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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
gifte of God. They saie further that the lawfull Ministers oughte to he sente not of Pastors pretended and whiche haue nothing of Pastors but the Title and name onely but of God as appeares in Ieremie where this marke is sette foorthe to knowe and marke a false Pastor when he insinuates him selfe or is sente of other than of God. Touching the Article folowing they saie that the true marke by which we maie iudge certainely of a Reuelation is rather the woorde of God than the consente of many bicause it happeneth many times that the multitude in the Churche declining from the woorde doothe wholy swarne and goe astraie as in the time of Micheas Iesus Christe and since in the time of Constance the Emperour Touching those Prophetes who folow and are ledde by their sprite as they that leauing Goddes woorde reste vpon the commaundementes and traditions of men or the vanity of their braine it is not to be douted that suche are not false Prophetes and to be eschewed and reiected onely wée muste vse greate difference betwene the Reuelations and testimonies of Goddes sprite and the vaine imaginations of the minde of men To that the Doctors alleaged that Heretikes as Anabaptistes and others serue theire turne to confirme theire errors with those places of scripture whiche the Ministers haue produced they denie not but it maie be so for that the Scripture being common maye be alleaged of euery one Neither oughte wée to staie vppon that whiche is produced but to weighe and examine howe and to what ende and pourpose it is alleaged by whiche will appeare the difference that is betwene the Ministers and heretikes Touching that whiche was inferred of Brentius and Bucers opinion that by the onely tradition of the Churche the Canonical Bookes maye be discerned from the Apocryphal the Doctoures séeme to miâ—â—erue their purpose with that seing they mainteine that all the Bookes of the Bible are Canonical and yet by their reporte of Brentius and Bucer it appeares that both the one and the other according to the Tradition as they saie do put a distinction calling the one Canonical and the other Apocryphall To the Article folowing wherein the Doctors alleage certaine places of the auncients to take away the difference betwéene the Canonical and Apocriphal Bokes the Ministers answere that as they haue alleaged certaine to proue it so also they are able to produce of the same for the disproofe as S. Ierome in his Prologue named Chaleatus and in an other which beginnes prater Ambrosiuâ— to whome writing the summe of euery Booke of the Bible he makes no mention but of those which the ministers call Canonicall They are able also to alledge two or three Cataloges recited in Eusebius who receiue not for Canonical Bookes but suche as the ministers them selues approue The Councell of Laodicen alleaged by the Doctors speakes for the ministers as not comprehending that wherof there is question and touching experience they Aunswere that it is a question de facto as being better to be alleaged againste the Doctors than the ministers Lastly to the ende no more time be spente in so often repetition of one selfe thing and that we prepare to conferre the pointes of the Confession which the Doctors wil debate the ministers declare that the .xxiiij. Bookes of the olde Testament which are in the Canon of the Hebrues with all the Bookes of the newe Testament be approued Canonical of the one and other parte and they are sufficiente to decide wholy all the pointes of their Confession and generally all that belonges to true religion neither haue they occasion by the meanes of that to delay any more the conference in respecte of difference betwéene the two parties touching the distinction of the Canonical and Apocriphal Bookes Obiection Notwithstanding the Ministers say their religion is fouÌ„ded vpon the woorde of God yet they grounde Gods woorde vpon inward Reuelation so that Reuelation is the ground of the woorde and consequently of their religion for they receiue for the woorde but that which they thinke to be particularely reuealed vnto them Touching the other Article where they resiste the opinion of the Doctoures that Faithe is gotten by the hearing of Goddes woorde it séemes they offer to â—â—umble vppon small blockes as not to enter into the principall And where they alleage that faithe is a gifte of God and therfore not gotten it is moste manifest by many ordinarie textes of Scripture that it dothe not differ one thing to be giuen and gotten as the kingdom of heauen which is giuen to the blessed and yet we doe get it hauing true Faithe woorking by charitie the scripture also calles it the rewarde and recompence of good woorkes and S. Paule saithe that by liberalitie and almes men gaine the grace of God Yea there can be none other vnderstanding of S. Paules speache Fides ex auditu but that Faith comes by hearing Goddes woorde which is the obteining of the same by the meane of hearing it preached albeit it be a gifte of god They vse the like subteltie in going about to rebuke the opinion that Faithe is the truthe reuealed as putting a great difference betwéene the truthe reuealed and the Reuelation of truthe which subtiltie shoulde be of force against S. Paule who sayeth Panis quem frangimus nonne communicatio corporis Domini est which is as much as panis fractio nonne c. And therefore to speake properly the text of S. Paule must néedes lie subiecte to suche rebukes So that touching this Article to the ende not to incidente notwithstanding the Replie of the Ministers the Doctors will dispute no more of it as being a matter too muche impertinent séeing that in the ende it would procure spéeche of merito and so from one to another It gréeues them to enter vpon the vocation of the lawfull Ministers of the churche and therefore to auoide that question they will not alleage which they might without any superfluous discourse that afore their Doctrine be receiued they muste be examined whether they were lawfull ministers sent of the true church to preach Gods woord and to be heard of the people in their sermones according to S. Paules place alleaged heere before which if they of the newe Religion had well considered they might haue a moste sufficient argument not to receiue their Doctrine bicause it is no lesse cleare than the day that they are no Ministers sent by the Pastoures of the Churche but haue foisted in themselues to Preache and are not able to shewe any signe of their vocation either from men and muche lesse from GOD And if it were lawefull to euery one that saithe he is sent to Preache the woorde it were to raise infinite Sectes as wee see happeneth in this time and so they cease further spéeche in this Argument least they giue a greater heate to the matter Touching the Article declaring howe we may knowe a Reuelation to be of God which the ministers hold is
