A defence of the Apologie of the Churche of Englande conteininge an answeare to a certaine booke lately set foorthe by M. Hardinge, and entituled, A confutation of &c. By Iohn Iewel Bishop of Sarisburie.

M. Hardinge.

How ignorantly, wickedly, and stubbornely the Authour of this Apologie burdeneth the reue∣rent Father in God, and Honourable prelate Cardinall Hosius with that he neuer saide, it is not vn∣knowen to al men, who haue readen that Booke, whiche he wrote, De Expresso verbo Dei, of the expresse VVoorde of God. Here I aske so muche pardon, as to detecte an hereticall touche or twoo, be∣fore I make direct answeare to the foule slaunderinge of Hosius.

Firste I note, with what fidelitie these newe Holy brethren doo their thinges. It maie be thought that the Secretary of this newe Clergie at his penninge of the Apologie, sawe not Hosius Booke of the expresse woorde of God. But as they haue benne conuersant in S. Augustine, Hierome, Chrysostome, and the Auncient Fathers, so vse they Hosius at this time: that is to saie, they reade neither the Olde Fa∣thers with any diligence, neither the writers of our time: But by snappes and pieces either them selues write out here and there a line or two, or vse that, whiche some of their owne secte hath ta∣ken out of them. So that for moste parte they neuer knowe the true meaninge of the place, whiche they alleage. But vsinge patched note bookes, and bringinge in scattered Authorities, they be decei∣ued themselues, and deceiue others. And he that tooke the note, knewe well they were not the woordes of Hosius, and did but onely put the name of Hosius vnto them, because they were taken out of his Booke. The writer of this Apologie, not knowinge, or not remembringe so muche, when he founde in the note booke the name of Hosius with suche woordes, he did rashely put them in printe, to his owne greate shame, and discredite. If this excuse be not true, wee muste needes laie maruelous malice to the saide writer, who wittingly and of set purpose did impute the woordes to Hosius, whiche he reported by waie of mislikinge of them, and shewinge whose Heresie they conteined.

Now let the Defenders chose, whether they will haue their Secretarie condemned of ignorance, or of malice. How so euer it be, marke yet the thirde pointe, whiche hereof we wil gather. The A∣pologie was skant Printed and published, but that grosse errour was out of hande espied, and woorde thereof brought to the Authour, I meane him, that penned it. But what did he? Did he confesse, that he was deceiued? Did he crie Hosius mercie? No, no. That is not the woonte of Heretikes. They wil go forewarde with the matter once begonne, what so euer come of it. VVhat did he then? VVhen it shoulde be set foorthe in Englishe, and woorde came to him thereof, he made an excuse, I warraunt you meete for an Heretike, whose propertie it is Proficere in peius, as S. Paule saithe, to proceede to worse and worse, to take his degree backewarde, and of a great faulte to make a farre greatter. For whereas before (as Charitiemoueth me to thinke) he had made an errour, supposinge Hosius to haue saide that, whiche he had not, after warde by stubborne mainteininge of it, he sheweth what spi∣rite he is of. And when he mighte reasonably haue excused his ignorance, chose rather spitefully to discouer his malice: As it shall manifestly appeare by the circumstance of the thinge. He laieth to Hosius charge, and in his persone to all our charges, that we do not esteeme the Holy Scriptures. He proueth it by certaine woordes alleaged out of a treatise made by Hosius De Expresso verbo Dei. The woordes are here put in the Apologie, as the reader maie see. The true argumente of Hosius booke is no other then to shewe, that all Heretikes haue alleaged the woordes of God, as they be written: But none of them all haue taken the righte vnderstandinge of Goddes woordes, as they doo in deede signi∣fie. For that onely the Catholike Churche atteineth vnto, because onely it hath the Holy Ghoste. All

Heretikes haue brought for their opinions the written VVoorde of God so longe, vntill at the laste (saithe Hosius) there were founde, who by the woordes of the Scriptures toke vpon them to take a∣way al Auctoritie from Scriptures. Natum est (saithe he) nouum quoddam Prophetarum ge∣nus, qui non sunt veriti Scripturarum auctoritate Scripturis auctoritatem omnem detra∣here. En quò perduxit rem tandem Saranas? A certaine newe kinde of Prophetes is risen, who sticke not by the Authoritie of Scriptures to take away al auctoritie from Scriptures. See whither at the length the Deuill hath brought the matter.

