OF Academ [...] [...] Philo­sophe Pla [...] [...] for his deap knoulege and contemplation in diuinite vves callit diuine [...] aboue all things did rendre thanks vnto God that he vves born in the dayis of Socrates out of vvhose mouthe he had resauit so many fair and frutfull instructions: if this most fa­mus Philosophe florissing in a tyme full of all Sapience humane did notvvythstanding glori­fie him self to haue bene born in the Olym­piad or age of à Socrates of vvhom culd be lernit no Science bot humane and morall, the knoulege vvharof culd bot prefer him in svm [Page 2] Aicademye philosophique: hou muche more am I (being born boyth ignorāt and in à tyme so full of ignorance) oblist vnto the merceis of god vvho hes prouydit for me, not à Socrates bot à Samuel to instruct me, not in humane bot in diuyne science vvharby I am intterit vvthin the Academy of the holy churche, after I have full fo [...]rty years vāderit in the vildirnes of my avvin vane opiniōs vvthout fear or for­sycht, Till it pleasit▪ his hevinly maiestie yat in the year of o [...]r lord 1599. in the moneth of O­ctober I shuld cvm to Paris in as vofull and cō ­fortles case as the Israëlites vver into vvhēas thay fled frō Egypt: for as thai had behind thame thair Enemis, befor thame the read Sea, on ether syid mōtans replenisit vvith ravenus beastes: So vvheder soever I culd turn my Eyis vves no thing for me bot the fearfull Image of death, My Enemis inuading, my freinds for­saking me.

And as the said Israëlites fand thair deliurance in ane Element Most to be fearit so fand I my­ne in ane instrumēt most offendit vith me. vvho hauing for the tyme the honor to haue bene Rector of Paris (vvharby he had sufficient pouer to aueng) yit his pietie suppressing all Passiōn maid him to pitie and not to persevv me vvhenas my kinred and acquentance did stand far of not caring vvhider I suld sink or suim. He vves in this desastre my Ariadne Leading me out of the Labyrinth of many mi­s [...]reis: Or rather he vves vvnto me as that An­gell [Page 3] vvhilk did cōfort Agar sitting in the soli­tud Leding to Sur, or as à Kynd Samaritan pouring in my festerit voundis vyne and oyill, and ane vther Philip, explaning to me passa­ges obscur: vtheruayis I had still vvith quene candaces Enuch red vvithout resolution and In vane buseit my self vvith Sisiphus Rolling à restles stone of blynd zeall vvithout Kno­lege.

Bot to th'end I hyd not the talent cōmit­ted, nor schoot vvp vvnder à buschell the can­dill vhilk he hes lychted, my deuite to god al­mychty, to my dearly belouit cnutreymen and instructer forsaid is to mak vthers participant of the benefit resauit: Considdering yat nou à Dayis the snares of Satan be more subtill and mēnis ignorance arrogance and curiosite more grosse, Impudent and dangerus nor thai haue bene in any Age heirtosor, the ampill crookit vayis Leading to perdition being al most innu­merable yit all hauing sum apperance to be Straicht and treu and all crying and contesting cryist to be hear, cryst to be thair, and eury one going about to establiss his doctryne by arguments dravin out boyth of humane and diuine science. In Such doutfulnes and des­perat confusion vvhat courss can simpill▪ ons follovv? or hovv shall thai certenly knov vvhar Cryst and his verite is all standing so doubtfull and atubiguus.

For if in thus vnholy age one shuld be re­soluit to follovv the most holy then shall sum [Page 4] obiect yat holynes is a verey incertan [...] mark for yat the most holy vver bot sinuars Seing all flesch be includit vnder sin and yat thair is none yat doth good no not one: vhich asser­tion or stūbling blok thai go about to proue and illustre by exemples follouing, imputing polygamy vnto the patriarches, vvnto Noah drunkinnes, vvnto Lot incest, To Moyses, incredulite, To king Dauid adultery and ho­micid: Euin as if mē shuld abstene to imitat and follovv the faythfull brigand be reson of his brigandry, or the teares of S. Peter and of the Magdalene for his denyell and hir debau­chit Lyf preceding: or as if the yeall of S. Paul vver to be dispysit becaus he fand à lavv in his membres repugning to the lavv of his spreit and becaus the euill yat he vold not yat he did. By the self same reson Noah mycht haue refusit to haue interit vithin the ark becaus in it vver includit vncleane beasts vith the cleane: and S. Paul to have ioynit him self vvith the vther Apostles becaus one of thame vves à Iudas. Agane if one shall resolue to follov antiquite Thay shall allege Cain the reprobat to be eldar nor Abel th'elect and Esau elder nor Iacob, and Ioseph and Beniamin to be the Youngest of all the tuelf trybes yea the Deuill and sin to be most ancient yit not to be follouit? Euin as if on th' vther part thair lakit exemples vvhar the Eldest brethering vver bestbelouir of god and most to be follouit of men (as vver Sem and Abraham) or as if [Page 5] one should say god and goodnes vver not more ancient nor Satan and Sin. Last if one vvill protest to follovv famous counsalles and doctores it shall be arrogātlye affirmit that Do­ctores vver bot men and Coūsalles bot assem­blees of men subiect to errores: As thocht thay vvho neuer shal haue the honour to be docto­res of the church nor pouer to conuocat oicu­cumenique or generall counsalles vver exempt and voyid of all errour.

Finally novv adayis such is our deplora­ble blyndnes and boldnes that vve be not content to infer or gather our conclusions vpone Thay that be curius in this age vse Scrip­tures for se­quelles and handmaydes vnto thair friuolus opi­nions: ane ar­rogance con­demnet be all venerable antiquite. enunciations or antecedentes expres­lie set dovvn in Scripture (albeit vve brag much of expres vvordes) bot vve vvill ha­ve the scripture à sequell or Servant to our vnattentik antecedenres. as for exemple. Obey your Princes euin theis that be throvvart or peruerss. and of pastores. do vvithout contra­diction vhat thay command. Theis tvvo pre­ceptes be expresly commādit in holy scripture yit vve vvill not study to leuell by this infalli­ble squair our fond and fallible opiniōs vvhilk go about vnder pretext of cōsciēce and cōmun­velth to schak of the most necessar and salutar yok of all subiection ciuill and Ecclesiasti­que not being content to render our self and our passionat opinions captyne vvnto thei [...] sa­cred oracles. Bot vve be bold an [...]uch vppon our auin maximis or antecedentes (vvhilk be that Princes and Pastores peruerting Iustice [Page 6] and Religion may be disobeyit and degradit) to gather, cite, vrest and throvv vnto our pur­pos all scriptur ether speking directly or indi­rectly of th' one or vther dignite. Inlykmaneir in that affirmatyue, Emphatique and most pith­thy propositiō Registrat in the sacred protocoll of the holy Euāgell This is my body, ād in that ne­gatyue proposition (This is not my body bot à mark or [...]igne tharof) our partialite and presū ­ptiō is to mvch manifested, in that ve go about to falsifié the finger of god leading the pē of the blessed Euangelistes and to verifie the imagi­nation of man, vvhilk in express vords shall never be fovnd in Euangelist, Prophet nor A­postle. To be schort sic is our damnabill indu­tation that vve Can admit no principall or fon­dament of religion bot theis of Protagoras vvho did allovv every one of his disciples to esteme that most trevv vvhilk to thair opinion did appear most probable: No squair or reull bot the lesbyā of lead vvhilk mycht be bovvi [...] and applyit to any form or figur.

Agane to decern in questiōs of Religiō cōtro­uerted vve can admit no Iuge bot the dum lettre, That the dū text of Scri­ptur be no cō ­petent Iuge in matters cōtrouerted. vhilk is ane paradox so absurd and vith­out exemple preceding as to this hour by anti­quite it can not be verifeit vhar the actor and defender pleading at any bar or court ha­ve bene iugit allanerly by vvrittin lavves. Mo­rouer seing it is of necessite requirit that not only the parteis pleading bot euin the mea­nest membres of all courtes ciuill or criminal [Page 7] vvnto the bedalles, sergeants, domsteres and ischeres shuld have iugment and discretioun in sum mesour albeit the process vver bot of à sous or schilling: vvhat folie is it in the ma­ter of saluation to admit à Iuge vvhithout iu­gment or sens. Bot let vvs heir considder the practise that hes b [...]ine observit Vpon this sub­iect heirtofor in all politique gouernemen­tes fathfull and infidelle. Did thay vvho so much estemit the lavves of the 12. tables a­mang the Romans, or thay vho reducit the hoill lavves in one Cod or volum only ad­mit the said lavvis for competent Iuges? And Amang the Hebrevvis vvhar the blessed lord god him self vves Lavvmaker vves thair not Iuges establissit to Iuge and discern Vpon all cō ­troverseis that culd fall out [...]and albeit it be said in one place ( search the scriptures) that is no com­mandement to declyne all vther Iuges bot the scriptur, becaus that cōmanding our childring diligently to study the lavves vve vvis thame not to contēm all vther Iuges nor to denye any decisition of lau bot such as thai thair self shall collect of the said lavuis: as also in ane vther place of scriptur it is said ( tell the church.) by vvich vvordis ane vther Iuge nor the scriptur is euidently designit. Heirvvihall it can not be denyit that the church is to the scriptur as the pilot to the Rodet, the mason to the lyne The Magistrat to the lavves. for as during the tēpest it aualit no thing to haue vvithin the schip stoir of Rodares except thai be gouernit by the hand [Page 8] of the steirsmam or pilot: And as to beild à hous stoir of Lynes, squaris, stone and tymber disor­doritly heapit vvp heir and thair serve for no purpos except the mason vse his art in disposing thar of: And as millions of Codes and digestes, of actes of covnsall or parlament or vhat soe­ver laues Imperiall or municipall can never decyid à proces nor pacifie parteis contending except the magistrat by viue voyce decern se­cundum allegata & probata: Evin so the rodar and compas, the lyne and squair of the holy scriptur and laues contenit tharin except thai have the church to be steirmam, masson and Iuge thay of thair self shall neuer pacifie parteis contending in fayth and religion, more nor the compas allone can gyid the Schip or the lyne allone beild the hous. And agane albeit evry one Imbarquit have for sautie of his lyf à spe­ciall Intres to see the sthip vveill gouernit yit it shuld be boyth presumpteus and perrelus if contemning the ordinar Pilot and Marinelles evry one shuld put to his hand to sett the com­pas, cast the lead, Hold the helm and steir the roddar: and albeit evry one of the familie ha­ve speciall resons to see the hous cōmodiuslie beild yit shuld it be boyth à fectles and confusit vvork if evry one of the houshold should play the Architectour or mason: Euin So in the schip of Crystis church tosted this day so dangerou­sly to and fro by so many turbulent vyndes and vaues of herreseis, and in the fabrique of his mysticall hous if evry one Shall presum [Page 9] and vsurp the gouuernall and lyne of the bles­sed scriptures, in such rakles cōfusion can be no beilding vp bot breking doun, no sautie bot schipurak.

And vhar it is allegit that by scripture vee must iuge of spreittes and parteis contending vpon questions of scripture: yit yat being gran­ted it doth not necessarly follou that the said scriptures be competent iuges: for adhering to our former similitudes vithout the gou [...]ernall the schip can not be veill gouernit, nor vithout the lyne or squair the hous deuly perfyted: yi [...] the steirman is callit the gouernor and not the gouernall, the masson the beilder and not the lyne or squair: and this comparison doth hold in all exemples of the ly [...]k nature: for behold vhen you compt vith comptares not thai bot you be callit the comptar: vhen vith your mo­ney you buy any thing not the money bot you be the buyar and yit more specially, you can ne­ther hear, smell nor taist bot by meanis of your cares, nose and toung, yit you be callit the hea­rer, smeller and taister and not thai. Euin so al­beit by the most eequall lyne and leuell of the scripture the churche doth iuge betuix ortho­dox and hereticall opinions, yit Sche not the Scriptur only ar to be estemit lafull Iuge: for as sayit the Apostle sche is the pillar and fondamēt of veritie: vho if sche shall not vith hir holy h [...]d steir ad gouern the Christian barque so mise­rably distressit vith so many contrarius fluxes and refluxes hereticall and schimaticall vee [Page 10] shall be of necessite oueruhelmit vith the vehe­mentnes of sic erronius inundations, and if sche shall not apply vnto vs the iust leuell of veri­te in this vofull varietie vee must remane no les confusit, indisposit, disordorit and vnapt for the mysticall fabrique of the hous of god as con­fusit materialles of stone and tymmer scatterit abrod hear and thair be vnfitt vnto à materiall fabrique of the hous till thai be collected, pla­cit ad and polisit by the cunning handes of the skilfull masson.

Bot to the end the madnes of this age vhilk vill not submit thair self vnto such as vithin the church be deuly authorised vith Apostolique succession (lyk as in ancient ages all contro­uerseis in fayth ver submitted to the doctores and counsalles possessing the same places) may be euidently vinquisit I vill befor I inter into my matter produce only one exemple of the fa­mus Empriour Theodose the elder so much prasit by S. Augustin, Orosius and the Poet Claudian. Theodor. Cass. in the Tripartit. History.

This sacred ēprour seing in his day is the church pitifully vexit by the hereseis of Eunoniꝰ, No­uatius, macedonius and Arrius did call vpō Ne­ctarius bischop of Cōsttiānople vhar for the tyme he remanit crauing the said Nectarius opi­niō vhat cours ves to be hold for pacifeing the­is schismes. Nectarius (not presuming to much of his lerning as men vithout lerming in theis dayis do) did consult vith Agelius ane vther bis­chop and vith Sisinnius à lector. Nou this Sisin­nius [Page 11] being the od man of his age for erudition and eloquēce gaue this aduys saing that so long as the parteis forging and fostring neu doctrin had libertie to vrit and disput thair culd be no hoip of concord bot rether of greter schis­mes and factions, affirming the only vay to pa­cifie all ves to caus matterres controuerted be submitted to the censur of the churche in re­forming and reducing all vnto and by the voyce and authorite of the fathers vho had be­ne anciētly admitted for autētik doctors tharof: for so said he [...] the curiosite of restles branes be brydelit by the self same mai [...]stie viche had confundit all heretikes from the ascension of Cryist Iesus. The bishop Nectarius lyiking veill of this aduise did inform the Emperor tharof vissing him call vpon the cheif heresiarches and ringleadars of the factius and to ask of thame if thai vold stand to the decision of ancient do­ctors vho did floris befor thair neu opinions ver hard of and ver for that caus to be estemit indif­ferēt iuges in that thai had neuer sene nor hard any of the parteis contending, and in case the said nouators suld refuse this most resonable submission the Emperour ves solicited to hold thame manifest cōtradictors and impugnars of the authorite of the fathers ād of the primityue church. To be schort the schismati [...]s ver cited and standing vp befor the Emprour he did ask of tham vhat opinion thai had of Ecclesiasti­que doctors namly of such as had vrittin befor theis neu questions ver controuerted? Vharun­to [Page 12] at the first vith gret modestie thai ausuerit saying thai did esteme the said ancie ntes gret preceptors and pedagogs of the church. Bot the emperor àgane demāding if thai vold sub­mit thair neu opiniōs to be censurit by the vrit­tes of the said anciēts, then thai began to dout, sum refusing, sum granting simpliciter, sum grā ­ting and refusing conditionally: Vharupon amang tham self did aryis such confusion and clamour, sum affirming, sum denying sum distinguising that by thair insolidite and incertenty the solidire and certenty of the Catholique church ves manifested and the said Emprour in­terponing or conioyning his imperiall authori­te vith the spirituall did conclud and decern vith Tertullian traitting this passage of S. Paul flee from ane heretique after he be once or tuyis admonisit in vhilk traittie the said Tertul­lian doth aduyse treu Catholiques not to dis­put vith Heretiques by expres text of Scripture bot to reduce rham to the ancient tradition of the church and doctors tharof and from the said church and ancients to resaue the treu sens and interpretation of the scriptur and of all questions cōtrouerted vithin the church accor­ding to the laudabill opinion of Origenes vho doth affirm that only to be resauit for vndou­ted verite vhilk in no point doth differ from ancient Ecclesiastique tradition. Occasi [...]n mo­uing the au­thor to vrit this small treatise.

Bot Seing in theis latter dayis thair be no emprour to practise the counsall of Sisinnius al­beit the curiosite of this tyme brangilling all the [Page 13] fundamentes of treu religion had more nead tharof nor euer heirtoforun so much as Sim­pill ons be cast into such incertentic that hardly can thai resolue vhidder to follou antiquite or nouetly, science or ignorāce, ordor or disordor, it is tharfor the deuite of eury one in particular to supplie this generall defect to his pouer (be it neuer so meam) by studeing to edifie the igno­rants and by expressing his charitable affection ether by vord or vork. For vhilk caus I not puft vp (as the lord knouit) vith the suelling spreit of curiosi [...], contention or malice, nor corrup­ted by lucre or auarice do vnto the glory of my gratius lord god, benefit of my cuntrey men and satisfaction of such as ether dout of or de­tract my conuersion simpillie and sensibillie sett doun my popular opinion in this behalf decla­ring hou I my self ves clearit of all theis doutes and brocht by goddes grace to knou on vhat syid the verire ves to be found. The verite is to be knouin by the church and not the church by the verite.

Aftet I had red in the Apostle Timoth. 2. and 3. chap. the church of God to be callit the fun­dament or pillar of verite I thocht it necessary to serch out vhar this pillar ves to befound that being assurit tharof I suld no more dout of the verite beildit tharupō, esteming it à matter presumpteiis, preposterus, and absurd to think that eury priuat man must first knou the verite befor he knou the church and by the said veri­te to discern the treu church from the fals: Seing S. Augustin him self ves not aschamit in expres vordis to confes that he had neuer bele­uit [Page 14] or knouin the Euangell for Euangell (albeit it be the vndouted verite) except the authorite of the church had first moued him tharunto. The holy father doutlesly did consider thou im­possibill it ves to eury one in particular of him self to penetrat and rip vp the latent secreittes of this verite vharin is comprehēdit such deap and deantie treasors of visdome, vich gaue not only occasion to ancient Doctors of the primi­tyue church to spend so much tyme and study in explaning tharof bot euin the Apostles thair self if thai had not bene first assisted by the ce­lestiall commentares of Cryists aum viue voice and secondly vith supernaturall assistāce of his holy spreit after his most glorius Ascension thai had neuer bene habill to haue comprehendit the deap of that inscrutable profundite for ma­nifestation vharof the holy spreit ves specially boyth promisit and send vnto thame. That the sens of Scriptur is not so facill as many suppo­n [...].

Sanct Hierome in his first book agans the Pelagians doth complene of the Heretiques of his age vho to drau the pepill to thair opinions ver not aschamit to affirm that the Scripturs ver easy to be vnderstud of childring, vemē and idiotes, to this effect vritting to Paulinus theis be his vordes. The only art to vnderstand the scri­ptur is that vhilk eury one doth vendicat or vsurp euin to the doting cloone, skolding drab and babil­ling Sophist: of the Scriptur (Sayis he) thai all pre­sum and pratill, teching befor thai be tacht. August. 2. boo [...] Confess. chap. 25. of vhilk presumpteus arrogance if vee shall trust S. Au­gustin, S. Hilar, S. Epiphan and the said S. Hie­rome [Page 15] all haereseis haue precedit vhenas eury one interpreting the Scriptur after his auin ple­sure persuade him self to haue foūd out the vn­douted verite. Hilar. 2. book of the Trinit. Epiphan. 7. Syn. Sess. 6. Hieron. 2. chap. to the Calat. Bot the most venerable fathers did not tak vpon thame to vnderstand the scri­ptur till thai ver first veill instructed by such as had sufficient vnderstanding tharof. So sant Hierome glorifeis him self to haue lernit the holy Scriptur vnder Gregor Naziazen and di­dimns. So Sanct Basilius Sequestring him self from all secular study and societie did schoit him self vp in ane monastery full 13 Yeares pas­sing his prentisschip in the scriptur and souking vp the treu sens tharof out of the blessed paip­pes of ancient approued doctors and not of his auin priuat imaginations as too many do nou adayis.

Moreouer in the auld testament vee read not that all ver doctors and interpretors of the lau bot à feu did exerse that function: and in the neu testament vheras Sanct Paul doth institut degrees vithin the church aponting sum to be Doctors, sum Prophetes▪ &c. tharby the A­postle doth manifestly insiuuat the sens of scri­pture not to be parent to [...]ury one. Tertullian also in his prescripsions. chap. 14. doth esteme it for ane euident mark of hereticall churches vhar thair is no difference of sex or office nor di­flinction maid in reding holy Scriptur, and vhar (to vse the said authors vordes) Catechumens or in [...]rants vithin the church think thame self perfyit befor thai be instructed, vhar vemen be so bold and inscent [Page 16] that thai dar presum to tech, disput, contend: vhar he that is to day diacon is to morrou Lector, and to day preist tomorrou Laique or secular, and vhar Laiques exerce and vse the office of preist and Sacrificateur.

Agane if it be the part of the Phisitiā and not of the patiēt to try the sincerite of medicamē ­tes: if the steuart and not eury houshold man suld oppin the stoir hous and distribut the vit­talles for eury one of the familie in particular: if the master and marinelles not eury slumme­ring and seaseik passinger suld sound the deap: direct the cours and gouern the schip: Hou much more is the tryall of the Metaphysicall Medicin and distribution of the celestiall food of our Saüles conteanit in holy Scripturs and gouernement of the schip of the church pro­per only vnto tham that vorthely haue passit thair degrees in that spirituall facultie and be laufully aponted dispensators and steuarts of that celestiall familie and finally be masters and marinelles ministeriall vithin the mysticall bar­que of the holy church aud not to eury child, voman or idiot?

Besyid this vee see by dalye experience not only in liberall sciences bot in artes mechani­que hou base soeuer thai be that mē haue nead to lern diligently certane yeares befor thai be habill to tech and thai must pass thair prentis­chip befor thai be maid maisters, and ve see that thai vho presumes to do vtheruayis be estemit bot arrogant and impudent: if so be vhy suld not the lyik (if no more) tyme and [Page 17] study be imployit in Theologie befor vee pre­sum any gret perfection thairin seing [...]che is the quene and mistres of all vther sciences bot vee as thai say in Latin entre in and defyill vith vn [...]eschin feet the pure Sanctuary of hir Scri­pturs euin the first year, moneth or day that vee can spell or read any thing in our vulgar [...]oung as tho vee n [...]dit no pilot or pedagoge▪ being thair into lyik the folisch butterflees vho desy­rus of lycht flee headlong to the candill and so burn thair self not k [...]uing the inconuenient ioynit vith the lychtwh [...]n it is not deuly and re­spectiuly vsit: So heady ferss idiots beleuing the beames of holy scriptor [...]an not burn teme­rar branes thai flee thairunto vithout fear or forsicht nor considering the maiestie thairof bot foli [...]hly trusting thair self capable of any thing thai can curiuslie consait, incōtinent thai tak on and t [...]che befor thai [...]e instructed, thai interprit, disput, distingi [...]s conclud, prech and pen befor thai can veill reid the rudimentes of vther inferior sciences much lus att [...]nit vnto any perfection in this science of sciences and heirin thai do resemble such as cūming to pass à dāge­rus sea do hyir à burque ād furnis the same vyth cōpas, todar ād all such necessares b [...]t thinking pilotres and marinelles to costly and superfl [...]s in that thai thair self haue sum knoulege in that art hauing lernit sum generalities tharof as 10 knou the arrhes, pointes of cōpas, babord and sterbord, lof ād lie: Bot the nicht cūming, the sea suelling, the storm incressing and the licht of [Page 18] moone and starres extinguisit by force tharof, no dout such temetite can not esca [...]p vntymus repentance: euin so thai vho be imbarquit in the veak veschell of thair auin fond imaginations presuming nottheles to saill the sacred seas of holy scriptur vithout perfyit pilotes and peda­goges can not escaip sum notable schipurak ether by dasching thair self vpon sum roque of rebellion or by ruuming in sum botomles golf of hereticall sect or schisme.

S. Augustin in his first book of Christian doctrin. 6. chap. sp [...]iking vpon this matter agās the foolhardines of sum in his age doth say in this sort: thai be desauit vith manifold obscuri­teis and ambiguiteis vho raschly read the scrip­tures taking oft tymes one thing for ane vther and in ane vther place the said father doth af­firm the holy spreit not to haue vnaduysitly co­uerit or maid obscuir the scripture to the end thai suld not by too much familiarite or faci­lite becum contemptibill. bot Ireneus as most ancient so is he most euidēt in this point saying in his 2. book chap. 27. agans Hereseis that the scrpturs abound in infinite mystereis of diuyne Sapience and that thai schyne vith inspekable maiestie contening so many variable Dialectes so many obscuyr phrases, parables, tropes, figu­res vith so many clauses vhilk at the first seam contradictorius or repugnant.

The scripturs then be difficill in tuo respectes, one in respect of the mater vharof thai treat, that is to say of the most highe mistereis of creation, [Page 19] Incarnation, Regeneration, Predestinariō of the Sacramētis, Angelles, of the most blessed vnite ād trinite, vith many vther suꝑnaturall se­creittes. Agane the styill of the scriptur rēdres it difficill: for not only passages ād clauses tharof vhilk be indead obscuir bot euin such as seā ve­rey plane oft tymes cā not be vnderstud vithout assistāce of the self same grace vhilk did deuyis and dyit thame as sayit Solomon in the 9 of the book of Sapience. O lord vho can knou thy Sens or meaning except thou send thy spreit from aboue:

Morouer no mā can deny bot that aue mer­uelus iugmēt and experiēce is requirit to knou vhat places be litterally vhat figuratiuly to be interprit. Heiruythall the ambiguus phrases of Scriptur doth render the same difficill: as vhen vee reid in S. Io. 8. Thou vho art thou? 1 the begin­ning vho doth spek vnto you▪ and in Matheu the 11. he kneu hir not till sche brocht to bed. and to the Corinth. 1. chap. 15. vhat shall thai do that be bapte­sit for the dead or for dead. and to the Ephes. 3. that the manifold visdome of God may appear by the church vnto Princes and potestates in places or per­sons aboue &c. and in the first of Peter the 3. In the vhilk cūming vnto the spreittes imprisonnit vho beleuit not attending the pouar of God in the dayis of Noah. Siclyk imperfyit phrases producis gret difficulte as that in the 5. to the Romans. as by one man sin vnto all men so by the Iustice of one iustifica­tion of lyfe vnto all men: vhar in that hoill period or clause thair is no verb copulatyue to absolue [Page 20] the sentence▪ and the same difficulte doth aryis of phrases spokan after the Hebreu f [...]sson as in the 118 Psalm. my Saull [...] euer in my handes. aud in the Euangell. vho vold saue his Saull let him lo­se it. Siclyk be sum phrases Ironique or spokin in derision as in Genese 3. Lo. Adam as one of [...]. knouing Good and bad. Thair lak it not also most exquisit and quik antiphrases or spechis hauing à contratius sens as in Iob 1. vhar it is said that he sacrificed daylie for his childring lest thai suld bliss God, and in ane vther place the said Iob speking to God. I haue not sinnit yit my Ee remanit in bit­ternes And yit agane vnto God. thou knoueth that I haue done no thing vickitly.

Bot of sentences at the first face seaming cō ­tradictorius the Gretest difficulte of all doth arys as in Exod. 20. I am the lord God strong and [...]alous visiting the iniquit [...]is of the fathers vpon the childring vnto the thrid and four [...] generation: vhar­unto that of Ezech 8. apperit directly contrar vhar it is said. the sone shall not bear th' iniquitie of the father. And in the lordes prayer vee pray the lord not to lead vs in tentation: Yit Sanct lames sayit that God tempted no man. and Sanct Paul to the Romans. 3. vee beleif (sayis ho) that man is iustifeit by fayth vithout the vorkes of the lau. contraryvayis Sanct. Ia. chap. 2. sayit. you see then that man is Instifeit by vorkes and not of fayth oniy: yea Sanct Paul in this matter seamit to be contrarius vnto him self saying 2. Co­rinth. 3. chap. all fayth vithout charite to be no [...]hing. seing charite is à vork commandit by the [Page 21] la [...] Item Exod. [...]0, Honor thy father and mother, &c. and Matth. 13. Call no man in this erth father. and in the same Decaloge. Sanctifie the Saboth, and in the 12. of Matth. the Preistes vithin the tem­pill did violat the Saboth not committing any cryme. Item à litill you sall see me and à litill you sall nos see me. Item in Iob. in my flesch I am assurit to see God my Redemptor. and in 1. Corinth. 15. flesch can not inherit the kingdome of God. Item in the 26. of the Pruuerb. Ansuer not à fooll according to his folie: and in that same place ausuer à fooll according to his folie. Item Iohn 10. the father is greter nor I, and Iohn. 4. the father and I be one. Item Io. 11 the vord ves maid flesch and Malach, 3. I am God and am not chāgit. Itē Marc. 15. vee read that thai vho hang on the cross vyth Cryist did blasphē him: yit in the 2 [...]. of Luc. it is said that only one of tham did blasphē him. I [...]ē in one place, my flesch is verey food, aud in ane vther: flesch profited no thing. Item in the epi­stle to the Hebreues it is said yat vithout eff [...] ­sion of blood is no remission of fins: Matt. 9. 2. Luc. 5. 20. Luc. 7. 27. Io. 20. 23. yit in the Evāgell vee reid that Cryist boyth did remit and gaue pouer to his Apostles to remit sins vhar thair ves no effusion of blood.

Theis phrases ambiguues, figuratyue, Ironi­que, antiphrastique and at the first seaming cō ­trarius gaue no small matter of studeis vnto famus doctors preceding, uhose tedius trauel­les and incredible labors scheu euidently yat thai haue bene too stupid and vane in ta­king such endles panes vpon matters so plane [Page 22] orelles vee too arrogant esteming difficul­teis so facill: for explaning vharof none be mo­re busy to vritt paraphrases, annotations, com­mentares and commun places nor thai yat mak the ignorant pepill beleif the scriptur to be so plane and none persuad more the necessi­tie of prechors nor thai do: vhilk suirlie ver all superfluus if the sens tharof ver so euident and patent as thai imagin. And moreouer if it ver so Sanct Peter ver much to be blamit vhen­as he doth say yat in th'Epistles of Sanct Paul sindry things be difficill to be vnderstud vhilk the vnlernit and incōstāt peruert as vther scrip­tures to thair auin perdition. and not only S. Peter bot sindry other disciples merit iust re­prehension vho in the 6. of Iohn did say. This is ane hard spech vho can hear him.