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
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
made and contained amongst Christians in Baptisme afore there were any Apostolicall wryting and in Baptisme it was proposed to beléeue the saide Créede afore there was entrie into the wrytings or speache therof in the primitiue Churche wrytings were examined whether they were to be receiued or not and the vnderstanding of the same together if a Doctrine were true or false by this Simboll and rule of Faithe and to imitate or confront it with it as Irenaeus Tertullian and others affirme And though it should happen that a man neuer heard but the Simboll without knowing whether there were holy Scriptures or not yet he might beleeue the said Créede and be a true Christian so that he were not infected with other particulare false opinions And of the contrarie if the beleefe of the Créede depended vppon the knoweledge of the Propheticall or Apostolicall wrytings as to vnderstand and be assured of the conformitie that therein is afore wée beleue it onely wise men and such as were wel studied in writinges who woulde assure them selues of the saide conformitie should be bounde to beleue the Symboll or at the leaste assured of the truthe of the same and so there shoulde be fewe Christians Therefore the beléefe of the Créede dependes not vpon the knowledge of the Scriptures By meane whereof the Doctoures holde by tradition of the Churche gouerned by the holy sprite that the Creede is of the Apostles and that there is no doubte thereof In like sorte by the same tradition we muste geue Faithe to it as a Doctrine of the Apostles not written and yet of equall authoritie with that whiche is in their writings notwithstanding we had no knowledge of other Scriptures The Doctoures are very sory that the other parte hath so muche declined to aunswere pertinently and absolutely to these twoo pointes why they proponed onely to shewe what Faithe and authoritie men oughte to attribute to this Symbol and all other Doctrine receiued by Tradition of the Apostles without Canonical writing whiche might haue bene lefte by them by the same meane and reason that is shewed that the Symboll was geuen to the Christians by the said Apostles without that they put it in writing For ende the Doctours persuade suche as shal reade this conference not to amaze or maruel at so many perplexities declining from the true ende of the said two pointes proponed with request to remember the conferences of S. Augustine with the Donatistes and Pelagians whose fashion resembles the presente manner of the Ministers with whom they conferre laying them selues notwithstanding vpon the iudgemente of suche as shal reade the matter of this disputation Resolution of the Ministers WHo affirme according to the former propositions alwaies mētioned by them also the better to confirme the faithe of the Duches that as S. Cyprian writeth it is incertaine whether the Symbol which beares the name of the Apostles was made composed suche one by them or els drawne and gathered of their Doctrine and also why it is called Symbolum whether it be by reason that euery one of them broughte his parte and portion to it or that it is a marke or certaine signe of Christian Religion as touching whiche Regardes it is a thing indifferente for Saluation as hauing alwayes one equall weighte and authoritie whether the Apostles write it or whether it was faithfully gathered of their writings as were also the Symbols aswel of Niceus as of Athanasius of whom the Church neuer doubted that they conteined not a pure Apostolicall Doctrine as shée hathe well and euidently declared in ordeining that the saide Symboll of Nyceus shoulde be openlye published to the people when they assembled for the Communion the same being in obseruation at this day in the Churche of Rome where this Symboll is readde and sunge euery Sonday in the Temples whiche if it conteined not Apostolicall Doctrine it shoulde impugne the 59. Articles of the Councell of Laodicene by whiche it is forbidden to reade in the Churche any thing of Priuate inuention but onely the Doctrine comprehended in the Canonicall Bookes of the Olde and Newe Testament whose number is there made The Ministers doo further affirme that the reason and principall cause of the Faithe which Christians adde to this Créed is the knowledge they haue that it is the pure woord of God and he that teacheth it mainteines also that it is Gods woorde the same appearing by the testimony and writing of S. Paule who after he hath proponed to the Corinthians the Deathe Buriall and Resurrection of Iesus Christe whiche be the principall Articles of the Créede as vpon whiche also our iustification is chiefely founded Addeth this speache that he hathe geuen them that whiche he hathe receiued whiche is that Christe is deade for our sinnes according to the Scriptures and after that he was buried and is risen againe the thirde daye according to the Scriptures Christe him selfe also proposing in like sorte his Deathe and Resurrection to his twoo Disciples alleageth to them the Scriptures for their more assurance saying Oh fonde weake of hart to beleue all things that the Prophets haue pronounced was it not méete the Christ suffred these things and that he entred into his glorie then beginning at Moyses and the other Prophetes he declared to them in all the scriptures the things that were of him selfe In the same chapter appearing to them after his Resurrectiō yea afore the créede was made speaking to them of his death and resurrection for their better assuraunce he laies vnto them the scriptures saying It is so written and it was méete that Christ suffred and rise from death the third day by which wée maie inferre that for the grounde of Faithe and assurance of the Articles of the same there is no better meane than to propone the Scriptures And albeit in the tyme of the Natiuitie of the Churche the Créede was proponed to suche as were Catechised afore the Apostles or Euangelistes had sette downe any thing in writing yet it foloweth not for all that that there were not other scriptures vppon which mighte be founded euery Article of Faithe Whiche to decypher by péecemeale the Article of Creation hathe his fundation vppon the beginning of Genesis The Article of the Almightinesse of God hathe his grounde vppon the 40. of Esaie and many other places of scripture The Article of the Conception of Iesus Christe vppon the vij of Esay For the place of his Natiuitie vppon the v. of Micheas and for the Regarde of the Time vppon the xlix of Genesis and ix of Daniel The Article of his death the Crosse vpon the xxij Psalme xxxv of Esay and ix of Daniel The Article of Resurrection vppon the xvj Psalme the Article of Ascension vppon the xcviij Psalme the Article of the Iudgemente in Daniel xij the Article of his sending the holy ghost in Ioel ij the Article of the Church in Esay 2. and Micheas 4. the Article of Remission of
