THAT Somwhat I should write vnto your highnes of the expresse worde of God, (Right myghty kyng Sigismond) the vnbrideled bould­nes of the heretikes of our age hath moued me. VVho albeit emong them selues they be wonderfully di­uided, yet doth eche secte of them, so conten­tiously challenge the same vnto themselues, [Page] yea so vsurpe it vnto them selues alone, that from the possession therof, they labour to ex­clude, not only all suche sectes, as dissent frō euery of them, but euen the very Catholikes and right beleuers. For suche is the arrogācy of these men, so great the forgetfulnes of thē selues, that they take all others, to be but foo­les, doultes, and blockes, that cā see nothing in the scriptures and perswade them selues to be the only persons, that haue attayned to the true vnderstanding therof.

But is it leekly, where so great pryde re­steth, where so great inflation of the mynde is, that there can be that Spirit, which [re­steth not but ouer the hūble and meeke, and Esa 66. suche as fearfully tremble at his word?] Very Prouer. 11 notably sayd the wise man. [VVher is humil­lite, ther is wisdo: wher is pryde and swelling of the mynd, ther is follye. For calling thē sel­ues Rom. 1. wise men, they are become fooles. In the lowe valleys (sayeth that holly Kynge and Psal. 103. Prophet) not in the high hills, doth God send foorth the springes and foūtaynes of his gra­ce: he hydeth his mysteries frō the wyse and Matth. 11. reueleth them vnto the hūble and meeke.] Therfore none do lesse vnderstād what is the [Page 2] expresse worde of God, then they which most glory therof, and which do so arrogat vnto thē selues alone the vnderstādig therof that (as the Prouerbe sayeth) they will seme to They are sayd to pryck out the chou­ghs eyes vvhich condēne and out of those thī ­gs vvhich vvith great cō ­sent hath byn allo­vved of old tyme by their forfathers Hiere. 28. pricke owt the choughs eyes. But this is no newe practys. It hath allwayes been the pro­pertie of heretikes to glory of the clere and expresse word of God, and to challēge it vnto thē selues alone. VVith what other shewe or pretēce did the false ꝓphettes, euē before the byrth of Christ, deceiue the people, but with this, of the word of God? VVhē the ꝓphet Hie­remy did foretel many heauy thigs, we reade he vsed to begynne with these wordes, as other the ꝓphets of God did. [Thus sayth our lord:] And did not the false ꝓphet Ananias also vse the same wordes, whē falsely he pro­phecyed farre cōtrary thinges? who our lord denyed to haue beē sent frō him? VVhō in an other place wee heare thus speaking of these false ꝓphets: [Falsly do prophets prophesie in Hie. 14. 29 my name, I sent thē not, I cōmaunded them not, neither spake I vnto thē. They prophe­sie vnto you a false vision, a deceiuable pro­phesie, and the wrōge cōceyte of their owne hart.] And in an other place. [Harken not Hier. 23. [Page] (sayth he) vnto the wordes of prophetes, which prophesie vnto you and deceyue you. They tell you the vision of their own hart, and not out of our lord his mowthe. They saye vn to them which blaspheme me. [The lord Ibidem. hath sayed: peace shalbe with you] and a litle after, he sayeth, [they steal his wordes.]

VVhich place S. Hierome doth thus inter­prett: ‘A lye (sayth he) doth allwayes coun­terfait, Hieron in cōmenta. ibidem. and borowe the likenes of a truthe. For howe could it otherwise abuse and de­ceyue the simple? Euen so therefore as false prophetes did lye vnto the people before the comyng of Christ, saying, [Thus sayth the lord I haue seen the lord, and the word of the lord was shewyd to hym, or to hym:] so doo here­tikes take vnto thē the testimonies of scrip­tures out of the owld and newe testamēt, and steale the wordes of our Sauiour, euery one, of that which cometh next to hand: of the Prophetes, Apostles, and Euangelistes, and take vnto thē their tounges, that therwith they may vtter owt of their mowthes, the poyson of their hartes. Very aptly doth S. Hierom compare heretikes with those lying prophetes, and right well (said he) doth a lye [Page 3] allwayes imitat, and counterfait a trowthe.’ For as the prophetes of God said: [The word of our lord, The mowthe of our lord hath spo­ken it. Thus sayeth our lord] the same phrase and termes vsed also the false prophettes.

But what they bothe prophecied lett vs marke a litle. The prophettes of God rebuked The pro­phetes of God. the sinnes of the people, exhorted them to amendement, and for shewed vnto them, the heauy wrathe of God to hāg ouer their hea­des, that he would cōsume them with swor­de, famyn, and pestilence: That he would oppresse them with most harde bondage, yea and vtterly destroy them with an vniuersal slaughter.

On the other syde, those lying prophettes False pro­phetes. Hiere. 14. (whom our lorde had not sent nor cōmaun­ded) sayde [yowe shall not see the sworde, and hunger shall not be emong you, but the lord will geue you, true and sure peace. They cured (sayth the prophett) the cōtritiō of the Hiere. 6. dowghter of my people slenderly saying pea­ce, peace, yet was there no peace] And as one other prophet saith of those lyars, who said, [Thus sayth the lord] whē the lord had not Ezech. 13. spoken it, [they sowde together cusshins for [Page] the elbowe of euery hand, and made pillowes to lay vnder the heades of euery age, the more easely to entrape their soules.]

How contrary was the preaching of these The diffe­rence betvvene true and false pro­phetts. ij. sortes of prophetes? They thretned, to saue: These lulled, to destroye: Yet in the meane ty­me both prophezied in the name of God: bothe gloried in the worde of the lorde.

But is not the trade and manner of the prophets of our age euen leeke to this? VVhat do they els which be laufully sent of the Ca­tholike Churche, but denoūce vnto the peo­ple the same which Esaie, Hieremie, Eze­chiel, Esa. 58. Daniel, Ioël, Ionas, & other the ꝓphets of God, did in those dayes denounce? They re­buked the wickednes of the people, they ex­horted thē, that beīg drōke, they would awa­ke, weepe, and howle. Fearfull thinges they fortolde thē. And being so put in feare, they exhorted thē, that they should turne vnto Ioell 1. our lord, that they should yeld worthy fruits of penaunce, that so being throughly correc­tyd thy might happely escape the paynes wherwith the lord had threatned thē. And being so turned ageine vnto our lord [yn fa­sting, Ioell 2. weeping, and mourning] then at the [Page 4] last, did they discouer vnto thē, the mercye of our lorde and did forbidde that no person throwgh the greatnes of his sinnes, should dispayre of pardō. [For our lorde is gētle and Ezech▪ 33. mercyful: pacyēt and of much mercy, and one that wilbe intreatid, to remitt his displea­sure. He will not the death of a synner, but rather that he should conuert and lyue:] He followeth not mans impatience, but [loge looketh for our repentaunce] so as yf wee Hiere. 26. yeld worthy fruictz of penaunce he also re­penteth him of his threates, and forbearith to lett faull vppon vs the plages which he denounced, and with our chaunge, is also chaunged him self.

Thus the myndes of mortall mē beyng lyft vp into a better hope, lest perhaps the prea­ching of the greatnes of Gods mercye might make them agayn negligent, and careles, be­hold how he tempered his speeche. [VVho Ioel. 2. knowyth (sayth Ioël) yf he shall turne? yf he shall forbear and leaue behynd him his bles­sing.] ‘As though he would saye (sayth S. Hierome) wee, truly do exhort so myche as Hiero▪ in cōmenta. ibidem. in vs is, to repentaunce, because wee knowe the mercy of God to be vnspea­kable: [Page] but because we can not knowe the bottom of the wisedom and knowledge of God, we temper our speeche, and wishe ra­ther then presume our sinnes to be forgeuen vs.’ And Remigius the Bisshopp of Au­xerre, Remigius Altisiodo rēsis Epis­copus. about 700. yeres past or there about, following herein S. Hierō: ‘They might (sayth he) haue answered, because the lord is pacyēt and of myche mercy, as thow saiest, it is not needful that we afflict our selues and do pe­naunce, for he will haue mercy on vs, what so euer we do. But the prophett to mete with this, sayth: what man liuyng knoweth yf Ioel. 2. God be turned from the fury of his wrathe to mercye? It is not possible for any man to knowe it. It is better that doing penaunce wee meryt to atteyne pardon of our sinnes, and after penaunce doon hauing obteyned remission thereof, then wee offer sacrifice vnto our lord.’

After the same sort more then 400. ye­res past Rupertus Abbat of Tuitia (by Collē) Rupertus Abbas Tu [...]tiēsis. reporting the same wordes. ‘Euē yn penance it self (sayth he) the Prophett wissheth vs to be ware, and taketh away surety.’ Of the same opiniō allso nere 300. yeres past was Albertus [Page 5] (not without cause named the great) whoo expownding the same wordes. ‘Although (saith hee) it bee certaine that God pardo­neth Albertus magnus the cōtryte, yett is it vncertayne whi­ther any man be truly contryte: he shall see that he cā not be correctyd whom God hath Eccl. 7. despysed. The wicked mā prayed to the lord, 2. Mach. 9. of whom yet hee did not obteyne mercye. Cain made oblation, yett God had no regard Gene. 4. Nume. 16 to his sacrifyce. Moises saide of some: be­hold not o lord their oblations.’ Thus farre Albert. Behould how Ioël preached and how euer since by the space of one Thousand ij. hundred yeres by long succession of Priestes and Bisshops, euen to this our age these wor­des of his, haue been vnderstanded.

Yet did not Iohel alone so preache, but Daniel Daniell. 4 allso. VVhen he expownded to the king Nabugodonosor his dreame, did hee not in the beginning terribly feare him, when hee declared what mischieffs should happē vn­to him? yet did he not by and by will him to dispayr: but shewed him the waye wher by he might escape the paynes which were thretnyd vnto him. [Let my councell (sayth he) (O king) please the: Redeme thy sinnes [Page] with almes, and thy iniquitees with mercy toward the poore.] VVith these wordes he brought some comforte to the kinge, being before stryken with a wonderfull feare. Yett would hee not sett him in a carelesnes or surety. He said not, be sure thy sinnes shal be forgeeuē thee, but thus. [God will perhaps forgeeue thy sinnes.] Of wich wordes S. Hie­rom Hierō in Danie. treating: ‘when Daniel (sayth hee) for­knowing thinges to come doubteth of Gods determination, full rashely doo they which bouldly promise forgeuenes to sinnes. And the ordinary Glose saith. This their temery­tee is intollerable.’ Thus thē prophesied Ioëll, and thus Daniell.

But what did the kinge of Niniue when Ionas the prophett fortolde him, it should Ion. 3. The pe­naunce of the kyng of Nini­uee. come to passe, that with in xl. dayes Niniue should be destroyed? did not he (beīg clothed him self in sackcloth and sitting ī ashes) exhorte the people to penaunce, that men and beastes should be couered with sackes, that they should strōgly crye vnto our lorde, that men might be turned frō their euill waye, and from the iniquitees which they had in hand? But did he after suche cōuersion bidd [Page 6] them stande by and by in surety of pardon? No: but as Ioël and Daniel did, so did he: [who knoweth (saith he) yf godd will be tur­ned, and forgeue vs?] which wordes S. Hierō Hierony­mus ibidē expoūding sayth. ‘Therfore this (forgeuenes) is made doutfull and incertain, that while men stād yn doubte of their saluacion, they shoulde the more earnestly doo penaūce and more stirre God vnto mercy.’ which wordes are in like termes repeted of Remigius and Rupertus and yn the ordinary glose. In such sorte that neuer any one mā yn the Church of God semeth otherwise to haue vnderstode the wordes of those ꝓphettes. VVhose māner of preaching yn this point, wee reade the A­postles allso to haue followed. For so did Peter Act. 8. speake vnto Simon Magus, who thought the gift of God might be possessed for moony: [Doo penaunce (saith he) for this thy wic­kednes, No man ought to stand assured of his saluacion and pray to God, to see yf happely this nawghty thought of thy hart may be forge­uen.] If happely (saith he:) he dooth not bid him to be certayne and sure therof.

This doctryne of the prophettes and Apostles, dooth the Catholyke Churche yett howlde, geeuing Terrour to sinners, [Page] that therby shee may the more effectually stirre them to repētawnce, which whē they haue done, shee dooth not therfore cōmaund them by and by to be owt of feare, but ra­ther by all meanes dooth feare them from perillows securite, and well commawndeth Psal. 36. them, [to hope in our lord and to doo good]. But assurednes of forgiuenes of their syn­nes, and certayn knowledge therof to brag­ge of, and yn that suertye rechlesse to rest, shee forbyddeth. For albeit of the mercy of God, of his promyses, of the merytt of Christ his death, of the vertue and efficacye of the sacramentes no good man ought to doubte, yet when anny man respectyth hymself, and his owne infirmitee, hee may well feare and stand yn doubt of Gods grace in his owne parte. This is the preaching of the Catho­lyke Churche, well and rightly agreyng with the doctryne of Esay, Hieremie, Ezechiell, Daniel, Ioël, Ionas, yea and of S. Peter the Apostle.

But doo these men which not muche mo­re then. xxx. yeres passed, departed from vs agree therwith? Naye: rather they seeme, to stand cleane square from this doctrine. [Page 7] For what other thing saye these teachers, The doc­tryn of he retikes. but that which Ananias, Semeias, and the rest of the faulse prophetes sayde, to whom our lord had not spoken? [you shall not see the swoord (say they) there shalbe no famyn emong you, but sure peace wyll the lord gee­ue you.] Peace, Peace, they crye, when pea­ce is not, and denouncyng a sownde slepe se­curyte, deceyue the sowles of many.

For they teache what so euer our woorkes So Luther in lib. de fide Chri­stiana. be, so our fayth be fyrme and stedfast, wee are sure of our saluation, for that God regardeth not woorkes: VVhere yet the playn woordes of the scripture be manyfest to the contrary. Namely where it speakyth of the Niniuites their appeasing of God. [God sawe their wor­kes and because they were turned frō their euill waye, he had mercy of them.] God saw Ion. 3. their woorkes (sayth the Prophet:) These fel­lows on the other syde saye, God regardeth no workes [Behould lord, (sayth the prophet Dauyd) my humillite and trauayll, and par­don Psal. 24. all my synnes] And in an other psalme, [Regard my humillitee, and deliuer me, be­cause Psal. 118. I haue not forgotten thy lawe. Behould (lord) because I haue looued thy commande­mentes, [Page] Quicken me yn thy mercye.

VVhich wordes S. Hilary expounding. ‘The Hilarius super psal 118. prophett (sayth he) reseruyng all to the iud­gement of God, desireth to be deliuered, for Ambrosi' the meryt of his humillitee.’ whom S. Ambro­se following, sayth. ‘As he which hath hūbled his hart, As he, which hath laboured muche there he desireth his sinnes may be forgeuē,’ and here he prayeth to be deliuered. And after a fewe wordes he thus sayth farther. ‘A good wrestlar sheweth his lymmes, that the well orderyng of him self for that feate, may be allowed: he allso then shewyth his lymmes, when after hard tugging, and paynfull grypes, hee is ageyn prouoked to the wrestlyng place: to the end, the Iudge, seing his weary and trauayled body, com­pell him not eft soones to wrestle. She we thow therfore the humillitee of thy hart, that the tokens of thy vertue may appea­re. Shew also the paynfull stryfes thy body hath Indured, that thow mayest saye, I haue wrestled a good pulle. I haue endyd 1. Tim. 4. my race, and the spirituall Iudge beholding, thy striuing for the game, may adiudge vnto thee, the Crowne of iustice, becau­se [Page 8] thow hast accomplisshed the lawe of the game.’ The prophett prayeth godd that hee would regard his humilyte, his tra­uayll, and that he was not forgetfull of his lawe, that hee looued his Comman­dementes, which Saint Ambrose com­maunded also wee should shewe vnto Godd.

But the false prophetes and false Ghos­pellers The fauls prophetes of this our age denye that God, hath any regard to our vvor­kes. of our age, denye that God regardith our workes. They denye that he hath any care of them, and teache, that how so euer our workes be, yett must euery man stand assured here of, that freely for Christes sake, his sinnes be forgeeuen him. That hee is in the fauour of God, and heyre of the lyfe e­uer lasting, for so muche as all our Iustice, and all our holynes, is but This is the clere doctryne of Luther in his Ar­ticles ad Leon▪ 10. Art. 1. & 6 10. 11. 12. & 31. 32.mere synne, and a thing Condempned. As for Contrition that it is a thing so farre from profytyng that it makyth a man the greater synner. That yff remorse of synne doo gnawe any mans conscyence, hym doo they com­mawnd thus to awnswer.

VVhat is synne but Sinne? I am not­withstandyng The vvic­ked saien­ges of he­retikes holly, or yf I be not, yett [Page] Christ is God, As though it were lausull for euery man to be wicked, because Christ is God? By his Iustice (teache they) wee are Iust, by his goodnes wee are good, yea thowgh wee haue not in vs so muche as one sparke of his goodnes. Yea althowgh wee be ouer whel­med yn all kindes of Iniquitee. Looke how muche the more wicked thow art (sayth one of these newe Ghospellers) so muche the sooner dooth God geeue his grace vnto thee. Yea hee Commawndeth his followers, thus to saye, My sinnes doo burdē Christ, not my cō ­science.

But what? maye not wee say with Hie­remie the prophett? [VVoonders are happe­ned Hie. cap. 5. vpon the earthe to the astonning of men. Prophetes prophesied lyes, Priestes clapped their handes, and my people leeked suche thinges.] In dede the people hath lee­ked suche thinges. For so may wee see men rauisshed with the smothe woordes of the­se lyeng prophetes, euen as it were with the sweet songes of meremaydes, that yf a man will go aboute to preache vnto them rather true and holsom thinges, then those which are swete and pleasaunt to the eares, he [Page 9] shall be hissed out of the place. And rude vnlearnyd asses, will not styck sometyme to prescribe vnto the prophettes, what they shall preache, and to teache them of whom they shoold be taught. [See not (say they) looke not owt for vs those thinges which ar ryght: Speake vnto vs pleasing thinges, ‘Looke owt errours for vs.] Preache vnto vs Esaie 30. S. Hierō. in com­mentar. ibidem only fayth. Threaten not hell fyer, but pro­myse vs the kingdom of heauen. that after our ryott, and delycaces, after our incestu­ous wedlockes, wee may yett looke to fynd paradyse open vnto vs. what shewe youe vnto vs the way of the lord which wee are not willing to enter yn to? what doo youe recyte to vs the name of the holly one of Israël,’ which dooth not enter ynto the secrettes of our hartes?

Thow seest (most vertuows kyng) of what sort is the preaching of those, which in this our age call them selues Gospellers, (wher yn deed they haue no agreement with the Gospell,) and what ys agayne the doctryne of the catholykes. Those men commawnd nawght ells, but that eche man sted­fastly beleeue, and rest well assured that [Page] he standeth yn the state of grace, and ys an Luthers doctrine vvorde for vvor­de in lib. de Christi ana liber­tate & in cap. Baby lonica▪ The ma­ner of pre achīg and vniforme doctrine of the ca­tholikes vndoubted heyre of the kyngdom of hea­uen, how so euer his workes be, And with this their vayne surety they lea­de men hedlong to the euerlasting pay­nes of hell.

Our men on the other syde, albeit they cōmaund vs to hope, for mercy at our lorde his handes, yett doo they forbydde men, rechelesse to lyue yn securite, and farther warne them, that they thinke it not Inough to amend, except they yeeld allso woorthy fruictes of penaunce, and shewe foorth by their workes, the fayth which they pro­fesse: That when wee shall appere at the last Iudgement, it shall not be asked of vs what wee beleued, but (beleeuing) what good or euill wee haue done here in this liffe.

But seeme they not on bothe sydes armed with the woordes of the lawe of godd? Tru­ly The scriptures of the catholikes a­gainst Only faithe. Matt. 3. both partes glory of his expresse woorde. Bothe crye▪ the woorde of the lord. The mouthe of the lord hath spoken it. Thus sayeth the lord. The Catholikes bring foorth these scriptures. [Shewe foorth good [Page 10] fruictes of penaunce. Except yee repent Luke. 1 [...] yee shall all perishe. VVee must suffer, with Christ, yf wee wyl be glorified with him, wee must dye with him, yf wee will Rom. 8. 2. Tim. 2 lyue with him, wee must indure with him, yf wee will raigne with him.

If thow wilt enter ynto life, keepe the Matt. 19 loan. 3. commawndementes. If you knowe these thinges, yee are happy so that yee doo them. Thow lord wilt geeue to euery man accor­ding Rom. 2. to his woorkes.

VVee must all be browght before the 2. Cor. 5. iudgement seate of Crist, that eche man may carry away according as hee hath done yn the flleshe either good, or euill. Mercy shall make a place to eche man ac­cording Eccles. 16. Apoc. 22 to the merytt of his workes. I comme quickly, and my reward is with me, to yeeld to euery man according to his workes.

They which haue doon good shall coo­me Ioan. 5. foorth to the Resurrection of lyffe and they which haue doon euyll to the Resur­rection of Iudgement. Man knowyth Eccl. 9. Psal. 18. not whither hee bee woorthy of loue or ha­tred. VVho vnderstandeth his offences? [Page] From my secret and hidden sinnes lorde clense me. who can saye my hart is clea­ne, Prou. 20 Iob. 9. I am pure from synnes? I fearid all my woorkes knowing that thow wooldest not spare an offender. My conscience dooth 1. Cor. 4. not accuse me of any thing, yet am I not Iustified therby. Of synne pardoned, yett stand not cleerly without feare. Say not Eccl. 5. the mercy of the lorde is great, he will haue mercy on the multitude of our sinnes: For his mercye, and wrathe are soone at hand, and wrath is bent vppon synne.

VVith feare and trembling worke your sal­uation. Philip. 2. Blessed is the man▪ that is all way­es Prou. 28. fearfull: He that is without feare can not be iustified.]

These and many others which were to Eccl. 1. long to recyte, are the scriptures wherby the Catholykes and right beleeuers, as by the expresse word of God, Indeuour to pro­ue, that it is not Inough for a man to belee­ue, his sinnes be, thorowgh Christ, forge­uen him, that hee standeth yn good grace, and is an heyre of the lyfe euerlasting, ho­we so euer the matter goe with his workes, but euen as [It behoued Christ first to suffer Luke 24. [Page 11] and so to enter ynto his glory,] so must wee allso suffer before wee come to that glorye, and [as hee walked so must wee allso walke] That wee must [by our good workes make 2. Io. 2. 2. Pet. 1. stronge or sure our vocation,] and yett when wee haue all doon, wee must not stand assured, or Carelesse, but mistrust all our Iob. 9. Luc. 17. Eccle. 5. workes, and [say wee be vnprofitable ser­uauntes,] so farre foorth as wee [be not without feare euen of that synne which is forgeeuen vs.]

They on the other syde which haue de­uyded them selues from the Churche, bring foorth allso their scriptures and defend the contrary opinion. [Hee that beleeueth and is baptised, shall be saued. So God looued Mark 16. Ioan. 3. the world that he gaue his only begotten sonne, that euery mā that beleeueth yn him should not peris he, but haue lyfe euerlastīg. Doo manfully, and feare not at the sight of them. Doo manfully and thy hart shalbe Deut. 31. comfortyd. Saye yee vnto the cowardes, Psal 26 Esai. 35. Ephes. 6. 1. Pet. 5 be yee of good chere, feare not. Putt on you all the armour of God, that yee may resist yn the euyl daye. VVhom resist you being strong yn faythe. Hee hath sent his sonne yn 1. Ioan. 4. [Page] to the world that wee should liue throwgh Rom. 5. him. Godd shewyd foorth his loue towardes vs in that, that when wee were yet sin­ners, Christ was doon to deathe for vs.

The lord gouerneth me and I shall want no­thing, Psal. 22 Ibidem If I walke yn the middes of the sha­dow of death, I will feare no euill, be­cause Psal. 26 thow art with me. The lord is the protector of my lyffe, of whom should I bee Psal. 30 affrayed? In thee (lord) haue I trusted, I shall neuer be Confownded. Sure I am that Rom. 8. neither deathe, nor lyfe, nor Angels, nor anny other creature can seperatt me from the looue of God.

All that my father geeueth me, shall Ioan. 6 come vnto me, and him that cometh to me, I will not cast foorthe. VVhoo so euer cal­lyth Rom. 10 on the name of the lord shal be sauyd. All that is borne of God, ouercometh the 1. Ioan. 5. world, and this is our victory which ouer­cometh the world, Our fayth.] These be the Brentius [...]n his 2. pericope of his a­pologie ageinst Peter A soto. scriptures which Brentius bryngeth to con­firme his assurednes and vayne suerty by. Yett they be suche, as you shall sooner dra­we foorth mylke of a poomisse stone, then owt of thē, the thing which Brētius seeketh.

[Page 12]You see now how owld a practys this hath been of heretikes to glory yn the woord of God, sins it was vsed euen yn the dayes of Hieremy and Ezechiel. But what? Euen soone after the coomyng of Chryst was not that deuyse allso putt yn vre? VVell knowen is that Storye of the Gospell, Matt. 4 wher in it is wrytten howe Christ so soone as he was baptised, was ledd by the spi­ryt ynto the wildernes, and was there tempted of the deuill. But with what o­ther weapons, did he assault Christ, but with the very scriptures?

The Euangelyst Mathew sayth. [The Mat. 4. diuell sett him on the pinacle, of the Temple, and sayd vnto him. If thow be the sonne of God, throwe thy self downe. For it is written, he hath geeuen his An­gelles Psal. 90 charge of thee, that they shall take thee yn their handes, lest thow hurt thy foote ageinst soome stone,] which place S. Ambrose treating of prouidently warnyth Lib. 4. in Lucan [...] vs, saieng, ‘Learne here allso for the diuell transsormyth him self yn to an Angell of light, and of the diuyne scriptures thē sel­ues, makyth ofte tymes snares, to intāgle the [Page] faith full. So dooth the heretike, so dooth hee Hereti­kes trās­formed ynto Aun­gells of ligh. ripp vp the faith, so dooth hee assault the lawes of pietye. Therfore lett not the he­retike deceyue thee because he can bring foorth some exāples of scripture: Lett hī not stande much in his owne conceyte because he hath some shew of Learning: for the diuell allso vseth the testimonye of the scriptures, not to teache, but to cumpas, and deceiue.’

Very excellenty allso doth Vincentius Vincen­tius Lyri nensis Lirynensis a writer allso in the dayes of S. Ambrose handle that place, yn that his goulden booke which hee intitules, ‘For the antiquitee, and vniuersalyte of the Catho­lyke faythe. I will the more at large repete his wordes, because they are worthy not only to be read, but to be lernyd without booke.’

‘Here (sayth hee) some man will, perhaps Hereti­kes vse the resti­monyes of scrip­tures to confir­me their doctryne aske, whither heretikes doo allso vse the te­stimony of the scriptures. They doo sure, and that vehemently, for youe shall see thē fllee throwgh euery volume of the holly lawe, Throwgh Moyses, the bookes of the kinges, the psalmes, Apostles, Euangelystes, and pro­phettes. For be it emong their famyliers, or straungers in priuatt, or in publyke, yn their [Page 13] Sermons or bookes, at feastes, or yn the streates, they neuer vtter anny thing, of their owne, but they seeke to ouer shadow it with some wordes of the scripture. Reade the workes of Paulus Samosatenus, Priscil­lianus, The vvor kes of ol­de hereti­kes full of Scriptures Eunomius, Iouinianus, and the rest of the pestilent heretikes, and thou shallt fynde there, an infynitt heape of examples, and almost no one half leafe omitted which is not paynted, and coloured, with sentences of the newe and ould Testament. But looke now myche the more couertly they lurke vn­der the shadowe of Gods word, so myche the more must thow feare and be ware of them. For they knowe their vnsauery fylthe, would hardly at the first, please any man: therefore do they sprinckle it ouer as with a certayn sweet spyce of Gods word, to the end that he which easely would fynd, and reiect the er­rours of men, may yett forbeare to con­temne that, which semeth to be drawen out of the word of God. Therefore as they which geue vnto children some bytter drynckes do first annoynt the brimmes of the cuppes with hunny wherby their vnskilfull chil­dishenes hauing fore tasted the sweett, fea­reth [Page] not the bitter. And as they, which vtter vnholsome drogges of seedes and li­quors, vnder colour and names of me­dicynes, whereby he that fyndeth writ­ten theron the name of a medicyne sus­pectyth not the poyson: euen so do he­retikes.’

‘And heerof did also our Sauiour hym self forewarne vs, Crieng out vnto the peo­ple. Matth. 7. [Beeye ware of faulse prophetts, which come vnto you in sheepes clothing, and are with in rauenīg wolues.] VVhat other thing is this sheps clothīg, but the wordes vtteryd by the Prophets and the Apostles, which they with playne and symple sinceryte, did worke (as it were, fleses) to that vnspotted lābe, which taketh away the sinnes of the world?’

‘And what other be those rauening Rauenīg vvolues. wolues, but the fell and greedy wittes of heretikes, which do allwayes trouble, and assaylle the foulde of his churche, and teare in pieces his flocke by all meanes they can? But the more craftely to steale vpon the sel­ly shepe, keeping styll their woluish feerse­nes, they lay asyde their woluishe shape, [Page 14] and wrap them selues yn the sentences of Gods word, as it were in certayne fleeses, that when one feelyth the softnes of their woll, he should not feare the sharpnes of their teethe.’