Theis difficulteis so dangerus vnto the vn­lernit and inconstant (as Sayit Sanct Peter in the place forsaid) maid me diligently to serch out vhar the treu orthodox Catholique, By Knouing the treu church vee shall knou the verite ad treu Pastors and by thame be resoluit of all doutes of cōscience. Aposto­lique church suld be that by hir I mycht vithout danger knou yat vihilk adhering only to my priuat opinion I culd not vithout [...]earfull dāger presum to knou: to vit to knou the veritie (vha [...] of sche is the pillar and fundament) the laufull Pastores, treusens of the verite and of all que­stions this day co [...]rouerted. for if it be treu (as it can not be vith reson denyit) that of the primityue church and Doctores tharof vee ha­ue resauit the cataloge of the canons or boo­kis of authentik Scriptur (vhilk be the vndou­ted [Page 23] verite) by vhat reson can vee refuse to resaue the treu sens and interpretation of the said bookis and of all questions rysing tharu­pon of the laufull, lineall and vndouted suc­cessors of the said church rendring vnto thame the lyik honor, respect and credit vhilk our lau­dable forbeares euer from the dayis of king Donald (vho regnit à 1400 yeares ago and resa­uit the Christian fayth as it is this day professit at Rome by meanes of Pope Victor the fyf [...]eint bischop from Sanct Peter) did giue vnto anciēt churches preceding: vharunto if vee suld vith Christian obedience bou out stubborn hartes vee suld clearly vnderstand all theis ceremoneis vsit in the Romane church in the seruice of God vihilk do seam vnto many (as thai did once to my self) so ridiculus Idolatrus and absurd to be nottheles most decent, necessary and salutar ornamentes, full of consolation, Good exemple and prouocation [...] vnto humilite and holines, and such as be (as one of the ancients did say) benefices vnto men malefices vnto the deuill and Sacrifices vnto God.

Bot in respect all Heretiques heirtofor haue That all He­retiques heir­tofor haue v­surpit the na­me of the church. boyth arrogated vnto thame self the treu sens of scriptur and name of the treu church it shall be necessary for auoyding of prolixite to mak mention only of such markes as be peculiar and propre only to the treu church omitting such as be commun boyth to the treu and fals. Ireneus in his dayis did much complene in his S. book agans Valentinus vpon the impudent­nes [Page 24] of Heretiques vho bragging of the treusens of Scriptur vnineffected vyth gloses and tradi­tions of men did also brag that vith them ves the treu church and treu successors of the Apo­stles: and the lyik impudence doth Lactantius regret of the Heretiques in his dayis vho (sayis he) did more confidētly vse the name of Chri­stians and treu church nor the Christians thair self and befor Lactantius Sant Cyprian in his▪ book of diuyn institutions. doth say of Nou [...] ­tian that as apes not being men did notuyth­standing con [...]refait the gestor of men so Nou [...] ­tian not being of the church ves not aschamit [...]o vsurp the name tha [...]of blaspheming the treu church and calling hir hereticall and Hilarius in his book to Iouinianꝰ doth inlyk maneir lamēt yat the Synagog of the antecryst suld vendicat the name and pouer of crystes church. Sanct Augustin in his Book to Constantin August doth obiect the self same impudence agans the Donatistes, and Sant Bernard in his 66 sermon vpon the Cāticle doth declare yat in his age versum calling thair self Gnostiques and Apostoli­ques vho (as thai allegit) had only reuelit vnto thame the treu sens of Scriptur after the same had bene hid from the knouleg of ages prece­ding: and theiss Gnostiques albeit thai vold spe­cially be callit Apostoliques yit thai did Scorn and mok all vther euidence of Apostolique suc­cession except of thair doctrin lyk vnto sum of yat same humeur in this deplorable age, vhose preposterus opinion in this bealf I remit [Page 25] to be refuted Heirefter in the article of Aposto­lique succssion.

Then to th' end theis falslie vsurpit titilles desaue not the ignorant causing thame tak the vyfe of Putefer for Susanna and Samaria for Ierusalē, I vill produce four peculiar markes of the treu church vhilk the most simpill soull in the vorld may easaly see only to apertene to the church of Rome and hir adherentes and not to any vther church impugning hir.

And as to such as vold haue sound doctrin and sincer ministration of the Sacramentes to be infallibill marques of the treu church, Soūd doctrin and sincer ministration of the sacramēts be not insalli­bill marques of the treu church. such men be pitifully abusit: for theis be not the pro­pre marques of the church quarto modo as say the Logicians seing all Heretiques yat haue be­ne heirtofor haue chalengit as much or more that prerogatiue as did the vndouted orthodox church. Yea this day euery Hereticall sect doth bitterly contend one agans one vther to haue only the honor of theis tuo markes. Tharfor vee must fynd sum vther markes more certane and speciall to th' end vee may euidently see vhilk church this day contending vpon this point suld be preferrit vnto the rest. Vhence then sall vee extract the said infallibill marques? not of the brane of any party contending: for lyik as to the making of of à perfyit circle vee must haue à firm and immouable centre: so to [...]ind out theis marques deuly as aperteyneth to th'end no party contending haue iust cause of exception thai must be deriuit from such equall [Page 26] and clear fundaments as all contendantes sall agree vnto. For this cause vee sall extract tha­me partly out of the Symbol vhilk generally all Christians this day vse collected (as Sanct Augustin doth affirm) by the Apostles thameself: Four infalli­ble marques of the treu church. Partly of theis Symboles vhilk ves gathe­rit by ancients in the most famus counsalles of Nice and Cōstantinople more nor à 1300. years ago. In the Symbol of the Apostles the church is callit holy and Catholique, in th' other tuo sche is callit one and Apostolique. Vharupon I do gather four marques so proper and peculiar to the treu church yat churches Hereticall can not vithout manifest impudence arrogat the sa­me as thai do the vther tuo of sound doctrin and sincer ministration of the sacramentes.

Then the first mark is to be holy: The first mark of the treu church is holines. vhilk is not to be vnderstud yat all being vithin the church be holy and iust: becaus yat the church vhilk in the Grec is callit Ecclesia hes hir name from vocation or calling vharby it is certane yat thair must be as veill vnholy as holy vithin hir, considdering yat many be callit and feu elected to holines and iustice. For this cause in Scriptu­res the treu church is designit vnder the name of à grange or barn in vhilk be boyth corn and caf: Sche is callit à feild in vhilk the poppill and tares grou vp vyth the Good grane: Sche is cal­lit à nett vihilk resauit both Good ād bad fisch: A vyneyard in vhilk be both sour and sueit gra­pes, frutfull and vnfructfull vynes: A flok in vhilk be boyth goattes and Scheip, Rouch and [Page 27] rent, scabbit and hoill: To ane hous vhatin be Veschelles of gold and Siluer, of tree and erth, sum to honor and sum to dishonor, and to the ten virgins of vlhilk as many ver foolisch as vyise. Tharfor in the treu church so long as sche is militāt heir in the erth the bad be mixit vyth the Good seeing it is only the church trium­phant in the heaum vhar all the membres be Good lyk as all the infernall menzee be leud. Thē the treu church is not callit holy in respect thair be none in hir bot holy ons bot in respect none can in effect be holy housoeuer thai haue outuart apparence of holines except thai be cō ­prehendit vythin hir. Euin as à gret army is cal­lit braue, puissant and riche, not becaus eury one of the army in particular haue theis quali­teis bot becaus the better part and most vorthy personis tharof be such: Euin so the treu church frō the better part not frō the greter is callit ho­ly. Vharunto is agreable yat of Sanct Matheu 13. vhar the chunch is callit the kingdome of heauin not yat all vithin hir be heritores of yat kingdome bot becaus none can inherit heauin except he be first comprehendit vyrhin the church.

And vhat as it is said of the church in the cā ­tique of Solomō you art (my darlin) altogidder beautifull and thair is no spoit in the, yat is meant properly of the church triumphāt vhilk in the same chaptor is said to be crouned by hir spouse: Bot if vyth S. Gregore vee sall apply theis vordes to the church militant then the [Page 28] church sayis the said holy doctor may be callit fair and spotles becaus the elect membres tha­rof by inherent grace be pure befor God and be not defylit by the societie of the reprobat, S. Grego. 18. Eccles. dog­mat. and albeit no iust nor holy man be faltles be­for God yit he ce [...]ssit not to be holy becaus by his vouis and vill he doth Supple the defect ād febilnes of his force and faculty obseruing à daylie Cleannes (as Sayit the said holy father) vhenas by his teares he doth daylie vesch avay and confes his smaller sins and doth abstene from the greter. Greg. vpon the 4. of the Cantiq.

Nether is it impertinent to call hir sanctaid est sanguine Christi tincta vhilk is to say sprink­illit vyth the blood of Cryist becaus vyth his pre­tius blood he hes vaschit auay hir sins and hes so loued hir yat he hes geuin him self for hir, Apocal. 1. Ephes 5. Hebreu. 9. yat sche mycht be sanctifeit and purgit by his blood from the vorkes of deth. and for this cause Sanct Augustin vpon the 85 Psalm. dot affirm yat all the faythfull be callit sanctes.

Thair be also many vther resons vhy the church suld be callit holy, as for yat sche doth institut not prescryue no reull in doctryne or maners vhilk is vnholy: by th' one forbidding all infidelitie and by the vther all iniquitie, ha­uing also vithin hir ane holy Sacerdoce or preist head vhilk neuer hes bene altogidder depry­uit of sum secreit assistance of the holy spr [...]it (as heirefter in the auin place sall be moir planly delectarit) in so much as tho sche seam bot as à barn or stak vharin doth appear no thing out­vardly [Page 29] bot caf and stra: Yit being threschit, scha­kin and riddillit befor the vynd of treu tryall thair sall alvay be found in hir à heap of Good corn vhilk no vynd of vanite nor tempest of tribulation can scatter or blau avay. And albeit as sayit the prophet it doth appear yat Satan hes schorn the feild of the church ād vēdagit the vy­nes tharof ād yat God doth bot glane after him ād only gather sum feu grapes: yit is not his nū ­ber so small bot yat he boyth hes had throuch­out all ages of all kynd persons and in all pla­ces sufficiēt stoir of holy ons vythin his church designing no other limite or marches to his in­heritāce bot from the sone setting to the rysing tharof. and this inheritance by the ancients is pertinently comparit to gold or siluer vhilk in the mynes is not found all pure and perfyit bot couerit and mixit vith many filthy materialles, yit the myneres and meltares do not for all yat vilany dispyis the defylit lignot bot doth put vp the same esteming it a mettall most rare ād pretieuex Naming the hoill myne or pitt thar­of not after the name of the huge montans of other contemptible matterialles couering or compassing hir bot à myne of gold.

Bot omitting all theis significations of holines vhilk all properly do apertene to the Ca­tholiq̄ Romane church I adher principally vnto yat signification vhilk bringit vith it such spe­cialite as can not be applyit to any vther Chri­stian church bot to yat of Rome vhilk is yat amang the Latins by theis vordes (sanctum es­se, [Page 30] to be holy) is vnderstud as much as to say to be firm and stabill, difficill to be inuadit or violat at lest vhilk nether suld be inuadit or violat. So the ciuill lau doth call the rampartes and fortications of à strong citie, the Tribuns, tresors and tempills tharof holy things becaus none may, at lest none suld molest or incom­mod theme. Euin so no thing being more au­gust magnifique or venerable befor God and amang men no thing more firm and stabill nor the church of God, of Good reson sche hes ever had the titill and addition of holines, for vhat can be more firm and stabill nor yat vhilk is de­dicat by and to Cryist from vhom by force no thing can be abstracted yat his father had geuin vnto him She is beild vpon such à roque as nether rane nor vynd incressing can dimoliss nor the portes of hell preuaill, Io. 17. Matth. 7. Marc. 16. 2. Corint. 2. hir fundation being so solid (as sayit the Apostle) yat one vther fundation can no man lay then yat vhilk is alredy layid to vit Iesus Cryist. Resting vpon this fondation thair nether is, ves nor sall be pouer or policie yat can defait hir. for as sayit S. Io. Chrysost in the Homilie of his expulsion. Tom. 5. sche is more durable nor the erth ād as durable as the heuin, becaus hir root­tes be fessinnit in boyith heir hir membres mili­tant and aboue hir membres triumphant. Mo­rouer that of Sanct Math. 28 vhar our blessed sauior doth say yat he sall be vyth his Apostles to the vordles end: theis vordis of necessite must be relatiue vnto thair successors and to the hoill church succeding as veill as vnto the said Apo­stles [Page 31] seing thai culd not liue till the vorld ver ēdit: By theis vordes I say The church is not on­ly declarit to haue ane vndouted holynes boyth in doctryn and lyf (housoeuer sche be traducit or sklanderit) and that becaus Cryst Iesus be verteu of his holy spreit is vyth hir to the con­sommatiō of the vorld, bot also hir firmitie and permanentes is expreslie confirmit in yat no term is set vnto hir bot the latter end of all ages. The church then is ye land Vhilk the lord hes ordenit to lest for euer, vharof the prophet doth say. Esay. 60. thou hes foundit hir vpon hir stabilite and sche sall not faill vorld vythout end: and sche is the kingdome vharof it is vrittin. Hir kingdome fall command eury vhare. of vhilk the prophe [...] so oft cryit. The pepill and Kingdome yat sall not serue the sall periss.

Vharupon I gather for conclusion of this ar­ticle. That church vhilk nether foren enemis nor fals brethring culd neuer to this day altogidder defait remaning terrible lyk ane army veill renged in battall: Cantiq. 6. Psalm. [...]8. That curch vhilk may say vyth the Psalmist: hou oft from my youth haue thay inuadit bot culd not vinquis me. That church as sayit Iustinꝰ Mar­tyr in the collogue agans Triphonius: Vhilk as the vyne the more you sned hir the more sche is frutfull: That church as said Hilarius in his book de Trinitate, vhilk triumphet the more sche be tred vpon: That church vhilk can not sink more nor the palm and abydit the fornace lyk the fyne gold, euer florissing housoueuer sche be forcit is to be estemit holy in this pro­per [Page 32] signification of holines contening firmite and perpetuite. Bot amāg all churches that this day stryue for the prerogatyue tharof only the Romane church may produce attentik testimo­neis of this firmite agans all fortons euer since the tyme yat th' Apostle Sanct Paul vritt his Epistle vntho thame vhilk nou is near à 1600. year. During vhilk tyme nether infidell Paga­nes by thair fearfull tormentes, Egesip. 3. book 3. chap. Arnob. 2. book agans the gentils. Euseb. 5 book hist. chap. 16. Athanas. 1. Ruffiinus, Euagrius. nor Tyrans by thair Barbarus persecutions, nor leuis by thair obstinat opposition, nor schismatiques by thair factius separatiō, nor Heretiques by thair perni­tius cōtradictiō and inuectiō euld neuer be ha­bill to extinguis the lycht of this Romani lamp nether by thair slicht nor micht: vheras other sects and monopolles going about to supplant hir and all Herescis lifting vp thair hornes aga­nes hir for the most part haue perissit befor thair doctrin ves veill plāted: and if any of tha­me haue sum feu ages indured: the patience of God almychty in yat behalf and his longanimi­tie hes euer recompensit thair obstinat indura­tio vyth the more fearfull punitions often ty­mes to the Eyis of the vorld vharof vee haue the notable exemples of Simon Magus to the terrour of the beholders by euill spreittes most violently lifted vp in the air and tharefter thro­uin doun all rent and dismembred: of Mani­cheus flain quik by the king of Persians: of Mō ­tanus vho patt violent handes in him self: of Arrius vhose bouelles brast out at his fundamēt to the extreme horror of the assistants and of [Page 33] Nestorius vho ves eatin vp vyth vermin. In sum: all Hereseis and Heriarches yat have impu­guit the Romane church be such as sayit Sanct Paul as cā not lōg induir bot Sche (as Sayis one of the ancientesis the beautie of the firmament vhilk schynit perpetually: 2. Timoth. 3. and hir Enemis be bot cometes conceauit of terrestriall vapores vhose flam ceassit hou sone thair gros aliment beginnit to faill. Sche is one indeficient flood vhilk being continually nurissit by the liuing springes of the holy spreit can not dry vp: thai bot brookes or burnes vhilk do ceas hou sone the storm or tempest is ouerblouin. To this pur­pos Sanct Augustin u [...]itting vpon theis vordes of the 97. Psalm: Thai sall turn to nooht as doth rusching vatter [...]s, sayet. Be not astenied to see the small brookes ryis and rummill for à vhyill for that is bot à sp [...]it vhilk rouschit avay and can not lest: Many Hereseis (sayis he) haue ro­red and run mychtely bot thai be nou as run­ning vatteres past and gone and in such sort dryit vp as if ancientes had not maid mention of thair names hardly had vee knouyn yat euer any such perfons had bene, this much Sanct Augustin. Contraryvyis it is certane yat the church Catholique Romane hes continuit euer glorius as veill in persequution as in prosperitie sen the dayis of th Apostles vnto this hour pro­fessing and obseruing that same fayth and form of diuyne seruice vhilk this day is obseruit: vhilk albeit the enemis tharof can not villing­ly grant yit the most impudēt of tham all must [Page 34] be forcit to confes yat the matteres most re­prehendit by thame vithin the said Romane church, ves brocht in and begū near à 1200 year ago, vhilk is à longer tyme nor cā be prouin yat any Hereticall church hes indurit. Heiruythall it is to be considderit yat vhen Martin Luther maid defection except in the church of Rome and hir adherentes ves no religion in the vorld bot Paganism, Iudaism, Mahometism and the dregges of Nestorianism in Grecia bot no man can be so effronted as to say yat the church of Cryist ves amang any of theiss sectes: and thar­for of necessite it must follou yat sche ves ether at Rome or no vhar. And suirly as this marque of holines signifieng ane euident perpetuitie is a marque most infallible so doth it infallibilly dis­cern betuix the orthodox and Hereticall church for since Theobutes and Simon Magus first Heretiques vnto Martin Luther sum 200 Here­seis hes ruschit and replenissit from bank to bra lyk inundatiōs of speit vatters, vharof sum ha­ue bene mentenit by most michty patrons as by Emprors, kings and cunning mē vho vrit and publist innumerabill bookes in such sort as hu­mane raison vold neuer haue thocht yat such doctryne culd haue bene suppressit: yit by the admirabill prouidence of God thai be so extin­guisit yat thair rested tharof no memory at all as is befor said: Act. 5. lyk as no dout sall cum to pass vpon all hereseis modern vho lyik to yat vhilk Gamaliel doctor of the lau did say of Theudas and Iudas of Galité Schismatiques vho sedusing [Page 35] much pepill to follou tham ver destroyit and thair pepill scatterit. So thai vho this day follou the lyik schismaticall humour housoeue [...] thai run and rore, thai bot abu [...]e thair self if thai at­tend any better firmitie or fin nor vther of the lyik humour haue had heirtofor. Vharupon to be schort I collect and conclud yat holynes in all the significations tharof namly in the last (vhilk is most proper) is only proper and pecu­liar to the Catholique church Romane and to hir adherentes and to no vther yat hes aban­donit hir.

The second marque of the church is to be Catholique or vniuersall. The second marque of the church is vniuersalite. the vhilk Sanct Au­gustin interpreting in his 131. Sermon doth say yat to be Catholique is to be deffundit throuch the hoill vorld and not to be comprehendit in sum feu corners as Schismat [...]que churchis be. And this vniuersalitie vee fynd to be threefold to vitt of places, tymes and persons. To proue vniuersalite of places the Psal. sayit: thair sound ves hard throuch all the erth and thair vordes vnto the end of the vorld. and in Sanct Marc last chap. The Apostles be commādit to go and tech th'Euangell throuch the hoill vorld.

The vniuersalitie of tyme is no les euident in yat by attentik historieis the church may be prouin to haue visibilly continuit from Adam vnto this hour insomuch as hir beginning ves at the beginning and hir diuturnite sall be so long as the vorld sall induir for God hes foun­dit hir to lest eternally saying in the 28. of Math. [Page 36] I sall be vyth you to the vorlds end and in the 2 [...]. of Luc. This generation (meaning of the church) sall not pass till all things be endit.

And yat the church doth comprehend all kynd of persons of vh [...]tsoeuer estat, condition, age, sex or nation thai be of is verifeit by Sanct Paul. Rom. 10. Saingy at in hir is not any difference betuix [...]eu and gentill, circumsition and prepuce, [...]ar­bar and grec, bound and free, masle and femelle, bot Cryst is all in all, the lord of all, plentifull vnto all yat call vpon him: for vhoseuer callit vpon his name sall be saue. And agane: you hes redemit vs vyth thy blood furth of all nations, trybes, tounges and peapill and hes maid of vs à Kingdome vnto God. and sanct Peter Act. Act. 9. 9. of à treuth (sayis he) I do persaue yat God is not ane excepter of persons bot yat throuchout all nations vho seruit him and doth iustly by accepted vythout exception.

Thē if the treu church be dispersit trouchout all places continuing from all ages and compōd of all kynd of persons, The multitud and visibili­tie of the church pro­uin. nations, estats &c. It sea­mit à glory laking Good ground to ostend or brag of neunes or feunes. For so did the Dona­ [...]stes, agans vhom Sanct Augustin sayis yat thai robbit Cryst Iesus of his dignitie seing it is vrit­tin: in the multitud of pepill consislit the dignite of à Prince and in feunes tharof he is dishonorit: Seing also Cryst hes had and euer sall haue his herita­ge from end to end of the vorld: in such sort as vho vold abstract from him the honor of yat multitud acquirit in the multitud of his mer­ceis thai bot abstract thair self from the infinit [Page 37] multitud of his inheritance, vhilk being com­parit to the sand of the sea he can not content him self vith à sma [...]l handfull of such as haue chosin to thair self singular opinions repugning to the generall consent of all attentique anti­quitie (as heirefter in the auin place sall be god­uilling declarit.) Vho vyth the Psalmist do all agre yat copiosa est apud eum redemptio (yat vyth Cryst thair is à copius abundant or larg redemption.

Eunomius the heretique desyrit his auditors ne­ther to respect multitud nor antiquite: bot Ba­silius the gret in his first book agās the said Eu­nomiusestemit him vnhorty to be hard much les to be ansuerit vnto: the said father affirming it ane matter most absurd to yeild alyk reuerē ­ce, respect ād credeit to ane hādfull of rebellius, recent, busy branes and to ane venerable multi­tud of ancient obedient and reuerend persons defendars of the Christian fayth agans infideli­tie and liuing and deing in Christian obedience vnto Cryst Iesus and vnto such as he hes apon­ted his Vicarres and Vicegerents vythin his church.

And vnder this generalitie is comprehendit the subaltern marque of visibilitie. A mark in­deed housoeuer it be impugnit yit veill establis­sep by many passages of holy Scripture. For in Math 18. command is geuin to hear the church and to complene vnto the church. Vhilk com­mandements seing thai ver geuin vnto Chri­stians to induire for all ages, thai do necessarly [Page 38] proue à perpetuall visibilitie of the church, vnto vhom vee suld in vane spek or cōplene if sche ver not subiect vnto our senses. It is treu yat vee spek, pray and complene vnto God vnseing his inuisible maiestie becaus he his à spreit inunsi­ble. Bot to Imagin the church (vhilk is ane as­semblee of bodies and not of spreittes) yat vee can spek and cōplene vnto hir as vnto à thing inuisible it is ane absurdité neding no ansuer and ane Heresie neading much hellebor. Sui [...]ly the Royall Prophet in his 18. Psalm ves of ane vther opinion speking of the church and saying yat God had placed hir in the sone yat sche mycht be manifest. and Sanct Math. 5. callis hir à citie beildir vpon the top of ane mōtane vhilk montane Esayias and Micheas forspak, Esay. 2. saying. Miche. 4. Yat in the latter dayis the montaue of the hous of the lord (meaning of the church at and after the first cumming of Cryst) sa [...]l be preparit vpō the top of the mōtās ād sall be exalted aboue all vther hilles, and all nations sall resort and much pepill go vnto hir: and this is the hill vhilk king Nabochodosar did see cutt out of the quarry vythout handes and from à litill stone to grou vnto ane huge montane and to haue visibilly filled the hoill vo [...]ld: Dan. 2. in vhilk montane after the interpretation of Daniel the lord of heauin (af­ter he had brusit all vther kingdoms) rasit vp à kingdome for him self to indure for euer vhilk sell not be dissipat nor geuin to any vther pea­pill. Bem. 6. serm. vpon the Cā ­tiq. Sanct Bernard citing this place agans the Heretiques of his tyme mentening the self sa­me [Page 39] absurditie of inuisibilitie doth say. Go too say it he. be you so mad as to beleif the stone of the church cutted out of the montane vythout handes and maid à gret montane to be smud­derit vp in your caues and corners? You ar (sayis he) desauit, and tharfor let no Christian fall frō this montane: Bot if sedusars shall say vnto Christians (as once the deuill said vnto Cryst) if you be the sone of God fall doun: (Vhat soe­uer passages of holy Scriptur thai can alleg fol­louing the fraud full exemple of the deuill) let it not entre in the hart of à Good Catholiq̄ to cō ­sent more nor Cryst did vnto such imposturs, or desauers. and if one sall fay: Lo Cryst is hear, Cryist is thair: Cryist him self admonisis vs not to giue credite. and if thai sall allege yat he is in the desert or in the secreit corners of the hous, go not out sayis Cryst nether follou tham: and the reson is becaus the head naturall is not bot conioynit vyth the naturall body nor Cryst the head mysticall of the church Bot vith and in the same church and no vay in or vith thame yat establiss vnto thair self particular sectes and sotieteis repugning to the vniuersall body of the Catholique church: from vhilk vhosoeuer doth separat him self he is not to be estemit Ca­tholique bot ether Heretique or at lest Schisma­tique becaus he doth chose to him self singular opinions contrar the vniform, ancient, and lau­dable consent of the vniuersall body of the church.

Bot to mak this matter yit à littill more [Page 40] plane I do insist in maneir follouing, saying: yat in so much as all the partes of this militant church be visible and in so much as in the church vee must haue fayth proceding of hea­ring (as sayis th' Apostle) vee must haue preching of the vord and prechors, ministration of Sa­cramēts, collection and distribution of almesse, places to convene, &c. suirky to say yat all theis circumstances (for the most part so necessary as vhar thai be not thair can be no church) be in­uisible ver too absurd and impudent: and if thai be not inuisible, the church must neads be visi­sible.

As to yat vhilk is allegit of Elias comple­ning yat he allone of all the church did remane: 3. King 19. the feabilnes of yat argument can not be bot clear to the simpillest Saull in the vorld yat vill vythout partialitie read yat text, vharin it is ma­nifestly said yat God had reseruit à 7000. vho had not bouit hair knee vnto baal: Vhilk nvm­ber culd not be inuisibill at lest one vnto one vther housoeuer thai ver separat from publict societie by the tyrannie of yat tyme, except vee suld presuppose yat thai ver all blynd. Agane it is certane yat the Prophet Making yat com­plant ves in Samaria vhar by meanis of bloody Achab and Iesabell the church had no oppin exercise of religion at yat tyme and so his com­plant ves bot for the church at Samaria not for the hoill church Iudaïque seing yat evin at the self tyme thair ves à florissing church at Ierusa­lem vnder Good king Iosaphat as is manifest by [Page 41] the same History. Bot geving ād not grāting yat the church had bene vnuisibill to Eliah it doth not tharupō necessarly follou yat sche ves alto­gidder inuisibill: seing the Prophetes did not see all things bot only such as pleasit our lord reueill vnto thame: 4. Kings 4. chap. for Eliseus vho had the spreit of Elias doubillit vpon him ves not aschamit to say and this ves hid from me.

Item it is à verey poor argument to say the church hes bene or is vnseene: ergo sche is vn­uisibill or may not be sene. For thair be many things vee see not vhilk notvythstanding may veill be sene. as for exemple. Ve se not the mo­ney Schot vp in a box nor the child in the mo­thers vomb yit thai be things verrey visibill vhen impedinents be remo [...] it.

And vhat thai say yat the accident vhilk aua­lit or takit place in one membre or part of the hoill takket place or at lest may tak place and fall vpon the hoill membres. Bot the accident of inuisibitie hes fallin vpon sum partes of the church as vpon yat of Samaria. Ergo. Vharunto I ansuer first yat in arguments à posse ad esse the consequent avalit not nixt the proposition not being simpliciter treu is to be simpliciter denyit. for experience techit the contrar often tymes in partes of one nator as veill as in partes of different natour. For exemple of partes of diffe­rent nateur be the body and Saull vhilk Ioy­nit togidder mak the hoill man: Yit the acci­dent of deth fallit in the one and not in the other. and in partes of one nature lo the eyis [Page 42] and eares as vther orgās of our senses be of one corporall nature: Yit blyndnes vhilk fallit to the eyis can no more fall vnto the eares nor deafnes can fall vnto the eyis. Bot if I suld grāt the propositiō to be treu yit the assumption ver manyfestly fals: for it shall neuer be prouin yat ether the church at Samaria or any vther part of the Catholiq̄ church hes bene so inuisibill bot yat thai haue bene sene one to anevther secreit­ty being secretty schoot vp as thai did publikly hauing publik liberty. ād vhar thai yit go about to iuggill saying yat the treu church consistid in the elect, and vee nether seing nor knouing vho be the elect that for the treu church cā not be sene. Euin as if vee ver valking amidds à gret court of Ducs, Marquises, erlles, Barons and Knyghtes, and suld Imagin vee did not see any of thame becaus vee kneu not vhilk of tham thair king loued or hated: ver not this à vyise argument to proue that court to be inuisible. Suirly in this friuolus and fond assertion I haue such compassion vpon my former partialite in alleging this poor argument yat I knou not nou vhidder to be Hiraclit or Dimocrit yat is to say vhidder I suld lauch or lament the same: for granting vnto me the benefit of this fond distinctiō thē sall no thing be visibill vnto me nether in church nor markat, my freindes my foes, my parentes, my Prince, yea the authors of this chi­mer by the self same gyges ring suld be inuisi­ble to thair inuisible flok. and morouer if it be treu yat logicyās say, yat things contrarius haue [Page 43] contrarius raisons or considerations then suld it follou yat as the elect is inuisible becaus vee knou not vho be elect: So the reprobat vhom vee knou to be reprobat must be visible. and so consequenily the deuill and such reprobat foull spreittes suld be more visible nor men.

