An apologie fully aunsvveringe by Scriptures and aunceant doctors, a blasphemose book gatherid by D. Steph. Gardiner, of late Lord Chauncelar, D. Smyth of Oxford, Pighius, and other papists, as by ther books appeareth and of late set furth vnder the name of Thomas Martin Doctor of the Ciuile lawes (as of himself he saieth) against the godly mariadge of priests Wherin dyuers other matters which the papists defend be so confutid, that in Martyns ouerthrow they may see there own impudency and confusion. By Iohn Ponet Doctor of diuinitie and Busshhop of Winchester.
About this Item
Title
An apologie fully aunsvveringe by Scriptures and aunceant doctors, a blasphemose book gatherid by D. Steph. Gardiner, of late Lord Chauncelar, D. Smyth of Oxford, Pighius, and other papists, as by ther books appeareth and of late set furth vnder the name of Thomas Martin Doctor of the Ciuile lawes (as of himself he saieth) against the godly mariadge of priests Wherin dyuers other matters which the papists defend be so confutid, that in Martyns ouerthrow they may see there own impudency and confusion. By Iohn Ponet Doctor of diuinitie and Busshhop of Winchester.
Author
Ponet, John, 1516?-1556.
Publication
[[Strasbourg :: Printed by the heirs of W. Köpfel?],
1556]
Rights/Permissions
To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
Subject terms
Gardiner, Stephen, 1483?-1555. -- Traictise declaryng and plainly provyng, that the pretensed marriage of priestes, and professed persones, is no mariage, but altogether unlawful, and in all ages, and al countreies of Christendome, bothe forbidden, and also punyshed -- Controversial literature -- Early works to 1800.
Celibacy -- Church of England -- Controversial literature -- Early works to 1800.
Cite this Item
"An apologie fully aunsvveringe by Scriptures and aunceant doctors, a blasphemose book gatherid by D. Steph. Gardiner, of late Lord Chauncelar, D. Smyth of Oxford, Pighius, and other papists, as by ther books appeareth and of late set furth vnder the name of Thomas Martin Doctor of the Ciuile lawes (as of himself he saieth) against the godly mariadge of priests Wherin dyuers other matters which the papists defend be so confutid, that in Martyns ouerthrow they may see there own impudency and confusion. By Iohn Ponet Doctor of diuinitie and Busshhop of Winchester." In the digital collection Early English Books Online. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/A09913.0001.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed May 6, 2024.
The VII. Chapter. Martins notable and shameles lyeng / and falsifienge of authors is disclosid / ād confutid concludinge by his own reasons that the Papistes be both Heretiques ād lechors / with a declaration that the chefe old Heretiques and infectors of Christen¦dom with erroneus opinions were vn∣maried Priests or Monks etc? Wherin Martin by his own reason is prouid a lechor an heretique and a traytor.
THis long discourse haue I made to this ēd (as I haue / before declarid) that it might appere whether parte were heretiques. And seīg I haue with diligēt wayīg aswell by the scriptures as by aun¦c••ant wryters (grounding my self apon the very definitiō of an heretique) found Martin and his fellowes giltie with the most rank heretiques that haue bene in the church of god / so that iustly thei cā not deny / but that they haue the ouerthrow I wil take this as a feeld won. And now turning my pen agayn to Martyn thus I resume his maior from the which apon necessary discorse / offerid by Martins or¦der in this book I haue so lōg digressid.
Heresie and lechory sayst thow Mar∣••in be commonly ioyned together / and in ••he 4 leaf of thy book thow saist
(Heresie ••ysseth not to keep lechory company) wherunto I add this minor or mean pro¦••osition.
But the Papists be heretiques (which I haue at large prouid) ergo (to ••on Martyn you Papists be lechors. Lo ••t is often tymes seen / he that wilbe busy ••urling stones at the son̄e / shall haue thē ••ight apō his own pate. To what purpo∣••e I pray the diddest thow speak of Sim. Magus, Basilides, Carpocrates, and such other heretiques / if it were not to geue him oc∣••asion / that should confute thy folishnes / to search how the opiniōs of the Papists and thers agre together? Yf it were to declare that because they were Hereti∣ques / they must also be lechors: The sa∣me induction being now brought aga∣inst the and thy fellowes / must be no lesse hable to proue thee and al other Papists ••echors: seīg they be shewed by plaine de¦monstration to be heretiques Yf it were to proue vs heretiques / because ye fayne vs with your lyeng tong to be lechors / thē shuld it folow / that all whores of the ••tewes / and whoremongers were hereti¦ques / which I am suer the Papists dare
not say / for feare of inquisitio haereticae prau••∣tatis that is now enterid into England •• like with the Spaniards to destroy the l••••bertie of the English nation / wherby n•• doubt shortly the noses of the nobiliti•• shalbe holden to the gryndstone / and th•• necks of the commons / tyed vnder th•• priests gyrdels / from which misery I b••••sech Iesus Christ saue so many as fauo•• from the bottom of there hart Christ and the noble realm of England. Amen.
But it may be / that ye sought som oc∣casion in the beginnīng of your bok to d••••uise a quarell by a color of your Rheto∣rik callid Canina facundia .i. dogges eloqu••••ce / wherby to bring maried priests int•• haterid: in alledgīg that the first marie•• preests in Spayne / in Rome / in ffraunc•• in Itali / and so forth where ye will / were heretiques. And yet if ye had myndid tha•• profe / ye shuld haue named none hereti∣ques / but such as were maried priests.
But seing all those heretiques whom ye name were vnmaried / as it is euiden•• by there opinion condempnig mariadge •• your argument is turnid against you•• self / for that they were heretiques / and l••••chors / as yow hold / and vnmaried virgin priests / as you Papists be. And wha••
••old ye cōclude therof / if it were trew? ••old ye by this / define that all maried ••riests be heretiques? That kind of rea∣••oning is not vnlike to this? The first ••orn child that Adam had was wicked / na¦••ely Cayn. The first born child that Abra¦••am, had / was wicked / namely Ismaell / The ••irst born child that Isaac had / was wicked ••amely Esau. Ergo the first born and el∣••est children of all mē be wicked. Or els ••his way.Saull was the first king that ••as chosen to rule Israell / and he was ••n euell man.Romulus the first king in Rome / who lyke a most trayterose tyrāt ••ylled his own brother Remus wherfo∣••e he also was an euell man. The firstkin¦••e in Spayne was a tyrant / that came ••ut of Gothia. The first king in Fraunce ••hat obtained any generall rule alone was the Tyrant Clodoueus / which when ••e had ouercum the Persians / occupied ••he kingdom of ffraūce by tyranny. The ••irst Emperor was Iulius Caesar, who en∣••red by cyuill warre / treason / and tyran̄y, ••he first king in England that rayned a ••on / draue out the other kings / and occu∣••ied there lands and posseszions by tyran¦••y: will yow now therfore conclude that ••ll kings be naughty men and tyrants?
