching this Article vntill now but to knowe whether it be in Gods power to bring to passe that a body be in two places at one instant or not And for the second Article the Doctors say the Ministers Aunswere not to the matter For the Obiection was not if quantitie were accidente of a Mathematical body aut de predicamento quantitatis as the philosophers hold but to know if it were of the essence and necessitie to the quantitie of a body to be circumscript and enclosed in place And touching S. Augustine alleaged by the Ministers he speakes expressely according to the propretie of the diuine nature and corporall nature saying that the Diuine nature is euery where but not the corporall as of his naturall propretie requiring a certaine place wherof the Doctoures make no difficultie arcording to the saide naturall propertie But the Question is if aboue nature by Goddes omnipotencie it may not be that a body be withoute place equall to his greatnesse the same being openly coÌ„fessed by S. Augustine when he speakes De clansis lanuis hauing no longer regarde to the nature of things but to the power of God And we coulde wishe that the ministers woulde alleage this Epistle of S. Augustine against the Doctrine of Caluine and his Ministers as often as they alleage the texte of the place of bodies againste the power of God touching the body of Iesus Christe in the Sacrament Touching the third Article the ministers are abused for according to the Philosophers and natural reason of bodies whiche
For conclusion of this Article we would willingly aske the Ministers if they holde as an Article of Faithe the virginitie of the mother after hir deliuerie and if they can proue it by expresse and inreprocheable woorde of God written bicause Beza calles in doubte these two poyntes at his pleasure and the Religion pretended reformed amongste other Articles of Faith of their diuers confessions imprinted recites sometime the Virginitie of the mother of God after hir deliuerie and sometimes it is omitted And in some Confessions is brought in no more but that Iesus was borne of the virgine Marie and only issued of the séede of Dauid The Doctoures applie for the Resurrection and issuing of Christes bodye thorowe the stone of the Sepulchre the moste parte of the Authorities alleaged by them vppon the doores shut as the absolute reading of the saide Authorities will make Faithe togither with Gregorius Nazianzene in his tragedie of the Passion of our Lord who ioynes as many other Auncients these thrée miracles hapned in the body of our Lord aboue nature the birth without breaking the virgine the resurrection thorowe the stone and his entrie thorowe the doores shutte We say also that Caluine and Beza make conscience to ioyne with the Ministers that oure Lorde rose not againe the Sepulchre being closed and shut yea they had rather fall into the friuolous absurdities and vaine Expositions héere afore alleaged than discende into the opinion of the Ministers bicause there is more Testimonie in the texte of the Gospell that Iesus was risen afore the stone was rolled away by the Aungell as the most parte of the Aunciente Christians doe consent which meane also giues occasion to beléeue more easily the Resurrection of our Sauioure than if the stone had bene taken away before his Resurrection for so it mighte haue bene more easily sayde that the bodie was transported and not raised or risen neither doothe the Texte beare that the Aungell rolled away the stone afore the Resurrection or when Iesus did rise or rather after as is greate likelihoode in Scripture in reason and all Antiquitie Pope Leo is euill alleaged by the Ministers as concealing that is wrytten in his Epistle touching the shutte dores as also producing euill the matter of the Resurrection for it is not sayde that our Lorde did rise after the stone of the monumente was rolled awaye But it is sayde agaynste the fantastike sorte that the substance putte on the Crosse and that which rested in the Sepulchre and likewyse that whiche rose agayne the thirde day the stone of the Monumente being rolled awaye is the true Fleshe of Iesus Christe By whiche speaches the Pope meanes not to saye that oure Lorde did not rise afore the stone was reuersed but only declares that the body of Iesus Christ risen was a true body and not fantasticall whose Resurrection appeared by the opening of the monument And this is the common interpretation of the Auncient authors touching the reuersement of the stone For ende of these Auncient testimonies we maruel that the ministers séeing them so manifest and as conuinced not only that God can bring to passe that two bodies be in one place but also that he hath done it dare reprochefully depraue the vnderstanding of the same and yet they say that the reasons taken of suche and so euidente testimonies are impertinent Like as by like licence common with the Heritikes they feare not without any texte of the scripture nor any place of the Ancients to enterprete two bodies penetrating to be no other thing than one body to giue place to an other of which false and licentious interpretacion euen the common vse of spéeche amongste the Philosophers dothe condemne them Like as also their fine example touching such as walke thorowe the aire which moues them and the birdes when they flie is farre to subtill And where they vaunt in the sayde Article that in denying two bodies to be able to be in one place by the omnipotencie of God or one body in two places they yet aduaunce and magnifie the power of God the same is as true as when in all other their erroures by whiche they oppugne Gods truthe and blaspheeme it yet they bragge alwayes to aduaunce Gods glory seeming héereby that they haue néed to couer their filthinesse and deformitie with some cloke of spéeche the better to blinde the simple and ignorant The ministers haue also good reason not to seeke to excuse the interpretacions of Caluine and Beza as too friuolous and yet they preferre their owne much more vaine before their Maisters by which may be séene the agréement betwéene the Maisters and Disciples vsing all the foundacion of their religion which is to beleeue and preferre afore all others their particulare and priuate interpretacion and inspiration where the Ministers say that the body of oure Lord was not inuisible to the disciples of whome is spoken in S. Luke 24. but only the hauing a swift body was sodainly withdrawne we Obiect that the sodaine departing which S. Ambrose and de Lyra speakes of makes not that the body was inuisible according to the Gréeke woorde aphantos not signifying sodaine departure but incapacitie to be séene and knowne and so the text of the Scripture is apparantly for the Doctoures as also that as often as bothe the auncient and present Diuines giue example that Christ made himselfe inuisible they alleage ordinarily this place The ministers who vaunte to rest onely vppon the pure woord of God for the exposition of the scripture bring forthe their dreames grounded vppon their owne persuasion as hath béene séene touching the doores being shutte vsing the like licence to expounde the texte of S. Paule which mainetaines expressely that our Lorde pierced the Heauens and they say that it is a likely truthe that the Heauens deuided and were open And if they be asked from whence they fetch this interpretacion their Aunswere is from Goddes woorde grounded of their inwarde inspiration by the which they accommodate the saying of S. Mathevve that the Heauens were open when the Piller discended vppon oure Lorde as thoughe all the Heauens were deuided and that the spirite could not descend without the same were opened being not aduised that the scripture in many places takes the Heauen for the aire And where they alleage that S. Stephen sawe the Heauens open when he was stoned it were more conuenient to the ministers to interprete such visions to be done in spirite as there is great likelihoode Otherwayes two miracles must be confessed the one in the Diuision of the Heauens and the other in that the sight of S. Stephen pierced not only into the Heauens but also euen aboue where the ministers confesse the body of Iesus Christe is vpon the righte hand of his Father which S. Stephen saw the same being against the order of God established in the world by which it is necessary that there be a certaine difference betwéene the eie séeing and the
thing which is séene Neither is it lesse harde that suche a thing be done than that two bodyes be penetrate We must not forgette that oftentimes the scripture in the appearings and spirituall visions vseth this language that the Heauens were open and yet in suche cases there was but spirituall vision and likewise but spirituall appearing And as the Ministers séeke to take the rigoure of the woorde opening of the Heauens euen so they must not note it straunge if we wrest in like rigoure the penetration of the Heauens specially in the Article of the Ascention where is Question of the body of Iesus Christe which had already pierced bodyes more impenetrable than the Heauen which pointe of penetration of the Heauen we referre to be more amplie handled an other time as nowe to auoide tediousnesse Touching the eight and twentieth Article where the ministers againste expresse scripture defend obstinately that God of his power can not bring to passe that a Camell or Cable enter the eye of a néedle we can not a little maruell bothe at their blindnesse séeming to sée nothing in the midde day and at their frowarde obstinacie By which as we can not iudge that they vnderstand not wel their fault but sinne euen against their conscience oppugning the truthe by them well knowne so it séemes God suffereth this to happen to them in this text and place of the scripture so manifest to the ende that by this Article the world may vnderstande howe farre more hardie they are to giue false vnderstandings of scriptures more obscure than this yea in the matter of the Auncient Christians which are against them But to the ende the world vnderstand their great wrong to denie that our Lorde can bring to passe that a Camel or cable passe thorowe the hole of a néedle we obiecte that it were impossible to God to saue a riche man vsing this Argument taken of the texts of the Gospell it is more impossible or harde that God saue a riche man than to bring to passe that a Camel