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
the Question For the Doctours demaunde seeing it is essentiall and naturall to a body earthly and heauie in respecte of his waight and heauinesse to tende downeward to know if God by his only vertue against the natural propertie of a body heauie and waighty can not hold and suspend it on highe And touching the euasion which the Ministers make of a most strong and mightie argument againste their Doctrine that two bodies may be in one place according to the proofe taken of the scripture not only to iustifie that God can bring to passe that two bodies may be in one place but also that he hath done it serues for nothing to couer their erroure as to say that in S. Iohn it is not written that our Lord did not enter by the gates shutte but that he was in the midst of them and stoode where the saide Ministers helde their peace and omitted this Verbe venit reasting onely vppon this Verbe stetit For the expresse Texte of S. Iohn Chapter .21 verse .19 saythe that the doores being shut Iesus came into the place where the Disciples were assembled and was there in the middest of them And therefore we nowe aske them séeing the Scripture sayeth he came thither the Doores being shutte and was in the middest of them Whether he was in the middest of them and in the saide place wythoute entring Or if he dyd enter seeing the Texte beares that the Doores were shutte when hee came how will they proue by the Scripture that he entred there but by the shutte doores the same séeming a greater miracle to be in the middest of his Disciples without entring into the place where they were This refuge is too light to saie it is not written that he entred For S. Augustine in his Booke de Agone Christiano Chap. 24. vseth these woords Nec nos moueat quòd clausis ostijs subito euâ—n apparnisse Discipulis scriptum est vt propterea negemus illud fuisse humanuÌ„ quia contra naturam huius Corporis videmus illud per clausa ostia intrare omnia enim possibilia sunt Deo. Nam ambulare super aquas contra naturam huius Corporis esse manifestum est tamen non solum ipse Dominus ante Passionem ambulauit sed etiam Petrum ambulare fecit Wherein appeares that S. Augustine holdes openly that our Lord entred by the shutte doores referring the whole to the almightinesse of God. Besides the Texte of S. Luke ioined with the authoritie of S. Iohn declares that he entred throughe the doores for the Apostles had not had reasonable occasion to thinke it was a Sprite and not a Body seeing him in the semblance of a man before them but that he entred otherwayes than a true Body and a true man can doo meaning that he entred by the shutte doores whiche a true man and true body coulde no waye doo Neither coulde it serue to any pourpose to saie that the doores were open and then shutte by myracle or otherwayes For so mighte a true body a true man enter the same taking away al occasion to thinke that it was a Sprite or Vision Moreouer the Doctours saie that all the Auncient Heretikes and Christians were of this common accorde that Iesus Christe passed through but their difference was suche as at this daye is betwene the Doctours and the Ministers The Aunciente Heretikes helde that Christe after his Resurrection had not a true bodye bicause he did woorkes contrary to the nature of a body the same implying contradictioÌ„ in the naturall body that in one instante he was in one selfe place with an other bodye as when he had passed throughe the doores The Ancient Christian Catholikes aunswered that truely the nature of the Body bare that he coulde not passe throughe the doores issue out of the bodye of the Virgyn in his byrthe without breaking it nor come throughe the stone of the Sepulcher in his Resurrection but yet that it did not imply contradiction that two bodies shoulde be together by the Omnipotencie of God bicause it was so happened in the three cases done and recited The firste that speakes of it is Iustinus Martyr in the 117. Question againste the Gentiles wherein he makes this Demaunde If a bodye grosse or thicke saith he be lette to be able to passe throughe the doores howe did our Lorde enter the doores being shutte after his ResurrectioÌ„ And if it be so why was the stone rolled by the Angel from the mouthe of the graue to the ende his body might rise againe he aunsweres euen as our Lorde withoute chaunging his Bodye into a Sprite walked vppon the sea making in deede by his Diuine power the sea harde to walke vpon it and not onely to beare his body but S. Peters also euen so by his diuine power came he out of his graue the stone lying vppon it and entred to his Disciples the doores being shutte by whiche as we haue to vnderstande that things procéeding of diuerse vertues oughte to haue a like Faithe euen so wée oughte to know that suche things as passe nature when they are done in the same by power diuine ought not be measured according to the reason and propertie of nature in whiche respecte our Lorde séeing his Disciples troubled with his entrie offered them to touch the partes of his body the markes skarres of his woundes to the end they might sée he did not enter by changing his bodye into a sprite but in his proper body composed of his conuenient dimensions thicknesse and that by his Diuine almightinesse which did al things excéeding the force of nature S. Hilarie in his third Booke of the Trinitie euen of thée saith he which wilt search things iuscrutable be iudge of Gods secrets his power I aske couÌ„sel that thou giue me reason and solution only of this deede yea to me that am ignorant beleue simply in God touching al things as he hath saide and pronounced them I meane that as the Lord hath oftentimes presented himselfe after his Resurrection to be séene and knowne of those who beleued it not So the same Lorde applying him selfe to the imbecilitie of our vnderstanding and to satisfie the doubtes of the vnfaithefull shewes a secrete an acte of his Omnipotencie Therefore expounde to me who euer thou arte that wilte be a searcher of the Omnipotencie of God the reason of this facte The Disciples were enclosed together and drawne into a secrete place the Lorde reuealed him selfe to Thomas to confirme his Faithe according to the condition he desired that is to touche his body and proue his woundes For whiche reason and cause it muste needes be that he bare euen that true body wherein he had receiued those woundes I aske then séeing he was Corporall by what parte of the house did he thruste or intrude him selfe within For I see the Euangelistes opnion is plaine that Iesus came the doores being shutte and was amidde his Disciples Did