1Yf this kind of reasoning seem so goo•• in your sight▪ then I pray you harken t•• this other lyke therunto. The first heret••••que that euer was in all the world afte•• Christs death was Simon Magus of Samari•• who hauing not the gyft of sole lyfe / wol•• not enter the holy state of matrimony / bu•• folowing / or rather beginning the popi••••he kinde of chastitie / kept a harlot name•• Selene / 2 or Helena as some do call her▪ The first Heretique that was in Persi•• was Manes / the first roote of the heret••¦ques callid Mamcheis who lyuid in su•••• chastitie / as the popish priests do / not on∣ly refusing to marry himself / but conde••¦pning mariadge in the ministers of hi•• sect / 3 whom they callid (as Saint Auste•• Epist. 72. saith) Electos. The first Anabap∣tist in Rome was Nouatus the heretik a•• vnmaried priest whose sect alowed no•• mariadge in ther preests and denyed rep••¦tance to offendors.4 The first heretik•• that sprāg in Spaine were the Priscilliani••stes / (as Saint Austen witnesseth) abou•• the yere of our lord 386 who so much ab∣horrid the mariadge of priests and of o∣ther of there sect / that they caused the sa∣me practise which now most shamefull•• is practised in England (that is to say
they causid to be diuorsid uiros â nolentibus foeminis, & foeminas, â nolentibus uiris .i. mē frō there vnwilling wyues / 5 and wyues from there vnwilling husbands (as Saint Au¦sten saith) The author of that sect was Priscillianus an vnmaried Bushop of Abile in Spaine. The first notable Hereti∣que of England was Pellagius a monk / ab¦out 400 yere after Christ / who lyued such a single lyfe as the Papists now doe.6
And about a hūdreth yere before him The first notable heretique in Affrica was Arrius an vnmaried priest of Alexandria as both Epiphanius Eusebius / and other do wit¦nes whose virginitie was much lyk to doctor Westons sauing that Arrius, kept himself close / and Doctor westons knaue¦ry is knowen to all men.7 The first here∣tiks in Paphlagonia, and Armenia were Eu∣stachiani, whose chefe heresie was the con¦dempnīg of priests mariadge / so that thei refusid to receaue the communion at the hands of such priests as were maried for the which thinge they were condempn̄ed as I haue before declarid in the Coūcell holdē at Gangris about the tyme of the Ni∣cene Councell which was cōfirmed by the syxt synod in Trullo / holden at Constanti∣nople. And from whence came the doc∣trine
of Machomet / which now is folo∣wed of the Turkes and Saracens / and is muche largelyer spred abrod then is the doctrine of Christ? cam it not from Sergius an vnmaried monke / that fled for his na∣ughtines from Byzans / of whose leszons Mahomet mad his Alcoran? And all he¦retiques before the tyme of Heiuidius (if it were trew as vow say that Heluidius were the first maried priest in Christendō) we∣re vnmaried priests: Yet were some of them Stupratores uirginum, & depopulato∣res matrimoniorum rauishers of virgins ād defylers of matrimony as Saint Cyprian wryteth of Nouatus. Some liuid in luxuria & uoluptatibus as yow testifie of Carpocra∣tes, etc. now to cōclude All these of whō I haue spoken / were priests / & vnmaried priests & heretiques / ergo al your popish virgī priestes (if your reason were good) that marry not / be heretiks. And now ye see what ye haue wō with reasonīg ab inde finito ad uniuersale. Which kynde of rea∣soning is commonly vsed in the logick of yow Papists. As one speciall place amō∣gest many other / the reader shall fynd in Gardiners bok against my lord of Can̄∣terbery whiche appeareth in my sayd lord of Cāterberies bok in the latter end of the
sixt pagine wherunto in the latter ende of the VII. pagine / my lord maketh a le∣arned answer / open̄yge to the world Gar¦diners vnlearned kynd of reasoninge. Yf now Martin / thow canst not deuyse so∣me prety kynde of shift / wherby thow maist recant / and make this reason na∣ught / thow hast shamed thy selfwith thy first Chapter / The som̄e wherof standeth apon this point: that heresy and lechory be commonly ioyned together. Which say¦ing / thou prouest none otherwise trew then that the first maried priests in some countryes were heretiques / and by cer∣tain notes / etc. And like as it is a shame for the in such a weighti matter / to make such a bald reason thoughe thye grounds were trew: so thy grounds being vntrew thy rebuk is increased / for who knoweth not that Saint Peter was a priest? and the gospell restifieth that he had a wyfe / the Euangelists say that Christ healid pe¦ters wyues mother of a feauer.
And Clemens Alexandrinus testifieth that he did not put her away / but continewed with her till she dyed in martyrdom for Christs sake / which Martyn denyeth / ād the same Clement sayeth that Peter spa∣ke to her when she was in dyeng saying
to her Vxor memento Domini wyfe remem∣ber the lord / and that this is trew Saint Hierom against Iouinian can not denye And I am suer thow wilt not denye but that Peter dwelt XXV. yeres at Rome (for so yow Papists hold) Now if it were trew / that the first maried priest in Ita∣ly (as thow dost alledg for the profe of thy purpose) were an heretique / then by this means shuld Peter be an heretique onles thow wilt say that Rome is not in Italy. For that it was not / Heluidius / shalbe reasoned hereafter. And for fur∣ther profe of thy purpose / thow saist also that the first maried priest in Fraūce was an heretique / which saying thow prouest by the second councell holden at Towers / a worthy coūsell I promes yow / of eight frenche pusshops all a great / gathered to¦gether without the popes consent / which marreth all the matter by the iudgement of the Papists. but let it be grauntid that it had bene a generall Coūcell / as it was none / and that the busshops being all Pa¦pists had not bene so: yet doth not the 20. Canon by the alledged proue thy purpo∣se that the first maried priest in Fraunce was an heretique. But it sayth that this opinion (or heresie as this iolly counsell
nameth it) a quodam presbytero primū surrex∣it. sprang first of a certein priest / not na¦ming where he dwelt / neither whether he were maried or vnmaried / But apon this place ye note vpon the margent of your bok /
The first maried priest in Fraūce was an heretique.
where all men may see of that place / it may aswell be gathe∣red that it was an vnmaried priest.
The place serueth aswell for the one as the o∣ther. Yea & it is to be thought that Here∣sis presbyterorum, not to be of the mariad∣ge of priests of Fraunce / but some other heresy begon by certein priests. For if it had been an heresie / maried priests sho∣uld not haue bene suffered to receaue the communion. Look bak in thy book of ge¦nerall Councells one hundreth yere / and thow shalt fynde another Councell / holdē in the very same place at Towers / in the tyme of Leo the first / where the Councel found falt with there forefathers which had made lawes wherby to remoue mari¦ed priests from the communion / and toke apon them to moderat that wicked law / which was before that tyme made by po¦pe Syritius (a man altogether vnler∣ned in the scriptures / as by his re∣asonning hereafter shall appeare)
by the which moderation / it is euident that they did condempne the extremitie and vngodly Iudgement of Syritius and other the enemies of priests mariad∣ges. The words of the Canon be these.