or cable passe thorow the hole of an Néedle God can not bring to passe of his omnipotencie as the Ministers say that a Camell enter the hole of a néedle then he can not of his almightinesse make that a riche man be saued and enter into the kingdome of Heauen The Maior is of the Scripture the Minor is confessed by the Ministers and the consequence is necessary and according to all Philosophie he that can not doe the moste easiest can not doe the moste hardest The Auncientes also haue expounded withoute gaine saying the present Scripture as Origen in his Homilie vppon this place saying it is possible that a Camell enter the eie of a néedle not for all that that it be possible as in respecte of men but to God like as the manner by which suche things may be done is knowne to God and his Sonne Iesus Christe and to him to whome it is reuealed S. Augustine likewise in his Booke de spiritu littera Cap. 1. and 5. writes in this sorte to Marcellinus it séemes to thée an absurde thing when I tell thée that a man may be withoute sinne albeit there is none suche founde except Iesus Christe thoughte it to seeme absurde to thée that a thyng may be done whereof no Example can be shewed séeing as I beléeue thou doubtest not at all that it was neuer done that a Camell entred the eye of a néedle and yet it is said that suche a thing is possible to God. By their Aunswere to the nine and twentie Article it may easily be knowne that they beguile and abuse their Disiples making them beléeue by faire woordes and writings that Really in the Supper they receiue the bodie of Iesus Christe euen he that issued out of the wombe of the virgine and was putte vppon the Crosse for the restauration of mankinde And they séeke to make to vnderstande that these which put not to the Sacrament which they call of the Supper wyth the Breade and Wine but some Spirituall effecte onely as redemption iustice sanctification eternall life and other giftes and benefites which Iesus Christe brings to hys chosen diminish the excellencie dignitie of the same Sacrament and that they be Zuinglians yea and that ouer and aboue suche spirituall effectes it muste be beléeued that the body of Iesus Christe is truely receiued in the Supper and yet they feede an other opinion in their braine For when they are pressed to Argue not being able to sustaine that fantasticall presence confessed in their writings they make themselues Zuinglians and returne to the spirituall presence of Iesus Christe in the Supper the same being as muche to say that bisides the Breade and Wine they receiue some spirituall effecte and not Really the body as the Ministers holde in the presente Aunswere which as they make manifest by that they recite of the Apostle S. Paule so by the same may be gathered what is their opinion touching the supper which is that the body of our Lord Iesus Christ is not Really but onely by spirituall effecte in the heartes of the Faithfull For the Galathians by the hearing of the preaching of S. Paule did not receiue Really the body of Iesus Christe crucified but onely had an imagination of the Crosse and Passion of Iesus Christe and receiued onely the frute of their Faithe That is by that meanes they were iustified and sanctified before God. The Allegation also which the Ministers make of S. Cyprian tendes to this ende to shewe that in the Supper is receiued onely certaine effectes spirituall which notwithstanding Allegorically are signified by these woordes to embrace the Crosse of Iesus Christe to sucke his bloude c. wherein they denie albeit againste the intente of S. Cyprian in his Sermon of the Supper the Reall presence of the body of Iesus Christe The Doctoures confesse that the Argumente which they haue made tendes to the Caluinistes and not to the Zuinglians neither did they thinke that the ministers woulde otherwayes iudge of this Sacrament than Caluine Beza and the other ministers who vaunte them selues to be ministers of the churche of the Caluinistes which they call reformed But those which exhibited to the Bishops being at Poissi the Cōfession touching this Sacrament vsed an other maner of spéech They without difficultie confessed Really the Bodye of Iesus Christ to be present in the Supper which at this daie the Ministers denie with the Doctoures conferentes And as farre as the Doctoures can iudge the Ministers be come of Caluinistes Allemanistes which suche wil not wel disgest as mainteine the Doctrine of the Churche whiche they call Reformed séeing their principal supposts faile them at néed as vnable to aunswere one Argumente obiected by the Doctours as affirming in their aunswere to be so farre illumined with the Holy Sprite which makes them vnderstande and knowe al things Touching the Article folowing they reueale openly their present opinion touching
the presence of Christes Body in the Sacramente bicause they saie that the faitheful receiue no more in the time of the Gospel than the Ancientes before the Lawe and vnder the Lawe And it is certaine the Ancients receiued not Really the body of Iesus Christ which was not then formed so that we muste conclude that vnder the Gospell is not receiued Really the Body of Iesus Christe in the Sacrament which the Ministers cal the Sacrament of the Supper To the 31. Article they aunswere not as in déede they coulde neuer answere And necessarily they must confesse that in vertue of theire Faithe they doo that whiche implies contradiction for they mainteine a thing in one instant one place to be present and not present neither doth their spirituall or rather fantasticall presence any thing seeing according to their Doctrine the body cannot be present but with his dimensions Locally Diffinitiuely and Corporally otherwayes it were to take cleane away or corrupte the body And the manner to be there spiritually cannot make that the body be not there otherwayes they saye falsely that it is present in the Supper and abuse the worlde wherefore it is necessary that if the body be there yea spiritually if their Doctrine be true of the nature of a body that the body of Iesus Christe be Corporally Diffinitiuely and Locally in the Supper Besides séeing he is absent according to their confession it folowes that he is not there present And as to conclude the Ministers saie he is there and that he is not there so for an absolute solution without entring into the principall of the argument they thinke to escape with obiecting to vs certaine woordes of briefe which wee haue not yet seene which wée thinke they haue found in certaine Breuiaries of Monkes as that thei remember wheÌ„ they were in the Couent they vsed so to chaunt and say But albeit such things were found in the Breuiaries vsed in the Romish Church yet such manner of speach might be defended in the sense which the Auncients haue giuen when they said the Apostles Conficiunt Corpus Christi Like as also the scripture saith that they baptize they forgiue sinnes saue those whom thei conuert which is vnderstand as Ministers of God who of his authority and as Maister baptiseth forgiueth sinnes and iustifieth the faithful persons Where the Ministers maruel that the Doctors cal faith humaine vertue considering the great woonderfull effects it woorketh the Doctours replie that they haue no great occasion of woonder séeing that all woorke so long as it is in man that it woorkes there with God is reputed humaine as also the scripture cals the Faith of man the woorke of man The Doctours delare to the Ministers that according to their custome resting alwayes vpon smal things they folow not that which is the principal in the mater not vnderstanding or faining not to vnderstand where lies the difficultie of that which is handled as they doo in their aunswer vppon the Argument proponed by the Doctours by which they obiect that the Ministers by their faith whether it may be called Diuine or Humaine may doo more than God can to whiche Obiection the Ministers without entring to the pointe aunswere with songs In the 32 Article thei passe ouer very lightly many obiections made by the doctors wherin whether ther be superfluity or repetition or whether they be impertineÌ„t the iudgment remaines to the Reader notwithstaÌ„ding al the the doctors wil not forbeare once againe to require theÌ„ to bring foorth some place of scripture to ground that God cannot bring to passe that one body be in twoo places séeing this coÌ„sequence is too foolish vaine God cannot lye he cannot then bring to passe that a body be in twoo places for so must thei subsume Wel God hath said ordeined that one body cannot be in two places then he cannot make that it be so but they shall neuer teach the truth of the assumption or Mâ—nor propositioÌ„ the contrary wherof hath bene verified sufficiently by many testimonies of the Scripture We demaund also that the Ministers produce some Ancient yea a man euer reputed Catholike that durst pronouÌ„ce that God could not bring to passe that one body be in twoo places But in all their answeres they coulde not bring foorthe any of that opinion excepte S. Augustine albeit falsely alleaged bothe in respecte of the Letter and for the sense of the Letter neither will wée cease to vrge aswell the Ministers as al others that there is founde neither place of Scripture nor Booke of any Auncient that God cannot bring to passe that one body be in twoo places Touching the laste Article wée are fully determined to shewe by the pure and expresse Woorde of God interpreted by the common consent of all Antiquitie that our Lord hath instituted the Sacramente and Sacrifice of the Aultare And wée wil teache the effecte and vertue of the Masse according to the Institution and Ordinaunce of Iesus Christe making also to vnderstande that the Ministers haue polluted and defiled the Sacramentes instituted by Iesus Christe And lastely that the Supper mainteined by the Ministers is no Sacramente in any sorte but a prophanation of Holy things conteining execrable Blasphemies which al the worlde ought to abhorre Sondaye the xxij of Iuly the yeere aforesaide The Aunswere of the Ministers to the writing of the Doctours sente to them by the Duke de Neuers xxij of Iuly aboute fiue of the clocke in the Euening 1566. THe Ministers afore they enter into particulare Answere to the Obiections and Reproches of the Doctours séeing in all their speaches withoute any occasion they laie vppon them imputation of blasphemie thinke good in their beginning to tel them that albeit thei haue heaped iniuries vpon them yet they holde themselues neuer the more wronged and muche lesse to be guiltie in blasphemie bicause they repute them for such no more than our Lorde Iesus Christe in the iudgemente and opinion of Caiphas the soueraigne Sacrificator and S. Stephen vppon whom the saide crime was vrged by the enimies of truthe and also Naboth notwithstanding he was innocent for it is a custome common to suche as hate the truthe and the light to blaspheme that which they vnderstande not and so yeelde to their proper and naturall furie as S. Peter Iude write that impudently they denie things moste apparante without shame confesse others that are straunge and obscure the same being offered of the Doctoures to the Ministers of whom they will heare nothing with iudgemente nor iudge their Doctrine vprightly but séeme in all the course of this Disputation either to confront them generally without respecte or at least to giue sentence without examination that what so euer they produce is either lyes or matter of blasphemie And albeit the Ministers handling the Omnipotencie of God according as they haue learned by the consent and contentes of the Scriptures agrée alwayes that he is