are obiected to corrupte the scripture the Doctors say the the Ministers can not deny that they chaunge not the sense and glose the matter of the Supper this is my body this is my bloude By which and suche like Authorities vnder pretext of obscure reasons euery one may pretend to corrupte the other Scriptures and alleage certaine impossibilities of nature and contradictions For the Article beginning touching the opinion of the scripture that the body c the Doctors say that in time and place they will declare their Obiections and make a more large discourse of the Sacrament of the Altare Touching the Obiection of the Doctoures that the contrary parte doe not grounde their affirmation which is that God can not bring to passe that one body be in two places vppon the expresse testimonie of the Scripture or that they can deduce it thereof the Ministers haue alleaged for all their places but that God can not lie God can not deny him selfe But the Doctoures say this consequence is nothing woorthe God can not lie God then can not bring to passe that one body be in two places which notwithstanding it had behoued the Ministers to haue made so if the places brought in had serued to the purpose like as also when it is saide that God can not lie as the Ministers haue recited to be able to lie is not power but infirmitie So that it behoued to say thus according to the true sense God is not infirme or weake as to be able to lie than God cannot bring to passe that one body be in two places which consequence woulde be ridiculare And where the Ministers haue broughte in certaine authorities of the Auncientes to proue that there is diuersitie betwéene the Creatures and the Creator and that the Creator by Nature is euery where and the Creatures are not in diuers places naturally The Doctoures receiue with reuerence the Authorities of the holy Fathers but there was no néede of their trauaile to produce the saide places for the confirmation of a thing so manifest and which was not in difficultie But the Doctors are yet to vnderstand one only place of the Scripture or one onely Testimonie of the Auncientes which sayeth that God coulde not bring to passe that one body were in diuers places The Doctoures desire the Ministers to receiue with like reuerence the Auncients specially touching the interpretation of the holy Scripture whose Exposition shall be the iudge betwéene them and the Ministers Vppon a request made to the Lorde of Neuers by the Ministers to assigne a day for Aunswere particularely to euery Article and reproche heaped before by the Doctoures in their Obiections The saide Lorde prouided that the Ministers shoulde take away with them at nighte one of the Copies of the Obiections to the ende to come readely prepared the next day by noone to Aunswere them whereunto the doctoures agréed who for their partes made like request for sufferaunce to Replie to the Ministers Aunsweres if they sawe it were so good with the which they will giue Resolution touching this Article of Gods omnipotencie to the ende to passe further and examine the Reall veritie of the bodie of Christe in the Sacramente of the Altare like as also the Ministers for their partes doe agrée to yelde a full Resolution to what so euer shall be deduced by them The morowe folowing being Wedensday the seuentens of Iulie the companie being assembled the Lorde of Neuers considering that the day afore the Doctoures had furnished all the time so that the Ministers had no oportunitie to aunswere presently thoughte there was no lesse leisure due to them to Aunswere and therefore with other necessary respectes which woulde haue bene a long and weary season he ordained from thence foorthe the conference to passe by wryting and that the Ministers shoulde bring againe the Copie that was giuen them to Aunswere and sende it vnto him signed by them and two Notaries whereof he woulde cause his secretorie to drawe oute an other copie to sende to the Doctoures reseruing with him selfe the Originall and in like case woulde sende the Ministers the copie of such as the Doctoures should send to him Wherunto the one and other parte submitted them selues and disputed afterwarde by wryting as foloweth The Aunswere of the Ministers to the Doctoures Obiections giuen vppon Tuesday the sixtienth of Julie THey denie that the Doctoures consequence is necessary which is God can not bring to passe that one body be in two places at one instant and that therfore God is not almightie bicause Gods omnipotencie ought not be measured but by the things only conformable to his will and do not derogate either his nature his wisedom his truth or the order he hath established in the world Whereunto that which the Doctoures preferre dothe directly resiste that one selfe body at one selfe instante may be in diuers places by which it should folowe that a body may be a body and not be limitted and so by consequence that he may be and may not be all together For the measures as to be long large and thicke and to be bounded and limitted within certaine endes are so essentiall to the bodie that withoute them he is no more a bodie in whiche spéeche the Ministers doe in nothing diminishe Goddes omnipotencie but of the contrarie establishe it not attributing to him any mutabilitie or chaunge in his Councell nor contradiction in his will for feare to make him lie a thing impossible to him by the Scripture And touching that which the Doctoures alleage of the ancientes that they haue not denied the almightinesse of God the Ministers haue declared héere before that they haue and in what cases it may happen yea Fertullian in his Booke which he wrote against Praxeas speaking of this matter vseth this spéeche Certainely nothing is hard to god But if withoute iudgement we vse this sentence and interprete it according to our fond fansie we may faine al things of God and say he hathe made them bicause he coulde make them wherin we must not beléeue that bicause he might and may do all things that therefore he hath made that which he hath not made but rather to enquire if he haue made it and so the conclusion folowes that the power of God is his wil and his not power likewise his not wil. It rested then to the doctors to shewe that God would make a body which in one instant should be in diuers places as to shew that he could do it And it is a maruellous matter that they impute againste the ministers to derogate the almightinesse of God as to except frō the same that which is contrary to his wil séeing they themselues confesse it and except the same things as standing betwéene them and the Doctors no other difference than that they say that God brings to passe that one body be in diuers places in one instante bicause he can doe it and the