Bot if no vth [...]r thing can moue the defen­dars of this phantastik reuerie of inuisibilitie (repugning so much to sens, raison ād scriptur) to quy [...] and renūce the same: at lest me think thai suld be disgusted tharof for yat it doth allu­terly tak auay thair auin church and all obediē ­ce tharunto. For if it be treu yat the tren church is compond of the elect vhilk be inuisibill be­caus none see or Knou vho be elect: Then thai thair self not knouing vhidder thai be elect or not if any man sall agknoleg or obey thame he bot abusit him self to knou or obey yat vhilk nether he yat is vythout no [...] thai yat be vythin knouit certenly to be the treu church: Vharin I can compare tham to no thing so much as vnto the folish Atheniens reprehendit by Sanct Paul for yat thai erected ane altar to the vnknouin God: Euin so thai vold have vs to agnouleg a­māg thame à treu church vhenas thai thair self do say yat the treu church is inuisibill and vn­knouin becaus no mā knouit vho be the elect.

Bot hear I pray the indifferent redar consi­der vharfor this subterfuge of inuisibilitie pro­ducing so many absurditheis ves inuented. Vhilk ves for yat the lait enemis of the Romane church finding yat thai culd not scheu vh [...]r [Page 44] thair church ves befor Marin Lutherat lest be­for Io. Hus, letome de Prage and Vik lef, that-for as one deap drauit on ane vther and as the haching of à serpents [...]gge can bot produce ane vthet of the same kynd: So to excuse the defect of this most necessary and requisit retour of eu [...]dent succession from th' Apostles dayis thai haue, fleing Scylla fallin into Ca [...]bdis as all selflykares and louats of thair auin priuat a­ctiōs and opiniōs haue done heirtofor. So Cain to couer his murther, disdanfully askit at God if he ves the kepar of his brother: so the vnnatu­rall brether of Ioseph vent about to color his vick it vēdition vnto the Ismaëlites by à scham­les he alleging vnto thair venerabill father yat the youth ves deuorit in the vildernes tea [...]ing His coit and tramping it in the blood of à goat. So our gret grand father to qualifie his originall inobedience ves not aschamit to imput the falt to him yat vas faltles saying to God. The vo­man vhilk you gaue me for my help did per­suad me.

Nou to put ane end vnto this secōd mark of [...]niuersalitie let vs indifferētly cōsidder vithout [...]ead ot fauor to vhat church this day professing Christian fayth may the same be most Iustlie at­tributed Is thair I pray you any of thame all ex­cept the church Catholique Romane yat can exhibit attentik testimoneis thar of vythout in­termission euer sen th' Apostles dayis? vhilk of [...]hame all impugning hir hes bene and is pre­sently dispersit trouchout all natiōs of the vorld [Page 45] as sche hos bene and presently is vee see yat all abandoning hir be lyik vnto creuling serpents vho vse not to creep far from thair cauerns. and if vee suld grant yat Heresie ver allvhar as the veritie is alluhar, yit as sayit Sanct Augustin the veritie is so alluhar yat novhar shall be fund in hir any difference vheras Hereseis scarse can be fund one lyik ane vther in tuo cūtreyis, collegis or cōuentiōs For this caus the said S. Aug cōpa­rit hereseis vnto serments or sueddings of the vyne vhilk ly still inutilly inthe place vhar thai be sned of, and the treu church he cōpa­rit to the root and stok vhilk still extending hir branches bringit furth in deu season grapes in abundance Eu [...] so the Catholique church Ro­mane hes extendit hir beautifull branches from the sone rysing to the setting tharof: Amāgs the Turcks, Persians, Tartars, Pagans: For sche is not comprehendit vithin Italy, France, Spane, Al­many, Polony, Syrie, Armeny, Ethiop, Egypt, and in vrher places vhai of vee scars knou the names bot euin in the neu fund vorld (specially vhar the Potent king Catholique doth regne:) on the Orient Thatof all the Indes (vhilk ver once subiect to the Kings of Portugall nou vn­to Spane) obserue the form of the curch Catho­lique Romane: vpon the Occident the Ameri­ques: Touard the north, Iappon: Touard the south Bresill. and not only in theis neu fund lan­des bot euin in such nations as haue abiurit all Romane obedience thair be many yealus Ca­tholique Romans the number tharof incressing [Page 46] daylie, as in England, Scotland, Denmark, and Hollād. For vhik Caus vythout impudent per­tinacitie it can not be denyit bot yat this second marque of vniuersalitie of persons, tymes and places is allanerly proper vnto the Catolique church Romane and hir adherentes and to no sect impugning hir.

Bot agās this mark of vniuersaliti thair be yit tuo ordinar obiections: by th' one is said yat it cā be no certane mark of the treu church vhilk hes the name of à litill troop, flok or handfull in respect of the aduersars tharof, lyik as the vay leading to lyf is said to be strait and narrou and feu to entre tharby and the contrar larg and ampill and many to pass yat vay. Item yat thair be many callit feu elect, as alsovee be forbiddin to follou the multitud vhilk for the most part is inclynit rather to vyce nor to verteu. Heirū ­to I aussr. Yat thair be not only one bot many larg vayis leading to perdition and gret multi­tuds yat go thidder (seing perdition is boyth in thingis forbiddin and permitted in the for­mer simpliciter in the other vhenas things lan­full be abusit) vheras thair be bot one vay to lyf so strait ād difficill as feu can entre tharby: it is treu also yat multitud is not aluay to be follo­uit since the most part is nor alvay sene to be the best part: yit the scriptur doth call the church the multitud of yame yat beleue not in respect of infidelles vhilk beleif not al, vho hes euer in nūber excedit the faythfull as much or more as the ten trybes did exceid the tuo, or the body [Page 47] of Gedeōs ost the handfull of 300. vhilk lay not doun on thair vombe to leap the vatter, bot in respect of heretiques, vhose number nor petpe­tuite neuer ves comparabill vyth yat of the treu church, vhilk tho sche be in respect of all vther trees (vhilk be infinit in number) only lyk that one tree of lyf vhilk ves in Eden yit in respect of the rottin branches yat haue fallin from hir sche is à gret deall more plentifull and larg nor thai all: For (as is heirtofor said, thai fallingly still and consum, bot sche doth yearly bud and bring out neu bourgeons in place of the vi [...]he­red, florissing lyk à frutfull palm planted by the riuier syid. For this causs ves said to Abraham (father of the faythfull) yat his seed (meaning of the faythfull or church) suld be as innume­rable as the strars of heauin or sand of the sea. and in the 7. of the Apoc. the Euāgelist did see of all the tribes of Israëll or of the Hebreu church aue hūdreth fourty four thousund cōprehēding vnder yat finit nūber à nūber infinit, ād tharef­ter à gret multitud of all nations, trybes, pea­pill and toungs vhilk culd not be nummerit all cled in vhyit garments and carcing palm bran­ches in thair hādes, signifiēg heirby the church vniuersall vnder grace.

By th' other obiection thai alleg yat in saying Catholique or vniuersall Romane is includit à contrarietie in respect Rome is bot à particular place. I ausuer. yat thair is no more contrarietie nor incongruitie in saying Catholique Romane nor in saying Catholique Apostolique. For if [Page 46] [...] [Page 47] [...] [Page 48] the vniuersalite of all persons may be pertinēt­ly limited vnder the compass of tuelf particu­lar persons: Vhat absurdite to comprehend the vniuersalitie of places vnder the name of one principall place seing boyth holy and propha­ne vrittars haue vythout offens vsit yat phrase of speking, th' one calling the vniuersall impy­re the Impyir Romane, the vther (namly S. Paul in the first to the Romans) calling the vni­uersall fayth annuncit throuch the h [...]ll vorld to be the Romane fayth. Then if the vniuersall Christian fayth by so famus ane author as Sanct Paul may be callit the vniuersall Romane fayth vhat falt is to call the vniuersall faythfull or church vniuersall, Vnitie the 3. mark of the chu [...]ch. the vniuersall church Ro­mane?

The third mark of the treu church is vnitie: vharby scho is discernit from all excōmunicats yat be cut of from hir vnitie and frō all schisms and sectes yat haue disvnited yair self from hir vniform societie: Vhilk sectes being evry one discōformable to one vther the treu church re­manit all vhar one and conform to hir self. Vh [...]r of the bryidgrome sayit in the 6. of the can­ticke: My doue is one, sche is one vnto hir mother. and this vnitie ves also signifeit by that seamles coit of Cryst mention at in the 19. of Sanct Io­vhilk had no pach nor peice and vharupon vn­deuyding the same the Soldats did cast loittes for fulfilling the prophesy. lyk as the Mosaicall or dōnance cōmanding bot one lamb to be ea­ting for the pasouer in evry familie ves à figur [Page 49] boyth of Cryst Iesus the only Immacular lamb and of the vnitie of his church in vhilk he vold haue no diuision agreable to yat of th Apostle 4. to th' Ephes. saying: one body, one spreit as you ar callit in one hoip of your vocation tharby mea­ning yat as many membres mak bot one body, and as all theis mēbres be gydit vyth one spreit: so all Christian mēbrea mak bot one Christian church and suld be contentit to be gydit vyth one spreit yat thai may say, think and accord in one, and vyth one mouth and hart, in one form of fayth and religion (housoeuer thai differ in habits) vorschip and adote one threefold vnitie and onefold trinitie. Vhatupō I do collect. That yat church vhilk is lyik the land of of one lan­gage mentionat in the xj. of Genese, in vhilk one Cryist, and one reull of Religion is obseruit and vhat thair is bot one hart and one kynd of exterior form amangs the hoill multitud of the beleuars (I gather I say) yat only to be the treu church Catholique.

Bot amangs all churches Christian conten­ding for the said prerogatiue only fall this con­formable vnite be found in the Catholique church Romane: vhilk being compōd of so ma­ny particular churches so largly spred throuch the vorld and amangs so many nations or diffe­rent mynds and maners: vit in hir god is not on­ly adorit in one sort euin to the meanestrites ād ceremoneis thar of bo [...] almost evry vhar in one tong or langage thai pray and prais God: in so much as ane infidell cumming from the fardest [Page 50] part of vorld and seing evry vhar this constant conformitie he sall incontinent vnderstand the said Romane church to haue this vndouted vnitie.

And morouer if at any tyme different opi­nions in ceremony or substance interuene amang the mēbres of this church, The authors thar of captiuating thair auin iugment after the reull of the Apostle do ever giue obedience vn­ro the sacred oracles, cannons and decrees of generall or prouinciall counsalles pronuncit v­pon matters controuerd. Vhilk vyth my Eyis I did see in the year of Iubilee 1600. at vhilk ty­me sum of the most lernit and Reuerend I esui­tes and Iacobins disagreeing vpon the prescien­ce of God did send thair deputes veill instru­cted vnto Rome submitting thair self and all thair opinions to Ecclesiastique censur: and fol­louing the laudabill exemple mentionat in the 5. of the Acts vheras the primityue church pre­sented thair temporall tresors befor the feit of Sanct Peter (vho in the 10. of Matheus Euan­gill is callit the first of the Apostles) euin so thai laying thair spirituall thresors at the feat of Cle­ment the 8. Sanct Peters holy and most Cle­ment successor did humill thame self and obtē ­per vnto his sentence returning home veill ac­cordit and cōtent lyk as in the year immediatly follouing the controuersy yat ves betuix sum ingliss Iesnites and Preists (not for any matter of fayth bot for chosing ont of persons most capable to be send in England for reesta­hlessing [Page 51] thair of the Catholique Romane reli­gion) ves by consent of boyth parteis remitted to his holines determination.

Bot this vniform vnitie and Christian obe­dience sall not be found amangs any sect this day vendicating the name of the treu church. No vnite a­mang tham yat haue abā donit the Romane church For thai disassenting one from ane vther boyth in substantiall and ceremoniall pointes vill, not submit thame self one to ane vther contēning the iugment of any bot of thair auin fautors and follouars, vhar by vithin thair auin bouelles thai be more vexit and vinquisit then thai be by the Catholiques. Vhilk Sāct Ambrose and Epipha­nius prouis to haue chausit vnto the Arrians, Eunomians, Macedonians aud Marciones. Lyk as vee may see the self same contrarietie in our age. Behold Martin Luther hes most satirikly scharpit his pen agans the Anabaptists, Zuin­glius, Carolostadius ad Aecolympadius: and thai vho vill be callit no Lutherians bot protestants vrit bitterly agans Luthers doctrin: Agane Ioachimus Vestphalus, Hessutins, Castalio▪ Casanouius, Molinaeus, Morellus vex Io. Caluin most my chtely, and the same Castalio, Brentius, Smedelinus and Sindry vthers Inuad Theodor de Beza. In some being deuydit in insinit sectes thai so vrangill and viric thair self yat thay can giue no greter argument vnto the vorld of thair erronius doctrin nor by this vnchristian alter­cation, vhilk is snch yat hardly sall you fynd any one of theis sectes altogidder cōform to the self at the lest vhilk doth not vsually chāge sum one [Page 52] opinion or vther according to the circumstance of tyme ioynit vith sum neu curius conceptiōs interuening. For vhilk caus it is reported yat Georg Duc of Sax suld haue said yat he kneu full vedl vhat his nychboris of Vhittenberg did trust yat year bot vhat thai suld beleif the nixt year no man culd knou becaus thai ver so sub­iect in that be half to mutabilitie. And of this de­plorabill diuision vee haue most manifest exē ­ples vithin our ile of gret Britanny vhar betuix the Englis and Scottes Protestantes thair be no littill disputatiō of the supremacy of the church of the authoritie of bis [...]hops, of habitts and ho­ly dayis: yea in ether of the said kingdoms the Protestants disagrees amang thair self: as in En­gland the Prelats and puritans, and in scotlād euin the ministres amang thame selfs haue had much to do first for abolition nixt for restitutiō of bischops: yea in Geneue (thair lydian stone) the Ministres lak not sum intestin canker of cō ­tradiction seeing Mousieur de Perot the second Ministre of that toune dois hold firm and fast agans Theodor Beza yat the bischops of Rome haue greter prerogatyue nor any other, and yat the bischops of Geneue vho ver naturall lordes of yat toun ver most imustly expellit. For this caus this day it is cum to pas vhilk Hilarius in his age did complene vpon as of à matter most misetable saing yat thair be as many faiyths as thair be defferent desyrs as many doctrins as maners, as many occasions of blasphemy as thair be curius hedes. Bot thair querelles be the [Page 53] quietnes of the church: for vhen as thai stryue one agans ane vther thai bot confirm the fayth Catholique Romane. and it fallit vnto thame as vnto vandring pilgrims vho straying once fro­me the hie vay (becaus thai did scorne to haue any gyid in a paith appering so easy to hold) and seking according to thair particullar phantaseis sum one sum ane vther crookit by vay thai err vnpersauing thair error till by sum notable in­conueniēt thai be forcit to considder the same: euin so the nouators of this age slyding out of the Catholique streit of holy church and refu­sing hir to be thair g [...]id tyning once the string vay of treu religion eury one according to his auin curiositie doth find out sum od and extra­uagant by vay being only fessinnit by the tailles lyk Sāsons foxes and careing thair vythall bur­ning fyir brandes thai run desperatly to burne and destroy the ryip corns of the Catholique church Romane according togidder in nothing almost bot agans hir euin as Pilot and Herod did agans Cryst Iesus: for lyk the forsaid foxes thair heades or opinions be sett into sindry ar­thes vhilk Sanct Augustin interpretis to be one euident mark of heresie, and as Rupertus sayit thai eat vp thair auin tounges vhen as eury one of tham doth impung his fellouis and condisci­pills opinion yea oftin his auin Masters, as Me­lanchon did Luthers, Zuinzius Melanchons, Caluin Zuinglius, Seruet Caluins. So thai being contradictorius one to ane vther thai be all destitut of the charecter or mark of vnitie.

[Page 54] Thai sall thē do veill and vyslie both for thair reputation temporall and Saluation eternell ty­muslie to leaue theis tumultuus vatters of con­traction, theis obstinat alters of opposition and this confusit Babell of discord and disunion re­membring yat obedience is the best victim yat ve can osfer and vnite vyth tham vnto vhom ve au obedience à most euident argument yat vee be vnited vnto him yat is the author of vnitie and concord, vhilk in one of the most excellent Canticles of degrees the Psalmist cō ­parit vnto sueit oyntment distilling from the head of Aaron (hie preist) vpon his beard and bordors of his garment, and to the deu falling from the hill hermon doun into the valleyis of Sion, saing morouer yat our lord hes commādit his blessing to abyid in this vnite for euer. O then that the beard and garments (that is to say Potestats, Princes and pepill of this age) vold susfer this blessed Balm and diuyne Deu of vnitie slyid doun vpon thame from the Mi­nisteriall head and hill of the church and yat thai suld vyth as gret kyndnes resaue as he vold kyndly and clemently (follouing his name and naturall) Ministre the same vnto thame as one seiking the conuersion of all and confusion of none. O yat thai vold patiently lyk the Lost scheip induir to be bound and brocht home from thair vandring in the vildernes of thair partiall opinions vnto the glorius societie of the nynetie nyne yat neuer strayit: or rather yat thai suld be so happy as to return not bound [Page 55] nor compellit bot of freuill as did the forlorn fone to th' end the fatt calf of reconciliation, [...] the banquer of benediction and Musicall in­strumēts of absolution micht be prepared and presēted vnto thame to thair particular saluatiō and generall loy of the hoill familie of the church yat vyth one voyce vee micht all glori­fie the celestiall falher becaus thai ver once lost and nou be found. Otheruayis to spek indiffe­rently if thai sall continu disunited vythout and vithin as thai be it sall be hard for thame to pro­ue befor indifferent Iuges yat thai be so much as treu membres much les meriting to haue the honor and dignitie of the hoill body of the church vhilk can no more be vithout vnitie nor fyir vythout heat and vatter vith out humidite. The 4. mark of the church is to be Apo­stolique.

By the fourt mark the church is callit Apo­stolique vharby is not meanit yat the Patriar­ches and Prophets be excludit, seing the church did not begin at the Apoles bot at Adam being foundit vpō the doctrin boyth of Prophes and Apostles: For vhat the Apostles prechit to haue cum yat the Prophets did Prophecy suld cum.

Morouer that church only suld be estemit Apostolique in vhilk ve fynd not only thair do­ctrin bot also à laufull continuall succession of preisthood or bischops euer from the dayis of th' Apostles to our age. And agane the doctrin of th' Apostles doth consist boyth in thair tra­ditions and vrittings vho vndoutedly did pro­pone and vse many rites, ceremoneis and for­mes for planting, vattring and confirming the [Page 56] church and consciences of men vhilk nohuar vee fynd vrittin. 2. epist. 2. ch. For vhilk caus Paul vritting to the Thessal. exhorter thame saying. Stād ād hold the traditiōs yat you haue lernit of me ether by my sermon or by my Epistle. by vhilk vordes he declarit euidērly yat hevold his vordes suld haue as gret credit as his vrittis: Yea apperātly more in so much as he doth name tham befor the other: vhilk consideration seamit to be veill groundit in so far as Sanct Hierosm in one epistle ad Paulinum speaking vpon this subiect sayit yat thair is much more pith in vords nor in vrit: for proue vharof he doth alleg yat of Aeschynes vho being in the Rhodes à banist man did hear the pepill read yat inuecty­ue orason vhilk Demosthenes did vrit agans him: at the hering vh [...]r of vhenas he did persa­ue thame merueluslie to prais the art and clo­quence of the said Demosthenes, then Aeschynes after sighing à lytill did say vnto thame: My freinds vhat if you had hard the beast him self ꝓnūcing theis verds? Meaning thairby yat his vi­ue voyice had geuin [...]th me much more matter of admiration then thai c [...]ld haue by reading of his vorkes. And agane by Sanct Paul 1 Corint. 11. it aperit yat by vord he did institut the form hou the supper of the lard suld be administrat saying▪ Epistr 118. cap. 6. the rest (meaning of the said supper) I sall dispose at my cumming. Vharupon Sanct Au­gustin vritting to lanuarius taketh occasion to say yat the same form vsit in his dayis in mini­stration of this blessed sacrament (vhilk differit [Page 59] no thing from yat vhilk this day is obseruit in the Romane church) ves by vord institut by S. Paul to remane for euer as à patern inuiolable▪ and yit in ane vther place the said Apostle. I cō ­mend you my brethring yat in all things you keap my precepts as I haue left tham by tradi­tiō. and last to timothe, 2. epist. chap. 2. vhat you haue hard of me befor many vitnes yat report to the faythfull vho be habill to tech vthers. of vhilk vords it is most clear (as ancient Irenee lōg ago hes collected) yat rhe primityue church ves instructed in many pointes of religion aud rites by th' Apostles vhilk thai neuer did vritt, bot gaue thame by verball traditiō to thair successors by vhom from hand to hand thai haue bene knouin and suld be continuit so lōg as the church Apostolique can lest.

For this cause vhosoeuer vold profes him self to beleif à Catholique Apostolique church he must not only be leif ād resaue vhat the Apo­stolique church hes beleffit and resauit of thair vritts bot also vhat sche beleuis and resauis of thair traditiōs vnurittin by thā. It is ane He­resie ancient­ly condemnit in the Arriās to admit no thing in the church bot the bair text. of scriptur. vtheruayis vee sall be brāgillit and maid incertane in the cheif points of our fayth. Nether did the anciēt He­retiques (as the Arrians and sindry vthers) dif­fer more in any point from treu Catholiques nor in this yat thai vold resaue no Ecclesiastique tradition housocuer it ves authorised vyth anti­quite bot groūdit thā self scrupulusly only vpō the text of Scriptur. Vheras Good Catholiques knouing boyth traditions and vrittes to haue [Page 60] procedit from one fontane of the holy spreit ād to haue bene both brocht vnto vs equally by one canall and conuoy of the holy church thai reuerently vyth the Thessoliens obserue boyth the one and vther ād obseruing merit the prais Forsaid geuin by the holy Apostle vnto thame: vhilk prais ve reid not in any place of holy scriptur to haue bene geuin to any yat did contem theis verball traditions. Sanct Hilar. in his book to cōstan. August. Vhenas one said to him yat he vold haue no nev thing Said or estemit for at­tentik yat ves not vrittin in the text of scriptur, replyit saying. My freind say rether thou vilt ha­ue no neu Medecin agans neu poyson, no neu punition agans neu insurrection, no neu con­sultations agans neu treasons, no neu varrs agās neu ennemis. and Athanasius speking of this purpos, vhenas out of Thëognostus, Dionysius Allexandrinus and Origines he had prouin a­gans the Arrians the sone to be of one essence vyth the father▪ Behold (sayis he) vee haue ve­rifeit our opinion or sentence by vniform con­sent and tradition of the fathers from hand to hand delyuerit from predecessors to succes­sors: Bot you Disciples of Cayphas vhorn can xou exhibit to be authors of your opinions bot your self.

And this gaue occasiō to Theodoretus in his first book. 8. chap. to say yat the Arrians ver cō ­uict by not vrittin vordes Christianly vnder­stood. For vhenas the said Arrians did reiect the vord consubstātiall becaus it ves not to be foūd [Page 61] in Scripture, then Athanasius and the bischops Catholiques assisting did refut that heresie by testimoneis of the fathers vho had resauit the same vord consubstantiall by Apostolique tra­dition. The vse and necessitie of traditions is declarit. Vee knou also yat Eluidius the heretique by passages of Scripturs did impung the imma­culat virginitie of the blessed Virgin Marie lyk as he Donatists did the Baptism of infants: Bot S. Hierome did refut th' one and S. Augustin th' other by Ecclesiastique tradition.

And of this Apostolique Ecclesiastique tradi­tion vndoutedly such is the authoritie yat not only is it vnto the self bot euin vnto the hoill scriptur as à tuichstonc: By tradition of the church is knouin v­hat books be canonique v­hat Apocry­phe. for as the fyne gold can not be discernit frō the fals bot by the said sto­ne: No more suld vee haue knouin vhat scriptur ver atentik or vnattentik if thai had not bene tuichit vyth the lydian stone of the church: be reson yat in the Scriptur the self vee fynd not in expres vords any catalog tharof, for vhilk cau­se, vee must of necessitie seik the same elsuhar and seiknig it elsuhar ve sall neuer fynd certē ­ty except vee yeild vnto Ecclesiastique tradi­tion: for vhenas you say yat the vndouted asseu­rance of all matters pertening to fayth and sal­uation is contenit expressie in holy scripturs and I agane not sinding in hoy scripturs this ca­tologe distinguising books canonique from apocryph you perrell to much the authoritie of theis canonicall books. O bot you vill say (as I my self sum tyme did most impertinently) that by the pouer of the self same spreit you kno [...] [Page 62] his styill in theis yat be attētik and yat you that­by haue incorporat à greter certēty nor the au­thoritie of man can giue vnto you. if so bee you arrogat vnto your self allone and to your spreit Imaginatyue (after the maneir of th Anaba­ptists) yat vhilk you refuse to giue to the hoill church as tho neuer one of the church had be­ne illuminat vyth yat spreit befor you, or as tho in thair approbations thai ver bot men appro­uing by no greter varrand nor humane, and yat you in your approbatiōs be more nor man and so possessit vyth the holy spreit as if you culd not be desauit in yat vhilk you resaue for asseu­rance. And thus puft vp by the belliss of your priuat presumpteus Imaginatiōs you vold haue your science to be our lantern and lodstar, pro­nuncing all vthers yat be not of your opinion to be bot ignorant obstinat persons altogidder depryuit of the lycht of the holy spreit: albeit it can not be deneyit bot yat ancient Doctors and counsals of vhom vee haue resauit the catalo­ge of holy scripturs haue bene by many degrees more illuminat nor you vyth the same spreit, vhar of thair pietie, antiquitie and doctrin ioynit vith the verteu of so many miracles so far exce­ding any perfection yat can be persauit in you be vitnessis admitting no exceptiō: Vheras you of your speculatyue inspiration haue no other testimony bot your ouin, vhilk is boyth suspect and partiall. Be contentit then to submit your variable apprehensions vnto thair venerable authoritie and your rakles temeritie vnto thair [Page 63] reuerent traditions considdering vyth your self yat your priuat certenty is manifestly detected to be full of publict incertenty in yat all sectes impugning the Apostolique church Romane doth arrogat the self same peculiar prerogaty­ue of the holy spreit as you do. Vharin I pray vith my hart our gratins lord God to pardō you seing you vatt not vhat you do. 4. Kings 6. For lyk the king of Syrias soldarts vho vent to dothaim the hous of Eliseus to haue surprised him being preuen­ted vyth blyndnes thai strayit to Samaria amāg thair enemis: So you intending to inuaid the hous and head ministeriall of Crystes church you bot go blyndfold to your auin perdition, and perseuering in this perrinacitie in taking vpon you by your secreit illumination to knou the styill and method of the holy spreit in discerning scripturs you fall vnuars in the damnabill errors of ancient Heretiques of vhom sum vold haue all matters in fayth and religion prouin by expres vords of scriptur as the Arrians and Donatists (of vhom in thair auin place.) Vthers vold admit no books of Scriptur to be attentik bot such as seruit most to confirm thair errors. For this cause Carpocrates and Manichaeus did condem the hoill auld Testament: Cordon and Cerynthus all the Euangelles except yat of Lu­cas: lyk as the Seueriās reiected the Actes of the Apostles: the Ebionites all th' Epistles of Sanct Paul, and the Alogians said yat the Apocalyps ves bot ane figment of cerynthus. So thair ves neuer one of the Canonicall books culd escaip [Page 64] the allseing Eyis of theis lunatiques vho reie­cting ancient tradition did beild vp vnto thair self à Babell of thair auin Imaginatiue illumina­tion. Bot the visdome of God hes prouydit à re­mede agās such busy branes in spyring the suc­cessors of his Apostles the ancient Pastors and Doctors of his church to leif vnto vs in Register à iust cataloge tharof to th' end yat any que­stion arysing tharupon vee may haue recours to the protocoll and not to particular instru­ments of parteis contending: vhilk cataloge vee reid insert amang the acts of the counsall of Cartage vhar S. Augustin ves present à 1200. yeers ago, and in the Epistle vhilk holy Innocē ­tius vrit vnto Exuperius. chap. 6. lyk as the fa­mus counsall of florence à 150. ago did allou the same by commun consent of all the Grec, latin, and Armenian legats assembled tharunto and last of all the celebre counsall of trent hes boyth repeted and ratifeit the same cataloge.

For this cause vee admit the Canonique scri­pturs affirming tham vndoutedly to be such al­beit the cataloge tharof be not expressie men­tionat in holy scriptur, August. 7. tom. agans crescentius 1. book. 13. cha. be reson yat by laudabill consuetud euer since the dayis of th' Apostles, thair successors frō hād to hād haue by traditiō resauit and reputed tham to be such: Vhillk did moue Sanct Augustin to affirm yat ancient tradi­tion suld determin and defyne vnvrittin vereteis and apoint the canon of the scriptur. August. 4. tom. of con­sent of the E­uange. 1. book 1. chap. Lyk as in ane vther place the said holy father sayit yat the Euangells pu­blisit vnder the names of Sanct Thomas and Eartho­lome [Page 65] Apostles and of Nicodemus Disciple by verteu of the same tradition be reiected, and theis of Marc and Luc be resauit albeit thai ver nether Apostles nor Dis­ciples bot did only vritt vpon report and relation of vthers.