God Almighty as being able without exception to doo what so euer he will and that there is no power neither in Heauen nor Earthe which may hinder change or delay in any sort the effect and perfecte execution of his eternal and immoueable councelles yet his Omnipotencie ought not to be stretched without discretion or distinction to all things generally that men maye conceiue and imagine in their fonde fansies but to those onely whiche neither are nor can be contrary to his iustice bountie wisedome nor by consequence againste his holy and eternall will wisedome and truthe which is and shal be for euer to doo al things wel and wisely with number weight and measure without any iniquitie disorder or contradiction in any thing he doothe All whiche things being well vnderstande and considered are able to cleare the Ministers to all indifferent people of the slaunderous imposition of the Doctours raised and falsly pronounced by them to make vs hateful to the worlde And to proue it by degrées and set a truth of their slaunders they chaunge and alter almoste al the speaches of the Ministers either by additions or retractions as knowing that without that policie they were without meane both to grounde their saide reproches and giue them any colour of likelyhoode whiche shal nowe appeare by the deduction and particulare confutation of their pretended blasphemies against vs. Firste they accuse vs as to haue saide that Gods Omnipotencie oughte not to be measured but by the onely things which are conformable to his will and not to derogate his wisedome his truthe his nature or the order which he hath established in the worlde Wherein to verifie their accusation and slaunder they choppe and hacke this sentence taking the laste parte of it onely whiche they haue separated from the rest and which the Ministers had limit to the whole for a more expresse and cleare declaration howe Goddes Almightinesse ought to be knowne beleued and woorshipped of al the worlde neither haue they vnderstande the terme of order according to the sense and meaning of the Ministers who signifie thereby the estate and disposition whiche God hath established conserues and enterteines in all things by his eternall prouidence and immoueable will onely to intercept that no confusion happen in his workes according to the Diffinition of S. Augustine in his Bookes de Ordine and himselfe hathe vsed in the fifth Booke of his Confessions the which being not vnderstande by the Doctours they haue translated the opinion of the Ministers to the ordinary and accustomed course of Nature and to the mouing of the creatures whiche be in this worlde Wherein to procure a more exception to the Doctrine aforesaide they obiecte the myracles that God did aboue nature inferring thereby that God doothe and maye doo againste his Order established To the whiche the Ministers aunswere that albeit the myracles be done ouer and aboue the ordinary course of nature yet they are not done contrary to the Order aforesaid bicause al things referred to the prouidence and ordinaunce of God be well done and rightely disposed notwithstanding theire reason and Order be many times vnknowne to men according to the opinion of Salomon God doothe all things in their time to the whiche maye be appropriate a testimonie out of the Sentences of S. Augustine 283. and 284. God who is the Creatour and Conseruer of Natures doothe nothing in his myracles contrary to nature Neither doothe it followe that that whiche is newe in custome is contrary to reason c. whereof if the Doctours will knowe further lette them reade the seconde Booke made by the saide Holy Personage of the Order and likewise what he writes of the myracles in the fifth and sixth Chapter of the thirde Booke of the Trinitie This aunswere may suffise to confute the twoo other pretended blasphemies which folowe in the obiection of the Doctours And touching the fourth wée aunswere that the will of God maye be considered in twoo sortes as the Diuines teache which is as it is declared to men by woordes signes and effectes and according as it is retained and hidde in himselfe the one is called Wil knowne by signes and the other the Will of the good pleasure of god For the regarde of the firste consideration the Ministers confesse as heretofore they haue said to the doctors that God can doo many things which he wil not But to the other we saie his wil is equal with his power as also his power in that regard is equal to his wil According to which consideration ought to be vnderstanded and interpreted the sentence of Tertullian alleaged by vs and euill applied by the Doctours to the Monarchians as beste may iudge all suche as heedefully reade that place produced by vs who to aunswere an other reproche of the saide Doctoures accusing vs of wrong to the Auncientes as to accepte some matter of the Omnipotencie of God are here enforced to reiterate Theodorete in his thirde Dialogue who writes as foloweth Wée muste not saie without some determination that all things are possible to God for who so holdes suche absolute opinion comprehendes all things aswell good as euill whiche oughte not in any sorte be attributed to God. By whiche maye appeare that neither this good Authour nor the others before alleaged by vs woulde not submitte all things indifferently to Goddes power But doo excepte what so euer is contrary to his will and essence To be shorte to qualifie the difference betwéene the Ministers who holde it impossible one body to be in diuerse places at one instant and the Doctours which affirme the contrary there is but one meane which is that the Doctours without entring into so long a circuit and wasting of speache in alleaging so many superfluous matters doo proue summarily by one onely place of the Scripture that God wil doo it To knowe whether the Ministers haue wel or euil alleaged S. Augustine as to proue that a body cannot be withoute place and measures and also whether they haue well or euill defended that the Quantity is essential in a body and not accidental as the Doctours holde they laie themselues vppon the vpright iudgement of the Readers of the Acts of this conference Touching that which foloweth in the writing of the Doctours that there is no place aboue the Heauens wherein Iesus Christ is not comprehended conteined that the Bodies and Sprites are therein differently without any distinction and distaunce of place The Ministers saie that touching all those pointes they rather beleue the Scripture expresse woorde of God which they haue alleaged than all the suttleties and Sophistries which the Doctoures or others are able to bring foorthe of their vaine Philosophy Besides the same is expressely conteined and taught in one of the Articles of our faithe in this phrase From thence shal he come to iudge both the quicke the deade By whiche muste be noted that there is Vnde which is an Aduerbe signifying
one Body to be in diuerse places the Ministers vsed no other reason to withstande it than that al this was contrary to the Order established in the worlde touching the nature of the Bodye which as it cannot be vnderstande but of the common order wée sée in nature so the Doctoures haue therefore broughte in againste them that God cannot doo a myracle contrary to the order established in the worlde taking it as the Ministers haue declared in their former answeres against the order of nature as knowing for our partes that the Ancients obserued not this difference aboue nature or contrary to nature which appeareth by Tertullian heretofore alleaged where is saide that God can bring to passe contrary to nature that a man flée aswell as a byrde But wee wil not stay vppon rigour of woordes but apply to the Ministers with whom wée conferre who cal a woorke against the order established in the world a body to be in diuers places bicause it impugnes the common disposition and property of bodyes by which reason the Doctours holde that al other myracles ought also to be accompted contrary to the order established in the worlde bicause they are against the common disposition and property of nature And folowing stil the vnderstanding which the Ministers now giue of the order established in the world for the estate and disposition which God hath appointed conserues enterteines al things by his eternal prouidence and immoueable wil to guide al things directly and prouide that no confusion happen in his woorkes Here the Ministers committe eftsoones a new blasphemy against Gods Omnipotency for he may wholy chaunge alter destroy such order as he hath established in the world albeit he wil neuer doo it and raise a new world more perfecte than this And if it were so that he could doo nothing contrary to this order his power were terminable and limited for he coulde not doo but certaine effectes according to the order which he had established in the worlde which should happen not by the repugnancy of the Creatures but bicause God shoulde binde euen his owne handes And so contrary to the Scripture his hande should be shortened and his power restrained