Al¦though it hath been ordeined by our fore¦fathers that what soeuer priest or deacon were conuictid / that he gaue himself to the procreation of children / he should ab∣staine from the communion of the lord / Nos tamen huic districtioni moderationem adhi∣bentes, & iusta Cōstitutione mollientes id decreui∣mus &c. We not withstanding that ordi∣naunce (sayth the decree) adding a moder¦ation to this rigor / & tempering it with indifferency / Thus haue decreed. That a priest or deacon whiche remaineth in the desier of matrimony / or els absteineth not from procreacion of children / let him not ascend to any higher state or promotion / neither offer sacrifices to God / or mini∣ster to the peple. This only may be suffi∣cient for them / that they benot remouid from the communion / but that they may kepe these things / they must cut of drun∣kenes the mo••her of all vices etc.
By this Canon it is plaine good rea∣der [ 1] that 44•• yere after Christ it was no Heresy in fraunce for a preest to haue a
wyfe / nor whordome neither / (as Mar∣tin [ 2] vylie termeth it) / neither was it a fil∣thy [ 3] thing / for then should the Counsel ha¦ue done amisse to alow him to receaue the communion / which was a more holy thin¦ge than euer was there Idoll the masse caak. And allthoughe the superstition of these french busshops / do somwhat appe∣are in denieng him to minister the com∣munion to other / yet doth ther folishnes appere withall / in that they alow the ma∣ried priest to receaue it himself / if he were (as Martin sayth) an Heretique. Who cā iudge / a matter of lesse weight to re∣ceaue the communion then to minister it? Belyke they were of this opinion / that the vncleanes of the minister / did hurt the thing ministrid Which was the opinion of the Heretiques named Eustachiani as apereth by the first and 4 Cannons of the Councell holden at Gangris: and is at this day the opiniō of the Anabaptists. And Mar¦tin with all such papists / as say that a pri¦est may not marry because of the vnclea∣nes that should be in the minister after lyeng with his wyfe / and therfore may not minister the Sacrament / do declare that it is the plain opinion of the sect of the Papists as I haue partly before tou¦ched.
And although I haue here matter inoughe wherwith to charge the Pa∣pists and Martin ther proctour / concer∣ning this point / that the vncleanes of the minister ought not to be regarded / in case that mariadge could make the minister vnclean (as none but heretiques and Pa¦pists say): I will leaue that matter vn¦till another place / where I intend to de∣bate more at large the cleanes of mariad¦ge in all states / for this present it shal be sufficient for the reader to vnderstand / that Martin maketh a lye in telling the reader / that the 30. Canon of the secōd Councell at Towers / in Fraunce proueth that the first maried priest in Fraūce was an Heretique. I passe ouer / that euen in thesame 2. popish prouinciall counsell of Towers in Fraunce the XIII. canon grā¦teth the busshop to haue his wyfe as his sister. and so rule the ecclesiasticall ād his owne house / And allso that the XIII. Can¦on of the same councell maketh mention of the busshops wyfe calling her Episcopa.
That is to say the busshops wyf or busshopes / charging all busshops that lak wyues / that they shall haue no cum∣pany or trayne of women folowing them etc. onles they haue wyues. And to set
one Papist••••••aynst another and to bea•• you with 〈◊〉〈◊〉 oun Doctors look in the bok named Manipulus Curatorum / wher the Papist Guido de monte Rocherij. confesseth speakinge of the Sacrament of orders / that in the primatiue churche / preests had wyues / and that they were callid Presbyte∣rae / and these be his very words. Pressbyte∣ra autem uocatur, quia secundum morem primiti∣uae ecclesiae erat uxor presbyteri / (that is to say / the preests wif is callid Presbytera / becau∣se that accordinge to the fashion of the primitiue Church / she was the preestes wyf.
And thus ye see that we doe not only proue by your own Doctors that preests had wiues in the primatiue churche / but we also shew how they were then named. And I will also teache Martin that this is wrytten of S. Hylary bushop of poti∣ers in France (two hundreth yere before the 2. Coūsell at Towers that he alledged) that he was both a bushop / and a ma∣ried bushop / And lest Martyn shuld say that he absteined from his wyfe / which he had before he was busshop (as he fasly sayth all busshops do) I shall desier the to call to remembrāce / the epistle that he wrote beīg an old mā (as he saith himself the¦re)
to his doughter Abram, who was so yong that he doutid whether she could vn¦derstand his wryting or not / and therfo∣re said vnto her Tu uero si quid minus, per ae∣tatem in hymno, & epistola intelligis, interroga matrem tuam. Yf by reason of your tēder age / ye can not vnderstand the hympne & the Epistle / aske your mother / and imme¦diatly he calleth her his most dear daug∣hter. Wherby it may appeare in Saint Hylaries dayes it was lawfull for a bus••hop in Fraunce to haue a wyfe / for other••wise the holy man Hylary / wold not ha∣ue vsid it. And the age of himself / and the youth of his daughter / seē to proue that she was begotten after he was made bus••hop. But Martyn lyke himself / trium••pheth saying no bushops had wyues bu•• heretiques / wherin his rayling tōg con∣dempneth Hylary for an Heretique / i•• any man wold beleue him / But his ton∣ge is no slaūder / to all such as know him God be praisid. Also for further profe of his purpose he alledged out of Sain•• Hierom against Heluidius that the firs•• maried priest in Italy / yea in the whol•• world (as he saith) was an Heretique Mark now good reader and thow sha••
here a gloriose lye of Martins. I call it gloriose / because he hath set it forth with such a glory not here only / but hereafter in the 118. leaf also. Martīs words in his first place be these.
In Italy the first pre¦est that maried: was he any better? (mea¦ning then an heretique) S. Hierom saith it was Heluidius the heretique which de¦••yed our blissid lady to haue continued a v••••gin.
These be the words of the great cl••••k Master Doctor Martī the lawyer (as off hīself he sayth) but I might / bet∣ter haue said / of D. Martin the lyar.
For doutles he is a thousand fold better seen in lyeng then lawīg. Which appereth not only by the most parte of the notes in the margēt in his first Chapter (pointing to the text of lyke trueth) that be most com∣menly lyes: but also by this place / and an infinit nomber of other / wher he belieth falsly the old Wryters / not only in falsly turning them / and wrything there say∣ings against there meanings: but also in most falsly aduouching them to say / that they say not / as in this place / he maketh a most shamfull lye apon Saint Hierom. for I assuer the good reader that Saint Hierom saith not in all his book against Heluidius that he was (as Martin re∣porteth)
the first maried priest in Itally No Saint Hierom saith not that Helui¦dius was maried / and how may it then be trew that Saint Hierom saith he was the first maried priest in Italy? So now ye see that Martin is not contentid to make one lye apon Saint Hierom / but he must also lay one in anothers neck / re∣porting Saint Hierom to say that Hel∣uidius was the first priest that maried in Italy: because it is a lye that he was ma¦ried at al / And yet sayth Martī S. Hie∣rom reporteth that he was not only mari¦ed / but also the first maried priest in Ita∣ly. And in this point also Martin is not a litle to be blamed that he doth not only belye Saint Hierom / but also the thing it self is a lye which he faineth S. Hierom to say, But yow will aske me how I can proue that Saint Hierom sa¦ith not so? Forsoth two waies / First I am contentid to be iudged by the whole book which S. Hierom hath wrytten against Heluidius. Secondarily I am cōtent to let Martin himself be iudge / for these be his words which immediatly folow this lye before wrytē. And (sayth Martī) he saith not (meaning by S. Hie) that he was the first maried priest in Italy / Loe
god reader what neede I to haue any fur¦ther condempnacion for Martin in this point / then his own pen? Well doth S. Hie. say so? no verily sayth Martin. why thē for shame suffereth he those lines be∣fore in the text? & that note in the mar∣gent / to stād in his book / without adding vnto it / some such note as this is? Beleue not Mar. in this place / for here he lyeth ••gregio••ly.