Ministers affirme that he doth it not and can not doe it bicause he vvill not for that according to Tertullian the power of God is his will. Touching the Doctoures reason of Philosophie to proue that a body in respecte it is a body forbeares not to be in diuers places the Ministers say that they suppose a false which is that the quantitie is accidentall and not essentiall to the body For that a body is measured limitted and circumscript is so of his essence that without it it is no more a bodie according to S. Augustines opinyon speaking euen of the bodie of Iesus Christe glorified that if they take from a bodie his space he hathe no more place where he can be and by Consequence being no where he is no more The reason of their Philosophie touching the firste Heauen not to be in any place the Ministers denie it seeing to vse the speache of the Scripture we must confesse that euen aboue the Heauens there is place As Christe saide to his Disciples I go to prepare you a place and in the very place in the house of my Father be many dwellings And in an other place There where I am taking the Present for the Future there shal be my seruaunte in whiche sentence wée muste obserue that there be Aduerbes of Place S. Augustine writing to Dardanus holdes expresse opinion that the Body of Iesus Christe must necessarily be in some place in Heauen bicause it is a true Body Besides in the number of the erroures heretofore condemned by the facultie of Paris it is said expressely that the Heauen called by them Empyreum is the place of Angelles of happy Soules and Humaine bodyes glorified Touching that whiche the Doctours pretende that by the Ministers Doctrine mainteining that a Bodye cannot be without place nor in many places at one instante maye be inferred that they blaspheme the power of god The Ministers of the contrary saie that the Doctoures blaspheme his Maiestie whiche they diminishe as giuing to the Creature that which belongs to him alone that is to be incircumscript as appeareth by Dydimus in his Booke of the Holy Ghoste where he proues that the Holy Sprite is God and not a Creature bicause it is circumscripte and all creatures necessarily are circumscripte and lymited The same resembling also the opinions of S. Basile Vigilius and the Maister of Sentences in the firste Booke Where they confesse that the Ancientes happy Sprites are circumscript albeit they are not corporal Bodyes they reason directely againste themselues and properly to proue our opinion heretofore of Bodyes whiche is that it cannot be but in what place so euer they are they are circumscripte For by an argumente of the Lesse to the More if the Aungelles whiche haue no Dimension nor measure be by their confession necessarily circumscripte as being creatures by greater reason the bodyes of men which be Creatures and measured muste be so And where they alleage that the Auncientes haue not saide that a Body by the power of God cannot be in diuers places that impugnes S. Augustine in his 30. Treatise vpon S. Iohn which is recited de Consec Distinct a. C. Prima quidem where speaking of the body of Christe he saith precisely that the Bodye of our Lorde wherewith he rose againe muste be in one place teaching thereby that at one time it cannot be in diuerse places And touching their reason taken of the Sacramente to enforce and proue their saying the Ministers aunswere that the Angelles neuer vnderstood nor saide that the body of Iesus Christe was in Heauen and in the Sacramente in one self sort maner nor that he was in the Sacrament otherwayes than sacramentally And where they pretend to proue in their resolution that the Angels may in one instant be in diuerse places whē we vnderstande their reasons they shal be aunswered Their speache deliuereth absurditie to saie that a Bodye being dispoiled of his Dimensions forbeares not for all that to be a Body For if it happened that a substance Corporall were wholy dispoiled of his dimēsions it should be no more a Body but a substance not Corporal of like nature to the Aungelles and Sprites And albeit God by his power may separate the Dimensions of a substance withoute corrupting it yet it cannot be but they muste be separated from a Bodye without corrupting the same bicause the Qualitie and Dimensions be Accidentes of the Substance but not of the Body which cannot subsiste without them bicause they are of his proper Essence And where the Doctours inferre after in their obiection that the weight in a body is a thing essential the Ministers denie it and by this reason if it were of the Essence of the Bodye the Bodye failing it muste also cease to be And yet we sée that the Body of Iesus Christ glorified to the which the bodyes of all the Electe shal be conformed after the Resurrection dothe not forbeare to be and subsiste albeit at this daye it be exempt from al weightinesse Touching theire moste strong and mighty Argumente that if twoo Bodyes maye be together in one place one body may also be in diuers places at one instant the Ministers withoute graunting their Antecedente saie theire Consequence vnder correction is not good as the Argumente it selfe is moste weake Adding this further that the Doctoures neither haue proued nor euer can proue by Scripture nor any Authoritie of the Auncientes no nor any sufficiente Reason that either the matter of theire Antecedente or the Consequence they inferre vppon it are true Where the Doctoures to proue that twoo bodyes may be together in one place alleage scripture that Christe entred the house where his disciples were the doores being shutte the Ministers aunswere that it is not written that he entred by the doores shutte but onely the doores being shutte whiche the Aunciente Interpreter hath giuen well to vnderstande expounding in one of the places of S. Iohn where standes mention of the matter afore recited Cum Fores essent clausae When the doores were shutte came Iesus c. Yet the Ministers saie they beleue and are assured of the cleare opinion of the Scripture that the doores being shutte he came and stoode in the middest of his Disciples But that it cannot be defined nor determined whiche waye he entred whether throughe the Walles or by the Gates of Woode whiche S. Hilarie him selfe puttes in doubte in his place alleaged by the Doctours what soeuer it be the Ministers say that in entring he made his way myraculously the one body whether it were the wood or the wal made place to the body of Iesus Christ entring or that an opening was made to him by the Aungel who opened shut the doores againe in a moment as hath bene said before But in what fashion so euer it was done two bodyes were neuer founde together in one selfe place Touching that they alleage of S. Augustine in his Booke de Agone Christiano