and lymited from which blasphemy flowe infinite others as shal be well declared by vs vpon occasion and due oportunitie Touching the seconde and thirde Blasphemies noted by the Doctours the Ministers say they haue satisfied in one woorde by a newe interpretation of the order of the world whiche fals oute nothing to pourpose to dissolue the Arguments produced by the Doctours And the Ministers passe ouer the places of Scripture alleaged which open the Blasphemy and dissemble the contradiction of the Doctrine with Caluines opnion touching Gods prouidence in the order established in the world like as also they spare to answere our obiection that from the third Blasphemy many others doo flowe fearing least in confessing them they heape not blasphemy vpon blasphemy by that meane make their Doctrine hateful to al the world To aunswere the fourth Blasphemy the Ministers vse a distinction of the Will of God whiche may be considered in twoo sortes the first is called Wil knowne by signes and the other a will of his good pleasure According to the firste they confesse that God can doo more than he wil and not according to the seconde which is as they say equall with the power of God and hid and vnknowne to men which distinction if it ought to haue place we say that the fundation vpon which they fixe the truth pretended of this proposition God cannot bring to passe that one body be in diuerse places is wholy reuersed For they will haue Goddes power measured according to his wil not according to the seconde which is hid from men so that it must néedes be according to the firste by which they confesse that God can doo more than he wil. By whiche it foloweth that their Rule which they haue giuen to measure the power of God is false for it cannot be measured by his wil séeing he can doo more than he will. The Doctours saye further that the Ministers ought not require them to proue that God would that one body were in twoo places to shewe that he could doo it for the Doctours would obiecte to them that to teache that God can doo any thing we muste not proue that afore he woulde doo it séeing that according to their confession God can doo more than he wil. Wée say further that séeing the wil of God appeares not to vs but by signes woords effectes and that the order established of God in the worlde according to his prouidence which the Ministers agrée withall is hid to men that the Ministers cannot affirme and shewe that God hath established such an order in the world that one body cannot be in diuers places for it behoued them to teache and instructe of such ordinaunce of God and declaration of his will. Many times they haue bene required to preferre onely one place of Scripture where such wil of God is manifest or where it is saide that he cannot bring to passe that one body be in diuerse places Touching the place of Tertullian wee leaue to euery directe iudgemente the vnderstanding of the same And as for Theodorete we finde him euil alleaged by the Ministers as woorking more against them than he aides them For wher he writes that we muste not say indeterminately that God can doo al things comprehending therein both good and euil in this he makes no restraint of Goddes Almightinesse but of the contrary he amplyfieth it bicause that not to be able to doo euil things is a vertue power as hath bene heretofore amply recited Where the Ministers require vs to shewe that God would that one Bodye be in diuerse places wée aunswere that they are twoo different questions if God can doo it and if he would doo it And séeing it maye be confessed of all Christians as in déede it ought to be that the power is in God it may be easie to proue the Will by the woorde of the Supper and the Ascension which they of the Religion pretended refourmed haue in custome to depraue and wreste by the impossibilitie which they faine to be in God to put one body in twoo places The Doctors leaue also to the iudgement of the Readers whether the ministers haue alleaged S. Augustine to pourpose or not like as concerning the quantitie whether it is essentiall to be a bodye or not wée neuer called it in doubte that it was not essentiall speaking of a bodye as the Philosophers doo In predicamento quantitati◠〈…〉 is to knowe if it be 〈…〉 certaine place 〈…〉 it is not 〈…〉 â—dy w◠〈…〉 d◠〈…〉 as that which they alleage to confirme that our Lorde is in a place aboue the Heauens is too friuolous séeing that by the same reason they might conclude that the Diuinitie shoulde be circumscripte And there be Aduerbes signifying place when
in the scripture it is spoken of the Diuinitie aswel as when there is speach of the Humanitie of Iesus Christ Where the Ministers say wée confesse our Canons to be false it is a manifeste slaunder For wée acknowledge no Canons if they deriue not from the Councelles and other Authentike Bookes and not as they are gathered by any particulare man as is the Compilation of Gratian to whom there is no further faith giuen than he deserues that is recited by him For Resolution of the eighth Article wée sende the Ministers to the Phisophers Schole to learne that there is in the Predicament of substaunce a Body whiche is Species of Substance and in the predicament of Quantitie an other body which is Species of quantitie and also to learne that the body which is of quantitie is Accidental and not essentiall to the body of the predicament of substance Besides the Ministers erre againste all Philosophie to call a Substance materiall incorpored But the Doctours wil not stande vpon those things and are sory they haue not to doo with men better principled in Philosophy who would 〈…〉 â—son than the Ministers doo 〈…〉 Consequence of twoo Bo◠〈…〉 be in twoo pla◠〈…〉 â—nd like in◠〈…〉 â—e if the 〈…〉 the 〈…〉 passion they woulde examine the testimonies of the Auncientes and reasons drawne from the same But by this wée proue that when there is any thing that presseth the Ministers it is then they sette a good countenaunce and make shewe to haue good righte Besides the Doctoures maruell muche howe the Ministers dare affirme that Iustine and all the Auncientes haue not put the myracle of the doores in the body of Iesus Christ séeing Iustine makes this expresse question howe it is possible that a body grosse be not let to passe throughe the doores shutte in the answere of which question they conclude it that bicause that myracle was done in the nature of the Bodye of Iesus Christe the Apostles iudged it was not a true Body but a Sprite As if the Body had bene transnatured into a sprite which Iustine saith did not happen but that withoute any chaunge of nature suche operation to passe throughe the doores shutte was giuen to the Bodye of Iesus Christs by the Omnipotencie of God as also Iustine saithe not that anye myracle was done in the Sea when Iesus walked thereuppon but that by the Almightinesse that was in him he made it portable without chaunge of the nature of his Bodye or of the Sea notwithstanding the myracle was in his Bodye whiche contrary to his nature did so walke It is not inoughe to alleage S. Hylarie that the power of God made place to the Bodye of our Lorde for he doothe not onely auouche that but addes the manner of the facte whiche is that the Bodye passed withoute chaunge or diminishing his nature or withoute any opening And yet notwithstanding he passed by the operation of the Omnipotencie whiche wroughte in his Bodye piercing the close and shutte places Nihil inquit cessit ex solido Parictum with other like speache whiche he vseth by which cannot be vnderstand any other thing than a penetration of many Bodyes S. Chrysostome disputes expressely that contrary to his nature he passed through the doores shutte aswell as out of the belly of the Virgyn without breaking neither dothe he saie simply that he is ignorante wherein consisted the facts séeing he discribes it but he amplifieth the vertue of the facte and saith that the reason and greatnesse cannot be comprehended bicause it procéeded of the power of God incomprehensible Touching al which pointes the Doctours referre themselues to the reading of the Bookes without any further debate against the Ministers who thinke alwayes to abuse the ignorance of suche as beleue them to denie or affirme what they thinke good And as we gréeue and are weary to reiterate the reasons herebefore so familiarely and clearely deduced so by the euasions of the Ministers so often repeted we are enforced eftsoones to intrude that which by common consent of the Ancients they oughte to beleue touching the Articles We much maruel of the manner of Answeres of the ministers who without regard to the matter obiected to them say what they thinke good of the pointes proponed and not answere to the Argumentes as in the Article that toucheth the byrth of Iesus Christe in the deduction whereof wée haue brought foorth many testimonies of the Auncients holding that our Lord came myraculously from the belly of his mother as he was also conceiued Wherin as the said Ancientes affirme that that Natiuitie was done withoute any breaking to the body of the Virgyn so they condemned in Heresie al such as helde the contrary whiche the Ministers séeke yet to mainteine and for al their aunswere affirme it staying as they say vppon the Scripture and dare not openly say that they reiect the iudgementes of the Aunciente and Primitiue Churche to repose vpon theire owne sense which notwithstanding appeares clearely inough in theire Answere vpon this Article wherein they falsely apply the Scripture as thoughe it conteined that in the Byrth of our Lorde A perta fuerit vulua Virginis And where thei say that that disclesing impugnes not her Corporal Virginitie by which the question is mente they bely the Resolution of the Auncientes who haue determined vppon this matter In the Article of the resurrection whether there be other matters than coniectures the reading of the Obiection of the Doctors shall witnesse the same being to be séene of suche as desire to know the truthe And where vppon the ende of the Article of the Resurrection the ministers complaine that we lay wrongs and scoffes vppon them we doubte not but they take in displeasure that their suttleties and maners of doing are discouered which if they were well knowne the world woulde not be so simplie beguiled as héeretofore they haue bene The Resolution pretended by the ministers as being not written aphantos autois but apauton is not pertinent For be it in what sort so euer our Lord was inuisible to his Disciples whether it was by sodaine vanishing away or otherwayes the which vanishing in a body present at the eie not troubled can not be done but that the body is made inuisible to them And how so euer it be the Gréeke text beares inuisible and vnseene Touching the Article for the opening of the heauens the ministers according to their custome aunswer not directly For it is not saide that the Heauens were deuided or open when he mounted thither as in the baptisme of Iesus Christ and the vision of S. Stephen but the scripture saith expressely that Christe pierced the heauens and not that the heauens disclosed to him Neither can the ministers forbeare to reproche vs in deprauing the vnderstanding of our writings the same being witnessed in this present Aunswere wherin they faine to vnderstand that in that text of the scripture importing that Christ pierced the heauens we would signifie