‘But what sayeth our sauiour? By their fruicts youe shal knowe them. That is to saye when they begyn not only to vtter the di­uin wordes, but also to laye them abroade, not only to vawnt therof, but allso to in­terprett and expownd the same, then lo is perceiued that Bitter, that sower, that Rage: then doth the ayre of the nue poyson breathe foorthe, then are opened prophane noueltyes. Then maiest thow behowld the hedge cutt down, the awncyent bowndes of the fathers caryed awaye, the Catholyke faith troden downe, and the doctrine of the Churche torne in pieces.’

‘Suche are they whom the Apostle Pawll streeketh at, in his second Epistle to the Corinthians, saying: [Suche false Apo­stles 2. Cor. 11. Heretikes transfigu­red into the Apo­stles of Christ. leeke subtyll workmen transformed them selues into the leeknes of the Apostles of Christ.] what meanyth that? How did they transforme them selues in to the Apostles of [Page] Christ? The Apostles browght foorth exam­ples owt of the lawe of God. So did they allso. The Apostles vouched the saienges of the Prophettes, So did they to.’

‘But when they beganne to expound leeke textes, with vnleeke, and farre contrary in­terpretations, then were the playn dealers, discernyd from the crafty, the naturall from the paynted, the right from the peruers, and finally the true Apostles from the false [and 2▪ Cor. 11. Sathan transfor­mid in to an Aun­gell of light. no maruaill (sayth he) for Sathan transfor­myth him self into an Aungell of light, then is it no greate matter for his ministers to transforme them selues into the leeknes of the ministres of iustice.] Therfor according to the teaching of the Apostle Pawll when so euer false prophettes, or false doctors vou­che the sentences of the lawe of God, by the wrong interpretation wherof, they labour The deuil can find no easier vvay to deceiue mē vvith, then by pretence of the vvord of God. to buyld vp their errors, it is not to be doub­ted, but they followe the subtill deuises of their auctor the diuell, which doubtles he would neuer haue inuentyd, had he not found that same of all other, to be the easyest waye to deceyue. That where he would in­duce couertly a wycked and pernicious er­rour, [Page 15] there to holde forth the auctoritie of Gods worde.’

‘But some man perchaunce will aske me, howe proue youe that the diuell vseth to vouche the scriptures. Lett him (I saye) rea­de the Ghospell wherin it is written. [Then Matth. 4. the diuell toke him vp] (that is to saye our lord and Sauiour) [and sett him vpon apyn­nacle of the temple, and sayde vnto him. If thou be the sonne of God, Throwe thy self downe. For it is written, he hath geuen his aungells charge of thee, that they keepe thee in all thy wayes. They shal take thee in their handes, lest thow happ to dashe thy foote against some stone.] VVhat will this fellowe do to vs wretchyd men, who did with te­stimonies of scriptures, geue the onsett euen to the very lord of Maiestye him self? [If thow be (sayth he) the sonne of God, Throwe thy self downe:] why? [For it is written] saith he.’

‘The doctrine of this place, is especially to Note. be marked and remembred, that when we see any man with suche an example of euan­gelicall auctorite, bringe foorth the wordes of the Apostles, and Prophettes, against the [Page] Catholyke fayth, wee nede not to doubt, but it is the diuell that speakyth by him. For euē as then the head spake vnto the head, euen soo do now the lymmes, speake vnto the lymmes, that is to saye, the lymmes of the diuell, to the lymmes, and mēbres of Christ, the Traytorous to the faithful, Churche rob­bers, to the Religious, and finally heretikes to Catholikes.’

‘But what sayth he? [If thow be the son­ne of God, throwe thy self downe.] That is: wilt thou be the sonne of God and receiue the inheritaunce of the heauenly kingdom? then throwe thy self downe: that is from this high churche, which is reputed the churche of God and from the doctryne and tradition therof, throwe thy self downe. And if you aske one of these heretikes that perswadeth suche things to himself, how ꝓue you, or how will you teache vs, that we ought to forsake and lett goe the vniuersall and aūciēt faith of the Catholike Churche? By and by [for it is written] sayth he. And therwith all he presently getteth him a Thowzād witnesses, examples, and auctorities, owt of the lawe, the Psalmes, the Apostles, and Prophettes, [Page 16] wherwith beyng expoūded after a newe and lewd sorte, the vnhappy soule is throwen downe headlong from the high Tower of the catholike Churche, into the bottomles pitt of heresies. Then, with syche promises as followe, do heretikes vse wōderfully to abuse, suche as be not heedfull, and ware. For they will not stick to promesse, and teache, that in their churche, that is in the conuenticles of Cōgrega­tions of heretikes. their cōmuniō, the great and especiall grace of God is, personally present, yea so as without any labor, studye, or industrie, although they neuer aske, seeke, or knocke, yf they be of their number and sect, it is so from God him self dispēsed vnto them, that they being hol­den vp with the handes of Aungells, that is, kept with angelicall protection, can neuer hurt their foote against any stone, can neuer offend or fall into any errour.’ Thus farre Vincentius.

And coulde he possibly with more notable markes haue painted foorth the heretikes of our age, thē in this place wee see he hath do­ne? For what doth Sathā more earnestly at­tempt by thē, then to persuade mē to throwe thēselues downe? to let thēselues fawll, from [Page] the doctrine and tradition of this high Churche, (which Christ callyth the Citee Matth. 5. builded on a hyll)? VVhich thing so soone as he hath once perswaded, thē hath he attey­nid, the vndoubted victorye. For vntill a The first and prin­cipall at­tempt of Sathan to bringe a mā to he­resie. man throwe him selffrom that high Cite, yn vayn are all the attemptes of Sathan. But so soone as he letteth him self fawll downe from thence, so soone as he is departyd from the fowld, and seuerith him self from the rest of the flocke, then is he immediatly be­coome a praye to the wolf. To this one end therfore doth the diuell bend all his force, that he may leade men, to throwe them sel­ues downe, from the high and infallible do­ctrine of the church. To sett nowght by the traditions therof, to followe and esteme ra­ther the priuatt spiritt of them selues, or of any one man, then the interpretatiō and consent of the Catholike and vniuersall Churche, wher vnto is promysed the spiritt of truth.

Neither is he without scripture, wher­by he indeuoureth to persuade the same. For it is written (sayth he) [walke not in the Ezech. 20 Math. 16. precepts of your fathers. In vayne doo they [Page 17] worship me teaching the doctrines and cō ­maundements Ezech. 20▪ Marth. 15. of men.] That yf in any one thing he may persuade a mā to throwe him self downe, to departe, from the precepts, and ordonaūces of his forefathers, and from the doctrine and traditiōs of the Churche, then hath he wonne him within his reache, then doth he easely fynd the meanes, that he shal daily throwe him self downe deeper. Nei­ther is there any doctrine thē so farre wyde from all pietye, or godlynes, wherin he doth not easely stayne and infect his mynd. In this one thing therfore doth he spend his whole studye and trauaill, to accustome men to throwe them selues downe, and not to make any accompt of the sence and generall cōsent of the whole churche, but especyally to resist and withstand the ordonaunces therof.

VVhich thing, as of all other heretikes, Martine Luther The en­sign bea­rar of Sa­than. so Martiu Luther their capitaine and stan­dard bearer in this our age, wee see dilligētly and very handsomly practysed. For what other thing soundeth he in all his wrytings, but that men should throwe them selues downe? That they should cutt them selues from the churche, resist the decrees therof, [Page] and what so euer shee commaundeth, in des­pight Preceptes of the Churche. to doo the contrary.

As for example. The Churche cōmaun­deth thee to fast in the lent, and toward the feast of Easter, to confesse thy sinnes, and to come to the receauing of the sacramēt: But Prece ptes of Luther what sayth Luther to this? Thus he sayeth.

Because it is so appoynted by the churche, Vide Rof­fens. in [...] therū. A [...]t 28. ad Leo nem. for the self same cause will I not doo it, and yf it had not commaunded me, I would haue doon it, but I will now doo it at some other tyme, which the Churche hath not appoyn­ted: at what tyme, and in what sorte so euer myne owne free will shall moue me.

Likewyse, The eleuation of the Saeramēt he thinketh a thing indifferent: But bicause the Churche hath thowght good it should be lift vp, therfore in despite of the Churche he teacheth it must be forborne. Ageyn to re­ceyue the sacramēt in one, or bothe kyndes, in many places he writeth to be indifferent, for that nothing is commaunded therof by any precept of God, as of necessitee: yet in his booke which he intituled of the foorme of the masse, he sayeth.

Yf by chawnce the councell should so Lutherus [Page 18] decree, then would wee not receyue yt in ī libro de formula Missae. bothe kyndes, but in despight of the coūcell, vse only the one kynd, or neither of bothe, and not bothe, and holde them for accursed that by the auctoritee of the councell should vse bothe.

But what doth a Councell represent, but the Churche? Sathan therfore by this his not obscure member, commaundeth to do all thinges contrary to the decrees therof, yea and that yn despight of the same, and by that his worthy lymme yet cryeth. [Throwe thy self downe.] And doth not he throwe him self downe who followeth not that, which is vniuersall, catholyke, receiued, and allowed, by generall consent of the whole world, which professeth the name of Christ, but more willingly reposeth him self in that which some one fantastycall man hath bet­ter leekyd? VVho albeit he be perhapps repu­ted circumspect and discrete, yett when he speakyth of hī self, vttereth nowght ells (as Iohn 8. the Truthe it self bearyth witnes) but a ve­ry lye. For maye a man more throwe him self downe, then to slippe from that sence and vnderstānding, which is vniuersall, and com­mon [Page] to all, vnto that which is but priuatt? that is, from trowth to fashed, which man vtterith whē so euer he speaketh of himself?

The very same song therfore which the diuell himself songe vnto Christ in the de­sert, the same doth he euen now sing by his members to Christians. Neither doth he vrge any thing more, then that they should throwe themselues downe, and lett goe the VVhat Sathan pro­mesyth and per­suadeth to hereti­kes. vniuersall and auncient faith of the catho­lyke Churche. He promyseth by his membres and yet still teacheth, that in the congre­gations of his communion, there is a certain great, peculiar, and personall grace of God.

He persuadeth the vnlerned yf a man So did Eunomius the Ar­cheheretike persua­de his scolers also August. ad Quod­nu [...]tdeum haeres. 54 imbrace the priuatt and especyall faith, of his members, that he (though he be not only vtterly voyde of good workes, but allso drow­ned in all kynd of wickednes) must yett be well assured, he is in state of grace, and that the Aungells shall one daye take him vp in their handes, and leade him straight to hea­uen: That beyng preserued by their protec­tion, he shall not once hurt his foote against any stone, but standeth highly in Gods fa­uour, yf he continewe to the end. This he [Page 19] will haue his mēbers, to make so full and assu­red accompt of, that they must thinke there can be no greater synne or wickednes com­mitted, then once to doubt neuer so litle therof. which persuasion is cōmon to all he­retikes. For the Lutherans doo no lesse VVhat the Lutherās, Svvī ­ghans, A nabapti­sts and al other sectes, of heretikes doo all a leeke promes­se to their follovvers. carnestly exact this of their followers, then do the Zwinglians and Anabaptistes of theirs: when in the meane tyme fyer and water do not more disagree, then the doctri­nes of these men do one from an other: so as it cānot be, by any reason, but some of them are leekly, rather by the handes of diuells to be throwen into the bottomles pyt of hell▪ then that the aungells of heauen wil vouch­fafe, to help them vp to heauen. VVho when they haue all a leeke, cutt them selues of voluntarely from the body of Christ, that the heauenly Aungells haue then nothing to doo with them, it is more certayn, then that it may be doubted of. Now therfore haue wee seen how Sathan assaulted Christ with the expresse word of God.

And hath he not doon the same also by his lymmes & mēbers agaīst the same Christ the sonne of God? Did he not labour by the [Page] expresse word of God, to shew that Christ was not only no prophett, but allso worthy to dye? wee reade in the Gospell, that when the Iewes heard the word of Christ, some sayd, Ioan▪ 7. An other testimony vouched by the de­uill out of holy scripture. [this is a ꝓphet] some others [this is Christ] yett were there not some emong them that sayd? [What? Shall Christ come owt of Gali­lee? Doth not the scripture saye, Christ co­meth of the seed of Dauid, and foorth of the Castle of Bethleem, where Dauid was?

The Phariseys allso said to Nicodemus: [Searche the scriptures, and see, that owt of Galilee shall aryse no prophette.] Yett not Ioan. 7. content therwith, by the scriptures, which they browght foorth to denye him to be a prophett, they cryed out farther saying: [VVe Ioan. 19. haue a lawe, and by that lawe he owght to dye, because he hath made himself the son­ne of God.]

VVho will not be astonyed when he rea­deth these thinges? The membres of the di­uell browght foorth the lawe, and the pro­phetts against the very auctor and lord of the lawe and the prophetts. And (as to them it seemed) proued by the expresse word of God, he was not only not a prophett, but one [Page 20] worthy of death as a wicked transgressor of the lawe. So that if against Christ him self, when he yett walked emong men, ther was so earnest fyghting not only by the diuel him self, but by his members allso, and that with the very sworde of the scriptures, what shall wee thinke may not be doon against vs selly men? Or what will not Sathan presume, and not hope to cōpasse, which thought assu­redly he could euen by the very scriptures teache that Christ not only was no pro­phett, but also worthy of death?

Nowe therfor is this made playne, that the diuell feared not euen with the weapons of scripture to assault Christ the sonne of God lyuing here on earth: and looke what sence he drewe foorth therof, that would he haue to be takē for the expresse word of God.

But what? did he not euen with the same tooles sett on the Apostles? yes▪ and that ve­ry sore. For what ells shewe these wordes of Sathan as­salted the Apostles euen as he had befor assailed Christ him self of S. Pawll? [Suche fauls Apostles, are subtyll workmen, trāsfiguring themselues into the Apostles of Christ. And no marueill. For euen Sathan transfigurith him self in to an aungell of light. It is not myche therfore if [Page] his ministers transforme them selues, in to the leeknes of the ministers of Iustice.] How properly S. Pawll heer paynteth owt the fauls Apostles of his tyme? They woldyn no wyse seeme to preache, ay other thing, then Christ and the Gospell. But as the he­retikes of our age woold pull from the Chur­che, The Crafty prac­tis of the fauls A­postles in the primati­ue Chur­che, re­nued at this day by the heretikes of our a­ge▪ Galath 1. the Catholike doctryn, so woold they ha­ue doon the name of the Gospell from Pawlls preaching, and woold seeme to arrogat the same vnto them selues.

Dooth not S. Pawll openly signifie this, whē he thus wryteth vnto the Galathians? [I marueyll you are so sone caryed away from him which caullyd you vnto the grace of Christ, yn to an other Gospell, which is but one, not diuers. Only some there be which trooble you, and woold turne the Gospell of Christ.] VVhich place Iohn Chrisostom (the true and faythfull Interpreter of S. Pawll) Chrysost in cōmē tar. ibidē expownding saieth. ‘Suche is the slaight of the diuell, not to laye open the snares whe­rin hee seekyth to cache and intangle men. For if they had sayd, departe from Christ yee Galathians, they wold haue auoyded thē as wicked and corrupt deceauers: But now [Page 21] suffring them as it were to remayne in their faith, and in the meane tyme couering their frawd with the name of the Gospell, the vn­derminers without any daunger with great bouldnes vndermined the house, whil by the spreding of these veyls, their right names wer couered. Sins therfor they termyd their fraud, the Gospel, S. Pawl also striueth against the name, etc.’ You see now howe euē at that The deceitfull pretē ce of heretikes in al ages. tyme, as in this our age, some cloked their deceyt with the name of the Gospell, and called their frawde, the Gospel. That which they taught, and not which Pawll preached, they would haue to seeme the Gospell, and with this honest pretēce, casting a colour be­fore men, they labored to crepe into their myndes: So doth Sathan to snare mē, alwayes vse some shrowd, and doth not streight waye (to vse the: phrase of the cōmō people) shewe Sathan v­seth to shrovvd him selfe vnder the name of the Gos­pel, his hornes, but layeth the forthe name of holly scripture, of the word of God, of the Gos­pell, that he may the more easely drawe men before they beware, in to his nettes. But it becomyth not faithful folcke by and by to be moued with suche, masked Sprittes, nor if a man call his owne trechery the Gospell, [Page] straight way for suche to repute it. 2. Thess. 2.

The same Pawll allso remembryth writing vnto the Thessaloniās, that there were some, which feared men by an Epistle sent as it were from him, as though the day of the lord were euē then at hād, when yett by S. Pawll no such thing had bene writtē. But where as he, in his former epistle to thē had thus written, 1. Thess. 4. [VVe which lyue, which remayne to the comyng of our lord shal not come befor them which haue slept,] to those his wordes they fastned that straunge sence, which he neuer mēt. So allso euē whyle Pawll yet lyued, some were not affrayd to misconster his wordes. For thus S. Peter the Apostle writeth of 2. Peter 3 Pawlls Epistles. [That some things therin be hard to be vnderstanded, which vnler­nyd Vnlerned and light­headde persons depraue the scrip­tures. and wauering persons do depraue, as they doo allso some other scriptures to their owne damnation.] If then whyle Pawll yet li­ued on the earth, there were some found which turned and misconstrued his wordes, what wonder is it if after so many ages past sins his death, they haue been, and yet be handled in lyke sorte?

But what that was, which vnlernyd and [Page 22] wauering persons sowght in Pawlls epistles August. de fide & operibus Cap. 14. to peruert, S. Augustin teachith, in that his booke, which he intituled of faith and wor­kes. ‘For where Pawll had writtē, wee thinke Rom. 3. man to be iustified by fayth, without the wor­kes of the lawe, some lewde and vnlernyd persons (sayth he) so tooke these wordes, that with a certayn wicked securitee, and care­lesnes, they cast awaye both them selues and others, whyle they gathered heerby, that The here­sie of iustisicaciō by faith only sprāg euē vvhill the Apostels yet liued and vvas by them selues im­pugned. to obteyn Saluatiō only faith suffised: which thing (he sayeth) was the cause, that the other Apostolicall Epistles of Peter, Iohn, Iames, and Iuda, are chieffly bent and directyd against that opiniō, so, as they very strongly buyld and mayntayn the cōtrary. VVhich is, that faith without workes proffitteth no­thing.’

‘As S. Pawll him self also teacheth. VVho defyneth not euery faith wherby wee be­leeue yn God, but that only to be the helth­some, and true euāgelical fayth, [which wor­kyth Galat. 5 by loue.] VVherby how litle or no­thing that fayth auayleth which some thin­ke sufficient to saluation, he so farre foorth shewyth, that hee sayth: [If I haue neuer so 1. Cor. 13 [Page] myche fayth, so as I be able to remoue moun­taynes owt of their places, and yet haue not charitee, I am nothing.] But wher this faith full charitee, worketh, ther no doubt is good life. For [the fulnes of the lawe is Charitee.]’ Rom. 13. Thus farre S. Augustyn.

Behould I pray yow how owld this heresie is which sayth: Only faith is sufficient to sal­uation. For it sprang euen whill Pawll yet leeuyd, and was sought to be prouyd and mayntened, euē by the expresse word of God, vtteryd by that his elect vessell Pawll the Apostle, when yett this was neuer the mynde of S. Pawll, but as Saint Peter 1. Pet. 3. writeth, [some vnlernyd and vnconstant heades peruertyd the meanyng of his wor­des.] And what (for Gods loue) dooth Sa­than ells now allso more earnestly seeke by his members to beate into the eares and myndes of men, but that they should hold for suertye, that only fayth suffiseth both to iustification, and to saluacion?

If Peter then at that tyme complaynyd of the peruertyng of Pawl his wordes, How myche more would he now complayne, when this most pestilent doctrine, is with syche [Page 23] vehemencye sett foorth, when it is obtru­ded to the eares and eyes of men, with these most pernicious wordes?

That the Gospell may not suffer to heare Amost pestilent doctrine of prote­stants. any preaching of good workes. That the sheepe of Christ quakyth, when he hearyth them namyd of the preacher. That faythe may not abyde any good workes to stand nere her: That they which are coueryd, as it were with good workes, can hard­ly enter into heauen, for that workes follo­wing after iustification are vncleane. Luther defendeth this pro­position stoutely against Pope Leo Art 31. & 32. Vide Roffen. Yea and the best good worke is very synne. That they are pestylent teachers, and that it is a Roote budding nowght but Gawll, owt of the newe Testament to vexe con­sciences with workes, and that there can not be together in the Churche, a teacher of fayth and of workes?

This so vnpure and wicked doctrine, yf Peter should heare cloked with the name of the Gospel, yf Pawl should heare these wicked men vawnt them selues that they had drawen this doctryne owt of his Epistles, wherin it appearyth he did so carefully re­commend vnto vs good workes, and stirre [Page] vp all faithfull mē, to vse and embrace them, what thinke wee, would they bothe, saye, and doo therunto?

But herofinowgh. For in this place wee mynded no more, but to shewe that euen in the Apostles tyme, allso, ther wanted not so­me, which shrowded their lewde deceytes vnder the name of the Ghospell, and which of the very wordes of S. Pawll, by peruerting the sense therof fearyd not to professe, and sett forward a contrary doctrine. So that if first against Christ, the very auctor of the scriptures, Sathan feared not to bring the scriptures, and agaīst Pawl him self, to bring by his members, Pawll his owne wordes wre­styd into a reprobat sense, who can myche merueil if in thies latter dayes, he hathwith more impudence, attemptyd the same?

Tertullian is a very owld writer not lōg Tertulliā. lyued in the yere of our lorde. 230. after the Apostles tyme. He wrote a no­table booke, of prescriptions against hereti­kes, wherin he shewyth that this was a great word in their mouthe. [Seeke and yee shall fynd, Searche the Scriptures.] And therin he exhorteth the faythfull, that they would yet make some end of their seeking, and [Page 24] therwith all preferryth fayth, before trauail in the scriptures. In the end he vseth these wordes.

‘Of the scriptures doo heretikes taulk very Tertulliā. i prescrip. Cap. 15. myche. To the scriptures they counsell vs, as though they could not otherwise geue aduyse touching matters of fayth, but owt of the lettres and wordes of faith. Now therfore come wee to the purpose. For to this end, did we direct and bend the entree of our taulke, that euen here, wee may Ioyne vpon that poynt, wher vnto our aduersaryes so earne­stly call vs. Scripture they pretend, and with this their bowld countenaunce, they moue some, very muche. But in the very conflict they wery the strong, they take the weake, and the indifferent they send awaye with scruple of mynd.’

Then by and by he addeth, what is to be The ende of dispu­tīg▪ vvith heretikes. done to them, whē they shrowd them selues vnder the scriptures. ‘Thus (sayth he) do wee at the first encownter stoppe them, that in dede they are not to be admitted, to any dis­putatiō at all of the scriptures. That if their force lie in scripture, we must knowe howe they come by it. Therefore must wee see to [Page] whom of right apperteyneth the possession of the scriptures, to the end, he be not allo­wed therunto to whom in no sorte it belon­geth.’ And lest any should thinke he wrote thus as hauing mistrust in his cause he foorthwith goeth forward in this sort.

‘This would I not haue browght foorth, for geuing suspicion of diffidence, or of desier to haue any other the state of the cause, if the case stood not so, as heerin we owght obe­dience Tit. 3. Three causes vvhy he­retikes ought not to be dis­puted vvith by scriptures to the Apostle▪ who forbiddeth to en­ter into questions, or to lend our eares to newe and straunge voyces. For an heretike (sayeth the Apostle) must be taulked with af­ter one Reprehension, not after disputation. For in this did the Apostle forbid disputa­tion, in that he apoynted an heretike to be rebuked, and in that respect only to be taul­ked with, and that but once because he is The. 1. not to be esteemed as a Christiā. Nor should be rebuked after the manner of a Christian, 1. Tim▪ 6 Matth. 18. once or twyse, or by testimony of ij. or iij. wit­nesses, but is a man therfore and in that res­pect to be rebuked, for that he is suche a per­son, as owght not to be disputed with. And The: 2. because allso conference of scriptures with [Page 25] suche a one profitteth nothing, but only stir­reth The. 3. So hereti­kes reiecte novve a dayes so­me the Machabe­es, some S. Iames Epistle etc. choler, and troubleth the brayne.’

‘Agayne this heresie admitteth not some scriptures, and if it allowe some, yet doth it peruert the same by some addition, or de­traction, to the defending of that it would proue, or yf it receyue some scriptures, yet will it not receyue them full, and whol. And if it doo, yet will it turne them by inuēting some newe and contrary exposition. No lesse ouerthwarteth the Truthe a bastarde Glose, then a corrupted text. Variable preiudices must nedes refuse to acknowledge those things wherby they are ouerthrowen. To those things they leane, which either faulsly they haue patched together, or haue bene occasioned of ambiguous wordes, and doubt­full texts.’

‘VVhat shalt thow profit, thowe that art best excersised in the scriptures, when, what so euer thow defendyst he shall denye, and what so euer thow denyest, he shall defend? Thow losest but thy voyce in contending with him, and gainest nowght but vnquyet­nes of mynd, in hearing his blasphemyes.’

‘The partye (if any suche be) for whos sake [Page] thow entrest into disputation by the scrip­tures, to the end thow mayest confirme him in the trowthe hāging yet doubtfull, is leeke inowgh to faull deeper in to heresies, when he shall see thow hast profitted nothing, the matter remayning in euē termes of defence, and denyall. Surely of this arguing to and fro, he shall departe more vncertayn then he was before, not knowing whether of the two is the heresie. But this argument may they also agayn retourne vnto vs. For it is necessary for them allso to saye, that by vs the scripture is falsefyed, that wee do wron­gely expounde them, and they therefore will nedes take vpō them, to defend the trowth.’

‘VVe must not therfore appeale to the scriptures, wherin the victory is none at all, or ells vncertayn, or not very manifest. For albeit we supposed the conference of scrip­tures should not so faull owt (betwene Ca­tholikes and heretikes) that it should set vp both sydes a leeke, yet the order of thin­ges required, that this pointe, should first be propownded, which now lyeth only in Af [...]er this very sorte discour­seth S. August. lib▪ de vti­lit. cred cap. 14. question. As, to whom the very fayth be­longeth? whose be the scriptures? frō whom,’ [Page 26] by whom, when, and to what teachers that doctrine was deliuered wherby wee are ma­de Christians?

After the same sorte writeth Clemens Alexandrinus, one that liued aboute that Clemens Alexādri­n' ageinst heretikes. time also. ‘If (sayth he) they which followe he­resies dare at any time vse the scriptures, first they will neuer vse them all, nor wholle, nor as the very body and text of the scrip­ture speaketh, but choosing foorth those things which are ambiguous and doubtfull, they turne them into their owne priuat opi­nion gathering here and ther a fewe wordes as it were flowers, and not considering what is signified by them, but only abusing the ba­re and naked termes. In euery word almost which they bring foorth, you shal fynd them stickyng in the only names and termes, and quyte swaruyng frō the significatiō therof.’

VVhat could be written better, or what more aptly to the matter now in hand, then that which we fynd writtē by that most ler­nyd mā Tertulliā? He sheweth vs that the vsage of heretikes was to talke mych of the scripture, to persuade by scripture, and to holde foorth the scripture. But in the meane [Page] tyme, he admonissheth vs, to stop them at that step, and that they bee not admitted to any disputation of the scriptures, for that they haue no interest, or possession theryn, sins the Catholikes do prescribe in the pos­session therof.

He allso bringeth for proofe herof, the te­stimony of S. Pawll who forbiddeth vs to wast tyme in cōtending with heretikes. For that, allwayes debate breedyth debate, and of argumēt groweth argumēt: so as ther is ly­ke to be no end of brauling and cōtētiō, wher a mā hopeth to ouercome obstinat persons by disputatiō. For neither wāt they wordes at any tyme, and their frowardnesse geueth thē courage neuer to be tyered with cōtention. So as it is farre better to auoyde all occasiōs of cōtending with them (which is the thing they seeke) and to refrayne brawlyng with them by disputation, for so myche as therby is that owld prouerb often verefyed: By to myche altercation the trowth is lost.

But see whether those wordes written by Tertullian that this heresie admitteth not some scriptures, and so foorth as before, be not very truly spoken of the heretikes of [Page 27] our tyme? The first fownder wher of did he The levvd practys of the ovvld herētike, Marcion renved in our dayes by Martin Luther In lib. de Christ. libert. & in Art ad Leonē 10 Vide Reg. An­gl. de sa­cram cō-Lutherū not (I praye you) opēly vse the same hatchet to cut of the scriptures which were contra­ry to his purpose, which Tertullian sayth, Marciō the heretike did at that time vse?

He taught only fayth to suffise both to our saluation, and iustification. And seing that this his doctrine could not stand, if the ca­nonicall Epistle of Saint Iames remayned in forse, straight waye taking his hatchet in his hand, he cut the same of from his booke, saying: This shall haue no place in my Bibles. Loe the imperious auctoritee of the man. He caullyth them his Bibles, wherby he she­wyth they haue no fellowship with the Bi­bles of the Catholyke Churche.

Hee tawght also prayers and sacrifice for the dead to be superfluous, and herunto seing that parte of the scriptures, to be directly contrary, which for the more parte all the owld catholyke writers bring foorth of the Machabees, he katcheth ageyne his hatchet and cutetth of also that booke.

He tawght farther that all things came to passe by a certayne absolute necessitee, and that wee owght to be certayn, and sure of [Page] grace, and saluation. Against this his opi­nion maketh that which is written in the booke of wisedom, and in Ecclesiasticus. He therfore with his hatchet cutt of also these bookes. So wee see that those scriptures which serued not his purpose, he receiued not, but taking his hatchet in hand, cut them out of his Bibles.

