MEN demaunde at this daie, concerning the markes and au­thority of the church: the question beeyng raysed by those, who, when they see their erroures to bee refelled, by the worde of God, obiecte vnto men, that are vn­skilfull of these matters, the sacred name of the Church: and by heaping vp the disputations of auncient fathers a­gainst Heretiques, they bring vs into hatred, as though we had corrupted both the bookes of Gods worde, and also, as though by violating all authority of the church, we had (after the example of the They were so called of one Dona­tus, who baptized such as imbraced his o­pinions, though they were baptized be­fore, and made a schisme in the Church, a­bout the yeere. 334. Donatistes) set vp altar against altar: to be short, as though be­cause wee haue shaken of the yoke of Babilon, we had [Page] forsaken the Church, without the which notwithstanding (euen as we our sel­ues confesse) there is no saluation. And neither doth this subtle kinde of reaso­ning, dryue away the vnskilfull onely, from the knowledge of the truth, but al­so causeth, some euen amongest them, which séemed most stedfast to wauer. Furthermore, by this occasion very ma­ny take counsell betwéene both sides, and as in opinions, they indeuour to mingle light with darknesse: so also in discerning of the true Church, they la­bour to mingle the bastardly or false marks, with the true and proper marks therof. But except men would willing­ly be deceiued, the deceit of these men, might be very easely perceiued and a­uoyded. Men must first define the Church, before they enquire any thing of the authoritye thereof. For, first men should demaund, what that Church should be, before they determine of the boundes of hir autho­ritie: which order they that doe not fol­low, commit truely that grosse error, and worthy of stripes, which they call That is, the begging or taking of that as granted: which is in cōtrouersie Petitio principij. Go to then let vs sée what these men meane by the Catho­lique [Page] Church.

These men holde (what so euer they dissemble) that the Church (in which we ought to abide, That the Catholique Church is not rightly called euery congregati­on, in which is a suc­cession of Bi­shops. if we will be saued) is an assemblie of Bishops, whose calling and names may bee fet from the Apostles them selues. We say that this succession which is meerely personall, neyther is 1 the Church, neither any whit at all per­tayneth 2 vnto those that alleadge the same.

That it is not the church, may appear 1 euen vnto very children, first by this, The order of Bishops is not the church. y ^t vnder the name of the church, proper­ly taken, it is certain, that not only the Pastors, but also the flocks are compre­hended: Now it is altogether ridiculous to define a part, as the whole it selfe, be­cause by that meanes the whole and the parte, shoulde be one and the selfe same thing.

They reply, The con­sent of a by­shop and of a flock is not alwayes a note of a true church. that they vnderstand to­gether with the Pastors, the very flocks them selues, cleauing vnto them. But this thing is also ridiculous, séeing that both hereticall, and backesliding Pa­stors, 1 may succeed Pastors of sound [Page] iudgement, and hereticall flockes true 2 sheepe: and some times in deed the Pa­stors are hereticall, and the sheep true, & contrary wise, true pastors may haue hereticall sheepe. When that thing fal­leth 1 out: to wit, that both the Pastors and the flockes, are heretticall, the very aduersaries them selues dare not deny, but that such a whole Church (although it haue had auncestors in deed Aposto­licall, & both the Pastors and the flocks, do agree amongst themselues in falling away) is yet notwithstanding altogea­ther a false Churche, vnlesse they will take these speeches, to wit, to be hereti­call and vniuersal, for one and the selfe same thing. But in the latter case, at least wise in one part, there is found falsehood, although on both sides that personal succession may be found. Therfore neither the succession of persons by it selfe, neither such maner of consent, doth of necessitie prooue a true Church, for as much as, where both are found, yet some times there maye be a false church: and there in some sort may be a true church, where the pastor dissenteth [Page] from the sheepe, or the sheepe from the pastor. Now, that men may, by exam­ples both past and present, prooue that these things haue too often times fallen out, no man I suppose will denie.

But againe they say, that they dispute not of particular Churches, which they graunt may fall away, but of that Ca­tholique or vniuersall Church, 1. Tim. 3.15. which is the piller & foundation of truth. But how I pray you do they define this catholike Churche. Firste by a certayne place, as 1 those that will haue catholicke and Ro­man to be al one: Secondly, by the mul­titude, 2 Catholique and Roman are not all one. as they which vpbraide vs with fewnes. Let vs see, therfore what man­ner of arguments these be. They be (if they be kept within the iust rules of reasoning) vnlesse I be deceaued, these and such like. The church of Rome tea­cheth so: very many, in respect of a very few so beleeue, and so it was from hand deliuered vnto vs. Therefore this is the catholique truth. But who is so far void of all reason, that he seeth not here a­gaine, Petitio principij, and the thing in controuersie to be taken as graunted? [Page] Shew vs therefore, ye Sophisters, or at least wise teach vs probablie, firste how a part should be y ^e whol (y ^t we may graunt vnto you your Romish church, to be a principall member of the catho­licke church). And then from whence, I pray you, haue ye learned, this Romish Church, to be ordayned for a perpetuall rule of truth? and from whence haue ye drawen that to be true, which is appro­ued of the greatest number? Verely ye shall neuer proue this, out of the bookes of the old or new Testament. For those corrupt argumentes: Vpon this rocke I haue builded my Church: Mat. 16.18. Luk. 22.23. I baue prayed for thee Peter that thy fayth faile not: and that saying of Christe thrise repeated, feed my sheepe, Ioh. 21.15.16 with men not altogether ignorant of these thinges, need not any further confutation. But happely, ye will prooue it out of the writinges of auncient fathers. As though for sooth it were the same thing, to commende the faith and religion of the church of Rome (as long as it was worthy praise) and to establish hir for the catholicke church, or a perpetuall rule to the catholicke [Page] church. And seeing that by the name of the church of Rome (if these flatterers will speake that they thinke) they doe vnderstand no other thing, than the by­shop of Rome him selfe, what madnesse is this, I beseech you, to haue the deci­ding of so great a controuersie, to depēd vpon y ^t seat, in which their own writers being witnes, not so much the monsters of men, as Sathan himselfe, doth seeme to haue sit so many ages together.

These men replie, that the dignitie it 1 selfe, and the authoritie of the seate, is not taken away by the faults of the per­sons: euen as the Leuiticall high priest­hood, was true then also, when it was exercised by vngracious and wicked high priestes. And neither do we thinke that either the dignitie, or els the effica­cie of the ministerie, may be abolished, thorowe the faultes of the ministers (which thinge these men yet thinke when it pleseth them, as they that hang that their transubstantiation, vpon the intēt of their sacrificing priestes a very rotten coard surely) but this we say that (their principle being graunted, to wit, [Page] that the Byshop of Rome is that head, that should stand the catholique church, as in stead of a soule) it must altogether followe, that this head be wyse, if they will haue all his members, that is, the particular Churches to be wise: And a­gaine, if that be frantick, that the whole Churche must be franticke also. Now, that the Romish Bishoppes haue beene franticke many ages together, not one­ly as priuate men, but specially also as Bishops: that is to say, that euerie one of them almost haue bene, not onely the most wicked of all men in respecte of their conuersation, (which thing these men can not denie, vnlesse they woulde rather be conuinced by their owne testi­monies:) but also as concerning the points of our religion, whilst that, part­ly they haue neglected all true religion, and partly also haue set them selues a­gainst it, so much that (which thing two or three ages ago Petrarcha hath writ­ten, whose verses they commend.) Rome hath beene a thousande yeeres at the least, the temple of heresie, and hath vt­terly subuerted (as much as was in hir) [Page] all the offices of Christ, yea so far forth that shee hath exalted hir selfe, aboue Christe him selfe (as the Apostles Iohn and Paule, greater than all exception haue fore tolde: all the beste approoued writers, Gréeke & Latin, being the By­shops of other churches, so interpreting the same) vnlesse we haue sufficiently heretofore proued it, we are ready again to prooue it, before all vpright iudges. Let this controuersie therefore, be firste decided, O yea Sophisters, before that ye of this fained foundation, as it were, graunted vnto you.

But go to, let vs graunt that the By­shoppes of Rome were suche, whose so great and large succession is alleadged by these men. Who yet vnlesse he be vt­terly out of his wittes, will therefore conclude, that the bishop of Rome, is the vniuersall head, to whome who so euer doth cleaue, is to be iudged a true mem­ber of the Catholique Church? And yet these be the sophistications of these good­ly fellowes, which will haue catholique and Roman to be one and the selfe same thing: to wit, because Paule wrote, that [Page] in his time, Rom. 1.18. the faith of the Romans, was famous throughout all the world. But how much more rightly nowe, may we say, that the stenche of that whore, hath not onely filled the earth, but hath ascended also, euen to heauen: and that excellent epistle of the Apostle written to the olde Romans, ought now truely to be writ­ten againste the Romans their succes­sors.

2 Let vs now come vnto those, who e­steeme their catholicke churche, The Catho­like Church must not be esteemed by the multi­tude. by the number and glorious shew of pages or seriaunts. Verely if these men speake truth, Christ and his flocke, shall iustly be pronounced excommunicat, and that multitude shal be the catholicke church, which so often times cried out, Take him away, Mat. 26.23. take him away, crucifie him. The A­postle also shall be found a lyar, wri­ting to the Corinthians: Brethren yee see your calling: 1. Cor. 1.26. that we are not many wise ac­cording to the fleshe, not many mightie, not many noble: to be shorte, then these men shall be worthie, (whom to confute we may take paines) when either by reason or examples, they shall proue, that there [Page] are more wise men than fooles. Now then, I thinke it doth sufficiently ap­peare, that, by this bare successiō, which they brag of, that true catholike church, wherein we must abyde, cannot be dis­cerned from the false Churche, from which we ought of necessitie to depart.

But yet, before that we conclude this place, we muste refell an argument, which these Sophisters would haue to be deemed such a one as cannot be ouer­come. For say they, Hovv the fathers vsed the argumēt of personall succession. the fathers so dis­pute, from the succession of bishoppes, a­gainst auncient heretiques. But againe what can be more corrupt than this subtle kind of reasoning? for this is that which is well knowne, euen to children which they are wount to call an elench, The fallacie of composition or diuisi­on is a false conclusion, made by a wrong application of wordes alleadged or spoken: referring that to one, which is alleadged, or spoken to an other. or a fallacy of composition and diuysion. First therfore I deny, that a­ny of the auncient fathers, were myn­ded to vse the recitall of Bishops, but to haue recourse rather euen to the Apo­stles. And why so? that the authoritie of [Page] doctrine, rather than of persons shoulde be mainteined? But these men obiect vnto vs, the succession of their bishops, not in déede bishops, so far letting passe the mention of that Apostolicall doc­trine, that they woulde haue it accoun­ted a wicked thing, to demaund it at his handes, that woulde proue him selfe to succeed the auncient byshoppes. Now I pray you, howe many authors of blas­phemies, haue sit in those chiefe seates of Alexandria, Antioche, Constantinople? yea, what seat will these men shew me somewhat more famous, where some hereticall bishops, haue not helde their seate? And as touching the Romish chayre, from which these men by a rottē coard hang the catholique church. Ho­norius the Monothelites, were certain heretiks about the yeare. 565, who affirmed that there vvas but one will and one action in Christ: denying that ther was in him two naturall willes and actions, which might aunsvvere to his two natures. Monothelite, openly condemned of the sixt general coun­cell and priuate­ly of Agatho an­other Roman Bishoppe: And Iohn the 22. thinking euill touching the soule of man: in like manner condemned of the [Page] colledge of Sorbon in Paris, were sounde to haue sit in that seate. To let passe, Liberius for ambitions sake fell into the Arrian heresie. Liberius, He, while Siluerius the Pope liued (by the ayde of Belisarius, the captaine of the Emperors armie, obteined the popedome. Vigilius, and He meaneth of Anastasius the 2. who fell into the heresie of Arrius and Eutiches, which heresies Acatius also him selfe did propound, about the yeere, 484. Anasta­sius, whom I see of some to be ex­cused, although Gratian. 2. Disti. 19. reckeneth this last also as an Acatian heretique a­mongst the condemned Popes.

But if any man would obiect, y ^t these are blotted out of the number of By­shops, and therfore are not comprehen­ded in that title or role of succession: yet this he shal be inforced to graunt vs, to wit, that the succession of y ^e seat of Rome, was then at the least broken of, when these were therefore blotted out (which persons notwithstanding they themsel­ues as yet number in their Catologue) because they had declined from the Apo­stolicall doctrine. Whervpon followeth that which Tertulian rightly affirmeth that religion ought to be proued or tried not by the persons, Tertulian. but the persons by religion. [Page] But here truly I confesse, that I do somwhat ouershoot my self, for seeing the question is of doctrine, what doth this appertaine, to the Byshops of the Churche of Rome, whome all Chri­stendome knoweth nowe so manye yeeres, to haue beene for nothing lesse carefull, then for anye doctrine, eyther true or false, but onely for to e­stablishe and enlarge theire owne ty­rannie.

But they will say, no man hath con­dēned these Popes. I confes it. For who would haue taken to himself this law­ful authority against their tiranny, who had perswaded all men, that they ought to be iudged of none? Therefore there hath bene not of late onely, but many a­ges together, not an interruption, but a full abruption or renting of the succes­sion of Rome, from the body of the ca­tholique true church, except peraduen­ture these men iudge, that it is some­thing lesse, eyther to belleeue nothing, or to teache nothing, than to be an Here­tique.

And I beséeche you what impudencie [Page] is this, True doc­trine ought to go before true succes­sion. to haue the knowledge of trueth to hang vpon succession? wheras on the contrary, these men themselues can not deny, but that the trueth ought necessa­rily to go before succession.

And these Sophisters, The Chri­stian church in the time of Christe, coulde not be knovvne by the suc­cession of Persons. if they had bene in the times of Christ, by what Bishop­ly succession, would they haue acknow­ledged the true church? surely not by the title or name of the Leuiticall high priests? because that priesthood was then at an end: and Christ cannot be called the successour of Aaron vnlesse Iudaisme be agayne established: wherefore also he is sayd to be made a high priest, Heb. 7.16.17 not ac­cording to the order of Leui, but according to the order of Melchisedec, Therefore the holy men at that time, acknowled­ged the Catholique church, without the marke of personall succession: to wit, by the comparison of the doctrine of the Prophetes, with the doctrine of Christe him selfe, and the Apostles. Which is so farre true, that on the contrarye, none haue lesse acknowledged Christe, than they that haue cleaued to a Byshoply succession. Therefore that personall [Page] succession, is no true and perpetuall marke of the Catholique Church.