Vee see then vat in most principall heads of Religion vee be forcit to adher vnto such tradi­tions as in scriptur vee haue no particular men­tion tharof. and heirin for satisfation of simpill ons I vill be yit à littill more speciall: Behold no scriptur doth say yat three persons mak one Godhead, yea the name of person (at lest ap­plyit vnto God) is not to be fond in any place of scriptur not yit the name of the blessit trini­tie, nottheles vee say that be three persons and à trinitie, not becaus the scriptur so sayit bot (as sayit Sanct Augustin) becaus the scriptur doth not gane sayit and because ve haue so re­sauit thame frome the Apostles and that succes­sors. lyk as Dionysius Areop. 4. chap. of his Hie­rarchie ād origenes in his 5. book 1. cha. testifies the baptism of childring to be traditiue and not of the text of scriptur vhilk scriptur seamit to exclud such as haue not the actuall vse of faith as much or more frō baptism as frome the Ce­ne as apperit by the vords of Sanct Philip to the enuch in the 8. of the acts saying if you beleif no thing can stay the to be baptesit and by that of the Euangell vho beleuit and is baptesit sall be saue: by vhilk and many other passages of Scri­ptur actuall fayth or beleif seamit to be so ne­cessary in baptism yat it sould alvay precead the [Page 66] same: Bot the nouators of this age disdaning to resaue this custome by tradition thai alleg childring neu borne to be faythfull throuing sum passages of scriptur impudētly and vnap­ly to that effect as vhar it is said by our master in the Euāgell suffer littill childring to cum vn­to me: euin as if to cum vnto Cryst and to be ba­ptesit by him ver all on thing or as if he did baptis all that he fuffred to cum vnto him vha­ras ve reid not in scriptur yat euir he baptesir a­ny person. in this same sort thai throu also yat of the first. Corinth. 7. chap. Yat the seed of the faythfull be holy tharfor say thai childring vhilk be the seed of the faythfull must neads be faythfull. ane incōgruꝰ and absurd cōclusiō: for all things yat be holy be not faythfull mor nor all that beleif be holy: lo the deuill beleuit sayis S. Iam. 2. cha. ād yit he is not holy: ād vee reid in the scriptur that tēpills, altars, orisōs yea kissing sum tyme be callit holy yit such things can haue no fayth and morouer to say (as sum do) yat the sead of faythfull men be actually faythfull is as extrauagant as to say yat the sead or chil­dring of lernit men be actually lernit men hou sone thai be borne vheras the one ād vther ha­ue bot the aptitude or disposition to the one and vther qualitle. and last if Childring be actually faythfull vhy ar thai not as veill admittit to thair Caene as ūto thair baptism. As to thair sub­terfuge cōparing baptism to Circomcitiō it is yit most feolisch of all for if thai vill astrict me to the ordinar tyme of Circumcition thai must [Page 67] be also astricted to the Sex yat ves Circumcidit to vit the mas [...]es allanerny and so thai suld ba­ptis no femelle childring. Thus the nouators to escaip the necessitie of tradition thay bot mask thair former errour vith ane vther more intolerable and ridiculus, ascryuing to infants yat vhilk thair age and the ordinance of God almychty doth not permit vnto tham (at lest ordiinarly): euin as to hy [...]d the obscuritie of thair church vhar of no testimony can be found befor the year of our lord 1520. thair lyik the subtill sepia truble the clear fontans of the holy scriptur vith thair vgly ink of inuisibilitie to the end no man suld persaue thame being inuo­luit vithin theis sophisticall labyrinths.

Theis and many vther incongruiteus thai fall into vho vill not yeild vnto Apostolique tradi­tiō bot in preiudice tharof vold vrest and thrau the sens of scriptur otheruayis nor the nature thar of and vniform consent of ancients vill permit. Bot heir I returne to the matter.

The beleif (vhilk Sanct Augustin in his 10. tom. Sermon 115. de temp. affirmit to haue bene maid by the Apostles self) and vnto the analo­gie and proportiō vhar of all vther scriptur suld be leuellit and interpreted: yit nether in the A­ctes of the Apostles nor in no vther place of scriptur can ve read yat Symbol or beleif as it is collected and confessit in Christian churchis.

To be schort novhar sall it be scheuit in the text of scriptur vhar vee be cōmandit to chang the sabbath day (vhilk ves satterday) in the son­day [Page 68] follouing, bot vee haue in the Decalog à precept directly commanding the said Saboth to be obseruit ād the vther sax dayis be designit for our labour. Novhar sall vee fynd the supper of the lord callit à Sacrament: Novhar any com­mandemēt to resaue the said supper fasting bot rether if vee suld follou the exēpill of our bles­sed master to resaue it after supper. Yea sum­things be expreslie forbiddin by the text of Scri­ptur vhilk notvythstāding vee may vithout of­fens vse as to cat of blood and things suffocat vhilk in the first counsall of the holy Apostles ves expreslie defendit ād forbiddin. and all theis cōsuetuds and rites partly not vrittin partly for­biddin by tradition vee be bold to obserue be­cause the church hitherto hes obseruit the same euer since the dayis of the Apostles vhose tradi­tiōs if you vold more particularlie see you may reid Origenes in his 5. homel. vpon Numeri. Tertull. de corona militis. Athanas in his book of diuers questions. Basill. in his book of the ho­lyghost. chap. 28. and 29. Sanct Hierom agās the Luciferians: Aug. 2. book cap. 7. of the Baptism of childring. Bot Sanct Augustin most of all doth planly say yat thair be many things vhilk nether cā be found in the vorks of the Apostles nor in the coun­sells of thair successors vhilk notvythstanding being obseruit by the hoill church ar to be estemit as recom­mendit vnto vs by the said Apostles. The contënars of traditions do not vith­stāding vse many both neu ād auld.

Bot heir I cā not meruell aneuch at thair par­tialite vho so much impung traditiōs seing thai thair self follou many auld traditions vith the Catholiqus and yat vhilk is more intollerabill [Page 69] disdaning sumtyme to follou traditions recom­mendit vnto vs by ancient authoritie thai vill follou thai auin traditions laking all authoritie approbation or commendation bot thair auin, as by thair Psalm books prentet at Geneue is manifest, in vhilk be comprehendit thair neu formes of prayer, preching, fasting, Sacraments, buryall, excommunication, absolution, visita­tion of the seek, election of ministres elders and decons, punition of offendars and disciplin of thair church. all vhilk formes be inuented by thair self can not be red nether in holy scri­ptur, nor ancients. The enemis of the Roman churche vse many consue­tuds tharof changing on­ly the names and not the nathor.

And yit thai be so inconsederat as to obiect for execrabill in vthers the self same things v­hilk thai think tollerabill in thair self. Yea more nor yat thai vse and vsurp à gret many of things vhilk thai condem in the Catholiques chāging only the names tharof and not the natur. as for exemple thai vill haue no bischop bot superin­tendents: no Cathedrall chaptors, bot Presbyte­reis: no preists bot eldars: no Dioces bot Prouin­ces: no senzeis bot Synodall assemblees: no Ar­chebischop or Mitropolytan bot moderators: no Officialls bot Commissars.

No handfasting bot contracting: No dene ru­rall bot visiteur: no cursing bot excommunica­tion: no aggreging or reaggreging bot first secōd and thrid admonition. no forcing of mens con­science bot confiscation of Goods, imprison­ment and banisment of such as vill not conform thair conscience to thair appetit: thai vill not [Page 70] haue Catholiques to re [...]use disputation to any mā in matters of fayth and religiō tho the same be ratifeit by actes of generall counsalls and Im­periall edicts, bot vhar thai haue authoritie it must be treason ād heresie to dout or to demād disputation in matters of thair fayth and reli­gion ratifeit only by thair generall as [...]emblees and acts of parlament.

Thai vill haue no altar vharupō to celebrat the blessed memoriall of the deth and passiō of our blessed sauior bot à tabill: No fayth to eat ād drink really his blessed body ād blood heir on erth vnder the spece or form of bread ād vyne as he did test in his latter vill, bot à fayth to eat ād drink the same really in the heauins cōtrary to his vill and testament, as if he had not force aneuch to fulfill his promis heir on the erth ex­cept by force of thair fayth ascēding vp to hea­uin his infirmitie ver assisted: thai vill not grant Good vorks to mereit, and yit thai exhort all men to Good vorks and confes yat at the latter day our lord and Master sall cum and rendre to eury one according as he hes done, Good or bad: thai vill not haue glorifeit Sancts in heauin to pray for tham, bot men lyik thair self thair fellou membres and brethring yat be not yit glorifeit vith the garland of immortalitie thai vill haue to pray for tham. and speking of the dead thai vill not haue vs to say vhom God assolzie or absolue, bot the lord be vyth thame (à desyr full of dout and directly agans thair auin doctrin vhilk condemnit all prayer for the dead:) Thai [Page 71] vill not call the blessed Eucharist of the Catho­lique church à sacrifice bot thair communion must be callit à sacred or holy action: thai vill not suffer Catholiques yat can not read to vse beaddes for remembrance of vhat prayers thai haue said vhat rested to be said, bot in thair church such as cā reid be suffreit to haue strings or marks in thair books to the end thai may begin vhar thai left and so go on till the Psalms or prayers aponted for yat tym be endit: Thai can not auay to see à Crucifix yit thai commād to hear hou Cryst Iesus our blessed master ves Crucifeit, as tho our eyis gaue not quikker im­pressions vnto our hart nor our ears can do ac­cording to yat of the Poet. Segnius irritant animos dimissa per aures, quàm quae sunt oculis subiecta fide­libus, & quae ipse sibi tradit spectator. or as tho it ver idolatrie to see yat vhilk Sanct Augustin de­syrit so much to haue sene to vit his master and redemer in the flesch: vhilk loyfull aspect sin­ce vee can not in this corruptible tabernacle in­ioy vee suld be glaid day lie to see at lest in por­trait hou he suffrit, yat by the ministry boyth of eyis and ears our frosin hartes may be inflāmit to loue yat inspeakble loue yat so villingly did losse his lyf for our saik: and heirin I beleif I may vithout offēs affirm yat the most part of the you­th vithin the realm of Scotlad nether knouit v­hat is à Crucifix or vhat it is to be crufeit and all becaus thai neuer did see the pourtrait or repre­sentatiō tharof. Thai vill haue no holy dayis bot the saboth yit none must vork vpon veek dayis [Page 72] aponted by tham to thair preching (at lest du­ring thair seruice) Thai vill haue no fasting on fryday as did the ancients, bot thai allou to fast on sunday vhilk the ancients did condem:

Thai can not auay vith the fast of lent vhilk all Christians, suld obserue (as sayit one of the ancients) because it vas institut in imitation to our pouer of the fast of fourty dayis vhilk our blessed master indurit in the vildirnes and ves prefigurat by yat of Moyses and Elias reiecting the same becaus vee be not habill to fast fourty dayis as he did, euin as if vee suld not imitat his loue, patience, obedience, humilitie and chaste­tie vith other his most laudabill exemples (vhilk he him self gaue vnto vs to imitat saying I giue vnto you my exemple) becaus ve can no more attein to his perfectiō in tham nor in his fasting: bot in place of this Christian imitation thai vill institur fasting vpon thair auin fond imaginatiō minassing the contemnars tharof vith all puni­tion temporall and spirituall.

Thai vill admit no interdictions after the Ca­tholique Romane fasson, bot such as Remane obstinat contradictors vnto tham is debarrit from thair prayers and sacramēts. Thai vill not haue generall counsalls to merit the name of the church, yit in the Actes of thair generall as­sēblees thai vsurp yat qualitie saying the church hes decernit &c. Thai disdane the vords of bin­ding and lousing in the Romane church, yit thai profes to excōmunicat and absolue: Thai scorn to heir that the Catholique church can not erre [Page 73] in matters of fayth or that simple men suld be­leif as sche beleuit, yit the most ignorant amang thame must grāt and sueir thair articles of fayth to be vythout all error and thai must be beleuit vhidder men vnderstand tham or not.

Thai vill not haue Catholiques to fynd falt vyth prophane persons violētly intrusing thair self in functions, faculteis and possessions Eccle­siastique Romane: Bot if any man amang tham be he neuer so qualifeit sall inter in to play the minister and to lift vp thair stipends vithout ad­mission preceding, incontinent he is declarit à seducteur, à Shismatique, à sacrilegius person, à volf inuading the flok, à vyld boar vasting the vinzard of Cryst Iesus and à theif yat hes en­tred by the vindo and not by the door.

Thai despyis all acerbitie of vords yit the pops holynes must be callit the Antechrist, Rome the Synagog of Satā, the Romane Clergie successors to Iudas and all Catholique Romans obstinat Idolators. Thai abhor all cruelty yit strait com­mandements most be publesit prohibiting lo­gein, meat or drink to be geuin vnto thair con­tradictors▪ thus vsing in the premisses ād in ma­ny vther points the self same things vhilk in Ca­tholiques thai condem I meruell not à litill of thair inconsideration and of mens simplicitie vhilk is so miserably abusit bot most of all is to be merueillit hou thai can vythout schame ob­iect so frequētly the contumely of cruelty agās Catholiques perseuing the said Catholiques so bitterly as thai do vyth imprisonment, proscri­ption, [Page 74] confiscation of thair Goodds (Yea vyth famin, Tuiching vo­cation. if the clemency of our gratius souerane and compassion of the pepill did not impesch thair furie) su [...]rly for my auin part I besech God yat men suld on the one and vther syid go about to establis Religion by no seueritie bot vyth all sueitnes specially thai vho laking lau­full vocation can haue no laufull authoritie to punis vthers.

For thair be bot tuo sorts of vocation or cal­ling and nether of thame can theis nouators iustlie acclam, seing the ordinar vocation must be from tham yat haue the ordinary pouer, to vit from such as can exhibit euidēt testimoneis boyth of doctrin and descent or successiō Apo­stolique: and this kynd of ordinar calling thai lak except thai vold say yat Io. Viclef, Io. Hus, Hierome of Prag, and Martin Luther thair pre­decessors had the same becaus for the most part thai ver professit preists and graduat Doctors vharby thai had pouer to institut vthers as thai thair self ver ordinarly institut. Bot thai must vn­derstand yat as the defection of thair said pre­decessors in preching and defending damnable doctrin repugnant to the obedience and digni­tie of thair institutars togidder vyth the sentē ­ce of degradation iustlie pronuncit agans tham did sufficiētlié degrad and depryue tham of all ordinar degree or function vhilk of befor thai had obtenit: euin so thair successors succeding in thair vyce ād cōtumatiusly perseuering tharin be comprehendit vnder the self same censur [Page 75] of degradation. For as à deputie contrauening the tenor of the patent of his deputation sche­uit him self ipso facto vnuorthy of such credit Euin so subaltern deputations maid by the said deputye los thair force and effect vhenas the person subaltern or mediat persisted in the vy­ce of the immediat deputie. and agane if it be treu (as it is indead) yat superiors hauing pouer to bynd or erect haue also pouer to looss ād de­iect specially vhen the partie erected vnto any dignitie doth dispyis or Inuade the dignitie of the erecter: suirly thair predecessors haue forfal­ted any prefermēt thai haue had of the church of Rome lyk as thai thair self haue done by thair opiniastre obstination agans the said seat Apostolique as also by thair voluntar and vick it abnegation contenit in the confession of thair faith prented and put vp amang the actes of parlamēt vharby thai detest abiure and renon­ce as things damnable and idolatrus all benefit office and charg proceding from the authoritie of the church Romano, by vhilk oppositiō and renuntiation forsaid thai manifestly depry­ue thair self of all ordinar vocatiō if thai or thair predecessors hes had any. As for extraordinar vocation thai haue as litill reson to vsurp it seing yat kynd of calling hes euer bene accum­paneit vyth such extraordinar giftes as gaue suf­ficient authoritie and credit to thair calling, as vith irreprehensibill holines of lyif loynit vyth extraordinar miracles: Bot thair lyf rendring no extraordinar licht nether of extraordinar holi­nes [Page 76] nor miracles thai haue no reson to vsurp the honor of extraordinar calling. I am not igno rant vhat subterfuge thai vse in this point alle­ging thai tech no neu doctrin crauing neu o­peratiō of miracles seing thai tech only the do­ctrin alredy confirmit sufficiently by the mira­cles of Cryst Iesus and his Apostles. vharunto I anssr yat albeit it ver treu yat thai did tech on­ly the doctrin of Cryst and his Apostles vncor­rupting the same vyth thair auin gloses and neu interpretations repugning to the ancient inter­pretatiōs of the fathers yea oft tymes to the text of scriptur. yit in so much as thai Impūg the Pa­stors vhilk only haue the euidence of Apostoli­que ordinar succession, of necessitie thai must fortifie and confirm thair extraordinar opposi­tion vith sum extraordinar miracle. Euin as the prophets did vho albeit thai techit no lau bot yat of Moyses confirmit long befor vith glorius miracles Yit in respect thai did reprehend the ordinary Doctors of the lau and such as sat in the seat of Moyses thai did qualifie thair most inst thretnings and reprehensions by miracles meriting gret credit and authoritie.

Bot in respect this matter of vocation doth merit à seuerall discours I delay the same to sum vther place more propre and conuenient returning vnto my purposs and affirming that the ministres thair self in most things vhilk thai vse in thair church thai follou ether old or neu tradition or at lest interpretation vhilk be not expreslie contenit in holy scriptur: For as is a for [Page 77] said in thair baptism the baptesing of childring and in thair communion to resaue it fasting and not after supper is by tradition, in the decalog the chang of the saboth day is also by tradi­tion, lyk as the vords of parents and adultery must resaue interpretatiō: yea morouer vee suld not knou the blessed volum of holy scriptur to be such if by tradition it had not cum to onr knoulege nether is it à Paradox to say yat the books of prayers pennit and prented in Gene­ue be no more in expres vords in scriptur con­tenit nor the Roman matin books be. Vharun­to thai aussr indirectly vhenas thai say all yat be contenit in thair books ether to be scriptur or at lest nor repugning tharunto: becaus thai astrict Catholiques to expres vords and thai as preui­legit person must be licentiat so thai may scheu the matter or fundamēt of thair forms to be in­cludit any vay vithin Scripturs: Bot thai must vnderstand that the matter and fundament of vords differ as much from expres vords as the fondation of a hous and à finissit hous or as the matter and sorm vhilk be so different in natur as that à naughty form rendrit à Good matter to be naughty: behold the most delicat fruitts resauing once the filthy form of putrefaction or the best venison yat can be vissed conuerted once in vernim becum bot contemtibill notuy­thstanding thair former fynnes: or to spek mo­re conueniently to this matter: behald the puri­tie of theis passages of holy scriptur vharupon Arrius, Donatus, Eluidius and other Heretiques [Page 78] did found thair errors ver bot vitiat and defylit by the heretical forms yat thai ver partially throuin vnto resauing cōtrar thair nator by the filthines of the said forms sum infection as clear fontās infected by repair of filthy beastis or pre tieux stones staned by sum contrarius accident be not preseruit by thair singularitie from such inconuenients vhen thai chanse to fall. and suir­lie thai be giltie of this partiall preuarication or collusion vhosoeuer doth cite, apply, throu, or interprit holy scriptur not according to the mynd and tradition of the most ancient, most holy and most le [...]it fathers bot according to the mynd ād plesuir of sum priuat modern per­sons vho to aduance thair auin priuat credit go about to mak the holines and doctrin of the said fathers to be suspect and odius.

Bot to th [...]end I may once absolue this fectiō of traditions I only add th [...]iss menifest passages follouing. Manifest pas­sages of an­ciēts prouing traditions vnurittin. Of Ignatius Euseb. Story Eccles. 3. book 3. chap. first of Sanct Ignatius Bischop of An­tioch ane author of the same age vith the Apo­stles vho in tho year of our lord 38 going to be martyred did exhort all churches by vhilk he ve [...] to diminis no thing ef Apostolique tradition vhilk he vissit tham for the more securitie to put in vrit. Nixt of Tertullian ane author of the first age after the Ascension saying in his book of fasting yat the solennell institutions ver e [...]kkit to the fayth ether by scriptur or by tradition of the eldars.

Thridly of Eusebius bischop of Cesaree in Pa­lestina ane autor of the second age after the As­cension saying in his books of Euangelique demonstration Euseb. 1. book 9. chap. de­monstra. E­uangel. [Page 79] yat the Apostles applying thair doctrin to the eares of many hes consignit or left thair said do­ctrin partly by vritt partly vythout vrit as à certane lau or custum vnurittin. Ferdly Sanct Basill bischop of Cesaree in Cappadocia à 1230. years ago in his book of the holy spreit chap. 27. saying. of the doctrin yat is obseruit vithin the church sum tharof vee haue by vritt in instruction, sum by secreit tradi­tion of the Apostles, yit boyth th'one and other haue alyik force in Religion, nether is thair any hou ly [...]rill so euer he be exercised in the laues of the church yat can deny the same. Fyftly of Sanct Epiphanius bis­chop of Salamin in Cypre à 1220. years ago saying in his book agās Heretiques, in this sort. Vee be forcit to vse traditions for all things can not be drauin out of scriptur, and for this causs the holy Apostles haue left vs sum things by tradition, sum things by vrit. Saxtly of Sāct Chrysostom archi­bischop of Constantinople about à 1200. Years ago vritting vpon the same text of Sanct Paul, 2. to the Thessal [...]. chap. (vhat the Apostle com­mandis tham to obserue his traditions resauit ether by vord or vrit.) the holy father sayit thꝰ. it apperit (Sayis he) of this text yat the Apostles haue not left vs all by vrit bot yat thai haue recommendit many things vnurittin: tharfor ve think the tradition of the church is vorthy to be beleuit: It is à tradition, inquyir no farder. Last of all S. Augustin bischop of hippo in Afrique in the same age vritting a­gans the Donatists in this sort. The Apostles to cō ­fes the treuth (says he) hes vrittim no thing of this matter bot it is to be beleuit yat this custome hes ta­kin [Page 80] his beginning from thair tradition, as thair be ma­ny things vhilk the church vniuersall obserue vhilk notuithstanding of Good reson is to be thocht commā ­dit by the Apostles albeit thai be not vrittin. Vhy Sanct Augustin callit the tuo testamēts tuo pap [...].

Theis be testimoneis so manifest as it ver su­perfluꝰ to produce any more: yit I knou thai vill alleg to the contrar the self same S. Augustin in his 3. traittie vpō the epistles of Sāct Iohn saying yat the tuo testaments be the tuo Papes of the church out of the vhilk vee suld sook the milk of holy historeis: vharby thai vold conclud yat the said father vold seclud all tradition yat ves not comprehendit vithin the said testaments.

Bot the aussr heirunto is easy to such as vill read the place forsaid vharin the holy father makit distinction betuix the milk and solid meat contenit in the tuo testaments, by milk meaning Cryst in his humilitie, by solyd meat meaning Cryst as he his equall vnto the father, affirming that the sacred historeis of his huma­nitie and diuinitie ar to be soukit out of the papes of the tuo testaments the one for milk th [...] other for solid meat: vilk vee also confes to be treu: Bot to infer heirupon yat Sanct Augustin by theis vords dois condem all vnurittin tradi­tions ver not only to condem him self vyth all the venerable fathers preceding him bot also to condem the said tuo infallibill testaments or pretieus papes out of the vhilk vee may souk (if ve be not sensles) the milk of Apostolique and Ecclesiastique vnutittin traditiō by the Apostle saying in one place. 1. Timoth. 3. chap. yat the [Page 81] church is the pillar and fondament of veritie (vharby all hir tradition and ordonnances vrit­tin and vnurittin be confirmit to be autentik:) and by the same Apostle in ane vther place 2. Thessalo. 1. chap. commanding thame to keip his traditions vhatsoeuer vrittin or vnurittin as is aforsaid. morouer theis traditiōs haue seruit for cheif veapins vharvyth the holy ancients haue voundit all Heretiques to this hour For Anciēt Ireneus vsit the same agans the Heretique Va­lentinus: Tertullian agans Marcion: Origenes agans Celsus: the counsall of Nice agans Arrius: Basilius agans Eunomius and Amphilochius: Sanct Hierom agans Vigilantius, Iouinianus and Luciferianus: Cyrillus Allexandrin agans Ne­storius: Proclus bischop of Cōstantinople vrit­ting to the Armenians: Theodoretus in his Po­lymorph agans the Heretiqus of his tyme: Sanct Augustin agans the Donatists, and Iulian: Leo, Gelasius and Iohn bischops of Rome agans Eu­tyches: the Saxt Synod vsit this tuo eggit veapin agans the Monothelites: the seuint Synod agans the Iconomachs: Beda the venerable vsit the sa­me vritting of the varietie of the cours of the Moone: Peter of Cluny did the lyik agans the Henricians and Petrobrusians: Sanct Bernard agans Peter Habailardus: Euthemius agans the Heretiques of his tyme: Finally all holy vrittars vnto theis dayis haue vsit the same for most pi­thye and peremptory arguments agans all he­reseis and Heretiques.

Bot I do not so insist in defending the neces­sitie [Page 82] and authoritie of Apostolique and Ecclesia­stique tradition as if the hoill glob of the Apo­stolique church Romane suld succumb if thai ver denyit: Not only tradition bot al­so expres scri­ptur prouit Catholiques opinion in cheif contro­uerseis. becaus expres scriptur doth confirm thair doctrin in points most cōtrouerted, vhilk I proue by theis feu testimoneis follouing. vhen in the beleif it is said by degrees yat Cryst our blessed master ves crucifeit, dead, bureit and therefter des cendit to the hell, tharin the fayth of the Catholi­ques is Prouin to be orthodox or autentik vho deny his descēding ether to haue bene befor or in bot after his deth. Agane vhen it is said indefi­nitly in the same beleif: I beleif the communion of sancts: doth it not proue the Sancts militāt and triumphant to haue à mutuall communion? bot vhat communion can vee mortall militants ha­ue vyth theis immortall glorifeit triumphants bot vhen by our reuerent voues ad prayers ve supplie thā to interceid for vs throuch his meri­tes and passion vharby thai be alredy glorifeit knouing yat thai vnderstand our estat in yat it is mentinat in the fyftent of Luc yat thai reioyis at the conuersion of sianars: and on the other part vhenas the said membres triumphant do commemorat or offer vp our orisons and almes deadis as ve reid partlie in the rent of the actes in the history of Cornelius, partly in the 8. of the Apocalyps that thai haue done. Vhen it is said in the 2. of Machab. 12. chap. (Vhilk book Sanct Augustin doth numer amang the Cano­nicall) prayers for the dead to beholy and helthfull, vho can deny bot such prayers be necessar? vhē [Page 83] vee reid Sanct la. 5. Yat the preist suld be callit vnto the seik to auoynt yame in the name of the lord and to pray for tham, doth not this text command vn­ction to be conioynit vith prayers in the last ar­ticle of lyif vhen our seiknes is such as can not be curit? Vhen vee reid in the .5. to the Ephes. Matrimony to be à gret sacrament, vhy suld vee cō ­dem tham yat this day affirm the same? vhen ve read. 1. Corinth. 7. chap. Yat he doth veill yat Ioy­nit his virgin in matrimony, bot yat he doth better vho ioynit hir not and vhen vee reid 2. of Timoth. 5. If young vidoues yat [...]e consecrat vnto offices of the church sall Marye thai incur damnation violating thair former vou [...]ls it not euident yat our mo­ther the holy church hes drauin out the doctrin of celibat or auouit virginitie out of the pure fontās of holy scriptur, Vhen vee reid. Peter. 5. many things to be in the Epistles of Sanct Paul diffi­cill to be vnderstand: and in Io. the 6. Many Disciples to haue said to Cryist, vhenas he himself did spek, Thus is à hard spech vho can heir him? Yea sum Disci­ples to haue left him for the hardnes of his spech and the verey Apostles thame self to haue said in one place, spek vnto vs planlie and not in parables. in respect of theis spechis vhat Heresie is it to say yat the sens of scriptur is sum tymis difficill? vhē vee reid Philip. 2. Yat God sall rendre to eury one according to his vark is: and 1. Corinth. 9. Evry one sall resaue his proper reuard according to his labor, and Matth. 16. Since vee be commandit to vork our auin saluation and Math. 25. vhen it is faid Yat at the latter day it sall be rendrit to evry one according [Page 84] to his charitie and almes deades to the indigent: doth it not follou yat Good vorks be meritorius? vhē it is said. Yat the sin agans the holy spreit sall neuer be forgeuin in this vorld nor in the vorld to cum and in the 1. Epistle of Io. 5. chaptor. Yat thair is à sin vnto deth vhilk suld not be prayit for ād agane, Yat thair be sum sins not vnto deth: is it not manifestly prouin sum sins to be mortall, sum veniall, and sum heir in this lyif sum after this lyf forgeuin? Vhen in Io. 3. it is said except vee be regenerat by vatter and the holy spreit vee can not inter in the kingdome of heauin, is not tharby declarit the ne­cessite of baptism vnto saluation? vhen vee read in the 8 of the Acts, Yat the Apostles layid thair handis vpon thame yat ver alredy baptesit, is not tharby the imposition of hands vsit in the Ro­mane church vnder the name of confirma­tion most euidently establissit? Vhenas as vee reid to the Thessalloniscen. chapit. forsaid the Apostle to commād tham to obserue the traditions lernit of him ether by his sermō or vords and agane in the 1. Corint. 11. yat agans the contētieux he doth obiect only cōsuetud or custum saying vee haue not such cu­stome nor the church of God. Be not the. authoritie of vnurittin traditions tharby euidently confir­mit? vhar to Timothe the church is callit the pillar and fundament of veritie, and, in the 18. of Matt. Vho disdanit to hear hir let him be to the as ane ethnik or Publican doth not theis passages vrg to beleif as the church beleuit and to be assurit sche can not err? Vheras in the 4. of Genes. God sayit vnto Cain vhy art you angry ād vharfor doth you cast doū [Page 85] thy visage: if you do veill sall you not resaue it, and if you do euill is not sin or punition at thy port: bot thy appetit sall be vnder the and you sall reull ouer it. and in the 15. of Ecclesiasticus (vhilk book al­beit Io. Caluin affirm to be doutfull yit seing in the 3. counsall of Cartage 47. canon it is rek kin­nit amang the canoniques as the Epistles of ia­mes and lud vhilk ver also once douted vpon and yat Sāct Augustin in his book of grace and freeuil chap. 2. doth vse this same passage to proue freeuill I produce the same for autentik scriptur) Iesus the sone of Syrach in the said book saying in this sort. God at the beginning did constitut man and left him, in the handes of his auin counsall: He gaue vnto him commandemērs and pre­cepts saying if you vilt keip tham thai sall conserue the he hes sett befor the fyir and vatter to vhilk of the tuo you vilt put out thy hand: befor man is Lyif and deth, Good and bad, vhat plesit him sall be geuin him Vheras in the 30. of Deuterō. Moyses sayit to the pepill I call the heauin and erth to vitnes yat I haue sett befor your Eyis lyif and deth, cursing and blessing chuse tharfor lyf yat you ād your sead may lyue. Vhe­ras to the same pourpose. 1. Corinth. 7. chap. it is said. vho being firm vyth hym self doth in his hart conclud not of necessitie bot hauing pouer vpon his auin vill, &c. Doth not theise clear passages pro­ue the doctrin of freeuill to be orthodox and attētik? Matth. 16. Vheras ve read yat Cryst our master first reuelit vnto Sanct Peter Yat he ves Christ the sone of the leuing God the other Apostles esteming him bot ether Elias for his yeall vnto the obser­uation [Page 86] of the lau, or Hieremias be reson of his holynes, Io. Last. or Io. Baptist because he prechit the doctrin of baptism as Iohn did, or sum prophet because he propheceit of things to cum. Io. 13. Vheras specially pouer ves geuin to him to bynd and lousse and promis of the keyis of the kingdome of heauin: Io. Last. Vheras For him only Christ payit tribu [...], Io. 6. him only he causit valk on the vatters, him only he did recōmed to confirm the fayth of his brethring, of him allone he tuik plesour so oft to demand if he louit him, to him allone he said thryis fead my scheip, vnto vhom allone chā ­ging his name he gaue one of his most famus names calling him Cephas: vnto vhom of all th' Apostles he apperit first after his glorius Resurrection and befor his deth to him allone did fortell the same and the maneir of his deth, Finally vheras in expres vords in the 10. of Math. Euangill he is callit the first of all the Apo­stles: is not the supremacy of S. Peter by theis passages and by many vthers (vhilk God vil­ling in à traittie à part I sall sum day collect) most clearly confirmit. Vheras in the first to the Romans the Apostle doth so extoll thair fayth yat he sparit not to call the fayth vniuersall or Catholique prechit thruch the hoill vorld to be thair fayt: Vhat Heresie or offens is it this day to call the vniuer­sall church of the faythfull vnder the venerable name of the Romane church vhilk nou profes­sit no vther form of fayth nor yat vhilk the Ro­mane church did profes vhenas the said Apostle did commend thame.