the aire vnder the name of the heauens which neuer entred into our thought only we said that the scripture many times speaking of the opening of the Heauens by the Heauens meanes the aire which ought not to be applied to the opinion that our Lorde pierced the heauens By this manner of Aunswere the ministers thinke to make forgotten the force of the reasons of the Doctoures whose spéeche was thus if when it is spoken in the Scripture that the Heauens were open we must wrest the woordes with rigor and vnderstād that truely the Heauens did deuide we muste in like sorte when the Scripture saithe that Iesus pierced the Heauens take this woorde pierced in his propre signification and with rigoure which impugnes directly the diuision or opening as things contrary one to an other To which reason it giues none other Aunswere than ordinarily to the other arguments of the saide Doctors Touching the difference which they put betwéene the sight of S. Stephen which stretched euen to the high heauē and the being of two bodies in one place and that the one is a miracle of nature and the other a wonder against nature and the will of God They should doe muche as being good secretaries of the councell and will of God if they coulde teache the Doctoures that God would the one and coulde not will the other and so there woulde be reason in their saying as to shewe what difference they assigne betwéene bothe The inconstancie of the Ministers is knowne in the Article of the Camell which is whether God can make him passe through the eie of a néedle For in their first Aunswer vpon our Obiection they saide without any distinction that it was a thing impossible to God to bring to passe that a Camel or cable entred the hole of a Néedle And in their seconde Aunswere they alleage that Christ saying what was impossible to men is possible to God pretendes no other thing than to Aunswer to the Question proponed by his Disciples who may be saued whereunto he answered that that was impossible to men And that also that sentence of Iesus Christe ought not to be vnderstanded but of the saluation and conuersion of the riche men onely The which spéeche exclusiue when the ministers affirme that our Lord saying what is impossible to men is possible to God ought not to be vnderstand but of the saluation of rich men shewes clearely inoughe that the Ministers ment to say by their Aunswer that our Lord did not meane to comprehend vnder this proposition what is impossible to men is possible to God the possibilitie that a Camell may passe thorowe the eie of a néedle as if this proposition were not to vnderstand vniuersally of which our Lorde inferres this particulare it is possible to God to saue a rich man yea he speakes vniuersally by expresse woordes omnia apud Deum possibilia sunt we desire such as shall read this present wryting to consider the escapes of the Ministers whose good custome is to disauowe and denie the errors which they maintaine when by the truthe they are conuinced Nowe the ministers giuing ouer the defence that God can not bring to passe that a Camell passe thorowe the eie of a Néedle haue inuented a moste friuolous interpretation in confessing that God can do it but the meane shuld be in that God might cut of and diminishe the greatnesse of a Camell and all other things that might let him to passe But the text can not brooke suche a glose séeing oure Lorde speakes of a thing altogither impossible to men which shoulde not be For albeit it were impossible for a man to make and produce a Camell of so little thickenesse and greatnesse as he might passe thorowe the eie of a Néedle yet if God produced such one or if he did proportion or fashion so farre the greatnesse and thicknesse of a Camell and that a man helde him he might make him passe But there is no Question to produce a Camel or to make him great or little but only to make him passe which should be no miracle in respecte of the passage if he were so little but onely in regarde of the production of suche a Beaste or chaunge of his quantitie And in taking this name of Camelus for a Cable which Caluine findes the better the absurditie of this newe exposition wil appeare the better For a man may so much extenuate a cable by drawing out his mater wherof he is made that in the end he might make it passe thorow the creuise of a Néedle Besides it might be easie for a man to make a Néedle whose hole might be so large that a cable yea a Camell might passe therein But the scripture speakes of things impossible to a man and according as they be in their nature Therefore as we muste take the hole of a néedle in his little and straite quantitie so must we take a Camell or cable in his naturall greatnesse neither were the Auncientes euer so suttle as to inuent suche politike interpretations which can not be red without laughing But they can not so cunningly escape with this fine exposition that the world séeth not clearely inough how they denie that Gods power can stretche so farre as to make that a Camell remaining in his crokednesse and thickenesse may passe thorowe the hole of a néedle but only when by the power of God he is brought in quantitie proportionable to the hole of the néedle the same being against the expresse text of the scripture and farre from the exposition of the Aunciente interpreters Notwithstanding that bisides the literal sense they conster the Camell sometimes Allegoricallie which Allegoricall exposition takes not away the truthe of the literall sense no more than the Actes of Iesus Christ forbeare to be true albeit the interpreters expounde them Allegoricallie wherein the ministers are abused as thinking bicause they haue redde some interpretation other than literall in S. Ierome that the comparison which oure Lorde vseth in this behalfe is also a Parable which is false For it is a true argument that our Lorde vseth to declare his power to saue a rich man as being a matter of more difficultie than to make a Camell passe thorow the eie of a néedle To conclude this Article we tell them once againe that of the deniall of the scope of Gods omnipotencie doe folowe many other absurdities which we cā not otherwayes terme than blasphemies as that by Gods almightinesse two bodies can not be in one selfe place that God can not make a body without circumscription of place That Christ did not enter nor could enter by the doores shutte That he did not nor coulde rise againe but that the stone of the Monumente was taken away that he is not nor could issue out of the virgines wombe without disclosing the body of his mother that he did not nor coulde penetrate the heauens without opening of the same That he did not nor could make a
Doctrine they disdaine they should wel know that this reason is nothing bicause the Angelles and suche as are blessed being alwayes conformed to the wil of God may doe all that they will doe and there is no creature that cā hinder the effect of their wil and yet they are not omnipotent touching the saying of S. Augustine taking it as the ministers do the reason of Gods almightinesse is too weake and false But to haue a true vnderstanding of this sentence we muste consider that there is difference betwéene the will of God actuall and the power of the wil for God may wil many things which he will not nor neuer would and therfore he can will more then he will not actually wherein we ought rather to measure his omnipotencie then according to his actuall will. In this sorte must we interprete the texte of S. Augustine that Goddes omnipotencie stretcheth to all things which he can will and not according as he actually willeth S. Augustine also is recited by the ministers being destitute of testimonie of the scripture albeit in their former Aunswere they vaunt to haue taken that reason of the scriptures In the Article folowing the ministers charge vs falsly to haue curtalled some woords of their last wryting which shall not be found true For our text beares these woords it is vndoubted that aboue all conceite and imagination of mannes spirit Gods power is great infinite and incomprehensible by which may be clearely séene that we speake vniuersally of all conceite and imagination withoute exception of any whether it be of wisdome or of follie therefore it was without néede to expresse the woordes of the ministers séeing the Doctors spake generally the which that which goeth before dothe shewe as the ministers haue recited it where it is said that we reprehended them in that they gaue some restraint and limitation of the omnipotencie of God as not suffering it to stretch generally to all things that mannes wit mighte imagine or conceiue where in these woordes generally and all things they declare that we woulde comprehende according to humaine iudgement euen the foolish fansies and imaginations which men may comprehend And that we would not cutte of anything of the wryting of the ministers who perhappes were of opinion that we would not say that God can doe all that a fonde braine can imagine as fearing that we would inferre against them that God could doe any follie which should not folowe for albeit in the iudgement of men certaine things are estéemed fonde yet séeing they are possible in themselues they may be done of God but wisely notwithstanding the witte of man iudge the contrary Like as in many iudgementes