Nowe those scriptures which he did re­ceyue and allowe, did he not by his additiōs, and detractions peruert them to his owne priuat purposes, making of good Latyne, lewd high Dutche? VVhich is layd to his charge not only by the Catholikes, but allso by the By the Bre thern of Zurich sectaryes them selues. And yf he did receyue any scriptures whole and sound, did he not deuise therunto strange or rather mere con­trary expositions? which thing we allso see doon by the rest of the heretikes, who be no lesse diuers among them selues, then contra­ry to the catholikes in expounding the scri­ptures: which thing to haue lykewyse been doon by the heretikes of his tyme Tertullian remembreth.

‘From their owne rules (sayth he) them sel­ues In prae­script. hae­ret. do varye: whilest euery of them do pype [Page 28] after his owne volūtary, those things which he hath receiued: euen as he that first deli­uered thē, framed the same by his owne fan­cye.’ VVith such therfore as receiue no scrip­tures, but suche as they leeke, and those which they doo receyue, wreast, by addition and detraction to their owne purpose, or ells deuyse therunto newe and straunge exposi­tions, Tertullian willeth vs in no wyse to en­ter into disputation of the scriptures: but commaundeth them to be sett ouer to the Ecclesiasticall tradition.

VVhich his mynde euē Luther him self se­meth to allowe when he hath to do with sa­cramētaries and Anabaptistes. But you shal heare his owne wordes. he sayeth:

VVee haue read what the holy fathers did Mar. Lu­ther vppō the. 28. psalme in the councell of Nice: so sone as they heard the heresie of Arius read, they hissed it owt with one voyce, and would not vouchesase to heare them that presented it, nor suffer them to defend it, but presently condemned them withowt any disputation, as manifest blasphemers. Moyses allso in his lawe, com­maunded Leuit. 24. that suche false teachers should be stoned to death. Euen so in this case ther is no disputatiō to be vsed, but suche manifest blas­phemers [Page] are to be condemned withowt plea­ding their cause.

As Pawle allso commaundeth, in the third Tit. 3. chapiter of his Epistle to Titus that an here­tike should be auoyded after one or two warnings. He allso forbiddeth to Timothee all 2. Tim. 2. contentions and disputations, as things which do nothing ells but trouble the hearers. For suche common articles of all Christendom be now sufficiently heard, declared, and conclu­ded, by the writings and generall cōfession of all Christendom. They are confirmed by ma­ny miracles sealed vp with myche bloud of many martyres, defended by the bookes of al lerned men, and not now needing any mans conning or deuise to enlarge them.

Yet is it not in all pointes trewe that this hyperbolicall doctour reporteth, the holy fa­thers to haue done in that Councell of Nice, as though they had condemned Arrius vn­heard, or his cause vnexamined. For albeit there be extant in Socrates and Nicephorus an epistle of the coūcell of Nice to the chur­che of Alexandria, and to them which were in Egipt, Libia, and Pētapolis, in which they wryte: that they would not indure so muche li. 1. ca. 9. li. 8. cap. 14. as to heare the wicked opinion of Arrius, [Page 29] the madnes of his mynd, or his blasphemous wordes: yet is it manifest ynough by the epi­stle of Constātyne the Emperour, which euen there followeth fast after, that his doctrine was dilligently viewed and considered. For The vvor des of Cō stantin the Em­pour too­ching the condēna­ciō of the Arrian heresie. the Emperour vseth these wordes: ‘All his sayings and writinges were diligently exa­mined which by their dowbtfulnes or disa­greement seemed to brede any pretence or colour.’

If all thinges were so diligently exami­ned, how was it then, that Arrius was not heard? VVherfore that the fathers write, they would not vouchesafe so myche as to heare his blasphemous wordes, may be more rightly wnderstanded in this sence, that af­ter his doctrine was once thoroughly exami­ned, and yet he proceded in redoubling his blasphemous talke, the fathers would not then vouchesafe to heare him any more, but strake him with the sentence of curse and condemnation.

For, that he was heard, Socrates plainly shewyth when in the same place he writeth that the Emperour signified to the people of Socrates lib. 1. aap. Alexandria, the determination of the faith [Page] not to haue been simply or rashly made, but with great examination and deliberation to haue been set foorth. Not that some thinges only were spoken, and some thinges past in silence, but that what so euer was needfull to be set foorth for the confirmation of the doctryne, were layde open: and that it was not barely determined, but first exactly en­quired of, and what so euer might geue oc­casiō of dissenciō or debate were so reiected, that nothing cowld be sayd against them. Therfore (sayth he) the Emperour calleth The agreīg sentēce of Bisshops in general covvncel is the sentence of Godd. this concord and agreing sentence of the Bisshopps in that Synode, the sentence of God: and yeldeth thankes to the holy Ghost for so great concord and vnite of mynde among so many fathers.

Sozomenus allso, when he telleth vs that the Bisshops there dilligētly assembling thē selues callyd foorth Arrius, and aduisedly li. 2. ca. 19. searched his propositions: (For they were very ware not to geeue an headlōg or rashe sentence on either part) dooth sufficiently declare vnto vs, that Arrius was heard: but in dede after his cause was thorowghly exa­mined, it is leekly hee was not thē suffred to [Page 30] prate or talke any more.

But this in the meane tyme is very true, that as heretikes allwayes prouoked to disputacion The duty of Catho­likes vvhē herely springeth vp. and browght yn newe faythes, so the Catholykes lightly, auoyded argumētes, and gladly reposed them selues in the faith of their fathers, as among the writers of the Ecclesiasticall storie, lib. 5. cap. 10. Socrates, lib. 5. cap. 12. Sozome­nus, lib. 2. de perse. Victor, and lib. 12. cap. 15. Nicephorus, wee may plainly see. Looke in what matter so euer the decree of a councell had once takē order, that would the catholikes neuer permyt to be browght agayn in question.

Athanasius writeth that Germinius, Auxentius, Valens, Vrsacius, Demophilus and Gaius, exhibited a certayn paper of their confession which they would haue had to be preferred before all the auncient coun­cells. But what answer therūto made the Ca­tholike fathers assembled at Arimino? ‘VVe In epist: de synodis Arimini & Seleuciae congrega­tis. (said they) assembled our selues hither not because wee lacked a fayth (for that wee haue bothe pure and sownde) but to con­found thē which gaynesaye the trouth, and attempt newe thinges. Yf therfore you now beginning as it were to beleue, haue thus [Page] written, you are not to be accompted as any of the clergy, but suche as now beginne to learne the first principles of the faith. And if you came hither, with that minde, as we did, then let vs all agree, let vs with curse condēne these heresies, and hold fast that we haue receiued of our fathers, to the end we may cut of Vnder­stande of this Arriā heresy. all occasiōs hereafter of ke­ping councels, since the fathers once already assembled in the coūcell of Nice haue by sure establishemēt and sound determinatiō pre­uentyd all farder questions,’

It seemed an absurd thing to those fathers that any newe fayth, or confession of faith should then be brought foorth, and that cal­lyd back into questiō, which they had recei­ued of their fathers: for which cause also in the Epistle which they wrote to Constantius the Emperour he reporteth them to haue vsed these wordes.

‘VVe humbly beseeche your clemency with Nieepho­rus lib. 9. cap. 14. benigne eares and fauorable countenaunce, to behould our imbassadors: and that you ad­mitte not to the reproche of the dead, any nouelty, but suffer vs to remayne in the rules and decrees of our forefathers, whō we affir­me [Page 31] to haue doō althinges, with great wisedō, foresight and direction of the holy Ghost.’ Soo­thely these newe things which these men, attempt, do make the beleeuers to faynte in belefe, and do stirre vnbeleuers to contēpt of belefe. VVhat would these fathers do if they sawe now allmost euery Citye of Germa­ny bring foorth their seuerall faith or cōfes­sion therof: and cōtēd to haue them allowed, reiecting the faith of the fathers, as though they were no Christians? Can any thing be imagined more absurd or more wicked? As though forsooth our fathers were ignorāt of the Christiā fayth, and now at the last Christ were to be knowen vnto vs by the meanes of some fewe such as be in deed traytors vnto Christ? VVherfore the opinion of Luther in this pointe is to be commēded, to witt, that suche men are not to be heard, but meete to be condēned without pleading their cause.

Yet looke what lawe he gaue to the Sacra­mentaries and Anabaptistes, the same must him self stand vnto: Namely synce him self is he, whom those men professe them selues to followe as their guyde and capitayne, as the first auctor of this their departure [Page] frō the Churche, and father of so many sectes as are now hard to bee nombred: for looke Augusti­nus de A­gone christiano. cap 29. what S. Augustin writeth to haue happened vnto Donatus, ‘that as he sought to deuyde Christ, so was him self dayly deuyded in pee­cemeles, by his disciples, the very same doo wee now allso see happened vnto Luther.’

Hee laboured to deuyde the Churche being Christes mysticall body. And is not he him self leek wyse deuided os his followers by day­ly hacking and mangling? But to saye no­thing of the sacramentaryes, Anabaptistes and Campanes (whom perhapps Luther will denye to apperteyne to him,) are not Me­lancthon, Brentius, Osiander and Illyricus professed Lutherans? But what spitefull en­mitye is ther emong them? what bitter dis­sensions in matters of weyght?

Doo wee not heare Melancthō complayne The enmitie and dissension vvhich is bevveen the here­tikes thē selues. that where hee wrote the confession of Aug­spurg, they now goo about to take from him the name and honour therof? For the Illy­ricans doo gredely challenge that to them selues, and labour to exclude from the same the Melācthonists with their maister: whom as in diuers other things they shewe to haue [Page 32] gone frō the mynd of his maister Luther, so doo they lowdly charge him in the doctryn of the sacrament to haue ioyned him self to Caluin his lore. Of which thing Caluin him self also dooth not a lytle glory.

Now yn that matter which they will ha­ue to bee the summe of the Gospell, which is os Iustification, Lord, how sore Melancthon See the Apologie of Frid. Sta­phylus. par. 3. and Brētius dissent the one from the other, while Brentius defendeth Osianders opi­nion, which the Melancthonistes thinke most execrable? So amōg the disciples of Lu­ther there is litle agreement of the princi­pal doctrines of our religion, wherof very contenciously they quarrell emong them sel­ues, and be as it were heretikes one to an other: so as they neede not to be better bla­soned then them selues blasone one an other. By Lu­ther his ovvn sentence ther must no disputaci­ons be heclde vvith he­retikes.

VVherfore of right Luther must suffer by the lawe which him self gaue to others, that there be no disputation allowed to the fol­lowers of his doctrine, but that so sone as it apperith they be of that sort, they bee pre­sently cōdemned vnheard. For it is no more trewe of the Zuinglians, then of the Luthe­rans, which is sayd by the disciples of Lu­ther [Page] that they are to be restrayned not by writing, but by the Mace and power of the magistrate: especially synce neither these The here­tikes of this age bring almost no­thing but that vvhich vvas a M▪ yeres past condem­ned for heresy. bringe almost any thing, that was not more then a thousand yeres past condemned for heresie.

But wee may seeme to haue wandered somwhat from our purpose. VVherfore let vs returne to the matter frō whence wee haue by occasion a litle declyned. VVee haue she­wyd you before, that euē at that tyme when that most auncient doctor Tertullian floo­risshed, heretikes vsed to vaūt, to talke, and to holde foorth before them the scriptures, and that Tertullian doth vtterly forbid all disputation with them, or triall of the con­trouersies to be referred to the scriptures, but would haue thē putt ouer to the tradi­tion of the Churche.

But dooth not S. Cyprian allso complayne of the deceyts of the diuell, who transfigu­reth De simplicitate prae latorum him self as it were in to an aungell of light, and suborneth his ministers leeke vn­to the ministers of iustice teaching night for daye, damnation for saluation, despera­tion vnder the veyll of hoape, infidellite [Page 33] vnder pretence of fayth, and finally Ante­christ, vnder the name of Christ, that while they falsly report thinges not all together vnleekly, they may by their subteltie chase and driue awaye the very truth it self?

Nothing could be sayd more trewly then Cyrillus Epist 28. Note vvherein heresy cō sisteth. that which wee fynd to be written by Cy­rill: ‘All heretikes gather the occasions of their errour owt of the scripture inspired by God corrupting those thinges by their owne malice, which by the holy Ghost were well geuen, and vttered, and so kendling vpon their owne heddes an vnquenchable fier.’

‘S. Augustin allso sayeth that heresies and Augusti­nus tract. 18. in 10. peruers doctrine intangling and throwing downe headlong the sowles of men in to h [...] cometh of none other grownd, but whē thin­ges well written in the scriptures, are not well vnderstanded and when that which is not well vnderstāded, is rashely and bould­ly vtteryd for a truth.’

And therfore S. Ambrose did thinke Ambrosi in cap. 3. ad Titum good in this sort to describe heretikes: ‘He­retikes (sayth he) are they which by the ve­ry wordes of the lawe do impugne the lawe: for they adde vnto the wordes of the lawe [Page] their owne sence and vnderstanding, that by the authorite of the lawe they may sett foorth the shrowdnes and malice of their owne mynd. For wickedness knowing autho­rite to weygh muche, worketh her snares vnder the name therof, to the end that sy­thens an yll thing by it self can not be ac­ceptable, it may be commended to the world vnder the name of a good thing.’

VVhen they which in the Councell of Carthage, were by Agrippinus assembled, sayd, it was no trewe baptisme which was August­de baptis contra do natistas lib. 5. ca. 2. geuen by Schismatikes and heretikes, did they not saye, they so found it in the holy scriptures, and seemed to cōfirme that their sentence by the expresse word of God? This councell yet afterward by the auctoritte of the Churche was disanulled.

But let vs heare Vincentius Lirinensis Vincētius Lyren. in lib. ad­uersus he­reses. talke of that matter: ‘So great excellency of witte (sayth he) was in those fathers, suche flowing vaynes of eloquence, suche a number of them that affirmed it, so great leeklyhood of truthe in so many texts of the scripture, (but after a newe and yll sort vnderstan­ded) that me thinke all their great agree­ment [Page 34] conspiring in one, could neuer haue been ouerthrowen, yf only the profession of nouelty, which was the only cause of all that great styrre, so much then mayntayned, de­fended and extolled, had not discredyted the whole matter. They therfore were desti­tute not of textes, and authoritees of scrip­ture, but of the trewe vnderstanding of them.’ VVherfore S. Hilary doth very well Hilariu [...] in lib. ad Cōstanti­quem ipse ei obtulit. warne vs.

‘Remember (sayth he) that ther is no he­retike, but faulsly affirmeth that all the blasphemyes he vttereth are warrantyd by the auctoritee of scripture. For hereof Mar­cion, Marcion. when he readeth the word of God vn­derstandeth it not. Hereof Photinus could Photinus not fynd by his doctrine Iesus Christ to be a man: Herof Sabellius when he could not vn­derstand Sabellius. this text: My father and I be all one: could not fynd God the father, nor God the sonne: Herof Montanus by his madde Mōtanus. weemen went about to maynteyn a newe ho­ly Ghost. Herof Maniche and Marcion hated Maniche the lawe because they found it written: the letter kylleth, and the Prince of the world is the diuell. They vtter all the scriptures [Page] without sence, and pretend fayth withowt faith. For the scriptures consist not in rea­ding, but in vnderstanding, not in thwar­ting, but in charitable consent, and vnitee.’

VVhom S. Hierom following in his booke Hieron. contra Luciferianos & in ep is. ad Gal. against the Luciferians, sayeth: ‘Let not he­retikes flatter them selues if they seeme to fynd somwhat in some chapiters of the scrip­ture, which they thinke cōfirmeth their he­resies: since the diuell him self hath allso alle­aged places owt of the scripture: and the scri­ptures cōsist not in reading, but in vnderstā ­ding.’ In leeke sort wryteth allso Athanasius In orat. contra Arrianos. of the Arriās. ‘If (sayth he) mē reading some goodwordes of the holy scripture written in these fellowes bookes, will therfore by and by take blasphemies for blessinges, it will allso come to passe that whē they see Iues of this our tyme diligētly to read the lawe, and the prophetes, they will also with the Iues denye Christ. Perhapps also hearing the Maniches vouche certayne places of the Gospells, they will with them denye the lawe and the pro­phetes. But if throwgh ignoraūce they do so boyll, and babble, let them learne out of the scriptures how the diuell him self the inuen­tour [Page 35] and deuiser of heresies, for feare of beyng bewrayed by his strong ayer, vsurpeth allso thies wordes of the scripture, to the end that shrowded therin, hee may deceyue the simple, so infectyd with his poyson. For so de­ceyued he Eue: so allso lead he other here­tikes into error, and euen so dooth he now persuade Arrius, that, as it were vnder co­lour of talking leeke an aduersary against heresies, he might the better deceyue him in foysting in his owne.’

Chrysostom allso following Athanasius Chrysos. in sermo ne aduer sus here­ticos. To. 3. ‘Open o Arrius (sayth he) the sepulchre of thy throte filled with dead wordes for thou hast not yet that liuyng and quickening word, which thow seekest to frame to the mayntenaūce of thy reasons: but he so soone as he is callyd, maketh the entree of his talke with scriptures. But thow that art the faythfull, fear not when thow hearest him bring in scripture, for euen the diuell him self when he came to Christ and tempted him, bourded him with scripture saying: If Math. 4. Psal. 90 thow be the sonne of God throwe thy self downe, for it is written, he hath geuen com­maundement to his Aungells that they shal [Page] keepe thee in all thy wayes, and shall hould thee vp with their handes.’

And it is well knowen that Arrius Arrius produced xl. texts of the scrip­ture to mayntein his here­sye. browght foorth fowrty places of the scriptu­re to proue that the sonne was not of one substance with the father. And what did he and his followers crake euer of, but of the scriptures, the Gospell, and the expresse word of God? To the scriptures he appealed and would not otherwyse be dealt with, but only with the scriptures.

Maximinus when hee should enter in August li. 1 contra Maximi­num. to disputation with S. Augustin prescribed this lawe vnto him that he should of neces­site yeld to what so euer he should bring out of the scriptures. For thus he sayth.

Those wordes which are takē out of the scri­pture faull not to vs by chaūce, synce the lord him self hath thus warned vs saying: in vayne do they worship me teaching the preceptes Matth. 18. and commaundements of men.

S. Augustin allso writeth euen the leeke of the Donatistes: ‘As the diuell (sayth he) against the very lawemaker, browght owt the very wordes of the lawe, so ye by the wordes of the lawe accuse the men ye knowe [Page 36] not, and withstād the promisses of God which are geuen by the very wordes of the lawe.’

And a lytle after. ‘You speake (sayth he) the wordes of the lawe, but against whom you speake them youe marke not: No more did the diuell when he vtteryd the wordes of the lawe, knowe him to whō he spake them. He would haue throwen downe our head which was ascending vpward, but ye would contract to one lytle part, the body of that head, which is dispersed throwgh the whole earth.’

‘In leeke sort also dealt Macedonius as Macedo­nius. may be gathered by the sermon which Gre­gorie Nazeanzen wrote of the holy Ghost.’ And so played Nestorius: for he thowght he Nestorius was able by the expresse word of God, to shewe that Mary the moother of Ihesu was deliuered but of a bare man, because in the Canonicall scriptures shee was sometymes callyd the moother of Ihesu, but neuer the mother of God.

Leekwyse Eutiches, whē he denyed ij. na­tures Eutiches to be in Christ, seemed therin to leane to the expresse woord of God, and asked of the Catholykes. In what scripture those ij. na­tures [Page] appeared: I haue not learnyd owt of the Concil. Chalde. Act 1. fol 776. In qua scriptura iacent duae na­turae? holy scriptures any suche ii. natures: And of suche thinges must wee make searche only in the holy scriptures, which are of more force then the doctrines and expositions of the fathers.

But what needyth in a manifest thing to vse moe wordes? when nothing can be August. more truly sayd, then is written by S. Au­gustine. ‘Errour could not spring cloked vn­der the name of Christ, but of the scriptu­res not well vnderstanded: Neither dare the diuell attempt any other waye, but by the diuine scriptures as wee reade in Origē.’ VVho whē he had brought foorth the diuell alleaging those wordes of the Psalme: [They shall hould the vp with their handes, &c. Psal. 90

‘How comith it to passe Sathan (sayth he) Origen. Hom. 31. in Luca. that thow knowest thies thinges to be writ­ten? hast thou read the prophetes? or knowest thow the scriptures? though thow hould thy peace I will answer for the: thou hast read them, not that, by the reading of holy things thy self wouldest become better, but that by the bare letter thow mightest kyll the frēdes therof. Thow knowest that yf thowe shoul­dest [Page 37] speake out of any other bookes, thow coul dest not deceyue, neither could thy allega­tions haue any authoritee. So did Marcion read the scriptures, as did the diuel, so Basi­lides, so Valentinus, that with the diuel they Math. 4. might saye vnto our sauiour, it is writtē etc. Yf any tyme therefore thou here testimonyes browght owt of the scripture, take hede thou do not by and by repose thy self on the spea­ker, but cōsider him well what he is, of what mind and dispositiō: lest happely he faine him self holy, and be not so in dede, and lest the woulse infectyd with the poyson of heresy, lye shrowdyd vnder a shippes skin, or lest the diuel speake scripture out of him.’

This admonition of Origen is so depely to be layd vp in our mynd that at no tyme it go owt therof, that when wee heare one bring foorth the scriptures, or glory of the expresse word of God, wee do not by and by beleaue euery suche kynd of sprite. Be the Luthe­rans only they in this our age (trowe yee?) which so confidently beate our eares with their continuall boasting of the word of God? Doo not the Sacramentaries with as great or greater assurednes arrogat the same vnto [Page] themselues? VVherunto doth Caluin appeale but vnto the scriptures, when he hath to do with the Lutherans? VVhat can he beare more vnpacyently then when both by the Christians and Lutherans he seeth obiected against him the auctoritee of the fathers and Councels?

VVhen the Magdeburgenses wrote, wee are coōmawnded from God to heare the son­ne of God, Caluin ansvereth them in this sort.

Maliciously, and wickedly doo they ob­iect to vs the auctoritee of Christ, as though Caluin. our mynd were one iote to declyne from his pure and syncere doctryne, whoo haue all­wayes shewyd our selues in very deed with no lesse reuerence to receiue, what so euer hath issued out of the diuyne mowth of the lord, then they yn wordes doo boast on their part. Lett therfore the sonne of God be vnto vs without all cōtrouersy the chieff, most per­fytt, and only maister: in whose doctrine it may not bee laufull to alter one worde or sil­lable. But the obedyēce of the fayth dooth not lett but that wee may bee attentiue to the sownd vnderstanding of his wordes.

Loo as wicked and blasphemous as Cal­uin [Page 38] is, yet may he indure nothing worse then to be charged that he geueth not eare to the sonne of God, or declyneth any thing frō his pure and syncere doctrine. But what? Do the Anabaptistes with any lesse courage stande also vpon that poynt? No truly. For beholde howe one of them (as we haue read) talked vnto the heauēly father in this sort? The vvor des of an Anabap. Lutheral­so sayth. I am sure, my doctri­ne is frō heauen In princi­pio lib cō tra Reg. Henr.

Certainly I can not herin be deceiued. Thy word o heauenly father haue I beleued: that receyued I of the holy Ghost, as the sure word of truth: And a litle after: I knowe as­suredly (sayd he) that this my doctrine which is the word of God in the daye of vpright iudgemēt shall not only iudge lordes, kinges, and the whole world, but allso the Angells them selues.

Doth not this honest man thinke him selfe as sure that his doctrine is the expresse woord of God as Luther or Caluin? and yett for all that, both his, Luthers, and Caluines, are in deed the expresse worde of the diuell. But whereto in the end cometh this geare? Strawnge and wonderfull it is. For lo: whyle in this sort, euery sect seeketh to vsurpe vn­to it self alone the word of God, and the true vnderstanding therof, there is sprong [Page] vp a certayne newe kind of prophets, which A nue kid of prophetes, sprōg vp, apon sight of the dissen siō emōg the prote­stantes feare not euē by the auctoritee of the scrip­tures, to withdraw all auctoritee from the scriptures. Lo wher to at last Sathan hath brought this reckening. Forsooth to this that he hath drawē wretched men to that passe, that looke what doctrine euery of thē hath by chaunce imbracyd, the same should he firmly persuade him selfe to be the expresse worde of God, and not suffer him self by any reasons to be drawen from it. Now therfore this is apparant that neuer almost was ther any heretike, which did not cōfirme his er­rour by the scripture, and which affirmed not his opinion to be the very word of God. The thing it self so she wyth this, that far­ther demonstration needith not: but yet the chief of all heretikes of this our age doth also testifie the same: who writeth: That the holy scripture hath now at the last obteynid this name to be caullyd the heretikes booke: be­cause all heresies deryue their course and origi nal spring frō thence. But to what end is this will some man saye? Doo you go about to ex­tenuat the word of God, and to withdrawe auctoritee from it? Haue you browght vs [Page 39] foorth so many thinges to the end to shewe that who so euer vseth the testimony of the scripture is an heretike? No: God forbid that wee should so myche as thinke a thing so straunge and vnsitting for any Christian man: ‘No wee rather saye as S. Hillary whi­lom Lib 2. de Trinitate. Note, vvherihe resie con­sistcth did: Heresye is in the vnderstanding, not in the scripture. The sence not the text is blamed.’

Nothing is more holy then the scripture nothing of more auctorite, nothing (next God) more worthy of all honour. But what thing cā be so holy, which the enemie of man kind abuseth not to the destruction of man? VVee must not thinke that God alwayes ope­neth their mowthes whō wee heare talke of the word of God, and alleage the words of the scripture. The most learned Origen did well Origen. hom 3. in Exodum. note to vs that not seldō the diuel also ope­neth the mowth of syche as vtter the word of god: [who speaketh alye (sayth he) it is cer Ioh. 8. tayne the diuel openeth his mowth to vtter a lye:] But thow wilt saye how may he lye that bringeth foorth the testimony of the scriptures, which no good man doubteth to haue proceded frō the holy Ghost the spirit [Page] of truth, and from whom floweth all truthe? Short and redy is the aunswer hereunto: In the scriptures themselues which we knowe to haue ben inspired from God aboue, ther can in deed be no lye. But in the sence which man bringeth (of whom it is written: [eue­ry man is a lyar] hee that will saye there can Psal. 115. not be a lye, what doth he ells but denye the saying of God, and as it were charge the ho­ly Ghost of Vntruth?

VVhat then, will soome man saye? yf eue­ry man bee a lyar, dooth it therfore followe that what so euer a man speaketh, what so e­uer hee bryngeth owt of the holy scripture should therfore be a lye? God forbidd: I saye not so.

How shall I then knowe when hee vtte­ryth a lye? This will the very Truth teache vs, which can not lye. For that sayeth, [whoo Ioan. 8. so euer vtteryth a lye, vtteryth of his owne.] No man hath of his owne but synne and vn­trouth: But yf a mā haue any point of trouth or righteousnes, that hath hee of God. Hee therfore speakyth the truth, which vtte­ryth not that is of him self, but of God.

But thow wilt saye agayne: Speakyth he [Page 40] not frō God which recyteth the very words of God? and the testimonies of the scriptu­res? Yow haue heard now not only once, but often opened vnto yow by me, that the diuel also alleageth testimonies of the scriptures, and yet doth he not therfore speake the truth, because he speaketh of his owne. VVhat is this speaking of his owne? It is when he bryngeth his owne sence of the scripture, and not the sence and meaning of God. ‘For this is, to bean heretike (as before we taught out of S. Ambrose) to buyld his owne sence vpon the wordes of the lawe: and so by the wordes of the lawe to impugne the lawe.’

But how shall I discerne when a man bryngeth his owne sence, and when the true sence and meaning of God? This will that no­table August. li. 12. Confes. ca. 25. doctour of the Church, S. Augustine teache vs: ‘who in this sort speaketh vnto God: Thy truthe (lorde) is neither myne, nor Truthe is not ptiuat ot psonal but cōmō to al. his, or his, but common to vs all, whom thow doost openly call to the communion therof, terribly warning vs that we presume not to make the same priuat, lest wee be depri­ued therof. For who so euer doth challenge as proper to him self that, which thow hast [Page] geeuen foorth to bee enioyed of all, and will make that his owne peculiar which is com­mon to all, hee is throwen downe from that which is common, to his owne: that is to saye from truth to vntruth, for hee that maketh a lye speaketh of his owne.’

Doest thow now vnderstand whoo spea­keth Ioan. 8. of his owne? that is to saye whoo spea­keth vntrought? Truth (thow seest) is not his or his, but is common to all. All hath God caullyd publikely to the communion therof. VVho so euer therfore maketh priuatt, that is publyke, whoo so euer challengith to him self, and cōtenciously will make his owne pro­per, that which by charitee is commō to all, hee speakith of him self, hee speakith an vn­trouth. For truth is not any wher ells but a­mong Throuth is only in the Catho like Chur che. all: that is to saye in the Catholike or vniuersall Churche.

Therfore whoo so euer seekith owt any singular vnderstanding or inuenteth any strange and vnknowen expositions, or brin­geth to the world any newe and singuler o­pinions, though hee shewe six hundreth te­stimonyes of the scriptures, because hee vn­derstādeth them not with that sence wich [Page 41] is receiued of the Catholike Churche, but ioyneth therunto his owne proper and pri­uat exposition, he speaketh of him self, and therfore speaketh an vntrouth, for the truth is not with any one, but with all, that is to saye in the Catholike Churche, wher­unto the light of sownd and true vnder­standing of the scriptures is promysed of al­mighty God.