These men happely, beeing driuen from the Leuiticall succession, will a­gaine obiect another succession from the Prophetes. But neyther so, shall they speake the truth, if they sticke in the persons them selues, for the succession of Prophetes was not perpetuall, no more than the succession of Priests: yea rather it was broken of a long time, especially after Malachie. They wil also obiect vnto vs that saying: Mat. 23.2. The Scribes & Pharises sit in Moses chaire. But agayne, they shold remember, y ^e same Christ to haue said: Take heed of the leauen of the Phari­sees: Mat. 16.6. And therefore by that saying of Christ, we are not called backe to a suc­cession of persons, but to a succession of doctrine.

But I haue besides an other thing more peremptorye (as they them selues speake) to aunswere againste that, in which these men falsly boast themselues to followe the authoritie of the Fa­thers in discrying the church, by which thing also their wilines may more and [Page] more be made manifest. I denie there­fore, The aunci­ent fathers vsed not the argument of personall succession against all heretiques. that any of the auncient fathers haue at any time made mention of this succession, but either against Schisma­tiques, whilest yet a lawfull succession remayned, (as it was done against the Donatistes) or againste them, whiche brought forth new bookes of our religi­on, as were, in the beginning almost an infinite nū ­ber as I suppose that he speketh here of Simō Ma­gus, mentioned in Act. 8. of whom many thinges are writtē in the old writers, specially he affirmed that Christe was not come, neither suffered any thing of the Iewes, but that he himself was Christ Simon, He amongst other things taught, that Christ the sonne of God, tooke not mans flesh of the virgin, but that he had a spirituall or heauēly bo­dy, which passed thorow the virgin Marie, as wa­ter thorovv a pipe or Conduit. He vvas about the yeere. 150. Va­lentine, He affirmed, that Christ appeared not in the substance of flesh, but in a phantasticall body, & that one Simon vvas crucified in his steede, a­bout the yeare. 124. Basilides, He taught that Christe vvas not very man, and that he ascended into heauen vvithout his flesh, and first made lavves for abstinence from meates and marriages, hee vvas in the yeare. 180. Montane, to conclude y ^e whole troup of most shamelesse men. After this sort the Fathers of right iudge­ment, ga­thered and reserued a­gainst these [Page] Such as pretended to be inspired vvith reuela­tions. The Messalian he­retiques vvere so called, who affirmed that bap­tisme and the Lords sup­per did neither profit nor hurt, but that those whi­che gaue themselues to prayer onely or sleeping should be inspired vvith the spirite, vvhich being once receyued, after­vvards they had no need of the word, or any other exercise of godlines, but that he that vvas so in­spired, vvas altogether vvithout sinne, and did foresee thinges to come, and did sometimes be­hold God with their eies. Enthusiasts, saying. If your doctrine be true, eyther there hath not beene euer yet anye churche, or the doctrine which you alleage is old and ancient. But that both these thinges are false, appeareth by that, both because the apostles haue gathered together the churche of Christe, and you teach your doctrines, as taken not out of the writings of the Apostles, but as newely reuealed vnto you by the holy ghost. And a­gayne, (sayd the fathers,) both these things appeare by that, that we count the beginnings of our churches, by ascending vpward, euen to the Apostles themselues: but you could not haue re­ceiued from the Apostles your thinges, which ye first deuised.

Here remained one thing, which the moste subtile of those moste fantasticall persons obiected, to wit, that all things were not reuealed to the apostles, and therfore that men ought to beleeue their [Page] reuelations also. But Tertulian (whom I maruail, could afterward be deceiued w ^c Montanus holy ghoste) most plentifully, and strongly con­futeth this prescription, shew­ing that the Lord hath neither kept backe any thing from the apostles, (the chiefe builders of his church:) nor agayn, that the apostles haue concealed, a­ny of those things, which they had receiued of Christe. After this sort I say, the fathers v­sed, the argument of the succes­sion of persons agaynste those heretiques, altogether by de­monstration as it were. But they vsed it not in like sorte, a­gainst y ^e So called of Paulus Samosatenus, vvho de­nied the sonne of God, to haue descended from heauén, but that Christ did proceed from Marie in the earth, hee was a­bout the yeare, 372. Samosatans So called of one Sa­bellius, who taught that there was but onely one person in the godhead, & confessed that the trinity was distincted in respect of names only, & not in respecte of persons. He was about the yeare 320. Sa­bellians, So called of one Arrius, who affirmed, that the Son was not truly & naturally God, neither coeternall with the father, but to haue had a beginning, & to be made of nothing, he was about the yere, 320 Ar­rians, So called of one Pellagius, who held free will, and that euery man might obtayne sal­uation by his owne workes: that infants were borne, vvithout originall sin: and that Adam hurt himselfe onely by his fall. He vvas about the yeare, 466. Pelagians: to be short, againste anye with whome, the questyon was not of the very bookes, but of the [Page] meaning, because this had beene verie foolishe.

Briefly therfore I answere these two thinges: that the auncient Fathers, whose authoritie these men shameleslie abuse, haue, neither at any time sepera­ted the succession of their bishops, from the succession of the Apostolical doctrine: nor haue set this succession, against a­ny other heretiques, but against those, of whom some new reuelation was pre­tended: As at this day of the They mayntaine a­mongest other errors, re­uelations, and take a­vvay the baptisme of in­fants. Anabaptistes, They (casting a side all feare of God vvhat so euer) hold, that men may lyue as they list. Libertines So called of one Casper Svvingfeldius, vvho held, the same mat­ters that the Anabap­tistes do. Swingfeldians. And there­fore, for as muche as now the controuersie is, betwixt the Romanistes and vs, for two thinges onely, to wit, for the interpretation of the Scrip­ture: and whether the wry­tinges of the Prophetes and Apostles, doe most fully con­tayne, what so euer we ought to beleeue, it is prooued that they, in the first point, impudently abuse the exam­ple of the fathers, in alleadging against vs the argument of succession: and in [Page] the other, is ministred vnto vs a sure weapon, to confute them. And that this succession also was alleadged against the Donatistes as Schismatickes, this no­thing toucheth vs, whom these men ac­count, not properly for Scismatickes, but for heretiques: of which thing notwith­standing, we will say some thing in his proper place.

That the false church of Rome, is not onely not propped vp, by the argument deriued frō the personal succession of the apostles: but also o­uerthrown, although the questiō, be not of the doctrineBut go to, let vs gratify them a litle. 2 and (which thing may be done without any preiudice of the trueth). Let vs graunt vnto these men how much force soeuer they can imagine, of that their personall succession. What shall this I besech you, help their cause?

That there vvas neuer any Aposto­licall, vni­uersall mini­steriall head, and there­fore that his succession is not Aposto­licall.For, that we may begin, at the high­est step of their Hierarchie, or priestlike gouernement, as they call it, that is, at that vniuersall mynisteriall head (vnto whome they afterwarde, appropriated the name of Pope, which before was common to all Bishoppes,) they shal as easely finde the Diuell him selfe in the kingdome of God, as any such head, either in the bookes of the [...] newe Testa­ment, or in the auncient church. For ve­rie [Page] children know this, how false, folish, and absurd arguments they be, whatso­euer they bring out of the scriptures to proue the same. And as concerning the history of that auncient purer church: (that is to say, in this behalfe verelie, euen to the tymes of that manslaier Phocas) they shall finde none, that so in­terpreted the primacies, and glorious titles, which are attributed to the bishop of Rome (although in deed the bishops of Rome, ambitiouslie sought nothing more, and there wanted not some, who most shamlesly euen then flattered thē) as that they did for all that, gyue this degree of vniuersall head vnto him. Therfore, they haue not Christ, nor Pe­ter, but that most vile man of al, Phocas I say, the emperor, for the author of this vniuersallitie: and they haue Boniface the thirde, the head or beginner of this tyrannie: or (that I may vse the words of Gregorie the great himselfe) the chiefe or head of Antichristianisme: in so much, that the Romishe popedome, doth but onely sixtene yeares at the most, goe be­fore Mahumetisme, or the turkishe reli­gion.

But, by what sleightes, that monster hath vsurped, and attayned this tyran­nie, who, I praie you, at this day can be ignorant, vnlesse he be ignorant of hi­stories, or whose eyes Satan hath blin­ded? yea, seeing that this most holy fa­ther, doth boast him selfe to be, not the successor of Peter alone, but of Paul also (whose heads being cut off, not so much by newes hang men, as by the Pope himselfe, he ingraueth in these his lea­den seales): it must needs be, either that afterward two heads were growen into one, whose authoritie afterward, passed for sooth to this successor of them both: or els that neither Peter nor Paule, were this onely vniuersal, ministeriall head: except he woulde rather acknowledge, that the catholique churche, hath had at the beginning two heades vppon the earth.

But what say I? that I may speake nothing here of so many Antipopes, or Popes one against an other, when as Liberius and Damasus, at one and the same time, (as all men affirme), obtay­ned [Page] that seate of Rome, where was then that one vniuersall head? And let these thinges be sufficiently spoken, touching the deliuerie of that spirituall sworde from hand to hand.

And as concerning that other sworde, which they call, secular or politique, wherewith they haue ouerthrowen all magistracie: From whence I pray you do they take the beginning of this iuris­diction? for, though we shoulde beleeue that fable, of the donation or gyfte of Constantine, to be as true, as it was shamelesly fayned, yet truely it shal not be set from the apostles, but frō the em­peror: neither yet graunted by Christ, or by Peter, but by men. Which thing not­withstanding, was neyther lawfull for Constantine to do, nor for the Bishoppe of Rome to receaue, although it had beene willingly offered him. Wherefore, if they shall of their owne authoritie, re­quyre agayne these two feathers, the churche those former, to wit, the ecclesi­asticall gouernement, and Kinges and Princes these latter, to wit, ciuill iuris­diction and authoritie (both which in [Page] their time shall come to passe) this fel­low will then appeare, not the head of the church, but an vnfeathered cuckow. And these things concerning this head, haue I put down in few words, because they haue of late, by them of our side ve­rie plentifully, both out of the worde of God, & out of the truest histories of for­mer times, & to be short, out of the testi­monies of y ^e Popes thēselues, ben mani­festly declared and plentifully proued.

Now the head of this succession being cut off, That there can be noe Apostolicall succession in the Cardi­nalles, Me­trapolitanes, Primates, or Archbishops what shall the rest of the body be, but a roteen and stinking carkas? Truely them selues are compelled to confesse, that the next degree vnto this head, to wit, the order of cardinalles, as it is nowe, cannot be set from the more auncient time. There follow primates and Archbishoppes, for scarce the verie name of Patriarkshippe, is yet remay­ning, and Mahomet, at the length hath ended the matter incon­trouersie, which firste arose, betweene the That is, those foure men that tooke vppon them, the gouernment of the vvhol world he meaneth the foure Patriar­ches, to wit, Hierusalem, Alex­andria, Constātinople & Rome. Quartumvi. i, and af­terwards betweene the [Page] That is the fiue mē that toke vppon them the gouernement of the world. Quintumuiri. Therefore the Ni­cene councell it selfe, doth not refer the beginning of these offices, to the word of God, or Apostolicall insti­tution, eyther written, or not writ­ten, but to ancient custome. So that nei­ther can this succession, be thought to be Apostolicall.

The degree of Bishopps wherin they are exalted aboue the rest of the Mini­sters or Pa­stors, was vnknowen to the Apostles and therfore that there is no Aposto­licall succes­sion therof.There rest yet Bishoppes so called of them, to wit, which are set in euerie diocesse aboue ministers (for the other inferiour orders, these pleaders of succession, nothing esteeme,) whose onely suc­cession neuerthelesse, hath some shew of Apostolicall succession. But it maye plainely apeare, out of the firste Epistle to the Corinth: not onely that there was no suche degree of Bishops ordeyned by the Apostles, as immediatly afterward was brought into the Church, after the times of y ^e apostles: neither y ^t ther was any such allowed of the Apostle, to wit, y ^t ther should be one degree of a bishop, and an other of a minister, or that some man should be called a Bishoppe, not in respect of a flock, but in respect of his fellow elders. For who doubteth, but that [Page] the Apostle, woulde haue gyuen this counsel vnto the Corinthians, or himselfe woulde haue perfourmed it, or haue at­tributed it to Caephas or Apollo, if (which thing Hierome hath written to Euagrius, and in his commentaries vpon the first Epistle to Titus) he had iudged this re­medie profitable, much more necessarie, for the brydling of Schismes? But whe­ther it were lawfull, to ordayne this de­gree in the Church, or not (for of this I like not nowe to dispute) that thing is not only apparant out of Hierom, vpon y ^e epistle to Titus, y ^e Bishops are greater than ministers, rather by custome, than by the truth of the Lords appoyntment: But also by witnesses which these men (as greater than all exception), are ac­customed to alleadge, as Lucius y ^e Pope, Clement the second, Anacletus (vnlesse their Epistles be rather counterfaite, which yet these men cite for authenti­call.) Lombard in his fourth booke of sen­tences the 24. distinct: Gratian, and to be short Cardinall Cusan, in his booke of the vniuersall vnitie, & Platina, in the life of Pope Bonifacius y ^e third: al which plain­ly [Page] witnesse, that all this Hierarchicall or priestlike gouernment aboue ministers was deuised by men, after the example of the Roman empyre, that is to say, that it is the true Imag [...] of the beast, described in the reuelalion of Iohn. Reuel. 13.1. Reuel, 14.9. For whose cause some, in the beginning also did trauaile which ment not to performe that which afterward insued. The thing it selfe in fine, taught vs, that it was a matter of great importance to decline, euen but a nailes bredth from the word of God.

The conclu­sion of the disputation, touching the succession of persons, sun­dred from the successi­on of doc­trine.Now, for as much as these thinges be so, that is, seeing neither this succession of persons, is a sufficient, true and pro­per marke of the Churche, nor (though we should graunt it such) pertayneth a­ny thing at all, to this popishe vizard. What is then the matter, wherein we see some at this day so greatly to sticke, that no small number (as though That is some fearefull & terri­ble thing. Gorgons head were caste in the way), goe backe? Verely this is the strength of the spirite of error, that they which are prooued and pure, may be made manifest.

Now let vs heare also, suche an other [Page] testimonie of their impudencie: That the canonicall or­deyning of Ministers, i [...] not a perpe­tuall and ne­cessary mark of the Ca­tholique Church. they wil haue that to be iudged a Church, where there continueth an ordinary calling, to the holy ministerie. But what other thing is this, than (after the example of that hostise of Chalcis) to set before vs a­gaine, the same meate new drest? Not­withstanding, because here againe, I sée some sticke as it were at a rocke, and that, not without danger of shipwrack: I will indeuour and that as it were by the wind of truth, hence to deliuer them, that are cast vpon this coast.