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
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
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
the greatnesse of our God to maintein his woorkes incredible by nature which are comprehended in his woord in our Faith and also to confute all suche as woulde deny any of them as impossible to be done by any manner what so euer And bicause Caluin and Beza with their Ministers raise them selues against the power and greatnesse of our Lorde and openly deny him to be able to commit the body bloude of Iesus Christ vnder the formes of Breade and Wine and bicause also that in the Religion pretended reformed to resist the efficacy of the woorde This is my Body this is my Bloude they teach not a more great reason nor more familiare to al those that are out of the way than the impossibilitie of God to be able to make a body to be in twoo or many places that is to say in the Sacrament and in Heauen wée obiecte with good righte to the Ministers that in their Doctrine they derogate the firste Article of Faithe which is of the Almightinesse of god And also we knowe that the anciente manner of the Christians disputing againste the aduersaries of Faith was oftentimes to beginne to aske whether that whereon they doubted were possible to God or not or whether onely he woulde not doo it in which sorte and order Tertullian and others propone the pointes wherein they enter into contention againste the Heretikes In like sort afore we passe further into the matter of the holy SacrameÌ„t we would in preamble wise fele of the Ministers whether they iudged it to be in Goddes power to make a body occupy many places or whether only he would not c. wherein wée are enforced to aduertise al Christians of one manner of dealing common to al the Ministers of the pretended reformed Religion which is when they are asked if God can establish the body of Iesus Christ in the Sacrament or not they aunswere that there is no question of the power of God but of his Will onely And when wée produce matter which declares the will of God then of the contrary they deny that his wil is suche bicause it is impossible to him Alleaging here their contradictions according to the nature of the body And bicause they thinke this to be impossible in action they depraue and interprete the woorde of the Supper otherwayes than either it beares or is written Here is also to be noted that wherin an Almaine called Heshusius reprocheth Caluin that he his felowe Ministers are goodly noble amplifiers of the power of God but when it comes to the déede and pushe as the saying runnes they neither giue or graunte him any more than they thinke méete to introduce their errours and fansies resembling as the saide Almaine compares them a good Traitor who most dooth cherishe and magnifie a man when he is most ready to betray him as Iudas did our Lorde wherin wée are constrained to say of the Ministers touching Goddes Almightinesse as Tertullian saith of the Heretikes Credendo non credunt which is in beleuing the Omnipotencie they beleue it not for when they haue saide that there muste be no exception they hold againe an other way that it must not stretch to euery thing that mannes sprite can conceiue and so they will not apply it but to what they thinke good couering themselues with the nature wisedome eternal wil of God which are no lesse vnknowne and incomprehensible to them than his Omnipotencie in which respecte wee aduise euery one not to be abused with the speach of Caluin nor his ministers but to consider the woorkes which they deny to be in the power of god Wée haue produced to them these foure questions Whether God may make a body to be in twoo places and of the contrary twoo bodyes in one place Whether he can lodge one body in one space lesse than his greatnesse and whether he can make it inuisible which haue bene specially culled and chosen for that vpon them are founded the principal arguments of the pretended reformed Religion againste the true presence of the Bodye and Bloude of Iesus Christ in the Holy Sacrament Wée beleue simply as al other things that the foure questions are possible to God and haue proued it by the infinitie of his power both by the scriptures who giue vnto him al vertue ouer creatures without any exception and also by Examples and straunge myracles don vpon bodyes against their natures which are writteÌ„ as Tertullian holdeth in his Booke of the Resurrection to the ende wée beleue that our God is more mighty than al Lawe and nature of al bodyes whereunto he addes that such knowe God very euill who thinke that he hath not in his power things which thei cannot comprehende in their fansie From whence it comes as S. Cyril saith that such wicked sprites reiecte and condemne al things as impossible bicause they vnderstand them not Besides wée thinke wée haue sufficiently shewed no lesse by expresse scripture than by the Exposition of the same taken of the Ancient Christians that it was not only in Gods power to make twoo bodyes to be in one place and one body without place equall to his greatenesse but also that he had already truely done it in the byrth of the body of our Lorde Iesus Christe in the Resurrection of the same â—â—is entry throughe the doores shutte and in his Ascension aboue al the Heauens like as also wee haue deduced that there was equall and like repugnancy in those deedes as in the other of one body in twoo places whiche by the scripture is no more excepted from the power nor will of God than the others as to iudge it impossible to be done neither hath there bene any Christian afore our time which durst affirme the same to be impossible and out of the power of God notwithstanding the occasion was often offered if they had any waye estéemed it impossible as the Ministers of the supposed refourmed Religion pretende Of the contrary the most parte of the auncient Authours of the Primitiue Churche haue holden expressely that it was in Goddes power to bestowe a creature in many places according to S. Ieromes opinion againste the Heretike Vigilantius that the soules of the Sainctes maye assiste in many places with the immaculate Lambe our Sauiour Iesus Christe Yea there was question Whether the saide soules and sprites of the Holy ones did assiste at any time the Churches where their Graues and Monumentes were the same resembling with S. Augustine in his Booke whiche he wrote of the care to be had of the Dead Chapter 16. wher he saithe that by the power of theire nature the soules cannot be here belowe and in Heauen or in many places but that the same may be done by the power of God and he will not resolue whether they vnderstande our affayres by suche assistaunce in many places or by reuelation of the Aungels or other meane of the power and grace of God. Morouer it is