So as there can be no surer argument, that a man speaketh his owne, that is, a lye, then when he departeth from the sence, ex­position and consent, of the Churche: For thē althowgh he bring neuer so many texts of the scripture, hee may vtter in dede the expresse word of the diuell: but neuer can he in that sorte bring foorth the expresse and pure worde of God. For it is as certayn that the diuel openeth the mowth of them, which teache Gods word, being owt of the Churche, as that God him self openeth the mowthes of them, which beyng of and with in the churche, doo vtter the same. And this is the cause that when so euer ther is in the Church memory made of an Euāgelist, or any other notable doctour, that both in the [Page] entry of the Masse, and in the Canonicall howres, this text of Ecclesiasticus is read: Eccles. 15. [In the midle of the Churche he opened his mowth:] VVherby is signifyed that God openeth the mowth to no mā vnlesse he be with in the Churche. From the true sence and vnderstanding wherof who so euer dif­fereth, his mowth, not God, but the diuell doth open.

How famous so euer any doctour of the Churche bee, yet yf he be not with in the Churche, if he consent not with the sence of the Churche, it is certayn that God opened not his mowth. But yf any man speake cōtra­ry to the sence and consent therof, wee need not doubt to saye that the diuell opened his mowth. VVho so euer therfore vttereth his owne, vttereth a lye, and he that speaketh of God, speaketh the truth: but he speaketh of God which vttereth the scriptures not at aduenture, or by his owne priuat sence, but with the sence that is common to all, that is, with the sence of the catholyke Churche.

And that is it which is truly and pro­perly VVhat is the true vvord of God. caullyd the word of God, when to the wordes of the scripture, not our owr owne [Page 42] sence, but the commō sence, that is, the sence of the Catholike Churche is applyed: which to be the very trewe sence and meaning of God, is not to bee doubted.

For thus wee reade noted by Socrates that the Emperour Constantine calleth the sen­tence of all them which were assembled in li. r. hist. Eccl. ca. 9. the councell of Nice, the sentence of God. For the voyce of the Church, is the voyce of God The voy­ce of the churche is the voy ce of God vtterid by her. Ezech. 13. speaking by her. He therfore is a Catholike, and a right beleuer, and syche as can by no meanes vtter vntruth, which (being mind­full of that is written, [woo be vnto foolishe prophetts which followe their owne spirite, and see nothing] followeth not his owne, but the spirit of the Churche, not his owne ima­gination or conceyte, but the sence and con­sent of the Churche. Yea thowgh the wordes of the scripture should seeme not very open and playne, which syche a one bryngeth foorth, yet because he produceth them with the sentence of the Churche, he vttereth the very worde of God.

But if a man will applye therunto his VVhat is the vvor­of the di­uell. owne proper conceyte, if he will temper the scriptures with his owne imagination, (for [Page] he ioineth his owne sence to the scriptures, which contendeth so earnestly not for the true vnderstanding of the diuine scrip­tures, but for his owne) that he will haue that to bee the scriptures which is his, when he owght rather to make that his, which is the scriptures, yf I saye he obstinatly de­fend VVho is an hereti­ke. syche his sentence against the common sence and cōsent of the whole Churche, he is an heretike and a schismatike: And bring he neuer so many testimonies of the scriptu­res, yet he vttereth not the pure word of God, but the expresse worde of the diuell. Ther is therfore no authoritee taken from the scriptures, when it is sayd, that heresies spring not so myche of them, as of the lewde and faulse vnderstanding of them.

‘This is an owld complaynte made by S. Basilius in Hexa­merum. hom. 2. Basill that the deprauers of the truth doo not applye their vnderstanding to the scrip­ture, but violentlye drawe the mynd of the scriptures to their owne will.’ But notable is the counsell of S. Clement, that when the lawe of God is read, it bee not read or tawght Lib. 10. Recongnitio­nū & epi. 5▪ according to the vnderstanding of a mans owne brayne: for there are many thinges in [Page 43] the diuine scriptures, which may (with for­ce) bee drawen to syche sence as eche man shall fancye to him self. ‘And therfore (sayth he) must we learne the vnderstanding of the scriptures, of him which keepeth them being orderly deliured vnto him, by his fore­fathers according to the truth.’

VVhich counsell Rufinus writeth, those Li. 2. hist. Eccles. cap. 9. An exā ­ple most vvorthy to be noted and folovved. ij. lights of Grece, Basill the Great, and Gre­gory Naziāzene, to haue followed. VVho whē they gaue them selues to the only study of the scriptures, remouing from them al other secular bookes of Greke writers, they follo­wed not in seeking the true vnderstanding therof, their owne fanceys, but the writings and authoritee of the fathers, whom they allso knewe to haue learnyd that rule of trewe vnderstanding, from the Apostolike succession.

But how farre do they differ frō the dea­ling of these fathers, who rashly faull them selues to the wayghing of euery scripture, and beleeue it according to their owne iud­gement, not passing at al vpon the sence & exposition of the fathers, to wbom they thinke it iniurious to be put ouer? But what [Page] may bee sayd more rightly to these men by vs, then that which wee reade to haue been sayde to the Manichees by S. Augustin? August li. 32. contra faustum cap. 19.

‘Yow see (sayth he) your dealing tendith to this end that all auctoritee bee takē from the scriptures, and that euery mans priuat mynde should tell him what were in eche scripture to be allowed, and what to be disal­lowed. That is in effect: that the mynde should not by faith, bee subiect to the aucto­ritee of the scriptures, but should make the scriptures subiect to the fancye of the mynd. So as nothing pleaseth him because it is found written and receiued with high and great auctoritee, but therfore it seemeth well written, because in some respect it plea­seth his fancye. VVherunto doest thow com­mitte thy self thow wretched and frayle sowle, all wrapped in cloudes of the fleshe? VVherunto doest thow committe thy self?’

Maye wee not well saye also to these men, where bestowest thow thy self thow misera­ble and wretchyd sowlle, wrapped in cloudes of fleshe? VVhere bestowest thow thy self? VVilt thow haue, that what so euer pleaseth thee, wee should take for scripture and [Page 44] howld that for the pure and expresse word of God? And why not that which hath semed good to al, that is, to the vniuersal Churche?

VVhat an intollerable pryde is this? VVhat an arrogancy and swelling of the mynde? The extreme arrogā ce of heretikes. VVilt thow so challenge to thy self alone, the spirit of God, and so pull it from all others, that what so euer sense thow wilt bring owt of the scriptures, wee showld bee bound to beleue that, neglecting the sence and vn­derstanding of the whole churche? can there be a greater arrogancy, or a greater tiranny then this?

It pleased fryer Luther, it leekyd him, that Luther his decree this or that scripture shoold haue this or that sence: VVhat so euer therfore hath been deliuered frō the fathers, what so euer hath been establisshed by aucthorite of councells, what so euer hath been receyued and allo­wed by the continuall practise of the whole Churche, all that must wee despyse, reiect, and howld for vayne. These be Lu­thers ovvne vvor­des in his booke. De seruo Ar­bitrio. Neither must suche a multitude, greatnes, depthe, largenesse, mi­racles, or hollinesse of so many Sainctes of the Churche, mooue a mā one iote: But that sen­se which hee interpreteth, wee must not [Page] dowbt to haue been the very sense and mea­ning of the holly Ghost.

And that which the Catholikes haue tawght, which the auctoritee of the Chur­che hath deliuered, which all Christian peo­ple Luthers vvordes, as before haue so many hundreth yeeres imbra­cyd, which schooles defend and mainteyne, all that wee must thinke to be the deadly poyson of Sathan.

How trewly is it sayd of S. Pawll, [Know­ledge 1. Cor. 8. puffith vp and Charitee edifieth?] Thowgh in deed opinyō of knowledge rather puffith vp, then knowledge it self. For if the­se fellowes had but one cromme of charitee in them, could they so swell with pryde to thinke all men in respect of them sel­ues to be blynd, foolish, blockish, and ig­noraunt?

But euē as wyne if it be not delayed with water, dooth trouble the mynd, euē so know­ledge yf it bee not temperyd with charitee, doth with a certayne pryde and ouertur­ning make a man, as it were dronke, or ra­ther starke madde-VVherfere S. Pawll doth very well adde thus: [but yf a mā thīke him 1. Cor. 8. self to knowe myche, he hath not yett lear­ned [Page 45] in what sort he should knowe.] For yf he had, he would neuer with the opinion of his owne knowleage haue growen so insolent, to preferre him self before all others: and as it were from an high to looke downe vpon them. For, the beginning of trewe knowleage, is the knowleage of God, which breedeth in vs humillitie and submission, and dooth rather deiect, then by pryde erect, the mynd of man. And wher so great pryde is, as we see is in these men, what can there be ells in them, then in deed a very ignoraunce, and not knowing of God?

But S. Pawll teacheth vs in an other 1. Cor. 3. place by what meane wee should learne rightly to knowe: [Lett no man (sayth he) seduce you. yf any man among yow seeme wyse in this world, lett him becoome a foole, that he may be made wyse.] So then by the iudgement of Saint Pawll, a man may become wyse, yf hee leane not to his owne fancye, yf he condescend to seeme in his owne sight a foole, yf he examin him self. And yf he seeme to haue any wysedom, that he reduce and submitt the same to the [Page] seruyce and obedience of Christ, the Head, and his mystical body, to beleue what he tea­cheth and rather with feare and reuerence to imbrace the same, then to follow that which seemeth probable to himself. ‘VVhich thing where it is not done what ells follo­weth then that (as S. Augustin writeth) all Augus. li. 32. cap. 19. cōtra fau. stum. The race andissevv of hereti­kes in our age. auctoritee be taken from the scriptures?’

And doo wee not see it euen now thus come to passe? There is sproong vp in this our vnhappy age Martin Luther, who hath with violence broken into the scriptures, and shouldering out all others cōtentiously bea­ryth mē in hād, that the sense of the scriptu­res is euen suche, as he will haue it, and as may best accorde with his doctrine: In fine he so handleth the matter, that he sowght to bee reputed not a dispensor, but a lord ouer the holy scripture. He required obedience of Luth de Seruo Arbitrio. Non volo Iudicium: sed obse­quium requiro. all in imbracing that sence of the scripture, which he him self hath browght foorth▪

After that sprāge Carolstadius, and after him Zwinglius, Oecolampadius and Caluin, and as Luther had reiectyd all the catho­lykes, and right beleuers, so did this man to­gether with the rest, remoue allso Luther Carolsta­dius. [Page 46] himself. And with greate exclamations Zvvingli' Caluin. contenciously affirmeth that the scriptures doo not meane as Luther sayth, but as he him self teacheth.

Then brake owt in an other corner not Pacimon­tanus. long after one Balthasar Pacimontanus: He in interpreting certayne places of the scrip­tures dissenteth both frō Luther and Zuin­glius, and will nedes haue the scriptures to meane as he doth interpret thē, and not as they will haue it.

The heauenly prophets, so called, (wherof Svvēcksel dius Swenckfeldius is now the ryngeleader) es­pied this, that these fellowes thus tempered the scriptures to their owne sence, and con­tēded so earnestly not for the scriptures, but for the maintenaunce of their owne priuatt and peruers opiniōs and that (for ensample) they set foorth to the people for the pure and expresse word of God, not that which Marke or Mathew thought, but that which them selues had imagined. So as whyle euery mās mynde was to him self an authour, and tea­cher what was in euery scripture to be al­lowed, or disallowed, they did not submitte them selues to the authoritee of the scriptu­res, [Page] but thrall the scriptures to them selues, and as it were vsurpe a rule and maistry ouer them: then (I saye) begāne these diuine prophetts thus to thinke with them selues.

How long in the end shall we indure the The Svvēcfel diās vvor­des tyranny of these vnhooded and rennagat fryers? Howe longe shall we be driuen to adore as the expresse word of God; what so euer hath lyked them to sprinckle with a fewe wordes of the scripture? VVhen yett in the meane tyme we see them so fight and dis­agree emong them selues, while euery of them laboureth that his followers should esteeme and receiue, not the mynde of the Apostle, or the Euangelist, but his owne pro­per exposition, for the expresse worde of God? VVhat? will these fellowes now be worshipped as Gods? what remaineth thē, but that wee should kneele downe to this, or that Archheretike? and presently worship as the very voyce of God, what so euer shall be spoken by any of them?

Nay: we will for our partes rather harken for the mynd of God out of heauen and These a­re the vvordes vvith vvhich the Apo­logie of England ī the first editiō ig­norantly, in the la­ter obsti­natly and maliciously char­geth Ho­siꝰ vvithal as his ovvne vvor­des, and as generally defended of al Ca­tholikes. Thou seest here (Good reader) they are the Svvēcfel­diās vvordes tom­trolled by Hosius. Psal. 93. Matt. 23. Iacob 3. will bidde away both with these fellowes thus striuing for the vnderstanding of the scriptures, yea and with the scriptures them selues, wherof wee now see so many not on­ly [Page 47] diuers, but allso mere contrary exposi­tions daily browght foorth. And looke what it shall please that heauenly teacher to re­ueale vnto vs, that will we receiue with due reuerence as the very expresse word of God: and will rather heare him self speake, (according to the saying of the prophett: ‘I will heare what the lord speaketh with in me) then turne our selues to those bare elementes and naked letters, and in them, (which wee see to be turned this waye and that waye) to sette our saluation.’

It is not needfull to be cunning in the lawe or the scripture, but to be tawght of God. Vayne is the labour which is bestowed on the study of the scripture. For the scripture is but a creature, and a certayn bare letter. It is not meete for a Christian to be to mych ad­dicted to the creature. Yow must heare God: his voyce is to be expected from heauen to teache vs: blessed is the man (sayth Da­uid) whom thow teachest. He dooth as well teache vs now, as in the owld tyme he did the Patriarkes and Prophettes. Christ forbadde that wee should haue any moe maister, for that wee haue our only maister in heauen.

Thou seest heerby (most vertuous kyng) wher vnto at last the matter is come, and how [Page] truely it was sayd by S. Augustine that all Augusti­ne lib. 32 cōtra fau­stū ca. 19. auctoritee is taken from the scripture, when a man will not only not be subiect to the au­thoritee of the scriptures in matters of faith, but make them thrall, and subiect vn­to him, neither will contend for the mynd of the scriptures, but for his owne. For what so euer him self thinketh, that will he haue reputed for the trewe and expresse word of God, though all other men thinke the con­trary. By to mych altercation (sayth one) the truthe is lost. And I pray yow is not▪ the truth now in manner lost? Is not with some men the authoritee of the scriptures taken awaye Marke here, you Authors of the A­pologie, vvhether Hosius de rogateth from the Scriptures or you are foūde manifeste Slaunde­rers, Pride and selfeloue the cause of al this garboyle in religiō in the which only, lyeth all vndoub­ted truthe? Namely since euery man hath sowght to arrogat to him self the iudgement of the scriptures, and remouing the sentence of all others, hath sought to haue his owne being wyde and straieng from the Churche, to be worshipped as the very expresse word of God?

But could this matter euer haue come to this passe, yf these fellowes remēbring them selues to be men, would rather haue chosen to followe the iudgement of the Churche, [Page 48] and therunto reuerently haue submitted themselues, then thus insolently to cōmaun­de men to imbrace the visions of their har­tes, for the word of God? VVhen in deed no man lyuing can be of so excellent learning, or of so singular holynes of lyfe, that it can be lawfull for vs to receyue his opinion, for the expresse worde of God.

But on the other syde where as is a consen­ting The voy­ce of the Churche. voyce of the whole Churche, yf a man dowbt that, to be the expresse word of God, and a most certayn truth, what doth he ells, but dowbt whether God be true or no? VVhō it is most certayne and vndoubted to speake by the mowth of his Churche?

Thow perceauest now (most fortunat king Sigismond) that it is not by and by the ex­presse and pure word of God what so euer is browght owt of the scriptures: From the per­uers vnderstanding wherof, wee see all he­resies haue sproong. Namely that the diuell him self did also say: [for it is written etc.] Math. 4. VVhen yet the sence wherwith he browght those wordes, was the diuells owne, and not the pure word of God.

Marke agayne ye Authors of the A­pologie. Heresie is in the vn­derstādīg not in the scripture. Hilarius lib. 2. de Trinitate. The scriptures (no doubt) are sacred [Page] and holy: and in them is contayned the very word of God, yf the sownd meaning and vn­derstanding therof be applyed therunto. ‘But heresie is in the vnderstanding, not in the scripture, the sense not the text is in the fault.’ VVee cōtend not for the scripture with those that haue departyd from vs, which boasting them selues so myche of Gods woord, doo vsurpe the same vnto them selues alone. For they them selues confesse, they haue re­ceyued the scriptures from none other but from vs, from whom they be departyd: who doo allso with reuerence receyue all the Ca­nonicall scriptures. They on the other syde, because they will not in matters of fayth, be subiect to the aucthoritee of the scripture, doo receyue only that in thē, which by wre­styng may be framyd to serue to their doc­tryne.

The controuersy therfore between vs is VVhat is the cōtro­uersy be­tvven Cathoi­kes and protestāts not of the scriptures, but of the sence and vnderstanding of the scriptures. Brefely the selfe same varyance wee reade to haue been in all ages betweē Catholikes and heretikes. Arius brought foorth this scripture: [my father is greatter then I:] by which text as [Page 49] by the expresse word of God he sought to per­suade A mani­fest example of the present cōtrouer­sies. to the ignorant people, that Christ the sonne of God was inferiour to his father, and was not of the same substaūce with him. And in deed yf an vnlerned man come to the wayghing of those naked wordes, Ar­rius may seeme to haue sayde somwhat vn­to him. But what did hereunto the Catholi­kes and rightbeleuers? They reuerently ac­knowleged the text. But that which Arrius gathered therof, they constantly affirmed not to be the pure word of God, since Christ neuer spake them in that sence, as to teache him self not to be equally God, or in any thīg vnequall to his father. For in that he was the sonne of God, he was of the same sub­staunce with his father, but in that he was the sonne of mā, he was inferiour vnto him. And allthowgh the sectaryes and followers of Arrius, tooke that for the expresse word of God, yet the Catholikes▪ doubted not to affirme it to be the expresse word of the di­uell.

Euen lyke to this is the contention at this daye of the contrary doctrines between the Catholikes and the heretikes: For we striue [Page] not with them that haue departed from vs, abowt the scripture, but about the vnder­standing therof. And to make the matter the playner, let vs consyder but this one pla­ce of scripture which is now a dayes com­monly alleaged: It is sayd to be the ex­presse word of God: [Drinke you all of this.] And doo wee denye this to be the expres­se Matth. 26. VVhat vvorde of God pro­testāts ha­ue for cō ­muniō in bothe kindes. woord of God? No: but doo willingly gra­wnt it: Yet that it is the expresse word of God in that sence, which they that bee de­parted frō vs doe gather of that text, that is it which wee doo vtterly denye. For what doo they (trowe yow) gather of this place of scripture? forsooth that all which communi­cate, ye euē the laye people should be bownd by the commaundement of God to receyue the sacrament of the aultar vnder bothe kindes. But that Christ spake those wordes in that sense, we graunt not. But euē as Lu­ther Against the Bohēs in his resolutions him self once sayd, the same in this case saye wee allso. That Christ commaunded no­thing in this matter as necessary to the laye people: because these wordes were spoken to none other, but to the Apostles.

Yow see that here wee differ not abowt [Page 50] the text, but about the vnderstanding therof. For with no lesse, yea and with more reuerence, then they which haue deuided them selues from vs, doo we Catholikes re­ceiue this text, as the very worde of God.

But they would intrude their owne newe The diffe­rence be­tvvene catholikes and pro­testants. sense forged therunto. And wee seeke to de­fend the sense receyued in the Churche. They looue and leeke the sense which them selues bryng, not becaase it is trewe, but because it is their owne, and will needes defend that with toothe and nayle: VVee looue and leeke the sense browght by the Churche, not be­cause it is our owne, but for that wee stedfa­stly beleue it to be the very trewe sense of the scripture: VVhich to be so, not one pri­uatt Note. man, but the Churche (being as S. Pawl. 1. Tim. 3. Ioan. 14. calleth it, the piller and sure grownd of truth, and wherunto the spirit of truth was promised and sent) hath tawght vs.

But let vs yet a little more diligently wayghe the very text it self. They saye the Matth. 26. expresse word of God is: [Drynke yee all of this.] Ergo it is necessary that all persons The pro­testants argument should drinke of the cup: and yf any do other wyse they are giltye (say they) of breaking [Page] the institution of Christ. VVee will here a litle nerer ioyne foote to foote with them.

I pray thee, what caliest thow the word of God? The scripture. And what meanest VVhat the expresse vvorde of God is. thow by this worde, liuely and expresse? Cle­re, playne, and that which is so layde opē to all mens eyes, that no man is so dull of sight, which may not plainly see it. But yf it be so playne and cleere, how cometh it to passe that there is now such a doe about it? Of thin ges which are clere and manifest is there any man that will moue argument? As for example. VVhether it be daye or no, when wee see the sonne vp and shinyng vpon the earth? Of necessite therfore it must nedes followe that this is not so expresse and playne a worde, as to thee it seemeth, since there ryseth so muche question vpon it. And yf it be so playne and expresse, it is a great mar­ueill that in al these 600. yeres, since Polonia first receiued, and hath imbracyd the Gos­pell of Christ, and these wordes of Christ ha­uing ben commonly read and rehersed in the Churche, that no man hath ben founde not only in Polonia, but neither in the whole world besyde, wherin the name of Christ is [Page 51] professed, who coulde thinke it in that sence that yow now bryng foorth, to be the expres­se word of God. That is to saye, that therby the laye people should be bound as by the commaundement of God of necessite, to re­ceyue the sacrament of the aultar in both kindes.

The Grekes themselues, albeit the laye The schisma­ticall grekes better then protestants. people were with them admitted to the cup, did yet neuer so interprette these wordes: VVho when in the Councell of Florence more then an hundreth yeres past they as­sembled them selues with the Latynes, and contendyd with them about some other mat­ters, yet did they not bestowe iij. wordes in altercation with them about the vse of the Challyce, because they knewe there was no precept of Christ wherby the laitye were of necessite bounde so to receiue the same. Doo you then thinke all men to haue been blynde, and suche blockheades, and stockes that in so many ages, yea euē synce the tyme that the Gospell was written, they could ne­uer see this so playne and expresse a word of God? But wayghe well with thyself whe­ther this be a point of Christian pietye and [Page] modesty so to thinke of the fathers, wherof a See to vvhat point the protestat is dryuen by his pri­uat sense of holy scripture. great number neuer being acquaynted with the vse of the cup to other thē to the Priestes themselues in the sacrifice of the Masse, did yet leaue vnto vs the Gospell of Christ sea­led with their bloud: VVilt thow so cōdemne them all of blyndnes or impiete, that either they sawe not this so playne a place of Gods worde, or els that seing it (which were more intollerable) they wold wittingly haue gone against it?

But thow sayest what so euer is become of Obiection Matth. 26. the fathers, the wordes be cleere: [Drinke yee all of this:] he that sayeth [all] exclu­deth none.

VVith what impudency then dost thow Ansvver. make of [all] not all? But yf he exclude none, whic sayeth [All] wilt thow then haue infi­dels also to drinke of the cup? God forbid thow saist, for the participatiō of the sacra­mentes pertayneth only to the faythfull. VVhy? But a lytle before, thow saydest, he that sayeth [All] excludeth no man. VVith what face then dost thou now exclude the infidels? and so of [All] make [not All?] But in this poynt (synce thow thinkest rightly) we will [Page 52] gladly agree with thee, and will not be vn­willing to allowe this thy restraynt.

But now tell me of good fellowshipp: whe­ther thinkest thow children that be christ­ned to be of the number of the faythfuii or All aud not all, is as it plea­seth pro­testants no? Thow sayest, yea: How thē? VVilt thow cō ­maund them allso to drynke of the cupp? no: why? but a litle before thou saydst that all the faithfull must of necessite drynke of the cupp. VVherfore dost thow now agayne of (al) make (not all?) VVhy dost thow allowe to thy self that, which thow wilt not allowe laufull to the church of God? Thow thinkest it lau­full to keepe children from all sacramentall participatiō of the body and bloud of Christ: and yf to laye persons being past their child­hood, the one kind be not geuen (when yet in that other which is geuen, all and whole Christ is receyued) then complaynest thow that great sacrilege is committed.

But here thow wilt saye. As touching in­fantes, that I thinke them well kept from Replie. the communion of the Sacramente of the body and blood of Christ, the auctorite of S. Pawll moueth me, whoo wryteth: [lett eue­ry mā trye himself and so eate of that bread 1. Cor. 11. [Page] and drinke of the cupp.] But how shall an infant trye him self? and how shall he iudge our lord his body which is not yett co­me to reason and vnderstanding?

But what (I praye the) if it be superflu­ous Reyon­dre. that they shoold trye themselues, whom wee knowe to be cleane, being purified by the holy sacrament of baptisme, and newly entryd ynto the howsehold of Christ? VVhat yf litle ones can iudge the body of our lord which they receyue, by their God fathers and God mothers, who before they be bap­tysed, doo in their name professe to beleaue, yea and that the chyld him self beleaueth and renounceth Sathan? Yf the faith of the suertyes, and of the churche suffise the in­fant to the receiuīg of baptisme, why should not their triall and iudgement allso suffise him to the receiuing of the sacramēt? Verely Ruardus Tapper a learned man, bringeth none other cause, why childrē are kept from the sacramentall participation of the body and bloud of Christ, but only that they doo not allwayes swallowe that is put into their mowth, or yf they doo, yet do they often putt it vp agayne.

[Page 53]But God forbidde, I should reprehend, that you doo therin allso, farther restrayne this word [All] and denye allso the commu­nion to infantes.

For this is in deed the mynd of the churche, althowgh wee reade it was otherwyse in the In the time of S. Cyprian and S. Augustin ex­pressely. Cypr. in ser. de lapsis. August. de peccat. mer▪ & re. li. 1. ca. 20. primitiue churche. But yf thow thinke it is with good reason doone that the churche keepeth infantes from all sacramentall par­ticipation of the body and bloud of Christ, why doest thow not allso persuade thy self that in forbearing to geue the cupp to the laye people it was leekewyse led therunto by iust reasons, and waighty considerations?

But let vs yet wayghe and examine far­ther these words of Christ: which yf wee will rightly vnderstand, it behoueth vs to haue regard to those which went before, to the end we may therby knowe to whom these Matth. 26. wordes were spoken. S. Mathew descrybing the supper of our lorde, speaketh thus: [But when euening was come he sate downe with his twelue disciples.] S. Marke thus: [But Cap. 14. when the euening was come he came with Cap. 22. his twelue.] And S. Luke thus: [And when the hower was come, he sate downe and his [Page] twelue Apostles with him.] In the former place, the word [All] seemyd to yow very playne and cleere: How cometh it then to passe, that this word ( Twelue) should not seeme vnto yow as playne and cleere? VVould there be any matter of stryfe yf you would as sharply behould this word, as you doo that which went before? Is not either of them the word of one and the same God? both (All) and (twelue)?

This therfore is the true sense of Christ The true sense of Christes vvordes his wordes: [Drinke ye of this all ye twelue which are set doune with me] It is wel knowē there were diuers others in the howse of Sy­mon the Lepre, where the supper was made, yet only the twelue Apostles sate downe: 1. Cor. 11 Luk. 22. VVhō after he had instituted newe priestes of the newe sacrifice, saying: [Make or doe this thinge for remembraunce of me,] He commaunded them only to drynke of the cuppe, which they did as S. Marke writeth saying: [And they drāke all therof.] Might Mar. 14 you not as laufully gather herby, that albeit the sacramēt of the body and bloud of Christ, pertayne vnto al, yet these words [Drinke ye Matt. 26 Mar. 14. all of this] pertayne only to the Apostles, and [Page 54] to syche as succeede them, to wyt, bisshopps and Priests? And so the expresse word of God in that point to be this, that so often as Priests make that, which Christ then made and commaunded them to make, that is to saye, when so euer they consecrate the body of Christ, and offer the same in the remem­braunce of his passiō, it is necessary for them to vse both kyndes, both in conseerating, offering, and receiuing: so as yf therein they leaue owt that one kynd, they may iustly see­me to committe great sacriledge?

But shewe vs now one word, I will not The here­tikes cān­not she­vve one vvord to proue, that it vvas at any ty­me com­maunded, that the laytee; shold of necessitee receyue the Sacra mēt in bothe for­mes Manna and the paschall lab vver the figu­res of the Sacramēt. saye cleer and playne, but how darke so euer it be, wherof wee may with any reason con­iecture, that euer Christ commaunded the laye people to drynke of the cuppe, or at the lest where Christ gaue them his bloud to drynke. And yet ye obiect against vs the expresse word of God, and with open mowth charge vs therwith, when ye can not fynd so myche as any shadowe therof in the scrip­tures. But wee, whether ye will regarde the shadowe and figure, or the trouth and thing it self, can out of the very scriptures, shewe you the contrary of your doctrine.

[Page]Ye are not ignorant that Manna ge­uen to the lewes from heauen, was the shad­dow and figure of this sacramēt of the body and blood of Christ: So was the pascall lābe allso: Of these all did eate, but lyquors neuer came to the vse of any others, then of the Priests, neither did the laye people vsurpe Note. to themselues any porcyon therof,

Lett vs nowe come to the truthe and the thinge it self. Christ drawing nere vn­to Luke 24 those ij. which went to Emaus wēt with them, when they came to the Castell, he ta­ryed with thē, and sitting downe with thē, tooke bread, blessed it, brake it, and gaue it vnto them. And their eyes were opened and they knewe him: and then he vanysshed owt of their syght. This bread the holly August. lib. 3 de cō sen. Euan­gel. cap. 25 Beda lib. 6 in Lucam Chrysost. hom. 17 in Matth. Theophi­lact. in Lucam 24. fathers interprett to haue been the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ: Here is no mē ­cyon made of the Cupp. Doo yee now see this expresse word of God that Christ gaue the Sacrament vnder forme of bread alone to them, which were no Apostles? But that hee commaunded to geue, or that him self gaue to the laye people his bloud to be dronke owt of the challyce, that is so farre from [Page 55] being the expresse word of God, that ye can not so myche as fynd any shadow ther­of in the scriptures.