Truely, Pastors must in deede, al­wayes be sent by the Lorde, but there is not alwayes a­like order of their sending if a man bid them declare vn­to vs, what they vnderstād, by the name of ordination, (which requeste in this question, is altogether honest and verie necessarie) then the clawes of these Li­ons, wil openly shew themselues. They will alleadge, that of the Apostle: How shall they preache vnlesse they be sent: and that saying: Rom. 10.15. 1. Cor. 14.40 All things ought to be done in the house of God, rightly and in order. We agrée vnto it. They will say, that, all that order is comprehended, in the olde Canons, which may not or ought not, by any meanes be broken.

First, we aunswere, that it is playne, by the comparison of the very Canons, that one, and the same order in the Christian Churches, neither alwayes hath beene prescribed, nor euerie where kept: and that also, the diuersitie of cir­cumstances, cannot suffer this, that one order in these thinges, shoulde be euerie where, and alwayes exactly obserued: and therefore very vnseasonablie, is the obseruation, euen of the moste auncient and best Canons required, as absolutely and necessarilie to be kept. And if they be here so impudent, that they will deny this thing, truely I will conuince them as manifest offenders. For, if it be vn­lawfull, Although the canoni­call ordina­tion be esta­blished for a perpetuall marke of the catholique church, yet it reproueth the false church of Rome. to omit any thing of the Canons without any exception? From whence commeth that greate gaine, vnto the court of Rome, by dispensation also euen with the law of God? neither truely wil I easely suffer my self, to be thrust from this exception.

^a But go to, we are content here to do these men a pleasure, let vs therfore say (the disputation of this exception beyng deferred) that vocation is an order, not [Page] onely agreable to the worde of God, but also euen to the verie auncient pure Ca­nons, by which an ecclesiasticall office, is committed to some man. Let vs graunt them also (yet with no preiudice of the truth) that there also the true Church is to be seene, where this order continueth sound and pure, yet I say, that by that meanes, it most certainely appeareth that that Popishe Churche is, nothing lesse than that catholique church, whose name it chalengeth to hir selfe? For tell me, what is this order? to wit, that a lawfull knowledge of learning, and of manners going before, and the order of ecclesiasticall degrees beeing not rashly violated: some man (by the free consent of any whole Church, touching which y ^e question is) being appointed to this holy ministerie, is ordained by thē, of whom he ought, that is, is put into the possessi­on as it were of his office. And if anie man breake this order, that is, if a fault happen, either in the examination, or in the election, all the pure Canons com­maund, all that, to be iudged of no ef­fect: and so they subiect him, that orday­neth [Page] the minister, to moste gréeuous punishmentes. That this is so, they them selues cannot denie. Wherefore I woulde not load many leaues, with the alleadging of Canons.

Now let these men come forth, and let them alleadge vnto vs, euen one a­mongst all their clergie, in whome this order, hath beene thorowly obserued. I demaund not, whether these thinges, prescribed both by the word of God, and also by the pure Canons, haue bene exact­ly obserued of them now a long time. But this I aske, whether there be any vse of election, amongest them in the most places, seeing that y ^e Romish har­lot, hath couenaunted with Kings & Princes, for the abolishment of it, and suffereth those bargaines to be printed, and set out to sale. Now where there re­maineth any shew of election, woulde a man haue thought any of them, coulde haue beene so impudent, y ^t they shoulde be so bold, as to denie, that those offices which the whole world knoweth, are o­penly gotten by purchase: and that by buying free voyces (which thing is spe­cially [Page] practised, amongst them that seke for priesthood, and Canonicall persons (as they call them, that is to say a­mongst swine and asses, which are al­together vncleane beastes) to be so bold I saye, as to denie it, to be anye other thing, than an abhominable treading vnder foote of all law, both Gods owne, and of that purer part of the canon law (as they call it)? And of the triall, both of doctrine and maners, the lawful wit­nesses, for sooth, be those wicked men, getting their liuing by no other means but by dayly and open periuries, partly in the prouinces of the Church of Rome, partly, in the lappe of that Romish har­lotte. And this thing for sooth the high Bishops know not, which begin their bulles with these wordes. The honestie of life and maners, vppon which commen­ding the same vnto vs, by a credible ttstimo­nie, &c. What say I? their lawes of gi­uing, either ordinarie, or falling out vpon some (as they call them): and the lawes of resignation, where were they deuised, braied, strained out, & at length, set out and deliuered, to make mad, all [Page] both the highest and the lowest, but in the deuilles kitchin? And yet these men for sooth, will prooue the Ecclesiasticall calling, to remaine in their possession.

That the false clergie of Rome doth rashly dispute a­gainst vs, for the lay­ing on of hands.But againe let vs heare that, that may more conuince these mens shame­lesnesse. When they dispute with vs of a calling they are wont to vrge the lay­ing on of hands, as though the true dif­ference of a lawfull and counterfaite calling consisted in that. But I suppose, these good men haue not forgotten, that, which I euen now saide, to wit, that by al the old canons, his ordination should be iudged of no force, who hath not bene lawfully examined and chosen, That no Pastors are ordeyned by the lay­ing on of handes, but being alredy ordeined, are put into the possessi­on of their office and commended vnto God. and they that ordeyne suche, to be subiect also to very gréeuous punishment. And there­fore they doe vainely challenge vnto them selues that, which is no where found amongst them.

Moreouer this also they should know, that Pastours, are not made by the laying on of hands, but being ordeined by a lawfull calling (which is the voyce of God) are so commended, and put into y ^e possession of the ministery. For, wheras [Page] they recken, this ceremony of laying on of handes, amongst sacramentes, by the same reason that they recken baptisme, and the supper of the Lord: we say, that it is altogether a vaine dotage, seeing there is no expresse commaundement of that ceremonie extant, neither is there ioyned vnto it, any sacramentall pro­mise, neyther doe we reiect, eyther this ceremony, or iudge to bee vnprofitable the prayers of the church, commending and as it were, offering vnto God, the Pastor that hee hath sent them, for the sending of God, is a lawful calling. But here surely, it falleth out with these hy­pocrites, as it hath in other things also, to wit, that those things being omitted, in which a true calling consisteth (that is to say the trial of doctrine, and of life, and a lawfull election of the whole Church) they sticke in the outward ce­remonie, whiche ceremonie also they haue defiled, with infinit vicelike rites: that I may let passe, that horrible sale of benefices and treading vnderfoote of the old cannons, made, touching the multiplication of benefices (as they call [Page] them) and touching ordination, by ouer leaping (as they speake of inferior or­ders.) And yet notwithstanding, they themselues are not ignorant, that, by the ful consent of the ancient Synodes, not onely ordination, but also, other bet­ter parts of a calling, are, by y ^e meanes, iudged of no force.

That euen a lawfull ordi­nation, is not a perpe­tuall and al­together a necessarye marke of the true church, eyther Ca­tholique or particular.But goe too, let vs put the cafe also, that all these men, were both lawfullye chosen and ordeined. Shal therfore their congregation be the catholique church, or not rather a denne of théeues, if in a­busing their calling, they turne lighte into darkenesse, and perfourme this one thing alone, to make slaues to Sathan, the sheepe, that shoulde bee brought to Christe? And yet if forsooth, the head of his false Church doe this (as what els I pray you doth he?) he will not endure this, that he may be iudged of any mor­tall man. For so these men haue beene bolde, nowe a long time, not onely to speake, but also to write. And if this bee playnely to play the Antichrist: what is this Catholique Church (I beseech you) of which Antichrist is the head?

Wherefore, The con­clusion of the whole former dis­putation, of the personal succession & ordination. (that I may at the length conclude this place) I suppose, that these two thinges, doe nowe sufficiently ap­peare, that neither a base succession of persons, nor the obseruation of an out­warde vocation, is that necessarye, and perpetuall marke, of the true Churche, which the Logitians call proper after the That is, whiche agreeth to euery one of the kind, onely to the kind, and always to the kinde: as to be apt to laugh, agreeth to all men, to men only, and alwaies to them, and to eue­rye particuler of that kinde. fourth sort. Neither al­though it shoulde be so, doe these things at any thing at al, belong to the Church of Rome, (such as now it is) that is vnto the Pope­dome: but rather what argumēts soeuer conuince the Churche of Antichrist, the same doe so eui­dently appeare in this Harlot, that, he that would not acknow­ledge, flye from, and detest her, as an a­dultresse forsaken of her husbande, true­lye, A true defi­nition of the true church, and a proper, ne­cessary and perpetuall marke of the same. must either nothing regarde these things or else be without all vnderstan­ding.

Nowe, because we haue determined, not onely to set out the false markes, (which thinges wee suppose wee haue done?) but also, to poynte out as it were [Page] with the finger, the true and proper markes of the Church. Go to let vs at­tempt this latter point. We say there­fore, that a true definition of a true Church, eyther particularly, or vniuer­sally considered, is that, by which it is said to be a congregation, that confesseth the true Iesus Christe: their onely saui­our. For we say, that Iesus Christe, is that onely foundation, of that true spiri­tuall house of God: Iesus Christ onely, is the soule of that misticall bodie: Iesus Christe onely, is the square of that buil­ding.

The true Christe must be discerned from the false, by the onely wri­tinges of the Prophets & Apostles.The aduersaries will aunswere, that they also acknowledge, and preache the same thing. Therefore we do adde (see­ing there be many false Christes) that we dispute of the true Christe. These men also will replie, that they haue done, and do the same. In the third place therefore we adde, that he is in deed the true Christ, that hath most fully reuea­led him selfe, by the mouth of his Pro­phets and Apostles. And the mouth of the Prophetes and Apostles, we inter­pret to be, their authenticall writings, [Page] wherin we affirme, are most fully, and moste perfectly comprehended all the pointes of the Christian faith, partly plainely, and partly by necessary conse­quences to be gathered thereof.

For, we beléeue it, to be as absurd, that the true Christ must therefore be perfectly knowne by the writings of the Apo­stles & pro­phets, be­cause they did fully and plainly, both knovv and teach the whole Chri­stian religi­on, and the same Pro­phetes and Apostles, do yet in their writinges teach it vn­to vs. to thinke, that the Apostles were igno­rant of some thing, of the misteries of christianitie, or not to haue reuealed all thinges vnto the worlde (both which Tertulian hath iustly accounted, verie greate pointes of madnesse): as not to haue put in writing, all things necessa­rie to saluation: or, to be short, not so to haue put them downe, that, either they should not be plaine inough of them selues, or, if any thing be written some­what more obscure, their true interpre­tation shoulde be els where sought, than out of their very writings. But here we haue the aduersaries manifestly disa­greeing from vs, yet not al, neither those which like shamelesnesse. For there be that graunt both these thinges, that is to say, that the Apostles knew perfectly all the doctrine of saluation, and taught all the same most faithfully vnto the [Page] Church: which thing in deed they iustly graunt, for as much as Christ him selfe, in the 15. of Iohn and the 16.13. witnes­seth this in most plaine wordes: And Paule in the 21.27. of the Actes. Galathi­ans, 1.8. Hehrews. 1.1. otherwise it shold be false, at least in some part, which the same Apostle speaketh: to wit, That the Church is builded vppon the foundation of the Prophetes and Apostles: And that, which he witnesseth of the holy scrip­tures. 2. Timot. 3.16.17. Moreouer, that shall be false to, which the same Apostle saith: That the Churche, is the piller of truth. 1. Tim. 3.15. Vnlesse all truth beeing ingrauen in that piller should be manifest. Other some, more shamelesse, suppose there is left vnto these men, whom they call the successours of the Apostles, I know not what excellent thing, and that they doe affirme so assuredly, that they hold, they can not be deceiued in that matter, whose opinion I suppose, néedeth not at this time, amongst men of sound iudge­ment, any confutation.

But, in the ouerthrow of these two latter, and especially of the last point, I [Page] perceiue, that all these men, VVhat we ought to think of the vnwritten word. are altoge­ther of one opinion against vs. For they vrge, I knowe not what vnwritten worde, which they call Apostolicall tra­ditions. And verely I do not vnwilling­lie graunt vnto them, that all thinges were not seuerally put downe in wry­ting, according to the circumstances of times, place and persons, which were obserued, either by the Apostles, or by their consent, in the very forme and or­der of the seruice of God.

But who wil graunt, that we must thinke the same, of the decrees of the ve­rie doctrine it selfe? Finally, when the aduersaries are bidden to bring forth, what these pointes be, then that lying spirit bewraieth himselfe, because those thinges, which they will haue deliue­red from hand to hand, could neither by word nor writinges, haue bene deliue­red by the Apostles, but they should dis­sent from themselues. But euen al the fathers of sound iudgement, haue iud­ged farre other wise, of the most excel­lent, and moste sound perfection of the holy scriptures, with whose testimonies [Page] being a thousand times alleadged, I thought it not good now to fill these leaues.

There remayneth the question to be handled, The inter­pretation of the vvritten vvord, is not else vvhere to be fet, then from the vvorde it selfe, to wit, by compa­ring of the places one vvith ano­ther: and out of the ana­logie or proportion of the articles of our fayth. touching the interpretation of the scripture. Which truely is so tos­sed to and fro by these men, that they cannot eschew the sinne of blasphemie. There be I confesse some places of the scripture (partly through the ignorance of tongs, partly also, throgh other faults of our owne) so dark vnto vs, euen vntil this day, that as yet euen the most lear­ned interpreters, and such as be of best cōscience, cannot thoroughly agrée what should be the proper & natural meaning thereof. There be some thinges also, in the holy scriptures, so profoundly spo­ken, that euery one maye not lawfullye procéede so farre. To be short, there be some things also written in such terms, that (as Augustin saith) it shold appeare the holy ghost would whet our diligence in the serching and meditating of them. And vnlesse the necessarie points of doc­trine and Christian religion were so playnely and clearly: to be short, so fa­miliarly [Page] declared in the writings of the Prophetes and Apostles, that they may be (the holy ghost being presēt amongst them, whereby God lightneth all his sayntes) manifestly vnderstoode in the Church, to what end, shoulde the Lorde haue sent his hearers to the scriptures? Yea that more is, to what ende haue, both the Prophets and Christe himselfe also, and the Apostles spoken, if they would not haue these thinges, to be vn­derstood, which all ought to know?