man beguiles himselfe estéeming that for follie which is wisdome with God as S. Paule saith So that we say that all things which are to be imagined by man are to be done with God without excepting any thing sauing suche things as implie contradiction to be and not to be which can not be done in respecte of repugnancie procéeding of their parte and not by faulte of the power of God wherein we pray suche to whome these conferences shall come to note that the ministers are alwayes found slaunderers when they lay that crime vpō vs like as in the former wryting they stande as conuinced therein The Ministers will also be founde slaunderers in the Article folowing where they clippe our sayings and falsly lay vpon vs to haue writtē that God cā do any thing against order in déede we sayd that to holde that God could do nothing against the order which he hath established in the worlde is to blaspheme God in which may be discerned the slaunder of the ministers who mangling the speeche haue taken away these woordes established in the world where they inferre that it is a blasphemie to say that God may do a thing which is not well ordered it is oute of doubte but to doe any thing contrary to the order established in the world importes not any thing disordered but onely mutation and chaunge of order without any disorder which the Ministers confesse in their Article folowing We greatly abhorre the blasphemies cōtained in the next Article whereof the firste is that one body be in diuers places is a thing derogante to the truth of God bicause in God there shoulde be yea and not so that the Ministers hold that God should not be true if he broughte to passe one body to be in diuers places and yet they neither teache nor can teache that God hathe euer sayde that one body coulde not be in diuers places it impugnes the wisdome of God bicause in his woorkes there shoulde be disorder and confusion wherein likewise they confesse that God shuld not be wise if he made one bodie at one instante to be in diuers places The thirde is that suche thing resistes the omnipotencie of God séeing in suche acte there should be suche imperfection that muche lesse according to the opinion of the Ministers that God in doing this shoulde be omnipotent but of the contrarie he should be imperfect and impuissant The fourthe is that if suche a thing were done it shoulde be againste the eternall and immoueable will of God and therefore God should be mutable Oute of which blasphemies is necessarily vomited a manifest Atheisme that God should not be God if he made one body in one instant to be in diuers places For God can not be but true wise almightie and immoueable which blasphemies we are content to coate and marke only with admonishment how many miseries spring of their Doctrine that denie the Reall presence of the body of Iesus Christ in the holy Sacrament and not to stay any more to confute them as being too manifest and hauing regarde with all to the saying of Ireneus that there be heresies whome to discouer is to refute them In the Article folowing they resiste that with so many times they haue saide that God coulde not bring to passe that one bodie be in two places at one instante bicause it impugned the order which he hathe established in the worlde as though God could doe no other wayes than according to the order which he hath already established and in this present Article they confesse that God can chaunge and alter the said order out of which Confession we draw this argument God can chaunge and alter the order which he hath established in the world and that withoute any preiudice to his truthe his wisdome power and immoueable will then he can chaunge the order by the which he hathe established as the Ministers séeme to holde that one bodie should not be but in one place and to bring to passe in the contrarie the order being changed that one bodie shall be in diuers places and yet in that there is no derogation to his truthe wisdome power and will and by consequent that God of his omnipotencie may bring to passe that one body be in diuers places Touching the
pretend any right to exalt the power glorye of God by such a confusion and hotchpotche of all matters together Moreouer we let the Ministers vnderstande that wyth better reason we could returne vppon them the conclusion they pretende to inferre of the subtiltye and art of Sathan the same being as they write that vnder a godlye pretence of pietie Sathan in the maner of a Serpent slides into the Church of God to the ende to plant their disorder and at last to set vpon euen God himselfe Let euerye one sée and consider in himselfe if this be not the true enterprise of the Ministers both by their deductions and generallye the principall poyntes of their doctrine For vnder a farie pretence to roote vp certayne abuses and errours whiche falsely they séeke to persuade the world to be in the catholike Church against Gods word and vnder colour of preaching that they searche to exalt the name of the Lord they go about to dispoyle God of hys properties and perfections notwithstanding they declare it not no more than Sathan opened his intent to the first man. The Ministers besides deface the merite and efficacye of the blood of Iesus Christ and by their doctrine open the gate to all vices and synne For proofe wherof albeit we should spare to repeate what they haue holden of the power of God yet their writinges stand as their accusers onelye in good resolution although they vtter faire spéeche God can doe no more as they holde than it pleaseth them to receiue of hys wysedome and wyll which they disguise after their sense when it is founde declared in the scripture Agaynst the bountye of God they hold that he is author and worker of euyll and synne Against his mercy they teache that he neyther doth nor wyll pardon a man that hath impugned by malice the knowledge of the truth or resisted it Against the merite of the blood of Iesus Christ and passion of the crosse they haue written in proper tearmes that if Iesus Christ had dyed onelye by the anguishes of corporall death and the effusion of all his bloud he had done nor profited nothing for our redemption If being vpon the crosse and afore hys death he had not endured the payne of the damned in his soule with other horrible blasphemies contayned in the article of his discention in to hell They instruct also their adherentes that manslaughter adultery robbery theft sacriledge and all other crime what soeuer are but veniall synnes to the predestinate whom they say are neuer out of Gods grace whatsoeuer they do Assuring their faythfull and such as stand in their Church to beleue constantly that they be in grace and predestinate which in playne spéeche though they would otherwyse excuse it is to giue full licence to do all euyll With sundry other articles whiche we intende to verifie as the matter requires But if they denye these poyntes to bée wrytten and published in their secte the places in Calums bookes which we haue noted in the Margent are to giue witnesse In effect that is the glorye of God and hys Sonne Iesus Christ whereunto the Ministers incline and tende by the extirping of the pretended impieties mencioned in manye articles of their last resolution To aunswer the which in short spéeche we saye that some are spitefullye and falselye layed vppon the catholyke Churche by the Ministers others be expresselye written in holye Scripture and others drawne out of the same and confirmed by the tradition of the Apostles and vniuersall consent of the first Christian churche except the slaunderous impositions which in euery article the Ministers doo adde And so in tyme and place we wyll declare and proue by péecemeale if the pacience of the Ministers wyll consent to handle euerye difficultie in hys place But if they continue to cauell withall to put confusion in the doctrine we protest to aunswer them with scoffes For the rest they bable much of Gods power in general alledging that we ought to take certaine knowledge of it by the Scriptures whiche wée haue alwayes aduowed vnto them They say also that it is infinite and incomprehensible but when we offer particularities to knowe wherein omnipotencie consistes then they forget the holye scriptures and without them measure it according to the wisdome and eternall wyll of God and the order established in the world yea and as if they were without all remembraunce that that almightynesse were infinite they wrest it to a condition propertie and naturall order of creatures as if to do anye thing against or aboue the order condition and naturall propertye of the sayd creatures were a thing repugnaunt to the wysedome nature and wyll of god This is the short resolution which we may gather of their opinion touching the omnipotencie of God the same appearing in their papers and answers giuen to vs wherin touching S. Augustine produced by them we haue sufficiently aunswered before Where the Ministers lay vpon vs to hold as a sufficient argument that a case being done of God declares that hée could do it we referre our selues to our writinges whereof our resolution and obiections containe all the contrarye We are also slaundered by the Ministers to affirme that faith contrarieth nature euery way onely we sayd that ordinarily the contradiction done to fayth founded vppon the worde procéedes of the consideration of thinges naturall against the power of God. Touching Abraham the scripture of Genesis wytnesseth alwayes that hée and hys wyse made a certaine difficultye touching the promise of God and considered corpus suum emortuum et mortuam vuluam Sarâ—ae vntyll he hearde the assurance of the omnipotencie as also S. Paule speakes ynough of Abraham since his first vocation till after that assurance without putting distinction in the historye of that which was afore or after suche assuraunce according to the saying of the Apostle that he did not consider corpus suum emortuum resting vpon the assurance of the power and promise which had bene made to him We say we haue better concluded touching the fayth we ought to haue of the power of God to make one body in diuers places than the Ministers who haue no woord of God to assure their faith and beliefe that God cannot do it or that it impugnes his wisedome prouidence and eternall vertue or the humanitie of Iesus Christ yea onely the nature of a simple body But touching all this the Ministers truste in their presumption and particular reuelation without one onely place of the scripture whereupon they maye settle or rest their opinion Where of the contrary we haue grounded our faith not onely touching the power of God to bring to passe that a body be in diuers places but also to beleue the fact and that God would it so vpon the holye Scripture as appeares in our resolution together with the places of the auncientes alledged for that purpose the same being so manifest that as the Ministers are not able to gainsay them so