This did the Boemians well vnderstande that of these places of the Gospell, where the Supper of our Lorde is described, they could not defend their errour wherby they had with priuat auctoritee vsurped to them selues the Challyce: VVherfore this text of S. Iohn seemed to them a playner word of God, to buyld their errour vpon: [Except ye eate the fleshe of the sonne of Iohn. 6. man, and drynke his bloud, ye shall haue no lyfe in you.] VVhich word they which in this our age haue deuyded themselues from the Churche, denye to appertayne any thing to the supper of our lord, but will haue them vnderstanded not of the sacramentall, but of the spirituall eating. So, that, which see­med to the Boemians the plaine and cleere word of God, to the Lutherās was not so clee­re. VVho whē they had takē away owt of the Churche both priesthod and sacrifice, which yet the Boemians did not: (for these will haue all men Priestes) they will also haue these wordes to be spoken vnto all: [Drinke [Page] ye all of this.] But to this which the Bohemi­ans bring owt of the sixth of Iohn, a good and learnyd mā hath very well aunswered more then an C: yeres past.

No faithful Catholike sayth, that the saying of S. Iohn: [Except ye eate etc.] or ells that any other the commaundements of Christ owght not to be kept: but the Catholike sayeth, that the vniuersall Church of Christ, better vnderstandeth which be the com­maundemēts of Christ, and how they owght to be kept, then Husse or his followers: The Hussitani varyance therfore is not of the wordes of Christ (which euery good man doth receyue with all reuerence) but of the sence and vn­derstanding of his wordes.

But the heretikes of our tyme (as we said The here­tikes of this age. before) denye those wordes to be rightly ta­ken of the sacramentall eating of the body and bloud of Christ, for which cause allso they forbeare to vse the authoritee of this text to the affirming of the vse of the chal­lyce. Tho Ca­tholikes But wee (who doo willingly follow the mynd of the fathers) doo not denye, but they maye be well vnderstanded of bothe kyndes, and yet do constantly affirme that when the [Page 56] only forme of bread is receyued, both the bo­dy of Christ is eatē, and his bloud is dronke. They did eate (sayth S. Cypriane) and drāke In sermo­ne de Coe­na domi­ni. of one self bread, according to the visible forme. Here thow seest it reported, they did not only eate, but allso drinke of one bread: yea and in the scriptures wee reade, that bloud was allso eaten. The body of Christ is Leu. [...]. 17. therfore eatē, and his bloud is dronke, when the only forme of bread is receyued: yea thowgh nothing be powred owt of the chal­lyce into the mowthes of the faithfull. For allthowgh it be neither grinded with the teethe, nor swallowyd, yet is it eaten and dronke by faith and charitee,

But it is a wonder to see that the Bohe­mians laboured to proue their purpose by The folye of the Bohemians. Ioan. 6. that place of the Gospell, where no mention is made either of the cuppe or of the wyne, but only of bread, which allso alone to suffise vnto saluation the wordes of Christ do de­clare, saying: [If a man eate of this bread he shall liue for euer: and the bread which I will geue is my fleshe for the lyfe of the world. Hee that eateth this bread shall liue for euer.] You see how the promisse of eter­nall [Page] lyfe was made to the bread and not to the cuppe. And in all that sixth chapiter of S. Iohn, is made no mencion in any one word, either of the cuppe, or of the wyne.

VVhy doest thow therfore complayne O Sathan, why doest thow so often dull our ea­res, with thy vayne boasting of the expresse worde of God? VVhē, what so euer is browght foorth of the scriptures, if it be rightly vn­derstanded, seemeth muche more to make to the allowing of the receyued order of the Churche, then to the maintenaunce of this. thine errour?

But there is no cause why a Christē man should thinke that Sathan passeth so muche for the cuppe. For he knoweth wel inowgh, it is no whyt materiall to saluation, whether a mā vse the cuppe or no: synce by his lymmes, Luther, Bucer, and Philipp Melancthon he doth manifestly confesse, nothing touching the vse of the cuppe, to be commaunded by Christ as necessary to saluation. Full well (knoweth he) that it was very trewe which by the fathers in the Coūcell of Basill (which The de­cre of the councell of Basill councell wee knowe in this matter to be re­ceyued, and allowed) was fully decreed, that, [Page 57] whether a man cōmunicate in one or bothe kyndes, so it be done by the ordinaunce and obseruaunce of the Churche, it profiteth the worthy receyuer to saluation. Therfore this offendeth him not, that a man should com­municate vnder one forme, neither dooth he force to haue him communicate vnder bothe. But that it should be doone accor­ding VVhy Sa­thā requi­reth so e­arnestly the cōmunion vn­der bothe kindes. to the ordinaunce and obseruaunce of the Churche, because in that sorte (and none otherwyse) it profitteth the receyuers to saluation, that is it Lo, that chiefflly offen­deth Sathan. And that they should not cō ­municat in that sort, that is to saye, accor­ding to the ordinaunce and obseruaunce of the Churche, that, is it which he is so ear­nest abowt.

VVell: Sathan will be Sathan: for in the Hebrew Sathan is as myche to saye as an ad­uersary. He therfore will still be an aduer­sary both to Christ the head, and to his bo­dy. It is an ordinaunce and obseruaunce of the Churche, which is the mysticall body of Christ, that wee should communicat vnder one forme: he will haue it doone vnder bothe.

[Page]But suppose the ordinaunce and obser­uaunce of the Churche (which is the mysti­call body of Christ) were so, that we shoulde communicatt vnder bothe formes? Then wil you haue it done either vnder one alone, or vnder neither of bothe. But wil you heare the beast vtter his owne wordes? VVe recited them before, but it shall not be a mysse to heare him agayne: Thus he speaketh by his chosen vessell Luther.

If perhapps the councell should so decree, The vvordes of Sa­thā by the movvthe of his chosen vessell Martyn Luther. in lib. de for­mul. missae then would wee not receyue in both kindes, but then chieffly in despight of the councell, would we vse either the one, or neither of both, and not both: and playnlie hould thē ac­cursed which by auctoritee of syche councell should vse both.

See you now, to what end Sathan tēdeth? He seeketh not so myche to haue the vse of the cuppe permitted to the layetie, but that all things in despight of the Church should be doone contrary to the decrees therof. He is a right Sathan. He is the enemye of Christ Sathanas in the he­brevv toūg signifieth an aduersary. the head, and of his body. He is Antichrist. VVherfor what so euer it hath pleased Christ to decree by the mowth of his churche, allbe­it [Page 58] he knoweth the same to be right and agreable with the worde of God, yet dooth he all wayes with toothe and nayle earnestly withstand it. And looke what song he being the head of his body and lymmes, did once synge to our head and maister Christ, the sa­me by his members, doth he now recorde to vs being the members of Christ: [Throwe VVhat is ment by thise vvordes, Thro­vve thy self doune thy self downe.] That is to saye (as wee haue before heard Vincentius Lirinensis inter­prett it,) Lett thy selffawll downe from the doctrine and traditiō of this high churche, which is reputed the church of God. Followe not that which seemed good to the churche, but that which leeketh me: Imbrace the vn­derstanding of some priuatt man, who being inspired with my spirit shall not doubt to arrogat any thing to him self, and to dero­gatt all thinges from others, and followe not the sence and cōsent of the whole christian worlde, wherunto it is certayne the Spirit of Christ wanteth not.

Therfore so often as you shall heare Sa­than saye owt of the Gospell: [For it is writ­ten, Drinke ye all of this,] so often thinke you heare him saye nothing els, but that [Page] which he sayd to Christ. [Throwe thy self VVhat Sathans in­tent is by heretikes his mini­stres. downe.] For this is it which he seeketh to persuade wnto men that they should despyse the churche which is the grownde and pil­ler of truthe: that in the interpreting of the scriptures they should geue more auctori­tee to their owne priuatt iudgement, then to the decree of the churche. That they should howld for nawght her ordinaunces and cutt them selues of from the body of the churche. VVherfore as touching the vse of the sacramēt wee may well saye to these men as S. Augustine sometyme sayde to the Do­natistes. Augustin ‘The faulte is not in the sacramen­tes, but in the separation. The fault is not in communicating vnder one or both formes:’ but yf thow communicat contrary to the or­dinaunce and obseruaunce of the churche, in that only is the faulte: And doubtles so great a faulte, as that all wickednes compa­red with this, is as a strawe in respect of a beame.

Then what a kynde of religion is this of some men, that saye they are moued with the feare of God and loue of his lyuely word (for that is their maner of speache) to thinke it [Page 59] necessary for them to receyue the cuppe? As who should saye that in the space of this 600. yeres (wherin Polonia with the countries adioyning hath receyued and helde the faith of Christ) there hath been no man that hath feared God, no man that lo­ued The odi­ous arro­gance of ꝓtestāts. his lyuely worde, no nor is at this daye in the whole Christian worlde, but on­ly syche as hath been inspired with the spi­ryt of Luther.

VVhat an arrogācy? what a deuilif he and odious pryde is this, so to arrogat vnto thy self alone the feare of God, and the loue of his lyuely word, that thow wilt vtterly pull the same from all others, were they of neuer so singular pietye and godly lyfe? VVhat be these men ells then degenerated childrē and as the prophett caullyth them: [the seed of Esai. 57. the harlott and adulteresse,] that dare thus charge their holy elders and blessed forefa­thers, of so extreme impietye, as that none of them should feare God or loue his word, and that syche fathers, from whom they haue re­ceyued both the rules of well liuing, and the doctrine of true belefe? VVhich many of them allso haue left vnto vs sealed with their [Page] bloud, by whose trauayll it came to passe that wee first heard the name of Christ, that being drawen out of most thick clowdes and darknes of idolatry, wee are sett in the bright and shinyng light of the truth. These are they forsothe, which so religiously em­brace the expresse word of God, saying vnto Exod. 20 Matth. 15. vs [honour thy father and thy mother.]

But let vs waygh a litle what feare of God this is, wherwith they saye they are so strykē that they may not forbeare the cuppe. Sure this is syche an other feare as the Iues VVhat kind of feare it is that pro­testants be streekē vvith. loan. 18 semed to be in, when they doubted to enter into the place of iudgement, lest they should be defyled. They had a great conscience to enter into the place of iudgement, thinking that by entring therinto, they were gre­uously defyled: but to deliuer vp Christ to the gentills to be scornyd, whipped, and cru­cified, therin had they no religion or con­science at all: but rather thought it an of­fence of conscience and religion to haue do­ne otherwyse. For they persuaded them sel­ues that they fulfilled the commaundement of God in deliuering the sonne of God to the Gētills to be done to death. [VVe haue a lawe Ioan. 19 [Page 60] (sayd they) and by that lawe he owght to dye, because he made him self the sonne of God.] They seemyd to them selues, by the ex­presse word of God to shewe that they right­fully deliuered Christ to the Gentills to be put to death: and theryn were so litle trou­bled with any scruple of consciēce, that they thowght they should haue committed a wycked act, yf they had done otherwyse. But what? should they not with myche lesse fault for any cause haue entred in to the iudge­ment place, then haue crucified Christ the sonne of God?

But euen syche is their religion, which saye they are forbidden by their conscience to content them selues with receiuing the sacramēt in one kynd: Very rightly are they touched with the place of the Psalme: [They Psal. 13. trembled for feare, where was no cause of feare,] and that which Christ him self sayth in the Gospell [They straine a gnat, and swal­lowe Matth. 23▪ downe a camell.] They will seeme to feare God: They knowe the churche by the expresse word and precept of God, is to be Matth. 18. 1. Cor. 11. 2. Thes. 2. heard, and that the custome receyued and allowed by the same, is to be receyued and [Page] kept: yet when the holly catholike Church the mysticall body of Christ, which he so lo­ued that he gaue his true and liuing body to death for the same, when that (I saye) is in daunger to be deuyded in to many partes, and to be no lesse cruelly torne and rēt, then the true and liuely body of Christ was of the Iues, there shewe they no feare or scruple of conscience at all.

But euen as the Iues when they deliue­red the true body of Christ to be rent of the tormentors, affirmed they did it according to the expresse word of God, saying: [VVe Ioan. 19. haue a lawe and by that lawe he owght to Note. dye:] Euen so these men when they are en­tred into the leeke councell, against the my­sticall body of Christ, when they seeke all the wayes and meanes they can to deuide, and cut the same into many partes, which their attemptes (greate is the pittye) haue had to speedy successe, taking their entry with the matter of the cuppe, will needes seemes to do it according to the expresse word of God, still cryeng allso. VVe haue a lawe, drinke yee all Note. of this: and by this lawe the mysticall body of Christ the Churche must be deuyded and [Page 61] cut in soonder. How wonderfull are these VVōder­full are the slou­ghetes of Sathān. sleightes of Sathan? How great is the subtel­tie of his crafty deuises? Of that very thing which Christ would haue to be a sacrament of pietye, a tokē of vnitee, a bond of charite, he seeketh to make a cause of dissencion, a matter of deuisiō, and a fyrestone of hatred. For what ells is there done in this sacramēt, 1. Cor. 11 but (as S. Pawll sayeth) [the death of our lord is shewyd?] And for what cause dyed he? Verely [to gather in to one (as s. Iohn sayeth) Ioan. 11 the children of Israell which were dispersid.] Christ therfore dyed that he might gather together vnite, and make vs one body, of which matter he allso would this sacrament to be a token. [For wee which be many, be 1. Cot. 10 one bread and one body, in that wee partici­pate of one bread.] But here Sathā the true Antichrist not only in word, but in deed, the very enemye of Christ, did therfore cast in this contention about the cuppe, to sepa­rat, deuyde, disperse and cut in pieces the church, which Christ by the sheading of his precious bloud, hath gathered together, so as therby he might make voyd the benefitt of the crosse and death of Christ, to them that [Page] should followe this wicked and sacrile­gious counsell of separation.

‘Our lord (sayth S. Augustine) did in this Augustin sacrament marke and seale vs: by this he would vs to appertayne vnto him: in this table did he consecrate the mystery of peace and vnitee: he that receiueth this mystery of vnitee, and howldeth not the bond of peace, he taketh not a mystery for him self, but a wittnesse against him self.’

But will you knowe how great a wicked­nes he committeth? then harken to S. Pawll, 1. Cor. 11 who telleth the, [that he is giltye of the body and bloud of our lord:] that is to say he hath committed no lesse wickednes, and shall be gilty of no lesse crime, then euen they who with their owne hādes, whipped Christ, shed his bloud, crucified his body, and put him to greuous death. And this is the thing which Sathan seeketh, that diuisiō may be wrought in this sacrament of Vnitee, so as therby Christ may be crucifyed agayne, and as it were scornyd and mockyd at. But shall it be thus euen with him which calleth it the sauing word? Deserueth this to be called the sauing worde which cōdēneth to euer lasting [Page 62] death? Verely, this is no sauing word: Drinke of the cuppe: for Iudas dranke of the cuppe and was condemned: many heretikes, many false bretherne, many confessing Christ, and yet denying his power haue dronke of the cuppe. But how? To death, and euerlasting damnatiō: not to lyfe and eternall saluation.

But wilt thow knowe what is this sauing Nore. Charitee is the ve­ry liuely, and sa­wing vvor de, word? It is a short worde and an easy: Loo­ue. Charite is this sauing word, which who so hath not, lett him drynke of the cuppe so myche as he will, yett shall he gayne euerla­sting death: eternall saluation he shall neuer atteyn therby. For it is trewe that is writtē, [he that loueth not, dwelleth in death, but 1. Ioan. 3. he that loueth his neighbour, hath fulfilled Rom. 13. the lawe.]

And can he possibly seeme to loue his neighbour which doth so iudge of them that haue auctoritee ouer him, and whom he is commaunded to obey, that they neither haue nor euer had, any feare of God, or loue to his sauing word? but allwayes endeuoured them selues to oppugne and withstand the same? Surely these are not signes of loue, but Heretikes voyde of charitee of hatred. Seemeth he to loue his neighbour [Page] which doth not only separat him self from one person, but from all which truly professe Christ, and from the vniuersall catholyke churche, condemning his fathers and el­ders of impiety as men that had resisted the holy Ghost, and would not embrace a knowē truth?

The property of charitee and (Loue) is to vnyte and knytte together, and not to sepa­ratt and deuyde. This word therfore, Drinke ye of the cuppe, is not that sauing or liuely worde. But the sauing word is Loue: That is to saye. Separatt not thy self from the vnitee and knot of the body of Christ, frō the agree­ment of his churche, but obediently and re­uerently heare the same: humble gladly thy sense and conceyte, to the sense and consent therof: and neuer arrogat so myche to thy self, as to preferre thyne owne iudgement before the iudgement therof.

It is very well written by S. Augustine. Aug. trac­tatu 7. in epistolam Iob. 1. Loue and doo what thou wilt. VVhether thou drinke, or drinke not of the cuppe, (so thy drinking or absteyning be in loue and vnitee according to the ordinaunce and obseruaūce of the churche) it proffiteth thee vnto sal­uation: [Page 63] And contrary wyse whether thow drynke, or drynke not of the cuppe, standing in deuision, thow shalt be gilty of the body and bloud of our lord: because there thou seekest discord where Christ chieffly cōmen­ded vnto vs vnitee and concord.

VVhich thinges being so (most fortunatt Kyng Sygismond) who can sufficiently com­mend this your Acte, that when to your self it hath allso been often sayd, [Throwe thy self downe,] that is to saye, let thy self fall from the doctrine and tradition of this high churche, or at the lest in this only com­munion of the sacrament of the aultar, suf­fer that to be done which is contrary to the decrees of the churche, and differing from the rest of Christendome: yet coulde your highnes neuer be induced to yelde to these sedicious counsells of separation.

But when more then once or twyse you The aun­svver of the king of poloni­a to the ambassa­dors of the prote­stantes. had openly professyd, it appertayned not to your person to determyne any thing in mat­ters tooching religion, (for so myche as the Emperour being allso a chylde of the Chur­che, and within the Churche, not aboue the Churche, is bound reuerently and obedient­ly [Page] to heare his most holy moother, and not to prescribe vnto her:) your highnes therfore thought meete to referre the matter to the next generall councell, or to the iudgement of the holy Apostolyke See. VVherin suerly you did a thing which was well sitting to your woorthines, and to the vertu and pie­tye of your renoumed Auncetors. For what thing is there that can woorse become a christian and Catholyke kyng, then to take vppō him to meddle in those thinges which are proper and peculiar to Priestes and Biss­hopps? which wickednes when so euer any Prynce hath commytted, wee reade that God hath most greuously punisshed him.

But I doo not denye that the vse of the cuppe vppō iust causes shewyd and appering to a generall coūcell may by the same be per­mitted to the laye people: But yf any one kingdom will vsurp the same vnto it self, diuiding it self therin from the rest of the christyan world, what dooth it ells, but wil­lingly and wittingly spott it self with most wicked schisme?

And that is it wherunto Sathan ten­dith. Satan pas­seth not on the cupp so he may Induce the schis­me. He passeth not for the Cuppe, but see­keth [Page 64] to worke the schisme. For yf the cuppe shoold by an agreing consent of the churche be permitted, thē would he (as before by the wordes of Luther his member doth appere) thinke meete vtterly to refuse it. So seeketh he none other thing, but separation and di­uision in that sacramēt, which is the pledge and knot of vnitee: for it is he (of whom the prophet spake) which setteth discord emong Ose 13▪ Matt. 12. brethern, of whom Christ him self also sayd: [He that gathereth not with me; shatte­reth.] And on the other syde: [Our God is 1. Cor. 14▪ not a God of diuision or dissensiō, but a God of peace, loue, and charitee:] so as no good man ought to doubt, but that it is the ex­presse word of the diuell, wherin nothing is sought, but discord and diuision.

Yet are there some which labour to per­suade The sub­telt ie of Sathan. vnto the people, that this is the waye and only meane to stay the dissensiō in mat­ters of religion, and that herby only, it might come to passe that in your highnes kingdom, cōsent and vnitee of doctrine and fayth myght be retayned, yf the cuppe, might be permitted to the laye people. But these men seeme not as yet to haue sufficiently [Page] learned to knowe the sleightes of Sathan. Can any wyse and good man beleue, that by The vvay to auoy de errours, is not by per missiō of any. permitting an errour, errors be takē awaye: or that separation being graunted, vnitee can be reteyned? I call it an errour, if the cuppe be challenged as necessary to saluatiō: And a separatiō I meane, yf it be permit­ted to any one countrey apart from the rest of the Christian world.

And suerly to me this waye seemeth contrary to reason and common sense. The fathers haue been of farre cōtrary opinion: They thought not the meane to quēche he­resies, Note, ho­vve here­sies haue bene quē ­ched by the olde Fathers to be permission, but by making of contrary decrees, and constitutions.

VVhat iniquitee seemed to be in that matter that Nestorius would haue our lady to be called the mother of Christ? Did not shee in deed beare Christ? Doo we not fynde her in the scriptures commonly called the mother of Iesu, and neuer termed directly the mother of God?

Yet seemed it good to the holy fathers as­sembled in the councell holden at Ephesus to Concil. Ephes▪ Can. 2. make this decree, that yf any man should call her the mother of Christ, and not the [Page 65] mother of God, he should be accursed.

And litle did it moue them that Ne­storius still cryed out, he leaned to the ex­presse word of God, or that in all the canoni­call scriptures it could not be founde that euer she were termed the mother of God, and that they owght to receiue nothing which were not expresly contayned therin: for they sawe well ynough that the heresie of Nestorius (wherby he laboured to proue that our lady when shee bare Christ was deliue­red but of a bare man only) could not any other waye be sooner quenched then by a de­cree and generall constitution to the con­trary. Neither was their opinion frustrat therin. For soo deepe a roote in the myndes of men, did this decree of the holy fathers take, that euen to this daye ( In the yere of our lorde 435. as long as it is since that councell) ther is no natiō found (wher the Gospell of Christ is receyued) in whose vulgar tong the virgin Mary is not more commonly called the mother of God, then the mother of Christ.

Agayne wee knowe there is a Canon of Canō. A­post. 50. the Apostles that suche as be Christened should be thryse dypped. Yet for auoiding the [Page] sclaunder of schisme, and the vse or allo­wing of hereticall doctryne, we reade it was decreed in the iiij. Councell holden at Tolle­do, Concil. Tolet. 4 Cap. 5. they should be but once dipped, lest by thryse dipping, following the manner and custome of heretikes, they should seeme to allowe their assertion.

Neither are wee ignorant that Christ made the sacrament of his body and bloud in vnleauened bread, which custome was al­so a whyle obserued in the churche, and is agayne at this daye. But so sone as the He­bionytes begāne to sprynge (who would nee­des Irenaeus lib. 1. cap. 26. & Epi­phan. lib. 1. haer. 30. haue all the ceremonies of the lawe also, as precysely obserued and kept, as the very Gospell, and therfore vtterly denied that this sacrament might be made in leauened bread, because all oblation offred to our lord ought by the lawe to be with out leauē:) the contrary was decreed: that is to saye: That the sacrament should be made of leauened bread: VVhē yet the thing in his owne nature is indifferēt, neither seemeth it muche ma­teryall whether you make it in vnleauened or in leauened bread. But after the heresie of the Hebionites ceased, the Latyn churche [Page 66] thought good to returne agayne to their in­termitted manner of consecrating in vn­leauened bread. Thus wee see our holy fathers thought not good by permission to noorishe heresies, but by meere contrary de­crees to suppresse them.

But somwhat they saye is to be graunted to the multitude which require this. VVhat yf the multitude should propound this pointe of doctrine: that only God the father A truthe receyued by the churche is not to be abolis­hed for satisfiēg the fond re­quest of a multitud. were to be adored, and called vppon, but Christ to be holden only for an aduocate? Shall we say that this is straight wayes to be graunted, because the multitude required it? The matter goeth yll, when we shall ra­ther chose to followe the vnlearned multi­tude, then the iudgement of those, who are properly called to this office: ‘Namely synce it is truly sayd: that the multitude is the Chrysost. ho. 1. oper. imperfect▪ in Matt. mother of sedition and contumacye, and the small nomber the mistrese of discipline.’ The multitude ought to be gouerned, and not to gouerne: ought to obey, but not to prescribe lawes: That kingdom is in an hard and pit­tefull case, where the Rule and gouernemēt standeth in the multitude. As in all other [Page] thinges, so chieffly in matters of religion it is diligently to be considered, not who, or how many, doo requyre, but what the thing is, that is required.

The multitude requyred of the Apostles and their followers that they should denye Christ, and offer incense to idolls: The power and auctoritee did also earnestly aduyse thē therunto. But what did they to this? [VVee Act. 5. must (sayd they) obey God rather then men.] And so they were ready to indure al kynd of punishemēt, yea & to laye downe their nec­kes vnto thē, rather thē they would do that they required: yea and by their martyr dome they ꝑformed in deed that they had spokē.

VVhat your part is to doo (most vertuous kyng) in the suppressing of heresies you are not ignorant: You are taught this also by the lawes of your contrey, to the keeping wherof you bound your self by an othe, when you Note▪ were inuested in this your kingdom. Verely all men which will be accompted Christiās, especially wee that be bisshops and guides of religion, must rather desire a thowsand dea­thes, then once to denye Christ.

But he denyeth Christ, not only which [Page 67] confesseth him not to be God, and acknowle­geth him only for an aduocat, or he which dooth not beleue euery poynt and article, which the infallible auctoritee of the cano­nicall scriptures prescribeth vnto vs, either of his diuinite or of his humanite: but allso he, which dooth not in all pointes communi­catt with the vnitee of his churche. For Christ is both the head and the body: The head is the only begotten sonne of God, and his body is the Churche: they be as husband VVhat is to de­nye Christ. and wyfe two in one fleshe. VVherfore he dooth as myche denye Christ which dooth so dissent from his body the Churche, that he thinketh the communion therof not to be spred ouer all, but to be found separat in De vnita te eccle­siae ca. 4. in 1. Ca. nonic. Iohānis. tract. 6. & setmo­ne 31. de verbis a. post. Li. 6. Ec­cles. hist. Cap. 45. some one part: as he which dissenteth from the holly scriptures in any point touching Christ him self the head therof: as S. Augu­gustine teacheth vs in many places.

There is extant in Eusebius an epistle of Dionysius Alexādrinus to Nouatus, wherin he writeth that martyrdome indured for not deuyding the Churche, is as glorious, as that which is indured for refusing to com­mitte idolatry: ‘Yea and surely in my iudge­ment [Page] (saieth Dionysius) it is so myche more glory. For there he suffreth martirdome, but for his owne soule: but here for the whole churche.’ VVherby wee may see it is no lesse greuous offence to deuide the Churche, or Note. by assent to allowe a schisme, then to offer in­cense to idolls.

Let it therfore be farre from a christian man, and namely from a Bisshopp, by and by to geue his assent whē a multitude or power requireth a separation from the Churche of God. It is to be wished that it may please The dev­tye of a good Biss­hop. God to geue vs this mynd, rather to suffer our bodyes to be deuyded from our soules, then by our assent to allowe any sacrilegious deuise of separation from Christ or his body the churche. Of this mynd as it becometh all Christians to be, so chieffly vs that be bisshopps, yf wee will duely execute the of­fice of good pastors.

It is well remēbred (most vertuous kyng) how when your highnes came first to the gouuernement of this Realme, and that some thing was then requyred of you, which partly tended to separation: your highnes curteously (as your manner is) and yet well [Page 68] and flatly denyed their request, saying you could not without offence of your conscience graunt the same: vsing farther in the pre­sence of your councell, and a very notable assembly of the people, this saying of Christ. Matth. 16. [VVhat auayleth it a man yf he gayne the whole word, and suffer his soule to perishe? or what exchaunge may a man make for his soule?]

Your princely crowne, the empyre of your large and populous kingdome and of so ma­ny Note. dominions adioyning therunto, were not so deere vnto you, that the losse, or hazard of any of them could once moue you to do any thing, that should seeme to be against your faith and religion. And why should not the lyke wordes now allso serue for answer? Vnlesse perhapps this separatiō seeme of lesse importaunce then the other, being now re­quired to permitt a deuisiō to be made from the holly Catholike Church being the body of Christ?

But some what is to be graūted (say they) in respect of a publyke tranquillitie. And (I pray you) was not then allso the publyke tranquillite of the kingdome pretēded? VVas [Page] it not said that great troubles would ryse, yf the request were not graunted? Yet God did forsee and prouyde for the tranquillitie of your kyngdome. And yf tranquillite and quyet be to be bought with so great losse of suche a number of sowlls: it were better (as the Prouerb sayeth) that heauen and earth should meete, and a thousand tymes to in­dure the losse of this mortall lyfe, then being deuided from the body of Christ to lead a whyle a happy lyfe heare in yearth (in the iudgement of common men) and soone after to change the same with euerlasting death, and hell tourments that neuer shall haue end. Lighter is the losse of goodes and lyfe, then of the soule, the losse wherof is not to be recouered.

I reason not as though it were true which they seke to persuade, that it should myche perteyne to the preseruation of the tran­quillite of your Realme, yf the vse of the cuppe were graunted to those which require it: to whom it may well be sayd, [you wotc not what ye aske.] But it is in deed most Matth. 10 certayne, and vndoubted, that yf the thing they require be graunted, that shall bryng [Page 69] to your kyngdom mycbe greater troubles.