To be schort vheras in expres vords it is said: Ane euident probation of reall presence. this is my body and agane except you eat the flesch of [Page 87] the sone of mā and drink his blood you sall not obtene eternell lyfe. and agane my flesch is verey meat and my blood verey drink doth not theis expres testi­moneis most clerly proue the eating and drin­king and reall presence of Crysts body? and v­heras in this reall manducation the gros appre­hensions of the Capharnaits is reprehendit by theis mysticall and deap spechis of our blessed sauior saying: it is the spirit yat quink kinnit: the flesch profitet no thing: and agane, my vords be spreit and lyf, bot thair be sum of you yat beleif not: by theis vords (I say) is not the disdanfull derision of such as falsly imput Cyclopique Anthropo­phagie or eating of mens flesch vnto Catholi­ques manyfestly elidit and couicted? for theis scoffing mokars grosly imagening (as did the Capharnaites) the naturall and carnall body of Cryst so to be eatin naturally ād carnally yat his flesch is torn and his bones brokin after such sort as Poëttes did fayn the geāt Polyphe­mus and as ve knou the barbarus Bresilians to eat men and vemen, and tharuithall lyik vnto naturall Philesophors distrusting all doctrin vhilk agreit not vith naturall sens or raison thai be pitifully desauit ether ignorantly or arro­gantly preferring (contrar the doctrin of Cryst) sens vnto fayth and flesch vnto the spreit. For if I suld say vyth theis Sacramentars yat by my fayth I ascend vp vnto heauin and tharby am conioynit vith Cryst and so doth eat his flesch and drink his blood: in doing all this vhat haue I done repugning to naturall raison seing the [Page 88] verey infidell Philosophors confes the heauins to be the habitation of the goddes and yat by our vouis and eruist affection ve be conioynit vyth tham and no otheruayis: Bot on the vther part if vith the Catholiques Romane I sall say yat I do eat à bread descending frō heauin pre­figurat by the Hebreuis Manna, the food of an­gells geuin by God vnto men, à graip consauit in the vynetree of à virginall vomb, hauing no pressoir bot à potence or cross, no veshall bot à blessed naturall body, no canall bot his sacred syid hāds and feit, no fum bot the force of the holy spreit to mak me dronk vyth yat cellestiall nectar: A flesch prefigurat by the immolation of Isaak and eating of the paschall lamb. and ane Innocent calf killed for me and vs all prodigall childring, and in one vord if I sall vyth Catho­liques affirm the bread to be changit in the flesch of Cryst and the vyne in his blood, the philosophors sall lauch, sens and naturall raison sall raige and repung: tharfor in this manduca­tion of Catholiques vee haue nead of fayth and spreit, in the other manducation of the sacramē ­tars (Cheiflie theis yat follou Io. Caluin, it suffe­sis to follou the gross opiniō of sens and flesch. vee read yat the Disciples of Pythygoras had such respect and reuerence vnto thair maister yat it vas sufficient probation amang tham in all thair disputations to say. ipse dixit (he hes said it and vho douted thar of (housoeuer thair auin o­pinions ver contrarius) ver expellit out of his paedagogy: bot thai in theis dayis vho vill only [Page 89] be callit the Disciples of Cryst vill not admit his sacred oracles as he hes said and pronuncit, bot as plesit thame to interprit and cēsure tham not by the pith of the spreit bot by the pouer of thair impuir sens by vhilk if thai vill permit me to mesur the rest of the mistereis of holy scri­ptur then sall I branggill all the fondaments of our fayth. For behold I find à cōception and in­carnation of à man vythout the seid of man, à voman after hir birth to remane virgin, à natu­rall body to ascend, to valk vpon the element of vatter to Inter really vithin à houss all ports ād passages vharby to inter being schoot vp, I find to be schort all things to haue bene maid of no thing: vold not the Capharnaites, carnall sens ād Aristot vyth his carnall curiosite anssr (as it is reported he once did reading the books of Mos ses) much is said, no thing prouin: for corporall things must descend not ascend, sink and not valk vpon the vatters much les entre throuch doores vy [...]nout persing or breking thar of: that men be generit by men, that to be mother and mayid at one tyme is as impossible as to be child ād mā at one tyme ād finally yat of no thing no things cā be producit. Bot heirūto the sacramē ­tars ausuer (and verey Christiāly) yat the author of nature (vho may vork vhatsoeuer his vill is ād yat villit no thing bot vhilk is Good) hes vrocht supernaturally in the premisses, and yat he spak only and pronuncit and all ves perfyted. Then if in the admirable creatiō of all vorldly things, in the vonderfull redemption of mankind, in [Page 90] the glorius operation of all miracles contenit vi­thin the compass of holy Scriptur vee do con­found all sens and raison humane only by the vord of God assuring, tresting and hoping con­trar our auin asseurance, trest or hoip only be­caus he hes so said and pronuncit: vhy suld vee in the blessed sacrament of the supper of our lord dour or deny any corporall or bodely sub­stance to be thair except the bread and vyne vhilk vee see vith our eyis considdering he hes solēmtly said in presence of à doson of vythnes­ses agans vhom can be no exception ( this is bo­dy.) o bot you say, this is à hard spech to affirm yat the body of Cryst can be vnder the form of bread vyne. I ansuer so ves it à hard spech to the Capharnaites and many vthers yat vhilk Cryst spak of regeneration, and of this kynd of man­ducation: and so is it à hard spech to all infidells to hear of the creation, saluation, illumination, resurrection and immortalitie of man. humane raison can not attene heirunto. bot rendring our raison captyue vnto his vords vho is aboue vs and our raison as author tharof ve sall not pre­sum to dour or deny any thing yat he hes said. can à litill pot comprehend the hoill vatters yat be in the vorld or the small centre of the erth the hoill circumferance of the same? no more can humane raison comprehend the deap diui­nitie of this high mistery. Moyses culd bot see the hinder parts of footsteps or rether à small glāse of the glory of God passing by: Exod. 33. 3. Elyas coue­rit his face vith his mantill trembling to heir the Kings 21. [Page 91] tempest of vhirlvynds erth quaiks and fyir pre­ceding the soft and sueit air vharin the voyce of God vas: Solomon for all his humane visdo­me fand him self so blindit behalding the vis­dome of God yat astoniet he did say. qui scruta­tor est diuinitatis confundetur ab ea (vho vold serch out diuinitie meaning by humane raison sall be cōfun­dit vith the force tharof). and Sanct Paul vho ves rauisit once to the thrid heuin did fynd not­uyth stāding in the vorks ād vords of God (vho is longsuffering and suddane vithout cōtradi­ctiō) Ialuse ād patiēt vithout passion, mercifull and iust vithout partialitie or preuarication, vn­habill to do euill vithout impotētnes or priua­tion, infinitly gret vythout dimension, eury vhar vythout circumscription and all in all vythout confusion) the said holy Apostle I say did fynd in the vords and vorks of God such inscrutable profundite exceding the schallounes of his na­turall sens yat strikin vyth admiration in the 11. to the Roma. he dois say: ô the profund riches of the visdome of God: ô hou incomprensible be his iug­ments and his vayis impossible to be found out (mea­ning. by flesch and blood) Bot Inuane I do hear al­leg the exēples of Prophetes and Apostles vho ver bot men seing the verey Angelles vho be as clearseing celestiall eagles vncouering thair faces dar not behold the blasing beames of his beautifull aspect much les presum to censur his vords and vorks by the quikes of thair Angeli­call intelligence: yit vee blind oulles and molds vho haue only bot the deprauit dregs of [Page 92] yat ridiculus reason vhilk our grandfather did gain losing his originall innocence, ve I say be bold to leuell vyth the lunatique lyne of our cu­riositie à largnes vhilk hes no term or limit, ad­mitting no thing (Vhen vee list to lyik our auin opinions) to be treu vhilk the narou pot of our prudence and the small centre of our Eye is not abill to comprehend. Bot vee suld remēber vhat our lord and master did say for such incre­dulitie vnto Sanct Thomas of India. Thoma, Thoma, because you hes sene you dois beleif, bot blessed be thai that haue not sene ād yit be­leif. Then the Catholiques Romane be blessed far aboue theis Eeunderstanders, becaus yat rē ­dring thair carnall consaitts vnto the pouer of the spreit thai beleif vithout disput or dout as did S. Thomas of Aquin in of one his heuinly hyms vhilk in Latin I haue set doun because vn­lossing the naturall grace it can not for my opi­nion be trāslated in our vulgar poesie namly by me yat neuer ves à poet, and syne the qualitie of my distressit estat admitting no Lasar to amuse my self vpō the quātitie of syllabes vhilk exer­cise as sayis boetius in his mourning book de consolatione Philosophiae be more sit for co­medeis nor calamiteis.

In supremae nocte Coenae, recumbens cum sra­tribus, obseruata lege plenè cibis in legalibus, ci­bum turbae duodenae, se dat suis manibus. Verbum ca­ro panem verum verbo carnem efficit, fitque sanguis Christi merum, & si sensus deficit ad firmandum cor sincerū, sola fides sufficit. and in ane vter place.

[Page 93] Dogma datur Christianis, quod in'carnem trāsit pa­nis & vinum in sanguinem: quod non capis quod non vides, animosa firmat fides, praeter rerum ordinem: Sub diuersis speciebus, signis tantum & non rebus, la­tent res eximiae, caro cibus, sanguis potus, manet tamē Christus totus, sub viraque specie. A sumente nō can­cisus, non confractus, nō diuisus, integer accipitur: Su­mit vnus sumunt mille, quantum isti tantum ille, nec sumptus consumitur. Sumunt boni sumnnt mali, sorte tamen inaequali, vitae velinteritus: Mors est malis, vi­ta bonis, vide paris sumptionis, quam sit dispar exitus. Fracto demum Sacramento, ne vacilles sed memento tantum esse sub fragmento, quantum toto tegitur, nul­la rei fit scissura, panis tantum fit fractura, qua nec sta­tus nec statura, signati minuitur. Tantum ergo Sacra­mentum veneremur cernui, & antiquum documentū nouo cedat vitui, prastet fides supplementum, sensuum defectui.

As to yat vhilk is allegit out of the first Co­rinth. 11. chap. Vhar the body of our lord is callit bread: Vharupon if thai vill infer yat thair can be no thing thair bot bread my I not as veill infer yat thair can be no thing thair bot the bo­dy of our lord seing our lord him self did call the bread his body. This mycht be ane sufficiēt ansuer to ane argument so insufficient bot yit I vill be more speciall in declaring vharfor the body of our lord is callit bread by th' Apostle. First becaus Cryst him self and his blessed body is in many places of scriptur so namit: as in Ieremie 11. vhar it is said let vs put the tree to his bread: Vhar by the tree the cros and by the bread Cryst or [Page 94] his blessed body vas praefigurat according to the opinion of all th' ancients: and in the Euangell Cryst is callit the bread vhilk descēdit frō heauin. Bot in the tabill of out lord I remember not to haue red the body of Cryst to haue bene callit absolutly bread bot euer vith sum adiction, e­ther demōstratiue, relatyue, or explicatiue: as in the passage of Sanct Paul forsaid vhen it is said: Vho eated of this bread, and agane, the bread vhilk vee brek, and in the. 6. of Iohne. the bread vhilk I sall giue you is my flesch. and as all the ancients doth affirm the holy spreit vsit to Ioyn theis adiections yat vee may vnderstand tharby yat he spekit not of commun bread bot of sum misticall bread or mysterie comprehēdit vnder the form of bread. Secondly the Apostle calling the body bread he so spekit becaus the linia­ments and form of bread and not of the body be sene, euin as he callit the blood nether blood nor vyne bot à coop becaus the contening coop is more patent to our Eyis nor the contents tha­rof: thridly in the scriptur oft tymes things be namit after thair exterior form: So the brasin serpent vas callit à serpent so the Angelles var callit men appering in the form of man. Last of all it is à cōmun custum in scriptur to retene or keap the ould name in things changit from one form or natur to ane vther: Numer. 21. Genes. 18. and 19. so vyne is callit in the Euangill à graip or berry, so the deuill is yit callit Lucifer, so man is callit clay, so the rod of Moyses ves callit à rod vhen it vas no rod bot à serpent: and this I fynd also confirmit by [Page 95] ane vther auld hym ascryuit to Sanct Ambrose vhar it is said. Paulum profers tu docētem, panis no­men imponentem, corpori dominico: Moysen ego refe­rentem virgae nomen in serpentem, pari modo replico. Mos est frequens Scripturarum, rerum vt praeteritarum voces dent praesentihus: Homo humus nominatur, vi­num vna appellatur, daemon Lucifer vocatur, sat haec sanis mentibus.

Last vheras in the place for said th'Apostle doth pronunce such as eat and drink vnvorthe­ly to be gilty not of bread or vyne bot of the body and blood of Cryist Iesus, thatby he doth manifestly point out vnto vs no commun bread bot the body of Cryst to be eatin in this blessed Sacrament.

Then to conclud this section if you shall say vith the Capharnaits, this is ane hard speeh, I vill ansuet vyth Cryst yat flesch heirin profetit no thing yat is to say yat carnall raison can no more comprehend this nor sche can cōprehend à creation of all things of no thing, à conception and generation vythout carnall copulatiō pre­ceding, à corporall ascension vithout violence, or à resurrection of body and bones conuerted in dust and asches. if you sall say vith Sanct Thomas yat you canst not beleif except you see, I sall yit ansuer vyth our blessed sauior yat thai be blessed yat beleif and haue not sene. and if you salt (as did the Virgin Marie) astoniet exclame saying hou can this be seing I knou not à man? as if you suld say yat you canst see no naturall appearance or likliehoid yat the bread suld be [Page 96] conuerted in ane reall body: I ansuer vith the Angell yat it behouit the holy spreit to surprise or posses the and the pouer of the most high to ouerschaddou the, otheruayis you sall no les dout of thy creation, saluation and resurrection nor of the reall presence. Morouer you suld not misknou yat fayth hes no praiss or merit vhar humane raison may proue the same, ād yat mo­dest Christians in matters of fayth suld content thair self yat thai be such vndemanding vhy or hou thai be such lyk as S. Paul being rauissit vn­to the heauins kneu he sau Cryist bot vhidder he did see him corporally or not corporally he ne­ther kneu nor inquirit.

Bot returning to the matre I hoip I haue by argumēts preceding clearly scheuit the doctrin of Catholiques in cheif heads of Religion con­trouerted to be insallibilly confirmit, by expres text of scriptur lyik as heirtofor by euidēt pro­bation I haue confirmit the same by euident te­stimoneis of ancient fathers. For vhilk cause seing expres text of scriptur and authoritie of Doctors notvithstanding the distance of tyme and places vhar and vhen thai did vrit, to vit Tertullian and Sanct Augustin in Afrique: Hila­rius in France: Ambrosius, Leon, Gregotius in Italy: Io. Chrysostom. in Thrace: Theophylact in Mysia: Io. Ephtaim, Io. Damasen and Sanct Ierom in Syria: Basilius in Cappadocia: Orige­nes, Cyrill and Athanasius in Egypt: seing the four principall Oicumenique counsalls, to vit of Nice vharin did assist 150 bischops: of Ephe­se [Page 97] vharin did assist 200. bischops: of chalcidon vharin did assist 630. bischops: Seing I say boyth scripturs, fathers and counsalles do spek, vrit ād conclud in questions this day controuerted as the Romane church presently doth, sche must be vndoutedly the treu church Catholique. and vho vold haue à clearer demonstration of hir present consent in doctrin vyth yat of the pri­mityue church let him read the book callit the Augustian cōfession vhilk (being collected out of all Sanct Augustins Tomes) euidently prouit yat same form of fayth and Religion vhilk nou the aduersars of the Romane church so biterly doth impung to haue bene vsit in the said do­ctors day is à 1200. years ago or more. Of Apostoli­que succession vithout the vhilk in the primytiue church all do­ctrin vas su­spect.

Nou lest the abondance of this subiect force me more and more to digress I begin to spek as I haue promisit of Apostolique succession yat is to say of the laufull lineall successiō of pastors frō th' Apostles dayis vnto this present age: vhilk lineall succession vhar it is not conioynit vith the doctrin of th' Apostles thair can be no church Apostolique. Bot the enemis of the Ro­mane church laking this marque do reiect it as à thing not necessar as did the Arrians and Do­natists vho dispysing all doctrin yat culd not be cōfirmit by expres text of scriptur thai culd not abyid to hear any man spek ether of traditions or of laufull succession of bischops. Bot this marque of successiō vee suld the more villingly Lib. 4. ca. 63. resaue for yat thair is not almost one of the ho­ly fathers vho has not estemit it amāg the most [Page 98] principall marques of the church. First Irenaeus vho ves nixt the Apostles dayis did agknouleg the same saying. the treu knouleg (or mark of the church) is treu doctrin and the ancient stat or dignitie of the church obserued throuch all the vorld by succession of bischops cōtinuit vn­to our tyme. Lib. 4. ca. 43. and agane the same Irenaeus com­mādit to obey only such bischops as haue thair succession euidently descending from the Apo­stles, Tertull. in the praescriptions. agans Here­tiques. vho vith the grace of veritie (or treu do­ctrin) haue resauit the certane succession of Epi­scopat: all others vharsoeuer thai be establisset he holder for suspect. And Tertullian not long after him speking agās the Heretiques of his ty­me. I vold (sayis he) thai suld scheu me by vhat authoritie haue thai cum to licht (or to authori­tie) let thā produce the originalls of thair chur­ches: let thame scheu the ordor (or lineall des­cent) of thair bischops by successiō descending from the beginning in such sort as thair first bis­chop can exhibit sum Apostle or Apostolique person (yat is to say placit and perseuering vith th' Apostles) to be his author and predecessor, Origen. in the proem of his I, book callit penarchon. as the church of smyrna can exhibit Polycarp pla­cit by S. Iohn and the church of Rome Clemēt placit by S. Peter. this much Tertulliā. and Ori­genes almost in the same age vith Tertulliā sayit in this sort. In respect (sayit he) thair be many yat beleif thai think as Crystians suld think and yit sum of tham hold opinions different from former bischops: in such difference let the Eccle siastique preching Ioynit vyth ordinar successiō [Page 99] prescryuit by th' Apostles and continuit to our age be aluay obseruit, For yat is only to be este­mit vndouted veritie vhilk in no thing disagreit vyth Apostolique tradition. Sanct Cyprian ha­uing respect vnto this laufull and lineall succes­siō doth affirm the church to be vhar Pope Cor­nelius vas not vith Nouatius vho culd produce no euidēt of Apostolique succession. Sanct Hie­rom vritting to Pope Damasus doth for this same caus highly extoll the laudabill successiō of the Bischops of Rome saying. I spek vith the successor of Sanct Peter and vith the disciple of the cross, and follouing none bot Cryst by commu­nion or consent I associat my self vith your bea­titud yat is to say vith the chair of Sanct Peter. Vpō yat roque I knou the church to be beil dit: vhosoeuer out of yat hous doth eat his paschall lam is prophan, and vho beis not found in yat ark during the deluge fall periss. and à littill af­ter. I knou not (sayit he) vitalis, I despyis Miletus, I compt not much of Paulinꝰ (vho haue no lau­full successiō Ioynit vith thair doctrin) bot vho gath [...]rit not vyth Damasus he scatterit, for he yat is not of Cryst is ane an ti [...]ryst. Sanct Augu­stin in many places doth agkouleg this note of succession in expres vordis pronūcing such to be out of the church as separating thair self frō thair ordinary successiue bischop do ether esta­blis thair self or any vther to be Prelats, Pastors or bischops. and vritting agains the epistle of Manicheus 4. chap. theis be his vordes. Many things hold me most iustlie vithin the bosome [Page 100] of the church, the consent of pepill and nations the authorite begun vith miracles, nurissit vith hoip, augmented by charitie, confirmit by anti­quitie and successiue preisthood continuing vn­to this present bischop of Rome from Sāct Pe­ter the Apostle vnto vhom our lord after his re­surrection recommendit his scheip to be fed. and agane vnto the Donatistis Numer (sayis he) our preists from Sanct Peter and considder in yat succession of fathers vho hes succedit vnto vther. In the begin­ning of his 7. Tom. epist. 16 agans the Do­nat. Yat seat is the roque vhilk the proud ports of hell can not preuaill vpon &c. and mo­rouer in his epistle to Generosus he doth num­ber all the bischops of Rome from S. Peter vn­to Anastasius then Pope. Optat. 2. book Agans the Donatists. as Optatus in yat sa­me age did inlykmaneir vritting agans Parme­nianꝰ in this sort saying that the Episcopall seat ves first geuin to Sanct Peter (to peter sayis he) the head or cheif of the Apostles and tharfor ves callit Cephas being head, as thai be callit schis matiques vho go about to erect ane vther chair aganis this capitall chair. tharfor (sayis he) in yat singular chair (vhilk is the first or principall) pe­ter first satt vnto vhom linus did succeid (albeit Clement vas nomina [...] befor Linus) and so nu­mering all the Romane Popes from Linus vnto Syricius vho then occupyit the place at lenth he brusted out in theis spechis. Scheu (sayis he) the origin of your church, you vho vsurp the name of the holy church. and ancient Irenaeus did vse the lyik enumeratiō of Romane bischops, vhilk enumeratiō Eusebius did register in his 1. book [Page 101] 6. chap. of the Ecclesiastique History.

Then seing theis holy ancient and let nit Do­ctors, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyprian, Hierom, Angustin, Optatus &c. be vniform defendars of this Apostolique succession I am bold to cōpre­hend the same vnder this epithet or mark of A­postolique vhatsoeuer the enemis of the Ro­mane church obiect to the contrarie. deman­ding of thame vith Tertullian and Optatus by vhat authoritie, thai do vsurp any authoritie, vissing tham to exhibit the origin of thair chur­chis, to expone the ordor or lineall descent of thair bischops, to name vhilk Apostle or Aposto lique person hes bene thair first predecessor frō vhom thair preisthood or Episcopat hes succes­siuly and incessantly continuit vnto thair self. bot thai be not habill to scheu any such seruice or retour and tharfor thai must be estemir vio­lent possessoris meriting to be eiected for thair Laules intrusion.

It ver too tedius particularlie to repeat all par­teis and passages vhilk proue the church to be euidentlie knouin by this Apostolique successiō euer esteming the same succession as necessarlie to be cōiunit vith treu doctrin as the print or ar­mes of à Prince be vnto his money or as sub­scriptions and sealis be vnto attentik euidents.

If so be: then remouing all partialitie let vs à littil perpend and considder vhilk church this day contending to merit the name of the treu church may exhibit clear testimoneis of Apo­stolique succession ioynit vith thair doctrin ex­cept [Page 102] onlie the church Romane, vhilk by à conti­nuall course or continuation of 236. bischops li­neally succeding one to ane vther from Sanct Peter vnto this present most Clement Clemēt the. 8. cā qualifie hir beginning, progres and pre­sent estat by testimoneis extractit out of the at­thentik protocolls of famus historians and Do­ctors. and if none bot sche cā produce such eui­dent arguments and indenyabill instruments, suirly thai be too effronted and schamles that deny hir to be Apostolique lyk as sche is alredy prouin to be holy, Catholique and vniform and tharfor the vndouted treu church militant. For this cause separating our self from hir, impug­ning, moking or douting of hir authoritie ve be­cum parttakers and subiect vnto the punitions of him yat vncouerit ād it ridit his fathers schā, of tham yat did resist vnto Moyses, of tham yat scornit to inter vithin the ark and of such as in the desert douting of Gods promisis ver neuer permitted to intre vithin the land of promissiō, and to be schort albeit it nether becummit me nor vill I pronūce any hard sentence agans thā yat be separated in maneir forsaid villingly or vnuillingly frō the gloriꝰ societie of this church, because I do agknouleg the merceis of God not only to be hid from vs as is his Iustice bot also his merceis to be so infinit as thai exceid all his vorks: Yit the ancients hes not sparit to compair such persons to à canall or strād cut of from his fontane, to ane brench sned of his tree, to à mē ­bre cutt of his body ād to theis yat ver vithout [Page 103] the ark during the deluge vnto vhom as thair ves no sautie so doth the said Doctors much dout of the saluation of the vther pronuncing yat in heauin thai sall not haue God to be thair father vho in the erth doth disdane to admit the treu church to be thair mother. That the po­pe is not the Anticryst nor Rome the sy­nagog of Sa­tan.

Bot heir I must saill à sea of innumerabill cō ­tum elies the eenemis of the Romane church all crying and contesting yat hir bischop is ante­chryst and sche the synagog of Sathan. Vharun­to I vill ausuer vith greter modestie nor the salt­nes of such skandalus imputations doth merit intending by Goodis grace to proue yat as the infallibill marques desingning the treu church be only proper to the Romane church and hir adherēts, so the propre marques in Scriptur de­singning the Antichrist and Synagog of Satan can not vithout manifest impudence and par­tialitie be attribut vnto hir ād hir holy bischop. in treating vharof I vill alleg no friuoll or ambi­guus places vhilk eury party at thair plesor doth throu as à nose of vax, as yat of the Apocalyps speaking of the number of the best (vhilk as it is applyit to the vord [...] euin so the name of Martinus Luterus vrittin in Hebreu lettres gro­uit to the same number of 666.) and such vther Prophetique and profound passages ill vnder stand to the perdition of the peruertars. I vill al­lanerly produce thre or four places vhilk boyth spek most clearly and vhilk the aduersaris vse most ordinarly in this matter.

The first place is in the Epist. to the Thessal. [Page 104] chap. 2. vhar it is said. Yat the Antecryst sall be the man of sin, the sone of perdition and sall extoll himself aboue all yat is callit God or yat is vorschippit, in so much as he sall sut in the tempill of God ostenting himself as if he ver God. The second passage is in 1. of Io. 2. chap. vhar it is said: Vho is à lyar bot he yat denyit Iesus to be Cryst or the anoynted, and this is the Antecryst. The thrid passage is out of the xi. of Daniel vhar the Prophet sayit speking of the Antecryst. Yat he sall not agknouleg the God of his fathers and yat he sall contem all goddis or godhead becaus he sall exalt him self aboue all. Vpon vhilk passages all the anciēts do agre yat the said An­tecryst sall proclam him self to be the Messias and yat he sall go about to tread vnder foot all Christian doctrin that is to say preching of the vord, ministration of the Sacraments, yea the hoill scriptur.

Nou let vs try if any of theis monstruus mar­ques may be iustly applyit vnto the church Ro­mane and Pastors tharof, vho haue not only bene cheif propugnators of Cryst and his scri­pturs from his ascension vnto this hour, bot al­so of popes or Romane bischops more nor à thretty haue sealled vith thair hart blood the lo­ue ād loyalty thai did bear vnto Cryst Iesus our blessed sauior. Agane in the year of one lord 327. vho did conuocat the famus counfall of Nice for condemning the heresie of Arrius affirming yat Cryst Iesus ves not cōsubstantiall vyth God the father? Vas it not Pope Siluester? vho did cō ­uocat in the year of our lord 383. the counsall of [Page 105] Constantinople to repres the Heresie of Mace­domꝰ, denying the diuinitie and godhead of the holy spreit, vas it not Pope Damasus? Vho did conuocat the counsall of Ephesus in the year 436. agās Nestoriꝰ affirming thair var tuo persons in Cryst, vas it not Pope Celestinꝰ? vho did cōuo cat the coūsall of Chalcedō in the year 454. agās Eutyches alleging yat our blessed sauior after his incarnatiō had ōly our humane nature, vas it not Pope Leo the first? vho did cōfirm vyth thait Apostolique authoritie all vther cōsalles assem­bled for extinguising of Hereseis as in Cartage and Mileuetum agans the Pelagiens denying the necessitie of the grace of God for assisting vs in fulfilling his commandements, and in many vther places agans the Donatists, Manicheans, Luciferians, Angelites, Anthropomorphites, A­pollinarists, agās Cerynthus, Basilid, Carpocra­tes, Hermogenes, Valens and the rest vnto this day? Var not all theis Hereseis and Heretiques suppressit by the Popes ād pouer of the church Lomane? for none bot thai had vith à laufull authoritic ane ernist yeall and competent po­uer conioynit to resist so many mychty Emprors and subtill Schismatiques. if so be he must be à strāge Antecryst yat hes so stoutly defendit the doctrin of Cryst (yea sum tyme vith effusion of his auin blood) and sche must be à strange Syna­nage of Satā yat can not suffer persons or spreit­tis Satanicall or Hereticall remane vithin hir sanctuary.