of August 1566. THe Ministers forbearing all that is superfluous and immateriall in the wryting of the doctors as their repetitions and dissembling withal their wrongs and accustomed scoffes by which they proue muche better the spite they beare to the truthe and vs then the questions proponed we will rest only vppon the pointes which séeme to require Answere In the first place we denie to haue imposed vpon the Doctors that they haue drawne and restrained the Church into a certaine place but rather to a certaine company and to the traditions giuen folowed and approued by the same wherein we praise God that the saide Doctoures are come now to acknowledge that the Catholike Churche stretcheth thorow oute all the world and that it is not enclosed within bounds and limites of the authoritie and traditions of the Romishe Churche which as we confesse was highly estéemed of the Auncients when errors abuses and vices did not abounde in it as is happened since So nowe being so corrupted as well in manners as in Doctrine as nothing is more hateful than the woorde of God the light the truthe and vertue we say that as the estate of the saide Churche hathe bene chaunged so also oughte the value and reputation wherin it hathe dwelt And yet in what degree of honour so euer it hath ben raised in times passed the Auncients neuer estéemed it an vniuersall Churche nor hir Bishop an vniuersall Bishop as appeareth by that which S. Ierome wrytes to Euagrius and the resolution of one of the Councels of Carthage And touching the reformed Churche in Fraunce we say not that it is the Catholike and vniuersal Churche but only a member of the same and that shée hathe hir foundation not vppon the opinion or Authoritie of men but vppon the Doctrine and wrytings of the Prophets and Apostles For the rest touching the protestations of charitie zeale by the which the Doctors feare to be driuen forward into the inuectiues and pursutes which they raise againste vs and other the Faithfull by the example as they say of S. Augustine and other Bishoppes who not long since solicited the Magistrates against the Donatists Their procéedings which they haue and doe vse against vs and other the Faithful reueale plainely inoughe that with false shadowes they couer themselues with those examples Bicause euen the Catholikes which they alleage persuaded the Magistrates to vse moderation and softnesse to the Donatistes and other Heretikes prouing all meanes to reduce them afore they ministred the rigor of paines and iudgementes enforcing themselues furthermore to bridle and represse the fury of the people that they should not be put to the spoile and ouerrunne Where they of the contrarie sharpen againste vs bothe the people and Magistrates and that by slaunders and false imputations with all other meanes they can suborne to that ende Touching the omnipotencie of God and the Diffinition we haue laide of the same drawne out of S. Augustines bookes the Doctors in their laste wryting inferre no newe thing to driue vs from it For that which they alleage of the Angels to be able to doe what they will and therefore to be almightie as well as God if the diffinition aforesaide of Gods almightinesse had place is no Example either to the presente purpose or to proue that there is in Angels a power equall with God séeing it is most certaine that their wil and power depende elsewhere and that God rules ouer them to chāge suspende and stay them as it pleaseth him and as he can doe to all other creatures which can not be saide of God without blasphemie But be it in what sorte so euer if they will reprehende the diffinition of Gods almightinesse proponed by vs it is not with vs but with S. Augustine that they haue to doe for the saide diffinition was taken woorde by woorde out of his wrytings We muche maruell that hauing so amplie aduouched to them our opinion of the omnipotencie of God with declaration that it stretched indifferently to all things which mens fonde fansies coulde conceiue or imagine that yet they will eftsoones regrate vpon that pointe alleaging that God can do wisely that which the foolishe imagine fondly For it is moste manifest that Fooles may imagine many things which are impossible to God As for example that God is not as is written in the Psalme .14 and .53 that he is corporall as the Anthropomorphites did déeme that the worlde is eternall as the Peripaticiens did teache that there be two Princes as the Manicheans held All which things can not be attributed to the omnipotencie of God withoute blasphemie But in this are we best contented that touching this Article our maisters after long and sharpe debate with so many blasphemies euen when we stoode in the truthe of it are yet constrained in the ende to consent with vs and folowe the interpretation and restriction which we gaue touching Goddes omnipotencie as appeareth by one speeche of their last wryting whose woordes be these All things say they that are to be imagined of man are to be done of God without excepting any thing but suche as implie contradiction to be and not to be Then what reason is there that for suche things wherein they cōsent to vs which be excepted frō Gods almightinesse that we for excepting them shoulde be guiltie in blasphemie and not the Doctoures who say and confesse the selfe same thing This proposition that a naturall bodie euen that of Iesus Christe is in diuers places at one instante is of the numbre of those things which implie contradiction as hathe bene already sufficiently proued therfore we conclude that the omnipotencie of God oughte not to be referred and stretched so farre The Doctoures charge vs afterwardes with foure horrible blasphemies as they terme them grounding them vppon our opinion defending that one body can not be in diuers places at one instante as to resiste the truthe wisdome and omnipotencie of God this the Doctoures finde so straunge and farre from reason that they disdain to refute it thinking it is vnworthy of Answere and that only it suffiseth to recite it whereunto we Answere that to say it is a blasphemie vnworthy of Answer is an easie and most ready mean to shake of all difficulties wherwith they may be entangled The Doctoures are also importunate with vs to bring foorthe by Goddes woorde that one body can not be in diuers places at one instante whereunto we Answer once againe that it belongs to the Doctours to proue the contrary by one text of the scripture that one body may be in one instante in diuers places séeing they are proponantes and we respondents in this conference And yet we haue declared héere before by liuely reasons drawne out of the scripture and essential propreties of God the nature of bodies the Authoritie of the fathers that the matter of the question is altogither impossible and touching their argumēt containing this nature form God
the bread more briefly and darkely which is also proued by S. Paule The breade which we breake saithe he is not the Communion of the body of Christe which is a manner of figuratiue spéeche bicause that to speake and vnderstaÌ„d properly the bread which is a corporall and materiall thing is not the Communion which we haue in the body of Iesus Christe which is a thing spiritual and inuisible and yet it is so called as being a signe thereof to represent it to vs and assure vs of it euen as we call commonly the letter signed and sealed which containes the declaration of the last will of a man his Testament albeit it is not his testameÌ„t which is properly the declaration which he hath made verballie of his said will but it is so called bicause it is the instrument and testimonie thereof And euen as the Scripture and the Auncients as well to recommende and raise the dignitie of the signes and cutte of by that meane the mistaking of them as also for the conformitie and likenesse that is betwéene the signes the things signified haue attributed sometimes the names of the same things signified to the signes which they represent and speaking of the signes haue vsed figuratiue speeche So they haue spoken of them sundry other times properly to take away all occasion of abuse and preuent that in taking without distinction the signes of the thing signified by them there shuld be attributed to them the effectes which appertaine not but to the matters only which they signifie of these two sundry reasons and manner of spéeche there be examples as well in the scriptures as in the Auncient fathers Of the firste we haue an example in the Circumcision when it is called by figure aliance Gene. 17. vers 13. And of the seconde there is also an example in the same Chapter vers 11. where the Circumcision is properly called signe of the aliance in Exo. 12. ver 11. there is also an other example of the firste manner of figuratiue spéeche where the Lambe is called the Passeouer of the Lorde and touching the seconde man which is propre an example also in the same place vers 3. where the bloude of the Lambe is called a signe In like manner and order when is mention in the scripture of the supper the woordes run somtimes of the bread by figure as when it is called the bodye of Iesus Christe or the Communion of the body as hathe bene said before and sometimes also it is spoken of properly as when it is saide who so euer shall eate of this breade also euery one then proues himselfe and eates so of this breade Like diuersitie in bothe the manners of spéeche is founde oftentimes in the Auncient fathers touching the matter of the supper For sometimes they speake of the breade by figure calling it the body of Iesus Christe as S. Cyprian when he sayeth the body of the Lorde is taken with foule handes and his bloude dronke with a prophane and defiled mouthe and in an other place that we sucke his bloude and fasten oure tongs