to him and yet notwithstanding he may be incircumscript For if it be necessary that the dimensions wherof he is composed be terminable it folowes then necessarily that he is termined limited and circumscript Afterwardes where they say that our reasons takeÌ„ of the Creede alleaged to proue that the body of Iesus Christe is in heauen in place certaine are friuolous we Answere that therein they shewe the reuerence they beare to the woorde of God and his holy spirite which hath reuealed it vnto vs and to his Apostles who haue pronounced it to vs. To iustifie Gratian and the Canon which we alleage of S. Augustine as prouing therby that the body of Iesus Christe muste necessarilye be in a certaine place Wée alleage againe for more ample confirmation the Maister of sentences Lib. 4. Distinct 10. who reciting the selfe same texte of S. Augustine vseth this verbe Oportet and not Potest Where the Doctours alleage Iustine to proue that the myracles which were done when Christ appeared in the middest of his Disciples the doores being shutte and when he walked vppon the waters were done in his person Wée maruell muche that the Doctours doo yet repeate that seeing the same Iustine as hathe bene already aunswered them saithe in expresse termes that at the time when the saide myracles were done there happened no chaunge in the body of Iesus Christ which as it had bin necessary if the myracles had bin done in his person so wée confesse stil as many times wée haue done that the cause of the saide myracles and the Diuine vertue of which they procéeded rested in Iesus Christ as when he healed the sicke that touched him with other myracles recited in the Histories of the Gospelles which were done by him but not in him but in the person of those that were healed There is greate difference betweene those myracles and them of his Transfiguration and Resurrection which were done by his onely vertue and in his proper person Vppon the importunate repetition whiche the Doctoures make aswel touching the meane of the byrth of our Lord Iesus Christe as of the terme Aphantos The Ministers no lesse to auoide the losse of time than to gréeue or trouble the Readers sende them to their former aunsweres Wée maruell also that the Doctoures to proue their penetration pretended of twoo bodyes and theire dimensions will grounde their proofe and principell Argumente vpon the proper signification of the woord to Penetrate For be it that by the French terme they woulde interprete the Gréeke woorde Pâ—eâ—cliestai or the Latine woorde Penetrare yet it shoulde be alwayes impossible to them to proue that which they pretend And to shew it is so in the Actes of the Apostles chapter 1â— 10. it is saide of the Aungel and S. Peter that they passed the firste seconde warde And in S. Luke 4 3â— but he passed through the middes of them and wente his way And in S. Iohn 4.4 He must passe by Samaria in al which places the Doctoures cannot finde that the terme Diercherstai alleaged in the said places may be any wayes applied to their penetration of dimensions neither can they proue any more that the terme Penetrare which the Auncient Translatour hathe vsed in 2. Timoth. 3. may be referred to their said penetration Wée say further that the Doctoures oughte not to finde it more strange that Iesus Christ mounting into heauen with a body termined and limited made himselfe opening to enter therin than wheÌ„ he discendes betwene the hands of Priests singing their masses for then as S. Gregorie saith the heauens are opened to make him passage albeit that according to their imagination his body be then separated from his measures dimensions The Doctors ought to haue conteÌ„ted themselues with the answer which we made them vpon the similitude parable of the Camel. For first they could no way proue that the saying of Iesus Christ vpon the end of the speach ought to be referred otherwaies than to the next member of the same where is spoken of the conuersion sauing of the Rich séeing the Pronoune Demonstratiue Hoc shewes it clearly After notwithstanding the proposition generall whiche is vpon the end coÌ„clusion of the said speach that al things are possible to God stretcheth aswel to the Camel as to the rich men as the doctors hold yet to accomodate the two parts of the comparison thei must confesse that as changing is necessary to the rich man to be saued so is it also to the body of the Camel to make him passe through the hole of a néedle but what so euer it be in what manner so euer that may be done the doctors shal neuer proue or conclude by that that two bodies may penetrate one an other Bicause the doctors by their most mighty and strong Argumentes coulde not conclude any their said absurdities nor enforce vs by force of their reasons to coÌ„fesse them they doo nothing but crye blasphemie blasphemie the same being the last shift of al men that despite and whet their téeth against the Truthe and mainteiners thereof when they can not ouercome them If wée woulde subscribe to their errours and abuses wée should be good and Catholike men but bicause wée resist and reproue them wée are in their opinion Heretikes Seducers Blasphemours and Atheistes Yea they haue in vs such horrour that it is maruel they rent not as did Caiphas their hoodes and hattes in spite of Gods woorde proponed defended by vs and condemned by them as Blasphemy The doctours haue dissembled our place of scripture alleaged to proue that faith is a worke of God that it produceth in the hart of the faithful when he wil regenerate him speaking by chaunge of Frée wil and Merite of Woorkes wherein wée are determined to answere and mainteine the truthe of these twoo pointes with Gods grace againste the enimies of his glorye when they shal be proponed to be debated vppon And touching the ioy that they say they haue receiued for that wée haue confessed to haue read in no ancient Authour or expresse termes that God cannot bring to passe that one body in one instant be in diuers places they haue no great cause to reioice at it séeing that albeit the said ancients haue not spokeÌ„ it in expresse speach yet haue they both said and written it in termes equiualent and that in infinite places A shorte resolution of al the discourse and aunsweres whiche the Ministers haue made vppon the matter of Goddes Omnipotencie in the conference which they haue had with the Doctoures THe craft art of Sathan hath bene alwaies from the beginning of the world to traÌ„sfigure him self into an Angel of light search some fine preteÌ„ce to colour distinguish him self as vnder such colour to insinuate into the church of God there to sette abroach his Lyes trumperies like as we sée that vnder the colour to honor God he hath established al the Idolatry