Let tham ausuer heirunto vith consideration [Page 106] and not vith contention vith mondestie and no malice: may thai Iustlie say yat the Popes by past or the present Pope (if he be tho cht more intol­lerabill nor the former) that he hes exalted him self aboue all yat is callit God or yat is adorit as God? Seing he doth humill him self as the mea­nest seruād of God to vesch, to veep, to kiss the feet of verey miserable persons (vharunto I vas à seing vitnes in the last year of Iubilee 1600.) ministring also vnto thame all necessars for food and rayment as thai had bene his do­mestiques or proper childring: in so much as the almess vhilk his holines did euery day be­stou vpō pilgrims ād poor ōs vas à matter incre­dibill: for in Trinitie hospitall at Rome (besyid à gret many of vther houses ād hospitalles vhilk var all replenissit) I did see more thonsands lo­git all at one tyme tharin nor can be veill truster by tham yat knou not the place. This vas all the ambitiō yat indifferent beholdars culd persaue in him to vit to be à faythfull dispensator and distributar of Sanct Peters patrimony spirituall and temporall vhilk is in effect to be seruand of seruands yat is to say yat possessing all he posses­sit nothing, and being gretest and highest of all he noruythstanding rendrit him self to be the humillest and meanest of all: in the former fol­louing the aduyis of the Apostle in the last the counsall of Cryst Iesus.

Agane hes his predecessors or he denyit Iesꝰ to be the anoynted? The marterised blood of sum Popes past and the holy lyf of him yat is pre­sent, [Page 107] yea heuin and erth vith all such as setting partialitie apart vill behold his laudabill actiōs be so many vitnessis to the cōtrary euidētly de­claring yat as his said predecessors sparit nether lyf nor liuelod to mak Iesus be knouin the anoynted: So he follouing thair footsteps doth spair no cost nor panes agans all Heretiques and infidelles to th' end yat thai may boyth deuly vnderstand. Cryst to haue bene crucifeit for tham and to lern for his saik agane to [...]rucifie all thair concupiscence contradictions and cu­riositeis.

Can any man be so impudent as to say yat ether thai or he haue cōtemnit the God of thair fathers seing yat boyth in and out of season thai haue persuadit and he presently doth pray, per­suad and importun not to transgres the limites or marks of Christian Religion institut by God and obserued by our fathers. His increbibill cair throuch all Christendome to reduce all Hereti­ques to this Christian consideration, his diligen­ce to vnit all Christian Catholique Princes (as he hes of lait vnited the most Christian and Ca­tholique kings) his extraordinar and sumpteus charges to preserue Christian dominiōs (nam­ly in pannony and vther places from the vio­lēce of the Turk the Archiinfidell and capitall contēner of God) togidder vith his almess dea­dis daylie bestouit for goddis causs vpon more nor ten thonsand indigents, his irreptehensibill lyif and Good exempill in all his actions boyth publict and priuat specially vhenas he celebra­ted [Page 108] or assisted vnto diuyn seruice his humiliatiō thairin being accūpaneit vyth such burning at deur, contusions and tears as veill expres the su­pernaturall fontane and furnace of the holy sprcit (cōparit vnto fyir and vatter) to posses his hart: otheruayis hou culd it be by naturall ope­ration yat at one tyme such cōtrarius effectis of floods and flam [...] suld glans and gousch our by the canalls and conduit of his ardent and allbe grou [...]tin eyis: all theis arguments proue yat he is no contemner of God, and yat he can not be callit Antechrist bot by sum antithes nor the church of Rome the synagoge of Satan bot e­ther by sum Ironie, Of the hoor of Babylon. arrogance or ignorance.

The fourt passage is extracted out of the 17. Apocal. Vhar Sanct Io. descryuit the seat of the Antechrist in this sort, saying. I did see à vomā sits vpon à beast of cocoin or cramsin colour hauing se­uin heads and ten hornes replenissit vith names of blasphemy, and in the forhead tharof vas vrittin à mysterie, gre [...] Babylon, mother of fornications and ab­hominatiōs of the erth, and I did see the voman drōk vith the blood of Saincts. and à littill after. The se­uin heads be seuin montans vpon vhilk the voman doth [...] and at th'end of the same chaptor, the voman vhom you did see is the gret citie vhik regnit ahoue all the kings of the erth, By this passage v­henas I had not so much as remouit one sto­ne of the Romane church more nor rabsake did of the church of lerusalem for all his rail­ling, I did nothuithstanding once think yat lyk ane other Iosue agans Ierico by the only sound [Page 109] of this sentēce I had maid hir bastions and bul­uerks equall vnto the groūd, lyk as all enemis of the said Romane church cōtinu still in the self same ignorance and induration: for thai alleg fast and firm yat all this prophesie ves forspo­kin of Rome vhilk hauing seuin hills hes also had the empyir aboue all vther kings, yoa aboue the hoill vorld: as also yat sche is dronk vyth the blood of Saincts as of the Valdenses, Albigenses, Hussits, Viklefits, Lutherians, &c. that sche is the mother of many abominations be reson of the multitud of sins reigning in hir: That in vther places of scriptur sche is callit Babylon as in the first epist. of Sanct Peter last chap. Vhilk is confirmit by authoritie of the fathers. first by Tertulliā in his book agās the Ieuis and. 3. book agans Marcion. Saying yat Babylon mentionat in Sanct Io. is the figur of Rome. Nixt by Sanct Ierom vritting vpon the 47. chap. of Isayas and in his 2. book agās Iouinian about the latter end tharof, and in his epistle to Marcellin vhar he callit Rome the porpre or skarlat hoor. Thridly by Sanct Augustin in his 18. book of the citie of God chap. Oros. lib. 2. 22. Vhar he callit hir ane vther Baby­bylon. and Last of all by Orosius vho by many argumēts goeth about to persuad yat schei agreit vyth Babylon in many respects. For vhilk cau­ses hir adu [...]tsars conclud hir to be the seat of the Anticryst and hir bischop to be the only an­tecryst. Matth. 10.

Vharunto I ansuer yat the forsaid passages of holy scriptur and anciēts proue no moir the Po­pe [Page 110] and church Romane to be Anticryst and the Antichrists seat nor yat of th'Euangell vhar it is said I came not to bring peace bot the suo [...]d doth proue Cryist to be the author of discord and not of concord. For thai vho comprehendit Rome vnder the name of Babylon thai did tak Rome for the Citie and empire of Rome not for the church Romane, and yat Rome vhilk in thair opinion vas Babylon, the pur­purit harlot and the gret citie dyit in the blood of the Saincts, vas Rome Ethnique not Rome Christian, the empyir of Rome and not the Romane church. to be schort yat Rome vhilk is designit vnder the name of the hoor of Babylon is not Linus, Cletus Clemens and thair faythfull successors, bot Nero, Domitiꝰ, Diocle­sian: Yat is to say not Rome suffring patiēt, Apo­stolique: bot Rome persequutor, infidell Anti­apostolique.

In this sort Tertulliā in the forsaid place doth expone him self saying: Babylon is à figure of the citie of Rome not of the church Romane. I do notuythstanding confes the citie of Rome to haue surpassed boyth Babylon of Egypt and Chaldae a for pryid and persequution of the ser­uants of God: for as the Chaldaean and Aegyptiā kings did afflict the Hebreu church, so did the Romane emprors much more persequut the poor Christian church: For by thair meanes boyth Cryst him self and Peter and Paul the principalls of the Apostles vith many Romane bischops and ane infinit multitud of vther con­stant [Page 111] Christians var martyred partly at Rome partly at Ierusalē partly at vther places subiect to thair dominions. and for this cause Sanct Hierom after he had callit Rome à Babylō and purpurd hoor &c. For the multitud of sins vhilk regnit in hit (as vsually thai do in all gret citeis) he addit notuythstanding theis vords, Hierom epi­stle to Mar­cellin chap., ann in his 2. book agans Iouinian. saying thair is in hir ane holy church, à treu profession of Cryst and the trophees or enseinges of many blessed Martyrs and morouer by this confessiō of Cryst (sayis he) the blasphemy or mysterie v­rittin in the forhead of that citie, is effaced and veapt auay. For theis be his vords in yat same place speking to Rome. Vnto the I vill spek o potent citie commendit by the voyce of th' A­postle vhilk by confession of Cryst hes veapt auay the blasphemy vrittin in thy forhead.

Rome then in respect of hir Ethnique Em­pyir and persecurion of Crystians mycht veill haue bene callit Babylon bot in respect of the Christian church yat euer hes bene in hir sen the dayis of th' Apostles sche nether vas callit nor vas Babylon. Morouer (if vee sall ether gi­ue credit to historeis or Doctors of the prim i­ue church) it is certane yat vhen Nero tyranni­sed in Rome Sanct Peter dogmatiset thair vnto yat church vhilk in the last chap. of the first e­pistle of S. Peter is callit th' elect church vhilk is in Babilō ād yat after S. Peter thair var many ho­ly Romane bischops martyrised thair by infidell c̄prors boyth th' one ād vther remaning at one tyme vithin the said citie. Yea after the emprors [Page 112] tharof becam Christians sche did ceass any mo­re in any respect to be Babilonique, and vas cal­lit Apostolique if vee may trust antiquitie.

Vharfor vhenas Sanct Augustin and Orosius doth compare hir vnto Babylon all yat is in res­pect of ethnique infidell emprors not in res­pect of the Christian, faytfull pastors and trou church. and this phrase of spech as it had bene of auld so is it in this age vsit. For as the prophe­seis yat var agans Ierusalem being yit Iebusaean an Cananae an vas not meant of Ierusolein Hae­broean or Iudaean, nor the threttinnings pronū ­cit agans Ioram, Achab, Zedechia directed agās Iosias, Iosaphat ād Ezechia. So iu theis dayis the acerbitie vhilk many protestant ministers vse agans sindry Citeis, nations, and peapill is not meant of thair auin felloubrethring remaning in such citeis and nations bot of thair aduersars as for exemple. Vhen thai call paris à den of ido­latrie and à goufre of all vyce, August. vpō 61. Psal. and of the Citie of God 20. book. 9. chap. commentars vpon the A­poc. put out vnder the name of Sanct Ambrose ād ane vtber cō ­mentar amāg the vorks of S. Augustin. tharin that only comprehend Catholiques Romane and not thair auin conf [...]erie duelling in Paris: Vhen at Paules thai call london à Laque of Licherie and at Sanct Geles, Edinbnrg à [...]oucherie, à Bordell and brybing house: by theis vords thai mean no thing les nor of thair auin churchis in lōdon ād Edinburg, designing only thatby vhoormon­gers, homicids ād corrupt Iuges duelling in the one and vther place.

Bot I remember sum tyme to haue redà mo­re probabill interpretation of this passage of S. Iohn. collected our of Sāct Augustin and Sanct [Page 113] Ambrose vho do not interprit theis s [...]uin mon­tans for theis seuin moreriall hills of Rome (in vhilk this day nether the Pope not the Romane peapill doth duell bot in yat place vhilk ves callit campus Martius) Not the purpurd harlot ād coecin beast, nor Babylō ād the seuin heads and gret citie for Rome or any one particular Empyre or citie, or societie of vick it men yat hes molested the church of God son the Ascension of Cryst: bor thai tak the same in ane vther sens more agreing vith the text, esteming the said se­uin heads and seuin montans &c. to be seuin di­uers kingdoms vhilk hes persequuted the church of God boyth befor and after the in­carnation of Cryst: yat is to say the Egyptiens in Moyses dayis: the Canan [...]ans after Iosue vas dead: the Babyloniās vnder Nabuchodonosor: the Persians vnder Datius and Cyrus: the Grecs vnder Allexander and his successors namly by Antiochus Epiphanes: and theis be fyue king­doms yat ve [...]it the Hebreu church. the Saxt vas the Romane Empyit and the seuint sall be the gret Antecryst vhilk destroying the said Roma­ne Empyir sall go about also to destroy the church of Cryst. and theis be the seuin he ads or hills of vhillk (as the same Sanct Io. doth say) fyue var past and gone befor his dayis that is to say the empyits preceding the Romane vhilk did tormen [...] the Hebreu church. and one nou is (sayt S Iohne) yat is to say the Romane Empyi [...] vhilk in S Iohns dayis did domin, and the othor or the last (sayi [...] he) is not yit eum and [Page 114] cūming it behouit him to lest bot à schort spa­ce, and this is the Antecryst, vhilk fall not be the hoill beast, or hills, or heads bot one or the last of the said hills, heads or Kings. Vharby it is eui­dent yat the Romane Empyre must be endit ād gone befot the Antecryst begin and yat the said Antecryst sall bot lest à à schort tyme if vee vill credit this same text of Sanct Io. allegit: Thessal. 2. 2. Bot the Romane Empyr yit doth lest in the hous of Au­strisch and the Popes haue continuit nou neir by 2600. year: tharfor thai can not be vyth reson estemit the Antecryst nor Rome the Synagoge of Satan: It apperit rather yat the Antecryst sall sit in Ierusalem nor in Rome if vee sall ether be­leif Sanct Paul or the said Sāct Io. th' one saying yat he sall sit in the tempill of God, th' other in the 11. of th' Apocalyp. saying yat the beast or Antecryst. Sall kill the tuo vitnessis in the gret citie vhilk is spiritually callit Sodom and Egypt vhar thair lord vas crucifeit: vhilk must apperāt ly be meanit of Ierusalem vhar the tempill of God vas and vhar Cryst vas crucifeit and not in Rome.

Bot all this can not content the contentius vho still insist saying yat albeit the Romane church hes resisted vnto Heretiques and maid much in scheu of the text of scriptur, yit thai haue so corrupted the sens tharof, infected the sa­craments and forged such errors as sche is alto­gidder intollerabill. Vharunto I ansuer vith in­terrogation demanding if the scripturs haue be­ne puirly interprit vithout Heresie or infection [Page 115] or the Sacraments deuly administrat at any ty­me à 1300. year ago? if thai sall grāt (as thai must neads orells condem many vhose scho lachets thai be not vorthy to looss) thē do I as the treuth is affirm yat boyth the doctrin and decent or­dor Ecclesiastique vsit in the primityue antiqui­tie forsaid Yea at yat same tyme vhen the Chri­stian fayth vas first planted in Scotland (vhilk vas about à 1400. year ago) is vsit presently and obseruit in the Romane church. For probation tharof nedit no more bot to reid the confessiōs Augustinian prented in places vnsuspect and fathfully collected out of S. Augustin vho slo­tissit about à 1200. years ago: vith the Hierarchy ād Apostolique institutiōs of Dionis. the Areo­pagit and of Clemens Romanus vho var audi­tors of the Apostles.

For all this, the insatiabill vill not yit be sati­feit still replying yat the names of transsubstan­tiatiō, purgatory, mess &c. var not hard of à lōg tyme after the Ascēsion of Cryst Iesus. I ansueir Yat no more ver the sacred names of trinitie ād consubstantiall vsit or hard of till more nor à 300. years after the Ascēsion: and the reson is for yat neu errors producing neu erronius vords to obscuir or corrupt the veritie gaue occasion to the ancients for illustration of the said veritie to inuēt and vse neu religius names in matters cor­rupted. Euin as if à fyne pretieux stone suld be douted vpon and brocht in question amangs vnskilfull lapidars, and as if the auner the more to scheu the bonte and beaute tharof suld poli­se [Page 116] and inchass it in pure gold and tharefter call it not à pretieux stone bot à bage, à but­ton or targat according to the neu form re­sauit the stone aluay remaning in the auin nature notuithstanding this neu nomination procurit by the ignorance of the lapider not by any craft or malice of the auner. Euin so the an­cients partly to obuiat Heretiques, partly to in­struct ignorāts haue found out many necessary vords for edification of the church ( lyk vnto the forsaid) neuer peruerting the nature or sub­stance of things signifeit tharby. Ceremoneis be bot things indifferēt yit the most part of Roman▪ ce­remoneis be authorised by laudabill antiquitie.

Agane thai can not auay vith coppes, cornerd cappes, mitres, surplices &c. esteming all theis to be recent and ridiculus: bot thai forget yat roūd bonnetts, syid gounes and larg breikks, mules and skarpins ver not in vse in th'Apostles dayis (vho vēt for the most part bairfoottit and bair­leggit) nether sall vee fynd in scriptur or Eccle­siastique History the names of companation brocht in by Martin Luther, of imputation brocht in by to Io. Caluin, of Protestants inuē ­ted in Germany and of commissionars, modera­tors, modifiers vith many more inuented amags our self. and the treuth is yat apparell and cere­moneis be bot things indifferent and muta­ble and such as merit not of necessitie to be au­thorised by antiquitie: yit the most part of Ro­mane ceremoneis sall be foond in Sanct Denise and Sanct Clement vho var auditors of the A­postles as is afor said. Morouer I haue obseruit in Protestant churchis the self same libertie in [Page 117] changing of rites and rayments at the plesor of thair minister and consistory. For in sum places thai baptis befor, in sum places after sermon: Sum resaue thair communion kneling, sum pas­sing, sum fitting and in sum places the vemen stand and the men sitt only at thair table: in sum places men be commandit to communicat in thair best, in vther places in their verst apparrell and In sum places be vsit (for marques to inter to thair table) billzetts of stāpit paper or kardes, others thinking such marks of kards sumvhat prophan vill haue none bot of lead. heirby may the indifferent readar considder if the Romane church authorised vyth so many euident argu­ments of ancient possession and precedence be much to blame in vsing neu names rites and ce­remoneis in the policie of thair church seing neu intrants laking all laufull authoritie ancient or modern presum daylie to form and reform neu vords, rites and ceremoneis after thair auin appetit. The Romane church doth not vsurp any pouer aboue the scriptur.

Morouer vhar thai say yat the Romane church doth go about to discredit the authoritie of scri­pturs vsurping pouer aboue tham as things im­perfyit and insufficient, calling tham à diuinitie of ink ane nose of vox à reull of lead &c. to the end thai may bring in thair traditiōs repugning to scripturs. Tharunto I anssr yat if it be vsurpa­tion of any authoritie aboue thame or contem­ning of tham to agknouleg not only the hoill body tharof bot euin eury period or clause tha­rof to be most puir perfyit and sufficient in th [...] [Page 118] self abeit yat in respect of our grosnes, imperfe­ction and insufficiency thair nedit many things to mak our dulnes comprehend tham (as the treu interpratatiō tharof, ministration of the sa­crements by persons meit for yat function vith many ceremoneis and supplements for celebra­tion of diuyne seruice and support of our insuf­ficiency): Vhilk suplements the nouators thair self be forcit to vse vith no les confidence not as if all thair formes var expreslie contenit vithin the compas of holy scriptur: if this I say be to dis­credit the scripturs the said nouators be socij criminis yea more criminall nor Catholiques vho haue the primityue church for thair author in any traditiō thai vse the said nouators hauing no authoritie bot thair auin. Bot to mak this matter euident by exemples. Canst you deny bot yat thy Prince and his authoritie Royal in the self is sufficient aneuch to gouern his realan? Yit you seest yat the same Royall authoritie must di­still as from à fontane by seuerall cānalles thro­chout all places and persons hauing nead tha­rof, as by his bailleis, steuartis, Sch [...]iffees Com­missars, Courtes and sessions: vharby his dignitie Royall is no thing diminissit by such as think theis subaltern cōplements neadfull for the ser­uice of his realme. Bot to hold vs at matters of the same nator vith that vharof ve treat. Behold the passion of Cryst Iesus is sufficient in the self to saue va, yit befor the same can be applyit vn­to vs many vther accessory matters and Chri­stian exercises be necessar (as fayth, hoyp, chari­tie, [Page 119] prayers, penitence, and holy lyif &c.) and in one vord. is any thing more sufficient nor he yat is all sufficient? yit yat supreme sufficiency disda­nit not bot hes determinit subaltern coopera­tors to concur vyth him boyth in actions natu­rall and spirituall, begetting vs by our parents, nurissing vs by naturall food, defending vs by Magistrats, instructing vs by his holy vord and prechors tharof, finally he ordorit all things on erth yat kepit any ordinar course by the ministry of sum other things yat be not of his essence: Yit the vsing of theis ministeriall cooperators (taking aluay thair originall pouer from him) doth not argue or conuict his maiestie of any in­sufficiencye: Euin so all imperfection or insuffi­ciency yat is or can be obiected vnto the scri­pturs is bot in respect of vs: For thai be in thair self as à sufficient quantitie of fyne and sufficiēt seed and ve be as ane feild yat long hes Lyin vn­laborit vnfit and insufficient ether to resaue the said seid or to bring out any fruit tharby except Vve be pleuit, harrouit heggit or hirdit and vat­tred from aboue. So if at any tyme the said scri­pturs vhilk in the self be as inflexibill and firm as à vall of brass and more significatiue nor hu­ [...]ne sens can comprehend, if notuystanding tharof thai be callit à diuinitie of ink, à reull of lead à nose of vax all yat is in respect of such as vrest, throu ād peruert thame to thair auin per­dition as sayit Sanct Peter in one place, Pet. 2 epist. 3. chap. Pet. 2. epist. II. chap. delyting in yat vhilk the said Apostle in ane vther place hes expreslie defendit to vit in priuat interpre­tations [Page 120] of propheseis or scripturs, of vhilk per­sons thair hes euer bene Good stoir throuchout all ages sen the ascension specially sen Martin Luther of vhom hes procedit more more nor à 60. of schisms all throuing the said scripturs to thair auin priuat sens as if thai had bene bor à reull of lead, à nose of vax or à diuinitie of paper and ink and not à doctrin descending from aboue. in this sens S. Paul sayis yat albeit the treu sens of scriptur doth quikkin yit the letter tharof doth Kill. in this sens he not only callis him self the sauor of deth vnto sum albeit he vas the sauor of lyf vnto Vthers bot also he callis Cryst Iesus the only corner stone to be à stumbling stone vnto the reprobat.

Last of all vharas the said Nouators reiects as A­pocryphe sindry books ād fragmēts of holy scriptur vhilk the primitiue church hes resauit for canonicall (to vitt the books, of Tobias, Iudith, Esther, the Visdome of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, the song of the 3. childring, the Historeis of Susanna bell and the Dragon vith tuo books of the Machabees follouing tharin the exempill of ebiō and his fellouis vho as sayis Tertulliā in his prescriptiōs tho thai euer appeall to scripturs yit vhen scriptur is cited agans tham thai ether deny tham to be attētik orells thai expone tham after thair auin fantasie.) all vhilk books ve fynd rekkinnit for canonicall in sindry counsalls nā ­ly in the 3. counsall of Carthage vhar Sanct Au­gustin vas present. For probation vharof let his cataloge be red vhilk ve fynd in his 2. book 8. [Page 121] chap. de Doctrina Christiana and yat vhilk he vrittit in particular of the prophesie of Baruch in his 17. book 33. chap. de Ciuitate Dei.

Nou let any indifferent person luge betuix Catholiques and Protestants vhilk of the tuo doth most discredit the scripturs, vhidder thai yat follouing thair auin priuat opinions agans the opinions of the primitiue church vill curt of such books of scriptur as spek agās thair errors ād vill haue all vther scriptur (vhilk plesis tham to admit) to be interpretit after thair fantasie: or thai vho hes captiuat and renūcit thair auin opi­nions grounding thair self vpon the pillar of veritie obseruing after [...]he counsall of the Apo­stle 2. Thessall. 2. chap. all traditions resauit ether by vord or vrit from the Apostles and thair vn­douted successors vho vith the chartor of thair doctrin can also produ [...]e attētik sealls of lineall descent from the said Apostles.

And as to theis passages so impertinently al­legit by sum speking of this matter, albeit such friuolus allegations merit no anssr as proceding from men yat rether haue in post run ouer nor red the said passages or at lest beleue yat other men haue not red thame at all: Yit I vill in one or tuo vords for the benifit of sumpill ons anssr tharunto. Thair first passage is out of the 4. of Deuteron. Vhar it said by Moyses you sall ne­ther eik nor pair to the vord yat I spek, &c the second is in the Euangell of Sanct Io. vhar it is said. Ioan. 20. theis things be vrittin yat you may haue e­ternell lyfe in his name. the thrid is in Sanct [Page 122] Paul 1. Corinth, 4. chap. Vhar th' Apostle sayis, let no man beleif aboue yat vhilk. is vrittin, and the last is in the last chaptor of the Apocalyps. Vhar the Euangelist Io. sayir vho eikkit vnto this, God sall eik vnto him the plages vrittin in this book, and vho diminissis from the vords of the Prophesy of this book. God sall diminiss his portion out of the book of lyfe and holy citie. as to the first passage if no thing suld be eikkit nor no thing diminissit vnto yat vhilk Moyses hes spokin in his Pentateuch then as all the sa­crifices and ceremoniall lau must yit be kepit so all books of the Prophetes and all the rest of the auld and neu testamēt must be cut auay and abolisit. to yat of Sanct Iohns Euangell. Vpon theis vords, theis things be vrittin yat you may beleif and haue saluation: to conclud heir vpon yat no thing more neadit vnto saluation then that vhilk is vrittin in the said Euangell: by yat vyiss argument you sall cut of all the rest of the auld and neu testament in vhik be many things vrittin yat is not to be red in the Euangell of S. Io. To yat of Sanct Paul saying. let no man be­leif aboue yat vhilk is vrittin, I anssr yat bele­uing vnurittin traditions I beleif no thing abo­ue yat vhilk by vrit I am commandit to do yea and vthers befor me haue bene commendit for doing the same. behold in 1. Corint 11. chap. the same Apostle commendis the said Corinthians yat thai kepit his traditions and agane in the 2. to the Thessalonicen. 2. chap. ve be commandit to stand and keap the traditiōs vhilk he had ge­uin [Page 123] ether by his sermon or epistle, vhilk is to say by vord or vritt, vnurittin or vrittin and for the malediction contenit in the Apocal. Vpon the augmentars and diminissars of the vords of the prophesie of yat book let any equall man Iuge vho meritis most the said malediction vhid­der thai yat presum not at all to interprit the same contenting thair self in yat point (as ma­ny holy and lernit men haue done) rather in ane reuerent ignorance nor in ane arrogant science, or if thai interprit or apply any part tharof thai aluay conform thair interpretations vnto th' antients of the primityue church: or thai vho vith the Gnostiques and Anabaptistes presuming to much of priuat inspirations tak in hand to expone the mistere [...]s of yat profond re­uelation as ordinarly and confidenlie as if no matter var tharin contenit bot such as var alto­gidder clear and Historicall: Vhilk temeritie can not be vithout dangerus distorsion and alte­ration of the sens of the said Euangelist and tharfor can not be denyit to be ane euident and impudēt eikking and paring vhenas thai be not afrayit to mak scornfull mytologeis of theis sa­cred mistereis finding the Pope and Romane Prelatts in many passages tharof as partially ād Iniustly as Achab did imput the trubilling of Is­raēll vnto Elias and Sedecia the sone of Cha­naana the spreit of fals Prophetie vnto Mi­cheas.

Bot of all exclamations the sorest is agans the vitieux lyf of the Romane Clergie or church [Page 124] men: The viti [...]ux lyf of church men suld not mak vs abā ­dō the church Vharin (as Basilius Magnus in his 69. Epi­stle doth cōplene) vho vas most apt to blasphe­me vas estemit the best prechor: Euin so is it in this miserabill age: For the enemis of the Ro­mane church not knouing by vhat raison thai may confound hir doctrin and dignitie agans all raison thai do inuent and obiect infinit cri­minations agans the person of the Doctors of the said church. Vhilk kynd of vniust crimina­tion S. Augustin also complenit to haue bene in his age the authors tharof going about by such partiall imputations and rhetoricall motions to excitat and inflam the myndes of the ignorants vhilk be euer inclynit to auarice and [...]nuy, and intending by this meanes no thing bot priuat commoditie and preferment th [...]i pretend not­uithstanding boyth republict and religiō, vhilk be the tuo fals pretexts yat all factius persons haue vsit heirtofor. So did Theobutes, Simon Magus, Valentin, Marcion, Arrius, and the rest abandon and impung the virgin church incor­rupted at yat tyme vith fals doctrin as sayit Eu­sebius in his 4. book of his Ecclesiast. Histo. all becauss thai var debarrit from the profit and preferrement vhilk thai expected vithin the said church. and heirof vee haue à most mani­fest exēple in Martin Luther (of vhō northeles I sall be loth to alleg any thing yat can not be qualifeit by. Io. Sleydan his freind and fauteur.) For vhat caus I pray you did the said Martin Mak defection from the Romane church? bot for yat the publication of pardons or Indulgence cal­lit [Page 125] of the croissad (and so namit becaus the Pre­chors tharof ver astricted to bear à cross vpon thair vpper garment) var granted in germany to Frere Io. Tetzed Iacobin and not to the said Martin nor to anv of his confrery of Augustin Heremitts vho of à long tyme befor var prouy­dit to publiss such Pardons. In the mean tyme he kneu full veill yat this Indulgence ves pro­mulgat by Pope Leo the 10 For fiinssing the sta­tly church of Sāct Peter, and for gathering sum tresor to resist Solyman vho at yat tyme by Hū ­gary had Enterit to far vithin Christiendom: notuythstanding vharof the said Martin prefer­ring the priuat vtilitie of his particular societie to the generall vtilitie of all Christiandome, of à mōk he became à malitius Enemie and of ane Hermit ane Heretique preching agās the prodi­galitie and pryid (tho vith greter pryid) of Pre­laltus eury vhar crying and contesting yat it ves more lust and necessary to resist the Pope nor the infidell pagan.