I will speake something more bold­ly, which yet I hope I can proue. VVe cannot by naturall vnderstan­ding knovv, vvhat the pointes of Christian religion are, but by the writinges of the Pro­phets and Apostles. That we may consent vnto the points of Christian religion, as vnto true groundes, and muche more that wee may applye them vnto our selues, it behooueth sure­ly that wee shoulde haue our eares else­where opened, a fleshly beart giuen vs, to be short, that we should elsewhere be taught tban of flesh and blood, because the church, is the congregation of them, that must be taught of God, & to whome the arme of the Lord is reuealed: Esai. 53.1. and that men may vn­derstand, what the Prophetes and Apo­stles, haue briefly thought and taught, [Page] concerning euery article of our religion, they haue neede, not onely of a wit in some measure sharpened, but also of the knowledge of tongues, and of careful and diligent reading.

For it is one manner of thing, to vn­derstande, what this or that man sayth, then so to vnderstand the things, which thou doest perceiue, that thou also ap­proue of them: Compre­hension, knowledge, and full per­swasiō, must be distin­guished in the holy scriptures of which that, to wit com­prehension, is naturall, the other is in deede spiritual, but also commō to many re­probates: The third is proper to the children of God. and not onely that thou vnderstand what the thing is, but also wherefore it is: and comprehension is another thing, than knowledge, euen in prophane matters: and agayne in mat­ter of diuinity this knowledge is ano­ther thing, than full perswasion, there­fore comprehension belongeth vnto all men that are endued with some iudge­ment, and vnto knowledge, there is re­quired also an outwarde lightning of Gods spirite, by reason of the blindenes of mans iudgment, which gift notwith­standing is common as well to many e­uil, as to many good men. But ful per­swasion, doth seperate the chosen chil­dren of God from the castawayes, and is the proper riches of the Saintes.

Therefore we require, In what points we doe at this day dissent, when the question is demaunded, touching the inter­pretation of Gods word. the exposition of the worde of God, not onely as profi­table, but also as necessary, yet not for the same cause, as these mē thinke, nei­ther yet wil wee fet it from y ^e place, frō whome these men suppose we wil take it, for they think that that worde is so darkly deliuered, that (as thogh it were some darke thing) it should neede light, fetcht elsewhere then from it selfe, and when we demand of them, from whence at the length this light should be fet, thē they lay vnto vs, y ^e vizard or bare shewe of the Catholique Church, vnder which name somtimes, they lay before the ig­norant, these or those of the Fathers: sometimes the fragments of particular or general counsels: to bee short, they lay before them very often, long custom for an argument that cannot bee refu­sed, to which thinges, if a man doe not forthwith consent, he is now layde open to the slaughter of the outragious people (no knowledge of his cause beeing had before) as thogh he were guilty of some haynous crime, committed against God or man, wheras in times past, he was [Page] condemned to bee burned, vnder some certaine colour of law.

And in deede this is now their zeale. But we, (that we may in one word de­clare all thinges which belong to this matter) say, that the Church of Christe, is a schoole, in which the worde of the Lorde is not onely barely to be read, as out of the letter written, but also to bee taught, that it maye bee rightly vnder­stoode, and so to be taught, that exhorta­tions, corrections and consolations, both openly and priuately, maye bee vsed, which in Paul is vnderstoode by y ^e name of Prophecying. Rom. 12.6. Moreouer this also wee adde, which thing ought here chiefly to bee marked, that the interpretation of those scriptures, are to be set, no where else, then out of the scriptures themsel­ues, not onely because the word of God, is able to giue credite to it selfe: but al­so, because that trueth is reuealed vnto vs no where els, then in y ^e writings of y ^e Prophetes and Apostles, For that say­ing of Austen is well knowen, and is most true, That the scripture is to be ex­pounded by the scripture: Neither shall [Page] it irke me heere to put downe, that no­notable place, out of the 49. Homelie, of the imperfect worke vpon Mathew, be­cause it agreeth altogeather with our times. He that will know (saith he) which is the true Church of Christ, let him not know it but onely by the scriptures. And by and by after. Christians therefore, beeing willing to receiue, the certainetie of true fayth, let them flie to nothing but to the scriptures, otherwise if they shall haue re­spect to other thinges, they shall stumble & perish, not vnderstanding, which is the true Church: and by this meanes they shall fall into the abhomintaion of desolation, which standeth in the holy places of the Church.

But to whom shall belong (will these men say) the interpretation of scrip­tures? Verily all be not Prophetes, all be not teachers. But againe. Esay. Esay as cri­eth, that both Priestes and Prophetes, haue erred in their vision: neither would Christ haue admonished, Math. 16.6. Math. 23.2. That the leauen of the Pharises, should be auoyded, if we shoulde without exception, haue consented vnto them, That sit in Moses chayre: Neither should the false Prophetes be eschued, if [Page] all the Prophetes did speake the truth: neither would Caiphas, and the whole Synode of the Priestes, haue condem­ned Christ, if the holy Ghost, had beene tried without exception to those, that sit in Aarons seat: What then?

Antiquitye or noueltye maketh no­thing at all, to instruct men to dis­cerne the true inter­pretation of scripture from the false.Let these men therefore heare at length, that which we haue so often times cryed out vnto deafe men: to wit, that we do not simply reiect, neither the old nor the new counsels, whether they be particular or generall, vnlesse they be plainly theeuish: that we do not sim­ply refuse, neither old nor new writers, vnles they be manifestly, either superstitious or ridiculous, or by cōmon consent abrogated: That we doe not simply cast from vs, the writings, neither of aunci­ent nor new writers, whether they be Ecclesiasticall or Laicall (as these men call them, for God is no accepter of per­sons, and often times euen by the basest sorte, he confoundeth the pride of the most wise), vnlesse they be plainly wic­ked, superstitious or foolishe. But this onely we require, which the most lear­ned, and euery the most religious of the [Page] old writers, monish carefully to be don, to wit, that all these thinges, should be diligently examined, according to the rule of the written word of God. For antiquitie and authoritie of those that wryte, may in deed set some collour of truth vpon falshood, but that it shoulde be true, which disagreeth neuer so little from the writings of the Prophets and Apostles, that truely it can neuer bring to passe. Furthermore, The Creeds of the anci­ent Synodes & the iudgement of the fathers a­gainst here­tiques, are at no hand re­iected by vs: yea rather, they are strongly de­fended a­gainst ad­uersaries al­though not as yeelding credite themselues. experience it self more than sufficiently declareth, that there haue beene long time since, builded vpon the foundation layd by the Apostles, not onely bay and stubble, but also yron and rust, to be short, lies vppon trueth: All which thinges, muste at the length be consumed by the light and fire of Gods word.

Now least these men shoulde agayne complaine, that what soeuer hath bene established by counsell after consell, in the auncient Churche, shoulde by this meanes be called into doubt: we confes, that we doe acknowledge the Créedes, which were alwayes approoued by the common consent of the whole Church, [Page] to wit, the Creed of the Apostles, Nice, Athanasius his creed, the creed of Con­stantinople, Chalcedon, togeather with the curses pronounced in the second counsel of Ephesus againste Nestorius: And that we both with mouth and hart detest, al heresies, which either by open or secret consent of the whole Church, were out of y ^e word of God, condemned in those 4. councels, and also ouer throwen, in the fifth and sixth councels of Constantino­ple: And all other heresies whatso­euer, which afterwarde, eyther newlye sprong vp, or are newly polished, not y ^t the truth hangeth vpon any Synods or Creedes, but because we acknowledge, that the thinges which are prescribed and established in them, The con­clusion of the disputa­tion of the true Christ, who is the only, true, perpe­tual, and ab­solute necessary note of the true Church. may be rightly iudged, by the writings of the prophets and Apostles: so far of is it, y ^t we take a­way the authority of y ^e church, or dispise y ^e consent of the godly, either ancient or new writers, which thing our aduersa­ries, falsly & shamlesly obiect vnto vs.

Now the summe of al these things is this, that Christ is the true, perpetual, necessary: & to be short, the onely marke [Page] of the Church: yea I say, the true Christ that is, suche a one, as he from the be­ginning hath most perfectly (touching the matter and maner of saluation, re­uealed him selfe, both in the writings, of the prophets and of the Apostles. Mat. 12.13. For that saying standeth sure: He that ga­thereth not with me, scattereth abroad: and that saying, 1. Pet. 2.7. that christ is that corner stone of the foundation, vppon whome the whole building riseth vp: And that onely head, which ministreth vnto his body, that is vnto the true catholique Church, al fée­ling and mouing: To be short, Iohn. 10.7. Iohn. 14.6. Iohn. 11.25. he is the dore, the way, the resurrection, and the lyfe. Therfore, whersoeuer y ^t word is heard, as it ought to be, there in deed Christe raigneth, and where Christe raigneth, there in deed we iudge the Catholique, visible Churche to be, neither tied to a­ny certaine place, nor vnto the multi­tude: for where that dead carkas is, Mat. 24.28. to wit Christe crucified, there be those Egles: there is saluation, Act. 4.12. where that onely name is, in which we must be saued: there be the children of light, where that sonne shineth there be the true sheepe. Where the voyce of [Page] that sheepeheard is heard, Mat. 18.20. although two or three onely, throughout all the world, shall be truely gathered together in his name: And to speake in fewe wordes, where that true seede is sowen, there is the Lords field: and there that haruest gro­weth, which shall neuer be burned.

But againe, because it falleth out, partly thorough the weaknesse of mans wit, euen in the moste excellent men, partly through the wickenesse or negli­gence of the pastors, that scarce at any time, since y ^e time of the Apostles, y ^e doc­trine of Christ, hath beene so preached in the Church, but that some blemish, hath priuely crept in, (which thing ap­peareth to bee done, euen by the Epi­stles of the Apostles, and that whilest they also were liuing: Finally, because the Lord hath apointed, not onely that the worde shoulde be taught: but also that it shoulde not be taught of euery man: And for this cause, hath appoin­ted certaine lawes, touching this order. I must here again declare two things: to wit, how farre it shoulde be necessa­rie, that that onely marke of the true [Page] Church, that is to say, the preaching of Gods worde, shoulde be pure, and how much we should giue, to the ordination and succession of the Pastors them­selues.

Therefore, How farre it is necessary that the do­ctrine of fayth, should be pure in the Church. that the Church ey­ther particu­lar or gene­ral, may be a true church. as touching that former point, I put downe three thinges. One is, that although there be nothing set out vnto vs in the holy Scriptures, which is not most profitable and verie necessary as it were vnto saluation: yet there are certaine chiefe points, and as it were grounds of our religion, which are to be discerned from the rest. The second point is, that there haue beene some matters, which in times past haue beene rudimentes of the Catholique Churche, and may in other times also be rudiments of some particular chur­ches, yet for all that those points cease not, to belong to the true Churche. The third is, that the religion and marke of the Churche, either vniuersall or parti­cular, is not to be measured by some thing, that this or that Pastor teacheth by worde or writing: neither by that, that some sheepe by them selues haue [Page] thought this: Or by the disputations of some, whether they be many or few, but by that doctrine, which is commonly re­ceiued in the Churches, so that it be a­greable to the word of God.

That all the points of christian re­ligion, are not of the foundation thereof.Now because these questions are cal­led into controuersie, go to, let vs con­firme them by sure reasons & examples. As touching the firste, the thing it selfe sheweth, y ^t there may be variaunce tou­ching some things, & yet the soundation of christian religion, remaine safe: And againe some things cannot be taken a­way, but that the whole building, be vt­terly ouerthrown. He that denieth Christ to haue come in the fleshe, Iohn. 4.3. is not of God, but is the spirit of Antichrist. Therefore the companies of y ^e They denied Christ, to haue come in the flesh. Dochitae, of y ^e The Mar­cionistes of whome he speaketh here, did hold that Christ was not true man. Marci­onits, and of such like, be not the Church of Christe, whereby it is prooued, that the point, touching both the natures of Christe, is an article of Christian reli­gion, belonging to the foundation. A­gaine, the Churche of Ierusalem (wher­in who was better learned, than Peter) knew not the calling of the vncircum­cised, and yet what true Churche was [Page] there then in the worlde, if the Church of Ierusalem were not it? Therefore the point concerning the calling of the vn­circumcised, is not of it selfe, of the points of Christian religion, which con­cerne the foundation. Therfore, there is some difference betweene those thinges which are set forth vnto vs in the scrip­tures, to be beléeued.

The second also may be prooued, by a more euident example. For who doub­teth, That there are some ru­diments of particular Churches. VVhich thing also in times past fall out, in the Catho­lique church. but that if euer there were any where, a true, and almost onely and wholy Catholique Churche, that was Christes owne houshold, being conuer­saunt and that according to the fleshe, with those his twelue disciples? Who likewise is ignoraunt, that the point of the resurrection (the foundation wherof is the resurrection of Christ himselfe) is of so great waight, that the Apostle doth rightly pronounce, that (that beeing a­bolished) the whole fruit of the Gospell, shoulde be abolished? but y ^t very congre­gation could scarce beleue, y ^t Christ was yet risen. And Thomas gaue not credite, to his own very fellow disciples: yea the [Page] disciples, would not haue beléeued, euen their owne verye eyes, if the Lorde had not sayd, Luke. 24.39. VVe may not deter­mine of the falshood or truth of any church by the doub­ting of ei­ther many or few. A spirit hath not flesh and bones.

And that third thing is confirmed, by the examples of the Churches of Achaia and Galatia, which doubtlesse, the Apo­stle would not haue called the churches of Christ, and therefore true churches, if hee had therfore thought that the church of Corinth had denied that article of the resurrection of the flesh: & the churches of Galatia, had reiected the benefite of their liberty, purchased by Christe, be­cause some in Corinth, yea perhaps some of the pastors themselues, did doubt of the poynte of the resurrection: and the most part of the Galathians, called backe agayn the vse of circumcision and other ceremonies, seeing that yet notwith­standing, Gal. 5.2. the same Paul sayth: If ye be circumcised, Christ doth profite you nothing: and seeing that he affirmeth that those which vrged circumcision, not of igno­rāce, but of stubbornnes, they were remo­ued alway vnto another gospel, Gal. 1.6. Phil. 3.2. & therefore he openly calleth thē Apostatates or fallers away, and compareth them to Dogs, [Page] that is to say, to vncleane beastes. But it is an other thing, to erre through ig­ [...]aunce, than obstinately to resist the truth, as wiful fellowes are wont. He­resie which is without the Church, if it be of some point of the religion, that toucheth the foundation, is an other thing, than being deceiued or an error, which requireth and suffereth it selfe to be taught. To be shorte, the Eclipse of the Sunne, is an other thing, than the absence of the same: and the euening is an other thing than the darkenesse of the night: yea the night it selfe, which the day succeedeth, is an other thing than the darknesse were, Gen. 1.2. when they coue­red the depth.