Why but I pray you / is it not enoghe for Martī to say that Saint Hierom saith not so? yes forsoth enoghe ••o proue the other saying a lye. But to ••rocede / if S. Hierom say not so / I pray ••ou what saith he? marry (saith Martin) He saieth not that he was the first mari¦••d priest in Italy.
But the first priest that ••ecame both spirituall and temporall in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the whole world. Now belike Martin ••ath lokid so narrowly to his matters ••hat he will not be taken with his accu∣••••omed fashion of lyenge. But what will 〈◊〉〈◊〉 say if this also be a lie? think yow not 〈◊〉〈◊〉 thē he were a meet man to lye for the ••hetstone? Verely god read this is no les 〈◊〉〈◊〉 lye thē the other for this saying is not 〈◊〉〈◊〉 all Saint Hierom neither / wherby 〈◊〉〈◊〉 may se his Tonge so accustomed to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 / that he can not when he Wold /
say trueth? But I pray yow what sa∣ith S. Hierō of Heluidius? forsoth that which foloweth in Latin in Martīs own boke. these be his words. Solus in uniuerso mundo laicus simul & sacerdos, The English wherof is this: he ōly in the whole world was both at once a priest and a lay man. In the whiche words thow maiest see good reader / that there is no mēcion nei∣ther that he was the first maried prist in Italy / neither that he was the first mari¦ed priest in all the whole world / neither that he was maried onles ye wil say that all lay men be maried / yea if it were trew that all lay men were maried men yet is there neuer a word in Saint Hierom neither of (Italy) nor of (first) nor of (last) nor of (mariadge) Now may you see what credit is to be geuē to Martin wh••̄ he alledgeth old authors. But it may be peraduenture he will say the printer de∣ceaued him / and put it in of his own head I think there be now / plentie of such pri••••ters in England that prynt they care no•• what / so they may gaine neuer so litle though it be horrible blasphemy agains•• God & his Aūgels as in the books tha•• com forth dayly pryntid by Cawawoo•• and such lyke appeareth. But Marti••
can not escape so / for in 118 leaf 1. G. pa. 2. he maketh the selfsame lye agayn / and sa¦ith also there / that the heretique Heluidi¦us was the first maried priest that we re¦ad of in all Christēdom. Yt is the proper∣tie of some lyers / when they haue told a lye ones or twyse or oftner / that by often telling of there lyes to other / at last they think them true themselues / ād so it may be that Martin by often telling this vai¦ne fable / doth now think it is a most true story. But seing it is plainly shewed that Martyn fayleth in the profe of his gro∣unds where he intendid to proue by in∣duction / the first maried priest in Italy / ād in France / & so forth / were heretiques (thoughe he were able to make some pro¦fe of other maried priests in other cun∣tryes) yet can not his reason hold as I haue at large before declarid / because so∣me partes of the Induction being impro¦uid / the reason rūneth but from an inde∣finite / to an vniuersall / which kynd of re¦asoning yong Sophisters in Cambridge be shent when they vse.
But Martin fearing lest all his brab¦ling will not serue his turn / hath pyked out a pece of Saint Hierom / where he se¦meth to note certain properties and qua∣lities
/ which he sayth be commonly in he¦retiques / and stryueth to aply the same to such as had professed Christs gospell in England. The words be these / as he doth alledge them.Raro haere••ici dili∣gunt castitalem, & quicunque amare pudicitiam se simulant ut Manichaeus, Martion, Arrius, Tati∣anus, & instauratores ueteris haereseos, Venenato ore mella promittunt, caeterum iuxta Apostolum quae secretè agunt, turpe est di••ere.
The English wherof (as you Martin haue handelid it) doth euidently proue that yow vnderstode not the latin / for this place doth so playnly set furth the proper¦ties of the popish virgin priests / and of the other Papists / that in all Saint Hie¦rom there can not lightly be found a bet∣ter. wherfore that the reader may vnder∣stand the true sence of it / I will translate it truly / that your falshod in translation may apperare when my translation and yours shalbe laid together.
Heretiques (saith S. Hierom) ād all suche as pretēd that they loue Chastitie / do very seldom l••••ue it in deed / As Manichaeus, Martion, Arrius▪ Tatianus, / and the renewers of the old heresie. They promise hon•• with a poysoned mouth / but accor••ding to the saying of the Apostle / it i••
Now mark good reader Saint Hierom in this place inueieth sharply a¦gainst the old Heretiques which wold not marry themselues / nor alow mariad¦ge in other but pretendid such a holynes with a shew of virginitie / and hatered of mariadge / that with there holy looks & sweet words they deceauid the peple.
Wherby thow maist well perceaue that this place of Saint Hierō maketh fully against such priests as say they ha∣ue the gyft of Chastitie / and haue it not / that lyue in whoredom and marry not / that pretend holynes in the sight of the peple but lead a filthy lyfe in corners / ād in secret. And for example he nameth a nomber of heretiks that were vnmari∣ed priests / as the popish preests be / and thought mariadge to be to vnclean a thing / to be in a minister / as all the Pa∣pists doe / let Martin himself denye yf he can that these were vnmaried / so that ther is nothinge here / that agreeth not fully with the Papists. Lo how ignorance blin¦deth Martins eyes. Ye may see how he ••s felled with his own weapon. All the ••it he had culd not / or els of frowardnes ••e wold not / make a sence of this place.
But note his impudency / In his transla¦tion out of the latin into the English / he putteth in these words (against the Sa∣crament of matrimony) which be not in the latin / mynding as it semeth by a sle∣ight / for want of other profe to perswa∣de the vnlerned reader by this peece of S. Hierom̄ that mariadge is a Sacramēt.
Which if it so did / yet were it no more for his purpose in this place / then any va¦yne talk of the moone / or other by matter.
So in this place we haue also an other testimony of Martīs falshod. & see plain¦ly that the notes / wherby he myndid to haue (with the authoritie of Saint Hie∣rom) descrybed vs / do paint himself and his popish virgin priests euidently to our eyes. But Martin suspecting by lyk that these notes also / either could not at al / or not sufficiently serue his purpose / he procedeth to another pece of S. Hie∣rom.••educinge as before / his reason 〈◊〉〈◊〉posteriore / trusting that now he hath foūd out such notes / wherby to proue vs here∣tiques / as we can not auoyd.