Bot granting vnto theis men yat Popes and Prelatts oft haue declinit and daylie declyne from the tenour of thait vocation polluting thair self vyth infinit vyces, For the vyce of officiars of­fices suld not be bispysit. is it tharfor reso­nabill yat the seat Catholique vyth the fayth and vndouted Christian doctrin vhilk thai tech and causis be techit suld be contemnit and cast auay? seing à holy lyf tho it be à gret ornament to sound doctrin yit it is not the principall cau­se quhy vee suld follou or flee the doctor. For it is most pertinently demandit by Terullian in [Page 124] [...] [Page 125] [...] [Page 126] his prescriptiōs speking of this purpos, suld vee (sayis he) approue persons by thair fayth or the fayth by persons? that is to say yat so long as the Pope, Pastors or Prelats do tech treu fayth and cause it to be techit vithin thair iurisdictiōs (lyk as thai do if the Symboll of the Apostles be the treu fayth) vhat doth it belong or apertene vn­to me vhat lyif thai lead? Agane vhat am I yat I suld luge ane vthers seruand fitting in the chair of Sanct Peter, seing he fallit or standit vnto his lord and is only to rendre compt vnto him of his lyf and sunction. For vhen vee sall compeir befor the tribunal seat of God it sall not be askit at vs hou our cheif Pontif or Pastor hes leaued, bot vee must giue à rekkinning of our auin lyf not of his, and vee must suffer in our auin per­sons according as vee haue done (as sayit the A­postle) thar for the ho [...]ll flok much les one tuo or sum feu particular s [...]heip suld not presum to cē ­sur and put ordor vnto thair Pastor vho is apō ­ted to ordor and gouern tham: nether suld thai think yat it can much impesch thair helth hou­soeuer he liue prouyding he conuoy and keip tham in holsum pastures.

Bot vhat nead I by similitudes to explane this matter seing Cryst him self hes expressit his auin vill in this behalf saying in the 23. of Sanct Math. the Scrybes and Phariseis sitt in the seat of Moyses: do as thai bid not as thai do. For thai say and do not. Vhilk is to be vnderstud yat thai command Good out of the chair off Moyses, bot do euill out of the chair of malice, thai say [Page 127] yat vhilk is of God bot do yat vhilk is of thair self. then the obedience deu vnto the Good of­fice is not to be reiected for the ill officiers nor the vnitie of the flok to be dissoluit for the disso­lut lyf of the Pastor. For as sayit S. Augustin agās the lettres of Petiliā. first book 2. chap. respect of persons ād not of places is the mother of all errors: in vhilk place the said S Aug. doth affirm yat the fayth may be frutfully prechit euin of perfides yat is to say of dissoyall trators. Vee read also yat our lord vouch [...]fit once to spek by ane ass: Numeri 22. Vhat thē can empesch his Majestie to spek sū tyme by men subiect vnto beastly lubriciteis? Vee knou yat the spreit of our lord doth breth and brust out vhar and in vhat sort he vill, sum­tyms contrar the mynd and intention of tham that hes resauit the same. Lo Balaam being cor­rupted and hyred to curss the peapill of God vent forduart to haue done so: bot contrar his deliberation hou sone he did see the pepill of God he vas forcit to bless tham. king Saul vent out of sett purposs to haue killit Dauid, 1. Kings 19. bot cum­ming to Nayothramatha (vhar Dauid vith v­ther Prophets did sing and Prophesy) the spreit of God did so ouerreull him yat he did entre in amang tham and remouing all vrath and vindi­cation did strip of his clothis singing and pro­pheseing all nakit vith the rest of yat sanctefeit societie. Vho knouit not the vickitnes of the preists in the dayis of Herod, yit thai being inqui­rit vhar Cryst suld be born thai ceassit not for [Page 128] all thair vickitnes to ausuer euin prophetically yat he suld be born in Bethle ē of Iuda. Vho culd be more cursit nor Cayphas? (For obtening his Pontificat iniustly he did vse and exerce the sa­me more iniustly) yit vhen as he said yat it vas expedient yat one suld die for the pepill to th' end the hoill nation suld not periss, he spak not yat of him self (as sayis S. Io.) bot being the hie preist sor yat year he did Prophesy. Io. 11.

Sanct Hierom exponing yat place of the 10 of S. Math. Vho resauis à Prophet vnder the name of à Prophet sall resaue the reuard of ane Prophet, and vritting also vpō theis vords: Vho resauis you resauis me. The faythfull (sayis he) mycht haue heirby takin occasion to think yat thai var cō ­mādit to resaue Iudas the trator or any fals Pro­phet cumming vnder the name of à Prophet: bot (sayis he) Cryst be vay of preoccupation doth ansuer heirūto vhenas he sayis yat the na­me of ane Prophet and not the person of à Pro­phet suld be resauit and yat the resauers be vor­thy of reuard albeit thai be for thair persōs vn­uorthy yat be resauit.

Then Cryst vill not haue the persons of Pa­stors to be respected bot thair names: vhilk is to say yat he vill not haue vs too solist or curiꝰ vpō the lyif, merit or maners of him vhois ministry God vsit in gouerment of his church, vhidder he be Iudas or Peter: bot yat vee suld be con­tent to knou yat he doth sit in the laufull chair laufully, yat he is ane Apostle, yat he is Cryst Ie­sus Vicelegat, à preist or bischop ordorly auoyn­ted [Page 129] out of vhose mouth vee be commandit to heir the vord of God. tharfor tho he be Iudas so long as he is ane Apostle and exercesit the lega­tion of Cryst our master let it not moue the to contēpt ād cōtradictiō tho he be à theif bot do as he cōmādit not as he doit not hauing respect ( as sayit) S. Aug.) ūto him bot ūto his lord vhois legatiō he bearit, 2 Book agans the epist. of parmen. ij. chap. for vho resaui [...] him not resauit not Cryst, in so far as it vas generally said to Iudas, Peter and Iohne and to all the rest of the Apostles vho reiected you reie­cted me, bot if it be yat Peter and Iohne sall vse the same legatiō you suld study boyth to obey thair vords and to imitat thair vorks, this much Sanct Augustin. To be schort tho our Pastours be lyik the car­pentars yat beildit the ark of noah vorking by the vill and apontment of God the vork of our saluation neglecting thair auin: tho thai be lyik the candill yat clearit vs consuming the self: tho thai be as Mercurs o [...] signs set vp in vilsum vayis to direct vs in the rycht pathe thai thair self still remaning vithin the desolat deserts vhar thai be fixit, vee suld not dispyis the Good benefites of God offrit by thame for thair leud behauior, No more nor Noah dispysit the ark notuythstan­ding the vncleā beasts yat var thairin logit vith him, nor Cryst Iesus the societie of sinuars and Publicans. Var it not à foolisch thing in à patiēt to contem his potion becaus the Apotacary is subiect to seiknes? and var it not à gret simpli­citie to think yat the beames of the sone can be defylit tho thai schyne in vilanus and filthy pla­ces: as foolisch is it for the vyces of men to abā ­don [Page 130] the church vhilk is the pillar of all veritie, or to think yat the verteu of the vord and sacra­ments can be diminissit by the impuritie of the preist. For this cause in the dayis of Sanct Au­gustin the Donatists and in the dayis of Sanct Bernard sum calling tham self Apostliquis var boyth pronuncit Heretiques becaus thai denyit the Apostolique church to be any vhar bot vhar thair vas à lyf comparable vyth yat of th' Apo­stles mesuring aluay the vtilitie of the vord and Sacramēts by the verteu and dignitie of the mi­nistres tharof.

By this discours it is euident yat the vocation and not the lyf of Pastors is to be respected, Yat laufull Princes and Pastors hes euer had à secret conco [...] [...]ance of [...] [...]ol [...]spreit howsoeuer that ver in lyf v [...]rteusor vitius. and yat à laufull vnction or vocation hes euer con­comitance of the holy ghost in vhatsoeuer per­sones preferrit to be cheif Princes or Pastors, as by the exemples of Balaam. Saul, Cayphas and others euin debausch [...]r and reprobat Princes ād Pastors heirtofor rehersit is manifest.

Yea it is also to be considderit yat it is not vi­thout gret reson vhy God hes suffrit his darrest seruands and elect vasschels vhom he fand euin to be mē agreing vith his auin hart (as vas king Dauid) to fall most dangerusly, to th' end ve suld not giue vnto men the praiss and honor vhilk is deu to thair office lyk as vndoutedly ve vold do if the sinceritie of mē var in all points equall vnto the dignitie of thair office. For this canss albeit Sanct Peter vas verey veak in his fayth and theruith all most vnuorthely denyit his lord and master, yit yat did not impesch our [Page 131] lord after his resurrection to cōmit his flok vn­to him saying Peter fead my scheip: nether did the damnabill treson of Iudas cause the rest of th' Apostles to abhor his place bot mouit tham the moir to plant ane vther tharin. by vhilk tuo exemples ve be clearlye admonisit to hold such for laufull Pastors as this day sitt in the fear of the said Apostles and yat be laufully authorised vitth thair doctrin and lineall descent vhatsoe­uer personall imperfection thai haue so long as thai posses the said place: as also the said Pastors falling to be displassit (as vas Iudas) yit for all yat the dignitie of the place suld not be disdanit bot aluay reuerensit and the said place rendrit vn to sum vther more Idoneus, in Somuch as vho vold go about to bring in any vther form in lyk cases thay imitat not Cryst Iesus and his Apo­stles bot the turbulent ten trybes vho for the fo­lie of à Yonug Prince did schaik of all oblisit o­bedience chusing à seditius Ieroboam for thair souerane lord and erecting in Dan and Bethell conflatill calues contrar the tempill of Ierusalē: Vheras thai be bound to bear vith the imperfe­ctiōs of thair Pastors (cheiflie of such as be cor­rigibill as vas S. Peter) and if any of the said Pa­stors cum to be displassit for high offenses (as vas Iudas) then suld the consistory of Apostoli­que successors elect sum vther vnto the vacant place euin as the said Apostles did institut Mat­thias: ve not going about at our auin hād to ab­rogat the dignitie for the defaltes of the Doctor more nor ve vold viss the ministeriall estat to [Page 132] be abolissit for the capitall crymes yat many Ministres haue cōmitted: Vhilk crymes as thai suld not (in our opinion) preing nether the pla­ce nor persons of other ministers yat be inno­cent: no More suld the allegit offenses of libe­rius, Marcellin, Syluester the 2. Iohn. the 22. (in caiss all var treu yat is obiected agans tham) animat vs agās Innocent Popes and Prelats and thair Apostolique function.

Bot to adher vnto our purpos tuiching Pastors I vill vpon this subiect for auoyding prolixitie only alleg one exemple vrittin in ancient Anna­les of vigilius 61. Pope in number. This Vigilius interit to his Pontificat by vnlaufull meanis, for by instigation of Augusta the Emprisse he pro­curit the banisment and eiection of, S. Siluerius (afteruart marterised for the Christiā fayth) the said Augusta being highly offendit vith the said Silucrius becaus he vold not restore hir freind Authemius to his Episcopat of Constantinopill from vhilk he vas Iustly eiected (as one mētey­ning the Heresie of Eutyches) by Agapetus pre­decessor vnto the said holy Siluerius. Nou Vigi­lius to obtene the Pontificat did promiss vnto the said Augusta to reestabliss hir said freind and by this meanis he is maid Pope and holy Siluerius cast out. Bot the said Vigilius vas not so sone installit and set doun in the chair of Sanct Peter vhen thair chansit vnto him ane accident boyth admirable and laudable. For as king Saul going out fulfillit vith the spreit of malice and of deliberat mynd to haue killit Dauid vas not [Page 133] uithstanding surprised by the spreit of mansue­tud far by his expectation: so Pope Vigilius In­tring in to his suprem dignitie of set purpos to haue fulfillit his vnlaufull promis vas possessit vith the holy spreit by verteu vharof (as Sanct Paul going to be à persequutar vas turnit in à Pastor) he chusit rather all reproch, ignominy and punition nor to bloit the Pontificall place of his glorius antecessors by fulfilling à filthy iniquitie promisit allanerlie vpon auarice and ambition. So after he had most Christianly and constantly indurit imprisomment famin and many vther torments by means of the said Au­gusta he did vith gret patience confes yat most iustly he had merit such torments and more for his iniust dealing agaus holy Siluerius. So this Vigilius at his first entree vas not vnlyik Cay­phas: yit the secre [...]t blessing of God still acc [...]m­paneing the place and function vhilk he did posses preseruit him from accōplissing his per­uersit promis.

Bot in anssring this vay to eury particular matter yat the curiꝰ and captiꝰ tak exception a­gās or to refut point by point eury head cōtenit in the negatyue cōfessiō of fayth vsit vith in scot land (vhilk in effect is no thing bot à denyall of the fayth and form yat vas vsit in the church e­uer till the dayis of Martin Luther or rather of Io. Caluin) it is nether my meaning nor vold I viss yat any man suld so deall vyth tham for if ve sall go and disput vpon all ceremoneis from the holy vatter vnto the hie altar ve sall bot vr̄agill [Page 134] one vith ane vther vithout edification, that for to knou if all rites and customs vithin the Ro­mane church be laufull or not me think no bel­ter mean is nor euer to reduce the aduersars to yat point yat thay may be cōtent to try if sche be the laufull and treu church or not, for in trying only yat one point (vhilk may be done vith as li­till or les pane not to try the meanest of all the rest) as on th' one part tharby you may in gros iustly declyn and detest all hir ceremonies try­ing hir not to be the treu church: so on th' other part being found to be the treu church (as vn­doutedly sche is) then you must be estemit too to arrogant and impudent dispysing hir ordonnā ­ces housoeuer thai seam contrarius to your pri­uat sens. For exempill vharof Behold if à sedi­tieus fellou sall start vn in Scotland and find falt vith many things authorised by the kings laues: as such à one suld be iustlie estemit seditius so he he var no les simpill yat vold aussr vnto him any vther vay bot yat such laues proceding from à Prince hauing à laufull pouer vith incompara­bill prudēce suld not be put in questiō reducing the partie aluay to yat point if he had reson to impung the Princes authoritie. For in particular to disqut vith such à mad headit fellou vpon the particular resons mouing the Prince in his taxa­tions, donations, reuocations, forfaltors, restitu­tions, pardons and punitions, &c. var à matter boyth endles and such as none bot the Prince him self culd veill render reson for: seing the harts of Princes be only detected and directed [Page 135] vnto and by God. Agane I fynd à lord in posses­sion of à fair seigneurie, I inter vithin the same, I mark all his palices and plantations, his tryne and tenents. I fynd sum of his houses to my cō ­sait so ill situat so ill proportionat, his familie ād fermes so out of ordor yat I must not only repre­hend bot I must also put to my hand at my auin hand and reform, and not only reform bot pos­ses my self vithin the said lordschip becaus I cā reuil it better nor the heritor tharof hauing no patience first to try if the said lord be iust pro­prietar or not. Euin so vhen ve sall indifferent­lie ponder the procedur and actions of tham yat be most greuit vith the Romane church ve sall fynd tham no more formall nor better foundit and tharfor thai must aluay be forcit to cum to the fundamentall question to try if the church Catholique Romane be the treu church vhilk being tryit to be such (as no dout it is) then hir ordōnances suld be vithout cōtradiction obeyit and the repreheusions, reformations, possessiōs of hir aduersars estemit bot sa mony iniust im­putations, deformations and violent vsurpatiōs, and finially all incorrigibilly refusing to hear hir voyce suld be according to yat in the 18. of Sanct Math. reputed for Ethniques and Publicans.

Then to conclud this section supponing yat all var treu vhilk thai obiect agans the Romane church vhat remeid I pray you var most conue­nient and Christian to reduce all theis turbulēt tempests afflicting the church vnto à quietnes according to the vniform ancient estat yat sche [Page 136] vas once into, to the glory of God ād vniuersall quietnes of the said church. Suirly after I had much meditat vpon this matter vith such indif­ferēcy as my meannes culd aford I culd find no middis more agreable or aequall to all parteis contending then theis yat foullou.

First as is aforsaid yat distinguising betuix the name and persons of Pastors vee respect not so much the vyce as the office, Vhat seamit the best re­mead to paci­fie all schismes perturbing the church. the Doctors as the dignitie, the person as the place: Vhilk if vee suld do vee suld neuer abādō or leif the seat of Rome vhilk hes so euidēt argumēts of Apo­stolique succession, albeit all var treu yat is obie­cted agans hir. Vharunto Sanct August, in ex­pres vords did exhort the curius and contentius of his age in his 2. book. 5. chap. agans the lettres of Petil. Saying: Vhat hes the chair of the Romane church done vnto the in vhilk chair Peter once did sitt and nou sittit Anastasius? and immediatly tha­refter. Vhy callis you the Apostolicall chair the chair of pestilence? if it be because men sitting tharupon spek the lau of God and do it not, did our lord Iesus Christ for the Phariseis of vhom he sayit (thai say and do not) do any iniury vnto thair chair? no bot he repre­hendit thā rēdring aluay deu honor vnto thair chair) saying in this sort: thai sitt on the chair of Moyses, vhat thai say do, bot do not as thai do, for thai say and do not. If you suld follou this exempill Sayis the holy fa­ther then suld you not for mē vhom you defame, blas­phem the Apostolique chair vith vhilk you vill not communicat.

Nixt let vs vithout partialitie considder trou­chout [Page 137] all the 1600. centureis or aages son the n [...] ­riuitie of Cryst Iesus vhat most famus consalls and Doctors haue bene in eury aage and lett vs serch out decisions of matters controuerted in traditions or interpretations of scriptur from thame resauing as it ver licht at such as did liue in aages narrest Cryst Iesus ād his Apostles vho var the licht of the vorld: for (as sayit Sanct Au­gustin in his 2. Book agans Iulian the Pelagian and in the epilog tharof) theis blasing starrs and illustre lamps of the church ar to be estemit vn­suspect Iuges in yat thai neuer kneu any of the parteis contending and so thai be vndoutedly voyid of all fead or fauor and irrepresensibill for any suspition of partialitie. Then if I can eui­dently proue by Ecclesiastique annalles and an­cient Doctors yat in every age (yat is to say eury hundreth year) sen the natiuitie of Cryst our master the principall Doctors and counsalls haue bene of the self same opinion in matters this day controuerted yat the Catholiques Ro­mane be of presently, and yat thai vho haue a­bandonnit or renuncit the said Romane church of Vhatsoeuer sect thai be sall neuer be-habill to produce any one counsall or Doctor no not any one man of Good lyif and lerning trou­ [...]hout all ages preceding yat in all points of do­ctrin hes said as thai nou say: For befor Io. Huss vas neuer one in all points of his opinion: befor Luther none absolutly à Lutheran: Befor Hessusius, Melāchton and interimmists vas ne­uer one altogidder vbiquitar or semilutheran as [Page 138] Bischop Lindamus callis tham, and befor Zuin­glius, Aecolampadius and Io. Caluin vas neuer one in all respects Aecolampadian, Zuinglian, or Caluinist: ād morouer if I can proue the mo­dern nouators to haue no vther authors and e­xempills of thair erronius opinionsibot such as haue bene trouchout all ages condemnit Here­retiques, it must be à matter indeniabill yat Ca­tholiqus Romane be better foundit nor the said nouators. For probation heirof.

Vee fynd in the first age the first vrittars vz. the Euangelists and Apostles, to confirm the cheif point controuerted to vit of the reall pre­sence. as by Sāct Luc 22. Sanct Marc 14. saying this is my body. and by Sāct Io 6. saying except you eat the flesch of the sone of man and drink his blood you sall not haue lyif and by Sanct Paul 1. Cor. 11. saying in expres vordes yat thay vho eat of this bread and drink of this coop vnuortely thai be gilty not of bread or vyne bot of the body and blood of Cryist Iesus: Vharby is most euidently signifeit à drinking and eatig not of the mate­riall elements bot of the mysticall aliment of Chrysts body and blood.

[...]yk as vther vrittars of the same age hes left vs [...]e Liturgie or hoill seruice of the mess, vith th [...] self same ceremoneis and traditions yat the Romane church doth this day vse confirming also vnto vs the consecration and dedication of tempills, voluntar pouertie, voues of chastitie, aponting of certane tyme for fasting and peni­tence, the vse of the cross and signe tharof, mar­tyrdom [Page 139] to be of Gret merit vith the primacy of Sanct Peter. All vhilk doctrin partly in Ignatius Linus, Polycarpus, Philo Iudaeus, partly in Cle­mens Romanus and in Dyonisius Areopagita auditors of the said Apostles is extant and eui­dent. and in this goldin age feu Hereseis being yit sprūg vp ād the Apostles being more ttublit vith Ieuis and infidels nor vith Heretiques ve reid of no counsall bot of yat originall counsall haldin at Ierusalem vharin the Iudaism vas cō ­demnit: Yit in the same counsall vho vill indif­ferently considder it he sall persaue the same form of counsall this day obseruit in the Roma­ne church toggider vith the primacy of Sanct Peter manifestly confirmit in yat the said S. Pe­ter as Chancelor and President of yat synod did first ryis vp and brek the matter vnto the rest schauing hou God had chosin or thocht Good yat by his mouth the Gentils suld hear and be­leif th' Euangell. And Albeit (as fayit Egesippus) the church at yat tyme vas as one indefylit vir­gin yit thair did ryis vp in the flour of hir virgini­sit desbauchit men going about to deflor hir: ād theis var the first Heretiques to vit Theobutes, Simon Magus, Menander, allexander aerarius and Hymeneus, vhose first heresie vas à defectiō or à schismaticall separation from the Apostles: and vnto such schismaticall thai must neadis be successors vho in this age separat tham self from the societie of yat church vhilk allone of all v­ther can produce attentik euident of Apostoli­que succession.

[Page 140] In the second age ch [...]if Ecclesiastique vrit­tars var Iustinus Martyr, Irenaeus, Egesippus, Tertullianus, Victor Papa, Aquila Pōticus, Dyo­nisius Corinthius: and theis douted no thing of freeuill, of transsubstantiation, prayers for the dead, purgatory, the crism and vther ceremoneis of baptism, differēce of meatts, of lent ād of the sacrifice of the mess Lyik as the fyue celebre co­vnsalls of yat age assemblit agans the tessaresde­cades or quatuordecimās and vther Heretiques did confirm the same doctrin preceding, euin as the Romane church dois this day. bot hir ene­mis, the Trinitars, Anaptists, &c. denying yat Cryst is Deus de Deo & ex substantia Patris sed de Patre and Scorning yat part of the Symboll of Athanasius calling it à battalogy or à super­fluus idill repetition vhar it is said Deus de Deo lumen de lumine, Deus verus de Deo vero, so doing thai haue lernit yat lesson at the scooll of Valentinus, and the Caluinists taking vpon thā speciall knouleg and reuelation of the veritie h [...]d from ages preceding tham thai follou Basi­lides and Carpocrates, and disputing by Philo­sophique and naturall reson in matters of fayth as th [...]y do in the matter of trāssubantiatiō thai be successors to Marcion and Heracleus and to thair colleges cōdemnit Heretiques in the said second age.

In the thrid age or hundreth year partly the 13. celebre counsalls partly the famus vrittars as Clemens All exandrinus, Speking of Origenes and Tert [...]ll. I rek­kin thā amāg famus vrit­ars so far as that consent vith other doctors not vher as thai follou thair ou [...]n pr [...]uat opinions. Origenes, Gregorius Neocesarie [...]sis, Tryphon, Dyonisius and Euse­bius [Page 141] Alexandrinus, Cyrillus Antiochenus. At­nobius the Master of Lactantius. Theis heir and thair descryue the mess to be à sacrifice and to contene the treu body of Cryst, baptism to con­fer grace repeting th [...] vnction and ceremoneis rharof: tha [...] affirm Purgatory, tha [...] call cōfirma­tion and matrimony Sacraments, thai allou the primacy of Sanct Peter, Images, lent, freeuill, differēce of meatts, merit of Good vorks, prayer to Sancts and Apostolique indulgence, euin as the Roma [...] church this day doit: bot the Noua­thors of this age pretending à particular inspi­ratiō of the holy spreit repugning to the church thay Imitat the Nouatians vho vanly ostēting thair self of ancimaginar puritiever callit cathari euin as sū this day be callit puritās. In displacing ordinary prelats and Pastors out of thair places and vsurping the same by violence that follou Paulus Samosetanus vho by the mycht of que­ne Zenobaea did expell Demetrus laufull bis­chop of Antioch and did intruss him self tharin: In bragging yat yat the treu church is vyth tham and not vhar the euident Apostolique successiō is sene to be tha [...] be lyik vnto the Donausts vho gesting at Apostolique succession did alleg the treu church only to be vith tham in Afrique: In denying freeuill and all pouer to do any thing tharby, as if ve ver stōs and stoks and no liuing men, and gloring in peculiar illuminations and pretending ane assurance of à licht and leading of the holy spreit more nor any church had be for tham thai becum Manicheās vho defending [Page 142] the self same opinions ver conuict of damnabill Heresie.

Of the fourt age the counsalls and notabill vritars to vit Sanct Ambros, Athanasius, Lactā ­tius, Epiphanius, Damasus, Gregorius Nazianze­nus, Basilius, Eusebius Cesariēsis, Hieronymus, Hilarius, Palladius and Optatus: all theis heir and thair do yit more clearly cōfirm the points preceding as the Roman church nou doit: bot the nouators dissenting from hir and disposses­sing hir of hir digniteis thai becum lyk the My­letians in Aegypt vho scorning to follou the church planted thair by th'Apostle Sanct Marc vold neads intruse thair self vithout all laufull vocatiō) and lyik vnto lucius yat thrust him self in the chair of Alexandria obiecting many skā ­dalus imputations agans the ordinary Pastor of yat place, euin as did all the Arrians of yat age. Finally thai becum lyk Eunomius vith his sect callit anomi (Vhilk is to say laules) in yat thai contem ancient ordinary calling pretending à iustification by fayth only and à peculiar knou­leg of God ād of his veritie more nor any vther of à long tyme hes had or presently hes: and in dispysing Ecclesiastique ceremoneis and orna­ments in veschels, vestiments and suchlyik com­mendabill decoration of diuyn seruice thai be­cū vnuars lyk Iulian, Heron, Felix, Elpidius and vther Aposlats of yat age.

In the fyst age the 32. famus counsalls tharof and notable vrittars to vit Theodoritus, Orosiꝰ, Gelasius, Prosper, Socrates, Sozomenus, Seduliꝰ. [Page 143] Hilarilius Arelatensis, Petrus Chrysologus bot specially S. Augustin and Chrysostom be most strong propugnators of all traditions this day vsit in the Romane church, and the enemis tha­rof conforting and sustening Schismatiques be lyk the opulent Lucilla of Aphrique vho by hir substance bair out the schism of Donatus: thai resemble the Pelagiens of yat age and the Peter­brusians and Henricians of ages follouing vho denyit baptism to confer any grace specially vnto childring laking fayth: Thai follou Faustꝰ and Xenaias vith such Eutycheans contemning beautifull temples, altars, incens, lycht torches and church ornaments. Finally thay be cōform to the enthysiastes vho affirmit thai ver so in­inflāmit and fulfillit vyth the holly spreit as only thair interpretations and decisions in Religion vas to be embracit and no vther.

In the Saxt age the 41 famus counsalls tharof vyth the holy vrittars to vit, Fulgētius, Symma­chus Pōtifex, Euodius, Gregorius Magnus Eua­grius, Victor Vticensis, Nicephorus in express vords defend all yat is condemnit so partially in the Romane church: and the said counsalls and Doctors condemning the Enthousiasm of the Eutycheans, Manicheans, Montanistis, Mono­thelites and agnoits vith sindry vthers do in ef­fect condem the reuelations and se creit inspi­ration yat men separating tham self from the church presum this day to haue. In the seuint age ād all vthers succeding ūto this age all coū ­salls and Doctors of the church in eury one of [Page 144] tham thai do so particulary debat the sentēce of the church Romane and defait the contrary vat hir enemis think thame all partiall and suspect, and if at any tyme thay cite or alleg passages out of the said Doctors and counsalls for cōfirming thair errors it is not to be thocht strange. For so thai do cite passages of holy scriptur as all Here­tiques haue done from the beginning bot thair citations be ether manq [...]e and mutilat or [...]lls throuin and vitiat. and vho vold exem if hei­rin I haue treuly allegit the names and authori­te of Doctors and counsalls let him reid theis goldin centureis of the most Illustre Cardinall Baronnius the ornamēt of this age, or if perhaps theis seam to tedius let him peruse that of Gene­brardus callit notae Chronicae, or if all theis be suspect be reson the authors tharof be Catholi­que Romane, I am content to be censurit by thair auin centuries cailit centurriae Magdebur­gēses euin theiss yat be prented at Hedelberg or Basle.

Bot if nether the distinctiō betuix person ād places, nor the authoritie of counsalls and Do­ctors can content vs let vs yit be content vith experience the scoollmaster of foolles: by vhilk experience vee sall fynd yat all controuerseis vhilk hes from the Apostles dayis fallin out tui­ching Religion haue bene decydit by the autho­rite of the Romane church. For in the secōd age the question of the celebration of easter vas de­fynit by Pope Victor. In the thrid age the dete­stable Heresie of Nouatus vas condemnit by au­thoritie [Page 145] of Pope Cornelius. In the fonrt age Po­pe Syluester did condemn Arrius and in yat same age Pope Damasus condemnit the Macedoniās In the 5. and. 6. age vho bot the Romane bis­chops did extinguis the Hereseis of Nestorians, Eutychaeans, Pelagians and Sindry others, and vnto theis dayis from the Apostles no vther church hes presumit to conuocat any Oicume­nique counsall for citing, examing or condē ­ning any Heresie or Heretique: if so be vby suld ve so obstinatly oppone our self vnto such lau­dabill consuetud confirmit by all Ecclesiastique historians and Doctors boyth Grec and Latin. specially in yat the Romane Emprors haue re­mittit all controuerseis in religion to the deter­mination of the Roman church: Vharin if any man sall dout let him reid Euseb. 7. book chap. 26. Gratian th' Empror in his Epistle to the bis­chop of Aquileia in Italy, Theodos: the younger in his epistle to the Synod of Ephes. Athanasius in his Epistle to tham yat leadit à solitar lyif Ba­silius in his 31. Epistle. Tertullian in his book of prescriptions. Sanct Ambrose 32. Epistle, Sanct Ierosm in his Epistle to Damasus Sanct Augu­stin agans [...]resconius Donatist chap. 33. Bot Ire­neus as most ancient so spekit he most euident­ly of this matter in his 3. book 3. chap. saying. Vee conuict and condem all such as for lak of vnder­standing, for curiosite, for malice, for vane gloir or greid gather or conioyn thair self agās the gretest and most ancient church constitut at Rome knouin vnto eury man to haue bene soundit by the tuo most glo­rius [Page 146] Apostles Peter and Paul: For vnto hir be reason of hir principall pouer it is necessar yat all vther church suld conuene or obey and S. Cyprian in his first book. 3. chap. vritting vnto Pope Cornelius sayit in this sort. Suirly Hereseis and schismes haue not proce­dit elsuhar bot for yat men did not obey the preist of God ād for yat ve vill not admit vithin the church of God à Preist or Sacrificator to be Iuge as Crystis vi­cegerent or Lieutenant, vnto vhom if ve suld as ve be commandit yeild and obtemper no man suld moue or attemp any matter agans the college of Preists or Prelats.