These things then being put downe, That some errours may creepe into the Catho­lique church yea and that in some point of faith, which concerneth the founda­tion. it shalbe easie to iudge, that euery error doth not take away the name of the true church, and with al that to be most false, which the aduersaries say, to wit, that the Catholique Church cānot erre, and yet that euery error doth not abo­lish the name of the Catholike Church. For as touching this latter point, if some particular Church may erre, euen [Page] in some chiefe head or article of Christi­an religion, and yet it ceasseth not ther­fore to be a true Church: wherefore shal not a man say the same of al particular Churches, not considered one by one, but vniuersally, for this is the Catho­lique Church? Truely it is not probable that there liued then any men (when Christ rose againe) better or more per­fectly instructed in true faith, then those twelue Disciples: And yet we see this whole congregation, for a time (as I e­uen now sayd) so to haue doubted of the resurrection of Christ, that for that cause (as Luke writeth) Christ remayned with them fortie dayes after the resurrection, Act 1.3. that he might fully assure them of his resurrection. Wherefore this thing we conclude, that the chiefe points of our religion, ought of necessitie to remaine sound, in the Catholique Church, that it maye be called Catholique: But there may some times fall in some cloud (spe­cially through the negligence of the Pastors) which may some times dar­ken, one while this, an other while that article, which neuer the lesse (when the [Page] holy Ghost appeareth) straight wayes vanisheth away.

Therefore Catholique is not, (as the vnlearned imagine) alwaies and with out exception the same, that right or sound is, seeing that euen some vniuer­sall error, may continue for a time. And the same thing may and ought muche more to be spoken of the particular congregations of this vniuersallitie. And if these things be true, euen in the very grounds of our religion: how much more, may wee thinke the same to bee true, as often as errours creepe in, by which the very foundations of religi­on, are not ouerthrown? And this is the stuble or chaffe which sometimes (as S. Paul sayth, 1. Cor. 3.12. are builded vpon the foundati­ons of the Apostles, which at the length shall vanish away, when the day of the Lord appeareth.

But this day sheweth it selfe some­times sooner, somtimes later. (So I had almost sayde, all the Byshops of Africa thought with Cyprian, that baptisme ad­ministred by heretikes, was of no force. Which thing, although it were false, [Page] might neuertheles (so long as the sum of fayth remayneth sound and vnhurt) be wrongfully taught and beléeued. But this errour continued not long. There is a like consideration to be had of many traditions, which for that cause, began at the length, falsely to be called, and to be deemed Apostolicall, because that be­ing once confirmed by continuall vse, they were supposed to haue come euen from the Apostles them selues: which traditions also, by reason therof, the day of the Lorde (which hath againe in our times shined forth) cannot now abolish, with out very great contentions. Be it therefore farre from any to thinke, that for such maner of blemishes, some con­gregations should be thought, not to be­long, to the bodye of the Catholique Churche, That ble­mishes at the first somtimes tolle­rable, cease to be ble­mishes, and grow to bee cankers. although godly and diligent Pastors, shoulde giue very great dili­gence, that these spottes also shoulde be wiped away, with the sponge of Gods word.

But this thing first of al must here be marked, that these blemishes and as it were byles or swellings, do some times [Page] so farre increase, that they growe to a canker, and that they pull away the ve­ry members from the body: which thing the most shamefull examples, both of auncient times, and also of our times, declare to haue fallen out, especially by the fault of the pastors. As for example, exorcisme or cuniuring (one sort of it be­ing proper to them that were possessed with ill spirites, and an other common to all that were growen in yeares, and came from Paganisme to Christianitie, brought in also by the negligence of pa­stors, into the baptisme of Infants, that were borne of Christians) was at the beginning onely a blemish, and yet not being looked into of the old Byshoppes, at the length increased so farre, that in the papacie it was retained as necessa­rie, and so became a wilworship, a mat­ter now at no hand indifferent: And in some Churches, (although lightened with the Gospell) it is retayned as not vnprofitable, with great shame (truely) to the pastors: of so great importance is it in season to preuent, euen the smalest errors.

The ceremonie of anoynting with oyle in baptisme (which was ministred to those that were as it were, to fight a­gainst the Deuil, and the fleshe) was in the beginning chaffe, but this chaffe, how farre in processe of time it grewe, we see, Chrisme in baptisme prefered be­fore water, the element of the sacra­ment. when the Crisme also began to be reuerenced, which thing notwith­standing did not fal out in the very wa­ter, a true and an essential signe of bap­tisme. So it is manifest, that the signe of the crosse, was at the beginning an o­pen profession of christianitie, the abuse wherof at the last, brought to passe, that the very crosse, was set vp, in the place of Christ crucified, neither is there any idolatry in all the worlde more detesta­ble. So the remembrances of martyrs, and the funerals of the more famous Byshops, were celebrated, both with Orations in the praise of thē, and with incredible concourse of people, from whence by and by after sprang vp inuo­cations of the dead, at their sepulchers, and in processe of time, the worship­pinges of reliques also. The paine­ting of walles, brought into the Chri­stians [Page] temples, about foure hundred yeares after the deathe of Christe, and that without any worship thereof, was in deed accounted, haie. But howe farre this blemish hath growne we see, insomuch, that the second of the ten commandements, was vnder that colour, o­penly by the Papists blotted out: and (which thing cannot bespoken, without the incredible shame of some) that se­cond commandement, is also at this day numbred, by certein men (which should not so deale) amongest the ceremoniall commandementes. Such was in the be­ginning, the lenten fast, and some choise or difference of meates, without any o­pinion of worship, added therto. Which things, we nowe see so established, that sundrye and those no small persons, but such as wil seeme to be most Catholike, do most obstinately defende, that in the doing of them, consisteth in some respect, the forgiuenesse of sinnes, yea the wor­thinesse of merites or power to deserue. What I beséech you, coulde seeme at the first, to haue been more indifferent then for the celebration of the supper, to haue [Page] a table of stone or of wood? But, if the Grecians in the celebration of the saide supper, had neuer vsed their That is, their Altars dedicated to Deuils. [...] and the Latines their Alters, but had beene content with their cōmon tables (which was in vse in the Apostles times) likely it is, that the controuersie, touching that detestable idolatry of y ^e masse (by which we see, the whole worlde at this day, to be set on fire) could neuer haue sprung vp.

Now, to what end, tend these things? to wit, that first in descrying the marks of the true church, heresies might be dis­tinguished from errors, and haye & stubble, from those things, which eyther of themselues, or by reason of the opinion of worship brought in, are either vngod­ly or superstitious: and yet that all the gouernours of y ^e Chucch, ought to vnder­stand, that as the alter, was not in time past to be builded of stones, garnished by the diligence of man: neither yet that it was lawfull for them, so much as to fa­sten a naile in the Tabernacle, but ac­cording to the paterne which Moses had seene in the mount: euen so now also, all [Page] godly magistrates indeede, and all true shepheards, ought to endeuour, that in restoring the temple of the Lord, by so many means fallen down, they shoulde not onely restore those thinges, which haue beene ouerthrown by Antichrists, but also that they should most diligent­lye wipe awaye all, euen the lightest spottes, that haue proceeded from the same Antichrists, although they be, as it were waxen hard vpon the walles of the temple: and that marking (partly by the story of former ages, and partly by the beholding of the present ruins of the Churche) these former euils of Satan, they should at no hand suffer themselues to be mocked, by the allegation of the fragmentes, of certaine of the auncient fathers, or by any vayn shew of custom: but rather that they should not leaue of, vntill by doctrine, both the Ceremonies and all the Ecclesiasticall gouernment also, be apted, not vnto some figuratiue Image of shew, which was needful vn­der the schoolemastership of the law, but exactly framed, according vnto y ^e moste perfect paterne, which the sonne of God [Page] him selfe by his owne mouth & his Apo­stles after him, haue moste perfectly set forth vnto vs in their writings. But cō cerning this matter, we wil elswhere speake more fully (as I hope) when we shal answere those notable meane men, who reprehend vs, as ouer seuere exac­tors of y ^t work, & especially whē we shal seuerally answere, vnto the writing of Cassander, to the end, al men may vnder­stand, that none more hinder the worke of the Lorde, than these Samaritans.

VVhich be the principal points of the Catholique faith or reli­gion.Now, because I sée some (not yéelding vnto these things, which we haue spokē in general, cōcerning y ^e fundamental or principall points of our religion) again to demād what those shold be: I answer y ^t these articles are to be called grounds or principles, which being laid, y ^e whole building remaineth: & which being ouer thrown, al things builded therupon fall to y ^e ground. And al these things, we profes to haue bene described w ^t great shortnesse & plainnes, out of the word of God in y ^e Créed, which they cal the Apostles. Which thing ought to be added to y ^e ten commandements, & the Lords praier of [Page] the which, that, to wit, y ^e ten commaun­dements, doth verie compendiously set out the order of Christian life: and this, that is, y ^e Lords praier, doth very briefly also set out, right inuocation and praier. This (I say) is y ^t fundamental, true, and perpetuall mark of y ^e Catholike church, which shall neuer bee blotted out vnto the worlds end: but which neuerthelesse ought to be expounded, out of the wry­tings of the Prophets and Apostles, frō whence it is taken, that al men may vnderstand it and keepe it, as much as in them lyeth.

Now the order of this exposition is 2. VVhat ex­position of Catholique doctrine is required in the Church. fold: one more familiar, which is neces­sary for al men: an other more large, and far more plentiful: as we sée that the A­postles creed, was afterwardes expoun­ded, by some other Creedes of the holy Synodes, that heresies might bee met withall, & the Consciences established more and more in sound doctrine. Ther­fore, albeit that to the ende, that some man might be a true member of Christ, it be not necessary, that he should most exactely vnderstande, for what cause [Page] thinges are spoken and set downe, and should know the determinations of dis­putations in diuinitie: Yet euery one ought to know according to his capaci­tie, what he doth beleeue, and why he doth beleeue, and not to rest in the de­uilishe inuention of faith, which they call vnfolded, that is to beleeue, as the Churche hath determined, and to aske no further: but to adde also vnto that familiar instruction, the exposition of holy writings, That the true, yea the Catholique church hath more then once wan­ted, an ordi­nary and lawful mini­stery, and therefore that that or­dinarie and lawfull ordi­nation and succession of Pastors, vvas for a time broken off. of which Paul setteth be­fore vs foure pointes 2. Tim. 3. to wit, doctrine, reproofe, correction, and comfort. All which are by diligent Pastors and teachers, publikely and priuately, to be applied, to the capacities of the belee­uers.

It remayneth that we declare, howe much we ought to giue to personal suc­cession and ordination. We haue sayde, that the onely, true, perpetuall, and ne­cessary marke of the catholique Church is that doctrine, which diuersly, and sundry maner of wayes, first by worde, and afterward by wrytings, hath bene deliuered by the Prophetes, and at the [Page] last most perfectly declared by Christe him selfe, and that by his owne mouth, and by his Apostles. For this word, as (euen after Christe him selfe), Peter sayth, is that seede, by which the Catho­lique Churche, both at the beginning of the world appeared, and by which also it shall continue, euen vnto the ende of the world. But seed is to no purpose, ex­cept it be sowen, and the Lorde, (who both vnder the olde, and vnder the new Testament, appoynted an order for the sowing of this seed, by the ministry of men) hath (I say) necessarily appointed this sowing (for otherwise the sprea­ding abroade of this Churche woulde quickly end) to endure to the ende of the world: Be it so truely. Then thou wilt saye, ordination also and succession of those persons, is a true, perpetuall, and necessary mark of the catholike church, agréeing altogether with that other, to wit, the mark of sowing. So our aduer­saries do conclude, but falsly and foolish­ly. For, (that I may let passe those two thinges already confuted by vs, that is to say, because they babble of the succes­sion [Page] of persons, omitting the succession of that Apostolicall doctrine: Moreouer because y ^t they propoūd an other succes­sion, than that which hath beene begun by the Apostles them selues) either they do not see, or they dissemble that they do see (albeit the sowing also, and the sowers, are required no lesse than the seede, to the tilling of this fielde of the Church) that the same order hath not alwaies bene kept, either of sowing the seed, or of ordeyning them, vnto whome this sowing is committed. And this notwithstanding, they ought to haue lear­ned, both by the fore tellings of the pro­phetes, and also by the holy histories, which things remaineth to be proued of vs. The Church therfore I confes, was neuer without y ^e worde of God. But let these men also shew vs, that there hath bene some one, certaine, & perpetual or­der both of that sowing, & of the persons admitted to that sowing, and that the same hath bene tied also at all times, to the same lawes of ordination, before that first the lord had consecrated to him selfe the first begotten. Exod. 3.2. and 19 [Page] 22. and the 24.5. in whose steed after­ward that Leuiticall priesthood was or­dained, almost with infinit ceremonies. Num. 8.18. Therfore then at the length began, that certaine & ordinary order of succession & ordination, that is, of sow­ing, and of those vnto whom the charge of that sowing was committed. Which succession, and which maner of orday­ning, if before that time the Church lacked it, it is prooued, that that ordinary succession and calling, hath neither bin alwaies necessary nor continual, séeing that the visible Churche stood so many ages, before both of them,

Now let vs see, whether y ^e Leuiticall priesthood, hath cōtinued without inter­ruption, euen vnto y ^e cōming of Christ. In deed we read, y ^t the spreding abraod of Aarons posterity, cōtinued vntill the ouerthrow of the tēple. But euen as we say, thogh Dauids stocke were not aboli­shed, yet Dauids kingdome (euen as a­mongst other the prophets, Ezechiel had foretold) was broken of, frō the dayes of Sedichia, vnto Zorobabel, frō whose tims in steed of kings they were Dukes, and [Page] at the lengthe (the Asmoney, taking all power vnto themselues) Dauids posteri­ty, I say, in stéede of Dukes became Se­nators, vntill at last they being also ta­ken away by Herod a forrainer borne, and Iudea being reduced to a Prouince, and so in fine as Iacob had foretold (all go­uernment being taken from Iudea) y ^t sonne of Dauid sprang vp, Gen. 49.10. to sit in the throne of Dauid for euer: So it appeareth, that all the Leuiticall priesthoode, was not at once broken off, vntil (the eternal priest­hood of Melchizedech succeeding) it was wholy abolished. For, (to let passe those publique miseries and slaughters of the people, vnder the iudges, and especially that time which is spoken of, in the fiue last chapters of the story of the Iudges, in which time it is euident that the pub­like ministery was greatly decaied, and sometimes almoste abolished) who will deny, that there was any true church, in the kingdome of the ten tribes, from the time of Ieroboam the first king, vnto the ouerthrow of Samaria? and yet that there was no succession, nor ordination of Le­uitical priesthood amongst them, appea­reth [Page] by this, because it is writtē of Leui, that he departed from y ^e kingdome of the ten tribes: and by that same most heauy complaynt of Helias, which is reported by the Apostle, Rom. 11.2. for concerning that which is reported afterwardes of these hundred prophetes, hid in a caue. 1. Kings. 18.13. it doth not prooue, that there was there, any ordinarye mini­stery.