And his no••tes be these.
They geue themselues t•• gluttony to delicatnes / to eating of flesh (whom therfor Martin calleth fleshmo••••gers) to haunting of baynes / they smel••
of musk and perfumes / and with sondry other ointments they procure themselu∣es to be bewtifull of body.
I think Mar¦tyn wold neuer haue medled with this place / if it had not bene for a desier that he had to turne the latin words (carnibus uescuntur) by the new found english term of fleshmongers / rather then the eating of flesh / as the word soundeth / but the de∣uise of such fantasticall termes agreeth wel with Martins pen / But to the pur∣pose of this note / all mē know right well that as absteinīg / doth not proue a good Christian man / so doth not eating of flesh proue a mā an heretique / Manichaei, Tatia∣ni, Montani, Cataphryges, Aeriani, Priscillianistae Saturninus, Basilidiani, and many other old archheretiks absteined from flesh and taught this Doctrine that the eating of flesh did defyle a Christian man / and yet notwithstanding there doctrine and ab∣stinence / they were rank Heretiques.
Wherfore it semeth that S. Hierom did not finde falt with them that eat flesh but with them that eat it not for the satis∣fiēg of there honger / but of their pleasu∣re and in such case the eating of fish or of bread other / is not commendid. The Chri¦sten man abhorreth superfluous dyet / ād
the vayn pleasur that is increased of ea∣ting without necessitie / and without re∣spect of the kynd / whether it be fish or flesh / knowing that all creatures of God be good / if they be taken with thanks ge¦uing / for they be sanctified by the word of God and praier. And also that which en¦treth the mouth / defileth not the man but that which commeth out of the mouth de¦fileth the man / (that is to say) euell thou¦ghts / murther / adultery / whoredō theft false ••ortnes / and slaunder. And where as Martin thinketh the other notes / as smellinge of muske / and washing in bay¦nes / and paintinge of faces etc. be notes wherby to know Heretiques: Then it is an easie matter in princes courtes / ād busshops houses / and many other mens houses also / to fynde out Heretiques by the nose / without the popes kynde of In∣quisitio haereticae prauitatis. Yf (I say) the sa∣uors of Cy••et / musk / perfumes / and oint¦ments be sufficient notes to proue an heretik (as Martins diuinitie out of S. Hierom semeth to inferre) Then must it also folow / that the greater & strōger sa∣uor shall proue the greater and stronger heretique And then if a man wold finde out the Rākest heretique in a company /
his best way is to get him to a popish procession / (for sermons be laid a syde which reproued the abuse of such things) or to Masse / specially apon a highe day / ād he shall try out by his nose / who is not only an heretik / but also who is the most arrant / and most rank Heretique aboue the rest. And it is lyke that the fayerer / and greater nose shall doe (in this case) the better seruice / ād therfor it might be thought good that the Queē / in bestow∣ing her bushopriks / should consider not so muche the learninge of the party / as whether he haue a fayer nose or not that is skilfull in sauors. For the bushops no∣se (by this doctrin of Marrin) shall doe him as good seruice / as some handsom Sōner / & in deed might some tyme smel out his maister / for the most can kerid he¦retique in the company. Well seing it is so that we be condempned for heretiks because we smell of perfumes & hote sa∣uors / and delicate fare etc (Yf it be trew that Martin saith) Then take you heed / you seely sould Papists / of your needles break fasts / of your stretchbelly din̄ers / of your gluttonuse suppers / reare suppers blowsinge bākets / & Epicureus fare: Ta¦ke heed of your hote wynes / of your hote spyces / and continuall iunketing chere /
Take heed how yow vse baines / or strōg sauors / Take heed ye paint not your fa∣ces to make ye seem more bewtifull then you be in deed / take hede ye cary not clo∣ues or some lyke thinge / in your mouth∣es to saue your breath from stinking / ta∣ke hede ye dwell not in the north (which is an other of Martyns notes): for in ca¦se ye offend in these things / your great le¦arned proctor / master Doctor Thomas Martin the lawyer by his diuinitie hath prouid you all heretiques.
And as tou¦ching my self and other / whom it pleaseth his masshepe / to call heretiks / we are cō∣tentid let this be the issew: wheather of the Papists or of vs haue more of these notes / let thē be callid heretiks with sha∣me enoughe / ād let the other syde be cal∣lid Catholiks and Christiās according to his clerkly determinatiō.
Oh (saith Mar¦tin) if S. Hierom had lyued in our dayes trow yow that he wold haue wrytten eny lesse of our maried priests?
Verely it may be thought / if he were a lyue at these da∣yes / and saw Martins wrything of his wryting / he wold not iudge Martin one of he wysest / applyeng that / S. Hie∣rom spake of the filthy vnmaried here∣tiks / to the godly maried priests of our
daies / for besyds al other profes this on ne (where S. Hierom saith he speaketh
of them
qui pudicitiam amare se simulant
(as Martī also alledgeth) that is / which pre¦tend they haue a loue to chastitie) shewed plainly that his sayings must be applyed to such vnmaried / as the popish Priests be / and can not be applyed to them which without dissembling there infirmitie for the auoyding of fornicacion take them wyues / and liue in the godly state of ma∣trimony
Also besyds his plain words qui pudici tiam amare se simulant. i. Which pretend that they loue Chastitie / the heretiks whō S. Hierom reherseth for profe and example wer vnmaried priests / and therfore (as thow seest) must needs be applied to such a wyueles dissembling generatiō / as the same Hierom noteth Antichrist there ho¦ly father. Yea and it is further to be thought that if he were this day aliue / he wold commend ••. Luther / Oecolampa∣dius, D. Capito, Bucer, & ••. Peter Martyr / for the sinceritie of there doctrine / & for that with wryting apon the Scryptures they haue geuen such a light / as Saint Hierom his eyes wold be ioyfull to see thoughe it were with the retractation of
other things / besyds those wherwith his freends charged him in his books aga∣inst Iouinian and such lyke as I haue noted before. Yt is like that you fell into this wishe of Saint Hieroms lyfe in these dayes / because ye wold fynde some way to tell the world (that Oecolampadius, Capito, and Munster, were munks or fry∣ars and afterward maried men. No man can iudge otherwise that noteth your pro¦ces / and perceaueth the desier that your tonge hath to lyeng. Well seing Capito was no munk nor fryer (as you report him) ye shall not chuse but suffer me to say to you this is another of your lyes / for it is trew that of these all that you report he was neither monk nor fryar. And in case they had beene as D. Luther. D. Bucer & the other were / it could neither further your matter / nor hurt ours / onles it be to ease your tong a litle / when it is desyrose to rayle. And where yow say ther mariad¦ge was both against the law of God / and the law of man / and also where in the se∣cond chapter of your book yow say it is an old heresie new scowerid I dout not before I haue done with yow and your fellowes / ye shall see it prouid befo∣re your face / that it is an old trueth
taught by Christ and his Apostles / new∣ly by you Papists and Gods enemies ma¦de heresie. In which discourse it shall al¦••o appeare / that D. Luther. D. Martyr / etc. were not the first founders of this religi∣on (as yow slanderosly reporte) but the patriarches / the prophets and Christ and his Apostles.