The wyse and pollityke men of this world Plato li. 7. de legibus which haue written of common welthes, haue taught vs how perillous to euery com­mon welth is innouation, and chaunge: Na­mely of lawes or auncient manners. VVhich they haue proued by a similitude taken of the body of man: In so myche as they which leaue their accustomed manner of diet, and chose vnto them selues a new, hardly and Arist. li. 2. poli. 6. very seldom doo it without hazard of their health. VVherfore they thinke it better to tollerat some faultes of the lawe makers, and magistrates. For that it is often seen that in diuers cases there cometh not so myche good of correcting an errour vnorderly, as hurt, in that therby, men are by lytle and lytle ac­customed VVhat harme co­meth of innoua­tion and change of lavves. not to obey the magistrat: So as ofte to chaunge lawes seemeth to be none other thing, but to withdrawe all the force and credit from the lawes: and to accustome men by litle and lytle to the attempting of moe, and greater alterations: And ofte we see that thinges which in them selues seeme small, do proue causes of great mischieffes.

And doo wee not euen presently before [Page] our eyes see, those thinges thus to haue hap­pened; both emong our neighbours, and euen emong them allso which in this your realme applyed their myndes to innouatiōs? I could touche soome by name which at the begin­ning requyred but the cuppe, which allso soo­ne after, they vsurped to them selues. But did they rest there? No: but after receyued and imbracyd the whole confession of Aug­spurg. The variable altera­tion of Polonian he retikes And within a whyle reiecting that, tooke the Picardican religion: And after that the Gehennian (I woold haue sayd Ge­neuian, but that Gehennian and Geneuian be all one) which Lysmaninus the Apostata, bānyshed by your highnesse (king Sigismōd) dooth now openly professe. VVhat they will doo in the end I knowe not: perhapps they Our cōtre is fallē by such schisme frō lutheranis­me to Caluinisme will faull to Suenckfeldius. I woold any man coulde shewe me, any one contrey where the cuppe hath by priuatt aucthoritee been be­goonne to be vsurped, where very sone after many other and most horrible heresies haue not followed.

VVithin the memory of our Grandfathers, in the kingdō of Bohemia our next neygh­bour first fell this cōtentyon about the cup, [Page 70] which soome Cittyes of their owne auctho­ritee vsurped to themselues. But what mō ­strous heresies did not presently ensue? How few townes coold yee find in Morauia or Bo­hemia (where the vse of the cuppe was re­ceyued) in which you might not see sixe or seuen sectes at once, and all miserably deui­ded Hovve he resy hath creped on in Germa­ny. one from an other? But in Germany (which with owt great sorrowe and woōder wee cānot behould) wherof did this Satha­nisme take beginning but of the cuppe?

These sleyghtes which by the members of A very ꝓ­per and apte simili­tude. Sathan are vsed and framyd against true pietye, seeme myche lyke, vnto a wedge: which being very thīne at the edge, semeth scarce entryd into the wood, whē soone after it throwghly cleaueth and deuydeth the sa­me in soonder. But albeit the first edge be but thinne, yet maketh it a waye to the gro­wing thicknes that followeth, so as when the first part is receiued, and edge entryd, of ne­cessitee the rest followeth vntyll at the last the whole peece be soondered. And yf a man woulde saye the cuppe to be the thinne and sharpe edge of this destroying wedge, he shall no whit erre frō the truth. For where [Page] the same hath been receyued wee see the thicke parte of the wedge hath followed.

First the Augustane confession, which to­ke The Au­gustā Confession. away both priesthood and sacrifice, and brought God him self as it were in to an e­quallite of degree, so as he should haue no more honour doō vnto him, then to mortal men. Thē entryd by and by a thicker part, which was the Tigurin and Lascan cōfessiō: The Tigurin and Lascan cō fession which tooke away those ij sacramentes, to witt of the supper of our lord and of baptis­me, which yett the Augustane confessiō had of curtesie left vnto vs: to the end that as that confession had left their followers with owt priesthood or sacrifice: so this, would farther allso leaue theirs, withowt sacra­mentes. And this secte findeth no lesse fault with the Lutherans, then it dothe with vs that be Christians. But cōdemneth both of idolatry: because we both are persua­ded (though after a diuers sorte) that the very body and bloud of Christ is conteyned in the sacrament: And therfore as by their iudgemēt wee made of that a certayne ydoll, so doo we also (as they saye) of the sacrament of baptisme, in that wee attribute therunto [Page 71] remission of synnes and beleue our selues to be saued thorowgh the fonte of regeneratiō. Looke therfore what we seeme to the Luthe rans, the same do the Lutherās seeme to the Sacramentaryes, that is to saye, idolaters. Suenkfel­dius

At last foorth cometh Suenckfeldius, who taketh away not only the whole scrip­ture, but allso all outward ministery of the word, and maketh the Sacramentaryes, Lu­therans, Note. and vs Christians, idolaters all a leeke: who hauing regard to the bare letter (meaning the canonicall scriptures) seeke there in to fynd our saluation. And this was the last but, or end of the wedge, whose first part being entred and recey­ued, how thinne so euer the edge therof see­med, wee see how by litle and litle all the In the ha­chet of he resyes rest of this Sathanisme brake in, as mo­re largely wee haue opened in an other booke.

Thus doo you see (most vertuous kyng) wherunto the matter is now brought: How after that in despight of the churche the cuppe in the beginning had encroched, how greate a forwardnes, and swaye grewe therby to the rest of the Sathanisme. VVho [Page] so euer is a Christian man, at the lest yf he be of any pietye, can not easely be induced to depart from the sense and consent of the Principijs obsta. vniuersall churche. But so soone as a be­ginning of departure in any one thing is made, now is it more hard to fynd the end, then it was to see the beginning: So as not without cause it hath been taken for an old prouerb, the beginning is more thē the halfe of the whole: which wee may see manifestly verefyed in them which at the first by the only vse of the cuppe wowned thē selues out from the knot of the churche, who sone after receiued if not all other sectes, yet at the lest the whole Lutherā heresie owt of hand,

Haue wee not to good proufe of this matter The disordered Al­teratiō of Germanie in Germany? There was set forth a certain Interim religiō (as muche to saie, as religion put to daying) how well I will not saye, but at the lest by auctoritee suffred, and receyued allmost of all, sauing only a few: But I pray you with them that receyued it, was the lawfull priesthood and sacrifice restored agayne according to the forme prescribed in that booke? No. Nothing lesse. But the In­terimistes be, and were a like with the other [Page 72] Lutherans, but that some where they abstey­ned from fleshe in the lent, and on the fri­daye: and in their diuine seruice, or rather prophane, (to forbeare the calling of it by the right name, Sacrilegious:) they vse in some places surplises, and other priestlyke vestiments.

But in your owne kyngdom doo wee not see the like, wher the cupp by great sacrilege is vsurped? Is not there both the priesthood and sacrifice leekewyse abrogated? Doo not Hovve many mere laye mē committe this sacri­lege in En­gland? laye men arrogat to them selues the office of Priestes? Do they not take on them power, which they haue not, to make the body of Christ? and so geue vnto the communicantes mere bakers bread? For how can he make the body of Christ to whom power is not geuen so to doo?

In fyne Sathan sayth nothing ells (when cōtrary to the ordinaunce and obseruaunce of the churche he commaundeth the layety to drinke of the cuppe) but euen that which he somtyme sayde to Christ him self: [Throwe thy self downe] that is to saye. Leaue the tra­dition of the churche. Cast away all obediēce therunto: Make none accompt of the aucto­ritee [Page] of the councells. But a Christian man feareth yet to throwe him self downe, be­cause he seeth great perill therin, and ther­fore long deliberateth with him self, whe­ther he were best so to doo or no. But yf he haue once begōne to throwe him self downe, then is it not in his owne power to stay him self, but that without recouery he falleth hedlong downe to the bottome. August. in Psal. 103.

S. Augustine writing vpon that text of the Psalme: [He builded the earth on a sure foundation, which shall neuer be re­moued, but continew from generation to ge­neration:] Interpreteth the earth to be the churche, and the water which runneth by Psal. 77. and cometh to nothing, in an other Psalme, he expoundeth to be heresies. And for pro­uision Decrees of coūcels the Bakes of the Churche, that waters flowe not in to the churche, that is to saye, that heresies may not drowne the same, great cliffes and bākes are set against the sayd floudes. VVhich ban­kes may well be interpreted to be the de­crees of councells. But though the bankes be neuer so strong, yet yf there be neuer so litle a hole made into the same, straight An apte similitude waye the whole waight of the waters lyeth [Page 73] there vppon, and soone breaking downe the banke farre and wyde ouerfloweth whole fieldes, pastures and villages, so as nothing may then stay the violent course thereof.

This hole therfore is then opened, when against the ordinaunce and obseruaunce of the churche the cuppe is permitted to the laytie. For who may let why, by this hole (how small so euer it be) all kynd of heresies brea­king downe the bankes, that is to saye, viola­ting the decrees of councells may not vio­lently breake into the churche? VVhich con­sidered, it is a wonder to see that there want not some, which are not asshamed to promyse tranquillite vnto the church, and to your highnes kyngdom: if against the ordinaūce and obseruaunce of the churche the cuppe Note. might be graunted vnto the laye people.

Yf the peece of wood may be preserued whole and sound, which the first part of the wedge (seeme the edge therof neuer so thin­ne) is driuen and entred into: yf it may be prouided that the thick part therof driuen with many blowes shall not yet at all cleaue the peece: yf the corne fieldes and meddowes Note. may be preserued where into the flouddes, [Page] by breache made in the banckes, doo with great force flowe in, and can not easely fynd a waye owt agayne: yf a man may be preser­ued who hath throwen him self downe hed­long from an high tower: yf he may stay him self in the middest of his faull so as coming hedlōg to the ground he breake not his neck, or bruse some other part of his body: thē may in deed that kingdom be safe, sownd and quyet, wherin the cuppe is vsurped in des­pight of the churche and councells.

Many ther be which require a councell, but to what end? or to what effect may it be, yf after thinges therin well determyned, it be laufull to the most abiect kynd of men, to doo all thinges contrary in despight therof? VVill the auctoritee of councells be more re­garded and feared then dyettes and parla­mentes? But haue not wee seene before our Councels and parliamentes in like regarde vvith heretikes. eyes in despight of the kyng and the parla­ment, many thinges done contrary to that, which hath in those assemblies been de­creed? yea and syche thinges as before the decrees made, they durst not haue done? And shall wee there hoape for tranquil­lite and quietnes, where no auctorite of [Page 74] councells, assemblies, Bisshopps, or princes is regarded? VVhere it is sought that we should be without lawe, without kynge, without priesthood, sacrifice, sacramentes, yea and without a God to? VVhere it is so earnestly laboured to buyld and make of that Citye, which hitherto hath been of one toūge and one language, a new found Babylon, wherin Gen. 11. The buil­ding of Babilon that is to saie of cōfusiō is so great confusion of tounges that no man can heare the voyce of his neighbour?

But what nedeth more? Your self know (most vertuous king) how whē some thought good to graunt the cuppe to some clamorous persons, so that they would rest there, they refused to accept it, with that condition. Fewe there are in your kingdom that will be contented only with the cuppe: no not many which will staye vpon the confession of Auspurge. Most of them that are departed from vs, are either Picardines, Caluinistes, Laskanistes, Nestorians, or Seruetiās, of which sectes no one will be satisfied with the only permission of the cuppe. VVho so readeth the The Apo­logie of picardes Apologie of the Picardines, shall therin fynd that they seeme only to follow the Boemians, being willing to rest only vpon hauing the [Page] communiō in bothe kyndes, and in all other thinges shewe them selues in māner as ca­tholyke, as they which are in deed true and perfyt catholikes in all poyntes.

Againe Petrus Paulus Vergerius who the last yere came into your kingdō for none other cause, but only to stirre seditiō therin, brought foorth letters written to certayne persons, which letters he allso caused to be Malice the mo­ther of he resy, ma­keth her children forget cō ­mon hu­manyte. printed. But was this first the part of an ho­nest mā? Verely yf he had had any shame, yf any sperk of honesty had been in him, he would neuer haue attempted any syche mat­ter. But herein he shewed him self a man voyde of all humanitee, and ignorant of the honest course and trade of lyfe emong men, synce to publishe letters priuatly written, is none other thing, but (as Cicero sayd) to Cicero. 2. Philip. take from this lyfe the societye of lyfe, and the commodite of secret and familyar talke between absent frendes. He publisshed allso in print ij. letters of Paulus Quartus the Bisshop of Rome, and not content therwith he wōderfully darkened and deformed with his owne Gloses, and wrong interpretations, those thinges which were therin godly and [Page 75] vertuously written. Heare what he writeth in his notes vpon the first epistle.

Some man will saye thus: yf we might Note the Sacrilegius vvor­des of this Gos­peller. dryue the Pope to this, that he would but as­sent that the ministres of the churches might haue wyues, vse the vulgar toung in the ad­ministration of the sacramentes, and geue the sacrament vnder both formes to the lay peo­ple, and in all other articles and doctrines to consent with the Churche of Rome, as hi­therto wee haue doone, would ye not thinke good we should there rest for a tyme? And laying vp that gayne in store, by lytle and lytle in proces of tyme deuise for the win­ning of the other poyntes?

I answer, saith Vergerius.

I lyke it not: For the matter consisteth not The aunsvver of Vergeri­us to his ovvne obiectiō. only in that the minister should haue a wyfe, vse his vulgar toung in the Churche, and de­liuer the sacrament in both kyndes: but in that he haue a liuely faith, that he be a member of Christes Churche, and be of a right iudgemēt, shewing vnto the people that pure doctrine which our lord Iesus Christ the sonne of God brought out of his fathers bosome. VVhat a defyling of our doctryne, what a straunge thing should it be, yf we should geue our consent that the pastor of our soules should [Page] be a massing priest, annoynted and allowed by some Bisshop and mēber of Antechrist? etc.

Here Sathan by this his champion goeth to his matter more opēly, then by thē which contend so earnestly for the cuppe, and syche other things as seeme of lesse waight: VVhose wily deceytes also herein he discloseth, and thinkyng it superfluous to vse any more cir­cumstances, he fleeth euen straight to the throte: to the end that withowt any more delaye God may be brought in order and The here­tikes goe about to bring God ī to order. equallite of degree, with mortall men, ha­uing left vnto him neither any priesthood, nor externe sacrifice, wherby he should be acknowledged to be God. This is the thing which Sathan by his lymme and trusty seruaunt Vergerius thought good euē at the first brunt to attempt: And suerly it hath been truly sayd: In vayne is that doone by many, which Arist. in Phys. li. 1. may be doone by fewe. For what should a man go about the bus he yf he may easely get thorowgh?

But heare what after a fewe wordes he addeth farther: For after that this man (being ouer curious of the state of forreyn common welthes, wherunto he is a straūger, [Page 76] and euen borne (as it seemeth) to stirre vp seditions) had exhorted the Polonians, that yf these iij. thinges were graunted them, they should constantly refuse them, he hath these wordes.

VVote thow well Polonia, this matter Beholde here an o­pen and plaine pro testing protestāt. which now lyeth in controuersy touching religion may indure no moderation or con­cord. Marke well what I saye and laye it in thy remembraunce. For there be some that say, were it not trowe we possible that some meane migt be found to appease this contro­uersy? I answer (sayth he) that none can possi­bly be fownd. For yf the papacy remayne in force, the doctrine of Iesu Christ can not be free. And againe yf the doctrine of Iesu Christ which wee professe doo preuayle, then of ne­cessitee must the whole papacy be rooted vp, so as ther is none other meane of concord or establisshing of the true churche of Christ, but that the whole papacy with all the tiranny and wicked doctryne therof, be cleerly ta­ken away.

And sure as for that Vergerius writeth that the state of religion may indure no mo­deration, or concord, I can not well denye, but he writeth truly. For either a man must be a whole Christian or a whole Lutheran. [Page] There is no haltyng on either syde. As well shalt thou be dāned yf thou be a half Chri­stian or a half Lutheran as yf thou were a whole Lutheran.

I call him an half Christian, which belee­uing VVho is a demye Christiā. all thinges as he ought to doo of Christ the head, dooth yet by his owne priuat fancye in certayne rytes deuyde him self from the body. He thinketh he houldeth fast the head and yet deuideth him self from the body. Therfore he will be halfe a Christiā and half a Lutheran: that is to say a Sathanist: For Christ him self sayth, [No man can serue ij. Matt. 6. Luke 16. 2. Cor. 6. masters: what participation can ther be be­tween righteousnes and iniquitee? or what society (sayth Pawll) betweē light and darck­nes? or what agreement between Christ and Belial?] And in the Apocalips wee read: [I Apoc. 3. knowe thy workes that thou art neither hot nor cold. I would thou were either hot or cold: but synce thou art luke warme, and neither hott nor cold, I will by vomyt cast the out of my mowth:] The luke warme is euen in lyke sort cast foorth, in lyke sort vo­myted out of the mowth of God, as he which sinneth in the contrary part. Therfore they [Page 77] are in dede very muche deceyued which thinke to contriue a concord by mediocrite Esai. 28. in matters of religion. [The bed is straight (sayth the prophet) so as the one must nedes fall out, and a scant cloke cā not couer both.] They can not be together in one bed, that is to say Christ and Luther may not ioyne in one mans hart, the one of them must nedes faull out: they can not be both couered with one cloke. VVherfore in some part of rytes and ordinaūces to professe Christ, and in an other part Luther, is nothing ells, but to de­nye whole Christ. That is therfore so true as may be, that matters of religion admyt no concord by that meane.

VVe professe in our crede that wee beleue the holly catholyke Churche. From her who so euer departeth, and harkeneth not to her teaching and preceptes, but geueth more credit to his owne iudgement, then to hers, though he beleue all the rest which is cōtay­ned in the crede, though he beleue and re­ceyue all the scriptures: though he honour them as the very word of God, (as in deed they are being rightly vnderstanded) yet hath he nothing to do with Christ the head, [Page] which hath separated him self from the bo­dy He cā not be accompted a christian that diui­deth him self from the misti­cal body of Christ. of Christ. He is an Ethnik and a Publican not deseruing in any part the name of a Christian.

How often did the Arians attempt to co­me to soome agreemēt with the Catholikes? VVherūto to shewe them selues willing, they sayd they woold not stick to permytt that [...] should be beleued to be the sonne of the father, so he were not callyd [...]. There was but one poore letter Iota (.i.) in Ther vvas only one letter in questiō betvveen the Chri­stians and the Arria­nes. question or difference between the Christiās and the Arrians. Yet could not the Christiās thinke meete to graunt it vnto them. For vnder this one letter they sawe them hyde their heresie, wherby they were content to allowe the sonne to be leeke vnto the father in fulnes of grace, but not in propriete of nature.

VVith what sleightes did the goouernour of Cesaria seke to persuade vnto S. Basil, that he should yeeld to the tyme and not bryng so many Churches in daunger, by standing vp­pō the sifting of so nyce a point of doctryne? Theodo­tet lib 4 ca. 19. hist. But what sayd S. Basil therunto? ‘Suche taul­ke (sayth he) may serue yoong men: for they [Page 78] and syche lyke gape after sych toyes. But they which haue been trayned vpp in the holly scriptures, can not suffer to haue one syllable therof brought in question or hasard. But vse rather to offer them selues to any kynd of death,’ yf the case so requyre. And therin Basill seemed to the heretikes to be froward, as before him Athanasius and Hilary were allso reputed. But that which the heretikes Constācy of the Ca­tholike fathers. iudged frowardnes, that the Catholikes and right beleuers, esteemed for great constācy.

VVherby I find my self allso the lesse gre­ued, if to soome I seeme stubborne in sayeng ther can be no concord between Catholikes and heretikes, onles they which haue depar­tyd frō vs retourne agayne to the place they went from, that is, to the lap of our mother the holly Churche: onles they beleeue her, commytt them selues to her, and submytt their iudgementes to hers. I had rather be counted styffe and stubborne with Athana­sius, Hilary and Basill, thē lyke a vayne reed to waue with euery wynd: But these proce­dinges which I haue remembryd, were of long tyme past.

Lett vs see how oftē in this our age the­re [Page] hath been practyse for concord, between the Lutherans and the Suinglians. But how hansoomly fell that out to the Lutherans? VVhat a concord was it that was made be­tween Martin Luther and Martin Bucer? The gētle agreemēt betvveen Bucer and Luther. In Synod. Constant. habita▪ An. 1534 & iterum Isenaci. An. 36. Martyn Bucer in fauor of Luther was cō ­tent to graunt the body and blood of Chryst to be substancially in the sacrament, so that Luther would agayne to pleasure him, gra­unt that the body and blood of Christ was not there, but at the very instant when it was receyuid.

VVhich of these Martyns (I pray you) drewe the other to his opinyon? VVhether became Martyn Luther a sacramentary, or Martyn Bucer of a sacramentary a Luthe­ran? Verely Iohn Caluin dooth not any other way make a more effectuall argument that Caluin his cheefe argument of deniēg the real presence in the sa­cramēt. the body of Christ is not substancially in the sacrament, then of that graunte of Luther confessing a reall presence only, when it is receiued. VVherof also he gathereth that the body and bloud of our lord are geuē vnto vs only by vertu and efficacy, but not by their substācial presence: and none otherwyse then they be present and geuen vnto vs in bap­tisme [Page 79] and penaunce, or when so euer the death of Christ worketh any effect in vs. Of which opinion he gloriously sayeth Phillip Melancthon allso was.

Is not this a proper concord wherby they which are allredy heretikes become greater heretikes? And by their sacrilegious bould­nes growing stronger in blasphemies and errours, wexe daily worse, and worse, not 2. Tim. 3. only erring them selues, but drawing allso others into errours? But let vs passe ouer the Sacramentaryes: whose impietye the Lutherans them selues though they differ not myche frō them, doo yet so abhorre and 2. Iohn. [...] detest as they may not afoord any of them, so myche as a good morowe, or indure their Note, the state of protestāts in the free Cytes of Germany. fellowship or company, or once to receiue or harbour them: but so sone as it is knowen that there is a sacramentary emong them, they straight way bannish him out of their Cittyes.

How often hath there been concorde in­treated between the Lutherans and the Christians? VVhereupon was the Inte­rim Religion agreed vnto, but that the­re were some gaue great hope that con­corde [Page] by this meanes might growe be­twen the Christians and Lutherans? But hath that succeded according to their ex­pectation? No God wot: But looke what was with full iudgement of all (except only a fewe) allowed at the dyetts of the Empyre, and with their good willes ther determi­ned, that, soone after was not obserued by them selues, which had receiued it.

They of Lipsia lest they should seeme not The Lyp­sians. to be wyser then the rest of the whole Em­pyre, though at those assemblyes they had agreed to many thinges, touching the Inte­rim religion, which was there prescribed, yet thought they many things of their owne and of their master Martin Luthers deuise meete to be kept: and therfore set foorth a Interim vpon interim. i. day­ing vpon daying. dooble Interim which in some things agreed, and in some disagreed from the former Interim agreed on at the assemblyes.

But they of VVittemberg though they The VVit tēbergers. were neer neyghbours to them of Lipsia and subiects to the same Prince, who had subscri­bed to the Interim religion, set out allso in writing an other deuise of theirs, wherin they would not be caulled Interimistes, but [Page 80] Adiaphoristes, and therin departed from the Adiapho­ristes, as ye vvoul­de saie: in­differents. doctrine of their maister, Luther, in fewer thinges then the Lipsians hadd done.

But the Cittyes of Saxony when Ma­thias Flaccus the Illyrican had kindled fy­rebrands The Ze­lous or Rigorous Lutheranes. amongest them, would not goo one heare bredth from the deuyses of their M. Martin Luther: but thought what so euer was spoken or written by him, meete to be receyued and adored as the expresse word of God.

VVe see therfore that after concord at­tempted and thought to haue been in man­ner brought to passe, there is growen greater discord then before. For as the Lutherans most wickedly deuided them selues from the Catholike vnitee and the mysticall body of our Sauiour Christ, so did they soone disperse their owne vnitee, with hellish discordes among them selues. VVhat a reuell was ther, The reuel that vvas emōg the Lutherās about the surplesse how many and how bitter contentions be­tween the Zelous Lutherans (for so they would be accompted that follow Flaccus Illyricus) and between the degenerat dis­ciples of Luther, whom Flaccus calleth Adiaphoristes and Interimistes: of which sort [Page] they be that follow Melancthon, what a doo (I say) hath there been between these only about the surplesse which of auncient tyme the Priestes haue vsed to weare in the chur­ches? But what was the cause that they thus pursued one an other in syche small mat­ters? Sure none other but for that the These a­re the Ze­lous or Rigorous Lutheranes. Ger­mayne Lutherans feared lest yf any of the auncient customes and ceremonyes were re­storyd againe to the churche, it might seeme in parte an inclinyng from Luther to Christ and doubted lest they might seeme therby to open a wyndow agayne to the papacy.

If they then which reioyce to be caulled true Lutherans, tooke syche ware and care­full heed, leest by restoring the auncient ce­remonyes of the church, they should open a wyndow to the papacy, with how myche mo­re diligēce ought wee that glory in no name, but in the name of Christ, to forsee that ther be none opened for Sathan to enter at? To whom without doubt they are opened, when men are accustomed not to geue eare to the churche, and to set at naught her or­dinaūces preferring their owne priuat iud­gementes before the iudgement therof.

[Page 81]It is most certayne and vndoubted that The Ori­ginall of this great schisme and here­sie grevve only of contempt of the churche this whole Sathanisme which now (with tea­res I speake it) florissheth in Germany and buddeth euen in your kyngdom (most ver­tuous Prince) hath chieffly growen heerby, that euery mā dispising the iudgemēt of the churche, hath thought it lawfull for him self to interprett the scriptures and of his owne head to alter the rytes and ceremonyes therof. VVherfore wee are not vnwilling in this poynt to agree in opinion with Verge­rius that the matter of religion now in con­trouersy may not admyt any moderation or concorde: namely syche as they would haue, synce it is so truly written of the blessed martyr S. Cyprian: ‘There can be no socyetee Cypr. Lib. 1▪ epist. 3. between faith and infidelitee. He that is not with Christ is agaynst Christ. He that is ene­my to his vnitee and peace can not ioyne with vs: If they come with submission and satisfaction lett them be heard. If they come with curses and threates, let them be re­fused.’

But where that lewde fellowe Vergerius writeth there is none other meane or hope of concord, except the vniuersall papacy be [Page] suppressed, see for Gods sake what sleyghtes these be of Sathan: and to what end he ten­deth in seeking so earnestly to ouerthrowe the papacy: But that our saying may be the better beleeued, wee wil rather bryng foorth his testimony of the papacy, who so long as he liued, held mortall warre against the same: and whose word Vergerius adoreth as the very word of God, then vse our owne wor­des. For thus writeth Luther in a certayne Epistle to ij. parish priestes of the Anabap­tisme.

I heare (sayth he) and see rebaptising taken The vvordes of Lu­ther tou­ching the papacye x▪ yeres af­ter he vvas strayed from the churche in hand of some, vpon this grownd that they would doo it in the despight of the Pope, as men that will haue nothing of Antechrist. Euen as the sacramentaries will haue in the sacrament, but meer bread and wyne in des­pight of the Pope thinkyng them selues able by this meanes to suppresse the papacy. Vere­ly this foūdatiō is friuolous and vayne, wher­upon they can build no good thing: For by that reason wee must denye al the holy scrip­tures, and the office of preaching: For all this haue wee from the Pope. And then must wee make allso a newe scripture. Then must wee forsake also the ould Testamēt, lest we should seeme to haue any thing frō the infidell Iues. [Page 82] All this is but foolishnes. For Christ allso found in the Iuishe nation abuse emong the Scribes and Pharisees, yet did he not therfore reiect al things which they held and tawght. But wee confesse that vnder the papacy is See vvhat Luther graunteth to Papi­stes. myche good Christianitee, yea and all good Christianitee. And that from thence it hath come vnto vs. Yea truly wee graunt that vn­der the papacy is the true scripture, the true baptisme, the true sacrament of the aultar, the true keyes of remission of synnes, the true office of preaching, the true Cathechisme which is the lords prayer, the x. Commaun­dementes, and the Articles of the Crede. I say farther that vnder the papacy is the true Note. Christianitee: yea and the very true kernell of Christianitee.

And lest any man should thinke that An obie­ction putt of. Luther wrote this when as yet the light of the Euangelicall veritee (wherof he so my­che vaunteth) had not shyned vpon him, let him knowe that this Epistle was written An. 1528. by him the x. yere after he had cut him self of, from the Churche of God, at what tyme his name was very farre spred by the fame of his heresies. Thus ye see how the truthe brake foorth from him against his will, euen as it did thorowgh the throte of Balaam Nume. 22. [Page] the prophet, all be it he were an enemy of the truth.

See you now (most vertuous kyng) wher­unto the deuyses of Sathan tend, when by his sowldyar Vergerius and by others of that kynd he seeketh to haue the vniuersall pa­pacy taken away? For he seeketh therin (by the verdit of Luther) to haue taken away the true scripture, true Baptisme, the true Sacrament of the Aultar, the true keyes of remission of synnes, the true office of prea­ching, the true Catechisme, true Christia­nitee, yea and the very true kernell of Chri­stianitee. And haue not these his deuises succeded as he would haue them?