The aduersaries will reply, that the godly Israelites went to Ierusalem, and therefore, that they perteined to the Le­uiticall priesthoode. Bee it so that some went, yet there was some true Churche then, in the kingdome of the ten tribes, not going to the Citie, neyther vsing the ordinarye sacrifices, nor reteining anye vse of the Leuiticall priesthoode.

But agayne these men say, they had notwithstanding colledges of prophets, and assemblies of Godly men also, at their appointed dayes, as appeareth namely out of the 2. Kings. 4.23. and therefore the ordinary succession of the ministery, did not then cease, And ney­ther doe I conclude out of this place, [Page] that there was then no holy ministry in the kingdome of Israell. But this one thing I gather, that the succession of the Leuiticall ministry (which was the onely ordinarye ministerye) was then all togeather broken off, in the kingdome of Israell. For neither were the Prophetes ordained by the mini­strye of men, neither was their order continuall.

They will againe reply, that an ordi­nary succession may cease, in particular Churches: but at no hand in the Catho­lique church, that is to say, vniuersally: seeing that then also the temple conti­nued in the kingdome of Iudah. But be­side that, I can replie out of the testimonie of the Prophetes, that Iudah so be­haued hir selfe, not onely in maners, but also in the very worshippe of God, that she iustified Israell hir selfe: Ezech. 16.51. and that also the temple of the Lorde was shut vp vnder Manasses, after that it had beene imbrued, with the blood of the Prophetes: and that horrible idolatry declared vnto Ezechiel in a vision: beside these things I say, I furthermore adde [Page] two other: one is, that if some particu­lar Church may be a member of the ca­tholique Church (without the marke of succession, and ordinary ordination) it necessarily followeth that those notes, are not that, which the Logitians cal proper, after the fourth sort: that is to say, a terme that alwayes agreeth vnto one kinde, and to euery particular of the same kind, whereof we now demaund, and in deed doe iustly demand it, séeing the whole force of the definition, consi­steth properly, in the knowledge of the difference. The other is, that if (which thing we haue shewed before) some parte of the Catholique Churche, may lacke that successien, and ordinary ordi­nation for a tyme, it followeth that that thing maye fall out in all parti­cular and seuerall Churches. For why shoulde it fall out to one, rather than to an other? But where this thinge shall fall out, in what generall thing I praye you, maye a man finde that, which he wanteth not in all and eue­rie singular parte of the same?

But least these men should agayn cry out, that yet that thing hath not fallen, which might haue fallen out. Let vs proceede further, and let vs consider, what the state of the Cotholike Church was, vnder the captiuitie of Babilon. Ve­rely these men shall neuer prooue, that there was then any ordinary ministery of the Leuites. For the fable of Susanna is confuted, out of the true story of Dani­el, so that it must be a narration either fabulous, or meerely allegoricall: euen as also the booke of Iudith is. And though Ezechiel sometimes in some place, exer­cised the office of a Prophete (as it is manifest by his Prophecies) yet by that it shall at no hande bee proued, that the Leuiticall Priesthoode was not discon­tinued.

But thou wilt say, Circumcision then continued. I graunt it, for this was the singuler benefite of God: euen as Satan could not (in our time, and in the time of our Fathers) bring to passe, but that the Sacrament of Baptisme shoulde re­mayne. But the selfe same Circumcisi­on was not vsed those forty yeeres, be­ing [Page] the time of their wandering in the wildernes, where notwithstanding if the Catholike Church were not, it was no where. Seing therefore the Churche may for a time want some sacraments, truely this part of the publique mini­sterye, is not absolutely, the perpetuall and necessary marke of the Churche: which thing yet cannot be sayde, of the seede of the word it selfe, for the patent it selfe of a couenaunt, is another thing, than the seale put to the patent it selfe: so that the church, may for a time lacke this, by reason of many letts cast in the way: but that, to wit, the worde, it can neuer lacke, although he that dispiseth that, to wit the Sacrament, despiseth both, and therefore shall worthily bee iudged out of the Couenant.

What then? truely the Church, can neither at any time lack the séeds of the word, neither the sowing, nor the sow­ers: but yet the sluggishnesse and wic­kednes of the Pastors chiefly hindereth, that we cannot restraine both the sow­ing and the sowers to an ordinarie suc­cession and calling. And this thing fal­leth [Page] out, by two meanes. By one, when the chayres or places be not empty, but they which sit in them, haue entred in, either by the doore, or by the window, and do either wholly neglect their du­tie, or mingle cockell with seed, or els sowe nothing but poyson: as such was the state of y ^e ancient catholique church, vnder the moste parte of the vacant go­uernments of the iudges: afterwards in Iuda vnder the moste of y ^e kings, and at the length, in the times of Christ being conuersant vpō the earth. By the other, whē as that ordinary both sowing, and also ordinary calling of sowers ceaseth, being for a time as it were, more than halfe dead (for we doe not acknowledge that these things, can all together be a­bolished before the ende of the worlde) and such was, as we haue sayd, the out­warde forme and face of the Church of the tenne Tribes, and of the Catho­lique Church, in the captiuitie of Baby­lon.

I say therefore, that the very same thing, hath some times thorow the iust iudgement of God, fallen out in the [Page] Churche, in respect of the sowing, and the sowers, which often times falleth out in the times of famine and warre, to wit, that there is vtterly no place for sowing. Which when it cōmeth to passe al do not yet die, but the hunger staruen that remaine, are relieued, by the fruits gathered in the haruest of the former yeares, euen as heretofore, in the times of Ioseph, the Egiptians did sow nothing, but in the very seuenth yeare of the fa­mine. So it behooued Daniell, Ezechiell, Zorobabell, Ezra, Nehemia, and the rem­naunt of the godly in Babylon, when an ordinary ministry was wanting, to be Prophetes and Pastors vnto them­selues, ioyning with most feruent prai­ers the continuall reading and medi­tation of the holy scriptures, as in that story, we reade to haue bene done, vn­lesse we woulde rather say, that Moses and the other Prophetes (whose wry­tinges were then extant, although they them selues were dead long a goe) were notwithstanding their Pastors in this exile, vntill the Lord in his time, should haue mercy vpon Syon.

But amongest these breaches of the Church, That the mark of suc­cession and ordinarie vocation, is nor aboli­shed, by e­uery fault that may fall out in the minister. there is yet muche difference. For where the Pastors doe their duties onely negligently, or else offend only in manners, neuertheles the double mark of the Church, which is ordinary and to be séen, remayneth. By the double mark of the Church I mean, the séed, and y ^e so­wing, and also ordination, if so bee that these Pastors, although negligent, bee notwithstanding lawfully called. And if they mingle only some leauen, The lea­uen is to be taken beede off, but the pastors notwithstanding are to be hard, so farre foorth, as they sit vppon the chayre, not of Peter, but of Christ: neither doth such a congregation, therefore ceasse, to bee deemed as a member of the Catholique Churche, (or els the Catholique visible Church is no where) although perhaps no other, but negligent Pastors, corrupt in maners, and mixing some leauen, be found throughout all the whole worlde. Such were in the times of Christe, the Pharisees and Saduces, and the Doc­tors of the Lawe, whose Leauen hee teacheth, Math. 16.6. must bee auoyded, which yet hee [Page] commaundeth to bee hearde, Mat. 23.2.3. So long as they sit in Moses Chaire. But this place peraduenture, is not of euery one dili­gently inoughe marked: for it is to bee noted, oute of other places, that the writinges of Moses, and of the Pro­phetes, were reade bee piecemeale in the Synagogues. Which thing, the Sections noted, euen at this daye, by a true order in the Hebrewe Bybles, doe declare. Nowe, vnto this pure and sin­cere reading, was added an interpreta­tion; full of Leauen: of which sorte are these pointes which especiallye in Ma­thew are plentifully confuted by Christ. Therefore Christ commaundeth those thinges to bee heard out of the Pulpit, which were by custome, syncerely re­cited out of Moses and the Prophetes, in the Synagogues: but the Leauen, wherewith they did corrupt, the puritye of Doctrine, to be eschewed. So it is not to bee doubted, but that that outwarde Worshippe in the Temple, was in the times of Christe, diligently exercised without Idolatry, which also Godly men did diligentlye perfourme, al­though [Page] the right vse of the sacrifices, and of the whole lawe, was vtterly de­stroyed by the iusticiarie Pharisees, and by the S [...]duces, which denied the resurrection, that is to say, the chiefe ende of sacrifices. What maner of marchandize of high priestes office, there was then, and that againste the prescript of the lawe, appeareth by historyes. But this fault of persons, in so great confusion of thinges, did not abolishe the very facts of the priesthoode, which did depend, not vpon the priest, but vpon the ordinance of God. For there is some certain mean thing betweene men meerely pryuate, and men lawfully called: to wit, when as some (exercising the place of those that be lawfully called) are either tho­row ignoraunce, or thorow winking at them, borne with al: and in their name execute some publique office, as we read, that it was ordayned in the lawe of the Romans, concerning one Barbari­us Philippus, of which matter we haue in an other place spoken more fullye. Therefore the Church in deed retayned (and that in Pharisiisme and Sadu­cisme) [Page] hir note, both of Gods seed, and in some sort also, of the very sowing there­of, although it were some what defa­ced, and yet neyther Pharisijsme nor Saducijsme, was a parte of the sound Church.

But as often as euen openly, In the Ro­mish church such a one as now a good while it hath been, all the notes of the true Catholique Church, are not in some sort defaced onely, but euen vtterly taken away, as was fore­tolde by the Apostles. the chayre of truth is vtterly destroyed, so that on the one side syncere breade is not propounded vnto vs, so that a man maye receiue it: and on the other side, some Leauen, is so set before vs, that a man may not reiect it, but poysons are drunke to men vnwilling of the same, who will account the congregation of these Wolues (or of those which fol­lowe them) for the true eyther Catho­lique or particular Churche. Now I affirme, that the Popedome, that is to saie, the Churche of Rome (as at this daie they call it) hath by little and little growen to be suche a one. See­ing that those thinges beeing in deed fulfylled, which both Paule 1. Thessalo­nians 2. And also Iohn in the discrip­tion of the Image of the beaste, haue now so many yeares paste, set before [Page] our eyes to behold: and the auncient fa­thers, both Greeke and Latin interpre­ters, Irene, Chrisostome, Hierome, Augu­stine, Becla, and Cardinall Cusan himselfe also, haue interpreted the same of the seat of Rome. For which of those three markes of the catholique Church (wherof we haue shewed, that one of thē one­ly is vnmoueable and perpetuall, the o­ther we haue declared also to be some time discontinued) remaineth in the po­pish Church? For to speake first of that proper, perpetuall, and absolutly neces­sary marke, that is, the holy word wri­ten, seeing that that is in the popishe Church, is not set forth vnto the people, but torne in sundry péeces, and that also in a strange tongue: and further, seeing that their shamelesnesse hath proceeded so far, that they can not beare the same to be turned, into vulgare & cōmon spe­ches, neither yet indure, that the Latin interpretation being barbarous, and in many places false, shoulde be amended, by the Hebrue and, Greek copies, is there any man, vnlesse he be by the iust iudge­ment of God blinded, that will iudge [Page] these men, to be the Catholique Church (in which onely there is saluation) and not rather take it to be that Babylon, out of which all, that will not perish ought to depart? But some amongst them say. We do not onely receiue the writinges of the Prophetes and Apostles, but also receiue them, and in deed receiue them more large, than yee receiue them. For for one and two places sake, they ad the bookes which are Apocripha. As though in deed to haue books decked with gold and precious stones, to worship papers trāsformed into idols, to sing in a strāge tongue, parcels torn in sundry peces, or to hang them about the necke, or to vse them in magical inchantments, be the same, that it is to teach the writings of the Prophets & Apostles, and by these to direct, the whole seruice of God, and to be short, by these to order, the whole life of man.

But againe they saye we haue euery sunday sermons, and the readinges also and homelies of the Doctors: and to be short, admonitions (as they call them) in parishes Yea, haue truly. But when [Page] what maner ones, of whome, and to what end are they had?

Note.Now, to comprehend all thinges in a few words, seeing there be three wayes of corrupting the holy books of scripture, one is, when some thing is taken away from thē: the second is, when some thing is added to them: the third, when some thing is changed in them. Who at the length seeth not, that these men are cō ­demned as guilty of so many sortes of falsehood?

That I may beginne with the law. That vnwriten word, which they haue deuised & wil haue to be y ^e chifest part of y ^e seruice of God, & that authority which they take to thēselues, to make lawes to bynd mens consciences, by what name shal we call it? Now, haue they not vt­terly blotted out, without any shame, y ^e second commandement, to the ende they might openly and manifestly, renew al kind of idolatrie, while they haue chan­ged the names onely of ancient Idols? Haue they not oppressed the miserable consciences of Christians, both by new and directly repugnant traditions? and [Page] vnder that cloake, Mat. 23.14. Haue they not deuou­red widowes houses onely (as in times past the Pharisees did): but also haue swal­lowed vp empires and kingdomes? To be shorte, haue they not ouerthrowen from the very foundations, the vse and end of the law?