Now afterwarde expoundinge this matter more at large, he declareth the Capitaine of that He∣resie to haue benne Zwenkfeldius. He sheweth that by a Texte of Scripture, where Dauid saithe, I will heare, what our Lorde speaketh in me: Zwenkfeldius wente aboute to wil men to heare what God telleth euery man by inspiration, rather then to geue attendance to the written woorde of God. And whiles Hosius reporteth, what Zwenkfeldius saide for the maintenance of his fonde Heresie, a∣monge other his woordes these are, which be brought in this Apologie against Hosius, and againste the Catholikes: whereas it is neither Hosius, nor any Catholike that speaketh them, but onely Zwenkfel∣dius him selfe.

Hitherto we haue shewed that the woordes alleaged in the Apologie vnder the name of Hosius, make neither againste him, nor against vs, as not beinge his woordes, nor ours, but onely the woordes of Zwenkfeldius. VVell, what credite maie we geue to this man in expoundinge the VVoorde of God, (whose true meaninge he maie falsisie at his pleasure, because we can not bringe foorthe God him selfe to declare his woordes) seeinge he dareth to burthen Hosius with these woordes, whiche Hosius him selfe beinge yet aliue can declare to haue another meaninge, as the Booke it selfe doothe witnesse to all that liste to reade the same. This was a greate faulte, to impure so horrible an Heresie to Hosius vniustly. This was a greate ignorance, to charge him with that Heresie, whiche he refuteth and impugneth. They are greate crimes, and yet suche, as might ri••e of misreporte and ignorance. But when he was tolde of them, he shoulde of reason haue corrected them. He should haue repented with Peter, and not despaired with Cain and Iudas.

But what did he, when he vnderstoode he had erred? He addeth a Glose farre more malicious then the former errour was. For, graun••inge that Hosius setteth out the matter so, as though neither he, nor any of his side, but the Heretikes Zwenkfeldians spake so, this not withstandinge he burtheneth bothe him and the Catholikes with it, saieinge, that he dissembleth, and hideth what he is. Syr, was this the waie to amende your faulte, to graunt that Hosius spake against the Zwenkfeldians, and yet to beare men in hande, he fauoured them? If he had fauoured their Heresie, what needed he to refell it? But how saie you, that Hosius dissembleth and hideth what he is sith that euen here in two places in moste plaine woordes, you laie the Zwenkfeldian Heresie to his charge? Reade your owne Booke. Before the allegation of Zwenkfeldius Heresie, saie you not thus? VVe, saithe he, will bid away, &c. And after the allegation, haue you not these woordes, This is Hosius saieinge? How standeth all this togeather? You haue forgotten the Prouerbe, that biddeth a lier to be mindefull. I can not tell howe to name this kinde of your dealinge, lieinge, or detraction, slaunderinge, or malicious speakinge. But Sir, if Hosius haue spoken euill, why geue you not witnesse against him of euill? If he haue spoken well, euen by your owne confession in reputinge the Zwenkfeldians for Heretikes, why finde you faulte with him for his good woordes, suche I saie, as your selfe confesse to be good? You reprooue him, who speaketh not against Zwenkfeldius: and againe you graunt he speaketh against him: and yet be∣cause you had once reproued him, you will contine we in it without reason, learninge, or witte. But it must needes so be: for without pertinacie no man is either a perfite Heretike, or a perfite slaunderer.

If yet you stande in Defence of it, all the worlde will accompte you for a desperate persone. For no man that euer sawe Hosius woorkes, can thinke that he was gilty of that you burthen him with. But some man might thinke you were deceiued, and mistooke Hosius. But sith you graunt, you doo not now mistake him, and yet charge him with auouchinge that, whiche he holdeth for Heresie: he that vnderstandeth thus muche of you, maye assure him selfe, that you are disposed to belie and slaunder Hosius, though it coste you the damnation of your Soule. For shame man, repente, and reuoke that, for whiche your owne conscience stinteth not to barke at you.

But Hosius (saie they) peraduenture will not allowe the woordes of Zuenkfeldius:* 1.1 yet he doothe not disallowe the meaninge of the woordes. VVell and clerkely reasoned. As though woordes were allowed or disallowed for any other so principall a cause, as for theire meaninge. And therefore he that disalloweth woordes, hath muche more disallowed the meaninge of them. Yet, (saie they) of the Holy Communion vnder Bothe Kindes he reiecteth the plaine woordes of Christe, as Deade and colde Elementes. Verely a man mighte thinke this Booke was set foorthe by some ennemie of our newe Englishe Clergie, it is so mutche to their defacinge, had not thēselues at diuerse times acknowleged it for a whelpe of their owne littour. A mā for his life can not finde one leafe in it without many Lies.

Notes

• * 1.1

  The mis∣takinge of Hosius.