First Luther sowght to take away the pa­pacy, The foundaciō layd by Luther and therunto he layd certayne founda­tions as we haue before shewed. For first in despight of the Pope and the councell, he graunted the cuppe to the laye people. Then he abrogated aunciēt rytes and ceremonies, and instituted newe. Not long after of the Luthers procedin­ges. number of the vy. sacramentes he tooke away v. And last of all, he ouerthrew toge­ther both sacrifice and priesthood. But what came herof? VVith in a short tyme after, vp [Page 83] sprang Sacramētaryes, and Anaptistes, who tooke from vs those ij. sacramentes allso, of the aultar, and baptisme, which ij. Luther had yet (of his curtesy) left vnto vs: And that did they not, more in hatred or des­spight of the Pope, then of Luther him self, if wee may beleue Philip Melancthon. For The suc­cesse the­reof. they seing Luther thus to play the Pope, yea and more then a Pope, could not broke this intollerable tyranny of the man.

After this, foorth came the heauēly pro­phetes The heauēly prophetes. which tooke from vs both the scrip­tures, and all externe ministery of prea­ching. At the last (owt of what darke caues I know not) issued Campanus and Seruetus, Cāpanus and Ser­uetus he retikes which sowght to pull from vs our Sauiour Christ speaking very blasphemously of his di­uinitee. This end at the last they attayned which laboured to ouerthrow the papacy, and to do all thinges in despight of the Pope.

I vse somtyme (most vertuous kyng) to reade the triffles of those heretikes which are of no great name, that I may knowe the better how things goe amongest them. My happe was (emong others) to hyt vpon a cer­taine Germayne Luther an named Erasmus, [Page] and not only by syr name, but in deed right­ly caulled ( Alber­tus. All beere) who wrote a booke against Carolstadius and other Sacramen­taries, Anabaptistes, and image breakers. Therein he telleth of one Iames Schēck, how The Im­pietee of a Lutheran only for that he vvoold contrary and ouer­th vvart the order of the churche. One other of the sa­me bac­che. when at Berlin he preached to the people the word of Luther for the word of God, he could not by any meanes be induced vpon the solemne feast day of Easter to preache of the Resurrection of our Lord, but vpon Easter daye he would nedes preache of the Passion. And of an other at Francfort that would in no wyse kepe the feast of Christmas daye. And why I pray you? Forsooth in des­pight of the Pope: lest they should seeme in any thing to impart with the papacy, that is to say with Christianitee: they had rather all the memory of Christ his benefits, were extinguisshed, then they would celebrat the same with those Christians that acknowledge the Pope.

You see (most vertuous Kyng) what thin­ges haue followed wher the papacy hath been taken away. And this very state of thinges Vergerius or rather the diuell by Vergerius his solliciter seeketh now to bring allso into [Page 84] your kingdom: For this hath allwayes been an owld practyse of Sathan: as wee reade written by the holy martyr. S. Cyprian to in­fest Li. 1. epi. 3. and persecute, in all he may the head ruler of the churche to the end that hauing taken away the master he might with the more violence, and owtrage, spoyle and ran­sacke the churche.

‘Neither haue heresies or schismes (saith S. Cyprian) risen of any other occasion then Cyp. lib. 1. Epist. 3▪ of that, the priest of God is not obeyed, and that one Priest for the tyme in the churche, and one iudge for the tyme in stead of Christ, is not thought vpon. To whom yf the whole brotherhood would be obedient accor­ding to Gods teachinges, no mā would make a doo against the Colledge of Priestes: No man would make him self iudge not of the Bisshopp now, but of God after Gods iudge­ment, after the fauour of the people decla­red by their voyces at the election, after the consent of his fellow Bisshopps: no man tho­rough breache of vnitee, and stryfe would deuyde the churche of Christ. No man stan­ding in his owne conceyte and swelling with pryde would apart erect abrode a newe [Page] churche. VVhom S. Hierome following tea­cheth Hiero. cō tr: Luci­ferianos. vs, that the saftye of the churche de­pendeth of the dignitee of the high Priest, to whom yf there be not geuen a certayne peerlesse power, and supereminent ouer all others, there will become in the church so many schismes as ther be Priestes.’

Heerby may you gather (most vertuous Kyng) wherabout Vergerius goeth when he would haue the papacy taken away: For he would haue taken away what so euer remay­neth of Christianitee with in your king­dome or dominions: he would haue schismes brovght in, heresies spred abrode, Christ bā ­nished owt of all your dominions, and that farre and wyde thorowgh owt all the same, might creepe, this whole Sathanisme, which wee see hath taken syche depe roote among your neighbours of Germany to the great hurt and spoyle of that nation. And to stop that this his enterpryse take not effect, no­thing more auayleth, then Vnitee. This Vni­tee therfore, dooth he assaut with all his in­gense and deuyses and earnestly laboureth to displace him, by whose authoryte it co­meth to passe that vnitee is reteyned in the [Page 85] churche of God. For he seeth that so long as his dignitee and auctoritee remayneth in force, he can proffit nothing.

But weygh with your self (Right renou­med Kyng) how after some had taken away the papacy, whether the same men did not soone after deuyse and attempte allso to re­moue the Emperour. VVhere wee see that emong them it is no lesse reproche to be caul­led a Caesarist then a Papist. VVhat hath pas­sed not many yeres synce in Germany your VVherū ­to thede­uises of heretikes tend. highnes is not ignorant. But those odious matters I had rather passe ouer with sylēce. It shall be expediēt for you to remember al­wayes this verse which is so common in eue­ry mans mowth.

Take heed therfore lest shortly it come to passe that it be counted no lesse ignomi­nious to be called a That is. to holde of the kinge then to holde of the pope Regist, then a Papist. For to this tendeth all their deuyse to take away all order, to bring the auctoritee of princes in hatred and contempt, and so to induce a confuse popular gouernement with­out a Prynce. VVher of synce Vergerius is a [Page] certayne brand, and kindleth nothing, but Paulus Vergerius a fierbrād of seditiō. seditions and broyles, and for that he caul­leth him self an exile of Iesu Christ, and that truly, for he hath in deed nothing to doo with Christ, euen as he hath made him self, an exile of Iesu Christ, so shall it be very well that your highnes make him an exile and bannisshed man out of your whole kingdom and dominions.

He sayeth, this doctryne of Ihesu Christ which he professeth can not stāde in surety, yf the papacy remayne in force: as though ther were any one of all the heretikes of this our age (who yet in this one thing doo mar­uelously agree that the papacy must be taken away) which did not as stoutly vaunt him self to professe the doctryne of Ihesu Christ, not withstanding that all and euery of thē doo both disagree emōg them selues and stād in a mere opposite, of the doctryne of Ihesu Christ. And yf you seeke narrowly in his pack, which doctryne of Ihesu Christ it is, that he professeth, suche is the ignorāce and vnskilfulnesse of the man, ‘that I beleeue he woold be myche to seeke of a direct awnswer.’

For so farre as we may gather of his other The incō ­stācy and Incertai­nty of vergerius his doctryne. [Page 86] writinges, he is soōtyme with the Swingliās, soomtyme with the Lutherans, and soomty­me with the Picardines. As for the confessiō of Ausburge no man can well iudge him to be of, in so myche as he preferreth the con­fession of Brentius (whoom he hath in espe­cyall admiration) before all other confessiōs. And that Brentius dooth allowe the doctry­ne The doc­tryne of Osiander. of Osiandre touching iustification (which is the somme of the whole Gospell) it is well knowen. But how myche they which would be accomptyd of the confession of Ausburge doo detest that doctryne, it is also cleer, both by the censure of the doctors of VVittēberg and by the writinges and dooinges of Ma­thias Flaccus and Ioachimus Merlinus.

For what reckening Merlinus made of them whoo being of his flock harkened to Osianders doctryne, it is not vnknowen: for The im­pietie and crueltie of Merli­nus the heretike a­gainst the follouers of Osiader his doctrī. neither woold he allow them buryall when they were dead, nor be persuadyd to affoord Baptysme to their children. And can the­re be any man found that will suffer him self to be persuadyd that this doctryne of Verge­rius is the doctryne of Iesu Christ, which not only the Christyans detest, but allso the Ger­mayne [Page] Lutherās doo so excedingly abhorre, that with syche as professe the same they will neither whill they be alyue nor after, haue any communion or fellowship.

But I will taulke no more of Vergerius: whoom in this place I thought not amysse to remēber, to the end that eche man may per­ceyue how myche more openly Sathan hath Sathā did more opē ­ly bevvra­ye hīself by Verge­rius, then by any of the other heretikes. layed foorth his mynd by him, then by those which by certayne vnderminynges, labour to blowe vp and ouerthrowe the vnitee of the churche, in seeming at the first to re­quyre nothing but the cuppe: And that they are farre wyde whiche thinke that cō ­cord may growe between the Christians and Lutherans yf the cuppe might be graun­ted to the laytee, and wyues to the Priestes. A goodly concord suerly wherin not the vyces of the papacy (which men would leeke well ynowgh) but the whole papacy shall be taken away, that is to say, all Christianitee abolisshed. But because wee haue now spoken sufficiently of these thinges, let vs retourne to our principall matter. Epilogus.

Our purpose was to wryte chieffly of the 1. expresse word of God. VVherof wee haue [Page 87] shewed you that the heretykes do as myche, or more glory and vawnt as do the catholy­kes and right beleuers.

VVee haue also shewed that we contend 2. not with them about the expresse word of God, or the Gospell, but about the interpreta­tions and expositiōs of them, which are de­parted frō vs, to whom we may well vse the same wordes, which S. Augustine sometyme August. epist. 62. vsed against the Donatistes: ‘that against Christ, they beare the enseigne of Christ, and against the Gospell they glory of the Gospell which they vnderstand not.’

VVe haue allso shewed this, that were­uerently 3. receyue all the canonicall scriptu­res: and that they on the other syde for so muche as they will not in faith be subiect to Heretikes vvill not be subiect to the scriptures but thravvll them vn­to their ovvne myndes the auctoritee of the scriptures, but seeke to make the same thrawl vnto them, do not re­ceiue in thē, but that which seemeth to ac­cord with their owne doctrine: that they frame to the wordes of the scripture their owne priuat sence: And that they contend not with vs about the sence and mynd of the scripture, but about their owne sence & vn­derstādīg therof, which rather thē we would [Page] adore as the pure word of God, against the cō ­uiō sence and cōsent of the whole church, we are redy to do and suffer all thinges. For wee are persuaded that so to do were right ido­latry. Synce therfore wee haue at large she­wed why wee can not agree with the ene­myes of the Gospell which by the wordes of the Gospell assault the same, and contend with vs about their owne mynd, and not the mynd of the scripture, wee will brieffly discourse the cause why we can not so do.

First the most seuere commaundements The cause vvhy the catholikes may not consent to the he­retikes. Galat. 1. Matt. 12. Ezeeh. 14. 1. Cor. 10. of God, forbid vs to geue eare or consent vn­to them according to these wordes: [If any man preache vnto you any other Gospel then that which ye haue receyued, let him be ac­cursed: If any man speake blasphemie against the holy Ghost it shall not be remitted vnto him. Flee from idoles.] Seeing therfore these men be syche as preache vnto vs a Gospell which wee haue not receyued: and syche as speake blasphemy against the holy Ghost: and seeke to be adored of vs as certayne idolls: wee obeying the commaundements of God are iustly feared frō consenting with them.

And lest any man thinke wee applye [Page 88] these scriptures to our owne proper sence, we will in fewe, shewe, how the auncient ca­tholyke fathers haue expoūded them, to the end euery man may plainly perceiue, that wee doo very truly vse them against these enemyes of the Gospell.

And first who is ther to whō the name of Athanasius is not knowē and wel thowght of? ‘VVho (as S. Cyrill writeth) adorned hea­uen Cyrill. ad Reginas de recta fide. it self with the workes he. wrote as it were with a most fragrant oyntment:’ This father therfore in his booke which he inti­tuled of the incarnation of Christ (as it is by Cyrill cited) vseth these wordes: ‘VVho so euer besyde these thinges teacheth out of the holy scripture, that there is one sonne of God, and an other sonne borne of the virgin Mary: and adopted for a sonne only in suche sorte, as wee men be, so that there be two sonnes etc. Or yf any mā saye that the fleshe of our lord came from aboue, and not of the virgin Mary, or the whole diuinitee to haue been cōfounded or chaunged into the fleshe: or the deitie of our lord to be passible: or that the fleshe of our lord as of man, is not to be adored: this man dooth the holy and [Page] Catholyke churche accurse, following therin the holy Apostles saying: If any man preache Galat. 1. vnto you any other Gospel thē that which ye haue receiued, let him be accursed.’

Behould this good Father (whose memo­ry in the churche is holy and immortal) sayth, he is accursed of the catholyke chur­che, who so euer should go about to teache (yea though it were owt of the holy scriptu­res) any of these poyntes. But (o holy father) by what auctoritee thinkest thou that may be done, yf he teache the same owt of the scriptures? For sooth (sayth he) by the aucto­ritee of S. Pawll, who sayd: [If any man prea­che Galat. 1. vnto you any other Gospell, then that which ye haue receiued, let him be accursed.

A marueilous matter: The same sen­tence which the heretikes of our age haue allwayes in their mowthe, wherby they thinke as with a ramme of Iron to assault, and ouerthrow the whole auctoritee of the fathers and coūcells, thou bringest foorth on the cōtrary syde. To wyt, yf any man shal goe about to saye (yea though it be out of the scri­ptures) the cōtrary of that, which hath bene defyned in lawfull councells, of the fathers, [Page 89] especially generall, and by them deliuered to vs, from hand, to hād, thou thinkest him not only, not to be harkened vnto, but allso to be accursed: and that wee must firmly remayne in that, which wee haue receiued: though a man bring neuer so many textes of scripture in apparence to the contrary.

Athanasius will not that the children Athana­sius. should iudge of the decrees of the fathers. He will not that syche thinges as hath once been tryed by the rule of the scriptures, should agayne be caulled back to the same, vnlesse they will shewe them selues not to Esai. 57. Osee. 3. be laufull children, but the seed of the har­lot and adulteresse, which if they dare do, let them crye tyll they be hoarse, [For it is writtē] (as the father of heretikes attemp­ting Christ once did) yet maketh he no doubt by the doctrine of S. Pawll to hould them ac­cursed: because they preache a contrary Gos­pell to that, which they receiued.

But did holy Athanasius when he wrote thus, teache vs to contemne and holde for nawght, the expresse word of God? No: God forbid: It was neuer any part of his thought, but he would haue taken for the pure and [Page] expresse word of God that, which the Ca­tholikes, and not which the heretikes browght foorth: that sense (I saye) which the Catholikes, not which the heretikes drewe foorth of the scriptures.

VVe fynd notably written by S. Hierome Hier. in c. 1. ad Gala. ‘that the Gospell standeth not in the wordes of the scripture, but in the sense, not in the superficiall face or shewe, but in the marye: not in the leaues full of wordes, but in the roote of reason. You see now how the most earnest defender of the Catholyke and ryght faith,’ produced these wordes of S. Pawl: with whose only auctoritee (namely synce he stan­deth in place of many) we will for this tyme be content lest we seeme to long.

But yet agayne (though perhapps wee maye herein doe otherwyse then becometh vs) to the end the truth may the more plain­ly appere, wee thinke it not amysse to bringe foorth euen an heretikes exposition of these wordes of S. Pawl, and of that heretike who­se Note. mynd touching the sacramēt, Melancthon is sayd to haue followed. He therfore speaketh in this sort, intreating vpon those very wor­des of S. Pawll.

[Page 90] Note this worde of the Apostle: Accepistis, Caluin in commēt. ad Gala. 1. Ye haue receyued: For styl the Apostle labou­reth to this end that they should not hange as it were in the ayre vpon an vnknowen Gospell only by way of imagination, but should hould for a certayne and sure defini­tion therof that, that was the true Gospell of Note hovve Caluin defi­neth the Gospell: Quod ac­cepistis. Christ which was deliuered vnto them, and which they had receyued. He commaundeth therfore that they should be reputed for di­uells, which would presUme to bryng any other Gospell, differing from his: calling that another Gospell, wherunto other mēs inuen­tions are ioyned.

And surely this his sentence (though he were an heretike) we can not but in this poynt very well allowe. For he will not haue any vnknowen Gospell receyued, but that which hath been deliuered vnto vs, and which we haue allready before receyued. But nowe, that which is of these men termed the Gospell: and the expresse word of God, came to light in manner but yesterday, and was to our fathers vtterly vnknowen. May we not therfore with S. Hierom aptly say thus vnto these fellowes that so earnestly labour to ob­trude this new fownd Gospell vnto vs?

[Page] ‘VVhat so euer thou be, thou teacher of Hiero. in Epist ad Pamachiū & Ocea­num. new doctrynes, I pray the forbeare the Ro­maine eares, forbeare the faith which hath been recommended vnto vs from the mouth of the Apostles. VVhy doest thow seeke after iiij ^c. yeres (but wee may now say after four­tene c. yeres and more) to teach vs now that wee knew not before? VVhy doest thow bryng foorth that which Peter and Pawll would not shewe? The Christian world hath been withowt this doctrine vntill this daye. I will for my part being now an owld man, hould that fayth wherin being a chyld I was borne and bred. VVhat a madnes then were this yf wee should now receyue a straunge vnknowen Gospell, and reiect that which wee hould by deliuery vnto vs from those holy fathers?’ For yf they meane the name of the Gospell those bookes which wee haue written by the Euangelistes and Apostles, and before them by the Prophettes, that Gospell hath Polonia had and receyued And vve En­glish men almost these M. yeres. al­most this vi ^c. yeres past: neither is ther any amōg vs that doubteth, but that in the same is the expresse word of God: VVherfore as touching the scripture, it is none other [Page 91] Ghospell which the heretikes would at this daye obtrude vnto vs, but the same which we professe allredy. Yea (and that is more) they openly confesse that they haue receyued the whole Canonicall scripture from vs.

VVhat Gospell then (I praye you) is that, which they preache vnto vs? Forsooth such VVhat nue Gos­pel it is by Caluins fentence vvhich heretikes seeke to obtrude vnto vs. Galat 1. a Ghospell, wherunto (as Caluin writeth) other mens inuentiōs and deuyses are ioyned, wherof they bring a straunge sence hither­to vnheard of in the churche of God. And this is it, wherof S. Pawll geueth warning saying: [Yf any man preache vnto you any other Gospell then that which you haue re­ceyued, let him be accursed.] That is as myche to saye: If Luther, Caluin, or Melanc­thon, come vnto you, and preache the Gospell to any other sence or meaning, then that which you haue receyued of the blessed fa­thers: yf he tell you any thing contrary to that, which they haue deliuered vnto you: let him be accursed.

Be wee not thinke you by these wordes of S. Pawll iustly fearyd from taking the inuen­tions and deuyses of these men for the true word of God? Namely synce this is truly sayd [Page] to be a synne against the holy Ghost, and to blaspheme the same, when by contempt wee violat those thinges which haue been deli­uered vnto vs, by the fathers. VVhich thing that blessed Bisshop Damasus teacheth vs Damasus in epist. ad Aure­liū Car­tha. Epis. in these wordes.

‘Voluntary breakers of the Canons (sayth he) are greuously iudged of the holy fathers and condemned by the holy Ghost, by whose instinct and gift they were decreed. For Rightly seeme they to blaspheme the holy Ghost which against those holy Canōs do any thing voluntarely, or frowardly not cōpelled by necessitee: or presume to speake against them: or willingly consent to any, that at­tempt so to doo. For syche presumption is ma­nifestly The breache of the Ca­nons is one kin­de of blasphemy against the holy Ghoste. one kynd of blasphemy against the holy Ghost. Yow see how this holy man telleth vs, it is one kynd of blasphemy against the holy Ghost,’ yf a man presume to do or speake frowardly or malapertly against those thin­ges which are deliured vnto vs from the fathers. Therfore lest wee should become giltye of this kynd of blasphemy, wee dare by no meanes consent to these men, who thinke it a matter to be fled frō, as a pestilēt poyson [Page 92] of Sathan, which the Catholikes and right beleuers haue taught by the space of so ma­ny hundreth yeres, which the ouctoritee of the churche hath deliuered, all Christian people imbraced, and the schooles of the di­uines mayntayned: And on the other syde would haue vs to esteeme the dreames of their owne brayne as the very pure and ex­presse word of God: especially synce wee are twyse warned by these wordes of S. Pawll in one epistle that yf any man preache vnto you Galat. 1. any other Gospell then that which ye haue receyued, let him be accursed.

But chieffly that feareth vs which is Ezec. 14. 1. Cor. 10. spoken by the prophet [depart ye frō idolls:] VVhich thing allso S. Pawll dooth itterate vnto vs cryeng out, [Flee from the worship­ping of idolls,] which S. Iohn the Euangelist 1. Ioan. 5. dooth allso repete vnto vs: Concluding that his notable Epistle with these wordes: [My children keepe ye from idolls.] But what? be Note vvho be the idols vve must flee frō. not trow you Luther, Caluin, Melancthon and Brencius very idolls? Is there not in these menne, a wonderfull heygth, lifting it self vp against the knowledge of God? Doo they not resist and withstand? And (which 2. Cor. 10 [Page] is the property of Sathan) doo they not ex­toll themselues aboue all, which is sayd or 2. Thes. 2. worshipped as God, shewing them selues as it were God, and seeke to haue worshipped of all men as the expresse word of God, what so euer they wryte, or say?

But here lest wee seeme to apply these thinges according to the vision of our owne hart (as heretikes vse to doo) let vs in fewe, lay open what the holy fathers haue taught to be signified in the scriptures vnder the names of idolls. S. Hierome expounding that place of Zachary: [I will destroy the names Hier. in 13. Zachari. of idolls from of the earth:] sayth that by these wordes are signifyed not only those idolls wherof we read in the Psalmes: [The Psal. 113. images of the Gentills made of siluer and gould being the workes of mens handes] but allso those wherof Pawll speaketh sayeng. 1. Tim. 4. [But the spirit telleth vs manifestly that in the latter dayes some shall depart from the faith geuing eare to seducing spirites, and to the doctrine of diuells, teaching faulse vn­der hipocrisy, hauing their consciences mar­ked with an hot yron.]

‘For euen as idolls (sayth he) are made by [Page 93] the hand of the worke man, so the peruerse doctrine of heretikes what so euer it self de­uyseth it turneth into an idoll, and maketh Antechrist to be worshipped for Christ.’ Leekewyse intreating vppō that place of the Cap 2. Prophet Esay: [Their land is full of idolls: The workes of their owne handes haue they worshipped, and that which their owne fyn­gers haue made, hath man bowed vnto, and Idolls are doctrines contrary to the trouthe Cap. 8. humbled him self:] Idolls he interpreteth to be doctrines contrary to the truthe. Nei­ther will he haue otherwyse vnderstanded that which is written by the prophett Osee: [They made their siluer and gowld idolls to them selues that they might perishe.]

S. Augustine allso after he had spoken ma­ny August. de v [...]a religione. Cap. 38. thinges of idolls made with handes: ‘Ther is (sayth he) a worse and more base worship­ping of idolls when men worship their owne fancyes, and honour with the name of Reli­gion what so euer they haue imagined, in their erring myndes puft vp with pryde and vayn glory. Of which kynd of fanceys,’ and vayne visions, he interpreteth Iosue allso to speake in that place, where he sayeth: [Take 1▪ Reg. 7. away straunge Gods from emong you and en­clyne [Page] your hartes to the lord your God.] Ezech. 16 Leekewyse that place of Ezechiell: [of my gould & of my siluer hast thou made to thy self images.] ‘But the images of their fanceys Aug q 25. super Io­sue cap. 23 (sayth he) wherin their carnall soules de­light to wallowe, ouerturne both all the sa­cramentes, and all the wordes of the holy bookes. But yet it followeth not, because those images be faulse, that therfore the sacramē ­tes and scriptures should be so myche dis­honoured, that they should be thowght to be theirs, because our lord sayd, of my gowld and of my siluer, &c.’

Vincentius Lirinensis allso a writer of that tyme sayth that the owld Testament caulleth straunge Gods, syche doctrines as are straunge and diuers from the churche: because heretikes make no lesse a doo to the mayntenance of their owne opinions, then the Gentills did for their Gods, wher allso it is written in the Deuteronomy: [If there Deuter. 13 ryse emōg you a prophet that foretel you any signe or wonder which cometh to passe as he hath spoken, and he sayeth vnto you: Let vs go after straunge gods, whom you knowe not: thou shalt not harken to the wordes of [Page 94] that prophet, for the lord your God pro­ueth you that it may appere whether you loue him with all your hart, and with all your soule or no.]

‘Here (sayth he) by straunge Gods are sig­nified, Straunge Gods Vincētius expoun­deth to be nevve do­ctrines▪ 1. Cor. 11. straunge, newe, and vnknowē errours, which God somtyme suffreth to be spred that he may trye our constancy in louing of him, and in cleauing to his sound doctrine: accor­ding as it is allso written by S. Pawll: [there must be heresies:] For this cause (sayth Vin­centius) the auctors of heresies are not by and by rooted vp, to the end that they which are tryed may be seen how faithfull, and con­stant, and how stedfast a louer he is of the ca­tholike fayth. And in deed (sayth he) when any nouelty boyleth vp, by and by is seen the wayght of the Corne from the lightnes of the chaffe. Then very easely is blowen away with the ayre that, which by no wayght was kept in our lordes barne flower. For some are blowen quyte away, some only streeken, and being wounded as persons half dead, and halfe a lyue, are affrayed to perishe, and asshamed to retourne, as men which had only receyued syche quantite of poyson as [Page] neither would kyll, nor be digested: nor force them to dye, nor suffer them to lyue.’

Heerby, it may easely appere what the auncient fathers thowght to be signified in the scriptures, by the name of idolls: to wyt heretikes and their faulse doctrine. For to imbrace as the very word of God, the saying of any one man, teaching in māner all thin­ges contrary to the receyued doctrine of the whole Churche, and to adore and inclyne vnto what so euer he hath sayed, or writtē, what can be a kindly idolatry, yf this be not? VVhich who so doeth, what doeth he els, but adore Antechrist for Christ?

Luther sayth: that which I teache is the word of God, and the pure Gospell. By and by they adore and inclyne vnto it, as before an idoll. The same sayth Zuinglius, and Caluin, the Anabaptistes, and the Picardines, Suenckfeldius, Seruetus, Campanus, and di­uers other heretikes: They brynge foorth certayne textes of the scripture wrested into a Note. wrong sence, and by and by, this word of men or rather of the diuell speaking by men, simple persons doo imbrace, and adore as the word of God, and the very Gospell of [Page 95] Christ. Horrible is this idolatry and to be Heretikes are to be fledd frō as the vvorst kind of Idolles. Ezech 14. 1. Cor. 10 fled from, with full sayle (as they say) accor­ding to the warning geuen vs by the Pro­phetes and Apostles. For what other thinge can follow herof, but that, whyle euery sect vaunteth his owne word to be the expresse word of God, their sectaryes and followers must nedes haue so many Gods as there be archheretikes?

Doo you now marke (most vertuous kyng) to what end Sathan dooth by so many his diuers members, make so great vaunt and bragging of the expresse word of God? There is no one heretike of this our age, which hath not allwayes that in his mouth, which dooth not glory therof, and so particularly challenge the same vnto himself alone, as that he will exclude all others from the pos­session therof. The mynd therfor of Sathan Sathans full intēt and final perpose. is, that wee should bowe downe, now before this man, and now before that, and that we should imbrace nowe his word, and now an other mans as the very word of God, and so instead of one God, worshippe many idolls, and in place of one Christ, bowe downe to many Antechristes.

[Page]But lett vs harken to the voyce of the Prophets and Apostles crying vnto vs: [Flee frō idolls, flee frō idols:] Flee frō the peruers doctrines of Luther, Caluin, Melancthon, and Brentius, flee as many, as be of them, which wil haue their owne fanceys worship­ped for idolls, and labour to haue what so euer they saye or thinke to be adored as the pure word of God, and the very Gospell.

But see (most gracious kyng) how these Germayne Gods can not abyde one an other, but euen lyke Homer his Gods make warre emong them selues. I speake not in this place, of those deadly bataylles and innumerable slaughters wherewith vnhappy Germany hath been miserably afflicted, synce they be­ganne to worship these Gods, and to receyue what so euer was by them sayd or written as the expresse word of God. But harken how the Gods them selues (which doo thus set to sale to the vnlerned multitude their owne word for Gods word) do quarrell and braule emong them selues. The ciuill vvarre e­mong the heretikes thē selues

Did not Luther as an enemy inuade and set vppon Zuinglius and his followers? And leekwyse vpon the Anabaptistes? Did he not [Page 96] labour as myche as he could, to cut the thro­tes of both those wicked sectes? VVhom he thought meet not only to be brydeled by his writinges, but allso to be kept vnder, by the mace of the magistrate. Therfore not only emong Christians, but allso emong the Lu­therans Lutherās ageinst Zuingliās etc. them selues is so sore detested the name of Zuinglians, and Anabaptistes, that they are (as the Prouerb sayeth) forbidden fyre and water emong them, and yf any Lu­theran Note. receyue or harbor any of them, he is by order greuously punisshed.

And I pray you be the Zuinglians any Zuingliāt against Lutheranes. more mylde to the Lutherans? In deed they doo not persecute them with the lyke cruel­ty. Not, that they lacke any good wil therto, but because they fynd them selues vnable. For they well perceyue their strength is not yet syche that they be able to matche them. But of what mynd they be toward the Lu­therans, it is by their wrytings manyfest to all men: for they make euen the lyke ac­compt of the Lutherans, as the Lutherans Caluin & Alasco against VVestphalus. doo of them. The wrytinges of Iohn Caluin and Iohn Alasco against Ioachimus VVest­phalus and against the Cityes of Saxony doo [Page] well witnesse this. Bucer allso wrote that Luther was accused of all men to be a man to full of wordes, very imperious, and ouer bitter, not hauing the pacyence to be contra­ryed by any man: which fault the Tigurins allso charge him with. If he looke (sayth Bu­cer speaking of Luther) that no man should in any one thing dissent from him, then let him proue him self to be a God: Couertly meaning therby, that he sought to be reue­renced as a God, and to haue his word ado­red of all men as the word of God: brefly that it were no more laufull for any man to dissent from his mynd then from the sentēce of god. Thus you see his very fellowes thought intollerable this his exceding pryde, wherby he presumed to sytte in the temple of God, euen as he were god himself.