But to maintaine your lye withall / ye digresse from your argu∣••ent / and fall to slandering of Luther ••nd the rest / alledging that
he robbed Christs church of one of the Sacraments ••allid the holy Sacrament of Matrimo¦••y.
Thus Martin trouleth his tong ••t will / not knowing those lerned mens ••ayings concernīg matrimony / whether & how they think it a Sacramēt or not / wherfore thow shalt vnderstand good re¦••der that the opinion of these lerned fa∣••hers / and of all other that fear God / in ••hese dayes / is groundid apon Gods ••ord / and it is this. Yf ye take the name ••f this word Sacrament largyly and am ••lye / for any such action / or thing as may ••epresent another holy thing / then they ••enye not but that Matrimonie is a Sacrament because it representeth vn∣•••• vs the coniunction of Christ with his ••hurch. Wherof there is a plaine
testimony of Saint Paule in his Epistle to the Ephesians. Howbeit taking the word (Sacrament) after this sort ye shalbe forced to confesse / that there be not only seuen Sacraments: but also a great nomber more / as the washīg of feet / The wypīg of the dust from the feet of the A∣postles / The embracing of yong children in the armes / And the most parte of all Christs actions. But if ye restraine the name and word (Sacrament) not only to those actions which represent spirituall thīgs / but also to those which be appoin∣ted in the new Testament by our Saui∣our and his Apostles to be ministrid by certaine words with commandement t•• thesame / that they shuld so be ministerid with the offer and promes of forgeuenes of sinnes: Then can not matrimo∣nie be put in the number of Sacramēts namely of the new Testament / because i•• was ordeined in Paradise before Adam•• fall. And matrimonie ministred befor•• Christendō held after Christēdom 1. Cor.••Si infidelis discedit, discedat. Ergo matrimon•• is not a Sacrament of the new Testa∣ment. And ye read not that / Matrimo∣nie was ministrid by a priest at church v••••till the tyme of pope Euaristus or vntill th••
tyme of pope Sother (as Platina wryteth in his lyfe) who was 170 yere after Christ and for the auoyding of priuie contracts made first that decree / that matrimonie should be celebrat at church and by a priest. But seing Martī brought in this matter but for a raylīg purpose / I wil lea¦ue it of with these few words for this pre¦sent. And will tell the good reader of a∣nother solempne lye that Martin hath made whyles his tong runeth railīg af∣ter D. Luther. He saith there / that Lu∣ther hath wrytten in his book De Captiui∣tate. Babylonica, Si uxor nō possit, aut non uult, an∣cilla uenito. (that is to say) if the good wy∣fe can not / or will not / the good man may take his maid / Speak again Martī / whe¦re saith Luther these words? thow saist in his book de captiuitate Babylonica. The self same lye maketh Pighius of Lut. Contro∣uersia 15. Take that book in thy hand good reader / and read it ouer / and whan thow findest there / as Martin doth re∣port / I am content let it be said that I ha¦ue slaunderid Martī / if not / testifie with me that he is a lyeng witnes / and one of those Doctors whom Saint Peter cal∣leth / Pseudoprophetas in populo /and falsos Doc∣tores qui clam inducent sectas perniciosas.
False prophets amongest the peple / and false lyeng Docturs / which shall pri¦uily bring in perniciose sectes: I assuer the good reader this is a foule lye that Martyn the lyer and Pighius his fellow maketh of Luther / for that saying which they alledge in latyn / as thoughe it had been so by Luther penned / is not in all that booke / where Martyn most shame∣fully aduoucheth the same to be. Schame ye not you Papists that suche a loud lyēg babler / and so false and vaine a man hath taken apon him the defense of your cau∣se? whose own mouth and pen condem∣pneth for an opē lyer? Tremble ye not to shed any mans blud / apon the report of such an impudent man as he is? I will not hyde from the good reader / Luthers iudgemēt in that book / concerning that matter. In one place there speaking of the impediments of matrimony / he saith that if the man be such a one by nature that it is impossible for him to doe the du¦etie of a husband: then his contract with a woman / shall not bynde her to be his wyf and this is his reason. quia error, & ignorantia uirilis impotentiae, hic impedit matri∣monium. Because saith he the error / and the ignoraunce of the impotency of
the man in this case letteth the matrymo¦ny. Which saiyng yf you Papists wold comdempne / ye condempne the doctrine of your own father the Pope himself.
For Gregory busshop of Rome wrytīg to the bushop of Rauenna saith on this wyse. Vir & mulier si se comunxerint: & di xerit postea mulier de uiro, quod coire non possit cum ea, si possit probare quod uerum sit per iustum iudicium, accipiat alium. Yf a man and a woman be maried together (saith the pope) and the woman afterward say that the man can haue no carnall knowledge of her / and can bring forth lawfull profe therof / let her take another.
Moreouer before in the same question and afterward / in the Chapter (Si quis) These words be plain and in maner the very same that Luther hath spoken.
Impossibilitas reddendi debitum, soluit Vincu∣••um cōiugij. The impossibilitie of doing the ••atrimoniall dutie / breaketh the bond of ••atrimony: vnderstandīg the same defect ••o be naturall as Luther by the plain wo¦••ds there declareth that he doth.
And the selfsame doctrine is largely ••et furth and alowed by the master of the ••••ntence. li. 4. D. 34.
wherfore lyke as / for this saying Lu∣ther cā not be charged with any new doc∣trine / for that the same is taught by the Pope himself and the master of the senten¦ce / and Gratianus etc: So can not thesa∣me discharge Martin of his former euy∣dent and most manifest slanderose lye? Yf the Papists haue none / of more credit thē Martin the lewd lawier is / to defend there quarell / there doctrin must needs lye in the dust / for lak of men of honestie and credit to defend it, Yf Martin were not shameles I could not but maruaile why he should so report of Luther conce••••ning his doctrine of matrimony in that bok / for he is there so ware in his words and so circumspect with his pen in that poynt / that he will define nothing / as by the very last words there / intreating ap•• matrimony / it is most euydent / which for breuitie I will omitt. Many tyme i•• chaunceth that self will bredeth much yll •• and neuer more / then whan it lighteth i•• a great personage. Which saying wer•• prouid very trew by Martins story of M••••chael Palaeologus / if it were truly reportid but his mouth is so full of lyes that a m•••• can not tell when he may beleue him / H•• saith he hath red that history of Michae••
Palaeologus in a Grek autor / And that may be trew / but yet it is very vnlikely becau¦se the histories do declare that there were diuerse Emperours of the east whose na∣mes were Michaell / but no more named (as I remēber)Michaell Palaeologus sauing Michaell the seauynth and last of that na¦me (Michael) who was a thousand two hū∣dreth and threscore yere after Christ / as Chronicles do witnes (that is to say) ab∣out thre hundreth yere agon. But the hi∣story that Martin ascribed to the Empe∣ror Michael Paleologus / was (as he himself saith) when pope Nicholas (about the ye∣re of our lurd 860) sent out an excommuni¦cation against Photius Patriarch of Con∣stantinople. And so it foloweth that Mich¦ael Palaeologus the Emperour was (if Mar¦tins tale could be trew) fower hundreth yere before be was born / wherby it should seem that Martins talk in this place is a notable fayned lye and so muche the mo¦re lyke to be a lye because he is in all the rest of his book so geuen to lyeng.