And in the Gospell (the other and the chiefest part of Gods word) what haue they left sound? First, what maner of Christ do they set forth vnto vs? verely, a christ now in deed indued with a body without a body? do they propound him, 1. Cor. 1.30. as he which was made of God vnto vs wise­dome? Yea for sooth, so far as he helpeth our natural light. Do thei propoūd him as our whole righteousnesse? for sooth so farre as this thing is attributed to vs, who are therto prepared, partly of our selues, and partly by grace, that the re­ward of eternall life, may, by desert be ascribed vnto the deseruinges of oure righteousnesse. But what if our owne deseruinges be not sufficient? Verely, the deseruings of some certaine saints (whose treasure is not yet in deede drawen drie) purchased by a certayne [Page] price at y ^e hand of these brokers, shal be added vnto vs. And the merites of what saints I besech you, do they set forth vn­to vs? surely, such as the Bishoppes of Rome them selues, shal put into their ca­lender, and such as euery one shal chuse to him selfe for Patrones and interces­sors. But doe they propound Christ as our sanctification? yea for sooth againe, so far as he augmenteth the remnants of our naturall holinesse. Doe they pro­pound him, as our onely redemption? in deed they doe it in worde, but performe nothing lesse in deed. For they except y ^e satisfaction of punishment, which being granted, they make God himselfe most vniust. For what is more wicked, than to require of him, which is not in fault, satisfacory of punishmēts? And to what ende hath the Lorde borne our sinnes vppon the tree? Esai. 53.4.5. to what end hath our chastisment rested vpon him? But now, seeing we are come to those satisfactions, doe they not most manifestly mocke with God and men, when they teach, that in the sprin­kling of coniured water, in tapers, in spittle, in oyle, in the signe of the crosse, [Page] in choyce of meates, in the murmuring vp also of certaine prayers not vnder­stood, in the praiers of counterfeit saints for the most part in the worshipping of images, in the ringing of bels, in a cer­taine kinde of apparel also, and that af­ter death suche satisfactions doe consist? what more? O the moste abhominable wickednesse that hath at any time bene committed of any man) in the very real offering of Christ him self for the quick and the dead, which is therfore so much the more effectuall, as they say by how muche it is the more often reiterated, but in deed, is an open & manifest trea­ding vnder foot, of the sacrifice, made once for vs: when they teach I say, that satisfaction for the punishment of sins, may be bought at theyr hands, both for vs that liue, and also for them that be dead, scorched in that their fier of pur­gatory? What maner of thing therefore is this Gospell? And what manner of Christe is this of the Romishe Pope­dome? Who also perceiueth not, by the conference of the word of god, that these men, by their doctrine of Opus operatum, [Page] that is of the worke wrought, haue o­uerthrowen all the vse of sacraments? That I may saye nothing of the de­stroying of the trueth of Christe his bodye, of his Ascention into heauen, and of the article of his descending out of heauen. And that by the opinion of Transubstantiation, they haue ouer­throwen the definition of a Sacra­ment? And that they haue polluted the Sacrament of Baptisme, with infi­nite corruptions? And that they haue taken awaye, euen at the firste, one Element of the Supper of the Lorde? And whilst that afterwarde by a more than abhominable wickednesse (chaun­ging that Sacrament, into that dete­stable propitiatorie Sacrifice) they haue vtterly taken awaye, all that holy action, and therefore openly haue by violence pulled away the seale of the couenant of the new Testament? To be shorte, that they haue, by as many false Sacraments, as it pleased them to deuise, taken to them selues, the au­thoritie of Iesus Christe, oure onely lawe gyuer? Therefore what parte of [Page] Gods worde, haue not these men cor­rupted, or rather cleane taken away? And then where is that onely, true, perpetuall and necessarye marke of the Catholique Churche? Where is that Seede, whiche beeing taken a­way, the spreading of the Church also vppon earth, muste needes be taken a­way?

Now, if the question be, touching that Ecclesiasticall gouernement (that I may speake some what more fully of this matter, than heretofore I haue done) what I beseeche you, can a man finde, in the Popishe cleargie, but that Image of the beast? Hath not this high Bishoppe succeeded the other high By­shoppe of Rome, which was wont to be therin the hyre of the Gentiles? What say I? Hath not that Romishe Pope, snatched to him selfe, (by occupying nowe at the laste, and in some ages here to sore, by sittinge in Rome) the verye name, and all the authoritie of the verie Emperour of Rome? For the thinges whiche yet remayne there, beeing Reliques not so muche [Page] of the Romaine empire, as of y ^e Germane kingdome and gouernment, what are they more I pray you, but a bare shewe and name, not onely because, the empe­rours themselues doe of their owne ac­cord; at this day, worship the féet of this beast, but also, because, he suffereth, not so much as one of his false cleargie, to be subiect, to any secular power, as they call it? yea rather who perceiueth not, this wicked fellow, not contented, with this so great wickednesse, to be the very same person, whom Paul fore told should sit (after the empire of Rome was de­stroyed) In the temple of God, 2. Thes. 2.4. and exalt him selfe, aboue all that is called God? For is not this he, that openly affirmeth, that he muste bee iudged of no man, no not of the Aungelles? Who (if his price be giuen him) boasteth that he can open both heauen and hell? who at his pleasure openly breaketh all lawes both of God and men? who also more than once, with in these few yeares, hath vn­done lawes established by nature it selfe: which wickednesse also the pro­phane city of Rome in time here to fore, [Page] (in the raigne of Claudius the emperor) abhorred? who hath sold euen for a far­thing those very canons, whose name was wont, to make a fraide the igno­rant people.

And as for those purpled Cardinals, what other thing are they, than an I­mage, not of y ^e auncient senate of Rome, but of that senate which serued the em­perors, and deuiding the gouernement betweene them: but who is so ignorant of the state of Rome, that doth not per­ceiue, that that distribution of gouern­ments, is a picture of y ^e empire of Rome ouerthrown, which thing also the Bi­shops of Rome themselues, and the wri­ters that be addicted to them, do wit­nesse? And as concerning other ecclesia­sticall functions, such as they were or­dained of Christ by his Apostles, what doth there remaine among them, but most vayne names and bare titles? For the office of a bishop, which in the beginning, that is, while the Churche flori­shed, was (as Hierome also witnesseth) nothing els, but the office of an elder, whilst euen immediatly after the time [Page] of the Apostles, it proceeded to those heights of dignities (or as they them selues speake) prelacies, (of which we haue before spokē) is now a good while ago, wholly vanisht awaye amongest them.

Nowe what is it with them to bee a minister? Is it to be appointed to feede some flocke? Is it to haue y ^e ouersight of manners, and to beare rule in the Cen­sures of the Church? No in deede, but to haue aucthoritie to offer Christ agayn? What is it to bee a Deacon? Is it to take charge of the goodes of the Church, and righty to dispence them to the mi­nisters, and the poore, and to render an account of that which is receiued and layde out? Fye, fie, for this (except al­wais the yéelding of accounts) is rather the onely chiefe and common office, to all of the whole Popish clergie, & speci­ally of the Pope himselfe: and that so o­penly and so carefully indéede, or coue­tously rather exercised, that they exact, (euen of those that bee deade manye yeeres before) a greate Tribute, and, vnto them that be aliue, they doe not [Page] fréely giue anye thing, though neuer so little. Therefore there is no suche, eyther Byshoppe or Minister among them, as the apostle alloweth of: and as for Deacons, not so muche as one at all. And yet these bee the men, that obiecte vnto vs, the succession of the Apostles. And if so bee, that that one olde Canon so often times repea­ted in the aunciente Synodes, and altogether agreeable to the woorde of God, did preuaile, to wit, that that ordination which is boughte by mo­ney (that I may omit the principall parts of a iust ecclesiastical calling, that is to say, trial and election, ioined with the free consent of the whole Churche, which are wholly abolished by them, if a man consider the thing it selfe,) should be iudged I say, altogether void, what marke of Apostolicall ordination, shall there bee founde amongst them? vnlesse happelye they meane, that it is one and the selfe same thing, to mocke at the order instituted by the Apostles, and to keepe that Order [Page] diligently, which hath beene deliuered frō hand to hand: and vnlesse they wold prooue, that lawfull and currant coyne, were to be knowen from counterfeit mony, by the bare image, grauen vpon it, and not rather, by the matter it selfe, especially as often as, they shewe the same image to both parties.

To be short therefore, what maner of one is that Catholique church, in which in steed of true Christ, a most false idoll, at least wise, in respect of his office, is set vp: and where in steed of Gods pure word, partly the traditions of men, and partly, the traditions of the Deuill are placed: and where also in steed of succes­sion, & Apostolicall ordination, nothing hath place all most but most manifest and detestable, euen to the Deuill him selfe as it were, both bying and selling of soules redéemed by the blood of Christ, in so muche that they woulde haue it to be accounted, an vnlawfull thinge to searche into these matters, yea so farre haue they procéeded that they would cō ­demne men (though their cause be not heard) yf high treason against God and [Page] man, wheras on the other side if a man should graunt these things, there shold be nothing so wicked, so blasphemous and so horrible to be thought, which a man might not with their good leaue & liking, think, speak, and write.

But (these men wil say) although we were nothing lesse, than we will séeme to be, doth it followe that the name of Catholique Church, which yee take frō vs, doth agree vnto your Churches? No verely. Wherefore we haue in vayne now a long time agoe desired triall to be made, by the matter it selfe, That our Churches haue all the true markes of the Ca­tholique Church, and specially the pure vvorde of God. if their bare deniall may be accepted. We ther­fore affirme, that the three notes of the Catholique Church (to wit, the seede of the written worde, and the right and lawfull Ecclesiasticall calling and suc­cession, all which we haue restored, are in our possession, and stand on our side. These things they stoutly deny. In déed this controuersie cannot be decided in a few words, neither do I at this present goe about it. But that which I had ta­ken in hand to prooue, I hope I haue perfourmed, to wit, that the false and [Page] counterfeit notes of the Church, which they alleaged, are sufficiently confuted, and the true notes of the Churche set forth and approoued.

For it is one thing, to dispute of those markes, which they are, and another to dispute, who haue them. Notwithstan­ding, because I haue in few wordes de­clared, that they haue not those marks, this thing also I may now speake, that we haue at least, two very waighty coniectures, which make for vs agaynste them: to wit, that in discerning and tri­yng of opinions, we stay our selues, vp­pon the only written word of God, that is, the writings of the Prophets and A­postles? and that we require the inter­pretation of it, by the onely conference of places, and proportion of the articles of fayth. Neither do we refuse the wri­tinges of any, either old or new author, so y ^t they may be examined, by the rules afore sayd: by Gods worde, and the pro­portion of faith. But what these mē ob­iect against these vpright requestes, it sufficiently appeareth.

Now in the question of succession and [Page] ordination, they haue thought that not many yeares agoe, they haue found out, That our Churches, haue the true Apostolicall succession. a more certain reason to dispute against vs. For they demaund euen with great loftinesse and pride, that we shoulde shew them, whom they haue succeeded, which in our times haue established our Churches, as though we were no better able, to shew our original, thā the Donatistes coulde theirs. We aunswere that the doctrine which we defend, hath (euen from the time of the Apostles, al­though heresies haue assaulted it, & the Romish false bishops, and others, made drunke by y ^e harlot, haue by al y ^e means they could, and that for the space of cer­taine yeres polluted it) continued notw ^t standing, euen vntill our times, & shall continue, euen to the end of y ^e world: and that about 200 yeeres since this light of the Gospell began againe, (and that thorow the singular goodnes of God) in y ^e west to apeare, out of y ^e filth of popery, & those hiddē places, into which these mē had thrust it, vntill y ^e cādelsticks, which were takē away, were set again in their places, & by that means the elect people [Page] of God, did from all quarters flow to­gether vnto the sayd truth.

But as concerning the succession of the holy ministery, 2. The. 2.7. we say, that that mi­stery of iniquity (which the Apostle witnesseth in his time to haue beene begun, was not accomplished, but in some processe & length of time, and therfore y ^t that old Church of Rome became, & that but by little & litle, of Apostolical, Apostatical, that is, fallen from the truth: and we af­firme that other Churches (as it is eui­dent by histories) did not straightwaies fall away from the foundation, but thē verely, when as in the church, the false bishop, 2. The. 2.4. and sonne of perdition in deed, cal­ling him selfe the vniuersall head of the Church) did at the length, exalt himselfe aboue all that is called God. And that this was don when the kings and Princes, yea, and the very Pastors them selues, in other countries, being bewitched by this harlot, had submitted them selues to the feet of Antichrist. Now, when, & by what degrees and sleights that hath bene brought to passe, cannot else wher be better not only known, but euen perceiued [Page] almost by the very eyes, than by the very liues of the bishops thē selues, declared by good and sufficient writers: y ^e euents and falling out of things iust­lye agrreing with the foretellinges of y ^e Apostles, and y ^e expositions of the learned, both ancient, and also certaine new writers, which our very aduersaries, dare not refuse, in so much that y ^e which the Apostle heretofore spake of his mi­nistry, 2. Cor. 4.24. that his Gospell was had in deed frō them that should perish, & whome the God of this world had blinded, that the light of the Gospel of the glory of Christ should not shine vpon them, the same we may now most truely affirme of this wicked An­tichristian sinck, faining or pretending the name of the Catholique Churche. Therefore we haue next after the Apo­stles, for successors, those very right iud­ging pastors, not onely of the Roman church, but of other churches also, whose succession (beeing broken of by these wolues & tirants) we haue begun tho­row Gods goodnes at the last to restore: so farre of is it, either that we are desti­tute of the lawful argument of successi­on, [Page] or that they shoulde bee able to al­leage any Apostolicall succession.

That the Catholique Church hath bene, and in some respect as yet is, in the Pope­dome thogh the Pope­dome be not the Catho­lique church nor any part thereof. Math. 21.33.34.Therefore say these men, where was that Catholique visible Church, aboute two hundred yeres past? Christ himself maketh answere for vs, that it hath bin heretofore, and as yet in some respecte is, in the handes of the wicked busbande­men, who themselues, slewe the ser­uauntes of the Lorde, being sent vnto them, and with all, as much as they coulde, euen the Sonne himselfe, beeing cast oute of the Vineyard: and in steede of him, they haue placed a Christ in words, wherwith thei mocke the people, but in deede euerye one, euen the wickedst of theire owne sort, that they can or could get. But it is well, that neyther the eternall kee­per of that vine, can againe in déede be caste out, neither could againe be slaine. who liueth vnto God, and who also nowe againe appearing, hath begun, to lette out that Vineyard, to good and faithfull husbandmen, Paule also aun­swereth in oure behalfe, foretelling that which wee sée fulfilled: To wit, that that wicked one, shoulde vsurpe to [Page] him self the Temple of the Lorde, 2. Thes. 2.4. vntill the Lorde shoulde agayne discouer him. Iohn also aunswereth that that woman, hauing lately brought foorth hir Childe, bath togeather with hir Childe, layen hidden in the wildernesse, free from the Dragon, who trusted to, and vsed also, and was euen as it were vpholde with the power of Kinges and Princes: And that that ho­ly Citye, hath in the meane time conti­nued sure, not for a smale time, but for two and forty monethes, or a thousand two hundred and sixty dayes. But we leaue the acccount of those dayes to sharper witted men: we vrge onely the matter it selfe. Therefore, to speake plainely, we say, that so long as that great Mi­chaell did appeare by little and little, killing that Dragon with the swoorde of his worde (which hee hath agayne committed to his faythfull seruauntes) or with the spirite of his mouth, that so long the Catholique Churche, (that is to saye, euery number though neuer so smal, of such as helde fast both the per­sonne, and also the office of the true Christe) laye hidde in the filthinesses [Page] of the Romish Babylon, whilest y ^e wicked one with his angels, vsurping the seate of the ministery, and the harlot that sate vpon the seuen hilles, did make y ^e world drunke with her dreggs.

But they say, that this true Churche, ought always to be visible.

