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.

The Apologie, Cap. 5. Diuision. 6.

If so be that Pope Pius were the man (wee saie not, whiche he would so gladly be called) but if he were in deede a man, that either would accoumpt vs for his brethren, or at least would take vs to be men, he would first diligently haue examined our reasons, and would haue seene, what might be saide with vs, what against vs: & would not in his Bul, whereby he lately pretended a Councel, so rashly haue condemned so great a part of the worlde, so many Learned & Godly men, so many common wealthes, so many Kinges, & so many Prin∣ces, onely vpon his owne blinde preiudices & foredeterminations, & y^t without hearing of them speake, or without shewing cause why.

M. Hardinge.

Speake of Pope Pius, what ye wil, and what ye can. Neither your praise can aduaunce his e∣stimation, nor your dispraise abase it. His singular vertues be wel knowen. God is highly to be praised for that he hath prouided for his flock so good a shepheard. As for you, as ••e taketh you to be men, so not his brethren, bicause ye haue cut of your selues from the Catholike churche. Your reasons haue ben

diligently and exactly examined already.* 1.1 In respect of your reasones Learning, and Holy Scriptures whiche ye bring, ye are founde suche as Balsasar Kinge of Babylon ••as signified by the hande, that appeared writing before him in the wall.

What it is, Heretikes to be admitted to reasoning, it is and hath ben euermore too wel knowen. Be they neuer so throughly confuted, they yelde not. Ouercome they may be, reformed th•••• wil not be. Therein no good lightly is done.

The B. of Sarisburie.

Yf Pope Pius w••te so good 〈◊〉〈◊〉, who so, 〈…〉〈…〉 thy a Passout for the Churche of God, why then did his Cat d••••lles of thee 〈◊〉〈◊〉 so 〈◊〉〈◊〉 by trea∣son, and conspiracie to oppose him, 〈…〉〈…〉 you say▪ so good a man▪ 〈…〉〈…〉 it were not so,* 1.2 why then did he himselfe 〈◊〉〈◊〉 thereof so vtterly in ••n Oration pro∣nounced openly in Rome in the Consist••••te▪ Is it not lauful for so good a man to liue in Rome? Is the same Proclamation nowe practised emong the Cardinalles in Rome,* 1.3 that was sometime vsed in the Councel house at Ephesus, Nemo nostrum frugi esto. Let no good man be emongste vs:

Ye safe. Pope Pius would not vouchesaue to cal vs his Brethren. No marueile, séeing his owne dèere, and first begotten Children the Cardinales would no lenger haue him to be theire Father.* 1.4 It is sufficient for vs,* 1.5 that Christe the Sonne of God is contente to cal vs his Brethren.

Ye haue Excommunicate vs, as the Ph••riseis did the Apostles, bicause wée speake vnto you in the name of Christe. But your owne Lawe saithe, Excommuni∣ca••us non poiest Excommunicate: He that is Excommunic••t him selfe, cannot geue Sen∣tence to Excommunicate others:* 1.6 And your owne Gelasius saithe.* 1.7 Neminem ligate debet iniqua Sententia: A wicked Sentence (of Excommunication) bindeth noman. But before al others God him selfe saithe, Ego Benedicam Maledictionibus vestris: I wil Blesse, that you Curse, saithe the Lorde. You saie, you haue weighed our Reasons, and haue founde them too light. Now surely that is a good Light answeare. Euen in sutche Light sorte Iulianus the Apostata wrote sometime vnto the Christian Bi∣shoppes:* 1.8 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: I haue readde your reasons: I know them wel yenough: and therefore I haue condemned them. But the same Christian Bishoppes answeared him againe, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. It may be, ye haue readde our reasons: but ye vnderstoode them not. For if ye vnderstoode them, ye would not con∣demne them.* 1.9 As S. Paule also likewise saithe, Nam si cognouissent, nunquam Dominū Gloriae crucifixissent: Yf they had knowen, they would neuer haue Crucified ye Lord of Glorie.

But vnto many of your side, M. Hardinge, I feare me wée may ouer truely say as S. Hilarie saithe vnto the Arian Heretiques:* 1.10 Verè Deum nesciunt: at{que} vtinam n••scirent: Cum procliuiori enim venia ignorarent: In deede they know not God: and would God they kn••w him not: Then theire ignorance were the easier to be pardoned.

You saie, There is no Disputation to be had with Heretiques. Yet your Fa∣thers in the Councel of Basile,* 1.11 and your Frendes in the last Councel of Trident, I wil not say, had Disputations, but certainely yelded, and gaue place vnto the Bo∣hemiens, & vnto sutche others, as you cal Heretiques. But ye haue reason: ye can foresée your best aduantage. It were the readiest way to disclose your shame You ne∣uer yet càme to Disputation, but some of your companie shranke away from you, As I before haue reported out of Tertullian:* 1.12 Veritas nihil veretur,* 1.13 nisi abscondi: Truthe feareth nothing, but lest shee be hid. If the God of Israel come into the Temple, the Idole of Dagon must needes fal downe.

Notes

• * 1.1

  A comparison betvvene the Defenders and Balsasar King of Babylon. No good vvrought by reasoning vvith Heretikes.
• * 1.2

  Oratio Pij Papae.
• * 1.3

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.4

  Mattha e. 28.
• * 1.5

  Iohan. 20.
• * 1.6

  11. Quae. 3. Cui est illata.
• * 1.7

  Mala. 2.
• * 1.8

  Sozomen. li. ••. Cap. 18.
• * 1.9

  1. Corin. 2.
• * 1.10

  Hilar. De Syno∣dis aduersus Arianos.
• * 1.11

  Concil Basil. Concil. Trident.
• * 1.12

  Tertull. in Apo∣logetico.
• * 1.13

  1. Regum. 5.