Bot Inuane do I allege the exēples and autho­riteis of Catholique Orthodox in this matter (seing thair hes bene none of thā Sen the Apo­stles dayis yat hes not referrit matters in religiō controuerted vnto the determination of the Romane church:) becaus not only thai bot euin the verey Heretiques haue so done if ve sall trest credibill historeis. For vee reid yat Eusebius bis­chop of Constantinople tho he vas ane Arrian he did notuythstāding send to Iulius bischop of Rome requiring the said Iuliꝰ to be Iuge betuix him and Athanasius: and not only the said Euse­bius bot also the hoill Synod of Arrian bischops assemblit vyth him at Anthioche desyrit thair Actes and decrees to be ratifeit by the said Po­pe Iulius. Sanct Cyprian also makir mention yat Fortunatus ane bischop establissit by Hereti­ques and Basilides ane Heretique did boyth­notuithstanding appell vnto the seat of Rome, and Peter habailardus for all his heresie did the [Page 147] same in the dayis of Sanct Bernard: Sanct Au­gustin also in his 2. book of originall sin chap. 7. doth affirm yat the Archi Heretique Celestiꝰ durst not disobey the lettres or citatiōs of Pope Innocentius. and Berengarius archidean of An­giers did submit him self to Pope Victor the 2. and vnto Stephanus the 9. and so did Martin Luther once vnto Pope Leo the 10. Vnto vhom the said Luther did submissiuly vrit theis vords. Most blessed Pope Leo, I do offer myself pro­strar befor thy feat vith all yat I am and haue: quicken or kill: call or reuok: approue or disap­proue as plesit you: I sall hencefurth agknou­leg thy voyce to be the voyce of Cryst presi­ding and speking in the albeit this humiliation of the said Martin Lested no Longer nor that of celestius forsaid.

Bot heir if you sall say [...]at the ancients as veill he­retiques as Orthodox had Good reson to rēdre such honor ād prefermēt (as holines and verteu did veill deserue) vnto the anciēt bischops of ROme preceding the fourt age bot tharefter the bis chops succeding only to the dignitie and not to the doctrin, to the place and not to the precedēt pietie, thair cā be no resō to agknouleg thame as thair predecessors did veill mereit to be agknou legit. Heirunto I anssr yat the same doctrin is yit techit in the Romane church yat vas techit in the primityue church if ve vouchaf to call the articles of fayth and tuo Testaments the self sa­me doctrin. Vharin tho thai seā to vs (yat be bot à feu membres) to peruert the said doctrin by [Page 148] eiking or parīg, or interpreting the same sinister ly, or yat thair maners be dissolut ād damnabill, vhat reson haue ve being bot à feu to condem the hoill the cause yit depending and the que­stiō yit vndecydit? Suld vee dispyis our Prince at all tymes vhen vee think yat he ether denyis, de­layis, or peruertys Iustice? or suld vee abādō our Pastors hou sone thair doctrin and lyif apperit vnto vs reprehensibill? suirlie if this be permittit boyth pietie and policie may tak thair leif. Such inutill animositie suld be aluay auoydit and such curius branes suld be vsit and gouernit lyk febri­citāts: For as thai yat haue the ague vhenas thair hart is brint Vp vyth the extraordinar flam of the feure and thair branes oppressed by the v [...]hementnes thairof, thair taist and all thair senses lossit incontinent thair rycht operation all meat and Medicin seaming vnto tham bittir and di­sagreable housoeuer thai be sueit or salutar of thair auin natur: For vhilk cause the gard or ke­pars of such febricitants doth minister vnto tha­me not after the Idill consait of the seik persons bot after the prudēt aduys of the Phisitian: Euin so heady hoit felouis hauing thair hart and har­nes inflammit vyth the fyir ether of vanegloir, malice, curiositie, auarice, (yea sum tyme hauing boyth hart ād head oppressed vyth no other di­seasse bot vith mere folie and ignorance) thai cā think, spek, nor pronunce no thing bot Idill in­uectyue vords full of the flams of contumely ād sklander: Bot hou sone this burning ague of he­resie fall leif thame and yat thair malice sall be [Page 149] turnit in the modestie of the anciēt fathers then sall thai begin to think and spek of the Pope ād Prelats of this age euin as the said anciēts did of vther Pops heirtofor: yat is to say vhenas thai sall be inspyrit vyth the Good spreit yat did gouern S. August. S. Bernard, S. Hierō vho did so much honor Anastasius, Honorius and Damasus: then sall thai not be aschamit to rēder the lyk honor to his holines yat sitter this day in the same place (for pietie and Iustice comparabill if not prefe­rabill to any of his predecessors:) Bot so long as thair Eyis be obscurit vyth Schismaticall blynd­nes no maruell tho thai nether see the lycht nor the Schyning lamps of God: For vhar the Ee is vickit all the body is dark. In one thing notvith­standing boyth the Pope and Prelats may reioys yat in suffering such reprochis thai suffer vyth th' Apostles vheras thair aduersars sall fynd no exempill of thair insolent inuectiōs bot in lan­nes ād Iambres yat did blasphem Moyses: in fe­stꝰ vho allegit Sanct Paul to be mad: in theis yat said th' Apostles ver dronk vith neu vynes and in theis yat disdanfully callit Cryst Iesus à carpē ­tar and à carpentars some.

Thridly if the laudabill practique and cōsue­tud of the church ratifeit by attētik testimoneis of Historiās, Doctors, Emprors, cā not moue vs to à mediocritie nor to vse ane remeid approuit by so famus vitnes. Let vs yit patiently consid­der vhat the holy Prophets of God did in the lyik caiss vhenas thai persauit the impietie and insolēce of the Hebreu preists boyth in doctrin [Page 150] ād maners. did the said prophreits dispyise the holy preisthoid for the vnholines of the preists or the Mosaicall dignitie and offices diuyne for the detestabill vyces of the Doctors? did thai a­bandon the tempill of God for the vngodlines of men aponted to gouern the same? did thai intruse thair self in the possessions and places of the preistes? did thai seditiusly drau the ignorant peapill in sectes, schismes, monopols and factiōs erecting à Samaria agans à Ierusalem and alter agās alter? No No: thai did Prophesy vithin the tempill affixing thair Propheseis vpon the por­tes tharof: thai var contentit to liue poorly and frugally vpon thair auin not brigging or ambi­tiusly aspyring to the places and possessions of the parteis vhom thai reprehendit: yea thai ab­horrit so much all factions as thai chusit rather vithin the tempill amang the preists and Prin­ces of Iudaea to suffer all torments nor amang the schimaticall and factius vithout the tempill to liue at thair plesure delyuerit of all danger. Vhilk constant patience and exemplar modera­tion vee reid to haue bene in Amos vho vas kil­led by Amasias hie preist: in Easaia vho vas sauin in tuo by Manasse king of Iuda: in Ieremia vho by the Iudaique peapill vas stonit to deth: in E­zechiell vho in Babylon amang the Ieuis vas murtherit: in Michaeas vho by Ioram in Iudaea vas throuin headlong ouer ane precipice and in Zacharia vho vas murtherit besyd the altar vi­thin the tempill.

Last of all if vee vill nether follou the exē ­ple [Page 151] of the Prophets nor no laudabill consuetud preceding let vs at lest marque veill that allego­ricall nauigation of the Apostles being imbar­quit vith Cryst Iesus at that tyme vhē the storm and tēpest did so tost and tormēt thair bark ād it may be perhaps yat thair beauior in yat mate­riall nauigation in à materiall barque may mol­lifie our stif hartis and moue vs to lern by thame hou to behaue our selfes in this misticall nauiga­tion vithin the misticall barque of the church. The said Apostles being imbarquit in Maneir forsaid seing the fearfull image of deth in the extraordinar tēpest thai var ouertakin vith ex­traordinar fear: Yit so long as thair apperitvnto tham any hoip of sautie thai kepit silence and vold not presum to auaik thair lord and master much les to tak on and trubill him or the ordi­nary Pilolts or Marinells: bot finding at lenth the schip all most sittin doum and sonk then thai came to auaik him not disdanfully bot deu­tifullie, not rigoruslie bot reuerētlie saying Lord or Master saue vs, vee peris. Vho vold be callit follouars of the Apostles hou can thai refuse to follou thair exemple in this nauigation. ar thai inbarquit vithin the schip of the church? find thai hir tosted to and fro by impetuus vaues and vynds of vyces boyth in doctrin and maners? see thai hir ready to peris by rigor of the said tēpest and Cryst Iesus à sleap in his Vicars or Vicege­rents vho suelling in sensualiteis and lying dead dronk vith all delicatnes can not auaik call, cry and pull as you list: In such disastre or danger [Page 152] thai suld not tak on and truble the hoill estat of the church: thai suld not vith veapins ād by ma­neir of vindication go and steir vp persons im­barquit vyth tham by ciuill varris and schismes attempting to discredit and degraid the said vi­cepilotts: bot in all humilitie follouing the for­said exemple thai suld rin vnto Cryst the cheif pilot and steirsman for his saik respecting such as he hes respected and honorit vith his Lieute­nantry and vnto him yat hes no les pouer vithin the misticall bark of the church nor he had in the materiall forsaid thai suld vith all respect ād reuerence pour out thair complants saying lord saue vs vee peris: Aua [...]k lord in theis vnto vhom you haue committed your deputation in gouerning the distressit bark of your church: Let the sueit found of your breth blau auay frō thair slummering eyis this deadly Lasines to th' end that thai being once valkinnit thay may cō ­mand the vynds and vauis of all concupiscen­ce, sklander and ill exemple boyth in thair self and vthers to ceass vhat by after so desperat dā ­gers men seing à desyrit tranquillitie may mar­uell, and magnifie God and say: Vho is this vn­to vhose ministeriall membres boyth vynd and sea doth obey. Suitly for my mean opinion this var the only mean to quiet the church: for experience may tech vs yat all vther turbullent courses vhilk factius men daylie vse by vritting, declaming ād inuading one ane vther by slycht and mycht be bot so many bellisses making this fyir of discord burn the more furins [...]ie.

[Page 153] Be cōtētit thē my dearty belouit kins foll [...] ād cū ­trey men vith the Prophets and Apostles to Re­mane vithin the tēpill ād barque of the church notuythstanding any naughtines yat can be in preists or pilotts, Lest yat separatīg our self yar­fra as did Chore, Dathan, and Abiron, Simon Magus, Theobutus, Allexander the copper smyth and Hymenaeus vyth sindry vthers you boyth merit and incur the infamy and vnhappy end vhilk fell vnto tham.

And heir the laudabill exemple of Constan­tin the gret sall not be impertinent to be remē ­brit: vnto vhom vhenas sum mutinars did pre­sent infamus libelles agans thair ordinary bis­chops he not only causit burn the said sklande­rus libelles bot also ansuerit in this sort to the presentars saying yat in spirituall things he vas to obey his Pastors and not to be obeyit and yat he thocht it so vnseaming in him or in any of the flok to spy out curiusly the lyif of thair Pa­stor as if he suld chanse to see any of tham com­mit any foull off ens yat he vold couer the same vyth his Clok lest the eyis of vthers suld be of­fendit tharuith.

Vold God yat this Christian modestie of Cō ­stantin the Gret var this day obseruit: vold to God at lest yat Innocents allone suld presum to throu the first stone agans malefactors▪ if so var vndoutedly such as be most prompt to pique ād spek agans vhers suld abstene from thair ordi­nary inuectiōs knouing first thair self not to be altogidder irreprehensibill and syne yat in the [Page 154] church yair had euer bene chaf vyth the corn, dregs vyth the vyne and much refuse and of­skourings about mettels yat be most fyne. Vas thair not in the familie of Abraham ane Ismael? in the familie of Isaac ane Esau? in the familie of Dauid ane Absolon? vith Moyses Miriam and vith Elizee ane Gehazi? Vas not one of the tuelf Apostles à Iudas? and vhen thair vas bot eight persons in the church vas not one of tham à Cham? and vhen sche had bot four childring vas not one of tham à Cain? and consisting bot of tuo persons in Paradis, did not the one tempt the vther to incredulitie and disobedience? Vhat Maruell then if amangs 236. Popes and amang millios of Prelattes and professed religius men thair be found à Iudas, à Cain, à Cham, à Is­mael &c. For vhose preuarication or peruer­sitnes if vee suld abandon the Romane church, vhy suld vee not by the lyik reason abandō and abiure the churchis impugning hir in vhilk thair be also for all thair small number à great deall of tairres, goats, scabbit scheip and de­bauschit childring vhilk daylie for licht faltes be fynit and forcit to sitt on the stuill of repen­tance, and for greter crymes be censurit by thair spirituall suord of excommunication yea sum­tyme vyth the temporall suord of the Iuge cri­minall. bot heir I both pitie and spair tham by myself of all men most fragill knouing huma­ne fragilitie, vissing nottheles yat fering to be Iugit after the counsall of the Euangell ve suld not raschly Iuge and yat vee suld first tak the [Page 155] beam out of our auin Ee befor vee persaue à moit in our nychtbors vnderstanding yat thai be most redy to raill and reprehēd vho be most reprehensibill: Vharof vee haue manifest exem­ples in Achab agans Eliah, in the fals Iuges agās Susanna, in Sedechia the sone of Chanaana agās Micheas and in the vyf of Putiphar agans Io­seph.

Bot to th' end this Paraenese exceid not the number of sum feu scheittes of paper (as I did determin) for conclusion I submit my self to the indifferent readar to considder vhat groundes I haue had to rendre, or rether vhat grounds heir be sett doun to persuad him to rendre and capti­uat his auin priuat sens vnto the obedience of the Catholique, Apostolique church Romane not becaus sche is Romane bot becaus of all Christian churchis contēding for the glorius na­me of the treu church sche allome may vyth Good reson gloir in the treu marques tharof as heirtofor I beleue be sufficientlie prouin. And yit to be callit Romane is no small preferment seing yat epithet allone doth contene boyth v­niuersalitie, antiquitie, vnitie and puriti [...] Apo­stolique. For in yat th' Apostle vritting to the Romās doth extoll tham saying thair fayth vas annunciat or prechit throuchout the hoill vorld he doth first by theis vords signifie the antiqui­tie and origin of thair church to haue bene in his dayis à 1602 Years ago: nixt by theis vords the vniuersal [...]re tharof is manifested in yat he sayit thair fayth vas preschit eury vhar: Last is descry­uit [Page 156] the vnitie tharof and puritie Apostolique in yat by à certane emphase or exaltation he vou­chafit to call the vniuersall fayth to be thair fayth. For this caus sayis S. Augustin in his 162. epistle yat is vas not vithout Good reasō vhy such prerogati­ue lies euer bene geuin to the romane church more nor to any vther laking the dignitie of the cheif Apostoli­que chair. For sayis he the churchis plāted by all vther Apostles haue maid defection, only this Rome holy ād Apostolique, mother ād nource vnto all vther churchis by supernaturall grace of God did neuer declyn from the puritie Apostolique nor defyill hir self vyth Here­ticall nouelteis bot did constantlie obserue the self sa­me roull vhilk sche at the beginning resauit of the tuo principall Apostles Peter and Paull. Lo (sayis he) the church of Ierusalem var Sanct Iames, the church of Achaia vhar Sanct Andro, the church of Asie vhar Sanct Iohne, the church of Persis vhar Sanct Iud bro­ther to Iames, the church of India vhar Sanct Tho­mas, the church of Aethiopia vhar Sanct Matheu, the church of Phrygia vhar Sanct Philip the church of Grecia vhar Sanct Paul did prech, haue all declynit: only the Romane church is yat church (as also sayit Sanct Cyprian. lib. 1. 3. Epictle) vhilk neuer maid defe­ction and in vhilk no perfidie nor infidelitie culd ha­ue place: vharunto agreit veill yat of Sanct Hierom saying in this sort. be assurit (sayis he) the Romane church being so highlie commendit by the Apostle S. Paul can resaue no neu illusions albeit ane Angell suld annunce the same: For vhat sche hes found sche hes follouit, vhat sche learnit sches hes taught, vhat sche hes resauit from hir fathers sche hes faythfullie ren­prit [Page 157] vnto hir childring.

O Ancient Citie! ô Citie so much commen­dit by the voyce of the Apostle and by commun elogies of all Apostolique mē! ô Citie throuch thy force sumty me lady ouer all other Citeis and Seignoureis, nou throuch thy fayth far surmon­ting the praise yat any mans pen can giue vnto the! suld I be aschamit (I the ofscurings of my futhers hous, the horrour of my auld acqnen­tance, the vofull husband and father of ane hartbrokin vyf and familie: Finally the ludibry or lauching stok of fortoun) suld I (I say) so vn­uorthy à vorm be aschamit to intre vithin the Azil of thy blessed sanctuary? Suld I disdane to lik vp the crommes yat fallit from thy tabill (I anc forlorn child, à publican, à harlott yat hes not had the honor to inter vythin thy vyneyard befor the aleuīt hour) No No I vill not be ascha­mit bot I vill go ād labor tho I haue oft and ob­stinatly refusit lyk him mentionat in the 21. of Math. Euangell: I vill no more vressill agans the Good Angell of God seing my loyin is alredy out of ioyint. I vill no more presum vith Cham to vncouer the schame of my father: I vill not hyid my self any more vith Adam from the voyce of the lord, I vill not any more vith Ionas flee vnto tharsis from his presence. Finally I vill not any more seik Cryst in corners bot in his church situat vpon the top of à montane kna­uing yat as he is the corner stone of all ve­ritie so sche is the piller of the same veritie vhilk louit the lycht and can not abyid to be [Page 158] schoot vp in corners seing such only hait the lycht as by doing ill fear to haue the veritie pro­nuncit. So the treu church vharsoeuer sche be, is estemit not only to be in the lycht bot to be as à clear lantern geuing lycht to vthers becaus sche neuer ferit tryall bot the more sche be exemd the more sche is eminent: vheras hereticall chur­chis be aluay in darknes housoeuer thai seā gal­land or glorius because thai dar not abyid lycht and tryall of the treuth. Inioying this lycht I had rether be à doorkeaper vithin hir courts nor to reign vythin the tabernacle of hir enemis.

Tharfor I vill nou return vnto my fathers hous to eat of his falt calf lamenting vyth my hart yat I haue so long and so vnthriftely vai­sted my fathers substance in ane vncouth land vhar I culd fynd no food bot suaddes: I vill nou licht my candill, sueip my hous and seik the penny that I haue sleuthfully lost to the end yat finding the same agane I may reioiss vyth my freinds and nychbors. Yea I sall be glaid to sell all yat I haue to inioy this pretieux stone ād inestimable feild vharin lyit hid the tresor of my saluation. Follouing hir I can not Erre or go a­stray and if I sall erre I sall not at lest erre fol­louing my auin voyce or the voyce of any strā ­ger bot I sall erre vith the most lernit, most ho­ly, most ancient fathers, vyth the Patriarks Pro­phets, and Apostles yea vith Cryst Iesus him self vho is voyid of all error.

Then (My dearlybeleuit) be not aschamit vith me rather tymussie nor to lait to chang [Page 159] theis your altars of contradiction vith this ark of benediction and your insolid partialitie for this solid pillar of veritie: [...]or you knou not at vhat vach the bryid grom [...] sall cum, Nor vhen you sall be inuyted to the vedding, nor vhen the theif sall inuad your cottage of clay vhilk you so pett and pamper: You haue then (and vee all haue) gret nead not only to vach and vard bot to be veill armit vith the spirituall armure of this church mentionat in Sanct Paull: vee had nead in tyme to licht our lamps at hir lycht and to intreat hir as our dear mother for à vedding garment: lest being surprised and vnprouydit vee be ether hold or put out at the dreadfull cū ­ming of the gret bryidgrome vhenas heuin and erth sall be mouet and the vorld Iugit vith fyir.

O my dearly belouit if you vold deuly con­sidder the danger you stand into in Cossing the clear fontans of this holy church for trubled pittes of your auin priuat Imaginations vhilk nether can hold nor keip sueit vatter. vharin lyk Adā you Loss Edē for ane apill: Lyik Esau you Loss your birthrycht for à meas of pottage and in one vord you loss Lycht for darknes and the piller of veritie for à puddill of vanitie. O if you vold vyth patiēce and reson ansuer and declair ūto me vharfor you haue so vnkyndlie separa­ted your self from à societie so much extollit by the Apostle ād all venerable ātiquitie: yea such à societie as euidētlye is markit vith all the signes of the treu church. In doing vharof do you not persaue hou you condem as infidells and tepro­bats [Page 160] all yat hes precedit you, sib and fremd, freind and fo, lernit and vnlernit, holy and pro­phane Good and bad: For if your fayth and pro­fession be Good and the only vay to saluation: then all yat befor your age be dead must be in danger of damnation becaus thai deit in à con­trary profession.

Agane if I suld let it pas yat you had iust caus to abandon the Romane church, yit vold I at lest vnderstand of the vharfor you art mo­uit rather to follou more one of the sectes abandoning hir nor ane vther? in respect all se­ctes impugning hir be thai Lutherans, Semilu­therans, Antilutherans, thai all pretend equall assurance of the holy spreit and produce var­rands out of the vord of God eury one of tham contesting yat sche is the treu church. Heirunto if thou sall say yat thou lyikit best sum one or vther of the sectes descending from Bernardus Rotmannus father of th' Anabaptists vhilk be in number 13. or yat thou lyikit more sum fra­ternitie of the Homologistes or Protestants des­cending from Melanchton vhilk be in number 32. or yat thy mynd be most of all vpon sum societie of the Sacramentars descending from Carolostadius, Zuinglius and Io. Caluin vhilk be in number 8. all of one surce or sead to vit of Martin Luther, and all vnknouin to the vorld bot so much as thai haue bene sene sen the year of our lord 1517. if I say thou vill alleg and affirm yat thou hes chosin sum one or vther of theis sectes as yat vhilk in thy opinion or iug­ment [Page 161] seamit vnto the most agreable and con­sonant vnto the veritie: then mark I pray the thy dangerus presumption in establissing thy priu at opinion to be the reull of thy fayth, vsur­ping vnto thy self vhilk you vill not giue nether vnto Doctor, coūsall, nor hoill church becaus in thy opinion thay may all err and as if you culdst not erre at all and this follouing thy priuat fan­tasy vithout resipiscence, you fallis in the dam­nabill error of ancient heretiques.

Bot if I suld grant vnto the yat it is lesum to follou in matters of fayth such as se amit to the most consonant vnto the veritie: yit let me on­ce demand if you canst produce vnto me any one man of all ages preceding yat in all points did follou and affirm yat sam form of veritie vhilk thou dois affirm and follou? Heir thou must haue recours only vnto thy coryphe or au­thor of thy sect for befor him such nouelteis all in one person var not hard of. if so be, vhat ar­rogance, vhat ignorāce, vhat impudēce to quyit and condem the vniuersall ancient doctrin of the hoill body of the church euer sen the ascen­sion of our lord and master vnto this day for à particular recent doctrin of sum feu infected membres tharof start vp allanerly sen the defe­ction of Martin Luther: Darst you affirm yat so many Chast Virgins preceding the, so many cō ­stant confessors, so many famus Doctors, so ma­ny glorius Martyrs vho haue by thair incredibill holines, vōderfull miracles, and precieus blood plāted, vatt erit and propagat the church of God, [Page 162] darst you (I say) affirm tham all to haue bene bot ignorant idolators hauing no greter reson for the bot becaus you ād the author of thy sect vnderstādit better the sens of scriptur nor euer any of tham did: as if thy spreit (vhilk you ima­ginis to be the spreit of God and tharfor vill not submit it to any mans spreit preceding the) var to be preferrit vnto our spreit vho diffyding in our auin Knouleg knouit vith Fear after the counsall of the Apostle and doth captiuat our spreitts and opinion vnto such ancients as vn­doutely had the spreit of God in more abondan ce nor thou canst be thocht to haue it till by thy vorks thou sall declair the lyik pouer of the spreit to be in the yat vas in tham. O Christian Socrates vhois cheif knouleg vas to knou no thing! ô Ethnique Christians vho pretend to knou all things mote nor any present or prece­ding thame. Ve knou notuithstanding yat our foliss predecessor serching only to knou more nor did apertene vnto him vas depryuit of his originall innocence and knouleg: vee knou yat seditiuse mariam bragging to much yat sche had knouleg and the spreit of God as much as Moyses had hir body vas strik in vith leprocy to mak hir vnderstand yat such mad apprehensiōs of knouleg var bot leproseis of the mynd. Ve knou yat one of the anciēts hes said yat knou­leg vith sobrietie is suir knouleg: Ve knou yat in one place of scriptur it is said knou or vnder­stand vith fear, and in ane vther vho presumit to much of his knouleg knouit no thing at all, [Page 163] and in the thrid yat thair is better hoip of â ve­rey fooll nor of one yat estemit him self to knou much.

Vold thou then knou the incertenty of thy speculatyue knouleg, thou must go à litill out frō it. For as thai yat valk in à mist do not see it so veill as thai yat stand vpon à hill vyid from it: So fareth it in discerning of our oune knouleg vhose propertie is to blīd thā that trust to much tharin, vharby thai can not see the miserie of thair auin estat: For this loftie opinion of knou­leg euin as à Rauen first of all pikit out the poor scheips eyis to th' end sche may not see the vay to escaip his tyrānie: So it bereuit the of thy spi­rituall sicht in such sort as you can not rychtly iuge [...] betuix vanitie and veritie: It bindit the in sueit bondes, rokkit the in à creddill of curio­sitie making the sleap in cairles securitie: Matth. 4. it settit the vpon the pinnacle of ambitiō scheuing vn­to the many digniteis ād making the tkink you art capable of vhatsoeuer thy hart can consait. it presented vnto the many fair and pretieux Clo­thes bot in no case may thou look vithin the peices or cary thā to be discernit vyth the licht: it had 400 fals Prophets to flatter the as Achab had and to keap the from the hearing of Mi­cheas coūsall (yat is from the church vhilk vold tell the the treuth) it had à 1000. 3. King 22. cūning fischars to giue the fair bait bot all furnisit vith dāgerus hookes. Apoc. 17. It hes infinit strūpets to offer the drink in gold in cooppes bot all replenissit vith dead­ly poyson. it lakit not at all occasions sum allu­ring [Page 152] Iaëll to tempt the vith the milk of à glo­rius mynd, Iudic. 4. bot all haue hammers and nailles in thair hāds to murther the vhen you fallit à slee­pe: it had in eury corner à flattring Ioab and fals Iudas to kisse, to kill and to betray the.

Finally it hes all arguments and allurments to caus the glorifie thy self and contem vthers: vold you then perfyitlie see thy auin infirmitie in this behalf. Then ascend vp into sum monta­ne vhar you may behald the foggy mist vhilk hes replenissit theis corners and dennes vharin you hes so long duelt. Bot you vill ask vnto vhat montane I viss the to ascend: not vnto the mō ­tane of thy auin imaginatiō vharin Satā Goeth about to mak the bou vnto him, vhilk in effect you doth vhenas thou extollit thy self to much: bot I viss the ascend vnto the montane vhar Cryst is transfigurat or transsubstantiar yat is to say to the montane of the church Catholique Apostolique Romane sett vpon the top of à montane vhar you hes Moyses and Helias, Pe­ter, Iames and Iohne in thair laufull successors to talk and confer vith the: cōferring vith tham thou salt lern knouleg of laulines not of lofti­nes, of submission not of presumption, of con­firmitie not of any faction or contradiction.

O yat you vold vith vnfenzit hart indelaitly ascend this montane and mak all the Sancts of heauin reioyfit at thy happy conuersion! Luc. 15. o yat you vold not greif the spreit of God offring vn­to the this fair occasiō! o that you vold lyik ane vther Sanct Augustin or ane vther Sanct Paul [Page 151] change schism and sectes for the societie and felouschip vharin all thy most nobill Princes of most vorthy memory, all thy dear antecessors, finally all men and vemen of thy nation young and auld poor and rich did liue and die frō the year of our lord 203. vnto the year 1559. O yat you vold sett forduart in this course ād say vyth yat ould champion of Cryst Iesus Sanct Hie­rosm: if my father stood veping on his knees be­for me and my mother hanging on my nek behind me, and all my brethring, sisters, chil­dring and kinsfolk houling round about to re­tene or hinder me from this happy resolution, I suld fling of my mother to the ground, dispyise all my kinred, rin ouer my father and tread him vnder my feet tharby to run vnto Cryst vhen he callit on me. Beuar, beuat my dearly belouit to giue Cryst Iesus occasion to say vnto you as on­ce he said vnto Ierusalem. Ierusalem Ierusalem hou oft vold I haue collected thy childring as the hē doth hir chickins vnder hir vings bot you vold not, tharfor thy hous sall be left desolat. Beuar lyk the hoggish Gerasens to prefer your suyne yat is to say your sluggish and lasie opiniōs vnto Cryst Iesus and his treu church: beuar to excuse your self lyik theiss mentionat in the 14. of Luc. saying you haue bocht à ferm and yok of oxin or mareit à vyf as if any erdly respect suld serue for excuse being thus so freindly and effe­ctually Inuyted. So for conclusion I besech vith vnfenzit hart the lord of lords in vhose hāds be [Page 150] the hartes of all men yat theiss my Homlie In­deuores may be red vith pitie and cōpassion in respect of my veaknes, resauir vith gratfulnes in respect of my gooduill, ād yat thai may produce effects agreable vnto the sinceritie and singilnes of my mynd to the glory of God almychty and your eternall saluation. Amen.

Soli Deo honor & gloria.