But let it be trew that Michaell the sixt (between whom and pope Nicholas the first / the contention was / for Ignatius / and Photius) were named Michaell Palaeolo∣gus: (which I say Martin can not proue)
yet the history that Martin ioyneth to this matter / (that is) that he hath red the cause of the contention between pope Ni¦cholas the first and him / was for a plea∣sur that the said Emperor should shew to his vncle for the putting away of his lawfull wyfe / and marieng his daughter in law / I think be not altogether trew.
But that somwhat in this history is ad¦ded of Martins own forging / desyring to haue some color for his quarell when he intended to slaunder kyng Henry the eight the Queens father / which intent of his appereth / whē he wisheth that the ly¦ke had not been practised els where. And somwhat this my suspicion is increasid by that Martī refuseth to name the Gre¦ek author / whom he alledgeth. And ag∣aine where as in the books of generall Counsels / the earnest epistles wrytten frō Nicholas the pope / to the Emperour Mi¦chaell the sixt (for in those dayes there we¦re none named Paleologus as Martin saith) speak of the putting out of Ignati¦us and the putting in of Photius / into the office of the patriark / no mention is made of any such matter / which is not ly¦ke the pope wold haue left out / being (as Martin alledgeth) the chefe cause of ther falling out / & speaking so stoutly to the
Emperour / and taunting him so vylie as his Antichristian boldnes doth. But how much soeuer of the history is trew / this chefe point that Martin alledgeth the history for / (that is that the heresie against the holy gost and the contention therof sprang apon this occasion) this (I say) is manifestly false / as by sundry sub∣stanciall reasons I will proue plain to such as haue any knowledge of the doing in generall Counsels / and be not as Mar¦tin is arrogantly wyse: wyse (I say) in there own conceyt and not in deed. For profe wherof / first and formest it apper∣eth in the fift book and tenth Chapter of the history of Theodoret / an old Greek author by the confeszion of pope Dama∣sus (fyue hundreth yere before the tyme of that Emperor whom Martin falsly nameth Michaell Palaeologus) which confesz∣ion he sent to Paulinus bushop of Thessaloni∣ca in Macedonia that anon after the Nicene Counsell sprang contention for doctrine against the holy gost / & that such a busi∣nes ensewed therof that the fathers we∣re fayne to punnish the offenders therin by excom̄unication. Wherapō it folowed that both in Toletano concilio 1. about 400. yere after Christ & also in the secōd Coun∣sell
/ which some name the seuenth Coun∣cell of Nice / the busshops did put into the Creed the procedīg of the holy gost from the fahter ād the son̄e / as ye may read in∣those Councells. The latter .7. Nicen Coū¦sell was holden in the tyme ōf pope Ha∣drian the first / a hundreth yere before Michaell had the contention with Po∣pe Nicholas the first / in whose tyme (Martin saith) this error first began / ād fiue hundreth yere before Michael Palaeolo∣gus was born / of whom Martyn falsly fa¦therid this story.
Which saying of his / if it were trew / how could Theodoretus wryte of it / be∣ing dead in the tyme of Leo the first Em••peror (as Gennadius witnesseth) many hun••dreth yeres before? will Martin make men beleue / that the first Councell at To∣let in Spain / and the 7 Counsell of Nice amendid things so many hundreth yeres before they were amisse? and that Theod••oret could talke of thīgs that were do∣ne aboue thre hundreth yere after he was dead? You fauorers of Martin behold your own folly. Furthermore the decree o••Eugenius the 4 wherby the vnion of the e∣ast and west churches was declared / doth shew (as the same pope Eugenius doth co••••fesse)
that this dissention for the proce∣ding of the holy gost / began nongentis & amplius annis (that is to say) more thē ny∣ne hundreth yere before his tyme.
And Eugenius the 4. began his rule in the yere of our lord 1431. Out of the which nomber if ye take 900 and more accor∣ding to pope Eugenius his account / it shall appere that Michaell Pelaeologus (tho∣ugh he were in the tyme of Nicholas the first as Martin falsly reporteth) was ab¦oue 300 yere after this dissention began / which Martin for maintenance of his ly¦es saith began in his tyme.
Yf I should bring in the first Coun∣sell holden at Constantinople against Eu∣nomius for denieng the proceszion of the ho¦ly gost from the father and the sone what can Martin say? Against this Eunomius / Basill and other hath writtē plentifulli.
Thus ye see concerning the begin̄ing of this heresie against the holi gost / Mar¦tin is foūd a falsyfier of histories / not on∣ly by the suputation of yeres / but also by the very testimony of the pope hīself his God. Now concerning the cause of the dissention between the Greeks / and the Latins wher with Martin charged the Emperor Michael Palaeologus.
The learned man Cardinall Bessarion pa∣triarch of Constantinople and Archebus∣hop of Nicea wryteth a whole Chapter for declaration of the cause of this schis∣me and dissention: shewing that the bush¦hop of Rome was the causer therof for that he. Sua unius authoritate fretus aduocata sy¦nodo generali particulam illam communi symbo∣lo fidei, non cum communi assensu ascripsit. (that is) when he had callid a generall Coun∣sell / he tooke apon him of his own priuat authoritie / to adde this parcell (.i. of the proceding of the holy gost from the fat∣her and the sun to the commō Creed / with out the consent of the rest of the other bus¦hops there assembled. Behold good re¦ader a plain prof / that it was the rashe / and termerose boldnes of the bushop of Rome that causid this dissention / who of his oune authoritie wold doe that tumul¦tuosly / which he might haue done with others consents quietly / and that was it which caused first all that dissention that ensued and also the latter ruine mischefe Destruction / and Turkishe Captiuitie / which Martin faith is this day lighted apon the church of God in Grecia.