in the woundes of our Redéemer Likewise S. Ierome when he saithe that Exuperius Bishop of Tholoze caryed the bodie of our Lorde in a little pannier of Willowes and his bloude in a glasse S. Chrysostome also when he wrytes that Iesus suffreth himselfe not onely to be seene but also to be touched and eaten and that teethe are fixed in his fleshe and touched with tong Lastly S. Augustine With what care do we take heede when the bodie of Iesus Christe is administred to vs that nothing of the same fall from our handes to the earthe All which senteÌ„ces with their likes are figuratiue wherin is no doubt that in the right and directe interpretation of them ought not to be taught to the readers but that in them the name of the thing signified is applied to the signes which signifie it which may be easily gathered of other sentences and textes of the saide Auncients where speaking properly of the breade and wine which are distributed in the supper they cal them signes and figures As Tertullian Iesus Christ saith he tooke breade and distributed it to his Disciples and makes it his body when he saith this is my body which is to say a figure of my body And Cyprian by the wine shewes the bloude of Christe Also in a Sermone which he made of the supper of oure Lorde As often as we do this we whette not our teethe to bite but breake and distribute the holy breade in true Faithe by the which we distinguishe the matter diuine and humaine Also in a Sermon he made De Câ—â—â—â—â—le the Lord gaue with his proper handes bread and wine in the Table wherein he performed his laste repaste with his Disciples but on the Crosse he deliuered into the hands of the armed men his body to be wounded to the ende he might imprinâ—e so muche the more deepely the truthe into his disciples and they to declare to the people how the bread and wine were his body and bloud and howe the sacrament agréed with the thing for the which it was instituted and also howe one sacrament is made of two things and therefore is named with two names and one selfe name is giuen to that which signifieth and to that which is signified S. â—asile propones to vs figures and patrones of the sacred bodie and bloud of Iesus Christe And likewise S. Augustine the Lord had no horror to say this is my body when he gaue the signe of his body The Lord receiued Iudas to his supper wherin he recommended and gaue to his Disciples the figure of his bodie S. Ierome After he had eaten the Pascall Lambe with his disciples he tooke bread to strengthen the hart of man and past to the true sacrament of the passage to the end that as Aâ—lchisedech had done before in his figure he mighte also there represent his true bodie S. Ambrose this sacrifice is a figure of the body and bloud of our Lord Iesus Christe Chrysostome he hath dressed this Table to the ende he may shew vs daily the breade and wine in mysterie and similitude of the body and bloude of Christ And it happeneth sometimes that a Doctor in this matter expoundes the other as may be perceiued in the conference of the two places the one of S. Augustine alreadie alleaged and the other of Tertullian in the Booke of the crowning of a Knighte where he sayth we hardly suffer that any thing of oure breade and wine fall on the earthe In place of that which S. Augustine to the same matter saythe as hathe bene recited heere before we take diligent heede that nothing of the body of oure Lorde fail on the earthe And euen as in diuers places the Auncientes as hathe bene declared haue vsed the two manners of speeche aforesaide speaking of the supper sometimes by figure somtimes simple and properly so it is oftentimes
table did not eate nor taste any thing of the meates there serued should he not doe dishonor wrong to him that inuited him had it not bene better for him not to haue come thither euen thus is it of thée For thou art come thou hast song Psalmes with the rest of the people thou hast confessed thy selfe to be of the number of the worthy and not departing from those that are vnwoorthy how then dost thou tary and not participate at the table of the Lord thou sayst I am vnwoorthy I answere thee that euen so arte thou also touching the Communion of Prayers Thirdly the gobbins and tronshons of the Gospels and Pistles the Creede Prayer and other péeces referred to the scripture altogither confused and shaken of pronounced to the people in a tong not vnderstand contrary to the expresse commaundemente of God and without any edifying of the multitude is no other thing than a vaine vsurpation of the name of God against the expresse defence made by the same which ornaments are too narow and short to couer the shame and horror of the Masse Fourthly what execrable abuse is it to say that the Masse serues not only to the liuing but also for the dead to obtaine remission of their sinnes wherin the priestes forgetting neither shame nor blasphemie deuide their ofte into three parts with this visor vppon it that one is for them that be in heauen an other for suche as liue on earth and the thirde serues for the soules that abide in purgatorie But the Sacrament which is not ordained but to confirme the faith of the word stretcheth no further then the ministerie and the ministerie no longer than this life so that if it be so that those that are in heuen such likewise as are fained to be in purgatorie be dead and departed this world we must necessarily conclude that as Gods woorde can not be preached vnto them so also they cannot pertake in the administration of the sacraments and if they be not administred to them they can nothing profite them The ende of the Resolution An Answer to the last Obiections proponed by the Doctoures touching the Supper WE say that there be many things in the sayde Obiections impertinente to the matter of the Question as where they demaund how many worlde 's the Doctrine hath remained pure bothe touching the supper and other articles of religion whereunto we Answer that euen in the time of the Apostles there were heretikes and Antichristes as Ebion Cerinthus Simon Magicien the Samaritanes and others who by their errors and heresies went aboute to shake euen the Apostolical Churches and corrupte the pure Doctrine of the same whome the Apostles resisted valiantly in all possible sorte reuoking and referring alwayes all things to their former institution and foūdations of the pure woord of God as we sée S. Paule did on the behalfe of the Corinthians and Galathians whose Churches albeit he had most well planted and licoured yet they were corrupted in his life time both in manners and doctrine And where the Doctors aske howe long time the puritie of the doctrine and Religion hath perseuered in the Churche of God after the decease of the Apostles as wel touching the Article of the supper as for others we Aunswere that the continuance hath bene euen so long time as Gods woorde hath bene folowed and preached Touching the Obiection of the Doctors folowing blasing the supper celebrated in the Reformed churches as that we shoulde abuse the Communicantes by giuing them no other thing than a nothing betwéene two platters we Aunswere that that blase doth more aptly become them than vs bicause they offer to suche as they summone to their Masses but the Accidents indiuidible waues and only the sighte of formes of breade and wine to féede them withall A litle after they call the sacrifice of their Masse most pretious wherin we cōdiscend with them and say they haue reason so to exalt it with a noble and most precious title bicause of the greate reuenues and riches which this pretious sacrifice brings them which we may say hath bene to them a fléece or mine of Golde more riche and plentifull than euer was that of Iason or all the mines of the Easte as hauing brought the world to beléeue and spetially the founders of Abbaies Priories and other benefices that their sacrifices were auaileable for the redemption remedie and reléefe of their soules Afterwards the Doctors without all shame call the supper of the Lord detestable bicause as they say we offer nothing there but common bread and wine wherunto we Answer that in our supper we offer in déede bread and wine to the people which after the consecration remain in their substance as before but we denie that for al that the said bread and wine are common bicause as hath bene héertofore amplie declared to the Doctors that both the one and the other by the preaching and pronoūcing of the ordinance of God is changed as is said in respecte of the vse but not touching the nature wher the doctors offer to charge vs with monopolides contributions conspiracies secrete practises against the state of our Prince vnder colour pretence of our supper we Answer that that is not to impugne our doctrine but impudently to despite slander vs for such hath ben the faith of the reformed religion as bisides that it hath ben proued with the losse of their bloud life yet the king in his councel by his edict hath declared vs his most faithful well affected subiects but it is not to be maruelled if the doctors heape these slaunders vpon the reformed churches seeing in al times the Christiās haue bene accused of such crimes by the enimies to the truth As appeareth by the Apologetike of Tertullian and S. Augustines Bookes of the Citie of God By the Treatise of S. Cyprian againste Demetrius and by the Booke of Arnobius which he wrote againste the Gentiles Onely we maruell howe the Doctoures are so euill aduised as to alleage the Suppers in the Refourmed Churches to verifie theyr accusatiōs séeing that as they are at this day publikely done euery where in the view and presence of so many as wil beholde them so there is nothing hid nor so hard as euery one if he wil may not easily be informed only it is the zeale great charitie of our masters the Doctors wherein héeretofore they haue protested euen by the Inuocation of the name of God that caries them without shame or likelihoode thus to slaunder vs whose iustice in this case is to Answere for vs bothe afore God and men And to proue and confirme their poynts afore recited the Doctors adde that it appertaines not to all men indifferently to Consecrate the matter of the sacramentes but to suche only as are ordained by imposition of the Romishe Bishops hands wherunto we Aunswer and confesse the first poynte as hauing saide in other places that the