To this, if I shall aunswere, that the true Church indeed, hath alwaies beene visible, and so shall be, so farre forth as she consisteth, of true visible members, and that it is not a counterfayte thing: In what sense the true Church is called vi­sible. and also that it is visible so farre forth, as it hath outward and euident marks: & yet not in such sorte visible: as though they that embrace true religion, should always so agree, that euery man might pointe out with this finger, both who they are, and where they are: if I saye I shall aunswere this, I shall indeede speake, as the matter is, and that which I haue a little before, by reasons and examples declared. But I make not this place my refuge: for I saye, that if wee will fetch recordes, euen from the Apo­stles themselues (who haue as it were with their finger poynted oute this [Page] wicked one, and all his false Church) that then we shall find, that there scarce hath beene any age, but that therein, so soone as this Antichriste began to shew his head, the Lord hath alwayes stirred vp some, who did set themselues against his tyrannie. If they denie this thing, let them laye a wager, but withall let them giue pledges or sureties for y ^e per­fourmaunce, & I doubt not but we shall shew foorth euen to al men, y ^t the thing is so (vnlesse they had rather be willingly blynd) yea and that by good and suffi­cient witnesses, and by cleare, euident, and manifest testimonies, drawen out of their very owne courtes and records.

But the aduersaries cannot so be bri­deled, but that they will reply, That the true laying on of hands remayneth vvholy with vs. deman­ding at the last, what laying on of hāds we are able to alleadge, that they haue receiued, by whō, in our time our chur­ches haue bene established. For so I re­member, Spensa, a Doctor of the Sorbo­nistes, did cry out against vs, by whome afterward there was published concer­ning these matters, a voulome verye grosse, and full of slaunders.

Hovv farre forth the laying on of handes hath beene coun­ted necessari to a lavvfull calling.First, I answere that, which he him­selfe elswhere hath noted out of Hierom, against the So called of one Lucifer, vvho helde that the soul vvas of the substance of the flesh. Luciferians, which place al­so Gratian hath put into his decrees: to wit, that the laying on of handes after baptisme perteineth rather to the honor of priesthood (as they call it) than to bind anye by necessitye of lawe, to obserue it. After this sort therefore I saye, did Hierome iudge whome they call vppon amongste their Sayntes. But they will replye forsooth that he disputeth of laying on of haneds in confirmation, and not of laying on of handes in ordi­nation, as they are woonte to speake. Whiche that I maye graunte to bee so, (although Spensa thoughte otherwise) what shall this replication or excep­tion helpe them? for they themselues do not onely number confirmation among the Sacraments, but also (when it plea­seth them) they account it more excel­lent, than Baptisme it selfe. But let vs omit this thing. They confesse (vn­lesse they will dissent from Bernard, in his Epistle 77. who notwithstanding, standeth bothe vppon the worde of God, [Page] and also vppon the authoritie of Austen and Ambrose) that those whiche are of the yeeres of discretion, are blotted out of the Churche, for contempt of Bap­tisme, and not for the want of it. And what shall let vs, that wee maye not muche more speake the same thing, of the laying on of handes, vsed in gi­uing orders? vnlesse peraduenture, they shall saye, that that is more to bee re­quired vnto the holy Ministerye, than Baptisme vnto saluation. But howe can these excellent seruauntes of God, seeme to haue contemned the laying on of handes, which in our time, by a ve­rye Heauenlye inspiration, haue deli­uered the Churche from the Tyran­nye of Antichriste, when as they had none, of whome they could lawfully, e­uen by the warrant of the olde Canons themselues, aske, or receiue the same? for I haue before shewed, & yet affirme this thing, that there can not be found one amongst the whole clergie of Rome, which is able, by the pure and auncient canons, to defend their ordination to be lawfull. What say I? It appeareth that [Page] euen in the most pure Churche also, the laying on of handes, was not counted so necessary? for who I besech you laid his hands vpon Philip, that of a Deacon he shold be made an Euangelist? Act. 8.4. who laid handes vpon them, in that firste disper­sing of them selues abroad at Hierusa­lem (the very Apostles also being igno­rant therof) preached the Gospell with so great fruit in Samaria? but these men. Peter and Iohn were afterwarde sent, who should lay their hands vpon them. Act. 8.14. Yea for sooth vppon those who beléeued and were baptised, for as for thē which first had preached the Gospell vnto thē: there is no mentiō at all made of them. But let vs put the case that this place were to be vnderstood of these men also. The Apostles therefore ratified that, which the other as occasion serued had done, euen before examination, and be­fore ordinary election, not meaning to make the laying on of hands, to be ab­solutely necessary. And if these men be the successors of the Apostles (as they will be called and accounted) why haue not they them selues also, & that by the [Page] example of the Apostles, made haste, to approoue at the least, the zeale of godly men? Or why did they not helpe, the at­tempt of that Archbishop of Colen, ra­ther thā they should haue betrayed him to that Romish Antichrist? for a reward also, of which wicked déed Gropperus had the Cardinals hat bestowed vpon him, a couer in deed worthy for suche a cup. For sooth (they will say) because ye are heretiques. Therfore the question must be of the doctrine and not of the laying on of handes, and then (as I hope) we shall get the victory.

But they will againe reply that that thing was lawfull at the first, when the Churches were springing: but now an order beeing once established, the same thing is not lawfull. I aunswere that I confesse, there ought great regard, to be had of the times, & that they are not to be borne with all, who violate the lawes of the Church, beeing well esta­blshed. But what if I shall say that the lawes of right and lawfull ordination are not violated by vs, but that (when they were taken away and defaced by [Page] them, that fayned them selues to be the keepers of that order) we haue applyed our selues to the restitution, and restau­ration of them? For, that this thing is so, it appeareth by this, that (excepting the ceremonies which are iustly abro­gated) al thinges cōmanded in the word of God, and prescribed in the auncient pure canons, are obserued exactly in our Churches, but amongst them, manifest­ly neglected. Now, who, when Pastors by common consent, are chaunged into Wolues, woulde saye, that the sheepe shoulde looke for such manner of ayde, from Wolues: and that shoulde bee condemned, whiche after the example of the Prophets, doth willingly set him selfe againste wolues? Let this contro­uersie therefore be firste disputed of, be­fore the question be made, touching the forme of ordination: and let these men leaue of to boast of the apparell and out­warde shewe of Pastors, when as in­wardly they be rauening wolues. Mat. 7.15. Verely Christ commandeth true Pastors to be distinguished from false, not by y ^e lay­ing on of hands, Mat. 7.16. But by their fruits, y ^t is, [Page] by doctrin and maners. But what wil their Pastors that be made, by Bulles and licences, answere to these things?

They being inforced, to condemne extraordinary vocations, That mira­cles are not necessary to prooue anye holy, lavvfull vocation, ei­ther ordina­rie or extra­ordinarie. and that more than once, and without exception also, at the laste they flie vnto myracles, which they will haue of necessitie to be requyred, to this extraordinary vocati­on. But if a man bydde them alleadge, oute of what place of Scripture, they haue at the length drawen this rule: then it necessarily followeth, eyther y ^e they can speake no more than fyshes, or els bewraie extreem shamelesnesse.

Now, firste it is manifest that the gyfte of myracles, hath alwayes beene free, that is, set in the power of God a­lone, who hath gyuen the same at cer­tayne tymes, and to certaine persons: Therefore we can make no rule of it. Next, seeing that not onely Christ hath foretolde, but also the olde and new sto­ryes witnesse, that this gyft, was com­mon both to true, and also to false Pro­phetes, what madnesse shall it argue, to bee desirous to haue the false sen­ding [Page] to be discerned from the true, by miracles?

By vvhat meanes false vocations may be pro­perly discer­ned.Then you will say, it shall be lawful for euery one to teach in the Church? no in deed. For who soeuer (where there is place for order) dispiseth that order, he declareth by this very thing, that he is not of God and therfore not to be heard. Therefore the Donatistes, who were in deed Schismatiques, are by this reason iustly cōdemned, because, though it had bene most true, which they obiected vn­to Occilianus, yet the order of the church, was not for that cause to be broken, and they were not to be borne with, when for the defection of some Churches, they cryed out, that all the world was fallen away. But where a generall disorder, vnder the shew of order, beareth sway, and no remedy can be looked for, from the authours of this mischiefe: then doubtlesse, this must be performed that euen as when a fier is raysed in a City, those men cessing, or setting the city it selfe a fier, which by the ordinances of the city, ought to haue come to the quen­ching of that fier, it is the part of euery [Page] good Citizen, to carrye water, yea euen without order, and to cast it vppon the flames: so in this, much more dāgerous fire of the Temple of the Lorde, it is the duetie of euery godly man, as muche as in him lieth, to set him self against that euil: and also of the godly magistrate, to prouide that a lawfull order bee re­stored. So haue the godly Prophets in times past done: so haue y ^e godly kinges Ezechias and Iosias done: and vnlesse y ^e very christian Emperors, when heresies bare greate sway, had interposed their authoritie, none had more beaten down the Church (as at the length we sée it to haue bene done) than they that gouer­ned the chiefest seates. And if notwith­standing all this, there haue beene no ordinary vocation, in the times of these ancient Synodes, we muste know that that fell out in deed, because, that a lawful order then established in the church, was not altogeather abolished, as it is manifest that it hath beene performed, now sundry ages since, thorow the ty­ranny of the false Romish Bishop: ther remayning amongest them not so much [Page] as a very slender shadow of the princi­pall parts of Ecclesiasticall vocacion: to wit, of triall and election: but (after a most filthy sale of all thinges), they v­sing onely a vicelike kinde of laying on of hands, thereby to deceiue the comon people.

VVe vvant not euen that laying on of hands vvhich the false church of Rome, doth vntru­ly make sim­ply necessa­rye to a lavvfull cal­ling.But though these thinges were not forcible (which indeed are yet notwith­standing most strong) what doth an ex­traordinary vocation appertaine to vs? For it is most manifest, that those firste restorers of Gods house, in the dayes of our forefathers: to wit, Wickliffe, Hus, Hierome of Prage, Luther, Bucer, Oecolam­padius, Swinglius, Pellican, Haller, and ve­ry many other) had the selfe same lay­ing on of hands that these men require, giuen them by their Bishops, to teache the people: by whome afterwardes the Churches were, by little and little re­stored: In which Churches also, we af­firme, that the true vocation of pastors, Doctors, and Deacons, was restored. Now I call that a true calling, which is according to the prescript of Gods word.

But here againe our vnorderly ordi­naries suppose, The laying on of hands, belongeth to the pres­biterie and not to that state of By­shops which men haue deuised. that they haue found out somewhat, wherin they may manifest­ly blame vs. For they deny, that albeit those men, whom euen now we named, were ministers, y ^t therfore we are law­fully ordayned, seeing that bishops one­ly may ordayne ministers, muche lesse say they, can we be bishops. I in deed do willingly leaue vnto them, al this state of bishoppely gouernment, whereof I plainely say, that the holy Ghost was not the aucthor, but mans wisedome, and vppon which, vnlesse we perceiue that God hath layed a curse, verely we do as yet see nothing at all: and we fo­ster a Viper in our bosome, which will again kill the mother. But of this mat­ter we will speake in an other place.

Now onely I demaund of these men, from whence they haue fet this: for sooth from the second Canon of the Apostles, (as they call it). But Gelasius the Pope him selfe doth recken these Canons, a­mongst the writinges counted Apocra­pha: to wit I suppose, at the least for the titles sake. For he must needes be too [Page] impudent, that woulde deny these Ca­nons, to haue bene made in more ages than one, so farr is it of, that ridiculous inuention (attributed to I cannot tel to what Clement, and lately published in Greeke and Latin, in which the Apostles are brought in one by one establshing these matters, may bee allowed of any man that is of any sound sense or iudge­ment. But to what end should we han­dle these thinges so largely? That the Euangelists were aboue the ministers of which we speake (for otherwise Peter the Apostle, calleth euen him selfe a fel­low minister with thē. 1. Pet. 5.1.) these men dare not deny, because the Apostle him selfe setteth them before Pastors and Doctors. Ephe. 4.11. But euen Paul him selfe witnesseth, that Timothie, not appointed a Bishop to Ephesus, or any other Churche, but an Euangelist, and the companion of Paule the Apostle, did not receiue the imposition, or laying on of handes, no not from Paule him selfe, but from the presbiterie, that is, from the companie or felowshippe of Elders. Wherfore if these men that mind to de­fend [Page] the false bishoply tyrannie, be dis­posed to reason, let thē dispute not with Geminianus (as y ^e ciuil lawiers are wont to say) but with Paul him selfe. We ve­rely thinke those to be lawfully orday­ned, who hauing according to the Apo­stles rule, and exact inquirie of their do­ctrine and maners going before, and a free and holy election, by the consent of the whole Churche, which they are to gouerne, are consecrated and dedicated to God by solemne prayes, and the very rite of laying on of handes vsed (if men shall so thinke good) but yet simple, and of it selfe, and not defiled with any tra­ditions of men.

Now seeing these things are so, The con­clusion of the vvhole Treatie. I say that the fauourers of the false Romishe Churche, doe in vayne set out or obiect, those three notes of the Church: to wit, succession méerely personall, a calling sundred from the doctrine of the Apo­stles: and the laying on of hands. And I say this, both because that none of these by it selfe, can be either, a true, or sim­ple necessary, or perpetuall note of the vniuersal Church: and also, because that [Page] though it were so, yet that no one of these notes at all, can be founde, in the false Romishe Church, which doth not­withstanding cal hir selfe, (though most falsely,) the vniuersall Church: and on the other side I affirme, that that onely, true, necessary and perpetuall marke of the Catholique Churche, that is to say, that doctrine, which is most perfectly contayned in the wrytings of the Pro­phetes and Apostles, doth once agayne shine bright and cleere in our Churches: and to be shorte, that the very personall succession, vocation, and ordination of the holy and right ministrie, are resto­red in the same our Churches: and that we haue not forsaken Syon, but haue fled out of Babylon as the Lorde warneth vs: Reuel. 18.4. & that, wee haue not rent in sunder the Church, but following Pauls fact, in the Church of Ephesus, mentioned Acts. 19.9. haue seperated Disciples to the Lord: and that we haue not by the example of Ie­roboam, 2. King. 16.10. &c. or the Donatistes, set vp altar a­gainst altar, but casting the altar brought from Damascus out of the Lordes house, we haue begun to restore the true and [Page] sincere worship of God, which worke also I hope (although Sathan, do by his ministers set himselfe against the same, both within the Church, and without it) shall yet notwithstanding (when that sonne of perdition, 2. Thes. 2.8. shall at the last be thorowly ouerthrowen, by the spi­rit of Gods mouth) be bles­sedly atchieued and finished.