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
1. Cor. Cap. 11. Whereunto howe so euer the Ministers Aunswere the Doctoures desire that the text of Caluine together with the reasons which he brings of the holy spirite may be well weighed and considered They Obiect further that the Ministers in their Supper attribute more to the humaine vertue than to the omnipotencie of God yea they doe more than God coulde doe as in that they vaunt to doe a thing by their Faith which implies contradiction saying in their Confession of Faithe exhibited at Poissi to the Bishoppes which were in the congregation that Faith makes things absent present at one instant in one place that is in the soules of the Faithfull when they make the supper the same being as much as if they had saide that faith makes things not present present in one time place so as to euery Faithful man in the Supper comming woorthily the Body of Iesus Christe is there present in vertue of Faith And yet is he not there present as themselues holde saying He is but in Heauen wherein maye be séene implication of contradiction that is presente and not presente Really neither can it serue to any purpose a little stippe or scape whiche they saide to vs that the body of Christe is on high corporally but in the hearts of the Faithfull in the supper spiritually For the spiritualitie can not take away the substance of the thing and their Faith can not bring to passe that a body is not a body and that a body hathe not his dimensions as they haue saide héere before Therefore in what sorte so euer they confesse that the Faithfull in the Supper receiue the substance of the body of Iesus Christe into their soules they muste necessarily and willingly confesse that either their Faithe is more mightie than the vertue and infinite power of God or else that God can bring to passe that his body shall be locally in Heauen and Sacramentally Really notwithstanding and substancially in the Sacrament of the Aultare in which pointe the Doctoures desire to heare the Ministers and after to sette downe their Aunswere by writing The Ministers can neuer shewe by the woorde of God that their Faithe can bring to passe that in one instant and in one place a thing shall be present and not present And it is as muche to say a thing present and not present by Faithe as to say the body of Iesus Christe is in a Faithfull man and is not Neither néede there to be put any chanell of the power of the holy Spirite to make the Fleshe of Iesus Christe slide from Heauen hither if the saide Fleshe were not but in Heauen and yet come to vs. And touching the poyntes which the Doctoures haue obiected that Peter Martyr and Theodore de Beza were the first that saide that God could not bring to passe that one body might be in two places which newe Doctrine the Ministers would confirme by antiquitie we not name it otherwayes than blasphemie The Doctors say that many times they haue prayed the ministers not to lose time to the end things might be better cleared to say nothing that were not to purpose which notwithstanding they alleage forthwith the testimonies of the fathers to shew that a body by nature is circumscript naturally can not be in many places but the same authors speake nothing that God is able to do it And yet S. Augustine and others in their places recited by the Doctors touching the Article of the doores being shutte witnesse that by the power of God two bodies may occupie one place which containes the like difficultie and when it comes to the profe of the reall presence of the body and bloud of Christ they are to shew euidently that all the auncients wholly which haue spoken of the Sacrament haue not onely confessed hys abilitie to bring to passe that his body was on highe in heauen and héere belowe in the Sacrament but also they with one accorde haue aduouched to beléeue according to the woorde of Iesus Christe that he is in Heauen and heere in the Sacrament The Doctoures demaunde of the Ministers if any afore Peter Martyr and Theodore de Beza haue denyed this power of God whome they maruell not if they so muche magnifie séeing of them they haue taken all the places alleaged For the Article that begins where the Doctours pretende that the forme c the Doctoures say this forme is common as often as the power of God is debated vppon neither can she proofe be better guided than to folowe the woorde of the Aungell that there is nothing impossible to God From which when any thing is exempted there is alleaged the selfe same that the Ministers inferre that there is a repugnancie of things wherof folowes an implication of contradiction as did the auncient Heretikes against the Fleshe of Iesus Christe alleaging alwayes some impossibilitie according to nature doing the like againste the Article of Resurrection and Incarnation as if there had bene contradiction that God was man man was God As shall be easie to a wicked mind to forge alwayes some contradiction in his spirite according to the propreties of nature for the Article beginning wher the Doctors alleage that God can change c The Doctoures say they haue not well conceiued their meaning For they take for a thing absurde that a substance resting affected of his qualities may by Gods power haue effectes contrary to his qualities As if God coulde not bring to passe by his omnipotencie that the fire possessing his natural heat in place to burne do refreshe and qualifie which no man of sounde iudgement and a Christian would not denie For the Article touching the limitation of the povver c the Doctoures say it séemes by the Aunswere of the Ministers that Gods power is limitted according to his will which is as muche to say as God can not but that which he willes which is manifestly false Touching the Hebrue alleaged it séemes the Ministers haue desire to shewe their skill therein For suche recitall is nothing to purpose resting principally vpon the woorde danar which is as muche to say as a thing but it meanes not that we oughte to vnderstand it as a thing done the sense of the place is suche by the woorde shall any thing be hid from me And bicause harde things be hid and things impossible also more hid they haue therefore turned is there any thing hard or impossible to me which Pagninus and other interpreters of the Hebrue tonge shew well that the verbe Pala signifieth to hide The Doctoures had not made Aunswere to this but to make it knowne that they are not astonied at one woorde of Hebrue For the Article beginning touching the daunger c the Doctours say they are but woordes superfluous and what so euer the Ministers were able to produce others mighte vse againste them And where they say it is a reproche in that they