But dooth not Caluin allso cōplayne that Caluin his com­playnt of Luther. the churche of god is to imperiously bownd to the deuyses of Luther? How greuously dooth he take it, that they dresse him vp with the spoyle of S. Iohn Baptist, and call him Helias by whom all thinges were to be restored? VVith which falshed they did no lesse distayne the name of Luther (sayth he) [Page 97] then the Egyptians did the body of Hiere­my, by worshipping his sepulchre.

And yf (sayth he) the name of Helias were to be graunted to Luther, yet was it a poynt of sacrilegious temeritee to affirme him to be the last Helias: as though the hand of God were shortnyd, that he could not hereafter, send a better, or at the lest an other as good as he. For by what oracle was it oppened vnto them that the treasures of the mighty power of God were so myche diminisshed and wa­sted, in the person of one man, that out of so great, and incomprehensible a number, the lyke of him might not be found?

Here Caluin could not dissemble the grudge he had cōceyued, in that Luther was thus caulled the last Helias: wherby no place was now left for him, who thought himself in no poynt inferiour, but rather superiour to Luther.

But Ioannes Alasco who dooth seeme al­most Ioannes Alasco to consent with Caluin, beside that in many places he shewyth himself to thinke very yll of Luther (as it is noted by Eras­mus Albere) he writeth thus allso of the Lu­therans, that when all their stuff is spent, then they vse to flee to the Confession of [Page] Augspurg, as to their shooteanker, and make (sayth he) so myche a doo of that, that there want not emong them (yea and not of the meanest sort) which say they had rather Some Lu­therās professe that they vvill sooner dought of S. Pavvl his doctri then of their M. Luthers. dowbt of the doctrine of the Apostle Pawll, then of Luthers, or of that which is contay­ned in that Confession.

You see how the sacramentaryes themsel­ves can not beare, that the contentes of Lu­thers bookes, or of the Augustan confession should be receyued as the word of God: though with some for all that, it be of more pryse then the word of God. And shall wee Christiās beare that, which the lewde Zuin­glians can not beare? And shall wee suffer that to be obtruded vnto vs for the expresse word of God, which wee most certainly knowe, and haue proued to be the expresse word of the diuell?

But some there be perhapps that will in this case geue the lesse credyt to the iudge­ment of the Zuinglians, for that the world seeth they dissent from the doctrine of Lu­ther. Let vs see therfore what iudgement the Lutherans them selues haue one of an other. I thinke no man will denye, but the [Page 98] Confessionistes be Lutherās: VVherof though The Con­fessioni­stes. Andreas Osiander were himself one, yet dooth he not complayne, that with his fol­lowers the Confession of Augspurg is more regarded then the word of God? And that they which procede masters of art and pro­fessors of diuinitee at VVittemberge, abiure the word of God, and sweare to be subiect to the worde of Melancthon? Marke yee how this fellow condemneth the disciples of Melancthon of idolatry, and warneth them to flee from this idoll.

But to come to Melancthon himself, did Melācthō him selfe against▪ Luther. not he at the first, with tooth and nayle, de­fend and esteeme no lesse then the very word of God, these doctrines of Luther? That man hath no free wyll: that all thinges happen by absolute necessitee: that man fee­lith no more what God dooth within him then the Anuyll feelith what the hammer dooth: that workes are not necessary to sal­uation: that no rytes or ceremonyes owght to be admitted into the Churche. Melācthō cōplay­neth that he hade follo­vved Lu­ther to seruilly.

Yet afterward complainyng that he had been to seruilly bond to Luther, he reiected these his toyes, and came to a better mynd. [Page] For which cause yet he bred to him self so great hatred yea euen of his owne disciples, that they pittefully reuyled him, and sought to exclude him from the Confession of Augs­purg, wherof it is knowē he was the Author.

But Mathias Flaccus is not affrayed to arrogat yet more vnto him self, and sticketh not to pronounce his master Melancthon (to whō he was behoulding) and all the ad­herentes Matthias Flaccus condem­neth his M Melan­cthon and his follo­vvers. of his doctrine, vnworthy to be ac­cōpted other then very Ethnikes and Pub­licans: And to make his meaning playne he thus interpreteth him self, that no good mā ought to haue any familiaritee, freendship, or cōpany, with them: And to him (which not being especially bound to them by neces­sitee of lawe) should doo any of these thin­ges, he pronounceth the contagion of their lepre: and so without all doubt the wrath of God. And that (I thinke) was the cause that iiij Lutherā doctors ageinst Melācthō Luthers ovvne der linge. at the last conference at VVormes, Schnep­pius, Merlinus, Strigellius, Sa [...]erius, and certayn other Illiricans departed thence without doing any thing, for that they thought the fellowship of Melancthon and Brentius (both whom Flaccus had excom­municated [Page 99] from his congregation) was of them to be auoyded. Namely synce none of them gaue any shewe of inclination to any syche retourne or amendment, as they re­quyred.

VVho therfore is there, which dooth not now see as cleer as the day light, that these be the idolls which the Prophetes and Apo­stles so earnestly exhort vs to flee from? The heretikes I say of this our age, Luther, Cal­uin, Melancthon, Brētius, Flaccus, they com­maund vs to flee, as from the vyper and Cockatryce: for so doo they emong them sel­ues and by their owne iudgement one of an other, condemne them selues. But may not wee myche the more iustly accompt them for syche as they are become, not only by the iudgement of the Catholike Church (which Matth. 18. wee are commaunded to harken vnto) but allso by their owne iudgement one of an other? And shall there now be any man that may persuade vs (which acknowledge and honour only one God) to adore the word of these heretikes as the expresse word of God?

O Christ which hast allmost this 600. yeres [Page] shyned ouer this countrey, with the light Note the vertuous and god­ly prayer of the Author. of thy Gospell, rather take from vs all our worldly goodes, the sweet fruition of this lyght, yea all thinges which are in this world most dere to mortall men, then once to suffer vs to be remoued frō this mynd, wherin wee are determyned rather to doo and suffer all thinges, then to depart from that thy holly word, which allmost. 600. yers past was by thy goodnes deliuered and impartid to our na­tion: and in stead therof to receyue their word, which set them selues in the Temple as Gods, and so thrall our selues to the most greuous cryme of horrible idolatry.

But to retourne wher wee leeft: I trust wee haue sufficiently shewyd that the word which is now by heretikes set to sale to the vnlerned multitude for the expresse word of God, is not in deed the word of God, but the word of the diuel, frō the which the mindes of all good men ought to abhorre and to flee from, as a deadly poyson, according to the wordes of the Prophets, and Apostles, which styll crye vnto vs [Flee from idolls.] Nowe Ezec 12. 1. Cor. 10 is it tyme to blowe the retraict, but that we meane first a litle to discusse vnto you what [Page 100] is the expresse word of God: to the end that when you knowe the same, the expresse word of the diuell may the better be discerned.

There are truly in the scriptures many Here the Author teacheth in fevve vvhat is in deed the ex­presse and liue­ly vvor­de of god Gal. 5. Matt. 22. Rom. 13. 1. Tim. 1. Aug. in prologo Psal. 140 wordes of God, but they all make, but one word of God: which is (Loue:) for [al the lawe (sayth the Apostle) is fulfylled in this one word.] And in this dependeth not only the whole lawe, but allso the prophetes: as Christ him self witnesseth: The fulnes of the lawe therfore, and the end of all the commaun­dements, is Charyte. For therunto is refer­red euery one of the commaundements.

‘Seeke none other thing (sayth S. Augusti­ne) in any of the scriptures: let no man geue you any other precept. VVhat so euer is darke in the scripture, Charyte lyeth hiddē therī: and what so euer is playne in the scripture, there allso is Charyte open and playne. This In Psal. 130. ser­mone. 1. precept of Charitee is aboue and ouer al the heauens, and ouer al bookes: All bookes are subiect, and vnder this: euery toung of holly men, and euery mocyon of the dispensors of God, and of the mynde and body▪ serueth vn­der this onsigne: what so euer thou hast, and hast not this, it proffiteth thee nothing: [Page] Other thinges yf thou haue not, yet haue The force of Chari­tee. this, and thou hast fulfylled the lawe. If this alone be absent, all is emptye▪ yf this alone be present, all is full. This only it is which suffi­seth to saluation, and is so necessary to salua­tion, as ther is no meane, wherby a man may hope to atteyne the same without charitee.’

This word therfore which dooth consum­mat Rom. 9. and abbreuiat, this liuely and sauing word, this word of Charitee and Loue is so expresse, and playne, that Clemens Alexan­drinus Li. 3. peda­gogi. ca. 21 sayth. ‘It may be learned euen with­out the scriptures: for that it is a certayn lawe of the spirite written in the hartes of the faythful, be they neuer so simple and vn­lerned. No man therfore can be so dull, as not to vnderstand this word,’ neither shall any man be excused thorough ignoraunce therof. This is that word wherof the Psal­mist speaketh saying: [Thy word is a candle Psal. 11S. to my feet, and a light vnto my pathes.] VVherof he allso speaketh wher he sayeth: [Thy precept is cleer geuing light to the Psal. 18. eyes.]

In deed the eyes of our hart are lightned by Charitee, as on the other syde they be [Page 101] blynded by coouetousnesse. VVhither the coo­uet ousnesse or desyer be of the flesh, or of the eyes, or of prayse and glory: VVher that is, there is nothing, but meer darcknesse, no­thing but a fowll dimnesse. On the other sy­de, wher Charite is, ther is a shining light, yea so cleer and bryght, that nothing can be darke to him that hath charite: Therfore it is very well sayd of S. Augustine: ‘Let him August. loue and haue charite that will come to the knowledge of God: In vayne cometh he to reading, meditation, preaching, or praying, which loueth not: But because loue and cha­rite can not be perfect in any other place, then in that heauenly contrey of the blessed sainctes, therfore the knowledge of him shall in the end ther allso, and no wher ells, be­come perfaict. Here in the meane tyme in 1. Cor. 13 part wee knowe: and in part wee prophecy.’

VVherfore yf any man marueyll why (as emōg other heretikes) so allso emōg the Con­fessionistes them selues, ther is so great a myst and darcknes, that after the manner of the Andabates they fyght wyncking, or in the darke, and can not atteyne to the knowledge of the truth: let him now cease wondring, [Page] synce he hath learned this to be the cause VVhy ther is su­che a mi­ste before the eies of heretikes that they see not the▪ trouth. Ephe. 4. Coloss. 3. therof, that they be destitute of that Chari­tee which only geueth light to the faithful. For they would neuer haue deuided vnitee, yf they had not first lost Charite which is the bond of peace and vnitee. But for this cause are they destitute of Charite, for that they be full of couetous desire, as of many other thinges, so chieffly of prayse and vayne glory. According to that is written by the Poet: he is a rare mā that can geue ouer and renounce his owne wyt.

Nothing so myche hindreth the fynding Pride is the grea­test hinde rance to the attchi uing of knovv­ledge. Prouer. 13. out of the truth, as pryde, which is the moo­ther of all heresies: For ther are euer braw­les emong prowde men. But to attayne to the truth, ther is none other waye but hu­millite, by the which Charitee is noorisshed, and vnitee reteyned. ‘And that humillitee is (sayth S. Augustine) the first, second, and Epistol. 56 thyrd vertue, and so foorth, how often so euer you should aske of me, that aunswer would I styll make, as it is writtē, Demosthe­nes somtyme spake of pronunciation.’ By this way synce heretikes walke not, who can myche marueil though they can not atteyne [Page 102] to the knowledge of the cleer truth? VVhat a reuell kepe they both with vs, and emong themselues about the expresse word of God? Yet in the meane tyme can they not see that, which is the most expresse, clere and playne thing in all the scriptures and as clere as Charite is the scope and end of the ho­ly scriptu­re. the sunne shinyng, and which alone to haue lerned doth abundantly suffise vs to salua­tion: to wit Charitee. For that is the somme and end of the whole scripture, as is very wel written by S. Augustine saying.

‘VVho so euer thinking him self to vnder­stand Li. 1. de doctrina christiana ca. 36. t. Tim. 1. the holy scriptures, and euery part therof, and yet by that vnderstanding doth not buyld vp this dooble Charitee, toward God, and his neyghbour, he vnderstandeth nothing. But who so euer draweth out therof syche an vnderstanding as is proffitable to the building vp and working of Charitee, though he speake not the very same, which he whom he readeth may be proued to haue ment in that place: yet for so myche as he is deceyued by syche an vnderstanding as yet worketh Charitee, he is not hurtfully decey­ued: neither dooth he therin alltogether lye: but he is so deceyued, as a man which (ha­uing [Page] lost his waye) dooth yett by coasting, co me to that place, wherunto that direct waye would haue brought him.’ S. Augustine ad­uyseth in reading of the scriptures so to vnderstand them, as Charitee be wrought therby, yf wee will not erre to destruc­tion.

But doo these men (which now a dayes haue nothing more in their mowth then the scriptures, and the expresse word of God) apply their vnderstanding to this end, that they labour to worke and buyld vp nothing, but Charitee? Nay: whoo seeth not that they doo vtterly all that euer they doo, to the contrary? VVhich may well appere by these their wordes, then the which none are more common emong them. Trotz, a name of vncleanesse and fyl­the. Trotz, Trotz, in despight of the Pope, and in despight of the Councell. Is this to buyld vp Charitee?

But wherof growe ther emong vs so many debates, contentions, seditions, warres, he­resies, and sectes, wherby wee see the chur­che myserably torne and deuided, but of this only, that whiles euery priuatt man ca­cheth vnto him self the expresse word of God, and seeketh to vsurpe and appropriatt [Page 103] vnto him self the right vnderstanding therof, nothing is lesse sought in reading the scriptures, then the edifying of (Loue) The intollerable pride of the vnlerned multitude and of so­me vayne vveem [...]n allso. and Charitee? VVe see the rude and vnler­ned multitude, with an intollerable pryde, and without wasshing their handes or feete (as they saye) come vnto the reading of the holy scriptures: Yea wee see foolishe and fond woomen arrogat so myche vnto them selues, that condemning their fa­thers, dispising their bisshops, and teachers, setting at naught the sence, and consent of the whole Churche, they are not affrayed to preferre their owne expositions, before all others: VVhom yet they know to haue been conuersant in the scriptures many yeares Psal. 1. both day and night, and to haue omitted no study, labour or diligence, to atteyne vnto the trewe vnderstanding therof: whom they allso knowe to be set ouer them, and that they owght in those matters to be sub­iect vnto them, in so myche as they haue Heb. 13. the Carke and care to make a iust and good accompt of their soules. Is this to buyld vp Charitee? Yet thus hath it seemed good to the Archeheretyke of our age, who first pre­sumed [Page] to geue that was holly vnto dogges, and to throwe pearles before swyne, vnder Matt. 7. whose feete how filthily they be troden, who can without teares behould.

Notable is that saying of Gregory Na­zianzen: Li. 1. Theologiae. ‘that it is not for all men to talke of diuine matters, no nor lauful at all tymes, and in all companyes to dispute of all thin­ges. But good regard is to be had, when, to whom, and to what end, that is to be doone: which matter he pursueth at large.’

Nothing is better, then the reading of the scriptures: nothing more proffitable. But there is a certayn tree caullyd Rhodo­daphne Dioscori­des li. 4. Plinius li. 24. cap. 11. (in Englishe Osiander) whose leaues are to beastes poyson, and to men medicyna­ble, against serpentes. Euen leeke vnto this, is the scripture, which as to sober and wyse men it geueth holsome nouriture, so to foo­lishe and wycked persons, it ministreth oc­casion of heresy and of more wickednes. But were it not better to keepe these brute bea­stes (to whom Christ forbadde to geue that which was holy) frō the reading of the holy scriptures, then to suffer them lyke spyders to drawe nothing therof, but deadly poyson?

[Page 104]But as for wemen how myche better should they be occuped in spinning on their distaff, at syche tyme as they take on them to dispute of the word of God? [Be all Apostles, be all Prophetes? be al pastors and teachers?] sayth the Apostle. But now all will be Apo­stles, 1. Cor. 12. all Prophetes, al Pastours and teachers, yea wemen and all. Christ would not that his [body should be only one member, but that ther should be therūto many mēbers:] Now these folke on the other syde will haue that all, should be one member and one grosse substaunce, all of a facyō, not distincted with any varietee, but a certayne vnfrutful heape and confused Chaos, without apte pro­portiō or measure. By which meanes not on­ly the body is weakened and the order of nature peruerted, but the auctoritee of God is allso manifestly shaken, whyle euery man vsurpeth to him self more then is geuē him.

Hereof groweth the dissencion, sectes and quarrelles, wherwith the Christian world is now tormoyled, while neither the hand nor the foote will vouchesaff to doo his duety, but euery member will take on him the office of the eye, and the toong, and so neglecting [Page] his owne, impudently intrude him self into Note. the office of an other.

But these perhapps may seeme soōwhat frō the matter which I haue now taken in hand. Yet is it not alltogether frō my purpose and matter. But now to returne to my especyall poynt, will yow know (most vertuous Kyng) what is the expresse word of God, and what is One self scripture taken vvith the right sen­ce may be the vvord of Godd, and being peruerted may be the vvord of the di­uel. the expresse word of the diuell? For both (as I haue before sufficiētly, shewed at large) may be drawē out of one, and the self same scrip­ture: But yet learne in a fewe the differēce.

If a man so vnderstand the scripture as he doo therby, edifye and buyld vp Charite, then is it the word of God. But yf by his vn­derstanding therof, he buyld that which is contrary to Charitee, then is it become the word of the diuell. Yea and that is more, marke this. If a mā out of the holy scriptures The diffe­rence be­tvvene the vvord of God and of the diuell. drawe that sence which may be proffitable to the increase and edifying of Charitee, all be it he saye not the very same, which [...]e whom he readeth as Mathewe, Marke, Luke or Pawll, may be proued in that place to haue ment, yet is he not hurtfully deceyued, nei­ther dooth he erre from the word of God: but [Page 105] he is so deceiued as a man which strayeth somewhat out of his direct waye, and yet by coasting in a fayre playne champion cometh to the same place wher vnto that other way would haue brought him.

As therfore they which by sailyng cut the foming seas, haue especiall regard to the The vvoord of God aptly compared to the lo­de starre. Pole, and the lode starre, called Cynosura and Vrsa minor, so they that trauayll in reading of the scriptures must direct the eyes of their myndes to none other thing, but only to Cha­ritee, wher vnto yf they bend their vnder­standing, they can neuer swarue from the word of God: seing (as I sayd a lytle before) all the wordes of God, are but one word of God: which is, Loue. Then the which word nothing is, or can be in the scriptures more playne and cleer.

VVhat a fury therfore is this? what a mad­nes? VVhat a blyndnes of mynd? The expresse word of God is sought: Myche stryuing ther is about the same: and yet when the same so The mar­ueilous blindnes of hereti­kes. expresse and cleer word of God dooth offer it self before our eyes, it is not seen. VVhen it dooth inculcate, it self into our eares, it is not heard. VVhen it offereth it self willingly [Page] as it were to be handled with our handes, yet is it not acknowledged or receyued. But wretched men they suffer the same lightly to passe away, from their eyes, eares, handes, and hartes, while they falsely persuade them selues, that their saluation consisteth in knowing and reasoning, and not rather in louing and beleuing. Doth not that place of Psal. 113. the Psalme rightly tooche those men. [Eyes haue they and shall not see, eares and shall not heare, handes and shall not fele?] Chari­tee, Charitee, Charite, doth in euery place of the scriptures come toward vs, and offreth it self vnto our eyes: it is of al other the clee­rest word of God: and without that, who so euer thinketh knowledge will bring him to saluation, he is farre wyde.

Very truly sayth a vertuous and lerned Hugo de S. Victore li. 1. par 10 ca. 6. de saciamentis man. ‘The Clemency of God regardeth not, with how great knowledge wee beleue, but with how great deuotiō we loue that which we beleue. And an other vertuous mā also Gerson in li. an Mo­nachus pro studi­is, neglige re possit diuina cō siderat. 9. sayeth: In the last day wee shall not be asked how myche, how sharpe and how lerned our vnderstanding was, but how great our af­fection and zeale to our lord God: that is, [Page 106] how simple, how right, how vertuous, hum­ble, and deuout, and how willing and fayth­full our seruyce toward him hath been.’

VVhich thinges being so, why doo we not rather spend our whole study and labour in this poynt, which only and alone we knowe to be necessary to our saluation, to reteyne among our selues mutuall loue and brother­ly charitee, which is the very proper marke of the childrē of God? ‘In so myche as the vn­derstāding of the scriptures is not to all men a leeke necessary. The simplicitee of beleuing, August. contra E­pist. Mani chaei quā vocāt fun damenti li. r. ca. 39. de doctri­na Chri­stiana. not the quicknes of vnderstanding, keepeth safe the vnlerned multitude. And as the same S. Augustine sayth. The man which trusteth to faith, hope, and charitee, and fast reteyneth them, hath no need of the scrip­tures, vnlesse it be to teache others. And therfore by these three many lyue well in desertes, and solitary places without bookes.’

Now contrarely all men will search the scriptures and dispute of the sence and vn­derstanding therof. But that wher vnto as to a certayne marke al the scriptures are re­ferred: and that which those scriptures la­bour to inculcate in euery place into the [Page] eyes, eares, and myndes of men: that Chari­tee (I saie) which only bringeth saluation, no mācareth to reteyne. And verely looke how myche the oftener and more feruent disputation is made of the scriptures, and of the expresse word of God, so myche the more dooth Charitee (which all the scriptures doo with one voyce sounde out vnto vs) wexe could in the mindes of men.

And is it leekly that the sound vnder­standing of the scriptures, and the expresse word of God is there, wher Charite is wex­en Heretikes can not possibly haue the expresse vvoorde of Godd. so could, and hatred so hot? VVhere besides rayling, reuyling, skofing, and contu­melyes, a man can allmost read or heare no­thing? And where they them selues, which are departed frō vs (who had rather be cal­led Gospellers, then Christians) doo not only fight against vs, but allso one against an other, with syche infest, rāckorous, and vn­christian myndes, that no cruell Barbarians or enemyes of Christ his Crosse, could deale more leeke enemyes?

Truly before this Gospell sprang vp (which is proceded from none lesse then frō Christ) wee neuer sawe any syche bitternes of myn­des, [Page 107] or cruell contentions. Namely emong those, whose office was to teache, and open the Gospel of Christ. And shall wee cal this the Gospell? shall we call this the expresse word of God, from the which all Charitee, the thing most expressly commaunded in the Gospell is so vanished, that euen they (which glory to haue been the Note this vvell first, which (as them selues say) haue of late brought to light the buryed Gospell) doo so hatefully con­tend emong them selues, burne with syche mutuall enuy, and so byte one an other that Gal. 5. it can not be long, but wee must nedes see them consumed one of an other?

This is sure the expresse word of the di­uell, not the expresse word of God, seing as I haue allredy so often sayd, the expresse word of God is only Loue and Charitee. ‘That is it that imbraceth Vnitee, that ioyneth vs all Ambros. in Ca. 3. ad Coloss. in one body, that geueth peace, and with pure hart keepeth the same.’ And Christiā charitee can not be kept, but in the Vnitee of the churche: so that in vayne doth he vaunt him selfe to haue charite, which doth not imbrace Vnitee. But yf this expresse word of God, Charitee, be not kept any where [Page] but in the vnitee of the church, who is there that can thinke that the expresse word of God can be found any where out of this vnitee?

And this is it that in this treatyce I shewed before, that somtyme when two men bringe foorth one self text of scripture, yet God openeth the mouth of one, and the diuel of the other. For he which hauing deuided him self from the churche, alleageth it not with the common sence and vnderstanding of the Churche, but with his owne priuat and wrested interpretatiō: (for so myche as S. Iohn sayeth [VVho so euer speaketh of him Hovve to kno­vve vvhen the true vvoord of God is vttered Ioan. 8. self, (yea though he speake scripture) yet vt­tereth he a lye) the mouth of that man doth the diuell open, and that which he speaketh is the word of the diuell.

But allthough following S. Ambrose wee sayd, that Charite is the thing which imbra cyth, and conteyneth vnitee and which ma­kyth vs all one body, wee would not be vn­derstanded in that sence as though we mēt therby, that euyll and vniust men were ex­cludyd from the body of Christ, which is the churche. For allthough Charitee which the [Page 108] scripture chieffly commendyth vnto vs, be the proper marke of them which doo truly honour God, wherby the children of God are discernyd, from the childrē of the diuel, and that those be only they, which appertayne to the coompany of the Elect: yet is there a cer­tayne De vnita te Eccle­siae ca. 2. 1. Cor. 13. vbi su­pra ca. 5. other congregacyon or churche of thē that are called, from the which they be not excluded which are destitute of true cha­rite, so they reteyne that, which S. Augu­stine calleth, ‘the loue of vnite:’ by the which he sayeth the members of Crist are couppled vnto him. The working wherof is to suffer al thing. ‘That ther may be (as the same S. Au­gustine writeth) a certain force of suffring, houlding the sure handfast of vnitee, which was signified by the pytche, wherwith the Gen. 6. Arke (being a figure of the churche) was fastned and sodred, both within, and with­out: for euill men are to be suffred both with in and without, lest the knot of peace be dis­solued.’

Of which charite allso S. Augustine wri­teth Li. 1. con­tra Cres. ca. 29. in an other place saying: ‘I do not thinke any mā to be so vnwyse, as to beleue that he, which hath no charite, doth appertayne to [Page] the vnite of the churche, whē it is certayne that they doo belonge to the vnitee of the churche, so long as they be not cut of from the same: yea though they be destitute of the other effectes of charitee, so that reteyning that force or vertu of suffring they be emōg them of whom S. Pawll writeth: [suppor­ting Ephes. 4. one an other in charite: carefull to pre­serue the vnitee of the spirite, in the bond of peace.]’

But here these fellowes will denye that to be the churche of God which we professe, and wherof we glory and reioyce to be the hūble children, and wil go about to challenge that name to their congregation. But I would fayne haue them shewe vs their churche. I speake not now of the Sacramētaries, Ana­baptistes, heauēly prophetes, nor of the Cam­panians, or Seruetians (all which sectes they haue allredy throwen out of their congre­gation:) but let the Confessionistes or Lu­therans shewe vs their Churche.

Melancthon and his followers, Brentius also with his bande, are throwen foorth of that Churche, which would be counted of the Augustan (not Christian) confession: as [Page 109] wee may plainly see by the writinges of Ma­thias Flaccus, and Ioachimus Merlinus, who glory themselues to be vpright perfect Lu­therans. But yf any man will geue more cre­dyt to the iudgement of Melancthon, or of his disciple Iustus Menius, then shal he fynd that they geue the like iudgemēnt of Flaccus, as Flaccus doth of them.

VVhere then shall wee now fynde this The Con­flict emōg heretikes about their pri­uat chur­ches churche of Luther? Melancthon will not graunt it to be emong the Illiricans: The Il­liricans on the other syde, say it is not emong the Melancthonistes or Brentiās, whom they haue allredy throwen out from the commu­nion of their Churche. And haue not thus the very followers of Luther by hellis he dis­cord deuided allso their owne vnitee, euen as their maister before did by most impious sacrilege diuide and separat him self frō the catholyke vnitee, as from our lordes barne flower? VVhere then shall wee seeke this church of theirs, which neither of themsel­ues wyll graunt to the other? VVho is there so destitute of all reason, that will not rather chose to remayne in that Churche wherin he was borne, and allso regenerat in Christ [Page] (which was the greater benefyt) then forsa­king this, to betake him self vnto that, which to them selues is so vncertayne, and vnknowen?

But God forbid that a Christiā catholyke The true churche of Godd. and right beleuing man, should haue any doubt, whether that churche, wherin not only him self, but his parentes, his graundfa­thers, and great graūdfathers, haue been en­tred into the faith of Christ be the true church of God or no. For what were this ells, but to doubt whether he be a Christiā man, or borne of christian parentes, and (as it is written by the Prophet) [to stumble at none Esai. 59. Psal. 18. Matt. 8. daye: as in the darke?] God hath placed his tabernacle in the sunne. He hath planted his churche as a citye vpon an hill, which can not be hidden.

But of that matter our purpose is not to taulke any more in this place, for that it ap­perteyneth not properly to this treatyse, and for that as well in our christian confession, as in our writing which we haue late pub­blisshed against the prolegomena of Brētius, we haue at large treated of that matter: wher we haue taught you which be the mar­kes [Page 110] of the true churche: To wytte, that it be one, holy, catholyke and Apostolyke churche, wherof except one haue the chiefrule whose auctoritee all do acknowledge, it can not be caulled the churche of God.

Now therfore we wyll not tary any len­ger vpon this matter: For that I trust wee haue sufficiently shewed that the expresse word of God, wherof those mē brag so myche, is not the word of God, but the expresse word of the diuel. For the cleer and expresse word of God is Charite. VVhich that it may please God by his holy spirite to power into our har­tes, and once to geue ende to thies schismes and heresies, and to restore to his churche the desired tranquillite, wee humbly be­seeche his infinite mercy. VVhich no doubt he will do, not for our merites (wherunto most greuous punishementes are dewe) but of his owne exceding great goodnes, so that we amend our lyues, and with confidence adressing our selues to the throne of his gra­ce, incessantly contine we in feruent prayer.