But Martin will say the thing that he did was Good:
Yea but the maner of the doīg was suche as I thīk Martin / if he thorowly knew it / as he wold seme to do / he himself (for all his foly) will not yet defend it / And the inconueniences that folowed the popes brainles and beastly audacitie / declare that the meanes which he vsid in compas¦sing his doings / were wicked and deue∣lish. So that wher as Martin impu∣teth the breche and contention between the Greek and latin church and the ouer throw / both of the Grecians church and kingdom / to the lecherose lyfe of the vn∣kle to the Emperour Michaell Palaeologus: it is prouid / that the Pope / the author of al mischefe in the church of God / was the only matche that kindled this fier. A wor¦thi matter doutles to depryue the Pope for euer after bearing any rule though•• there were nothing els wherwith to char¦ge him. And thus is Martin once a∣gain ouerthrown with his own reason & taken with a duble lye: aswell for alled¦ging the heresie against the holy gost to begin so lately / which began so many hū¦dreth yere before / As for auouching the dissention which arose between the east and the west church to procede first of the lechory and Ambition /
(as he termeth it in his note in the mar∣gēt) of the Emperour Michael Palaeologus & his vncle / which proceded first (as ye see by the testimony of Bessariō) from Gods great enemie / the pope the Archheretik in Christendom. Now to make an end of answer to that few lynes which remay¦ne in Martins first Chapter / I need not to take further paines / because they be nothing ells but lyes & raylings / groun¦ded apon false grounds as I haue before declarid / only to this ēd / that king Hen∣the eight the Queens father might appe¦re to the world both a lechor an heretique and a mā full of all other wickednes / out of whose naughty lyfe Martī wold haue al the preachīg in King Edwards dayes which he calleth heresie / to haue his first Originall. And the procedings of the la∣te parliament in the second yere of the Queens raigne / wherin all her fathers doings in religion be condempned / seme to confirm the same. So that the Que∣ens father (if he had bene such a man as the Papists report him) were now con∣demned with vs. Wherfore it is to be thought / seing almightie God hath per∣mitted some of vs / to suffir martyrdom by fyer / by blody persecution and the Ty∣rannie
of the popes law / and tormentes for professing the trueth of Gods word: that now the body of that noble Prince the Queens father (because he was the beginner of all this as Martin repor∣teth / and the continewer of it XXV. yere / as the procedings of the parlament seem to pronoūce) shalbe taken vp at windsor and burned as wicklyffes was. All men of wisdom and discretion may well iud∣ge of thee (if thou were not as thou she∣west thy self / a shameles rayler voyd of all regard / against whom thy tong tal∣keth) that it had been thy parte to haue couerid the fault of the Queens father / if thou haddest any fault wherwith to charge him / lest the world perceaue some vnnaturalnes in her / so to suffer her no∣ble father now being dead / to be rayled apon by one who shewed himself a tray∣tor to him when he was a lyue. All the world right well knoweth / that there is no spark / nether of Gods spirite / neither of good nature / in those children / which are not greued to here / there dead parēts euell reported / and there faults reueled. Such is the reuerence dew to them that be dead / vnto whom we ought obedien∣ce in the tyme of there tyfe / And what /
good opinion may any man euer hereaf∣ter conceaue / of thee / when thy shameles pen doth confesse now / that thow wert a traytor thē. But this is not thy peculiar vyce alone / but of Steph. Gardiner also & of a great rable of the rest / who glory in nothing more now / then that they ha∣ue bene rank traytors this many yeres / And what thing shall haue the name of vyce / where treason is made a vertew? Or what iustice cā be ministerid where a traytor is the iudge? Who knoweth not in a counsell where there be but twelue / what a perelose thing it was to haue one Iudas? though none of the rest loued him? how much more it is thē perelos / wher al the rest alow his counsels and doings / & make as it were of an old Iudas / a new Christ? Apon this bold confession of thy trayterose harte / vtterid in declaration of thy fained history of Michael Palaeologus I may by thine own iudgement / iudge thee to be a traytor still. For in the 20 leafe of thy book thow bringest in a rule of the law sayinge / Semel malus, semper praesumitur esse malus, in codem genere mali. i. (that is by thyne own interpretatiō. A person once e∣uell is euer presumed to be euell in the sa¦me kynde of euel▪ Which rule being trew
(as thow sayest it is thought in law) All men may geue sentence against the and such lyke / by the iudgement of thine own pen and by force of thin own argument That thow and such thy fellowes / be at this present all rank Traytors. This re∣ason is none of myne / but thine own rea∣son it is / that cutteth thin own Throt.
And I dout not but the indifferent read will confesse that hether to I haue fought with the with thine own weapons and re¦asons aswell in prouing the Papists he∣retiques ād lechors / as also in this parte prouing the and such lyke traytors. And because your glory is so great in the na∣me of old Doctors / I haue by the most old Doctors confirmed all my profes / or els by such not so old / as thow thy self hast abusid for thy wicked purpose. wherby the reader shall also perceaue / that your glory in the name of the Doctors / is but a vayn blast / blowen into mens ea••es / to stop them from hering the treuth of gods word. wherin though thy wryting decla¦reth the al thogether ignorant / yet see∣mest thow very loth so to appeare to the reader / and therfore in the last end of this Chapter thow hast chopped in a pece of scripture / a strong pece of new clothe se∣wed to a rotten garment / and therfor /
for it renteth all that thow hast patched before into peces.
I pray you brethren (saist thow out of Saint Paule) beware of them who cause dissentions / and offen¦ces against the doctrine which you haue lerned / and voyd your selfes from there company / and flee them / for such persons serue not Christ our lord but there belly.
These be Saint Paules words by thee al¦egid. To this Maior / or grownd I adde this Minor or mean proposition. But you Papists cause dissentions and offen∣ses against the doctrine that S. Paule taught in thesame Epistle to the Rom∣ains (of which doctrin he there speaketh) in that ye hold a man is made righteous by his works / and that a man of himself•• may merite eternal saluation / and in your other opinions of originall sinn / of me∣rits / and fre will / and against the eternal predestination of God / and against the obedience of certain of your shauen gener¦ation to magistrats / as of the pope / who is in deed a subiect to the superiall power and yet yow exclude him / from all obedi∣ence / and of your monks ad such lyke: Ye and more ouer you teache other Doctri∣nes of pardons / of pilgremages / of wor∣shipping of Images / of masse / and diri∣ges
/ and of dyuers kinds of Idolatries which Saint Paule nor none of the Apo¦stles of Christ neuer herd of: but these be doctrines both praeter & contra besids and against the doctrines which the Romai∣nes had receaued at the hands of Saint Paule or otherwise of Christ or of any of his Apostles: wherfore this is a necessa¦ry conclusion that Saint Paule in that place which you alledge / biddeth all men vnder the name of the Romaines to be∣ware of you Papists / and such like rank heretiks as you be / because ye be not the ministers and seruants of Christ (as you pretend) but ye make Christ your seruāt and instrument wherby to feed your fat belyes as Saint Paule there saith / with out regard to the feding of the soules cō∣mitted to your charge by the lyuely word of God / but feed them with traditions & doctrins of your own makinge / which is neither grounded / neither can by any me¦anes be deduced out of the lyuely word of God / as you your selues neither can / nor ••o denye / in that yow hold ād defend this ••lasphemose heresie. That althīgs neces∣••ary for our saluation are not conteined ••n the scripture / which is asmuche to say /
as we ought to dissent and receaue some doctrines besids that doctrin that the Ro¦maines had receaued by the teachings of S Paule cōtrary to the text by the al∣ledged. Yea al the doctrin of the pope chopt to gether and mingellid as herbes to the pott / and couched in his Antichri∣stian law / is almost nothing els / then a lomp of lerning besids and against the ly¦uely word of God.
Now therfore good reader I will end as Saint Paule doth / desiering and bese¦ching the in the name of Iesus Christ / to beware of all the Papists / and all other heretiks that cause dissentions / and offences against the doctrine which you haue learned / out of Gods word / and shune and flye the cōpaines of such / for they serue not Christ our lord but there own bellyes.